This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Liberals suck

  • Lean intellectual times at VoteVets

    Now that Brandon “Beaker” Friedman has moved on, dicksmith seems to be all alone over at the VetVoice blog. They took on Matthew Alexander, the pseudonymous interrogator who also works as Batman in his spare time, but Alexander isn’t contributing much. That damned Batsignal keeps going off in the evening sky.

    Well, now they’re really scraping the bottom of the intellectual barrel. In keeping with their MoveOn overlords’ directions, they let another phony vet write for them on another non-vet related subject;

    (more…)

  • Some Level of Federal Indoctrination More Equal Than Others

    Tim Rutten of the LA Times sums up the controversy of Obama’s Sept. 8th speech as the paranoid delusions of the Right-Wing Hate Machine (patent pending) akin to Birther/Muslim type conspiracies found in scary corners of the internet:

    Miller has identified precisely the process at work in the healthcare hysteria and, increasingly, elsewhere where the GOP thinks it can shove the Obama administration into a ditch. Republican officials such as the Florida state chairman are playing a dangerous game with an unhinged segment of public opinion that regards Obama not as an elected official with whom they disagree, but as an illegitimate usurper of the presidency.

    That paranoid fantasy is what’s really behind the “birther” movement and the allegations that the president is — take your pick — a secret Marxist or a secret Muslim.

    A bit extreme in his characterization, since he doesn’t mention the fact that the Department of Education issued a memo for kids to think about what they could do for the president (later revised), which was summed up superbly by Professor Jacobson as a bit “creepy“. BooRadley (who has a lot of kids and might know something about being a parent) already summarized the low-level anxiety at TAH, and noted that the President speaking to school kids is fine, but using the opportunity to stump for the political issue of the day is not.

    But, I’m confused, because I thought the left was always looking to protect school kids from the imperiali$tic/capitalist horrors of Uncle Sam , at least if its the military. Remember the lady in Seattle who wanted to ban recruiters from public parks because her wuss kids might be scared? The Marines in Berkeley getting their recruiting vandalized? Most, recently the ever-moderate Mother Jones exposing a secret plot within the Pentagon to garner information on potential recruits from public schools. Our favorite commentator, Jim Staro, offered his keen insight into the scandal (note the two exclamation points means you really better read this!!):

    This was just more from the cheney/bush cabal acts against the country, and their growing list of proof of crimes against this Nation and Our Constitution, no one was safe, especially our children, needed to fill the ranks of bringing democracy? to others by extreme force!!

    You can only wish that the left would apply some sort of ideological standard on what constitutes outrage in public schools before they attempt to squash all criticism from their political opponents, because I’m now baffled on what is “genuine” outrage.

  • Towards the Edge of Sanity

    It’s a bit surprising that the notable and commendable Joe Gandelman of The Moderate Voice would play the role of liberal demagogue by blaming the current political climate on the standard boogeymen (angry geezers at Town Hall meetings, dittoheads, Glenn Beck, etc.) instead of examining why this type of discourse is occurring. A typical distraction to shame the opposition while the real people in power can’t defend their own crummy policies. From TMV:

    What has changed? The country.

    We are now seeing the triumph of the talk radio political culture — a politics that now is framed in terms of high-concept sound bites, trying to affix labels to those who disagree on an issue, trying to push emotional hot buttons so that the political target is hated enough to serve as a catalyst for a goal (in the case of talk shows to grow and maintain an outraged audience; in the case of politics, to mobilize one side).

    Despite the punditocracy best attempts to portray rubes in fly-over land not onboard the Obama express as racists, nihilists, etc., Obama’s approval rating is dropping faster than a pair of panties on prom night. Joe seems to miss the real story that the level of outrage might be peaking because the President is fast putting the country on the path to massive deficits and European-style socialism. One needs only to look at state governments that overspent their budgets to understand where our country is headed (at least the feds can always print more money!). The Obama Administration rammed through a stimulus package to create jobs and we got more unemployment (especially for vets), he tried Cash for Clunkers which was a major dud, and now they want to seriously intervene in the health care industry (even more than they already do)? Anyone, else seeing a trend here on the level of competence when the federal government attempts to subvert market forces.

    So, it’s difficult to be completely preoccupied with all the birthers and people pounding on windows at Town Hall meetings when there’s stuff going in Washington that is truly frightening. Glenn Beck isn’t going to run the country so badly into debt that the dollar become worthless, Obama might.

  • The never-ending 2012 campaign

    This morning we awaken to a new phase of the Obama 2012 campaign – the election campaign that never ends. Apparently, the face we never tire of seeing has called a special joint session of Congress so he can explain to them what he expects from their healthcare that he refuses to draft – voting present on one of the most important issues to be decided this year. (Washington Times link)

    The White House on Wednesday said Mr. Obama would head to Capitol Hill on Sept. 9 to speak to lawmakers in prime time upon their return from a monthlong vacation that was highlighted by heated town-hall meetings on health care. Top advisers to the president promised that Mr. Obama would give more detailed direction to Congress, after months of only general guidance.

    Though David Axelrod, top adviser to the president, said Mr. Obama still “embraces” a government-run “public option” for health insurance, which combined with the plan’s price tag has fueled much of the public blowback, the president was not expected to insist that it be part of any final plan. The White House has declined for weeks to be pinned down on the controversial government-run component embraced by the Democratic Party’s liberal base, saying only that Mr. Obama’s priority is a reform that increases competition in the health insurance industry and choice for consumers.

    So, Obama is for the single payer option, while simultaneously being against it. That’s what you get when you elect a politician instead of a leader.

    The Washington Post calls it “fleshing out his vision”. You’d have thought he would have done that sometime before now, wouldn’t you? That’s what has Americans so upset – no one really knows what’s in that thousand-page document – not even the folks who are writing it. But this administration speaks in abstract concepts and doesn’t pin itself down to specifics. So, I’m pretty sure all we’ll see is the strutting rooster at the podium, chin high, staring down his nose at America – pretty phrases and no specifics.

    Oh, and TSO, look who is expected to flip on the GOP side to lock in the health care vote in the Senate according to the Wall Street Journal;

    The White House is holding intensive talks with Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe, a moderate Republican, about Ms. Snowe’s proposal to use the public plan as a fallback option, aides familiar with the conversations said.

    Surprised? Yeah, me neither.

    But that’s not all. After a big kerfuffle yesterday about Obama attempting to campaign to school children, going around their parents, he’s decided that he won’t require a term paper from children in which they pledge their souls to Obama (yet another Washington Times link);

    President Obama’s plan to inspire the nation’s schoolchildren with a video address next week erupted into controversy Wednesday, forcing the White House to pull out its eraser and rewrite a government recommendation that teachers nationwide assign students a paper on how to “help the president.”

    Presidential aides acknowledged the White House helped the U.S. Education Department craft the proposal, which immediately was met by fierce criticism from Republicans and conservative organizations who accused Mr. Obama of trying to politicize the education system.

    Yes, our President who struggles every day to find a new way to get his face on television, is surprised that parents are starting to push back against the incessant blather that comes from the White House.

  • I pledge?

    1stCavRVN11B sent me this link to a Michelle Malkin post about a Utah elementary school principal who showed this video to 850 of his students;

    According to the Deseret News, parents were pretty upset;

    “I think it’s outrageous. It’s indoctrinating children in a leftist liberal political position,” Utah Eagle Forum President Gayle Ruzicka told the Deseret News Tuesday.

    The video called “I Pledge!” was shown at an assembly of about 850 children on Friday to kick off the school’s annual theme of service, said Davis School District spokesman Chris Williams.

    Parent Jennifer Cieslewicz, of Kaysville, who has a first-grader at Eagle Bay, told the Deseret News, “I am very upset, to say the least. Values are to be taught in the home – not the school. These kids are young and impressionable.”

    The PTA President is shocked at the reaction;

    Eagle Bay PTA President Jennifer Maxwell says she is shocked and surprised by people’s negative reaction to the video. “I thought it was inspirational,” Maxwell said. “It was intended to inspire kids to make a difference in the community. We weren’t trying to be political.”

    Now, I don’t have a problem with the basic content of the video – all of those things that these self-absorbed, condescending Hollywood types talk about are things I’ve been doing for decades. But why all of a sudden are we supposed to do them this year?

    The Right are apoplectic that this typical self-serving crap is being shown in schools. And, to a point I agree with them – but only because the Left would have been just as apoplectic if the exact same slick personality cult crap would have appeared on television last year with George W. Bush as the person we’re supposed to honor with our pledge to be better people. Of course, George Bush would never let this stuff fly related to his visage.

    It’s garbage like this that makes the Far Right’s irrational fears seem less irrational. The video accomplishes nothing except drive a wedge between people – it amounts to gloating over the election. Like that 52 to 48 drivel.

    And showing it in school? In Utah? Stupid, stupid, stupid. I’m trying to hold a moderate line here, Barrack – you’re not making it easy.

  • DUmmies: Clinton kept us safe for 8 years

    Still working hard on rebuilding the Clinton Legacy and rewriting history, the folks at DU are convinced that fire doesn’t melt steel or something;

    du-clinton-love

    Ignoring the fact that the US was attacked in the first year of the Clinton Administration, not to mention in Oklahoma, the African Embassies, the USS Cole, the DUers are convinced that this empty-headed political strategy is the one Democrats should use next year. Well, unless we get attacked between now and then, huh?

    bushisanidiot 6. You’re exactly right. Everyone knew Clinton was going after Bin Laden but Bush came in and called the dogs off of Bin Laden, thus, enabling him to attack us with no one caring enough to pay attention to his activities.

    Yup, Clinton was “going after bin Laden”, if by “going after” you mean hoping he’d go away.

    Mika 7. What about the first WTC attack? Isn’t that one of the rebuttals to your statement? The big difference was that the Clinton admin caught, prosecuted, and convicted the terra-ists and didn’t launch an illegal war (over it).

    Well, unless you include the war against Serbia where we had no national interest and killed hundreds of innocent civilians for no good reason. Just because the nations that had a stake in the outcome wouldn’t defend their own national interests. How did the Chinese Embassy come through that war?

    Hepburn 15. Hi, Jen…….I just love Darth Cheney talking about how they kept us safe. What? He slept through 911?

    jenmito 16. Hey, Hep…I know. Me, too. I love watching him brag about how they kept us safe after the biggest attack on our soil.

    Um, what should they have done? Pre-emptively strike the Taliban and al Qaeda? That would have had the full support of the DU crowd, huh? Every time the Bush Administration rolled up a terrorist cell inside the country, they cried “Scare tactics!”

    It amazes me that they don’t mind looking like hypocrites.

    Thanks to Claymore for the links.

  • Rangel the tax cheat

    Charlie Rangel, that guy in charge of writing tax laws in the House, has been busted owing the American people thousands of dollars in back taxes according to Byron York at the Washington Examiner;

    Last week, we learned that Rangel filed a grossly misleading financial disclosure report for 2007 — failing to report at least half a million dollars in assets.

    It turns out Rangel had a credit union account worth at least $250,000 and maybe as much as $500,000 — and didn’t report it. He had investment accounts worth about the same, which he also didn’t report. Ditto for three pieces of property in New Jersey.

    Beyond that, we’ve learned that Rangel has failed to report assets totaling more than $1 million on legally required financial disclosure forms going back to at least 2001.

    The news comes on top of revelations last year that Rangel didn’t report — and didn’t pay taxes on — income from a villa in the Caribbean. In that matter, the Internal Revenue Service gave him sweetheart treatment; Rangel paid about $10,000 in back taxes but was not required to pay any penalty or interest.

    In response to the sweet deal Rangel was given to eradicate his tax cheating, Republicans are hitting back;

    And then there is H.R. 735, also known as the “Rangel Rule Act of 2009.”

    The brainchild of Rep. John Carter, a Texas Republican who spent two decades as a judge before coming to the House in 2002, H.R. 735 would require the IRS to give everyone the same kid-glove treatment it gave Rangel.

    Yeah, fat chance that will pass – it took over two hundred years to subject members of Congress to their own legislation (thank you, Newt Gingrinch), it’ll take longer than that to get the real sovereigns of this country the royal treatment Congress reserves for itself.

    And it’ll take even longer to get Charles Rangel, the serial tax cheat,to own up to his malfeasance and pay us what he owes us.

  • Massachusetts Senator needs to read the Constitution

    Former Vice President Dick Cheney appeared on Fox News Sunday and reminded us all why we miss him (Wall Street Journal link);

    Mr. Cheney described himself as being isolated among advisers to then-President George W. Bush, who ultimately decided against direct military action.

    “I was probably a bigger advocate of military action than any of my colleagues,” Mr. Cheney said in response to questions about whether the Bush administration should have launched a pre-emptive attack prior to handing over the White House to Barack Obama.

    “I thought that negotiations could not possibly succeed unless the Iranians really believed we were prepared to use military force,” Mr. Cheney said. “And to date, of course, they are still proceeding with their nuclear program and the matter has not yet been resolved.”

    He went on to criticize the Obama Administration for beginning a witch hunt against CIA agents who extracted intelligence from our more reticent enemies;

    “It’s clearly a political move; there’s no other rationale for them to be doing this,” the former vice president said of the Obama administration review.

    Mr. Cheney was particularly critical of Mr. Obama’s statement that he had not influenced the attorney general’s decision, and charged the president with waffling on his earlier pledge not to unearth old allegations. “I think he’s trying to duck the responsibility for what’s going on here, and I think it’s wrong,” Mr. Cheney said of the president.

    Of course, this raised the ire of the only Senator from Massachusetts, who happened to appear on another show on some lesser known and lesser watched network.

    “Dick Cheney has shown through the years, frankly, a disrespect for the constitution for sharing of information to Congress and a [dis]respect for the law and I’m not surprised that he’s upset about this,” Kerry told me this morning on “This Week.”

    I’d like the only Senator from Massachusetts to point out for the rest of us where in the Constitution it says that the Executive branch of government needs to share information with the legislative branch. Well, other than this line;

    [The President] shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient….

    The only Senator from Massachusetts obviously isn’t well read and probably doesn’t even understand his duties and responsibilities. Massachusetts is obviously poorly served by their lone Senator, who until recently, voted the way his mentor told him to vote. Obviously, thinking for himself isn’t one of his strong suits.