I guess with all that has been going on of lately with the BP oil spill, the Sestak job buyout, Obama cancelling trips to make himself look good in the public eye and the continual outrage on the Arizona immigration law, what else could we possibly add to the ever-exciting news cycle? An "inconvenient" breakup of the Gores? Should we be shocked, saddened, gleeful or ho-hum, grab the remote and keep channel surfing?
Ever since the whole PMRC thing went down in 1984, I just flat-out hated the Gores period. I couldn't care less what Tipper did, what she wore, how good she looked despite she went up and down like a yo-yo with her weight like a blonde Delta Burke in her own public show, in which I'll entitle, "Designing Nannies" with Tipper as ring-leader, Susan Baker, Pam Howar, and Sally Nevius co-starring. All four women were wives of prominent D.C. husbands that worked inside the federal government. This isn't exactly what you would call the "Golden Girls" in the world of Rap, Heavy Metal, Rock and any type of music that had a pulse or a message these women didn't agree with. These four women waged a jihad blaming rock music for rape, violence, drug abuse and teenage suicide. Defenders of the faith, Judas Priest were one of many bands accused of making a teen commit suicide due to their lyrics or some dumbass idiot thinking the music was subliminally back-masked and had the message encrypted. The Beatles did this too supposedly but no one ever brought them to the courtroom in the 80's. The PMRC held a Senate hearing in August 1985 to discuss and attempt to impliment censorship in music. The PMRC had many professors and psychiatrists testify on their part. Opposing them was Dee Snider (Twisted Sister) Frank Zappa, John Denver, Jello Biafra (Dead Kennedys) and many more from the Rap and Pop communities. Technically the PMRC succeeded by forcing production companies to put the ever common Parental Warning sticker on the cover of explicit albums. The PMRC claimed to be acting on behalf of the American People. In reality, the PMRC was just a bunch of Washington socialites that wanted something public to do and this was one of the early stages back then of turning things into a "nanny state" thinking "parents are dumb, kids are dumb, we know what's best for you" mentality.
With that said, I just turned 40 and I still listen to the bands that were part of the "Filthy 15" like Motley Crue, W.A.S.P., Mercyful Fate, Judas Priest, AC/DC, Def Leppard and Venom. The rest of the list is an interesting array of others that included Prince, Sheena Easton, Vanity, Madonna and Cyndi Lauper. This is like comparing Lady Ga Ga with GWAR. Both have their own way of writing lyrics but Ga Ga is more sexual in nature while GWAR is just not hiding their vulgarity with interesting stage shows that have more than deviant props to get their point across but if you're the typical parent who never gets involved in what your kids do outside of the house or what they are into, this is what we get, another Judas Priest referendum, "Parental Guidance". Hence, big brother has to interfere.
The whole problem that Tipper and her succubuses engaged in just made albums and cassettes sell more of something vulgar, examples being Poison's original cover for "Open Up and Say Ahh!" and later Body Count's first pressing that included the controversial "Cop Killer" song (which I can say I own an original before it was pulled off the shelf)amongst splatter art from bands like Cannibal Corpse, Suffocation to controversial covers by Deicide, Exhorder and Sodom; I can go on forever since this is my area of expertise but you get the point. The number of gore, anti-religion and sexually deviant lyrics has quadrupled since 1984 and despite the stickers are still blazing all over the covers, it doesn't stop the kids from buying. Helps the artists but waters down what artists have to offer. The album cover could be spectacular but the music could really suck depending on what genre you're into.
So despite a small victory for the PMRC in those regards, doughboy Al and his "planet has a fever" campaign on global warming started thereafter during the overkill of the count-recount redundancy of the Bush election of 2000, in which to this day people think (as well as Al) Gore won. This was a pretty good setback for Al, Tipper and the whole Democratic party and the constant whining, bitching, complaining, moaning and groaning we had to endure seven months after the fact and a few blurbs here and there even in 2010. Al then concentrated on the global warming and eventually put out the "Inconvenient Truth" documentary which won an award; why i don't know but the whole Hollywood scene is just as whacked as anyone on the left and with a cherry on top, give the man a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts.
So what is left on the plate for today's Al Gore after a bomb was dropped over in England when emails were recovered that global warming was a hoax and Michel Mann and his cohorts were being investigated (of course, nothing has been really reported since then)? What about the $8.8 million house he and Tipper just obtained despite the old one still used that consumed in a yearly balance 80 times that more electricity and a carbon footprint bigger than 3 normal people while he preached his BS all over the world while he always used his jet? Is Al just irrelevant now after all this? Lose a campaign, your global warming theory is being shot to hell and despite you made billions off of it, ole Tipper doesn't find you relevant anymore or has the carbon footprint below your waist turned into a frozen tundra that Viagra can't fix? Or maybe either one of you two found a new love on the side, kind of like Edwards did and we'll get some sort of confessional from a Tipper Gore book or Al will pen a book since the money may dry up at some point.
Sort of makes you wonder if this relationship was anything but merry and be out of "convenience" like the Clinton's. I don't care if they had kids, that's just part of the mantra since you're in the public eye and people like this will do anything to shed a different perspective on things to sway the truth to another prism of light. The Clinton's were good at that. Remember the beach incident when we had to be horrified of Hillary's cottage cheese body in a bathing suit while Bill did a staged event with the pile of stones and put them into a shape of a cross and acting like no one was around? That's your typical PR moment and the Gore's, Clinton's and Obama's all engage or have engaged in it. I'm sure the Bush's have as well but nothing to this extent of blatant idiocy.
All you headbangers, moshers, thrashers, homeboys, hip-hoppers and rappers, stick to what you listen to and buy with your head and heart without the persuasion of "purists". There's plenty of other stuff you can be delving into that is worse off than just listening to music. At the rate everything is going with the FCC and radio, TV censorship, you may have to Fort Knox your collection up before "nanny" gets ahold of it. Remember, we're stupid, we can't think for ourselves and just because we listen to this type of music, we fit all the automatic stereotypes these elitists label us under. As far as Al and Tipper? You can't just throw 40 years away just like that without some other "entity" in the mix that made this story just appear out of thin air. I see something else in the bigger picture and hell, it may even be another diversion for Obama as things have been over the last several months with almost seemingly "planted" stories and the ones of importance being hidden on Fridays and holiday weekends. Like the great Judas Priest sang, "You've Got Another Thing Coming".
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
The In-Specter Gadgets of Axelrod
It's one thing knowing the Obama administration is nothing more than a shadow government with all the czars they have but it's getting old no matter who is President of why all investigations come down to the White House lawyers. Doesn't one think that there is a conflict of interest and an easier route to sweep things under the rug? It's one thing to have your own lawyers investigate matters that can impeach a President but to have the media spin it in a way that it makes everything sweet and palatable is beyond belief. For instances like the Sestak ordeal before he campaigned against Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, there should be a totally different group of investigators not affiliated with any of the parties to investigate matters like these but how do we know there isn't a slant on one's belief and an agenda there depending on who they support in their personal life? Damned if you do, damned if you don't, right?
Joe Sestak has come out and mentioned that the Obama administration on numerous occasions and even before the Primaries was offered a high-ranking job if he was to bow out of the race against Specter. Of course with further investigation by Obama's senior adviser David Axelrod and a couple of White House lawyers, they found "no evidence" that supports Sestak's claim. This was vocally brought to light from Axelrod himself on CNN's "John King USA" as well and even said it "constitute a serious breach of the law". Sestak on the other hand has not said who offered him the job or what the job was either. Robert Gibbs added more confusion to the mix by dodging more than a dozen questions on the matter before hitting Sunday's talk shows and mentioning "nothing inappropriate happened". Axelrod's tone on King's show was almost a blatant regard that Sestak was lying but not just coming out and saying it.
The fire hasn't fizzled on this one yet and if anyone is keeping the heat on it's California's Darrell Issa (R) which is demanding a probe and members of the GOP are hoping for a Congressional investigation into the matter and of course the Democrats have gone mum on the subject. Issa went on to say that the probe would try to discover whether the "most transparent administration in history" tried to illegally manipulate an election. Sestak is standing firm on all of this but really hasn't come out with any real details of the matter.
A letter to Axelrod from the Senate Judiciary Committee was signed by Republicans Orrin Hatch, Charles Grassley, Jon Kyl, Jeff Sessions, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn and Tom Coburn about the allegations and the seriousness of the political process being "taint with bribes and political machine manipulation". The White House all week has pushed any attempt back that Obama or any of his staff are involved or attempted to bribe Sestak from withdrawing from the Democratic Senate primary in PA.
So it all boils down to is Sestak lying, Axelrod lying or is this yet another cover-up swept under the rug by the media and the administration? Seems to me everything that goes wrong and can be finger-pointed at Obama or one of his trolls, it gets buried, dropped, covered or spun....or some big event happens and the media turns it's attention to that story to bury the old one--how quaint.
As Issa's spokesperson, Kurt Bardella puts five good questions together that Issa and many people would like to have actual answers for:
1) Do either Gibbs or Axelrod know who spoke with Sestak and what, if anything was offered?
2) If nothing "inappropriate" or "problematic" happened, then why don't they just answer these questions and move on?
3) Even if nothing technically illegal happened, does the implication in itself that they tried to maneuver Sestak out of the PA Senate primary effectively taint then candidate-Obama to change the business-as-usual attitude of Washington?
4) Since Axelrod said he believees after talking to the White House lawyers that the accusations are founded, is Sestak lying?
5) Is he telling the truth and everyone else is jumping through hoops to avaoid answering questions directly because the person Sestak spoke to was Rahm Emanuel?
With all that said, I think this will be yet another chapter to add to a list of things that we'll never know the truth about. This administration hasn't been transparent since Day 1 and Princess Pelosi is just as guilty for saying that from the get-go and yet we haven't heard a peep out of her polyurethane face with that "deer in the headlights" gleam she sports. I really don't know what to conclude on this one since we have all the makings of a pure slanted and tilted story because every avenue you hit, there's someone linked to the White House that is picking the garbage up off the floor and keeping anything incriminating away from the press, the people and making Obama look like the true Messiah as he was initially painted as. Even this whole BP thing is really turned on to the oil company and not the lack of response by the administration and even 33 days after the fact, Big O has plans for a vacation....swell ain't it? God forbid if this was Bush right now with the BP incident and wanting to go on vacation. The poor guy couldn't visit the porcelain god without some dumbass reporter saying he's dropping the ball on something.
So what's the stakes with you readers? Will Sestak be pointed at as a liar? Will this whole thing just vaporize into nothingness while the crickets chirp in the dark of night or are we going to get some sort of racecard issue if there are true allegations? Or will it be shifted off somewhere other than in Obamaland where he can say he didn't know anything about it? Quite possibly he could spin it enough that Bush can be blamed for it? Ya think?
Joe Sestak has come out and mentioned that the Obama administration on numerous occasions and even before the Primaries was offered a high-ranking job if he was to bow out of the race against Specter. Of course with further investigation by Obama's senior adviser David Axelrod and a couple of White House lawyers, they found "no evidence" that supports Sestak's claim. This was vocally brought to light from Axelrod himself on CNN's "John King USA" as well and even said it "constitute a serious breach of the law". Sestak on the other hand has not said who offered him the job or what the job was either. Robert Gibbs added more confusion to the mix by dodging more than a dozen questions on the matter before hitting Sunday's talk shows and mentioning "nothing inappropriate happened". Axelrod's tone on King's show was almost a blatant regard that Sestak was lying but not just coming out and saying it.
The fire hasn't fizzled on this one yet and if anyone is keeping the heat on it's California's Darrell Issa (R) which is demanding a probe and members of the GOP are hoping for a Congressional investigation into the matter and of course the Democrats have gone mum on the subject. Issa went on to say that the probe would try to discover whether the "most transparent administration in history" tried to illegally manipulate an election. Sestak is standing firm on all of this but really hasn't come out with any real details of the matter.
A letter to Axelrod from the Senate Judiciary Committee was signed by Republicans Orrin Hatch, Charles Grassley, Jon Kyl, Jeff Sessions, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn and Tom Coburn about the allegations and the seriousness of the political process being "taint with bribes and political machine manipulation". The White House all week has pushed any attempt back that Obama or any of his staff are involved or attempted to bribe Sestak from withdrawing from the Democratic Senate primary in PA.
So it all boils down to is Sestak lying, Axelrod lying or is this yet another cover-up swept under the rug by the media and the administration? Seems to me everything that goes wrong and can be finger-pointed at Obama or one of his trolls, it gets buried, dropped, covered or spun....or some big event happens and the media turns it's attention to that story to bury the old one--how quaint.
As Issa's spokesperson, Kurt Bardella puts five good questions together that Issa and many people would like to have actual answers for:
1) Do either Gibbs or Axelrod know who spoke with Sestak and what, if anything was offered?
2) If nothing "inappropriate" or "problematic" happened, then why don't they just answer these questions and move on?
3) Even if nothing technically illegal happened, does the implication in itself that they tried to maneuver Sestak out of the PA Senate primary effectively taint then candidate-Obama to change the business-as-usual attitude of Washington?
4) Since Axelrod said he believees after talking to the White House lawyers that the accusations are founded, is Sestak lying?
5) Is he telling the truth and everyone else is jumping through hoops to avaoid answering questions directly because the person Sestak spoke to was Rahm Emanuel?
With all that said, I think this will be yet another chapter to add to a list of things that we'll never know the truth about. This administration hasn't been transparent since Day 1 and Princess Pelosi is just as guilty for saying that from the get-go and yet we haven't heard a peep out of her polyurethane face with that "deer in the headlights" gleam she sports. I really don't know what to conclude on this one since we have all the makings of a pure slanted and tilted story because every avenue you hit, there's someone linked to the White House that is picking the garbage up off the floor and keeping anything incriminating away from the press, the people and making Obama look like the true Messiah as he was initially painted as. Even this whole BP thing is really turned on to the oil company and not the lack of response by the administration and even 33 days after the fact, Big O has plans for a vacation....swell ain't it? God forbid if this was Bush right now with the BP incident and wanting to go on vacation. The poor guy couldn't visit the porcelain god without some dumbass reporter saying he's dropping the ball on something.
So what's the stakes with you readers? Will Sestak be pointed at as a liar? Will this whole thing just vaporize into nothingness while the crickets chirp in the dark of night or are we going to get some sort of racecard issue if there are true allegations? Or will it be shifted off somewhere other than in Obamaland where he can say he didn't know anything about it? Quite possibly he could spin it enough that Bush can be blamed for it? Ya think?
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Powder Kagan
The left turns just keep on coming with the Left-Socialist-Progressive agenda Obama has put forth since day one (with constant denial by him and his cronies) and with this newest and latest Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan.
Surprisingly, both sides of the aisle are stirring on this decision for the obvious reason Kagan has no experience. She has as much experience as Obama does as a Senator to be quite frank. When you eventually peel away the layers, this pick for Supreme Court is pretty much just a female clone version of Obama and his radical agenda let alone her biased self-views on certain subjects negating calling anything from the Constitution or the bench itself. The liberal and progressive thought-process is pretty much in the same vein.
Kagan is most noted for her famous attachment to the banning of military recruitment officers on the campus of Harvard due to the Pentagon's banning of gays in the miltary and that whole "don't ask don't tell" scenario. I guarantee you she won't be scrutinized half as much as when Bush appointed Harriet Meyers; we all know how that all went down. Just another rhetoric whim of the left and the double-standard they live by. As soon as it was known Kagan was nominated, Patrick Leahy, D-VT wasted no time and made a retort of the Republicans looking for any excuse to oppose an Obama nominee. "The Presdient could of nominated Moses the Lawgiver and critics would have said, "Where's the birth certificate? He then quipped, "She will be confirmed."
Jeff Sessions, R-AL and Mitch McConnell, R-KY both mentioned of Kagan and her background being "thin" for this position. McConnell continued to say "It strikes me that if a nominee does not have judicial experience, they should have substantial litigation experience. Ms. Kagan has neither. A lifetime position on the Supreme Court does not lend itself to on-the-job-training."
It's been almost 40 years since an appointee has been nominated and has never served as a lower-court judge. Then again, the Dems are quick to the trigger about Rehnquist despite he had alot of experience as a trial lawyer compared to Kagan.
Even if the GOP tries their hand at a filibuster and needing the magic "41" votes to block Kagan, RINO's Olympia Snowe, R-ME and Orrin Hatch, R-UT are the usual turncoats on any vote of this nature. Rahm Emanuel wasted no time in talking to Snowe on May 10th once Kagan was nominated as reported by USA Today. I'm sure there's a deal or a talk session going on to make sure they have her "yes" vote.
"Elections have consequences." Yes, so true and yet another chapter in the oblivious world of the snub-nosed arrogant left. As long as these prophets of the "regime" have power, they will continue to push bills, hire czars with no experience in that particular field (let alone never voted in...just appointed)and continue with their absurd limitations to people's liberties and freedoms while they criticize everyone else of the same things they are enjoying. This is why your vote is so important if you want to stop this constant chaos. Otherwise, the liberals, democrats, progressives, whatever you want to call them will continue to live under their set of rules and so-called "free speech", which is only free to them because if they disagree with you, they try to silence you or take your speech away. Obama already admitted there's "too much information out there" that we have access to. If they had their way, they would suppress that too and it would be just like Germany and how Hitler forced the news and media propaganda on it's people.
The USA Today section of "Our View" was a joke in itself with their take of "early critiques of Kagan fall short of substance." Excuse me? Are you referring to her being a dean and having all that great schooling under her belt and not looking at the overall picture of experience on this high level? Your the media, of course you're going to side with her and Obama's pick, other wise, boo-hoo, wah-wah, I might be called a racist if I don't agree with her views because she was picked by a Black man. Get off this damn appeasement trip and stop smelling the ink presses already. Kagan doesn't call it from a Constitutional standpoint; the military ordeal with Harvard is proof enough of her views and in her own words, "a moral injustice of the first order."
Conservatives just flat-out are opposed of Kagan's inexperience and have recently requested papers and documents when she served as adviser to Bill Clinton from 1997-1999. The GOP is focused on any discrepancies or anything that can be deemed as controversial in the way she handles things and in what situations she was under that will evidentally pertain to what qualifications she really has. I see this ending up at a brick wall because it seems every time a GOP member wants papers or some sort of facts, they never get them. You know, stuff like Obama's real birth certificate, why his Columbia papers are never to be released and half of his czars don't even have experience in the field they were assigned to let alone they were never voted in just appointed by Obama himself. I know Presidents do that but Obama has like an army of them now...I lost count.
As far as the "critiques" the USA Today failed to spin on a reader such as me, the obvious pundits who they did have reply are the usual "guilt by association" leftist organizations and women's rights groups....that's like having a Jeopardy panel with Alice Cooper, Derek Jeter and Andre Agassi and asking all heavy metal questions. The people of mention are Ed Whelan (Ethics and Public Policy Center), sounds like another ACLU branch, Debra Ness, President of National Partnership for Women and Families (sounds like Code Pink and NAG meets Family Planning)and one of our favorite chuckleheads, Patrick Leahy, D-VT. They all are behind Kagan, so there's no real need to repeat the soothing remarks they had.
On a bit of a surprise, Carrie Severino's comments were pretty heady against Kagan and USA Today actually printed it...mark that on my calendar! Carrie is the chief counsel and policy director to the conservative Judicial Crisis Network and she pretty much says in a nutshell that Obama is just packing his court with reliable liberal votes to rubber-stamp an agenda that he knows the American people would not accept and what better way than to appoint a loyalist from your own Department of Justice? Severino also mentioned of how Kagan bent over backwards to avoid taking public positions of hot-button topics until something she personally couldn't help, the "don't ask, don't tell" episode.
Once all this smoke clears as far as Kagan being confirmed, the next court term starts in October and Kagan may have to sit out on alot of the cases due to "conflicting interest" due to the nomination. The calendar has been filling up to and a couple notable cases are coming up that people are keeping an eye on like the "Schwarzenegger vs. Video Software Dealers Association" in which there's a law wanted in California to prohibit sales and rentals of violent video games to minors. The other is "Snyder vs. Phelps", one people will watch carefully because this is the radical preacher Fred Phelps from Kansas that has his cronies interfere with military funerals while spewing their anti-gay slurs during a time people are trying to lay someone to rest and grieve in peace (if people would let them). Snyder is the dad of the deceased soldier that won a $5 million verdict due to the stress it caused. Phelps is appealing due to he thinks his freedom of speech was violated.
As you can tell in the last few months and even recently, there's just a ton of stuff on the plate that's going on. Wall Street, the oil spill, another Cap and Trade bill introduced, the problems in Greece and what that bailout will do, Gordon Brown stepping down and in the next few weeks we have a bunch of Primaries to get through (oh yeah, the "anti-incumbent" spin the media is saying is just too good with Utah and West Virginia ousting their incumbents..anything to disregard the Tea Party, right?). I'm just wondering what other garbage this "regime" is going to jam down our throats. We're just sitting ducks right now in a shallow pond and the liberals have the shotguns and several boxes of shells, just adding more insult to injury to the minority in the House and Senate, the Constitution and even worse, the American people. No matter the anger level we have and they know we have, this Administration just keeps showing us they just don't care---they have an agenda, it needs to be put in place; quickly, swiftly and rapidly. Can we stop it before it's too late? Or is this our version of a bomb-filled SUV?
Surprisingly, both sides of the aisle are stirring on this decision for the obvious reason Kagan has no experience. She has as much experience as Obama does as a Senator to be quite frank. When you eventually peel away the layers, this pick for Supreme Court is pretty much just a female clone version of Obama and his radical agenda let alone her biased self-views on certain subjects negating calling anything from the Constitution or the bench itself. The liberal and progressive thought-process is pretty much in the same vein.
Kagan is most noted for her famous attachment to the banning of military recruitment officers on the campus of Harvard due to the Pentagon's banning of gays in the miltary and that whole "don't ask don't tell" scenario. I guarantee you she won't be scrutinized half as much as when Bush appointed Harriet Meyers; we all know how that all went down. Just another rhetoric whim of the left and the double-standard they live by. As soon as it was known Kagan was nominated, Patrick Leahy, D-VT wasted no time and made a retort of the Republicans looking for any excuse to oppose an Obama nominee. "The Presdient could of nominated Moses the Lawgiver and critics would have said, "Where's the birth certificate? He then quipped, "She will be confirmed."
Jeff Sessions, R-AL and Mitch McConnell, R-KY both mentioned of Kagan and her background being "thin" for this position. McConnell continued to say "It strikes me that if a nominee does not have judicial experience, they should have substantial litigation experience. Ms. Kagan has neither. A lifetime position on the Supreme Court does not lend itself to on-the-job-training."
It's been almost 40 years since an appointee has been nominated and has never served as a lower-court judge. Then again, the Dems are quick to the trigger about Rehnquist despite he had alot of experience as a trial lawyer compared to Kagan.
Even if the GOP tries their hand at a filibuster and needing the magic "41" votes to block Kagan, RINO's Olympia Snowe, R-ME and Orrin Hatch, R-UT are the usual turncoats on any vote of this nature. Rahm Emanuel wasted no time in talking to Snowe on May 10th once Kagan was nominated as reported by USA Today. I'm sure there's a deal or a talk session going on to make sure they have her "yes" vote.
"Elections have consequences." Yes, so true and yet another chapter in the oblivious world of the snub-nosed arrogant left. As long as these prophets of the "regime" have power, they will continue to push bills, hire czars with no experience in that particular field (let alone never voted in...just appointed)and continue with their absurd limitations to people's liberties and freedoms while they criticize everyone else of the same things they are enjoying. This is why your vote is so important if you want to stop this constant chaos. Otherwise, the liberals, democrats, progressives, whatever you want to call them will continue to live under their set of rules and so-called "free speech", which is only free to them because if they disagree with you, they try to silence you or take your speech away. Obama already admitted there's "too much information out there" that we have access to. If they had their way, they would suppress that too and it would be just like Germany and how Hitler forced the news and media propaganda on it's people.
The USA Today section of "Our View" was a joke in itself with their take of "early critiques of Kagan fall short of substance." Excuse me? Are you referring to her being a dean and having all that great schooling under her belt and not looking at the overall picture of experience on this high level? Your the media, of course you're going to side with her and Obama's pick, other wise, boo-hoo, wah-wah, I might be called a racist if I don't agree with her views because she was picked by a Black man. Get off this damn appeasement trip and stop smelling the ink presses already. Kagan doesn't call it from a Constitutional standpoint; the military ordeal with Harvard is proof enough of her views and in her own words, "a moral injustice of the first order."
Conservatives just flat-out are opposed of Kagan's inexperience and have recently requested papers and documents when she served as adviser to Bill Clinton from 1997-1999. The GOP is focused on any discrepancies or anything that can be deemed as controversial in the way she handles things and in what situations she was under that will evidentally pertain to what qualifications she really has. I see this ending up at a brick wall because it seems every time a GOP member wants papers or some sort of facts, they never get them. You know, stuff like Obama's real birth certificate, why his Columbia papers are never to be released and half of his czars don't even have experience in the field they were assigned to let alone they were never voted in just appointed by Obama himself. I know Presidents do that but Obama has like an army of them now...I lost count.
As far as the "critiques" the USA Today failed to spin on a reader such as me, the obvious pundits who they did have reply are the usual "guilt by association" leftist organizations and women's rights groups....that's like having a Jeopardy panel with Alice Cooper, Derek Jeter and Andre Agassi and asking all heavy metal questions. The people of mention are Ed Whelan (Ethics and Public Policy Center), sounds like another ACLU branch, Debra Ness, President of National Partnership for Women and Families (sounds like Code Pink and NAG meets Family Planning)and one of our favorite chuckleheads, Patrick Leahy, D-VT. They all are behind Kagan, so there's no real need to repeat the soothing remarks they had.
On a bit of a surprise, Carrie Severino's comments were pretty heady against Kagan and USA Today actually printed it...mark that on my calendar! Carrie is the chief counsel and policy director to the conservative Judicial Crisis Network and she pretty much says in a nutshell that Obama is just packing his court with reliable liberal votes to rubber-stamp an agenda that he knows the American people would not accept and what better way than to appoint a loyalist from your own Department of Justice? Severino also mentioned of how Kagan bent over backwards to avoid taking public positions of hot-button topics until something she personally couldn't help, the "don't ask, don't tell" episode.
Once all this smoke clears as far as Kagan being confirmed, the next court term starts in October and Kagan may have to sit out on alot of the cases due to "conflicting interest" due to the nomination. The calendar has been filling up to and a couple notable cases are coming up that people are keeping an eye on like the "Schwarzenegger vs. Video Software Dealers Association" in which there's a law wanted in California to prohibit sales and rentals of violent video games to minors. The other is "Snyder vs. Phelps", one people will watch carefully because this is the radical preacher Fred Phelps from Kansas that has his cronies interfere with military funerals while spewing their anti-gay slurs during a time people are trying to lay someone to rest and grieve in peace (if people would let them). Snyder is the dad of the deceased soldier that won a $5 million verdict due to the stress it caused. Phelps is appealing due to he thinks his freedom of speech was violated.
As you can tell in the last few months and even recently, there's just a ton of stuff on the plate that's going on. Wall Street, the oil spill, another Cap and Trade bill introduced, the problems in Greece and what that bailout will do, Gordon Brown stepping down and in the next few weeks we have a bunch of Primaries to get through (oh yeah, the "anti-incumbent" spin the media is saying is just too good with Utah and West Virginia ousting their incumbents..anything to disregard the Tea Party, right?). I'm just wondering what other garbage this "regime" is going to jam down our throats. We're just sitting ducks right now in a shallow pond and the liberals have the shotguns and several boxes of shells, just adding more insult to injury to the minority in the House and Senate, the Constitution and even worse, the American people. No matter the anger level we have and they know we have, this Administration just keeps showing us they just don't care---they have an agenda, it needs to be put in place; quickly, swiftly and rapidly. Can we stop it before it's too late? Or is this our version of a bomb-filled SUV?
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Stacking The Scale
Well, here we are, step one of the procession towards Socialism. The Three Stooges (Obama, Reid and Pelosi) come out guns blazing and sweetening the rot in the basketful of apples that are what I call the "hot stove deals" with the Democratic Party. Despite not being fooled by Kanjorski, Stupak and Carney, as long as you have a "D" after your name, it makes no difference if you're "moderate" or "blue dog"....you're still a flaming liberal!!!
As we see it, we have 14 states in junction to file lawsuits mandating the constitutionality of this HC Bill. Fine and dandy. Libs/Dems are trying to get things written in a way they won't have to worry about any sort of rule violation as far as the Reconciliation Bill and Repubs are going over things with a fine-toothed comb to hopefully find the smallest thing that can possibly delay this and maybe overturn the whole bill. The big question is besides the Parliamentarian being biased (he was hired by none other than Harry Reid), will the Supreme Court be tilted enough to Obama. I know, they are to judge fairly by the books and law, but so far everything that our forefathers gave us has been trampled on; so makes you think these lawsuits will have any valor?
If the Supreme Court is anything like the 9th "Circus" Court out of California, you can kiss all these lawsuits goodbye. Maybe the next dirge of 37 states that have other lawsuits lying in wait will get a crack at it and maybe get something positive out of the result. But for now, things look a bit bleak and the substance of the bill is not really what Liberals are focused on, it's the defeat of Republicans, the power grab of the U.S. population and satisfying the class of "moochers", "spongers", "couch potatoes", "lazy ass", "unintelligent boxes of rocks" that suck off our system. For pete's sake, a lady went in on Monday after HC passed and she was looking for a free mammogram already; she was told no and yes, the bill passed but the services haven't started yet. I do hope another 2 million people make that same mistake and Obama will finally be exposed for being a fraud. Too many Kool-Aid drinkers to go along with the classes I mentioned earlier. If they outnumber us at any time in the next 20 years, we are so screwed. That's what this administration is doing with the help of destroying the economy, severe job loss, a healthcare package 58% of the people don't want, building empires within the educational system while punishing home schoolers and cyber school attendees (they can dumb down public school kids way faster) and now we're going to be threatned by the Boxer-Kerry Bill soon (Cap and Trade) and Amnesty for illegals (I do not want to hear immigration reform! That's just code speak). If Obama fails miserably with this Health Care Bill, he will need voters for 2012 and what better way to do that and to do the Amnesty thing?
This whole thing is planned out carefully. Follow me on this. Primaries are May 18th, the HC Bill only does a slow bleed here and there on some taxes and insurance companies won't see any fluctuation. November comes around, elections take place and again, no real damage to the insurance companies. Will this improve Obama and the Democrats chances to keep things strong in the House and Senate? That will be determined on the jobless factor compared to jobs created (or saved? more stupid code speak). Tea Party and 912-ers amongst Conservatives, Libertarians and people with any "common sense" will still be charged up after the HC vote. Dems think this bill will change their minds or they're that stupid, they'll forget. WRONG!! Rude awakening time. If this does happen wait until Jan 2011 comes around because this will be the time the health insurance companies balance their books for the year (again...all about timing). I don't see much fluctuation for the year but there will be a gradual squeeze and choke on them as demand grows for services and equipment...the trickle down as we call it. As soon as these companies have to raise their costs to cover these expenses, the Dems will blame them for raising their rates for no real reason instead of blaming themselves for a defective, uncapitalistic bill. This trend will continue. Everyone will be on an individual insurance mandate by 2013 (how convenient, a few months after the Presidential Election).
What's it going to take to vote these people out? The schools are hindering any progress the "Reagan" boomers are trying to teach these kids...this is the plan, get your foot in the door, tinker and whittle away at the rules you have set. Move the goalposts as you go; call an audible if you will but if we don't do something now, soon and with a prophetic force, if these other bills pass, we will be in a place far worse than Russia or Germany. The powertrip cable must be spliced, rendered or totally eliminated for this to happen. The "uninformed" must be taught and the younger generation must be intercepted from the indoctrination that these public schools provide. Everywhere we have a slight edge, it is being bulldozed by some bill, some interest group or some union group. The only hope and change I want to see is "Hope" this clown is one term and done and that I may have more than just "change" in my can on the street corner.
As we see it, we have 14 states in junction to file lawsuits mandating the constitutionality of this HC Bill. Fine and dandy. Libs/Dems are trying to get things written in a way they won't have to worry about any sort of rule violation as far as the Reconciliation Bill and Repubs are going over things with a fine-toothed comb to hopefully find the smallest thing that can possibly delay this and maybe overturn the whole bill. The big question is besides the Parliamentarian being biased (he was hired by none other than Harry Reid), will the Supreme Court be tilted enough to Obama. I know, they are to judge fairly by the books and law, but so far everything that our forefathers gave us has been trampled on; so makes you think these lawsuits will have any valor?
If the Supreme Court is anything like the 9th "Circus" Court out of California, you can kiss all these lawsuits goodbye. Maybe the next dirge of 37 states that have other lawsuits lying in wait will get a crack at it and maybe get something positive out of the result. But for now, things look a bit bleak and the substance of the bill is not really what Liberals are focused on, it's the defeat of Republicans, the power grab of the U.S. population and satisfying the class of "moochers", "spongers", "couch potatoes", "lazy ass", "unintelligent boxes of rocks" that suck off our system. For pete's sake, a lady went in on Monday after HC passed and she was looking for a free mammogram already; she was told no and yes, the bill passed but the services haven't started yet. I do hope another 2 million people make that same mistake and Obama will finally be exposed for being a fraud. Too many Kool-Aid drinkers to go along with the classes I mentioned earlier. If they outnumber us at any time in the next 20 years, we are so screwed. That's what this administration is doing with the help of destroying the economy, severe job loss, a healthcare package 58% of the people don't want, building empires within the educational system while punishing home schoolers and cyber school attendees (they can dumb down public school kids way faster) and now we're going to be threatned by the Boxer-Kerry Bill soon (Cap and Trade) and Amnesty for illegals (I do not want to hear immigration reform! That's just code speak). If Obama fails miserably with this Health Care Bill, he will need voters for 2012 and what better way to do that and to do the Amnesty thing?
This whole thing is planned out carefully. Follow me on this. Primaries are May 18th, the HC Bill only does a slow bleed here and there on some taxes and insurance companies won't see any fluctuation. November comes around, elections take place and again, no real damage to the insurance companies. Will this improve Obama and the Democrats chances to keep things strong in the House and Senate? That will be determined on the jobless factor compared to jobs created (or saved? more stupid code speak). Tea Party and 912-ers amongst Conservatives, Libertarians and people with any "common sense" will still be charged up after the HC vote. Dems think this bill will change their minds or they're that stupid, they'll forget. WRONG!! Rude awakening time. If this does happen wait until Jan 2011 comes around because this will be the time the health insurance companies balance their books for the year (again...all about timing). I don't see much fluctuation for the year but there will be a gradual squeeze and choke on them as demand grows for services and equipment...the trickle down as we call it. As soon as these companies have to raise their costs to cover these expenses, the Dems will blame them for raising their rates for no real reason instead of blaming themselves for a defective, uncapitalistic bill. This trend will continue. Everyone will be on an individual insurance mandate by 2013 (how convenient, a few months after the Presidential Election).
What's it going to take to vote these people out? The schools are hindering any progress the "Reagan" boomers are trying to teach these kids...this is the plan, get your foot in the door, tinker and whittle away at the rules you have set. Move the goalposts as you go; call an audible if you will but if we don't do something now, soon and with a prophetic force, if these other bills pass, we will be in a place far worse than Russia or Germany. The powertrip cable must be spliced, rendered or totally eliminated for this to happen. The "uninformed" must be taught and the younger generation must be intercepted from the indoctrination that these public schools provide. Everywhere we have a slight edge, it is being bulldozed by some bill, some interest group or some union group. The only hope and change I want to see is "Hope" this clown is one term and done and that I may have more than just "change" in my can on the street corner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
