Obama Creates New Job: For Himself

I guess that's how he intends to create all the other phony taxpayer funded government jobs - just make them up. The Office of the President -Elect? Let's count the adjectives we can use to describe Obama's latest act of hubris: arrogant, disrespectful, insulting, offensive, megalomaniacal, demeaning, un-American, stupid, childish,...there's just too many.

Holy Land Foundation Guilty

We've had a major legal victory against the enemy the left refuses to name or fight:

"A federal jury in Dallas on Monday dealt the Stealth Jihad initiative in the United States a crushing defeat: it found five former officials of an Islamic charity, the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), guilty of funneling at least $12 million of the charity’s funds to the jihad terror group Hamas. The notorious “Muslim civil rights” group, the Council on American Islamic Relations, is involved as well, since Ghassan Elashi, a founding director of CAIR as well as founder of the group’s Texas chapter, was among those found guilty; Elashi and his co-defendants face prison sentences of up to twenty years for providing support to terrorists.

Another unsavory link between the HLF and the global jihad
came to light during the first trial of the charity, which ended in a mistrial last year. Found among the HLF’s documents was the Muslim Brotherhood memorandum about its “grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within” first came to light. It seems clear now that the HLF itself was one of the chief engines of this stealthy effort, enjoying a sterling reputation as a charitable organization while actually acting as a virtual fundraising engine for Hamas.

One chief operating procedure of this stealth jihad effort is constantly to portray oneself as being unjustly victimized by a racist and bigoted Justice Department. (Al-Qaeda manuals, similarly, advise imprisoned members to claim that they have been tortured whenever and wherever they may find themselves in an infidel prison.)

I can't wait until we close Gitmo and give these barbarians the constitutional benefits of US courts. Here' some video of the peaceful religion of Islam that is oddly responsible for almost all of the terrorism, violence and wars in this world.

Arrogant, Ignorant and Dangerous

The most frustrating thing about watching congress strut around telling us they're going to solve a financial crisis they created is the fact that they no nothing about the subject. They repeat politically expedient myths and lies about market economics and the equally ignorant public nods their heads at any simplistic explanation of a complex problem.

Look back at the oil bubble of this past summer. One of the favorite scapegoats was speculators in oil futures. It was said they were driving up prices for profit at the expense of the public although none of these demagogues criticised them when the price plummeted. It was never explained or understood that futures traders were just predicting future supply and demand and that all trades require a buyer and a seller.

John Lott warns us not to trust control of our economic lives and individual decisions to government force run by by people who wouldn't know a balance sheet from a bed sheet:

"Politicians pose as the ultimate experts. They may never have worked in an industry or studied an issue before, but after few months of time on a topic they know everything: the types of cars that should be produced, the science of global warming, and how much doctors should charge for different types of surgery...

Outside of studying law, few in Congress even have backgrounds that are closely related to some of the issues covered by government. Just take the Senate this year, almost half, 45, are attorneys. Only one doctor, four farmers, 13 business people, seven teachers, four professors (all law, and three are listed as just adjuncts), and virtually all the others list their past experience as professional politician. No members of the Senate are scientists or economists. One member of the Senate played professional sports, and another owned a professional sports team...

...Harry Reid says Congress will give the automobile companies another $25 billion when they provide a “viable plan.” But how is Congress going to evaluate what a “viable plan” is better than the shareholders and bankers whose money is at stake? The auto companies presumably have to turn to Congress for money because others don’t think that they are good investments.

Would you want to invest in a company that congressmen tell you is a viable investment, or in companies where shareholders and banks are willing to put their own money?"

Dems Will Make It Worse

There are two types of economists. Those that don't know and those that don't know they don't know. Peter Schiff however, now looks like a genius after he correctly predicted with great certitude, the current economic mess we find ourselves in. What's more amazing is that he not only called what would happen but was dead on as to the why. As a side note, he must be having a lot of fun watching the other so-called experts rudely dismissing him while making now laughable predictions of their own.

Now Schiff is predicting further disaster as Obama promises to crank up the presses in a futile attempt to prop up an economy that needs to fall. (Video Below) Democrats are offering more government solutions from the same government that tripped everything up in the first place.

We will have more government spending on inefficient make work projects that take money from the private sector or borrow more on the country's already maxed out credit. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will pass protectionist policies and block free trade deals that will result in retaliatory tariffs overseas. This will be on top of even more uncompetitive new regulations, labor laws and tax increases.

Buckle up and pucker your sphincters folks. It's going to be a wild ride.

Much thanks to Hot Air

There's No Free Lunch, Stupid

The economic ignorance of the general public is one of the most dangerous threats to freedom today. A majority of Americans actually believe the fairy tales of the Left and unwittingly voted for their own economic destruction.

Jamie Whyte at the London Times gives an excellent explanation of the real costs of a heavy handed government:

..."To an economic child, taxing companies sounds like an obviously good idea. Who cares about companies? Can a company be hungry, homeless, uneducated? Will you put the interests of these wealthy inhuman entities ahead of real, flesh and blood people, many of whom are struggling to make ends meet?

But companies cannot be rich or poor; only the people who own them or work for them can be. Nor can the cost of taxation fall on a company; it must ultimately fall on the company's owners, employees or customers. Before you can tell whether corporate tax is a good idea, you need to understand who bears the cost and how it affects their behaviour. Once you do, it turns out that taxing companies is a bad idea.

Research shows that the cost of corporate tax falls more or less evenly across a company's shareholders (in lower dividends), employees (in lower wages) and customers (in higher prices). So, in terms of the “social justice” so beloved of the Left, corporate tax is no better than a combination of income and sales taxes.

But, in terms of efficiency, it is worse. Research also shows that corporate tax has a greater “deadweight cost” than both income and sales taxes, because it discourages the allocation of resources to productive uses - in other words, it discourages investment.

Markets are another, increasingly popular, fantastical bearer of costs. The current financial crisis, we are told, was caused by “unfettered markets”. Fetter them! Alas, you cannot fetter a market. Markets are nothing but places (sometimes “virtual” places) where people enter into voluntary transactions. You can fetter a market only by fettering those who participate in it. You must dictate the terms on which they may do business with each other or conditions they must meet to participate in the market.

Market fetterists claim their shackles protect the vulnerable. That sounds plausible only if you ignore the effects on individual market participants. Complying with regulations imposes a fixed cost on businesses. It thus disadvantages small firms, creates a barrier to market entry and stifles the competition that delivers the best deal for consumers. In short, it shafts the little guy. That is why large incumbent firms lobby politicians to increase market regulation...

... When it comes to bearing costs, there are no companies or markets or other aggregations of people. Costs are always borne by individuals. That is what Margaret Thatcher meant when she denied the existence of society: “They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people.”...

NYT: Palin Condones Turkey Executions

The New York Times editorial board has taken their childish hatred for Sarah Palin to the level of self-parody. They now have their collective panties in a twist over a video of Palin on a turkey farm that was... Killing Turkeys!!!

" And then there’s this. You don’t have to be a huge animal lover to question why Governor Palin chose to be interviewed — while issuing a traditional seasonal pardon of a turkey — while turkeys were being executed in the background."

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air had this to say:

"One man butchers a turkey for food (two, actually), and the New York Times gets the vapors. Have any of them ever eaten meat? At all? The editors of the Times should declare right now whether they plan to eat real turkey on Thanksgiving, and/or use turkey in sandwiches from now on. If so, how would they expect to have that available to them without the kind of process seen in this clip? Did they think that turkeys somehow committed suicide and left wills donating their bodies to family dining tables around the world?

Executed. Someone send the Times a vat of smelling salts."

One one wonders how this instructional video on how to carve up a turkey corpse made it past the fragile sensibilities of these infants and on to the Times dining page.

Obama: I Didn't Mean MY Kids!

From the "some are more equal than others" department, we've been told that it's bad form to criticize The One for sending his children to a private school while denying those less fortunate the opportunity to do so themselves:

(CNSNews.com) - President-elect Barack Obama and his wife Michelle “have every right” to send their children to public or private school, and no one should “criticize” their decision, Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), said in an interview with CNSNews.com on Monday at the National Press Club.

Democratic Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack echoed Weingarten’s comments at the conference, telling CNSNews.com that “it’s a very personal decision” that the president-elect and his wife need to make and the issue “should not be subject to criticism or comment.” ...

...Weingarden said “none of us” can relate to being in the position of president of the United States. “Look, none of us knows what it’s like to be a president of the United States of America or a president-elect,” she said. “I think Senator Obama and his wife have every right to make a decision that works for their family and their kids, and none of us should criticize it.”

Vilsak and Weingarden can relate to and make personal decisions for the millions of ordinary parents they wont allow to escape from the corrupt and incompetent government school system. The education fascists would also prohibit parents from teaching their own children if they could as we saw in the recent attempt to ban homeschooling in California:

The California Teachers Association, the state teachers’ union, has been critical of parents’ rights in the case. “Parents do not have an unfettered right to dictate the terms of their children’s education,” stated a lawyer for the union. “Unregulated,unsupervised homeschooling, the lawyer said, is an invitation to ‘educational anarchy.’”

That's because the Obamas are part of the anointed ruling elite and their kids need and deserve the best education possible. The children of the unwashed masses on the other hand, merely need to be indoctrinated as loyal servants of The Church of Secular Government with just enough education to make them useful drones. Well educated, critically thinking people are just trouble making bourgeoisie.

So everyone should just know their place and stay there. Disruptive questioning of the ruling class will not be tolerated.

Michael Jackson Converts to Islam

It's comes as no surprise that he would join a religion that officially condones pedophilia, specifically the buggering of little boys:

...Perhpas not altogether insignificant in this grotesque phenomenon is that the Koran itself promises to put pre-pubescent boys at the service of jihadi martyrs not interested in the female virgins awaiting them in paradise. The boys will be like “scattered pearls” of “perpetual freshness” (Suras 52:24, 56:17, 76:19).

The Triumph of The Eco-Marxists

Barack Obama gave a speech to the Bi-Partisan Governors Climate Summit
that was full of the typical boilerplate lies of the Global Warming hoax along with the predictable solutions of an even more heavy handed government.

He will get his way and this nonsense will be piled on top of a fragile economy already crippled by government meddling and social engineering. And the only solutions on the table is more of the same. The enslavement of the populous by the fascist/socialist elite is almost complete. The irony is that most of the slaves voted for it:

"Few challenges facing America - and the world - are more urgent than combating climate change. The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear. Sea levels are rising. Coastlines are shrinking. We've seen record drought, spreading famine, and storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane season."

This is the most audacious use of the Big Lie in history. Non - Scientists Obama, AlGore and their Eco-Marxist allies either wilfully ignore contrary views or ridicule and blacklist detractors with propaganda from the lap dog media. Obama and his leftist congress along with useful idiot Republicans have vowed to address this mythical problem through higher taxes and energy costs, more regulation and less individual liberty.

Nevertheless, 31,000 American scientists alone have signed the following petition:

"We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

We also have this extensive list of real experts that are skeptical at best of this "crisis". It also comes as no surprise that the True Believers refuse to subject their claims to even the most basic requirements of Scientific Theory.

In fact, not one person has stepped to claim the $500,000 prize in The Ultimate Global Warming Challenge:

$500,000 will be awarded to the first person to prove, in a scientific manner, that humans are causing harmful global warming. The winning entry will specifically reject both of the following two hypotheses:

UGWC Hypothesis 1
Manmade emissions of greenhouse gases do not discernibly, significantly and predictably cause increases in global surface and tropospheric temperatures along with associated stratospheric cooling.

UGWC Hypothesis 2
The benefits equal or exceed the costs of any increases in global temperature caused by manmade greenhouse gas emissions between the present time and the year 2100, when all global social, economic and environmental effects are considered."

Here's some video from The Great Global Warming Swindle.



More Info and Links at Junk Science

Ignoramuses For Obama

Via How Obama Got Elected

Watch the video above to see how well informed The One's supporters are. Zogby has done a poll that tests the political knowledge of these morons. This is no small part due to the journalistic malfeasance of the dinosaur media in behaving as the propaganda arm of The Messiah's campaign. They gave him billions in free advertising.

Add to that the 7:1 spending advantage Obama has over a weak, Bob Dole re-tread and it's striking that Mc'Cain got 48% of the vote. Additionally, millions of Republican voters stayed home due to Mc'Cain's repeated betrayals of his own party and its principles.

This election was a triumph of form over substance. In other words Obama was dragged over the finish line by money and MSM cheer leading. He and the Democrats are easily beatable if Republicans can grow the balls to put forth a contrasting agenda rather than be the Democrat Lite Party.

Zogby Poll:

512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

But they could get these questions right:

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct. Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)

More at Gateway Pundit

Ayers Re-Defines Terrorism

"It's not terrorism because it doesn't target people, to kill or injure," Ayers said.


Terrorism (těr'ə-rĭz'əm) n. The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons. - American Heritage Dictionary



It's bad enough that a so-called "distinguished" professor of education either doesn't know or unilaterally decides to redefine a simple word. He's also a pathological liar and a bad one at that.



Ask John Murtagh whether he felt terrorized at age nine when Ayer's group firebombed his home:

"Through the large windows overlooking the yard, all we could see was the bright glow of flames below. We didn’t leave our burning house for fear of who might be waiting outside. The same night, bombs were thrown at a police car in Manhattan and two military recruiting stations in Brooklyn. Sunlight, the next morning, revealed three sentences of blood-red graffiti on our sidewalk: FREE THE PANTHER 21; THE VIET CONG HAVE WON; KILL THE PIGS. "

For the next 18 months, I went to school in an unmarked police car. My mother, a schoolteacher, had plainclothes detectives waiting in the faculty lounge all day.

Would Ayers feel terrorized if someone were to firebomb his home or that of his children and grandchildren?



"... I never hurt or killed anyone," Ayers said.



Neither did Charles Manson. But I don't think he's going to be offered a teaching position anytime soon. And it's not as if Ayers didn't try. The fact is that this psychopath founded the Weather Underground and his group and its allies did hurt and kill people, while attempting to kill many more.

Kill all the rich people. ... Bring the revolution home. Kill your parents." - William Ayers


Ayers has nothing to say about his failed plot to kill hundreds at a Fort Dix dance. Thankfully, the bomb makers blew themselves to smithereens in Greenwich Village. One of those killed was Ayers girlfriend, Diana Oughton, and he seems to be as unbothered by that as I am.

Afterwards, Ayers said the bombs were intended to do serious damage: "tearing through windows and walls and, yes, people too."

There seems to be nothing this sociopath can't rationalize:

"What you call the violent past, that was a time when thousands of people were being murdered every month by our own government. ... We were on the right side," he told "GMA."

Oh well, if you say so! A lot of abortion clinics have been bombed by people who thought they were "on the right side". Is that OK too?

Ayers also admires RFK assassin Sirhan Sirhan and mass murderers like Mao Zedong and Che Guevara. I guess genocide in the name of communist tyranny is alright in Ayers book. He certainly doesn't have a problem with the slaughter of millions in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos after he got his way.

Now Ayers wants to be thought of as just an old radical that wants to make money off of his book in the capitalist system he abhors. Indeed, all of his money comes from those he professes to hate. He and his psychotic wife are just regular folks now dontcha know:

"For the past few years, I have gone about my business, hanging out with my kids and, now, my grandchildren, taking care of our elders (they moved in as the kids moved out), going to work, teaching and writing."

Awww.... Isn't that sweet.

Too bad the people and families you and your buddies terrorized and killed have the memories of your childish brutality seared into their minds. Here's another word for you to redefine:

Treason n.1. The offense of attempting to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance, or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power; disloyalty; treachery. - Websters Dictionary

Had you and your wife committed your crimes during the Civil War, WWI or WWII, you most surely would have been executed as that is the penalty for treason. And let's not even think about how they treat traitors like you in the old USSR, China or Cuba.

It would be ironic if someone was as morally sure about your sedition as you were about your "enemies". They might feel that you still needed to pay a price. Not that I would condone such a thing. But I would certainly understand.

Bush Backs $25 Billion To Auto Co.'s

Let's face it. Other than tax cuts, GW Bush has been terrible on economic issues, especially spending. Now he advocates throwing good money after bad with a $25 Billion loan to the Big Three. That's Our money folks.

AP- The White House on Friday threw its support behind a plan to speed release of $25 billion in existing loans to the Big Three automakers but rejected a Democratic proposal to use money from a financial bailout to help the troubled industry

The private sector wont put their money behind these losers for good reason. Their antiquated union contracts make them structurally uncompetitive. Unless a top to bottom restructuring of US automakers is included as a requirement of these loans then all we're doing is delaying the inevitable.

Government bailouts by definition are fraught with moral hazards which in this case has to do with purely political considerations rather than good business sense. This insanity is about preserving the status-quo of unsustainable union contracts. It's also about fear of paying the price of failure that must go hand in hand with success in a free market economy.

The unions have bought off the Democrats in this regard but Republicans shouldn't go along. Bankruptcy will force these companies to re-organize in a more efficient and competitive manner or have their assets sold to better run companies.

Let the private market decide what to do with these private companies. We will all be better off and the taxpayers wont pay the bill to prop up those that deserve and need to fail.

The Fantasies of Steven Pearlstein

The Washington Post's Steven Pearlstein has proved once again why he is the personification of the Peter Principle. As that paper's business reporter, he consistently shows his hostility toward the very subject he covers with calls for the failure of capitalism and increased government interference in private enterprise.
Now he does himself one better with the moronic claim that increasing taxes during a recession is a good thing:

“That there’s something wrong with raising taxes in the middle of a
recession – that it’s always a bad idea – not true,” Pearlstein said. “It
depends on what the government does with that money and what people would have done with the money if they already – if they had it and it wasn’t taxed.”

In other words, individuals are poor judges of the proper way to invest and spend their own money. Therefore the high priests of government, who are of course endowed with supernatural powers, should confiscate those funds by force in order to ensure it is used in the most beneficial (politically motivated) way. After taking a cut of 30% or so for the Church of Secular Government of course.

This glittering jewel of economic ignorance goes on:

“And it’s quite possible that if you raised taxes on people who
otherwise would have saved the money and you, and you invest it wisely – the economy can be better off,” Pearlstein said. “So it’s not always the case raising taxes in a recession is a bad idea. It matters on whom and how you use the money.”

I find it quite amazing that Pearlstein doesn't understand that savings is investment. Where does he think interest comes from? I guess he really means that the anointed in government are the only ones who know how to invest "wisely". They've done such a good job with Social Security and Medicare contributions, so why wouldn't this dope think that?

Of course Pearlstein has history on his side, right? After all, Jimmy Carter raised taxes during recession in the 70's and that worked out well didn't it?
Herbert Hoover did the same thing 1929 and that...never mind.

Pearlstein says it's "quite possible" is dumb idea would work, which is like saying it's quite possible that the umpteenth email I got from Nigeria today really will be a way for me to make millions.

Pearlstein isn't going to find a lot of takers for his incoherent ramblings:

Even Democratic President-elect Barack Obama said tax increases could be detrimental to the overall economy. And as Murray Rothbard pointed out for the Ludwig von Mises Institute – raising taxes in this environment is a bad idea – under any school of economics.

“Every school: Austrian, Keynesian, monetarist, or classical, would react in horror to such a plan, which obviously worsens a recession by lowering saving and investment, and productive (as opposed to parasitic and wasteful government) consumption. Raising taxes does nothing to help the inflation, and does a lot to make the recession more severe; and it aggravates the deadweight burden of government on the economy.”

Related Posts:
WAPO's Anti-Business Reporter Wants Less Business
WAPO's Anti-Business Reporter, Steven Pearlstein

Hail Obama!

It's generally a given that organizations and the people in them reflect the attitude of the person or people at the top. Put simply, a fish rots at the head first. With that in mind, this seemingly innocuous statement by Obama Spokesperson Valerie Jarret, becomes all the more frightening:

"There is one president at a time. President Bush is still the president. He's graciously invited President-elect Obama to the White House tomorrow to begin their conversations of the transition. So we respect that. He will be the president until January 20th. However, giving--given, really, the daunting challenges that we face, it's important that President-elect Obama is prepared to really take power and begin to rule day one."

Video Below

Hamas Suspicious of Obama

Via MemriTV - It's cool dudes. Barry was just sending props to the self loathing dupes in New York and Miami. You psychotic assholes don't have to worry ,what with all The One's Jew hating friends and allies.

"Sheik Abdallah Abu Jarbu’: Barack Obama has won. Is he good or bad for the Arabs? Before you talk about this or that, you should know that no American leader has ever won their elections, unless he pledged his loyalty to the Jews in advance. Obama went to the Wailing Wall, put on their skullcap, shed tears just like they do, and lamented their sorrow, but he did not mention the Palestinian people at all. He talked about the suffering of the Jews and about the Holocaust, but he did not even mention the people of Beit Hanoun, who were killed while sleeping in their homes."

Obama Would Never Be British PM

One of the funniest things to come out of this election is the sanctimonious nonsense coming out of Europe. They celebrate our election of a black man while their own racism goes unchecked.

The continent that gave us Hitler, Stalin and two world wars laughably has the balls to lecture us on the evils of bigotry. Now we have an admission from the UK that racism isn't unique to the colonies. Accusing the Labour Party no less. As if we didn't know that already:

"If Barack Obama had lived here I would be very surprised if even
somebody as brilliant as him would have been able to break through the institutional stranglehold that there is on power within the Labour Party," Trevor Phillips told The Times...

...He said: "The parties and unions and think-tanks are all very happy to sign up to the general idea of advancing the cause of minorities but in practice they would like somebody else to do the business. It's institutional racism."...

..."It would be very difficult for somebody like Barack Obama to find their way through the way we do things.

Tax Takers Aren't Doing Their Fair Share

Have you ever heard a Democrat seriously talk about the government doing with less? Of course not since the state is the secular church and that would be blasphemy. IBD gives us some facts:

..."Sacrifice" is evidently not lacking on the tax side of the federal
fiscal equation. The spending side is a different story, however.
If there is a lack of "sacrifice," it lies not with the taxpayers but with the "tax takers."...

...Washington's talk of "sacrifice" is no more than a stalking horse in the left's hunt for higher taxes. This call for higher taxes is not so much about funding the war against terrorism as it is about the left's desire to use the tax code to redistribute income.

The contrast between taxes and spending during the current and past three conflicts could not be starker. And it could not demonstrate more clearly the left's divergent view of taxes. It differs fundamentally from the rest of America's. For most, taxes are a necessary evil as disagreeable and inevitable as death.

For the left, they are a good to be pursued, a means to an end. Not simply needed to expand government, they are sought to smooth the perceived inequities arising from a market economy's distribution of wealth.

Washington's call for "sacrifice" therefore rings hollow on every front.

Obamunists Say: Let's Make Nice

Now that the Obamabots have their victory, some of them want to kiss and make up with a nauseatingly oh so cute web site. Andrew Breitbart writes of this new tone in the Wahington Times and has this quote:

"There's nothing easier than telling the guy you just beat that he should forget the depths you plumbed to do so," wrote Jim Treacher at his blog.

Indeed. It would be easy for me to tell these punks to go F&%@ off but since I'm an adult, I won't. Obviously these cowards are concerned about retribution for their vile and un-American tirades over the last eight years.

They need not worry since Conservatives and Libertarians don't generally resort to the type of viciously immature behavior that passes for political discourse on the Left. And no amount of conciliatory gestures on their part will lead me to believe it wont happen again if they don't get their way.

Nevertheless, I have no interest in their fascistic call for "unity", which is just another way of saying they will not tolerate dissent from their utopian socialist agenda. That's not going to happen and I fully expect to be called a cynic, racist and every other projection of these hate-filled infants' true character.

If these knuckleheads think I'm just going to sit by and allow their Marxist leaders to destroy my property rights, take away my right to defend myself and surrender this country's sovereignty to a bunch of goons at the U.N., they're even dumber and more insane than I thought they were. I'm an individual, not a drone in the Obanation.

H/T to Gateway Pundit

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke

Secret Orders Let Us Kill the Enemy!

Does anyone have a problem with this?

WASHINGTON — The United States military since 2004 has used broad, secret authority to carry out nearly a dozen previously undisclosed attacks against Al Qaeda and other militants in Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere, according to senior American officials.

Isn't that exactly what G.W. Bush said we were going to do and everyone was on board with it? We as a country vowed in 2001 that AQ would have no safe haven and that any country that harbored them was our enemy as well. There were "Huzzahs!" all around.

Do we want to wait for another 9/11 plot to come out Syria or Somalia as it did in Afghanistan? Or do we want kill these cowards wherever they are. And is anyone seriously suggesting that these governments didn't know AQ was operating within their borders?

The anti-American leftist media is reporting this revelation as if it's a shocking violation of...something or other. I see it as a comforting confirmation that we're allowing our military to do its job. How long that will last remains to be seen.

Now What Do We Do?

The Obamabots have had their celebration and now comes the hangover. The acolytes of The One's cult will now realize that nothing will change in their lives as they are still stuck with themselves.

Even worse, Obama will change the Government in ways that will hurt the very people who thought they will be helped by him. The loss of jobs from a heavy handed anti-business government and the other roadblocks and punishments to success that will be imposed, assures a cold slap of reality and the realization that there's no free lunch.

Here's some funny video along these lines from South Park and The Onion.





Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

Indoctrination by The Indoctrinated

This video of a useful idiot school teacher reveals both the cruelty and incoherence of the bullies on the double-speak Left.

That this was filmed by Europeans makes it embarrassing as well.

Diantha Harris: It’s a senseless war! [Stares at Kathy.] And by the way, Kathy, the person that you’re picking for president said [Harris shakes her head] that our troops could stay in Iraq for another hundred years if they need to! [Kathy bites her lip, looks ashamed. Other kids stare at Kathy, laugh, smirk.] So that means that your daddy could stay in the military for another hundred years!

[Kathy is on verge of tears.]

[In an interview later:]

Diantha Harris: Now I can support whomever I want to support, as long as I don’t browbeat another person for the candidate that they supported. Like I have some students that support John McCain, and when they told me that, I said ah … “that’s good’ and I just moved on. So, I think that everybody is entitled to their own personal opinion.

The frightening thing is that this fascist drone actually believes what she's saying. What's more frightening is that a Democrat controlled government will give the government schools additonal power while cutting off all avenues of escape.

H/T Hot Air

Mc'Cain Losers Blame Palin?

The one bright spot in Mc'Cain's failed candidacy was Sarah Palin. The mere fact that she drove the left nuts told me that she was a good pick. As the saying goes: "When you're catching flak, then you're over the target. She was also the only energizing factor in an otherwise lackluster repeat of Dole 96' .But the Democrat Light Republicans that populated the Mc'Cain campaign are finished with her and want to make sure she never comes back.

Palin headed home Wednesday to Alaska amid new reports of
sniping from anonymous McCain aides, mulling her own future unencumbered by her supporting role on the presidential ticket.
In an interview with CNN, Palin insisted there's no animosity from her toward Team McCain, despite media reports citing its staffers calling her a "diva" and a "wack job."

She was chosen specifically to bring back a Republican base that saw Mc'Cain as a grandstanding gadfly who relished sticking his thumb in their eyes. Palin was the only thing that kept Mc'Cain from being completely crushed as many Republicans came out and voted for him only because she was on the ticket.

Palin made conservatives temporarily forget the betrayals of Campaign Finance Reform (which Obama used to burn him), Immigration (amnesty) Reform, his opposition to Bush's tax cuts etc. And in the end his Democrat and media "friends" hung Bush around his neck. He was the Democrat's and the media's favorite (weakest) nominee and they kissed his ass until they could kick it. The ironies abound.

And now they blame her for giving them a fighting chance? I'm not happy Obama won but this tells me Mc'Cain was and is his own worst enemy.

**More anonymous back-stabbing from Fox News.

Here Comes the Tyrants

Obama wins and now we will have a President who is at best ambivalent about his own country, its history and its very constitution. He will have the cooperation of a like minded congress that will move swiftly towards as much more government control of the individual in every aspect of life.

** The best example so far of Democrat congressional arrogance and contempt for dissent is Jim Moran who decries "the simplistic notion that those who have wealth are entitled to keep it." He then goes on to berate those who would even suggest that Democrats had any responsibility for the mortgage crisis. Expect a lot more of this intolerance and heavy handedness. This is what you get when ask government to improve your life by force.






Chuck Schumer has already started to justify coming attempts at censorship by setting up an incoherent and illogical comparison of talk radio to pornography.




These are just two examples of the type of dictatorial high-handed attitude we will see constantly from an imperious Democrat controlled federal government. Remember, to them the state is the church and to question the hierarchy is blasphemy

The Final Ad

The National Republican Trust has a last minute ad that runs all their previous one together.

Obama vs Obama

Here's a video from Mary Katharine Ham that will go into the I told you so file should The One get elected. What's more frightening than the bad lying is that Obama's head is so far up his ass he doesn't know which end is up.

Obama: Bankrupt 49% Of Our Energy

"So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted."

When a Presidential talks about bankrupting any U.S. company or industry, it should disqualify him for any high office, much less the Presidency. Unfortunately there may be a majority of Americans who either A) Don't know anything about The One other than he's The One or B) Are ignorant of economics, history and just about everything else and actually think his statist philosophies are a good idea. Or C) Do know all this and will vote for him anyway because they don't believe a collectivist dictatorship could happen here. Yeah, well they thought that in Russia, Germany, Cuba, Zimbabwe and hundreds of other places.

The coal industry has responded:

"Regardless of the timing or method of the release of these remarks, the message from the Democratic candidate for President could not be clearer: the Obama-Biden ticket spells disaster for America's coal industry and the tens of thousands of Americans who work in it...

"It's evident that this campaign has been pandering in states like Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, Indiana and Pennsylvania to attempt to generate votes from coal supporters, while keeping his true agenda hidden from the state's voters.

Gee! Ya think?

Moving on, Obama tells us that he actually does understand something about economics:

You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.

And then from the above video we have more plans from Lord Obama to dictate how we should live.

Q: How do you convince people to change their lifestyles, to live differently, or to turn the question on its ear, are voters ahead of the politicians on this stuff? Do they get it, and maybe the politicians don’t?
A: Well, I think, uh, I think voters do understand it. I think it is important for us to send some price signals to change behavior.

This is the crux of Obama's economic philosophy. Use the tax and regulatory structure to force individuals into behaving the way the anointed believes they should. It will never stop, it never does. Statists like Obama see individualism and free will as a threat to their power and their unrelenting quest to re-order society to their liking.

If you accept the notion that it's government's role to tell you how much energy to use, then why not the food you eat, the place you live or the things you say or believe?

Here's more from Comrade Obama telling us that Electricity will "necessarily have to skyrocket".