Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

The Ultimate Moral Problem Characterizing The Democrat Party

February 17, 2014

The Democrat Party is the party of sodomite worship in America, bringing on the full wrath of God according to the Book of Romans Chapter One.  Don’t be deceived: the argument that “God is love,” and therefore God would never be against a man’s love of sodomizing another man is obscene.  Because while God IS love, the ultimate characteristic of God is HOLINESS.  The Bible never says that God is “love, love, love.”  Instead we have the threefold repetition, the ultimate Hebrew intensifier, that God is “holy, holy, holy.”    And a holy God cannot tolerate SIN and judges sin.  And in fact, without judgment of sin there can be no “love.”  Consider what would happen if you had a “loving police department” that refused to punish criminals because that would be unloving: you would have literal hell on earth in your town as evil and hate triumphed over good.  God MUST judge sin or He isn’t God.  And homosexuality is sin according to God’s Word.  But the Democrat Party – as the party of giant human government in defiance of God – believes it stands in judgment of God and everything and everyone else.

The Democrat Party is the party of the murder of more than fifty-five MILLION innocent human beings – making them more than nine times more monstrous than the Nazis – again in crystal clear contrast to the teaching of the sanctity of innocent human life according to Psalm 139:13-16 and numerous other scriptures.  Do  you want to know why our Social Security system is going to collapse?  Because Democrats have systematically murdered what now amounts to one-sixth of our entire population and more than HALF of today’s American workforce, that’s why.  Now we have an increasingly large elderly population and the young workers who were supposed to provide for them with current taxes are DEAD because of the moral crime of abortion.  And you can thank Democrats for every single murdered unborn child in America.

Jesus nailed the essence of the Democrat Party when He said, “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:44).  And we have 55 million murdered babies, based on lies from hell.  Because right from the beginning, Democrats supported the murder of babies leading up to 1973 and the wickedness of Roe v. Wade.  And sure enough, that evil decision was based entirely on lies, as the liberal ACLU lawyer perpetuated a dishonest story about “Sally Roe” having been gang-raped in order to manufacture the worst-case scenario when it was an outright lie.  In fact, we learn that BOTH the ACLU attorneys for Norma McCorvey (Roe) and Sandra Cano (Doe) in the most famous abortion cases surrounded their cases with lies from their father, the devil.

You think about these (literally godawful) bumper sticker slogans that liberals “think” in: “It’s my body.”  BULLCRAP.  Every single CELL of an unborn baby’s body is different from the mother’s; it is NOT her body.  Democrats lie.  Let’s go through the taxonmic system that classifies every single living thing with our unborn baby: That “fetus” (which is Latin for “unborn child” by the way) is classified as Kingdom-Animal; Phylum-chordata; Class-Mammalia; Order-Primate; Family-Hominid; Genus-Homo; and Species-Sapiens.  Just like every human being whose life is precious.  That is a unique individual human being you are murdering.  Or, “Pro-child, pro-choice.”  And the correct response to that one is, “Pro-Jew, pro-Nazi.”  You don’t “help” somebody by murdering them.  Or that particularly morally idiotic slogan, “A woman’s right to choose.”  Choose to do WHAT?  Do women have the right to choose to drive their cars into crowds of people?  Why do women have the right to murder their babies?  Why don’t fathers have that right, too?  Oh, that’s right, because it’s supposedly a woman’s body, right?  Even though it isn’t.  What has happened to the family because of this demonic lie?  How have men responded to the Democrat lie, “You are not the father of anything.”  At the moment of conception, and as long as Democrats want that baby dead, it’s NOT a baby; it’s a non-human lump of inanimate goop.  And so “fathers” CAN’T be “fathers.”  Because if we truly give you the right of “fatherhood” you’d have a say in whether your baby is MURDERED or not.  Instead, men somehow BECOME “fathers” only if and when a “mother” decides NOT to murder her child – because Democrats, BEING Democrats, need a “fall guy” to pin the blame on and force somebody else to pay for that “fetus” that suddenly is a “child” after, all.  And it’s all based entirely on lies straight from the ugliest part of hell.

And THAT is how Democrats murdered the family, by turning men into indifferent bystanders whose children can be murdered right in front of them and their only right is “the right” to like it.

And that attitude of using lies to deceive people into liberalism is typical, as we just found out with ObamaCare and a president who told “the lie of the year” to see his evil socialist takeover of the health care system based entirely on his lies.

The Democrat Party is the party of the ugliest racism.  Just look at which side fought a war to free the slaves and which side fought to keep blacks in the chains of bondage; then look at which party began the Ku Klux Klan as its terrorist wing; then look at which party (hint: under Woodrow Wilson) REsegregated blacks from government service and the military after the other party (that would be the Republicans) DEsegregated military and government service; then consider which party had its national convention so completely dominated by the aforementioned Ku Klux Klan that it was called “Klanbake.”  Look it up.  And then consider how tired the constant charges of “racism” are from this bunch of racist race-baiting thugs.

The Democrat Party is the party of true evil.

But there’s a deeper reason that the Democrat Party is so evil.  And that is because it is the party of naked contempt for God and for religion, as seen in its determination to impose a “separation of church and state.”  All of the above flows from the Democrat Party’s hatred of and contempt for God.

As Democrats have increasingly successfully separated America from her God, they have replaced God with something else: the State.

It’s interesting: I’ve come across speeches in which presidential candidates of the Democrat Party including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and many others have butchered the Bible trying to justify socialism.

But the Bible actually WARNS mankind about the dangers of socialism.  Just read Genesis Chapter Eleven (after understanding the key biblical difference between bricks and stones) and 1 Samuel Chapter Eight, where God warns us repeatedly “the king will TAKE.”  Are we to help the poor?  Of course we are.  But WE are to help the poor OURSELVES; not empower a vast welfare state to do it for us.

For the record, to any who has ears to hear, no, Jesus was not a socialist.

Israel was to care for the poor because Israel at that point was a THEOCRACY.  And in the New Testament, it is the Church and ONLY the Church that is called upon to help the poor.  Liberals strip religion’s benefit of humanity away when they “separate church from state” and then REPLACE God WITH their “State.”

The Democrat Party is the party of Marxism.  Karl Marx believed and enacted the same policy toward God and the State: which is why “separation of God and state” is NOWHERE to be found in the U.S. Constitution but IS found in the Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.  Marx called religion the “opiate of the masses” because he wanted the people to rise up in a spirit of hate and rage and class envy but instead they were content.  And he didn’t want them to be content any more than modern Democrats want the people to be content.  That is why both Marx and Obama have done what they have done.

Marx didn’t want to follow God; he wanted to BE God through the totalitarian imposition of his State.  He wanted to decide who wins and who loses, who gets rewarded and who gets punished, who lives and who dies.

That’s the same spirit that Democrats have demonstrated when they passed ObamaCare “to control the people.”

What has the Democrat Party done?  They have exploited “separation of church and state” to purge religion from government and from society.  Even as they pushed their true God – the human State – into near total totalitarian power.  They hate God and seek to limit Him and make the people godless even as they impose THEIR god onto society.  And ultimately, they will get their demonic way in the form of the coming Antichrist, the beast, who will be the ULTIMATE big government liberal.

And that is why Democrats are so evil today.

Trayvon Martin, Racism, The Stand Your Ground Law And Michael Dunn. No Comparison Whatsoever.

February 12, 2014

One can do a search on my blog and see how vigorously I defended George Zimmerman’s right to defend himself against Trayvon Martin.

I was of course called a “racist” by the incredibly racist left for doing so, as someone reading the comments can see.

George Zimmerman was physically attacked.  Only the most rabid ideologue fool refuses to acknowledge that Zimmerman was on his back getting beaten with Trayvon Martin on top of him “MMA style” raining down blows on a man who had already suffered a broken nose and serious abrasions to the back of his skull.

Liberals are fascists who do not want ordinary people to possess the right or capability to defend themselves.  Period.  On top of that, liberals are racist race-baiters who demonize white people and who have no compunction whatsoever to alter reality to make themselves victims.  Thus George Zimmerman became a “white Hispanic” to eradicate the fact that he himself is a racial minority.  And Trayvon Martin became an innocent ten-year old in the news accounts rather than a 6’3″ thug who already had had numerous encounters with the law and who by his own accounts was already glorifying in violence.

The case was a “no-brainer” from the outset.  And liberals proved that they are brainless ideologues who refuse to accept the real world in their steadfast determination that George Zimmerman be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for daring to defend himself rather than placing all his trust that Obama and the State would defend him.  The ONLY reason the case even ever went to trial was because Democrats are rabid fascists.

The Michael Dunn case is entirely different.  And pathologically rabid liberals might be surprised to learn that I am very firmly on the side of the car-full of black kids who got shot rather than on the white man who shot them.

Michael Dunn, unlike Zimmerman’s defense, is citing the “Stand Your Ground Law.”  Again, pathologically dishonest Democrats made the Zimmerman case all about that “Stand Your Ground” law even though Zimmerman’s defense NEVER cited it.  And the reason that Democrats hate that law so much is that, again, they are fascists whose demons inhabiting them start twitching hysterically the moment an ordinary person is deemed to have the right to stand in any way, shape or form or to protect himself in any way, shape or form.  And that is especially true – in the Democrat age of “Never bring a lawsuit against a black” – when race is involved.

George Zimmerman is Hispanic.  Not a “white Hispanic” as the racist, bigoted, socialist and frankly evil New York Times branded him.  Either acknowledge that Zimmerman is Hispanic, you jackals, or for the sake of any kind of honesty whatsoever STOP CALLING OBAMA AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN PRESIDENT WHEN HE IS ONLY HALF AFRICAN-AMERICAN.  But the fact of the matter is that Democrats are hypocrites without any kind of shame, honor, decency, integrity or virtue whatsoever.  So Obama gets to be the first black president and anybody who doesn’t like Obama’s policies is a “racist” by definition while Zimmerman becomes a “white Hispanic” with the sole emphasis on his being “white” and therefore guilty.

But let’s get back to Michael Dunn.

Here’s the basic account of what happened:

Mr. Dunn, a middle-aged white man, allegedly opened fire on a car with four black teenagers in it at a Jacksonville, Fla., gas station. The boys were apparently blasting music, and when Dunn asked them to turn it down, they responded angrily. Dunn has said he felt threatened and thought he saw someone point a gun at him through the back window, so he opened fire. No gun was found in the boys’ car, and none of the witnesses to the altercation noticed a gun.

Here’s another:

The day after last Thanksgiving, Dunn was in good spirits when he attended his son’s wedding at a historic home overlooking the St. Johns River in Orange Park, a quaint Jacksonville suburb.

But after the wedding, Dunn got into a parking lot dispute with teenagers at a gas station that ended with a 17-year-old dead and Dunn charged with murder.

Police portray the South Patrick Shores resident as an out-of-control gunman who became enraged over loud rap music booming from a nearby car, grabbed a 9mm pistol from his glovebox and fired two volleys into a Dodge Durango containing four black teens. The gunshots killed Jordan Davis and narrowly missed two other boys.

Dunn told detectives he acted in self-defense after he heard threats and thought he saw Davis raise the barrel of a shotgun above the SUV’s rear passenger window. No gun was found, police said.

Here’s the thing that makes Michael Dunn guilty:

Asked by detectives why he didn’t report the shooting by calling 911, he said he planned to drive Rouer home to Brevard County in the morning, then confess to authorities.

By 4:25 a.m. the next morning, Jacksonville police had obtained an arrest warrant and contacted the Brevard County Sheriff’s Office, looking for Dunn. A witness at the gas station had reported his license tag number.

He was arrested by deputies at about 10:30 a.m. at his condo, then taken to police headquarters in Viera for a videotaped interview with two Jacksonville detectives.

Wearing a yellow short-sleeved collared shirt and striped shorts, fidgeting and wiping his hands on his knees, Dunn related his side of the story – but neither detective bought his version of events.

Rather, they said details of Dunn’s story didn’t match those at the crime scene. Neither the surviving boys nor independent witnesses at the gas station said Davis had a firearm or tried to exit the SUV – in fact, one of the boys later said Davis couldn’t have exited a rear door because the child locks were engaged.

“If there was a shotgun coming up at you, we would expect you to do what you did. The problem that we have is, there is no shotgun. That’s the bridge that we’ve got to get across,” a detective told Dunn.

“You keep dwelling on this shotgun as if there’s one at the scene. If there was a shotgun, a BB gun, any type of gun at the scene – hell, if there was a water gun that was black that looked real at the scene. …” the detective said.

This case is NOT about race, any more than the George Zimmerman case was ever about race.

Democrats pathologically despise the Constitution or the United States and our founding fathers, unless and until these great men are perverted into deists and atheists in radical abandonment of actual history and unless and until their words are “fundamentally transformed” by liberal judges into a grotesque mockery of anything they ever actually intended their words to mean.  And the words that Democrats hate only slightly less are Martin Luther King, Jr.’s words from his “I have a dream” speech:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

Democrats hate those words.  They hate the idea that the content of one’s character should matter.  They want it to be exclusively about the color of one’s skin.  And if you are black, you are by definition a “victim” and if you are white, you are by definition a “racist” and a “bigot” and “privileged” and therefore guilty of whatever crime Democrats want to scapegoat you with.

I think of the character in the great movie, “The Ten Commandments” named Nathan.  Because he is the epitome of the Democrat Party.  Like Nathan, DEMOCRATS are the real party of slavery.  Democrats literally fought the damned Civil War to keep slavery while Republicans fought to liberate the slaves.  The Ku Klux Klan that rode like a living cancer after that Democrat War constituted the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party who persecuted blacks and white Republicans while their fellow Democrats undid everything Republican president Abraham Lincoln tried to do in his Reconstruction Act.

I’ve documented this before, so I’ll quote myself.  Who are Democrats?

The Democrat Party under Woodrow Wilson actually RE-segregated the US Military and government service (after Republicans had de-segregated them and allowed blacks to serve).  The Democrat Party in 1924 was SO completely dominated by the Ku Klux Klan that the Democrat National Convention was called “Klanbake.”    The Democrat Party under FDR and their New Deal was rife with racism and unions and Democrats used it to prevent blacks from getting jobs.  The Democrat Party continued to be THE Party of hard-core racism for the entire history of the republic.  The racist horror story of “Mississippi Burning“ was OWNED by Democrats from the Governor right on down.  In fact, the state Democrat Party in Mississippi was limited to whites only.  And the fact is that a FAR higher percentage of Republican Congressmen and Senators voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act than Democrats.  Democrats were the Party of keeping the black man down until they cynically – incredibly cynically – saw that there was another way to keep exploiting black people to keep them on their plantation and keep them down.

The cry of Democrat blacks today is “Give us welfare or give us death.”  But the two amount to the same thing as blacks have given in to bitterness, hopelessness and a spirit of entitlement rather than trying to actually fulfill the American Dream for themselves.  You can either wait for your damn check to come off the work of other people or you can go out and work your ass off to make your world and your kid’s world a better place.  And because of the Democrat Party, blacks have pursued the former and abandoned the latter.  These are people who have fallen prey to the belief that whitey is out to get them and there isn’t any hope of a fair deal – so why try?  And the only reason that is true is the same Democrat Party who told them that are the very same white people who have actually been the ones keeping them down with promises of welfare for nothing forever.

Or read my slightly different account here about who the Democrats are:

We know that FDR was a racist bigot who detested black people and allowed labor unions to exclude blacks from work that they desperately needed to survive the darkest days of America.

The question as to why black people have in recent years chosen to celebrate and support the party that put their ancestors in the chains of slavery, fought a vicious Civil War to keep them in those chains, invented the Ku Klux Klan as the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party to keep blacks who had been freed by Republicans in subjugation, resegregated blacks under the tyranny of “the father of the modern progressive movement” also known as the racist white supremacist Woodrow Wilson, was still so racist in 1924 that the Democratic National Convention of that year was called “Klanbake,” allowed black men to go untreated with syphilis so researchers could study the progression of the disease (the Tuskegee Experiment) throughout the entire FDR presidency, was largely THE party of racist discrimination through the 1950s, and then only passed the Civil Rights laws with the overwhelming supporting votes of Republicans, is a mystery that I will not attempt to explain.  I have no idea why black people as a culture allowed Democrats who had subjected them to one form of plantation allowed Democrats to bait and switch them into a different form of plantation (the welfare plantation of institutional generational dependency).

Or for more modern facts, read my account here about who Democrats are:

Now, of course, you run into the irony that it was that Grand Old Party that freed the slaves, and fought a bitter war to free the slaves against the Democrat Party that was fighting just as bitterly to keep black people in the chains of human bondage.  But that’s beside the point in the Democrat narrative.

Harry Reid is also on the record admiring Obama as a:

‘light-skinned’ African American ‘with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.’

Maybe it’s because Obama was half white, but Harry Reid nevertheless praises Obama for overcoming that stupid negro dialect.  And being light-skinned is a huge bonus for Harry Reid.  “Whiter is better” when you’re in the party of “the White Man’s Burden.”

Bill Clinton wasn’t quite as happy with the man who was stealing his white wife’s rightful place as leader of the free world.

Bill snidely told Ted Kennedy,

A  few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”

I know, William Jefferson.  That’s back when southern Democrats like you had a different way of keeping black boys in their proper place.

Senator Robert Byrd, a distinguished “Exalted Cyclops” and “Kleagle” of the famous Democrat-created Ku Klux Klan, was on the record as once saying:

“I  shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by  my side …   Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory  trampled in the   dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved  land of ours become   degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the  blackest specimen from  the  wilds.”

Ah.  There’s that depiction of blacks as being in that long-way-from-being-human I earlier mentioned.

And:

“The Klan is needed  today as never before and I am  anxious to see its  rebirth here in West  Virginia and in every state in  the nation.”

When Bill Clinton honored fellow Democrat Robert “Exalted Cyclops” Byrd, Clinton said:

“He  was a country boy from the hills and hollows of West Virginia. He  was  trying to get elected. And maybe he did something he shouldn’t have   done…”

Well, as long as he was just a Democrat trying to get elected, then ANY racism or racism is fine, isn’t it, Hill Billy?

And you can read here for the massive, hypocrite double-standard that Democrats lived by when it comes to “race.”

Liberals are liars and haters.  And worst of all, they are true moral idiots.  “Democrat” stands for “Demonic Bureaucrat” as they seek to advance two interests: Satan’s love for 55 million murdered human beings in the abortion mills and the worship of homosexual sodomy, plus their determination to replace the God of the Bible with “the State” and make GOVERNMENT our God and Savior while increasingly marginalizing and even criminalizing the worship of Jesus Christ and the God of the Bible.

So what’s this Michael Dunn case about?  I already stated it above.  It is about a guilty man – and I don’t frankly give a damn WHAT color he is – who fired ten shots into a vehicle with kids inside and claimed he was being threatened with a gun when nothing even remotely resembling a gun was found at the scene.

It’s about this question: do you have the right to stand your ground with a gun?  You’re damn right you do – and again, I don’t CARE if you are white or black or Hispanic or Asian or whatever.  Do you have a right to whip out a gun after confronting somebody and then start shooting at them when they are no real threat to you?  You’re damned right you don’t.

Michael Dunn ought to be convicted for his crime of shooting at those kids and for murdering one named Jordan Davis.  And if Michael Dunn were black and the kids were white, he should be every bit as convicted.

And I say that as a conservative and a Republican rather than a racist liberal Democrat.

 

CBO Report: ObamaCare To Gut U.S. Growth, Destroy 2.3 Million Jobs, Add Over Trillion To Deficit (Just Like We TOLD You Would Happen)

February 4, 2014

This just in: Democrats are demon-possessed liars who destroyed America during that two-year period when they fascistically OWNED the White House, the Senate and the House (now they merely fascistically own the White House and the Senate, and you’d think they have no power or responsibility at all given the way they blame the House under GOP leadership for basically all the hell that has resulted from Democrat rule).

One of my very favorite Democrat-Obama lies from hell is actually one of the earliest: the lie that it was BUSH who somehow drove up the deficit in the year AFTER he left office and Obama has been reducing it ever since.

Here was one of my earlier responses to that one:

That is such bullcrap it is beyond unreal.

It is your assertion that it was President Damn Bush who passed the $862 billion stimulus on February 17, 2009 is it?

It is your assertion that it was President Damn Bush who did that $79 billion bailout for Government Motors and their union Democrats in 2009?

It is your assertion that it was President Damn Bush who signed that $410 billion Omnibus bill in March of 2009?

It is your assertion that it was President Damn Bush who left $350 billion in TARP money to President Damn Bush who spent it in early 2009???

It is your assertion that it was President Damn Bush who rammed that damned $2.6 trillion ObamaCare - Ooh, I’m sorry, GorgieCare bill – down our collectivist throats?

It’s really amazing to me what a lousy bunch of Marxists you liars truly ARE.  Obama passes all these things, takes credit for them, but when it’s time to be financially responsible for his own damn bills it’s more “Bush did it! Put all the garbage I did and took credit for on Bush’s bill!!!”

George Bush actually HAD a budget for FY-2009.  It was of course decried by you cockroach Democrats for its CUTS.  It had a deficit of $400 billion, you lying weasel.  And It didn’t have any of the above crap that you seem to think Bush was responsible for.

Obama cynically and ruthlessly exploited the technical fact that most of a new president’s first year is under the budget of his predecessor to LOAD UP THE DEFICIT in 2009.  Obama BLEW UP the deficit, which had been $10 trillion under Bush and is now well over $17.3 trillion.  Bush added over $4 trillion to the deficit over eight years, which of course was bad; Obama is on pace to more than TRIPLE that such that he will add over $12 trillion to our unpayable and unsustainable deficit before he leaves office in disgrace.

Even the liberal Washington Post fact checked that and gave it the Liar-in-Chief the maximum number of Pinocchios for his lie.  But like Hitler, Obama merely keeps telling his “Big Lie” over and over and over again.

Of course, our true debt is way north of $225 trillion now.  America is doomed.  It WILL collapse under the weight of Democrat debt.  And please don’t be so stupid and so depraved not to realize that 99.9 percent of all our debt has come from DEMOCRAT programs such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and now ObamaCare that just exploded federal spending far beyond the realm of sanity.  And the night before it all goes to hell, the media talking heads will be assuring you that everything will be fine.

Also, of course, the Demagogue-in-Chief has been so blatantly dishonest and hypocritical about the debt ceiling that it is beyond amazing.  That’s the man’s style.  Lie, lie, lie – and then demonize his opponents when the truth finally emerges.

And, of course, we’re only now BEGINNING to see just how truly awful and truly evil ObamaCare truly is.

Please understand that this latest CBO report STILL doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface as to how simply godawful ObamaCare will be to America.  Remember when it passed, laden with budget gimmickry designed to lie to the American people so they wouldn’t have any clue how demonic this piece of fascist garbage law truly would be?  They reported that ObamaCare would be “deficit neutral.”  And then the budget estimates just kept getting worse and worse as time passed.  Do you think now, with the ObamaCare monster only one-third out of its hellhole, that they’ve figured out how truly bad it is yet???  Not even CLOSE.

The UPI  article reporting on the latest ObamaCare fiasco today implicitly points out how truly bad the CBO has been in estimating the damage of ObamaCare:

WASHINGTON, Feb. 4 (UPI) — The White House Tuesday disputed claims a Congressional Budget Office study concluded the Affordable Care Act would cost millions of U.S. jobs.

The CBO study — which also said the ACA is projected to reduce the federal deficit by more than $1 trillion in 10 years — said the healthcare reform law is expected to reduce employment by about 2.3 million jobs during the same period. The new estimate nearly triples the previous CBO estimate of 800,000 jobs that the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, was to have cost the economy, the Hill newspaper reported.

The law is expected to slow the economy and cause many people to leave the workforce, the impact being felt mostly by low-wage workers, the Washington Post said.

From “this fascist ObamaCare takeover is going to wipe out 800,000 jobs” to “this Nazi ObamaCare law is going to destroy 2.3 MILLION jobs.”  You almost get the sense that panicked CBO economists are desperately throwing darts at a board to try to get their hands on some kind of number to relay just how catastrophically horrible this thing is going to be.

I remember Nancy Pelosi boasting that her messiah’s ObamaCare would create 4 million jobs, with 400,000 jobs occurring immediately.  That depraved, dishonest witch ought to be in PRISON right now for her crime of lying to the American people.  Just like her false messiah Obama ought to be in prison right now.

The Washington Post piece on the CBO bombshell of the fascist ObamaCare takeover of healthcare also underscores the CBO’s inability to comprehend just how bad this lawless “law” truly is:

The Affordable Care Act will reduce the number of full-time workers by more than 2 million in coming years, congressional budget analysts said Tuesday, a finding that sent the White House scrambling to defend a law that has bedeviled President Obama for years.

After obtaining coverage through the health law, some workers may forgo employment, while others may reduce hours, according to a report by the Congressional Budget Office. Low-wage workers are the most likely to drop out of the workforce as a result of the law, it said. The CBO said the law’s impact on jobs mostly would be felt after 2016.

Republicans quickly pointed to the report’s findings as more evidence of the health law’s flaws, one of their major themes ahead of this year’s mid-term elections. Republicans see the Affordable Care Act as a political boon this year, after the disastrous launch of the law’s Web site last fall.

The CBO report said those rocky beginnings of the federal online marketplace would suppress enrollment this year, though not in the future. The agency predicted that the number of Americans who buy private health plans through the new insurance exchanges before a March 31 deadline for coverage in 2014 will be 6 million, while the number of low-income people who join Medicaid this year will be 8 million.

Both figures are one million fewer people than the CBO had forecast the last time it issued such a prediction, nine months ago.

Off by a million people in only nine months.  Because after all, what’s a million people between friends?  It’s kind of like Obama’s totalitarian big-government socialist buddy Joseph Stalin put it: one death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.  Under messiah Obama, we’re all just “statistics” now.  And, of course, as the next Democrat president would have  you believe, “What difference does it make?”

But you see how the estimates just keep getting worse and worse???

Notice the description of the moral hazard of people who will simply abandon TRYING to get a low-wage job and simply skate on the dole with their free Medicaid.  This was a job-destroying act in every possible way you can slice it.

Barack Obama is the worst liar and the most amply DOCUMENTED liar in the history of the United States.  If he says good morning, the man is lying.  President “If you like your health plan you can keep your health plan.  Period.  End of story” has proven that.  A pit viper has more credibility than Obama and is far less dangerous to your health.

Take a trip down memory lane.  Conservatives have been ACCURATELY PREDICTING exactly what has happened under ObamaCare.  And Democrats viciously and rabidly demonized us in every way imaginable for telling the thing they hate the most – the TRUTH.  Because if you are a Democrat you hate the truth and call people who tell the truth “racist.”

People like me tried to warn America.  But the American people overall have become ignorant and depraved and frankly pathetic.  I think of Nazi Germany and a man who tried to warn that nation:

I am writing this from cell 24. Outside a new Germany is being created. Many millions are rejoicing. Hitler is promising everyone precisely what they want. I think when they wake to their sobering senses, they will find they have been led by the nose and duped by lies.”

That’s YOU, America.  YOUR country has been “fundamentally transformed” by the very worst kind of liar.  By the time most of you people finally wake up to your sobering senses, your country will have imploded under the weight of its own debt and moral stupidity and you will have nothing.  And of course what will you do?  Being wicked, you will keep rejecting the God whom you have already rejected with your love of abortion and sodomy and you will instead put your trust in total socialism.  And that’s when the beast prophesied in Revelation will come to finish the job Obama started.

A Los Angeles Times Article Displays How Cravenly Cynical And, Yes Racist, Democrats Truly Are About Racism

December 2, 2013

Before reading this article, just to provide you with some context for what you’re learning, realize the following information about Los Angeles County as reported by the Los Angeles Times:

When Democratic attorney general nominee Kamala Harris opened a South Los Angeles campaign headquarters earlier this month, she picked a spot on Crenshaw Boulevard right next door to the site of one of Barack Obama’s satellite offices during the historic 2008 presidential campaign.

Harris, the San Francisco district attorney, can only hope that Obama’s political magic in Los Angeles County — where he won a whopping 69% of the vote — will drift down the sidewalk.

Voter-rich Los Angeles County represents a sure-fire victory for most Democrats on Tuesday’s ballot, but it’s anything but assured for Harris. Her GOP rival, Steve Cooley, has won three consecutive elections as the county’s district attorney despite Democrats outnumbering Republicans 2 to 1 in the county — and, a recent poll shows, he has the edge this time too.

“If Kamala Harris loses L.A. County, she won’t win,” said Allan Hoffenblum, whose California Target Book handicaps California political races. “L.A. County is to the Democratic candidates what the Central Valley and Inland Empire are to Republican candidates. You have to be strong where your party is strong.”

History records that Kamala Harris is the attorney general of California.  Which apparently means Los Angeles County’s “sure fire victory for most Democrats” won out for her, too.

The FACT that Los Angles County is HEAVILY Democrat is important as you read the following:

Latinos want US to sue over LA supervisors’ board
By MARK SHERMAN / Associated Press / November 29, 2013

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration is aggressively pursuing lawsuits over minority voting rights in Texas and North Carolina, but the Justice Department has not moved on evidence that the latest round of redistricting in Los Angeles County unfairly reduces the influence of Latino voters.

Nearly half the 10 million people in the nation’s largest county are Latino. But political boundaries redrawn in 2011 make it possible for Latino voters to elect just one of the five supervisors.

The administration has resisted calls to sue the county, despite the county’s history of discrimination against Latino voters in earlier redistricting efforts.

The inaction rankles some Latino activists who count themselves as strong backers of President Barack Obama.

‘‘I support the Obama administration and the president, but frankly, Obama and the top people around him seem to be unaware on this issue. Obama is somewhat blind to the issues of Latinos,’’ said Cruz Reynoso, a former California Supreme Court justice and member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Reynoso said the administration seems more attuned to voting rights complaints of African-Americans.

He said the administration also appears reluctant to pursue a complaint against a jurisdiction that is dominated by Democrats. ‘‘Most of the folk in Los Angeles have been supporters of the president, so why make them unhappy despite the fact that, from my point of view, there is great injustice going on,’’ he said.

In the wake of a stinging U.S. Supreme Court defeat in June that rendered useless an important enforcement provision of the Voting Rights Act, the administration has focused its voting rights resources on Southern states that are controlled by Republicans.

The Justice Department has initiated or joined suits targeting voter identification laws and redistricting plans in North Carolina and in Texas, where Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott began moving to put the state’s tough voter ID law into effect just hours after the high court’s decision.

The suits were filed under other provisions of the voting rights law that were not part of the Supreme Court case.

The situation in Los Angeles County predates the high court decision and the passage of the laws now being challenged in North Carolina and Texas.

The Justice Department acknowledges it is looking at the situation in Los Angeles, but otherwise declined comment.

‘‘We have received significant amounts of information from the county and others about the issue and the matter is still under review,’’ said Justice Department spokeswoman Dena Iverson.

Matt Barreto, a political science professor and voting rights expert at the University of Washington, said the evidence against the county is overwhelming and includes a history of racially polarized voting that has hurt Latinos.

‘‘My perspective is that this is one of the easiest cases to be made nationally,’’ said Barreto, who has worked for the group of Latinos that includes Reynoso. Barreto also served as a consultant to the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, a voter-approved independent board that draws the state’s congressional and legislative districts.

Counties, though, retain the authority to devise their own districts. Nowhere is there more power and money at stake than in Los Angeles, where each of five supervisors represents nearly 2 million people and the county’s annual budget tops $26 billion.

Following the 2010 census, the board adopted districts in 2011 that made relatively few changes even though two supervisors cautioned that their colleagues were exposing themselves to a voting rights lawsuit.

Gloria Molina, the only Latina ever elected to the board, and Mark Ridley-Thomas, the board’s lone African-American member, supported maps that would have created a second district with a majority of Latino residents. But the two members could not persuade their three white colleagues to join them.

‘‘Today this board had an opportunity to make history, not repeat it, but all signs indicated that they would repeat history, and unfortunately, they did,’’ Molina said in 2011.

Molina was elected after a federal court documented political discrimination against Latinos dating back to the 1950s and drew a map to ensure Latinos would be represented.

Yet since that vote, Molina has not aligned herself with the loose association of activists and voting rights experts who are pushing for greater Latino representation. Her spokeswoman, Roxane Marquez, said Molina continues to back two majority Latino districts, but otherwise had no comment on possible Justice Department intervention.

Ridley-Thomas told Bill Boyarsky, a columnist for LA Observed, that he wants the Justice Department to get involved.

The map Ridley-Thomas proposed in 2011 would have increased the chances of making the Los Angeles board more diverse, said redistricting consultant Alan Clayton. Ridley-Thomas’ map would have preserved his district, created a second district likely to elect a Latino and increased the odds that an Asian-American candidate could be elected, Clayton said.

The first thing you learn from reading this article and understanding the facts is that Barack Obama and his vicious lawless law dog Eric Holder don’t give a flying DAMN about “racism”; they only care about the Democrat Party having total power.  If Obama and Holder were considering race or racial equality, they would look at the racial suppression of Los Angeles County and see “one of the easiest cases to be made nationally” and they would do something about it.  But it’s DEMOCRATS who are doing it, so no harm, no foul.

And why are these whitey Democrats screwing Latinos?  So they can keep their elitist and racist white paws on that $26 billion rather than “redistributing their wealth” to the dirty little brown people.

The second thing you see is that Mayor Bob Filner as the representative of the “war on women” party  is no fluke at all.  Not only is Bob Filner a Democrat, but he actually CO-FOUNDED the Progressive Caucus with Nancy Pelosi.   And the party who declared that the Republican Party was the party of “the war on women” protected this vile misogynist serial woman abuser and harasser for years.  Because to be a Democrat is to be the worst kind of hypocrite there ever has been or ever will be.  And you get another glimpse into the soul of a Democrat: what I demagogue at thee does not apply to me.

It’s not war on women when we do it; it’s not racist when we do it.  And in the quite recent case of Democrats who demonized the Republicans as Nazis for CONTEMPLATING to end the filibuster rules that had survived for 235 years when it was DEMOCRATS who actually DID the evil and vile and treasonous and anti-democratic deed, t’s not fascist when WE do it.

Democrats in the latter case decry Republicans as blocking judges.  IT WAS DEMOCRATS WHO STARTED THAT WAR WHEN THEY WERE THE FIRST PARTY TO BLOCK REPUBLICAN NOMINEES IN THE MODERN ERA.  HAVE YOU EVER HEARD THE DAMN TERM “BORKING????  Up until that day, it had never been done.  And then Democrats tried to do it again with one of the most vicious campaigns ever waged against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas.

The same is even MORE true on race.  The Democrat Party was the Party that waged a brutal Civil War to continue black slavery with a United States led by Republican President named Lincoln.  The Democrat Party was the Party that spawned the Ku Klux Klan as its terrorist wing of the Democrat Party.  The Democrat Party under Woodrow Wilson actually RE-segregated the US Military and government service (after Republicans had de-segregated them and allowed blacks to serve).  The Democrat Party in 1924 was SO completely dominated by the Ku Klux Klan that the Democrat National Convention was called “Klanbake.”    The Democrat Party under FDR and their New Deal was rife with racism and unions and Democrats used it to prevent blacks from getting jobs.  The Democrat Party continued to be THE Party of hard-core racism for the entire history of the republic.  The racist horror story of “Mississippi Burning“ was OWNED by Democrats from the Governor right on down.  In fact, the state Democrat Party in Mississippi was limited to whites only.  And the fact is that a FAR higher percentage of Republican Congressmen and Senators voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act than Democrats.  Democrats were the Party of keeping the black man down until they cynically – incredibly cynically – saw that there was another way to keep exploiting black people to keep them on their plantation and keep them down.

The cry of Democrat blacks today is “Give us welfare or give us death.”  But the two amount to the same thing as blacks have given in to bitterness, hopelessness and a spirit of entitlement rather than trying to actually fulfill the American Dream for themselves.  You can either wait for your damn check to come off the work of other people or you can go out and work your ass off to make your world and your kid’s world a better place.  And because of the Democrat Party, blacks have pursued the former and abandoned the latter.  These are people who have fallen prey to the belief that whitey is out to get them and there isn’t any hope of a fair deal – so why try?  And the only reason that is true is the same Democrat Party who told them that are the very same white people who have actually been the ones keeping them down with promises of welfare for nothing forever.

And now the same Democrat Party that spent its history betraying blacks is betraying Latinos.

The Democrat Party is the Party of genuine evil in America; just as it has ALWAYS been Democrats who have ALWAYS been the Party of genuine evil in America.

The Democrats’ Nuclear Option Is Treasonous. Don’t Take My Word For It – Listen To Obama And Other Democrats Blast WHAT THEY JUST DID

November 22, 2013

Today we mourn the assassination of John F. Kennedy – a conservative who believed in a) low taxes and b) a strong and in-your-face military that contrary to Democrat cowardice confronted evil - by a leftist/communist/Stalinist thug.

It is ironic that while we mourn the murder of one of our greatest presidents, we also mourn the murder of our democracy after Senate Democrats with Obama’s Stalinist approval invoked the “nuclear option” to “fundamentally transform” the American political system.

Please note that the Republicans DID NOT invoke the nuclear option when they could have done so when they faced the exact same situation from Democrats who were doing the same thing they now demonize Republicans for doing.  The Party of Lincoln stepped back from the fascist precipice that Democrats just dived over – amazingly right after they were caught in the most massive lie and the most massive socialist conspiracy ever to threaten our Republic via the ObamaCare meltdown.

A couple of quotes FROM LIBERAL SOURCES SUCH AS THE NEW YORK TIMES:

Cumulatively, recent developments surrounding the rollout of Obamacare strengthen the most damaging conservative portrayals of liberalism and of big government – that on one hand government is too much a part of our lives, too invasive, too big, too scary, too regulatory, too in your face, and on the other hand it is incompetent, bureaucratic and expropriatory.

And The Hill citing a bunch of Democrats:

“Here we are, we’re supposed to be selling this to people, and it’s all screwed up,” one chief of staff ranted. “This either gets fixed or this could be the demise of the Democratic Party.

“It’s probably the worst I’ve ever seen it,” the aide said of the recent mood on Capitol Hill. “It’s bad. It’s really bad.”

And what do Democrats do during this crisis?  They do what Hitler and Stalin did: they seize dictatorial power.  At the very moment that non-Nazis would have recognized their failure and stepped back.

So what are Nazi Democrats doing?  They are in their “Hitler-in-his-bunker” mode and they want as much damn  Nazi control as they can get.  Because only unelected “judges” that Obama can appoint thanks to their invocation of nuclear warfare in the U.S. Senate to further warp and pervert the meaning of our democracy and our Constitution can save their sorry fascist asses now.

Democrats are, for the official record, the party that BEGAN the vicious partisan warfare over judicial nominations when they invented the term “Borking” to prevent a good man from being a judge.  Now they’re furious that Republicans would dare to do what they started.  So they invoke the nuclear option – which I guarantee you they will decry when Republicans ensure that Democrat tyranny becomes the new national norm.

This is a rule that had endured for 200 years.  And Democrats have just “fundamentally transformed” America’s political system into one of pure lawlessness.  And a lawless hypocrite president endorsed it because he knows that this is his one chance to impose his agenda before the American people have a chance to vote.

Democrats are fascists.  To paraphrase Obama, they are fascists “period.”  “End of story.”  And “no one will be able to take the stink of naked fascism away from the Democrat Party, no matter what.”

We just had the White House Correspondents’ Association and 37 different news organizations decry Obama’s Stalinist propaganda and essentially scream to Obama’s promise of “transparency” that he is a naked liar.  The  American Society of News Editors and the Associated Press Media Editors sent a letter to the White House that underscores the fact that they are finally becoming aware that they’ve spent the last five years as the useful idiots of a genuinely evil man.  “We must accept that we, the press, have been enablers,” the letter says.  “You are only seeing what they want you to see,” we learn.  Which is the essence of Stalinist propaganda.

[Source of below]:

In 2005, Then-Sen. Barack Obama Called For His Colleagues Considering The Nuclear Option To Think About “Protecting Free And Democratic Debate.” SEN. BARACK OBAMA: “Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to think about the implications of what has been called the nuclear option and what effect that might have on this Chamber and on this country. I urge all of us to think not just about winning every debate but about protecting free and democratic debate.” (Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), Floor Remarks, Washington, DC, 4/13/05)

Click Here To Watch

Obama: “If They Choose To Change The Rules And Put An End To Democratic Debate, Then The Fighting, The Bitterness, And The Gridlock Will Only Get Worse.” SEN. BARACK OBAMA: “The American people want less partisanship in this town, but everyone in this chamber knows that if the majority chooses to end the filibuster, if they choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate, then the fighting, the bitterness, and the gridlock will only get worse.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Floor Remarks, Washington, D.C., 4/13/05)

Click Here To Watch

Obama: “It Certainly Is Not What The Patriots Who Founded This Democracy Had In Mind. We Owe The People Who Sent Us Here More Than That.” SEN. BARACK OBAMA: “Right now we are faced with rising gas prices, skyrocketing tuition costs, a record number of uninsured Americans, and some of the most serious national security threats we have ever had, while our bravest young men and women are risking their lives halfway around the world to keep us safe. These are challenges we all want to meet and problems we all want to solve, even if we do not always agree on how to do it. But if the right of free and open debate is taken away from the minority party and the millions of Americans who ask us to be their voice, I fear the partisan atmosphere in Washington will be poisoned to the point where no one will be able to agree on anything. That does not serve anybody’s best interest, and it certainly is not what the patriots who founded this democracy had in mind. We owe the people who sent us here more than that. We owe them much more.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Floor Remarks, Washington, D.C., 4/13/05)

Click Here To Watch

In 2005, Biden Called The Nuclear Option The “Single Most Significant Vote” In His “32 Years In The Senate” And “An Example Of The Arrogance Of Power.”  SEN. JOE BIDEN: “Mr. President, my friends and colleagues, I have not been here as long as Senator Byrd, and no one fully understands the Senate as well as Senator Byrd, but I have been here for over three decades. This is the single most significant vote any one of us will cast in my 32 years in the Senate. I suspect the Senator would agree with that. We should make no mistake. This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab by the majority party, propelled by its extreme right and designed to change the reading of the Constitution, particularly as it relates to individual rights and property rights. It is nothing more or nothing less. … We have been through these periods before in American history but never, to the best of my knowledge, has any party been so bold as to fundamentally attempt to change the structure of this body.” (Sen. Joe Biden, Floor Remarks, Washington, D.C., 5/23/05)

Click Here To Watch

Biden: “I Pray God When The Democrats Take Back Control, We Don’t Make The Kind Of Naked Power Grab You Are Doing.” BIDEN: “Isn’t what is really going on here that the majority does not want to hear what others have to say, even if it is the truth? Senator Moynihan, my good friend who I served with for years, said: You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts. The nuclear option abandons America’s sense of fair play. It is the one thing this country stands for: Not tilting the playing field on the side of those who control and own the field. I say to my friends on the Republican side: You may own the field right now, but you won’t own it forever. I pray God when the Democrats take back control, we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing. But I am afraid you will teach my new colleagues the wrong lessons.” (Sen. Joe Biden, Floor Remarks, 5/23/05)

Click Here To Watch

Reid, In 2005: “The Filibuster Is Far From A Procedural Gimmick. It’s Part Of The Fabric Of This Institution … Senators Have Used The Filibuster To Stand Up To Popular Presidents, To Block Legislation, And, Yes, Even, As I’ve Stated, To Stall Executive Nominees.” SEN. HARRY REID: “The filibuster is not a scheme and it certainly isn’t new. The filibuster is far from a procedural gimmick. It’s part of the fabric of this institution we call the Senate. It was well-known in colonial legislatures before we became a country, and it’s an integral part of our country’s 214-year history. The first filibuster in the United States Congress happened in 1790. It was used by lawmakers from Virginia and South Carolina who were trying to prevent Philadelphia from hosting the first Congress. Since then, the filibuster has been employed hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times. It’s been employed on legislative matters, it’s been employed on procedural matters relating to the president’s nominations for Cabinet and sub-Cabinet posts, and it’s been used on judges for all those years. One scholar estimates that 20 percent of the judges nominated by presidents have fallen by the wayside, most of them as a result of filibusters. Senators have used the filibuster to stand up to popular presidents, to block legislation, and, yes, even, as I’ve stated, to stall executive nominees. The roots of the filibuster are found in the Constitution and in our own rules.” (Sen. Harry Reid, Floor Remarks, 5/18/05)

Click Here To Watch

Reid: “Some In This Chamber Want To Throw Out 214 Years Of Senate History In The Quest For Absolute Power. … They Think They’re Wiser Than Our Founding Fathers. I Doubt That That’s True.” SEN. HARRY REID: “For 200 years we’ve had the right to extended debate. It’s not some procedural gimmick. It’s within the vision of the founding fathers of our country. They did it; we didn’t do it. They established a government so that no one person and no single party could have total control. Some in this chamber want to throw out 214 years of Senate history in the quest for absolute power. They want to do away with Mr. Smith, as depicted in that great movie, being able to come to Washington. They want to do away with the filibuster. They think they’re wiser than our founding fathers. I doubt that that’s true.” (Sen. Harry Reid, Floor Remarks, 5/18/05)

Click Here To Watch

Then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY): “If You Cannot Get 60 Votes For A Nominee, Maybe You Should Think About Who You Are Sending To Us To Be Confirmed…” CLINTON: “So this President has come to the majority in the Senate and basically said: Change the rules. Do it the way I want it done. And I guess there were not very many voices on the other side of the aisle that acted the way previous generations of Senators have acted and said: Mr. President, we are with you. We support you. But that is a bridge too far. We cannot go there. You have to restrain yourself, Mr. President. We have confirmed 95 percent of your nominees. And if you cannot get 60 votes for a nominee, maybe you should think about who you are sending to us to be confirmed because for a lifetime appointment, 60 votes, bringing together a consensus of Senators from all regions of the country, who look at the same record and draw the same conclusion, means that perhaps that nominee should not be on the Federal bench.” (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Floor Remarks, 5/23/05)

Click Here To Watch

Clinton Expressed Hope That The Senate Would Reject The Nuclear Option And “Remember Our Founders” And “Maintain The Integrity Of The U.S. Senate.” CLINTON: “And I just had to hope that maybe between now and the time we have this vote there would be enough Senators who will say: Mr. President, no. We are sorry, we cannot go there. We are going to remember our Founders. We are going to remember what made this country great. We are going to maintain the integrity of the U.S. Senate.” (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Floor Remarks, 5/23/05)

Click Here To Watch

One Republican’s Mea Culpa: Yes, I Am To Blame For The Collapse Of ObamaCare

November 15, 2013

I watch Fox News at home, and every time the subject of the failure of ObamaCare came up, I would hear liberals such as Juan Williams make it his primary point that Republicans always wanted ObamaCare to fail to begin with.  Which [of course] obviously made it our fault that it is failing.  When I am at my gym, I am invariably forced (deservedly, I’m sure) to watch MSNBC.  And of course I am told repeatedly that Republicans always wanted ObamaCare to fail and that [obviously] its failure is therefore our fault.

I see articles like this one in the Washington Post demanding to know “Who are the make-Obamacare-fail dead-enders, anyway?

Who are we, indeed?  Or, to put it in liberal-blame terms, “Just who the hell do we think we are?

I, as a representative Republican conservative, take it upon myself to accept the blame that liberals demand I wear around my neck albatross-fashion: I am responsible for ObamaCare and its failure.

It took me a while to figure out just HOW I was to blame, given that I never wanted the damn demonic law to begin with, but I think I finally understand.

You see, Democrats and liberals are people with pathologically inferior minds.  They are morally depraved, lesser beings.  And what happened is that the negative energy of my clearly superior conservative brain somehow affected the cud-chewing Democrat brain, such that my negative energy further retarded them and made them stupid.

So how could the ObamaCare web site designers hope to succeed?  Even when they spent $634 million to build a website that four million small porn sites somehow built for pennies on the dollar???

The problem, of course, is that “Glitch Girl” just didn’t stimulate the way that all those porn site girls did.  I guess at least the porn girls presumably got paid for what they sell.  But that is my fault, too.

The Face of ObamaCare herself never enrolled in this turd a.k.a. “The Affordable Care Act.”  The smiling face of ObamaCare bliss was all just an illusion as it was all just a delusion.  But that is my fault.

How could the product of such pathologically inferior minds possibly get off the ground with my superior brain waves influencing all and everything around me???  It’s my fault.

Can I be like a liberal here and beg forgiveness on the basis of my good intentions?  How could I know that my mind was so superior and that the minds of Democrats were so inferior that my negative brain energy would dominate all the liberals around me and make them so stupid and so incompetent that their “signature legislative accomplishment” would blow up like the Hindenburg???

But I realize that isn’t fair: only liberals can cite their good intentions to excuse themselves for the failures of their actions, of course.  Republicans – due to their superior minds – are expected to understand all the consequences of their actions and must therefore always be held responsible and criminalized wherever possible.

So there it is.  Pass it around.  Unlike Obama, I fully accept responsibility.  It was because of me that liberals and Democrats wanted this stupid thing, wrote this stupid thing, voted for this stupid thing and implemented this stupid thing.  And even though liberals did it all by themselves, my  negative brain waves were insidiously affecting them at every step of the way.

Now, for those conservatives who would still stubbornly insist that they bear no responsibility for the failure of ObamaCare, I make one further comparison to expose your guilt: to Elizabeth Smart.

Yes, just like Elizabeth Smart, conservatives like myself were forcibly abducted from our health care system that we preferred.  We had no say-so.  We didn’t vote for the damn thing.  We didn’t get to participate in it in any way, any shape or any form.  We had nothing to do with its implementation or the stupid website or the 18,000 pages of regulations that Obama wrote after the law was passed.

Yes, just like Elizabeth Smart, we were forced to participate in this system whether we wanted it or not.  We didn’t get to issue waivers to ourselves the way Obama issued waivers to all his union and corporate cronies.  I recall just a few weeks ago during the fury of the government shut down that Republicans just wanted to delay ObamaCare for a year, but they were told what?  How DARE you!  ObamaCare was passed by Congress, signed into law by the president, and affirmed by the Supreme Court.  Just like the Defense of Marriage Act, but that’s another story.  What right did Republicans have to change it or alter it in any way?  Only Obama - by unconstitutionally exercising powers that were solely reserved to Congress – had the right to repeatedly change the law.  Praise him!  Hail him!  For only he is worthy!

Obama provided a football analogy and said yesterday that he fumbled the ObamaCare football.  He also moved the goal posts and completely changed the rules of the game while the game was being played.  But all that’s beside the point.

But that’s besides the point, you see: because in spite of the fact that Elizabeth Smart was abducted, in spite of the fact that she was forced to take part in a “relationship” she never wanted, in spite of the fact that she was repeatedly raped, HAD SHE JUST WANTED IT, THE RELATIONSHIP WOULD HAVE SUCCEEDED.

If Elizabeth Smart had just accepted her new status and desired to be raped, everything would have been good.  But to her great blame, there remained some part of her that didn’t want any of it.  That poisoned the relationship.

It was Elizabeth Smart’s fault her relationship with her rapist abductor failed, you see.  At least in the minds of the Democrats who abducted Republicans and forced them to participate in the sick, twisted “relationship” otherwise known as the ObamaCare mandate.

Look, all Democrats want from us is this: when we’re getting butt-raped (by the “condom-protected,” of course) phallus of ObamaCare, all they ask is that we moan in ecstasy and push our eager rectums against our attacker as we accept his government thrusts into our lives.  That’s all they’ve asked us for regarding the assault of ObamaCare.  And as we listen to the diatribes of the left who point out that we were always opposed to our rape, is it really so much for them to demand that we just sit back and enjoy it???

Accept your blame, ye rape-hating Republicans.  The failure of ObamaCare is truly all your fault.  How dare you never have wanted it to begin with.  How dare you.

Barack Obama And His Democrat Party: The Most Documented Liars In The Entire History Of The Human Race

November 5, 2013

Barack Obama has a record that can only be broken by the Antichrist (whose useful idiot Obama is): Barack Hussein Obama is THE most thoroughly documented liar in the entire history of the human race.  And to paraphrase Obama, “Period.”

Regarding ObamaCare, which isn’t some inconsequential or tangential piece of legislation for Obama, but is his “signature legislative accomplishment,” Obama said stuff like this over and over and over and over again:

“No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.”

It is now a conformed, documented fact that every single thing Obama said about his socialist health care hijack was a pure, distilled, unadulterated, total lie from hell.

Yesterday Obama came out and “modified” his story to say this:

“If you had or have one of these plans before the Affordable Care Act came into law and you really like that plan, what we said was, you could keep it if hasn’t changed since the law’s passed,” added Obama.

Let’s go back to the instant replay:

“If you like your current insurance, you keep that insurance. Period. End of Story.”

That is NOT what you said, Obama, you wicked liar.  Not even CLOSE.

I want you to note that that last quote was cited in a National Review article dated July 21, 2009.  And even THEN they were saying Obama was lying through his teeth.  That article cited facts why it was a lie, and then added immediately after quoting Obama above, “But what the president forgot to tell you is that his assertion is only true if the story were fiction.”

And a little more:

A recent NBC investigation found, “buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, ‘40 to 67 percent’ of customers will not be able to keep their policy.”

 But as recently as the 2012 presidential campaign, Obama was telling voters they could keep their plans.

We now know OFFICIALLY that senior White House officials KNEW that what Obama was saying over and over and over again about keeping your insurance was a lie.  And he kept saying it anyway.

And Obama has added lies to his lies, as an example lying about being able to call the phone number or fill out paperwork to get around the failed website – when BOTH merely kicked directly back to the failed website.

Like I have been saying all along, this demon-possessed man is a pathological liar without shame, without honor, without virtue and without integrity of any kind whatsoever.  Period.  End of story.

Even the überliberal Washington Post was forced to give Obama four Pinocchios on a scale of one to four Pinocchios.  Barack Obama lied to the American people.  Period.  And No Democrat will take it away.  No matter what.

But it actually gets even worse: Obama and his minions are STILL LYING.  As the (above-linked) WaPo fact check points out:

The administration is defending this pledge with a rather slim reed — that there is nothing in the law that makes insurance companies force people out of plans they were enrolled in before the law passed. That explanation conveniently ignores the regulations written by the administration to implement the law. Moreover, it also ignores the fact that the purpose of the law was to bolster coverage and mandate a robust set of benefits, whether someone wanted to pay for it or not.

The president’s statements were sweeping and unequivocal — and made both before and after the bill became law. The White House now cites technicalities to avoid admitting that he went too far in his repeated pledge, which, after all, is one of the most famous statements of his presidency.

The president’s promise apparently came with a very large caveat: “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan — if we deem it to be adequate.”

The Obama White House knew as early as July of 2010 that every single thing Obama had said about ObamaCare - AND CONTINUED TO SAY – was a lie, and that upwards of 80% of people with individual health insurance would have their policies cancelled because of ObamaCare requirements:

“Remember: The President didn’t say if you like your plan and we approve it you  can keep it,” Stewart wrote, the Post reported. “He promised that if you like  your plan, you can keep it, period— “no matter what.”

Yet the NBC report  said the government knew that wasn’t true, saying that buried in regulations  from the July 2010 law was an estimate that because of normal turnover in the  individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to  keep their policy.

And because many policies will have been changed  since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing  grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.”

“This says that when they made the promise, they knew half the people  in this market outright couldn’t keep what they had and then they wrote the  rules so that others couldn’t make it either,” Robert Laszewski of Health Policy  and Strategy Associates, told NBC.

He estimated 80 percent of those in  the individual market will not be able to keep their current policies and will  have to buy insurance that meets requirements of the new law, which generally  requires a richer package of benefits than most policies today.

Most analysts expect to see 15 million Americans’ health plans cancelled.  And they AREN’T being cancelled because insurance companies are greedy or evil, but rather because Barack Obama and Democrats in their sweeping takeover of the health care industry were greedy and evil in their tyrannous overreach.  They are being cancelled because older people had been allowed to buy policies that addressed their individual needs; now Obama is forcing everyone to have, for example, maternity coverage, even if they are elderly and well beyond their child bearing years.  The policies that do not have such coverage (and many other types of coverage as well) are FORCED to cancel them.

Democrats scoffed at 15 million people as a “mere five percent.”  But let’s remember that these demon-possessed liars imposed ObamaCare on us to provide insurance for only THIRTY million people who were uninsured.

Now, according to what we know, ObamaCare won’t actually help the people who were uninsured.  When ObamaCare is fully implemented, there will STILL be 30 million people uninsured.  ObamaCare did nothing for the people it most promised to help.  But now add to that 15 million who just got kicked off the insurance they HAD because of the devil’s little helper Obama.

And it is simply a FACT (as the liberal WaPo points out) that ObamaCare from the very outset was depending on people paying considerably higher premiums to subsidize the uninsurable and the uninsured who would also be forced into the market by government dictate.  Obama is subsidizing these people at the cost of forcing most Americans to pay far more for their health care than they had previously.

But it gets so much worse its unreal.  And remember, Obama promised over and over again, swore to the American people time and time again, that if you liked your insurance you would be able to keep it, no ifs ands or buts.

Try this on for size:

Expert: At least 129 million will ‘not be able to keep’ health care plan if Obamacare fully implemented
12:45 AM 11/04/2013

If Obamacare is fully implemented, 68 percent of Americans with private health insurance will not be able to keep their plan, according to health care economist Christopher Conover.

Conover is a research scholar in the Center for Health Policy & Inequalities Research at Duke University and an adjunct scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. In an interview with The Daily Caller, he laid out what he estimates the consequences of Obamacare’s implementation will ultimately be.

“Bottom line: of the 189 million Americans with private health insurance coverage, I estimate that if Obamacare is fully implemented, at least 129 million (68 percent) will not be able to keep their previous health care plan either because they already have lost or will lose that coverage by the end of 2014,” he said in an email. ”But of these, ‘only’ the 18 to 50 million will literally lose coverage, i.e., have their plans entirely taken away. This includes 9.2-15.4 million in the non-group market and 9-35 million in the employer-based market. The rest will retain their old plans but have to pay higher rates for Obamacare-mandated bells and whistles.”

If you are lucky enough to keep your insurance and not just have it cancelled outright from under your feet, you will be paying a whole lot more for it and probably getting a higher deductible to go with fewer doctors and options in whatever network you get stuck on.

The New York Times can’t bring themselves to say that their messiah whom they endorsed and voted for and worship lied.  Instead, he “misspoke” when he said something that was absolutely false.  These people are liars who lied for these last several years while the cancer of ObamaCare metasticized and now they’re lying about all the lies they told to sell us their lies.

The New York Times editorial smarmily lectures us in the following way:

Many higher-income people who won’t qualify for subsidies, however, will have to buy policies providing more benefits than they want. Maternity care for those who will not have children is one sore point. But that is one price of moving toward universal coverage with comprehensive benefits.

Tell you what: I want women to be forced to cover prostate exams and see how they feel about the shockingly higher cost of their health care premiums.  I think that my erection is a matter that every single woman in America should be forced to concern herself with and pay for – so I demand every woman be required to pay for my damn Viagra pills so Mister Happy can be happy again.  And just remember, women, that your higher premiums is just “one price of moving toward universal coverage with comprehensive benefits.”

People by the MILLIONS are going to be dumped off their health insurance plans that they paid for and were happy with because Obama doesn’t think they provide enough left-wing goodies.

Allow me to paraphrase some lines from the Clint Eastwood classic “Unforgiven”:

Will Munny: It’s a hell of a thing, killing a man’s health insurance plan. Take away all the health care he’s got and all he’s ever gonna have.

The Schofield Obama: Yeah, well, I guess they had it coming.

Will Munny: We all got it coming, kid.

We’ve all got it coming in the Obama States of America.

God judges a nation for the wickedness of its king.  And we’ve elected ourselves a most wicked king, indeed.  Believe me, we’ve got it coming.

Obama and his lying minions are similarly claiming that all of the people who are being cancelled are having their plans cancelled because they are substandard and a burden on the taxpayers because they don’t provide adequate coverage.  This is also a lie, as is documented in the case of a California woman with “world class insurance” who is losing her coverage.

Barack Obama will be guilty of this woman’s murder (note the subtitle):

You Also Can’t Keep Your Doctor
I had great cancer doctors and health insurance. My plan was cancelled. Now I worry how long I’ll live.
By Edie Littlefield Sundby
Nov. 3, 2013 6:37 p.m. ET

Everyone now is clamoring about Affordable Care Act winners and losers. I am one of the losers.

My grievance is not political; all my energies are directed to enjoying life and staying alive, and I have no time for politics. For almost seven years I have fought and survived stage-4 gallbladder cancer, with a five-year survival rate of less than 2% after diagnosis. I am a determined fighter and extremely lucky. But this luck may have just run out: My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31.

My choice is to get coverage through the government health exchange and lose access to my cancer doctors, or pay much more for insurance outside the exchange (the quotes average 40% to 50% more) for the privilege of starting over with an unfamiliar insurance company and impaired benefits.

Countless hours searching for non-exchange plans have uncovered nothing that compares well with my existing coverage. But the greatest source of frustration is Covered California, the state’s Affordable Care Act health-insurance exchange and, by some reports, one of the best such exchanges in the country. After four weeks of researching plans on the website, talking directly to government exchange counselors, insurance companies and medical providers, my insurance broker and I are as confused as ever. Time is running out and we still don’t have a clue how to best proceed.

Two things have been essential in my fight to survive stage-4 cancer. The first are doctors and health teams in California and Texas: at the medical center of the University of California, San Diego, and its Moores Cancer Center; Stanford University’s Cancer Institute; and the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

The second element essential to my fight is a United Healthcare PPO (preferred provider organization) health-insurance policy.

Since March 2007 United Healthcare has paid $1.2 million to help keep me alive, and it has never once questioned any treatment or procedure recommended by my medical team. The company pays a fair price to the doctors and hospitals, on time, and is responsive to the emergency treatment requirements of late-stage cancer. Its caring people in the claims office have been readily available to talk to me and my providers.

But in January, United Healthcare sent me a letter announcing that they were pulling out of the individual California market. The company suggested I look to Covered California starting in October.

You would think it would be simple to find a health-exchange plan that allows me, living in San Diego, to continue to see my primary oncologist at Stanford University and my primary care doctors at the University of California, San Diego. Not so. UCSD has agreed to accept only one Covered California plan—a very restrictive Anthem EPO Plan. EPO stands for exclusive provider organization, which means the plan has a small network of doctors and facilities and no out-of-network coverage (as in a preferred-provider organization plan) except for emergencies. Stanford accepts an Anthem PPO plan but it is not available for purchase in San Diego (only Anthem HMO and EPO plans are available in San Diego).

So if I go with a health-exchange plan, I must choose between Stanford and UCSD. Stanford has kept me alive—but UCSD has provided emergency and local treatment support during wretched periods of this disease, and it is where my primary-care doctors are.

Before the Affordable Care Act, health-insurance policies could not be sold across state lines; now policies sold on the Affordable Care Act exchanges may not be offered across county lines.

What happened to the president’s promise, “You can keep your health plan”? Or to the promise that “You can keep your doctor”? Thanks to the law, I have been forced to give up a world-class health plan. The exchange would force me to give up a world-class physician.

For a cancer patient, medical coverage is a matter of life and death. Take away people’s ability to control their medical-coverage choices and they may die. I guess that’s a highly effective way to control medical costs. Perhaps that’s the point.

Ms. Sundby lives in California.

Again, Ms. Sundby - may God heal her because Barack Obama will surely callously murder that woman – is (still) living proof that everything Obama and Democrats have said and are now saying about ObamaCare and about insurance companies were diseased lies from the most rabies-ridden depths of hell.  This woman did NOT have a “substandard” plan; she had an excellent plan.  The insurance company was NOT “greedy” or “evil”; it had paid out over a million dollars to keep this woman alive in a fight that Barack Obama just surrendered for her on her behalf.

On this blog, I have been consistently saying that ObamaCare was truly evil.  And I say it more loudly and with more evidence to support my cries today than I have ever had.  And if this demonic takeover of health care continues, I guarantee you I will have even MORE evidence because this thing is as catastrophic of a failure as it is an evil takeover of what had been the best health care on the planet such that world leaders came HERE when they faced serious illnesses.

I think of Republicans who tried in vain to stand against ObamaCare - only to get excoriated by a demonic Nazi Joseph Goebbels media just a few weeks ago.  Just realize: they TRIED to do what was right for the American people, but the American people would have none of it.  And so when you lose your insurance, Democrat, independent, or Republican RINO who wouldn’t stand with Republicans like Senator Ted Cruz, just remember that you deserve it.

I submit for the record that Edie Littlefield Sundby’s sin was what she expressed in her second sentence: “My grievance is not political.”  Because it damn well SHOULD have been if she wanted to live.

If you want to live, you’d better be out in the street demanding that Barack Obama be forcibly impeached and removed from office and put on trial for his crimes.  And you had better be demanding that the Democrat Party be criminalized and that every single Democrat be hunted down with dogs and burned alive lest they inflict an even worse evil upon what is left of this nation.

Under Barack Obama, in these days before the Antichrist whose useful idiot Obama has been and continues to be, things are going to get increasingly ugly.

And this nation, this “one nation, under Obama” richly deserves it.

Let’s remember to say our pledge of allegiance as messiah leads us into hell:

[In unison]: “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the Obama States of America, and to the Messiah for which it stands, one Nation divided by race, class and gender, with redistribution and Marxist fairness for all.”

And don’t forget to praise the Antichrist and get ready to accept the mark of the coming ultimate big government tyrant.

Hillary Clinton’s Hypcritical Bubble Dream World

October 22, 2013

Some of what Hillary said at a speech (I love the absolutely propagandistic way the reporter framed the story in the bold-faced heading, too):

She wasn’t afraid to jab Republicans, however gently

Clinton stayed mostly positive, but she didn’t shy away from taking a few shots at Republicans, albeit not by name.

Talking about the political gridlock on Capitol Hill that led to a 16-day government shutdown this month, she said that “we have seen examples of the wrong kind of leadership” in recent days, an unmistakable poke at House Republicans.

“Politicians choose scorched-earth over common ground,” she continued. “They operate in what I called the evidence-free-zone, with ideology trumping everything else,” she said, before listing the consequences of the shutdown, such as furloughed workers and “children thrown out of Head Start.”

Clinton also made sure to highlight Republican efforts to enforce stricter abortion regulations in Virginia. McAuliffe, she said, would “stand up against attempts to restrict women’s health choices.”

Rounding out her speech, Clinton alluded to Alexis de Tocqueville, the French writer who described Americans as having “habits of the heart” when he traveled to the U.S. nearly 200 years ago.

But Clinton warned that such a spirit is under threat.

“We cannot let those who do not believe in America’s progress hijack this great experiment, and substitute for the habits of the heart suspicion, hatred, anger, anxiety. That’s not as a people who we are.”

That’s “gently”???  “The wrong kind of leadership,” “scorched earth over common ground,” “evidence-free zone, with ideology trumping everything else,” “children thrown out of Head Start,” “hatred, anger, anxiety.”  Yeah, that’s gentle.

Whoever wrote this story up thinks that the tea party (the people with no arrests who left every protest sight cleaner than they found it) were ugly and that the Occupy Movement with 7.765 criminal arrests for stuff including RAPE (and terrorism), and toxic protest sites were just wonderful.  Because we’ve got propagandists where objective JOURNALISTS ought to be.  But that’s another discussion, I suppose.

It’s also another discussion to see Hillary Stumping for a candidate after her husband Bill’s adventure in stumping for one of the most twisted men of the century.  Now, Bob Filner is a man who knew how to “stand up for women,” too.  As long as he was standing up to grope them.

Let’s focus on Hillary Clinton, the shrill, hateful woman who once blamed “a vast, right wing conspiracy” for forcing her husband to insert his penis into the mouth of one of his young interns.  But just remember while you’re damning the GOP for what Bill Clinton did with his penis that “It depends on what the meaning of the word is, is.”

Do you want to know what “the wrong kind of leadership” apparently DOES NOT look like?  It looks like saying 250 times that you can’t remember something that would convict you criminally if you COULD remember.  Kind of like this crap:

As part of that investigation, the prosecutors have been examining the legal work Mrs. Clinton did for Madison and related land deals, including a project known as Castle Grande. Officials of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. have told the Little Rock grand jury in recent months that a document drafted by Mrs. Clinton in 1986 was used “to deceive regulators” about the financing of Castle Grande.

The officials had originally concluded that Mrs. Clinton did little work for Madison or Castle Grande. But they changed their view after seeing her billing records, which disappeared for several years before turning up in the White House residence in 1996. Mrs. Clinton has said she does not remember drafting the document or performing other work on Castle Grande.

“The right kind of leadership” is not being able to remember one damn thing about all the fraud and crime you committed, isn’t it, Hillary?

But it was the line about “the habits of the heart suspicion, hatred, anger, anxiety. That’s not as a people who we are” that made me snort up my corn flakes.

As for “anxiety,” I’d like to know how many American presidents literally tried to demonize their own stock market because they wanted the economy to tank so they could blame the other party for it the way Obama did:

In unusually frank comments on issues that could sway markets, Obama warned that investors should be worried.

“This time’s different. I think they should be concerned,” Obama said, in comments which may roil global markets.

“When you have a situation in which a faction is willing potentially to default on US government obligations, then we are in trouble,” Obama said.

I’ll bet you can’t even COUNT how many dozens of times Obama fearmongered the word “default” in describing the debt ceiling debate.  Which is weird given the fact that the United States takes in at least ten times in tax revenue what it would have had to pay out in interest to service the debt, and the ONLY possible way America could ever have “defaulted” was if Obama refused to make the payments that the Constitution’s clause regarding “the full faith and credit of the United States” mandate that he make.

So, with no due respect, Hillary, “anxiety” is ALL ABOUT who as a people YOU ARE, you “vast right wing conspiracy” fascist.

Hillary Talked about “anger.”  I wonder how many American presidents have ever said -

We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us

- regarding roughly half of his own fellow AMERICAN PEOPLE????

You want to talk about “anger”???

Let’s take a LOOK at the face of “anger.”

Here’s “anger.”

Here’s some “anger” for you.

And here’s some more anger.

I’m kind of like that little kid in the movie who saw dead people, only I see “angry” people.

Yeah, I see “anger,” all right.

I see an incredibly angry man.

I see a man who seriously needs to blow off some of his anger and hate the way a train blows off steam.

A whole lotta anger on that man, judging by the pictures.

That’s EXACTLY the kind of people you are, Hillary.

As to “hate,” the WORST kind of hate is when you lie about your opponents and twist them the way your party’s own twisted soul is twisted.

Hillary Clinton, the vile, slandering, dishonest, demagogic liar that she is, talked about “children thrown out of Head Start.”

WHO THREW THOSE CHILDREN OUT OF HEAD START, HILLARY, YOU WICKED LIAR?

Headline:

House Passes Bill to Fund Head Start

As in “GOP House,” Hillary, you liar.

Here’s the opening line of another article for you to correct your slanderous hate, Hillary:

When CBS reporter Mark Knoller asked President Barack Obama why he refused to “go along” with any of the House bills to fund programs like Head Start or veterans benefits during the government shutdown, the commander-in-chief was blunt in his response.

Let’s consider which party really hates children, Hillary, you wicked, demon-possessed liar without shame, honor or integrity:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is blaming Republicans for the National Institutes of Health turning away cancer patients. But when asked why the Senate wouldn’t try to help “one child who has cancer” by approving a mini-spending bill, he shot back: “Why would we want to do that?”

Do you want to know what “hatred” looks like?  It looks just like using the Internal Revenue Service as an ideological weapon to attack your political opponents.  Kind of like “punishing your enemies,” you know.  That ought to be pretty obvious given the fact that just two days after Obama met with his own IRS appointee William Wilkins, Wilkins chanted the IRS mission from collecting taxes to punishing Obama’s enemies for “anti-Obama rhetoric.”

When we talk about “hate” or “anger” or “anxiety,” just remember: WE’RE TALKING ABOUT DEMOCRATS WHO SHAMELESSLY ADD “HYPOCRITE” TO ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THEY DO.

One of the things Alexis de Tocqueville said was, “America is great because she is good.  If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”  And America has very definitely ceased to be good under Democrats and their baby-murdering, sodomy-worshiping ways.  de Tocqueville also said, “The Americans combine the notions of religion and liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive of one without the other.” But Democrats have virtually murdered the spirit of God or religion in America.

When I consider the actions of Hillary Rodham Clinton before, during and after the debacle of Benghazi where Hillary Clinton’s incompetent bungling basically murdered the first American ambassador since Jimmy Carter’s failed presidency before blaming it on some stupid video that had nothing to do with anything, I realize that as unbelievable as it may seem, there actually IS a president who could be more wicked and more incompetent and more demon-possessed than the one we’ve got now.

Was Jesus A Socialist? How ‘No’ Can You Go?

October 16, 2013

This is one of the worst lies of the Democrat Party, as the party of slavery (as in when Democrats fought a bitter Civil War to keep slavery that Republicans finally won before a Democrat murdered one of the greatest American presidents in revenge.  Oh, and then Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan as the terrorist wing of the Democrat Party); as the party of genocide (with more than fifty-five million innocent American babies murdered by Democrats so far); as the official party of sodomy and the party of Romans chapter one: that Jesus was somehow a Democrat who would have urinated all over a Bible and voted with them in their demonic agenda.

The liberals’ argument that Jesus was a socialist boils down to this syllogism: a) Jesus loved the poor.  b) Government welfare programs help the poor.  Ergo c) Jesus loved big government welfare programs.

It’s kind of like this syllogism, however: a) Jesus loves the sun.  b) The sun shone on Charles Manson’s murder spree.  Ergo c) Jesus loves Charles Manson’s murder spree.  The logic flow in both cases is simply non sequitur.

The problem is that there’s an implicit assumption that only government programs can help the poor.  Individual people have no right or responsibility to help the poor with their own money; therefore government should seize their money and redistribute it themselves.  There is an implicit assumption that totalitarian government is an inherent and intrinsic good and that individuals having any right to their own money is an inherent and intrinsic evil.

For the official record, no, JESUS WAS NOT A SOCIALIST.

Now, I could argue this two different ways.  I could argue that the “war on poverty” has been an incredibly expensive FAILURE that did NOTHING to reduce poverty.  I could document that by showing that the poverty rate was actually already declining prior to Democrats’ “war on poverty” and that the poverty rate actually went UP because of the welfare state that Democrats created.  I could also then document that welfare has been moral poison as we have trained – “indoctrinated” is a far better and more accurate term – a massive segment of our society if not an entire generation to view themselves as “victims” who are “entitled” to a lifetime of “government assistance.”

But that’s been done at length.  What hasn’t been dealt with nearly enough is the Democrats’ convenient method of barring Christianity from public discourse UNLESS AND UNTIL IT IS CONVENIENT TO THEM.  And then all of a sudden you have the same people who have waged the “separation of church and state” war talking about how Jesus would have loved their big government welfare state.

The problem is that it is simply false.

St. Paul is the only figure in the Bible who said, “Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1).  That’s a rather bold statement when you stop and think about it: would YOU put that in writing to all of YOUR friends?  But the man who wrote 2/3rds of the books in the New Testament turns out to be the most Christlike men who ever lived.  And what did he say about “welfare”???  Try this:

For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. — 2 Thessalonians 3:10

I submit to you that what Paul – and frankly therefore what Jesus Christ – taught is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what Democrats teach and practice in their stupid and immoral laws.  Which is why the king of the depraved Democrat (which stands for “DEMOnic BureauCRAT”) has exploded the welfare state.  And it was not to help the poor or to provide health care; it was to create an entitlement mindset that would politically perpetuate the PARTY of entitlement forever – or at least until America collapses upon which time their “Cloward and Piven” strategy will kick in [for that see here and here and here and here and of yes HERE and here and here as I've been pointing this out since Obama took office.

How can you say that a welfare system in which sitting on your lazy butt and collecting the redistributed wealth of people who actually bother to WORK such that in 39 states receiving welfare pays BETTER than a secretary's job - and that in 47 states it pays better than a janitor's salary - is anything other than morally depraved?  What can you say about a system created by the Democrat Party in which people who bother to work are "suckers" as the labor participation rate drops beneath extinction levels and continues to and drop and drop some more under the Food Stamp president???

How can anybody with a single moral clue say that these are good things and not evil things???

How can you say that a nation whose debt now vastly exceeds the GDP of the entire planet is anything other than demonic???

But let's leave that aside for the rest of this article and instead examine what the BIBLE says about the role of human government in poverty.

We can go back to 1 Samuel chapter 8 to begin answering our question as to whether God loves giant human government to rule over everything and everyone:

and they said to [Samuel], “Behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint a king for us to judge us like all the nations.”  But the thing was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” And Samuel prayed to the LORD.  The LORD said to Samuel, “Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them.  “Like all the deeds which they have done since the day that I brought them up from Egypt even to this day– in that they have forsaken Me and served other gods– so they are doing to you also.  “Now then, listen to their voice; however, you shall solemnly warn them and tell them of the procedure of the king who will reign over them.”

So Samuel spoke all the words of the LORD to the people who had asked of him a king.  [God] said, “This will be the procedure of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and place them for himself in his chariots and among his horsemen and they will run before his chariots.  “He will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and of fifties, and some to do his plowing and to reap his harvest and to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots.  “He will also take your daughters for perfumers and cooks and bakers.  “He will take the best of your fields and your vineyards and your olive groves and give them to his servants.  “He will take a tenth of your seed and of your vineyards and give to his officers and to his servants.  “He will also take your male servants and your female servants and your best young men and your donkeys and use them for his work.  “He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his servants.  “Then you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day.”

Nevertheless, the people refused to listen to the voice of Samuel, and they said, “No, but there shall be a king over us…  1 Samuel 8:5-19

Did God want gargantuan human government?  The Bible is clear: NO.  Government is simply NOT the answer that the Bible points to as the solution to our problems.  Seven times in that passage you have your “he will take” showing us what a tax-and-cynically-spend-for-his-own-political-advantage President Obama would do.  And the result is that the people will ultimately “cry out in that day because of the king whom you have chosen for yourselves.”  And we’re already seeing that (it’s called ObamaCare and it is as failed as it is evil).

A professor of Old Testament studies comments on this passage and big government:

Under the monarchy, a centralized government was established and with it came luxurious living and a large bureaucracy, two things that required a larger expenditure, and therefore a heavier taxation.

Samuel warned the people about how the king and his government would operate. He told the people that the king would take their sons and make them soldiers. The king would put some of the people to forced labor to work on his farms, plowing and harvesting his crops. The king would conscript some of the people to make either weapons of war or chariots in which he could ride in luxury.

Samuel also said that the kings would conscript some women to work as beauticians and waitresses and cooks. He would conscript their best fields, vineyards, and orchards and give them over to his officials. He would tax their harvests and vintage to support his extensive bureaucracy. He would take their prize workers and best animals for his own use. He also would lay a tax on their flocks and all their property and in the end the people would be no better than slaves. Then Samuel warned the people that the day would come when they would cry in desperation because of the oppressive burden imposed upon them by their king (1 Samuel 8:10-18). The day came, the people cried, but it was too late.

And it is more tyrannous and more oppressive under King Obama today than it EVER was during the reigns of even the most wicked kings of Israel.

Here’s another question: is giving to aforementioned big government the same thing as giving to God, as Democrats believe?  Let’s let Jesus speak:

Then the Pharisees went and plotted together how they might trap Him in what He said.  And they sent their disciples to Him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that You are truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any.  “Tell us then, what do You think? Is it lawful to give a poll-tax to Caesar, or not?”  But Jesus perceived their malice, and said, “Why are you testing Me, you hypocrites?  “Show Me the coin used for the poll-tax.” And they brought Him a denarius.  And He said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?”  They said to Him, “Caesar’s.” Then He said to them, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s.”  And hearing this, they were amazed, and leaving Him, they went away. — Matthew 22:15-22

Okay, so you can give to Obama.  OR YOU CAN GIVE TO GOD.  BUT GIVING TO OBAMA IS NOT THE SAME THING AS GIVING TO GOD.

What Democrats dishonestly and falsely tell us is that giving to the government – which they say redistributes the wealth and gives to the poor - IS giving to God.  God is the State and the State is God.  And Republicans are greedy and evil for not wanting to give to the State God to help the poor.  WRONG.  JUST ASK JESUS.  Paying your exorbitant taxes and rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s is a very different thing from rendering to God the things that are God’s.

Here’s another one: consider the poor widow in Luke 21 and tell me where Jesus enlisted big government programs to help her:

As he looked up, Jesus saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury.  He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins.  “I tell you the truth,” he said, “this poor widow has put in more than all the others.  All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on.” — Luke 21:1-4

Did Jesus demand the creation of a giant welfare state to care for this poor woman?  No.  Did Jesus condemn that this poor widow should be “forced” to give while rich people got away with not giving enough, etc.?  No.  Jesus praised this poor widow for giving all she had – NOT TO THE STATE BUT TO GOD.

In fact, I submit to you that NOWHERE IN THE ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT does Jesus or any apostle or anybody else for that matter exalt the goodness of government or call for a welfare state.  In fact, the ONLY place in the entire New Testament that government is described as anything other than evil is in Romans 13:4, in which their role is to do something that many Democrats REFUSE to do: punish wrongdoers.  The only “wrongdoers” Obama wants to punish are tea party Republicans via his IRS sledgehammer.  If you foolishly think that Democrats want wrongdoers punished, consider California where liberal judges dictated that the state must provide exorbitant health care to inmates – (frankly better than what LAW-ABINDING CITIZENS receive) – and release thousands of violent criminals to prevent “inhumane overcrowding.”  If you want to find any passages at all on the government caring for the poor, you have to turn to the THEOCRACY of Old Testament Israel.  In a theocracy, for the record, we’d be STONING to death people who believe in homosexual marriage and abortion.  Now, if Democrats truly want a theocracy – and the moral laws that go with it – fine by me.  But of course they DON’T, do they?  They want only what they want, and hypocritically ignore everything that they don’t like.  They cynically use the Bible to “justify” things the Bible actually decries while ignoring the parts they don’t like.  And yes, hypocrisy DEFINES their quintessential essence.

You need to understand something very important, because with Democrats it’s always a bait and switch: should we care for the poor?  You’re darned right we should care for the poor.  Does that mean we should have a giant welfare state?  Absolutely NOT.

Let’s again see what Jesus has to say about this:

13 When Jesus heard what had happened, he withdrew by boat privately to a solitary place. Hearing of this, the crowds followed him on foot from the towns. 14 When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick.

15 As evening approached, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a remote place, and it’s already getting late. Send the crowds away, so they can go to the villages and buy themselves some food.”

16 Jesus replied, “They do not need to go away. You give them something to eat.”

17 “We have here only five loaves of bread and two fish,” they answered.

18 “Bring them here to me,” he said. 19 And he directed the people to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the people. 20 They all ate and were satisfied, and the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over. 21 The number of those who ate was about five thousand men, besides women and children. — Matthew 14:13-21

Allow me to put it in crystal clear terms: if Democrats were even remotely CLOSE to being correct in their socialist views, Jesus would have listened to His disciples and said, “They need to go to King Herod.  We need a giant welfare system that will empower the government to grow gigantic and put half of the people on food stamps.”  He says the exact opposite: he says, “YOU feed them.”  YOU, as in individual people and NOT the State.

What does St. Paul have to say about being angry over being poor?

Not that I speak from want, for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am.  I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need.  I can do all things through Him who strengthens me. — Philippians 4:11-13

For the factual record, “I can do all things through Him who strengthens me” is NOT a reference to Obama or his giant socialist welfare state.  Paul also doesn’t in any way, shape or form argue that it’s unjust or unfair or immoral for the rich to be rich and the poor to be poor, nor does he call upon any government to seize the wealth of the rich and give it to the poor.  What Paul says is that he has learned to be content in whatever circumstances he is in – unlike Democrats who are bitter and angry and whiny if they don’t get to have their neighbor’s stuff whether or not said neighbor worked eighty hours a week to get that stuff or not.

Let’s contrast Paul’s attitude with being content in poverty to Karl Marx’s.  And then let’s ask the question, who does the Democrat Party agree with more, St. Paul or St. Marx???  The essence of the Democrat Party today truly is Marxism, rather than anything even remotely close to the teachings of Jesus.  I’ve written about this in the past, so I will merely quote myself:

Atheism and a spirit of hostility and hatred toward God and toward religion is at the very core of Marxism.  In the words of Karl Marx:

The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower.

What did Karl Marx mean by this?

Basically, Marx taught that the world is divided into the haves and the have-nots – which is everywhere being shouted around us today.  And the have-nots were being oppressed by the haves.  But rather than the people rising up in rage and seizing what Marx declared was theirs by force as Marx wanted them to, the people were instead happy in their religion, which according to Marx had been invented by the rich to keep the proletariat in bondage.  Marx acknowledged that in his day, religion was the order of the world; but he determined – and in fact succeeded – in imposing a NEW world system.  Since religion is nothing but an illusion, and materialism is all there actually is, the happiness that the people had in their Christianity was nothing more than a narcotic that kept them in bondage.  The only “real” reality is economic reality.  And therefore the solution presented by Marx was for the people to set aside their shackles of religion and rise up in a spirit of rage and take what was theirs by force.  Only then could the people have actual, “material” happiness.

The eight commandment in the Holy Bible is “You shall not steal,” and the tenth commandment is, “You shall not covet.”  Both ultimately flow from violation of the first commandment, “You shall have no other gods before Me.”  Marxism – as Marx acknowledged – overthrew this system and imposed one in which the State replaced God.  And where God in the Bible had commanded man NOT to covet anything that belonged to his neighbor, Marxism was in fact BASED on coveting.  “Hey, look at those damn rich people!  They’ve got everything!  Let’s take their stuff!”  Because apart from that looking over the wall at your neighbor’s house and coveting what he had and becoming angry that he or she had things that you did not have, Marxism never gets off the ground.

God said, “Thou shalt not covet.  Thou shalt not steal.”  And Marxists – and frankly liberals and Democrats – declared instead,  “Thou shalt covet thy neighbor’s possessions, and thou shalt seize them and redistribute them.”

So much for Democrats ever learning to be content in their circumstances; because they have been indoctrinated to be the exact opposite of what the Bible told them.

The fact of the matter is that the same Democrats who have wickedly tried for years to purge God out of every facet of government are wickedly trying to steal from God and seize and “redistribute” wealth that belongs to HIM.  They not only know how to use other peoples’ money better than the people who actually worked to earn it; THEY KNOW HOW TO USE IT BETTER THAN GOD HIMSELF.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have both demonized the GOP as “anarchists,” which means they hate human government.  Okay, fine.  But Democrats are statolatrists who worship human government in place of God and hate GOD.

Having established that the Bible NOWHERE supports the Democrats’ depraved view of the totalitarian welfare state, allow me to point out that the biblical word “hypocrites” is in fact the best description of the Democrat Party that there is.

Let’s look at our two greatest Democrats and see how they lived this out, starting with the Obamas:

In 2002, the year before Obama launched his campaign for U.S. Senate, the Obamas reported income of $259,394, ranking them in the top 2 percent of U.S. households, according to Census Bureau statistics. That year the Obamas claimed $1,050 in deductions for gifts to charity, or 0.4 percent of their income. The average U.S. household totaled $1,872 in gifts to charity in 2002, according to the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University.

The national average for charitable giving has long hovered at 2.2 percent of household income, according to the Glenview-based Giving USA Foundation, which tracks trends in philanthropy. Obama tax returns dating to 1997 show he fell well below that benchmark until 2005, the year he arrived in Washington.

Both Obama and his wife, Michelle,  declined to respond to questions about their charitable donations.

Socialism is love of other people’s money.  And ONLY when it comes to seizing other people’s money and cynically and greedily bankrolling their massive bureaucracies can we talk of Democrats in terms of “love.”

Allow me to contrast Democrat Obama with the Republican whom the American people rejected because he wasn’t “socialist” enough:

“[D]uring a comparable period before Obama and Romney were running for president, Romney’s giving probably was at least ten times Obama’s as a percentage of their incomes, and possibly much more.”

In other words, even when Obama was president of the United States, he wasn’t even one-tenth as personally generous with his own money as Mitt Romney was (and was over his entire life as opposed to the Obamas, who were stingy, greedy, nasty people until they started campaigning themselves for public office.

But maybe that’s just an anomaly.  Surely the Democrat Vice President must be better (I mean, it would be hard for him to be worse, right?):

Looking at the ten-year total of Biden’s giving, one percent would have been $24,500. One half of one percent would have been $12,250. One quarter of one percent would have been $6,125. And one eighth of one percent would have been $3,062 — just below what Biden actually contributed.

“The average American household gives about two percent of adjusted gross income,” says Arthur Brooks, the Syracuse University scholar, soon to take over as head of the American Enterprise Institute, who has done extensive research on American giving. “On average, [Biden] is not giving more than one tenth as much as the average American household, and that is evidence that he doesn’t share charitable values with the average American.”

Oops.  I guess the person greed and stinginess of the Obamas as they cry out for more people to have more of their wealth seized by the divine State is the model of Democrat generosity, after all.

Dick Cheney gave 78% of his wealth to charity.  John McCain, for the record, gave 28% of his income to charity.  Let’s just call Republicans what they are: BETTER HUMAN BEINGS.

The trend follows nationally by the way: Republicans are much more generous than liberals.  At least when you’re talking about with their own money, rather than with other people’s money.

It’s simply a fact: the party that is true to the Word of God in terms of human life and sexual perversion is also the most true to it in being generous to the poor and the needy.

Democrats are a people who selfishly, greedily, bitterly covet and then empower their government to steal in the name of the people.  And what they end up with is a massive bureaucracy ran in the interests of the Democrat Party agenda rather than any real help for the poor.  As an example, ObamaCare was NEVER about caring for the poor or about providing healthcare to those who couldn’t afford it.  Not only are the deductibles in ObamaCare so high that nobody will be able to afford to get the dwindling health care resources in the aftermath of this terrible “Affordable Care Act”  (see also here), but ObamaCare has been used as a cynical attempt to drive religious organizations from providing help to the needy so that the socialist State is all that is left for increasingly desperate people to turn to.

ObamaCare was ALL about “the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to  put the legislation together to control the people,” just as a Democrat once inadvertently said it was.  All it was ever about was more power for the State God.  And Democrats will feed their God as many human sacrifices as necessary to “control the people” and give their God the State more power and more control and more ability to pick winners and losers.

Jesus was someone who did not look to the state or to human government to provide for ANYTHING.  Rather, HE was the provider, the healer, the giver.

The Democrat Party has been at war with God and with Judeo-Christianity and with the Bible and yes, with Jesus Christ for the past fifty years.  And whenever they bother to talk about Jesus (or even ALLOW talk about Jesus under their communist separation of church and state dogma) – and see here - they profoundly misrepresent Him and remake Him into their image which was always the essence of idolatry.

The notion that God wanted the United States of America to plunge into the black hole of demonic debt and literally make their own children – at least the ones they didn’t murder in the hellhole of abortion – debt slaves is frankly about as evil and demonic as it gets.

Now, having said all of this, allow me to address how government could take a giant step in the right direction if liberals would just allow it.

In the 1930s, there was something that many conservatives (I being VERY conservative, I assure you) would approve of today: the Works Public Administration – at least if it were done apolitically rather than being cynically exploited for ideological party [read "Democrat"] gain.

People who refuse to work should NOT eat.  We should not be taking care of these people, let alone creating giant bureaucracies who literally have conferences desperately searching for ways to get more and more people and groups of people hooked on the government welfare dole.  At the same time, there are many people who WOULD work if given the chance, but because of various factors (e.g., medical condition, children, less than ideal resumes), they don’t know how to get started and frankly don’t have much hope that they could get a job even were they to go to every business in town applying.

As a conservative, I would be all for an end to the “welfare state” and the beginning of a new “works public administration.”  People without jobs could come to the government to work and be PUT TO WORK on various public projects.  The government could also hire these people out to businesses that needed temporary assistance.  Those with physical disabilities could go into the administration end or into the childcare end, for example.

There is also the military.  People who can serve should serve.  We only need so many soldiers, but there are a lot of outlets in which out-of-work people could be put to work.

And having a job and demonstrating the ability to show up on time and simply WORKING would be a huge help to many.

Granted, there are people (for example, people with severe mental conditions) who simply cannot work; but these are the vast minority of Americans who don’t have jobs and frankly haven’t had jobs for years.  People who cannot work should be taken care of; frankly no one should starve to death ANYWHERE, let alone in America.  But if we could end the cycle of dependency, the people would be better and the nation would be stronger.

Human beings were created to work.  We need it physically, psychologically, emotionally and spiritually.  People who work for their own bread rather than holding out their hands for a check or an EBT card will be far better off than the current Democrat-imposed alternative.

If Nation Defaults, It Is ENTIRELY Obama’s Fault

October 7, 2013

Today Obama went to FEMA to thank them for working without pay.  That was his pretense, anyway.  Actually, he went to get in front of a microphone and demonize Republicans some more.

Here’s a short article that sums up the situation quite nicely:

Obama thanks FEMA for work during shutdown
Posted: Oct 07, 2013 9:51 AM PDT Updated: Oct 07, 2013 9:52 AM PDT
By JOSH LEDERMAN
Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama is thanking workers at the Federal Emergency Management Agency for doing their jobs under “less than optimal circumstances” during the government shutdown.

Obama made an unannounced visit to FEMA Monday as the shutdown neared the one-week mark. Some furloughed employees at the agency were recalled last week and worked without pay to help prepare for Tropical Storm Karen.

The president said FEMA employees remain ready to respond when needed, but their jobs have been “made more difficult.” He says the shutdown may actually end up costing taxpayers more money.

Funding for FEMA was among the series of piecemeal spending bills passed by the House last week. The White House has threatened to veto the measures, saying the government should not be reopened one agency at a time.

Do you get that, stupid universe?  FEMA isn’t shut down because Republicans shut them down; because REPUBLICANS FUNDED FEMA and a lot of the rest of the government.  No, FEMA is shut down because Democrats who control the Senate won’t allow the House-passed bill to go forward, and because if anybody tries to fund FEMA and pay those workers, BARACK OBAMA WILL VETO IT.

THAT’S why FEMA is on furlough.

But we live in an age just before Obama implodes America, sends the world into depression and the beast of the Book of Revelation comes.  And so the truth has largely been replaced by demon-possessed lies.

Here’s another reason that Obama rabidly refuses to negotiate or compromise in any way, any shape or any form as we approach a debt default:

Said a senior administration official: “We are winning…It doesn’t really matter to us” how long the shutdown lasts “because what matters is the end result.”

Obama and Charlie Sheen have something in common: they’re not bi-polar; they are BI-WINNING.

That and the fact that they are both demonic people who have a truly psychotic worldview.

Obama has been shutting down things left and right for the sole purpose of making the shutdown as painful for as many people as he can.  He’s shut down WWII memorials and things like the Lincoln Memorial that have NEVER been closed during ANY of our previous government shutdowns:

The Park Service appears to be closing  streets on mere whim and caprice. The rangers even closed the parking lot at Mount Vernon, where the plantation home of George Washington is a favorite tourist  destination. That was after they barred the new World War II Memorial on the Mall to veterans of World War II. But the government does not own Mount Vernon; it is privately owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’  Association. The ladies bought it years ago to preserve it as a national  memorial. The feds closed access to the parking lots this week, even though the  lots are jointly owned with the Mount Vernon ladies. The rangers are from the government, and they’re only here to help.

“It’s a cheap way to deal with the situation,” an angry Park  Service ranger in Washington says  of the harassment. “We’ve been told to make life as difficult for people as we  can. It’s disgusting.”

“We’ve been told – by OBAMA through his federal government demon-possessed bureaucrats – to make life as difficult for people as they possibly can.”  Quote.  And you’re damn right it’s absolutely disgusting.

Do you know that at all of these memorials that Obama has shut down for no other reason that to be petty and vindictive is that he’s using more security guards to keep the American people OUT of their monuments than were being used to just keep them open???

That was what Sen Rand Paul was mocking when he tweeted:

@BarackObama sent 7 security guards to this AM to keep out our vets. Sadly, that is 2 more than were present in Benghazi.

Obama tried to shut down the Army-Navy football game – again, for the first time EVER during one of our many government shutdowns - just because he’s a petty tyrant and that’s the kind of cheap trick that a petty tyrant does:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. –  On a beautiful fall day, the parking lot at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium was filled with fans and tailgate parties. A record crowd of 38,225 showed up Saturday for the football game between Navy and Air Force.

Navy athletic director Chet Gladchuk looked at the activity around him and smiled. After tumultuous week, he was right where he was supposed to be Saturday.

The Air Force-Navy game was in serious jeopardy on Tuesday, when the Department of Defense suspended athletic competition at the nation’s service academies because of the U.S. government shutdown. At that point, Gladchuk took action to convince the DOD that the game should be played because it was funded by non-appropriated money.

His effort paid off. Late Wednesday night, the DOD relented. [...]

“There was some concern, but I was hopeful it would happen because they’ve never canceled a Navy football game during a government shutdown,” Lang said.

“Navy athletics is privately funded,” Miles said. “The idea of them trying to cancel a game between two service academies is appalling.”

There’s another word to use to describe Obama’s thug tactics in addition to “disgusting”: “appalling.”

Obama the thug has his White House thugs and federal government thugs frantically trying to close down absolutely everything they can possibly close down just to hurt as many people as they can.  EVEN WHEN FEDERAL FUNDS AREN’T EVEN BEING USED.  Just so Obama can falsely blame Republicans even though the only part of government they basically HAVEN’T funded is demonic ObamaCare fiasco.

I recently pointed out a few other examples of just how positively VILE Obama and his Democrat stooge-thugs have been during this period.

But here’s another one that is just so utterly beyond “appalling” or “disgusting” that “vile” hardly is enough to describe it: Obama closed down the Amber alert system created to find kidnapped children before a pedophile can rape them.

And if it comes to it, believe me, Obama is thug enough and petty enough to order this, too, joke or no joke.  He’s just that demonic.

But you still haven’t grasped the true, genuine evil that is Barack Obama.  He’s actively trying to sabotage our economy just so he can blame the other party for what HE did.  Democrats are accusing Republicans of being “economic terrorists.”  But let’s take a look at our “Economic Terrorist-in-CHIEF”:

Washington (AFP) – President Barack Obama sent Wall Street a blunt warning Wednesday that it should be very worried about a political crisis that has shut down the government and could trigger a US debt default.

Obama said he was “exasperated” by the budget impasse in Congress, in an interview with CNBC apparently designed to pressure Republicans by targeting the financial community moments after markets closed.

The president then met Republican and Democratic leaders for their first talks since the US government money’s ran out and it slumped into a shutdown now well into its second day.

But few informed observers held out much hope for a sudden breakthrough.

Obama was asked in the interview whether Washington was simply gripped by just the latest in a series of political and fiscal crises which reliably get solved at the last minute.

In unusually frank comments on issues that could sway markets, Obama warned that investors should be worried.

“This time’s different. I think they should be concerned,” Obama said, in comments which may roil global markets.

“When you have a situation in which a faction is willing potentially to default on US government obligations, then we are in trouble,” Obama said.

Obama said he would not negotiate with Republicans on budget matters until House lawmakers pass a temporary financing bill to reopen federal operations and raised the $16.7 trillion dollar debt ceiling.

This is the bottom line: in a couple of weeks, America faces a debt ceiling issue.

Keep in mind that if Republicans act like Obama, they will vote against EVER raising the damn debt ceiling.  Remember what Obama said when he was a Senator to demonize George W. Bush???

“The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.”

And:

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”

That was when it was $9 trillion.  IT’S VERY NEARLY DOUBLE THAT NOW, THANKS TO OBAMA’S UTTER DEPRAVITY.

HOW WAS IT “IRRESPONSIBLE” AND “UNPATRIOTIC” TO INCREASE THE DEBT CEILING WHEN IT WAS $9 TRILLION BUT NOT SO NOW WHEN THE DEBT IS 17 TRILLION???  Other than that it isn’t fascist when Obama does it???

You need to realize something: the real crisis of this debt ceiling impasse is that America could find itself unable to make the interest payments on the debt – which would be a default on America’s perfect credit.

Do you know why that could happen?  Do you know who would be entirely to blame if that does happen?

Barack Hussein Obama, thug, liar and traitor, that’s who.

Our interest payments on the debt amount to about $25 billion a month.  That sounds like a lot, but during any shutdown or debt ceiling impasse, the United States still raises far more in taxes every single month.  And it would just be a matter of arranging to prioritize the payments on the debt and to assure the credit markets that we will be doing so in order to maintain confidence.

But Obama doesn’t want that.  He wants to create as much pain and misery and destruction as he can.  Because he wants to trot out to every single dishonest propagandist mainstream media microphone and slander the Republican Party for doing what OBAMA DID.

There is absolutely no chance of a true default if Obama does what any leader who isn’t completely morally insane would do.  It is entirely under Obama’s authority to make those interest payments.  And to complete the picture, the Republicans have already approved this and other payments.  Absolutely nobody but Obama would be to blame.

If the United States defaults on its interest payments and creates a market meltdown, it is because Obama – who could easily avoid that merely by making the interest payments that are his authority to make – wants to create a market meltdown.

And the fact of the matter is that Barack Obama is an evil enough man to make that happen.

Barack Obama has rabidly refused to negotiate.  Literally, he is the first president in the history of the republic to refuse to negotiate – in spite of his many lies to the contrary.  In fact, the debt ceiling has been raised 63 times since 1979 – and fully 27 of those times, the debt ceiling was directly linked to other issues.  For instance, in 1973, Ted Kennedy and Walter Mondale – both top national Democrats – attempted to link the debt ceiling to campaign finance reform.

And in every single case up to now, the president was enough of a grown-up to NEGOTIATE AND BE WILLING TO COMPROMISE.

I am so sick of Obama’s and his administration’s constant spewing of outright lies.

If the Republicans follow the example set by the president, they will likewise refuse to negotiate and allow the country to slide off a cliff.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 512 other followers