The Sheer Hypocritical, Cynical VILENESS Of The Democrat Party On Display In The Government Shutdown

As we speak, the polls show that people blame Republicans more than Democrats for “shutting down the government.”

The people believe a lie: Republicans are shutting down OBAMACARE; it is the DEMOCRATS who are shutting down EVERY OTHER PART OF GOVERNMENT.  As I will document below.

But first let me talk a little about “the people” and “the polls.”

Founding Father John Adams put it thus:

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

I have long given up on the American people as a good or decent people.  We have crossed the moral Rubicon and we are going down.  That is why we are following the world – and particularly socialist nations/regions such as Europe has been – rather than following our Constitution.  And we are going to pay for our national wickedness.  The Bible doesn’t mention the United States in the last days because America will either have become so diminished it no longer matters, or because it will soon outright collapse as a viable nation.

That’s why the polls are pretty much irrelevant to me these days.  Bad people believe lies and want bad things and vote for bad things and bad people ultimately perish because of all the bad things that they have surrounded themselves with.  That’s why we can point to all the cultures and nations that have risen to glory and perished ignominiously throughout history  as their people “fundamentally transformed” into BAD people.  Today we have a media that is so propagandist and so ideologically biased that it is beyond unreal who outright lie to the American people, and we have an American people who are becoming – if they have not already become – a bad people who prefer lies to the truth.

So if the polls say that people blame Republicans more than Democrats or Obama for the government shutdown, I couldn’t care less.  Because these are the same sort of people who were once screaming, “Give us Barabbas!” (Luke 23:18), and “Crucify Him!” (Luke 23:20) when Jesus was offered to them by a feckless Pontius Pilate and his big government who were desperate to appease the days’ “Occupy” mob.

I couldn’t care less about the opinion of such people.  And while it may shock me as much today that the people have become so toxic just as it would have shocked me in Jesus’ day that the people had become so toxic, I care about TRUTH and the FACTS.

So let’s consider the facts as to how the Democrats are conducting themselves.

First, let’s consider Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who demonized Republicans as killing children with cancer because the NIH was going to have to shutdown services.  But then the TRUTH comes out that Republicans were only too-willing to fund the NIH BUT THAT IT IS HARRY REID WHO IS KILLING CHILDREN WITH CANCER JUST SO HE CAN ACCUSE REPUBLICANS OF KILLING CHILDREN WITH CANCER:

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?”

Consider this exchange between Harry Reid and CNN correspondent  Dana Bash:

“If you can help one child, why won’t you do it?” asked CNN reporter Dana Bash.

“Why, why, why would we want to do that?” countered Reid.

“I have 1100 people at Nellis Air Force Base that are sitting home,” because of government employee furloughs, he told Bash and a roomful of other journalists. “They have – they have a few problems of their own.”

“This is – to have someone of your intelligence suggest such a thing maybe means you’re as irresponsible and reckless.”

The CNN correspondent had challenged Senate Democrats’ earlier lament that clinical trials for pediatric cancer therapies were among government services cut off Monday at midnight. The two houses of Congress, run by opposite parties, were unable to agree on the terms of a continuing resolution to fund the government in its new fiscal year.

“You all talked about children with cancer unable to go to clinical trials,” she began. “The House is presumably going to pass a bill that funds the NIH. Will you, at least, pass that? And if not, aren’t you playing the same political games that Republicans are?”

House Republicans have pressed forward with a collection of six legislative proposals to independently fund specific portions of the federal government through the length of the shutdown.

Why are 1100 people at Nellis Air Force Base siting at home?  Republicans have offered to fund the Air Force.  The fact of the matter is, those 1100 people are sitting at home because Democrats refuse to ALLOW them to go back to work.  Just so they can demonize the Republicans for keeping them sitting at home.

But of course that’s not anywhere near the worst of Harry Reid’s dishonesty: Democrats are so vile that they accuse Republicans of killing children when DEMOCRATS ARE KILLING CHILDREN WITH CANCER JUST SO THEY CAN SLANDER AND DEMONIZE THE GOP.  And when one correspondent had the guts to challenge the Democrats about their lies, well, they treated her like she was some hybrid between Fox News and the GOP (more on Democrats’ unhinged demonic slandering of their opponents later).

Democrats are terrible, wicked, evil, demon-possessed human beings.  And those are facts.

In the same way, Republicans are perfectly willing to fund things like the World War II monument.  And do you know that such monuments have NEVER BEFORE been targets in ANY of the previous seventeen government shutdowns before?  Take for example the Lincoln Monument; it has NEVER been shut down before because we’ve never had a “president” so cynical and so demonic that he would be so deliberately vindictive.  But that’s what we have now.  That’s because Democrats have never been so willing to sink so low in their effort to hurt as many people as possible just so they could blame Republicans for the damage that DEMOCRATS are causing.

Don’t believe me?  Believe the Washington Times:

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.”

Yeah.  Democrats are DISGUSTING.  Because it is Obama and Democrats who ordered those park rangers to close down everything they possibly could and make life as difficult as they could for as many Americans as they could.  Just to bring the shutdown home as much as they could so they could demonize Republicans as much as they could.

Obama and Democrats are putting up “Barrycades” to stick it to as many Americans as they possibly can.  And even though Republicans have voted to fund all this stuff it’s supposed to be all their fault because not supporting ObamaCare and taking the mark of Obama on your right hand or forehead is somehow numerically equivalent with wanting ALL of government shut down like the Democrats are doing.

Republicans are saying something that is morally obvious to any decent person: if we can’t reach any compromise (because Democrats refuse to negotiate) on what we can’t agree upon, THEN WHY DON’T WE AT LEAST AGREE ON WHAT WE CAN AGREE ON AND FUND THOSE THINGS???  But Democrats say that Republicans are “terrorists” and “jihadists” because they’re “holding ObamaCare hostage” WHEN DEMOCRAT JIHADIST TERRORISTS ARE HOLDING EVERY POPULAR PIECE OF GOVERNMENT HOSTAGE unless they get their beloved ObamaCare without ANY change or ANY delay (let’s not mention that Obama has himself abrogated the law and the Constitution by delaying a full THIRD of ObamaCare out of cynical political calculations).

WWII veterans – who frankly may die before they have another chance to see their monument – broke down the barricades that Obama put up to stop them.

And so Republicans voted to fund “spending for veterans, the District of Columbia and the Park Service.”

The RNC said it would pay for half of the WWII memorial to remain open out of their own budget if the Democrats National Committee would pay half.  Democrats basically said, “We are the Party of exploiting OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY.  We won’t use our OWN money to help the veterans of the greatest generation of Americans.”

Democrats and their media propagandist tools despicably accused Republicans of “grandstanding” and “politicizing” because Republicans tried to do something THAT ANY DECENT HUMAN BEING ON THE PLANET WOULD AGREE IS A GOOD THING TO DO.

WHO is trying to fund the WWII memorial and the rest of the National Park Service???  Republicans.  WHO is refusing to fund those things???  The same Democrats who are demonizing Republicans for what DEMOCRATS are actually doing.

But it actually gets worse.

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.

During the first day of the government shutdown, the market actually went UP.  What was good for America wasn’t good for Obama, who as a fascist needs to fearmonger a crisis, though.  Obama needs financial chaos and calamity for his plan to create suffering so he can blame his enemies for it.

So Obama deliberately roils the markets and of course they are plunging after Obama’s fearmongering.

So now he can blame Republicans for the financial disaster that HE wants to create so he can blame Republicans.

But – and this is frankly incredible – the sheer Democrat VILENESS actually gets even WORSE.

Again, Obama and his DEMOnic bureauCRATS want to foment and fearmonger a crisis so they can blame Republicans for the crisis they created.  So Obama sends out his chief intelligence stooge who fomented a national intelligence crisis:

Did anyone take the nation’s Director of National Intelligence (DNI) seriously when he told Congress this week that the government shutdown will put the country in danger, cause “insidious” damage and risk spy missions?

What about the part where he said financial stress—presumably created by not getting paid—could make his intelligence officers vulnerable to being bought off by foreign spies? It’s almost comical though it sounds really dramatic and quite distressing. Could it be true or was James Clapper putting on a show for lawmakers this week?

“The risk is 75 percent more than it was yesterday,” Clapper told the Senate Judiciary Committee. “The danger here… will accumulate over time. The damage will be insidious so each day that goes by, the jeopardy increases.” This is due to all that valuable intelligence that’s being lost because there are fewer workers to track targets, according to a news report of the hearing. Before anyone loses any sleep, the DNI chief assured that he’s keeping enough employees on the payroll to guard against “imminent threats to life or property.”

Then he upped the ante by insinuating that financial stress could make his intelligence officers vulnerable to being bribed by enemy governments. “This is a dreamland for foreign intelligence service to recruit, particularly as our employees already, many of whom subject to furloughs driven by sequestration, are going to have, I believe, even greater financial challenges,” Clapper said.

Look, if we’ve got a national intelligence crisis, PLEASE ALLOW REPUBLICANS TO FUND OUR NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SERVICES!!!  But no way.  Democrats and Obama hope there’s a terrorist attack so they can blame Republicans for it EVEN THOUGH THAT ATTACK WOULD HAVE OCCURRED BECAUSE DEMOCRATS REFUSED TO VOTE ON THE HOUSE BILL TO FUND THE INTELLIGENCE SERVICES OR PRETTY MUCH ANY OF THE REST OF THE GOVERNMENT.

That is about as evil as it gets.  Democrats remind me of the Arab states following the 1948 war in which Israel miraculously successfully fought for its right to exist.  Thousands of Palestinian refugees were created, but the Arab states refused to take them into their own countries or take care of them in any way.  No, because they wanted to be able to point a finger of blame at Israel and say, “Look at what Israel did to these poor people!”  And of course that is still the situation to this very day.  Israel has brought in Jews from all over the world while Arab states won’t even allow Arabs in from next door just so they can blame Israel for the plight of the poor Palestinian refugees.

The Democrat Party is the party of genuine evil in America today.  It is the Party of Romans chapter one and the wrath of God that follows.  It is the party of sodomy worship and baby murder.  And it is the party of lies and deceit.

Obama has been all-too willing to negotiate and compromise with America’s worst enemies and with the terrorists who would joyfully murder us all.  He’s been willing to negotiate and be “more flexible” with the Russians (and see here) who have been America’s chief enemy for the last sixty freaking years.  He’s been willing to negotiate with and compromise with the Syrians after they murdered over a hundred thousand of their own people and repeatedly used weapons of mass destruction.  He’s now willing to be the first president since the failed Jimmy Carter years to negotiate with and compromise with the Iranians who seek to get nuclear missiles and launch Armageddon.

But he won’t BUDGE and WILL NOT NEGOTIATE WITH OR COMPROMISE WITH anyone who loves America.

So he announces repeatedly that HE WILL NOT NEGOTIATE with Republicans even as he accuses them of not being willing to compromise and blames them for everything under the sun.  Democrats of course used to blame George Bush for everything under the sun even though Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate just because a Republican was president.  But now the last man on earth who can be blamed for ANYTHING is the Democrat President who has been nothing short of a coward and a fascist thug since the day he took office.

So Obama calls for a meeting with Republicans at the White House to negotiate while saying HE won’t in any way, shape or form negotiate.  Why?  So he can dishonestly and deceitfully present himself as the one who was willing to do what he himself said he WON’T do:

The White House says President Barack Obama has told congressional leaders he still won’t negotiate over re-opening the government or raising the nation’s borrowing limit.

Obama and top lawmakers met for more than an hour at the White House on Wednesday, the second day of a partial government shut down. The leaders emerged to say no progress had been made.

I mean, what a surprise after the president says he won’t budge a nanometer that the leaders would come out of such a charade meeting to say no progress was made.

Let me close this up by pointing out all the incredibly demonic slandering rhetoric coming from Democrats as they get shriller and shriller and more and more hateful.  Democrats have called Republicans terrorists and jihadists and anarchists with bombs strapped to their chests and accused them of being “legislative arsonists” (Nancy Pelosi) and blackmailers and extortionists (Obama Press Secretary Jay Carney) and – as I cited above at the beginning of this article – literally child murderers (Harry Reid).  Oh, and Obama accused them of holding the nation for ransom, which I believe would be a prosecutable crime.  Hateful, inflammatory rhetoric.

Think about the Democrats’ position: unless the Republicans fund EVERYTHING they will fund NOTHING and shut the whole nation down.  Unless the Republicans fund ObamaCare Democrats will cut off the funding for veteran’s benefits.  And Republicans are supposed to be the “terrorists.”

What is most ironic about that is the second worst domestic terrorist attack in American history was committed by a Muslim terrorist named Major Nidal Hassan.  This terrorist – who carried business cards that announced himself as a “Soldier of Allah” and shouted “Allah Akbar!” as he gunned down fourteen American servicemen and wounded another thirty-two; who had been in email contact with al Qaeda, etc., etc., – COULDN’T BE CALLED A TERRORIST, said the Obama administration.  Nope.  it was just a case of “workplace violence.”

Democrats reserve the title of “terrorist” and “jihadist” for Republicans, rather than actual TERRORISTS.  Democrats refuse to call people who murder American servicemen while screaming “Allah Akbar!” terrorists, but they will call Republicans who are guilty of the crime of using their constitutional powers terrorists with rabid spittle dripping from their poisonous socialist fangs.

These are wicked people.  And if a nation is wicked enough to support them, then let that nation say, “Let it be on our heads and on the heads of our children!” as they shouted once before.

Update, 4 Oct 2013: If you want to know how Obama REALLY thinks about this, consider the following acknowledged to the Wall Street Journal by a SENIOR Obama official:]

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.”

Wait a minute….. WHO’S “winning”???  I want Obama to identify the average Americans who are “winning” right now the way his rabid inner circle says THEY’RE winning.

I’ll be replaying this line again and again if the nation goes off the debt ceiling cliff and America defaults on its debt.  I’m thinking this Obama official is like Charlie Sheen in the sense of “not bi-polar, but bi-WINNING.”

Imagine if the government shut down under George W. Bush, and people weren’t getting the services they needed and couldn’t go to the jobs they and their families depended upon.  Oh, and children were dying of cancer and the nation was no longer safe from terrorist attack and all that stuff because of the shutdown that Bush was presiding over.  And some high-ranking Bush official turkey had been quoted as saying, “It doesn’t matter because it’s all about us and it’s all about our partisan politics and woo-hoo we’re winning.”  Imagine the screams of outrage that would have resounded throughout the mainstream media and the Democrat Party talking points then.  But the mainstream media are as hypocritical and as dishonest as the Democrat Party, and so the absence of any moral outrage is treasonous.

It’s just a game to Obama and his minions.  And they don’t give a flying damn who gets hurt or how many get hurt.  In fact, the more  who are hurt, the better to them.  And like the fascists they are, they are willing to fight to the last dead citizen to get their way.

You want more?  How about this: just LISTEN TO ONE OF OBAMA’S DEMONIC SPEECHES.  He’s giving speech after speech just flat-out DEMONIZING John Boehner and the GOP.  You listen to one and you find JUST ONE WORD of a real leader trying in any way, shape or form to reach out to the other side, to reach some kind of agreement.  Nothing.  Just the rabid ideological partisan rabid foaming-at-the-mouth hate from our “president.”  Why?  Because Obama doesn’t WANT a deal on the government shutdown or the debt ceiling or anything else.  No.  He wants an issue to demonize the Republicans on in the 2014 elections.  He wants the same dictatorial political tyranny that he enjoyed for the first two years of his tyrant presidency.  He WANTS the government to shut down; he WANTS America to default on the debt; he WANTS as much harm and misery and damage to the U.S. economy as he can foment SO HE CAN BLAME THE GOP and run against them in 2014.  Is that the mark of a real leader?  Even the Los Angeles Times says it is the exact OPPOSITE of what a leader who isn’t demon-possessed would do.

Obama Won’t Negotiate With GOP. So WHY Is He Negotiating With Terrorist State Iran (Declared Terrorist Since 1984)???

Barack Obama is a slandering liar who has told many lies in dishonoring his way to the White House, but here was the most cynical one of them all (as recorded in the New York Times):

WASHINGTON — At the core of Senator Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is a promise that he can transcend the starkly red-and-blue politics of the last 15 years, end the partisan and ideological wars and build a new governing majority.

To achieve the change the country wants, he says, “we need a leader who can finally move beyond the divisive politics of Washington and bring Democrats, independents and Republicans together to get things done.”

But this promise leads, inevitably, to a question: Can such a majority be built and led by Mr. Obama, whose voting record was, by one ranking, the most liberal in the Senate last year?

Which is pretty much these days another way of saying that EVERY SINGLE TIME Barack Obama opens his slandering mouth to demonize Republicans, he proves what a depraved, demon-possessed cynical liar from hell he is all over again.

You don’t make that promise that the New York Times recorded as “the core of Obama’s presidency” and demonize your opposition the way Obama constantly does if you are not a truly evil man.

Barack Obama is without question the most wicked, most dishonest, most divisive American politician who has ever lived.

Now, I am deeply opposed to Obama’s decision to exalt Iran with negotiations that the Islamic regime will use merely to continue to play us for the fools that we are while they race toward nuclear capability and the ballistic missile system they need to deliver that capability.  But with fairness we could say that Obama promised that he would talk to enemies and he’s merely fulfilling his promise.  On his view, you should talk with your enemies and try to reach some kind of agreement with them.  Even when they are psychotic and frankly murderous nutjobs as the Iranians have proven they are for the last thirty-plus years.  All we are saying is give peace a chance.  All that crap.

But here’s the thing that blows that thesis up and sinks the ship right down to the muck at the bottom: HE WON’T NEGOTIATE OR COMPROMISE IN ANY WAY WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT BEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS ‘TERRORISTS’ FOR THIRTY DAMN YEARS.  The man who promised that at the very CORE of his presidency would be a transcending of politics has been instead the worse political demagogue this nation has ever seen, bar none, and he calls up House Speaker John Boehner just to tell him that he will NOT negotiate with Republicans (see also here).  And then he lies like the demonic liar that he is to justify refusing to negotiate like a grown-up (see also here).

You need to understand: the very same man who has publicly declared that he himself will absolutely NOT negotiate and will fight to the last starving American citizen over issues like the debt ceiling is asserting that the OTHER side must utterly and absolutely cave in to HIS position or THEY are completely responsible for the ensuing chaos and suffering.

I suppose if the Republicans used poison gas to murder thousands of Americans, THEN Obama would compromise and negotiate with them the way he did with Syria?  I mean, he’ll go back on his word on his red line with “a thug and a murder,” but he won’t budge an inch for the party that represents half of all the American people???  Do you understand how truly and completely insane that is???

If you’re a Kool-Aid-drinking liberal who wants to assert that the GOP is worse than the ayatollahs, fine: all you have to do is show me the Republican Party’s plans to build themselves nuclear weapons.  All you have to do is show me all those times the Republicans in the House used nerve gas.  All you have to do is show me that the Republican Party has actively participated in the murder of American servicemen.  The way Iran has been documented to have done (see also here).

Otherwise, just shut the hell up, you toxic, rabid creature.  Because you only serve as one more PROOF that everything Obama said AS I QUOTED IN THE NEW YORK TIMES was nothing more than a demonic lie from hell.  You people never wanted to “transcend” anything; your messiah is about nothing more than WINNING his partisan and ideological war campaign of hate, and you would “fundamentally transform” this nation into a likeness of Stalingrad during WW2 in order to WIN that partisan and ideological war.

At this point, Barack Obama is as much as openly saying that he believes that a good half of the American people who agree with the Republican Party are not only terrorists, but are in fact worse terrorists than the mullahs in Iran and the thugs in Syria.  And that is sick beyond evil.

Is your view, Democrat, that the Republicans would be good negotiating partners with whom you could compromise and reach consensus with if the GOP just gassed a few hundred thousand people to death???  Maybe if the Republicans started a nuclear war of Armageddon they’d finally be worthy of your negotiating???  Have you and your party become that morally toxic???  Because it appears that you have.  It appears that you are saying, “Yes!  Negotiate with mass-murdering psychopath Islamic jihadists!  But DON’T YOU DARE negotiate with those Republicans because they don’t like sodomy marriage and baby-murdering abortions!!!”

Barack Obama is a liar without shame, without integrity, without honor and without conscience.  He is also the worst hypocrite I have ever seen in my life.  He is leading America to ruin day-by-day, month-by-month and year-by-year.  His core promises were ALL a pack of lies.

If he’s going to be the first president since Jimmy Carter in 1979 to directly negotiate with Iran, the least he could do is bring a little of that love for his terrorist ayatollah pals back home and negotiate with Republicans so we can finally get something done.

After Mocking And Slandering John Boehner Over His Failed House Vote, Senate Democrats’ Pathetic Debacle Takes America To Brink Of Fiscal Cliff

It couldn’t have happened to a more demon-possessed guy.

Remember just a few days ago, how gleeful Democrats were over John Boehner – who was it should be pointed out merely trying to get something the hell PASSED in the midst of the mean ugly drunk mother of all bureaucrtic debacles in all of history – was unable to get a majority vote on his “plan B” proposal?  With Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid leading the jeering section:

Let me remind you:

“John Boehner seems to care more about keeping his speakership than about keeping the nation on firm financial footing,” Reid said during a fiery address from the Senate floor. “It’s obvious, Mr. President, what’s going on around here. He’s waiting until Jan. 3 to get re-elected as speaker before he gets serious with negotiations because he has so many people over there that won’t follow what he wants. That’s obvious from the debacle that took place last week. And it was a debacle.”

Reid was referring to Boehner’s decision last week to call off a vote on his so-called “Plan B” in what was an embarrassing admission by the House Speaker that his proposal lacked sufficient support.

That actually happened AFTER Reid slanderously demonized Boehner by calling his House Speakership “a dictatorship.”

“The American people I don’t think understand the House of Representatives is  operating without the House of Representatives,” Reid said.

“It’s being operated by a dictatorship of the Speaker of the House, not  allowing the vast majority of the House of Representatives to get what they  want.”

You need to understand something: Reid is demandinging that the House hold a vote on what he wants them to vote on and the way he wants them to like the GOP is being unfair not to do that. Do you have any idea how many voted-on and passed House bills are sitting in Harry Reid’s Senate without Reid offering them an up or down vote???

Okay, so the man who has utterly failed to so much as even be able to produce a damn BUDGET in going on four freaking years is slandering his ideological enemy.  Classy.

How’s it going over there in the Senate that you Democrats (that’s short for “Demonic Bureaucrats”) own?

Not so good:

Congress Done for the Day, No Deal on ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Yet
Washington, DC
Sunday, December 30, 2012

No deal on the so-called “fiscal cliff” is expected in the Senate tonight. The Senate will be back in session tomorrow morning at 11am ET. The House comes back at 9am ET.

Earlier in the day, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced on the Senate floor that he was waiting for a response from Democrats to a GOP proposal made yesterday. He said he called Vice President Joe Biden to “jump start” the negotiations. “I’m willing to get this done. I need a dance partner.”

In reply, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) acknowledged Sen. McConnell’s “good faith” effort, but said “I don’t have a counter-offer to make.” Leader Reid said that he was working with the president and that a counter-proposal might be available later in the day. Shortly after words, Sen. Reid indicated that one of the issues holding back a Democratic counter-offer were proposed cuts to social security.

I’m sorry.  I’m not sure I heard that right, Harry Reid, you slandering lying hypocrite.  Tell us one more time how well you – the mocking a-hole who demagogued John Boehner for at least having the balls to call for a damn vote – have done on your side of the aisle:

I have had a number of conversations with the president, and at this stage we’re not able to make a counteroffer. The Republican leader has told me that — and he’s just said here — that he’s working with the vice president, and he and the vice president, I wish them well.

In the meantime, I will continue to try to come up with something. But at this stage, I don’t have a counteroffer to make. Perhaps as the day wears on, I will be able to. I will say this, I think that the Republican leader has shown absolutely good faith. It’s just that we are apart on some pretty big issues.

But Democrats were far too hopelessly fractured to come together to so much as make a counter-offer to the Republicans.  And that refusal to respond to the Republicans attempt to save America from ruin acknowledged after Reid got off the phone with his personal lord and savior Barack Hussein.  Obama doesn’t want a deal: he wants to raise taxes like crazy and actually blame the Republicans for the end to the Bush tax cuts while he’s doing it.  Harry Reid then actually left the Capitol Building for the night – leaving Senate Minority Leader McConnell burning the midnight oil desperately working all by himself to try to come up with something that will save the nation.

We’re 24 hours away from going off the cliff, and the Democrats can’t even get their acts together enough to make a counter offer to keep the talks going.  They want to raise your taxes and gut the military and they’re going to get what they want because this is God damn America and this is what happens in God damn America.  So Harry Reid closes up shop and goes home for the night.  Does the word “debacle” sound about right to describe what just happened in this hypocrites Senate under his dictatorship???

Why couldn’t you make a counter-offer, Harry, you turd?  Was it because you care only about your leadership position, you slandering demagogue hypocrite?  What the hell kind of damned dictatorship are you running in that banana republic of yours, anyway???

It so serves you right, Harry Reid.  And it so serves America right for cursing itself with stinking lumps of fecal matter for leaders such as yourself.  We deserve what is happening.  Our children deserve it.

Unfortunately, Republicans have made concession after concession while the lying Democrat Party has pretty much come up with snake eyes.  Which is fitting, given the fact that without snake eyes Democrats wouldn’t be able to see anything at all.

Meanwhile Obama has provided an example of his “compromise” in the form of the CPI (Chained Consumer Price) index adjustment he claims he’s willing to make.  Here’s the problem: there is absolutely zero way in hell that the Senate Democrats would ever go along with that.  In fact, the negotiations in the Democrat-controlled Senate utterly broke down until the Republicans conceded yet AGAIN by removing their demand for it:

WASHINGTON — Tense “fiscal cliff” negotiations on Capitol Hill Sunday inched forward slightly as Republican senators agreed to take Social Security cuts off their list of immediate demands.

The cut that GOP leaders had proposed — picking up on a now-defunct offer from President Barack Obama — involved basing Social Security cost-of-living adjustments on a chained consumer price index (CPI), which grows more slowly than current measures of inflation and therefore would give seniors less in benefits as time went on.

But Senate Republicans realized in a caucus meeting Sunday afternoon that the idea was a loser for now, even if they might return to it in reaching a larger deal later on.

“CPI has to be off the table because it’s not a winning argument to say benefits for seniors versus tax breaks for rich people,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). “We need to take CPI off the table — that’s not part of the negotiations — because we can’t win an argument that has Social Security for seniors versus taxes for the rich.”

“There’s a realization that in spite of the president’s apparent endorsement of a chained CPI that that proposal deserves more study,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). “My guess, based on what Democrats are saying is that that reform would not happen during this stage of the negotiations.”

A Democratic aide, informed of the reversal from a proposal that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) had offered late Saturday — which included the Social Security cut — took it as a hopeful sign.

“Well, that’s some progress,” said the aide, who was granted anonymity due to the sensitivity of the talks.

Which is another way of saying Obama has offered absolutely no realistic compromise of any kind.  Every single time Obama says that Republicans have to meet him half way, he is an absolute liar without shame, without honor and without decency.  Because this national disgrace-in-chief has offered up absolutely no real compromise that would ever actually see the light of day whatsoever.

Republicans are almost as insane as the Democrats for trying again and again to make concessions hoping to get a deal done with these fascists.

You want the truth?  America is now about $225 trillion in debt.  We are necessarily going to implode.  Children and old people are going to die.  And it is 99.999% the fault of the Democrat Party who cursed America with unsustainable entitlements in the form of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid without ever ONCE in their history being willing to fix the national ruin they guaranteed.

That said, not only do the Democrats demand tax hikes that won’t even pay for nine days of spending at current Obama fiscal insanity; they actually demand MORE spending and MORE debt to hasten our national collapse.  And somehow the Republican Party is immoral for trying to reign in this demonic spending.

This is God damn America under Obama, and God damn America fully deserves to go off the fiscal cliff and any other kind of cliff that we race toward in the determined drive to national suicide that began when Obama was re-elected.

America is now a truly evil nation.  We are an evil people who have wickedly and foolishly chosen evil leaders.  And God has made abundantly clear in His Word that He judges nations for the wickedness of their leaders.

Who will get the blame?  Republicans will.  Not because they deserve it, but because the people who will blame them are a wicked people.

I think back to George W. Bush getting all the blame for the bad economy during a period of time that Nancy Pelosi and Democrats owned the House of Representatives and Harry Reid and the Democrats owned the Senate.  When The Democrats took over in 2006, America was at full employment and America had a deficit of $162 billion.  Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi sure fixed that good.  Yet somehow Bush got all the blame even though Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.  And now that Obama is president and Democrats control the Senate, a stupid and wicked people are going to hypocritically and dishonestly blame Republicans even though they have a fraction of the power and responsibility that Democrats had when America went down in 2008.

I’m just waiting for the Rapture.  I call it the Great Bailout now.  Because Democrats have so completely screwed up America that its collapse is a guaranteed done deal at this point.  And the Antichrist is coming next.

‘Unconscionable’ Worm Harry Reid Demonizes Republicans For 60 Vote Requirement: READ REID’S OWN PREVIOUS WORDS

Harry Reid is a worm.  He can’t be negotiated with or compromised with because he is a pathologically dishonest hypocrite who can’t be trusted.

Here is Harry Reid demonizing Mitch McConnell for not allowing his smoke-and-mirrors bill to have a straight up or down vote.  Never mind that Reid had just got through tabling not one but TWO Republicans bills without allowing a vote at all.  And just how in the hell does that foster anything but a bitter and poisonous climate?

“It’s fair to say that the engagement there is not in any meaningful way,” Reid said. “Republican leaders still refuse to negotiate in good faith.” […]

He suggested that delaying tactics being exercised by his Republican colleagues are preventing a measure from advancing in the upper congressional chamber to raise the debt ceiling. The Democratic leader spelled out the word f-i-l-i-b-u-s-t-e-r to make his case.

“You can put lipstick on it, a nice suit, even a skirt on it sometimes, it’s still a filibuster,” Reid said in comments directed at McConnell. The Nevada Democrat suggested that it’d be “unconscionable” for Republicans to use the maneuver to prevent a bill from passing to avert default.

Filibusters (requiring 60 votes)_ are “unconscionable,” are they?  Let’s see how Harry Reid applies that to, oh, Harry Reid.

What is funny” is that I actually had a hard time finding these quotes even though I actually had the VIDEO of one of them.  The mainstream media’s dishonesty, corruption and propaganda are reaching sickening new depths.

Sen. Reid: ‘It’s Always Been The Case You Need 60 Votes’
Jul 29 2011

Sen. Reid Says: ‘The Need To Muster 60 Votes… Is A Tool That Serves The Long-Term Interest Of The Senate And The American People And Our Country.’

SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “In the Senate, it’s always been the case you need 60 votes.” (PBS’ “Charlie Rose Show,” 3/5/07)

SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “As majority leader, I intend to run the Senate with respect for the rules and for the minority rights the rules protect. The Senate was not established to be efficient. Sometimes the rules get in the way of efficiency. The Senate was established to make sure that minorities are protected. Majorities can always protect themselves, but minorities cannot. That is what the Senate is all about. For more than 200 years, the rules of the Senate have protected the American people, and rightfully so. The need to muster 60 votes in order to terminate Senate debate naturally frustrates the majority and oftentimes the minority. I am sure it will frustrate me when I assume the office of majority leader in a few weeks. But I recognize this requirement is a tool that serves the long-term interest of the Senate and the American people and our country. It is often said that the laws are ‘the system of wise restraints that set men free.’ The same might be said of the Senate rules. I will do my part as majority leader to foster respect for the rules and traditions of our great institution. I say on this floor that I love so much that I believe in the Golden Rule. I am going to treat my Republican colleagues the way that I expect to be treated. There is no ‘I’ve got you,’ no get even. I am going to do everything I can to preserve the traditions and rules of this institution that I love.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.11591, 12/8/06)

SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “60 votes are required for just about everything.” “I have talked with Senator McConnell about this. You know, we may have to come up with a number of resolutions that require 60 votes. Because, as you know, in the Senate, a lot of times 60 votes are required for just about everything. So that’s certainly one of the things we’re taking into consideration.” (Sen. Harry Reid, Press Conference, CQ Transcriptions, 1/30/07)

I don’t have to quote some Republican to show that Harry Reid is an “unconscionable” dishonest little hypocritical worm.  All I have to do is quote Harry Reid at a slightly earlier time.

Or how about simply point out what Harry Reid is actually doing RIGHT NOW while he himself filibusters even as he demagogues filibustering?

Democrats enforce filibuster against their own debt bill
by Stephen Dinan
Published on July 30, 2011

Senate Republicans want a 60-vote threshold for a debt-limit bill to pass the chamber, but it’s actually Democrats who are enforcing the filibuster on their own legislation, insisting on delaying a vote until 1 a.m. Sunday morning.

Republicans offered to let the vote happen Friday night, just minutes after the chamber voted to halt a House Republican bill. All sides expect Democrats’ bill will fail too, and the GOP said senators might as well kill both at the same time so that negotiations could move on to a compromise.

“We would be happy to have that vote tonight,” Sen. Mitch McConnell, Republicans’ leader, offered.

But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid objected, even though the vote would occur on his own bill. He instead said the chamber would have to run out the full procedural clock, which means a vote in the early hours Sunday morning.

He said he would be willing to move up the vote if Republicans didn’t insist on a 60-vote threshold, which has become traditional for big, controversial items to pass the Senate. But the GOP held firm on that demand, so Mr. Reid said he would insist on the full process, which he said would show the country that Republicans were being obstructionist.

“There is now another filibuster. That’s what this is. It’s a filibuster to stop us from moving forward,” he said.

Mr. Reid complained that if the House had been held to the same super majority rules the Senate often operates under, Republicans’ proposal never would have passed over there earlier in the day….

I will always wonder how Democrats’ skulls don’t literally explode from trying to contain all the massive hypocritical contradictions that so quintessentially define them.

Then there’s something that I actually didn’t realize: the so-called “Boehner plan” was actually a compromise between Republican leaders, Harry Reid and Barack Obama.  Until Democrats cut and ran and pulled out the rug from their own damned compromise:

CR Editorial Note: Sen. Reid, aka “Quirog of Greazidom” had already worked out the House plan in a compromise with Boehner that blew up the House and the Tea Party as many must have heard today. In other words, this was the negotiated plan that Reid worked out and then promptly voted to table as dead on arrival when it finally arrived in the Senate.
 
 Why did Reid table his own compromised plan?

Enter Barack Hussein Obama, who read Reid the riot act after his smary talk on compromise and needing to “get something done.”
 
You see, a compromise would totally go against Obama’s Cloward-Piven plan to bring everything crashing down around America.
 
That story line is becoming more and more convincing as more facts are unearthed.

Boehner didn’t get ONE single Democrat vote (fact: he got FIVE Democrat votes for the MUCH more conservative cut, cap and balance bill that Senate Democrats trivialized, demonized and tabled) for this compromise plan due to the hard-core partisianship of the Democrats.  Boehner stuck his neck out a mile to compromise with Democrats and his reward was a Democrat chopping block.  Because Boehner couldn’t get any Democrat support for his compromise bill, he had no choice but to “conservative-it-up” to get enough Republicans to pass it.

This entire debt ceiling fiasco is quintessential Democrat hypocrisy.

In demonizing George Bush and then voting “NO” on a debt ceiling increase, Barack Obama lectured:

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure,” he said. “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. … 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 and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

And since we were talking about the personal dishonesty and hypocrisy of Harry Reid, what did Harry Reid say when Bush was president and he was the same vile piece of rotten filth Senator he is now?

REID: “If my Republican friends believe that increasing our debt by almost $800 billion today and more than $3 trillion over the last five years is the right thing to do, they should be upfront about it. They should explain why they think more debt is good for the economy.

How can the Republican majority in this Congress explain to their constituents that trillions of dollars in new debt is good for our economy? How can they explain that they think it’s fair to force our children, our grandchildren, our great grandchildren to finance this debt through higher taxes. That’s what it will have to be. Why is it right to increase our nation’s dependence on foreign creditors?

They should explain this. Maybe they can convince the public they’re right. I doubt it. Because most Americans know that increasing debt is the last thing we should be doing. After all, I repeat, the Baby Boomers are about to retire. Under the circumstances, any credible economist would tell you we should be reducing debt, not increasing it. Democrats won’t be making argument to supper this legalization, which will weaken our country.”

WHY DON’T YOU ANSWER YOUR OWN DEMAGOGIC QUESTIONS NOW, HARRY REID?!?!?!

Republicans are standing firm for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution which would require both Republican and Democrat administration and Congress ALIKE to spend within their means.  And Democrats – who constantly deceitfully TALK about cutting spending and having balanced budgets – are willing to fight to the death to avoid allowing EITHER.

Democrats are actually opposing a plan that would entail just a one percent spending cut a year for six years.  JUST ONE PERCENT!!!  So you can rest assurred that everything they say about cuts is nothing more than a lie, and all their bills that claim to “cut” are smoke-and-mirrors lies that rely on bogus premises and meaningless rhetoric and non-binding resolutions and promises of future cuts that future Congresses are in no way bound to uphold.

Meanwhile, the United States is borrowing 43 cents out of every single dollar that it spends.  And Democrats refuse to do anything to even slow it down.

Medicare is going to go bankrupt in less than five years.  And Democrats refuse to do anything other than lie and demagogue and demonize to stop that from happening.  They will not cut spending and make it possible to extend the life of these programs in any way, shape or form.  Meanwhile, they just outright lie about the Republican agenda.

The Democrats are dishonest by definition at this point. The entire party is the party of “God damn America,” the party of hell.

Debt Ceiling Fight: Despite Lamestream Media Propaganda Claims, Sometimes ‘Compromise’ Is NOT A Good Thing

1 Kings 3:16-25

One day two women came to King Solomon, and one of them said: Your Majesty, this woman and I live in the same house. Not long ago my baby was born at home, and three days later her baby was born. Nobody else was there with us. One night while we were all asleep, she rolled over on her baby, and he died. Then while I was still asleep, she got up and took my son out of my bed. She put him in her bed, then she put her dead baby next to me. In the morning when I got up to feed my son, I saw that he was dead. But when I looked at him in the light, I knew he wasn’t my son.

“No!” the other woman shouted. “He was your son. My baby is alive!”

“The dead baby is yours,” the first woman yelled. “Mine is alive!”

They argued back and forth in front of Solomon, until finally he said, “Both of you say this live baby is yours. Someone bring me a sword.” A sword was brought, and Solomon ordered, “Cut the baby in half! That way each of you can have part of him.”

Splitting the baby in half in the name of “compromise” is NOT a good thing, for the record.

Democrats are people who are VERY happy with a dead baby.  The nearly 54 million babies they have killed in the abortion mills ought to be proof enough of that.

You can’t turn on your television or read a newspaper or a magazine without being told that compromise is good, and the Republicans are not compromising enough.

Obama ranted at a recent press conference, “Can the Republicans say yes to anything?”

Well, to quote the idiotic chant of certain famous fool, “Yes, we can!”

Republicans said “yes” to the Ryan Plan.  They also said “yes” to the ONLY plan that actually is in writing and actually passed in either branch of Congress.  Both the Ryan Budget and the cut, cap and balance bill would have averted the debt ceiling crisis that looms in front of us now.  But could the DEMOCRATS say “yes” to anything?  Not only did they say “no” to the Ryan budget, but they actually refused to say anything at all regarding the cut, cap and balance plan as Harry Reid tabled it without allowing a vote.  Harry Reid shut down debate and refused to allow the House-passed plan to come up for a vote because he doesn’t want the Democrats to have to go on record rejecting a balanced budget amendment – which would prove that whenever a Democrat talks about balancing the budget or actually cutting spending they are LYING.

Reid also demonized the cut, cap and balanced bill as “the worst legislation in the history of this country.”  Because he must have been all FOR the Democrat-passed Fugitive Slave Act.

And of course, you find out that Democrats couldn’t even say yes to the Obama budget, which would have increased the debt by $12 TRILLION and which failed in the Democrat-controlled Senate 97-0.  And that was an abject disgrace and proves as much as anything what a completely failed leader Obama truly is.

So it’s demagogic and dishonest to say that the Republcans somehow can’t say yes to anything, or even to suggest that the Democrats can.  For the record, the Democrats have produced NO plan; they have utterly FAILED to lead.  So they frankly have nothing to say “yes” to to begin with.

Barack Obama and the Democrats are despicable liars and demagogues.  Unfortuntely, the American people are becoming the sort of bad people who believe lies.

If the country were at some 50-50 balance between liberalism and conservatism, maybe one would be justified in calling for “compromise” with Democrats now.  But thanks to Obama, it simply isn’t.  We’ve veered wildly to the left, and so at this point when were more like 70-30 liberal, “compromise” just means status quo Obama liberalism.  No thanks.

After the 2008 election, Republicans came hat in hand seeking compromise with newly crowned King Obama.  But King Obama said unto them:

“Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.”

It’s kind of funny now that – after a historic ASSKICKING of Democrats by Republicans in 2010, suddenly Republicans are supposed to “compromise” with the Democrats who ran roughshod over them for the preceding two years of libery tyranny.

Is it a good thing to compromise, the way the media keeps framing this issue?

Keep in mind, the Republicans won a landslide victory in November 2010 after Democrats utterly refused to do anything to cut their reckless and radical spending.  They didn’t “compromise”; they were dragged to this point by the most massive political defeat in more than 70 years.  To try to claim that Democrats are “compromising” now is rather like claiming that Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan graciously decided to “compromise” after World War II.  They got their asses kicked over their ears, and the rest is just reality, not “compromise.”

And the Republicans ALREADY HAVE compromised.  Keep in mind the do NOT want to raise the debt ceiling; rather, they want to cut spending NOW (and if we WERE to cut spending now, we wouldn’t NEED to increase the debt ceiling).  The Republicans are willing to raise the debt ceiling; they are NOT willing to go back on promises they ran on and won on and increase taxes.

Also keep in mind that Democrats have also ALREADY RAISED TAXES BY $500 BILLION (i.e. half a TRILLION dollars).

Why on earth should “compromise” mean that they should agree to raise taxes again?  Particularly when Democrats have produced ZERO plans to cut spending and are essentially saying “Trust us not to screw you like we did the last three times we told you to trust us on cutting spending.”

Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner apparently actually had an agreement in principle with Obama to raise taxes by yet ANOTHER $800 billion on top of the $500 billion ObamaCare tax hike.  But almost immediately thereafter Obama welched on his own deal, demanding an extra $400 billion.

The New York Times – falsely and demagogically characterizing the Republicans as “The Party That Can’t Say Yes” (That already demonstrated to be an outright dishonest lie above) said of this reneged-upon deal:

“So, on the eve of economic calamity, the Republicans killed an overly generous deal largely over a paltry $400 billion in deductions.”

“A paltry $400 billion.”  Only liberals could be so stupid and so utterly depraved.  This is proof-positive that hundreds of billions of dollars mean absolutely nothing to these people.  They are recklessly irresponsible fools before this country collapses never to rise again.

If the New York Times was honest (they are not, of course – which explains why they are virtually bankrupt), then they would be pushing Obama to agree to accepting $400 billion LESS in revenues.  After all, it’s only “a paltry $400 billion,” right???  These people live in a realm of dishonest lunacy.

Is compromise a good thing?

How about this for a compromise.  Suppose we propose to eradicate the 72 million registered Democrats in the United States.  Get out that great big giant can of RAID and just wipe out all these cockroaches.  Well, the “reasonable” thing to do according to liberals would be to compromise.  So obviously on this principle Democrats would be all for a plan to eradicate 36 million Democrats; because that would be going halfway, after all.

Obama and the Democrats have repeatedly cited “corporate jets” in their recent demagoguery and demonization.  This is EXACTLY parallel to the fiasco of the “luxury tax” that annihilated the yacht construction and maintenance industries in the early 1990s:

The general thinking is that the rich can afford it, and an extra 10 percent tax isn’t going to stop the fat cats from indulging in their toys. What most people don’t realize is that those able to buy a new boat also have the ability to decide not to buy. And that is what they have done.

Since the luxury tax came into effect last Sept. 30 for newly ordered boats, nobody has bought a new boat on which the tax would apply! The National Marine Manufacturers’ Association, the industry association that tracks such things, can’t find a single sale in the whole country! Not one! However, the association has been able to document in excess of 100,000 layoffs (blue-collar workers — not fat cats) and numerous boat manufacturers going out of business. All during which not a single dollar of luxury tax has been collected.

A more detailed article on the 1990 tax and how it is remarkably similar to what Obama and Democrats are now proposing is available here.

It is the same failed fools with the same failed Marxist class hatred mindset.  The Democrats rescinded that tax in 1992 – but not until they destroyed more than a 100,000 jobs.  Their policy was based on Marxism and hate.  And it failed then just like it will fail now.

EVERY SINGLE TIME we have cut income tax rates we have INCREASED REVENUE.  And EVERY SINGLE TIME we have increased income tax rates we have DECREASED REVENUE.  What history proves is that when we increase the income tax rates “on the rich,” the rich respond by sheltering their money as they are forced to massively cut back on their job-creating investments by protecting themselves.  And what invariably happens is that the percentage of tax revenues paid by “the rich” dwindle while the percentage of tax revenues paid by the poor (in the form of excise taxes) increase.  This is a documented fact going back to the days of FDR:

Do you see what happened?  FDR kept raising income tax rates on “the rich” and demanding they pay more; but revenues from income taxes fell from 38% of revenue to only 24% of revenue (and corporate tax revenues fell from 43% to 29%) , while revenue from excise taxes borne mainly by the poor (e.g., liquor taxes, cigareete taxes) skyrocketed from 19% of total revenues collected to 47% of total revenues collected.

This is what happens in actual FACT.

If that isn’t enough, even OBAMA acknowledged that it would be stupid to raise taxes in a recession:

…In August 2009, on a visit to Elkhart, Indiana to tout his stimulus plan, Obama sat down for an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd, and was conveyed a simple request from Elkhart resident Scott Ferguson: “Explain how raising taxes on anyone during a deep recession is going to help with the economy.”

Obama agreed with Ferguson’s premise – raising taxes in a recession is a bad idea. “First of all, he’s right. Normally, you don’t raise taxes in a recession, which is why we haven’t and why we’ve instead cut taxes. So I guess what I’d say to Scott is – his economics are right. You don’t raise taxes in a recession. We haven’t raised taxes in a recession.”

Our economy is still in terrible, terrible shape.  79% of Americans say we are still in a recession.  And to quote Obama, “you don’t raise taxes in a recession.”

So how about if I listen to Barack Obama and argue that raising taxes would be an utterly TERRIBLE “compromise” to make.

Barack Obama Loves Racist Anti-American Preachers. And That Should Tell You Who He Really Is

Let’s consider the preachers that Obama likes:

Jeremiah Wright, he of “No, no, no.  Not God bless America, God DAMN America!” fame.

Of Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama’s spiritual mentor for 23 years, two things can definitively be said: 1) Jeremiah Wright is an admitted racist and Marxist; and 2) Barack Obama followed in his mentor’s footsteps.

Then there was Reverend Pfleger:

“… expose white entitlement. And supremacy, wherever it raises its head. I said before, I really don’t want ot make this political, because you know I’m really very unpolitical.

When Hillary was crying, and people said that was put on, I really don’t believe it was put on. I really believe that she just always thought, ‘this is mine. I’m Bill’s wife. I’m white, and this is mine. I just gotta get up and step into the plate.’

Then out of nowhere, ‘I’m Barack Obama!’

Imitating Hillary’s response, screaming at the top of his lungs again, he continues, ‘Ah, damn! Where did you come from? I’m white! I’m entitled! There’s a black man stealing my show!’

(mocks crying)

She wasn’t the only one crying, there was a whole lot of white people crying!”

And then we had Reverend James Meeks:

Described in a 2004 Chicago Sun Times article as someone Barack Obama regularly seeks out for “spiritual counsel”, James Meeks, who will serve as an Obama delegate at the 2008 Democratic convention in Denver, is a long-time political ally to the democratic frontrunner.

When Obama ran for the U.S. Senate in 2003, he frequently campaigned at Salem Baptist Church while Rev. Meeks appeared in television ads supporting the Illinois senator’s campaign…

Since that time, not only has Meeks himself served on Obama’s exploratory committee for the presidency and been listed on the Obama’s campaign website as one of the senator’s ‘influential black supporters’, but his church choir was called on to raise their voices in praise at a rally the night Obama announced his run for the White House back in 2007.

Interestingly, the Chicago Sun Times has also reported that both Meeks and Obama share a history of substantial campaign contributions from indicted real estate magnate Tony Rezko.

[JAMES MEEKS, REVEREND] “We don’t have slave masters. We got mayors. But they still the same white people who are presiding over systems where black people are not able, or to be educated.  You got some preachers that are house niggers. You got some elected officials that are house niggers. And rather than them trying to break this up, they gonna fight you to protect this white man.”

This man appeared in Obama campaign commercials. He served on Obama campaign committees. Obama campaigned at his church. Obama sought him out for “spiritual counsel” and political support.

And we had Obama’s next replacement for racist spiritual adviser Jeremiah Wright, Jim Wallis:

The United States of America was established as a white society, founded upon the genocide of another race and then the enslavement of yet another. […]

What has not changed is the systematic and pervasive character of racism in the United States and the condition of life for the majority of African Americans. In fact, those conditions have gotten worse.

Now we’ve got Dr. Wallace Charles Smith:

James Parker at WRNO-FM in New Orleans did some digging yesterday about Shiloh Baptist’s pastor, Dr. Wallace Charles Smith. Not only did he find that Smith loves to preach on race, but he noticed Smith even infused race into yesterday’s Easter sermon:

One has to dig into the blog notes from various reporters to piece together the content from the sermon.  Aside from the First Couple being honored guests, Pastor Wallace Charles Smith also announces that his 4 week old grandson is attending church for the first time, and a pool reporter noted an interesting perspective on the infant:

“[Pastor Smith] talked about how his baby grandson’s gurgling is actually “talking” because he is saying ‘I am here … they tried to write me off as 3/5 a person in the Constitution, but I am here right now … and is saying I am not going to let anybody from stopping me from being what God wants me to be.’”

 

Parker asks the obvious questions:

The pastor hears American institutional racism in a baby’s gurgle?  Do most people with infants hear Constitutional bigotry in their baby’s gibberish?  Did any mention of the 3/5 clause or racism in general make it into the Easter service you attended?  Is this pastor’s amazing leap from a baby bark to white oppression another coincidence to add to the list, or has he established a pattern of race baiting and white bashing in the past?

And Parker posts a sermon posted on Youtube to document that this was (to paraphrase liberally biased PBS), a “seriously racist, racist preacher” that Obama should have known to avoid like a particularly contagious leper.

Let me begin with his “three-fifths” screed.  It is a lie that this was intended as a racist statement or to promote racism.  The simple fact of the matter was that this was inserted into the Constitution to prevent the United States from having slavery forever, and if men like Wallace Charles Smith are in any way glad that they are not STILL slaves today, they should thank God that our founding fathers came up with that “three-fifths” compromise.

Take a moment to do something that no pseudo-liberal intellectual will never do: learn history.  The “three-fifths” compromise was intended to LIMIT the political power of slave states.  Slave-owning states wanted their slaves FULLY counted in order to maximize their political clout and so protect themselves from ever having slavery banned.  States that did NOT want slavery at ALL wanted to not count slaves at ALL.  The “three-fifths” thing had everything to do with representation and the number of racist pro-slavery congressional representatives a pro-slavery state could get on the basis of its slave population, and nothing whatsoever to do with the ontology of black peole as “human beings.”

If you want to argue that it was about ontolological status, then you are in the rather miserable position of saying that people who wanted blacks to be slaves are the good guys, and that people who wanted to abolish slavery are the bad guys.  It turns you into a moral idiot of the worst possible stripe.

But that is precisely the point: Wallace Charles Smith, Reverend Pfleger, Jeremiah Wright, Jim Wallace, James Meeks, and most definitely Barack Obama who keeps intentionally surrounding himself with these vile people are seething racists who hate and despise America and everything this nation stands for.

It is an amazing thing to have a president who hates me personally on account of my race, and who hates the nation that he was elected to lead and to represent.  But that is precisely what we have in Barack Obama.  That much ought to be blatantly obvious by now.

Finally, although what is above ought to be proof positive enough, Barack Obama is very definitely no Christian on any legitimate understanding of Christianity.  Allow me to simply quote myself from yesterday:

I DO know that [Obama] is most certainly no Christian:

 in 1995, Obama said, “my individual salvation is not going to come about without a collective salvation for the country …” and again in May of 2008, “our individual salvation depends of collective salvation.”

 

What does Jesus say?  Consider Matthew 16:24-25:

Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If any one (individual) wishes to come after Me, he (individual) must deny himself (individual), and take up his (individual) cross and follow Me.  For whoever wishes to save his (individual) life will lose it; but whoever loses his (individual) life for My sake will find it.

 

Consider 2 Corinthians 5:10 for the thoughts of St. Paul:

 

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one (individual) may be recompensed for his (individual) deeds in the body, according to what he (individual) has done, whether good or bad.

 

And again, St. Paul in Romans 14:12:

 

So then each one of us (individual) will give an account of himself (individual) to God.

 

Or consider Galatians 2:20:

 

“I (individual) have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I (individual) who live, but Christ lives in me (individual); and the life which I (individual) now live in the flesh I (individual) live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me (individual), and delibered Himself up for me (individual).”

 

And, again, in the words of Jesus as recorded in Revelation 3:20:

 

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock.  If any one (individual)  hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him (individual) and will dine with him (individual), and he (individual) with Me.”

 

Barack Obama is most certainly not a Christian to so miserably misunderstand that we are EACH INDIVIDUALLY saved by our PERSONAL faith in Jesus Christ through what He did for us on the cross.  This is not some esoteric “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?” sort of question; it is a core fundamental of the Christian faith.

We are in God damn America.  And as bad as things are now, they will continue to get worse and worse until Obama is finally no longer able to hurt America with his ruinous worldview and the ruinous policies that derive from that worldview.

Obama Ignores Own Expert Or Any Compromise, Refuses To Budge On Tax Cuts

The phrase “uncompromising radical ideologue” comes to mind.  As does the phrase, “the president of no.”

Barack Obama chose to ignore his own expert’s advice (which would explain why both of his top economic experts are leaving the Obama administration) and go his own way.  Given that Obama’s life experience basically consists in community organizing (i.e., Marxist-type fomenting of grievances rather than any actual business experience), that’s kind of scary.

Obama’s own budget director, his own party’s Senate Budget Committee chairman, and his own party’s moderates, are urging Obama to give ALL Americans tax cuts for at least a couple of years.  But Obama is determined that there should be no compromises with his socialist-redistribution class warfare agenda.  He says he’s not budging on ending tax cuts for the higher income tax rate brackets.

But have no fear: a president can always find a “yes man” to pitch whatever policy he wants.  That’s the advantage to having fewer officials with business experience than any other administration in history; the actual real world doesn’t matter.

First, outgoing White House budget director Peter Orszag, in his own words:

One Nation, Two Deficits
By PETER ORSZAG
Published: September 6, 2010

The nation faces a nasty dual deficit problem: a painful jobs deficit in the near term and an unsustainable budget deficit over the medium and long term. This month, the Senate will be debating an issue with significant implications for both — what to do about the Bush-era tax cuts scheduled to expire at the end of the year.

In the face of the dueling deficits, the best approach is a compromise: extend the tax cuts for two years and then end them altogether. Ideally only the middle-class tax cuts would be continued for now. Getting a deal in Congress, though, may require keeping the high-income tax cuts, too. And that would still be worth it.

Why does this combination make sense? The answer is that over the medium term, the tax cuts are simply not affordable. Yet no one wants to make an already stagnating jobs market worse over the next year or two, which is exactly what would happen if the cuts expire as planned.

Higher taxes now would crimp consumer spending, further depressing the already inadequate demand for what firms are capable of producing at full tilt. And since financial markets don’t seem at the moment to view the budget deficit as a problem — take a look at the remarkably low 10-year Treasury bond yield — there is little reason not to extend the tax cuts temporarily. […]

Senate Democrats and Republicans almost never come together anymore. This month, they should fight the dual deficits rather than each other. Let’s continue the tax cuts for two years but end them for good in 2013.

I have to take issue with Orszag simply based on the obvious facts.  Orszag says, “Ideally only the middle-class tax cuts would be continued for now.” And then only moments later he proceeds to provide his reasoning for why we need to keep the tax cuts.  He says, “Higher taxes now would crimp consumer spending, further depressing the already inadequate demand for what firms are capable of producing at full tilt.”

But there’s an inconvenient truth that means, on Orszag’s very own reasoning, that we badly need to keep the tax cuts for the rich:

August 5, 2010, 12:27 PM ET
U.S. Economy Is Increasingly Tied to the Rich
By Robert Frank

Who cares how the rich spend their money?

Well, perhaps everyone should these days. Consumer spending accounts for roughly two-thirds of U.S. gross domestic product, or the value of all goods and services produced in the nation. And spending by the rich now accounts for the largest share of consumer outlays in at least 20 years.

According to new research from Moody’s Analytics, the top 5% of Americans by income account for 37% of all consumer outlays. Outlays include consumer spending, interest payments on installment debt and transfer payments.

By contrast, the bottom 80% by income account for 39.5% of all consumer outlays.

So you’ll have to explain why Orszag would say that we have to have tax cuts because “higher taxes now would crimp consumer spending,” and then proceed to abandon his own reasoning by even suggesting that we shouldn’t keep the tax cuts for the rich along with everyone else.  I submit it’s because Orszag – like everyone else Obama has appointed – is himself a liberal ideologue first, and an intelligent economist second.  And whenever the first contradicts the second, so much the worse for the second.

That said, Peter Orszag is still now on the official record advocating that we keep the Bush tax cuts.  All of them.  Including for the rich.  For at least the next two years.  That, he says, in his capacity as Obama’s chief handpicked expert in dealing with the budget and budget deficits, is the best course.

Unfortunately, Orszag’s boss is something of a fool.

I’m reminded of a quote about another disastrous presidency in regards to the ruining of the economy:

[Franklin Delano] Roosevelt’s string of business failures did not surprise those who knew him well.  One friend, Franklin Lane, Wilson’s secretary of interior, concluded, “Roosevelt knows nothing about finance, but he doesn’t know he doesn’t know.” Therefore, he [Roosevelt] tried one scheme after another, pursuing whims not research, always thinking the next idea would be a winner.  Henry Wallace, who would become Roosevelt’s vice president, liked his boss in politics but not in business…. “I reached the conclusion,” Wallace said after watching Roosevelt in action, “… that I would under no circumstances, ever have any business dealings with him” [Burton Folsom, Jr., New Deal or Raw Deal?, p. 27].

As I point out, we’ve got another FDR on our hands, and that definitely aint a good thing.  Unless you like living through Great Depressions that just go on and on, that is.

Obama isn’t listening to his budget director.  He isn’t going to compromise, like Peter Orszag begs him to do.  Nope.  “Compromise” isn’t the kind of thing ideologues do:

Obama Is Against a Compromise on Bush Tax Cuts
By JACKIE CALMES
Published: September 7, 2010

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday will make clear that he opposes any compromise that would extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy beyond this year, officials said, adding a populist twist to an election-season economic package that is otherwise designed to entice support from big businesses and their Republican allies.

What’s Obama’s plan?  Nothing but pure, simple demagoguery.  Obama plans to dig in and refuse to budge, and then demonize his opposition for digging in and refusing to budge.

But he’s playing chicken with the US economy, and with a lot of Americans’ livelihoods and lives.

Peter Orszag is hardly the only Democrat who is opposed to Obama’s hard-core ideological refusal to compromise:

Democrats unlikely to repeal tax cuts for the rich
By David Lightman | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Democrats in Congress are poised to play a leading role this month in thwarting their party’s effort to raise income tax rates on the wealthy.

Tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 expire at the end of this year. President Barack Obama and Democratic congressional leaders have been eager to extend the breaks for individuals who earn less than $200,000 annually and joint filers who make less than $250,000. Those who earn more would pay higher, pre-2001 rates starting next year.

However, a small but growing number of moderate Democrats are balking at boosting taxes on the rich. Many face electorates that recoil at the mention of any tax increase. Some represent areas that are loaded with wealthier taxpayers. Further, some incumbent senators who don’t face voters this fall are reluctant to increase taxes on anyone while the economy remains sluggish.

Without their support, the push to raise rates on the rich probably will fail.

“The economy is very weak right now. Raising taxes will lower consumer demand at a time when we want people putting more money into the economy,” said Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., who isn’t seeking re-election.

[snip]

Rep. Gerald Connolly, D-Va., represents the northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, one of the nation’s wealthiest districts. Median family income there in 2008 was $117,892, well above the national average of $63,211. He said that repealing the top rates would have political consequences.

“Sometimes we forget how we became the majority. We did it by winning some affluent districts,” he said.

The bigger problem for Democrats looms in the Senate, where Majority Leader Reid’s immediate problem is getting the 60 votes needed to cut off debate on the measure. Democrats control 59 seats, and at least three of them — Bayh, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Kent Conrad of North Dakota — have signaled that they won’t back a permanent repeal of the tax cuts for the wealthy.

They suggest a way out of a stalemate — temporarily extending all the expiring tax rates — but so far the leadership isn’t going along.

Sean Neary, a spokesman for Senate Budget Committee Chairman Conrad, said the senator backed such an extension “for now.”

“The general rule of thumb is that you do not raise taxes or cut spending during an economic downturn. That would be counterproductive,” Conrad said.

Nelson also offered what’s become the centrist Democratic mantra. He, too, said he’d back extending the tax breaks for the wealthy “for at least a period of time because raising taxes in a weak economy could impair recovery.”

That stand could be even more popular with Democratic candidates for the Senate who aren’t incumbents. The hottest races are in conservative states, such as Kentucky, where Republican Rand Paul and Democrat Jack Conway are battling for the seat now held by Republican Sen. Jim Bunning.

Of the expiring tax cuts for the wealthy, Conway spokeswoman Allison Haley said that he “believes we should extend them now, especially when so many Kentucky families and small businesses are struggling under this recession.”

In Missouri, Republican U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt and Democrat Robin Carnahan are in a tight race. Despite a welcoming embrace with Obama at a Kansas City fundraiser in July, Carnahan said last week that she wanted to extend the Bush tax cuts for everyone.

“Now is not the time to raise taxes,” she said.

In Indiana, U.S. Rep. Brad Ellsworth, D-Ind., who’s seeking to replace Bayh, told the Evansville Courier & Press this summer that all the Bush-era tax cuts should become permanent.

That position makes sense, said Brian Vargus, a professor of political science at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, because Indiana is “an overwhelmingly Republican state … and there is never support for taxes or public goods.”

Here we go again.  Just like the stimulus boondoggle that is so unpopular that no Democrat in over 230 races is campaigning on having passed it; and just like ObamaCare which is so unpopular that no Democrat in over 230 races is campaigning on having passed it; the only actual bipartisan compromise is all on the Republicans’ side.

The moderate Democrats, and the bipartisan vote, are siding with the Republicans.  That is a fact.

But that doesn’t stop Barack Obama from demonizing Republicans.  Because he’s a demagogue and an ideologue, and that’s just what he does.

I recently expressed the same point in another article, along with pointing out other critical facts that make that article worth reading.  But the same rationale for keeping the taxes low on the middle class and the poor demands that we also keep the taxes low for the rich.  And if we don’t cut taxes for the rich, then let’s tax the bejeezus out of everyone.  Let’s start taxing the 47% of Americans who pay no federal income taxes whatsoever.  Let’s tax them out of their homes and into the poorhouse, and then let’s tax them out of the poorhouse and onto the street.  And then let’s impose a street tax.

Either that, or force Democrats to be consistent.  For just once in their lives.