Posts Tagged ‘hypocrites’

What Goes Around Comes Around, Democrats: And If You Had Any Decency Or Wisdom, You’d Already Have Learned That By Now

February 8, 2017

How are Democrats fascist?  Let me count the ways:

During the campaign we had violent Democrat Brownshirt-style thugs (and see herewith ties to both Obama and to Obama’s White House and to Hillary Clinton (and see here and here) physically attacking and beating Republicans who came to a free-speech rally to support the candidate that our Constitution enshrines as their right.  Not that Democrats have any more respect for the Constitution than roaches have for it.  Democrats then literally violently rioted, with more than 200 people charged with RIOTING in Washington D.C. on inauguration day because Donald Trump was elected president and butthurt Democrats didn’t like it.  You had Democrats saying they didn’t regard President Trump as “legitimate” and seventy elected Democrats – well over a third of their number in the House – refused to acknowledge the peaceful transfer of power and instead boycotted the inauguration.  Then Democrats took the unprecedented and incredibly childish step of boycotting hearings – refusing to show up and do their damn jobs – as a butthurt tactic to prevent government from functioning when they used to tell us that anything that kept government from functioning was “terrorist.”  We had leftist women who wanted to murder their own children and who rabidly hated Donald Trump march on Washington the very next day.  We’ve had vicious riots in cities and in universities such as leftist Berkeley where Democrats – and pardon me for just calling them rabidly intolerant fascists because that’s exactly what they are – couldn’t handle the right of someone to speak who thought differently from the Stalinists who violently screamed him down.

And Democrats are rabidly, hatefully, viciously boycotting ANY business that believes it has any freedom of speech or the right to creativity whatsoever: not only if you support Donald Trump, but if you simply don’t adequately demonize Donald Trump, Democrats will start hatefully boycotting you and trying to take American workers’ jobs away from them by shutting down or for that matter burning down the business that hired them.  So just the other day we had a brand new “firestorm” of hate and vicious, treasonous job-destruction in the form of a boycott of Under Armour because the CEO likes the business climate he’s seeing.

And ANY business that is like the vast majority of investors – pushing the DOW to historic highs never before seen during Obama’s regime – who appreciates a good business climate will be the target of rabid leftist hate.  The employees of those businesses, their families, their children, will all be the targets of rabid leftist hate.

This is vindictively in-American, anti-American, fascist.  Until the time when the Elizabeth Warrens and the Barack Obamas took over the Democrat Party, we could agree to disagree and the best business model at the best price won.  But there is a spirit of hate that basically says “Death to America!” and that spirit is the spirit of the Democrat Party today.

Three weeks after Trump was sworn in – you know, as fascists also known as “Democrats” rioted – the shrinking Democrat Senate has done everything possible in its fascist collectivist butthurt to do everything imaginable and unimaginable to stall Trump’s cabinet  from being allowed to take office and do their jobs in a manner that can only be described as “historic.”  Among the recent vile Democrat Party tactics, far leftist darling Elizabeth Warren – a dishonest woman who falsely claimed that she was an American Indian in order to falsely receive benefits from her false status – violated forever all pretense of Senate decorum that allows respectful debate by launching a firestorm of hate invective until she was rightly shut the hell up.  She tried to attack a sitting Senator by reading a letter in spite of a rule that reads:

Rule 19 states the following: “No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator.”

It’s a pretty crystal-clear rule.  Don’t talk ugly about your fellow Senator so we can keep a collegial climate and work together.  And yes, you fake, dishonest Pocahontas, the rule even applies when the hateful words impugning the motive of a Senator come from somebody with the last name of “King” who wrote a fundraising letter for the DNC.  It frankly doesn’t MATTER who wrote the damn letter, you cannot read it on the Senate floor if it “directly or indirectly” ascribes any motive or conduct unworthy of a Senator.  Which that fundraising letter from that leftist widow very clearly does.

The Senate has that rule unless we instead want to have fistfights and chairs thrown on the Senate floor like the socialist banana republics that we sometimes see on TV.  I’ve got an idea: why not have Republicans read from the Bible proving that everything Democrats do is godless and vile and wicked and an abomination and a detestable act and that Democrats are demanding the full wrath of God on this nation?  Did Republicans do that when they were destroyed by Obama’s victory?  No.  Did they EVER do ANY of the above?  No.

Amazingly, Democrats depict themselves as the “victims” of “intolerance” and “hate” when they are by far and away THE most hateful bugs in America today.

And so, amazingly, fake Pocahontas is now a “victim” because she tried to viciously attack the character of somebody else in a manner that ought to have her disbarred from the Senate and mean meanies who don’t want the Senate to degenerate into total chaos and anarchy stopped her from doing it.

Democrats in the Senate and in the House DO want the Senate floor to become a fight pit.  And I can state that as a categorical fact simply because that is precisely what they have intentionally “fundamentally transformed” America into through their community organizing tactics to unleash demonstration after demonstration, boycott after boycott, riot after riot.

I’ve pointed out more than once that I actually PREDICTED the rise of a candidate like Donald Trump and accurately explained the reasons why there would be so much anger in response to the truly fascist Barack Obama presidency:

Obama’s strategy is to set aside and flatly ignore the law for his own political benefit.  Every American who is not deeply troubled by that – troubled enough to not vote for this fascist – is UN-American.

What Obama has done is provide an example of out-and-out lawlessness on the part of the president of the United States.  And when we get a hard-core right wing president the way Obama has been a hard-core left wing president, Obama and the Democrat Party and all of those who voted for Obama and the Democrat Party will be entirely to blame for that president and his extremist actions.  You mark my words.  Because what goes around comes around, and if a Democrat can set aside the law the way Obama has now repeatedly done, well, guess who’s going to be stomping on your necks under your own president’s prior justification???  Conservatives are rising up in a spirit of righteous outrage.  You have repeatedly slapped us in the face through your messiah Obama, and the time is coming when we’re going to punch you hard in the nose and then keep on punching.  And when that day comes, liberals, look to yourselves for blame.My words on June 18, 2012

Don’t blame anyone but YOURSELVES and YOUR OWN DEMOCRATIC PARTY for the rise of Donald Trump, Democrats.  YOU did this.  YOU poisoned the well.  You ALONE and NO ONE BUT YOU.

We do we have President Trump?  Because you fascists allowed a fascist to act like a damn fascist for eight miserable years.  And people like me kept warning people like you that there would be CONSEQUENCES for what you were doing.  And then people like me promised you how you would get yours for what you had done before this election that was so damn surprising to you.

You should have learned that what comes around, goes around, fascists.  But you clearly didn’t.

Now you’re hanging yourselves on your own damn petards over and over and over again.  Such as when you fascists who illegitimately call yourselves “Democrats” as if you give one flying DAMN about “democracy” imposed the nuclear option to shove whatever the hell you fascists wanted down our throats.

The Senate is now firmly in Republican hands (after disgraceful Democrats were caught being evil maybe a million times too often).  But when Democrats owned the Senate, they shoved their crap right down the Republicans’ throats and changed the damn Senate rules to do it with a process that was so toxic to the Constitution that it was called “the nuclear option.”

On November 21, 2013, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid declared that “unbelievable, unprecedented obstruction” by Republican filibusters had made the confirmation process “completely unworkable.”[1] As a result, he said, Democrats were forced to eliminate virtually all nomination filibusters. […]

For nearly all of its history, proceeding to a final vote on a matter before the Senate required a supermajority.

The nuclear option is every bit as good for the goose as it is for the gander, demon-possessed ones.

And so guess who gets to use it now?

There are consequences for what you did.  There OUGHT to be consequences for what you did.

You should have learned that what comes around goes around, you fascists.

Oh, there’s more than that, such as prominent Democrats in our society dreaming out loud of bombing the [Trump] White House and calling for a military coup.  I actually remember when Democrats literally called Republicans “terrorists” because we didn’t vote the way Democrats wanted them to vote.

Here’s what Hillary Clinton said about Republicans daring to do anything whatsoever when Obama was president and Democrats held the House and Senate:

“We cannot let a minority of people, and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people, hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.”

They called us “terrorists” a whole bunch of times when it’s ridiculously easy to prove we didn’t do a tiny FRACTION of what they are doing now.  Now we start to see what actual “terrorists” really look like: just look in a damn mirror, Democrat.

And only now do I get to our judges: read the actual text of the law that Donald Trump lawfully and legally acted upon:

Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 states: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

Oh, and there’s this:

Here is the pertinent law, Title 8, Chapter 12, US Code 1182, courtesy of Cornell University Law’s website:

(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

Now how hard is that to understand?

It’s not just that the law is on Trump’s side; IT’S THAT THE LAW IS TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY ON TRUMP’S SIDE.

And so we have the most leftist District Court in the United States now deciding whether to uphold the injunction who are acting NOT AS JUDGES but as political ideologues imposing their own political agenda and calling it “the law.”  This law has been around since my 80 year-old parents were teen-agers.  Obama invoked this identical same policy with Iraqi refugees and again only recently to do to Cuban refugees – and did hypocrite Democrats riot with ‘Stop the hate’ signs THEN? – what Trump wants to temporarily do to seven countries that the Obama administration itself identified as having the most out-of-control and impossible-to-vet status of all countries on earth.

Is this a “Muslim ban” as our leftist newspapers and media keep claiming?  According even to the Trump-haters, fully 85% of all Muslims can freely come into the United States because the vast majority of Muslims on planet earth do not live in those seven countries.

The “judge” that imposed his stay on the Trump policy was FACTUALLY WRONG about the most major element of his ruling: not that Democrats give one flying damn about the fact that they are factually wrong and full of lies.

WASHINGTON — “The federal judge who halted President Donald Trump’s travel ban was wrong in stating that no one from the seven countries targeted in Trump’s order has been arrested for extremism in the United States since the 2001 terrorist attacks.

Just last October, an Iraqi refugee living in Texas pleaded guilty to attempting to provide support to the Islamic State group, accused of taking tactical training and wanting to blow himself up in an act of martyrdom. In November, a Somali refugee injured 11 in a car-and-knife attack at Ohio State University, and he surely would have been arrested had he not been killed by an officer.”

You moral roaches have NO RIGHT to do what your judges are doing.  In Arizona we settled that, like it or not, it is the President of the United States who gets to determine the shape of our immigration system.  the only difference there was that Arizona was actually only calling on Obama to enforce the laws of the United States and Obama was refusing to do so; here Donald Trump is lawfully using the authority that the laws of the United States give him.  But the same Democrats who told us that immigration was up to the President now say the opposite.

Lawyer and journalist Gregg Jarrett says that the law is very clearly entirely on Trump’s side and that ultimately Trump will prevail as this reaches a court capable of voting on the actual merits of the law rather than imposing their rabid judicial ideology onto the law rather than any legitimate interpretation of the law, the separation of powers, or the Constitution that these liberal judges falsely and deceitfully took an oath to uphold.

I am so beyond sick of this two-standards approach to the Constitution and to “judges”: when Obama imposed his ObamaCare, Justice Roberts literally re-wrote the damn ObamaCare law to make it “constitutional,” steadfastly and studiously ignoring what Obama had actually said prior to the passage of the law that clearly made it rabidly UNconstitutional.  And now we have these leftist pseudo-judges doing the precise-damn-OPPOSITE and citing campaign rhetoric that has virtually NOTHING to do with the actual policy that Trump imposed as president as the grounds for striking down the commander-in-chief.

What I am saying here is what Justice Antonin Scalia warned a leftist pseudo-intellectual once:

He added that the role of a Supreme Court justice should be interpreting the law, not inventing it.
“Whether it’s good or bad is not my job. My job is simply to say if those things you find desirable are contained in the Constitution,” he said.
Discussing pro-abortion judges who created a right to abortion, Scalia warned her, “Someday, you’re going to get a very conservative Supreme Court and regret that approach.”

You are about to get precisely what Scalia warned you about, Democrat.  You are about to get the hell you have tried to impose on us for DECADES now: right wing judges who read their own intent into the law without giving a flying damn what our Constitution says or what our founding fathers meant when they said it.  You are going to get judges whose reasoning process is “I’m a judge, and therefore whatever the hell I want to do must be the law.”  And they’re going to impose “law” on you the way you “living, breathing document” ideologues imposed pseudo “law” on US regardless of what the law or the Constitution actually was.

If YOU get to play games with the Constitution and impose your policy as law, then WE get to play games with the Constitution and impose OUR policy as “law.”  And if YOU are allowed to nominate judges who will “interpret” the law however the hell they want to, then WE get to nominate judges who will interpret the law however the hell THEY want to.

You’re going to be hung on your own petards.  Because what comes around ultimately goes around, you fascists.

The equivalent of what the left has done by allowing “judges” to hold a “living, breathing document” view of the Constitution that enables them to read their own “penumbras and emanations” into the law and impose their political goals and policy agendas as if they were “constitutional” is this: suppose we have a football game, and my side gets to use fully automatic assault weapons against your side.  You use your football skills and I’ll use my weapons and let’s play ball and see who wins.  If we win, we get a reprieve from fascist judicial activism; if you win you get to impose your rabid ideology upon us as if it were “the law.”

I noted an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times today talking about how both sides engage in hypocrisy.  And that’s true, much the way it is true that during World War II both sides engaged in killing.  But one side was so over the top evil with killing that it was dishonest to create a false moral equivalence; and in the same way one side (the Democrats) are so over the top HYPOCRITE that it is immoral to say that both sides do it.  The editorial itself – hypocritically entitled “Beyond hypocrisy” in the print edition – is a pile of leftist drivel and from my point of view isn’t worth reading because the author focuses on the evils of the right while steadfastly refusing to acknowledge his ideology’s own role in creating “nihilism” that he is so fearful of.  But it does come to a conclusion that I as a last days, evangelical, Bible-believing fundamentalist Christian, completely affirm: we’re heading toward total nihilism as a nation and that will guarantee our bitter, painful end.

Let me explain what is going on right now, as we speak: we cannot possibly endure as a society or a civilization because there are these people called “Democrats” who cannot abide either civil society or civilization itself.  Nihilism is our only possible option if Democrats are allowed to exist.

It’s a simple thesis to prove: what if REPUBLICANS had rioted the day Obama was inaugurated?  What if seventy REPUBLICANS had boycotted the inauguration – the peaceful transition of power – of Obama?  What if a million Republican right wingers had demonstrated the day after Obama was inaugurated and loudly demanded that Obama not be allowed to do what he had just won election campaigning to do?  What if REPUBLICANS hijacked journalism and the university system the way the left has done and started allowing students to violently riot whenever a pro-Democrat speaker came to the school?  What if Arizona REPUBLICANS had defied Obama and went forward with their own immigration solution in a militant way the way most Democrat-governed states are doing now???

We would have collapsed into a bloodbath of rioting.  I mean, we never did anything even CLOSE to what you did and your side is collapsing into a bloodbath of rioting anyway.  Just imagine if we acted the way you’re acting.  We would have pitched, vicious battles in the streets.

Let me use another analogy I’ve used a couple times before: World War I.  The wicked WWI Axis powers from which Nazism ultimately spawned from were the first to use total war and bomb civilian population centers and they were the first to use poison gas on Allied soldiers.  Do you know what stopped them?  The Allies fought back the same damn way until the Axis asked for a return to more civilized warfare.

The ONLY way to defeat your enemy is to be willing to fight with that enemy on that enemy’s terms.  Had the Allies not responded in kind when their cities were being bombed by Zeppelins and their soldiers were being hideously killed and disfigured by poison gas attacks they would have surely lost the war.  But they fought back using the same tactics.

And they continued to do so until their wicked German enemies asked for a truce on those fronts.

If Republicans aren’t willing to resort to violent riots and mass demonstrations and a rabid refusal to recognize the legitimacy of the next Democrat to become president, we will lose.  Because this is a bitter war to the end, now.  That is beyond obvious.  If we don’t start shoving the most rabid right wingers down the collectivist throats of the Democrats who haven’t nominated a single judge who actually believed in the Constitution as our founding fathers envisioned it for nearly a hundred years, we will lose.  And we will ultimately lose everything – including our very lives – because the “Constitution” only means whatever is convenient for Democrats to believe at any given moment according to their own view of it.  And I believe I have demonstrated that Democrats today are rabid, vile, vicious, violent fascists today.  And if we don’t punch them so hard in the face it is beyond unreal, we won’t get another chance.  Because they are already showing right now, today, that they are going to come at us with a spirit of rabid, hysterical viciousness when the very first chance they get.  And Republicans had better be willing to fight back with everything they have if they value their children’s lives.  I’m telling you.

If you have ever voted Republican in your life, you need to join in EVERY SINGLE BOYCOTT of EVERY business that has EVER said anything critical of Trump or of conservative pro-growth policies.  You need to fight back, or you need to die.  Because die you will.

But we won’t do it.  Because we have something Democrats don’t have: we have morality, integrity, restraint.  The Democrats who rabidly hate God and believe in the religion of evolution have no restraint simply because just what the hell morally disqualifies somebody from being an atheist?  And the answer is ‘NOTHING’.

And so as much of a piece of crap as Jacob T. Levy’s “Beyond hypocrisy” editorial is, I agree with him that what he is saying is exactly what is going to happen in the United States.  Only it’s going to happen because enraged Republicans are finally ultimately going to remember every vile Democrat roach trick and perform it themselves when the tables turn again.  WE’RE going to be the ones who will steadfastly refuse to recognize the “legitimacy” of a Democrat president; WE’RE going to be the ones violently rioting and showing up in giant mass demonstrations.  WE’RE going to be the ones using every single procedural gimmick of government to shut down the president’s and the ruling party’s ability to govern.  Why will we do that?  BECAUSE DEMOCRATS DID IT AND WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND.

Only by then it will be truly too late.  And our nation collapsed.  Jesus said that race would rise against race in the last days.  He also said the end would come upon us like birth pangs upon a woman, getting worse and worse until “the end” is born and devours us by the billions.  We’re seeing the birth pangs of it now.  Just as we’re seeing the “terrible times” that 2 Timothy chapter 3 said were coming as a truly toxic and vile last generation arose.  And we’re seeing that generation now.  The Antichrist of Revelation is just around the corner.

It’s amazing how the godless left and the religious right both agree: the end is coming.  And it’s coming on us FAST.  Welcome to what my fundamentalist Christian friends and I have been predicting for quite a while now as a result of our literal interpretation of what Jesus and the Bible said was coming.

And when it hits it will hit with the force of a sledge-hammer swung by a giant on an exposed and unsuspecting human face.

The funny thing is that, when the Antichrist comes, Democrats will be adoringly singing the man’s praises.  Because they desperately yearn for the poison the ultimate Government-as-God human leader will offer.

Just like eight years ago when Obama was spouting sewage like, “I won, and elections have consequences,” you Democrats have a right and a responsibility and a damn DUTY to put an END to the vile crap your party that you keep voting for is dumping on our culture and our nation right now.

But you won’t do it.

Which is why the beast is coming.

 

 

Advertisements

Minimum Wage Gain, Maximum Poverty Pain

April 4, 2016

The left is using the politically correct term “living wage” to describe their intent to impose their thug government on small businesses who are barely getting by as it is.

I’ve defined the term many times, but let’s consider “PC” again:

Political correctness is not just a leftist way to make overly sensitive people feel better. It was designed by early Marxists in Russia and the left continues to execute the Orwellian tactic today: if you can control words, you can control thought; if you can control thought, you can control actions.  “PC” is an enormous, sophisticated and highly coordinated effort by elitist intellectuals to “fundamentally transform” Western culture as we know it by  redefining it – by shaping the “acceptable” language people are allowed to use – and thereby dictating the parameters of cultural arguments.  And people with incredibly radical agendas have been exploiting this tactic for decades and it has succeeded.

Was George Orwell right in his 1984 first published in 1945 or was he right in his Animal Farm first published in 1949?  And the answer is that Orwell rightly understood that you have to have the ignorance of Animal Farm to get to the true tyranny of 1984.

This is how Cliffs Notes sums up Animal Farm:

Orwell‘s satire on equality, where all barnyard animals live free from their human masters’ tyranny. Inspired to rebel by Major, an old boar, animals on Mr. Jones’ Manor Farm embrace Animalism and stage a revolution to achieve an idealistic state of justice and progress. A power-hungry pig, Napoleon, becomes a totalitarian dictator who leads the Animal Farm into “All Animals Are Equal / But Some Are More Equal Than Others” oppression.

That’s where we are, sheople of America.

Democrats have incited a massive, profound hatred and bitterness to the so-called “white establishment.”  These tyrants have so much power, according to the leftist narrative, that even the mighty Obama, the divine messiah himself, has been unable to free the slaves.  And of course your Hillary Clintons and your Bernie Sanders have to pay lip homage to the Pharaoh god-king Obama while simultaneously irrationally claiming that the last eight years of suffering had nothing to do with Obama and his miserable policies; oh, no, they were inflicted on you by “Mr. Jones.”  And if you just give our power-mad government all the power in the world, we will pursue “economic justice” and thereby “achieve an idealistic state of justice and progress.”

Orwell realized that you cannot get to 1984 without a people stupid enough and wicked enough to buy the lie that enables Animal Farm.  First you must have a people willing to surrender their liberty so that a powerful State can give them whatever they promise in order to get to a slave state.

As Edward R. Murrow put the same idea, “A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”

And when a people gives themselves over to a giant government system, that people deserves to perish.

And so the Democrat Party is well on its way to its cherished goal of ushering in the Antichrist, the beast of the Book of Revelation.  They will NOT rest until every man and woman has been forced by the government to take the economic mark of the beast without which no one will be able to buy or sell.

So let’s consider the Democrat ruse on “living wages” otherwise known as the minimum wage hike.  Understand that I’ve written about this often enough before:

Teen Unemployment Another Proof Of How Desperately Wrong Obama, Democrat Policies Are And How Much They Hurt Little People

Miniumum Wage Increase Means Maximum Employment Decrease

The Party Of Genuine Evil And The Destruction Of America: In 39 States, Democrat Welfare Pays Better Than A Secretary’s Job

Realize That Obama Has ‘Fundamentally Transformed’ America Into A Failed Marxist State. Just Ask Poor People And Liberals

The Union Label Is Hypocrisy: Unions Hire Minimum Wage Non-Union Workers To Do Their Picketing For Them

Obama: Adding 11 Million Low-Skilled Illegal Immigants To America’s Dependency Roles Will Strengthen Middle Class Rather Than Depressing Wages

The Singularity Of ‘Solutions’ Proposed By Liberal Thinkers Is Only Surpassed By Their Abject HYPOCRISY

Democrats’ War On Poverty Has Been A War On America That Has Done NOTHING To Help The Poor

Obama’s ‘Hope and Change’ In Action: Poverty At Highest Number In 52 Years Census Bureau Has Tracked It

Inflation Back On The Table As Part Of Obama’s ‘Hope and Change’ Misery Buffet

It’s funny how Democrats invented a right to “privacy” in the Constitution that somehow ONLY applied to homosexual sex and abortion.  Why can’t people have a right to “privacy” when they hire someone to do a job?  What right does a government have to interfere with my business?  And on the flip side, why should I be barred from working for somebody if I want to work and I’m willing to do a job for the pay they are offering?

It is simply a FACT that when you artificially raise a wage and force every business to pay that wage regardless of what their employees are doing, or how much profit they actually contribute to a business, that many businesses will decide that job is simply no longer worth offering.  This is simply a fact of basic common sense: otherwise kindly explain to me why we don’t make the minimum wage $1,800 an hour (the hourly billing rate of the lawyer who hit the homerun for homosexual marriage)???  Why don’t we try that and find out how many people would have a damn job the next day.

So obviously it might be good for SOME people and it’s bad for many others.  And the left frankly doesn’t give a damn about those people who lose their jobs any more than they cared about the people who were victims of Obama’s health care law who found out that “If you like your plan, you’ll be able to keep your plan.  If you like your doctor, you’ll be able to keep your doctor” was a cynical lie.

Here’s a synonym for “minimum wage jobs”: ENTRY LEVEL jobs.  The idea is that you work, you develop experience, you prove you are capable of showing up and performing, and you leverage your job history toward increasingly better and better paying jobs.  In the past, at least before Obama got his roach hands into everything, it was mostly teenagers and young people who worked for minimum wage.  To the extent that Obama has made it harder than its ever been to get out of the minimum wage rung, the obvious answer is to repudiate Obama and Democrats rather than change the wage system.  It has always been in the interests of businesses to keep their good-performing people rather than see them go elsewhere; and offering better pay is one of those ways.  The ONLY people who want you to stay in the quagmire of minimum wage pay are DEMOCRATS.  And what Democrats do is force businesses to “spread the wealth” to the underperforming workers because I can’t give Wonderful William the raise he deserves because I was just just forced to give Lousy Lou and Terrible Tom a raise that they didn’t deserve.

The unions that bankroll the Democrat Party exemplify the Democrat mindset: whether you’re the best worker who ever worked or whether you’re the suckiest worker who ever conned his way into a job, you should get the same pay.  Democrats and their thug flunkies literally DEMAND that high-performing workers should NOT be able to get paid for their superior performance.  That’s something called a “documented fact.”  And that’s what’s going on here, rather than Democrats giving one miserable flying damn for good workers.

I loved this quote:

Everything we ever needed to know about collective unions we learned in Kindergarten. Why run around gathering up all the Easter Eggs – if they are just going to be reassembled in a big pile at the end of the hunt and equal amounts given to each ?

But that is precisely what is at the very heart of unions and wage control laws: the notion of forcibly redistributing good workers’ pay to lousy workers.

Then you add to that the problem that I explore further below where by forcing business to raise their wages across the board, they have no choice but to raise their prices.  So now everything cost more; and how did that actually help the worker who now gets to pay more for everything he or she purchases?

The hypocrisy on minimum wages on the part of the left is beyond appalling: liberals demand it, they impose it, and then they exempt themselves from it citing it would create an undue hardship on them to abide by what they force everybody else to abide by.  So you have unions that serve as the Democrat Party’s Brownshirt thugs exempting themselves from the minimum wages they are the stormtroopers in imposing:

Editorial L.A. labor leaders’ hypocrisy on minimum wage hike
By The Times Editorial Board
▼ Los Angeles labor leaders fought for a minimum wage hike; now they want to be exempt from it
▼ L.A. County Federation of Labor is being hypocritical in its stance on raising the minimum wage
May 29, 2015, 5:00 AM

No, employers with a unionized workforce should not be allowed to pay less than Los Angeles’ proposed minimum wage. It’s stunning that after leading the fight for a $15 citywide minimum wage and vehemently opposing efforts to exempt restaurant workers, nonprofits and small businesses from the full wage hike, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor is now lobbying for an exemption for employers with union contracts. That’s right — labor leaders are advocating that an employer should have the right to pay union members less than the minimum wage.

This is hypocrisy at its worst, and it plays into the cynical view that the federation is more interested in unionizing companies and boosting its rolls of dues-paying members than in helping poor workers. Such an exemption would create an incentive for companies to allow unions in — but rather than helping workers, it would undermine the purpose of the minimum wage ordinance, which is to set a new, higher pay floor in order to help lift the greatest number of low-wage Angelenos out of poverty.

You have the Hollywood that gave nearly 20-to-1 to Obama over Romney in 2012 demanding and receiving tax credits from Democrats:

LA Times Op-Ed To keep ‘Hollywood’ in Hollywood, tax incentives are key

New Tax Credits Boost Filming In L.A. In Q3

And how about the liberal universities?  Consider what I wrote about the sick trend to skyrocket costs on poor students I ranted about in September 2014 right along with the above fascist liberal power-brokers:

This Labor Day, Demand Leftists Professors And Universities Have Their Salaries And Tuition Redistributed To Poor Working Students
September 1, 2014

I am so sick of the left.

On a daily basis, you have the left screaming for a higher and higher minimum wage, beyond what most businesses can afford to pay entry-level and unskilled workers.

The unions want it because they will then demand a wage hike for THEIR workers; after all, if that unskilled slob is now earning twice what he used to, surely that union worker ought to earn twice as much, too, right???

It doesn’t matter how much it hurts the little people who both struggle to run small businesses and struggle to find jobs as they are literally priced out of the market as it simply doesn’t pay to hire them anymore.

So I’m watching the television and there’s this leftist professor demanding higher minimum wages.

Let it come out of HER wages.  Because as a liberal professor, she represents THE most depraved money-hungry predator of ALL:

Between 2002 and 2012, prices for new textbooks rose 82%, while tuition and fees increased about 89% during that period, and overall consumer prices grew 28%, according to a 2013 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

That according to the Los Angeles Times dated TODAY.

Tuition is skyrocketing.  The cost of college textbooks is skyrocketing.  And who runs that vile system lock, stock and barrel?  Cockroach liberals who say “other people ought to be forced to pay more.”

THEY ought to be forced to pay more.

I propose college tuition and books be reduced at the expense of college/university faculty and staff.

I further propose that any “living wage” increase ought to come right out of the wages of union workers who want to force other people to get gouged to pay for.

Let’s call it the “If you want it, YOU effing pay for it!” law.

Has this trend stopped?  Has it even slowed down?  Hell NO:

Over the last 20 years, the average published price for a year of tuition and fees at a private four-year college has increased from $11,719 to $31,231, an increase of 166%, an increase two and a half times the 61% rise in the Consumer Price Index. Adjusting for inflation, the price of tuition and fees has escalated by 67% at four-year private colleges and by 60 percent at two-year public colleges. Reflecting decreased government funding, the price has more than doubled at four- year public colleges. (Trends in College Pricing 2014 p.16) During this same period, the median family income in the U.S., also adjusted for inflation, has increased 5.2% from $51,006 to $53,657, but it has actually declined by more than 7% since 1999 when it peaked at $57,843.

The implications are clear—list price has made a college education appear unattainable to an ever-increasing proportion of the population, as indicated by several recent studies.

If liberals had one shred of honesty or integrity in them, they would have long ago treated colleges and professors like oil companies and CEOs.  But of course they don’t have any decency in them.  So they keep rigging the system to hand colleges and universities more government money and the colleges and universities keep taking that money and jacking up tuitions and expenses.

And Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are both loudly demanding we quadruple down on stupid.

Another word for “liberal” is FOOL.  Liberals are fools who keep going back to the same people who keep ripping us off and trusting them so that they’ll keep having better opportunities to rip us off even more.  Whether they turn to union thugs or university Marxists or Hollywood moguls, it’s the same damn mindset doing the same damn thing: pathologically greedy, dishonest hypocrites rigging the system for themselves at the expense of the poor who keep trusting them because they’re stupid, ignorant sheople who have been Pavlovian-trained to a particular flavor of racist, misandrist, ant-religious, anti-moral, fascist demagoguery.

And the left contemptuously knows that they keep coming back to that same Pavlovian formula.  No matter how many times it fails.

So we contemplate the minimum wages that unions fought fang and claw to impose and then absolved and exempted themselves from.

I just want you to consider what even the damn leftist Los Angels Times understands (even as they push for it).  All you have to do is read the full story:

Security guard Kenneth Lofton was among the workers who benefited last year when this East Bay city hiked its hourly minimum wage to nearly $15 for employees at large companies.

The jump was almost 50% more than what he used to make in nearby Oakland when he was paid $10 an hour. But it’s not enough for Lofton, 62, to move closer to work — he still has to commute nearly 20 miles from Hayward and back each day.

“It’s somewhat better, but not much,” Lofton said Tuesday morning while eating breakfast and manning the security gate at an Emeryville parking lot. “The high cost of living here takes a big bite out of whatever monetary increase you get, so it’s like not getting an increase at all.” [….]

A similar scenario played out in Emeryville, where some restaurants have increased prices to make up for the higher minimum wage.

On a Tuesday morning, hip cafe Farley’s is buzzing with young professionals from nearby companies. Despite its popularity, the eatery is still subject to the “razor thin” profit margins common in the food service industry, said co-owner Chris Hillyard.

After Emeryville’s wage increase, Hillyard said he had to increase the price of menu items by 5% to 20%. A roasted turkey and avocado sandwich that once cost $9 is now priced at $10. A latte went up 50 cents, to $4.

Hillyard also had to eliminate two positions from the cafe and end the cafe’s baking program. Farley’s now outsources its baking to a vendor.

“The council had good intentions when it increased the minimum wage, but that was one of the unintended consequences,” Hillyard said.

He said the additional wage hike this July will be difficult, as he’s still trying to navigate where his business is now. Farley’s has 12 employees.

“It’s going to be a challenge because we just raised prices,” Hillyard said. “At some point, we won’t be able to do that because there’s only so much people are willing to spend on a cup of coffee or a sandwich.”

So far, he said, customers haven’t minded the higher prices since they’re comparable to those in nearby Oakland and Berkeley.

Down the street from Farley’s, prices have also gone up at Los Moles, a popular Mexican restaurant.

Chef and owner Lito Saldana said he bumped up the price of every menu item by 10% to offset rising food and labor costs. Prior to the minimum wage increase, he said, Los Moles’ servers made $9 an hour, while kitchen staff averaged $13.50 to $14 an hour.

As costs have risen across the board, Saldana said the minimum wage increase hasn’t helped his employees.

“Even my employees who live in Oakland are saying it is now too expensive for them,” he said.

Seattle workers interviewed by the minimum wage study researchers said they were happy to get the higher wages. For some, it made a “fundamental difference in their quality of life,” said Vigdor, of the university.

At the same time, many workers said they were nervous about whether price increases would eat up their higher paychecks.

“The minimum wage, when it works well, is really a tool for transformational change in people’s lives,” Vigdor said. “And the worry is that it doesn’t always work well.”

The ONLY “successful” example the LA Times could find was a high-end restaurant owner (whose wealthy customers demonstrate how well-to-do they are by paying outrageous prices as a rule) who nevertheless said, “If I have to close some restaurants, so be it. If I have to restructure, so be it. I would rather pay a living wage.”  Versus the rest of the businesses who’d actually prefer to survive and be able to take care of their employees by continuing to provide them a JOB.

The minimum wage law has an incredibly sordid history, just as the progressive left that imposed it in the first place:

When California legislators voted to raise the statewide minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2022, labor activists cheered. Discounting fears that a $15 minimum might cost some low-wage workers their jobs, activists and their political allies celebrated a victory for fairness and economic justice.

Progressive labor activists took a very different view 100 years ago, when 15 states established America’s first minimum wages. Labor reformers then believed that a legal minimum would hand a raise to deserving white Anglo-Saxon men, and a pink slip to their undeserving competitors: “racially undesirable” immigrants, the mentally and physically disabled, and women. The original progressives hailed minimum-wage-caused job losses among these groups as a positive benefit to the U.S. economy and to Anglo-Saxon racial integrity.

Two overarching characteristics have always been true of progressive activists: 1) they are genuinely evil people and 2) they have always believed in the raw, naked power of their God, the State, to impose their evil on the rest of the country.  Function has always followed form with the left.

Just so you understand what happens when liberals artificially drive up prices by fascist fiat, there’s another article the same day in the same issue of the LA Times.  It begins:

More rent-controlled buildings are being demolished to make way for pricier housing
By Ben Poston and Andrew Khouri•Contact Reporters
April 2, 2016, 3:00 AM

Looking to cash in on a booming real estate market, Los Angeles property owners are demolishing an increasing number of rent-controlled buildings to build pricey McMansions, condos and new rentals, leading to hundreds of evictions across the city.

More than 1,000 rent-controlled apartments were taken off the market last year — a nearly threefold increase since 2013, according to a Times analysis of housing data. Evictions from such units have doubled over the same time.

You jack up the wages by dictatorial fiat, YOU PAY MORE FOR EVERYTHING.

AND YOU SHOULD PAY MORE FOR EVERYTHING.

It’s just like the colleges and universities that liberals keep giving more billions of dollars to by jacking up the limits of “financial aid”: “Hey, stupid-ass student, you’ve got more borrowed money now, so we can jack up tuition even higher, can’t we?”

And so liberal bureaucrats in cahoots with the colleges say, “Oh, no!  We’d better increase the amount students can borrow.”

And so colleges raise their tuition again.  And then again.  And again and again.

The same vicious cycle has been going on for decades.  And stupid liberals never learn because YOU KNOW PEOPLE ARE STUPID BECAUSE THEY CAN’T LEARN EVEN AFTER THEY’VE MADE THE SAME STUPID MISTAKE FIFTY TIMES.

So here we are artificially jacking up wages.  And it might seem like a boon to those who KEEP their job (it’s not a boon to those who lose their jobs because the wages government liberals force them to pay does not justify that job any more), but it’s an ILLUSION: because the price of everything just got jacked up to pay for the artificial wage increase.

Meanwhile, landlords say, “Oh, you’re earning 50% more?  Well, well, well, I guess that means we can jack up your rent by that amount.”

But will they learn?  Nope.  They’ll just vote for even more Democrats who impose even worse crap until:

And I heard a voice from among the four living beings say, “A loaf of wheat bread or three loaves of barley will cost a day’s pay. And don’t waste the olive oil and wine.” — Revelation 6:6

But that comes after Democrats have already voted for the Antichrist and his mark of the beast where Democrats’ dream government finally seizes total control of the economic system.

As The Veterans Administration Or ANYTHING Goes The Way Of Liberalism, It Goes Down The Toilet

March 12, 2015

I am a service-connected disabled veteran and use the Veterans Administration as my primary source of health care.

For the most part, the VA has done me well.  I have mostly had excellent physicians and health care professionals attending to me.  And I have been grateful to the VA for the care I have received.

But I have also been watching my level of care deteriorate.

And it is deteriorating because of liberalism.

This week is a marvelous example.

As a service-connected veteran with injuries to both knees and both shoulders, I have a significant level of pain to deal with.  I am prescribed oxycodone for my pain.  And of course that is a Schedule II drug that requires extra-level monitoring.

I have never ONCE been convicted for any kind of substance abuse.  I have never ONCE been arrested for any kind of substance abuse.  I have never ONCE ever even been ACCUSED of any kind of substance abuse.

But, you know, some people have abused their oxycodone.

So let’s treat EVERYONE like a drug abuser.

I got a phone call this week and was commanded to submit a urine sample for a drug test within two weeks of receiving the call.  I’m going in today and I am pissed off about it.

Oh, if I were a welfare-sucking parasite, I wouldn’t have to submit to a drug test.  I mean, they tried to do that in one state and the unholy rabid frothing-at-the-mouth fury on the part of liberals squashed that pretty fast.  I mean, how DARE you insinuate that people might not be getting jobs because they’re abusing drugs, you RACIST!

But it’s perfectly okay to accuse us veterans who fought for your right to be a depraved jackass of being a drug abuser, isn’t it, Democrat?

Thanks to Führer Obama, I get to deal with that insinuation about four times a year.   I was tested in November.  The fact that there wasn’t so much as a trace of a contraband cream puff in my system doesn’t absolve me.  Because where Democrats are involved, the last thing that matters is “facts.”

But I’m not done.

I just had shoulder surgery for my left shoulder.  And I’ve been having physical therapy on a schedule of three times a week, followed by two times a week, followed by three times a week, followed by two times a week, etc.  Well, I had a setback when I strained myself.  The physical therapist and the surgeon saw me and told me I needed to miss about a week plus and heal up.

So I just came back, and during that week plus I’d missed, the physical therapy department changed their scheduling policy.  You see, some veterans aren’t showing up for their appointments, and it cost the system money when people don’t show up for their appointments and leave medical professionals twiddling their thumbs when they could be treating patients.

So does the VA go after the patients who aren’t showing up for their appointments?  Of course not.  That would make as much sense as going after the actual MUSLIMS who are doing all the actual TERRORISM.  So instead, they have to treat EVERYONE like a terrorist, or in this case an appointment-abusing no-shower.

It doesn’t matter that I have NEVER missed a VA appointment in my entire life.

Now I have to get ONE appointment per visit.  The therapist has to spend one-fifth of each appointment writing the paperwork so I can get my next appointment.  And now suddenly I can’t GET two or three appointments a week anymore; nope, I’m lucky to get ONE.  And my recovery is going to suffer as a result.

So because Democrats are running the bureaucracies, we ALL get treated like terrorists.  Whether we’re 95 year-old nuns in our walkers slowly making our way through the airport or service-connected veterans who never once missed an appointment (or abused drugs).  We ALL get treated like terrorists who did something wrong by these power-grabbing dictators.

What is liberalism?  Liberalism is the belief that everybody is “good” while society is “evil” and must be reformed and then “fundamentally transformed,” and so on the one hand they refuse to hold perpetrators responsible for their crimes or their behavior because it’s SOCIETY that is to blame, right?  So we ALL get treated like farm animals while your Hillary Clintons are running around exempting themselves from the laws and regulations and policies that they impose on everybody else.

It would make sense to single out the abusers – whether the drug abusers or the appointment abusers – but Democrats are vile, wicked, depraved people who won’t be held accountable and won’t allow anyone else to be held accountable.  And add to that that Democrats are fascists who want to have total dictatorial control of every system of government.  And you get the perfect storm of me having my health care ruined because the system won’t hold the people who are screwing up accountable for being the ones who are actually screwing up.

Especially if they’re welfare-sucking parasites, for the record.

It’s the same thing with guns, and that’s going on right now, too.  Obama just tried to do one of his innumerable end-runs around the Constitution by banning ammunition for certain types of guns he doesn’t like.  It doesn’t matter if we have a right to those guns because Obama is a fascist and we have the rights Obama says we have and we’re racist if we think we have the rights the Constitution says we have.  In California and other states, Democrats are releasing criminals from prison at a record rate much the way Obama has released terrorists from Gitmo at a record rate (because the fact that I should be treated like a terrorist in any airport in America doesn’t apparently mean that actual TERRORISTS should be treated like terrorist, right?).  And this goes back decades, when during the 1960s Democrats declared that it was wrong to commit crazy people against their will and that the nutjobs who voted Democrat had RIGHTS, dammit.  And so Democrats made it impossible to deal with mentally ill people in America.

And now they demand that we ALL be treated like criminals and nutjobs as a result, and that we ALL have our right to keep and bear arms stripped away from us.

“Democrat” stands for “DEpraved deMOnic bureauCRAT.”  And they have “fundamentally transformed the United States of America” into something truly pathetic and truly despicable.

Now, excuse me.  I’ve got to go pee in a cup.  I’d have a Democrat take the test for me, but you know I’d fail my drug test given the fact that these same hypocrite liberals who are making me take this damn drug test are trying to get the very drugs that I’m being tested for legalized in state after state.

Especially if they’re welfare sucking parasites.

What A Difference A Hypocrite – Actually Just The Whole Hypocrite Democrat Party – Can Make When It Comes To Shutting Down The Government

December 12, 2014

Last year, Obama and the entire Democrat Party came unglued over Republican obstructionism – and literally anarchy and even hostage-taking and terrorism – because the Republicans were prepared to vote against the Democrat Party agenda and risk a government shutdown.

I mean, do you remember this crap out of Obama’s White House a year ago?

White House compares GOP to terrorists as government shutdown nears
By Dave Boyer – The Washington Times – Thursday, September 26, 2013

Senior White House adviser Dan Pfeiffer on Thursday compared Republican lawmakers to suicide bombers as the showdown over a possible government shutdown intensified.

“We are for cutting spending, we are for reforming our tax code, we are for reforming entitlements,” Mr. Pfeiffer told CNN’s Jake Tapper. “But what we are not for is negotiating with people who have a bomb strapped to their chest.”

Here was Obama:

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Good morning, everybody.  At midnight last night, for the first time in 17 years, Republicans in Congress chose to shut down the federal government.  Let me be more specific:  One faction, of one party, in one house of Congress, in one branch of government, shut down major parts of the government — all because they didn’t like one law.

This Republican shutdown did not have to happen

Last night Democrats in the House did absolutely everything they coul to shut down the government.

But in a world and in a political party that despises truth, such facts are irrelevant.

And of course the mainstream media – being the NAZIS they are – duly drooled out the Democrat Party talking points in lieu of the actual news.

But what a difference a year makes.  And now where are all the cockroach “journalists” who had horrible labels for Republicans because they were acting like Democrats acted just last night???

They’re hiding under the refrigerator, of course.  BECAUSE LIBERALS ARE ROACHES.

Elizabeth Warren was against government shutdowns before she was for them
By Doug Powers  •  December 11, 2014 02:56 PM

Last year, Elizabeth Warren tomahawked those in the GOP “Anarchy Gang” for bringing the government to the point of a shutdown:

Warren telling GOPers last year that “this democracy has already rejected your views” is an overdose of retro-irony considering the results of last month’s election. But anyway, fast forward to this week:

Congressional Democrats objected on Wednesday to controversial financial and political campaign provisions tucked into a $1.1 trillion U.S. spending bill, keeping the risk of a government shutdown alive.

The complaints from House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats clouded the chances for passage of the funding bill as a midnight Thursday deadline drew near.
[…]
Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren, a staunch advocate for tougher regulation of Wall Street, called for Democrats to withhold support from the bill due to the derivatives provision, which would effectively strike down a portion of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law enacted in the wake of a financial crisis fueled partly by complex mortgage derivatives.

Shutdowns are now … whatever the socialist hypocrite opposite of “anarchy” is:

So now the Democrats are calling Republicans “blackmailers.”

Nancy Pelosi: This is ‘blackmail’
By Lauren French
| 12/11/14 2:31 PM EST
| Updated 12/11/14 9:13 PM EST

Nancy Pelosi is “disappointed” in Barack Obama for backing a bill she described as a form of “blackmail” on the part of Republicans.

Because to be a Democrat is to be a pathologically unhinged lying hypocrite.

So now voting to pass a damn budget is “blackmail” when a year ago it was the essence of patriotism and virtue.  And to vote to shut down the damn government is the essence of patriotism and virtue, when a year ago it was the essence of treason and the heart of right-wing racist darkness.

This abject, despicable display of rabid hypocrisy is nothing new.  It’s par for the course from the party that decreed “elections have consequences.”  Unless they lose said election.  This is par for the course from the party that supported the Iraq War and voted for it only to treasonously betray their very own votes the moment the political winds changed.  58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the Iraq War Resolution, including Joe Biden (D-DE), Hillary Clinton (D-NY), John Kerry (D-MA) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).  Only to turn on the American troops they themselves had voted to send to war.  This is par for the course for the party that was fully briefed on waterboarding with NO OBJECTIONSAND OH, YES THEY WERE BRIEFED – only to later lie about it and disown the truth the way the disowned the CIA officers whose “crime” was to follow the laws as the laws were at a very dark and frightening time when 3,000 innocent Americans had just been viciously murdered and no one knew whether another massive attack was imminent.  Now they put America at risk in a “report” that amounts to a giant whine in which the informed professional officials like Obama’s own handpicked CIA Directors Leon Panetta and John Brennan directly refute.  Just imagine what would have happened to their $40 million hit job if they’d actually bothered to interview the professionals who WEREN’T Obama political appointees, given what even the political appointees say.

This is par for the course from the party whose fascist president bitches at Bush for waterboarding three vicious terrorists when this aforementioned fascist bitchy president has murdered more American citizens without one scintilla of due process than Bush waterboarded terrorists.  Meanwhile, Obama’s drone strike victims number in the THOUSANDS with scores of innocent women and children numbered with the guilty.  And this Nazi dares to stand in judgment of a period of time when the New York Times was reporting that al-Qaeda had obtained a 10-kiloton nuclear weapon and smuggled it into New York City.  You sanctimonious tube of slime.

Democrats are officially outraged that the people tasked with protecting America would aggressively interrogate people who saw the heads off of children.  I can’t even begin to describe how much Democrats outrage me.

You want to talk about “betrayal of American values,” Democrat?  I’ve got an idea for you; bring to light what Obama is doing TODAY rather than what Bush did to keep the nation safe ten damn years ago.   Expose what Obama did when he covered-up his fiasco in Benghazi with lies that made a grotesque mockery of our national security; help us expose Obama’s criminal abuse of the IRS as a weapon to target his political opponents; help us expose the cynical lies that were behind the passage of ObamaCare.  Expose Obama’s violation of the separation of powers as Obama himself assured us he would be committing if he issued the executive order on amnesty for illegals that he treasonously went ahead and issued anyway.  Do that and then maybe you’d have a shred of credibility – because you sure don’t have any now.  You want to make America “transparent”???  Fine; just help us expose the wrongs of the LEAST TRANSPARENT PRESIDENT IN HISTORY even according to many doctrinaire liberals.

Democrats don’t want to talk about ANY of the MYRIAD disgraces of American values perpetuated by Obama.  And their rabid protection of the most criminally opaque administration in American history proves the don’t give a flaming damn about “transparency.”

Every day in every way, Democrats are liars and hypocrites.

 

Hollywood Liberal, When It Comes To Health Care, Thy Name Is HYPOCRITE

May 27, 2014

Just by way of introducing this topic, it’s not like it ought to be any kind of a secret that being a “Hollywood liberal” is numerically equivalent with being a “total hypocrite.”  This kind of crap has been a documented FACT for years now when it comes to liberals demonizing everybody else for wanting to pay lower taxes even as they whine for the same tax breaks for themselves that they love to deny to everybody else.

But you need to realize that it turns out that the hypocrisy of Hollywood liberals is all-pervasive and all-encompassing.  Like the doctrine of human sin under Calvinist theology, hypocrisy extends into and corrupts every single aspect of the liberals’ being.

I published another example of the pure, unadulterated hypocrisy that is pathological in Hollywood liberals yesterday.  And while we’ve got a terrible drought on the leftist coast of God damn America, it is nevertheless raining hypocrites here.  In Hollywood, there are a tsunamis’ worth of them.

I came across this one-sided presentation of the wonders of ObamaCare in the Los Angeles Times and immediately saw that the “journalist” who “reported” on this story pathologically refused to consider the ramifications of what she was writing.

But consider: given that liberals LOVE to attack whole industries for not paying their workers enough, blah-blah-blah, look who ALSO hasn’t been paying their damn workers anywhere NEAR enough (before we deal with just what “big” beneficiaries of ObamaCare actually are getting).

We’re told in the article below:

More than most people, workers in the area’s vast entertainment industry are poised to benefit from the federal health law…

And do you know why that is?  Think of it from the perspective that the liberals love to demonize everybody else over.  Here, I’ll help:

“When people think Hollywood, they think George Clooney and Meryl Streep, but that’s not the average person in this town,” said Dan Kitowski, director of health services for the western region of the Actors Fund, a national nonprofit that does Affordable Care Act outreach.

Yeah, that’s right.  Liberals are always out there demonizing CEOs and saying conservatives are EVIL because they think the people at the top should make more money than the people on the bottom.  But that is only because, being liberals, these people are pure, rabid hypocrites who WILL NOT consider the log in their own facelift-surgery-widened eyes.

Liberal, thy name is hypocrite.

Actors, musicians are big beneficiaries of Obamacare
By Soumya Karlamangla
May 22, 2014, 4:28 PM

In 2011, actress Lynda Berg didn’t make enough money to qualify for health insurance through her union. And, on her own, she had trouble finding a plan she could afford because she’s a survivor of breast cancer, considered a preexisting condition..

The uncertainty of not having a health plan was stressful and at times expensive, she recalls. A few years ago she fell and broke her hand and elbow and ended up paying $4,000 for her medical care.

But all that has changed for Berg, 59. In March, she went online, signed up for a policy through Covered California, the state’s new health insurance marketplace set up under the Affordable Care Act, and now is getting medical care.

More than most people, workers in the area’s vast entertainment industry are poised to benefit from the federal health law. But as the new law takes hold, the massive overhaul has also stirred up considerable confusion and anxiety over how to navigate a host of new healthcare options.

For decades, artists have flocked to the state, and many have just scraped by while trying to get their big break. According to a study from the National Endowment for the Arts, California has the highest number of artists in the nation.

The same study found that more than 30% of artists are self-employed compared with 10% in the general population, and rates of uninsured are typically higher among the self-employed than others.

In the industry, actors and other movie workers typically get insurance through their unions. But many say they don’t get enough hours or steady work as actors to meet the income requirements to apply.

For instance, according to data from SAG-AFTRA, the country’s largest union for actors, broadcasters and recording artists, only about 15% of members qualify for health insurance through the union.

“When people think Hollywood, they think George Clooney and Meryl Streep, but that’s not the average person in this town,” said Dan Kitowski, director of health services for the western region of the Actors Fund, a national nonprofit that does Affordable Care Act outreach.

The federal law that went into full effect this year made it easier for people to buy health insurance on their own because coverage is guaranteed regardless of preexisting health conditions, and subsidies are available to make premiums more affordable.

That creates a new range of options for people who are self-employed or who may have held on to a job they didn’t like just for the benefits, said Laura Baker, a senior health and benefits consultant for consulting firm Mercer in Los Angeles. One Harvard study estimated that 11 million Americans were stuck in so-called “job lock” — not able to leave their jobs for fear of losing their health benefits.

“It’s certainly a whole new world for some,” Baker said.

Actress Berg, who lives in Beverlywood, now pays a premium of $145 a month for her Blue Shield of California plan. She’s using her coverage to get prescriptions for $5 a month that she was paying more than $100 to fill before. She plans to head to the doctor’s office soon for a checkup she’s been putting off.

“It’s a tremendous blessing to actors and anyone who doesn’t have insurance,” she said. “Even if you get a plan with a large deductible, at least you have that safety net … and you’re not in debt for the next seven years.”

At a recent workshop at the Actors Fund’s Los Angeles office, actors and artists tried to sort through their new choices.

In a room with a mural of the Hollywood sign on one wall, they asked questions specific to their unpredictable lifestyles: Can they find doctors when they’re on tour? Are specialists, such as throat doctors for singers, covered? Can they dip in and out of union health coverage, or change plans as their income shifts from job to job?

Jorge Bermudez, a percussionist who lives in Baldwin Park, asked what would happen if he couldn’t pay his premium one month. He jumps from gig to gig, and he’s afraid he’ll lose his coverage if he falls behind for a few weeks. He hasn’t had health insurance since he and his wife got divorced several years ago, and he hasn’t been able to get a much-needed hearing aid.

In the past, fluctuating incomes have meant that many artists such as Bermudez, not able to afford their own health plans, have simply gone without when their union insurance or other options lapsed. But now, many can afford individual plans, and are starting to put them to use.

Thousands of Angelenos like Berg signed up for a health plan during Obamacare open enrollment this year. Los Angeles County led the state in sign-ups, with more than 400,000 enrolling through the state exchange. The county made up almost 30% of the statewide total of 1.4 million.

Obamacare open enrollment ended in March, but people who lose their jobs — or get married, have a baby, move or have any other serious change of circumstance — can sign up for a plan year-round. Open enrollment begins again in November.

Krista Madsen, senior vice president of MusiCares, the charitable arm of the Grammys that provides health services to musicians, said that historically, more than 75% of their clients report being uninsured. Not having health insurance has long been part of the life of an artist, even though health problems can have a particularly debilitating effect on artists’ careers.

“If you think about your body as your tool of trade,” Madsen said, “it’s a bigger deal if you have a problem with your vocal cords or with your hearing.”

First of all, the tone of the article is this: Obama destroyed YOUR health care so that Hollywood hypocrite liberals could have their health care.  Average Californians’ health insurance rates will DOUBLE so that Hollywood liberals can have their Obama plans.

Average households are getting utterly screwed so that these Hollywood liberal turds can finally have what their hypocrite and union elites have hypocritically refused to give their workers while they self-righteously demonized everybody else for not being quite as evil as THEY have been.  You see that in this article: actors and musicians are among the MOST LIKELY OF ALL WORKERS NOT TO HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE.  But hey, I’m a liberal, so let’s go over and scream at Wal-Mart for being better than WE are instead.

I read through this and did not see one single criticism of ObamaCare.  Even though there are ALL KINDS of criticism about this damn law even in uberleftist California.

It is a vastly different thing to have “health insurance” and to have “health care” when your “health insurance” is in such a limited network that you can’t see a doctor and you definitely can’t see a specialist.

Just the other day in the very same paper as this “news article” appeared praising ObamaCare for saving liberal actors and musicians, I saw this one about what you “win” when you “win” your ObamaCare:

Obamacare enrollees hit snags at doctor’s offices
Many consumers faced hurdles signing up for Covered California health plans. Now they’re having trouble finding in-network doctors
February 04, 2014|By Chad Terhune

After overcoming website glitches and long waits to get Obamacare, some patients are now running into frustrating new roadblocks at the doctor’s office.

A month into the most sweeping changes to healthcare in half a century, people are having trouble finding doctors at all, getting faulty information on which ones are covered and receiving little help from insurers swamped by new business.

Experts have warned for months that the logjam was inevitable. But the extent of the problems is taking by surprise many patients — and even doctors — as frustrations mount.

Aliso Viejo resident Danielle Nelson said Anthem Blue Cross promised half a dozen times that her oncologists would be covered under her new policy. She was diagnosed last year with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and discovered a suspicious lump near her jaw in early January.

But when she went to her oncologist’s office, she promptly encountered a bright orange sign saying that Covered California plans are not accepted.

“I’m a complete fan of the Affordable Care Act, but now I can’t sleep at night,” Nelson said. “I can’t imagine this is how President Obama wanted it to happen.”

To hold down premiums under the healthcare law, major insurers have sharply cut the number of doctors and hospitals available to patients in the state’s new health insurance market.

Now those limited options are becoming clearer, and California officials say they are receiving more consumer complaints about access to medical providers. State lawmakers are also moving swiftly to ease some of the problems that have arisen.

“It’s a little early for anyone to know how widespread and deep this problem is,” said California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones. “There are a lot of economic incentives for health insurers to narrow their networks, but if they go too far, people won’t have access to care. Network adequacy will be a big issue in 2014.”

The latest travails come at a crucial time during the rollout of Obama’s signature law. Government exchanges and other supporters of the healthcare law are trying to boost enrollment, particularly among young and healthy people, ahead of a March 31 deadline.

Of course, complaints about outdated provider lists and delays in getting a doctor’s appointment were common long before the healthcare law was enacted. But some experts worry the influx of newly insured patients and the cost-cutting strategies of health plans may further strain the system.

Maria Berumen, a tax preparer in Downey, was uninsured for years because of preexisting conditions. The 53-year-old was thrilled to find coverage for herself and her husband for $148 a month after qualifying for a big government subsidy.

She jumped at the chance in early January to visit a primary-care doctor for long-running numbness in her arm and shoulder as a result of bone spurs on her spine. The doctor referred her to a specialist, and problems ensued. At least four doctors wouldn’t accept her health plan — even though the state exchange website and her insurer, Health Net Inc., list them as part of her HMO network.

“It’s a phantom network,” Berumen said.

It was no surprise to her family doctor, Ragaa Iskarous. She has run into this problem repeatedly with other patients in the last month, the doctor said. “This is really driving us crazy.”

Berumen said she was seen by a neurosurgeon Thursday — after state regulators intervened on her behalf.

Insurers say they are working hard to resolve customers’ problems as they arise, and they continue to add physicians to augment certain geographic areas and medical specialties.

“Any huge implementation like this comes with a lot of moving parts,” said Health Net spokesman Brad Kieffer. “There is a learning curve for everyone, and we expect as time goes on these issues should dissipate.”

Looking to head off potential problems, government regulators and patient advocates are pushing for tougher rules to ensure health plans provide timely access to care.

Last week, the California Assembly approved legislation enabling people who lost coverage because of the overhaul to keep seeing their doctors if they’re pregnant or undergoing treatment for cancer or other conditions.

Nelson, the cancer patient in Orange County, and her family lost their previous coverage when Aetna stopped selling individual policies in the state last year. After numerous complaints to her new insurer, Anthem, and to public officials, the company said it would cover visits to her current oncologist through March 31.

Nelson said such a temporary extension doesn’t solve the problem, and as a result, she’s rushing to check out other policies for herself before open enrollment closes in March.

A spokesman for Anthem said the company “continually works to update its provider directories to ensure accuracy” and helps customers with these issues on a case-by-case basis.

You’ve got “insurance,” thanks to Obama.

What you DON’T have and now will NEVER have is “health care.”

Because even in a state like California that liberals are praising because everything there is working “better” than most of the other states that are a complete unmitigated disaster, the system is broken and will now necessarily fall completely apart.

And because liberals got what they wanted (genuine evil, as usual), you can count on the FACT that you are going to now have to pay more and more and more to get less and less and less:

O-Care premiums to skyrocket
By Elise Viebeck – 03/19/14 06:00 AM EDT

Health industry officials say ObamaCare-related premiums will double in some parts of the country, countering claims recently made by the administration.

The expected rate hikes will be announced in the coming months amid an intense election year, when control of the Senate is up for grabs. The sticker shock would likely bolster the GOP’s prospects in November and hamper ObamaCare insurance enrollment efforts in 2015.

The industry complaints come less than a week after Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to downplay concerns about rising premiums in the healthcare sector. She told lawmakers rates would increase in 2015 but grow more slowly than in the past.

“The increases are far less significant than what they were prior to the Affordable Care Act,” the secretary said in testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee.

Her comment baffled insurance officials, who said it runs counter to the industry’s consensus about next year.

“It’s pretty shortsighted because I think everybody knows that the way the exchange has rolled out … is going to lead to higher costs,” said one senior insurance executive who requested anonymity.

The insurance official, who hails from a populous swing state, said his company expects to triple its rates next year on the ObamaCare exchange. {…}

You can find out more about the sky-high rate increases here.  I wouldn’t want to count on the Los Angeles Times.  To the extent they ever bother to actually report the truth at all, it is usually immediately swallowed up by a dozen propaganda articles that try to pump Kool Aid into your brain rather than facts.

Liberals are liars, pure and simple.  They are evil people with an evil and frankly demonic agenda.  That is what you get when you turn over “health care” to the demonic political party that has murdered more than fifty-five million innocent human beings since 1973 in their abortion mills before making the worship of homosexual sodomy mandatory.

But hey, the little people of Hollywood – you know, the tiny, little cockroaches of liberalism – have their “health insurance” now after having had it denied to them for decades by the same liberal progressive Hollywood tycoons who for years and years have arrogantly and self-righteously demonized the rest of us.  So praise false Messiah Obama for that, at least.

 

Saul Alinsky Was RIGHT In The Liberal’s Book He Dedicated To Lucifer: Christians Need To Start Living Up To The Book Of Rules

August 2, 2013

I was working out in my gym training legs.  I noted that the hack squat machine was in use, so I went over to the squat rack.  I did five good, hard sets.  During that time, the guy on the hack squat machine had done maybe ONE set because he was so occupied with his cell phone and his texting.  Right next to a sign that reads, “Cell phone use is prohibited while using equipment.”

Well, I wanted to use that hack squat machine, but the rude dude was still wasting his time on it.  So I went to the seated calf machine and did six good, hard sets of calves.

You guessed it: when I was done with that piece of equipment, the rude dude was still wasting his – and worse yet MY – time on the hack squat machine.

So I went over to the leg press machine right next to the hack squat machine.  And I was mostly done with the five sets on that before Mr. Cell Phone finally left.

Because I was right next to the hack squat machine, I was able to readily note two other facts: he didn’t re-rack his weight – in spite of the fact that he was literally “exercising” directly under a giant banner with two foot high letters that read, “Re-Rack Your Weight”; and he didn’t wipe down the machine after using it in spite of the sign right next to the banner that read, “Wipe down your equipment after use.”

Basically, there was no possible way this guy could have been more rude or more discourteous.

Well, here’s the rub: this guy, Mr. Cell Phone, is, rather amazingly, a “pastor.”  His church is virtually right next door to the gym.

I thought about confronting him for his unbelievable rudeness, but he’s a black guy.  And you know how THAT tends to go now that Obama has healed the racial divide.

The Bible tells Christians to confront brothers who are acting shamefully.  But tragically, in these slimes that are the times, it’s seriously risky to dare to treat certain people like “brothers.”  And I didn’t want to be the source of a rift – no matter how right I would have been – that very likely would have degenerated into a charge of “racism.”

All I can tell you is that man publicly shamed the name of Jesus Christ.  And it doesn’t really matter what color this “reverend’s” skin is when he acts like that man acted.  At least, not to me.

I wear a Cross or a Star of David every time I work out – and frankly virtually every time I appear in public.  There have been more than a few times that I’ve thought about saying or doing something and changed my mind because of the symbols I was wearing around my neck.

So I don’t even BRING my phone into the gym; I ALWAYS re-rack my weight every time I use a piece of equipment; and I wipe down the equipment I’m using TWICE – once before I use it (because there are a lot of rude people like Reverend Cell Phone) and once again after I’m finished.

I try to publicly live up to that cross – even though I have to confess that I’m not thinking very nice thoughts about the incredibly rude and ungracious people all around me.

When I gave my life to Jesus Christ, I very quickly quit smoking.  Why?  Because I thought of the image of myself trying to tell somebody about how Jesus Christ changed my life with a stinking cigarette hanging out of my tobacco-stained teeth, and it was enough of a visceral disconnect that I knew what I had to do.

More recently, I’ve lost over seventy pounds over the last 11 months.  And one of the driving forces to my success was the fact that I am named “Michael” and it was time to start LOOKING like the archangel I was named after.  Because in this postmodern, secular humanist culture that Hollywood liberalism has bequeathed us with, how you look very often determines more than anything else how people perceive you.  And I recognized that it was time for me in these last days before the Antichrist that it was long-past time for me to shape up in every way I could.

But all that said, it’s time for me to have my own mea culpa: I have too often resorted to name-calling in my articles and in my responses (to hateful comments).  And I was wrong to do that.

Anyone who has read much of what I’ve written has likely come upon terminology such as “turds” and “cockroaches” in my descriptions of the left.  I’ve been called much, MUCH worse myself – usually before my own use of such terms – but that doesn’t justify my behavior.

I’ve also been guilty of calling liberals “idiots” or “stupid.”  And while it is true that many liberals ARE ignorant and frankly stupid people, it is also quite true that some of the most brilliant minds routinely believe the most stupid things, such that George Orwell pointed out that “There are some ideas so absurd that only an ‘intellectual’ could believe them,” because no ordinary man was capable of being such a fool.  And thus it is not always easy to tell whether you are talking to a “stupid idiot” or a “brilliant idiot.”

I won’t call liberals “stupid” anymore because they may be very intelligent people who are merely a) evil and b) deluded.  Which is to say they might be very brilliant moral idiots – but not “stupid.”

Saul Alinsky – in his “Rules for Radicals” (which was dedicated to Satan and which Obama once taught in his days as a community organizer) has one rule in particular that liberals have loved to apply to me:

Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

I’ve had many liberals follow up on my response to hateful comments by liberals such as this one – “You are such a moron. I cannot waste anymore of my time talking to someone who is lost in an alternate universe. I only hope that you get hit by a truck or die a horrible death. You are an enemy of America scumbag. THATS A FACT” – by attacking me as a terrible Christian in my response.

I’ve noted to these liberals who follow the crash and then pile on:

It’s kind of strange.  I wrote an article never ONCE hoping anybody got hit by a truck or died a horrible death.  I never degenerated into that level of viciousness.  And nobody else did either.  Because that level of pure hate doesn’t happen UNTIL THE LIBERALS SHOW UP.

Here’s the liberal game plan for those who haven’t learned it.  Liberal A comes along and just viciously personally attacks the conservative.  Often they show up in rabid packs and just dump hate on the Republican.  And then, when the conservative responds with anger of his own, well, that’s when liberals like YOU show up.  The sanctimonious, self-righteous ones who pointedly ignore the hate that their own side just dished out and instead personally denounce the “hate” of the conservative.  That hateful, divisive conservative shouldn’t have responded angrily to all that liberal hate.  It’s wrong.  It’s evil, even.  And that sanctimonious, self-righteous liberal often proceeds to then attack the Republican’s Christianity.  Which is of course an even MORE hateful attack than the liberal haters that got the conservative to respond with anger, of course, but what does that matter?

And if you were to keep reading Saul Alinsky’s book where he gives his rule to “make opponents live up to their own book of rules”, you find that this leftist who called upon his fellow liberals to demonize others as evil really couldn’t have cared LESS about morality applied to himself or his liberal movement:

The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means. It is this species  of man who so vehemently and militantly participated in that clasically  idealistic debate at the old League of Nations on the ethical differences  between defensive and offensive weapons. Their fears of action drive them to  refuge in an ethics so divorced for the politics of life that it can apply only  to angels, not men. — P.26

One’s concern with the ethics of means and ends varies inversely with one’s  personal interest in the issue. — P.26

The fifth rules of the ethics of means and ends is that concern with ethics  increases with the number of means available and vice versa. To the man of  action the first criterion in determining which means to employ is to assess  what means are available. Reviewing and selecting available means is done on a  straight utilitarian basis — will it work? Moral questions may enter when one  chooses among equally effective alternate means. — P.32

The seventh rule of ethics and means and ends is that generally success or  failure is a mighty determinant of ethics. The judgment of history leans heavily  on the outcome of success and failure; it spells the difference between the  traitor and the patriotic hero. There can be no such thing as a successful  traitor, for if one succeeds he becomes a founding father. P.34

The ninth rule of the ethics of means and ends is that any effective means is  automatically judged by the opposition as being unethical. — P.35

The tenth rule of the ethics of rules and means is that you do what you can with  what you have and clothe it in moral arguments. …the essence of Lenin’s speeches  during this period was “They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and  for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be  through the bullet.” And it was. — P.36-37

Eight months after securing independence (from the British), the Indian National  Congress outlawed passive resistance and made it a crime. It was one thing for  them to use the means of passive resistance against the previous Haves, but now  in power they were going to ensure that this means would not be used against  them. — P.43

All effective actions require the passport of morality. — P.44

And just to ensure that any true morality NOT be pursued by the left, Alinsky wrote:

With very rare exceptions, the right things are done for the wrong reasons. It  is futile to demand that men do the right thing for the right reason — this is a  fight with a windmill. — P.76

So, the bottom line is that liberals acknowledge that they HAVE no “book of rules,” no true morality, and that “morality” for them is “a means to an end” to be invented and reinvented as it suits them in order to attack their enemies.  “Morality” and the Word of God become nothing more than a tool for hypocrites to attack those who actually TRY to follow morality and the Word of God.

That’s just a fact.

But you know what?  It doesn’t matter.  Because, as Saul Alinsky points out, unlike liberals, unlike secular humanists, yes, unlike Democrats, we DO have a “book of rules” that should be our guide to live by.  Unlike the Lucifer-Loving Left, we actually BELIEVE in morality and strive to be moral, decent people.

As I reflected upon the absolutely despicable example of “Reverend Cell Phone,” I had to face up to my own “issues.”  And yes, I tend to get very angry with hypocrites and slanderers who constantly hurt others with vile policies that they then want to exempt themselves from.  And just as one of MANY examples are the Democrat politicians and their staffs, the labor unions, the IRS workers, who – after fighting to impose ObamaCare on everyone else – now fight even harder to exempt themselves from what they just inflicted on everybody else.  I knew that this demonic piece of horror would hurt people.  And, yes, I am beyond LIVID that the very people who imposed this demon-possessed evil on everyone else would say, “Good enough to force on thee, but not good enough for me.”

I am angry at the people who are working so hard to do so much evil, who want to bring the Antichrist and the Mark of the Beast upon the rest of us.

And in my anger, I sinned.  And I fell prey to the trap of the rules for radicals devoted to Satan.

I’m going to try from now on not to do that.  I’m going to try very hard to – unlike liberals, unlike secular humanists, unlike Democrats – to actually LIVE UP TO THE BOOK OF RULES.

The Bible says in Ephesians 4:26, “Be angry, yet do not sin.”  We’re not told NOT to be angry.  We’re told that JESUS was angry (Mark 3:5).  And anger can be positive when it is harnessed and controlled in righteousness.  Anger is a “stimulant” that can get you off your rear end DOING something rather than standing idly by gaping while terrible things are happening all around you.  But you can’t allow anger to master you even while hypocrites are actively trying to bait you into it.

I’m going to quit my name calling, even when I’m called so many names.

But I’m going to replace name-calling with HONEST and ACCURATE DESCRIPTIONS of the people who are doing so much evil in these last days before the beast comes.

To wit, I’m no longer going to label Democrats and liberals as “turds” or “cockroaches.”  Because, very technically speaking, these people are neither insects nor are they composed entirely of fecal matter.  Rather, I’m going to call them what they truly technically ARE: government worshiping baby killing marriage-and-family murdering sodomy-lovers.  Because that is simply a fact.

I’m going to stop resorting to name-calling and start using the actual TRUTH to fight for the truth.

When you call somebody a name like a “turd” or a “cockroach,” you are no longer operating on factual grounds.  A liberal can respond, “I am not a turd.  I am not a cockroach.  You’re a liar and you’re hateful.”  But when you simply call these people what they truly ARE – and that is WORSE and more shameful than ANY name you can call them – well, they can call you “hateful” all day long, but that is only because they are people who find “truth” as “hateful.”  But given the facts that they ARE for government that replaces God; that they ARE for the continued holocaust of babies that has murdered more than 55 million children so far; that they ARE for a radical redefinition of marriage and family that has progressively eroded and undermined both marriage and the family; and that they ARE for homosexual sodomy along with numerous other perversions that are specifically condemned as “ABOMINATIONS” by the Word of God that Saul Alinsky wants us to follow, well, they can hardly call me a liar.

There’s a tactical aspect to this decision as well.  I’ll get one liberal who uses all kinds of terrible names on me and just dumps hate on me – literally wishing my death.  And I respond with my own anger.  Then comes the next liberal who is just shocked and appalled that any human being on earth could be so “hateful” as a conservative – conveniently (of course hypocritically) overlooking the liberals who wrote far uglier things.  And of course, given that this second attack from the liberals doesn’t employ such labels as “turd” or “cockroach,” they assign themselves the moral high ground when they call me “hateful.”

So on the one hand I am a) going to start trying to follow what the Bible teaches on hate and anger and b) just not give liberals an easy way to attack me literally about my religion (mind you, it would be a TERRIBLE thing according to secular humanist political correctness for me to attack someone of a different religion qua religion).  It’s never wrong when they do it; it’s always wrong when I do what they do.  But that doesn’t matter, because what matters is that I WILL TRY TO LIVE UP TO MY BOOK OF RULES.  The fact that liberals don’t HAVE a “book of rules” and the fact that they are hypocrites is immaterial.

Jesus famously guaranteed to His disciples that the world would hate them because they hated Jesus first (Matthew 10:22 cf. John 15:18).  And why does the world hate Jesus so?  Because (as Del Tackett so brilliantly pointed out in the Truth Project), Jesus came to testify to the Truth.  And that everyone – and only those – who would be on the side of truth would listen to Jesus (John 18:37).  And what is the truth about these people who hate us?   Their deeds are evil (John 3:19) and the truth is not in them (1 John 2:4).

Liberals can slander me any way they want to.  I don’t follow them.  They can label me as a “hater” because I declare the truth about them and they hate the truth.  And they hate the truth because they are children of the devil and enemies of everything that is right (Acts 13:10).

I’m going to declare the truth and ONLY declare the truth, and let the truth be my defense.  Which is why in hindsight I realized I should have got in that bogus pastor’s face and pointed out how incredibly rude he’d just been and what a lousy example of a Christian – let ALONE a “pastor” – he was and called upon him to either live like a Christian or at least to stop calling himself one.

United Nation’s Global Tax, Amazing Liberal Hypocrisy And The Frightening Reality Of How Truly DANGEROUS Obama’s Policies Are To America’s Poor

October 2, 2012

Ask your liberal friends to finish this sentence: “If the rich get richer, the poor get ______.”

Betcha a dollar your liberal will reflexively say, “poorer.”

The problem is that that is simply not true.  Unless an economy is a fixed sized pie such that if you get more of the pie, I by definition get less.  And as I shall try to explain, that is NOT the way a free market economy works.

The reality that liberals are too morally stupid to understand is that if I start a business, I start making my OWN pie.  By starting a business and becoming successful, I’m not stealing from anyone and I’m not exploiting anybody; rather, in direct opposition to what Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren – the brains behind Obama’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to go along with a genuine fake American Indian (read, “fake oppressed minority = fake victim”) believe – I AM BUILDING SOMETHING if I create a business.  And no, you liberal dumbass, I am NOT stealing from somebody else; I am building something where there had been nothing before.  I am putting a positive attitude that you have never had and will never understand into action and I am starting something.

That’s right. I said the “A” word, liberals.  I said ATTITUDE:

“The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life. Attitude, to me, is more important than facts. It is more important than the past, the education, the money, than circumstances, than failure, than successes, than what other people think or say or do. It is more important than appearance, giftedness or skill. It will make or break a company… a church… a home. The remarkable thing is we have a choice everyday regarding the attitude we will embrace for that day. We cannot change our past… we cannot change the fact that people will act in a certain way. We cannot change the inevitable. The only thing we can do is play on the one string we have, and that is our attitude. I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% of how I react to it. And so it is with you… we are in charge of our Attitudes.”  — Charles R. Swindoll

That 10% versus 90% is particularly relevant with Obama, who has the tiny little insect testicles to say he’s ninety damn percent not to blame for his insane and frankly demonic government spending.  When like everything else the man thinks he’s completely back assward.

That’s right, liberal.  Nobody’s taken anything from you; nobody’s oppressed you; and the only reason that you’re a victim is because you have spent your life victimizing YOURSELF and allowing your messiah Obama and liberals like him to talk you into being a weak, useless human being.  If you have the kind of positive attitude that Swindoll is describing, nothing is going to hold you down or hold you back – and the LAST thing you’re ever going to do is start whining like a liberal victim who is pathetic and cannot do anything unless government does it for you.

Here’s the thing: I’d love it if somebody asked Obama to complete that sentence I began with: If the become richer, the poor become ______.  And after the Marxist said “poorer,” I’d ask him what he thinks Americans should do given the fact THAT AMERICANS HAVE ABOUT THE WEALTHIEST DAMN LIFESTYLE ON THE PLANET.  I would demand that Obama explain on his view why Americans should redistribute trillions of dollars of American gross domestic product so that the desperately poor people in Africa and China and India and the Middle East and pretty much all over the damn planet could have more.

Here’s the thing. “If the rich get richer, the poor get poorer” the way liberals will invariably say, then what about the question, “If America gets richer, the rest of the world gets ______”???  How would the answer not be the same???  If America gets richer, then by liberal doctrine the rest of the world – particularly the poorest regions of the world – must necessarily get poorer.

Go to the Congo, where the GDP per capital is just $348.  That means the average person is forced to live (“subsist” is probably more fitting) on the currency equivalent of just 348 dollars per year.  That’s 29 bucks a month total.  That’s living the good life on 95 cents a day.  These people have NOTHING.  They don’t have houses; they have tiny little shacks that they build from whatever they can find; they don’t have air conditioning or refrigerators or laundry machines or for that matter electricity or plumbing.  Their kids don’t have disposable diapers.  Because they’ve never tried the free market economics or limited government you liberals despise, they’ve got squat diddly butkus and they’ll never have anything BUT squat diddly butkus.  And so hey, liberal poor person, unless you’ve never had more than $348 of welfare benefits or permanent unemployment benefits or allowance from daddy or however the hell you get your money and benefits in the course of a year, YOU DAMN WELL OWE THAT TRULY POOR SONOFABITCH IN THE CONGO.   And by your own rhetoric if you don’t send pretty much everything you get to the Congo, to Liberia, etc. etc. etc., then you are a greedy one percenter and shame on you.  You owe those poor people every single SCINTILLA as much as the rich guy in America owes YOU.  And what you know if you’ve ever had an honest moment in your entire life is that you keep demanding somebody ELSE give to YOU but YOU’VE never given people who’d rejoice on a tiny fraction of what you’ve got SQUAT.

I’m talking to you, resident of Detroit’s poorest neighborhood.  Because if you aint nearly starved to death you’ve got it FAR better than most of the population of the planet have it.  And it’s damn time you quit reaching your hand out and being a liberal TAKER and instead putting it in your wallet and becoming a liberal GIVER.

I’m talking to you, you damn liberal socialist hypocrites.  All you know how to do is justify redistribution when it applies to YOU or, in the case of liberal politicians, when it applies to your constituency as you pimp somebody else’s money in exchange for your damn votes so you can live like a fat cat like Charlie Rangel.

So a truly consistent liberal must therefore need to require America to lose wealth so the rest of the world can get richer instead.

So what’s Obama’s answer to the United Nations imposing a global tax?  Is Obama going to say he’s against the people of the Congo getting richer?  Then how DARE he allow America to produce more wealth?!?!?  What’s YOUR answer for why YOU shouldn’t have to pay right out of your ass because if you live in America, then compared to the majority of people on earth, you are a greedy one percenter compared to them???

The UN says America should pay a tax:

Global Taxes Are Back, Watch Your Wallet

Like a bad sequel to a rotten horror movie, the debate over global taxation once again is rearing its ugly head — courtesy of the United Nations. And, despite lacking the requisite hockey mask and chain saw, the seemingly countless proposals for the imposition of global taxes are truly terrifying.

In July, Inter Presse news service reported that a top U.N. official was preparing a new study that will outline numerous global tax proposals to be considered by the General Assembly at its September meeting. The proposals will likely include everything from global taxes on e-mails and Internet use to a global gas tax and levies on airline travel. If adopted, American taxpayers could wind up paying hundreds of billions of dollars each year to the United Nations.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is among those leading the charge, having stated that he “strongly supports finding new sources of funding” for the U.N. through global taxes, according to Inter Presse. In fact, Annan made very clear his support for the imposition of global taxes in a 2001 Technical Note that he authored for a U.N. conference. “The need to finance the provision of global public goods in an increasingly globalized world also adds new urgency to the need for innovative new sources of financing,” Annan wrote. The Note goes on to describe and evaluate the merits of several global tax proposals.

Global tax proposals are not new. Various plans have been flitting around in academic circles and liberal and socialist think-tanks for decades. And while the United States and other developed nations have staved off such proposals in the past, third world nations have increasingly dominated the U.N. General Assembly by sheer numbers since 1970. As a result, they have begun to see promise in their quest to take and keep for themselves the wealth of citizens from nations like the United States — specifically using the term “redistribution.” Recent U.N. actions have also provided a new excuse and set the stage for the third world to not only renew its pursuit of global taxes but also hold out hope for eventual success.

What do the poor liberal whiners in America have?  They not only have television sets (plural); they have CABLE television.  They’ve got refrigerators.  They’ve got air conditioning.  They’ve got cell phones.  They’ve got computers and video games.  They have got stuff coming out of their EARS compared to the poor in most of the rest of the world.

A lot of conservatives hate using the good word “liberalism” to describe liberals.  That’s because classical liberalism is actually a refutation of everything your progressive “liberal” Democrat stands for:

Classical liberalism is a political ideology, a branch of liberalism which advocates individual liberties and limited government under the rule of law and emphasizes economic freedom.

That aint modern liberalism, boys and girls; that’s MODERN CONSERVATIVISM.  And the more you explain what classical liberalism is, the more modern liberal progressives are disqualified from it.

So if modern liberals aren’t really “liberals” at all, then what are they?  They are a bunch of self-centered, greedy, narcissistic little whiners who harbor the basic worldview, “Everybody owes me something and forced redistribution is wonderful as long as its somebody else’s money that’s getting redistributed.”  That’s what they are.  They are people who have perverted the teachings of Christ and warped American history and the Constitution and system of government our founding fathers gave us to mandate socialism.  Unless you can find where Jesus taught, “Rendering to Caesar IS rendering unto God.”  Unless you can find where Jesus taught that a giant socialist government (or ANY kind of government for that matter) should forcibly seize and redistribute people’s property based on naked demagoguery and cynical political partisanship.

Hey, tell you what: just show me where Jesus taught, “If you earn less than $200,000 a year, you don’t have to give ANYTHING to the less fortunate; you get to use the raw power of government to take stuff from others so you can vote to redistribute it to yourselves.”

No, that’s not in the teachings of Jesus and it’s not in the writings of the founding fathers who forged a republic for Americans based on the principles of liberty and freedom.

Instead you pervert the wisdom of Jesus and of the American founding fathers and distort them to falsely claim that they taught the doctrine of your REAL ideological master:

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” – Karl Marx

If you want to know where modern liberalism comes from, THAT’S WHERE IT COMES FROM.

Jesus never absolves the poor from giving; to the contrary, HE calls for the poor to give:

Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.  Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others.  They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.” — Mark 12:41-44

So you aren’t off the hook any more than that rich guy you feel so self-righteous to hate and demonize and demagogue, poor liberal.

You, who judge and condemn the rich and demand the state confiscate more and ever more of what they work to earn, another teaching of Jesus applies to YOU:

“For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” — Matthew 7:2

It’s time you lived up to your own damn hypocritical rhetoric and slogans, you liberals (and especially you POOR liberals).

But don’t you worry, you pathological hypocrites who would never DREAM of paying taxes yourselves that you want everybody else to pay for YOU, if Obama gets reelected, HE’LL FORCE YOU TO REDISTRIBUTE YOUR WEALTH THE SAME WAY YOU WANTED HIM TO FORCE RICH PEOPLE TO REDISTRIBUTE THEIRS.

If the so-called “rich” don’t deserve their money because they’ve got more than you do, poor, stupid liberal; what the hell makes you think that YOU deserve YOUR money given that you’ve got a damn sight more than most of the world’s poor?

Somebody ought to take all your stuff away that the poor people in the Congo don’t have, have never had, and probably never WILL have (because the poorest countries are usually also the most socialistic countries and their failed economic system guarantees the constant destruction of wealth as corrupt government officials keep “redistributing” a shrinking economy into their own pockets).  Because that’s “economic justice” by your own rhetoric.

And Obama’s just the man to do it.  Because that’s the way he thinks; it’s the “Dream From His Father.”  And Obama literally “became” an American in order to chop America down to the size he believed as a “citizen of the world” that it ought to be.

And Obama has done an incredible job advancing that vision of America.

He’s the man whose entire history is that of anti-colonialism and hating the West for its prosperity when the have-nots of the planet have naught.

If we taxed the wealth of those who earned more than $250,000 a year at 100% – literally confiscated their wealth and left them with nothing – we would ruin those people and still only get 38% of what we needed to close Obama’s massive budget deficitWe’d have to tax them at the logically impossible rate of 134%, which means we would seize everything they owned and them demand that they pay MORE than everything they owned.  And with the rich people ruined, where would Obama go to collect the other 62%?  We’d have to then have ANOTHER group of people to demonize and confiscate from, wouldn’t we???

You can’t win with what the left is saying.  What they claim is guaranteed destruction and it is only bought by bad people who are selfish and greedy hypocrites who demand that somebody else should be forced to take responsibility for their failed lives.

As I pointed out earlier, liberals often use an incredibly flawed perversion of the Bible to try to justify their flawed Marxist economic system.  But when you understand what the Bible has to say about taxation, you realize that the left pretty much takes everything the Bible actually says and turns it completely upside down.

The truth is this: Wealth is not a fixed-sized pie.  The left is wrong; human creativity and ingenuity is such that people can always come along with new ideas that make them rich and create jobs for other people and improve the lives of other people who use their product or service.  They won’t be getting rich at somebody else’s expense; they’ll be building a pie where no pie existed before and that pie will make the overall pie of an economy larger.  If the rich get richer, other people can learn from that rich person’s example and be encouraged by it and also get richer.  The left is simply flat-out wrong.

So Much For ‘Moderation’: The Radical Leftist Obama Democrat Party Lied To And Then Betrayed Moderate Senator Arlen Specter

March 13, 2012

The way the mainstream media propaganda constantly frames it, the only “good” Republicans are the moderates like Arlen Specter – who proved his “moderateness” by actually becoming a Democrat.

Sadly for Arlen Specter, he discovered that Democrats are lying backstabbing little weasels who aren’t “moderate” in any way, shape or form:

Specter Feels Betrayed After Betrayal
By W. James Antle, III on 3.12.12 @ 4:26PM

The Hill is reporting on some tibdits from Arlen Specter’s forthcoming new memoir, Life Among the Cannibals. Specter feels that Democrats used him to pass health care reform and then didn’t follow through on their promises to help him win his primary.

“I realized that the president and his advisers were gun-shy about supporting my candidacy after being stung by Obama’s failed rescue attempts for New Jersey governor Jon Corzine and Massachusetts attorney general Martha Coakley. They were reluctant to become victims of a trifecta,” he writes.

The snub was made all the more painful by Obama flying over Philadelphia en route to New York City a few days before the election and then on primary day jetting over Pittsburgh to visit a factory in Youngstown, Ohio, 22 miles from the Pennsylvania border, to promote the 2009 economic stimulus law. The painful irony for Specter is that his vote for the stimulus legislation, which was instrumental to its passage, hastened his departure from the Republican Party.

Specter was also abandoned by Harry Reid, who had promised to protect the party-switcher’s seniority.

Instead, Reid stripped Specter of all his seniority by passing a short resolution by unanimous consent in a nearly-empty chamber, burying him at the bottom of the Democrats’ seniority list.

Specter found out about it after his press secretary emailed him a press account of the switch. Specter was floored that Reid had “violated a fundamental Senate practice to give personal notice to a senator directly affected by the substance of a unanimous consent agreement.”

Specter was left simmering after Reid’s spokesman at the time told the AP that Specter had known about the resolution and even joined in a deal to draft it, which Specter characterizes as a “falsification.”

If Reid had kept his word, Specter would have run for reelection as chairman of the Senate Labor, Health, and Human Services Committee and would have been next in line to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee (where he presumably would have promised to support all of Obama’s nominees, the pledge he made with regard to Bush in order to keep the gavel as a Republican).

I review Life Among the Cannibals in the March issue of The American Spectator.

Now, a conservative such as myself can easily point out that Arlen Specter got exactly what he deserved. But for those pathetic little weasels who praise “moderate” politicians or who uphold Democrats as being capable of even a scintilla of honor or trustworthiness, this story proves how pathetically wrong you people are.

If The Occupy Wall Street Crowd Had Any Integrity, They’d Be Attacking Obama (Who Has Raked In More Wall Street $ Than ANYONE)

October 11, 2011

I don’t want anyone to get hurt, so please make sure your seated before you read the next line.

The Occupy Wall Street mob, you know, the (what was that word Nancy Pelosi used to denounce the Tea Party movement?) Astroturfers manufactured by George Soros and Big Labor, are a giant gathering of hypocrites.

I know.  It’s just amazing, isn’t it?

But with all the outrage being directed at “Wall Street fat cats,” here is the actual truth:

Guess which President has raked in the most Wall Street bucks in a generation?
posted at 11:25 am on October 10, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

While the professional Left trashes Wall Street, they might want to consider how their current President got elected. The Sunlight Foundation reports that Barack Obama didn’t just win the Wall Street sweepstakes in 2008 over John McCain — he’s done better at getting Wall Street cash than any other President in the last 20 years:

Despite his rhetorical attacks on Wall Street, a study by the Sunlight Foundation’s Influence Project shows that President Barack Obama has received more money from Wall Street than any other politician over the past 20 years, including former President George W. Bush.

In 2008, Wall Street’s largesse accounted for 20 percent of Obama’s total take, according to Reuters. …

By the end of Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign, executives and others connected with Wall Street firms, such as Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup, UBS AG, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley, poured nearly $15.8 million into his coffers.

Goldman Sachs contributed slightly over $1 million to Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign, compared with a little over $394,600 to the 2004 Bush campaign. Citigroup gave $736,771 to Obama in 2008, compared with $320,820 to Bush in 2004. Executives and others connected with the Swiss bank UBS AG donated $539,424 to Obama’s 2008 campaign, compared with $416,950 to Bush in 2004. And JP Morgan Chase gave Obama’s campaign $808,799 in 2008, but did not show up among Bush’s top donors in 2004, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

That’s not limited to the 2008 cycle, either. The same people under attack from Obama’s political allies are still lining up to dump cash on the incumbent — or at least were:

So far Wall Street has raised $7.2 million in the current electoral cycle for President Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Obama’s 2012 Wall Street bundlers include people like Jon Corzine, former Goldman Sachs CEO and former New Jersey governor; Azita Raji, a former investment banker for JP Morgan; and Charles Myers, an executive with the investment bank Evercore Partners.

Those figures predate Obama’s sudden class-warrior pose of the last four weeks, though. After watching Obama incite these demonstrations aimed at intimidating investors and financiers, I wonder just how anxious they will be to continue funding Obama’s campaign. That impact won’t be clear until the 4th quarter numbers are released in January, but don’t be surprised if all of these “Occupy” protests don’t push those contributors towards an eventual Republican nominee — or maybe even a particular contender, perhaps one that comes from their world. Hmmmm.

In my maiden column for The Fiscal Times, I look at the eruption of class warfare in American politics and the irony of a generation shaped by Steve Jobs attacking the very investor market and private-property rights that made Jobs’ success possible:

As we honor Jobs, there is no small irony in the fact that Wall Street protests are coinciding with his death. Jobs was hardly a financial wallflower: Besides his extensive holdings in and control of Apple (part of a fortune estimated at more than $6.5 billion to $7 billion by Forbes), he was the largest individual shareholder in Disney, thanks to the sale of Pixar a few years ago, and a member of its board as well. It’s likely that a large number of the youthful protesters in the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations rely on products Jobs either invented or improved; many might even be using iPhones and iPads to help coordinate their efforts. None of that would have been possible without capital risk-taking and Wall Street investment in Apple, among other companies.

Think of the world before Jobs, before a handful of bright young minds began exploring the potential of small, relatively inexpensive computing. Communication meant either writing letters or picking up a phone – with service largely provided by a national monopoly. Having access to research materials meant buying an encyclopedia and subscribing to yearbooks for updates to already obsolete data, or spending plenty of time at the local library. News from around the world came to most people either from the only major newspaper in town or one of three national broadcast networks. Social networking meant going to cocktail parties and company events.

Compared with today, that sounds positively medieval, doesn’t it? …

Contrast the explosive success of personal computing, which lacked heavy government direction, to that of solar and wind power. Federal and state governments have subsidized and regulated these industries for decades, and they have deliberately handicapped other traditional energy-production technologies to make the renewables more competitive. According to Reason Magazine, each megawatt-hour of energy produced by wind and solar power in 2007 was delivered via more than $20 ofgovernment subsidies, as opposed to $2 for nuclear power and a dollar or less for coal and oil – most of those in the form of tax incentives rather than direct subsidies.

With all of that effort over several decades, are we closer to mass-produced solar and wind power? Have these industries even matured to the point of producing jobs? The industries that Jobs, Gates, and their colleagues created through private-sector innovation based on technological success employ millions of people around the world. In 2009, President Obama got $38.6 billion in job-stimulus funding to create a “green jobs” explosion that would also employ millions. Thirty months later, we have spent $17.2 billion of those funds, and created less than 3,600 jobs, roughly at a cost of $4.85 million per position.

Capital markets drive innovation, create and expand industries, and can rapidly improve our lives — if we keep government out of the way, and certainly out of the position of distorting markets to favor losers over productive use of capital and especially redistributive policies. As Wall Street has learned, three years of accelerated redistribution didn’t satisfy the Left — it only drove them to demand more of it. Time to end the war on capital by defunding the anti-capitalists.

And:

Cream of the Crop Gone Sour: America’s Troubled CEOs

The executives who ran the nation’s biggest banks and corporations were trained at some of the country’s top universities

The final tab: :

Harvard: 11
Columbia: 6
Chicago: 4
Duke: 4
Stanford: 4
American University: 2
MIT: 2
NYU: 2
Tufts: 2
University of Iowa: 2

Open Secrets Obama Top 20 Contributors in 2008:

University of California $1,648,685
Goldman Sachs $1,013,091
Harvard University $864,654
Microsoft Corp $852,167
Google Inc $814,540
JPMorgan Chase & Co $808,799
Citigroup Inc $736,771
Time Warner $624,618
Sidley Austin LLP $600,298
Stanford University $595,716
National Amusements Inc $563,798
Wilmerhale Llp $550,168
Skadden, Arps et al $543,539
Columbia University $541,002
UBS AG $532,674
IBM Corp $532,372
General Electric $529,855
US Government $517,908
Morgan Stanley $512,232
Latham & Watkins $503,295

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com

Barack Obama is owned lock, stock and barell by the very people whom the Occupy Wall Street fascists say are most responsible.  And the funniest thing of all is they’re going to go vote in 2012 for the very same corrupt bastards who brought America down and who paid Obama to KEEP bringing America down.

It would be funny if it wasn’t causing so much destruction to the formerly greatest nation in the history of the world.

Here’s a nice counter-protest sign for these hypocrites:

.

Obama Jackbooted Blackshirt Fascist Thugs Alert

June 21, 2011

I’ve explained why I call Obama a fascist at great length.  And of course that article could actually have been a whole lot longer than it was (here’s a VERY recent addition, for instance).

Take this, for example:

June 20, 2011
TSA Now Storming Public Places 8,000 Times a Year
By Tara Servatius

Americans must decide if, in the name of homeland security, they are willing to allow TSA operatives to storm public places in their communities with no warning, pat them down, and search their bags.  And they better decide quickly.

Bus travelers were shocked when jackbooted TSA officers in black SWAT-style uniforms descended unannounced upon the Tampa Greyhound bus station in April with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies and federal bureaucrats in tow.

A news report by ABC Action News in Tampa showed passengers being given the signature pat downs Americans are used to watching the Transportation Security Administration screeners perform at our airports. Canine teams sniffed their bags and the buses they rode. Immigration officials hunted for large sums of cash as part of an anti-smuggling initiative.

The TSA clearly intends for these out-of-nowhere swarms by its officers at community transit centers, bus stops and public events to become a routine and accepted part of American life.

The TSA has conducted 8,000 of these security sweeps across the country in the past year alone, TSA chief John Pistole told a Senate committee June 14.  They are part of its VIPR (Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response) program, which targets public transit related places.

All of which is enough to make you wonder if we are watching the formation of the “civilian national security force” President Obama called for on the campaign trail “that is just as powerful, just as strong and just as well funded” as the military.

The VIPR swarm on Wednesday, the TSA’s largest so far, was such a shocking display of the agency’s power that it set the blogosphere abuzz.

In a massive flex of muscle most people didn’t know the TSA had, the agency led dozens of federal and state law enforcement agencies in a VIPR exercise that covered three states and 5,000 square miles. According to the Marietta Times, the sweep used reconnaissance aircraft and “multiple airborne assets, including Blackhawk helicopters and fixed wing aircraft as well as waterborne and surface teams.”

When did the TSA get this powerful? Last year, Pistole told USA Today he wanted to “take the TSA to the next level,” building it into a “national-security, counterterrorism organization, fully integrated into U.S. government efforts.”

What few people realize is how far Pistole has already come in his quest. This is apparently what that next level looks like. More than 300 law enforcement and military personnel swept through a 100-mile stretch of the Ohio Valley alone, examining the area’s industrial infrastructure, the Charleston Gazette reported.

Federal air marshals, the Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Coast Guard, the FBI, the Office of Homeland Security and two dozen other federal, state and local agencies teamed up to scour the state’s roads, bridges, water supply and transit centers under the TSA’s leadership.

What is remarkable about these security swarms is that they don’t just involve federal, state and local law enforcement officials. The TSA brings in squads of bureaucrats from state and federal agencies as well, everything from transportation departments to departments of natural resources.

The TSA had received no specific threats about the Tampa bus station before the April sweep, reporters were told.

They were there “to sort of invent the wheel in advance in case we have to if there ever is specific intelligence requiring us to be here,” said Gary Milano with the Department of Homeland Security in an ABC News Action television report. “This way us and our partners are ready to move in at a moment’s notice.”

Federal immigration officials from Customs and Border Patrol swept the station with the TSA, looking for “immigration violations, threats to national security” and “bulk cash smuggling.” (How the bulk cash smuggling investigation related to national security was never explained.)

“We’ll be back,” Milano told reporters. “We won’t say when we’ll be back. This way the bad guys are on notice we’ll be back.”

The TSA gave the same vague answers when asked about the three-state sweep this week. That sweep wasn’t in response to any specific security threat, either.

The purpose was to “have a visible presence and let people know we’re out here,” Michael Cleveland, federal security director for TSA operations in West Virginia told the Gazette. “It can be a deterrent.”

It might be — if Americans are willing to live this way.

Tara Servatius is a radio talk show host. Follow her @TaraServatius and on Facebook.

It has ALWAYS been under liberals and progressives that America has degenerated into the depths of a police state.  Go back and see all the fascist garbage that Woodrow Wilson beqeathed us with, for example.  Consider FDR putting the Japanese into camps and even LYING to the Supreme Court to justify doing so.

Or perhaps you prefer to stay modern: consider Barack Obama’s confiscating General Motors from the legitimate bondholders so he could hand it over to his union cronies.  Or consider Obama denouncing George Bush as violating the Constitution in an Iran War he never even got in –

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” Obama responded [on December 20, 2007].

– prior to ripping up the Constitution and then urinating on it to get America into Libya and Yemen.

Liberals are hypocrites.  Hypocrisy is the liberals’ quintessential essence.  If you took the hypocrisy out of the liberal, you could not have liberalism.  You certainly couldn’t have Nancy Pelosi.  Oh, or John Kerry.  Or Charlie Rangel.  Or Al Gore.  Or Barack Obama.  Or Joe Biden.  Or Bill and Hillary Clinton.  Notice how these are pretty much all their top-level people; the rank-and-file march in goose-step behind them.  Democrats are the kind of people who demonize Republicans left and right for taking actions that are necessary in the face of direct threats.  And then they do far worse than the Republicans EVER did, and “It’s not fascism when WE do it.”

Barack Obama is of course the poster boy for the biggest hypocrite who ever lived.  Think of him demonizing Bush for Iraq and Afghanistan before keeping us in Iraq and Afghanistan and getting us in THREE MORE SHOOTING WARS to boot (Pakistan, Libya and Yemen).  Think of Obama on the Patriot Act.  Think of Obama on rendition.  Think of Obama on Gitmo.  Think of Obama on domestic eavesdropping.  Think of Obama on the surge strategy.  Think of Obama on the debt ceiling.  Think of Obama on transparency.  Think of Obama constantly assuring us of all the shovel-ready jobs to sell his massive stimulus boondoggle and then joking that “Shovel-ready was not as … uh .. shovel-ready as we expected” when the evidence that he’d lied was beyond overwhelming.  Think of Obama assuring the American people that if you like your health care plan you can keep it in the face of the new Price Waterhouse study that shows HALF of all employers will dump their employees into ObamaCare.  Think of Obama on damn near EVERYTHING.

Liberals are people who say one thing and do another.   They are people who are capable of endless self-righteous selective outrage that dries up when THEY’RE running things.

This is the same reason why the world’s worst human rights abusers routinely get to sit on the human rights council at the überleft United Nations and then lecture the rest of us on “human rights.”

Where are all the liberals demanding Obama be impeached for all his wars?  Where are all the liberals demanding Obama be impeached for all of his secrecy and his lies?  It was all over the place (and all over the front pages of the mainstream media) throughout the years of Bush derangement syndrome.  Remember how they were out in force every single day in front of the televesion cameras?  Where are all the Cindy Sheehands and the Code Pinks and the coverage of them NOW???

Where is all the outrage over our civil liberties as Obama’s thugs and goons fondle our junk???

Try to sort through the Democrats’ basic premise: the party that is trying to grow the size of goverment more and more and put government in charge of more and more of our lives ISN’T fascist; while the party that is trying to reduce the size and scope and power of government ARE the fascists.

Democrats are FINE with fascists and fascism, as long as the fascists are UNION fascists.