Posts Tagged ‘terrorists’

Call The Occupy Protest Movement And The Left That It Comes From What It Truly Is: Fascist

January 14, 2012

A couple of recent stories about Occupy protestors:

Police arrest 6 at Oakland protest
5:06 PM, Jan. 8, 2012 

OAKLAND, Calif. (WTW) — Six people are facing charges after Oakland police say they broke the windows of police cars, vandalized a television news van and threw bottles at police officers.
 
Police spokeswoman Johnna Watson says the six were arrested on a variety of charges, including assaulting officers, possession of explosives and vandalism during a march and protest in downtown Oakland late Saturday.
 
Watson says officers found and an explosive device described as a quarter stick of dynamite on one of the suspects they arrested.
 
After the protest, Occupy Oakland issued a release saying the march was held as a protest against recent police actions.
 
The arrests came during a week in which protesters tried to occupy the mayor’s office, and police cleared demonstrators from the plaza in front of City Hall, arresting 12 people.

For the record, political “protestors” who possess these kind of explosives are rightly labelled “terrorists” in every single other context.  And this isn’t the first time that the label “terrorist” correctly applied to the Occupy movement due to their being caught in possession of violent explosive devices.

Then theres this:

Report: Obama admin sends Coast Guard to protect ships from violent union members, occupiers
By Matthew Boyle – The Daily Caller Published: 1:39 PM 01/12/2012 | Updated: 12:23 AM 01/13/2012

President Barack Obama’s administration has ordered the United States Coast Guard to protect grain ships at the Port of Longview from violent “Occupy” protesters and dockworker union members, according to a local news report.

The Daily News in Longview, Wash., reported that the Coast Guard will protect a grain shipment from an onslaught of “Occupy” protesters and members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU). The ship will be transporting grain to Asia. A date for the shipment has not yet been set.

The group of leftwing activists had shut down ports all along the West Coast on Dec. 8, including the Port of Longview. The Coast Guard will apparently be helping the ship load its grain at the port, and then depart for Asia, safely.

The local unions and “Occupy” groups are planning to band together to protest the Coast Guard protections of the grain shipment when it happens.

The Coast Guard is a part of the United States Armed Forces and ordinarily falls under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security. The president can, however, at any time, move the Coast Guard to operate under the U.S. Department of Navy, and Congress can do the same during times of war. As the nation’s commander-in-chief, President Obama has the ability to control what actions the Coast Guard takes.

The Daily News reported that the ILWU said it has no plans to stop the grain ship.

Dockworker union members have protested the port since last January, according to a report on the World Socialist Web Site (WSWS).

Let’s pretend that the Tea Party had done stuff like that.  I would say I can’t imagine how unglued the mainstream media would have become, but that really isn’t true – because they came maximally unglued over the Tea Party even though the Tea Party hadn’t done ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE to that fascist crap.

It wasn’t very long ago that I wrote about the Occupy movement – the same Occupy movement which held a seminar in COMMUNISMshutting down the capitalist system using whatever means were necessary.

I keep documenting it.  And yet the same mainstream media that demonized the PEACEFUL AND CLEAN Tea Party continues to falsely depict the Occupy movement as a “positive” political force for good.

Advertisements

Hardcore Leftwing Media Bias As The New ‘Objective’ – And You KNOW They’re Scared Witless Of Rick Perry

August 26, 2011

I once heard a liberal TV talking head say something that still horrifies me to this day.  Rather than deny media bias, he essentially called leftwing bias objective, comparing entertaining conservative ideas with giving legitimacy to flat earth talk.  With such a mindset, allowing conservatives to have any voice at all alongside liberalism isn’t “objective,” but ridiculous.  And why be ridiculous and allow conservatives to have any voice whatsoever?

That’s what liberal “tolerance” and “objectivity” gets you: rabid censorship.  Consider what almost-president John Kerry recently said:

The media has got to begin to not give equal time or equal balance to an absolutely absurd notion just because somebody asserts it or simply because somebody says something which everybody knows is not factual.

It doesn’t deserve the same credit as a legitimate idea about what you do. And the problem is everything is put into this tit-for-tat equal battle and America is losing any sense of what’s real, of who’s accountable, of who is not accountable, of who’s real, who isn’t, who’s serious, who isn’t?

Such talk ought to be terrifying to liberals, who congratulate themselves on their open-mindedness.  But the quintessential ingredient to liberals is abject hypocrisy, such that they can shut down any competing voice to their own at the same time they pat themselves on the back for their committment to free speech, etc. etc.

CNN loves to present themselves as the REAL news (even though nobody watches them) because unlike Fox News they’re “objective.”

What does “objectivity” look like to a liberal?

It looks just like CNN‘s Jack Cafferty:

“In an election where the Republican candidate actually stands a chance against a weakened incumbent president, so far it is a couple of intellectual lightweights who are stealing the show.

Since Michele Bachmann won the Iowa straw poll and Rick Perry entered the race, these two have been sucking up most of the media’s attention, mostly for saying stupid stuff. Like Bachmann‘s claim that as president she’ll bring gasoline down to $2 a gallon. Or Perry’s highly inappropriate shot at Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke saying that his actions could be “treasonous.”

Meanwhile, some Republicans, including Karl Rove, are suggesting that the former half-term dropout governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, is going to join the race as well. Swell. Palin’s people are pushing back against the speculation, saying that anyone who claims to know about her plans is misleading the American people. But Palin has certainly been acting like a candidate, now hasn’t she? Showing up in Iowa during the straw poll voting, and…Iowa-themed political video released ahead of her Labor Day speech which is also scheduled to take place in Iowa. If Palin runs, we’ll have yet another MENSA candidate to join Bachmann and Perry. There is no doubt this three-some would consume the lion’s share of the media coverage.”

At the other end of the intellectual spectrum, there’s Ron Paul, who placed a very close second in the Iowa straw poll. He continues to talk sense – whether or not enough people are listening. There’s Newt Gingrich – love him or hate him, he’s a very bright man. There’s also Jon Huntsman, who says candidates like Bachmann and Perry are too far to the right and have “zero substance.” Testimony to his intellect right there.

He may be right, but I venture to say none of the three has a prayer against Curly, Moe and Larry. And that’s a sad commentary on the state of our politics, isn’t it?

Here’s the question: When it comes to presidential politics, why does America seem to be allergic to brains?

“Objectivity” looks like openly mocking every Republican who has any chance whatsoever of winning the GOP nomination.

And for what it’s worth, if Ron Paul, or Newt Gingrich, or Jon Huntsman actually pulled it out, Jack Cafferty and CNN would be attacking any of them, too.  We saw it with our own eyes when RINO “maverick” (because he constantly rubbed the Republican base raw) John McCain won the nomination.  Next thing you know they were doing this to him:

You know, versus all those “Obama as transcendent haloed messiah” figure that the mainstream media fed us over and over and over again.

The mainstream media have been feeding us this garbage – and ridiculing our candidates as stupid – since Ronald Reagan.  It’s like Lucy promising to hold the football for Charlie Brown.  “Journalists” say, “That conservative candidate can’t win; in fact NO conservative candidate can win!  Because conservatives are stupid and out of touch with the values of the American people.  It doesn’t matter if conservatives outnumber liberals by a full 2-1 margin.  Just like it didn’t matter if Barack Obama was THE most liberal Senator in the entire nation prior to his run for the presidency, just as John Kerry was before Obama.  Facts don’t matter.  Just trust us and let us pick your candidate for you.

And too often Republicans have done just that – and then watched in amazement as the media went from praising the Republican as “the moderate whom the Democrats most fear” into a rightwing fanatic boogeyman.

You want to know whom the Democrats most fear?  Just watch whom they attack the most viciously.  THAT’S the candidate they don’t want to see get the nomination.

And the candidate they most don’t want to see facing their beloved “haloed messiah” is Rick Perry.

Which is why the mainstream media propagandists have been ganging up on him with pure unadulterated lies they’ve artificially created and deceitfully slandering his record.

Remember how Obama made Chris Mathews leg tingle?  Nothing has changed:

Hypocritical Matthews Slams ‘Nasty’ Perry’s Attacks on Obama
By Scott Whitlock | August 22, 2011 | 12:22

On his syndicated program, Sunday, Chris Matthews slammed Rick Perry for being too “nasty” to Barack Obama. The liberal host also wondered if the fact that Perry is not a Mormon gives southerners a “permission slip” to like him.

Speculating on the Texas Governor’s popularity, Matthews theorized, “Do you think part of this southern appeal of this guy, who is to most of us this guy, Rick Perry, is he’s not a Mormon. He’s a Southern Baptist.”

The NBC anchor then suggested sinister motives behind his supporters: “And a lot of it is that permission slip people give themselves, ‘Oh, I’m not bigoted on race or religion, but I just like this guy.'”

On his self-titled program, Matthews said of the presidential candidate: “Some people like- apparently on the right- the fact that [Perry’s] so nasty against Obama.”

Just in the last week, Matthews has used his other program, Hardball, to compare Perry to segregationist Bull Connor.

He also suggested that the governor would have opposed integration. On Sunday, Matthews wondered if the GOP was the “nasty party.” Matthews certainly knows something about being nasty.

A transcript of the exchanges from the August 21, 2011 Chris Matthews Show can be found below:

10:10am EDT

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Do you think part of this southern appeal of this guy, who is to most of us this guy, Rick Perry, is he’s not a Mormon. He’s a Southern Baptist. And a lot of it is that permission slip people give themselves, ‘Oh, I’m not bigoted on race or religion, but I just like this guy.’

RICHARD STENGEL: Well, he checks all the boxes on the right and he doesn’t have to actually say all those conservative things all the time because people know he does that. So it’ll be fine with that. But I think it’s not so much about reaction to Mormonism, it’s a reaction to Obama. It makes the contrast with Obama seem much greater than it–than Romney does. Romney and Obama, if you blur a little bit, they can seem pretty similar.

MATTHEWS: Yeah.

STENGEL: Perry and Obama, no.

MATTHEWS: Yeah. That’s very true. Some people like–apparently on the right–the fact that he’s so nasty against Obama.

JOHN HEILEMANN: Yeah.

MATTHEWS: They like that.

HEILEMANN: The Republican Party is a very conservative party now and a lot of people in the Republican Party don’t believe that Mitt Romney is a genuine conservative. That is always going to be a huge problem for him going forward.

MATTHEWS: Is it a nasty party?

HEILEMANN: Well, there is a piece of it that obviously is very angry. And just to your point about the middle, the middle–there are a lot of different parts of the middle. There are a lot of suburban mothers who are–moms who are not going to like Rick Perry. But there’s an angry downscale part of the middle and they are mad about the economic condition of the country.

In just the past month Chris Matthews has called Republicans “muggers,” “kidnappers” and “terrorists” and slandered Rick Perry as a supporter of segregation and called Perry “Bull Conners with a smile.”

For the record, Bull Connor was so personally vile and such a racist that he was actually a DEMOCRAT.

So it’s really quite remarkable that a vile little weasel such as Chris Mathews would care that a politician not be “nasty,” given what a nasty little rodent he constantly has been toward Republicans in general and toward Rick Perry personally in particular.

It’s also amazing that this same Chris Matthews who is so upset with Republicans’ and Rick Perry’s “nasty” side didn’t mind at all when Barack Obama viciously slandered George Bush as “unpatriotic” and as a “failed leader.”  More recently, Obama tore into Republicans as people who put their party ahead of the country, and as people who “would rather see their opponents lose than America win.”

Meanwhile, Obama’s vice president Joe Biden said Republicans “acted like terrorists.”  While Democrat Representative Maxine Waters said “The Tea Party can go straight to hell.  And I intend to help them get there,” and Democrat Rep. Frederica Wilson said, “Let us all remember who the real enemy is. The real enemy is the Tea Party.”

But of course Chris Mathews is a hard-core Goebbels-style propagandist.  And being “fair” or “objective” is always a mantle such people want to claim while they attack their political enemies with every word they speak or write.

Twelve Reasons Why Barack Obama Is Nearly COMPLETELY Responsible For The Downgrade

August 16, 2011

There is plenty of blaming and finger-pointing going on right now as to just who is responsible for the downgrade.  The White House and the Democrat Party have been saying two contradictory things: 1) that the downgrade is a meaningless and baseless act of a discredited Standard & Poor’s and it’s ‘flawed math’; and that 2) that it is all the Tea Party’s fault.  I know there are liberals reading this, so I shall explain what should be obvious: why blame the Tea Party for S & P’s flawed math?  Or why blame S & P for the Tea Party’s ‘terrorism’???  What you see here is a Democrat Party and a White House who have nothing left but demonization and who are playing every card whether those cards contradict one another or not.

As an example, take Senator John Kerry (who coincidentally is one of the Democrat picks to be on the debt commission), who demonized the Republican Party and its “tea party downgrade” moments before proceeding to ” lament how Republicans insist on pointing fingers and assigning blame in this national crisis.”  You’d think his head would explode from trying to contain all the contradictions, but he’s clearly long since become immune to such a malfunction of mal-logic, illustrated by his self-righteously lecturing Republicans that the rich need to pay their “fair share” in taxes while he was trying to avoid paying his fair share on his yacht and while he and his billionaire heiress wife paid less in taxes than the average American family.

For the record, “a top Moody’s analyst reiterated that the United States is running out of time to reduce its debt burden before his company, too, would downgrade the country’s debt.”  And Moody’s is basically saying, “We still might downgrade the U.S., too.”  Which is to say that MOODY’S is just about to make a math mistake, too.

And yesterday Moody’s just officially lowered its outlook for the United States.  Which means a big “oopsie” for Democrats who demonized S & P.

This downgrade was fundamentally due to out-of-control spending:

S&P downgrades US credit rating from AAA
Posted: Aug 05, 2011 7:14 PM PDT Updated: Aug 05, 2011 9:54 PM PDT
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) – The United States has lost its sterling credit rating from Standard & Poor’s.

The credit rating agency on Friday lowered the nation’s AAA rating for the first time since granting it in 1917. The move came less than a week after a gridlocked Congress finally agreed to spending cuts that would reduce the debt by more than $2 trillion – a tumultuous process that contributed to convulsions in financial markets. The promised cuts were not enough to satisfy S&P.

The drop in the rating by one notch to AA-plus was telegraphed as a possibility back in April. The three main credit agencies, which also include Moody’s Investor Service and Fitch, had warned during the budget fight that if Congress did not cut spending far enough, the country faced a downgrade. Moody’s said it was keeping its AAA rating on the nation’s debt, but that it might still lower it.

And the Democrat Party are acting like drug addicts who are lashing out at anybody who gets between them and their next spending fix.

The Democrats are now treating Standard & Poor’s like Republicans, and of course they’ve ALREADY BEEN treating Republicans like “terrorists.”

This whole “Tea Party-terrorist” thing is beyond ridiculous.  Especially if the Democrats were to look in a mirror.  Here are twelve reasons that put the blame for this disaster precisely where the blame belongs:

1. Obama’s reckless and irresponsible spending was the primary reason for the downgradeLet me simply state as a fact that the Democrats who demonized Bush for reckless spending have been hypocrites without shame or decency in the Obama era from the very beginning.  We find that Obama’s deficit spending DWARFS Bush’s.  We find that Obama is pouring more than TWO-AND-A-HALF TIMES as much red ink on top of this country as Bush ever did.

And America has now crossed the insane threshold under Obama of having debt that actually exceeds the gross domestic product of the entire nation.

At some point any sane human being must say STOP!!!  But Obama and his Democrats simply are not sane human beings.

2.  Obama demanded the LARGEST debt ceiling increase in the history of the entire human race:

$2.4 Trillion Would Be Largest Debt-Limit Increase in U.S. History
Monday, August 01, 2011
By Terence P. Jeffrey

(CNSNews.com) – The bill to increase the federal debt limit that has been put before Congress today would increase that limit by up to $2.4 trillion, which would be the largest increase in the debt limit in U.S. history by a margin of half a trillion dollars, according to records published by the Government Accountability Office and the Congressional Research Service.
 
In fact, according to records published by the Congressional Research Service, if the current bill is passed and the debt limit is increased by $2.4 trillion, the two largest debt-limit increases in U.S. history would come in back-to-back years, both during the presidency of Barack Obama.
 
Up until now, the largest increase in the debt limit was the $1.9 trillion increase passed by Congress and signed by President Obama on Feb. 12, 2010. That law increased the debt limit from $12.394 trillion to $14.294 trillion.
 
Up until now, the second largest historical increase in the debt limit was enacted on March 27, 2003, when President George W. Bush signed a law that lifted the limit by $984 billion—from $6.400 trillion to $7.384 trillion.

I’ll wait until my third point to develop the ramifications of this.  But suffice it to say, considering that the landslide Republican takeover of the House of Representatives resulted from a fundamental GOP promise to reign in Obama’s reckless spending, raise your hand if you DON”T think Obama’s demand for back-to-back historic debt ceiling increases did NOT guarantee total war.

3.  Obama categorically stated that he would not sign ANY short term debt ceiling extension:

Sperling Says Obama Would Veto Short-Term Debt Ceiling Increase
Tuesday, July 26, 2011

July 26 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama would veto a short-term, six-month increase in the debt ceiling, the director of the White House National Economic Council said.

“The president has been pretty clear that he does not find that acceptable,” Gene Sperling said in an interview on MSNBC today. Sperling said “a faction” of House Republicans is blocking “this type of compromise, this balance that could get us there” in raising the debt ceiling and avoiding default.

It is without any question a pure demagogic talking point on the part of the left that Republicans or the Tea Party were “terrorists” who held America hostage.  BARACK OBAMA HELD AMERICA HOSTAGE.  In refusing to sign ANY short-term compromise extension, Obama said he wanted to either get it all, or send this country over a cliff to it’s fiery and bloody doom.  That’s one thing.  Furthermore, by demanding the largest debt ceiling increase in history AFTER GETTING THE PREVIOUS LARGEST DEBT CEILING INCREASE IN HISTORY, combined with this demand for no short-term extension, if you want to claim you are even a reasonably intelligent human being explain to me how Obama was NOT setting up America for an INCREDIBLY NASTY FIGHT THAT WOULD DRAG ON AND ON.

If you are arguing that this fight was somehow the Republicans’ fault or the Tea Party’s fault, you are frankly either stupid or you are insane.

4.  Obama refused to produce ANY plan of his own.  A president is supposed to lead.  And Obama not only failed to lead, he REFUSED to lead.

Republicans were BEGGING Obama to submit a plan so that the country could have some frame of reference to negotiate from:

Obama has set forth no plan to deal with anything whatsoever regarding the budget/debt ceiling crisis:

SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH): Where’s the president’s plan? When is he going to lay his cards on the table?

Senator Marco Rubio understood this when he utterly destroyed Bob Schieffer on CBS’ “Face The Nation” program after Schieffer – in his masquerade as a “neutral reporter” cited the Obama talking point as the “objective” view:

OK, so where’s the plan? Where’s the president’s plan? I’ve never seen a piece of paper with the president’s name on it that’s his plan to solve this crisis. I’ve seen press conferences. I’ve seen lectures that he’s given to the Congress. I’ve seen these press avails where the camera comes in and takes a bunch of pictures. I haven’t seen a plan. Where is the president’s plan?

And President Obama’s failure to lead is undermining negotiations. From ABC’s “This Week”:

MS. AMANPOUR: You also heard what Jack Lew said if there was part of a big deal, it would involve entitlements –

SEN. KYL: But we have no idea what he’s talking about. That’s the problem. Republicans are not willing to make a deal based upon some vague commitment that, sometime in the future, the president might be willing to look at something that he won’t identify.

By refusing to offer any kind of plan of his own, and for being like jello and taking one position one day, and a contrary position the next, Barack Obama created this crisis.  Republicans offered several plans, and they PASSED two bills that would have averted a credit downgrade.

5.  Obama REPEATEDLY fearmongered the debt negotiations and used reckless and false rhetoric such as “default.”  There is absolutely no question that Barack Obama quite literally FORCED this downgrade by using demagogic and flat-out false rhetoric.

The fact of the matter is that Obama repeatedly raised the public spectre of a “default” even as he tried to privately assure the banks that there was no way the U.S. would ever default.  What do you call that if not quintessential demagoguery???  Meanwhile, the actual facts of the matter – that the $200 billion in monthly revenue the U.S. was receiving was easily enough to pay all of America’s sovereign debt obligations with enough to pay out on Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, VA benefits and active duty military pay – proved that Barack Obama was playing an incredibly dangerous game.  Just what the hell were the ratings agencies to do about the fact that the sitting president of the United States repeatedly said that the nation might actually DEFAULT on its debt???

Obama repeatedly and in public raised the possibility that the United States might default.  And if default was ever even a possibility, our credit worthiness was in question.

Republicans tried to assure the nation, the markets and the world that the United States would NOT default.  Unfortunately, the president did everything he could to undermine that confidence.

Meanwhile, Obama was caught red-handed publicly frightening the American people with default talk while privately assuring the banks that there would be no default.

A Politico hit piece written on August 11th took a remark by an S & P official who specifically did NOT blame Republicans and then distorted it to blame Republicans:

Without specifically mentioning Republicans, S&P senior director Joydeep Mukherji said the stability and effectiveness of American political institutions were undermined by the fact that “people in the political arena were even talking about a potential default,” Mukherji said.

“That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable,” he added. “This kind of rhetoric is not common amongst AAA sovereigns.”

 Politico is trying to make it sound like it was the Republicans who hyped the fear of a default.  That is a flat-out LIE.  It was Obama and Geithner and the Democrat Party that continually raised the fear of “default,” even as Republicans continually assured the country that the U.S. could and would continue to make timely payment of principal and interest on its debt throughout any impasse.  Just as the U.S. government did the LAST time the government was shut down.

I pointed this fearmongering tactic out on July 18.  And on July 23, I pointed out that Obama’s fearmongering with the threat of “default” could very well lead to disaster.  I wrote:

This wouldn’t have been such a terrible crisis if Obama had been honest and promised that the U.S. would and could meet its obligations. Instead he used the debt ceiling deadline (said “deadline” already having been changed three previous times) to dishonestly demagogue and fearmonger the crisis ala Rahm Emanuel’s “never let a serious crisis go to waste” advice. In short, OBAMA LARGELY MANUFACTURED THIS CRISIS. Because all the rating agencies have done is take Obama’s demagogic rhetoric seriously.

So it’s just a little damn late for liberals to now try to blame Republicans for something that Obama started doing and then did often.

6.  Obama IRRESPONSIBLY did NOTHING for nearly three years while this went from a problem to a crisis to a disaster.  Why didn’t Democrats raise the debt ceiling in December after the election when Democrats still had total power over all three political branches in Washington?  Look at what Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said here:

Why Didn’t Democrats Raise The Debt Ceiling Last December?
Doug Mataconis   ·   Thursday, July 28, 2011

As we hurdle toward uncertainly, it’s worth noting, I think, that the Democrats passed on the opportunity to deal with the debt ceiling back in December 2010 when they still had control of Congress. Why, you might ask? I’ll let Harry Reid explain:

Briefing reporters yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he’s glad the debt ceiling was left out of this tax package. And he was unusually blunt about why.

“That’s something that we talked about,” Reid said. “My personal feeling is that I’m not sure — and a lot of my caucus doesn’t agree on this — but I think it may be better to do the debt ceiling, raise it next year rather than now.”

Why?

“I want the Republicans to have some buy-in on the debt,” he said. “They’re going to have a majority in the House. I think they should have some kind of a buy-in on the debt. I don’t think it should be when we have a heavily Democratic Senate, a heavily Democratic House and a Democratic president.”

Reid was responding to questions being raised as to why he wouldn’t attach the debt ceiling increase to the bill to extend the Bush Tax Cuts, a bill the GOP would be unlikely to vote against. His reason? Pure politics. Not shocking to those of us who have watched Washington for a long time, but it’s worth noting that neither side is innocent here.

Basically, Harry Reid was saying, “I want a huge fight.  I want to play a big game of chicken with America’s credit and its future.  I want a fight to the death so I can turn out my shrill rabid leftwing hate machine out.”

And the Democrats got EXACTLY what they wanted, didn’t they?

There is absolutely no question whatsoever that the Democrat Party engineered this crisis.  They should get to wear the result (the downgrade) like an albatross around their necks. 

7. Obama REFUSED to consider plans such as the House-passed Ryan Budget and the Cut, Cap and Balance bill.  Had we passed the Ryan budget that was passed by the House of Representatives, we would not have been downgraded:

Yesterday on Fox News Sunday, Paul Ryan responded to Standard & Poor’s downgrading of America’s long-term debt by explaining to host Chris Wallace that Republicans in the House “passed a budget, which according to somebody from S&P yesterday, would have prevented this downgrade from happening in the first place.”

That budget had more than $6 trillion in cuts.  But Obama would have vetoed that bill even if the Democrats in the Senate had voted for it.

Had we passed the cut, cap and balance bill that was also passed by the House of Representatives, we would not have been downgraded:

Mr. Beers of the S&P said on FNC, ”Cut, cap and balance would have averted the downgrade since it is the only serious outlook on the debt.”

Harry Reid played a procedural game to prevent that bill from even coming up for an actual vote.  And – again – Obama said he would veto it if it came to his desk.  And when Obama made that announcement, the long-term bond market just went right down the toilet.

But it is REPUBLICANS’ faults that we were downgraded? Versus Obama, who at absolutely no time offered an actual plan of his own?

Someone pointed out that blaming the Tea Party for the downgrade is rather like blaming the Betty Ford Clinic for alcoholism.

8.  Obama’s reckless Federal Reserve policies forced this downgrade.

Japan was downgraded by S & P back in January and that fact would have lit a fire under the feet of a wise American president.  But nope.

Among other factors in Japan’s credit downgrade was its policy of quantitative easing.  We’ve already done QE twice (essentially creating $1.2 trillion dollars out of thin air) and are all but promising to do it a third time. 

Quantitative easing reduces the value of the dollar (making each dollar worth less and undermining saving) and sets up obvious future inflation and even hyperinflation if the economy actually begins to revive and more dollars begin chasing the same amount of finite goods and services.

QE was one giant step toward collapsing the U.S. dollar.

Don’t think that such reckless short-sighted fiscal policies didn’t hurt us and won’t hurt us even more in the future.

9. Obama REFUSED to sign a balanced budget amendment that would have prevented a downgrade.  Democrats offer the following as a refutation of this premise, saying that a top S & P official said that a balanced budget amendment would NOT have helped.  But what S & P’s John Chambers said was that:

“In general, we think that fiscal rules like these just diminish the flexibility of the government to respond. Also, when Congress has a long track record of trying to bind itself with various rules…But when push comes to shove, they don’t bind very much. So even if you had a Balanced Budget Amendment, you’d have some questions about it’s credibility, and it would just reduce your flexibility in a crisis.”

Here are the facts, however: 1) We most certainly COULD structure a balanced budget amendment that has a “way out” in case of true emergency with some high but not outrageous vote threshold granting an exception.  2) We most certainly COULD structure a balanced budget that was otherwise binding apart from such a declared emergency/crisis.  3.  Fourteen states – Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming – have AAA bond ratings in America.  And all fourteen of those states have particularly rigorous balanced budget requirements in addition to maintaining budgets that do not rely heavily on borrowing.  And while their balanced budget requirements are not the official reason for their high bond rating, it is because of that requirement that they do not excessively borrow.

Obama openly mocked a balanced budget.

It is morally insane to continue to blame Republicans for massive spending when Republicans want a balanced budget requirement that would prevent massive spending.  But the very same Democrats who refuse to allow a balanced budget requirement that would curtail federal spending to get off the ground continue to blame the Republicans who are doing everything they possibly can to curtail spending.

10. Obama CONTINUED to demand tax increases even after the Democrat-controlled Senate abandoned tax hikes.  Frankly, Obama has been all over the board on tax hikes, which further demonstrates why John Boehner’s frustration in trying to negotiate with a man who had all the consistency of jello that had been left out of the refrigerator was correct.  He’s wanted tax hikes until he didn’t want them only to want them again.

In August 2009, Obama said, “you don’t raise taxes in a recession.”

Well, here we are with an economy that is on the verge of going into a severe double-dip recession – which economists say would be even worse than the last one that we allegedly just got out of – and Obama begins harping on tax hikes and pushing a class warfare agenda as a condition for getting a debt ceiling increase.

Until he backed Harry Reid’s kind-of sort-of plan that didn’t have any tax hikes in it.  Until he changed his mind and began to call for tax hikes only hours after backing a plan that called for no tax hikes:

In his White House speech tonight, President Obama renewed his call for a debt-ceiling impasse solution which requires “the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to give up some of their breaks in the tax code and special deductions.” In other words, he wants tax increases, even though earlier in the day, he backed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s “plan” (using the term loosely, as explained here and here) which, according to two separate reports (USAT; ABC), includes no tax increases.

In other words, the President, from all appearances, changed his mind — again. Calling the President’s performance in the debt-ceiling matter during the past several weeks “Jello-like” would appear to be an insult to the referenced food product.

What on earth is Obama’s position?  Which was different yesterday and which will very likely be different again tomorrow and then different from that the next day?

One other thing on this point: Democrats were demanding that the Republican House increase taxes when DEMOCRATS didn’t have the political will to raise taxes in late 2010 when they had control of all three political branches.  How was demanding that Republicans do the very thing they ran on not doing when even DEMOCRATS wouldn’t do that very thing just a few months earlier doing anything other than deliberately creating a crisis?

11. Obama allowed vile and poisonous rhetoric to poison the climate.  Hey, I’ll tell you what.  I’m going to be talking about yo’ mamma.  I’m going to publicly say that yo’ mamma is a whore and a slut, and that yo’ mamma has no idea who yo’ daddy is because she was doing the nasty with like 300 guys the week you were conceived.  But, you know what, after that I hope you sit down with me for a nice quiet negotiation and display a willingness to compromise.

And do you know what kind of “willingness” you’re going to show me?  How about the willingness to punch me in the face about a thousand times?

Democrats called us “terrorists” and “bomb throwers.”  They compared us to Hezbollah and Hamas and accused us of taking America hostage.  Obama’s very own vice preseident called Republicans “terrorists.”  And then they’re somehow surprised that we didn’t cheerfully show up at the negotiating table every day with an attitude of “let’s work together”???  And the same people who just rabidly demonized us were saying, “Why won’t they work with us?” 

How about because you’re about a hundred million gazillion years from evolving into slime for starters?

The Democrat Party poisoned the negotiations.  As I’ve already documented, they could have averted this entire mess to begin with by doing their jobs last year.  THEY DELIBERATELY AND INTENTIONALLY SET UP THIS FIGHTThey wanted this poison pit.  And they put their fangs on and started spitting out venom right away.

And Barack Obama sat back and let them do it.

For the record, in terms of which party was “terrorist,” consider how the Democrats voted for the bill that increased the debt ceiling and averted the shutdown.  We find that not only was the Democrat Party as a whole more “terrorist” than the Republican Party, but in fact that the Democrat Party was even more “terrorist” than THE TEA PARTY CAUCUS all by itself.  Which is to say that every single time Democrats point a finger at Republicans and label them “terrorist,” there are in fact three terrorist fingers pointing back at Democrats.

12. The Obama administration arrogantly and irresponsibly refused to deal with reality.  There’s the way you wish real hard upon a star that the world would be, and then there’s the way the world actually is.  Which world do you want the president of the United States of America to live in?

If you picked the real world, you should agree with me that it is time to get a new administration.  Because the one we’ve got lives in some combination of Never Never Land and fantasy land.

Look at what Obama’s handpicked tax cheating Treasury Secretary had to say about the possibility of a rating downgrade before he proved to be so completely wrong:

Geithner Downgrades His Own Credibility to Junk
By Jonathan Weil- Apr 20, 2011 4:00 PM PT

Fox Business reporter Peter Barnes began his televised interview with Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner two days ago with this question:“Is there a risk that the United States could lose its AAA credit rating? Yes or no?”

Geithner’s response: “No risk of that.”

“No risk?” Barnes asked.

“No risk,” Geithner said.

It’s enough to make you wonder: How could Geithner know this to be true? The short answer is he couldn’t.

And keep in mind that Weil was pointing out that Timothy Geithner had forfeited any credibility BEFORE the downgrade so disastrously proved him completely wrong.  It was an utterly inexcusable thing to do.

This is hardly the kind of leadership we need.  When our house is about to burn down, a confident assurance that there isn’t any fire is beyond stupid.

That’s twelve reasons why the American people should be blaming the man who ought to have a big “The buck stops here” plaque on his desk anyway.  And some of them are pretty damnable reasons, indeed.

If Raising Taxes Would Get America Out Of Trouble, WHY IS THE EURO ZONE IN SUCH DEEP SH!T???

August 8, 2011

A friend of mine (we’ve corresponded enough and seen the world the same way enough that I believe “friend” applies) from Sweden commented on my article, “Barack Obama, America’s First Downgraded President.”  In part of his comment, he said of his native Europe:

The leftwing liberal press in Sweden is doing everything to blame the crisis in the U.S. on the Tea Party movement and on the Conservatives’ refusal to raise taxes. As if the Europe’s high taxes are of any help in the Euro zone?

Left Liberal reforms require increased taxes, which then are followed by new leftwing liberal reforms that require even higher taxes, and so on. When the politicians begin to solve problems with tax increases, there will be no stopping as more and more people switch from financing their wellbeing by themselves, to expecting the state to offer it for free or almost free.

Obama and his supporters are leftwing liberals who want to transform the American system to a European kind of model, which means high taxes, big public sector and many more living on welfare and on the state’s expense. I say – do never go along with it, it does not solve any problems with overspending and using taxpayers money without any respect for its actual value.

In those European countries, where it is not possible to charge high taxes from the population, politicians “solve” it by taking large loans. You could say that the socialist and leftwing liberal politicians buy their positions of power with borrowed money. Now it is no longer possible. Europe is full of Obamas and Pelosis, and these have not only ruined their own countries but are about to ruin even Germany, Holland and probably also us in Sweden.

Europe taxes the bejeezus out of EVERYTHING:  “Take a look at the current European tax rates below which range from 59.6% to 83%. The European VAT tax (Government Sales Tax) ranges from 16% to 25%.”  And that’s just for starters; they also pay at least TWICE as much on gasoline and diesel because they massively tax energy, too.  And of course there are just ALL KINDS of other taxes and regulations that amount to massive hidden taxes in the Eurozone.

Democrats are out there just flat out rabidly DEMONIZING Republicans and particularly Tea Party caucus members as “terrorists” because we wouldn’t hike taxes.  In the article my friend Penumbra added his own insights to, I had said the following:

Obama and the Democrats are like addicts, blaming everybody but themselves for their failures and the chaos and disaster those failures have caused. The obvious fact of the matter is that the stock market took a huge hit for two reasons which both have “Democrat Party” written all over them: 1) the utter failure of European socialism at a time when Obama and the Democrats are still determined to follow this completely failed model here:

Markets worldwide were on edge over fiscal weakness in Italy and Spain and the eurozone’s ability to contain more crisis, as the two countries’ borrowing costs surged in recent days.”

and 2) the “let’s just create more money out of thin air” model otherwise known by the technical name of quantitative easing (i.e., QE1, QE2, and apparently soon-to-be QE3). Here’s how THAT very NON-Tea Party bankrupt and bankrupting policy will end:

We have officially crossed into the realm of abject fiscal and moral lunacy under Obama. We are now borrowing more than our entire economy is worth. Obama is borrowing 43 cents out of every dollar he is spending; he is deficit-spending $4.1 billion every single DAY; he has increased the size of government by 27% over George Bush (according to the CBO) and he is utterly determined to keep spending more and more and more.

In May of this year, Obama submitted a budget that would have added $12 trillion to our debt. It was so insane in so many ways that not even one single DEMOCRAT would vote for it in the Democrat-controlled Senate. Obama’s reckless and immoral budget failed by a vote of 97-0.

That’s not some right-wing talking point. That’s the TRUTH. Obama is an embarrassment. He is a disgrace.

Let’s take a moment to contemplate what Obama has done:

  • Trippled budget deficits since he took office
  • Gave us a failed $862 Billion stimulus package that the CBO said actually cost taxpayers $3.27 TRILLION.
  • Spent tens of billions in GM/Chrysler bailouts that were basically fascist (the corporatist state). See here and here.
  • Increased the size of government by 25%
  • Gave us chronic unemployment at Great Depression levels of 18%
  • Gave us a Debt/GDP ratio WORSE thanthe Great Depression
  • That in addition to two EXTRA wars in addition to the two he promised to get us out of and lied. The Libya war that he said would take “days, not weeks” has now dragged on for more than five months with no sign of ending
  • And now he’s given us a credit downgrade for the first time in American history

Obama will say ANYTHING. He is an abject liar and a fool who says one thing and then does another before saying something else entirely. Unfortunately, the pathologically biased mainstream media reports Obama’s constantly shifting rhetoric as if it had anything whatsoever to do with actual reality.

As an example, Obama repeatedly called for huge tax hikes in this debt ceiling deal on top of the $500 billion in tax hikes he got as part of ObamaCare. But listen to his own words in 2009: “You don’t raise taxes in a recession.”

The fact of history is crystal clear: Tax Cuts INCREASE Revenues; They Have ALWAYS Increased Revenues. Versus tax hikes, which reduce revenues and reduce GDP. As the National Bureau of Economic Research put it, “Tax changes have very large effects: an exogenous tax increase of 1 percent of GDP lowers real GDP by roughly 2 to 3 percent.”

And yet what do Obama and the Democrats keep doing? Obama is back to the same utterly failed Marxist class warfare tactics that have failed before. In the 1990s, Democrats imposed a “luxury tax” on items such as yachts, believing that the wealthy “could afford it.” Maybe they could and maybe they couldn’t, but the FACT was that the rich STOPPED buying yachts. As in stopped completely. As in NOBODY bought a yachtwith that damn tax on it. The Democrats finally rescinded that stupid tax two years later after destroying the yach building and yacht maintenance industries and killing over 100,000 jobs. Rich people weren’t hurt at all; ordinary people were devastated.

And now Obama wants to do the same thing with corporate jets that previous Democrats did to yachts. And they only people who will get hurt if Obama gets his way are the companies that hire people to build and maintain those jets and the workers themselves who will lose their jobs and their livelihoods. And the only thing that is stopping this rape of businesses, workers and the economy that depends on workers and businesses are Republicans. Even if many of the very people who are most hurt by Democrats Marxist class warfare policies are too stupid to know it.

It’s not enough to say that the Democrats’ thesis is false; the Democrats’ thesis has been utterly refuted before the world’s very eyes in Europe.  Our problem isn’t that we’re not enough like Europe; the very failure of Europe itself proves that our problem is that we’re already TOO MUCH like Europe.

We’ve got the second highest corporate tax rate in the entire world right now; and the United States is literally more communist than China now in many ways.  I submit that you must have both a mental and a moral problem in order to think raising those taxes and increasing regulations will somehow make our problems go away.  And yet that is precisely what Democrats foolishly believe.

Newsflash: 43% Of Tea Party Caucus “Terrorists.” Versus 49% Of Entire Democrat Party.

August 2, 2011

The vile diatribe from the left that the tea party people are “terrorists” is another example of the fact that if you are a Democrat or a liberal, YOU ARE A LIAR WITHOUT SHAME.

We were told that the tea party was “holding America hostage.”  They were like “terrorists.”  They were “suicide bombers.”  Etcetera etcetera etcetera.

Even Vice President Joe Biden called the tea party “terrorists.”

Vice President Joe Biden joined House Democrats in lashing tea party Republicans Monday, accusing them of having “acted like terrorists” in the fight over raising the nation’s debt limit.

Biden was agreeing with a line of argument made by Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) at a two-hour, closed-door Democratic Caucus meeting.

“We have negotiated with terrorists,” an angry Doyle said, according to sources in the room. “This small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money.”

Biden, driven by his Democratic allies’ misgivings about the debt-limit deal, responded: “They have acted like terrorists,” according to several sources in the room.

I pointed this out yesterday as the vote THAT THE OBAMA WHITE HOUSE SAID WAS ESSENTIAL TO SAVE AMERICA FROM A GREAT DEPRESSION was going down.

Today, after the dust has cleared, we learn that 43% of the “right wing” “terrorist” “suicide bomber” “Hezbollah” “hostage taking” House tea party caucus voted for America to have the Great Depression.  BUT 49% OF THE ENTIRE DEMOCRAT PARTY WANTED THE SAME GREAT DEPRESSION.

And for the official record, THAT IS A HELL OF A LOT MORE DEMOCRAT TERRORISTS THAN REPUBLICAN TERRORISTS, you depraved, immoral, liberal jackass media propagandists.

Even the New York Times acknowledges the tea party really wasn’t quite so “terrorist” after all:

But almost three-quarters of Republicans voted in the affirmative. And even the Tea Party came around in the end. By 32-to-28, members of the Tea Party Caucus voted for the bill, despite earlier claims — which now look like a bluff — that they wouldn’t vote to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstances.

These results seem to suggest that Mr. Obama left something on the table. That is, Mr. Obama could have shifted the deal tangibly toward the left and still gotten a bill through without too much of a problem. For instance, even if all members of the Tea Party Caucus had voted against the bill, it would still have passed 237-to-193, and that’s with 95 Democrats voting against it.

By your own twisted standards, The Democrat Party is the official party of terrorism in the United States.  And THAT IS EVEN WHEN COMPARED TO JUST THE TEA PARTY CAUCUS.

The average Democrats is even more “radical” and “extremist” than even THE most radical and extremist element of the Republican Party.

And Democrats – as is proven again and again and again – are the worst kind of hatemongers and liars on a daily basis.

Demonic Democrats Compare Republicans To ‘Terrorists’ For ‘Obstructing’ Debt Ceiling Vote. LOOK HOW DEMOCRATS ARE VOTING!!!

August 1, 2011

Here we are.  Tomorrow is the deadline.  According to the Obama White House on July 26:

“We are seven days away from an unprecedented financial event in this country’s history. One that could potentially put us towards a depression because the House Republicans, led by Speaker Boehner, are unwilling to compromise one inch.”

Let’s see.  Get out my calender.  There are 31 days in July.  That means the date for the Great Depression begins …. tomorrow!

Now, one party has been pretty consistent about comparing the other party to terrorists:

Vice President Joe Biden joined House Democrats in lashing tea party Republicans Monday, accusing them of having “acted like terrorists” in the fight over raising the nation’s debt limit.

Biden was agreeing with a line of argument made by Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) at a two-hour, closed-door Democratic Caucus meeting.

“We have negotiated with terrorists,” an angry Doyle said, according to sources in the room. “This small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money.”

Biden, driven by his Democratic allies’ misgivings about the debt-limit deal, responded: “They have acted like terrorists,” according to several sources in the room.

This utterly vile and one-thousand percent hateful and demagogic tactic is ALL over the place at the Democrat Party and the mainstream media propaganda machine.

But here we are.  Tomorrow we go into the Great Depression according to the Obama position.  Obama is either lying – which means he should be impeached – or he is pointing out that the Congress MUST agree to this deal that is now on the table or … we … will … all … PERISH.

And who are the actual terrorists?  Oh, I see Michelle Bachmann.  Check.  And I see Jason Chaffetz.  And then oh my God the rest of the terrorist who want to plunge America into the next Great Depression are ALL DEMOCRATS.  Lo and behold the TERRORIST DEMOCRATS outnumber the terrorist Republicans 11-2 on a must-pass vote backed by Barack Obama and Harry Reid.

There’s this:

75+ of the “Progressive Democrats”-AKA Socialist Faction of the Democrats in the HOUSE are outright saying they will NOT vote for the BIPARTISAN bill, along with the Democrat BLACK CAUCUS and then “Progressive Democrats” in the SENATE; so, where is that article CNN, ABC, CBS or MSNBC?

So there are just ALL KINDS OF TERRORIST DEMOCRATS who are voting to send America into the GREAT DEPRESSION – and that according to the Obama White House.

And Nancy Pelosi isn’t even bothering to TRY to whip a deal to influence Democrats to vote yes on a bill that Obama says we need to prevent the Great Depression!!!

The Democrat Party has passed ZERO bills to save America from THE GREAT DEPRESSION.  Barack Obama – who told us that we were in danger of the Great Depression if someone didn’t save us – offered ZERO leadership to SAVE US.  And thank God for Republicans who actually passed THREE bills whose votes saved America from the Great Depression that terrorist Democrats (again, that according to the Obama White House) voted to plunge America into.

It never ceases to amaze me just how despicably dishonest and blatantly morally EVIL Democrats are.  Democrat radical extremists outnumber the fringe Republicans at least a dozen to one, and yet these lying demonic hypocrites routinely demagogue the side of rationality as “extremists.”

I listened to Caifornia Democrat Rep. Karen Bass, who said the Democrat Party was planning to wait for the vote to begin because the Democrats want to see the Republicans have to stand up for this bill.  That’s because Democrats are cowardly, slanderous, vile, backbiting, undermining, demagogic cockroach scum who live to let others lead so they can demonize them for trying to do the right thing.

[Update] As of this moment (3:53 PST), 129 Republicans have voted yes ON A BILL THAT WILL PREVENT THE GREAT DEPRESSION compared to 12 Democrats.

[Update 3:55 PST] Now it’s 137 Republicans wanting to avoid a Great Depression compared to 15 Democrats.  47 Democrats are terrorists who want to plunge America into the Great Depression.

[Update 3:59 PST] Now 148 Republicans are joined by only 19 Democrats who aren’t terrorists and who voted against the Great Depression.

[Update 4:00 PST] Gabrielle Giffords – who knows a thing or two about terrorism now – showed up to vote for the bill.  Unlike most of her terrorist Democrat party.

[Update 4:02 PST] Now 153 Republicans who have voted not to have a Great Depression have been joined by only 19 Democrats.

Update 4:03 PST] 160 Republicans don’t want a Great Depression.  Only 21 Democrats feel the same way so far.  57 Democrats are terrorists.

[Update 4:05 PST] 97 Democrats still haven’t voted, proving that what Karen Bass said was in fact correct; Democrats had a strategy to make sure their moral superiors voted and put themselves on the line.

[Update 4:06 PST] The vote just passed with overwhelming Republican support [i.e. Republicans who voted to save America from the Great Depression].

You want to see a terrorist?  You want to see someone who wants a Great Depression?  Just look at the Democrat Party.

The way Democrats held back on such a critical vote is simply cowardly beyond compare.  If you are a Democrat, you are simply a craven human being.

We need moral courage and leadership now more than at any time in our nation’s history, and we have been cursed with Democrats.  The Democrat Party has taken the spirit of its messiah, Barack Hussein Obama, who voted “present” 130 times as an Illinois Senator rather than stand up and LEAD.  From the New York Times, December 20, 2007:

The record has become an issue on the presidential campaign trail, as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, his chief rival for the Democratic nomination, has seized on the present votes he cast on a series of anti-abortion bills to portray Mr. Obama as a “talker” rather than a “doer.” […]

An examination of Illinois records shows at least 36 times when Mr. Obama was either the only state senator to vote present or was part of a group of six or fewer to vote that way.

In more than 50 votes, he seemed to be acting in concert with other Democrats as part of a strategy.

And consider going on four years later Obama is STILL an abysmal failure of leadership even according to Hillary Clinton:

“Obviously, she’s not happy with dealing with a president who can’t decide if today is Tuesday or Wednesday, who can’t make his mind up,” a Clinton insider told The Daily. “She’s exhausted, tired.”

Now consider the entire Democrat House of Representatives basically acting like 193 Obamas.

I’ve said it often before: this is God damn America.  This is a leaderless, rudderless ship about to plunge into an iceberg and sink.

Justice Finally Comes To Osama Bin Laden, American-Style

May 1, 2011

It had to happen eventually.  And it finally has.  Osama bin Laden is in hell where he belongs, where seventy-two very un-virginal demons will tear his flesh for all eternity.

And it came the best way: by the trigger fingers of individual heroes, rather than by the faceless push of a button to activate a missile by a Predator drone.  It is fitting that bin Laden died at the hands of Americans who got to look him in the eye as they facilitated his journey to the eternally burning trash pit in the sky.

And just to add some icing to the cake, the reports are that they killed Osama bin Laden’s oldest son in the attack, too.

Osama bin Laden Killed; ID Confirmed by DNA Testing
By DEAN SCHABNER and KAREN TRAVERS
May 1, 2011

Osama bin Laden, hunted as the mastermind behind the worst-ever terrorist attack on U.S. soil, has been killed, sources told ABC News.

Bin Laden was killed in a ground attack by Joint Special Operations Command forces working with the CIA, not a drone strike, a national security source told ABC News.

According to a national security source, a compound in Pakistan where  the terrorist mastermind was believed to be had been monitored for months. When the decision was made to move on it, special operations forces were sent across the border from Afghanistan to launch a ground attack and take the body.

DNA testing confirmed that it was bin Laden, sources told ABC News.

Vice President Biden has reached out to congressional leadership to update them on the news tonight.

“This is a terrific day for America and quite frankly the whole world that cares about winning the war on terror,” former Bush chief of staff Andy Card told ABC News. Card said the news is “particularly significant” for the intelligence community.

“They’re the ones who kept their nose to the grindstone and worked very hard to allow this day to be realized … finally,” he said.

[The rest of the ABC story is mostly biographical on who bin Laden was and what he did.  You may read it here].

My congratulations and heartfelt appreciation go out to all the intelligence and military professionals who brought about this fitting end.

As President George Bush put it on October 11, 2001:

In terms of Mr. bin Laden himself, we’ll get him running. We’ll smoke him out of his cave and we’ll get him eventually.”

It was just a matter of time.

Anyone who has read one paragraph of my blog knows that I am a fierce critic of President Barack Obama.  But he and his administration deserve credit for approving the actions that led to this day of reckoning.  Obama also displayed some class in how he first called former President Bush and then cited him in his announcement of bin Laden’s killing.  

That said, the city where bin Laden was killed – Abbottabad – was a military district headquarters.  And the early releases are claiming that the Pakistani government was not informed prior to the raid that got Osama bin Laden.  And the fact that bin Laden was staying in a large walled security compound only 100 yards from a Pakistani military facility tells you that bin Laden was almost certainly being protected by at least a faction of the Pakistani military.

Given how badly we need Pakistan and other key Muslim countries to cooperate with us if we are to be able to use anything other than a “Kill them all; let God sort them out” policy, Pakistan’s apparent duplicity and its cooperation with al Qaeda is not good news.

The war on terror isn’t over.  It might even intensify, as the terrorist network al Qaeda looks for vengeance.  It’ s who they are; it’s what they do.  Here, for instance, is a story that al Qaeda threatened a “nuclear hellstorm” if America killed or captured bin Laden.  Rest assured, al Qaeda will be determined to do something that will seek to restore their honor and credibility in the Islamic world as a result of this raid.

What will happen as a result of this raid and the killing of bin Laden?  Will Pakistan be embarrassed into more cooperation with the U.S., or will they be embarrassed into LESS cooperation with the U.S.?  Did conducting a massively consequential military operation in a foreign country without notifying its leaders make that country a better friend, or a less trustworthy foe?  Under the presidency of Barack Obama, U.S.-Pakistani relationships have soured to an all-time low.  Did this attack on their country improve those relations?  What will happen as a direct result of this attack?

I don’t even want to think about what would have happened had a Pakistani military or police unit fired on the U.S. special operations forces.

If liberals are consistent, they will immediately denounce President Obama and demonize him for further antagonizing the Islamic world and for risking an escalation of terrorism.

The problem with that is that it is total crap.  And whether liberals like it or not, we are in a war for the survival of our culture against a culture of hate.

George Bush put it best describing countries and their attitude toward the United States: “You’re either with us or against us in the fight against terror.”  That statement was met with incredible criticism and condemnation from the left.  And yet, in what way did Obama’s actions today do anything other than reinforce that that was the only attitude we could realistically take?

The left has been proven fundamentally and profoundly wrong in its attitude toward the war on terror.  And it should be obvious by now that the only way to be successful is to not just follow George Bush’s example, but to actually try to “out-Bush” Bush’s example.

And Obama has largely “out-Bushed” Bush in Pakistan.  President Bush did not want to cause a deterioration in U.S.-Pakistani relations, because he viewed Pakistani cooperation as key in the war on terror.  Obama, in using drone attacks and now direct military action, has been far more aggressive in “taking the war” to Pakistan.

Another example of “out-Bushing Bush” would be the Libya attack.  George Bush – decried as the “imperial president” for his attack on Iraq – at least had constitutional authorization for that action (i.e,. the Iraq War Resolution).  Obama took the “cowboy” route in Libya without bothering to obtain permission from any constitutional authority whatsoever.  Except the “world.”  Obama’s actions should serve to amply demonstrate just how hypocritical and utterly vacuous George W. Bush’s liberal critics truly were.

Liberals said that Bush’s attack on Iraq was a provocation that would make the war on terror worse.  They said that the war on terror was a provocation.  They said the surge was a provocation.  And we shouldn’t be provoking the Muslim world like that.

Let me assure you, what those spec op warriors just did in their raid on that compound in Pakistan was an in-your-face provocation.

What’s the long-term effect of this degraded relationship with Pakistan going to be?  I have no idea.  But any liberal who wants to tell me that “cooperative” liberal policies are working where “confrontational” conservative ones have failed is simply an imbecile.  Because what just happened clearly proves the exact opposite.  And when you consider the fact that Obama has already pursued Bush’s policies on Guantanamo Bay, rendition, domestic eavesdropping, the Patriot Act, military tribunals, indefinite detentions and a host of other polices, George Bush and Dick Cheney stand as men proven correct.

We cannot relent.  Because our enemies will not relent.  They are determined to murder.  It is a virtue for them.  It is a religious duty.  And the 9/11 attack was a religious act.

If these terrorists want to get in America’s face or try to intimidate the American people, America should make sure that its warriors give them a giant shot to the nose that they will never forget in response.  Whether we speak softly or loudly, I don’t really care; just make sure that we always carry one big giant stick, and demonstrate the willingness to use that big giant stick on anyone who wants to make trouble for us.

And so there is one more thing to say: if President Obama tries to take political advantage of the killing of Osama bin Laden, we should make sure the American people know that Obama is planning to gut the budget of the U.S. military that just killed bin Laden.

Our warriors should smile and give one another hearty high-fives for this victory.  And then they need to get right back to work.  Because what they do is vital for their country, whether their country has the moral intelligence to understand that or not.

What I most like about this is that it sends a message.  Even ten years later, the United States of America will continue to hunt you down and kill you if you kill her citizens.  And that is a message that Republican and Democrat alike ought to be able to unite around.

Update: we are now learning that it was a squadron of forty U.S. Navy SEALs from Team 6 who conducted the raid that got bin Laden.  God bless you guys.

And now we are even beginning to learn that “enhanced interrogation” may very well have given us the information breakthrough that got us bin Laden.

School Bus Attacked With Missile In Gaza: Muslims CONTINUE To Target Israel’s Children

April 7, 2011

Please see my previous post here to see that this is no abberation, but a continuance of an incredibly longstanding strategy by Muslims to murder innocent Israeli children:

Missile from Gaza hits Israeli school bus; 2 hurt
By ARON HELLER, Associated Press Aron Heller, Associated Press – 1 hr 53 mins ago

JERUSALEM – An anti-tank missile fired from the Gaza Strip struck a school bus in southern Israel Thursday, wounding two people, one of them critically, and prompting fierce Israeli retaliation that killed five Palestinians.

Israel unleashed airstrikes and tank fire against Hamas targets across the border. It was the heaviest assault on the coastal territory since a broad military offensive two years ago. Besides the dead, more than 30 Palestinians were wounded, said Palestinian health official Adham Abu Salmiya.

He said one of the dead was a 50-year-old civilian who was sitting outside his home when he was struck by tank fire. Three others were militants killed near the southern Gaza town of Rafah. The fifth man was a Hamas policeman.

The sudden outbreak of violence illustrated the fragile situation along the Israel-Gaza border, where small bouts of fighting can quickly escalate into heavy-scale warfare.

After two years of relative calm, tensions have been rising between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza over the past few weeks. For Israel, Thursday’s attack was the most serious of this period.

But it also laid the groundwork for a major strategic breakthrough. The Israeli military activated a new cutting-edge missile-defense system for the first time, saying that the Iron Dome scored a direct hit on an incoming Palestinian rocket.

The escalation has also spilled beyond Israel’s borders.

In the past month, Israel has intercepted a cargo ship that it said was carrying arms bound for Gaza, jailed an alleged Hamas rocket mastermind believed to have been captured in Ukraine and been accused of carrying out a mysterious airstrike that killed two people in Sudan. Israel has not commented on this week’s airstrike, but officials have said they believe Sudan is a transit point for arms bound for Gaza.

Israel’s defense minister, Ehud Barak, ordered the army to respond quickly to the attack on the school bus and said he held the Hamas militant group, which rules Gaza, responsible for the violence.

“We will respond until it will become clear that the Hamas fully understand that we cannot accept and we will not accept such events,” he said at a military base in southern Israel.

Hamas issued a rare claim of responsibility for the bus attack, saying it was in response to the killing of three of its leaders earlier in the week. Usually, smaller militant factions claim responsibility.

Palestinian officials said Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh was making calls to leaders in Egypt, Turkey and Qatar appealing for their intervention.

Israeli defense officials said the incident marked a significant moment that would warrant a severe response. But there were no immediate indications that the violence would devolve into all-out war.

Israeli medical services said the bus was nearly empty after dropping off school children and was carrying only the driver and a lone passenger at the time of the attack. A 16-year-old boy with a serious head wound was evacuated from the scene and undergoing surgery at a hospital. The driver was moderately wounded.

TV footage showed a yellow bus with its windows blown out and its rear charred.

Israeli President Shimon Peres condemned the attack from New York, where he was holding meetings at the United Nations.

“This is another example of Gaza becoming a terror state,” he said in a statement. “Hundreds of thousands of mothers and children in southern Israel cannot sleep quietly at night as a result of the rocket fire from Gaza.”

The American and British governments condemned the attack.

Israel usually responds with tough reprisals to Palestinian attacks. It launched an airstrike on a Hamas training facility in northern Gaza.

Later Thursday, Israeli aircraft and tanks attacked Hamas facilities in northern and central Gaza Strip. A tank shell also struck a fuel depot in northern Gaza, sending a plume of smoke above the area.

“Israel will not frighten us and will not terrorize us,” said Hamas spokesman  Ismail Radwan. “We call on the Arab masses and the Arab revolution to stand by the Palestinian people in Gaza and to urge their regimes and their governments to stop this escalation, which aims to create a new pool of blood in Gaza Strip and Israel should be held responsible for the consequences of this.”

The missile attack came hours after Israel carried out airstrikes against tunnels it says are used by militants to smuggle weapons under the Egyptian border and carry out attacks.

Hamas and other Gaza militants have fired thousands of projectiles toward southern Israel in previous years. Israel launched a massive offensive in late 2008 to counter the near-daily barrage.

Israel recently deployed its first system to defend its tanks from anti-tank missiles. As a result, Gaza militants may be turning the weapons on new targets, since the attack on the bus appears to be the first time such a missile has been fired at a civilian Israeli target.

The military said that after the missile attack, about 45 rockets and mortar shells were fired from Gaza toward Israel, including one that struck a home, causing damage but no injuries.

In a separate incident, Israel said it had arrested five Hamas militants in east Jerusalem and charged them in a pipe bomb attack that wounded a sanitation worker last month.

In the West Bank, Israeli troops rounded up dozens of Palestinian women overnight in a massive sweep as part of a search for the killer of five Israelis in a nearby settlement last month.

Residents in Awarta said that between 100 and 200 women were taken into custody and that Israeli troops took their fingerprints and DNA samples from them. By midafternoon, all the women were believed to have been released. 

Israel has been carrying out arrests in Awarta since a young Israeli couple and three of their children were stabbed to death as they slept in their home in the neighboring Jewish settlement of Itamar.

___

Ibrahim Barzak in Gaza City, Dalia Nammari in Ramallah, West Bank, and Ariel David in Tel Aviv contributed to this report.

Tens of thousands of rockets have been fired at Israel by Muslims who would only rejoice if they were to strike a Jewish child.  For the record, 10,237 rockets were fired by Muslims at Israel in just a one month period in 2008.

The LORD (Jehovah), the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the Living God, the Lord God Almighty who was, and is and is to come, is protecting Israel.

Islam is a religion of hatred.  That “Islam” means “peace” is a lie of the devil; “Islam” means “submission”; as in submission by force.

Today, we see that the United Nations is immorally siding with the terrorist Muslims against democratic Israel.  One day, the Bible teaches, the entire world will gather their forces in a valley called Armageddon (Rev 16:12-16).  And they will say, “Come and let us wipe them out as a nation. Let the name of Israel be remembered no more” (Psalms 83:4).

And it will be Messiah Jesus, coming again as He promised as King of kings and as Lord of lords (Revelation 19:11-16).

The story that will begin with undying hate will end in unending beauty and glory:

“I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn” (Zechariah 12:10).

God is protecting Israel.  The Jews are His covenant people, the apple of His eye (Zechariah 2:8).  And one day soon Messiah Jesus will come to His own and this time finally be welcomed.

You touch Jewish children at the peril of your immortal souls, Muslims.  One day soon you will be called upon to account for your evil.

And you stand against Israel at the peril of your souls, you “united” nations that likewise gather against her. 

As for me and my house, we pray every single day for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6).  We love and support Israel and we eagerly await the Jews’ embrace of the same Messiah that we also embrace as Savior and as Lord.

Obama, I Demand You Apologize To George Bush And Dick Cheney For Your Lies And Demagoguery

April 4, 2011

Today we had Obama sucking the sewer scum with his crazy straw in a different way.

Barack Obama is a serial liar, and the only time he isn’t lying is if he says he’s lying.

Today we find out officially that Obama is backpedeling on two lies: one to close Guantanamo Bay, and the other to try the worst terrorists in civilian court.  As the LA Times reports via the AP:

Professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four alleged co-conspirators are being referred to the system of military commissions for trial, a federal law enforcement official said Monday.

The decision by the Obama administration is an about-face from earlier plans to have the five go on trial in civilian federal court in New York.

You know that Obama is going to go back on his promises.  That’s what liars do.  Obama is the type of slimeball who first broke his word to serve his Senate term, and then broke his promise to use public campaign financing if his Republican opponent did so.  Anyone but a fool should have known the man is a lying weasel on his noblest day.  But what you hope is that he will now keep breaking his stupidest and most despicable promises.

I pointed out the blatant reality that was readily obvious to anyone but the worst of fools nearly a full year ago:

Renditions? Obama got his butt kicked.  Eavesdropping programs? Obama got his butt kicked.  Patriot Act? Obama got his butt kicked.  Gitmo? Obama got his butt kicked.  Surge strategy? Obama got his butt kicked.  Iraq War? Obama got his butt kicked.  Iranian nuclear threat? Obama got his butt kicked.  That sort of thing.

You stupid, arrogant poodle, Obama.  You’d be completely ashamed of yourself if you weren’t such an arrogant narcissist.

Again and again, on issue after issue, Obama demagogued and demonized Bush policies on the campaign trail.  But when it came time to put up or shut up, and actually DO something, Obama’s “poodle policies” ended up on their back with Bush policy fangs around their throat.

And now we see it yet again.  Military Tribunals?  Another Obama butt kicking…”

But just when you think Obama has finally accepted reality, the idiot climbs back on his winged unicorn and flies off in another cloud of magic fairy dust.

By finally relenting – after 17 months of wasted time and God only knows how many millions of dollars spent fighting reality – to try the terrorists at Gitmo, Obama is acknowledging that Guantanamo Bay will not be closed as long as his loathsome character pollutes the White House.

Here’s the worst of it.  Obama cowardly and despicably went overseas and demonized his predecessor for his atrocities such as Gitmo and trying terrorists in military tribunals.  The contemptible rat bastard-in-chief even said he would consider holding Bush criminally responsible.  And now Obama will be embracing the very “atrocities” that he himself personally demonized.

The left has been saying that Gitmo and military tribunals would give al Qaeda ammunition for recruiting terrorists.  Riddle me this: how much more will they gain ammunition by replaying the very words of Obama and his attorney general Eric Holder as saying Gitmo and military tribunals were immoral?!?!??

I like the way Lyflines puts it:

Reality squashes yet another Democrat storyline…

Do you remember how the left demonized George W. Bush for eight years? Remember how he was trampling all over the Constitution with his military tribunals? Remember how Guantanamo was a scourge upon the face of humanity, a veritable second Auschwitz? Remember how Obama was going to close Guantanamo within his first year in office? Remember the “fierce moral urgency of change?”

Yeah, never mind…

Here’s one typical example of Obama being the cynical lying fool that he is.  After wrapping himself in the Constitution and the principles of our founders (both of which he has actually in fact mocked in a way that George Bush NEVER would have) – And I also can’t help but think of the many Democrats who have openly mocked our founding fathers, our Constitution and the conservatives’ love of both – Obama went on to say:

There is also no question that Guantanamo set back the moral authority that is America’s strongest currency in the world.  Instead of building a durable framework for the struggle against al Qaeda that drew upon our deeply held values and traditions, our government was defending positions that undermined the rule of law.  In fact, part of the rationale for establishing Guantanamo in the first place was the misplaced notion that a prison there would be beyond the law — a proposition that the Supreme Court soundly rejected.  Meanwhile, instead of serving as a tool to counter terrorism, Guantanamo became a symbol that helped al Qaeda recruit terrorists to its cause.  Indeed, the existence of Guantanamo likely created more terrorists around the world than it ever detained.

So the record is clear:  Rather than keeping us safer, the prison at Guantanamo has weakened American national security.  It is a rallying cry for our enemies.  It sets back the willingness of our allies to work with us in fighting an enemy that operates in scores of countries.  By any measure, the costs of keeping it open far exceed the complications involved in closing it.  That’s why I argued that it should be closed throughout my campaign, and that is why I ordered it closed within one year.

Now, you vile liberals, you explain to me how al Qaeda will not be playing Barack Obama’s and Eric Holder’s speeches and saying, “You see?  America is evil even by its very own president’s and attorney general’s standards.”

And the only thing that makes America evil is that we voted for a truly evil man to be our president.  Not to mention an illegetimate imposter who should not even be regarded as a legitimate citizen at this point.

Dick Cheney has repeatedly said that Obama couldn’t be more naive or more wrong and that he would ultimately be forced to abandon his immoral positions on both Gitmo and the military tribunals.

You owe George Bush and Dick Cheney a personal apology.  When Dick Cheney stood up to your lies and denounced your terrible policies, he rightly confronted you on the very issues that you just backed down from today in an implicit acknowledgment that he was right and you were totally wrong.  And if you had so much as a single shred of personal honor or decency, you would offer that apology.

The fact that you DON’T have any honor or decency is why we can know that you won’t bother.

Democrat Dick Durbin Gives His ‘Legitimacy’ To Terrorists

March 30, 2011

We are at a point where Democrats ought to have zero credibility, and the worst thing that should ever happen to someone’s reputation would be getting caught with your face in the same picture as a known or suspected Democrat.

But while we OUGHT to be there, we’re certainly not there yet.  There are fools and communities of fools who actually respect Democrats, and stupidly and naively believe they’re decent people.

So, as asinine and in fact as outrageous as it might seem, Democrats can add their “credibility” to others.

But being truly despicable people, Democrats have a tendency to lend said “credibility” to the very worst sorts of people.  Like terrorists.

For the record, I added the labeling to make it easier to identify both the terrorists and the dumbass in the photo.

Here’s a quick description of these guys Dick Durbin says are A-OK in his book:

Pictured with Senator Durbin [that’s the dumbass in the middle] is Jamal Said [the terrorist on the left], an unindicted conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case that led to criminal conviction. Said also reportedly raised money 11 years ago at an Islamic conference by asking for donations in name of a suicide bomber. More recently, he told a gathering of Muslim leaders in 2009, “We need to raise our children to know the martyrs of Gaza.”

Also in the photo [the terrorist on the right] is another unindicted terror trial coconspirator named Kifah Mustapha. According to the IPT, Mustapha serves as an imam for the Illinois Mosque Foundation. Last year days after becoming Illinois first state police chaplain, his appointment was revoked after ties to terror groups became public.

According to IPT, the Mosque Foundation has a long history of ties to terror organizations, even sponsoring a rally for a Hamas operative arrested in Israel. 

So we’ve got the cheerleader for suicide bombers and a guy who wants to radicalize our rapidly growing Muslim inmate population.

The guy who wants to raise money for suicide bombers’ families so terrorists can murder away knowing their families will be taken care of, the guy who wants the children to know these “martyrs” as heroes so the hate can continue to the next generation, is part of a murder plot against Israel’s innocent children going back decades.

And the guy who sought to be a “chaplain” so he could radicalize our prison population is part of a long effort to get the hate of Allah into our prison systems.  From an article in the Oxford Journal titled “Prison Islam in the Age of Sacred Terror“:

Research indicates that Islam is the fastest growing religion among prisoners in Western nations. In the United States, roughly 240,000 inmates have converted to the faith since the 9/11 attacks. According to federal law enforcement, Saudi-backed Wahhabi clerics have targeted these prisoners for terrorist recruitment.

An article on how state prisons are a breeding ground for radical Islam begins:

The four men accused of plotting to blow up synagogues and shoot down a plane all did stretches in state prisons – a major breeding ground for Islamic radicalization.

At least two of the suspects, James Cromitie and Onta Williams, entered the system as Baptists and were paroled as Muslims.

The concern about prisons incubating jihadists has been heightened in the debate over releasing Guantanamo terror suspects to facilities across the U.S.

FBI Director Robert Mueller has called America’s prisons “fertile ground for extremists.”

A 2006 study called “Out of the Shadows” found “tight-knit communities of Muslims in prison are ripe for radicalization, and could easily become terrorist cells.”

And the entire organization for which Durbin is lending his “credibility” is waaaaayyy beyond merely dubious.

Confronted with this, Durbin was unapologetic.  These people are perfectly fine.  What they’re doing is great.  And if you don’t want to be murdered in a giant explosion by a suicide bomber, you’re just a racist anti-Muslim bigot.

So just why do Democrats want to legitimize terrorists who want nothing more than your hot sticky jugular-vein blood all over their filfthy hands?  I now say “dumbass Democrats” rather than just “dumbass Dick Durbin” because this is just so par for the Democrat course.

Here’s Durbin’s rationale, complete with it’s own refutation:

U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., in an attempt to address what he claims is an increase in anti-Muslim bigotry, is relying on questionable statistics and a witness with a record of opposing virtually all law enforcement attempts to deal with Islamist-inspired terrorism.

In a statement, Durbin said his hearing Tuesday on the state of Muslim civil rights in America comes “in response to a spike in anti-Muslim bigotry in the last year including Quran burnings, restrictions on mosque construction, hate crimes, hate speech, and other forms of discrimination.”

While hate crime data for 2010 has not yet been released, FBI reports in recent years show no spike in anti-Muslim attacks. Those statistics show 107 anti-Islamic incidents reported in 2009, compared to 156 anti-Muslim crimes in 2006. In both reports, race related crimes dominated, and religiously-targeted attacks involved Jews as victims about nine times more often than Muslims in 2009 and more than five times more in 2006.

Durbin is literally championing the violent Muslims who are victimizing Jews at nine times the rate in America and calling the victimizers the “victims.”

Which is to say, Democrats are consistent, in that they are always fools all the time.

And what is the Fool-in-Chief up to?  He’s joining Osama bin Laden in siding with the Libyan rebels which include al Qaeda fighters, and who are led by Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi – a man who fought Americans troops in Afghanistan

No one knows a whole lot about these Libyan rebels, and everything we do know is bad.  Jonah Goldberg quipped yesterdat that this Libyan rebellion is kind of like Pelosi’s approach: “We have to pass this rebellion so you can find out what is in it.”

A Politico story covering Durbin’s hearing said:

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin said it wasn’t a response to Republican Rep. Peter King’s hearings this month on post-9/11 Islamic radicalization and terrorism — but it sure felt like it.

And that’s exactly what it was, of course.  And all King’s hearings tried to do was ask a question about the domestic radicalization of American Muslims.  And even the left-leaning Washington Post acknowledged that Democrats embarrased themselves in their coming unglued over simply asking a question and seeking information.

This is not just an unfortunate moment immortalized in a picture.  This is a demonstration of the morally bankrupt philosophy of not only Dick Durbin, but the entire Democrat Party.

And as usual, the mainstream media propaganda does not want you to know which side is right and which side is wrong.