Month: October 2008

Free Gas and Mortgages: Obama Cashes In On Oprah’s Entitlement Gig

Oprah should be worried. It looks as though the Chosen One has employed her tactic of buying a following. He might actually get a bigger fan base than the bigger “O” herself.

Make no mistake, this woman is a walking poster child for the Obama Entitlement Glee Club. In her mind, it is the government’s job, via the Messiah, to ensure she has gas in her tank, and that her mortgage is paid. I have no doubt that it will also be the government’s job, via my taxes, to make sure this giddy Obamite never has to worry about making her car or Dish Network payment.

Glad to help. Excuse me while I bend over.

Someone ought to inform this little groupie that her beloved Messiah’s Marxist promises smack of a little thing called…slavery. Obama has managed to dupe his followers into voting away their individual freedoms in exchange for a tank of gas.

For the record, [Disclaimer: Extreme violation of political correctness about to occur.] never again do I want to hear a person of color whine and say, “America still has a long way to go when it comes to equality in America”. This blessed country has come a long way. Problem is, a sizable portion of the black community continually thwarts any progress by willfully ingesting the maniacal we-are-oppressed-by-white-America wanking from the likes of Jessie Jackson, Louis Farrakahn, and now, Obama. And let’s not forget the priestess of the black empowerment movement, Grendel’s mother, Oprah. No doubt our little Obamite’s day isn’t complete without her weepy hour with O.

Am I being racist? Some would contend that I am. But I would argue that I am not the one voting for a wannabe Marxist slave holder.

Advertisements

Not All Effigies Are Equal

Like I said, when Obama is hung in effigy, it’s considered a hate crime.

So, when Obama is swinging from a tree, this is how it goes:

[Kentucky] Gov. Steve Beshear called the incident “embarrassing” and “deeply offensive.”

“This was not political speech. It was simply hate,” he said.

and this:

John Johnson, executive director of the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights, called the action unacceptable even if it was a prank.

“It’s astonishing that somebody would do that at this day and time,” he said. “You would hope that our country has progressed further than that.”

But stick a noose around an effigy of Palin and you get this:

Despite cries from some community residents for a hate-crime probe, the FBI and local police say they will not investigate an effigy of Sarah Palin hanging from a noose in West Hollywood, Calif., because it’s part of a Halloween display.

“I’m not defending this; I’m not criticizing it. It doesn’t rise to the level of hate crime,” Los Angeles County Sheriff’s spokesman Steve Whitmore told The Los Angeles Times. “Now, if there was a crime against bad taste …”

It is interesting to note that their was also an effigy of Obama hung on the University of Portland campus. Four students have been suspended.

The West Holloywood man with the Palin effigy?

ChadMichael Morrisette, who lives in the house, told a local TV news crew that cars and buses have been stopping near his home and that people have been snapping photos of the Halloween display.

He’s selling tickets.

Obama: You Say Illegal; I Say Donation

Here’s a shocker.

The Obama campaign is accepting untraceable donations. 

Seriously, is anyone surprised?

“Senator Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed.

Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aids acknowledge.”

Potentially illegal? I’d like that defined for me, please. What exactly classifies as “potentially illegal” in Donation Land? Money from terrorist groups? Money from brothels? Money from prison inmates?

“Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.”

File this with Saddam’s “Give me a year to get ready for the inspection” line. Scrutinizing after the money has been deposited? Kind of like the IRS?

But let’s give Obama the benefit of the doubt. I’m sure, after the campaign is over, his people will diligently “scrutinize” the books and say, “Oops. Lookie here. We got some money from Iran. Better cut them a check and send them their money back. Frank, get me Ahmadinejad’s mailing address.”

Yea, that’s gonna happen.

 

 

Update: More on this story at No Quarter

It’s Only a Hate Crime if it Happens to a Democrat

Halloween just wouldn’t be complete without effigies.

According to the feds, hanging Palin in effigy isn’t a hate crime.

If you find this confusing, let me explain.

First, to understand the proper use of the term hate crime, we must refer to the official Democrat Lexicon of Handy Legal Jargon (DLHLJ).

hate speech (n) any word, phrase, or utterance that points to or alludes to the Democratic party, and anyone affiliated with it such as: homosexuals; feminists; members of the NAACP, ACLU, or NEA [National Endowment for the Arts or National Education Association…pick one]; Marxist professors; drunken congressmen, senile supreme court judges, or socialist and/or adulterous presidential candidates as being anything other than tolerant, sane, and morally upright.

So, you see, by definition, hate crime is a relative term used unabashedly by left wingers for the age old purpose of CYA.

Here’s how this works. (This, by the way, is complete fiction. No one in WeHo (West Hollywood) would complain, but work with me here.) If a McCain-Palin supporter tried to file a suit claiming that hanging an effigy of the VP candidate was a hate crime, they’d get nowhere.

Why?

Because the injured party wasn’t a liberal Democrat. And, as the DLHLJ clearly implies, in order to be authorized to use the term hate crime, you must be a liberal Democrat.

Suffice it to say, if an effigy of Obama were swaying from a tree somewhere in…say…Oklahoma, that would be considered a hate crime worthy of felony charges, background invasion…er, I mean back ground checks by the feds, and a really bad bashing from the fems on The View.

So, to recap: Hanging a Republican VP candidate in effigy is not hateful because Republicans are not protected under the hate crime definition in the DLHLJ. (And, again, it’s WeHo…nuf said.)

However, calling Obama by his middle name, Hussein, is considered hateful because the mere mention of said middle name alludes to the fact that he just might be a Muslim sympathizer who, like the terrorists he would unconditionally sit down with, plans to turn America into a vapor trail.

Oh, and he’s a liberal Democrat.

New Money to be Minted if Obama Elected

This shouldn’t surprise:

US Communist Party thinks their time has come in America.

Ya think?

Rumor has it that during Obama’s first 100 days he’ll pass the Fairness Doctrine, initiate collective farming , and have all new coins minted with himself on the Quarter, Stalin on the dime, Lenin on the nickel, and Biden on the penny. (Which makes sense, since it costs more to mint a penny than they are actually worth, and having Biden in the White House will definitely cost America more than he’s worth.)

In an effort to head off outrage from Republicans in congress who claim Americans will not approve of the new coins , top financial adviser for Obama’s campaign, Penny Pritzker, has stated: “The outrage is premature. No American will actually see this money, since, after Sen. Obama wipes out those burdensome Bush tax cuts, and implements his own tax plan, only a hand full of the population will have any of the new coins anyway.”

It has been suggested by Democrats that the coins be given to members of congress packaged in commemorative, velvet-lined boxes.

The Socialist and the Plumber

Amazingly enough, there will still be scads of mindless leftists who will continue to deny that Obama is a socialist.

 

 

I don’t know why right wingers are only showing the mini clips from You Tube. The full-length version from ABC News, which can be found HERE, is more telling. (If you can’t find the video, in the search box, type: “Obama explains tax plan”.)

The scary thing about the full-length version is how long he talked and managed to say nothing but, “Socialism”, “Socialism”, and “Your higher taxes will help pay for their tax cut…but I’m not punishing you.”

The even scarier thing about the full-length version is that, when he was done blathering, there were still a gaggle of smiling sheeple adoring him. In a saner, more intelligent world, when he finished talking, he would have been left standing in the street surrounded only by his liberal film crew.

I guess there is no denying it: Ignorance is bliss.

Public Education and TV in America: How the Left Controls the Polls

Warning: This post is long, slams liberal ideology, and is worthy of a plush seat and a tall cold one.

While the leftist, Hollywood Politico wing-nuts are running the show (and the election) in this country, I find it stunning that no one seems to be able to figure out why. But what I find truly disturbing is that conservatives are scratching their heads wondering how this could be happening.

I’ve got two words: Education and TV.

Once again, it’s time for a history lesson and a dose of reality. We’ll start with the history lesson.

The number one reason militant, immoral liberals are lauded and deified while they mock and tear at the very moral fabric of this nation, (and waltz into power) is because, for the past eight decades or so, America’s children have been subject to a nasty little version of behavior modification called Public Education. There, I said it. I’m finally coming out of my home school closet with the gloves on. It’s time to pay attention.

To fully understand the the culpability of America’s pub-ed system, we must take a little trip back in time. Think back to the one-room school house and those little minions who actually got an education. The Bible, in many cases, was the book that was used as the “reader” to teach the children to…well, read. Things were moving along rather well until…

…Jump to the early 1900’s -John Dewey and Co. What a guy. John Dewey was a pragmatist, and a proponent of what was then affectionately called Progressive Education. Dewey and his followers thought up a system to reform the schools. But the schools weren’t in need of reform. The seeds of an interminable, liberal, Democratic pattern were being sown.

Dewey and his cohorts denounced traditional schooling. You know, the type that actually educates and trains children to think critically. Dewey wanted to replace the traditional schooling method with a child centered approach. Bottom line: They weren’t so much interested in learning as in socializing children, getting them accustomed to group activities and taking the direction of the group. I call it Sheeple Camp. They proposed to use the schools as the entering wedge for transforming society. In short, they sought to use the schools as a training ground for collectivism (that would be Obamaism, otherwise known as socialism) under the guise of being progressive. (Think: Change and hope. History is repeating.)

Who were Dewey’s cohorts? John Gatto, former New York state Teacher of the Year, and author of Dumbing Us Down writes:

Edward Thorndike (he is the Thorndike of the Thorndike/Barnard dictionary), and John Dewey of Columbia’s Teacher’s College and their industrialist allies [John D.Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford, and J.P. Morgan], decided to bend government schooling to business and the political state just exactly as it had been bent in Prussia. A higher mission would exist too. Schools would serve as “instruments of managed evolution, establishing conditions for selective breeding before the masses take things into their own hands” (Quoted from a published essay by Edward Thorndike at Columbia Teacher’s college in 1911).

More from Thorndike:

It will, of course, be understood that directly or indirectly, sooner or later, every advance in the sciences of human nature will contribute to our success in controlling human nature and changing it to the advantage of the common weal.

Then there is this from the very first report issued by John D. Rockefeller’s General Education Board. This is their first mission statement:

“In our dreams, people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present education conventions of intellectual and character education fade from their minds and unhampered by tradition we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into men of learning or philosophers, or men of science. We have not to raise up from them authors, educators, poets or men of letters, great artists, painters, musicians, nor lawyers, doctors, statesmen, politicians, creatures of whom we have ample supply. The task is simple. We will organize children and teach them in an perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way”.

But let’s not stop there; here’s a montage of the ideas from the men behind the morphing of America’s public education system over the years.

“The children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming, where everyone would be interdependent.”-John Dewey

“Our schools have been scientifically designed to prevent over-education from happening. The average American [should be] content with their humble role in life, because they’re not tempted to think about any other role.” -William Torrey Harris, U.S. Commissioner of Education from 1889-1906.

“Ninety-nine [students] out of a hundred are automata, careful to walk in prescribed paths, careful to follow the prescribed customs. This is not an accident but the result of substantial education, which scientifically defined, is the subsumption of the individual.” -William Torrey Harris, U.S. Commissioner of Education from 1889-1906.

“Individual talent is too sporadic and unpredictable to be allowed any important part in the organization society. Social systems which endure are built on the average person who can be trained to occupy any position adequately if not brilliantly.” -Stuart Chase, The Proper Study of Mankind, 1948.

“Nothing is more central to the maintenance of social order than the regulatory mechanisms employed to control and socialize our children.” -Ronald Boostom, Coordinator for Juvenile “Justice” in California, 1980.

I won’t even go into how poorly American children do on those incredibly mind-numbing standardized tests, or how colleges are having to lower their standards for their incoming freshmen, and I’ll skip the part about how the schools are handing out diplomas to functional illiterates en masse. It’s old news by now. And for all the money the National Education Association lobbies for (…er…it’s for the children…), nary a dime goes into actually, educating the kiddos. Last time I checked, the Democratic National Committee got more than the students. But make no mistake, this is all by design.

Suffice it to say, the talk of “fixing” America’s schools is pointless. It would be right up there with such worthwhile endeavors as nailing Jell-O to a tree, or trying to convince Bill Clinton that sex outside of marriage is a bad thing. Based on history, public education in America (and the Clinton’s marriage) is chugging along exactly as planned. Where once there were Bibles, we now have condoms. Where once was taught history, we now have political correctness, environmentalism, and anti-America rhetoric. Where once the kids actually learned, now they are shot. Yes, I’d say things are moving along quite smashingly.

So, how does all this tie to the current election and the gaggle of lunatics who seem to be running the show? To answer that, another question must be addressed: Why does it seem as if no one really understands what is at stake in this election? Here’s the key, folks. Precious few truly understand because the goal of the progressivism that spawned our government-run educational system has been met. Vast amounts of our population are uneducated in history and economics (by the pub-ed’s design), unable to think logically or critically (by the pub-ed’s design), and thus, unable to see the danger that lies ahead (again, by the pub-ed’s design).

And just what is the danger? The danger is in the forfeiting of this nation’s sovereignty, and our liberty to the Democratic group-hug called collectivism, aka, socialism. Make no mistake, the founding fathers of public education were unabashed collectivists. And their heirs are no less determined.

And who are their heirs? Glad you asked. Tenured college professors who willingly and knowingly train future teachers in the art of social reconstruction, humanism, and globalism; the Hollywood elite who have cashed in on America’s steadily declining intellect and morals; prominent newspaper and media moguls who, over the years, have raked in millions from the very giants who blueprinted our educational system. In the words of Goose, “The list is long, but distinguished.”

But enough with history. Now for the dose of reality. It’s time for that smack between the eyes that nearly everyone, present company included, deserves. Because, while it’s easy on the conscience to point the finger at the left, the sad, unavoidable truth is this: The other reason the Hollywood Politico wing-nuts have been given credibility while they assault America with their congressionally protected degeneracy and their blathering hate-America political lunacy — the reason they’ve been awarded the big nod is this: Americans arrange their living rooms, and their lives around the television.

Think about it.

America worships at the shrine of HDTV. We can’t live without it, at least that’s what we are being led to believe. From TVs hanging from the ceilings of malls and Wal-Marts, the mini TVs running the CNN ticker at bank drive-through lanes, and the scads of idiot boxes in doctors’ and dentists’ offices, you’d think the average American incapable of a single moment lost in quiet thought.

Ah, but isn’t that the point? A person who engages in the thinking process is a dangerous person in the eyes of a liberal, even if that thinking is done during the ten minutes it takes to buy a gallon of milk. Which, by the way, is about all the time it would take to realize that The View is a complete waste of time.

Big conspiracy theory, right? I don’t think so. As we all know, the old-school way of getting TV reception (the use of rabbit ears or tin foil wrapped around the cat’s tail) will be a thing of the past by February 2009. And since that means the freeing of millions from the blatherings of Katie Couric, Oprah, and the rest of the main stream media’s highly trained journalists, the government had to save the (their) day. Salvation, my folks, is coming in the form of a taxpayer-funded voucher. 

Now why would the government do that? Sounds kind of cryptic in a benevolent sort of way. Well, actually, it is. Anytime the government hands out money to “assist” people, it nearly always translates into the government using the tax payer’s money to further their agenda. In this case, and in the case of the NEA, the goal is to maintain a steady stream of liberalism flowing into the minds of Americans, young and old. And everyone knows that those who think like a liberal will vote like a liberal.

It’s genius, really.

So, again, talk of fixing the schools or holding the media accountable for its content is, in my estimation, a pointless endeavor. Both institutions are running exactly as intended, and the people running the show are in their positions by design. Did I mention it was genius?

If we can find alternative fuels (I’m still not on board with corn-fed cars, by the way.), then I’m fairly certain we can find alternatives to education and entertainment that won’t maim trees or deny mating space to the eastern Alaska snow rat…or Pamela Anderson. But are Americans, the conservative Americans who claim they are fed up, willing to educate their children or turn off their televisions?

Sadly, I think I already know the answer.

Your Kids, Obama’s Kids…What’s the Difference?

“When an opponent declares, ‘I will not come over to your side,’ I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to us already. . . . What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”

~Adolf Hitler The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, “Education in the Third Reich”

I’d wager Barney Frank’s bonus check that these kids don’t even understand what they’re singing about. Talk about child abuse.

I wonder how they’d feel if they knew Obama and his party are responsible for the sanctioned killing of nearly half their young generation. The little tykes might just change their tune.

Top image courtesy of Dr. Slogan’s Prescriptions.

Obama Youth Cheer Praises for the Messiah’s Version of “Healthy Mae”

I’ve been touting this book for years, but in the interest of beating a dead horse, I’ll tout it once more. Parallel Journeys written by former Nazi Youth member, Alfons Heck, is a must read in light of the “Obama Youth” video below.

 

 

As any good despot knows, brainwashing the youth is the best place to start when one wants to secure a stout, albeit mindless, following. It worked for Hitler.

Now, I’m not accusing Obama of actively recruiting young people and holding Hitleresque rallies (or poorly choreographed cheer squads). He doesn’t have to; he’s got the main stream media, public schools, and Rock the Vote working those gigs.

Why the Obama Youth pep rally? To sing the praises of Obama’s plan to turn America into a socialist state…er…I mean, to sing the praises of Obama’s health care plan, of course. Now, I’m not an expert on all things health care, but I have some serious issues with the message here. So, in the spirit of educating today’s youthful mush heads, I’d like to offer up a reality check.

The video starts out with the young men chanting, what sounds like, “Alpha, Omega.” Can’t you just see the Messiah laying hands on them? Lesson number one: Obama isn’t deity.

And the praise begins:

“Because of Obama, I’m inspired to be the next doctor.”

And thanks to the Messiah’s socialized health care plan, Jr., you won’t get paid squat. But that won’t matter since you won’t have student loans because, thanks to your Messiah, you’ll go to college on tax payer money. You’ll probably get extra grant money for being a minority. ACORN will make sure of that.

“Because of Obama, I’m inspired to be the next lawyer.”

And work for the NAACP or the ACLU suing “The Man” after you’ve gone to college on “The Man’s” dime. Oh, and I’m sure ACORN can use you.

“Because of Obama, I’m inspired to be the next automotive technician.”

Your vo-tech education will also be financed by the tax payers. You might not rake in the dough as a gear head, but at least you won’t be one of those selfish rich people who pay 70+% of the country’s taxes. You’ll also have free health care, and the government will ensure that you are fiscally solvent by securing your mortgage, thanks to ACORN. Oh, and they’ll pay for your kids’ college, too.

The “I’m inspired” chorus continues down the line until we hear a rousing can-can line of: “Yes we can!”

Then some loud mumbling that is barely discernible, followed by:

“Take more responsibility for our own lives.”

Pardon me? Responsibility for your own lives? With socialized health care? With the government bailing out failed businesses? With the government backing mortgages? With the government paying for everyone’s college? With the government telling you what kind of light bulb to use? I beg to differ.

Next up, viewers are apprised of the finer points of the Obama Health Care Plan.

Obama’s health care plan will include coverage of all essential medical services.”

And from the look of half you kids, treatment for juvenile diabetes will, no doubt, be essential. Oh, let’s not forget tax payer funded abortion. Wouldn’t want to punish your girlfriend or daughter with an unwanted baby.

Obama’s health care plan will provide minimal copay for deductibles.”

Copays and deductibles set by the very government lackeys who tanked Fannie and Freddie. I can’t wait.

Obama’s health care plan will simplify paperwork for providers.”

Show me a time, just one time, when government bureaucracy has EVER resulted in simplified paperwork. Look Jr., after you’ve stood in line at the DMV and seen its stellar efficiency, let me know if you still think the phrase “simplify paperwork” in regard to government isn’t the most ludicrous thing you’ve ever heard.

Obamas health care plan will provide services for families who cannot afford Medicaid.”

The services are already there; they are already being provided. The problem isn’t a lack of services, it’s a lack of payment. The tax payers are already footing the bill. On Obama’s plan, we’ll be footing even more.

Obama’s health care plan will provide the participants the ability to move from job to job without changing health care coverage.”

Yep, you’ll even get to keep your coverage if you quit your job at Slurpy Heaven, and become a permanent fixture in the unemployment line. Hence the term, ‘Universal’.

Obama’s health care plan will extend coverage to young adults up to the age of 25 through their parents plan.”

I don’t really get this one. I mean, universal coverage is just that – universal coverage. So, Jr. (at age 25?), when you finally decide to cut the cord, you can jump from Mom and Pop’s universal health care provided by the government to your own universal health care provided by the government. The difference would be…?

Obama’s health care plan will not turn any American away from any insurance plan.”

I could be missing something here, but how could there be any other insurance plan? Thanks to a government-funded, entitlement-driven health care system that is FREE (bought and paid for by the tax payers), all other insurance companies will go bust. This is pretty much a moot point.

Obama’s health care plan will offer health information technology.”

And that means…? I wasn’t aware of a major deficit in this area. I think the Messiah pilfered this from Senator Frist. But more on that later.

Obama’s plan will reform our market structure to increase competition.”

This is sheer lunacy. But since no one is bothering to actually hold Obama, or anyone in his camp, to what they say, this will probably pass uncontested among those who don’t know squat about history or economics. Katie Couric comes to mind…

Universal health care will not increase competition. Who can compete with the lowest bidder? Who can compete with the government giving hand outs? Who’s going to pay for insurance when the government will cover you? Who will be competing with whom?

And finally:

Obama’s plan will offer federal re-insurance to employers”

Again, a la tax payer money. I see a pattern here.

Obama’s plan, as highlighted by these youthful minions, sounds like a more Marxist version of Sen. Frist’s brainchild, “Healthy Mae”.

Speaking to the National Press Club last month [July 2004], Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist floated the idea that the country should create a publicly-chartered private insurer that would help create a big secondary market for health insurance. If it ever came into being, Healthy Mae, patterned after the mortgage market-maker Fannie Mae, would be designed to give individual buyers access to a more stable insurance market — which presumably would feature lower rates that could keep more people covered.

Given the demise of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the thought of a Healthy Mae borders on laughable…or downright frightening. Now that we have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, (and the fulfillment of years of Republican prophesying that Fannie and Freddie needed reform), the premise that Healthy Mae would have been “designed to give individual buyers access to a more stable insurance market-which would presumably feature lower rates” is a chilling thought, indeed. My guess is that even lower rates would be given to minorities at the behest of such prestigious groups as, oh, I don’t know…ACORN.

But back to the Obama Youth. I’m not knocking these kids. What they want to do with their lives is admirable. But to say their inspiration is “Because of Obama” is truly sad, indeed. What these kids don’t know, because the schools don’t teach history any more, is that Obama will hand them more of the same oppression that they’ve gotten from the Democratic party since the ’60’s. But because he’s black, we are anathema for pointing this out.

Universal health care sounds dandy when chanted by excitable, camo-clad zealots. But, if it’s so great, why do millions of people, from countries who have socialized health care, venture to our shores for treatment? Because our health care is better.

If these kids were being taught history, and not social reconstructionism; economics, and not disguised socialism, they’d know that Obama’s direction for this country hinders any chance of true empowerment, true liberty, or true self-reliance. They don’t realize that their conscience will be guided by the government, and the laws of this country will be subject to a global jury.

Sure, handouts and entitlements will abound. Health care, college, and mortgages for everyone. But what the youth for Obama haven’t been told is this: Whenever someone gives you something, whenever something isn’t earned, but rather, freely placed in an open palm, the giver can always take it away. The giver calls the shots. Under Obama, these kids will never really own anything.