Friday, April 29, 2011

Union and Labor Organizations Lay Siege to the Massachusetts Capitol

Well, not really.

But that is the headline you would have expected to read given the actions and the media coverage that took place when Wisconsin moved to revoke some collective bargaining rights, why wouldn't the same thing happen in Massachusetts? Because Massachusetts is union strong and would never do such a thing? Wrong!

Union Busting, Massachusetts Style
Pop quiz: What political party, in what state, this week passed a bill in the dead of night stripping public-sector unions of their collective- bargaining powers? Republicans in Wisconsin? The GOP in Ohio or Indiana?

Try Democrats in Massachusetts. Maybe the debate over public-sector benefits isn't all that ideological after all.
Where are the banging drums? Where is the overnight occupation of the capitol building? Why aren't union thugs physically blocking lawmakers from entering the premises to vote?

There are none. The unions are stunned. This is not how the corrupt system of collective bargaining is supposed to work! Especially not in true blue Massachusetts!
Robert J. Haynes, president of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO, was so irked he forgot to stick to the union script about "rights" and a "war" on the "middle class." He skipped to the real outrage—that the 81 Democrats who voted for the bill were failing to play by the political rules. "These are the same Democrats that all these labor unions elected. The same Democrats who we contributed to in their campaigns," he complained. The unions would fight this to the "bitter end," he vowed. "Massachusetts is not the place that takes collective bargaining away from public employees."
The system where unions collect dues from employees (against their will if necessary) and then hand that money to politicians who in return strengthen the unions position and funnel more tax payer money to the unions is a vicious circle of corruption. But like most criminals their greed knows no bounds and they have negotiated themselves agreements that the tax base can no longer afford. They are willing to kill the goose that lays their golden eggs.
Municipal health costs have as a result averaged near 11% growth annually—for a decade. The average premium is today 37% higher than in the private sector, and one-third higher than premiums for federal plans. The numbers have so exploded that personnel costs—salaries and benefits—are now eating up an astonishing 75% of local Massachusetts budgets.
So where are the SEIU and AFL-CIO armies? Where is the siege of the capitol and the intimidation of local businesses to support the unions? Why didn't the Democratically controlled State House members run away from themselves and take refuge in nearby New Hampshire or Rhode Island?
Wisconsin moved to rein in collective bargaining powers that are crushing the state. Massachusetts moved to rein in collective bargaining powers that are crushing the state. The only difference is that Democrats have chosen to portray Mr. Walker's legislation as "union-busting" while presenting their own as necessary reform.
Now, everybody act surprised!

Thursday, April 28, 2011

Trump for President: The Art of the Spiel. Trump 1 Obama 0

It's been fun watching and listening to all the varied spin, er, I mean analysis on the Trump/Obama birth certificate story.

It was surreal to be watching cable news and hear that President Obama would be speaking to the nation in ten minutes regarding his birth certificate, and then immediately after that watch Donald Trump get out of his Helicopter in Portsmouth NH and claim credit for being the one who finally got the President to release his birth certificate.

Trump Takes Credit For Obama Releasing A Birth Certificate
"I'm taking great credit and you have to ask the president, 'why didn't he do this a long time ago? Why didn't he do it a long time ago?' When Hillary Clinton was asking, when everybody was asking, why didn't he do it? It's shocking. It's shocking," Donald Trump said at a press conference this morning on President Obama's birth certificate.
I was literally laughing out loud, shaking my head, clapping slowly and thinking "Beautiful, just Beautiful".

Having grown up in New Jersey, and having gone to college in New York City I have been exposed to the Donald a little longer than the rest of the nation. I respect and like Mr Trump, but when I heard he was running for president I thought, "here we go again". Yes, I was dismissive. But my head is now turned, and I am listening closely.

Here is what others are thinking and saying.

Right, Wing-Nut!: Birthers 1, Obama 0
Even with an offical long-form birth certificate, Obama has lost this round badly to the "birthers".  If they're the crazy nincompoops that the media makes them out to be, and yet are able to bend the president to their will, well...what does that say about his mental capabilities,exactly?
Keith Olbermann: Maguffins 1 Obama 0
It is another reflection of our well-meaning but sometimes utterly tone-deaf President that he really dug up the long-form birth certificate – even after the previous one had been released,
Going on to say that of course this is all due to racism.

And then from the Wall Street Journal.

Born in the U.S.A. 
As for Mr. Obama, he easily could have allowed the birther bubble to grow, further tarnishing the mainly right-leaning crowd that either fell for it or, as with Sarah Palin, was willing to give it too much credence. He then could have pricked that bubble by releasing the certificate at a moment of maximum political convenience to his re-election campaign. That the President didn't do so is an act of leadership that deserves a note of appreciation.
Pretty charitable of the WSJ. But, sorry, I can't agree. Obama did this to himself. He could have put this to bed a long long time ago by releasing the very same birth certificate he released yesterday, but the fact of the matter is that he did not. The super genius - smarter than all of us president held it back for all of the cynical political evil genius motives that the WSJ suggests, and insiders have confirmed. And sorry, it was not an act of leadership that lead him to release the birth certificate, it was Donald J Trump who was beating the president like a baby seal over this issue, and the president wanted it to stop. I think that is a form of Karma when you do something for evil selfish purposes and it comes back to bite you. Mr Obama really has no one to blame but himself.

Not ever being a "birther" myself I do have to admit to taking immense amusement and schadenfreude over the whole ordeal. After all, it was the democratic party that first went after John McCain as being not qualified to serve as president because he was born in Panama. More Karma, don't you think?

And in the Irony department? This whole movement was born of a Clintonista dirty trick. Her team originally made the assertion. The "birthers" are not just GOP'ers as the main stream media would have you believe. There are a lot of female Hillary supporters out there who hate the president for what he did to their Hillary.

Anyways, I guess in the big picture, it is good when the circus leaves town, but somehow you still miss it a little.

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

the thinker: Being A Skeptic

Interesting post over at the ThinkingProf Blog.

the thinker: Being A Skeptic

He writes what I consider to be an irrefutable truth. Especially with the 'I get my news from John Stewart' demographic.
At times, I'm not sure people are even reading--much less reading critically and carefully--the information that they present and the links that they post.
And then goes on and uses one of my posts as an example.

I like the post because imparts some historical details I previously did not know (historical perspectives is a stated goal of this blog). It's worth a read.

I think his overall point is that in the arena of discourse facts can be used fast and loose and details may be obscured?

In this day and age of the sound bite, 'John Stewart as a Journalist', and hyperbolic propaganda, I could not agree more. I just feel a little self-conscious that I was singled out (not really). I would urge the professor to cite examples of the left committing similar transgressions (if that is what in fact he thinks they are) as well.

I am not sure the professor necessarily debunked the message I tried to convey by using the quote which was "The girl couldn't quite communicate the point of her sign. She was just super smart and if you didn't get it then you were just too dumb"

Monday, April 25, 2011

Kiss My Hamas: Part X

While there is zero national interest for the United States to be bombing Libya, we are there, and we are actively participating in the bombing of targets of opportunity.

Now in Syria the Military has turned on it's protestors in much the same way that Qaddafi did.

Seeing regime change in Syria is in the national interest of the United States.

Syria is the lynch pin to the Iran, Hamas, & Hezbollah triad. Through Syria, Iran is able to supply Hezbollah and Hamas with weapons with which they can perform acts of terror and acts of war on Israel. President Obama has an opportunity to influence a significant shift of power among Mideast blocs to be further in the pro-west camps.

Will he do so? Doubtful.

Either by massive miscalculation, stupidity, naivete, wishful thinking, or just plain dumb luck President Obama has made the wrong move in every critical turn with his dealings in the Mideast.

  1. First the president was unable to convince Iran to stop it's nuclear ambitions with his unicorns and fuzzy bunny era of detente.
  2. Then the president ignored the Green Revolution. When the population of Iran came out to protest the corrupt election, and protest their oppressive government much like they did in Libya, Egypt and Tunisia, the president showed no support and let the movement be brutally put down by their government, much like Libya and Syria are trying to do.
  3. The president publicly cooled relations with America's staunchest Mideast ally Israel.
  4. Despite remaining quiet and inactive when our enemies in Iran were threatened with public uprising, President Obama publicly comes out and calls for regime change in Egypt (which he never did for Iran). Mubarak wasn't a nice guy, but he was in the pro-Western bloc, and faster than you can say Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama through Mubarak under the bus.
  5. Having witnessed the United States throwing Mubarek under the bus, Col. Qaddafi a recently reformed western antagonist determines he must take take matters into his own hands, and uses military force to quell the uprising. Just like they did in Iran when the west did nothing. President Obama sends the military into Libya on humanitarian grounds.
Now what? Just like Libya, the Syrian government is using it's military to quell the public uprising. Will Syria get the Libya treatment or the Iranian treatment?

If they are not treated the same way Libya has been handled, then what does that say? Does it mean that if you are friendly towards the United States or at least not an antagonist you can be sure that America will stab you in the back? But if you are an open aggressor of the great Satan you can rest assured that your enemy is too timid to dare and reproach you (at least with anything more than words).

Or worse, does it merely mean that the Obama doctrine is that we only fight wars for oil.

Most of Obama's Mideast blunders are documented on this blog.
Kiss My Hamas
Very Foreign Policy

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Right, Wing-Nut!: A Tale Of Two Pulitzers....

Right, Wing-Nut!: A Tale Of Two Pulitzers....

Another good post over at the JerseyNut's blog.

This one is interesting because one of the subjects of the posts stops by the blog to leave a reply in the comments section. David Cay Johnston.

If you are a fan of Ayn Rand, or just of her tome "Atlas Shrugged" then it's worth stopping by and soaking in what people who are not fans of Rand think.

And if you are not a fan of Rand, it's worth stopping by to see how fans interpret her work.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Rhode Island Tea Party Hosts Tax Day Protest

April 15th 2011. It was a fine afternoon and many fine patriots turned out to express love for their country and their contempt for the Government that is hell bent on spending it's way to prosperity, and increasing taxes on it's citizens to fund it.

You'll see in the video some Anti-Tea Party "infiltrators" walking around holding up their protest signs, with messages made to mock the the "Taxed Enough Already" platform held by the Tea Party. BAsically their message was an aloof "duh, we need taxes for all the stuff goverment pays for, so like, just shut up and pay them"

The pseudo intellectual, earthy crunchy student from Brown University carried signs with slogans that read:


"I want crumbling roadways"

"Healthcare is only for the rich"

"I want to close all the libraries"

The "we are as smart as Obama" Ivy League youngsters did not do well when confronted to explain what their signs meant. You can see the "Astroturf" kid get confronted in the video, and over hear the "I want crumbling roadways gal" get heckled.

When "I want to close all the libraries" gal was confronted by the fact that the library system in America was invented by none other than Ben Franklin before there was an American government, and a hundred years before there was an income tax she seemed stunned. After all, these Tea Party people aren't supposed to know any history. When confronted with the logic that we didn't need taxes for libraries before, why do we need higher taxes now to keep them open, she just held her sign up in front of her face, turned around and walked the other way.


Friday, April 15, 2011

Happy Birthday Tea Party, Happy Bithday to You!

Two years ago I attended Boston's Tea Party. Today I will be in Providence.

It's a beautiful day here and I urge you to get out and join the 'angry mob'. They are nice people and you will enjoy yourself.

Then it's off to see Atlas Shrugged.

I'll post pictures this weekend.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Atlas Shrugs Tomorrow

I have already purchased my tickets on-line for tomorrow night.

There was a very good article in the WSJ today about Ayn Rand.

Remembering the Real Ayn Rand 
When Rand created the character of Wesley Mouch, it's as though she was anticipating Barney Frank (D., Mass). Mouch is the economic czar in "Atlas Shrugged" whose every move weakens the economy, which in turn gives him the excuse to demand broader powers. Mr. Frank steered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to disaster with mandates for more lending to low-income borrowers. After Fannie and Freddie collapsed under the weight of their subprime mortgage books, Mr. Frank proclaimed last year: "The way to cure that is to give us more authority." Mouch couldn't have said it better himself.
So true. So true.

I have pointed out more than a few times on this blog that being a Conservative Libertine means that you are embraced by neither the Left or the Right. In this article the author, Donald Luskin, reminds us that Ayn Rand also rankled the Left and the Right.
Rand was not a conservative or a liberal: She was an individualist. "Atlas Shrugged" is, at its heart, a plea for the most fundamental American ideal—the inalienable rights of the individual. On tax day, with our tax dollars going to big government and subsidies for big business, let's remember it's the celebration of individualism that has kept "Atlas Shrugged" among the best-selling novels of all time.
Not to get carried away with labels like our liberal friends tend to do, but I prefer the term Conservative Libertine over individualist. Individualist does sound a bit selfish, and that's not what Ayn Rand was advocating. Conservative Libertine I think better conveys the message that your ideology puts you on both sides of the fence. It just depends what the issue is.

Atlas Shrugs Posts

It's Happening.............
Another Victory for the looters.
Mediocrity Trumps Winning
Going Galt She’s Back!
Atlas Shrugged - The Movie! Finally!

Update: And, this post would not be complete without some references to the WhoIsJohnGalt blog. It seems as though John has returned from the far side of Galt's Gulch just in time for the movie.

Welcome back John!



Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Winning the Future? or Duh Losing!

Today President Obama spoke at George Washington University to dig in his heels, and fire the first volley in the coming battles that will be the debt limit and the 2012 budget.

He began by painting everyone who does not agree with his ideas as evil cold hearted evil doers by lecturing the country on social responsibility. Like these were thing the country did not know or understand

Transcript of Obama's Speech on the National Debt
“There but for the grace of God go I,” we say to ourselves, and so we contribute to programs like Medicare and Social Security, which guarantee us health care and a measure of basic income after a lifetime of hard work; unemployment insurance, which protects us against unexpected job loss; and Medicaid, which provides care for millions of seniors in nursing homes, poor children, and those with disabilities. We are a better country because of these commitments. I’ll go further – we would not be a great country without those commitments.

For much of the last century, our nation found a way to afford these investments and priorities with the taxes paid by its citizens. As a country that values fairness, wealthier individuals have traditionally born a greater share of this burden than the middle class or those less fortunate.
 And then he moved on to blame Bush for 40 years of entitlement and social program government spending.
But after Democrats and Republicans committed to fiscal discipline during the 1990s, we lost our way in the decade that followed. We increased spending dramatically for two wars and an expensive prescription drug program – but we didn’t pay for any of this new spending. Instead, we made the problem worse with trillions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts – tax cuts that went to every millionaire and billionaire in the country; tax cuts that will force us to borrow an average of $500 billion every year over the next decade.

To give you an idea of how much damage this caused to our national checkbook, consider this: in the last decade, if we had simply found a way to pay for the tax cuts and the prescription drug benefit, our deficit would currently be at low historical levels in the coming years.

While President Bush did in fact double the deficit he inherited during his eight year tenure, President Obama wants to ignore the fact that he double the deficit yet again in a mere two years. Yet this deficit problem is still Bush's fault (read: any republican who dares utter an idea toward cuts).

And then as a preamble to sharing his super genius plan for the budget (well his second one anyways) he attacks the opening bid proposed by Republicans. The cuts proposed in the Ryan proposal.
These aren’t the kind of cuts that Republicans and Democrats on the Fiscal Commission proposed. These are the kind of cuts that tell us we can’t afford the America we believe in. And they paint a vision of our future that’s deeply pessimistic.

It’s a vision that says if our roads crumble and our bridges collapse, we can’t afford to fix them. If there are bright young Americans who have the drive and the will but not the money to go to college, we can’t afford to send them. Go to China and you’ll see businesses opening research labs and solar facilities.
Great. China is his model. Centrally planned economies and trickle up poverty (communism) are the ideals he is looking to for inspiration. The fact of the matter is that the phenomena he is observing is due to the fact that China is moving toward free markets while America is moving away from them.
South Korean children are outpacing our kids in math and science.
And it's not due to lack of money. America has been throwing money at education for years to the extent that the amount of money per pupil has doubled in the last ten years in real dollars with no appreciable improvement. (statistics and reference to come shortly).
 Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can’t afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can’t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy
Well Mr President, as you said earlier in the speech
Even after our economy recovers, our government will still be on track to spend more money than it takes in throughout this decade and beyond. That means we’ll have to keep borrowing more from countries like China. And that means more of your tax dollars will go toward paying off the interest on all the loans we keep taking out. By the end of this decade, the interest we owe on our debt could rise to nearly $1 trillion. Just the interest payments.
So let's get to the super genius idea then. What do we do? Nope. We need to perform the eat the rich ritual first.
Think about it. In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90% of all working Americans actually declined. The top 1% saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each.
Really? I think we need a fact check on that one. If that's correct, then why are state tax revenues that are addicted to Millionaire taxes in so much trouble?

The Price of Taxing the Rich
The top 1% of earners fill the coffers of states like California and New York during a boom—and leave them starved for revenue in a bust.
Nearly half of California's income taxes before the recession came from the top 1% of earners: households that took in more than $490,000 a year. High earners, it turns out, have especially volatile incomes—their earnings fell by more than twice as much as the rest of the population's during the recession. When they crashed, they took California's finances down with them.
If Obama's outright lie were true, probably would not be having this discussion because we would be getting a good chunk of their purported prosperity already!

But back to the speech.
The first step in our approach is to keep annual domestic spending low by building on the savings that both parties agreed to last week – a step that will save us about $750 billion over twelve years
There we go. Finally an idea. Though he bemoaned those very cuts a week earlier, now they are his idea. Great. Whatever.
The second step in our approach is to find additional savings in our defense budget.
Fine. Everything is on the table. We should evaluate defense spending from many angles
( Charles Wolf, Jr.: The Facts About American 'Decline' -
And finally the president makes his third point.
The third step in our approach is to further reduce health care spending in our budget. Here, the difference with the House Republican plan could not be clearer: their plan lowers the government’s health care bills by asking seniors and poor families to pay them instead. Our approach lowers the government’s health care bills by reducing the cost of health care itself.
Uh oh. Here we go again. Entitlements will save us, not sink us. If the president hangs onto the idea that Obamacare is saving the country money and that more Obamacare will save even more money, then say bye bye in 2012. The public at large has already roundly rejected that silly lie.

And finally
The fourth step in our approach is to reduce spending in the tax code.
Wow? What does that even mean? It takes a second to sink in, but what it really means is raising taxes. Is that not the mother of all euphemisms?

So, that's it really. Nothing new to see here.

Hope and change has been replaced with winning the future. Big government is still the solution to all that ails, and all those opposed will be destroyed.

Resistance is futile.

Monday, April 11, 2011

Right, Wing-Nut!: Barack Obama: Deficit Hawk? Or Pathetic Poseur?

Exellent post by the "Jersey Nut".  

Use of his art work is posted nearby without permission. But as exhibited on this blog we have a real penchant for mocking the the "hope and change" decor, and couldn't help ourselves.

Right, Wing-Nut!: Barack Obama: Deficit Hawk? Or Pathetic Poseur?
Usually, poseurs were easily pinned out, and roundly mocked, for their insincerity and cluelessness. Expect Obama to experience the same, by, oh...Thursday morning, latest.

But we may not have to wait until Thursday. I think the President's "group or subculture" is already starting to pin him out. By none other than Paul Krugman.

The President Is Missing
What have they done with President Obama? What happened to the inspirational figure his supporters thought they elected? Who is this bland, timid guy who doesn’t seem to stand for anything in particular?
It's an accusation he goes on to make in a rather apologetic tone, but then......
What’s going on here? Despite the ferocious opposition he has faced since the day he took office, Mr. Obama is clearly still clinging to his vision of himself as a figure who can transcend America’s partisan differences. And his political strategists seem to believe that he can win re-election by positioning himself as being conciliatory and reasonable, by always being willing to compromise.

But if you ask me, I’d say that the nation wants — and more important, the nation needs — a president who believes in something, and is willing to take a stand. And that’s not what we’re seeing. 



Thursday, April 7, 2011

Government Shutdown - Thank Nancy Pelosi

Shutdown shmutdown. Who cares!

This Obama drama is brought to you by ex-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). And it really is just drama. Basically the democrats are engineering what they perceive to be a win/win proposition if the Republicans refuse to fund all of their drunken sailor spending. Win #1; A government shutdown really will equate to a paid vacation for the public unions, just as it did in 1995. Yes, that's right, we shut down the government in 1995 and everybody still got paid. WINNING! Win #2: With the help of the mainstream media the evil Republicans will get all of the blame for the government being shutdown. WINNING!

Let's remember that this fiscal year started last October. Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic controlled 111th congress never even considered funding the federal government in 2011. In the real world budgets are planned for and approved before the fiscal year begins. But no, They concentrated on spending. Huge spending with things like Obamacare, without worrying about how to fund it or even just keeping the government running. And then, in the second week of January 2011 they handed over this big stink bomb to John Boehner and the Republicans of the 112th congress.

How beautiful is that! It's like some sexist 1950's sitcom. Nancy Pelosi gets to play the part of the stay at home wife who takes the credit card and runs up a huge bill, and John Boehner gets to play the part of the hardworking husband who gets to come home from work and open the envelope and read the bill. "We cant afford this!" screams John. To which Nancy quips "That's not my problem" as she turns and shakes her hips as she walks away.

And now the drama we are witnessing is like the scene when the repo man comes to the house to collect things, and the wife (Nancy) is chasing him around a clinging to the things she could not afford, still not understanding why her things are being stripped away.

Obama Meeting Fails to End Stalemate Over Federal Budget
“It would be inexcusable, given the relatively narrow differences, when it comes to numbers, between the two parties that we cant get this done,” Mr. Obama said.
Really? What is irresponsible Mr. President is that you, and Ms Pelosi, and Harry Reid have done nothing to rectify the solvency of this nation. You want it all paid for and you'll need to raise the debt ceiling to do it. Standby for more Obama drama when that fight comes to the floor.

Mr. Reid accused Republicans of seeking a “shortcut around doing our jobs” by proposing another one-week, stop-gap funding measure to keep the government operating.
Well, a shortcut to doing your job is a lot better than just flat out not doing your job Harry! Why weren't you and Nancy doing your job before last October when it was supposed to be done! How dare you! Really!

All of this brings the "Yes we can" slogan to a new level. Thanks to Obama and Madison Ave in the upside down world we now live in 'No' equals bad, and 'Yes' equals good.

Boehner: "We can't afford all of this"
Obama: "Yes we can!"
Boehner: "No, really! We can't"
Obama: "Yes we can!"
Boehner: "But we would have to raise the debt ceiling and borrow even more money from the Chinese."
Obama: "Yes we can!"

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Eric's Epic Edict - Eric Holder Relents on KSM Tribunals

Eric Holder should resign. In his role as Attorney General he has demonstrated that he is out of touch with the law, out of touch with what is good for America and generally just out of touch with reality.

Well, I guess you could argue that yesterday's pronouncement that Khalid Sheik Mohamed and his cohorts would not be tried in Civil Court was somewhat of a reality check, but the Attorney General pretty much stated that he still doesn't get it. In what was a complete about face, the Obama Administration has retreated to the position put forth by the Bush administration.

Vindicating Guantanamo 
KSM and his fellow murderers will now be tried by military commissions of the kind that President George W. Bush proposed in the earliest days of the conflict formerly known as the war on terror. Someone should write the headline: Holder vindicates Ashcroft, as in Mr. Bush's first AG. Or how about: Current State Department Counselor Harold Koh vindicates John Yoo, the much-maligned Bush Justice Department official whose views on Presidential power have also been increasingly adopted by Team Obama.

Somehow we doubt we'll hear the same moral denunciations we once heard about Mr. Bush's policies. The Europeans are mute about Guantanamo, and Newsweek hasn't come up with any more pseudo-scoops about Gitmo guards desecrating the Quran. Mr. Holder made clear he's not about to apologize, much less thank his predecessors for their foresight, but we suppose his vindication of Guantanamo is enough.
We declared in 2009 on these pages that the thought of trying  KSM and other terrorists in civil court was a boneheaded idea.

This is your idea of Hope?

Mr Holder has demonstrated that he is out of touch with the law by thinking that it was appropriate to bring enemy combatants who were apprehended in other countries to the U.S. without any precedent. He has demonstrated he is out of touch with what is good for America for thinking it was appropriate to have the civil trials just blocks away from ground zero. And he has demonstrated that he is out of touch with reality by communicating that he still does not get it with his begrudged declaration that because of congress he was not getting his way.

Eric Holder should resign.

Saturday, April 2, 2011

Union Terror Continues in Madison Wisconsin

He Even Looks Like Tony Soprano!
Along the lines of yesterday's post, the terror being executed on small business bystanders continues without any notice from the main stream media. Unless you visit the Wall Street Journal, or Fox News, or certain blogs (Althouse), you won't hear about the protection racket thuggery being dealt to Madison Wisconsin businesses. Nothing on CNN, nothing at the L.A. Times, nothing at NPR, and nothing at the Grey Lady.

The problem that we are observing here is that our main stream media who collectively, and in a collusive fashion, whipped the country up to a maelstrom cry for civility is now silent and obtuse to the hypocrisy of what is happening in Madison Wisconsin. What was once considered 'violent rhetoric' is now not even newsworthy. The unions are cracking down on hapless Madison store fronts in a way analogous to what Quadaffi might do to his own people. Unions are threatening coffee shops, store fronts, and other small businesses to put the signage sent to them by the union prominently displayed in the windows, "or else".

Wisconsin Unions Get Ugly - WSJ
Dated March 28, 2011, the letter is addressed to "DEAR UNION GROVE AREA BUSSINESS OWNER/MANAGER," in Racine County. And it begins with this warm greeting: "It is unfortunate that you have chosen 'not' to support public workers rights in Wisconsin. In recent past weeks you have been offered a sign(s) by a public employee(s) who works in one one of the State facilities in the Union Grove area. These signs simply said 'This Business Supports Workers Rights," a simple, subtle and we feel non-controversial statement given the facts at this time."
Really? Given the facts at this time? What facts are they looking at? What facts suggest any state can afford the fat cat deals betrothed to the unions via the corrupt system of collective bargaining?

Everything You Need To Know About Gov’t Unions You Can Learn From R.I.
Government Workers Pay Next To Nothing For Their Benefits.

Government Workers Are Doing Better Than The Rest Of Us In This Economy.
These Generous Benefits Are Crushing Taxpayers And Exploding Budgets.

the taxpayer cost of providing a comfortable retirement for public-sector worke
The Problem Is So Bad, Even With The Increases, The Taxpayer Is Screwed.
And so what would normally be protected by RICO statutes is going completely unreported by main stream media.
Hey you White House, ha ha, charade you are
You house proud town mouse, ha ha, charade you are
You're trying to keep our feelings off the street
You're nearly a real treat
All tight lips and cold feet
I know you feel abused
- Pink Floyd 
Pigs ( 3 different Ones )

Friday, April 1, 2011

Where are the Cries for Civility?

Have you heard about the Wisconsin teacher who threatened as many as 16 GOP Wisconsin State Senators? If you weren't paying close attention, you may not have. What we are witnessing right now is the demonstrable extreme bias in the main stream media. Remember when the media at large contorted themselves to blame Sarah Palin's use of cross hair's on her web site for the violence of the lefty loon who shot  Arizona Representative Giffords? We endured weeks of mainstream propaganda lecturing the country about the danger of mixing rhetoric that might be interpreted as violent with political speech. Don't use words like 'target'. Don't ever say 'reload'. And when Tea Party protester's we're chanting 'kill the Bill', we saw the likes of Nancy Pelosi snivel about how she was concerned about the Tea Party rhetoric because she has witnessed political violence before (referring to the democratic lefty loon who shot and killed democratic political figure and gay activist Harvey Milk). The most condescending lecture/indictment came from Paul Krugman and editorial board at the New York times.

Jared Loughner is a lefty loon.

Left wing zealot Paul Krugman was part of the choir bemoaning the 'Climate of Hate'. At first blush, after reading the title you would have to be forgiven for momentarily thinking that the piece might be about the Bush years and the dementia, outrage and hate that surrounded the Bush / Haliburton conspiracy

And even low life lefty loon Marc Ash struck the pose of the indignant holier than thou phony.

But as soon as protesters in Wisconsin started chanting 'kill the Bill' the media went silent. No more lectures about violent rhetoric and petitions calling for 'civility in political discourse' were replaced by petitions for solidarity with the teachers in Wisconsin.

So, now that the media is looking the other way will they accept the blame for what are overt threats of violence coming from the left? or will they some how once again try and pin this too on Sarah Palin?

Woman faces charges in threatening emails to lawmakers
MADISON (WKOW) -- Authorities say 26-year-old Katherine Windels sent disturbing emails to 16 Republican senators, repeatedly threatening to kill them.
According to the complaint, Windels told the senators "you will be killed and your families [sic] will also be killed due to your actions in the last 8 weeks." She threatened to "put a nice little bullet in your head," and made reference to several bombs.