Tag: World News

Obamacare to stand says SCOUTS

Well, this was not what I was hoping to wake up to hearing on my 40’th birthday.

The Memeoradum round up is here.

The link round up is here: (H/T to Drudge)

Now for what I think: I believe this to be the biggest set back in American freedom since the McCarthy hearings and the red scare of the 1950’s. I guess I should not surprised, the this out of control federal behemoth that we call Government has always valued the idea of a tax on the American people.   I will comment on one thing that I read over at the Weekly Standard, that I linked to above:

It is understandable why President Obama has no interest in framing this election as a referendum on Obamacare. His party already suffered perhaps its worst defeat since the 19th century thanks to his centerpiece legislation. With the Supreme Court’s ruling now behind him, he will have even less incentive to remind voters about Obamacare going forward. As far as he’s concerned, the less the American people think about it, the better.

This means, of course, that the more they think about it, the better it will be for Mitt Romney.  It also means (of course) that Romney should encourage them to think about it, reminding them at every turn that this election isn’t merely — or even principally — about the economy; that it’s about something bigger; that we need to repeal Obamacare and replace it with real reform.  And he should convey to them what real reform would look like, thereby bringing into the fold those independents who don’t want to go back to the pre-Obamacare status quo.  He should start playing to win people’s votes, instead of merely trying not to lose them.

Yes, the fate of Obamacare will be the most important outcome of this election.  On some level, the American people know this.  There’s a reason why Romney gets standing ovations simply for mentioning repeal.

The question is whether either candidate will convey that he knows what this election is really about.  Obama can’t say it’s about Obamacare — even though that’s what he considers it to be about — because he’ll lose if he does.  Romney so far hasn’t said it’s about Obamacare — perhaps because that’s not what he considers it to be about — even though he’ll likely win if he does. 

Regardless, the Court has cleared the field. The stakes are historic. The citizenry will decide.

Yes, and you can bet that Barack Obama will have a army of lawyers to make sure that he remains President too. In fact, that is just what the Boston Globe is reporting:

OLYMPIA, Wash.—President Barack Obama’s campaign has recruited a legion of lawyers to be on standby for this year’s election as legal disputes surrounding the voting process escalate.

Thousands of attorneys and support staffers have agreed to aid in the effort, providing a mass of legal support that appears to be unrivaled by Republicans or precedent. Obama’s campaign says it is particularly concerned about the implementation of new voter ID laws across the country, the possibility of anti-fraud activists challenging legitimate voters and the handling of voter registrations in the most competitive states.

Republicans are building their own legal teams for the election. They say they’re focused on preventing fraud — making sure people don’t vote unless they’re eligible — rather than turning away qualified voters.

Since the disputed 2000 presidential election, both parties have increasingly concentrated on building legal teams — including high-priced lawyers who are well-known in political circles — for the Election Day run-up. The Bush-Gore election demonstrated to both sides the importance of every vote and the fact that the rules for voting and counting might actually determine the outcome. The Florida count in 2000 was decided by just 537 votes and ultimately landed in the Supreme Court.

This year in that state alone, Obama and his Democratic allies are poised to have thousands of lawyers ready for the election and hope to have more than the 5,800 attorneys available four years ago. That figure was nearly twice the 3,200 lawyers the Democrats had at their disposal in 2004.

Romney has been organizing his own legal help for the election. Campaign attorney Ben Ginsberg did not provide numbers but said the campaign has been gratified by the “overwhelming number of attorneys who have volunteered to assist.”

“We will have enough lawyers to handle all situations that arise,” he said.

The GOP doesn’t necessarily need to have a numerical counterweight to Obama’s attorneys; the 2000 election showed that experienced, connected lawyers on either side can be effective in court.

Believe me when I tell you; President Barack Obama and the left have been emboldened by this decision and they will stop at nothing to remain in power. Furthermore, the President knows that if he is to protect Obamacare and everything else he and Congress have worked for; they will have to win the election. So, if you all think that Obama and Co. are just going to let White America, which, by proxy will be represented by Mitt Romney —- roll over them and defeat them, you are crazy. They are now going to be emboldened to, in figurative sense — of course — fight to the death to protect everything that they have worked for in the last 3 years.

Putting it in “Southwest Detroit ghetto” terms: things just got very real. The Republicans must know, the kiddie stuff just ended, and now the real fight is now underway. From today, till election day is going to be a bare knuckle brawl. I just hope that the right; bloggers, writers, news people and the politicos know what they are in for. I also hope they know how to fight it, without getting overly stupid and letting their words and actions get them into trouble. This is not 1957 and if they fight like it is, they will lose and lose badly.

Needless to say, it is going to be a very interesting next couple of months.

As much as I hate to admit it, Libby Spencer has a point

…and no I don’t mean the one on the top of her head either…. 😉 😛

As you know, I am not a big fan of the previous President. In fact, his stupidity got me to start blogging — That was in 2006 — 8 Years ago. WOW. Makes me feel old. 😯

Anyhow, reacting to the news today and Nancy Pelosi’s reaction to it, Progressive blogger Libby Spencer says:

To which one can only reply, “Why the hell didn’t you do it?

Talk is cheap. If Pelosi’s Congress had actually pursued charges against the very real criminality in the Bush White House and had Rove’s pudgy ass frogmarched down Capitol Hill, it might have made the thieves and scoundrels think twice before embarking on their next caper. And even if it didn’t stop the GOPers, it would have at least made clear Democrats were as willing to fight as hard against the GOP agenda as the left did to put them into a majority.

That they didn’t is at least partly why they’re struggling right now to recapture the enthusiasm of the base.

via The Impolitic: Contemptible Congress.

I have to give the woman credit, when she is right — she is right. The no-nothing Democrats, during Bush’s term is why there was a good deal of lackluster support of the Democrats, during the era of Bush. This is why Obama shot forward, because the Democrats knew that if they did not pick someone like Obama, that they would lose to the Republican again in another election.  This is sort of the problem that they have right now; just like during the Clinton era — their President is in trouble and the bench is empty.  Except, back then they did have Gore, and Edwards and Hillary and Kerry. Now…. they have nobody at all.

It should be a lesson to them, overreach, when it suits your own political interests is never, ever a good idea. Yes, I know the Republicans have done it too and they paid for it in elections too. Now, it is the Democrats turn. I predict that this election coming in 2012 is going to be a wake up call for the Progressive community and to the Democratic Party. They are going to have to make some tough decisions about the future of that party. Because America is not happy with them, neither is their base. The old way of doing things in that Party is not going to work anymore. They need new ideas. The Democratic Party needs to come back to center and start over. This far-leftist way of doing things as failed and failed badly.

It is time for that party to change, and quickly, before that party is relegated to the dustbin of history.

In to which I say, “Irony Much, Asshole?”

This right here is irony at its best.

Here is the best ironic quote since President Obama backtracking on closing Gitmo:

President Obama’s claim that he can refuse to deport 800,000 aliens here in the country illegally illustrates the unprecedented stretching of the Constitution and the rule of law. He is laying claim to presidential power that goes even beyond that claimed by the Bush administration, in which I served. There is a world of difference in refusing to enforce laws that violate the Constitution (Bush) and refusing to enforce laws because of disagreements over policy (Obama).

Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, the president has the duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This provision was included to make sure that the president could not simply choose, as the British King had, to cancel legislation simply because he disagreed with it. President Obama cannot refuse to carry out a congressional statute simply because he thinks it advances the wrong policy. To do so violates the very core of his constitutional duties.

via Executive Overreach – The Corner – National Review Online.

Who wrote this rather lengthy piece on executive overreach? No other than that slant-eyed motherfucker —- John Yoo. Yes, that John Yoo. The goddamned John Yoo who told President George W. Bush that torturing terrorist suspects was just perfectly fine and should be sitting in a jail cell to this very damned day. However, because we have a Democratic Party that has no fucking balls and because the Republican Party still kind of thinks that Neoconservatism is just fucking peachy keen; this little slant-eyed puke is still living as a free man.

It is not only that I object to torture. I detest this ignorant piece of shit for another damned reason. This asshole did more to injure, discredit and bring harm to the Conservative and Republican cause than any of the Neoconservatives, hands down. It was because of this man’s actions; suddenly, everyone — including me at the time — believed that ALL Conservatives and Republican believed that torture of prisoners of war was just perfectly fine. Which I now know is horribly wrong. This man has done more to ruin the image of the political party that still believes in restraint of the fiscal, militarist and some, of the social kind. This man and his idiotic thought process is why I have never, and most like will never send the Republican Party a fucking dime and why I choose to call myself a right-libertarian.

So, in closing: John Yoo, shut the hell up, you slant-eyed fool; because nobody, least of all me — honestly gives two shits what you say, think or even feel. Please, just go back to your damned homeland of South Korea and take your goddamned borderline Communist attitudes about Constitutionality with you sir. Because quite frankly, Americans like myself, find your inane bullshit writings idiotic at best.

…..and I say all of the above, in the best Christian manner than I can muster. You’re welcome.

Signed,

A very proud Constitutionalist and right-libertarian

————————-

I mean, I hate to even write stuff like this, in this blunt of a manner. But, I am reading this guy’s crap on NRO and about into the second paragraph, my freakin’ head is about to explode! 😡

Again, the stupidity of this jack ass and the Iraq War debacle was what got my start in blogging about politics in the first place. So, this posting was a long time coming for me.

That is all…

Others: JustOneMinute, Outside the Beltway, Balloon Juice, Chicago Boyz, americanthinker.com, neo-neocon, Washington Monthly, Pundit & Pundette and The PJ Tatler

Why Scott Walker Won and the Democrats in Wisconsin lost

I was going to try avoid writing about this, but I am seeing some rather silly stuff being written about this win; So, I thought I would offer my thoughts as a former Democratic Party voter. Update: Greg Sargent over at The Washington Post hits the post a bit, but fails, as most progressives do; to see the full picture.

Putting it plain and simple, The Democrats in Wisconsin picked a fight that they could not win. — They were outspent, out-organized, and out-boxed; the Democrats had zero chance of winning this recall election at all. But yet, they still decided to fight for a recall election. They should have taken their cues from Michigan and left well enough alone. The Democrats in Michigan tried unsuccessfully to get Governor Snyder recalled here twice and both times they failed horribly. This is because residents of Michigan knew that the former Governor of Michigan was a incompetent moron who could not Govern worth a damn and they did not want a Democrat back in office again. Thus, the Democrats wisely dropped the issue and decided to try and win the 2012 election.  Wisconsin should have followed their lead, but they did not and decided to try and force their hand and failed.

Mother Jones has some good ideas as well:

1) Campaign Money is King

Walker crushed his Democratic opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, in the political money wars. The governor raised $30.5 million while Barrett pulled in $3.9 million—a nearly 8-to-1 advantage in candidate fundraising. Walker banked on in- and out-of-state donors, including heavyweight GOP contributors such as Houston homebuilder Bob Perry and Amway heir Dick Devos. Walker was able to raise so much money because of a quirk in state law that lets candidates potentially facing a recall raise unlimited funds for their defense. (The normal limit for individual donors in $10,000.) Barrett did not get to raise unlimited funds in his recall campaign—which placed him at a great disadvantage.

All that money helped Walker pound Barrett in the ad wars. An analysis by Hotline On Call found that Walker and his GOP allies outspent Barrett and his backers 3-to-1 on TV ad buys in the three months before Tuesday’s recall. The dark-money-peddling Republican Governors Association itself spent $9.4 million to keep Walker in office.

Just as the political money advantage proved crucial to labor’s win last year in repealing Ohio’s anti-union SB 5 law, campaign cash appears to have played a pivotal role in the GOP’s Wisconsin wins .

2) The Candidate

Filing nearly one million signatures to trigger a recall election, Democrats and union leaders and members had their sights trained on the governor. The recall election’s Democratic primary forced them to take their eyes off the prize. A primary fight between Barrett and former Dane County executive Kathleen Falk splintered the labor movement. The major unions endorsed Falk early on, sometimes over the opposition of their own rank-and-file. Several other unions held out until late March, when Barrett entered the race, and then endorsed the mayor. This primary drama knocked the anti-Walker effort off course for weeks, if not a month, in a race where every single day counts. It divided a unified movement into Barrett supporters and Falk supporters.

3) No New Ground

Democrats and labor unions touted their massive get-out-the-vote operation, which was supposed to tip the scales in their favor. Turn-out was way up in the elections, at 2.4 million, but the left failed to win over the types of people who elected Walker in 2010. As the Milwaukee Journal Sentinelnotes, Walker’s Tuesday win is a mirror image of his 2010 victory—just with more voters. He won men and lost women; won independents and lost moderates; and won suburban and rural voters but not urban voters.

More notably, Walker won 38 percent of votes from union households—an increase of 1 percent from 2010. Remember, union members or their spouses didn’t know in 2012 that Walker planned to target them after the election with his anti-union “budget repair” bill curbing collective bargaining rights. Yet 16 months after Walker launched his attack on unions, just as many people in union households voted for him. The unions failed to rally their own ranks.

My thoughts on the Unions — One of the main reasons why the unions failed; not because of a lack of members or money. The unions failed because for the following:

  1. They over played their hand, by storming the capital building and occupying it. This made them look like total buffoons in the eyes of the people, not mention the heavy handed tactics that were on par with communist gulags.
  2. The second reason is a rather simple one; not all union members are on board with the progressive movement, just because someone has a union card, does not necessarily make him a Democrat. Some union members are free thinkers and some of them resent being culled in together with the socialist crowd.
  3. The last reason is this; some union members are just not happy with the Democratic Party and with Obama. I believe Obama fatigue played a big part in the loss in Wisconsin. I believe it will also play out in November as well.

Needless to say, Scott Walker won big and the Unions and Democrats lost big. The results of this will be far-reaching and the Democrats in Wisconsin would be wise to lay low and try to hang on in 2012. But if they do not, they should learn the lessons of the massive over-reach that took place in Wisconsin and with the Democratic Party as a whole. However, knowing Democrats like I do; they will not learn a thing from this.

 

Artur Davis writes one of the most honest articles I have read in a long time

If I ever had the chance to meet this young man, I would thank him for his bravery. This man gets it, and he sees that the Democratic Party is totally broken. I saw it in 2007 and decided that I just could not support them any longer. This was way before the huge economic melt down of 2008. After that, the deal was sealed for me. Never again would I vote for that party.

So, my hats off to this man for seeing that too:

And the question of party label in what remains a two team enterprise? That, too, is no light decision on my part: cutting ties with an Alabama Democratic Party that has weakened and lost faith with more and more Alabamians every year is one thing; leaving a national party that has been the home for my political values for two decades is quite another. My personal library is still full of books on John and Robert Kennedy, and I have rarely talked about politics without trying to capture the noble things they stood for. I have also not forgotten that in my early thirties, the Democratic Party managed to engineer the last run of robust growth and expanded social mobility that we have enjoyed; and when the party was doing that work, it felt inclusive, vibrant, and open-minded.

But parties change. As I told a reporter last week, this is not Bill Clinton’s Democratic Party (and he knows that even if he can’t say it). If you have read this blog, and taken the time to look for a theme in the thousands of words (or free opposition research) contained in it, you see the imperfect musings of a voter who describes growth as a deeper problem than exaggerated inequality; who wants to radically reform the way we educate our children; who despises identity politics and the practice of speaking for groups and not one national interest; who knows that our current course on entitlements will eventually break our solvency and cause us to break promises to our most vulnerable—that is, if we don’t start the hard work of fixing it.

via A Response to Political Rumors | Official Artur Davis.

I have to agree with the man; he is right. The Democratic Party used Barack Obama to get elected, because they had no one else. They threw off Clinton, because they chose identity politics over experience.  You see, I remember 2000 and 2004. In 2000, the Democratic Party used a elitist out of touch buffoon, who could not get elected Mayor of a City; much less a President. Al Gore might have been from the south, but he lacked Bill Clinton’s likeability. In 2004, The Democratic Party ran a out of touch, elitist, limousine Liberal who, again, was seen by most as stiff and not of the people. Which he really is not, John Kerry is an incredibly wealthy man.

So, in 2008, the Democratic Party basically had Clinton, Edwards, Biden and yes, Obama. There were people in the Democratic Party, who did not want the Clintons back in the White House at all. So, the party rallied behind Obama for a number of reasons. Yes, race was one of the bigger reasons. Also too, I tend to believe that there were people, who Clinton “did dirty” back during his term in office and they wanted revenge; and revenge they got.

It was with the election of President Barack Obama that the Democratic Party went from being a party of the “New Left” to being a party of the “Neo-Left.” That was the whole changing of the guard within the Party. Saul Alinsky’s dream was finally realized. This is the change that Artur Davis is referring to and it is one that is only going to drive more and more people away from the Democratic Party and I do not mean just white people. Minorities, including blacks, are going to wake up and see that they being played like fiddles in that party. The quicker the better, if you ask me.

All what I wrote above, Reagan knew, long ago — he saw the changes that were happening behind the scenes and promptly changed his political stance. Mainly because he saw what was coming down the pike. Reagan saw that the Communists were changing tactics and embracing “social justice” as opposed to party loyalty. So, he left and embraced his Midwestern upbringing. The truth is Reagan did not change; The Democratic Party changed and they have since gotten totally worse.

Again, Kudos to Mr. Davis and I hope he comes to embrace what he knows to be right.

Audio: Pattrico’s swatter calls into show, insults Patterico and Michelle Malkin

This is unreal and it is the same person. Via Patterico:

This dude is obviously off his rocker. Accusing Michelle Malkin’s cousin of “offing herself” and Malkin of covering it up? How sick! 😡

Patrick Asks:

Two questions come to mind as you review these supremely creepy audio clips:

First: why did the caller make that call now? What does he have to gain?

And second: why did Erick Erickson get swatted last night?

Good questions. Although I will say one thing. Glenn Beck warned us; for that, he was called crazy by the left and by some on the establishment right. Andrew Breitbart warned us too. That this sort of stuff was coming and some dismissed it as fear-mongering. It is not. This is what happens when the left begins to lose the war of ideas; this is what happens when leftist fascists see that they have lost control of the conversation. This is what happens, when Liberals see their President weakened and losing the election. They stoop to this sort of a level.

My advice is simple. Girt your loins, arm yourselves. Prepare for the worst. Keep your faith; if you are truly saved and washed in the Blood of Christ Jesus the Lord. The Devil and his minions on the left cannot destroy you, unless God gives them permission. Let me assure you, that if the Lord continues to tarry, this will only get worse. The left knows no honor any longer and they will stop at nothing to destroy those who disagree with them. As the Christians who were fed to the lions and destroyed; we are standing for that which we know is right. The blessings will come in the life to come.

It is scary, I will admit that, but we must not fear them; that is what they want. They want to silence the right, they want to see the Conservative/libertarian opinions silenced; they want control — just like Al-Qaeda did in 2001. We must not allow that to happen.  We are Americans, we have looked in the face of tyranny before and said, “This shall not stand!” We did this in 1941, we did this in 2001 and we can and will do it again. We have the truth, we have the facts and we are right; and they are wrong. We will not submit to their fear.

To the swatters, I have a message for you sirs!

God Bless America.

 

UPDATED: This is a textbook reason why I stopped voting Democratic Party for good

Back before I ran my old blog, which was called “Political Byline”; I used to run a blog called “The Populist.” Well, that blog was hacked, either by some people, who call themselves Conservatives or by foreign entities. I suspect the former, but I tend to think it was the latter. Either way, by the time all that happened; I had become totally disillusioned with the Democratic Party. To be fair to myself; I never much did care for the Democratic Party establishment, this especially after the idiotic Clinton Administration’s nonsense. especially during his second term. Plus, as a Christian; I had not forgotten about the Waco incident.

Anyhow, one of reasons for this disillusionment was the Democrat Party’s treatment of our Military. It has been tepid at best. Proof of this, can be seen right here: (H/T NewsBusters)

Quoting this tool:

CHRIS HAYES: Thinking today and observing Memorial Day, that’ll be happening tomorrow.  Just talked with Lt. Col. Steve Burke [sic, actually Beck], who was a casualty officer with the Marines and had to tell people [inaudible].  Um, I, I, ah, back sorry, um, I think it’s interesting because I think it is very difficult to talk about the war dead and the fallen without invoking valor, without invoking the words “heroes.” Um, and, ah, ah, why do I feel so comfortable [sic] about the word “hero”?  I feel comfortable, ah, uncomfortable, about the word because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war. Um, and, I don’t want to obviously desecrate or disrespect memory of anyone that’s fallen, and obviously there are individual circumstances in which there is genuine, tremendous heroism: hail of gunfire, rescuing fellow soldiers and things like that. But it seems to me that we marshal this word in a way that is problematic. But maybe I’m wrong about that. 

I don’t write this to trash Chris Hayes, but to pose a question to the Conservative Democrats that actually read this blog and yes, I happen to know that a few of you that do, in fact, read here. Could you imagine a Democrat President giving a speech like this here?:

Not only can I not see a Democratic Party President giving a speech like this; but I would tend to believe that FDR would be chased out of the Democratic Party as a warmonger today! This is my issue with the modern-day Democratic Party; it is as if they are “Brothers-in-arms” with those who crashed those planes into the trade center buildings in 2001. The Liberal Democrats in this country have the attitude that the United States of America is the “great capitalist Satan” of the world and somehow or another deserved the attacks on 9/11. Who else has this attitude about America? oh yes! It is the Islāmic terrorists!

This is the reason Chris Hayes cannot call our Military dead Heroic men and women. Because it goes against his entire leftist DNA. Because the left hates our Military, hates the values that our Military stands for and quite frankly hates this Country for what it truly is.

That is the Democratic Party of the 21 century and I want zero to do with it, at all. 😡

The really sad thing is; is that Ron Paul and most, if not all, of the Paleo-Conservative right agree with this guy and his furry Progressive friends.  Which is why Ron Paul never, ever be President of the United States.  Ron Paul and the Paleoconservatives want to take us back to prior to World War 2 and leave the Jews to Hitler and put the WASP’s back in charge. Sorry guys, we lost that battle. We have to come to the 21 century. The quicker the better, I say.

Others Covering: Wizbang, Right Wing News, Booman Tribune, The Right Scoop, The Daily Caller, American Power, Examiner, The Gateway Pundit and Fire Andrea Mitchell! — via memeorandum

Update: This liberal blogger comes right out and says it. Hey, at least he is honest about it. Although, I tend to suspect that the irony of what he wrote is lost on him. It is because of the deaths of soldiers past; on battlefields domestic and abroad, he is free to even write that sort of tripe. Again, just another perfect example of why I told the Democratic Party to piss off and voted my principles — and no, I do not mean Republican either. Hell, the Republican Party has not been a true, small Government Conservative Party since Reagan left office and the Neoconservatives took power. Even Reagan was not truly a small Government Conservative either. He believed in small Government; when it was convenient.

Update #2: Chris Hayes has given a half-assed, non-apology apology.

Michelle Malkin is wrong about racism in the Tea Party

First off, let me say this; I do not believe that the Tea Party movement itself was racist at all. In fact, it never was a centralized movement.  In most movements, like the Tea Party movement; there will be people who do things that do not represent the movement as a whole.

So, when I see Michelle Malkin blatantly denying the fact that there were racists in the Tea Party movement, I have to say, “oh really?”

A quick search of Google Images brings up quite a few racist signs and images:

and this is not racist Michelle? (even though it is misspelled...)
And this is not racist?

Here is the one that really bothered me, and this dude ended up in jail for this too:

A "Death to Obama" sign... But, that's not racist, so says Michelle Malkin

 

Nope, No racism here! Only thing missing here is the N-word and that makes okay, according to Michelle Malkin

This image was used on signs and passed around in e-mails, by Tea Party supporters. (I know, I used to see it on facebook and in e-mails I would get from other Tea Party supporters. That until I told the idiots to quit sending me racist crap like that….)

But this is not racist according to Michelle Malkin (Willful blindness much Michelle?)

There is more, much more to see, just click this link to look at the results of a Google Images search.

Again, let me be clear; I am not calling the entire Tea Party movement racist as a whole, that is collectivism and this blogger is not a collectivist. In other words, I do not dismiss the movement in it’s entirety, as racist; but I will say that there were people who were carrying racist signs, not to mention doing stuff like this:

This is Chris Broughton, and yes, he is black, and he is a Ron Paul fan and yes, he was carry an assault rifle at a Obama event. My question is why? I think I know the reason and I think you do too. But, the Tea Party is just peaceful people... Most of them anyhow...

My point to this posting is this; The OWS crowd are a violent group and yes it does include anarchists, who do try and blow up bridges.  However, the Tea Party is not without its own individual nuts and looney tunes, who did bring a tarnish to the good name of the Party. Not to mention all of the infighting that went on with various groups.

However, my more intellectual point is this; to what end was all of this even done?   I mean, the Republican Party did not change one wit.  Oh sure, there were a few Senators who were elected as result of the grassroots surge.  However, the Republican Party’s  coronation of a Mormon George W. Bush is telling; and let me tell you something, if you think for one second that Mitt Romney is going to rip out Obamacare, you are crazy.  Oh sure, he will remove the mandate and anything else that seems to infringe on basic American rights.  However, I do not believe that he will remove the entire package.

Which makes me have to really wonder aloud, what exactly did the Tea Party accomplish; outside of the rhetorical flourishes?  Absolutely nothing.  Government is still there and it is still imposing upon our basic human rights.  All of those borderline racist signs, all of the verbal clashes, all of the excitement were for naught.

This was not to hurt Michelle Malkin herself; but it was to point out the Republican/Conservative/Fox News/Sean Hannity right’s willful blindness to the racism of the Tea Party — which was, and is still there very much so, to this very day.

Read this and try not to puke.

Ugh…..

Egypt’s National Council for Women is campaigning against the changes, saying that ‘marginalising and undermining the status of women would negatively affect the country’s human development’.

Dr Mervat al-Talawi, head of the NCW, wrote to the Egyptian People’s Assembly Speaker Dr Saad al-Katatni addressing her concerns.

Egyptian journalist Amro Abdul Samea reported in the al-Ahram newspaper that Talawi complained about the legislations which are being introduced under ‘alleged religious interpretations’.

via Outrage as Egypt plans ‘farewell intercourse law’ so husbands can have sex with dead wives up to six hours AFTER their death | Mail Online.

Gross. Hmm, I wonder if Samantha Power would support something like this? or…. dare I say it? Obama? Hmmmm…

Others: The Gateway Pundit, The Jawa Report, The Daily Caller, A Blog For All, Weasel Zippers, Atlas Shrugs, Clayton Cramer’s Blog and The Daily Dish

Remember Samantha Power?

It seems that Samantha Power has gotten a new job.

“Yid with a Lid” reports:

Only Barack Obama! Today the President tried to show he was a friend of the Jews with a beautifully crafted speech Holocaust Museum. Showing his words mean nothing, also today Samantha Power began work today as chair of President Barack Obama’s new Atrocities Prevention Board. If you don’t remember Ms Power she once called for a US force to invade Israel and force through a “peace settlement.” Powers also had some unflattering things to say about about America’s Jewish population during the 2008 campaign

How long do you think it will be before Powers uses that board as tool to de-legitimize Israel?

via “The Lid”: Obama Selects Woman Who Wanted to Invade Israel As Chair of Genocide Panel.

This lady is a real piece of work; head on over and check out the video over at Lid’s site. Previous Samantha Power offerings at my old blog here.