Wednesday, March 31, 2010


This week in Davenport, Iowa, the City Administrator, Craig Malin, sent a memo to city employees announcing that the term "Good Friday" would officially be known as "Spring Holiday".   This has ignited a firestorm of criticism that caused the city council (who were not given the opportunity to vote on the change) to overrule the decision and restore Good Friday.

The argument used for this change was, of course, the old liberal favorite - "separation of church and state".

It's time to set the record straight on this once and for all.  The liberals are fond of saying that the term "separation of church and state" is in the Constitution.  It is not.  The only mention of church and state in the Constitution is this:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

What that means is that the State is not allowed to impose a state-run religion on the people. or regulate how, what or where they worship.  The reason they added this language was because in England, the State runs the Church.  The situation with the Church of England has been a bone of contention amongst the British for centuries - one need look no further than  Henry VIII  and his daughter, "Bloody" Mary for proof of that. There are plenty of examples throughout european history as well, such as a little thing called the Spanish Inquisition.   Throughout history, state imposed religion in european countries has caused bloodshed and power struggles time and time again.

Our founders wanted to avoid the rise of one particular religion over the others as well as avoiding having the state control or mandate worship.  But at no point in time did they want no religion whatsoever.  Our founders were almost all practicing christians of some form or another and believed that faith in God was necessary to good governance.  God is all over the founding of our nation, from the four times He was mentioned in our Declaration of Independence to the numerous mentions in our Constitution.  "In God we trust" was emblazoned not just on our money, but also over the Speaker of the House in the US Capitol.  God is in our Pledge of Allegiance.  Throughout our Capitol, there are countless references to God and the Bible on monuments and state buildings - the Supreme Court building has a relief of Moses and the Ten Commandments on the east entrance and throughout the building (no matter how they try to spin it).  One of the first books our new nation printed was a bible, which was sponsored by Congress and was actually printed to be used in schools as a textbook.  Our representatives must swear, on a bible, an oath of office that ends with "So help me God" before taking office.  The Supreme Court, in 1892, gave us the "Trinity Decision" which stated that "this is a Christian nation".  Over and over again, the Judeo-Christian ethic is shown to be a founding principle of this country.

The reason the left is desperate to rid the state of religion is twofold.  First, if God is in our government, it follows that there should be morality, accountability and ethics, too - things that are sorely lacking these days.  Second, the progressives want government to be god.  This desire has become quite evident.  When our Founding Fathers created our government, they understood that rights were things only God could bestow.  Our current government, however, in it's current incarnation as "god" has taken to bequeathing new "rights" on the people (more on "rights" in a minute).  They invoke the Constitution, even as they trample on it, in their arguments against religion; but, as usual, they misinterpret it.  Perhaps they should try reading it sometime.  In fact, it should be a requirement of federal office that a thorough knowledge of the Constitution be proved prior to being sworn in.  Many of our recent officeholders (on both sides of the aisle) find it easy to sidestep our founding document due to their complete ignorance of it.

As to "rights", a right is something inherent - endowed by our Creator, not by man or government.  It is something everyone has without having to deprive someone else of something.  The right to free speech is a God given right, as are the rights to life and liberty.  Owning a home or car, or getting a college education or health insurance are privileges.    Our government is trying to sell us on the idea that those things are rights, because then they can play at being the benevolent 'god' and dole those things out to us as they see fit.  And let's not forget - that which has been given by man can always be taken away.  It is about power and control, ultimately.

So the next time some lefty spouts off about "separation of church and state", set them straight.  Tell them to read the Constitution before they try to invoke it, and not spin it to fit their theories.  Suggest, too, that they research the backgrounds of our Founding Fathers - knowing the men who created our country and the times in which it was created are very important to understanding our founding documents.  Explain that the so-called "separation" was to protect the church from state control, not to protect the state from church control.  It's well past time to set them straight and stop their revision of our history.

In the meantime, is anyone up for a rousing rendition of "God Bless America"?


Tuesday, March 30, 2010


I just found out what item of the health care bill is free.  It is the President Barack Obama Commemorative Health Care Certificate.  Bask in the glory:

President Barack Obama Commemorative Health Care Certificate

Oooooooh.  It looks so...official.  But, much like this administration, looks can be deceiving (not to mention words and deeds).  It will be interesting to see how many suckers supporters snap up their free copy. 

So, does this officially make Obamacare supporters certified lunatics?


Sunday, March 28, 2010


Just when it all starts getting to be too much and it seems like we're fighting a losing battle, a poll like this comes out.

The message is getting out there, even though sometimes it seems like it isn't.  The press is doing all they can to paint the Tea Parties as fringe and idiotic, but it just isn't working. 

As for our 'betters' in Congress, not only would  45% of Americans prefer random people chosen from the phone book to replace their them, but their desperate ploy to make anyone who disagrees with them and their agenda seem stupid, out of touch and ignorant of the issues isn't getting any traction, if this latest  poll  is anything to go by.

Most of the polls these days show that a majority of Americans are against the agenda that is currently being foisted upon them, so it really is mind boggling how they expect to win reelection with their current tactics.  One can only assume that they have convinced themselves that Americans really are so stupid and in possession of such poor short term memories that their insulting, degrading tactics won't come back to haunt them in November.

This most recent poll must really be insulting to our esteemed members of Congress.  After all, if the Tea Partyers are as stupid, braindead and uninformed as our representatives in Washington keep saying they are, then what does this new poll say about them?


Thursday, March 25, 2010


Four months ago in Washington state, a 15 year old girl walked into her school clinic and took a pregnancy test.  When the test came up positive, the school put her in a cab and sent her to the local Planned Parenthood clinic. 


Her parents were never notified.

The school did not break the law, because her mother had signed a consent form at the beginning of the year that gave permission for the school to send her daughter off premises for treatment.  No, it didn't specify abortion, but under Washington state law, at no age is a child required to inform her parents or get their permission if she wants an abortion.  Her mother, needless to say, was livid.  She found out about it four months later.  She assumed that the form she had signed back in September was in case of a medical emergency, such as a broken bone, or maybe even birth control.  But never did she imagine the school would use that form to facilitate and conceal the administration of an abortion for her child.  A procedure she had to go through completely alone.

That is what really sticks in my craw; as a mom, the thought of that young girl alone in that cab on her way to the abortion clinic breaks my heart.  Once there, she was admonished not to tell her parents, or they would have to pay for the abortion.  That girl faced a major watershed moment in her life alone.  Who was there to hold her and give her comfort after the deed was done?  No one. 

After this experience, she is going to view abortion in one of two ways, and neither one is comforting.

On the one hand, she could see it as not a big deal, and could, in the future, find herself in the clinic again and again.  After all, its no biggie - it's just another form of birth control, right?  It's just a clump of cells, not a baby - isn't that what Planned Parenthood preaches?

On the other hand, she could be emotionally scarred by what she has done and might spend the rest of her life regretting it or beating herself up for it. Abortion is the only clinical procedure out there with the potential to stain your soul.  Did she feel cut off from the main source of comfort a girl that age relies on when things really get tough - her mom?  Who happens to be pro-choice, by the way. She's  not one of those dreaded christian fundamentalists who would have forced the girl to keep the baby clump of cells.   Even if she had wanted to turn to her mom for comfort afterwards, let's not forget that she was admonished not to tell her parents or else they would have to pay the bill. 

This, to me, is the ultimate repercussions of the nanny state.  No longer, it seems, is your child your own to raise and counsel.  At the tender age of 15, she was viewed as an individual capable of mature, adult decisions without  guidance.  Now, we've all been 15, so we all know that at 15, decision making isn't really a strong point, generally speaking.  She needed the advice of someone who loves her, someone who has her best interests at heart.  Considering her mom is pro-choice, it still could have ended the same way even if her parents had been notified - but at least she would have had the comfort of having someone help her through it all.  Instead the state decided that she was a good candidate for abortion, and so abortion it was. 

As the mother of a teenaged daughter, I am appalled by this.  As far as I'm concerned, my child is my responsibility until she turns 18, not the state's, and all decisions regarding her person are her parent's to make.  As of 18, she is an adult and can begin making her own decisions - with a little advice when needed from her dad and me, of course.   The thought of a child of mine, young, scared and alone, going through all of that, trying to process it tears me apart.

The most horrifying part is that soon we will be funding this.

In addition, Planned Parenthood has embarked on a sex ed campaign that is quite remarkable in it's....thoroughness.  Combine the two programs, and you have the stuff of which nightmares are made. Call me old fashioned, but I'm just not comfortable with Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the country, being 'in partnership' with our school systems for sex education.

The case in Washington state is the perfect example of a worst case scenario.


Wednesday, March 24, 2010


The passing of Obamacare has been a real disappointment, but, unfortunately, not unexpected.  Especially disappointing is Bart Stupak's deal with the devil for a non-binding, waste of paper executive order and nearly $800,000 in taxpayer dollars for local airports.  There's no need to go into detail about it, though.  Hopefully his conservative district will make sure he is no longer a policy maker come November.

I have been wanting to blog on the health care situation, but have had family illnesses to take care of, ironically enough.  It's a bit late in the week to give a rundown of the health care bill, though, as it's been played out in the press ad nauseum.  Besides, now that it's passed we're finally going to be allowed to read it, so there is sure to be plenty of new stuff to talk about.  But, with all of the talk about repealing the law, it's time to figure out what we the people can do to fight against the tyranny imposed upon us by "the most powerful woman in 100 years" and her corporate cronies. 

Which brings me to what else we can do to combat the european socialization of this country against our will.  One of the reasons the democrats are so powerful is that they have the unions and most major corporations in their pockets, no matter how much they protest that it is the republicans in bed with corporate America.  The unions are with them because of shared ideology, but the corporations are working with them out of greed and self-preservation. 

Big Pharma is in bed with the administration because, in exchange for $80 billion in 'consessions' (lower drug costs), they will rake in hundreds of billions in perks.  The twelve year moratorium on imported drugs alone is highly lucrative.  Let's not forget, too, that there will be millions of new customers in the system and  no price controls.  The insurance industry has bought into the plan as well - after all, that means millions more customers for them, too.

In short, their greed is their destruction.  They have cut a deal for short-term gains, with nary a thought to the control they have handed over.  This is soft nationalization.  On the face of it, it seems like the industries are in control, but in reality, the government calls the shots.  Eventually it will evolve into hard control, but progressives are all about baby steps.  It enables them to call something "ridiculous" because it is still 10 steps away.   But a decade or two later, there we are. 

Since their greed impels them, it is their greed that we must tap into.  We the People have no lobby, so we must use our wallets in other ways.  It's difficult to boycott health industries, because it's often impossible to forgo or substitute the care we need, but there is still a way.

Wall Street.  Sell all Big Pharma and insurance stocks and buy into other sectors.  After the passage and signing of the bill, health industry stocks had nice little rallies - their gamble is paying off already, and it
is tempting to want to take a piece of that.  It's important to remember that they will be rewarded for their manipulations if people buy their stocks and drive the price up.  Instead, we need to sell their stock and drive the price down.  There are some who have even taken the step to remove all holdings related to the Obama administration as a whole.  IRA's, 401(k)'s, any stocks that support groups supporting Obama, Pelosi and the agenda need to lose their shareholders and thus the price of their stock.

There are still ways to fight this agenda.  We still have power, and we don't have to wait until November to use it.

We're winning other battles by going around the left - this is just one more front.  We're winning the media battle by using the internet, and in Texas we're winning the propaganda battle being waged against our children through their textbooks.  As Rosie says,

If money is the only language they understand, then we will talk in money.  Not just the health care industry - let's not forget that they are taking up Cap and Trade soon, just as soon as they rebrand and repackage it.  We can get a twofer on that one - GE is heavily leveraged in green technology and the administration.  That includes GE, NBC Universal and RCA.  Any company that lobbies for an administration bill should be held accountable by the stockholders.  Dropping share prices speak far more clearly to them than protest signs held across the street behind police barriers.  As a health care activist so aptly put it at a $10,000 a seat fundraising dinner last year for Sen. Max Baucus, who was putting together his health care bill (via the Washington Post):

"Money gets you in the door. The only thing the other side can do is march around and protest outside."

Protesting was a potent weapon in the left's arsenal because they received positive coverage from the media.  Tea parties get paltry coverage, and what there is of it is generally negative and diminishing in nature.  Not that we shouldn't keep protesting - no matter how much they spin it, pictures don't lie.

We need to realize that we have more than one arrow in our quiver, and it's time to start letting them fly.


Sunday, March 21, 2010


Well, Bart Stupak has caved, and he's bringing 8 or 9 former no votes with him.  It's over, and they haven't even voted yet.

Stupak has sold his vote for an Executive Order from the Liar-in-Chief President.  The EO will supposedly make sure there is no federal abortion funding.  In case you were wondering, legislation overrules executive orders, and, contrary to democrat protests, the Senate bill not only provides for federal funding, it actually requires a certain amount of each premium to be used, and there is no possibility of opting out, so Bart's hard-won EO is pretty much just a worthless piece of paper.

Couldn't he at least have held out for 30 pieces of silver?


Saturday, March 20, 2010


I'm sitting here trying to listen to Obama's speech to the Democrat Caucus, but I'm having a hard time.  I keep bursting out in laughter.

The line that really got me?  Obama claiming that the bill is "middle of the road".

Needless to say, the bs is flowing fast and thick at this meeting.  The meeting is basically a pep rally for The One to encourage the troops to vote for this mess.  Now that demon pass is not an option, they are going to have to suck it up and vote for the toxic Senate bill.

The meeting was also most likely a ruse to get the dems out of their offices and in a closed meeting so that they didn't have to face their constituents, who have stormed the Capitol to have their voices heard. 

Finally, a moment of truth from the Deceiver-in-Chief:

"Now, is this bill perfect?  Of course not.  Will this solve every single problem in our health care system right away?  No."

But it will tax us right away, so at least there's that....Oh boy, here's the liberal guilt push:

"If you honestlly believe, in your heart of hearts, in your conscience, that this is not an improvement over the status quo, in spite of all the information that's out there that says that without serious reform efforts like this one, people's premiums are going to double over the next five, ten years; that folks are going to keep on getting letters from their insurance companies that their premiums just went up 40 or 50%, if you think that somehow it's okay that we have millions of hard working Americans who can't get health care, and that it's alright, it's acceptable, in the wealthiest nation on earth that their children with chronic illnesses that can't get the care that they need, if you think that the system is working for ordinary Americans rather than the insurance companies, then you should vote no on this bill.  If you can honestly say that, then you shouldn't support it." 

One minor point, Mr. President - I know the image of sick kids is always an effective liberal tool to conjure up votes, but, um, didn't you take care of the uninsured children problem last year with the expansion of SCHIP?   Or is that program working as well as most other government agencies, and thus the uninsured kids?  I know it's hard to say no to sick kids - which is why SCHIP passed last year.  Sorry, Mr. President, those human shields have already been used. 

Oh, and, as for the increasing premiums, one of your own has disabused us of the notion this bill will fix that problem, as has the CBO.

Oh, and more people would have health insurance if they had a JOB!!!  It's going to be hard to get jobs for the millions of people who are out of work, so how about untying insurance from employment?  Another thing that might help is dropping state line rules and allowing the free market to work it's magic.  But those are republican ideas, so obviously they won't work and shouldn't even be considered.

There is only one other part of the speech that I agree with, aside from the moment of truth:

You're here to represent your constituencies, and if you think your constituencies honestly wouldn't be helped, you shouldn't vote for this."

Amen, brother.

Stay tuned tomorrow for the big vote....


Thursday, March 18, 2010


The House voted 222-203 to use demon pass on Sunday's upcoming health care vote today.  A few dems who said they were no votes on Obamacare voted yes on the use of the Slaughter Solution, but it's anybody's guess as to whether they will keep their word on Sunday and vote no or not. 

This is bad, bad news, since many fence-sitting dems seemed to be more concerned about the process than the content or cost of the bill.  Apparently the process wasn't as worrisome as first thought.  With any luck, they will realize the error of their ways come November, but, in the meantime, we will have to deal with the repercussions of their actions.

If they pass this monstrosity with demon pass on Sunday, and it ends up going to Obama for a signature, there are still a few things that can be done.

Namely, lawsuits.

There are a number of suits being prepared.  Mark Levin's Landmark Legal Foundation is preparing to file suit against the federal government if they pass the health care legislation through deem and pass. 

But wait, there's more....

Idaho passed legislation last night that would require the state attorney general to file suit against the federal government because of the individual mandate.

Virginia was the first state to pass legislation against the federal government over the health care legislation.  On March 11, 2010 they passed a bill opposing the individual mandate, arguing that insurance is a good and the federal government has no right to force their citizens to buy a good of any kind.

Thirty-six other states have filed legislation to challenge Obamacare - .Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Missisippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

Four more states have indicated an intent to file - Colorado, Montana, North Carolina, Utah.

It may only be symbolic, but the fact that 38 states are preparing to sue the federal government over a piece of legislation could easily be viewed as a consitutional crisis.

It's a bit surprising that Texas wasn't on any of those lists, but, then again, they seem to prefer to seceed altogether. 

My home state of Florida is stepping up to the plate, too.  The attorney general, Bill McCollum, has sent a letter to the National Association of Attorneys General:

"I invite you to join me in preparing a legal challenge to the constitutionality of whatever individual mandate provision emerges, immediately upon the legislation becoming law."

Sunday's vote does not mean the end of this 'debate'.

Oh, and you'd better gird your loins - The One is saying the Slaughter rule is so nifty that they might just use it on immigration "reform" and other goodies.

It has been said that Mr. Obama has told House democrats that his presidency is at stake.  Because when you really get down to it, it's always about Obama, isn't it?

There is the faint hope of a silver lining to all of this, and it all depends on the Supreme Court.  With any luck, the fact that there is no provision allowing the feds to force the public to buy goods nor pass laws by 'deeming' them passed, that more than half of the states are preparing to file lawsuits, and that the majority of the American people are vehemently against this bill will weigh heavily in their decision. 

It looks like this mess is going to pass, even though Senate Republicans are preparing a flood of amendments to slow things down.  Reid only needs 51 though, and he most probably has it.

We can only hope that the legal challenges stave off the taxation that will start immediately, and that the Supreme court will hear the cases and find in our favor.  Hopefully the remaining 12 states will file their own legislation along with the rest, but counting on California, Oregon, Vermont and Hawaii is probably not a wise move.

All we can do now is watch democrats flip and flop like fish in the sun as they are threatened and bribed for the final vote.


Wednesday, March 17, 2010


There is a new term for Rep. Louise Slaughter's unconstitutional solution to the democrat's health care dilemma.  Pelosi called it a "deem and pass" rule.  When you say that quickly, it sounds like "demon pass" - which is quite fitting, really, and seems to be sticking.   What more perfect name for a bill straight from the depths of Hell that has been served up by the queen succubus herself?  For those who don't know what a succubus is, it is a demon who takes female form to fornicate with men.  The only difference with my reference is that it will be the entire US population that will be getting screwed, not just the men.

Demon pass is in the process of being covered up, too - it's that distasteful.  Democrats are out on the talk circuit saying there will be a vote for health care, and whatever the public may have heard otherwise is sheer propaganda on the part of Fox News, Glenn Beck, and other lying right-wing radical propagandists. 

Their arguments just don't pass the sunshine test, though.  Speaking of sunshine, did you know that it's "Sunshine Week" on Capitol Hill?   It really is starting to feel more and more like we have all been unceremoniously dumped right in the middle of the Bizzarro world, doesn't it?  Nothing makes sense anymore, and the irony is so thick right now that I'm surprised there hasn't been a magnetic pole shift.

"During Sunshine Week, which focuses on the importance of open government and freedom of information, Congress is taking action to make the government more accountable, transparent and responsive to the American people," reads a fact sheet distributed to House Dems' offices, and which was provided to Hotline OnCall by an incredulous Dem aide.
"The public's right to know what its government is doing is fundamental to a thriving democracy and critical to empowering the American people to play an active role in their government, and to giving them access to information that makes their lives better and their communities stronger," the document reads.
The glaring hypocricy of this statement is staggering.  House democrats are in the process of passing a bill that no one has read by the entirely inappropriate means of attaching it to yet another bill that no one has been allowed to read (and don't forget the other bill included in the mess for good measure) and 'deeming' it passed instead of actually voting to pass it.  The only vote will be for approval of the rule that allows this travesty to occur.  The bill is chock full of smoke and mirrors, and the people out touting the bill are shamelessly lying through their teeth and being caught at it on a regular basis.   The bill itself is a deception of monumental proportions, from it's cost to it's effect on the American people, economy and health care system

This ridiculous attempt at touting transparency isn't really unexpected, though, if you think about Pelosi's modus operandi.  You can pretty much assume that anything out of her mouth is the exact opposite of reality, so her campaign to appear to support 'sunshine' and 'transparency' really means we should brace ourselves for more deception, substerfuge and shady dealings.  Apparently the democrats think that we are still believing whatever they say, no matter how insane it may be.

When, exactly, does this all go from bad behavior to tyranny?  In my personal opinion, the line is getting pretty blurry. 

Methinks the public will be doing a little 'demon pass' themselves.  Come November, they will 'deem' this administration an abomination and will 'pass' on reelecting them.


Tuesday, March 16, 2010


A three judge panel just ruled in favor of a NJ Tea Party group stating that they have the right to try to recall one of their senators.  The ruling doesn't allow them to pursue recall just yet, however.  The case is pending appeal.  Up for debate is the constitutionality of recalling a federal elected official, Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ).  Apparently there is no provision for such an action in the United States Constitution, no matter whether the tea partiers get the state required 1.3 million signatures from constituents or not, so the court is expecting a challenge and will not allow the Tea Party to start proceedings.

One would like to think that the people of a state could recall their own representation, but it seems there's never been a need for that option before.  This is a major case that bears watching.  If the courts finally rule that recall is possible, there is the potential that some of the other 8 states that have recall legislation might follow suit. 

There is another school of thought that recall is, in fact, provided for - in the state's constitution.  According to the Recall Congress Now website, the people of New Jersey:

...reserve unto themselves the power to recall, after at least one year of service, any elected official in this State or representing this State in the United States Congress. The Legislature shall enact laws to provide for such recall elections.

The United States Constitution is silent on this matter.  Because there is no provision for recall in the US Constitution, deference will hopefully be paid to the will of the state in question.  If so, New Jersey's constitution certainly provides for it.

It is interesting that there is no provision for recall in the Constitution.  Considering how protective our Founding Fathers were of states rights, it seems odd that they are silent.  Could it be that they were continuing in the same vein of protecting the states rights by leaving it up to them to make legislation on the subject? 

Crazy talk, I know.   

The real question now is, will this case be resolved in time to make it worthwhile?  In the meantime, congrats Tea Partiers of New Jersey - keep fighting the good fight!


Monday, March 15, 2010


I've never been a supporter of Anthropogenic Global Warming theory.  I'm quite a history buff, and, as such, I have noticed weather trends throughout history.  Things like the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age indicated, at least to me, that our climate has always been changing and will continue to do so.  There are a lot of people who now agree with me, so I'm happy that people are no longer giving me the stink eye quite as often when I voice my views on the subject.

There are a few holdouts, however, who refuse to acknowledge that the AGW scam has been shown up for what it is.  The first group of holdouts is our federal government.  Don't expect them to change their tune anytime soon.  For an administration that has talked about science taking a front seat again after the depravities of the evil Bush, they sure aren't interested in the science that is currently debunking AGW.  Not even the stuff coming from Phil Jones, the erstwhile head of the UK's Climatic Research Unit.  Their reason for ignoring the facts is simple, really - money and power.  Their cap and trade plans mean big money and absolute control over the energy sector, and, as we are learning with the health care 'debate', they are tenacious when they have their sights set on something.  Silly things like public opinion and facts won't deter them from their goals.

The other group is the Hollywood crowd.  They have spent years jetting around the world promoting neutral carbon footprints.  The truly dedicated ones, like Leonardo Di Caprio, have tried to live in accordance with their views, and I applaud them for that, even though I might not agree with them.  Unfortunately, they are few and far between - most of them live in their multi-million dollar, high carbon footprint mansions with their fleet of gas guzzling SUV's and definitely un-eco-friendly private jets.  For many of these people, the extent of their support for the green movement is smiling for a picture on the red carpet of a glitzy corporate financed fundraiser before snagging their swag bag worth thousands of dollars and hightailing it out of there to jet down to Mexico for some margaritas.

Some of those elite hypocrites might just be giving up the AGW ghost, however, once the newest study comes to their attention.  According to London's Mirror, cocaine use is now a major contributor to global warming:

Group chairman Keith Vaz said: "We were horrified to learn for every few lines of cocaine snorted in a London club, four square metres of rainforest is destroyed."


Whatever will all of the table-top dancing, club hopping, Chateau Marmont partygoers do?  What a dilemma! 

On a positive note, this might be a great development for Dr. Drew on Celebrity Rehab.  It's not just about being clean anymore - it's about being clean and green!  Talk about motivation!  

AGW - saving lives one acre at a time.

UPDATE:  Why am I not surprised? 


Saturday, March 13, 2010


I mentioned in my post The Revision of Pride that there is a battle brewing in Texas over classroom textbooks.  The battle is heating up, and, at least so far, the conservatives are winning.

Here's a little backstory for anyone who isn't up on the subject.  For the past few decades, the textbook publishers have been catering to the demands of California's board of education, because California bought the most textbooks of any state in the nation.  That certainly explains a lot about the liberal trend in the classroom, doesn't it?  Unfortunately for California, their budget woes have translated into fewer new textbook purchases.

However, what is unfortunate for California is quite fortunate for the rest of us.  Texas has since replaced California as the leading textbook purchaser for the nation.  This means the state of Texas can now make demands of the publishing companies, much as the state of California did, and those changes may well effect textbooks everywhere.  And demand, they are!

The Texas Board of Education is in the process of debating and voting on changes to curriculum, and the battle between liberal and conservative board members has been heated, but, so far, the conservatives are winning:

Conservative members had their way in the 11-4 vote, which came one day after several Democratic board members walked out, claiming the proposed standards dilute the contribution of minorities to American history and culture. The debate, which picked up again Friday morning, ended with only a single Democrat voting to support the new standards.

The fact that the liberals walked out should come as no surprise.  If we have learned anything from the past year+ of liberal rule it is that the only acceptable compromise is full capitulation to their demands.  Anything less is unacceptable.  The fact that there was one democrat who voted for the changes is cause for hope, though, and that democrat should be given credit for agreeing that learning about American exceptionalism is more important than the cultural significance of hip-hop music. 

The main liberal argument is that there isn't enough minority representation.  There were many minority contributions to the creation and preservation of this Union, but let's face it - back in the 1700's, whether in America or Europe, minorities didn't have much voice.  Happily, those wrongs were righted and became the freedom we enjoy today, but it doesn't take away from the basic facts of life.  This country was founded by a group of white men.  This is not a travesty - it just is what it is. 

Does that mean that our kids shouldn't learn about people like Frederick DouglassDolley Madison or Sojourner Truth?  Of course they should - they helped shape this country and should be remembered for their contributions.  But should our Founding Fathers be replaced by Famous Amos and Mary Kay?  I personally believe that the black community in America has contributed far more than just a cookie maker (wildly successful entrepreneur though he may be) and hip-hop, and it is a disservice to them to relegate their portion of history to those narrow confines.

As a woman, I feel that the suffrage movement should also be discussed, if not in depth, at least touched upon.   Susan B. Anthony, Sojourner Truth, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the many other thousands of women who risked life and limb in their nearly 100 year battle to win the priviledge of voting for all of us is something that has been lost to the girls of today.  Teaching our children about what they went through is important as a reminder that some sacrifices are worth it, and everyone deserves dignity and a voice.

This battle in Texas is so important, because the education we give our children dictates where we are headed as a country.  The California years, when they dictated the curricula, lead us down the path of collectivism and european socialism.  History lessons are based on feelings and impressions, not hard fact.  Our children are being taught to relate history into how they feel about an event, not the factual repercussions of it.    

The liberals swept themselves in to victory in 2008 because that election was enabled by the subtle decades-long indoctrination of our youth (who are now beginning to reject that flawed reality).  It's time to turn it around, and the Texas board of education has become the front line in the battle. 

The tide is turning, though, the tide is turning.  To keep it turning, we have to learn from the opposition.  The main tactic that has worked so well for them has been their role as the 'squeaky wheel'.  Their protests, lawsuits and generally irritating tactics have served them well.  We are learning their lessons, but we are only applying them to the federal realm.  As Tip O'Neill once said, "All politics is local".   Yes, we need to keep the pressure on the apparent federal socialist revolution that is taking place before our eyes, but we also need to apply that same pressure locally - most especially our school boards and PTA. 

Our children are literally our future, and we need to be as aware of that fact as the liberal/progressives have been.  We need to fight them tooth and nail for the hearts and minds of our children.  The Texas fight is just the beginning, but what a beginning it is!


Wednesday, March 10, 2010


Our esteemed President and his Congressional minions have reached yet another milestone (via ABC's Jake Tapper):

The government racked up a record-high monthly budget deficit of $220.9 billion in February, the Treasury Department announced today.

The latest flood of red ink brings the total deficit for the first five months of the current fiscal year to $651 billion, far exceeding the $589 billion shortfall for the same timeframe in the last fiscal year.

The government ended the 2009 fiscal year with a record $1.4 trillion shortfall. The Obama administration has forecast a $1.56 trillion deficit for this year.

Is it any wonder the young adults of America are losing hope?
Fewer than half said they believe they will be better off than their parents when they reach their parents' age.
Is it possible that this administration is going to end up being more Nixonian than Kennedy-esque or FDR-ish?  Not to say that President Obama will have to resign or face impeachment - it's more about the effect he and his administration's actions have  had on the psyche of the country.  The generation that came of age in the 1960's and '70's had their faith in government dashed in the face of the corrupt reality, and the gradual decline in trustworthyness really hit the skids.  After Nixon, there was a sense of disillusionment and distrust of government that permeated rank and file American's views of politics.  This caused a backlash of suspicion that took a few decades to dull.  There was a small uptick in the Reagan years, but that short period of faith was put back into its downward rut in the scandal-plagued Clinton years and beyond.
Then, suddenly, there was an abrupt, out of the blue 180 that occured the day Obama won the primary.  Suddenly, government was the answer to a whole new generation, and all that good will was poured into the empty suit  at the top of the ticket.  He was a blank canvas on to which they painted their hopes and dreams, a beautiful, lush utopia in jewel colors, and they transferred their dependency from their parents to their government, which was embodied in one man.
Obama was elected on a wave of goodwill.  He was lifted up as a shining example of what government could be.  Unfortunately, as often happens, the reality just hasn't lived up to the hype.  All of those college students and 20-somethings who supported him and looked up to him and his vision of a new utopia are now waking up to a harsh reality.  He is just another politician out to spend their future just like all the rest.
With the country in the midst of a slow economic recovery with nearly 10 percent unemployment, the data finds a deep sense of gloom among 18-29 year olds. The grim mood could have immediate political consequences, and it could also shape that generation's long-term faith in government and in its ability to improve their daily lives.
This particular generation has much farther to fall, too, because at no other time in our history has there been such a pampered, coddled youth; nor has there been so many who saw the government, parent-like, as the answer to all the problems.
There seems to be a delicious irony in all of this. 
After all, it was the hippy culture of the 1960's and '70's that gave birth to the whole 'never trust the government or anyone over 30' mentality.  Now those same people are well beyond their 30's and in positions of power in our government.  They are demanding, incredibly enough, absolute trust in government.  Even more incredibly, they apparently have received it from the younger generations who have been gradually indoctrinated into acceptance of government as the answer to everything.  Our youth have been taught that the nanny state is only out to serve them and take care of them, and they believed it, these priviledged children of overindulgent parents who took care of everything - they bought it hook, line and sinker.  Until their beloved government went hog wild, pillaged their futures, and taught them the hard way that nothing in life is free.  This seems to have created a suspicion backlash against those in power.  Again. That whole "what goes around, comes around" thing is a real pain, isn't it?
Hopefully those kids who have had a sad wake-up call will realize that there is cause to hope, and that it resides in them.  They are the hope for the future, not some politician or government entity.
This is a country built on dreams, and they are the dreamers.  The people of this country got through the Great Depression and came out stronger for it.  We can get through this - hopefully stronger and wiser.  Our pampered youth are learning the hard way that nothing comes for free, and that a politician's promise of utopia comes with a hefty pricetag.  But hopefully they will also learn that hard work, dedication and determination can deliver many wonderful things to those who dare.
Yes, our government has been frittering away their inheritance for decades, but that doesn't mean it can't be replaced.   In order to do that, though, the first thing that needs to be replaced is those currently in power.
There are literally trillions of reasons why.


Tuesday, March 9, 2010


In a report on health care tonight on Special Report with Bret Baier, they played a clip of Nancy Pelosi speaking at the National Association of Counties today about the legislation.  She said:

"We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it - away from the fog of the controversy."

After the clip, Baier said "You have to pass the bill to find out what's in it?"  To which the reporter, Jim Engle, replied (with a laugh) "Yea, I just report it, I didn't say it."

Whatever happened to that whole thing about transparency and bills being online for the public to view for at least 72 hours before a vote?

With all of the "controversy" over the bills and the way they are ramming them through, no one has really focused on what bill exactly we are talking about.  It is generally acknowledged that we are talking about the Senate bill, but, really, is it?

Obama himself apparently has a "proposal" out there, for what it's worth.  When he talks about the legislation, it seems like he is talking about his proposal.  But when the pundits speak about the situation, they are talking about the Senate bill.  Pelosi is just using the generic term "legislation" at this point.  Perhaps she thinks the Senate will miraculously pass her bill. 

What, exactly, is the point of Obama's "Proposal"?  It seems like it is just a blind behind which the democrats are hiding.  Sure, the proposal claims a lot of things, but, really, what does it matter?  It isn't going to get voted on, the items in it are not being included in the legislation, so what is the deal?  To me, it seems like its entire purpose is to act as cover when a democrat is asked if something is in the Senate bill that isn't.  "Sure, yeah, that's in the proposal".  Remember, these are lawyers we're talking about.  They aren't lying, because it probably is in the proposal - but that doesn't mean it's in the legislation

The Tonight Show had a hilarious spot about Pelosi talking health care while playing a shell game.  How apt.  One can assume the three cups are the House plan, the Senate plan and Obama's proposal.  God only knows what piece of garbage is going to emerge out from under all of this, but it's safe to assume that the country is being played, and the game is bait and switch.

Meanwhile, Robert Gibbs is starting to walk back his March 18th deadline.  Is it just me, or does it seem like this bill is like one of those nightmares that you think you have woken up from but find out you are still in - over and over and over again?

During the round table discussion, Charles Krauthammer opined that Rep. Stupak will probably vote yes on the bill:

"I predict Stupak will accept a compromise because I think he does not want to carry the mark of Cain all his life as the man who sank historic health care reform."

I have no doubt whatsoever that that is exactly how Pelosi is pressuring him (along with making plenty of hollow promises, bribes and threats).  What he really needs to think about, however, is the other side of that coin.

This bill is flawed - it doesn't matter which bill we're talking about, because all of the democrat health care offerings are flawed.  So although I can understand him not wanting to be blamed by his own party for killing health care, I wonder if he is prepared to be blamed by anywhere from 57 - 81% of the country as the man who cast the vote that forced this nightmare on the people.


Monday, March 8, 2010


North Carolina public schools are proposing a new lesson plan for American history.  They are not the first state to do this, and they unfortunately probably won't be the last.  Under the proposed plan, high school students would no longer be taught American history before 1877. 

No Declaration of Independence.  No Revolutionary War.  No Constitution.  No War of 1812.  No Civil War or Reconstruction.  No Founding Fathers, and no Abe Lincoln.

Why are they proposing this?  They feel that the things that happened in this country prior to 1877 are irrelevant to todays students.

According to Rebecca Garland, the chief academic officer for North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, the goal of this change is to teach what students will feel connected to, “where they see the big idea, where they are able to make connections and draw relationships between parts of our history and the present day.”

Wow.  So, apparently, an entirely new system of governance, a war to impliment it, a war to cement it and a war to make all men truly free in this country are not "big ideas".

According to The Heritage Foundation, the reason for this is simply a Progressive agenda to promote government as the answer:

The Progressives sought to remake America, so that the Declaration’s Founding Principles, the Constitution’s institutional structures, and the Civil War’s meaning as a victory for Founding principles would no longer ring true. The progressives argued that equal, natural rights were non-existent; government creates rights. They replaced representative government with the administrative, bureaucratic state.

I have another take on it. 

I'm not saying that the remaking of America by Progressives isn't the cause - it certainly is.  But I think there is more to it than that. 

I think that is it just not possible to learn about our history and not fall in love with this country.  Sure, there's the bad stuff, like slavery, but there is also the Civil War, which certain (Republican) factors fought in order to right that wrong.  It's no wonder Progressives don't want to teach the Civil War, since their Democrat brethren were most definitely on the wrong side of that one!  The decade after the Civil War, called the Reconstruction, ran from 1865 to, interestingly enough, 1877.  Why wouldn't the Progressives want to teach about that?  Well, the Reconstruction was marred by the creation of the KKK and the many attempts by southern white democrats to oppress the black (republican) community.   Suddenly that 1877 or earlier date makes a lot of sense, huh?

To learn about our country's Founding, from the Declaration of Independence, through the Revolutionary War and on to the creation of the Constitution is to learn what men of honor, integrity and moral standing were capable of.  Is it possible to learn those things and not foster a deep sense of pride that you are descended from that?  Is it possible to learn those things, those freedoms, those rights, without yearning to have them, nurture them and pass them on?

And therein lies the dilemma of the Progressives.  The objective for them is ultimately a nanny state that is subservient to a global community.  When there were attempts to add the U.K. to the European Union and have them forfeit their pound in favor the the euro, there was a hue and cry that was quite unexpected.  The British were proud of their long history and did not want to lose their national identity in the European collective.  One would imagine the other countries were not as concerned about the amalgamation of the European states into one union because they were used to the highly elastic boundaries of their countries throughout the centuries.  But the island nation of Great Britain has always stood apart, both literally and figuratively.

The United States is cut from the same cloth.  We are more of an amalgam of races and creeds than the EU,  but we have, in the peerless melting pot that is our country, created something new.  Something different.  Something special.  American exceptionalism is real.  Our love of freedom is ingrained in us from birth - it above all else, is our birthright.  It is that exceptionalism  and freedom that makes us a country, it is what binds the many different factions into We the People.  No where on Earth is like us, and, as long as we know our history, we will never give that up.

The Progressives know this.  They have revised their own history, but have found it difficult to revise ours, so instead have decided to ignore it.

The whole scheme has caused such an uproar that it is currently being "revisited" - for what that's worth.  Let's hope sanity (and concerned parents) prevails.

There is cause to hope, too, in Texas.  They are in the midst of battling textbook companies over the pronounced leftist tilt of the publications.  Texas is the largest consumer of textbooks in the country which means:

Textbook publishers will have to follow Texas guidelines if they wish to continue to sell textbooks in Texas.

In other words, as Texas goes, so goes the nation.  This battle could potentially affect all of our children's education across the country.  I don't know about you, but I'm damn glad this battle is being fought in Texas instead of California! 

The proposed changes will be voted on in May.

Considering the Battle of the Alamo occurred in 1836, I feel a tiny little spark of hope.....


Friday, March 5, 2010


My daughter's school, Ocoee Middle, was featured on Oprah today.

They did a 'flash mob' about reading, set the the Black-Eyed Peas' "I've got a Feeling", and sent it to Oprah.  She liked it so much that she featured the school on her show today and has arranged for their library to be filled with books and computers from Target.

Check it out:

It was also on the news.

No, you can't see my daughter, because she is lost in the crowd.  Yes, I'm proud anyway!!!

Go Cardinals!!!



Our entitlement generation are at it again.  Yesterday, there were dozens of campus protests across the country.  So what were our college students protesting?  The wars?  The economy?  A sudden epiphany about the fraud that is Global Warming?  Nope.

They were protesting the increased tuition at state universities - basically, they were demanding their right to cheaper higher education.  Their tuition is rising and their class options are falling due to cutbacks, and this makes them very unhappy.    After all, higher education is a right, isn't it?

It's too bad their $80,000 educations don't include lessons in civics and common sense.  If it did, they would realize that higher education is not a right, it is a privilege.  And if they had a shred of common sense, they would realize that the unsustainable social programs they and their ilk have demanded for decades are the main cause for their troubles today.

It's a remarkable irony, isn't it, that they are paying the price for the unsustainable demands of social engineering that they and those who have come before them have been advocating for since the 1960's?

Be careful what you wish for, kids!

The protests were encouraged and promoted by a plethora of lefty groups, most notably SDS - Students for a Democratic Society.  It should be called SSS - Students for a Socialized Society, but you know those socialists - they really think 'socialism' and 'democracy' are one and the same.

The sense of entitlement that sends these kids into the streets to protest for their right to demand that other people subsidize their opportunity for higher education (which will enable them to get much better paying jobs, which is also, apparently, a right) is the same sense of entitlement that propels them to demand a socialist takeover of our government. 

On a sidebar, I often wonder what these little putzes think, once they get that high paying job that is, apparently, also their right, of the insane taxes they are forced to pay once they become the rich and privileged class.  Oh, that's right, they pay their accountants to hide their assets and make sure they are paying the bare minimum.  Social justice, indeed.

The end result isn't the socialist utopia they were promised, unfortunately.  What they are getting instead is the collapse of the system that enabled their privileged upbringing.  Hey kids - that collapse is what you have been advocating for.  You know, "fundamentally transforming America"?  Hmmm...the reality sure isn't what you thought it would be, huh?

There is another irony to this story.  The hikes in tuition will cause a decrease in attendance.  This, in turn, will eventually cause a drop in tuition to encourage more enrollees.

That's called supply and demand.  It's a free market principle - something our college students desperately need to learn about. 

Looks to me like class is already in session on that.  Now let's see how many of our little socialists-in-training learn the lesson.


Wednesday, March 3, 2010


President Obama just wrapped up another speech on health care (#35, to be exact).  In this (hopefully final) speech, he says the time for debate is over and the time to make decisions is upon us.  It is time for a straight up or down vote.

Okay, 52% of us say no.

Can we move on to the economy now, please?

If only it were that easy.  Unfortunately, The One is not interested in the opinions of the peasantry.  So with the rallying cry of "Damn the Tea Partiers, full speed ahead!" still ringing in their ears, the democrats are ordered by their Dear Leader to prepare for their kamikaze run.

I have been getting a lot of questions about how reconciliation works.  First of all, let's call it what it is.  Budget reconciliation.  This is a process by which already passed budgetary measures are amended - amendments are to either cut spending/taxes or increase spending/taxes in a budget.  When the lefties whine that the evil Bush used reconciliation to get his tax cuts through, yes, he absolutely did.  Because that is what the process of budget reconciliation is for

What budget reconciliation is not for is reshaping one sixth of the American economy and the creation of  a massive new entitlement.  According to Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND), Chairman of the Budget Committee:

Yes, you may argue, but our esteemed president wants this to go through, and he thinks it is a good idea.


“He hasn’t gotten his way…uh…and that is now prompting a change in the Senate rules that really I think would change the character of the Senate uh forever and uh what I worry about would be that you essentially have still two chambers the House and the Senate but you have simply majoritarian uh absolute power on on either side and that’s just not what the Founders intended.”

That was then-Senator Barack Obama back in 2005 talking about Satan himself - Bush.  Apparently the Founders only intended for the democrats to "change the character of the Senate uh forever". 

In order to manage reconciliation, the House will have to pass the Senate bill as is, and hope that the Senate will pass the amendments House democrats will demand in exchange for putting the Senate bill through.  That is going to take a lot of trust on their part, and it doesn't seem like it's there.   I can't say as I blame them - I wouldn't take the word of a politician, either.

If the House does manage to choke down the Senate version and pass it, then it will go to the Senate for reconciliation, where they will add in amendments to fulfill promises made to House democrats, such as banning abortion funding.  After that, a simple Senate majority of 51 is needed to pass the whole thing and send it up to Obama for a signature.

This also may mean adding in a public option - hell, why not?  In for a penny, in for a pound, right?  If they are going to ram it through against the American taxpayer's protests using a method not approved for this use, they may as well just shoot the moon!  What do they have to lose - an election?  No biggie.  They think passing this mess will guarantee them majorities for decades to come. 

It's still a toss up on whether they will be able to pass this hideous thing, but I can guarantee they are going to do everything they can.  They don't care if they are committing political suicide, because this isn't just politics for them.

This is ideology, and they will not be deterred, no matter how unethical the means by which they enact it.

BTW - The Weekly Standard has a rundown of the numbers Pelosi has to work with.  Let's hope it's true.

UPDATE: Hilarious!


Tuesday, March 2, 2010


In a remarkably well-orchestrated first week, a 'nonpartisan' rival to the Tea Parties has arisen practically overnight.  They are calling themselves the Coffee Party, and are exactly what you might think they would be - left-leaning, big government embracing, Starbucks sipping elites (think goatees and Janeane Garofalo types). 

In their first week of existence, they have launched a website and video, garnered 40,000 followers on facebook and gotten not one but two favorable write-ups from major lefty publications. 

But they are entirely grassroots.



Only a week and they already have a slogan and a mission statement.  Yup, sounds grassroots to me!  I wonder if they have a nifty logo, too?  Maybe some cool pre-printed, government issue, NEA-created, taxpayer funded signs to wave at rallies?

The slogan is “Wake Up and Stand Up.” The mission statement declares that the federal government is “not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges we face as Americans.”

Sounds like the communist creed, no?  Government is not the enemy, it is the answer.  "Collective will"?  What are we, the Borg?  I prefer not to be absorbed into the collective, thanks.  And, in true progressivespeak, "democratic" can be freely interchanged with "socialist".

Really, how stupid do they think we are?

“We’re not the opposite of the Tea Party,” Ms. Park, 41, said. “We’re a different model of civic participation, but in the end we may want some of the same things.”

Hmmm...apparently, pretty stupid....

UPDATE:  As I was saying:

In fact, a simple internet search (which the NY Times apparently is not capable of doing) reveals that Park organized the Coffee Party for the specific purpose of undermining the Tea Party movement.

Park is a former Strategy Analyst at the NY Times who was one of organizers and operators of the United for Obama video channel at YouTube

Lots more info on Legal Insurrection.  Be sure to check out Ms. Park's tea party tweets! 


Monday, March 1, 2010


As a mom, I've heard some real whoppers.  On the second day of preschool, my eldest came to me, limping.  "I can't go to school, Mom", she gasped out, her little face scrunched up, one hand grasping her leg.  "What's wrong, honey?  Why can't you go to school today?" I asked, concerned.  "I can't go to school today because I broke my leg" she moaned, bottom lip stuck out to really sell it.  Ooookaaay.  Get your coat on and get in the car, kid.

I learned two things that day - one, my child definitely has a career in the theater if she so chooses, and two, there is no lie too ridiculous for some people.  Now, my child was just 4 when she said this, so I will cut her some slack. 

Unfortunately, there are people in high places whose mothers apparently never caught (or chose to ignore) their offspring's blatant fallacies.  This has to be the case, or else why would we have been subjected to the obvious whoppers that have been tossed out for our consumption just this past week. 

Our first example of creative modification of the parameters of a situation comes from the Goracle himself, the High Priest of Gaia, Al Gore.  Mr. Gore has finally made a statement about ClimateGate.  So what excuse has Mr. Gore given for the fiasco that is ClimateGate?  He's had about three months to come up with something, so I'm sure it was worth the wait:

I, for one, genuinely wish that the climate crisis were an illusion. But unfortunately, the reality of the danger we are courting has not been changed by the discovery of at least two mistakes in the thousands of pages of careful scientific work over the last 22 years by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Okay, maybe not.

Only two mistakes, huh Al?  I think not.  Let's see - the Himalayan glaciers aren't going to disappear by 2035.  African agriculture is increasing, not decreasing.  The sea levels are not rising.  The rainforests are not at risk of becoming tropical savannahs.  Not only aren't the polar bears waning into extinction, their numbers have increased fivefold in the past 25 years.  The Arctic is not ice-free and most likely won't be for a long time.  Those issues I just mentioned are the foundation and pillars upon which the Gaia cult has been built.  The so-called 'scientists' involved in the scam have perverted the scientific process from one of empirical evidence, stringent peer review and theories proved by scientific fact into a quasi-religious ideology of hysterical what-if scenarios fobbed off as fact, alienation of skeptics to the point of ostracism and career destruction, and forcing facts (to the point of blatant fabrication) to support a theory.   BTW - this is a point of view now supported by none other that Phil Jones, the disgraced former head of the CRU.

Mr. Gore, you are lying.  You have been called out on it, and doubling down and pretending you wish it wasn't true doesn't make it so.  The scam has been exposed.    I myself would like to see hearings on this and see prosecutions of the scam artists at the center of it, Mr. Gore included.

Unfortunately, there seems to be an epidemic of liars on the liberal front.  The entire agenda seems to be falling apart, so they are all doubling down and blatantly lying in a vain effort to further their plans.

Take Nancy Pelosi for instance.  This weekend Queen Nan went on the talk show circuit and didn't just tell a strategic lie or two - it was more like a carpet-bombing expedition.  The lies were flying so fast and thick that it was a little difficult to keep it all straight.

The most stunning lie was her assertion that she and the Tea Partiers had 'common ground'.  I can only imagine the reaction of most tea partiers, but I for one, was utterly disgusted by the naked opportunism on display with that one.  With one breath she talks about them being astroturf, and with the next, they are her long-lost brethren.  Hey, wait...taken in that contex, maybe she's right.....

She spoke of fellow democrats giving up their careers to do what is best for Americans.  Easy for her to say, since the odds of her losing her seat are about the same as her stimulus bill creating a job - about 787 billion to one.  She says she is listening to the people and doing what is best for them.

She also mentioned a unique definition of 'bipartisan':

"Bipartisanship is a two-way street. A bill can be bipartisan without bipartisan votes. Republicans have left their imprint."

Fascinating.  The only imprint I can think the Republicans have left in regards to this bill is the imprint of their knuckles on the locked door behind which Madame Sneaker wrote the bill with her closest cronies.

The blatant lying is reminiscent of my four year old, clutching her leg and really trying to sell it that it was broken.  Sorry, honey, but I'm just not buying it.  Or, better yet, in words she will be able to understand:

"Liar, liar, pantsuit on fire".


  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by 2008

Back to TOP