Sunday, March 30, 2014

Hot-Rod Harry is off his meds again

The first thing to go is your memory. The second is any remnant of dignity. Or maybe it's the other way round. Either way, does anyone remember this passionate display from Hot-Rod-Harry on the Senate floor back in late February? (Emphasis mine):

There’s plenty of horror stories being told. All are not true but they are being told all over America.
Good times, good times, no!
But wait what is this? On the same Senate Floor Hot-Rod said this not a month later:

[E]xamples that they think are bad -  I’ve called lies, Mr. President, is simply not true.
Really… I mean… I just… you can’t just… SAY WHAT? You cannot make this stuff up folks. He said it - then he unsaid it and now he’s denying he said it at all. Wow, just WOW. How big are his cojones when he can just simply tell an outright lie, on the Senate floor no less, with such a straight face and get away with it? We’ll in defense of his face I’m not sure he has the facial muscles necessary to actually change his expression so straight face is all we’ve got.
Look Reid has made it his practice to go on the Senate floor and simply tell outright lies knowing that apparently nobody will ever call him on it. Anybody remember him telling the public from the Senate floor that he knows for sure that Mitt Romney hasn’t paid income taxes since like the dawn of time? Or that the Koch brothers are un-American just because they exercise their freedom of speech?

Well, my hope is that come November we can reduce hot-rod harry to a back bencher where he can receive the care he needs in his senior years.

The (In) dispensable Nancy Pelosi

The things I do for you guys. I was trolling over at the Daily Beast (so you don’t have to - you’re welcome) and found this nugget of wisdom from Robert Shrum entitled The Indispensible Nancy Pelosi. The article is effectively telling the readers just how wonderful the former Speaker was and still is. Here's  a few slice of the preverbal ra-ra- that passes for journalism from Shrum (emphasis mine as always):

Republicans turned the Democrats’ leader in the House into the prime reason to keep a Florida district in GOP hands. No wonder they fear her: she’s as responsible for liberal success in Washington as President Obama has been.
Honestly, I can give you no argument here Mr. Shrum, conservatives do indeed fear her but not for the reasons you think. We fear given her role one as of the architects of the most crippling piece of legislation to ever come out of Washington and that it will eventually bring down this great nation of ours if we don’t do something about it and soon. Our fear runs deep and it runs long Mr. Shrum. What Mr. Shrum is touting as her ‘liberal’ successes is exactly why the GOP should be losing sleep over at night. More from Shrum:

So Pelosi had to find her own path to progress - and she did. As Speaker, she not only cajoled her majority into approving the Senate version of Obamacare without amendments - a disagreeable and nearly unprecedented concession from her own members and the only maneuver that could rescue the bill.
So let me see if I have this right, keeping in mind that Shrum’s going in position is that Obamacare, first and foremost, was the right thing to do (which clearly empirical evidence would suggest it is not). Second, even the mighty Pelosi had to bring her caucus kicking and screaming to vote for this steaming fly ridden pile of crap. Remember folks, the Dems had both houses of congress and the Oval Office and still she had to whip them into voting for it. Wow, that was tough. No, they got this remarkably flawed legislation though the House and the Senate using dubious procedure at best and most of that was done by Harry Reid not Pelosi. 

The rest of the dems had no idea just how bad this legislation was because nobody took the time to read it before it was passed. All they heard was the leadership, Pelosi included, touting ‘if you like your doctor’, ‘nobody will lose the insurance they have’, ‘bending the cost curve down’, ‘it’ll be just like Travelocity’, etc. Now the vulnerable Dems can’t seem to get far enough away from this toxic, career ending nonsense.

Finally, we get this Krugmanesque bit from Shrum (emphasis mine):

Earlier, she had held virtually every Democrat in line, all but 11 of her majority, to pass the 2009 Economic Recovery Act without a single Republican vote. The GOP demonized the legislation - for the wrong reason: it wasn't as big as it should have been - but it did prevent a second Great Depression.
Really, not big enough. It was almost $1,000,000,000,000.00, and at that time an increase on the total US debt of almost 10%. Think about that for a moment. The US was 233 years old, and Pelosi et al managed to increase the total debt of the United States by 10% and Shrum is trying to tell us that it wasn’t big enough? 

What boggles my mind it that he now has the advantage of hindsight and even the President said that the shovel ready projects weren’t so, um, shovel ready. So it should be insulting to everyone who reads this tripe from this knuckle headed elite liberals . Shrum writes a column extolling the great and wise Pelosi without addressing her part in creating this mess she has made in the a) insurance market, b) financial market, c) labor market… You get the picture.

Shrum swears that Pelosi is indispensable. I’ve got an experiment. Let’s get rid of Pelosi for a few years and see how well the markets do when the conservatives have both houses of congress and the Oval Office. But, unfortunately that is not up to us it’s up to San Francisco who keep giving us her highness every 2 years and apparently show no signs of voting her out. Thanks SanFran.

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Community organizing the world is tough work

What do you get when you put a community organizer in charge of the free world? Chaos. Look around the world today and you see less freedom, embolden enemies and the resurgence of our old nemesis the Soviet Union, I mean Russia. And here’s the catch, it’s pretty easy to see how we got here. Think about what Obama was trained to do for a moment. A good community organizer is skilled at certain things. For example, race baiting, denigrating those who don’t cotton to your views, giving speeches. All is critical when all you are trying to do is rally the base, but after the speech, the community organizer get’s to go home all self assured of his relevance, while it’s up to someone else to actually do anything the problem. 

The point is, Obama is trained to be reactionary not proactive. Community organizers, from Jessie to Al to Obama are always looking for causes or corporation to shake down, er, I mean, find wrong with and right them. In other words, their job doesn’t begin until say, a white Hispanic kills a black kid in Florida in self defense. Or a black professor is arrested in his home, or an NFL team has a perceived not so nice name. Those are all right up any self respecting community organizers preverbal alley. But when it comes to governing, meh, I’ll just give a speech and all will be well. 

Nothing has displayed the disparity between what is necessary for a chief executive (namely to be proactive) and Obama in his (reactionary) handling of foreign affairs. Russia just invaded another country without a shot being fired. Syria is still enjoying their chemical weapons stock pile, Iran will soon be nuclear armed, Libya and Egypt are an outright mess, oh, and don't forget he presided over the first US Ambassador assassination is 35 years. Our friends and enemies are laughing openly at his feckless indifference, if not outright naïveté, to how pathetically he approaches foreign affairs.

But here’s the rub folks, you can’t blame Obama, he is only doing what he was trained to do. He’s never run a state or a corporation, so to expect him to understand the chief executive role is unfair. So whom do we blame.  The usual suspects. The media, for their lack of simple curiosity about the man when he was running for office. The electorate for buying into he’s ‘stop the seas from rising’ bullshit. No we got what we asked for and we will have it for another three and a half years. I only hope the country can survive that long.

Sandra Fluke vs. Her Libido

Social Justice Lawyer Sandra Fluke

My guess is that Sandra Fluke will never ever work a day in her life. After a seemingly never ending ‘Career’ in academia, she is now running for state senate in California, where, she will never work a day in her life unless she turns to gun running (now there’s good work if you can find it). The Flukester recently wrote a op-ed piece for column for the Washington Post were she shrills in her title “the Supreme Court, a potential catastrophe for women’s rights”

Yes a catastrophe if the American corporations win the pending Supreme Court case that would allow them to not fund 2 out of 47 options for birth control. Oh the humanity, how will women’s health ever recover from such a draconian verdict? Here is the first paragraph of her column (emphasis mine):

A pair of potentially catastrophic cases will be argued before the Supreme Court on Tuesday. These cases are brought by privately held, for-profit corporations that are arguing their religious convictions should preclude them from offering employees the health insurance required by law. Specifically, these private employers don’t want to allow their employees’ insurance to cover some forms of birth control because, contrary to medical and scientific evidence, they believe some birth control causes abortions.
She goes on to go from the ridiculous to simple hyperbole.

Depending on the court’s rulings, the cases’ outcomes could deny millions of women coverage of any or all forms of birth control, limiting women’s ability to control their reproductive health, plan their pregnancies and manage their lives.
Yes and the studies have shown this to be, er, not true. The truth is that More than 99% of women aged 15–44 who have ever had sexual intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method with the vast majority not asking their employer to pay for it! What Ms. Fluke is trying to say is that contraceptives are a woman’s right and should be subsidized by someone else. While the ultimate truth of the matter is, the act of sex is 99.999% an elective activity. By her argument, Is she suggesting that women cannot control their libido? Wait scratch that I don’t want to get into trouble like Governor Huckabee did.

The point is that Fluke is a liberal and being such, she cannot control her impulse to her intrinsic messianic delusion that she sees as  her duty to force her views upon everyone, including those of us who don’t want it. Her ‘duty’ is purely imaginary and born out of vanity not  public spirit. Her impulse isn’t altruism either it’s just her insatiable appetite to bend the public to her opinion.

Friday, March 21, 2014

Just because...

I've been trying to find a reason to use this graphic but haven't yet. So I'll just present it to you with no comment.

Pelosi: Putting the “Affordable” back in the Affordable Care Act

Wow two Pelosi posts in one week, what are the odds? Well pretty good when she keeps spouting this nonsense.

Affordable - affordable - affordable! It's almost as if she is trying to convince herself, no? Well, maybe she is. Given this report from The Hill (emphasis mine):

Health industry officials say ObamaCare-related premiums will double in some parts of the country, countering claims recently made by the administration.
The expected rate hikes will be announced in the coming months amid an intense election year, when control of the Senate is up for grabs. The sticker shock would likely bolster the GOP’s prospects in November and hamper ObamaCare insurance enrollment efforts in 2015.
The industry complaints come less than a week after Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to downplay concerns about rising premiums in the healthcare sector. She told lawmakers rates would increase in 2015 but grow more slowly than in the past. 
“The increases are far less significant than what they were prior to the Affordable Care Act,” the secretary said in testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee.
Her comment baffled insurance officials, who said it runs counter to the industry’s consensus about next year. 
“It’s pretty shortsighted because I think everybody knows that the way the exchange has rolled out … is going to lead to higher costs,” said one senior insurance executive who requested anonymity.
The insurance official, who hails from a populous swing state, said his company expects to triple its rates next year on the ObamaCare exchange. 
Now that’s what I call Orwellian AFFORDABLE folks. Again, Liberals think that is they just keep saying it - magically, it will be so.  Yesterday, Pelosi doubled down on the political liability, er, advantage Obamacare The Affordable Care act will be for Democrats this election cycle.

But Pelosi warned that the Republicans' emphasis on the law as a campaign plank will backfire.
"We don't weigh its value as to what it means politically. We weigh its value as to what it means to the health, well-being, economic and health security of America's families," she said. "We just couldn't be prouder."
Riiiigght - can’t wait to see all those vulnerable Democrats flocking to the ACA bandwagon. Kind of reminds me of this guy:

Yep, all is calm, nothing to worry about. The reality? Larry Sabato had this to say on Neil Cavuto earlier this week (emphasis mine):

Look, Nancy Pelosi is from a deep-blue district. I have no doubt in her district, in the San Francisco area, you can be for ObamaCare and not have any electoral problems. The difficulty for Pelosi and the Democrats is, in every single reliable survey for a year, a plurality or majority of Americans have been opposed for a variety of reasons. She’s arguing, the best defense is a good offense. The problem with that is, when you are on the offense, using your time in the public arena to discuss a subject people have more or less made up their minds about, and they don’t like it, you’re wasting your time in the arena. Second point, Neil, which I think is even more important for the midterm elections: The people who favor ObamaCare, which is a minority, aren’t really that enthusiastic about it even if they favor it. But the majority who oppose ObamaCare are much more charged up, and they’re the people who tend to turn up in a low-turnout midterm election.
Translation: damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Grab the popcorn folks this should be an entertaining election cycle watching the Dems trying to defend and run away from this steaming pile of crap at the same time.