Tag: Politics of the United States

The Impeachment Canard

Over the course of Obama’s Presidency, there have been occasional rumblings to impeach him. These rumblings got a little attention a few weeks ago when Sarah Palin — who has no official position with the GOP — called for Obama to be impeached. But for the most part, the idea is being ignored. Conservatives are well aware that Democrats control enough of the Senate to block anything and that an impeachment fight would do little to benefit the country or them (even assuming appropriate “high crimes and misdemeanors” could be identified to fit the bill). You can peruse Hot Air, NRO, The Daily Caller, Town Hall … you’ll find little apart from shrugging. Conservative just aren’t that obsessed with the idea.

You know who is obsessed with the idea? Liberals:

Consider, for example, the Sunlight Foundation’s Capitol Words database, which tracks words spoken in the House and Senate. So far in July, there have been 10 mentions of the term “impeachment” in Congress and four others of the term “impeach.” Eleven of the 14 mentions have been made by Democratic rather than Republican members of Congress, however.

Impeachment chatter has also become common on cable news. On Fox News this month, Sarah Palin, the former Alaska governor, called for Obama’s impeachment, for instance. But for every mention of impeachment on Fox News in July, there have been five on liberal-leaning MSNBC.

In July, Fox News mentioned impeachment 95 times, or about three times a day. MSNBC mentioned it 448 times. And the trend was only going up at the end of the month.

Now why is this becoming such a big thing among liberals? Well, need you ask:

The Democrats’ congressional campaign arm pulled in $2.1 million in online donations over the weekend — the best four-day haul of the current election cycle — largely propelled by fundraising pitches tied to speculation that House Republicans could pursue the impeachment of President Obama.

Democrats have consistently used impeachment — a prospect that has been floated by several prominent conservatives but has not been embraced by most of the Republican establishment — to fill their campaign coffers, and their polling has shown that fear of an impeachment attempt as well as the House GOP’s efforts to sue Obama have the potential to drive midterm voter turnout on the left.

Ding! Or maybe I should say “Ka-ching!”

This shouldn’t surprise anyone, of course. For as long as I can remember, the Democrats have run on the platform that the evil Republicans are going to take away social security, gut Medicare, start World War III, send your job to Mexico, destroy the environment, impeach Obama and cancel Arrested Development. Fear is what they do; security is what they offer. And both are lies.

Now the Democrats and their defenders will point out that it was Republicans who first raised this idea. And that’s true. But the GOP leadership and most conservative pundits almost immediately dismissed it. The Democrats will also point out that the GOP made a potential impeachment of Bush an issue in 2006. That’s also true. But as Silver points out, the disparity in concern over the issue wasn’t nearly as dramatic (374 mentions for Fox against 206 for MSNBC over the first seven months of the year). Nor did it reach fever pitch this call has. Moreover, the Democrats actually introduced articles of impeachment against Bush in 2008, something I don’t see the Republicans doing any time soon.

It tells you how thin the veneer of confidence is among Democrats that the mere whisper of impeachment from a Fox News pundit can send them into this kind of tizzy. It’s going to be very ugly when they lose power.

Physician, Heal Nothing

It finally seems to have sunk into the Obama Administration how badly this Obamacare thing is going. There have been rumblings that the system will not be fixed by the end of the month (color me surprised). The total enrollment is something like 100,000 (only a quarter from the federal exchange). And millions of people are livid over having their policies cancelled.

If you’ve followed Obama for the last five years, you know what comes next: rewriting the law on his own:

The White House has its own idea to stop the bleeding: Allow insurers to renew existing plans in 2014 (which means they could continue into 2015) while forcing them to send Landrieu-like letters explaining why their plans don’t conform to the Affordable Care Act’s standards.

(I’m tired from baby stuff and I first read that sentence as “Landru-like” letters … as in Landru the computer from the classic Star Trek serial “Return of the Archons”. Funny thing is that, now that I’m awake, a letter from a fictional crazed computer still sounds a lot better than one coming from Mary Landrieu of Louisiana.)

This doesn’t really ensure anyone can actually keep their plan — which means it also doesn’t affect premiums in the exchanges. But it makes it easier for Democrats to blame insurers for canceling these plans. And it perhaps makes it easier for the White House to stop congressional Democrats from signing onto something like Landrieu or Udall.
The insurance industry is furious. They’ve been working with the White House to get HealthCare.Gov up and running and they’ve been devoting countless man hours to dealing with the problems and they’ve been taking the heat from their customers over canceled plans, and now the Obama administration wants to make them into a scapegoat.

In other words, this changes the wording to, “If you liked your plan, you could have kept your plan if it weren’t for those greedy insurance companies.”

The problem is that the machinery of canceling plans and creating new ones is already moving. The insurance industry has put a million piece in motion anticipating that the exchanges would, you know, work. Stopping it at this point is like slipping you car into reverse on the highway. It’s such a bad idea that the state of Washington has already said they will not implement it.

So why is Obama trying to sell this snake oil? Well, as McCardle points out, there really isn’t a Plan B. The process has advanced so far and the individual market is so delicate right now, that we really don’t have a good option. Obama has driven us into a ditch with no way out.

No matter what happens from now on, I think we are witnessing the beginning of the end of individual insurance policies. By the time Obama leaves office, your choices will be Medicaid or employer insurance. And maybe that was the intention all along.

Democrats Do What Democrats Do

The GOP’s shutdown strategy has predictably failed. Obamacare, despite its disastrous opening, is not going anywhere. The GOP is hemorrhaging at the polls and taking blame for the situation. The business community is bringing increasing pressure on the GOP to make a deal. So for the last few days, the GOP and Obama have been in talks about both the short- and long-term deals they want to make, starting with raising the debt limit.

If you’ve been watching American politics for a while, you are waiting for the other shoe to drop: when are the Democrats going to overplay their hand? Well, wait no more:

Senate Republicans are holding the line against Democratic demands for a framework to alleviate the across-the-board spending cuts established by sequestration as part of any deal to end the government shutdown and raise the debt ceiling.

In talks between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the main sticking point is now where to establish funding levels for the federal government and for how long. The Republican offer made on Friday — to set spending at sequestration levels of $988 billion for the next six months -– was rejected by Reid and others on Saturday on the grounds that it was too favorable to the GOP position and discouraged future negotiations.

By Sunday morning, little notable progress toward a resolution had been made. McConnell, according to sources, was adamant that the spending cuts of sequestration be maintained in any final arrangement.

This is stupid. The push for the last few weeks has been to pass a clean continuing resolution — that is funding the government at its current level while a long-term budget is worked out. That long-term deal could include a relaxation of the sequester … but only in exchange for statutory changes to entitlements that address the massive long-term deficits.

The debt ceiling, however, is only four days away making the wisdom or folly of the sequester irrelevant. For the Democrats to drag this out now is not only ridiculous, it’s politically stupid. The GOP has been getting beat up on the shutdown. Now the Dems are determined that they too must look like idiots.

I would be surprised but … this is utterly consistent with everything we’ve come to expect from the Democrats.

Update: If you want a laugh, trip over to some liberal blogs and witness everyone who has spent the last two weeks talking about petty and vindictive the GOP is suddenly claiming that this is reasonable because the Republicans should be hurt for the shutdown. Notice also how they are re-inventing facts, ignoring that the CR that we’ve been debating for the past three weeks funded the government at sequestration levels.

You are just to stupid to handle the truth, serfs.

Honestly, these crooks didn’t mean to destroy evidence that would show how they targeted political enemies of this administration, because the trail might lead back to the top. It’s SOP to get rid of these records after 3 months anyway…

Convenient! It’s also just a coincidence that Christine O’Donnell, a Tea Party candidate that seriously scared the left in Delaware, has some unknown entity trigger the IRS to put a lien against property she didn’t even own anymore, costing her the campaign. Since O’Donnell ran on a platform that advocated fiscal responsibility, having her targeted by the IRS in such a fashion, sure gave the left a great excuse to undermine her campaign. And it worked like a charm. But we are to believe that this incident, and the many others that are not getting any coverage from the LSM, are pure coincidence, and that any of us that point out the abuse of power to help rig so many elections in favor of Team Blue, are just kooky conspiracist.

The IRS agents, with the documents that would prove them the political hacks and liars they are conveniently destroyed, want us to believe that they didn’t breach O’Donnell’s rights before they put the lien against her property. I call bullshit. These IRS agents sure as hell were quick to issue that tax lien against her. That they then went back to fish for more shit they could disclose to undermine her campaign is now being used to pretend they didn’t breach her rights in the first place. Granted, we are dealing with agents of the state and neither accuracy nor ethics matter to these scumbags, but there is no defense for what they did. There is something seriously wrong here, and if we do not see people not only fired, but incarcerated for these criminal acts, we can kiss voting in our republic goodbye.

This last election proved to me that we now live in a banana republic and that nothing, abso-fucking-lutely nothing, is beyond democrats and their lust for power and political office. But they did it because they mean well. They are progressives! They want what’s best for us all, and if that means they need to break laws and impose laws on us that leave us all serfs to the state, it’s all good.

As I told people when they told me how refreshing it was to finally get rid of evil and stupid Boosh; the democrats, once in power, will dissuade anyone of the stupid notion that republicans are the ones that are evil and stupid, with real evil and incredibly stupid acts. The sad thing is that while I get to say “I told you so” the cost to us all for that little pleasure is just staggering. Some day the truth will come out, and then we will find out the orders came from the very top.

IRS Scandal update: FBI doing what?

According to the attorneys representing the groups screwed over by the IRS before the 2012 elections the FBI is doing “Zilch” despite this investigation being promised close to two months ago. From the article:

More than a month and a half after it was announced that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) would launch an investigation into the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) targeting of conservative groups, the groups and their legal representatives are still waiting to hear from the FBI.

Cleta Mitchell, an attorney representing nine tea party groups who were targeted by the IRS, told CNSNews.com that she has not heard from the FBI regarding the case and questions whether an investigation is actually underway.

“I have no reason to believe there is an investigation. It appears to me the Obama administration is only talking to itself,” Mitchell stated in an e-mail.

Mitchell and her clients are far from the only ones who are still left in the dark.

American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) Executive Director Jordan Sekulow, whose organization now represents 41 tea party groups in a case against the IRS, told CNSNews.com that they, too, are waiting to hear anything pertaining to the investigation.

“To date, none of our clients or any of our attorneys has been contacted by the FBI. The Director continues to assert that this is a priority for the Bureau, but at this point, there’s little evidence to suggest that this probe is on the fast track,” Mr. Sekulow wrote. “There has been no contact with any of the 41 conservative organizations we represent – the real victims of this IRS targeting scheme. Our expanded lawsuit continues to move forward.”

Not sure why this is news to anyone. The rats cannot investigate each other. If they start doing this, even if not in earnest, it might unravel on them and the crooks might all turn on each other hoping to sell someone else out in order to save their own skin. And they want none of that. So the FBI will interview nobody but claim they investigated and say they found nothing wrong. Just like the other departments involved in other scandals have been doing for going on 5 years now. And the LSM will lap it up and report that all is well in Black Jesus’ kingdom.

Don’t run afoul of these crooks. We are no longer a nation of laws, and justice only exists for the connected few. Ask Zimmerman.

The Astroturf Study

The Left is jumping with both feet on this study:

A new academic study confirms that front groups with longstanding ties to the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers planned the formation of the Tea Party movement more than a decade before it exploded onto the U.S. political scene.

Far from a genuine grassroots uprising, this astroturf effort was curated by wealthy industrialists years in advance. Many of the anti-science operatives who defended cigarettes are currently deploying their tobacco-inspired playbook internationally to evade accountability for the fossil fuel industry’s role in driving climate disruption.

The study, funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health, traces the roots of the Tea Party’s anti-tax movement back to the early 1980s when tobacco companies began to invest in third party groups to fight excise taxes on cigarettes, as well as health studies finding a link between cancer and secondhand cigarette smoke.

Taken purely as “science” — taxpayer-funded science incidentally — there are several problems with inhaling their conclusions without a hint of critical thinking. Sullum:

The main evidence for this thesis is that Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE), a think tank co-founded by libertarian billionaire David Koch and economist Richard Fink in 1984, received donations from tobacco companies (mainly Philip Morris) between 1991 and 2002. A year or two later, CSE split into two organizations, FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity, that have helped support and organize Tea Party activists. How much tobacco money did CSE get? According to Glantz et al., $5.3 million over 12 years, which amounts to roughly 11 percent of CSE’s revenue as of 2002. That’s a substantial share, but was it enough to corrupt “a think tank dedicated to free market economics” and backed by an ideologically motivated billionaire? Glantz et al. show that CSE saw eye to eye with Philip Morris on issues such as tobacco taxes and smoking bans, which presumably is why the company supported it. But they do not present any evidence that CSE took positions contrary to its avowed principles because it was eager to keep the tobacco money flowing. Nor do they claim that FreedomWorks or Americans for Prosperity, the groups that have aligned themselves with the Tea Party, receive substantial tobacco industry funding, let alone that such money is important enough to sway the entire Tea Party movement.

I didn’t realize that smoking rights was such a big deal to the Tea Party. I mean, every Tea Partier I’ve talked to has had that moment when his eyes glazed over and he mumbled, “People should be free to smoke anywhere. Tobacco taxes are bad. I like Phillip Morris better than Cats. I am going to smoke it again and again and again.” But I never thought anything of it.

Incidentally, you know who else got money from Big Tobacco? Algore. Yet, somehow, this does not discredit his opinions on global warming.

Sullum again:

If these positions are so clearly indefensible, why does the money matter? “It is important for policy-makers to be aware of the corporate funding sources for organisations that work to influence public policy,” Glantz et al. write. “It is important for policy-makers,the health community and people who support the Tea Party to be aware of these complex and often hard-to-track linkages.” But they never really explain why. Surely it is possible to judge arguments and evidence on their own merits, without reference to the alleged financial interests of the people offering them.

But rather than respond with arguments and evidence of his own, Glantz seeks to discredit his opponents by implying that they do not really believe what they are saying, that they are only in it for the money. “It is important for tobacco control advocates to anticipate and counter Tea Party opposition to tobacco control policies,” Glantz and his co-authors write, “and to ensure that policy makers, the media and the public understand the longstanding intersection between the tobacco industry and the Tea Party policy agenda.” In other words, if you don’t have logic and facts on your side, smear your opponents as Big Tobacco shills or dupes.

Exactly. Ever since the Tea Party arose, the goal of the Left has not been to engage them or debate them or defeat them. It has been to discredit them. To claim that millions of people with concerns ranging from illegal immigration to Obamacare do not come by these views honestly, but are racists, sexists, idiots or shills in some sort of Koch-funded behaviorist experiment.

Liberals, of course, come by their views honestly and with intellectual rigor. But anyone who disagrees with them must be insane, deluded or brainwashed. So … tobacco money! … or something. It is part of what I call the Grand Liberal Conceit: the belief that everyone is naturally liberal, that liberal views are intrinsically objectively correct and that the only reason anyone isn’t a liberal is because of some evil conspiracy. This view, of course, is the descendent of the “false consciousness” of Marxism, an idea that still extends its vile and vain tentacles into all branches of intellectual thought.

Bullshit. I’ll repeat what I said in a slightly different context, when Bill Maher complained that Obama’s opponents were running against an imaginary straw man:

not all of the complaints against Obama — not even a significant minority — are illegitimate. Obamacare is not a figment of the fevered Right Wing imagination; it’s an actual law that was actually passed and actually massively increases federal control over the insurance system. The crummy economy is not some specter conjured up by Rush Limbaugh. The massive deficit is not an illusion created by Fox News. We can argue over how much responsibility Obama bears for these things; but we can’t argue over whether they exist.

If you ask people why they don’t like Obama, I guarantee you that, except for a handful of pundits, the words “Saul Alinsky” will never pass their lips. They will cite bailouts, which Bush started but Obama supported and manipulated to the advantage of his political allies. They will cite the economy and the debt. They will cite Obamacare. They will cite Dodd-Frank. They will talk about a man who looks at our ridiculous tax system and proposes more complications.

These are not imaginary hobgoblins we attribute to some Barack X candidate who only exists in our diseased conservative minds (Maher, of course, thinking all conservative minds are diseased). These are things the President bears responsibility for.

Yes, some of the organizations affiliated with the Tea Party have taken tobacco money at some point and some have been funded by David Koch. So fucking what. George Soros has been doing that for years and failed to get a real movement going. Ross Perot tried that and failed to get a movement going. All the tobacco and Koch money in the world would not not have made a lick of difference were it not for genuine and legitimate concern about the direction in which this country is headed.

To be honest, this study and the reaction to it tells you a lot more about the Left than it does about the Right. All politics they disagree with is the result of shadowy conspiracies and rich oligarchs. The world is filled with fundamentally evil forces — Big Oil, Big Tobacco, the Koch Brothers — who infest and corrupt anything they touch. There are not legitimate Right Wing movements, only Left Wing ones. And if that all sounds familiar, it’s because those are views and prejudices that they constantly accuse the Right of having.

Hell’s teeth, I tire of that attitude. I wish a thousandth of the energy spent investigating and spreading BS conspiracy theories about the Tea Party or any movement were spent engaging and exploring their concerns and ideas and how those can be addressed in a sensible way. But I guess that tolerance and patience only applies to Occupy Wall Street.

The Court in Recess

Yesterday, the DC Court struck down several of President Obama’s recess appointments:

In a ruling that called into question nearly two centuries of presidential “recess” appointments that bypass the Senate confirmation process, a federal appeals court ruled on Friday that President Obama violated the Constitution when he installed three officials on the National Labor Relations Board a year ago.

The ruling was a blow to the administration and a victory for Mr. Obama’s Republican critics — and a handful of liberal ones — who had accused him of improperly asserting that he could make the appointments under his executive powers. The administration had argued that the president could decide that senators were really on a lengthy recess even though the Senate considered itself to be meeting in “pro forma” sessions.

Recess appointments are intended for when Congress is out of session and there is a dire need. They are not intended to bypass the Congress, even when said Congress are acting like idiots and refusing to do their Constitutional duty. I commented on this a year ago. While chastising the Republicans for refusing to have hearing on necessary appointments, I said:

All that having been said, two wrongs do not make a right. The Democrats pulled this pro forma crap too. Had Bush responded this way, the halls of Congress would have been filled with the sighs of Democrats fainting from such an egregious abuse of the process. Barack Obama, as Senator, was not exactly screaming to end filibusters when he could have done something about it (he was not part of the Gang of 14).

All sides are acting like spoiled little children, playing a game of “he started it.” It’s shit like this that makes me go up to Washington with a 2×4 and start whomping any Senator who gets within range. I don’t give a shit who started it. It needs to stop.

Violating the rules again is not the way to stop it, though. The Republicans got through this when Bush was President by finding Democrats who would let judicial candidates through. Scott Brown, at least, has indicated he would allow votes to proceed and I’m certain other Republicans could be cajoled or shamed into it.

I am nervous about the potential consequences of this decision (actions taken by recess appointees could be ruled invalid, creating complete legal chaos). I also suspect this will go the Supreme Court before it’s decided once and for all (the 11th Circuit previously upheld Bush’s recess appointments). It basically removes the President’s power to make recess appointments since Congress is basically always in at least pro forma session these days. But it seems like the Courts are going to force our legislators and our President to act like adults and actually go through the Constitutional process that is their obligation and duty.

This is why I refuse to “discuss” anything with the gun grabbers

Their brilliant idea? Well, since it stands in the way of the enlightened left’s agenda (that’s tyrannical shit for sane people), dump the constitution! The problems we have today are not the fact that stupid fucking assholes think they can override the laws of economics and human nature with their fantasies, the out of control spending by a political class that buys its power and grows it through that mechanism, and certainly not the fact that our government has become the people’s worst enemy, no it’s that god damned stupid document that is there to limit government from abusing us.

AS the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions.

Consider, for example, the assertion by the Senate minority leader last week that the House could not take up a plan by Senate Democrats to extend tax cuts on households making $250,000 or less because the Constitution requires that revenue measures originate in the lower chamber. Why should anyone care? Why should a lame-duck House, 27 members of which were defeated for re-election, have a stranglehold on our economy? Why does a grotesquely malapportioned Senate get to decide the nation’s fate?

Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues and inflamed our public discourse. Instead of arguing about what is to be done, we argue about what James Madison might have wanted done 225 years ago.

Now I get it: our political system is dysfunctional because we put restrictions on what our government can do to us! I wonder if the assholes that are now spouting this nonsense would feel the same way if the guy in the WH pushing his agenda was not this inept collectivist community organizer? What if the brilliant idea their government had come up with was something they didn’t agree with, let’s see eugenics, reeducation camps for dissenters, or maybe some big war to help with population control or to keep the sheep focused?

As someone who has taught constitutional law for almost 40 years, I am ashamed it took me so long to see how bizarre all this is. Imagine that after careful study a government official — say, the president or one of the party leaders in Congress — reaches a considered judgment that a particular course of action is best for the country. Suddenly, someone bursts into the room with new information: a group of white propertied men who have been dead for two centuries, knew nothing of our present situation, acted illegally under existing law and thought it was fine to own slaves might have disagreed with this course of action. Is it even remotely rational that the official should change his or her mind because of this divination?

Constitutional disobedience may seem radical, but it is as old as the Republic. In fact, the Constitution itself was born of constitutional disobedience. When George Washington and the other framers went to Philadelphia in 1787, they were instructed to suggest amendments to the Articles of Confederation, which would have had to be ratified by the legislatures of all 13 states. Instead, in violation of their mandate, they abandoned the Articles, wrote a new Constitution and provided that it would take effect after ratification by only nine states, and by conventions in those states rather than the state legislatures.

I had a long laugh at that drivel. After 40 years of “teaching” the constitution, this guy comes clean and admits he simply doesn’t even have a fucking clue what the constitution was about. To him, and other idiots that believe like him, this is just some thing put together by a bunch of long dead rich white shitheads that wore wigs and had slaves! How dare they limit the power of government, especially that of well meaning modern day “progressive” government, with such a stupid piece of paper? They are in the way of progress! Government has done this study, you see, and they now have the answer, and they know hoto fix everything, but then, that stupid constitution gets in the way and screws it all up! Laughable, I tell you. These geniuses in government always get it wrong. We are lucky when they get it just a little bit wrong.

This is exactly the problem we face today. People that suddenly see the one document that made sure citizens understood the agreement between them and the limitations they put on their government’s power, and in turn kept us free and made this country prosperous, as the problem standing in the way of their agenda. It’s not a coincidence or mistake that we are now seeing these leftards all coming out of the woodwork, right as are reaping more and more of the horrible consequences, foreseen or otherwise, of decades of their policies and social engineering, to now tell us we should just toss the constitution and let their enlightened masters do what they want. What the hell could go wrong this time, huh?

The “War on Poverty”, now in its seventh decade and costing over $18 trillion, has failed miserably? Well, it is the fault of the constitution! Every leftard attempt as social engineering has had unintended consequences or has actually resulted in predicted problems? It is the fault of the constitution! Our gigantic out of control government keeps making things worse by ignoring the constitution and taking advantage of the fact decades of indoctrination have produced so many insane and idiotic sheep that are quite content trading their freedoms for the illusion of security and the ability to pass off responsibility for their actions? Let’s roll back the constitution so that government can do even more of that! Gimme my free shitz, and you can do whatever you want!

If we but had examples throughout history of governments knowing what was best, after careful studies, doing just that and costing tens of millions their lives and forcing billions of their own citizens to live in prison states. After all, the progressives are in charge, and they mean well! And anyone that thinks more of the same bigger government is bad, is crazy too!

The deep-seated fear that such disobedience would unravel our social fabric is mere superstition. As we have seen, the country has successfully survived numerous examples of constitutional infidelity. And as we see now, the failure of the Congress and the White House to agree has already destabilized the country. Countries like Britain and New Zealand have systems of parliamentary supremacy and no written constitution, but are held together by longstanding traditions, accepted modes of procedure and engaged citizens. We, too, could draw on these resources.

My advice is you move your fucking “progressive” pro big government ass to Britain or New Zealand and leave the rest of us the fuck alone you collectivist idiot. Have no doubt that the agenda of these people that think the constitution and not the left’s beliefs and failures are the problem, is to turn the US into a two bit shit state. More government to solve the problems caused by too much government is only the answer if you are insane. Fear these people. When this plays out, as history has shown us, it costs millions their lives and imprisons billions in misery. I wonder if this moron was saying the same nonsense he is doing right now when Boosh was president.

Happy New year, indeed. 2013 sure looks like it is going to be one doozy of a year.

It is evil Boosh the fascist doing this! Right?

What am I talking about? Well, warrantless spying lives on in the Obama age and we all know that the left hated these violations of our rhts when Boosh-Cimpy-McHitler did them:

U.S. spies can rest easy knowing that the nation’s warrantless wiretapping program — secretly employed by the President George W. Bush administration in the wake of the 2001 terror attacks — won’t expire at year’s end.

That’s because Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) said Wednesday he would lift his procedural hold that bars the Senate from voting on the FISA Amendments Act, which the President Barack Obama administration maintains is its top national-security priority. The only real issue is for how many years the spy bill will be extended for and, according to Wyden, whether any transparency or privacy protections will be written into the spy program that Congress codified in 2008.

Other than that, it’s a done deal.

Apparently when done by Team Obama, stuff like this which heralded the coming fascist state isn’t such a big deal and deserves nothing more than some harsh words. Even the ACLU seems to only be playing games at this point. I know! It was bad when Boosh did it because he wanted to catch terrorists. Obama wants to catch enemies of the state, and since this ability can be used to deal with those pesky conservatives – which are far more dangerous than the silly religious haters that the left empathizes with – this renewal isn’t such a bad idea.

If it was not for double standards……

Hey Mr DJ: Brass Balls Edition

The GOP is in disarray!  Congressional Republicans are wavering on taxes as Speaker John Boehner’s eyes well up with tears at the sight of the oncoming fiscal cliff.

What happened?  Obama found his backbone with nothing left to lose now that he has four more years to party it up.  The polls favor his tax increases on the rich and he knows that his media allies will assure that the GOP takes the blame for the resulting tax raises on the middle class, the resulting recession, or both.

Never before has the GOP needed some balls more and yet found them in shorter supply.

A day may come, when the courage of conservatives fails.  When we forsake our oaths to Grover Norquist and break the fellowship of the Tea Party.  That day is not this day.  That day will probably come in December.

This week, we need to gather up and melt down some brass for John Boehner’s balls.  This will require:

1. Any track that uses brass instruments (e.g.: trumpets, saxophones, tubas, trombones)

2. Genres to consider include Big Band, Swing, Jazz, Ska, Blues, etc.

Predictable first selection is In the Mood by Glenn Miller

For last week’s smart shoppers:

pfluffy, who elbowed me in the ribs for that XBox*: Night Boat to Cairo by Madness

Iconoclast, who trampled over me at Best Buy* for the last Blu-Ray copy of The Complete Works of John Hughes Collection: Us and Them by Pink Floyd

Biggie G, who delivered a crippling kick to my kneecap and ran off with the iPad I wanted at the Apple Store*: Super Bad by James Brown

Mississippi Yankee…there I was at Toys R Us*, reaching for that super-cool Thomas the Train set. The second I touched it, MY emerged,  grabbed my hand, and bit it. He didn’t take the train set though.  Just wanted to share the pain. The true spirit of the holidays?  Green Hornet Theme by Al Hirt

*RTFLC thanks its corporate sponsors!