Monday, March 31, 2014


So it would seem that the electoral prospects for Democrats, at least as far as they may be related to this November’s midterm elections, continue to be more than a bit on the gloomy side. Because even after taking into consideration the outright hostility the majority of voters feel toward Obamacare, according to Andrew Kohut, founding director of the Pew Research Center, Democrat chances at electoral success are further hampered by the fact that the party is now losing ground not only among whites, but also those under 34, and independent voters.

Oddly enough there are surveys which are said to show that the public actually thinks that Republicans have fewer solutions when it comes to healthcare, than do the Democrats, and Republicans somehow manage only a four-point lead on handling the economy. Moreover, the Republican Party is said to have a 59 percent unfavorable rating, and the Tea Party is almost twice as unpopular today as it was in 2010. Nevertheless, polls still show the GOP stands a better chance of coming out ahead in the midterm elections, at least according to Mr. Kohut.

While Republican voters are more enthusiastic about their party and exhibit a higher voter participation rate, Democrats, who are said to possess a 48 percent unfavorable rating, are losing support among some of their key demographic groups. These days we’re told that Independent voters tend to lean Republican by 44 percent to 38 percent. And even though Barry "Almighty" failed to carry the independent vote in the 2012 presidential elections most so-called Independents that I know tend to lean more so to the left and to the right.

And it’s according to Mr. Kohut that about 80 percent of the midterm electorate is expected to be white. Democrats trail Republicans in white support 53 percent to 38 percent. And apparently Democrats are also losing backing among millennials. Identification with the Democrats now stands at 50 percent, which is down from 58 percent in 2009. Barry's unpopularity "is probably the greatest problem for Democrats this year," Kohut says. With a 44 percent approval rating, his standing could prove more than a hindrance to Democrat candidates.

All that said, I continue to be more than just a bit baffled as to why it is that there is so much ill will directed to those of us in the Tea Party. Unless of course, people actually believe all of the drivel about how we are supposed to all be nothing more than just a bunch of racists. I guess I just don’t understand why it is that because we choose to believe in our Constitution and are in favor of lower taxes as well as smaller, much smaller, government, we’re seen as being the villains and the reason the country is in such piss poor shape. But that’s far from being our fault.

I think we can all agree on how it’s a fact that a majority of those who make up the American electorate are far from being the sharpest knife in just about anyone’s drawer. But that’s the way the Democrats like things. Because an ignorant and uninformed voter is far more likely to march out to the polls and vote for any Democrat in any election. To me it only makes sense that if you are truly interested in the survival of your country, that one would want to join ranks with those who identify themselves with the Tea Party and the advancing of those shared ideals and goals.

It would seem to that continuing to teaming up with the Democrats produces nothing more than a losing proposition for all concerned, except, of course, for the Democrat politicians. But far too many of us see it as being somehow advantageous to continue that relationship if for no other reason than because it keeps the freebies coming our way. Too many folks fail to realize that at some point the gravy train, just like Obamacare, is going to come fully off the tracks. And then what? Doesn’t it make more sense to rely on oneself and not on the government?


There’s now someone else who, besides Kathleen Sebelius, appears to be demonstrating the fact that he’s smokin’, snortin’ or shootin’ up some pretty potent shit. And so, it now becomes all the more clear that Democrats are now so desperate as to be willing to tell any lie that pops into their head in their attempt to show that Obamacare is anything but the unmitigated disaster that we know it to be. This time around it’s none other than that rather slimy character, David Plouffe. On this the eve of the sign-up deadline for Obamacare, no one who is currently an active member of Barry & Co. seemed to be interested in appearing on any of the Sunday talk shows to urge Americans to enroll. Instead, the discussion was left to past members.

It was the afore mentioned Mr. Plouffe who, in appearing on ABC’s "This Week" with George ‘Stephy’ Stephanopoulos, actually described Obamacare, aka the Affordable Care Act, as being a "seminal achievement" the "politics" of which will improve over time. He then proceeded to say, and with a straight face no less, "The law's working." And then added, "You're going to have -- by the way, if you count people who are going directly to private insurance companies, Medicaid, children's health care, we're talking well more than 10 million people have health care, tens of millions more have security...This law is working." Which left me wondering just who it was that this guy was actually trying to convince.

This imbecilic dolt went on to claim, "And I think the Republican playbook of just 'repeal Obamacare, repeal Obamacare, repeal Obamacare' gets tougher as more and more people get health care. I think smart Republicans understand that." But the Republican playbook, as this ass puts it, has not been one based solely on the notion of repeal, repeal, repeal. There have been a number of alternate plans that have been put forward and that would serve the American people far better than does this blatant seizure of our healthcare system by our government. And they are plans that would actually reduce costs while not resulting in people being forced, arbitrarily, to lose their current plans, and therefore the doctors, that they like.

And it was Bill Kristol of "The Weekly Standard," whom I seldom agree with, who said, "No actual Democratic senator running for reelection sounds like David Plouffe." Kristol went on to say, "They are not saying this law is working. They're saying, 'Oh my God, we can fix it. Here's some new proposals.' Senator Mark Warner, Mark Begich is out there, unveiled a whole bunch of proposals to, quote, 'fix Obamacare' this week." Speaking as one of those who has already been forced to give up the insurance that I, and my family, had for over12 years and that allowed us all to be able to see the physicians that we liked, the only ‘fix’ for Obamacare is to simply get rid of it entirely, and as soon as we can.

But the Republican-led House will not vote to fix Obamacare, Stephy told his assembled little "Roundtable." To which Kristol responded, "I don't think the Democrat Senate will do it." Adding, "I don't think the Obama administration supports those proposals. They've resisted every attempt to do minor fixes and delays in Obamacare except for the ones they unilaterally decide on." Kristol added that it would be better for Republicans to run on "replace and repeal" rather than "repeal and replace." Kristol also said the polling goes up for Republicans when they talk about keeping Obamacare's tax credits and coverage for pre-existing conditions." There are a few things that could be kept, but for the most part, Obamacare needs to be scrapped.

According to ABC's political analyst Matthew Dowd, the 2014 election won't be about Obamacare at all. He said, "I think in the end, the 2014 election, if you look at the fundamentals of the election, it's not going to be about Obamacare. There's flaws in it, there's successes in it. I think everybody can debate that...But 2014 is about the direction of the country, the economy, and how people feel in their lives. It's not going to be about Obamacare." FLAWS? Dowd actually thinks that the only issue with Obamacare is the correcting of a few flaws? But look, even if you subscribe to this idiot’s logic, it seems rather obvious that our country is headed nowhere but down and the economy sucks.

So it is then that the Democrats, as well as their many media minions, continue to live in what can only be described as being some rather bizarre state of denial. When it comes to such things as the direction of the country, whether seen as being right or wrong, the pathetic state of our economy, and the escalating costs for your average American of simply being able to get by every day, many people don’t view Obamacare as being something that merely possesses a few flaws. And if the Republicans do gain control of the Senate, while keeping control of the House, they will have but a brief 24 months to demonstrate that they possess the willingness to do whatever it is that needs to be done to alter the course we’re now on.

And let there be no doubt that the American people will, most assuredly, be watching. And if not much more happens than what we saw take place after the 2010 elections, the party might as well forget about 2016. Because Obamacare, or no Obamacare, the Republican Party will be finished. And something that does not bode well for anything substantial taking place, is the fact that all three members of our House ‘leadership’ team plan on attending an anti-Tea Party gathering here in Florida next weekend. So I’m afraid that even if the Republicans are successful this November, all that we’re likely to be doing is to delay the inevitable. That point in time when the party simply ceases to remain viable.

Saturday, March 29, 2014


Once again we are witness to the kind of behavior that makes it very clear that John Boehner, Eric Cantor nor Kevin McCarthy deserve to be in their current leadership positions in the House. Because the fact is that, apparently, all three have now decided to attend what is nothing more than a gathering sponsored by an anti-tea party group at a Florida Ritz-Carlton next weekend. Also 25 other Republican House members will be joining them. And by so doing, these three scumbags once again demonstrate their willful disregard for the trust that has been placed in them to combat all that Barry and the Democrats seem so determined to inflict upon our country.

This is what’s so frustrating about these ‘Establishment Republicans’. We the People already seem to have so few to whom we can actually turn. And at a time when we could very possibly be on the verge of handing over to the Republicans complete control of the Congress, this is not behavior we should allow to pass for being leadership. It should, instead, be viewed as behavior that stiffens our resolve, making us all the more determined to show up at the polls this November to vote every single one of these bastards out of office. And we can do that by voting for any Tea Party conservative whose name appears on the ballot in opposition to them.

This "Main Street Advocacy" event will take place on Amelia Island in Nassau County in the state's northeast, and will cost $5,000 a person to attend, RedState.com reported.  What this group is, apparently, is an offshoot of the Republican Main Street Partnership which is led by former Ohio Rep. Steve LaTourette, who has said he will help defend center-right congressional members in primary fights with Tea Party candidates. And of this new group he said, "They have decided to systematically go against the center-right Republicans in Primary elections." He went on to say, "Here's the deal — we didn't start this fight, but I'm going to finish it."

Also according to RedState, the Main Street Partnership has received donations from left-leaning unions, George Soros backed organizations, and a major Democrat donor. Such information tells me all I need to know about both these group and the individuals whom they support. Now I’m all for supporting those conservative candidates who have the best chance to win. But the key word here is ‘conservative’. And for far too long we’ve allowed ourselves to believe those who told us that they see things the way we see them, so we would vote for them and they would go back to Washington and act as if we didn’t even exist. That must now stop.

So it is then that these three, nor any of the 25 others, MUST not be allowed to get away with their betrayal completely unscathed. Every one of their constituents who finds themselves in disagreement with the actions of their representative MUST get on the phones and make their opinion known and that our vote is now hanging in the balance. For me, here in Florida’s 4th Congressional District, I’ve been doing my best to drum up support for our Tea Party candidate, Ryman Shoaf. My current congressman is Ander Crenshaw who, while he claims to be a conservative, has done precious little that proves it. We need to get busy!

Friday, March 28, 2014


I feel fairly confident in now declaring that after having been able to escape one many years ago, I will never, ever, again reside in any state considered to be Blue. From declaring themselves ‘sanctuaries" for illegal aliens, to their penchant for gun control and now quite possibly the moving forward in their quest to drive small business owners to either reduce their number of employees, or completely out of business, by forcing them to pay what is an unreasonable ‘minimum wage, Democrats are slowly making their states uninhabitable. None of these things make the least bit of sense and yet Democrats continue.

So it is then that the very Blue state of Connecticut has now set the stage as being the first state to raise its minimum wage because, or so we’re being told, the lawmakers there were supposedly responding to what the people wanted, according to the state's Democrat Gov. Dannel Malloy. Malloy, in his appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" on Friday, said, "We are the first state in 50 states to do what the people want us to do, and that's to raise the minimum wage to $10.10." Much like Obamacare, the measure passed Thursday without a single Republican vote. Only in this instance I think it was 5 Democrats that joined with the Republicans.

This liberal boob, Malloy, made the imbecilic claim that the increase would somehow help lift full-time workers out of poverty. He said, "This is going to take a whole bunch of people who are working 40 hours a week and living in poverty, out of poverty. That's the goal in Connecticut, to get people working at a job that allows them to support their families." Well, while it may actually help a few, at what cost is this ‘help’ actually likely to come? I mean I’m no genius here, but it would seem to me that if the goal here is to get, and keep, people working, making it more expensive for employers to do so just doesn’t make much sense.

Malloy, who recently appeared with Barry "Almighty" and several other New England governors to tout the proposal, applauded Wednesday's votes, saying he'll sign the bill into law at the same New Britain restaurant where Barry dined earlier this month during a visit. "I am proud that Connecticut is once again a leader on an issue of national importance," Malloy said. "Increasing the minimum wage is not just good for workers, it's also good for business." Well, not really, actually it’s bad for business, very bad. And it makes it more difficult to keep prices down. But I guess that doesn’t matter to folks in Connecticut.

Jack Temple, some policy analyst for the National Employment Law Project, said Connecticut's vote clears the way for other states to pass the legislation, and possibly Congress. "I think the significance cannot be overstated for this," he said. "The more action we see on the state level like this, that's always an ingredient for momentum at the federal level as well." The New York-based nonprofit research and advocacy group said similar proposals are also being considered by lawmakers in Maryland, Massachusetts, Hawaii and elsewhere. Blue states all, or more accurately referred to as, separate enclaves of American socialism.

It was after the vote on Wednesday that Barry "Almighty" was heard to say, "I hope Members of Congress, governors, state legislators and business leaders across our country will follow Connecticut's lead to help ensure that no American who works full time has to raise a family in poverty, and that every American who works hard has the chance to get ahead." All this is, is just another bit of idiotic liberal drivel that, while it might sound nice, like Obamacare will accomplish absolutely nothing of what has been promised by those who first created this legislation nor the idiot who would go on to sign it into law.

Republican lawmakers said the move was the latest in a string of legislation, including mandatory paid medical leave, making Connecticut uncompetitive. "We continue to have this schizophrenic attitude, where we say we're open for business on one hand — small businesses, you're our backbone, you are our heroes," said House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk. "Then we keep taking actions that keep punching them in the gut." And the small businesses in the state can only take so much and at some point I wouldn’t be surprised to start seeing some businesses leave, heading to friendlier territory.

The bill passed the Democratic-controlled General Assembly on largely party lines Wednesday. It passed 21-14 in the Senate and 87-54 in the House. Under current law, Connecticut's minimum wage was already scheduled to climb by 30 cents to $9 on Jan. 1, 2015. But under this bill, it would instead increase to $9.15 an hour. It would go up to $9.60 on Jan. 1, 2016 and to $10.10 on Jan. 1, 2017. Supposedly between 70,000 and 90,000 people earn the minimum wage in Connecticut, and it’s likely that after this law takes effect that number will be reduced, perhaps significantly, with some losing their jobs.

According to a Quinnipiac University Poll released earlier this month, it was 6 in 10 registered Connecticut voters who claimed to support increasing the wage to $10.10 or more. So I’m sure none of these folks will mind, in the least, that now when going to McDonald’s, or the like, they may just end up paying $60 or $70 to feed their family of 4. And I’m just as sure that they won’t have the slightest problem with seeing their taxes go up in order to cover the cost of what are sure to be the ‘benefits’ that will need to be provided to those folks who will lose their jobs in order to allow their former employer to pay those who still are lucky enough to have a job.


Well it would seem that ‘Dingy Harry’s’ accusations that people are liars who are, essentially, too stupid to know how to use a computer, haven’t exactly improved how most folks now view what is a seizure by Democrats of how they are able to obtain their healthcare. Because a brand new poll seems to point out that those who say they support Obamacare equates to just 26 percent of the population. However, and something that makes very little sense to me, the poll also points out that at the same time only 13 percent want to have the law completely repealed. I guess you could put me firmly within that 13 percent.

The Associated Press-Gfk survey was completed before the White House announced this week that it had supposedly signed up 6 million people for private health plans through the state and federal exchanges under Obamacare. The poll showed that 7 in 10 American believe the law will stay on the books with some changes. The AP noted that support for the law has dropped 13 points since 2010, when 39 percent favored the law. Opposition also has dipped 7 percentage points from 2010, when it stood at 43 percent. The number of people on the fence, the AP reported, has tripled from 10 percent to 30 percent.

The limited support for the law is similar to what the poll found in January and December when it stood at 27 percent. Republicans hope that the public opposition to the law will help them defend their House majority and pick up the six net seats they need to flip control of the Senate in November. This despite the fact that such Democrat notables as Nancy Pelosi and DNC chair Debbie Wizzerman Schultz have said, repeatedly, that Obamacare remains something that Democrats can, and will, very proudly run on and that ‘Dingy Harry’ has recently claimed has now "dropped way down in significance." So I guess we’ll see.

Thursday, March 27, 2014


I think most of us can all agree on the fact that old Chuckie Schumer’s dislike for billionaires seems to be more than just a bit selective. While he sees it as somehow being appropriate to whine nearly incessantly about those dastardly Koch brothers, he sees absolutely nothing whatsoever wrong with the constant meddling of someone like George Soros. Schumer has even gone so far as to deliver speeches in front of one Soros’ many known front groups, the Center for American Progress Action Fund. But I guess that’s different.

To me, it just all seems a bit unseemly that old Chuckie would go so far as to actually claim that the actions and advertisements of the billionaire philanthropist David Koch are "un-American," and for no other reason than because Mr. Koch differing viewpoint. But then, Chuckie did fall just short of actually accusing Koch of being "un-American", as his buddy ‘Dingy Harry’ has done, repeatedly. But old ‘Dingy’ shouldn’t be accusing others of anything, as he has recently found himself in a bit of a scandal regarding some campaign funds.

But anyway, it was in a recent interview on another one of those MSNBC ratings juggernauts, "Morning Joe", that old Chuckie said, "I think what Harry Reid was saying was the actions are un-American. And, they are. And, they should change." "In running those ads? Absolutely [they are un-American]." You know, I always have to chuckle whenever I hear some toe-jam-sucking Democrat accuse someone else of being un-American. After all, name me one Democrat, just one, who doesn’t come across as being un-American.

Most folks are probably aware of recent, and near endless, Democrat attacks that have been focused on Koch and his brother Charles, billionaire brothers known for their donations to the arts and medicine, as well as to Republican political issues. Chuckie targeted the Koch brothers Wednesday in a speech where he laid out the Democrat's agenda for the elections in a message that pits the middle class against the wealthy, but somehow he managed to leave out of his comments anything about his buddy, George Soros.

It was also on Wednesday that Chuckie was heard to say, "Democrats are fighting for a fair shot for everyone, while Republicans are doing the bidding of the Koch brothers, the wealthy, and huge corporations. Those people already have a fair shot. Middle class people need a fair shot. That's the distinction we will draw in November." Now despite Chuckie’s claims, and all of this "fair shot" drivel, what the Democrats are actually fighting for is to come up with a way of getting rid of the middle class entirely, once and for all.

Old 'Dingy Harry' took direct aim at the Koch brothers back in February in a speech on the Senate floor, when he called them "un-American." Chuckie said ads, financed in part by donations by the Kochs, were "against the American grain and un-American." Chuckie again whined to ‘Morning Joe’, "David Koch's commercials, which are huge amounts of money, I think they should not be allowed." I guess Chuckie is also rather selective when it comes to who should, and should not, have the freedom of speech.

Now if we can believe old Chuckie, the Democrat agenda will focus on "things that average Americans talk about around the coffee table." He mentioned things like making college affordable, luring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S., and tax incentives for child care. Strangely, though, Chuckie made no mention of doing anything about what Obamacare has now done to the cost of obtaining healthcare. After recently being forced to change to a more costly insurance, that’s a topic now routinely discussed around MY coffee table.

I think it has become pretty common knowledge, or at least it should have by now, that anyone who dares to disagree with Chuckie and his fellow Democrats, or takes exception to their socialist agenda, is now going to be accused of being un-American. But the actual fact of the matter is that the truly un-American ones here, are actually the Democrats. And in their eagerness to be victorious they are willing to team up with anyone, no matter how sordid, while still feeling somehow justified in attacking those who support their opponents.


Well, it’s according to a recent Fox News opinion survey made public just yesterday that fewer Americans think the United States presents a strong image on the world stage or that Barry "Almighty" is a "strong and decisive leader." And it would seem that dissatisfaction with Barry's questionable leadership style apparently straddles across a variety of issues but generally breaks down along partisan lines.

According to this poll it’s some 59 percent of Americans who are still convinced that the U.S. is the world's "most dominant power" which is in pretty stark contrast to the 85 percent who held that same view back in 2002. And it’s about 52 percent who think the U.S. is less powerful than when Barry "Almighty’ first came into office, with 22 percent of Democrats agreeing and 78 percent of Republicans.

The number of Americans who say the U.S. is safer now than it was before the 9/11 terrorist attacks has again dropped to 49 percent. But most people feel air travel remains safer, at 59 percent. Thirty-four percent see China or, to a lesser extent, Russia as ascendant over the United States. But, either way, most now view America as having been reduced, by Barry, to being a second rate world power.

On Ukraine, 53 percent say Washington should not be more involved, yet more (46 percent) disapprove of Barry's rather inept handling of the crisis than bring themselves to actually approve (38 percent). Sixty-six percent say that Barry's idiotic approach is insufficiently robust. A majority of those polled say they are following the news about Ukraine. But I’m really not sure if I believe that.

Strangely enough 43 percent of these folks actually are able to view Barry as being a "strong and decisive leader." Meanwhile 53 percent disapprove of the way that Barry handles his job, compared to 54 percent earlier in the month. And it’s about 37 percent who now approve of his approach to foreign policy, better than the 33 percent earlier in March – yet 53 percent presently disapprove.

In a theoretical chess match between Vlad Putin and Barry, 49 percent now think Putin would win, compared to just 31 percent for Barry. On other issues, 66 percent of Americans disagree with the administration's plans to follow through on its commitment to turn over Internet oversight to an international monitoring group; and 63 percent disapprove ending the manned space shuttle program.

Let’s face it, I think it pretty fair to say that our president is now viewed, Nobel Peace prize notwithstanding, by most world leaders as being pretty much nothing more than a bad joke. And it’s because he’s seen that way, that the rest of us are as well. But personally, I think it’s his preference that America be viewed in such a manner. I’m not sure how else you can explain most of the things that he’s done.

And what truly frightens me is the fact that this country may actually elect Hitlery Clinton as his successor. Someone who maintains the same low opinion of her country as does Barry "Almighty". And because she hates this country as much, if not more, than Barry does, if that were to actually happen, there’s little chance that America’s stature in the world would be anything but even further reduced.


 If there is one thing that Democrats are very good at, it would be the ability to talk out of both sides of their mouths and pretty much simultaneously. We’re constantly being told how it is they, and they alone, who are the protectors of minorities and the guardians of women’s rights. Republicans are always being accused of wishing to return us to the good old days of Jim Crow and of when women were kept barefoot and pregnant. And sadly, many choose to believe this rather fictional account of reality. Because, let’s not forget, that such things as Jim Crow, slavery, segregation and even the creation of the Ku Klux Klan, were all institutions dreamt up and implemented by Democrats. And what exactly have Democrats accomplished for women that has, in any way, made them better off. Democrats have essentially convinced many women that they will be better off if the government is allowed to play the role of spouse or significant other.

For instance, nearly every day now, and especially during an election year, we hear how the Democrats, and especially Barry, very strongly supports equal pay for women who do the same job as men. And yet we find that 63 percent of the federal civilian workers who earned an annual salary of $100,000 or more in 2013 were men. At least according to data from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Now they wouldn’t lie about such a thing, would they? An OPM database, called FedScope, contains historical data on the federal civilian workforce going back to 1998. The database contains information about civilian federal workers employed by most ‘Executive Branch’, which Barry heads up, agencies and some Legislative Branch agencies. It does not include employees of the Judiciary Branch or congressional staff. So we see that Barry’s words don’t match up all that well with is actions. Big surprise there.

This database includes the numbers of federal workers at varying "salary levels," set out in $10,000 increments ranging from "less than $20,000" to "$180,000 or more." As of September 2013, there were 474,630 federal civilian employees, covered by the OPM database, paid a salary of $100,000 or more. Of those, 300,221 or 63.3 percent were men, and only 174,409 or 36.7 percent were females. Historically, females have outnumbered males in the brackets among the federal civilian workforce earning $39,999 or less. In every year since 1998, in all brackets earning $40,000 or more, men have outnumbered women. Since 1998, the first year in OPM database, the percentage of women in the federal workforce earning $100,000 or more has increased. But the rate of that increase has slowed considerably during the time that Barry has been in office. Oh no, say it isn’t so! But wait a minute, Barry said he’s all about being fair.

From September 2009 to September 2013, the percentage of females earning a salary of six figures or more increased from 34.9 percent to 36.7 percent, averaging a yearly percentage point increase of 0.7. From September 2001 to September 2008, the percentage of females earning a salary of six figures or more increased from 21.8 percent to 33.2 percent, averaging a yearly percentage point increase of 1.53. During Barry’s presidency, the female share of the federal civilian workforce has declined, hitting a recorded low in 2013, according to the OPM database. In September 2009, the year Barry took office, 44.3 percent of the federal civilian workforce was female. In 2013, it was 43.5%. This is but one more example of the type of dishonesty that we have seen play out time and again over the course of the last five years. Barry seems to be of the opinion that most people will believe anything he says because it’s him who’s saying it.

But let’s face it, there are few things that Democrats will not say, especially during an election year, in their effort to convince the less intelligent or the uninformed among us that is they who stand for fairness and equality. And sadly, far too many will choose to believe what is, in reality, nothing more than empty election year rhetoric. Much has been said about some theoretical war on women that is currently being waged by the Republicans. But it’s upon closer inspection that we find that that’s really not the case. What we would find is that it’s the Democrat Party that seems to be most interested in creating a level of dependency on government the runs completely counter to their rhetoric about only being interested in creating an environment that provides everyone with an opportunity to stand on their own two feet. But what they’re really striving for is to get as many people as possible completely dependent on government.

Wednesday, March 26, 2014


What has to be one of the most ridiculous, and quite bizarre, excuses yet made by any Democrat regarding the failure to get enough folks signed up for Obamacare, and also demonstrates the fact that they have now essentially run out of excuses, is this latest one to be put forth by none other than ‘Dingy Harry’ Reid. Because it was old ‘Dingy’ who said the fault of struggling to sign up on the Obamacare exchanges doesn’t lie with the faulty website, but instead with the people trying to sign up who simply aren’t "educated on how to use the Internet." He’s gotta be kidding, right? ‘Dingy’ doesn’t kid about Obamacare.

In attempting to explaining what it is that lies behind the latest in what has been a long list of many Obamacare delays, ‘Dingy Harry’ said that far too many people just didn’t know to use their computer properly and simply needed more time. Apparently, it had nothing whatsoever to do with all of the well-documented failings of the website that have continued to embarrass both the White House, and any number of Democrats currently facing re-election, for months now. We can plainly see that by claiming that people are too stupid to use their computers, Democrats have now officially run out of usable excuses.

‘Dingy’ said, "We have hundreds of thousands of people who tried to sign up who didn’t get through." He went on to say, "There are some people who are not like my grandchildren who can handle everything so easily on the Internet, and these people need a little extra time. It’s not — the example they gave us is a 63-year-old woman came into the store and said, ‘I almost got it. Every time I just about got there, it would cut me off.’ We have a lot of people just like this through no fault of the Internet, but because people are not educated on how to use the Internet." This is just all so idiotic.

It’s just the latest strange moment for the embattled ‘Dingy Harry’, who’s facing an increasingly uphill battle to maintain a majority of Democrats there in the Senate. ‘Dingy’ also recently came out and accused any American who would dare to tell their story of how Obamacare has had a harmful effect on them, as being essentially nothing but a liar. And he has constantly bashed the Koch Brothers as being "un-American" and "against everything that’s good for America." Unfortunately for old ‘Dingy’, he has a far higher negative rating with the public than do the Koch brothers.

Kinda makes you wonder what they’re going to be saying next. Of course there’s the fact that we also recently heard from that pathetic lying-sack-of-shit Kathleen Sebelius regarding the latest effort to allow more folks time to get signed up, which she said was not actually an extension of the 31 March deadline. Say what? Then what the Hell is it if it isn’t an extension? Call it whatever name you want, it’s still the allowing of more time to get folks signed up, which in my book is an extension. But did anyone really doubt that the final Obamacare enrollment deadline would end up slipping?

It’s not like Barry & Co. are setting some new precedent with their latest move, giving customers even more time to enroll after next Monday’s official deadline if they’re already in line. In reality, the administration is just continuing a long pattern of delays that while, claimed to demonstrate flexibility and help the law work better, serve to fuel a public perception that Obamacare deadlines never really mean anything. You know, kinda like them "red lines" that Barry is rather notorious for first drawing, then ignoring. This would be funny if it weren’t so catastrophic for so many millions of people.

This group already went through a similar exercise in December, cutting people some slack if they were stuck in cybertraffic by the deadline for Jan. 1 coverage. Then and now, administration officials argued that it’s only fair to give people extra time if they were held up by the volume of last-minute sign-ups. But the list of delays covers so much more. The administration has bent deadlines for the employer mandate (twice), put off the launch of the Spanish-language enrollment site and even delayed the enrollment season for 2015, pushing it off until after the November midterm elections.

Working backward, here’s a brief history of some of the most prominent Obamacare delays:

March 25: Final enrollment deadline extended. The March 31 deadline — the end of enrollment for 2014 — will be loosened for people with special sign-up circumstances.
March 14: High-risk pools extended. The special, temporary coverage for people with serious pre-existing conditions — which was supposed to last only until the health insurance exchanges were in place — was extended a third time for another month.
Feb. 10: Employer mandate delayed. This time, businesses with between 50 and 100 workers were given until 2016 to offer coverage, and the mandate will be phased in for employers with more than 100 workers.
Jan. 14: High-risk pools extended. The high-risk insurance pools, which originally had been slated to close Jan. 1, had already been extended once.
Dec. 24: Enrollment deadline extended. In a message on HealthCare.gov, customers were told they could get help finishing their Jan. 1 applications if they were already in line on Dec. 24.
Dec. 12: Enrollment deadline extended. Customers on the federal enrollment website were given nearly two more weeks to sign up for coverage effective Jan. 1.
Nov. 27: Small Business Health Options Program (known as SHOP) delayed. Online enrollment for the federal health insurance exchanges for small businesses was delayed.
Nov. 21: Open enrollment delayed for 2015. The administration pushed back next year’s enrollment season by a month.
July 2: Employer mandate delayed. The administration declared that it wouldn’t enforce the fines in 2014 for businesses with more than 50 full-time workers who don’t offer health coverage. The fines were pushed back to 2015.
Nov. 15, 2012: Exchange deadline delayed. The Department of Health and Human Services gave states an extra month to decide whether they would set up their own health insurance exchanges — a decision it announced just one day before the original deadline.

So while ‘Dingy Harry’ can see fit to blame the American people for being too stupid to know how to operate their computers, and Sebelius can, with her extension that really isn’t, claim all is working so smoothly, the truth of the matter is that what we have here, in Obamacare, is nothing more than a very shitty product that fulfills none of the many promises that were made. And add to that the fact that it has now been the direct cause of millions more Americans to have lost their insurance than the number of those who have now been able to gain affordable coverage for themselves, and it’s plain to see what a boondoggle this thing really is.


So, what we recently had was yet another brain-dead Democrat desperate to show that Obamacare somehow significantly improves the level of healthcare available to women by attempting to make the case that it does so solely by making all manner of birth control, even abortion, something that MUST now be covered by all health insurances. So the responsibility for one’s contraceptive use would now something that is paid for by someone else. I guess this is another example of that much talked about ‘Liberal Logic’.

Spewing nothing more than what has become the typical brand of drivel heard coming from just about every Democrat, it was as recent as this past Tuesday that we heard Sen. Patty Murray, DEMOCRAT, tell fellow dingbat, MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell, "I've worked hard to make sure that women have access to the right kinds of health care, and it's their choice, not their employer's choice." And actually, we’re not talking about healthcare, per se, what we’re actually talking about here is the supposed ‘right’ to an abortion.

This imbecilic dingbat went on to say, "Sitting in that court today, it was stunning to me to recognize that nine people are going to make that decision, and will decide for a long time to come, whether women have to question when they go to work every day what the shareholders of that company's religious views could be." Is that what this progressive boob is really trying to make this about? What this is really all about is the attempt by Democrats to literally force people onto Obamacare by going after their employers.

So unless you’ve been living under a rock someplace, I’m sure you’re aware of the fact that the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Tuesday in a critical religious freedom case. The court will decide whether, or not, the government is able to force family-owned companies to provide employees with health insurance that covers no-cost birth control and other medical procedures, i.e., abortions, that violate the owners' religious beliefs. But all means, the very last thing that we need to be concerned about is the protecting anyone’s Christian beliefs.

So the plaintiffs in this case argue that a 1993 federal law on religious freedom extends to private, for-profit businesses. And of course our dingbat Murray said the "compelling" question for her is, "Should a private CEO of a corporation or their shareholders' religious rights trump the right of employees?" What right is it of the employee that’s being trumped here? The right to screw everything in sight while at the same time making sure that someone else is made to be responsible for covering the cost of one’s desire to do so?

According to morons like this Murray clown, if the court does rule that private companies have the religious right to deny contraception, could that then be extended to such things as immunizations? Murray asked. "It really opens up a wide, wide range of issues that shareholders could decide about what they provide," she said. What is this hapless bitch talking about? For years things had been going along pretty smoothly. And then along came the Democrats and their attempt to seize control of our healthcare system.

This idiot went on to say, "And secondly, the question really is: So do 51 percent of the shareholders get to vote that they don't provide contraceptive coverage? I mean, the thresholds are very interesting here, and it's going to be very difficult, I think, for this court to make those determinations on this case." Spoken like a true believer in the socialist/progressive philosophy. And that’s really the driving force behind all of this nonsense. And with a court that leans a little left these days, religion may be about to take a hit.

The question of religious objection to vaccinations came up several times in Tuesday's oral arguments. Paul Clement, the plaintiffs' attorney, said he thinks the government "may have a stronger compelling interest" in requiring vaccinations as part of preventive services than it does in requiring birth control. Donald Verrilli, Jr., arguing for the Obama administration -- agreed that the government has a "compelling interest" in advancing colorectal cancer screening and immunizations -- as well as contraception coverage

One brilliant suggestion I heard, and I’m sorry that I can’t remember from whom it cam, was for this company, a company that has always provided health insurance to its employee, to simply cease providing coverage, pay the ‘tax’, and force their employees to use the Obamacare exchanges. Is that what the employees want? And regardless of what any Democrat may claim, that’s what this entire case is really all about. Forcing companies to stop providing coverage, and thus their employees into Obamacare.

So I suppose what this is really all going to boil down to is, are women, or at least enough of them, actually going to be stupid enough to fall for the line of bullshit that we continue to hear coming from Democrats like this boob Murray? Is birth control really such a priority for most women that they would actually risk losing their current coverage and be forced into taking Obamacare? If so, then I suppose one could argue that if that is in fact the case then we’ve got far bigger problems going on here, societally speaking. Well ladies?

Tuesday, March 25, 2014


He who possessed the reputation of having been what many have called this nation’s worst president before he was lucky enough to have Barry came along, Jimmy Carter, now says that it’s the Bible that’s to blame for the fact that women make less money than men in the workplace. So I’m curious, might that be the rationale used by Barry’s for his deciding to pay the women who work for him less than what he pays the men? Just askin’.

It was in a recent interview with NBC's Andrea Mitchell that Jimmy proceeded to rattle off some supposed statistics on the issue of unequal pay between the two genders. Carter said, "In the United States for the same exact work for a full-time employee, women get 23 percent less pay than men." He added. "And in the Fortune 500, only 21 of those leaders among the 500 are women, and in that high level they get 42 percent less pay" than men.

Now it was last year at an event celebrating the Equal Pay Act, that Barry repeated the myth that women earn 77 cents on a man's dollar. He said at the time, "The day that the bill was signed into law, women earned 59 cents for every dollar a man earned on average. Today, it's about 77 cents." Barry went on to claim, "Over the course of her career, a working woman with a college degree will earn on average hundreds of thousands of dollars less than a man who does the same work. " Every syllable was pure Democrat bullshit.

Something rarely of ever mentioned by Democrats is the fact that unmarried childless women's salaries very often exceed men's. In an actual comparison of unmarried and childless men and women between the ages of 35 and 43, it was found that, sorry Jimmy, women earn more, roughly 108 cents to a man's dollar. And honestly, wouldn’t you would think that if Barry was so concerned about the wage gap, why not fix things there in the White House? In 2012, female White House staffers made 87 cents on a man's dollar.

And here’s something else to consider. Women often make less than men because they choose more humanities and fewer science and math majors at college. Then, when they graduate, more choose to enter the non-profit or government sector. Finally, many actually choose to work fewer hours to better combine work and family. In May, 2013, according to Labor Department data, 23 percent of women worked part-time, compared to 11 percent of men. But to Democrats this is all of little consequence, it doesn’t fit the liberal narrative.

So like Barry, Jimmy offers up sone pretty questionable ‘proof’ to support his premise. However, unlike other Democrats, Carter has come up with a rather new spin on things after supposedly spending three years researching a link between religion and the abuse of young girls and women across the world for some new book his entitled, "A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence, and Power." His supposed research concluded that, yes, there is a link between religion and how females are treated, even in the workplace.

Carter said, "That is really derived, I would say, indirectly from the fact that religious leaders say that women are inferior in the eyes of God, which is a false interpretation of the Holy Scriptures." He then went on to say, "When [men] see the Pope and the Southern Baptist Convention and others say that women can't serve as priests equally with men, they say, 'Well, I'll treat my wife the way I want to because she's inferior to me.'" Is anyone really buying any of this drivel?

In the proposal for his book, Carter called the treatment of women a "human rights" issue. "I am convinced that discrimination against women and girls is one of the world's most serious, all-pervasive and largely ignored violations of basic human rights," Carter wrote, as reported by the New York Times. "It is disturbing to realize that women are treated most equally in some countries that are atheistic or where governments are strictly separated from religion," he said.

Ya know, it is my firm belief that this is really nothing more than part of what has become a concerted effort to convince women that it’s the Democrat Party that should be seen as being their protector. But it continues to be just the opposite that’s true, unless of course one’s looking for a free abortion. Because it has been during this president’s economy that women have been to suffer, unable to find a job. It’s Barry’s policies that have had the biggest impact on women and how they are able to go about living their lives.


Well, I guess the fact that an election is now right around the corner, and with many now talking as if it’s pretty much of a done deal that old ‘Dingy Harry’ will lose his coveted leadership position, he has now resorted to grasp at every last straw in an effort to prevent that very thing from taking place. His latest attempt came just this past Monday when ‘Dingy’ actually accused Republicans of having helped Russia annex Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula. Actually, when going in search of those who may have actually encouraged Vlad to make his move, ‘Dingy’ might start by looking a little closer to home.

This has become standard fare for ‘Dingy’ and came ahead of a test vote on a bill authorizing more U.S. sanctions on Russia as well as a $1 billion in loan guarantees to Ukraine. Outlining the Senate's agenda after a one-week recess, old ‘Dingy’ said the first item would be the Ukraine bill that Republicans blocked just before lawmakers went on break. ‘Dingy’ urged Republicans to consider "how their obstruction affects United States' national security as well as the people of Ukraine" and said their delay of any congressional action "sent a dangerous message to Russian leaders."

‘Dingy’ said, "Since a few Republicans blocked these important sanctions last work period, Russian lawmakers voted to annex Crimea and Russian forces have taken over Ukrainian military bases." And of course he then went on to say, "It's impossible to know whether events would have unfolded differently if the United States had responded to Russian aggression with a strong, unified voice."‘Dingy's’ charge comes despite widespread support among Republicans and Democrats for providing Ukraine with economic assistance and hitting with additional sanctions.

Republicans objected to the inclusion in the Senate bill of reforms of the International Monetary Fund, which the United States, Europe and others are working with to stabilize Ukraine's economy. The IMF's 2010 reforms increase the power of emerging countries in the lending body and shift some $63 billion from a crisis fund to a general account it can use for economic stabilization operations around the world. Republicans have long spurned the administration's attempt to ratify the IMF changes, saying they'd increase the exposure of U.S. taxpayers in foreign bailouts managed by the fund.

However, ‘Dingy’, in once again exhibiting his rather bizarre fixation with the Koch brothers, used them as being the reason that the Republicans blocked the bill. ‘Dingy’ made the claim that that did so only to "protect the anonymity of their big-money donors" such as the Koch brothers, two of America's wealthiest men who've strongly supported conservative causes. He was referring to an unsuccessful attempt by some Republicans to include an amendment to the bill halting new IRS regulations on groups claiming tax-exempt status. Like ‘Dingy’ Harry would NEVER do such a thing.

So ‘Dingy’ went off on what was yet another of his long-winded and rather insane tangents saying, "Republicans objected to moving forward with this aid package unless Democrats agreed to allow the Kochs and billionaires like them to continue to anonymously spend millions trying to buy America's democracy." He went to add, "It's hard to believe. But that's the truth." And in one of those rare instances that I agree with John Boehner, his office said that old ‘Dingy Harry’ "sounds completely unhinged" after having charged that Republicans are partly to blame for Russia's invasion of Crimea.

So I’m guessing that, at this point in time, there is pretty much nothing that we won’t be hearing come out of the mouth of ANY Democrat as they set about trying to find some way to salvage the November midterm elections. I’m sure the voices will become much more shrill, the accusations even more insane and the rhetoric much more incendiary as well as toxic. That’s how the Democrats do business. And I’m quite sure that those in our state-controlled media complex will be only too happy to assist in any way possible. So I guess it’ll be left up to American people as we see just how much of this tripe they’re going to be willing to swallow.

Monday, March 24, 2014


House Majority Leader, and RINO, Eric Cantor appears to be moving toward the center as he tries to unite the House around issues in which Republicans and Democrats can find common ground. "The growing realization around here is that the differences [between the parties] are still there, but that doesn't mean we can't focus on the things that bring us together," Cantor told The Washington Post. "The public is looking for someone who has their back." So Cantor has my back?

The RINO from Virginia has pretty much completely abandoned his push for major cuts to federal programs and he has instead moved toward pushing for more funding for pediatric cancer research, talking about solutions to urban poverty and education reforms. He has also been working, behind the scenes of course, to get House Republicans to support legislation that would allow some illegal immigrants that were brought across the border as children to become legal residents.

However, more than a few of the more conservative members of the House have made it known that they’re a bit skeptical of the shift. "Those of us who elected Eric expected him to be a lot more aggressive than he is right now," said Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California. Cantor's Tea Party primary opponent Randolf-Macon College economics professor David Brat has called him an "Obama ally and amnesty's staunchest proponent," according to the Post. I’d say that’s pretty accurate.

Cantor does at least appear to continue challenging Barry and he did recently help to pass the Enforce the Law Act followed by a report on Barry's "imperial presidency." "The administration has engaged in a series of ad hoc announcements that ignore statutory deadlines, waive unwaivable provisions of the law, and even create benefits not authorized in law," Cantor said in the report. But I still don’t trust him, as this kind of stuff is likely nothing more than window dressing intended to distract.

Cantor, I think, is what can be said to be the perfect example of those identified as ‘Establishment Republicans’. Frankly I have no idea if he was once someone that could be characterized as being a conservative. But there’s one thing for sure, and that’s that right now, today, he most certainly is not. And I would hope that those in his district will be voting for Prof. David Brat in the primary election. Cantor is no longer deserving of the public’s trust. He seeks to advance no one’s agenda but his own. He needs to be replaced.


Apparently not only is Barry "Almighty" our first black president, but also, as it turns out, he’s our most expensive president, ever. But then I suppose you could argue that one kinda goes along with the other because of that whole entitlement thing that blacks seem to have going for themselves these days. We’ve never had anyone quite so adept at wasting the taxpayer’s money. And that fact the he’s black reduces the likelihood that Barry would ever be criticized, since no one wants to be labeled a racist.

Because it’s now official, Barry "Almighty, the ‘One’ we had all been waiting for, has now spent more time traveling abroad than other U.S. president in history at this point in their presidencies. That according to a forthcoming study from the National Taxpayer Union Foundation (NTUF). "The most internationally well-traveled President, through five years, is also flying the most expensive-to-operate Air Force One to date," NTUF wrote. And very little, if anything, has really been gained from any of this travel.

After what has seemed like an eternity, but has only been five years, in the White House, Barry has now taken 31 trips for a total of 119 days abroad. At this point in George W. Bush’s presidency, Bush had taken 28 trips for 116 days, while ‘Slick Willie’ Clinton had taken 27 trips for 113 days. Barry’s many supporters are likely see nothing wrong here and would likely argue that America has somehow benefited. But most of those folks don’t pay any taxes and therefore play no role in picking up Barry’s tab.

Ronald Reagan on the other hand, after having been in office for five years, had taken 14 trips for 73 days while Richard Nixon had taken 12 trips for 60 days after five years in the White House. Meanwhile, Lyndon Johnson took 10 trips for 34 days at the five year mark and Dwight Eisenhower took 8 trips for 31 days after five years in the White House. And you know, I suppose I wouldn’t mind so much if on most of these trips Barry wasn’t going off to some foreign country for no other reason than to apologize for his own.

Citing a recent report in the Washington Examiner that found through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that taxpayers are on the hook for about $228,288 per Air Force One flight hour in 2013, a 27 percent increase from the previously confirmed cost of $179,750 per fight hour that NTUF used in its last study, the taxpayer watchdog concludes that Barry’s flights have cost taxpayers more than any other president. But hey, I’m sure he views his many excursions as somehow being worth it. I disagree.

NTUF estimates that Barry’s latest waste-of-a-trip to Europe and the Middle East "will likely involve about 29 hours of total travel time, assuming a cruising speed of 575 mph between Washington, Amsterdam, Brussels, Rome, and Riyadh, and then back to D.C." That amount, the group says, is going to cost taxpayers millions of dollars. "Using the previous estimate, the total cost of flying Air Force One between those international cities would be about $5,212,750," NTUF wrote. "Using the new data, the cost comes out to $6,620,352."

NTUF added that those amounts are just estimates, and the actual cost is likely to be quite a bit higher. "While these figures are approximations, and do not account for the additional (and likely greater) expenses of transporting the President’s Secret Service and diplomatic entourage, backup aircraft, land vehicles, and advance security teams, it goes to show that higher Air Force One operational costs substantially change the budgetary magnitude of these trips," NTUF wrote. But hey, it’s not like he’s spending his own money.



Demonstrating once again that she remains very much in the habit of regularly smokin, snortin, or shootin’ up what must be some pretty potent hallucinogenics, old Babs Boxer told a conference call just last Friday, "Never in my lifetime have I seen a law that is helping so many people be so vilified." Let’s be clear about something, anyone who can look at Obamacare, and what it has thus far accomplished, and still be of the opinion that is actually helping more people than it’s hurting, is very obviously suffering from some pretty intense hallucinations. I’m not sure how else one could explain such a state of mind.

It was also during this same call that old Babs was heard to brag about the millions of people in her state who are now benefiting from the law that Republicans have been so determined to repeal. Babs went on to say, "This is a huge success, this law. I'm saying that. We had a terrible rollout, it slowed us up, but it's all falling into place now and the Republican answer is very, very simple -- let's repeal it and take away all these benefits from people. And that's just gonna wind up to be very bad for them at the end of the day." Well, I guess if you can call winning control of the Senate as being something bad.

Joining Boxer on this conference call was yet another Democrat who also is a big supporter of this debacle, that perennial dweeb, Chris Murphy. Murphy who took note of the fact that the Republicans' "original mantra" was "repeal and replace." He said, "Well, they voted to repeal it 54 times. They've never voted to replace it with the exception of one slap-dash plan offered by three Republican senators a few weeks ago. In the four years since the bill was signed, there has been absolutely no effort to articulate what they would do differently." That’s nothing less than a flat out lie. There have be numerous plans.

And of course Murphy went on to spew what has become the standard Democrat line saying, "And so the Republican's plan is simply to take away all of these benefits that have now transformed the lives of millions of Americans." Both Babs and Murphy are part of what is a coordinated effort, organized by the George Soros front group, Center for American Progress, the purpose of which to spread as many lies as possible claiming that the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, is now working very well after it’s rather rocky start. What we have here is just another propaganda campaign.

This boob, Murphy, said, "We have launched the Affordable Care Act Works campaign." He added, "We are down on the floor of...the Senate every week, holding press events nearly every week using social media to tell the true story about how this bill, four years after signature, is changing people's lives." He then went on to claim, "Now that the Affordable Care Act is working, now that we've gotten beyond those early months of technological glitches, we have a really good story to tell, and we haven't even begun to talk about how much money this is saving taxpayers." REALLY?

And he too expressed confidence in the Democrats being able to run on the issue this election year, saying, "So, I do believe that this is an issue that Democrats and proponents of the law can run on, but if and only if we continue to go out and tell the story of the mounting successes in the law." And something that I thought was really rather comical was when Boxer said that "truth is the Democrats' best ally." She added, "And we've told you the truth today. We've given you the numbers, we can back it up, and we're beginning to hear people really happily get out there and tell their stories."

Babs said "And, you know, this is -- I think time is on our side. The election isn't tomorrow. And all we have to do is tell the truth about this law. I am so excited about it, and the Republicans' answer is to take away all these benefits, all of these benefits from the people. And at the end of the day, the people are smart." For one to perceive Obamacare as somehow being a ‘benefit’ doesn’t require one to be smart, but, in fact, just the opposite. It’s the smart people who are able to see this thing for what it is, nothing more than another attempt by Democrats to gain control of the people.

Murphy again who went on to claim that the Obamacare enrollment numbers have been "robust" despite Republican efforts to "undermine" the law. He said, "So I think you have to, I think you have to talk about the success of enrollment in the context of a massive effort to try to stop people from enrolling, and, and ultimately people will figure out the benefit that's available to them. In the long run, these propaganda campaigns that are being waged won't work, and the numbers are going to continue to grow, even in states that are working against the law rather than supporting the law."

Murphy, of course, couldn’t resist mentioning Texas as being a state that is working against the law. "Imagine if -- if everyone was on the same page," Boxer said. "It would be really great." The real propaganda campaign underway here is the one being waged by the Democrats. And as one who was made to lose insurance that I liked, I would prefer it if the remaining 49 states were to follow Texas’ lead in opposing this disaster. And what really pisses me off is how these pathetic sleaze-bags can accuse of being liars, those being made to lose their insurance as a direct result of Obamacare, while the Democrats continue to be the real liars here.

Sunday, March 23, 2014


If we can believe Jimmy Carter, somehow Barry "Almighty" is the first president to not see the wisdom in seeking advice from the former president who, up until 2008, had been considered by many to have been the worst president in modern American history. At least that’s what Carter told NBC’s "Meet the Press" on Sunday. "President Clinton did and President George W. Bush and H.W. Bush and even Ronald Reagan used to call on us to go into sensitive areas," Carter told NBC’s Andrea Mitchell Sunday. Although, try as I might, I just can’t come up with a single reason that might have prompted Reagan to have ever bothered to make such a call. So I’m not quite sure what it is that might have motivated Ronald Reagan to call him, other than to perhaps ask, "Hey Jimmy, what the hell were you thinking when you did that?" Other than that, I doubt there would have been much reason for any call to have been made.

Many have argued that in many ways Barry’s presidency is essentially nothing more than a continuation of Carter’s disastrous four years in office. And since the men see the world through a similar lens, there would never be any need for communication to take place. It is difficult to explain with "complete candor" why he and Barry do not have a closer relationship, Carter said, but he thinks it has something to do with his center at Emory University. He believes the Carter Center's views of equal treatment when it comes to the Middle East's countries may have caused tension between him and Barry. "I think the problem was that — in dealing with the issue of peace in between Israel and Egypt — the Carter Center has taken a very strong and public position of equal treatment between the Palestinians and the Israelis," said Carter. "And I think this was a sensitive area in which the president didn't want to be involved."

Carter also told Mitchell that he left the Southern Baptist Convention last year after it passed rules at its annual meeting "to require that women be subservient to their husbands, and women could no longer serve as a pastoral priest or as a deacon." Carter had been part of the SBC for years before he left the church, serving as a deacon and Sunday School teacher for six decades. Carter also commented on the problem of sexual abuse in the military and on the nation's college and university campuses. "Presidents of universities and colleges and commanding officers don't want to admit that under their leadership, sexual abuse is taking place, so rapists prevail," Carter said. And that’s exactly what I would expect to hear from someone who, like Barry, possesses absolutely zero leadership ability and is nothing more than an armchair quarterback. And as such. I feel that Carter really has no right to criticize those who do.

Also, as if anyone were truly interested, Carter made his opinion known on the ongoing situation in Ukraine. Remember now, that it was in 1980 when he banned U.S. athletes from participating in the Moscow Olympics. That was his rather limp-wristed response to the then-Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan. And Carter said where the Ukraine is concerned, "there has to be a concerted international prohibition against Putin going any further than Crimea." But the problem with that supposed solution is the fact that Barry has now lost the trust of most of our friends, and any semblance of respect of our enemies. And just like Carter before him, Barry now seems very determined in his efforts to put America on the path to be so severely weakened that she will be made incapable of providing leadership. And just as it was with Carter, that’s exactly Barry’s intent. Neither man views America as being a force for good.

And of course Carter also saw fit to discuss, briefly, the scandal concerning the National Security Agency and its surveillance practices. "I have felt that my own communications were probably monitored," said Carter. "When I want to communicate with a foreign leader privately, I type or write the letter myself, put it in the mailbox and mail it... I believe if I send an email it will be monitored." What business does this political has-been have communicating with foreign leaders? And is it not, more often then not, that he chooses to communicate with those with whom he has much more in common? That would be those who, like him, hate this country. So it is with great curiosity that I wonder just what sort of information this former president might wish to keep from prying eyes. Like Barry, Carter has demonstrated on any number of occasions that he is nothing less than an enemy of this country.

Saturday, March 22, 2014


‘Old Stretch’, Nancy Pelosi, most everybody’s favorite ‘Botox Queen’, says she still believes that Obamacare will be a winning issue for Democrats in this November’s midterm elections. She’s doubtful that the troubled healthcare law could actually cost Democrats control of the Senate. In what I’m not quite sure was an attempt to convince herself or others, it was at a press conference on Thursday, that old Nancy was heard to declare that, "I believe it's a winner."

Nancy also went so far as to brush off any and all concerns regarding Florida Republican David Jolly's recent victory over Democrat, and candidate who was pretty heavily favored to win, Alex Sink in what was a special congressional election held this past March 11. The highly contested race was to replace the late Bill Young, a Republican, and had been considered, by many, to be a barometer for how each party might be faring now and in November.

Nancy said, "With all the money spent, with all the criticism of the Affordable Care Act and a 13-point advantage Republican district, we got it down to below 2 points." What Nancy failed to mention was that most of the money was spent by Democrats, who spent roughly four times as much as Jolly. I’ll be curious to hear how she explains away not only the loss of the Senate for the Democrats, but also her being leader of a few less Democrats in the House, come 2015.

With many pundits now predicting that Republicans will seize on the flaws of Obamacare as a central campaign strategy, Pelosi could have an uphill battle in trying to convince fellow Democrats that the healthcare law could be a strength rather than a weakness. Particularly since some are now interpreting the Sink defeat as a sign of the public mood on Obamacare. And with poll after poll showing less and less support for the law, their concern may be well placed.

A number of vulnerable Democratic senators continue to distance themselves from Obamacare especially since the bungled rollout of HealthCare.gov, and are already seeing their popularity suffer from what has been an onslaught of anti-Obamacare ads targeting them in their districts. In particular, have been the ads paid for by Americans for Prosperity, the conservative political action group backed by much maligned Koch brothers, David and Charles.

This particular group spent $27 million on anti-Obamacare ads between August and February targeting at least nine vulnerable Democratic lawmakers. A number of polls since the beginning of the year have indicated that public opposition to Obamacare now stands at roughly 60 percent or more. That figure is even higher among the uninsured, and strangle enough those are the very ones who were supposed to benefit the most from Obamacare.

The bottom line here is that the passage of Obamacare was the number one priority for the Democrat Party back in 2010, much more so than even working on the economy or getting people back to work. They were determined to attain for themselves that which they had desired for over 60 years enable the government to control how the American people are obtain their healthcare. They must now be made to lie in the bed that is essentially of their own making.

Friday, March 21, 2014


I’m sure we all remember how it was back in 2010 when the Democrats were absolutely salivating over the prospect of their finally being able to acquire that which they had sought since the days of FDR. They were finally going to be able to put the government in control of how the American people were able to obtain healthcare. It was something that they had been willing to spend every waking moment on, first in the crafting of it and then in seeking any way possible to shove it through Congress and finally onto Barry’s desk. No stone was left unturned, no lie was left untold and not one Republican vote was requested in the effort to give this disaster life.

It was back then that we heard, then 83 year old, John Dingell-berry say, "Today is a day that is going to rank with the day we passed the civil rights bill in 1964." Such idiotic drivel came in the form of a speech given there on the House floor exactly four years ago today, as House Democrats moved to pass the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, without a single Republican vote needed, nor asked for. This toad then went on to say, "Today we are doing something that ranks with what we did on Social Security or Medicare. This is the day on which we can all be proud if we vote for that legislation." Yup, they were mighty proud.

Dingell-berry then proceeded to tell just one of the many lies that were told then, and have continued to be told ever since when he described the many things that it would supposedly make possible. He claimed, "Thirty-two more million Americans are going to have health care." He then said, "They don't now. America, which has health care of the best character in the world, does not make it available to 32 million people because they can't afford it, and Americans every day are losing their health care." The truth is that there were only roughly 8 million Americans who could not actually get insurance, not 32 million. He was lying then, and he knew it.

Now we fast forward just four short years to today and what we find is that with just 10 days left to go in the open enrollment period, Team Berry "Almighty" claims that around 5 million Americans have now signed up for insurance through the exchanges so far. But it claims that it doesn’t know, or it refuses to say, how many of those people have actually paid their premiums; nor does it say how many of those 5 million were previously uninsured. So you the lies and the mischaracterizations continue. In fact, the lies have been continuing, now, pretty much unabated for the last 5 years, since before it was ‘passed’ and signed into law.

"What does this bill do?" old Dingell-berry asked four years ago. And in answering his own question, this doddering old fool said, "It gives Americans the same health care that we here in the Congress have. It preserves their choice, and it sees that if those Americans want to change, they can do so." But last October, Barry & Co. were forced to admit that many people who wanted to keep their individual insurance plans, could not do so. That was despite Barry's repeated promise that if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. As it turned out, many of those plans folded because they did not meet Obamacare's minimum coverage standards.

"I want to commend my colleagues for this," Dingell-berry also said four years ago. "Madam Speaker, I have much humility, joy, and pride in supporting H.R. 3590 and H.R. 4872...As the historic vote draws near, I urge my colleagues to act on behalf of the American people." He said, "Let us this day stand boldly to do what is right for the health and well-being of our constituents, what is essential for the viability of American business, and what is necessary for our government...When we do this, history will smile upon us. And generations to come will say on this day, this President and this Congress performed something worthy to be remembered."

Let’s hope enough people remember this November 4 just what it was that old Dingell-berry and his fellow Democrats so proudly foisted on we the American people. How it was, because of their actions, that millions of Americans, myself included, would be forced to lose the insurance they not only liked, but that they could also afford. And when many of those folks chose to complain about having lost their insurance, the Democrats called them liars and accused them of concocting stories about how they were now worse off under the wonderful new healthcare law named for the president. This November let’s see just how many of them we can send home.


Apparently, Barry "Almighty" is none too optimist about his party’s chances come this November. And recently said as much, warning just yesterday at a private home in Miami that Democrats are likely to "get clobbered" in midterm elections. But his rationale for this potential clobbering that may now be looming for his fellow Democrats proves that he must either be delusional or living in some sort of bizarre alternate universe. Because he seems to be of the opinion that the problem has nothing to do with where the Democrats stand on the important issues that we face because, he says, a majority of the American people actually agree them.

Barry told those in attendance, "[T]he problem is not that the American people disagree with us on the issues. The challenge is, is that our politics in Washington have become so toxic that people just lose faith and finally they just say, you know what, I’m not interested, I’m not going to bother, I’m not going to vote." So am I to assume from that statement that he seems to think that a majority of the American people are actually in favor of Obamacare, or support his drive for amnesty for those in this country illegally, or his stubborn opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, or his support of gun control, or even his belief in global warming?

Barry went on to say, "And that’s especially true during the midterms. During presidential elections, young people vote, women are more likely to vote, blacks, Hispanics more likely to vote. And suddenly a more representative cross-section of America gets out there and we do pretty well in presidential elections. But in midterms we get clobbered -- either because we don’t think it’s important or we’ve become so discouraged about what’s happening in Washington that we think it’s not worth our while." Discouraged about what’s happening in Washington? Really? And whose fault is that? Surely not the Democrats, right?

Barry told the donors that "we need" Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. "We need Nancy Pelosi as speaker because folks like Nana over there, cleaning houses, may need her help and she’s going to look out for her. We need Harry Reid staying as Democratic Leader in the Senate because there are kids just like Elijah but who aren’t as lucky to have parents with the resources that Alonzo and Tracy have." Obviously Barry agrees with Bob Gibbs, who recently stated that should the Democrats lose control of the Senate, to use Gibbs’ words, it’ll be time to "turn out the lights, the party’s over." So Barry too thinks that we’ve been having a party?

As much as I hate to be the one to break the bad news to Barry, and any Democrat seeking re-election this year, while most on the loony left do in fact fully embrace the Democrats’ positions on the issues listed above, I think it pretty safe to say that there are millions of Americans who are very firmly opposed to his positions, and on nearly every single issue. Over the course of the last five years, in what has been his continuing effort to "fundamentally transform" our nation, all that he has accomplished is to run it even further into the ground. More people are now living off the government than at any other time in our history.

With each passing day some new poll comes out that makes it all the more clear that, despite the wasting of $17 million every month on ads designed to push it, more and more people want nothing to do with Obamacare. And when you put that together with the fact that real unemployment, not the bogus numbers that are being reported, has essentially skyrocketed, or the fact that the cost of gas, as well as the cost of heating and cooling our homes, is now twice as much as it was when Barry was elected, and the millions of people now receiving some form of government subsistence, more people are just tired of it all.

So, is Barry living in denial as he goes about the seeking of clues for why the Democrats will likely be on the receiving end of what could be a pretty severe drubbing come this November? But really, if that does in fact come to pass, it really shouldn’t be all that difficult to figure out why. Barry has constantly chosen to ignore completely those who did not vote for him. He as been all about dividing us, not bringing us all together. And it’s those folks who did not vote for him that have now become the ones who are continuing to be raped, financially speaking, by Barry and the Democrats in an effort to provide more to those who did vote for him.

Thursday, March 20, 2014


I’m really thinking that Barry must still be doing a little weed or something these days. It’s either that or he thinks that just because we elected one black guy as president we’d actually be stupid enough to elect another one. At least one that’s a Democrat and is one no more experienced for the job than he is. Barry recently made the idiotic comment that outgoing Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick would be a great fit in the Oval Office someday.

Barry made this silly suggestion during an interview with Boston-area TV station NECN, as he praised Patrick’s two-term run as governor and saying that the 57-year-old Patrick would make a great president or vice president in the future. I mean, how stupid is that? Patrick is no more qualified to be president than Barry was when first elected, or remains still today. And we see how well that’s turned out for the country on nearly a daily basis.

Barry said, "When you look at everything he's been able to accomplish and the strength of economic growth and job creation, the reforms that have taken place around education and improvements in transportation, Deval has done a great job, and I think signals that he could be very successful at the federal level, as well." But then, I don’t suppose he could do any worse than Barry has, but personally I’d like someone who’s actually qualified for the job.

Patrick, 57, is completing his second term in office and is bizarrely considered as being a rising Democrat star. Which just goes to show you just how shallow the gene pool must be on that side of the aisle. I’m guessing he assumes that because he’s the second African American to be elected as a governor since Reconstruction that that somehow makes him qualified to be president. That ranks right up there with being a community agitator.

But when taking into account the average intelligence of your average American voter, and the desire to elect someone whose only priority is the continuation of our current nanny state, the electing of a boob like Patrick isn’t really so far outside the realm of possibility. The majority of those who vote these days really couldn’t care less about whether or not measures are taken to keep their nation free. Their priority is the ensuring they get a free ride.

Because if people genuinely cared about making sure that their children would enjoy the freedoms that God intended for them, they would never vote for another Democrat as long as they lived. So the fact that millions of Americans seem to be quite willing to elect any Democrat, makes it very obvious that they are interested in nothing more than perpetuating their own individual little gravy-train. Such a warped mentality makes even a Patrick presidency a possibility.


Word comes of yet another big plus of Obamacare. This one concerns the fact that doctors are now being warned that due to arcane Obamacare insurance reimbursement policies they could find themselves in the position of being unable to collect payment for treatments rendered. So says the American Medical Association (AMA) . You see, apparently Obamacare provides patients who obtain subsidized coverage through state insurance exchanges with a 90-day grace period before their policies can be canceled for non-payment. Insurers do not have to pay physicians for services incurred during the last 60 days of a policy that has been terminated for non-payment. My wife works in a doctor’s office and was talking about this very thing just the other day.

What this means is that insurers are now permitted to retroactively deny patients coverage when a policy is terminated at the conclusion of the grace period. "The grace period rule imposes a risk for uncompensated care on physicians," AMA President Ardis Dee Hoven said in a statement. Ms. Hoven went on to say, "Managing risk is typically a role for insurers, but the grace period rule transfers two-thirds of that risk from the insurers to physicians and health care providers." Ya know, there is nothing about this socialistic boondoggle that has an up side. It has accomplished nothing of what was promised, and like everything that has come from this administration, it has only succeeded in making things very much worse.

Meanwhile, the AMA has issued some guidelines that are supposedly designed to help physicians minimize the chances of they’re being stuck with unpaid patient bills. These include suggested administrative policies for doctors and proposed financial agreements for patients to sign in which they directly assume liability for unpaid insurance bills. The association has also urged the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to modify the grace period regulation so that physicians are promptly notified if a patient is not paying their insurance premiums. Right, like any of that is likely to take place. And in this era of Barry, too many people are now of the opinion that just because they sign something there’s no obligation to follow through.

Those who can remember that far back will recall that it was the AMA who was a big supporter of Obamacare, that even though most physicians disapproved of the association's stance. Which should tell you a lot about the political leanings of this organization. Polling of doctors also shows they are skeptical that Obamacare will improve medical service delivery or help them make a living, The Daily Caller reported. But then I think most of us realize that the intent behind this thing all along had nothing to do with actually improving anything or lowering costs. The sole motivation behind the Democrats’ creating this obamanation in the first place was to create a way that would provide to our government an improved method of controlling We the people.

No matter how many lies we keep being told about this monumental debacle, the end result is that it improves absolutely nothing more than that the government now has the ability to dictate what healthcare coverage we are now able obtain for ourselves. No longer will healthcare options be decided between the physician and the patient, but by some faceless bureaucrat hidden away in some cubicle. And oddly enough, the implementation of this thing has resulted in more people losing coverage than have actually gained coverage. And now we’re finding out that doctors are, what, likely to end up providing healthcare for free? I mean the insanity that is Obamacare seems to know no bounds. And it shows what happens every time the government gets involved.