Category Archives: Flashback!

A Stroll Through Democrat’s Sexist Memory Lane!

Democrats in the elite media have been scream every “ist” word they can think of as Donald Trump’s transition is under way, so what better time to go back in time and take our Democrat friends on a little stroll through sexist memory lane!

Here is just a residue of the evidence for a candid world to review.

Democrats repeatedly accused South Carolina Governor Candidate Nikki Haley of having multiple affairs, but never offered proof to support it.

Salon Publishes MULTIPLE Calls for Torture, Murder of Sarah Palin

And Patheos Magazine asks:

Why, then, does every Sarah Palin item at the Huffington Post fill up with thousands or tens of thousands of hateful comments? Why have we seen, ever since she appeared on the national scene, articles like, “Why They Hate Her,” “Why They Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Some Women Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Elite Women Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Feminists Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Do Liberals Hate Sarah Palin,” “Why Jews Hate Palin,” “Why Do Jews Hate Sarah Palin So Much,” and even “Americans Hate Sarah Palin”? Why do we find “Hate Sarah Palin Days” at The View and t-shirts professing hatred for Palin and not for Bobby Jindal? The mere sight of her is enough to raise the hackles of most progressives, and the recent success of her daughter on Dancing with the Stars drove many to fits of apoplexy.

More Sexist Attacks from Left: Lefty blogs start rumor that Palin has implants and elite media runs with it. Tennessee Democrat, “You have to lift their skirts to find out if they are women”

More:

The Huffington Post put on its front page, “PHOTOS: Did Sarah Palin Get Breast Implants?” This included a poll.

Fox TV in Boston actually asked people on the streets if they thought Palin had gotten implants. [Editor’s Note – to see the video of what Fox25 did just follow the NewsBusters link; it is truly disgraceful. Honestly if that reporter had come up to me and started enquiring about any politicians boobs I would have thrown my drink in her face. That reporter is demeaning the profession. When I learned journalistic ethics the questions asked are: Does the story really matter. Does the story do more harm than good. Is it relevant? Is it true, if so can we prove it?]

Of course JWF has the evidence to show that they are NOT fakeLINK

Michelle Malkin has a great post on what the left does to disqualify women as candidates:

The first stage of Conservative Female Abuse by the Left is infantilization. Right-wing women can’t possibly believe what they believe about the sanctity of life, self-defense, free markets, or foreign policy. They must be submissive little dolls of the White Male Hierarchy. Or, as a far Left (is there any other kind of Left in San Francisco?) San Francisco Chronicle columnist wrote of First Lady Laura Bush, they must be put in their place as “docile doormats” with no brains of their own.

The second stage of CFA is sexualization. A conservative woman is not merely a sellout. She is an intellectual prostitute. Unable or unwilling to argue with them on the merits, detractors resort to mocking the physical appearance of their ideological opponents in skirts and denigrating them with vulgar epithets. MSNBC hosts insulted former GOP presidential candidate Fred Thompson’s accomplished wife and mother of two, Jeri Thompson, as working the stripper pole. Newspaper cartoonists Ted Rall, Pat Oliphant, and Jeff Danziger caricatured Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as a mammy, thick-lipped parrot, and Bush “House Nigga” armed with “hair straightener.” New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd derided former GOP Florida secretary of state Katherine Harris for applying “her makeup with a trowel.”

True to form, Dowd was first out of the box to snicker at Gov. Palin’s beauty pageant past, ridicule her “beehive and sexy shoes,” and compare her path to the vice presidential nomination as a “hokey chick flick.” Joe Biden backhandedly praised her as “good looking.” And left-wing bloggers worked overtime on lurid photoshops of Palin as a bikini model and porn star. At the Democratic Underground, a highly trafficked liberal website raising money for Barack Obama, members held a contest to come up with nicknames and posters to slime GOP Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. [Editor’s Note – the names they came up with are not safe for work. One of the nicer ones was VPILTF (VP I’d like to F**K)].

The third stage of CFA is demonization. When the Left tires of hurling whore insults, it turns conservative women in the public eye into nefarious creatures. Bill Maher called Laura Bush “Hitler’s dog.” George Carlin attacked Barbara Bush as “the Silver douchebag.” A Huffington Post website member wrote of Nancy Reagan: “Like her evil husband, she has lived far too long. Here’s hoping the hag suffers for several weeks, then croaks in the tub.” Another added: “I feel no pity for the bitch who took delight in watching thousands die of a horrible disease and watching the poor having to eat out of dumpsters because of her husband’s political beliefs.” True to form, rumors of Palin being a crypto-Nazi surfaced on the Internet and the fringe media. And liberal critics used her gun-rights record to smear her as bloodthirsty.

The final stage of CFA is dehumanization. Conservative women aren’t real women according to the liberal feminist establishment’s definition. Remember when Gloria Steinem called Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison a “female impersonator?” Or when curdled NOW leader Patricia Ireland instructed Democrats to vote only for “authentic” female political candidates? Or when Al Gore’s fashion consultant Naomi Wolf described the foreign-policy analysis of Jeane Kirkpatrick as being “uninflected by the experiences of the female body?”

Echoing the bottom-feeders in the liberal blogosphere, mainstream journalists and Obama water-carriers now question Palin’s commitment to motherhood and even challenged her pre-natal care decisions in an effort to destroy her.

Democrats Sprinting Down Sexist Memory Lane

Attacks on Sarah Palin’s womanhood –

SLEAZE POLITICS: Democrats Accuse Palin of Faking Her Pregnancy

Democratic State Chair: McCain had chosen a running mate whose primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion…

Lawyer on Obama’s National Finance Committee – Audio: Palin Should Be Home Taking Care of Her Kids

More Media Bias to the Point of Laughable Stupidity – This one is amuzing as CNN and the Washington Post attacked Palin for saying her husband Todd is a close advisor. Umm how many male presidents and politicians have said that their wife is thier most trusted advisor?

What Did the New York Times Say About Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 When She Was a Young Member of Congress with Three Kids?

Latest Palin Smear: Palin Charged Rape Victims for Rape Kits as Mayor… but when the truth gets out the elite media and the Democrats will have egg on their face again

It’s the Palin Stay at Home Sexist Double Standard

TROOPERGATE RESULTS: Branchflower finds Sarah Palin “Guilty” of not Keeping Her Husband Todd from Defending His Family from a Maniac State Trooper

Newspaper apologizes for calling Palin a “broad” – LINK

The David Letterman Attacks

Letterman calls Gov. Palin’s daughter a prosititute. Makes rape joke about Palin’s 14 year old. – UPDATED!

Video: Palin Responds to Letterman

Letterman Lied: He Knew His Rape Joke About Willow Palin Was About a 14 Year Old – UPDATE: Letterman Apologizes

Elite Media just taking rumors and/or reporting as true without a basic fact check:

New York Times makes up quote from Palin hairdresser in hit piece

Hey Gibson! About that Bush Doctrine: There are SIX of them. Palin was right again.

Washington Post Smears Palin Again, Gets Facts Wrong Again, Doesn’t Check CNN or Youtube – Even Better, Idiots at Huffington Post Don’t Fact Check Either and Run With It

Newsweek Publishes Lies About Palin Already Debunked Three Days Ago.

Speaking of NBC-Washington Post-Newsweek’s Slate.com That Published Lies About Palin Days After They Were Debunked…They Made This Video to Tell the World Exactly What They Think About Palin and You.

Busted: Washington Post, Lefty Media and Blogs Said Palin Cut Funding to Aid Teen Moms… Now the Charity Involved Issued a Press Release…

Democrat Bloggers Spreading False Rumor of Palin Divorce. Palin Considers Lawsuit.

New York Times Out With Another Palin Hit Piece – The Local Press Has a Different Take – UPDATE: NYT Didn’t Fact-Check Again, Debunking Already In Full Swing!

Another Palin Smear Debunked: $27 Million in Earmarks the Press and Democrats Say..

Politico gets it wrong on Palin again. Published the $27 million earmark lie (From the Washington Post) after bloggers and ABC News wire debunked the story.

ABC’s Jake Tapper Not Giving the Full Story on Alaska Earmarks – Update Tapper lied.

The Latest Accusation on the Left Wing Blogs and Media: Palin is a “Book Banner” and She Spent the City Into the Ground as Mayor… (but what’s the truth?)

Dear Chicago Sun-Times: Why do you have hate merchants like Mary Mitchell, who don’t fact-check, on your pay roll?

If You Ever Doubted Leftist Media Bias, I Present You With This Total Joke of a Hit Piece From the Washington Post: Palin Billed State for Nights Spent at Home

Washington Post Starts to Reverse Itself After Pressure From Obama – But Long List of Palin Lies and Smears From the WashPost Still Go Unretracted…

Reactions by foreign press and honest pundits:

Foreign Press Slams Sexist Media Bias Against Palin

More Foreign Press Appalled by the Sexual Attacks Against Palin and Conduct of the American Media Elite

Factcheck.org Starts Debunking the Lies That Washington Post and Other Outfits are Trying to Pass Off as Journalism….but…

Hotair.com says: Hey Obama Let’s Take a Trip Down Sexist Memory Lane…

Michelle Malkin Knows Something About Racism and Sexism & Calls Out the Media On Sexist Attacks Against Palin

Australia Herald-Sun Slams Elite Media and Democrats Reaction to Palin Interview

Clinton Political Strategist Mark Penn on Biased/Sexist Palin Coverage: ” Media on very dangerous ground” – Slams Media for Going Over Palin’s Daily Expense Reports While Not Doing So on Other Candidates!

Hillary Clinton Blogs Furious Over Sexist Attacks on Palin and Media Love Fest with Obama

More Hillary Backers Come to Defense of Palin

Retired CBS Newsman Bernard Goldberg: The media attacks Sarah Palin with malice and forethought.

White House Reporter: We took sides against Palin in the election, straight & simple.

The Boston Herald Took A Poll About Media Bias and Palin – Radio Host Howie Carr Explains – You must understand printing lies about Republican candidates is OK. It’s called “vetting.” Printing the truth about liberals – that’s called “swift-boating”

Newsbusters Mocks Washington Post’s Biased and Ridiculous Palin/Biden Coverage

Other stories of Palin media bias results:

VP Biden’s daughter on film with cocaine. ABC, CBS, and NBC offer no coverage. When “Biden” and “Cocaine” are searched on the NBC site it gives you a picture of Bristol Palin….

Biden’s Son Involved with Hedge Fund Crook

[Note – We included these because one should compare how the coverage of Sarah Palin’s children is totally outrageous yet Joe Biden’s kids have all sorts of troubles and the elite media has next to no coverage.]

MSNBC: Palin’s Book Will Do Well If She Can Read.

How Media Bias Works: The John Ziegler Interview

Ignorance in Action: Obama Supporters Cannot Answer Basic Questions About Government or About Their Own Candidates…But Look at What They Did Know…

And last but not least ABC’s Charles Gibson – Questions asked of Palin vs. Obama vs. Edwards

Obama interview:

How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?

Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?

Palin interview:

Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]

John Edwards Gibson Didn’t Pound Edwards in 2004; Asked Him If GOP Attacks Made Him Mad:

GIBSON: You speak with such equanimity this morning. Didn’t they make you mad last night?

GIBSON: Did you get mad, though?

More – Look at the portions of the interview ABC edited out of the Palin interview. Much of what was edited out was substantive answers that showed she had mastery of the issues – LINK

FLASHBACK: The Fine Art of Poll Rigging to Sway Opinion or ‘Make News’

Flashback: This is what yours truly posted in a Facebook Note March 24. 2016. Even though the explanation below is rock solid, the NeverTrump crowd insisted that the RCP was the ultimate in reliability. Just a little I told you so!

By Chuck Norton, March 24, 2016.

Trump can’t beat Hillary because the polls say so! Look at the Real Clear Politics (RCP) Polling Average! It has Hillary beating Trump across five separate polls!

rcp-average-3-24-2016-trump-v-clinton

The way all five of these polls were done is misleading and dishonest. Why? A number of reasons, but most of all because most of the people polled are not even going to vote and have no incentive to be informed enough to do so.

How do we know that?

Because none of the five polls above are of ‘likely voters.’

Why does that matter?

Because of the Motor Voter Law, AKA the National Voter Registration Act, if you get a state ID or a driver’s license you automatically become registered to vote. Most people in fact do not vote.

NOTE: Motor Voter has lead to increased vote fraud. Because voter rolls can be checked to see who does not vote. Absentee ballots can be obtained in the names of those who do not vote and said ballot is cast for them without their knowledge.

Therefore, polls of ‘registered voters’ is only a residue better than polling ‘adults’ – read anyone who will answer the phone.

Have you ever seen Jay Leno ask random people on the street questions about politics or current events and the answers you get back are usually a total farce? The methodology used in these polls really isn’t much better.

In short, if you want to poll people who are the least informed, least likely to vote, the easiest to manipulate with leading questions and who are most likely to regurgitate the elite media narrative that they see on television, these are the people you poll.

The Fox Poll is of ‘registered voters’ – http://www.foxnews.com/politics/int…

The Bloomberg Poll is of ‘adults’ – http://assets.bwbx.io/documents/use…

The Qunniapiac Poll is of ‘registered voters’ – http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/po…

The CBS-NYT Poll is of half ‘registered voters’ and half ‘adults’ – http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-…

The CNN-ORC Poll is of ‘adults’ – https://www.documentcloud.org/docum…

The questions in several of the polls were leading. For example, the Quinnipiac Poll asked if Donald Trump was responsible for the violence that happened in Chicago. Of course this was after a week of the elite media and the other campaigns flooding the airwaves with the message that the violence, which was planned by Move On, BLM and other Soros backed groups was somehow all Trump’s fault, in spite of the fact that the groups admitted that they planned the violence in advance and proudly took credit for it.

This is also why at this time the other Republican candidates are doing better in these same polls vs Hillary Clinton. Ted Cruz and John Kasich are not getting pounded day after day in the elite media as Trump is. If Ted Cruz were to become the front runner the liberal elite media would assault him relentlessly driving his numbers down with those who have a short memory and simply accept and internalize the elite media narrative, most ‘likely voters’ do not fall in this category.

Lastly, it is important to keep in mind that general election polls this early are meaningless. The general election campaign has not even started and those campaign’s do move votes as Ronald Reagan polled far behind Jimmy Carter until late August and then won in a landslide.

UPDATE!! 8-22-2016

In comparing the polls from the RCP average from 2012 to the polls in the RCP average today…..THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE. In 2012 the samples were large and included large numbers of LIKELY VOTERS. You can look at them and see for yourself:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep…

But today the RCP does not use polls of likely voters, many just poll “ADULTS”. The problem is that “”adults”” mostly do not vote and because of motor voter legislation most registered voters do not vote either. These people are the least informed of all of us. They mostly repeat the elite media spin they see on TV back to the pollster. Here is the RCP average from today:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep…

There is only one kind of polling that is worse than polls of “adults” and that is Online Polls. When MSNBC puts up an online poll, who is most likely to respond? Democrats of course. So here is the NBC poll methodology from today’s RCP Poll:

“The NBC News|SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking poll was conducted online August 8 through August 14, 2016 among a national sample of 15,179 adults who say they are registered to vote.”

In short, its a joke.

Flashback: KKK leader endorsed Hillary. Donated $20k. (video)

Obama and Hillary have brought up the KKK this week in an act of desperation. We don’t even bother talking about the KKK here for the simple reason that they have next to no membership and are effectively irrelevant. Let us explain.

Number of people who believe they have been abducted by space aliens – 300,000

Number of people in the Jedi religion – 175,000

Number of people in the Flat Earth Society – 3,500

Number of people in the KKK – less than 3,000.

That said, since the Democrats are bringing up the KKK again it is important to point out that the Klan has always been, and still claims to this day, to be a Democratic Party organization as their leader Will Quig states in the video below.

KKK leader Will Quigg has endorsed Hillary Clinton for president multiple times on video saying he likes her because of her “hidden agenda”. He donated $20,000 to her campaign.

Youtube, in an attempt to censor the story, has turned off sharing of the video, but you can watch in HERE, but in order to see it you have to load the link manually.

Here is another copy of the video:

1.4 Million in 32 States to Lose Health Insurance as ObamaCare Fails

It is like we and others reported in 2009/10, Obamacare is a system that is designed to fail. Obamacare designer John Gruber said that they had to lie to sell it.

Yours truly went to insurance school and passed the state exam on the first attempt so understanding how it was designed to fail wasn’t exactly rocket science.

Here is the bad news from Bloomberg:

A growing number of people in Obamacare are finding out their health insurance plans will disappear from the program next year, forcing them to find new coverage even as options shrink and prices rise.

At least 1.4 million people in 32 states will lose the Obamacare plan they have now, according to state officials contacted by Bloomberg. That’s largely caused by Aetna Inc., UnitedHealth Group Inc. and some state or regional insurers quitting the law’s markets for individual coverage.

 

FLASHBACK: Obama Says Illegal Immigration HURTS ‘Blue-Collar Americans,’ STRAINS Welfare [VIDEO]

Via The Daily Caller:

See the video HERE.

President Barack Obama once declared that an influx of illegal immigrants will harm “the wages of blue-collar Americans” and “put strains on an already overburdened safety net.”

“[T]here’s no denying that many blacks share the same anxieties as many whites about the wave of illegal immigration flooding our Southern border—a sense that what’s happening now is fundamentally different from what has gone on before,” then-Senator Obama wrote in his 2006 autobiography, “The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.”

”Not all these fears are irrational,” he wrote.

“The number of immigrants added to the labor force every year is of a magnitude not seen in this country for over a century,” Obama noted. “If this huge influx of mostly low-skill workers provides some benefits to the economy as a whole—especially by keeping our workforce young, in contrast to an increasingly geriatric Europe and Japan—it also threatens to depress further the wages of blue-collar Americans and put strains on an already overburdened safety net.”

If these feel like the words of one of Obama’s opponents, it’s because they’re the exact argument the president’s critics have been making as he now rushes to announce a sweeping executive order that would give work permits to millions of illegal immigrants in the country.

In the passage, Obama also reveals that he personally feels “patriotic resentment” when he sees Mexican flags at immigration rallies.

 

Political Ad Deception of the Day: Alison Grimes

UPDATE – And just how right were we??

Grimes Staff Caught on Hidden Camera: She’s Lying About Support for Coal Industry

The Video:

UPDATE II – So much for Grimes’ support for paying workers more than minimum wage.  Her family business pays minimum:

This ad is a great example of how far politicians will go to lie to get elected.

One would think by this commercial that Alison Grimes is a conservative Democrat. She isn’t. This commercial is clearly designed to paint her as a conservative Democrat, much like the the “Sportsman for Obama” pro-gun television ad from 2008.

Alison Grimes’ earlier speeches and debates clearly demonstrate that she is a proud card carrying leftist. Her rhetoric is similar to what one finds from DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schulz (1, 2, 3, 4), and like Schultz, is in solid standing with the Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid wing of the Democratic Party.

Grimes would vote to place the same gun banning, eco-extremist, anti-affordable energy leaders in charge of the Senate, committees, and confirm into the executive branch as it has now, which is why anti-gun groups and most every other far left interest donate to her campaign.

The 2008 Obama “pro-gun” television ad has been pulled down from his YouTube channel which is a shame because we would like to show it to you for comparison, but remember this:
Obama skeet shooting don't be fooled[Editor’s Note: Interestingly enough, back in 2008 during my college days, I wrote a post calling out Obama’s pro-gun ads as a fraud when compared with his record. Even MSNBC called him out on the deception. You can read the post HERE.]

Today’s political communications are designed to target specific groups of voters with messages and images designed for “attitude implantation”. A pro-gun coal miner might look at the Grimes ad and think he has a champion in her, but the truth is she would vote for the same leaders and appointees sent by the party leadership.

Emails and home mailings are targeted to the each type of voter specifically. If enough data can be gleaned from your internet activity, political donations, and Facebook group memberships you will get political communications in your inbox telling you exactly what you want to hear. For example, this very writer donated to Rand Paul’s lawsuit against illegal NSA domestic spying. Afterwards I received “please donate” emails from the RNC, as well as the House and Senate Leadership PAC’s sounding as if the GOP establishment is the heartbeat of the TEA Party movement and in the corner of Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Rand Paul when reality is in fact very much the opposite.

The technology exists today to find out exactly what the hot button issues for most voters are and to tell them exactly what they want to hear in order to solicit votes and donations with no regard for intellectual honesty.

Armed guard disarms teen in Atlanta school shooting

Obama and the elite media say that having an armed guard in a school is “nuts” – in spite of the fact that Obama and the elite media have armed guards  (and Secret Service protection) at their kids schools.

You wont see this on the elite media evening news….

Salt Lake Tribune:

A student opened fire at his middle school Thursday afternoon, wounding a 14-year-old in the neck before an armed officer working at the school was able to get the gun away, police said.

Multiple shots were fired in the courtyard of Price Middle School just south of downtown around 1:50 p.m. and the one boy was hit, Atlanta Police Chief George Turner said. In the aftermath, a teacher received minor cuts, he said.

The wounded boy was taken “alert, conscious and breathing” to Grady Memorial Hospital, said police spokesman Carlos Campos. He was expected to be released Thursday night.

Police swarmed the school of about 400 students after reports of the shooting while a crowd of anxious parents gathered in the streets, awaiting word on their children. Students were kept at the locked-down school for more than two hours before being dismissed.

Investigators believe the shooting was not random and that something occurred between the two students that may have led to it.

Schools Superintendent Erroll Davis said the school does have metal detectors.

“The obvious question is how did this get past a metal detector?” Davis asked about the gun. “That’s something we do not know yet.”

Lindsey Graham destroys Eric Holder (video)

Senator Lindsey Graham is a strange fellow. At times he is capable of inspiring moments of clarity where he really does “get it” and at other times he is not on Planet Earth. This is one of the better moments. This is also an example of why Eric Holder is the most radical and incompetent Attorney General in the nation’s history.

Obama White House Pays Women 18% Less… and His 2008 Campaign Did too….

As we reported in July 2008: The Obama Campiagn was paying women less, when McCain was paying them more; all while Obama accused McCain of not supporting equal pay for women – LINK

The Washington Beacon:

Female employees in the Obama White House make considerably less than their male colleagues, records show.

According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000).

Calculating the median salary for each gender required some assumptions to be made based on the employee names. When unclear, every effort was taken to determine the appropriate gender.

The Obama campaign on Wednesday lashed out at presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney for his failure to immediately endorse the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, a controversial law enacted in 2009 that made it easier to file discrimination lawsuits.

President Obama has frequently criticized the gender pay gap, such as the one that exists in White House.

“Paycheck discrimination hurts families who lose out on badly needed income,” he said in a July 2010 statement. “And with so many families depending on women’s wages, it hurts the American economy as a whole.”

It is not known whether any female employees at the White House have filed lawsuits under the Ledbetter Act.

The president and his Democratic allies have accused Republicans of waging a “war on women,” and have touted themselves as champions of female equality. Obama’s rhetoric, however, has not always been supported by his actions.

White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters last week that Obama believes it is “long past the time” for women to be admitted to the traditionally all-male Augusta National Golf Club, site of the Masters golf tournament.

But the president has demonstrated a strong preference for all-male foursomes in his frequent golf outings, a bias that extends well beyond the putting green and into the Oval Office.

“Women are Obama’s base, and they don’t seem to have enough people who look like the base inside of their own inner circle,” former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers told the New York Times.

In a 2011 article titled “The White House Boys’ Club: President Obama Has a Woman Problem,” TIME magazine’s Amy Sullivan detailed the president’s fondness for male-dominated environments.

“There’s a looseness to Obama when he’s hanging out with the boys club that doesn’t appear in co-ed gatherings,” she wrote. “The president blows off steam on the golf course with male colleagues and friends. He takes to the White House basketball court with NBA stars, men’s college players, and male cabinet members and members of Congress.”

As a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama was criticized for paying the women on his campaign staff less than the men, and far less than GOP opponent John McCain paid his female staffers.

CBO: OOPS Our $940 Billion Number Was Wrong – ObamaCare to cost $1.76 trillion over 10 yrs – UPDATED!

Remember when Obama and the Democrats went on and on saying that ObamaCare would only cost $900 Billion so that it would be revenue neutral (not ad to the deficit)?

It wasn’t just this writer back in his college days who said that this number was a pipe dream. Many conservatives who ran the numbers said it would cost over $2 trillion as I reported in my college days (1, 2, 3, 4).

But it gets worse, the CBO is still underestimating the cost. Why? ObamaCare doesn’t start to spend huge money until the last phase of it’s implementation in 2014, but the new taxes are already starting to be phased in and really ramp up in 2013 just after the election. So ObamaCare is taking in money for over a year before the large expenses start incurring. If we take that into account and start the ten years in 2014, which is much more honest, the expense according to my estimates will be close to $2.3 trillion over ten years. Feel free to mark me on this readers, as I am certain others will verify this in time, as my earliest predictions about ObamaCare have been spot on so there is no reason to believe my estimate will prove to be any different (the Examiner piece below mentions the nine year issue as well).

Remember the adverse selection “death” spiral we spoke of in posts below? The longer ObamaCare goes on the more the costs will rise exponentially as that is exactly what it is designed to do. If Democrats manage to prevent an ObamaCare repeal, they know darn well they will have to replace it with a total government take over soon or the system will blow up in a short time.

Washington Examiner:

President Obama’s national health care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released today by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.

Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation, the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014, so it would appear cheaper under the CBO’s standard ten-year budget window and, at least on paper, meet Obama’s pledge that the legislation would cost “around $900 billion over 10 years.” When the final CBO score came out before passage, critics noted that the true 10 year cost would be far higher than advertised once projections accounted for full implementation.

Today, the CBO released new projections from 2013 extending through 2022, and the results are as critics expected: the ten-year cost of the law’s core provisions to expand health insurance coverage has now ballooned to $1.76 trillion. That’s because we now have estimates for Obamacare’s first nine years of full implementation, rather than the mere six when it was signed into law. Only next year will we get a true ten-year cost estimate, if the law isn’t overturned by the Supreme Court or repealed by then. Given that in 2022, the last year available, the gross cost of the coverage expansions are $265 billion, we’re likely looking at about $2 trillion over the first decade, or more than double what Obama advertised.

UPDATE – ObamaCare to force increases in state Medicaid programs:

Again, this is something I wrote about and you can find on my old college blog in the four links above. One of the ways that  the costs of ObamaCare was hidden is that some of it’s implementation is through unfunded mandates to state medicaid programs.

Washington Examiner:

CBO boosts its Obamacare Medicaid cost estimate

The CBO now projects that from 2012 through 2021 the federal government will spend $168 billion more on Medicaid than it expected last year, $97 billion less on subsidies for people to purchase insurance on government-run exchanges and $20 billion less on tax credits to small employers.  That works out to a $51 billion increase in the gross cost of expanding coverage from what the CBO estimated a year ago. However, the CBO also expects the federal government to collect more revenue from penalties on individuals and employers, as well as other taxes. These revenue increases will more than offset the spending increases, according to the CBO, so it now expects the cost of Obamacare during those years to be $48 billion lower.

It’s also worth noting that we were told time and again during the health care debate that the law didn’t represent a government takeover of health care. But by 2022, according to the CBO, 3 million fewer people will have health insurance through their employer, while 17 million Americans will be added to Medicaid and 22 million will be getting coverage through government-run exchanges.

Check out the full CBO report here.

Obama Cabinet Secretary: ‘The Private Market is in a Death Spiral’; ObamaCare Is Designed To End Private Insurers

Editor’s Note – It is unfortunate that I have to gloat about such bad news, but this very writer was among the first in the country to observe and write that ObamaCare creates what is called an “Adverse Selection Spiral” (also known as an economic death spiral); meaning that the short term incentives, regulations and tax structure in the ObamaCare is designed to make the long term risk management economically unsustainable due to the long term increases in costs forced into the system.

This very writer said that ObamaCare is designed to break private insurance and make people “cry out for a public option”. Ironically some months later former Democrats Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said the exact same thing.

Flashback 2009-2010: Real Clear Politics Confirms IUSB Vision Analysis: Latest Health Care Bill Designed to Wreck Private Insurance & Make People Cry Out for a Public Option:

As we at IUSB Vision have stated again and again and again…. Real Clear Politics….

Speaker Pelosi used IUSB Vision Editor Chuck Norton’s exact words that ObamaCare will “make them cry out for a public option” on C-Span [Notice how all of the Democrats cackle maniacally when she says it]:

Read on HERE.

So much for the Obama promise of keeping your old health insurance and that it will be cheaper.

CNS News:

Sec. HHS Kathleen Sebelius
Sec. HHS Kathleen Sebelius

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told the House Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday that the days of private health insurance are coming to an end in the United States.

“The private market is in a death spiral,” Sebelius said, contending this would be the case whether or not President Barack Obama’s health care law had been enacted.

At the Ways and Means hearing, Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) asked Sebelius about the administration’s assurances that people who liked their current health insurance plan would be able to keep it under the new law.

“How about when the president said you can keep your health care coverage, if you like it?” Roskam said. “And yet, the reality is, according to Bloomberg (News) at least, 9 percent fewer businesses are offering medical coverage than in 2010. There the rhetoric didn’t meet the reality, did it?”

Sebelius did not contest the numbers. 

[Here comes the spin – Political Arena Editor] “Well again, congressman, what you’re seeing, it wouldn’t have mattered if we had passed the Affordable Care Act or not,” she said. “The private market is in a death spiral.”

 

It would have happened anyways is the new spin. Nice try.

Investors Business Daily:

ObamaCare Is Designed To End Private Insurers

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says that private health insurance providers are in a “death spiral.” Of course they are. Isn’t that the way the authors of ObamaCare planned it?

Testifying last Wednesday in front of the House Ways and Means Committee, Sebelius was asked by Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill., if the administration was being honest when President Obama promised that those who liked their health plans could keep them.

Said Sebelius: “The private market is in a death spiral.”

Sebelius tried to temper her comment by claiming the private insurance market would collapse even if the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act had not been passed. But the truth is, the market cannot survive under the growing weight of government, and Obama-Care was to be the final heavy load that will crush it.

Don’t believe it? Look at the provisions of ObamaCare and consider them in context with the Democrats’ constant public demonization of insurers.

Start with the mandates. By now, most of the country knows that ObamaCare requires health insurers to pay for contraception and other birth-control measures. But that’s not the law’s only mandate. Among the many diktats of the Democrats’ health care overhaul is the requirement that insurers must spend at least 80 cents on medical claims for every $1 they take in from premiums in the individual and small group markets, and 85 cents from premiums in the large group market.

Insurers’ first response was to cut broker commissions. But what gets trimmed next? At what point will the industry no longer be able to pay competent people in companies because of the medical-loss ratio mandate, or to make the profits needed to stay in business?

Maybe the industry could simply increase premiums to avoid problems created by the medical-loss ratio. But the central planners thought of that, too. Under ObamaCare, the secretary of Health and Human Services has the power to decline premium increases of 10% or more in the individual and small group markets. Only those considered “reasonable” by bureaucrats’ standards will be accepted. This policy is an effective price control that’s sure to cause losses in the industry.

Another Broken Promise: ObamaCare’s Abortion Funding Rule Finalized

Remember Bart Stupak? He was head of the Democrats for Life Caucus in the House. President Obama promised him an executive order, in exchange for the votes of his group of congressmen, to strip public funding of abortion so ObamaCare would never use tax dollars to kill babies? Well guess how well that worked out? And Stupak’s constituents were not fooled as he sold out the values he ran on and sacrificed his political career to advance the cause of government power.

Related:

The Myth of the Pro-Life Democrat in Congress – LINK

Stupak’s “Pro-Life” Caucus Gets $4.7 Billion in Earmark Funds after Voting for Public Funding of Abortion – LINK

ACLJ:

Despite President Obama’s empty rhetoric to the contrary, a recently finalized Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) rule makes clear that ObamaCare will use tax dollars to fund abortion.

Remember when President Obama told us that the Pitts/Stupak Amendment should be rejected because his Executive Order would prevent abortion from being a part of ObamaCare? We told you then that not only was an Executive Order insufficient to replace a strong statutory protection like the Pitts/Stupak Amendment, but also that the language of the Executive Order itself did nothing more than set up an accounting scheme to hide the federal subsidies that would flow to abortions.

Sadly, these facts have now come to fruition. HHS, under the direction of President Obama and Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has issued its final rule for implementing the state exchanges created by the ObamaCare law. These final rules include requirements for how abortion funding must be handled.

First off, when we consider that the President told us that his Executive Order made it clear that abortion was not a part of this law, it is reasonable to ask why the final rule references ‘abortion’ 30 times? If abortion funding was not to be a part of this law, the statute needed only a short, clear prohibition of such funding – a prohibition offered in the Pitts/Stupak Amendment, which was initially approved by the House of Representatives, and later stripped out by the President and then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Because the law does indeed contradict the President by allowing abortion funding, this final rule goes to great lengths to devise a scheme that attempts to hide that funding. The result is a complicated web of regulations that reference ‘abortion’ 30 times.

Everyone concerned about government promotion and funding of abortions should read this rule for themselves, but allow me to outline a couple of the basic components with regard to the abortion requirements.

First, beginning on page 453, this rule describes and reaffirms the “segregation of funds for abortion services” as required under ObamaCare. Essentially, insurance plans may include abortion services in a plan subsidized by federal taxpayer dollars. To justify this inclusion, the plan will collect a $1 “surcharge” from all policy holders. Of course this surcharge will be collected as part of a larger premium payment, and not as a part of a separate collection. Additionally, plans are entirely free to advertise the total cost of these plans without mentioning that $1 of the premium is specifically intended to subsidize the abortion coverage. Further, the surcharge is only to be disclosed when the policyholder first enrolls.

In short, the $1 surcharge does not even attempt to resemble an actual offset of the abortion coverage cost, is virtually undetectable by the policy holder, and serves the singular purpose of providing a flimsy defense for inserting the federal government into the business of providing coverage for elective abortions.

Additionally, on pages 364-365, the final rule makes it entirely plausible that States that have passed laws prohibiting abortion coverage will be forced to provide that coverage anyway. This would occur through the multi-state plans administered by the Federal Government. The final rule simply says that rules governing these plans will be issued at a later date, so it’s entirely feasible (I’d say likely) that these plans will be permitted to cover abortion, even when one of the States within the multi-State area prohibits it.

ABC News promoted militant Islamist as a “Peaceful representative of Islam”

Just a little reminder of how transparently corrupt the elite media has become.

Via Answering Muslims:

ABC News recently did a 20/20 special titled “Islam: Questions and Answers,” with Diane Sawyer, Bill Weir, and Lama Hasan. The program drew attention to moderate Muslims who will serve as America’s “first line of defense” against terrorism. Unfortunately, one of the moderate Muslims presented by ABC isn’t so moderate.

3M CEO: Obama is anti-business

3M CEO George Buckley

Notice Buckley said Canada as well as Mexico. Canada is in the process if lowering its corporate income tax to 16.5% (the USA is 35%). Canada is in the midst of a free-market awakening and wealth is flocking to Canada. They are slowly privatizing their health care system and streamlining their regulatory structure. Canada has realized that as the United States socializes that the wealth will flee, so they are making sure that the wealth does not have far to go.

(Reuters) – The chief executive of diversified manufacturer 3M Co called President Barack Obama anti-business in an interview with the Financial Times, arguing that manufacturers could move to Canada or Mexico as a result.

“We know what his instincts are — they are Robin Hood-esque,” 3M CEO George Buckley told the paper. “He is anti-business.”

Obama is working to shed the reputation that he is against the business community. Earlier this month, he assembled a group of top U.S. executives, chaired by General Electric Co Chief Executive Jeffrey Immelt, to advise him on economic matters.

He also brought on JPMorgan Chase executive William Daley as his chief of staff and made a high profile speech to the Chamber of Commerce, a business lobby, earlier this year.

But Buckley said he was not yet convinced by Obama’s actions.

“Politicians forget that business has choice. We’re not indentured servants and we will do business where it’s good and friendly. If it’s hostile, incrementally, things will slip away. We’ve got a real choice between manufacturing in Canada and Mexico — which tend to be pro-business — or America,” he told the Financial Times.

Inded GE’s Immelt has been sending jobs to China while encouraging Obama to do more of the same.

Corruption: Most Stimulus Funds Spent in Democrat Districts…

[Originally posted on my old college blog in April 2010 – Editor]

Via George Mason University, National Review, and HotAir.

The stimulus bill, as ill conceived as it is, gives is a fantastic opportunity to test Keynesian economic policy and models in comparison to actual results.

According to the law, districts with the highest unemployment were supposed to get the bulk of the stimulus money. Did that actually happen?

First: The idea behind the $787 billion stimulus bill is that, if the government spends money where it is the most needed, it will create jobs and trigger economic growth. Hence, we should expect the government to invest more money in districts with higher unemployment rates.

Controlling for the percentage of the district employed in the construction industry, a proxy for the vulnerability to recession of a district, I find no statistical correlation for all relevant unemployment indicators and the allocation of funds. This suggests that unemployment is not the factor leading the awards. Also, I found no correlation between other economic indicators, such as income, and stimulus funding.

Second: On average, Democratic districts received one-and-a-half times as many awards as Republican ones. Democratic districts also received two-and-a-half times more stimulus dollars than Republican districts ($122,127,186,509 vs. $46,139,592,268). Republican districts also received smaller awards on average. (The average dollars awarded per Republican district is $260,675,663, while the average dollars awarded per Democratic district is $471,533,539.)

The exact same thing happend under the “new deal” where much of the spending went to swing districts to buy votes. Massive amounts of money spent and non-farm unemployment never dropped below 20% during the New Deal.

The fact remains and it might as well be considered a Law of Economics: Politicians spend money with a political result in mind, not an economic one. Pictorial logarithm proof:

As you can see the log shows no correlation, but look at this….

Well would you look at that. Oh the news gets better…

In the report from Dr. Veronique de Rugy from George Mason University:

I found that an average cost of $286,000 was awarded per job created, a 16.3 percent increase over the previous period.

See the full report HERE.

Now in case you are thinking to yourself, /whiney voice on “Well wait, that economist you quoted doesn’t count cause she is French and she wrote a note about her findings to Natioal Review which means she is a nazi and only twice removed from Hitler’s third cousin!”

Well USA Today hired some econo-geeks and they came up with the same result:

Counties that supported Obama last year have reaped twice as much money per person from the administration’s $787 billion economic stimulus package as those that voted for his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, a USA TODAY analysis of government disclosure and accounting records shows. That money includes aid to repair military bases, improve public housing and help students pay for college…

More crony capitalism and corruption.

48 Out of 50 States Have Lost Jobs since Democrats’ Stimulus Law. Washington DC Gained Jobs.

And these numbers were taken from last December so it is even worse now. We have been losing about 400,000 jobs a week since that time based on new unemployment claims (in fairness this number does not include jobs created which helps to mitigate this number, but with wages going down and inflation goes up, lots of thes enew jobs are part time and/or are people just taking anything out of desperation).

House Ways & Means Committee:

While Democrats promised stimulus would create 3.7 million jobs, the reality is far different. To date, 48 out of 50 states have lost jobs, while the unemployment rate has remained at or above 9.5% for 15 consecutive months. As the nation nears the end of 2010 — when final statistics will be available to compare actual outcomes with the Administration’s pre-stimulus projections — Washington, D.C. remains the only place in America where those job-creation projections actually have been met.  Meanwhile, the rest of the nation is left asking “Where are the jobs?”

State Administration Projection of Change in Jobs Through December 2010 Actual Change in Jobs Through October 2010
Alabama +52,000 -43,500
Alaska +8,000 -1,200
Arizona +70,000 -73,800
Arkansas +31,000 -5,100
California +396,000 -543,400
Colorado +59,000 -83,200
Connecticut +41,000 -39,200
Delaware +11,000 -10,300
District of Columbia +12,000 +21,100
Florida +206,000 -169,200
Georgia +106,000 -126,200
Hawaii +15,000 -8,900
Idaho +17,000 -16,100
Illinois +148,000 -160,900
Indiana +75,000 -40,200
Iowa +37,000 -20,200
Kansas +33,000 -32,800
Kentucky +48,000 -7,700
Louisiana +50,000 -15,600
Maine +15,000 -9,900
Maryland +66,000 -13,900
Massachusetts +79,000 -33,500
Michigan +109,000 -105,900
Minnesota +66,000 -24,700
Mississippi +30,000 -23,900
Missouri +69,000 -66,500
Montana +11,000 -8,600
Nebraska +23,000 -11,400
Nevada +34,000 -79,000
New Hampshire +16,000 +5,200
New Jersey +100,000 -104,600
New Mexico +22,000 -13,300
New York +215,000 -127,700
North Carolina +105,000 -81,900
North Dakota +8,000 +6,600
Ohio +133,000 -157,500
Oklahoma +40,000 -24,400
Oregon +44,000 -41,300
Pennsylvania +143,000 -71,900
Rhode Island +12,000 -15,600
South Carolina +50,000 -22,900
South Dakota +10,000 -2,500
Tennessee +70,000 -53,700
Texas +269,000 -54,100
Utah +32,000 -15,000
Vermont +8,000 -5,200
Virginia +93,000 -44,500
Washington +75,000 -70,900
West Virginia +20,000 -10,600
Wisconsin +70,000 -69,100
Wyoming +8,000 -7,800

Source: Administration February 13, 2009 projection and actual U.S. Department of Labor data.

Flashback: Democrats Yearly Deficit Spending 6.5 Times Higher than Republicans. Democrats Pork Spending 50 Times Higher

An important reminder about the budget numbers from 2010.

CNS News reported:

When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be “no new deficit spending.” Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

“After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,” Pelosi said in her speech from the speaker’s podium. “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.”

Pelosi has served as speaker in the 110th and 111th Congresses.

So much for that promise.

Byron York of the Washington Examiner:

Press coverage of the budget frenzy on Capitol Hill has suggested that pork-barrel earmark spending is still a bipartisan problem, that after months of self-righteous rhetoric about fiscal discipline, Republicans and Democrats remain equal-opportunity earmarkers.It’s not true. A new analysis by a group of federal-spending watchdogs shows a striking imbalance between the parties when it comes to earmark requests. Democrats remain raging spenders, while Republicans have made enormous strides in cleaning up their act. In the Senate, the GOP made only one-third as many earmark requests as Democrats for 2011, and in the House, Republicans have nearly given up earmarking altogether — while Democrats roll on.

The watchdog groups — Taxpayers for Common Sense, WashingtonWatch.com, and Taxpayers Against Earmarks — counted total earmark requests in the 2011 budget. Those requests were made by lawmakers earlier this year, but Democratic leaders, afraid that their party’s spending priorities might cost them at the polls, decided not to pass a budget before the Nov. 2 elections. This week, they distilled those earmark requests — threw some out, combined others — into the omnibus bill that was under consideration in the Senate until Majority Leader Harry Reid pulled it Thursday night. While that bill was loaded with spending, looking back at the original earmark requests tells us a lot about the spending inclinations of both parties.

In the 2011 House budget, the groups found that House Democrats requested 18,189 earmarks, which would cost the taxpayers a total of $51.7 billion, while House Republicans requested just 241 earmarks, for a total of $1 billion.

Where did those GOP earmark requests come from? Just four Republican lawmakers: South Carolina Rep. Henry Brown, who did not run for re-election this year; Louisiana Rep. Joseph Cao, who lost his bid for re-election; maverick Texas Rep. Ron Paul; and spending king Rep. Don Young of Alaska. The other Republican members of the House — 174 of them — requested a total of zero earmarks.

Talk to Republicans, and they’ll say it would be nice if there were no earmark requests at all, but party leaders can’t control everybody. “Brown’s retiring, Cao’s defeated, Paul is Paul and Young is Young,” one GOP aide shrugs. Still, the bottom line is that the House GOP’s nearly perfect renunciation of earmarks is striking. “For a voluntary moratorium, it was impressive that there were only four scofflaws,” says Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense.

The Senate is a different story. But even though some Republicans are still seeking earmarks, Democrats are by far the bigger spenders. The watchdog groups found that Democrats requested 15,133 earmarks for 2011, for a total of $54.9 billion, while Republicans requested 5,352 earmarks, for a total of $22 billion.

If you look at the top 10 Senate earmarkers as measured by the total dollar value of earmarks requested, there are seven Democrats and three Republicans. (The leader of the pack is Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu, who requested $4.4 billion in earmarks.) The three Republicans are Sens. Roger Wicker, Sam Brownback and Thad Cochran. One of them, Brownback, is leaving the Senate, while the other two are from Mississippi, which is apparently earmark heaven.

 Commentary:

Isn’t it interesting that the only time you hear about “deficits” from the Democrats and the elite media is when they want to raise tyour taxes? Then the Democrats drop a 1.1 trillion dollar spending bill in the hopper near the end of a lame duck session and what do we hear? The  ….chirp….chirp….chirp… of crickets in the silence.

As the Deficit Commission has rightly pointed out tax rates need to be lowered for most individuals and businesses because the higher the rate the less the compliance, the higher the rate the more wealth goes overseas, the higher the rate the fewer will take risk, the higher the rate the less small businesses can hire. The simple truth is that the wealthy and upper middle class can take money and park it in a tax free growth account and leave it there. They have the option of not moving their money thus it cannot be taxed. It is for these reasons it is economic growth that generates real revenue, not high tax rates.

You heard the rhetoric all over the elite media and from the Democrat leadership, “If we don’t raise taxes on the “rich” the government will lose half a trillion dollars a year in revenue”. That entire narrative is a canard for the following reasons.

There are very few wage earners who make $250,000 a year.

The way the tax code is set up the majority of people who pay the top marginal tax rate and not individuals at all, but are Sub-S small businesses with 5 – 200 employees.

The half a trillion dollar number is generated from a series of formula’s that make up what is known as the “static Keynesian model”. These models not only are not accurate, but usually are not even clos,e as they do not account for changes in behavior that result from people changing the rules. For example: the government taxes every cheese burger 100 dollars. Since America consumes a billion cheese burgers a year the government estimates that the tax revenue will be $100 billion dollars.

Of course this leaves out the obvious, who would buy a cheeseburger of the government taxed each one $100? So along comes a Republican who proposes to lower the tax to $50 per cheese burger; along comes the media and the Democrats to cry that the tax cuts are costing the government $50 billion a year! Quite dishonest isn’t it?

Lowering tax rates resulted in increased revenue under Coolidge, Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton (second term tax cuts), and Bush II.

UPDATE2010 YEARLY DEFICIT: $2.08 Trillion. That is 10 times higher than the last year Republicans had budgetary control.

Flashback – Protesters with Former Obama Advisor Van Jones: “String Up Clarence Thomas” – “Revolution Now Like in Egypt”

[Flashback February 2011- these same occupy rent-a-protesters showing us their civility that they like to lecture Sarah Palin on.]

The elite media likes to tell you that the Tea Party are hateful racists, in spite of the fact that there is no good evidence to demonstrate that. However getting people to say these types of things at almost any left of center protest is easy (especially on most any college campus where there are plenty of unhinged Marxist professors and indoctrinated students in one place). I have seen it first hand as a former counter protester myself. What are the odds of seeing this on NBC News?

This group is called “Common Cause” and do I really have to state the obvious?… Yes they get money from George Soros.

Thanks to Andrew Brietbart for the footage.

The Kicker:

Common Cause is a nonpartisan, nonprofit advocacy organization founded in 1970 by John Gardner as a vehicle for citizens to make their voices heard in the political process and to hold their elected leaders accountable to the public interest.
The IRS considers them a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity because they are “non-partisan” (non partisan my ear…), so yes indeed being tax exempt means that YOU help subsidize them.

Dr. Sowell: The U.S. economy likely to decline in the long run. The private sector cannot prosper against the onslaught of government largess.

[Flashback February 2011: There was a glimmer of a recovery but now it seems that what we saw back in February was just inventory restocking. Time has demonstrated Dr. Sowell’s warning as he was not optimistic in this video when “economists” the elite media talked to were “surprised” by the monthly bad economic news. They were surprised every month for two and a half years.]

The video is of Dr. Thomas Sowell who is likely the greatest and most published economist alive. He is a free market guy so that is why many college students may not have heard of him. The use of Dr. Sowell’s materials is virtually banned at some universities such as Indiana University at South Bend. The left, as well as the IU administration, is very hostile to Dr. Sowell because he is a black economist who believes in and understands the free market.

Via The Daily Caller:

Dr. Sowell appeared on Wednesday night’s “The Kudlow Report,” on CNBC to promote his book, “Basic Economics: A Common Sense Guide to Economics.” Host Larry Kudlow asked Sowell about the current outlook and his long-term predictions for the economic system as a whole in the United States. The senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution replied that politics plays into the answer.

I have never seen Dr. Sowell so concerned. As some economists have said, this recession is different. Combine that with the fact that government has so effectively chased wealth out of the country and undermined economic confidence that unless we change government culture permanently and do it soon the United States may be done as an economic super power.

Donald Trump on Economics, China, Trade, Energy, Healthcare, and START.

Now that candidates will be seeking Donald Trump’s endorsement it is good to take a second look at his positions – Editor

While I do not agree with Trump on every issue, he does make some points which should be addressed in the upcoming election.

Free trade is OK as long as the enforcement is not one sided against us as it usually is, and if we don’t have a government that passes so many corrupt regulations that choke the economy and taxes businesses to the point where they flee. Trump is right that we cannot have endless consumption without production. Trump is right that ObamaCare is causing the price of health care to skyrocket.

Trump is right about START. Trump is also right that we should not be defending wealthy countries without them at least contributing to that defense.

Trump needs to understand what happens if you have a war and leave a power vacuum.

FLASHBACK: Obama vs. Obama on War Justification

Photo caption via Bob Schneider.

Remember this:

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

Or this:

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

More at Verum Serum.

UPDATE – Human Events has some fun:

UPDATE II –  Mona Charen Blasts Obama’s Hypocrisy

In the Democratic primary campaign of 2008, candidate Barack Obama scored points because he, unlike many Democrats, had opposed the Iraq War from the start. Though a state senator at the time of the 2002 congressional vote authorizing military action, Obama had delivered a speech to an anti-war rally in Chicago.

He said, “I don’t oppose all wars … What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”

Regarding the justifications for war with Iraq, state Sen. Obama was unpersuaded: “I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted U.N. inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity … But … Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors …”

As American forces join the war against Moammar Gadhafi, the nation is entitled to an explanation. How is the case for war against Gadhafi smarter (remember, Obama is only against “dumb” wars) or less “ideological” or more prudent than that for war against Saddam Hussein?

Certainly, with an army of only 50,000, Gadhafi represents far less of a threat to his neighbors or to us than did Saddam, who commanded an army estimated at 350,000. As for humanitarian concerns, what Gadhafi is doing to the rebels in Libya is exactly what Saddam did to his domestic enemies, but on a reduced scale. As Obama himself said, Saddam was “a ruthless man … who butchers his own people to secure his power.” Yet that didn’t justify a war, state Sen. Obama told us.

Sen. Obama did not believe that Saddam posed a danger to the United States or to his neighbors — though he had attacked or invaded three of his neighbors: Iran, Kuwait, and Israel. Yet Gadhafi has hardly ranged beyond his own borders.

m

Leftist conference of unions, students, legislators and leftist community groups: How we will disrupt capital and create economic uncertainty. How we can create a new financial crisis, bring down the stock market….

Editor’s Note – This was a post from just a few months ago and is a little reminder that the “Occupy” protest going on in New York right now was planned in a galaxy not so far away by the same usual suspects.

UPDATE – ‘Occupy Wall Street’ Organizer Is Marketing Analyst Whose LinkedIn Lists Work For Investment Bankers – LINK

Occupy Wall Street ‘Stands In Solidarity’ With Obama Front Group Funded by the Wealthy Financiers and Bankers They are Protesting – LINK

[Editor’s Note – and if these partially misguided protesters get their way the Democrats will pass a tax increase law that will not benefit the students, it will benefit the super rich because, as is the case with all of these “soak the rich” efforts, they either chase wealth out of the country and/or exceptions for those who are politically connected get included in the tax code and it will not be the GE’s and Google’s who pay, it will be the small and medium-sized competition who will get soaked.]

Steve Lerner SEIU

UPDATE Steven Lerner, the man in the video overtly plotting a new economic crisis, has visited the White House four times as well as the Treasury Department.

Watch this video:

Longer tape of this conversation:

Transcript and full article at Business Insider:

CAUGHT ON TAPE: Former SEIU Official Reveals Secret Plan To Destroy JP Morgan, Crash The Stock Market, And Redistribute Wealth In America

A former official of one of the country’s most-powerful unions, SEIU, has a secret plan to “destabilize” the country.

The plan is designed to destroy JP Morgan, nuke the stock market, and weaken Wall Street’s grip on power, thus creating the conditions necessary for a redistribution of wealth and a change in government.

The former SEIU official, Stephen Lerner, spoke in a closed session at a Pace University forum last weekend.

UPDATE I – Glenn Beck: This is a clear case of economic terrorism – LINK.

UPDATE II – SEIU sued under RICO statute (Via The Blaze):

Cockroaches, bugs, mold, and flies. These are just some of the props and rumors allegedly employed by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) against the American unit of French catering company Sodexo. And the company’s had enough.

Fed up with tactics that include intimidation, extortion, and yes, sabotage that apparently includes plastic cockroaches, Sodexo filed a lawsuit against the SEIU last week under the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

“We work constructively with unions every day but the SEIU has crossed the line by breaking the law,” Robert Stern, general counsel for Sodexo USA, said in a statement. “We will not tolerate the SEIU’s tactics any longer.”

SEIU has been fighting to represent 80,000 hourly Sodexo employees, which is above and beyond the 180,000 hourly employees who are already union members. The union regularly stages protests against the company to make its point, like this one last fall on the campus of George Mason University. The video alleges SEIU bused in protesters, who can be heard chanting, among other things, “As long as it takes, whatever it takes, we’ll be in your face!”

Sodexo’s complaint, filed in federal court in Alexandria, VA, alleges acts of SEIU blackmail, vandalism, trespass, harassment, and lobbying law violations designed to steer business away from, and harm, the company.

And just what exactly might those acts look like? Sodexo gives the details:

The complaint alleges that the SEIU, in face to face meetings, threatened Sodexo USA’s executives that it would harm Sodexo USA’s business unless they gave in to the union, and then carried out its threats through egregious behavior, including:

  • throwing plastic roaches onto food being served by Sodexo USA at a high profile event;
  • scaring hospital patients by insinuating that Sodexo USA food contained bugs, rat droppings, mold and flies;
  • lying to interfere with Sodexo USA business and sneaking into elementary schools to avoid security;
  • violating lobbying laws to steer business away from Sodexo USA, even at the risk of costing Sodexo USA employees their jobs; and
  • harassing Sodexo USA employees by threatening to accuse them of wrongdoing.

The complaint, filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia, seeks an injunction against the SEIU and its locals and executives, as well as monetary damages to be determined by the court.

UPDATE III – Member of Congress to Attorney General Eric Holder – LINK.