Bishop Jackson to Blacks: End Your Slavish Devotion to the Democrat Party

The press conference speech below is even better.

Tea Party Candidate Herman Cain wins Florida Straw Poll: Black Caucusers Still Think Tea Party is Racist

One of the Tea Party's favorite candidates, Herman Cain, won the Florida straw poll by a large margin. Yet, Big Government is showing a series of interviews from the Black Caucus convention in which interviewees routinely claim that racism "underlies" the tea party, even if it is not overtly racist. Story here.

The tea party issues are all about smaller government, lower taxes and fiscal responsibility. The reasoning of the black caucausers seems to be that the Tea party must be racist because it did not spring up until Barack Obama was president.

Newsflash to the Black Caucus: Barack Obama is a big government, bid spending liberal. The tea parties sprang up after the House passage of Obama's pork-filled stimulus bill, which was a big government solution to economic problems best solved by smaller government. Race has nothing to do with the widespread public dissatisfaction with the president, then or now.

It is of course ironic that the exclusively Black Caucus can accuse anyone of racism. Pot-Kettle, anyone?

That fact is, the Tea Parties and the vast majority of Americans appreciate candidates who make sense, like Herman Cain. Unlike Barack Obama. If the Tea parties are rally racist, they must also be blind, becuase otherwise they would know that Herman Cain is black.

The thing about name-calling liberals is that the facts don't matter. Expanding the Nanny state matters.

Here is an example of name-calling based upon facts that do matter:

After a few caffeine-heavy refills at our corner table, I asked [Herman Cain] about President Obama’s new effort to raise taxes on the wealthy, and Cain just about blew a blood vessel — especially when I mentioned the part where Obama says it’s about “math” not “class warfare.”

“Can I be blunt? That’s a lie,” Cain said, before the sound of his voice began to rise noticeably higher. “You’re not supposed to call the president a liar. Well if you’re not supposed to call the president a liar, he shouldn’t tell a lie. If it’s not class warfare, it’s highway robbery. He wants us to believe it’s not class warfare, oh okay, it’s not class warfare. Pick my pockets, because that’s what he’s doing!”

Source: http://nation.foxnews.com/herman-cain/2011/09/26/herman-cain-obama-liar-his-class-warfare-rhetoric-bull#ixzz1Z5CzBG00

Fun Political Ad

Peolsi: Republicans Insult Obama By Refusing to Go Public With Jobs Speech Disagreementsementw with HIm public

Fox News is reporting that the Republicans will not give a public rebuttal to the president's jobs speech. Nancty Pelosi says that is disrepectful. Do we need any more proof the Nancy Pelosi is nuts?

Republicans have decided they're not going to give a rebuttal to President Obama's jobs speech later this week, a decision House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi took as a high affront to the White House.

...

Pelosi said the party's "silence" would "speak volumes about their lack of commitment to creating jobs."

"The Republicans' refusal to respond to the president's proposal on jobs is not only disrespectful to him, but to the American people," Pelosi said.

But Boehner spokesman Mike Steel said Obama's proposals on Thursday "will rise or fall on their own merits," suggesting a GOP response was not needed.

I'm sorry, but that is just weird. Nancy Pelosi wants someone to rebut the President? Out of respect? Public disagreement implies respect? Wouldn't respect be to agree with him? Doesn't respect include listening, digesting any proposals and thoughtfully responding after careful consideration? does respect require an immediate response before Republicans have had the opportunity to discuss matters among themselves? Doesn't the immediate rebuttal imply mostly partisanship?

I can see only one argument that the refusal to rebut is disrespectful, but Nancy Pelosi did not make that argument. She could have argued that the failure to make a formal rebuttal trivializes the President's speech, implying that his ideas are not worth public dialogue. But she did not make that argument.

Whether the President's proposal are trivial remains to be seen. We certainly expect nothing less from the President than big government solutions that will make the problem worse. Whatever the President has to say, discussion by Congress happens in a different forum, not necessarily on the public airwaves.

Rick Perry

According to Rick Perry: “I’ll work every day to try to make Washington, D.C., as inconsequential in your life as I can.”

That is the attitude I want in a politician.

Great Political Ad

I was Feeling Guilty....

I was feeling guilty about missing last night's televised "debate" (mutual press conference is more like it) of the Republican candidates (well, not all of them), but after Ed Morrisey's review I realize I really did not miss much.

The teaser:

The biggest losers at last night’s CNN debate were the people who tuned in for political enlightenment, and ended up watching a two-hour game show. CNN’s moderator, John King, had me thinking of Rudyard Kipling and “good old grinnin’, gruntin’ Gunga Din” — but without the ironic redemption. Any political insight got lost in King’s continuous “uh uh uh uh uh” soundtrack that kicked in within seconds of a Republican attempting to speak. Not that there was much insight to be had in a format that insisted on asking “This or That?” questions, such as “Thin crust or deep dish?”

For the full review at Hot Air, go here.

Debbie Downer aka Debbie Wasserman-Schultz

I guess I am not alone in my feelings about this person.



I would only add that someone needs to introduce Debbie Downer to a comb.

Planned Parenthood Mammogram Lie

when it comes to liberals, no lie is too bold to get their hands on free money, i.e., federal funding. After, the end justifies the means, doesn't it?



Who is the Prince of Lies, again?

Four More Years

the first ad of the upcoming presidential campaign.



President Barack O-Bomber, the inspiration for the Tea Party movement. He brought us together.

Democrats To Shut Down Government

It seems the Democrats actually want to shut down the government, because they know the DNC meida arm (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNBC, MSNBC, and NPR) will falsely blame the shut down on the Republicans.

The Republican-dominated house of Congress, the House of Representatives, passed a budget with only modest budget cuts, but the Senate Democrats prefer to saddle future taxpayers with today's excesses. The Senate Democrats refuse to let the House-passed legislation come to a vote. Note: budget bills MUST originate in the House, under the Constitution.

Of course the Democrats are unhappy that the House refused to fund Obamacare and the House does not think that carbon dioxide, a natural element of our atmosphere, is a pollutant (because it is not).

As for Obamacare, did the Democrats not notice the trouncing that Obamacare proponents took in November 2010? If they are really so deluded they think that the public wants Obamacare, pass the budget defunding it, blame the Republicans for defunding it, and let the public respond in the next election. Of course, the public generally dislikes the Obamacare linchpin: the mandatory purchase of insurance. and without that linchpin, the entire scheme collapses.

And it is a scheme.

The Democrats threaten to shut down the government, knowing their press fellow travelers will dishonestly blame the Republicans. Memo to Democrats: the public is not really that stupid. Memo to Republicans: keep saying the truth over and over, that the House passed a budget and the Democrat-controlled Senate refuses.

The truth will set up free. And bring back our light bulbs.

Jimmy McMillan to Run for Republican Nomination for President

Jimmy McMillon, formerly New York's "the Rent is too Damn High" party, plans to run for President on the Republican ticket. His campaign slogan is, "The deficit is too damn high."



Exit line: "I put him [Obama] in the white house to do a job and he didn't do it."

NPR Fired This Guy. Good Riddance.

Here is the James O'Keefe video on the now infamous lunch between "citizen journalists" and NPR --now former-- official Ron Shiller.



Was there really ever any doubt that NPR is left-leaning? OK, federal funding is overall only 10% of it resources. Why is there any federal funding?

The Bible Tells Us Whose Side God is On

"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."

Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

Wisconsin Protests Show Left Wing Hypocrisy

Are Bill Maher and the other left-wingers featured in the video constitutionally capable of admitting they were wrong?

I don't think so.

Where is Nancy Pelosi decrying the left wing rhetoric in Wisconsin?

Why does it seem that there are very, very few on the left capable of telling the truth?

20th Century Genocide

I was reminded of a bit of history today. In the twentieth century, genocide was advocated by the socialists and the communists. \

The communists wanted to get rid of those they (the elites) did not consider productive members of society or those who were not "new men" having a bad attitude about being cogs on society's wheels. The National Socialists, when they took over in Germany, had a purpose of genetic purification, to create a master race.

The German exterminated 6 million Jews in their endeavor. The Soviet communists exterminated 7 million Ukranians by deliberate starvation and millions more in other totalitarian progroms. The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia killed another two to three million in genocidal campaigns.

These are not flukes of history. Purification by genocide is central to core communist and socialist philosophy -- all to create a better world (in their view). (Oh, we really don't think that anymore, they'll say. Sure. Not until you are in power.)

It baffles me that anyone today could give either ideology any credence whatsoever. But the left does.

It will be different this time, they think. Really?

Liberals' Foreign Policies Explained

Moron of the Day: President Barack Obama

In his weekly address, the President spewed socialist idiocy:

Supporting businesses with this kind of 21st century infrastructure and cutting-edge innovation is our responsibility. But businesses have a responsibility, too. If we make America the best place to do business, businesses should make their mark in America. They should set up shop here, and hire our workers, and pay decent wages, and invest in the future of this nation. That’s their obligation. And that’s the message I’ll be bringing to American business leaders at the Chamber of Commerce on Monday – that government and businesses have mutual responsibilities; and that if we fulfill these obligations together, it benefits us all. Our workers will succeed. Our nation will prosper. And America will win the future in this century just like we did in the last.

No, No, No.

It is the obligation of business to make a profit. Period More business activity helps everyone in society, but that is a by-product. The president needs to dump his Marxist notions that businesses have some other social responsibility.

Business has no obligation to hire workers, unless needed to make a profit. Business has no obligation to pay decent wages, unless needed to make a profit (and the workers, by their industry and skill are worth decent wages to the employer). Business has no obligations "to invest in the future of this nation."

More business is good for everyone, because there will be more jobs. Everyone who wants to work and be productive benefits, either form jobs created by others or by creating jobs for themselves. A rising tide lifts all boats (as a real president, President Reagan, once said).

More government does make anywhere good for business. More government "helping" business really means government favoring the business in-crowd, the favored few. It means hurting the rivals to the in-crowd, preventing business entry by the newcomers, all in the name of "protection" of the public. It is protection in the same sense as the mob providing protection, of course. The president's approach is truly evil, even if done with the best of intentions. Look for protectionism from any Obama plan to "help" business. Watch the government "protect" primarily union jobs. "Protection" promotes inefficiency. Government "protection" is at its heart corrupt.

Government is really efficient at only one thing in business: stifling innovation The best thing government can do the help business is get out of the way. Reduce the size of government. Repeal the EPA. The administrative branch needs maybe four agencies, maybe less. Eliminate or strictly limit the right of the administrative branch of government to enact regulations having the force of law. Congress is supposed to be making the laws, and it makes too many as it is.

Do I think the president means well?. I do. He is simply too ignorant of economics to understand how poor his policies and "vision" are. He thinks government is the answer, no matter what the question. He fails to understand that government is inevitably the problem, not the solution.

Congratulations to President Barack Obama, today's Moron of the Day.

Obama Announces Plan to Fix Regulations That Kill Businesses and Jobs.

There was an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal today purportedly authored by Barack Obama (who, the WSJ helpfull informs us "is president of the United States"):

From child labor laws to the Clean Air Act to our most recent strictures against hidden fees and penalties by credit card companies, we have, from time to time, embraced common sense rules of the road that strengthen our country without unduly interfering with the pursuit of progress and the growth of our economy.

Sometimes, those rules have gotten out of balance, placing unreasonable burdens on business—burdens that have stifled innovation and have had a chilling effect on growth and jobs. At other times, we have failed to meet our basic responsibility to protect the public interest, leading to disastrous consequences. Such was the case in the run-up to the financial crisis from which we are still recovering. There, a lack of proper oversight and transparency nearly led to the collapse of the financial markets and a full-scale Depression.

Over the past two years, the goal of my administration has been to strike the right balance. And today, I am signing an executive order that makes clear that this is the operating principle of our government.

This order requires that federal agencies ensure that regulations protect our safety, health and environment while promoting economic growth. And it orders a government-wide review of the rules already on the books to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive. It's a review that will help bring order to regulations that have become a patchwork of overlapping rules, the result of tinkering by administrations and legislators of both parties and the influence of special interests in Washington over decades.

Beware when any politician advocates for "common sense" anything. Rarely does common sense enter into the equation, but the phrase sells. The Clean Air Act has become a nightmare that demonstrates exactly the wrong way to handle environmental issues.

Still, the thought that someone will be trying to cut down on job-killing regulation is comforting, if true. At least he recognizes the need. It seems unlikely to succeed in this administration with its proven anti-business orientation and appointees. I do not see Mr. Obama or his appointees as having the track record or mindset to understand what regulation is truly needed and what is not (especially the latter). For me, I will believe in success of the announced initiative only when I see it.

Herman Cain Announces Presidency Run

Herman Cain, former Godfather's Pizza CEO and now a talk radio host in Georgia, announced yesterday that he was forming a "Presidential Exploratory Committee."

I have a sense that this next crop of Presidential candidates will include some really good choices.  from what I know of Mr. Cain, he seems like one of the good ones.

Here is an excerpt from Mr. Cain's opinion piece in the Daily Caller today:

People often ask why I would consider a potential candidacy. After all, I have enjoyed a successful career as an executive of several major American corporations and host a popular radio talk show.

My answer! It’s not about me. It’s not about us. It’s about them.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/13/its-about-them/#ixzz1AvaGUHFD