Saturday, August 17, 2013

You're Doing It Right, Kansas

This is priceless. Eric "Gunrunner" Holder wrote a nasty letter to the state of Kansas to try to intimidate the state with regard to its protection of its citizens' 2nd Amendment rights.  The State of Kansas responded.  Kris Kobach apparently agrees with me about What Congress Cannot Do.

Click here to get better resolution.

More Fun With Liberal Logic

On September 11, 2012, the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was attacked by over 125 masked terrorists. They were armed with rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), hand grenades, AK-47 and FN F2000 assault rifles, mortars, and heavy machine guns and artillery mounted on gun trucks.

Four Americans died in the attack: Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, former US Navy SEALs who were employed as security personnel.

The Obama administration's response to this tragedy formed the basis of what is now known as the Benghazi Scandal. Here's a brief summary of the points that make this a scandal:

  1. The Obama administration's repeated insistence that this was not a terrorist attack but rather a protest against a YouTube video.  Uh, so the fact that occurred on September 11th is a mere coincidence? These were just a group of regular guys, kicking back, playing XBox and watching YouTube videos when suddenly they saw one they didn't like. And so, all 125 of them piled into their military vehicles with the heavy weapons apparently all Libyans possess and roared off to the consulate to express their displeasure? Seriously, could you make up a lamer story? The only thing I can think of is "a herd of unicorns attacked the embassy!"  Good thing I don't work for Obama- they would have run with that one.
  2. It took President Obama a full two weeks to even call it an act of terror, a fact Candidate Romney called him on during the debate. Obama tried to claim he called it such the same day, but fact checkers swiftly unraveled the President's lie.
  3. The Obama Administration made a concerted effort to cover up what happened in Benghazi.  At first this was just exposed by conservative news sites like Alex Jones' InfoWars and Newsmax but now even HuffPo and CNN are blowing the whistle. And yet, Obama insists this is a "phony scandal."  Which brings us to the purpose of this post.
One of Obama's millions of brownshirted minions produced this graphic:

Wow, what hypocrites those Republicans are!  Sixty dead and they never mention that as a scandal!

Turns out there's a good reason for that. See, these liberals trot out these "facts" and then really hope everyone is too lazy to actually research it. Unfortunately for them, conservatives aren't as lazy as the pot-smoking OWS Occutards of which the Democrats are belatedly so ashamed. Let's go through the whole list.

January 22, 2002 US Consulate in Kolkata: First of all, it's a flat out lie that the US Consulate was attacked. What was actually attacked was an "American Cultural Center" consisting of a library, an office, and a cultural wing.  And the five dead?  Four local cops and one security guard.  Not a single American and certainly none of the embassy staff.  People get mugged and even murdered near the UN headquarters in New York all the time. Should that be a scandal for the Irish government? The Brazilian?  Every country that's a member of the UN?

June 14, 2002 US Consulate in Karachi: A truck bomb was set off outside the US Consulate. Again, no consulate staff were harmed, only locals. And here's a neat bit of liberal logic: The suicide bomber driving the truck is one of the 12 dead!

Feb 28, 2003 US Embassy in Islamabad: Yet another flat-out lie. It was the embassy in Karachi that had two Pakistani police officers shot by gunmen in the street outside. Once again, no staff at the consulate were harmed and this appears to be unrelated local street crime.

June 30, 2004 US Embassy in Tashkent: Same old story- happened outside the embassy, and the two dead were local security guards.  No embassy staff harmed.

Dec 6, 2004 US Compound in Saudi Arabia: Yet another example of liberals counting the attackers among the dead and blaming Bush for it.  Yet another example of a consulate that was not breached and of no Americans being killed.

September 12, 2006 US Embassy in Syria: "Three gunmen and a Syrian security guard were killed in a foiled attack on the U.S. embassy."  Once again, embassy never breached, no Americans harmed, and the attackers are counted by the liberals as part of the "four dead!"

March 18, 2008 US Embassy in Yemen: A group of local doofuses got ahold of a mortar launcher, completely missed the US Embassy, and bombed a nearby girl's school.  Embassy staff had no idea they were under attack. They may have looked out the window and said "now that's a war on women!"

July 9, 2008 US Consulate in Istanbul: I'm starting to get tired of typing "consulate not breached/no Americans harmed/attackers counted by liberals among the honored dead." You're probably getting tired of reading it. Maybe I should start thinking of an acronym or a pictogram to convey this all-too-common information.

Sept 17, 2008 US Embassy in Yemen: Thankfully, we're at the end of the list.  I've decided to use cut 'n' paste to convey "consulate not breached/no Americans harmed/attackers counted by liberals among the honored dead."

So, sixty dead.  Why no "Republican outrage?"  Because this is nine examples of US security working.  Of no Americans being harmed.  Of a President quite rightfully labelling them as acts of terrorism.  And of no governmental coverups, just a relentless search for those responsible.  The exact opposite of what happened in Benghazi.

This graphic in fact shows, for all to see, how George W. Bush was a far better president than the current liar-in-chief.

Friday, August 9, 2013

Liberal Myth versus Liberal Reality

Über-liberal Seth McFarlane trotted this out in his propaganda/child-indoctrination cartoon Family Guy:

But, of course, here's what's really going on at the TSA:

On September 11, 2001 nineteen muslim terrorists crashed airplanes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, killing thousands of innocent Americans.  And now, twelve years later, the liberal's "multicultural diversity" has these same people performing cavity searches on nuns. While at the same time they tell the lie that we're still an overtly racist "whites only" society.

Wake up America.

Thursday, August 8, 2013

Lies, Damn Lies, And Liberal Logic

While the rest of us are out working jobs to pay taxes, millions of indoctrinated liberal children sit unemployed in their parent's basement and flood the Internet with liberal propaganda.

The other day I came across this on the Craigslist Joke Forum:

Four different examples of how "Conservative logic is illogical."  Let's go through them starting at the top left.

Conservatives have the temerity to claim that life is precious.  Which, as every liberal knows, isn't true.  Meat is murder but never abortion.  Life ceases to be precious when a woman chooses it not to be.  But let's look at the photo to the right of the fetus.  What is that? Thank goodness for Google Image search. Turns out it's ostensibly a picture of a homeless child. Uh, so conservatives are somehow to blame for the homeless?  Then why did the U.S. Conference of mayors say that "homelessness continues to surge under Obama."  This is fueled largely by Obama's jobless recovery which leaves the 18 - 24 age group at a 13.1% unemployment rate.  But the picture above is not of an 18 - 24 year old, it's of what appears to be a 12-year old boy.  And I gotta call BS on that.  Every city, every county, every state in America has a Department of Family Services.  Any "homeless" child can call 911 and be in foster care that same day.  I did once see a child who claimed to be homeless in a store parking lot.  I was on the phone to the authorities immediately and they were there within minutes.  Turned out she was hustling money for her drug-addict mom (hey, it's woman's right to choose what to do with her child, right?)  That girl was off the streets and being cared for immediately.

Let's move on to top right.  On the left is a picture of a Tea Party rally.  On the right is a photo of the UC Davis pepper spray incident in which a few people at a Occupy Wall Street protest were pepper sprayed by a campus police officer.  First question, how the heck are conservatives to blame for this?  UC Davis, like most universities, is a hotbed of liberalism. That cop was hired by liberals, and served under the authority of a liberal administration. Why didn't they give the order to treat the Occutards nicer? Maybe for the same reason the ultra-liberal City of Los Angeles evicted them from City Hall.

But let's also talk about the notion "...unless you say something we don't like."  Can anyone tell me what the OWS Occutards had to say?  What was their point?  They themselves were certainly never able to state a point when interviewed by the media. It seemed to be nothing more than a bunch of lazy, low intelligence, out-of-work hippie stoners camping out on public property and making a tremendous mess for others to clean up.

In fact, it's the liberals who actively suppress any speech they disagree with. Barack Obama proved this by ordering the IRS to target conservative groups.

In the bottom left we have a fine upstanding Democrat doing what they do best, smoking a joint. Next to this liberal patriot is a picture of Ken Lewis, the former CEO of Bank of America, with the caption "...stealing billions gets you a bonus." First of all, that's an outright lie.  As liberal bastion HuffPo reported Ken Lewis received no salary and no bonus for his last year of employment. But let's talk about those "stolen" billions. Who was it that authorized the bailout of BofA? Why, of course, it was Barack Obama and the (then) Democrat-controlled Senate and House of Representatives. So... how is this in any way possibly a conservative thing?  Seems like those two pictures go together perfectly; the Dems smoked some pot and then handed out tens of billions of taxpayer money. Why not? No skin off their nose. They were squandering other people's money.

Finally in the bottom right we have a picture of a rally against Obamacare.  And beside it... a picture of a rally against Obamacare.  So, where's the contradiction? I guess this is why the caption admonishes "don't even try to figure it out."

Entitlement?  But, that's a liberal claim as in "everyone's entitled to healthcare."  This is the Democrats excuse for having the government destroy healthcare for everyone.  Seriously, can someone please name for me anything the government has taken over and not made much worse?  From education to the environment to charity to... pretty much everything the Federal government does is a disaster.  These are the people who tell the TSA to molest children in wheelchairs while doing nothing to stop the Boston Marathon bombing or Benghazi.  The people who so vigorously oppose American energy independence by blocking the Keystone pipeline so that instead we can continue paying billions per year to OPEC countries who funnel the money to Hamas and Al Qaeda.

But the bottom line is that 54% of Americans oppose Obamacare.  And yet, this is somehow an example of "conservative logic" gone wrong.  With liberal logic, ignoring the will of the people makes more sense.  Because then, when everyone is subjected to the abject misery of government healthcare, the liberals will use similar outright lying graphics to show how Obamacare was just another Conservative Plot and George Bush is to blame.

Tuesday, August 6, 2013

Attack of the Drones

At least two of the recent Two Worlds movies, Total Recall and Elysium, have involved the idea of evil regimes conveniently using robots to subdue humanity.  If all the people are oppressed, why trouble yourself indoctrinating soldiers when you can manufacture an army that is troubled by conflicts of loyalty and remorse?   The idea is a natural fusion of the idea of the Imperial Stormtrooper with the Terminator.  (Curiously, the robot in the old sci-fi movie Metropolis is not used as an instrument of war, but of corruption.)  Speaking of Star Wars, let's not forget Phantom Menace, which some have claimed was given anti-Bush and/or anti-conservative undertones.

Hmmm, robots used by collectivist totalitarian regimes to keep the masses in check.

There's something very messy about war, and while it's horrible, it's appropriate that human beings are on the field seeing it and knowing it.  Michael Medved, in his autobiographical Right Turns, writes about his front row seat in the pacifism movement of the 1960s/70s and how the student activism against the Vietnam War subsided when the rules of the draft changed to not terrify them so much.  Their idealism about making the world a better place went out the window when they didn't feel personally endangered, revealing much of the altruistic sanctimony as mere self-interest.

Now that more soldiers have come home from the Middle East (the end of the Wars goes on and on) the Wars have become more and more automated.  George Bush became the devil over the Wars in the Middle East, and the sainted Obama continued prosecuting the war with drones, the collateral damage to women and children due to increased drone use was largely ignored by the news and media.  The Bush was administration reviled for making rules for playing rough in the War on Terror and for not treating foreign terrorist with the rights of American citizens, while the Obama administration largely given a pass for secret kill lists, secret kill list criteria, secret interpretations of the Patriot Act, and "legal regimes" for indefinite detainment.  (Then again, do you really care what he's doing as long as he keeps dishing out "free" stuff for your out of his secret stash?) Claiming to be transparent but changing the rules to give itself discretion over how much sunlight is used to disinfect, waging a war against whistleblowers, this administration is almost scary, but, well gosh, look how intelligent Mr. President sounds and look at that nice paternal smile he gives us...

Hey, soldiers are coming home.  So forget about what's happening overseas.  Show's over, folks.  Nothing to see here.  Move along.

At least two recent movies feature some kind of superman taking out a drone:  The Bourne Legacy and the iconic Man of Steel.  I think we're supposed to relate to these triumphs of an individual spirit over an inhuman, mechanistic government.  But this is just the Hollywood story machine acknowledging our deep-seated fears.

Boston Dynamics' ATLAS
Meanwhile the present American regime keeps pushing the envelope in automating the surveillance and policing of our own people, even as the media and Tinseltown keep selling this very trend as a uniquely conservative policy.   How progressives intend to regulate our lives without being able to police our lives seems to be ignored for the most part.

The armed forces continues to become more and more automated.  After all, as the movie White House Down tries to convince us, armies made up of actual humans are a threat to Pres. Obama.  I mean, if most soldiers were liberal Democrats,  Al Gore might have tried to get their votes counted in 2000.  Time to replace these people with machines.  Soon we'll be able to sit down and watch tv and forget that war has been automated.  We can go on watching our favorite tv shows until we one day find that our human militias and our native soldiers all together are no match for the automated machines of war.  A government that doesn't want its people dictating the rules any more, will have a new option at its disposal.  The terrorist threat has already been redefined as people that are opposed to Big Government.  Stooges in the media immediately tried to sell the Boston bombing as a probable conservative attack.  Now liberal news outlets are trying to redefine Tamerlan Tsarnaev as a conservative.

Sleep well tonight.

Friday, August 2, 2013

Do Not Look At The Black Racism Behind The Curtain

In the midst of all this Treyvon Martin and Paula Deen epidemic racism scare, I read some article somewhere in which a person repeated the familiar claim that, and as I recall he/she actually stated it in these words, that blacks were unable to be racist.  Black people are incapable of racism, or so the claim goes, because racism, by definition, I assume they mean the definition used by critical race theorists like Obama hero Derrick Bell.

Of course, I know some Caucasian people, who are not racist, but who grew up as the minority in their communities.  To them, all this talk about white power structures appears contrived and absurd.  Racism is racism to these deluded (or so Derrick Bell would call them) people who think that 10 black kids surrounding an Asian kid to bully him/her is racism, not an expression of righteous anger for being so much worse off in America (!?).

Reginald Denny atones for the sins of Los Angeles
Of course, to Derrick Bell and others, these white people are racists too, and they too are unable to work out their salvation until they first confess their sins of being part of the great white power monopoly, let alone start making amends by imprisoning George Zimmerman for following and reporting more young black males than young white males.

Didn't this former Obama supporter (i.e. Zimmerman) ever hear of quotas? Just because most of the crimes in his area are committed by young hoodie-wearing black males who seem to have no curfew, he obviously should have been following and reporting just as many young white males. Of course, when that poor sap looks to gun down a black kid in cold blood, he first calls the police to let him know what he's doing, and then he lets himself get jumped and beaten up before he actually follows through on his evil plan-- or was it his evil plan to go scott-free by almost getting beaten unconscious before finally pulling the trigger?  He's obviously not that good at this whole evil racism thing.  And nobody's talking about how obviously sexist he is mainly following males, now that we've established how the actual crime demographics are unimportant.

Anyway, after being confronted with this courageous definition of racism that lets all black people off the hook of personal responsibility in a way that would have made Martin Luther King throw up, I couldn't help wonder about how the thoughtful men like Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams and Larry Elder -- who don't judge how racist someone is by the color of their skin, but who happen also to be black -- figure into this theory of racism.  According to that one commentator's definition, they can't be racist or do racist things because they are black.  Yet, they are supporting the "power structure" of racism with ideas that allegedly arise from white racism.  A paradox.  Al Sharpton and his groupies would probably say they have ceased to be black.  Judging by the way the black leftist politico-industrial complex labels men like this and like Clarence Thomas "Uncle Toms," one imagines that the Samuel Jackson character in Django Unchained was meant to represent these "traitors" to the Black Left's great crusade against color-blindness.

What would they say about a black leader that said:
"Do you know that Negroes are 10 percent of the population of St. Louis and are responsible for 58% of its crimes? We've got to face that. And we've got to do something about our moral standards.  We know that there are many things wrong in the white world, but there are many things wrong in the black world, too. We can't keep on blaming the white man. There are things we must do for ourselves."
This was said by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr in 1961.