Visit Counter

Monday, January 27, 2014

Barry's upcoming SOTU

I guess he can speak about all his accomplishments. 

Like the first president to get downgraded.

Like how he took a $10.6 trillion debt he promised to cut in half and raised it to $17 trillion.

Like how he pledged to close down Gitmo within a year (Glad he failed).

Like addition through subtraction… since Obamacare… there are more people without insurance then before the plan was enacted.

Like the Benghazi and IRS scandals he was, "going to get to the bottom of it"... so far the only person arrested was a guy who shot a video.

Like when he told us the NSA is not spying on Americans.

And these are just a few. He has lied to the American people so many times I don't how anyone could trust him anymore... even those who voted for him! I'll be watching for his last hurrah. How he's going to fix "our broken immigration system" How? Amnesty. How does one reward those who break the law? Grant them your blessing. I'm sure he'll make a case on how he's going to seal the border. (That's just until Lib's think they'll need another injection of more Democrats) Reagan was told the same pack of lies. Twenty 20 years from now we'll be facing the same problem. 

But... at least Barry will get the support of McCain and Grahamnesty.

Obama's speech: Big media buildup, little lasting impact

Oct. 25, 2013: President Obama speaks at Pathways in Technology Early College High School in the Brooklyn borough of New York.AP

Quick: What did Barack Obama say in last year's State of the Union?

It's not your fault if you can't remember, and it's not necessarily the president's, either.

Nor is Tuesday's address, as Obama begins his sixth year in office, likely to be one for the history books. As he noted in a New Yorker interview, he's overexposed.

The SOTU has become one of the great media rituals, training a bright spotlight on the annual speech to Congress, but creating a story line that fades within a day or two.

Part of this is the nature of the beast. The speeches have become glorified laundry lists with a few catch phrases thrown in. Many of the proposals are destined to go nowhere; others have already been ignored by Congress.

But the media go into full battle-dress mode for the Washington event: Live coverage, plenty of punditry, post-game analysis, insta-polls. The president calls in the big network and cable anchors for an off-the-record lunch that day, providing background and spin about the speech.

The process begins with a series of calculated administration leaks designed to stoke interest in the speech and mollify certain constituency groups.

As if on cue, Sunday's New York Times had unnamed aides conveying that Obama "will present a blueprint for 'a year of action' on issues like income inequality and the environment that bypasses Congress and exercises his authority to the maximum extent.

"Mr. Obama will still use the speech to push for an immigration overhaul, with aides guardedly optimistic that he may reach a compromise with Republicans."

Jay Carney was on "This Week" and Dan Pfieffer on "Fox News Sunday" as well as "State of the Union" talking up the speech. Reuters has Pfeiffer saying that "President Barack Obama will announce a new plan next week to help Americans who continue to struggle to find jobs even as the economy recovers from recession."

In recent years, the opposition response has become a bigger deal. The Tea Party started offering a separate rebuttal.

On Tuesday, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers delivers the GOP response. Sen. Mike Lee is the Tea Party spokesman. But Rand Paul — who delivered last year's Tea Party response — is promoting his own speech, according to Politico. It's all about grabbing airtime.

But is there any lasting benefit? What tends to be remembered are off-script moments. Bill Clinton's split-screen speech on the night of the O.J. verdict. Samuel Alito mouthing "not true" during an Obama speech. Marco Rubio's water bottle.

So my question about Obama's 2013 address? He called for gun control legislation. He urged a rise in the minimum wage. Oh, and his big-ticket item for the year was immigration reform. None of which happened. Which is why his aides are carefully lowering expectations for Tuesday's speech.


Saturday, January 25, 2014

The MSM at its finest

Benghazi vs. Bridgegate: Media coverage sparks debate

Four dead vs a traffic jam… compare the content and the tone of the reporting.

(If video won't load click post title)

Video 63


Saturday, January 18, 2014

A heart touching story

A little Muslim kid, crying, can't find his mother in the supermarket. 

The store attendant says "what does your mother look like?"

The kids says...  "I have no f--king idea!"


Socialism vs Racism

A young black kid asks his mother, "Mama, what is Socialism and what is Racism?"

"Well, Child,... Socialism is when white folks work every day so we can get all our benefits, you know... like free cell phones for each family member, rent subsidy, food stamps, free healthcare, utility subsidy, and on and on, know. That's Socialism."

"But Mama, don't the white people get pissed off about that?"

"Sure they do Honey. That's called Racism!" 


Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Bet You Didn't Know This!

Another revelation…this one truly astounding! I vividly remember the day the Supremes declaring ObamaCare constitutional and dumbfounded to learn Roberts (a Bush appointee) was the deciding vote. I didn't know about this adoption fiasco but it sure as hell answers a lot of questions for me when I said he was the one guy who could have put a stop to ObamaCare. Barry said it wasn't a tax, Roberts said it was. Can't have it both ways.  There is so much corruption in our government my head is spinning like a top.

I wonder if this will get as much play as orange cones on the GW bridge?

 Ed Kilbane
Senior National Correspondent

Why John Roberts (Likely) Is Protecting Obamacare…

Photo credit: terrellaftermath

On Monday, without comment (because he could not make a coherent one), Chief Justice John Roberts denied a request by the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons and the Alliance for Natural Health USA for a stay in the implementation of Obamacare. The groups had made their application last Friday, arguing that since the bill had been declared a tax by the Supreme Court (with Justice Roberts himself the deciding vote), and it had originated in the Senate (the Constitution says revenue bills may not originate), the law was therefore unconstitutional; and implementation of Obamacare should at least be stayed pending further examination.

While there are other minor issues attached to the application that were also not addressed, the truth of the matter is clear: John Roberts will never do anything to derail Obamacare, no matter what arguments against it are brought before him.

There is very good reason to believe that regardless of the media’s skillful smothering of the story, John Roberts is being blackmailed to make certain Obamacare never falls in a Supreme Court case. The basis of this charge surrounds the fact that a series of strange (and probably felonious) acts are attached to the adoption of his two children.

In 2005, when they thought they were doing the Democrats’ bidding, the New York Times dug into apparently easily accessible records and found that the children Roberts and his wife adopted in “South America” started life as Irish citizens. This is a red flag. The laws of Ireland regarding adoptions are very clear: adoptions by non-citizens are prohibited, as are private adoptions.

Apparently, when the Democrats realized they could control a Supreme Court Justice’s vote through blackmail over his having committed a number of international crimes, the Times pulled back and dropped its investigation. The Democrat paper of record pulled back because it didn’t want to “ break the seal of an adoption case” – as if violating laws ever means anything to Democrats in their quest for power. Keep in mind Barack Obama’s violation of his opponents’ “sealed” divorce records propelled him to a US Senate seat.

What does the Roberts problem mean for the average American who looks to Washington for relief from Democrat oppression? It means we won’t be getting any relief from the Roberts Court, period.


Thursday, January 9, 2014

BridgeGate Over Troubled Water

BridgeGate? Where were they (MSM) during the Benghazi, F&F, IRS, DOJ wiretapping, scandals?

Christie is being accused of using a government agency for his own political gain, or as they like to say... political retribution. Lets see... didn't Barry do that with the IRS targeting conservatives? 

For starters how do you compare lane closures with 4 dead Americans in Benghazi, and 2 more in F&F, not to mention countless Mexicans?

I watched Christie’s press conference. I must say I have new respect for the guy that I don’t always agree with. The way he handled this situation just cemented his nomination for POTUS in my opinion. To bad the attack dog media doesn’t go after “ lying milk toast Barry” and his plethora of scandals with the same zeal.

BTW...If this same type of situation occurred in Mississippi we would never have heard a word about it.

Typical article...  this one from the dogs at the Huff Post


To some, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is a ballsy, straight-shootin', independent man-of-the-people. To others, he's an arrogant, bullying, typically self-serving politician. And now he's embroiled in a scandal which seems to be proving the latter group right. Welcome to BridgeGate.

While running for re-election this past fall Christie sought the endorsement of Fort Lee's Democratic Mayor Mark Sokoloch, a public thumbs up he eventually did not receive. In retaliation, it's alleged that top officials in the Republican governor's administration flexed its muscle last September in getting lanes closed on the George Washington Bridge to make Sokoloch's political life miserable.

"Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee," wrote Bridget Anne Kelly, Christie's deputy chief of staff, in an email to David Wildstein of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which runs the bridge. Wildstein also happens to be an old high school chum of Christie's.

It didn't matter that people might be sick and/or dying in ambulances stuck in that gridlock. Or that school buses full of kids might be getting to school late."They are the children of Buono voters," Mr. Wildstein wrote, referring to Christie's Democratic opponent Barbara Buono.

This is the kind of brutal payback crap that's straight out of The Sopranos. And to many, it's no surprise. Many astute analysts have just been waiting for the Christie shoe to drop. For the myth to be shattered. For the skeletons to come crashing out of the closet. Welcome to BridgeGate.

Back in November, in his very blue state of New Jersey, Christie won a resounding victory, bringing into his big tent not just conservatives but many Democrats, independents, women, Hispanics, blacks and just about everyone else. He was immediately anointed The Great Republican Hope. The sanecandidate in a sea of Tea Party crackpots. It was as if the 2016 primaries were already over and Christie was the GOP's man to challenge the likely Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton.

But the notion that he was a virtual shoe-in for the Republican presidential nomination was largely based on the belief that the GOP, hijacked by the Tea Party, has swung so dangerously to the right, resulting in humiliating defeat in election after election, that the party and it's voters have finally learned their lesson. The problem with that contention is that ideology and wishful thinking always trumps logic, rational thinking and pragmatism.

What got lost in all the euphoria were three critical factors. First, New Jersey is not Kansas. Or Ohio. Or Iowa. Or the Bible Belt or Rust Belt or the Plains. Like Vegas, what happens in Jersey often stays in Jersey. The big question was how this brash, outspoken, obese, larger-than-life Northeastern politician would play in middle-America.

Next, Christie's no angel. There's been much speculation over the years of impropriety on many levels, from budget chicanery to abuses of power. There's no vetting process more intense and invasive than that of a presidential candidate. Could he survive this level of scrutiny?

Lastly, Christie's big win in November meant little in terms of proving his inevitability. Two years in politics is an eternity, and an awful lot of really bad stuff can surface in that period, especially when every aspect of one's personal and public life is put under a microscope. Welcome to BridgeGate.

Was Christie ever truly a viable GOP presidential candidate? Would he be able to overcome the weight issue? The last obese U.S. president was William Howard Taft over 100 years ago... before television and YouTube.

Would Christie be able to withstand a virtually non-stop deep-dive into his closet? Would Christie's record and reputation eventually catch up with him and burst his mythical bubble?

Welcome to Bridgegate. I think we might have our answer....