Archive for the ‘News’ Category

Non compos mentos, or stupid is as stupid does? Mexico Mayors “Blame America First”

October 2, 2010

Well, just when you think you have heard just about everything, Fox News reports that “A coalition of Mexican mayors has asked the United States to stop deporting illegal immigrants who have been convicted of serious crimes in the U.S. to Mexican border cities, saying the deportations are contributing to Mexican border violence.”

Apparently, the mayor of Juarez — the world’s most murder-plagued city, across the border from low-crime El Paso where Americans are able to buy and carry guns for protection — said “that of the 80,000 people deported to Juarez in the past three years, 28,000 had U.S. criminal records — including 7,000 convicted rapists and 2,000 convicted murderers.”

This, on the heels of a CNN story noting that Mexico’s foreign minister, Patricia Espinosa, has claimed that violence in the United States is not related to illegal Mexican immigrants, but that Mexico’s violence is caused by guns smuggled into Mexico from the United States.

Predisposed to spinning the news in favor of gun control, CNN attempted to bolster Espinosa’s claim by quoting a former Carter Administration staffer to the effect that, as CNN put it, “more than 90 percent of weapons in Mexico come from the United States.”

SOURCE

MAIG Mimics Brady Campaign’s Misuse Of Tracing Data

October 2, 2010

This week, Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) released a report, similar to earlier efforts by the Brady Campaign, claiming that guns originally sold in states that don’t have the gun control laws that MAIG likes are more likely to end up “recovered in out-of-state crimes.”

As you probably have already deduced, MAIG’s conclusions, like Brady’s, are based entirely upon BATFE firearm tracing statistics, which BATFE and the Congressional Research Service have repeatedly said should not be used to reach broad conclusions about criminal activity with guns.

BATFE says, for example, “Not all firearms used in crimes are traced and not all firearms traced are used in crime. Firearms selected for tracing aren’t chosen for purposes of determining which types, makes or models of firearms are used for illicit purposes. The firearms selected don’t constitute a random sample and should not be considered representative of the larger universe of all firearms used by criminals, or any subset of that universe. . . .[S]ources reported for firearms traced do not necessarily represent the sources or methods by which firearms in general are acquired for use in crime.”

Of course, for many years on many issues — “assault weapons,” “Saturday Night Specials,” lawsuits against gun manufacturers and dealers, and the list goes on — anti-gun groups have resorted to tracing data because crime and other reliable data have not supported their arguments. In this instance, for example, MAIG contends that illegal acquisition of firearms is associated with 10 specific state-level gun laws. But, the 10 laws — some of which are already in effect at the federal level — don’t correlate to state total violent crime rates. And, the 10 states with the highest violent crime rates, and the 10 states with the lowest rates, both have an average of two of the 10 gun laws.

Nor is there a correlation between the states’ violent crime and murder rates, and what MAIG calls their “export-import ratios” — the relationships between the numbers of traced guns that come into the states from other states, and the number of traced guns that eventually go from the states to other states. In fact, each of the 10 states that MAIG singles out for derision, for not having the 10 laws it favors, has a lower percentage of guns sold in the state later traced by BATFE, as compared to national figures.

A number of other factors underscore the limitations inherent in using tracing data in the first place. For example, while BATFE takes the position that illegal trafficking is more likely indicated when firearms are traced within two years of their original sale, the average interim period on traced guns nationally is 11 years. BATFE often does not even attempt traces on older guns, believing they would be unsuccessful or fail to reveal evidence of illegal trafficking. As MAIG pointed out, BATFE was not able to complete traces on 61 percent of the guns for which traces were submitted by law enforcement agencies.

Furthermore, while MAIG’s whole premise concerns interstate trafficking of guns, 70 percent of guns that BATFE traces were recovered by the police in the same state in which they were originally sold.

Of course, no comment on the lack of correlation between tracing and violent crime would be complete without mentioning that the vast majority of traced guns have not been used to commit violent crimes, but were rather taken into custody by police for possession and other less serious offenses.

Finally, when guns do cross state lines, it is not necessarily because they were illegally trafficked. People move across state lines for a variety of reasons, such as to take a new job, to be nearer family members, or to be in an area with warmer weather and/or a lower cost of living. And, a gun owner may sell a firearm to any dealer anywhere in the country, because the prohibition on interstate sales of firearms only applies to sales between two non-licensed individuals.

Thus, not by coincidence, guns that are recovered in one state, but originally sold in other states, typically come from neighboring states. For example, “out-of-state” guns recovered in Kentucky most commonly come from Indiana, Ohio and Tennessee. Those recovered in Ohio typically come from Kentucky, West Virginia and Indiana. And so on.

MAIG’s new “trafficking” report breaks no new ground. And, coming on the heels of FBI data showing violent crime at a 35-year low, it fails to make even a superficial case for gun control. But, considering MAIG’s support of microstamping and restrictions on concealed carry, its efforts to push Sen. Frank Lautenberg’s horrendous “terror watchlist” and “gun show” bills, and its penchant for blaming U.S. gun laws for Mexico’s ongoing war with drug cartels, the new report makes clear that the group’s leader, Michael Bloomberg, intends for it to remain the most aggressive and highly visible threat to the Second Amendment in the near term.

SOURCE

The opposition to our Health Care Choice Amendment – Amendment 63?

October 2, 2010

What follows was edited do to late posting, and a misspell! Sorry Jon!~ 🙂

Strange Anti-Health Care Choice Bedfellows: Who’s been funding the opposition to our Health Care Choice Amendment – Amendment 63? 90% of their funding comes from Washington, DC and most of that from the unions. The SEIU, the government workers union, the NEA, and the AFL-CIO are the biggest contributors by far. Good to know that the national teachers union realizes fighting Health Care Choice in Colorado is good for, um, education? I guess if educational choice is bad for kids, health care choice would be too.

Watch my latest health care debate on TV tonight! I will be on Colorado Public Television channel 12 right after my own show Devils Advocate ends to debate our right to health care choice initiative – Amendment 63. The debate is airing on “Colorado Decides 2010” at 9pm. I will be debating Edie Sonn, Director of the Colorado Medical Society who happens to oppose the repeal of Obama Care. (Spoiler alert: the bald guy wins).

Last week’s health care choice debate here: Rocky Mountain PBS (channel 6) aired a debate I had with T.R. Reid about Amendment 63 – Colorado’s Right to Health Care Choice last week. Did I mention my opponent T.R. is a Princeton-educated sycophant of collective health care? He was the “reporter” who did that completely unbiased PBS Frontline report on how every other country is the world has a better health care system than the US. Yeah… so check out the debate online here.

Great New Education Movie! Great New Education Movie! The school system is failing our kids on a massive scale, that much is evident. But are enough people motivated to take the right kind of action and fix it? The new movie “Waiting for Superman” should open many eyes with the story of five inner-city kids whose lives hang in the balance of a charter school lottery. Perhaps that’s why the unions and status quo interest groups have attacked the movie. Waiting for Superman opened nationally this past Friday, but mark your calendars for the October 15 Colorado premiere. Until then, check out little Eddie’s post for more information and a look at the theatrical trailer.

How to Save a Billion Dollars: Colorado taxpayers are on the hook for more than $1 billion in unfunded liabilities incurred in the defined benefit retiree health plan administered by the Public Employee Retirement Association (PERA). An additional $79 million in unfunded liabilities was incurred in 2008. These are just some of the findings by Independence Institute Senior Fellow Barry Poulson in his potent new issue paper, “How to Save a Billion Dollars in Other Post Employment Benenfit Costs.” In it, Barry lays out the looming fiscal crisis driven by, among other things, flawed actuarial assumptions by PERA, and outrageously optimistic assumptions (which have failed to be realized) about the rate of return on assets held in the Health Care Trust Fund. If saving a billion dollars seems like pie in the sky to you now, give Barry’s paper a shot and find out how it can be done.

PJ O’Rourke Book Signing Event! Because PJ was so much fun last year for our annual Founders Night, we decided to bring him back for an event at Jackson’s Bar and Grill in LoDo on Monday, October 4th from 6 to 8pm. He will be signing copies of his book “Don’t Vote, It Just Encourages the Bastards.” If you’d like to join us, RSVP to Mary MacFarlane by calling us at 303.279.6536 or emailing Mary at mary@i2i.org.

The Right to Earn a Living Event: The Independence Institute, Liberty on the Rocks, and the CATO Institute invite you to join us for an evening with Timothy Sandefur, Adjunct Scholar at the CATO Institute and Principal Attorney – Pacific Research Institute for a book signing of “The Right to Earn a Living.” We’ll be having the event at our Independence Institute offices in Golden on Thursday, October 7th at 5:30pm. If you’d like to join us, RSVP to Mary MacFarlane by calling us at 303.279.6536 or emailing Mary at mary@i2i.org.

Must see TV: What’s it like for Republicans running for Congress against incumbent Democrats in the age of Obama and a Democratic majority? To find out, tune in to Devil’s Advocate this Friday as I am joined by Colorado Republican candidates for Congress Ryan Frazier, Cory Gardner, Mike Fallon and Stephen Bailey. That’s TONIGHT, October 1st at 8:30 PM on Colorado Public Television 12. Re-broadcast the following Monday at 1:30 PM. And remember to stay tuned right after Devil’s Advocate for my debate over the Health Care Choice Amendment.

Must hear podcast: Education policy analyst Ben DeGrow deconstructs the $10 billion Edujobs bailout passed by Congress in August, noting that the policy not only seriously overestimated the need to curb teacher layoffs and ignored other available solutions but also discriminated against charter schools. It remains unclear exactly when and how Colorado school districts will use the funds to hire and rehire employees. Listen to this podcast on iVoices.org.

Perspective: In this week’s op-ed, Linda Gorman stresses the importance of Amendment 63 – the Right to Health Care Choice – ability to protect Colorado citizens from the mandates found in Obama Care. Colorado citizens already face dozens of mandates imposed by our state, the last thing we need is the grandaddy of all mandates to buy a health insurance, whether we like it or not, coming down from the federal government. Read here as Linda Gorman explains how Amendment 63 will stop DC.

Until next week…

Straight on

Jon Caldara

GOA RATINGS ARE IN

October 1, 2010

Gun Owners of America has released it’s ratings for the upcoming election. I found it interesting that they gave no endorsement for the Wyoming Governors race. Could that be because of the pitiful choices we have in the cowboy state? Read about that HERE.

GOA Congressional Ratings are Now Posted on the Web
— Time for fall cleaning of House and Senate!

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Thursday, September 30, 2010

With one of the biggest elections of our lifetimes only a month away, Gun Owners of America has now released its Congressional Ratings for the House and Senate.

Democrats have taken a radical turn to the left under the leadership of liberal anti-gunners like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama, and the electorate is ready to make a correction.

There is no doubt that the country is at a crossroads, with America’s Constitutional Republic hanging in the balance.

So the GOA Rating Guide is your tool for cutting through the bull that candidates are throwing at you during this election season.

Candidates who have established a voting record, either in the office for which they are running or in another elected office, are evaluated primarily on the basis of that voting record.

If an incumbent or challenger has not established a voting record or demonstrated his or her position in some other way, that candidate is evaluated on the basis of his or her responses to the GOA 2010 Federal Candidate Questionnaire.

You can go to http://gunowners.org/2010-candidate-ratings-guide.htm to see the ratings of every candidate on Second Amendment issues.

For 20 years, GOA has been the only gun group publishing an open-source national rating for gun owners to use. Our rating has been so devastating in smoking out the anti-gun bias of phony politicians that the Brady Campaign even took us before an administrative court three years ago to try and silence us. They lost.

Current GOA members will be receiving a printed version of this rating, and they are encouraged to photocopy it and distribute it around to their pro-gun family, friends and clubs. This newsletter not only contains ratings for every House and Senate race in the country, it includes explosive evidence that more and more government shrinks are using the Veterans Disarmament Act to disarm our military veterans.

To start receiving your own copy of The Gun Owners newsletter, please go to http://gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm to join GOA today.

The November elections are an exciting, if not anxious, time for millions of concerned Americans. Again, GOA encourages all members and supporters to go online and look up their candidates in the GOA Rating Guide to see where they stand on the Second Amendment. Then, make sure you pass this link along on to fellow gun owners, shooting ranges and gun clubs.

We have been to the marches, rallies, and town hall meetings. Now, it is time for millions and millions of concerned gun rights supporters to make their way to the polls and make their voices heard on Election Day.

To learn more about candidates endorsed by Gun Owners of American Political Victory Fund, please visit www.goapvf.org.

Colorado tosses out it’s own Constitution!

September 30, 2010

Judge’s ruling against judicial reform group Clear The Bench Colorado undermines transparency, accountability in judicial retention vote

Judge’s ruling favors entrenched incumbents and big-money special interests

Contact Matt Arnold: director@clearthebenchcolorado.org or 303.995.5533.

Judge’s ruling against judicial reform group Clear The Bench Colorado undermines transparency, accountability in judicial retention vote

Judge’s ruling favors entrenched incumbents and big-money special interests

Late last Friday afternoon, Clear The Bench Colorado was stunned by the news that Administrative Law Judge Robert Spencer (as an executive branch employee, answerable to the governor and not subject to a retention vote himself) set aside the documentary evidence, testimony by Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold along with the Elections Division director at the Colorado Secretary of State’s office AND the clear letter of the law to rule in favor of “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do) in what the same judge had earlier characterized as a “frivolous, groundless, & vexatious” attack (er, “campaign finance complaint”).

Despite reliance on over a year’s worth of guidance issued by the office of Secretary of State (as confirmed in numerous documents and in witness testimony provided in hearings on 15 September) reached after “numerous” internal policy meetings and much research that Clear The Bench Colorado was, is, and ought to be properly characterized as an “Issue Committee” under campaign finance rules; CTBC’s scrupulous compliance with all rules, regulations, and reporting requirements for over a year; and dismissal of CEW’s earlier complaint as “frivolous, groundless, and vexatious” – the judge changed course and found for CEW in their latest round of attacks, changing the rules in the final quarter of play.

Changing the rules at such a late date – mail ballots go out at the same time Clear The Bench Colorado has been directed to re-file as a political committee – and in direct contravention of the guidance upon which CTBC has relied for well over a year makes a mockery of the process of citizen civic engagement.  As noted by Clear The Bench Colorado lead attorney Scott Gessler,

“That’s just crazy, that ruling,” said Gessler. “What kind of crazy system is that, when you can’t trust what the Secretary of State tells you? [This ruling] means you have to hire a lawyer to do anything- to get involved at all in the political process.” (Colorado Independent, 9/25/2010)

From documentation provided by the office of Secretary of State:

Colorado campaign finance and Judicial retention

While judges are considered “candidates” for the purpose of campaign finance law in Art. XXVIII Sec. 2(2) of the Colorado Constitution, the question of the retention of a judge is a yes-or-no question.  Therefore, a committee organized for the purpose of advocating the retention or removal of a judge is advocating for a yes or no vote on that question, rather than advocating for the election or defeat of a candidate.  A committee organized for such a purpose is akin to a committee advocating for (or against) the recall of an elected official, which would register an issue committee under 1-45-108(6), C.R.S.  To that end, a committee established for the purpose of supporting or opposing the retention of a judge or judges is properly registered as an issue committee for campaign finance purposes.  Such an entity would not be considered a political committee, because political committees are established for the purpose of “support[ing] or oppos[ing] the nomination or election of one or more candidates” (Art. XXVII Sec. 2(12)(a)).  [emphasis added]

Adding insult to injury, the judge’s ruling is granting “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do) more time to pay Clear The Bench Colorado what they’ve owed since July than time for Clear The Bench Colorado to re-file under “political committee” status or to appeal the ruling.

Naturally, Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do) is trumpeting the ruling as a great victory, declaring in a press release Friday:

“The law does not permit a wealthy few to unduly influence the judicial retention process through large contributions against judges and justices whose rulings they don’t like.  Ethics Watch prevailed today in setting precedent to keep big money out of judicial elections…”

Ironically, the ruling “achieves” the exact opposite: big-money special interests will now be more prone to attempt to influence judicial retention elections behind the scenes, using vehicles other than the open and accountable “Issue Committee” organization types such as Clear The Bench Colorado.

In fact, big-money legal establishment special-interest groups are already active this year in promoting a “retain” vote for judicial incumbents (including, prominently, the three Colorado Supreme Court justices appearing on the ballot this year).  They’re just significantly less honest about their intentions…

In a campaign that has been conspicuous for its LACK of big-money interests and “large contributions” (Toro is whining about two – TWO! – contributions exceeding $500), acting with complete transparency and absolute accountability to educate voters as to their right to hold judicial incumbents accountable for their performance in office, and to shed light on the records of judicial incumbents at the highest levels in order to provide substantive information on which voters can base an informed decision, CEW’s attacks (and the judge’s ruling in this case) do the Colorado electorate a great disservice.

CEW’s Toro is right about one thing: “Judges are… subject to corruption” via the influence of big-money special interests keeping them in office.

The expenditure of tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) by legal establishment special-interest groups comprised of the very lawyers appearing before the judges they are supporting in office is much more likely to exert “undue influence” and raise the potential for “quid pro quo” corruption.

The Colorado Bar Association (COBAR) has already spent over $50,000 this last month (by their own admission) joining three other legal establishment special-interest groups (likely spending a similar amount, although the exact figures have not been made publicly available) in mounting an “education” campaign (electioneering without using the “magic words” of “vote yes” or “vote NO“) to prop up incumbent judges and justices.   In one month alone, they’ve spent more than CTBC has in a year.  Combined, these special interests are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in television, radio, and print ads providing “nonpartisan information about the performance of judges seeking retention” that, curiously, ALL supports a “retain” vote.

Another effort, sponsored by prominent Democrat attorney Mark Grueskin and other partisan attorneys (the “Colorado Judiciary Project”) is also spending large amounts (again, because this group formed as a “social welfare organization” their expenditures are NOT publicly available) supporting the judicial incumbents before whom they argue cases.  Conflict of interest?  Nah!

Ironically, these legal special-interest efforts come on top of hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars used to produce and distribute the one-sided and shallow “evaluations” perpetrated by the (taxpayer-funded) commissions on judicial performance evaluation – which, again, advocate 100% of the time to “retain” Colorado Supreme Court justices in office.

NONE of these expenditures – hundreds of thousands of dollars to promote the retention of judicial incumbents in office – are transparent and accountable to the public.

Did Friday’s ruling really succeed in “setting precedent to keep big money out of judicial elections…”?

Hardly.   It just provided cover for the big money that’s already comfortably ensconced in the process – erecting additional roadblocks to shedding light on the fact, and restoring accountability to the judiciary.

Clear The Bench Colorado has been consistently open, honest, and above-board in educating the public, and has scrupulously followed the rules under Colorado campaign finance laws for well over a year.  Forcing CTBC to re-file under a different set of rules – changed in the final quarter – makes a mockery of justice.

Yet another reason that now more than ever – it’s time to Clear The Bench, Colorado!

http://www.clearthebenchcolorado.org/

Outrage at Fort Hood!

September 30, 2010

Fort Hood soldiers told to list private weapons

Base requires make, model, serial number and who owns them


WND Exclusive


WEAPONS OF CHOICE

Fort Hood soldiers told to list private weapons

Base requires make, model, serial number and who owns them


Posted: September 30, 2010
12:55 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Greg Tropino Jr. displays a popular semiautomatic pistol manufactured by Springfield Armory at G. A. T. Guns in Dundee, Illinois on June 28, 2010. The Supreme Court held Monday that Americans have the right to own a gun for self-defense anywhere they live, striking down Chicago's nearly 30-year-old handgun ban but leaving the door open for other gun-control legislation.   UPI/Brian Kersey Photo via Newscom

The U.S. Army command at Fort Hood, where Muslim psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly shot and killed 13 people and an unborn child, now is demanding that its soldiers confess whether they have any guns in their off-base homes, what kind of guns they are and what are their serial numbers.

The action recalls similar disclosure demands on which WND has previously reported at Fort Bliss in Texas and Fort Campbell in Kentucky.

According to Christopher Haug Sr., the chief of media relations for Fort Hood, officials at the base issued an “operation order” that directed commanders “to reinforce Soldier Health and Wellness on Sept. 27.”

Full Story

Combat soldier in Iraq exposes Obama lies

September 30, 2010

Stolen, with permission, from Anthony at The Liberty Sphere;

Just a few weeks ago Barack Obama proclaimed to the nation that the U.S. ‘combat mission in Iraq is over.’

This gave the public the false impression that all U.S. combat forces in Iraq were being called back home and that there would be no futher U.S. involvement in fighting.  Our only continued role, accodring to Obama, would be to ‘advise and assist’ the Iraqis.
But one soldier who is still in Iraq, and is still engaged in combat for the foreseeable future, exposes the Obama pronouncement as a lie.
The following is an actual email from the soldier, which has been forwarded by scores of Americans via email:
“Hey, everybody I just wanted to send a quick update and give Yall the REAL story on what’s going on over here with the troop withdrawal…..The reason I’m sending this out is because I have had a few people ask if I left Iraq early because all of the combat troops are out of Iraq and I wanted to let everyone know the real deal.  It’s kind of ridiculous how the news is saying that the last of the “combat” troops are out of Iraq because of Pres Osama ( I mean Obama ).  He says that it was his campaign promise.  Take our Brigade for example.  We were originally called a HBCT ( Heavy Brigade Combat Team).  Well since Obama said he would pull all of the “combat” troops out by Aug all they did before we left was change our name from a HBCT to a AAB ( Advise and Assist Brigade ).  We have the same personnel/equipment layout as before and are doing the same missions.  The ONLY difference is that they changed our name from a HBCT to an AAB and that’s how he is getting away with saying that he has pulled all of the “combat” troops out.  It is really ridiculous what he’s doing and he has ticked alot of people off.  And it’s funny how the media is buying all of it, too.  So no the last combat troops are not out of Iraq we are still here.  There are other Brigades just like ours that are doing the same missions that are still over here.  Sorry for going on about it but we are just sitting over here watching it and are like “You’ve got to be kidding me!”  So anyway now you know the REAL story so that’s why I’m not coming back early.  You have to watch those liberals, their sneaky!  Anyways, I hope everyone is doing well and I’ll see you soon!”
This soldier’s courage in telling the real truth only further confirms the fact that Barack Obama has lied incessantly to the American people, as this column has stated on numerous occasions.  The only thing Obama has changed so far is the name of the brigade.  The name was changed so that Obama could claim all combat operations were drawn to a close.  But as the soldier relates, the mission remains.  The brigade is still involved in heavy combat for the foreseeable future despite the name change from ‘Heavy Brigade Combat Team’ to ‘Advise and Assist Brigade.’
Conservative Examiner has also learned that the White House has initiated a special ‘Honor Our Troops’ stunt in order to give Americans the impression that ‘our boys (and girls) are coming home from Iraq,’ when in fact nobody is coming home right now except for a few  The troops will stay in place until next year, and even after that 50,000 of our troops will be yet in harm’s way, involved in heavy combat in their new ‘advise and assist’ mission, at least until the end of 2011.
This deft sleight-of-hand maneuver in changing the wording and engaging in a campaign of distraction has become all too familiar with this White House.
Obama enlists scores of news outlets to tout his ‘victory’ in bringing home the troops, when in fact they are not coming home presently.  Thus, the campaign is one of propaganda.  And this is not even to mention that the mission in Afghanistan has been vastly expanded and intensified with no end in sight.
The mission in Iraq was a success under George W. Bush as a result of the troop surge.  But Obama wishes to take the credit, although he peristently opposed the Iraqi mission from day one.  He claims, however, that  he supported the Afghan mission, which again is a questionable claim, given that Bob Woodward in his latest book indicates that Obama refuses to use the word ‘victory’ in the mission, and the White House staff had severe misgivings about continuing the campaign–amid much infighting among the Obama team.
Thus, it is ever more apparent with each passing day that the current occupant of the White House cannot be trusted in any fashion.  Too many lies, too many misleading statements, and too many empty promises never fulfilled.
It’s time to get rid of the entire lot.
Be sure to catch my blog at The Liberty Sphere.

“[I want to] remind our base constituency to stop whining: epic fail obama

September 29, 2010

Pigs are not only wearing lipstick, they are flying!

With friends like these… “People need to shake off this lethargy. People need to buck up. … If people now want to take their ball and go home, that tells me folks weren’t serious in the first place. … It is inexcusable for any Democrat or progressive right now to stand on the sidelines in this midterm election. … The idea that we’ve got a lack of enthusiasm in the Democratic base, that people are sitting on their hands complaining, is just irresponsible.” –Barack Obama hammering his own base in an interview with Rolling Stone

“[I want to] remind our base constituency to stop whining and get out there and look at the alternatives. This president has done an incredible job. He’s kept his promises.” –Joe Biden on the same talking points

“And so those who don’t get — didn’t get everything they wanted, it’s time to just buck up here, understand that we can make things better, continue to move forward and — but not yield the playing field to those folks who are against everything that we stand for in terms of the initiatives we put forward.” –Joe Biden

“We have an electorate that doesn’t always pay that much attention to what’s going on so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what’s happening.” –Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), another snotty elitist lecturing voters

The GOP’s best friend: “[I]f we allow this to be a referendum on whether people are happy where they are now, we’ll lose.” –Joe Biden

But on the other hand: “I guarantee you we’re going to have a majority in the House and a majority in the Senate. I absolutely believe that.” –Biden

Patronizing: “There are strains in the Tea Party that are troubled by what they saw as a series of instances in which the middle-class and working-class people have been abused or hurt by special interests and Washington, but their anger is misdirected.” –Barack Obama

“[Fox News has] a point of view that I disagree with. It’s a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world.” –Obama in the Rolling Stone interview

On fiscal responsibility: “What I’m seeing out of the Republican leadership over the last several years has been a set of policies that are just irresponsible, and we saw in their Pledge to America a similar set of irresponsible policies. … [Although GOP leaders] say they want to balance the budget, they propose $4 trillion worth of tax cuts and $16 billion in spending cuts, and then they say we’re going to somehow magically balance the budget. That’s not a serious approach.” –Barack Obama, who must consider Republicans amateurs when it comes to blowing money.

SOURCE

Jerry Brown for Govenor of California: Can you say STUPID? I knew ya’ could!

September 28, 2010

California, my state of birth… (Oceanside, California, Camp Pendleton.) Somehow, survived the years that this God forsaken idiot was Governor there. Jerry Brown, caused, via his leftist policy’s and non-leadership; The worst times that the Golden State had ever been through. PERIOD!

He kissed ass to the Unions, to the illegal immigrants, raised taxes beyond belief, held gun owners in contempt, and pissed on the California Constitution as well as the Constitution of the United States of America so many times that I will not even bother with citation! He makes the epic failure obama look like a lightweight!

Now, to be honest? I don’t know an awful lot about Meg Whitman. But what I do know, is that Jerry Brown, is nothing at all like his Father.

Having lived under both, I know well what it is that I speak of.

More HERE.

Vote NO for Jerry Brown Jr!

Team Donkey: led by an epic failure; becoming an epic failure

September 28, 2010

“As Democrats head for what promises to be a midterm election fiasco of historic proportions, a pre-emptive excuse has begun to circulate: It’s all because of Citizens United. Team Donkey fans claim the Jan. 21 decision, in which the Supreme Court overturned restrictions on the political speech of corporations, triggered a flood of negative advertising by what President Obama calls ‘shadowy groups with harmless-sounding names.’ … In his weekly radio address [last] Saturday, President Obama complained about ‘special interests using front groups with misleading names’ who are saying mean things about Democrats on TV, a development he attributed to Citizens United. Yet similar complaints have been heard from both major parties in every recent election cycle. … Toward the end of his speech on Saturday, Obama accidentally told the truth. ‘You can make sure that the tens of millions of dollars spent on misleading ads do not drown out your voice,’ he said. ‘Because no matter how many ads they run — no matter how many elections they try to buy — the power to determine the fate of this country doesn’t lie in their hands. It lies in yours.’ Exactly right, Mr. President. No matter how shadowy or flush with corporate dollars an interest group is, the only thing Citizens United allowed it to do is speak. Advocacy has no impact unless it persuades people. So why not talk about the issues instead of impugning the motives of people who take a different position on them than you do?” –columnist Jacob Sullum