Friday, March 30, 2012

The Words of the Profits

(Click cartoon for full size)

For the second year in a row, the House of Representatives has examined the fiscal budget submitted by Barack Hussein "World's Smartest Economist" Obama and voted it down unanimously as being an utterly useless piece of political crap.

Hilariously, the Associated Press did their best to cover the president's keester on this embarrassing defeat, reporting that the "GOP-run House easily rejects Obama budget." Oh - the Democrats in the House weren't given a chance to vote? Well yes, they were - and the AP says that even the Dems "largely voted no."

Largely?! The vote was 414-0! The Democrats didn't largely vote no, they unanimously voted no! Not a living, breathing soul elected to the House of Representatives thought that the president's budget was worth even a token vote of support! The AP could more accurately have reported: "Obama's Budget Declared Rancid Roadkill - Too Foul For Even Dems To Swallow."

But maybe there will be more luck when a vote comes down on the Senate budget and...oh wait, that's right. Harry Reid and his band of merry marauders haven't bothered to even propose a budget in years, because they've been waaaaay too busy stimulating the economy, creating jobs, and underwriting lubricant subsidies for Georgetown coeds.

But Republican Paul Ryan has created a budget, just passed by the House (without the help of a single Democrat), which could actually make a positive difference in our nation's future by, for instance, making sure we have a future.

Because astoundingly, as this excellent video from Bill Whittle shows, Tim Geithner concedes that by his own calculations, our country will collapse completely just 15 years from now owing to out-of-control spending...and he blithely admits that the Obama administration has no plan and no intent to stop that disaster.

But after saying that he has no plan to prevent national armageddon, Geither sneers to Ryan that "we've seen your plan and we don't like it." End of conversation. And presumably end of country.

Well, Mr. Geithner, some of us don't much like the idea of you, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama deliberately spending the United States out of existence in the next few years.

Which is why we're hoping (but not expecting) that the Senate and the president will ratify Ryan's budget as soon as possible. Failing that, it is our greatest wish that this November, Barack Obama will receive exactly the same number of approving votes that his insulting, hypocritical, anti-American joke of a budget just got in Congress.


Don't laugh. We'd be better off.
FRIDAY BONUS: Even though I already linked to one Bill Whittle video in the commentary, this newer one is so important that everyone needs to see it. PLEASE forward this to friends (and/or liberals) through your social media!

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

You Can't Hurry Law

Today marks the final round of arguments for and against Obamacare in the Supreme Court, and the suspense is killing us. Because it's unlikely that there will be a bigger or farther-reaching legal decision made in our lifetimes.

The stakes go way beyond healthcare and can be basically boiled down to this question: does the government have the absolute power to control how and what Americans buy (not just healthcare, but everything) and, if that's the case, is there any limit on government control over the individual at all?

If you think we're overstating the case, then consider the statement by Chief Justice John Roberts that if Obama's legal team prevails, "all bets are off" in terms of the way government can seize control of our lives.

With our Constitutional freedoms so clearly at risk, you'd think that this would be a slam dunk nine-to-zero ruling for the court. But instead, the expectation is that four Justices will vote for Obamacare, four Justices will vote against it, and just one "swing" Justice, Anthony Kennedy, may ultimately be the sole person to determine the future of our country and the citizenry's relationship to Washington's new progressive overlords.

That, in and of itself, is a terrifying proposition.

As is this fact: if the Obama team wins its case, then the members of the Supreme Court can pack their bags and toddle home for the last time. Because their only job is to interpret the Constitution... and the Constitution will be no more.


Monday, March 26, 2012

Hot Topic

There's no doubt that the shooting death of black teen Trayvon Martin was a tragedy. But exactly what kind of tragedy remains unclear.

Was this an innocent black kid executed by a racist with an itchy trigger finger, or a civic-minded crimewatch volunteer whose life was ruined when he was bloodily beaten by a 6'2" football player and subsequently felt compelled to defend himself with a gun?

Honestly, we don't know. And neither does Barack Obama, who has chosen to take sides anyway, based entirely on the skin color of the participants - and not so subtly try to enflame racial tensions just in time for his reelection campaign. And that is a tragedy of national proportion.

Regarding the shooting, Obama bemoaned the fact that "if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon," and then said that all Americans need to do some "soul searching" about the incident. But why? What do the rest of us have to do with any of this? The direct implication is that Americans are, at heart, dangerous ugly-minded racists who need to work up at least a little residual White Guilt by Election Day.

And the president is getting plenty of help trying to whip up his racism souffl
é. Uninformed cries of anti-black racism and demands for anti-white revenge are already pouring out of the usual suspects: Al "Tawana Brawley" Sharpton, Louis "The White Man is Our Mortal Enemy" Farrakhan, Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson, and Eric Holder's favorite pollwatchers, the New Black Panthers - who have issued a $10,000 reward for the man accused of shooting Trayvon Martin so they can exact "eye for an eye" justice.

Meanwhile, the president hasn't suggested any national soul searching is necessary in the case of a 13-year old white boy who had gasoline poured on him and then was set on fire by two black teens who said "You get what you deserve, white boy." The boy's offense? Possibly it stemmed back to an incident in which he tried to answer a question about Black History Month in school, and his black teacher snapped at him "What would you know about it? You're not our race!"

But Barack Obama is a busy man and can't take time to comment on every little anti-white Hate crime in America. And unsurprisingly, he takes a special interest in Trayvon Martin because he looked more than a little like a young Barack Obama.

The resemblance can easily be seen at the Tampa Bay news site (the area where the incident occurred), where a picture of young, innocent Trayvon Martin is displayed and...oops, wait. That link went to a 14-year old who looks like Obama, but has been accused of rape and attempted murder. But the actual picture of Trayvon Martin on the website shows...hang on. Apparently that link goes to a 17-year old cop killer who looks like Obama. Hey, look- here's another guy on the website that look like Obama! Surely he must be Trayvon and...crap! Sorry, it's a 21-year old who robbed an 86-year old great-grandmother. On the other hand, this girl - arrested on felony charges - definitely doesn't look like the son Obama never had, though presumably her 17-year old brother does. He's currently facing a life sentence in prison if convicted of murdering two unarmed British tourists.

Rather than belabor our point (and trust me, we could) let's cut straight to the bottom line. Nobody's guilt or innocence should be judged by their skin color or "who they look like," even if the president of the United States thinks otherwise. Anything else would be the most despicable kind of racism.

But that is exactly Barack Obama's goal in injecting himself into this sad story. Having failed dismally as the president of "Hope," he is now redefining himself for 2012 as the candidate of "Hate." He - and his willing media accomplices - have already invented and fomented a "War on the Middle Class," and a "War on Women." Next on his checklist, to nobody's surprise, was to gin up a "War on Blacks" in hopes that any bloodletting can be turned into votes.

Is this the country we want - with American pitted against American for the benefit of a venal politician who must distract us from our real problems, his real failures, and his real agenda?

Because that is the question which actually demands soul searching from Americans of every race.