Thursday, October 31, 2013

From Bassinets To Barricades In Texas

by JASmius

Just in case you missed it, a little justice has just been served - in a ten gallon bottle:

A federal appeals court issued a ruling Thursday reinstating most of Texas' controversial new abortions restrictions, just three days after a federal judge ruled they were unconstitutional.

A panel of judges at the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans said the law requiring doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital can take effect while a lawsuit challenging the restrictions moves forward. The panel issued the ruling after District Judge Lee Yeakel said the provision serves no medical purpose.

The panel's decision means as least 12 clinics won't be able to perform the procedure starting as soon as Friday. In its 20-page ruling, it acknowledged that the provision "may increase the cost of accessing an abortion provider and decrease the number of physicians available to perform abortions."

However, the panel said that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that having "the incidental effect of making it more difficult or more expensive to procure an abortion cannot be enough to invalidate" a law that serves a valid purpose, "one not designed to strike at the right itself."
Translation: Judge Yeakel likes fetuside and thinks pro-lifers suck, while the Fifth Circuit applied the law.

Both sides' reactions are what you would expect:

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott had made an emergency appeal to the conservative 5th Circuit, arguing that the law requiring doctors to have admitting privileges is a constitutional use of the Legislature's authority.

Abbot said in a statement Thursday that "this unanimous decision is a vindication of the careful deliberation by the Texas Legislature to craft a law to protect the health and safety of Texas women."
Translation: Judge Yeakel so ludicrously overstepped his authority and so egregiously mangled constitutional jurisprudence that had A-G Abbott not immediately appealed, the Fifth Circuit may well have dropped a few daisy-cutters on Yeakel anyway, just because.

Lawyers for Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers had argued that the regulations did not protect women and would shut down a third of the abortion clinics in Texas.
"did not protect women" = "let them get all the abortions the taxpayers can be raped to pay for"; "would shut down a third of the abortion clinics in Texas" = "protecting women AND children".

In a statement Thursday, Planned Parenthood said the appeals court decision means "abortion will no longer be available in vast stretches of Texas."
Which is the whole point.  But what really pisses off Planned Parenthood is Texas's "death by a thousand cuts" approach.  If the Texas legislature had simply outlawed abortion, that law would have been overturned even faster than Judge Yeakel's opinionating was.  But by passing a bundle of statutes that amount to one obstacle to abortion after another, not one of which can be fairly described as unreasonable and all of which are women's health-oriented, they amount to a phalanx of pro-life obstacles that aborticians and their bloodthirsty backers have to navigate.

Texas, in other words, is making Planned Parenthood bleed for every fetal corpse they toss in the Lone Star medical dumpster.  And they are not happy about it:

"This fight is far from over," Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said in the statement. "This restriction clearly violates Texas women's constitutional rights by drastically reducing access to safe and legal abortion statewide

Actually, for all intents and purposes, Ms. Richards, it is, since the Fifth Circuit cited SCOTUS precedent in their unanimous instruction to Judge Yeakel to go abort himself.  But I'm sure you'll keep trying.

Or, to modify a saying from Yosemite Sam, "It's gettin' so a baby-killer can't earn a dishonest livin' no more."

ObamaCare Was Designed To Fail - Or Was It?

by JASmius

Cancellations, premium hikes, website failures. The news keeps getting worse when it comes to Obama's signature health care plan. Did Obama and Congressional Democrats really think that this plan would work, or was ObamaCare designed to fail? Hear the horrible truth on this Trifecta.

Devastating commentary across the board - but I think Bill Whittle's face-palm at the end says it all without words.

Over to you, Senator Cruz.

No Temecula Constitution Class Tonight: Happy Halloween

By Douglas V. Gibbs

We will not be meeting tonight for our Constitution Class.  I will be instead taking my wife out to dinner for her birthday.

That's right, my wife's birthday is Halloween.

Makes it real easy to remember.

Next Thursday the class will resume at Faith Armory and we will be discussing the 17th Amendment.

And don't forget, the Constitution Association meeting this Saturday will feature speaker Lawrence Hebron, and it has moved to Boston Billies in Menifee.  See website for address.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Hard Starboard Radio: Obama's Credibility Canyon

"[T]he distortions and lack of credibility of the Obama administration have matched and now trumped those of its predecessors. The public may have long ago forgotten that Obama did not close down Guantanamo as promised, or cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term, or stop the revolving door of lobbyists coming in and out of the executive branch.

"The public may even have forgiven the president when the stimulus bill never lowered unemployment as promised, or when his misleading boasts about vast increases in oil and gas production came to fruition despite, not because, of his efforts.

"But the distortions and broken promises have now become so frequent that many at home and abroad are finally tuning out the president. Almost nothing promised about the Affordable Care Act is proving true. Contrary to presidential assurances, Obamacare has not lowered premiums or deductibles. It will not reduce the deficit or improve business competitiveness. It really will alter existing health plans and in some cases lead to their cancellation. Signing up is certainly not as easy as buying something online on Amazon.

"Two considerations often turn presidential ethical lapses into political disasters. Unfortunately, both apply to the present administration."

Join us at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific, and don't forget my presents.  Just don't ask me my age; that can be a present in and of itself.

Information Technology Meets the Biblical Beast

By Douglas V. Gibbs

If you think Big Brother is doing what it can to track you now, wait until the Internet is implanted in your brain.

Never mind the phone, tablet, or computer.  Think it, and you will be on the Internet.  Think it and you'll be calling a wrong number.

By 2020, experts are saying chips will be implanted in people's heads for Internet access, and much, much more.

Will everybody be GPS located according to their brains?

The NSA has got to be excited about this news.

I say, while they are at it, they might as well stamp a nice little 666 on the chip as they shove it in your skull.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

A Chip in the Head: Brain Implants Will Be Connecting People to the Internet by the Year 2020 - Info Wars

Pamela Geller On Ezra Levant Combatting Honor Killings

by JASmius

Why would anything that was actually honorable need to be covered up?  And could that adjective and murdering young girls ever exist in the same semantic zip code?

"Honorable" certainly cannot be applied to nutless, sunken-chested Western dhimmism.  Ironic that by accessorizing themselves to this truth-censoring, dhimmis are getting in line for the same chopping block.

Students Chained To Wall & Beaten At Mosque, Elementary Kids Tell Police

by JASmius

The name of this mosque?  The "Mosque of Peace," natch.

Obama's Popularity Wanes Some More

By Douglas V. Gibbs

A few weeks ago we discussed a AP Poll dropping Obama to a 37% Approval Rating.

The media said very little about it.

The NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll now has Barry down to 42% in their poll.

The media is saying a little about it.

Rasmussen has Obama at 42%, too - right there with the Tea Party.

Normally, the polls are skewed in favor of the Left, so if the polls are willing to admit 37% and 42%, I can only imagine how unpopular King Obama has become.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Megyn Kelly Hammers Frank Pallone Over ObamaCare: "Why Do YOU Get To Decide What's 'Lousy'?"

by JASmius

Wow, I don't think Sean Hannity could have done the hammering any better.

Whenever I hear a Democrat attempt to define capitalism, I'm reminded of Boris The Animal's reaction to his LunarMax guards' comment on his "conjugating":

"When's the last time you CAPITALISMED ANYTHING!"

And, of course, "Let's agree to disagree":

Maybe Boris will eventually take that 9PM weeknight Fox News slot.  He's the only host I can imagine being more of an "animal" than Megyn.

UPDATE: Perhaps Cavuto is Boris' brother....

HHS Using To Collect Voter Registration Information

by JASmius

Well, duh - their door-to-door "navigators" are straight out of ACORN, after all.....

America's Second Biggest Lie

by JASmius

The second biggest lie in America is that the federal government needs more money and Americans don't pay enough in taxes. Its time to defeat the big lies.

I admire your spirit, Bill, but the lies of which you speak can and will never be "defeated"; that implies that the idea of more taxes and more spending can be destroyed; it can't, because there will always be a constituency for it.  In the same way, I'm pretty sure that the magnitude of power we would need to permanently suppress that constituency is unattainable and almost certainly unconstitutional.

So the Left's lies can't be defeated.  But they can be contained, and that's all we can ever really expect to accomplish.  And even that requires constant vigilance, which in and of itself runs counter to human nature.  Which is much of why Big Government is typically neither defeated nor contained.

You're right, the feds don't have the specific legal right to an ever escalating tap on our income and wealth - what's left of it anyway.  But they do have the power to seize it from us.  Always have, really.  It's the Obama Regime that has successfully detached one from the other.  And that, in turn, is why the Republic is fundamentally dead.

Which, in a sardonic, gallows-humor sense, is what will make your reaction to the results of any attempt to repeal the 16th Amendment so gosh darn amusing.  The Left would give up ObamaCare before they'd give up the income tax.  But they'd be overjoyed to add a national sales tax - or "fair tax," in your parlance - to it.  Which is the only way a "fair tax" will ever see the light of policy day.  And that doesn't seem like an outcome you would welcome.

It almost tempts me to call the idea of abolishing the income tax a "lie"; but that would be unfair.  It isn't a lie; it's simply a delusion.  But a glorious one.  "Aim high," as the Air Force used to say; you won't get your cherished dream, but there are plenty of lesser, attainable objectives to be had.  Like stopping that obnoxious black box car tax.

If you're willing to incrementally settle for them, that is.

Best and the Brightest is not Amnesty

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Even the Republicans are beginning to give in to the narrative about amnesty.  As a nation, we once used immigration for the purpose of improving the nation, trying to attract the best and the brightest.  People came to America because here they could achieve what they could not in their home country, and they were excited about assimilating, and making the United States a better nation with their presence.  Now, immigration is being used as a tool.  The Democrats use immigration as a tool to gain more votes, to solidify their power and position, and to destroy their opposition.  They are not interested in the best and the brightest.  They want those that will be dependent upon the government, and people who are willing to come to this country illegally, in violation of the law, if they have to.

The Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment states that in addition to being born her, or naturalized, to be a citizen you must be "subject to the jurisdiction, thereof."  The language of this clause was crafted by Senators Trumbull and Howard.  Their goal was to remain in line with what the Founding Fathers desired.  They wanted full allegiance to America, and new immigrants that were willing to fully integrate into American Society.

Jurisdiction meant full allegiance.  The Senators explained it as being like two ambassadors to the United States.  If those diplomats are married, and have a child on our soil, is the baby an American?  Of course not.  The child is a citizen of the country the parents have full allegiance to.

Illegal aliens do not have full allegiance.  Most of them come here to see what they can get out of Americans.  They come to turn the United States into something else.

We need immigration reform, but not the kind the politicians are clamoring for.  We need to enforce the laws on the books, and encourage the best and the brightest to come to America.  Forget votes.  Never mind trying to use these people for cheap labor, as we did with the slaves.  Let's encourage the best and the brightest to come here to move America forward, so that our nation can achieve great things.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentery

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Hard Starboard Radio: Sebelius & ObamaCare's Stone Tablets

Howard Dean makes the novel - which is to say, mendatious - discovery that the individual mandate doesn't require the syphoning of America's youth; From Here To Infirmity; The ObamaCare awakening; and Commissar Sebelius grants House Republicans an audience.

Join the cross-examination at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific.  And don't forget to genuflect; we'll all need the practice.

Tyrants Conquer

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Tyrants don't always use war to conquer.   They have learned that the slow introduction of bondage upon a people is much more effective; especially when the tyrants are able to convince the people that slavery to a powerful government system is for their own good.  In this way, tyrants have convinced entire populations that freedom is slavery, and dependency is happiness.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Bill Maher Talks To CNN's Piers Morgan About ObamaCare

by JASmius

I only have one question: why?  Wasn't Sean Penn a big enough waste of time?

Bill Maher extolling honesty; another sign of the Apocalypse.  Hypocritically, of course, but still a sign of it, nonetheless.

I guess Morgan figures that since nobody is watching him anyway, he might as well have his buddies over to indulge themselves.  Or what used to be known as "the public access channel".

Kathleen Sebelius and ObamaCare's Stone Tablets

by JASmius

Oh, yes, my friends, Cruella DeVile has given us permission to blame her for the ObamaCare rollout debacle - but not to do anything about it, or her, or her horned boss:

Sure, the ACA was "passed by both houses of Congress" - illegally and corruptly.  It's also flagrantly unconstitutional, which renders its ostensible legislative enactment irrelevant.

But we already knew that.  What is so amusing about the "national health chief's" rhetoric in this clip as that she gives every indication of viewing ObamaCare not as "law" or even "settled law" but as veritable divine revelation.  It's like it wasn't excreted out of the bowels of the Capitol Hill alimentary tract but floated down from the heavenlies on gossamer wings from the blindingly pearly gates of Godbama's throne.  It's the same insufferably obtuse mindset that permeates the post-ObamaCare left: "You can work with us to 'fix' the ACA, but you can't possibly be serious about getting rid of it!"  Because, of course, it's a religious icon to them; socialized medicine is their Ark of the Covenant and Holy Grail all rolled into one hellish package, and Allah help anybody who dares to consign its desiccated remains to the Lake of Fire where it belongs.

The same mockery applies to her professions of "responsibility" and "accountability".  It's the same tiresome BS we've heard from Obamunists countless times before.  Jim Geraghty sums it up well in today's Morning Jolt:

In Sebelius' reaction to her biggest and most important responsibility blowing up like the Hindenberg crashing into the Titanic, we get another key lesson in how the administration operates. When bad news pops up, they never confront it directly. They insist it isn't as bad as it looks. They attack the messenger. They insist it isn't their fault. They lie, and say that the law required them to take certain actions that it didn't.  
You can argue that the old Washington tradition of cabinet secretaries falling on their swords for the boss after a massive mistake was cynical, or not genuine accountability. But I think the simulation of accountability was better than the current situation of absolutely no accountability. Imagine how differently Obama would be perceived if at any point during the past five years, we heard… 
"Mr. President, I understand it is absolutely unacceptable that an agency under me was sending guns to Mexican drug cartels, including one used to kill an American Border Patrol agent.  My resignation letter is on your desk. 
"I'm sorry I have to accept this, Eric."
"Mr. President, on  my watch, the Internal Revenue Service, behaved in an out-of-control manner, unacceptably targeting Americans based upon their political beliefs, abusing its power and violating the trust of the American people.  My resignation letter is on your desk." 
"I'm sorry I have to accept this, Tim." 
"Mr. President, by allowing Snowden in the door, and failing to keep an eye on him, we've allowed one of the biggest intelligence disasters in American history.  My resignation letter is on your desk." 
"I'm sorry I have to accept this, Keith." 
"Mr. President, my department made awful, inexcusable decisions about the security for our people in Benghazi. There's no excuse. My resignation letter is on your desk." 
"I accept your resignation, Hillary." 
But they did fire the guy who made fun of his co-workers on Twitter.

Exit question: Can't we at least, in Cruella's case, figuratively run her through with the proverbial sword on which she imperiously refuses to fall?

UPDATE: Note the difference between the first vid, in which a committee Democrat fed her juicy Tea Party-bashing propaganda talking points, and this one, where she's actually being overseen by a committee Republican:

"Whatever"?  Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't sound like the contrite riposte of a public servant who is genuinely taking responsibility for the biggest policy disaster in the history of the former Republic.

Mein Gott, I wish we could see a cross-examination between Cruella and a Representative Gibbs.  Maybe we can put together a simulation for this Saturday's edition of American Daily Review.

Bill Cosby's Key to Failure

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs

I don't know the key to success, but the key to
Failure is trying to please everybody.  - Bill Cosby

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Obama Knew Health Care Law Was A Failure, And It Is Failing By Design

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs

Valerie Jarrett said that it is not the federal government's fault insurance plans are being cancelled.  It's the fault of the Health Insurance Companies.  But. . . it is because of Obamacare that the insurance companies have been put into position to be forced to cancel policies. . .

Remember when Obama said you could keep your doctor, and your insurance, when he was campaigning for the passage of Obamacare?

It is just like the housing crash.  The Democrats blamed the banks for the bad mortgages, but it was their policies, like the Community Reinvestment Act, that forced the banks into issuing the bad loans, and then selling them as securities.  The liberal democrats were the forces behind the mortgage housing crash, and then they shifted the blame to the Republicans, the banks, and whoever else they could find a way to blame.

And when it comes to Obamacare, they knew it was a failure.  The Health Care Law itself predicted a 40% to 60% policy loss.

This is all by design. . .

For those saying to just let Obamacare do its thing and let it fail all by itself, you underestimate the liberal left.  They want Obamacare to fail.  It is designed to fail, and to take the insurance companies with it, and push us within the decade into single-payer socialized medicine where the government becomes the only source of payment, and therefore finishes the liberal left's takeover of 1/6th of our economy.

It Is All By Design.

Hoyer: 'We Knew'...

Top Dem: Those aren't 'cancellation notices,' they're 'transitions'...

FLASHBACK: Obama '07: 'I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately'...

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Mt. Obamamore

by JASmius

Wild Bill plans a statue to reflect the Obama presidency....

Sounds good, Billy.  But you're forgetting the part of your statue where the Predator drone rises up behind the avenging eagle and blows it into a cloud of blood and feathers with a volley of hellfire missiles, even while Red Barry snaps the old lady's neck with a grind of his jackboot.  And then burns her bible and wipes his scrawny ass with her flag.
Next vid, try to remember the whole truth, not just the parts you find comforting.


NSA Spying Bush's Fault

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The National Security Agency has been spying on more than American citizens and suspected terrorists. Mexican President Calderón and German Chancellor Merkel, among many other world leaders, have also been targets of the prying eyes of the NSA. The media has vigilantly reminded us that the snooping program began in 2002, and President Obama has known nothing about it.

In other words,  it's all Bush's fault.

My first question is,  "How long does Barack Obama need to be President before he begins to take responsibility for the failures of his presidency?"

Americans are angry about the direction this nation is taking under this president, yet Obama has continuously kept himself separated from his own policies, acting like he's an outsider, as he is doing with the NSA.

With the continued failures of the Obamacare health care law as it tries to come on line, the IRS targeting conservatives, Benghazi terrorists killing Americans and the U.S. refusing to protect those Americans as it happened, and the NSA spying at will, it is impossible for the President not to know anything about any of it as the media claims.  And if indeed he was not aware, as the media proudly says, then why is Obama even President?  He knows nothing, and is involved with nothing.  They are telling us he is simply a warm body in the White House with no knowledge of anything.

Do we want a President that, as Rush has been saying, "Don't know Jack?"

Of course he knows what is going on, and I will even say the madness and confusion is by design.  Remember, crisis enables the government to do things they could not normally do, so Obama and his cronies are doing whatever they can to keep us in a continued state of crisis.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Top Senator: Obama didn't know of U.S. spying on Germany's leader - CNN

Spain Summons American Ambassador on New Reports of NSA Spying - New York Times

Merkel: Relations with U.S. 'severely shaken over spying claims' - CNN

U.S. Coping with furious allies as NSA spying revelations grow - U.S. News and World Report

Report claims US had Merkel's phone monitored since 2002 - Fox News

Reports: NSA Spying on Germany Began in 2002; Obama was briefed in 2010 - Democracy Now!

Sean Penn Calls For Ted Cruz To Be Committed By Executive Order

by JASmius

Wow, how very.....Soviet Socialist of him.

On the other hand, Penn and Morgan didn't urge O to simply have Senator Cruz "disappeared," like Vlad Putin would have long before now.

Wasn't this anus married to Madonna at one time?  Goodness, but that seems like a long time ago.  I can't even say which has had the better career since they split up, since both have become such loathsome parodies of whatever they may once have been.  I can say with confidence that Jeff Spicoli had more personal dignity in his conversations with "Mr. Hand" than Sean Penn has in his entire miserable life.  Which goes a long way towards explaining what he was doing on Piers Morgan's show.  Fact is, neither douchebag had anything better to do.

Heck, Morgan might as well make Penn his co-host.  That way he might be able to land Madonna as a guest, and he can ask her whether she's stopped shaving her pits again.

Hell Hath No Fury Like A Media Embarrassed

by JASmius

"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." Could a variation on that familiar saying suggest a silver lining to the very dark cloud of ObamaCare?

Hard Starboard Radio: Guess Who Took Away Your Healthcare?

The White House knew that millions would lose their health insurance, because Barack Obama saw to it personally, and yet they still persist with the lie; NBCCCP actually, if excruciatingly, reports it - will this finally ignite the public uprising of Ted Cruz's dreams?; If there is a "post-ObamaCare" healthcare debate, what will it look like?; and is Red Barry even still president?

Join us at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific for this journey to days of past future.  I don't think it works the other way around.

The Only Way To Defeat Obama

by JASmius

Get Wolverine to hit the reset button....

Jon Stewart Knocks Obama For Total Ignorance Of What's Going On In His Administration

by JASmius

Is the Obamedia dropping the "Ob"?  Is The One finally on his own now?

Well....they'd really, really prefer not to.  Every "journalist" in the country would love to be able to just batten down the hatches and wait for ObamaCare to blow over, as have IRSgate, NSAgate, Benghazigate, and all the other "gates" that have "officially" never happened.  But this is like winning a wild, moist, passionate night with Jessica Alba, getting her home, and having her unzip herself and reveal Martha Rae, denture wearer.  You looked forward to so much so avidly and wound up with enough erectile dysfunction to turn Viagra AND Cialis into perpetual motion machines even without zero-point energy extraction.  That's a level of disappointment bordering on Glenn-Close-In-Fatal-Attraction-caliber betrayal.

Remember, as hard left as the media is, they also believe themselves to be bigger than any one president, even their "god".  Politicians come and go, but the press considers itself permanent brokers of D.C. power.  And if Nebuchadnezzar is loping out to the fields to munch on grass, "reporters" are not going to develop a taste for grazing.

Krauthammer: Republicans, Hit the Disastrous ObamaCare Rollout Hard

by JASmius

via Townhall, another exercise in JASmius echo syndrome:

"'Hit 'em at every stage in the road,' Krauthammer encouraged."  Indeed; also, kick 'em while they're down, then beat them unconscious.  Don't give them a chance to get back up.  Finish them.

Or, what Ted Cruz was trying to do pre-maturely.

Hell, it oughtn't take Krauthammer's genius - or mine - or even Senator Cruz's - to figure this out.

Rand Paul Rallies With Ken Cuccinelli

by JASmius

Because, as a recently-excommunicated Tea Partier, Senator Paul is still irresistibly drawn to lost causes....

Where this support, and millions of dollars of financial backing, for Cuccinelli were in this race before now is anybody's guess.  It's almost as if the GOP was too busy ripping itself apart to even bother contesting the Virginia gubernatorial race, which is now guaranteed to fall into the hands of Clinton fixer Terry MacAuliffe.

Hopefully the term-limited Bob McDonnell can continue the Virginia tradition of governors-turning-senators and take out Mark Warner next year.  After all, MacAuliffe has to have somebody to beat in 2020.

How Barack Obama Conquered And Destroyed The Founders' America

by JASmius

Andrew Breitbart unwittingly gives the Republic's eulogy.

However, for all you hopeless Tea Party optimists out there who believe that the country in which we grew up is still salvageable, I would recommend paying particular attention to what the late Mr. Breitbart says at the 2:50 mark.  Even I couldn't put it better myself.

Hitler Finds Out About ObamaCare Exchange Problems

by JASmius

Wenn sie gerne ihren plan, sie können ihre plan - basta.

Monday, October 28, 2013

White House Knew Millions Could Not Keep Health Plans

by JASmius

Well, tell us something we didn't know, Scooter.

Just to go through the motions, here's the White House's purportedly astonished reaction to this totally, completely, stunningly unanticipatedly tragic turn of events:

White House spokesman Jay Carney admitted Monday some Americans won't be able to hold onto their current healthcare plans under Obamacare — despite the president's 2009 emphatic promise "if you like your healthcare plan, you'll be able to keep your healthcare plan. Period."

"So it's true there are existing healthcare plans on the individual market that do not meet those minimum standards and therefore do not qualify for the Affordable Care Act," Carney said in response to a question about an earlier remark by David Axelrod, a senior adviser to President Barack Obama during his first term, the Weekly Standard reported.
 And here is what they knew all along and were transparently BSing about from day one - and note the source:

NBC News, citing unnamed sources, reported that the administration knew that some 50% — or as many as 80% — of those with individual insurance policies could expect to be canceled largely because their policies don't meet Obamacare's minimum standards of coverage. NBC's experts say the costs of new policies will skyrocket.
Of course they knew.  How could they not know that by outlawing most or all forms of individual health insurance coverage below the "comprehensive" level, they would cause premium levels to explode?  It's like outlawing all cars below Lamborghini-class, then telling all automobile shoppers that they can keep their Ford Escorts or buy that 'vette they've always wanted at Yugo prices.  For all the fun we wingnuts have about O's incompetence, they're not that vapid.  It's the sixty-two million morons that elected and re-elected him that merit that description.

Well guess what, numbnuts - surprise!:

"Remember: The president didn’t say if you like your plan and we approve it you can keep it," Stewart wrote, the Post reported. "He promised that if you like your plan, you can keep it, period— “no matter what.”

Yet the NBC report said the government knew that wasn't true, saying that buried in regulations from the July 2010 law was an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, “40% to 67%” of customers will not be able to keep their policy.

And because many policies will have been changed since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40% to 67% range.”

“This says that when they made the promise, they knew half the people in this market outright couldn’t keep what they had and then they wrote the rules so that others couldn’t make it either,” Robert Laszewski of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, told NBC.

He estimated 80% of those in the individual market will not be able to keep their current policies and will have to buy insurance that meets requirements of the new law, which generally requires a richer package of benefits than most policies today.

Remember what I've been saying about pre-rollout opposition to ObamaCare being a mile wide and an inch deep.  Heretofore, the trauma of this unfolding assault - there really is no other word for it - was an abstraction, some amorphous potentiality floating around out there somewhere.  Now it's become brutally real.  And the $17 trillion question is now what will win the race that has been set before us: public anger and outrage propelling an all-out drive to repeal this nightmare before it can go any further, or the Left's obsessed zealotry to bulldoze the country into full-blown, all-out single-payer socialized medicine.

This is why I maintain that Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, et al pulled the confrontation trigger too soon.  The only ones who can lead this last ditch repeal effort are the Republicans - the same Republicans whose "brand" was tanked by the premature shutdown gambit.  Will the same American public that has this subterranean view of the GOP be so desperate that they will support them anyway in what amounts to a peaceful uprising against a Regime that knew and knows exactly what it is doing?

If they want their health care back, they have no other choice.

UPDATE: Well, this is interesting - and, of course, note the source:

Under pressure from the White House, NBC threw its reporter [Lisa Meyers] under the bus and censored the news that Obama wrote regulations to disqualify and terminate health insurance policies.

They later re-inserted the censored material. But what would compel them to delete true information in the first place?

Fears for Barack Obama's political position, of course.

Ace has a slightly different take on what makes this so incendiary a revelation - in essence, it matters less what the president knew and when he knew it than that he has it within his legitimate, constitutional powers to fix it and refuses to do so:

The story is not that "Obama knew" that policies would be terminated. That's damning.

But what is hugely damning and very important going forward is not that Obama knew, but that Obama made this happen, and could unmake it with a phone call, but chooses not to.

The White House's pushback on this point demonstrates that they understand how important this part of Lisa Meyers' report is....

This is not just about having knowledge that events beyond Obama's control would unfold - this is about events directly at his control. Regulation-writers are executive employees, and as such, answer to the president and not Congress.

This means Obama has the actual power -- not the puffed up, falsely asserted unconstitutional power, but the genuine legal power -- to call this agency and tell them, "We sold this bill as permitting people to keep their insurance; please re-write the regulations in a way that will honor this promise."...

Obama has it within his power to call up the HHS reg-writers and instruct them to honor the promise he made time and again for two years. And he doesn't want people to know this, because he is determined to break that promise....

[E]ven at this late date, he could still choose to honor his promise.

But he won't, because he can't -- he always intended to take people's insurance away from them. Always. And he's not going to undo, short of a veto-proof act of Congress. [last emphasis mine]
There's your cue, Senator Cruz.  Release the hounds.


All of the above, more or less, in video:

STILL ANOTHER UPDATE:  CBS joins the party as well.  Perhaps some media embargos aren't impregnable after all.

Federal Judge: Texas Abortion Restrictions Unconstitutional

By Douglas V. Gibbs

I have always thought that the term "Abortion Doctor" is an oxymoron, because doctors are supposed to save lives, not snuff them out.  In Texas, the part of a new abortion law that would require abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals was struck down as unconstitutional by a federal judge.  Pro-Baby-Slaughter people celebrated the decision as a victory against those mean old people trying to save the lives of innocent babies.

This whole scenario is wrong in so many ways.

The modern abortion battle began in Texas in 1973 with the Roe v. Wade case, that we are told made abortion legal throughout the United States.

Legalized murder, through unconstitutional means.

A pregnancy was once considered a blessing.

The very idea that the federal government is dictating to a State whether or not they can have laws regarding an issue that the federal government has no authority over as per the Constitution, and is not prohibited to the States (therefore, as per the 10th Amendment, is an authority reserved to the States), is preposterous.  Then, for the federal courts to determine the constitutionality of a State law, when it is a State issue, and force a State to abide by the wishes of a single person in a black robe, when the very concept of judicial review by the federal courts was never granted to the Judicial Branch by the Constitution, but was instead issued by the courts themselves, is allowing the federal government to decide for itself its own authorities, and it is allowing them to force the States to act in a manner in line with the federal government.

The federal government was created to protect State Sovereignty, not to control the States.

As far as the Constitution is concerned, abortion in none of the federal government's business, anyways.

Personally, I still have trouble understanding how the taking of an innocent life can be considered a woman's right.

Motherhood is supposed to be a blessing.  And as for that "the child would live in poverty" argument by some pro-baby-killer people, greatness is developed while in adversity.  How many great Americans have we slaughtered before they even had a chance to take their first breath?  How many great American stories about how a child born into a difficult life faced the adversity and rose up to do great things have we snuffed out?

The abortionists cry out, "Stop the war on women."  I say, "Stop the genocide against the innocent."

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Federal Judge Rules Part of Texas' New Abortion Law is Unconstitutional - Fox News

Hard Starboard Radio: Since When Is Despair Constitutional?

"For the country to be governed conservatively, however, conservatives have to win more elections. Among the most dismaying developments of the shutdown fight was the explicit assent given by a few conservative writers and politicians to the notion that it is a pipedream to seek to elect more conservatives who will then, for example, repeal Obamacare. That is asking a lot of a party, exponents of this view said, that has won the popular vote for president only once in the last six contests.

"So it is. But it is asking for the impossible to expect conservatives to realize their policy goals if that electoral record continues or gets worse. There is no alternative to seeking to expand the conservative base beyond its present inadequate numbers and to win the votes of people who aren’t yet conservatives or are not yet conservatives on all issues. The defunders often said that those who predicted their failure were “defeatists.” Yet it is they who have given in to despair. They are the ones who entertain the ideas that everything has gotten worse; that the last few decades of conservative thought and action have been for nothing; that engagement in politics as traditionally conceived is hopeless; that government programs, once begun, must corrupt the citizenry so that they can never be ended or reformed; that the country will soon be past the point of regeneration, if it is not there already.

"Effective political movements create the conditions for their own success. Conservatism has not done enough of that, but when it has prospered it has never been moved by despair. The apocalyptic style of politics holds that the future of the country is at stake. That is true, which is why conservatives need to get to the work of persuading and electioneering — and drop the fantasy of a shortcut."

Join us for some more tough love at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific, and see which of us it will hurt more.

Army Warns Soldiers of Christian, Tea Party "Threat"

by JASmius

Tea partiers, Christians, American Family, etc... considered hate groups.  Is this the result of the new Army Generals and other top level Army staff Obama has replaced those he fired in order to carry his more sinister plans for America?

Exit answer: Yes.

The Worldwide Wife Beating Club

by JASmius

The alliance between the Western Left and Islamic Fundamentalism is the strangest of bedfellows, two movements that ostensibly are each other's antithesis, joined at the proverbial hip.  Everything the Left claims to stand for - gender equality, modernity, homosexual rights - is precisely what the jihadists are doing everything they can to eradicate.  What unites them, of course, is their hatreds and prejudices; both hate Israel, both hate Western culture and values, and both hate Christians and Christianity with a fiery passion.

And yet it seems only the Muslims have their eyes wide open in this partnership.  It makes one wonder if any lib has given any thought to what their jihadist partners will do to them once their common foes are stamped out.

Obama Regime Supporting Blasphemy Laws Used To Murder Christians

by JASmius

Watch human rights attorney Brooke Goldstein reveal that "The Obama administration co-sponsored with the Muslim Brotherhood and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a resolution at the UN that criminalizes the use of the media to condemn Islam. We are supporting the pretext under which Christians are being murdered."

There are still those on our side of the aisle who insist that Barack Obama is a closet Muslim.  My retort has always been that Barack Obama worships no god but Barack Obama - why would he want to downgrade to parity with Allah?  That may sound tongue-in-cheek, but it's really less so than you might think.  In much the same way, I don't think it matters all that much whether King Hussein is Muslim or not, because it's brutally clear that he is anti-Christian and anti-Semitic, whatever is motivating those hatreds, and appealing to the very regime that is endorsing the global anti-Christian jihad is a noble but hopeless gesture.

Obamacare Website Woes Only Tip of the Iceberg

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs

Republicans lawmakers signaled that their efforts to dismantle ObamaCare will go well beyond criticizing the problem-filled website, saying computer glitches are only the “tip of the iceberg” for the federal health care plan.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal told “Fox News Sunday” that creating and running a website on which millions of Americans can shop for and buy an insurance policy is “the easy part.”

“The real problems will be when it’s time to schedule your grandmother’s cancer surgery,” said Jindal, chairman of the Republican Governors Association and a potential 2016 presidential candidate.

Republicans have largely opposed President Obama’s signature health care initiative long before it was signed into law in 2010 -- using Americans’ concerns about the massive government undertaking to help retake the House in 2010.

More recent opposition -- including the attempt to use voter dissatisfaction with ObamaCare to win the 2012 presidential election and more recently trying to "defund" ObamaCare -- have failed.

However, conservatives say they fully intend to chip away at the law straight through 2016 when they’ll try again to elect a Republican president who will repeal the law.

Jindal also told Fox News the bigger issue is that problems like those related to the ObamaCare website are almost inevitable when the federal government gets too big.

“This is symptomatic of a liberal ideology that believes government should be running our health care," he said. “We don’t need the government running health care.”

Wyoming Republican Sen. John Barrasso told ABC’s “This Week” that the website issues “are just the tip of the iceberg.”

“There are bigger problems to come,” he said.

Read More at Fox News

Editor's Note: I don't believe the attempt to defund Obamacare failed as stated in the article.  It was understood by those involved that defunding Obamacare was a longshot.  The goal was to bring more attention to the issue, and divorce the Republicans from being at fault as the Democrats had been trying to pin on them regarding the failures of the massive government undertaking.  In that sense, what Ted Cruz and Mike Lee did was very successful.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

ObamaCare Website Company Had Ties to Obama Fundraising, Michelle Obama

by JASmius

Fascinating, isn't it, that we don't have to devote an instant's thought to pondering the viability of making this assumption?:

CGI Federal, which secured a $678 million no-bid contract to build the Obamacare exchange web portal, has come under increased scrutiny for ties between senior executives and the Obama administration following the disastrous rollout of the healthcare website.

Toni Townes-Whitley, a senior vice president at CGI Federal, is a Princeton classmate of First Lady Michelle Obama, the Daily Caller reported. In addition to being college classmates, both Obama and Townes-Whitley are members of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni.

According to Federal Election Commission Records, Toni Townes-Whitley gave $500 in 2011 and 2012 to Obama's reelection, and another $1,000 to the Obama Victory Fund.

Close access to the White House was also enjoyed by other senior CGI officials, reports  the Washington Examiner.
The Examiner reported that visitor logs show that "CGI Federal President Donna Ryan visited the White House six times prior to her company being selected to do the IT design work behind the high-profile website."

"Two of the meetings attended by CGI executives were with Vivek Kundra, Obama's chief information officer. Kundra was a key figure in Obama administration information technology initiatives across the government," the paper reported.

In addition to the $88 million contract awarded to CGI Federal for the health-insurance exchange website, the company has received a total of $422 million in contracts related to ObamaCare since the legislation was signed into law, according to Bloomberg News.
Admit it, as soon as you heard about CGI you thought something along the lines of, "Hmmph, I wonder how much THEY coughed up for Obama's reelection campaign?"  Given the degree to which corruption is written into The One's DNA, there is no other rational conclusion to draw.

In much the same way, given his penchant for picking losers, it's equally as unsurprising that CGI is perhaps the most incompetent IT company on the planet:

CGI is not a creative free spirit from Jersey City with an impressive mastery of Twitter, but a Canadian corporate behemoth. Indeed, CGI is so Canadian their name is French: Conseillers en Gestion et Informatique. Their most famous government project was for the Canadian Firearms Registry. The registry was estimated to cost in total $119 million, which would be offset by $117 million in fees. That’s a net cost of $2 million. Instead, by 2004 the CBC (Canada’s PBS) was reporting costs of some $2 billion — or a thousand times more expensive.

Yeah, yeah, I know, we’ve all had bathroom remodelers like that. But in this case the database had to register some 7 million long guns belonging to some two-and-a-half to three million Canadians. That works out to almost $300 per gun — or somewhat higher than the original estimate for processing a firearm registration of $4.60. Of those $300 gun registrations, Canada’s auditor general reported to parliament that much of the information was either duplicated or wrong in respect to basic information such as names and addresses.

Sound familiar?

Also, there was a 1-800 number, but it wasn’t any use.

Sound familiar?

So it was decided that the sclerotic database needed to be improved.

Sound familiar?

But it proved impossible to “improve” CFIS (the Canadian Firearms Information System). So CGI was hired to create an entirely new CFIS II, which would operate alongside CFIS I until the old system could be scrapped. CFIS II was supposed to go operational on January 9, 2003, but the January date got postponed to June, and 2003 to 2004, and $81 million was thrown at it before a new Conservative government scrapped the fiasco in 2007. Last year, the government of Ontario canceled another CGI registry that never saw the light of day — just for one disease, diabetes, and costing a mere $46 million.

But there’s always America! “We continue to view U.S. federal government as a significant growth opportunity,” declared CGI’s chief exec, in what would also make a fine epitaph for the republic. Pizza and Mountain Dew isn’t very Montreal, and on the evidence of three years of missed deadlines in Ontario and the four-year overrun on the firearms database CGI doesn’t sound like they’re pulling that many all-nighters. Was the government of the United States aware that CGI had been fired by the government of Canada and the government of Ontario (and the government of New Brunswick)? Nobody’s saying.  But I doubt it would make much difference.
Indeed.  Incompetents of a feather flock together, and all that.  Especially if the kickback price is right.  That's all that mattered to Red Barry.  Besides, remember, gods don't make mistakes.  But they sure do also like that cold, hard cash.

Dick Cheney Sums Up Obama Administration

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Cheney: Mideast Allies No Longer Trust Us, Enemies Don't Fear Us - CBS DC

Sunday, October 27, 2013

The Evil That Knives Do

by JASmius

A mother and four children have been stabbed to death in a Brooklyn apartment, and a cousin of the slain woman's husband has been charged with killing them, New York police said Sunday.

Cher Calls for Death of TEA Party Republicans

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The liberal left loves to attack their opposition, but if their opposition even breaths a sour word about the Democrats they are immediately acting in an unacceptable manner.

As you read about what Cher had to say, think about two things.  Number one, what if a conservative had said this about liberals?  Second, does that mean she would have killed the late Sonny Bono, her one-time husband, back in the day?

Cher made the suggestions in her Twitter Tweets, suggesting Tea Party Republicans be killed over the government shutdown.

She called Republicans the "devil incarnate" in tweets filled with expletives, and suggested they be put in jail and ultimately killed.


Wow.  And they call the Right the intolerant ones.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Equal Protection Clause, and the Incorporation of the Bill of Rights to the States, Examined

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Convention wisdom dictates that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution requires that the federal government must ensure that the States properly protect the privileges and immunities of all citizens within their jurisdiction.  The common belief is that in order to properly apply the clause, it means that in addition to all citizens being equally protected under any State law, the Bill of Rights, which was written originally to only be applied to the Federal Government, must also be applied to the States.

The insatiable appetite for truth by the folks that hold the position that the 14th Amendment incorporates the Bill of Rights to the States is commendable.  I, too, share such a passion. As always, the positions designed to support their arguments, as presented to me more often than not by email, are well-thought out and well researched. However, my position is that the findings of the legislative body as a whole on the application of the Bill of Rights to the States is the final intention behind the clause.  The Congress, as a whole, and the States, during the ratification process, rejected the author's, Representative Bingham's, position.  The intent of the clause was not to incorporate the Bill of Rights to the States.

My findings, however, go deeper than just the intention of the legislators and State ratifying conventions, regarding the issue.  In fact, I believe that incorporating the Bill of Rights to the States actually assists the progressive movement.

The common assertion is that by applying the Bill of Rights to the States, it strengthens the rights of the individual because a piece of paper tells the States not to infringe on the person's rights. However, it actually creates the opposite effect. The Bill of Rights does not stop the government from infringing on people's rights. The Constitution does not stop the government from infringing on our rights, either. I am not questioning the wisdom of enumeration, but I do recognize the Bill of Rights itself created a condition that opened the door for the central government to dictate to the States what it is they can or cannot do. The purpose of the creation of the federal government was not to control the States, but to protect State Sovereignty, and their individuality.

As individuals, it is "our" responsibility to protect our rights. By applying the Bill Rights to the States, it creates two problems. First, it gives the citizen a false sense of security that their rights are protected by a piece of paper, which encourages them to be apathetic about protecting their rights themselves. Second, it enables the federal government the ability to force the States to abide by the Bill of Rights. If you allow the government to do this it then creates the opportunity for the federal government to dictate to the States the opposite, as well.

When a people are unwilling to fight for their own freedoms and rights, it encourages them to be uninformed. An uninformed populace is then easier to control, because they do not recognize tyranny as it begins to take over a system. The uninformed voters, in such a scenario, haven't been involved in acting as a check against the government, so they don't "know" that they are supposed to be a check against the government in the first place. Instead, the uninformed populace falls for the fallacy that the government was given the right to make sure the States were not being tyrannical. If the people no longer involve themselves in the process because the responsibility is given to the federal government through the incorporation of The Bill of Rights, the result is a tyrannical system, and a populace that allows it to happen through the sheer force of not participating in protecting their own rights.

I appreciate my opposition's passion on this issue, but I believe Congressman Bingham, who these folks most often quote, was of the mindset that the States misbehaved and had to be punished for daring to secede. The power of secession is a valuable tool for protecting State Sovereignty. The States must have the right to opt out of the social contract of the Constitution if the other party, the federal government, has breached that contract by exerting control over the States through a process of ignoring the Constitution, or "interpreting" it in such a manner that they assert they have the right to dictate to the States on issues that are supposed to be reserved to State authority.

We must remember that the discussions in the debates, such as is provided by The Congressional Globe of that era, regarding this issue, are not the final say if not taken in proper context. In the debates there are many arguments presented on both sides of the issue. Our task is to determine what the overall intention was, and what position best represents the collective intention of the legislature and ratifying bodies in general, as well as what best fits into the intent of the Founding Fathers. In the end, we must understand that our rights are best protected by us. The enumeration of such rights was only to put in writing so as to ensure the rule of law was to be more likely to be followed.  History shows that when the law is in writing, it is more likely to be accepted as the legal standard.  The defense of those rights still, regardless of the fact that they are enumerated in the Constitution, is a responsibility that falls upon the shoulders of the people.

They are your rights, and it is up to you to protect them.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

American People Unknowingly Adopting Socialism

By Douglas V. Gibbs

When discussing The General Will during the late 1700s, French political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau said The General Will is a will of the people the people do not recognize, and is only identified by the ruling elite.  Failure to abide by The General Will must result in the person being restrained by the body politic, and that "Man must be forced to be free."

Samuel Adams, an American Revolutionary that supported the principles of limited government as prescribed by the United States Constitution, recognized the dangers of collectivism.  Though socialism was not technically a concept unleashed upon the world, it did exist under different names, such as "Utopianism."  Schemes of Utopianism were present during the dawn of the New World, and the founding of America.  The notion of the redistribution of wealth, a socialist tactic used to diminish the standing of the wealthy in a society by taking riches away from the producers by way of heavy taxation, or inflation, and distributing those funds by way of entitlement and welfare programs, or price controls, to the "less fortunate," was not a strategy unknown to the Founding Fathers.  In a quote, Samuel Adams spoke of the action, calling it Schemes of Leveling. He said, "The Utopian schemes of leveling, and a community of goods (what we now call "Socialism"), are as visionary and impracticable as those which vest all property in the Crown. [These ideas] are arbitrary, despotic, and, in our government, unconstitutional."

Be it Utopianism, Collectivism, Socialism, Communism, Statism, Progressivism, or Liberalism, the idea behind the political ideology of a big government is to give more power to the government in the name of the good of the community, beginning with government obtaining all of the means of production in a system, and ultimately for government to control the populace through regulations, laws and taxes, leaving two classes: The rulers, and those that are ruled over.

A government seeking this kind of control "permits" all of the citizens to live, but that right to life is a privilege. . . a privilege granted only so long as the government feels that the life is worth all the trouble.  Should the government feel that the individual's value has decreased, it is then a legitimate action for the government to terminate the individual's life in a "kindly manner" for the good of the community.  The community, in these types of government schemes, is more important than the individual.  It is this concept that makes health care such an important addition to governmental functions for the Socialists, for if the government is paying for your health care, for the good of the people and the taxpayers, they can micro-manage every portion of your life.  And if your life becomes one that fails to lend worth to the system, or you are too expensive for the taxpayer to provide all of the medical services you require, a panel of government bureaucrats would be justified in ordering the end of your life.  One term for such a group of people having this kind of power would be, "Death Panel."

In order to survive, any system requires human labor, for that labor is essential to the production of goods.  In a socialist system where the government controls the means of production, those who do not produce have no right to life.

In the collective model individualism is not acceptable, and in fact is considered "selfish," or "greedy."  If individualism is a negative concept, then so is freedom.  The individual is not to be free.  Therefore, labor is not a liberty, but an obligation.  Government, in such a system, is the employer, and labor is no longer a choice.  Jobs are assigned, and changing one's career under such a system would no longer be a choice.  Failure to absent oneself from his job without proper excuse would then become an action punishable by imprisonment.

Such a system, on the surface, is not popular with the working class.  Those who desire that government controls the means of production, then, must hide the true nature of their schemes from the working class, and in fact actually turn it around through the use of propaganda and indoctrination schemes so that the working class is taught to desire the governmental control of the production of all goods, and services.  The strategy must be to deceive the worker, convincing the worker that the result of socialists coming to power is different than the reality of what the worker would experience should the Socialists come to power.

The problem for the Socialists was how to conceal the truth from the worker.

Norman Thomas, a presidential candidate for the Socialist Party before, and during, World War II, said, "The American People will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under the name of Liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened."

The true nature of Socialism has been concealed from the American People.  The Americans have been lied to.  The deception has been described as, "One way they look, another way they steer."

A. Ralph Epperson wrote, "The strategy is to promise the American people one thing and to deliver another.  Never make it appear that you, the candidate, are supporting socialism or are a Socialist, even though the platforms you will support after your election are indeed socialist in nature.  And you must never deliver so much socialism that the American people will discover the exact nature of the game and remove you from office."

Arthur Schlesinger Jr., a noted historian, outlined the program of giving the American people their socialism in gradual doses: "If socialism is to preserve democracy, it must be brought about step by step in a way which will not disrupt the fabric of custom, law and mutual confidence. . . . There seems no inherent obstacle in the gradual advance of socialism in the United States though a series of new deals."

The reason the socialists must deceive the unsuspecting citizen was made clear by the "London, England Times" which stated that Socialism was defined as: "Competition without prizes, boredom without hope, war without victory, and statistics without end."

In other words, most people don't want Socialism and they don't wish to live under the Socialist economy, so the Socialists must resort to trickery and deception, by a series of lies offered to the people by lying politicians, educators, and media.

President Lyndon Johnson, the author of "The Great Society," explained that there is no difference between Socialism and Communism (and I might add Utopianism, Collectivism, Progressivism, Statism, or Liberalism).  They are all names of the same system - public control of the means of production, where the government owns, and controls, everything, including the efforts of the people.

In the eyes of President Johnson, Socialism in America will be a government that exists to divide surplus take all of the money being unnecessarily spent and taking from the 'haves' and giving it to the 'have-nots' that they believe needs it so much.

The Socialists, like Johnson, and our current President, Barack Obama, all of them have the same goal: Redistribute wealth from the wealth to the poor.  Like Karl Marx, their aim is to use government to divide wealth.

The socialist machine in America has been slowly climbing the ladder to total control of the market place, and to ultimately become the final employer of all workmen.  A national ID is a part of this strategy, so that in the issuance of the identification, the government can say who shall have the privilege of working.  As Leon Trotsky, famed communist, once said, "Who does not obey shall not eat."  This is yet another reason why the Liberal Democrats support an uninhibited flow of illegal aliens into this nation.  It supports their goal of making America a Socialist country.  The problem of illegal workers will encourage the passing of a national ID card, so that the privilege to work can fall under federal control.  The permission to work will be granted by the National ID Card.

The Ford Foundation in 1969 published a "think piece" entitled "Planning and Participation," in which it declared, "The world is too complex for an abatement of government powers.  If anything, the role of government must be strengthened."

Debt, the deflation of the currency, and the destruction of an economic system is also a part of the design to make America a Socialist country.  The liberal left in America supports the Keynesian Economic Theory, an economic strategy devised by famous economist John Maynard Keynes, who wrote that the Russian Communist, Vladimir Lenin, was right.  "The best way to destroy capitalism is to debauch the currency.  By the continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens."  If you despise capitalism, and wish to replace the system with another that you prefer, it becomes imperative to find a way to destroy it.  One of the most effective methods is inflation, the "debauching of the currency."  The purpose is to destroy the free enterprise system.

Each and every policy by the Obama administration is geared toward the final push to bring the United States into a system of socialism.  The means of production, and the control of the people, falling under the watchful eye of government, is the aim behind each and every move the liberal left makes.  They believe we have "jumped the shark," that there is no turning back, and that they are "winning."  It is at this crucial time that we must not let down our guard, but instead increase our fight, and do all we can to turn the tide.  We are weary of the battle, and the liberal left is expecting apathy on our part because of that weariness.  Like a raft floating down the Niagra River, the river current of liberalism is leading us to their victory, destruction over the great falls.  Freedom is a fragile thing that must be fought for.  Preserving liberty takes great effort.

I would rather fight on my feet, than live on my knees.  It is time to grab an oar and begin rowing against the strengthening current that is leading us to socialism.  The question is, do we have enough people willing to row, and keep rowing.  And more important, are we teaching our children the importance of that fight, as well?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Thomas J. DiLorenzo, Hamilton's Curse, New York: Three Rivers Press, 2008

A. Ralph Epperson, The Unseen Hand, Publius Press, 1985

Saturday, October 26, 2013

Reid: Everybody Wants To Pay More Taxes But The Republicans Won't Let Them

by JASmius

You know, kind of like how every guy wants to slam his scrotum in a desk drawer repeatedly but those accursed Pachyderms keep talking us out of it:

Did you know that you had a huge wad of cash just burning a hole in your pocket that you wanted to send to Dirty Harry absolutely positively overnight?  Me neither.  Who knew?  I guess you have to possess his "logic and rationality" to gain that unique level of insight.

But I suppose, alas, that GOP anti-ObamaCare "insanity" will continue for a while longer, at least.  Something tells me it's becoming less "insane" by the day.  How do I know this?  It's this unique level of insight that I have.

Obama Knows

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

American Daily Review Radio Continues to Probe the Far Reaches of Political Insanity


American Daily Review

Hang on every word of Blog Talk Radio titans Doug Gibbs and JASmius (Hard Starboard Radio, as they show Donk-occupied America what a REAL dynamic duo looks and sounds like.

by ADR Radio
in Politics Conservative
today at 12:00 pm Pacific

Progressive Republicans versus Constitutional Republicans today's topic at Constitution Breakfast in Menifee, California

By Douglas V. Gibbs

A few elections ago I came across a story in the Riverside Press Enterprise where Republican Congresswoman Mary Bono Mack referred to herself as a "Progressive Republican."  A number of other Congress Critters, though they are careful to not refer to themselves as such, also hold to the progressive model of politics, which is a bigger government concept that drives towards a more collective society.  The needs of the community outweigh the freedoms of the individual, according to these people.  And what is scary about it is that it is nothing new in politics, and definitely nothing new in the Republican Party.

In today's presentation I will retrace the steps of the concept called The General Will, which Alexander Hamilton, who fought in the Revolutionary War, and was present at the Constitutional Convention, promoted.  We will discuss how those ideas evolved, and ultimately married with the socialist movement of the late 1800s, and eventually became a force determined to dismantle our Constitution, and fundamentally change the individual principles that make up the foundation of our government, culture, and American System.

Join us for a buffet breakfast, only $10 per person, at Boston Billie's in Menifee.  The event begins at 9:00 AM, and should run for a few hours.  A Question and Answer period will follow my presentation.

Boston Billie's
Address: 26850 Cherry Hills Blvd, Sun City, CA 92586
Phone:(951) 679-1756

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Friday, October 25, 2013

Brutal Muslim Gang Attack In London

by JASmius

American student beaten for....drinking beer?  London jihadist gang's motive could pose new level of sharia threat in the U.S.

"Islamburg"?  Twenty-two militant "training camps" around the country?  I seem to recall something taking place twelve years, six weeks, and two days ago that came out of one "training camp" in Afghanistan.  Multiplying that by a factor of almost two dozen....well, I guess it's pretty clear that they don't need frakking Afghanistan as a base of operations anymore, huh?

But don't worry about "justice," Megan; that term has been officially designated by the Regime as "Islamophobic," so you probably shouldn't use it on the air anymore.

Who HHS Secretary Sebelius Works For

By Douglas V. Gibbs

A friend of mine at Glenn Beck's 9/12 event in 2009 roamed the halls of Congress seeking as many politicians he could find so that he could give each and every one of them a "pink slip" that said on the front in big, bold letters, "You're Fired!"  When he happened across Congressman Charles Rangel, the representative hid behind his staffers and said to my friend after a quick glance at the wording on the pink slip, "What are you doing here?  You are trespassing!"

My friend quickly responded, "Who do you think owns this building?"

Rangel shuffled away before Mark could get a response.

The exchange made it obvious to my friend, and everyone he told the story to, that the Congress critters in Washington believe the town belongs to them, and they will do whatever they want to do, regardless of the opinion of We The People.  They are the ruling elite, and no peasant will dare challenge their authority.

While at an Obamacare Call Center visit on Thursday in Phoenix, Arizona, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, in response to continuous calls from Republicans for her to resign over the troubled launch of the ObamaCare sign-up website, said that those asking her to resign are “people I don’t work for.”

The implication is, then, that she works for the White House, and more specifically, President Barack Obama.

Today, Congressman Jeff Duncan, a Republican in the House of Representatives from South Carolina, on his Facebook page, wrote, "Yesterday during an interview about the disastrous ObamaCare roll out, HHS Secretary Sebelius responded to criticisms by saying 'I don't work' for the people calling for her resignation. Well, I have a message for Sec. Sebelius. You may serve at the pleasure of the President, but you work for all the people. You would be wise to remember that."

As was the case with Mr. Rangel, Kathleen "Cruella De Vil" Sebelius believes the people are the least of the government's worries, and are nothing but obstacles unless their vote has been bought by some government program, and if they are voting Democrat.

It is interesting how the same party that accused Mitt Romney of writing off 47% of the population during his presidential campaign, have written off most of the country, God (as we saw when they had to vote on whether to keep God on the Party Platform at the Democratic National Convention last year), and the United States Constitution, and have no problem with it.

I remember years ago when the Democrats were caught doing something they normally accused the Republicans of, Nancy Pelosi responded, and I paraphrase, "It's okay if we do it, because we are right."

They believe they are the ruling elite, and they know everything.  This idea regarding the "wisdom" of the political elite runs in line with the ideas of a French Political Philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who was one of the people behind igniting the French Revolution, as well as a man studied by statists such as Alexander Hamilton.  The will of the people, as Rousseau explained while promoting his belief in the General Will, is not necessarily expressed by the people, because they don't recognize it.  It is presumed, however, to be known by the ruling elite.  "No aspect of human life is excluded from the control of the general will. . . whosoever refuses to obey the general will must in that instance be restrained by the body politic, which actually means that he is forced to be free."

How could Rangel, or Sebelius, believe they work for the people if the people are too stupid to know what is good for them through the general will?  They aren't there to serve you, is their opinion.  They are there to rule over you.

Sebelius believes she works for the top guy.  The Big Cheese.  The Ruler.  The King.  The Anointed One.  He is President Barack Obama, his majesty, messiah, and healer of all ills.

At least, that is what the liberals think of him.

I just think he is a tiny man.  A coward.  A Marxist who is destroying the private sector, and the constitutional foundations of this nation, by design.  Every move has been mapped out, and the goal is to turn America into a socialist haven, and eventually for the United States to participate in a global governance system.

He is the radical who is leading America to her new future, should we let him.

He studied Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, which, by the way, was dedicated to "Lucifer. The first radical."

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Sebelius says she doesn't 'work for' those calling for her resignation - Fox News

General Will: Felix Morley, Freedom and Federalism (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1981), p. 36