Mychal Massie's View of the Obamas

 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Why I Do Not Like the Obamas
by Mychal Massie

The other evening on my twitter, a person asked me why I didn’t like the Obama’s? Specifically I was asked: “I have to ask, why do you hate the Obama’s? It seems personal not policy related. You even dissed their Christmas familypic.” The truth is I do not like the Obamas, what they represent, their ideology, and I certainly do not like hispolicies and legislation.

I’ve made no secret of my contempt for the Obamas. As I responded to the person who asked me the aforementioned question, I don’t like them because they are committed to the fundamental change of my/ourcountry into what can only be regarded as a Communist state.

I don’t hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists, they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America. They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds, and for those who are willing to admit same Michelle Obama’s raw contempt for white America is transpicuous.

I don’t like them because they comport themselves as emperor and empress. I expect, no I demand respect for the Office of President and a love of our country and her citizenry from the leader entrusted with the governance of same. President and Mrs. Reagan displayed an unparalleled love for the country and her people. The Reagans made Americans feel good about themselves and about what we could accomplish. Could you envision President Reagan instructing his Justice Department to act like jack-booted thugs?

Presidents are politicians and all politicians are known and pretty much expected to manipulate the truth, if not outright lie, but even using that low standard, the Obama’s have taken lies, dishonesty, deceit, mendacity, subterfuge and obfuscation to new depths. They are verbally abusive to the citizenry and they display an animus for civility.

I do not like them, because they both display bigotry overtly, as in the case of Harvard Professor Louis Gates, when he accused the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly, and her code speak pursuant to now being able too be proud of America. I view that statement and that mindset as an insult to those who died to provide acountry where a Kenyan, his illegal alien relatives, and his alleged progeny, could come and not only live freely, but rise to the highest, most powerful, position in the world. Michelle Obama is free to hate and disparage whites, because Americans of every description paid with their blood to ensure her right to do same.

I have a saying, that “the only reason a person hides things, is because they have something to hide.” Nopresident in history has spent over a million dollars to keep his records and his past sealed. And what the two of them have shared has been proved to be lies. He lied about when and how they met, he lied about his mother’s death and problems with insurance, Michelle lied to a crowd pursuant to nearly $500,000 bank stocks they inherited from his family. He has lied about his father’s military service, about the civil rights movement, ad nauseum.

He lied to the world about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address. He berated and publicly insulted a sitting Congressman. He has surrounded himself with the most rabidly, radical, socialist academicians today. He has fought for abortion procedures and opposed rulings that protected women and children, that even Planned Parenthood did not seek to support. He is openly hostile to business and aggressively hostile to Israel.

His wife treats being the First Lady, as her personal American Express Black Card (arguably the most prestigious credit card in the world). I condemn them because, as people are suffering, losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements, he and his family are arrogantly showing off their life of entitlement – as he goes about creating and fomenting class warfare.

I don’t like them, and I neither apologize nor retreat from my public condemnation of them and of his policies. We should condemn them for the disrespect they show our people, for his willful and unconstitutional actions pursuant to obeying the Constitutional parameters he is bound by, and his willful disregard for Congressional authority.

Dislike for them has nothing to do with the color of their skin, it has everything to do with their behavior, attitudes, and policies. And I have open scorn for their playing the race.

It is my intention to do all within my ability to ensure their reign is one term. I could go on, but let me conclude with this. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the media for refusing to investigate them as they did President Bush and President Clinton, and for refusing to label them for what they truly are. There is no scenario known to man, whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people as these two are permitted out of fear for their color.

As I wrote in a syndicated column titled “Nero In The White House” – “Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequalled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood…Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement – while America’s people go homeless, hungry and unemployed.” (WND.com; 8/8/11)

Oh, and as for it being personal, you tell me how you would feel if a senator from Illinois sent you a personally signed card, intended to intimidate you and your family. Because you had written a syndicated column titled “Darth Democrat” that was critical of him. (WND.com 11/16/04)

Related articles

• A guest post by Mychal Massie~ Daily Rant, Featured Why I Do Not Like The Obama's... (projectworldawareness.com)

Let's Collect From China

National emblem of the People's Republic of China (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Got this from www.ConservativeActionAlerts.com 

Obama Wants $1 TRILLION Debt Ceiling Hike -- But We Can Get That From CHINA Right Now... No Debt Limit Increase Needed!

YOU READ THAT RIGHT -- China owes the United States nearly ONE TRILLION DOLLARS from bonds they sold to US decades ago!

Everyone always goes on about how much WE owe to CHINA -- but they've conveniently forgotten the fact that China owes US so much money!

THAT MEANS WE DO NOT NEED TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING -- WE JUST NEED TO WITHHOLD OUR DEBT PAYMENTS TO CHINA!

You probably haven't heard about the fact that China owes billions to US -- or the fact that they have refused to pay what they owe.

Many decades ago, China sold sovereign bonds worldwide to investors in many nations. They sold tens of thousands of these bonds on U.S. soil to American citizens on the recommendation of our government, indicating it was a solid investment. Over the last sixty years, China has refused to pay to these bondholders either the principal or interest on these full faith and credit sovereign bonds.

China argues that because these bonds were issued by a former administration or regime, the Republic of China, today's China should not have to honor them. Does this mean that every time the United States changes presidents, we no longer have to honor the interest and principal payments to all who purchased U.S. Treasuries during the previous Administration? Can an incoming president simply refuse to honor any contracts or treaties approved by his or her predecessor?

OF COURSE NOT. In fact, China's position is in direct violation of the Successor Government Doctrine of International Law.

Under international law as it has been understood for centuries, successor governments, no matter the circumstances of the establishment of a new government, whether by revolution or civil war, must pay the sovereign debt incurred by its predecessor. But currently, the People's Republic of China owes a debt of over $750 billion to American citizens who are holding these full faith and credit sovereign bonds (many of them denominated in gold) sold to them by the Republic of China. Worldwide, the debt China owes to all bondholders is estimated to be several trillion dollars.

The debt owed to the American people should be paid. The U.S. government could dollar for dollar offset bond interest we owe China with interest, principal and penalties China owes us.

That would be $750 billion. Split 10 to 1, the U.S. taxpayer saves $700 billion in debt payments and the bond holders could receive the balance. As part of the deal, each state could receive badly needed investment funds as well.

That's money that America could use -- INSTEAD OF RAISING THE DEBT LIMIT AGAIN AND PUTTING US IN MORE DEBT!

It's not like there isn't precedent for China actually paying back the money they owe from past Chinese government debt. In 1987, threatened with being kept out of the British financial markets, China acknowledged the debt it owed from the sale of these exact same bonds to British investors. As part of the Great Britain-PRC agreement on Hong Kong, the PRC agreed to pay its debt to British citizens who owned these same bonds. By paying the British bondholders -- but no other bond owners worldwide, including U.S. bondholders -- China "selectively defaulted" on these bonds.

Currently, the People's Republic of China owes a debt of over $750 billion to American citizens who are holding full faith and credit sovereign bonds sold to them by the Republic of China. Worldwide, the debt China owes to all bondholders is estimated to be several trillion dollars. As reported by the American Bondholders Foundation, these facts are not in dispute by the U.S. Treasury Department, the White House, Congress or the State Department. In fact, an official at the Treasury commented that, "Yes, the bonds are real and yes China owes it and should pay it; however, good luck collecting it as China doesn't really want to pay it".

WHO CARES whether China wants to pay it? WE SHOULD WITHHOLD OUR PAYMENTS TO THEM if they don't!

Exactly what U.S. or international loophole, guideline, or precedent does China hide behind to keep from having to pay their debt to these bondholders? The answer is simple: None! They simply choose not to pay and no commercial, regulatory or government entity is holding their feet to the fire! China simply ignores the issue -- and our own government would rather not have to deal with it and risk "angering the dragon".

Yet China continues to enjoy open and unfettered access to U.S. capital markets, it has excessive cash reserves and a strong credit rating which the credit rating agencies (Standard & Poor's, Moody's and Fitch) are continually upgrading -- even though China's credit rating status SHOULD be "Selective Default" according to the rating criteria established by the credit rating agencies!

THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS! Congress needs to FORCE the Government Accounting Office to add up the total that China owes American citizens -- and then they need to stop paying money to China instead of increasing our own debt ceiling!

Look, it's no secret that trade between the United States and China is severely unbalanced. The PRC holds trillions of U.S. Treasury notes and bonds. The U.S. trade figures in 2010 showed a $273 billion trade deficit with the PRC. The difference between what we purchase from them and what they purchase from us is used by China to purchase more and more of our U.S. Treasuries. Then, of course, China receives tens of billions of dollars per year in interest payments from the Treasuries they purchase with profits from the U.S.-China trade imbalance.

Yet, in July of 2010 and again in November 2010, Dagong Global Credit, a leading Chinese Credit rating agency, downgraded the sovereign credit rating of the United States -- even though the U.S. has never defaulted on its debts. Not only has the U.S. never defaulted, it has never even offered to pay at a discounted rate.

The U.S. pays its debts in full, and yet China downgraded our credit rating due to assessed "potential" risk -- while its leaders announced to the world that the U.S. needs to be "financially responsible" and "economically sound." The irony is that being repaid by China is not a "potential risk"; it is today's reality for thousands of Americans to whom China refuses to pay what is legally and morally owed!

One U.S. Treasury official, when asked about the U.S. government's holdings of these bonds, confirmed that they had purchased a significant portion of the 1938, 1939 and 1940 U.S. dollar-denominated bonds, and they are still holding them. He affirmed that they did NOT shred them, destroy them, or in any way get rid of them; in fact, he replied, "Oh God no; we're saving them for a rainy day!"

These government officials don't seem to realize: it is pouring rain outside -- in fact, it's flooding!

NOW IS THE TIME to take advantage of the fact that CHINA OWES US MONEY! NO MORE DEBT HIKES!

As Michael Auslin of the American Enterprise Institute wrote in the National Review, "Beijing's plan since the early 1980s has been clear: Get strong. But in its success, China has developed the idea that the world's rules don't apply to it." And of course, when called to account for its behavior, it throws what Peter Huessy, President of GeoStrategic Analysis, calls "geostrategic temper tantrums."

You don't coddle children who throw tantrums; you make them do what's right. That's what we need to do NOW -- and that's why we've made it EASY to make your voice heard LOUD AND CLEAR on this issue -- please take action NOW!

P.S. Ironically -- and hypocritically -- with the fall of Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq, the PRC insisted at the United Nations that any successor government in Iraq must be held to pay its debts -- including debts to China. The U.N. approved.

That's what needs to happen here. We need to add up exactly what China owes America, and refuse to pay them what they say we owe them until they pay US back. PLEASE, take action RIGHT AWAY to DEMAND that Congress TAKE ACTION on this issue -- NOW! Thank you!

Related articles

• You won't believe who owes U.S. billions (bullittcountyfreedomfighters.wordpress.com)

A Good Read on Obamacare

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A few nuggets from Neal Boortz:

Ohhhhhhhh!  The evil insurance companies wouldn’t insure pre-existing conditions?  Are you kidding me?  This is supposed to be health INSURANCE!  Not a health care payment plan.  The very essence of insurance is that you’re covered against UNEXPECTED losses and expenses.  Automobile insurance doesn’t pay for oil changes, gas or new tires.  Those are expenses you expect when you own a car.  And you don’t buy auto insurance to repair your car AFTER you’ve had a wreck.  But with health insurance we expect virtually everything to be paid for, and we feel we should be able to buy insurance after we become ill.  If we looked at car insurance the way we look at health insurance it would cost you $6000 a year to insure a clunker .. .and that’s with a perfect driving record.

And while we’re at it … Health insurance policies should no more cover contraceptives than a homeowner’s insurance policy should cover Draino.  It’s your plumbing.  Keep it clean.
How about getting rid of mandates?  Did you know that in Connecticut all health insurance policies were required by state law to cover hair transplants for balding men?  Transplants are expensive --- I know – and as soon as coverage was mandated the companies had to increase their premiums to cover the costs!  So you had a middle-class family of four somewhere struggling to pay higher health insurance premium because some joker across the state wanted someone else to pay for some hair plugs.  Being bald is not a health problem.  If it were I wouldn’t be the healthy specimen I am today.  There is no reason in hell that insurance should cover costs like this … but there you are.  Did the Democrats suggest reforming this area of health insurance?  Not on your life.  Did the Democrats propose allowing someone in Connecticut to buy their health insurance from a company in Ohio that didn’t include hair transplant coverage?  No way!

Read the full article here.

Exploitation of a Death

Trayvon Martin Protest - Sanford (Photo credit: werthmedia)

The Death of Trayvon Martin: Is There Nothing Progressives Won’t Exploit?

By Derek Hunter (originally posted at Townhall.com on 3/25/2012)

A 17-year-old kid is shot dead. Police are investigating…and progressives see an opportunity. The Trayvon Martin case, in addition to being a tragedy, is a case study in political exploitation and progressive tactics.

The shooting death of a 17-year-old is horrible, whatever the circumstances and no matter their race. But progressives seem to care about this case only because of the race of the victim. There are thousands of murders that don’t “fit the bill” for exploitation and thus are ignored by these self-appointed “justice seekers.”

What happened that night? I don’t know. But neither do any of the race hustlers, such as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, who speak of it as if they are clairvoyant. They care deeply about Trayvon’s family… as long as there are cameras around.

This lack of actual knowledge doesn’t stop progressives – many of whom call for due process rights and the presumption of innocence for terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay – from demanding the head of George Zimmerman, the shooter in this case.

The hypocrisy runs deep.

I understand the tragedy here but not the selective outrage. There are thousands of murders in this country each year. How many have you heard of? A large percentage of those murder victims are younger than 30. How many have you heard of? Only a few.

How many cause people to take to the streets in protest? How many occupy a large portion of cable news? How many do these progressives screaming for the head of George Zimmerman ever mention on their TV or radio shows?

You know the answer.

For progressives to care about someone who has been killed there must be an ulterior motive. In the case of Trayvon Martin, there are many.

First, race. That news outlets can’t talk about this case without mentioning Trayvon’s race is a testament to how successful progressives have been in instilling a segregationist mindset in the media. That they rarely mention the shooter’s race is a testament to just how far progressives will go to exploit tragedy to advance their divide and conquer agenda. Zimmerman is Hispanic, not white, as originally thought. Since the race-hustling machine was already in motion and impossible to stop, they and their fellow travellers in the media simply ignore it.

Bill Maher, HBO’s resident crap-flinging monkey, tweeted, “No probable cause in #TrayvonMartin murder? If a dead unarmed teen and an angry racist with a smoking gun is too subtle a clue, what isn't?”

Is Zimmerman a racist? I have no idea (his father and neighbor say no), but I do know Bill Maher has no idea either. But that doesn’t stop progressive Maher from making a definitive statement on the issue. Facts don’t matter in pursuit of the agenda.

Second, policy. Progressives always have hated Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law. This case offered an opportunity to demonize it, and they took it – even though it does not apply to this case. Zimmerman wasn’t “standing his ground;” he was following Martin. Whatever happened when they engaged in their confrontation is a separate matter.

But again, facts don’t matter. The fascist progressives blame the law, almost as much as the shooter, for Martin’s death. Before any investigation is complete, calls for repeal (which were there before the shooting) are getting louder and louder. Mindless media drones and the professionally outraged progressive mob are calling for repeal. Screw facts; they demand action.

Third, politics. The one thing progressives value above all else is political power. They will dance on Trayvon Martin’s grave to keep people divided into the groups and sub-groups they’ve worked so hard to create and manipulate.

Media Matters, a fascistic group of anti-First Amendment progressives whose mission is allegedly to correct conservative bias in the media, has been promoting the Trayvon Martin story. What bias is there in this case? No one, right or left, doesn’t consider this a tragedy. It’s just that some don’t want to call for more blood without an investigation. But when Media Matters is involved, you can bet the Democrat Party is pulling the strings. Enter MSNBC.

MSNBC’s lineup is a who’s who of detestable bigots and professional hatemongers whose only goal in life is to advance the progressive agenda at all costs. Rather than focus on the life of Trayvon or the tragedy of his death, MSNBC had a segment entitled “The GOP agenda that produced ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws.” The dots were laid out so plainly even most of their intelligence-challenged audience could connect them – GOP pushed Stand Your Ground, Stand Your Ground is responsible for Trayvon’s death, therefore the GOP is responsible for Trayvon’s death.

Since many of the uninformed who watch MSNBC need things spelled out for them because they’re too busy trying to figure out why they can’t eat tomato soup with a fork, fill-in host and noted idiot racist Karen Finney went all-in. Mimicking the time progressives blamed Sarah Palin for the tragic Tucson shooting, only to have the insane man behind it be exposed as an anti-war, anti-Bush leftist, Finney blamed Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney for the death of Trayvon.

The only thing more disgusting than Finney knowingly (and believe me, she knows) exploiting the death of a 17-year-old for political purposes, or a “news” organization broadcasting that on their network is knowing of the other deaths and murders they willingly ignore because the victims, the perpetrators or both have the incorrect skin pigment to advance their agenda.

A human life is a human life to everyone – well, to everyone but progressives. To them, a human life is a tool, a toy, a means by which their anti-liberty, anti-American agenda can be advanced, provided those involved in taking it have the correct type and order of melanin, genitals or any other subdividing characteristics they deem worthy of outrage. The rest? The thousands who don’t fit their mold? They can rot. They can rot just like those who fit the mold in the past, served their purpose and are now forgotten for new pawns.

The death of Trayvon Martin is a tragedy, just as the death of every person who passes in such a matter is a tragedy. How it came to be will be determined in the due course of an honest investigation, not by exploiting a family’s tragedy for votes and ratings.

The only way to give Trayvon justice, for non-progressives still interested in such things, is to let the investigation lead where it goes, not pass the same prejudgment on George Zimmerman progressives accuse him of passing on Trayvon. It’s time for progressives to stop dancing on Trayvon Martin’s grave, to stop dancing on the graves of all the victims they exploit, take off their bigoted blinders and join the rest of society.

They won’t. They can’t. It’s who they are. So it’s up to the rest of us to help them at the ballot box by continually rejecting any and everyone who would seek to abuse victims for political gain. Especially when that trail leads to the White House.

Related articles

• Karen Finney - If Only Rush Limbaugh Wasn't So "Racist", Trayvon Would Still Be Alive? (neosecularist.com)
• Trayvon Martin and Enron (caraellison.wordpress.com)

Thoughts on Current Energy Policy

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Frank J over at IMAO penned the following thoughts on the current administration's energy policy. Too good not to share:

* Don’t worry about oil prices, because Obama is riding to the rescue with… half a pipeline. Yes, Obama is fast-tracking part of the Keystone pipeline… even though it didn’t really need this approval. And what can you do with a partial pipeline? Absolutely nothing. But that’s Obama’s genius compromise between the vast majority who wants the Keystone pipeline and the fringe minority environmentalist against it: a useless half pipeline. From our useless half-man president. Of course, that leads to the perfect Halloween costume for Obama: half a horse costume. You know which half. 

* You know that half billion lost on Solyndra? Obama wants to assure us it was not his program “per se”. Despite him appearing with Solyndra and championing them, he’s trying to claim he wasn’t involved in that giant waste of our money, putting blame on Congress… I guess for stupidly listening to Obama and approving money going to Solyndra. Anyway, there’s Obama’s energy plan: a half-billion in a defunct solar panel maker plus half an oil pipeline. Throw in some broken windmills and maybe part of a track for a high speed train and we’re…

Creating Your Own Inheritance

Author unknown:

Remember January 3, 2007

The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007, the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.

The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.

For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is “Bush’s Fault”, think about this:

• January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:
• The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
• The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
• The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
• George Bush’s Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!

Remember that day…

January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!

THANK YOU DEMOCRATS (especially Barney ) for taking us from 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!

(BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 times to stop Fannie & Freddie – starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy). Barney blocked it and called it a “Chicken Little Philosophy” (and the sky did fall!)

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA. And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress, especially BARNEY!!!!

So when someone tries to blame Bush…

REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007….THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!

Bush may have been in the car but the Democrats were in charge of the gas pedal and steering wheel they were driving the economy into the ditch.

Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democratic Party.

Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011.

In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budget.

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009. Let’s remember what the deficits looked like during that period. If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets.That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.

If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.

In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is “I inherited a deficit that I voted for, and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.”

“The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.”

Related articles

• National Debt Increases More Under Three Years of Obama Than Eight of Bush; Politico Ignores Development (newsbusters.org)

Miss Fluke Goes to Washington

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

When even casual sex requires a state welfare program, you're pretty much done for.

By MARK STEYN / Syndicated columnist

I'm writing this from Australia, so, if I'm not quite up to speed on recent events in the United States, bear with me – the telegraph updates are a bit slow here in the bush. As I understand it, Sandra Fluke is a young coed who attends Georgetown Law and recently testified before Congress.

Oh, wait, no. Update: It wasn't a congressional hearing; the Democrats just got it up to look like one, like summer stock, with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid doing the show right here in the barn and providing a cardboard set for the world premiere of "Miss Fluke Goes To Washington," with full supporting cast led by Chuck Schumer strolling in through the French windows in tennis whites and drawling, "Anyone for bull****?"

Oh, and the "young coed" turns out to be 30, which is what less-evolved cultures refer to as early middle age. She's a couple of years younger than Mozart was at the time he croaked but, if the Dems are to be believed, the plucky little Grade 24 schoolgirl has already made an even greater contribution to humanity.

She's had the courage to stand up in public and demand that someone else (and this is where one is obliged to tiptoe cautiously, lest offense is given to gallant defenders of the good name of American maidenhood such as the many prestigious soon-to-be-former sponsors of this column who've booked Bill Maher for their corporate retreat with his amusing "Sarah Palin is a c***" routine ...)

Where was I? Oh, yes. The brave middle-age schoolgirl had the courage to stand up in public and demand that someone else pay for her sex life.

Well, as noted above, she's attending Georgetown, a nominally Catholic seat of learning, so how expensive can that be? Alas, Georgetown is so nominally Catholic that the cost of her sex life runs to three grand – and, according to the star witness, 40 percent of female students "struggle financially" because of the heavy burden of maintaining a respectable level of pre-marital sex at a Jesuit institution.

As I said, I'm on the other side of the planet, so maybe I'm not getting this. But I'd say the core issue here is not religious liberty, which in these godless times the careless swing voter now understands as a code phrase meaning that uptight Republicans who can't get any action want to stop you getting any, too.

Nor is the core issue liberty in its more basic sense – although it would certainly surprise America's founders that their republic of limited government is now the first nation in the developed world to compel private employers to fully fund the sex lives of their employees.

I Have a Dream

by Tim Nerenz and published on his blog, "Moment of Clarity" on March 3, 2012

Remember these from school?  “Ask not what your country can do for you; demand it.”  “The only thing to fear is buying our own stuff.”  “Give me liberty or give me free stuff.”  “One if by land, two if by sea; get off that horse and buy my stuff for me.”

And who can forget, “I have a dream…where you have to give me stuff.”

What in the world has happened to us?  How did we go from Patrick Henry and Dr. Martin Luther King to some 30 year-old still-a-student from Georgetown going on national TV to demand more government because she can’t figure out how to keep from getting knocked up on her own dime?

The Hypocrisy of the Left Exposed

With the Left wailing about the comments Rush Limbaugh recently made about Sandra Fluke, why do they never condemn their own? Also, why does the mainstream media not provide the same level of coverage? Watch this video to see their false outrage exposed for what it really is.

Related articles

• Rush Limbaugh Is the Real Victim Here! (delong.typepad.com)

Shocking Undercover Video

Watch this shocking video where contraceptives were actually obtained without a government mandate.

Why Do We Have Deficits?

Tax (Photo credit: 401K)

By Neal Boortz

The answer is two-fold: We, Americans, are ignorant and lazy.  We have a system in this country that allows moochers, leaches and parasites to vote.  These moochers do not pay any income taxes; in fact they are the beneficiaries of a redistributive, progressive tax system.  We require absolutely nothing of these people, not even a freaking ID, to vote … it’s no wonder that our government has grown to its current size.

Two political scientists, Jody W. Lipford and Bruce Yandle, did a study on taxation in America.  The results of their study led them to the conclusion that our progressive tax system where high-income earners sustain a high tax burden is simply unsustainable.  The reason is simple: the number of moochers are growing, while the number of producers are shrinking.  That’s a fact.  “The share of total federal taxes paid by the bottom 40 percent of households has fallen from 9.3 percent in 1979 to 5.2 percent in 2007, while the shares of the tax burden borne by the top 10 percent and one percent, respectively, have risen steadily,” according to their research.  This acts as nothing but an incentive for people to vote for government services that they don’t have to pay for.

Voting is the lazy-man’s work.  Going to the voting booth once a year or so and voting for Democrats is much easier than waking up at 4am, working three jobs,  earning paychecks, and driving home in the dark.  Our progressive income tax system has enabled the moochers.  In fact, “during the period 1979-2007, the increasing progressivity of the federal tax code is associated with greater government debt and entitlement spending.”  Coincidence?  I think not.

Our forefathers predicted this.  In 1810, political theorist John C. Calhounforesaw this problem:

"The necessary result, then, of the unequal fiscal action of the government is, to divide the community into two great classes; one consisting of those who, in reality, pay the taxes, and, of course, bear exclusively the burthen of supporting the government; and the other, of those who are the recipients of their proceeds, through disbursements, and who are, in fact, supported by the government; or, in fewer words, to divide it into tax-payers and tax-consumers."

We were warned, but then along came the Sixteenth Amendment establishing the income tax.  These political scientists Lipford and Yandle believe that the Sixteenth Amendment “nullified the prior constitutional restraint on the size of government and enabled one group of citizens to vote themselves benefits at the expense of another.”

There’s a woman in Michigan named Amanda Clayton.  You can read about this lovely little moocherright here.  Last fall Amanda won $1,000,000 in the state lottery.  Today she’s still on welfare and using food stamps?  Why?  She needs the help to pay her bills.  This is mooching raised to an art form.  Care to guess how she would probably vote in November?  (If she votes at all)

Now, modern day Democrats have made enabling the moochers an art form.  Is it any wonder why the FairTax and its conditional repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment scares the bejesus out of liberals?  According to these political scientists, the Sixteenth Amendment is the foundation for big government and redistribution!

But it gets even worse.  Keep reading …

Related articles

• Taxes in the U.S. Are Low and Progressive (bigthink.com)