Thursday, October 30, 2014
“She has delivered the same 64-word speech eight times already, but Gabby Giffords is struggling to get through the ninth,” msn.com reports. ‘Together, we can win elections,’ the former Arizona congresswoman tells her Seattle audience before starting to stumble. After a moment of confused silence, an aide whispers the next line, and Giffords continues the broken sentence: ‘… change our laws.'” The rest of the article focuses on the fact that Giffords and her anti-gun group Americans for Responsible Solutions are fighting a losing battle for gun control. But here’s the main question raised by this piece . . .
Is ANY of this Giffords’ idea? The fact that the brain-damaged Congresswoman can’t make it through a 64-word speech she’s delivered countless times indicates either extreme fatigue or ongoing cognition problems or both. I reckon she’s being pushed beyond her mental and physical limits by her “team.” You know. “For the children.”
Here’s my idea: how about Giffords’ “handlers” and her hubby just back the F off and let the wounded Congresswoman rest, recuperate and retire? Not gonna happen. Giffords is the literal embodiment of the bloody shirt anti-gunners wave – without shame – to further their civilian disarmament agenda. And they call us cynical.
Monday, October 27, 2014
BOHICA! Remember the post about voter fraud in AZ and in IL?
Here it is:
Those pesky calibration problems with voting machines seems to be going viral. Now the voting machines in MD will only vote for DEMS.
Here is link to the latest voting Obamination: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/27/calibration-issue-pops-up-on-maryland-voting-machines/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fmost-popular+(Internal+-+Most+Popular+Content)
Open to jihadists.
Open to drug dealers.
Open to gun-runners.
Saturday, October 25, 2014
The president is upset. Very upset. Frustrated and angry. Seething about the government’s handling of Ebola, said the front-page headline in the New York Times last Saturday.
There’s only one problem with this pose, so obligingly transcribed for him by the Times. It’s his government. He’s president. Has been for six years. Yet Barack Obama reflexively insists on playing the shocked outsider when something goes wrong within his own administration.
IRS? “It’s inexcusable, and Americans are right to be angry about it, and I am angry about it,” he thundered in May 2013 when the story broke of the agency targeting conservative groups. “I will not tolerate this kind of behavior in any agency, but especially in the IRS.”
Except that within nine months, Obama had grown far more tolerant, retroactively declaring this to be a phony scandal without “a smidgen of corruption.”
Obamacare rollout? “Nobody is more frustrated by that than I am,” said an aggrieved Obama about the botching of the central element of his signature legislative achievement. “Nobody is madder than me.”
Veterans Affairs scandal? Presidential chief of staff Denis McDonough explained: “Secretary [Eric] Shinseki said yesterday … that he’s mad as hell and the president is madder than hell.” A nice touch – taking anger to the next level.
The president himself declared: “I will not stand for it.” But since the administration itself said the problem was long-standing, indeed predating Obama, this means he had stood for it for five and a half years.
The one scandal where you could credit the president with genuine anger and obliviousness involves the recent breaches of White House Secret Service protection. The Washington Post described the first lady and president as “angry and upset,” and no doubt they were. But the first Secret Service scandal – the hookers of Cartagena – evinced this from the president: “If it turns out that some of the allegations that have been made in the press are confirmed, then of course I’ll be angry.” An innovation in ostentatious distancing: future conditional indignation.
These shows of calculated outrage – and thus distance – are becoming not just unconvincing but unamusing. In our system, the president is both head of state and head of government. Obama seems to enjoy the monarchial parts, but when it comes to the actual business of running government, he shows little interest and even less aptitude.
His principal job, after all, is to administer the government and to get the right people to do it. (That’s why we typically send governors rather than senators to the White House.) That’s called management. Obama had never managed anything before running for the biggest management job on Earth. It shows.
What makes the problem even more acute is that Obama represents not just the party of government but a grandiose conception of government as the prime mover of social and economic life. The very theme of his presidency is that government can and should be trusted to do great things. And therefore society should be prepared to hand over large chunks of its operations – from health care (one-sixth of the economy) to carbon regulation down to free contraception – to the central administrative state.
But this presupposes a Leviathan not just benign but competent. When it then turns out that vast, faceless bureaucracies tend to be incapable, inadequate, hopelessly inefficient and often corrupt, Obama resorts to expressions of angry surprise.
He must. He’s not simply protecting his own political fortunes. He’s trying to protect faith in the entitlement state by portraying its repeated failures as shocking anomalies.
Unfortunately, the pretense has the opposite effect. It produces not reassurance but anxiety. Obama’s determined detachment conveys the feeling that nobody’s home. No one leading. Not even from behind.
A poll conducted two weeks ago showed that 64 percent of likely voters (in competitive races) think that “things in the U.S. feel like they are out of control.” This is one degree of anxiety beyond thinking the country is on the wrong track. That’s been negative for years, and it’s a reflection of failed policies that in principle can be changed. Regaining control, on the other hand, is a far dicier proposition.
With events in the saddle and a sense of disorder growing – the summer border crisis, Ferguson, the rise of the Islamic State, Ebola – the nation expects from the White House not miracles but competence. At a minimum, mere presence. An observer presidency with its bewildered-bystander pose only adds to the unease.
Charles Krauthammer is a columnist for the Washington Post. His email address is email@example.com.
Derek Jeter recently hit his last home run. The baseball bat he used will become a piece of famous sports history. People will travel from everywhere to see it and take pictures of their children standing next to it. Now, how about that same sporting equipment used in Joe Pesci’s last scene in Casino? Or by Robert DeNiro in The Untouchables?
(go ahead - Google "Joe Pesci Beatdown - Casino" even for me it is a bit too gruesome to post here.)
Doesn’t quite have the same feel, does it? Baseball bats are used quite often to bludgeon a victim to death, but we would look foolish if we called them “weapons” when we them on display at Walmart. Why? Because more bats are swung at baseballs than people, despite their origin as one of mankind’s first weapons, the club.
Similarly, the first use of a self-powered vehicle was to move artillery. In light of the tens of thousands of deaths by automobile, are they weapons or vehicles?
Firearms were originally designed as a battle implement. Their first purpose was to inflict human casualties; there is no argument to that fact. Today that is simply not the case - the vast majority of ammunition is produced and fired peacefully at paper targets. It is almost always incorrect to call pistols, rifles, and shotgun “weapons.”
So, why do some people insist on calling all firearms “weapons” in any situation? The answer is simple: Brainwashing.
Fear sells newspapers and keeps attention. This comes from our primal need to survive. On the 6 o’clock news, we all keep track of the Ebola virus. We want to know if it’s close to us. Some might tune out for sports and weather, but we will all have a universal interest in staying alive. Media knows that, so they provoke that emotional reaction the most natural and effective way possible–by implementing fear.
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
The Maricopa County GOP chairman provided the Arizona Daily Independent with the following account of what happened during the Aug. 26 primary election cycle:
“A person wearing a Citizens for a Better Arizona T-shirt dropped a large box of hundreds of early ballots on the table and started stuffing the ballot box as I watched in amazement,” said A.J. LaFaro, chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Party.
Guy: “What’s your problem?”LaFaro said he later submitted a public information request and obtained this surveillance video from 12:30- 1:30 on Aug. 25 (audio unavailable):
LaFaro: “I don’t have a problem.”
Guy: “Stop watching me. You’re annoying me.”
LaFaro: “One of your ballots isn’t sealed.”
Guy: “It’s none of your business. What’s your name?”
LaFaro: “I’m the chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Party. What’s yours?”
Guy: “Go f*** yourself. I don’t have to tell you who I am.”
LaFaro said it all happened as he was working with the elections staff during early ballots processing. The team in charge of processing the ballots got “way ahead” so the information systems coordinator convened an extended lunch period from 11:30- 1:00 p.m.
It was between 12:54 and 1:04 that LaFaro said he was seated at one of the cubicles, heard a loud thud and turned around to see the man who he claims was caught on tape stuffing “hundreds” of ballots. LaFaro described the man as a “vulgar, disrespectful, violent thug” with “no respect for our laws.” He said he would have followed the man to his car to get his tag number but “feared for [his] life.”
“America used to be a nation of laws where one person had one vote,” LaFaro said, the Daily Independent reported. ”I’m sad to say not anymore.”
On its website, Citizens for a Better Arizona says it is an “outgrowth of the grassroots movement that led to the historic recall of former [Republican] President of the Senate Russell Pearce.” The group is ”committed to improving the quality of life of all Arizonans – better schools, better health care, better jobs, better government and a better, more civil tone of respect and decency.”
Here in the NorthLeft state of Washington, all voting is done by mail-in ballots. The last few gubernatorial elections demonstrated clearly that Josef Stalin's observation about the election process hit the the nail square on the head - with a hammer and sickle.
Anyone with a pencil can vote as often as they choose with the only repercussions being those that will be a normal part of life in a big-government socialist state.
Here's another one.
Chicagoland voting machine casts candidate’s vote for his Dem opponent
October 21, 2014
SCHAUMBURG, Ill. – Admitting his confidence in Cook County ballot integrity is shaken, State Representative Candidate Jim Moynihan (R-56), was shocked today when he tried to cast a vote for himself and the voting machine cast it for his opponent instead.
“While early voting at the Schaumburg Public Library today, I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast the vote for my opponent,” said Moynihan. “You could imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.”
While using a touch screen voting machine in Schaumburg, Moynihan voted for several races on the ballot, only to find that whenever he voted for a Republican candidate, the machine registered the vote for a Democrat in the same race. He notified the election judge at his polling place and demonstrated that it continued to cast a vote for the opposing candidate’s party. Moynihan was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates, including his own race. It is unknown if the machine in question (#008958) has been removed from service or is still in operation.
“Clearly, I am concerned that citizens will be unable to vote for the candidate of their choice, especially if they are in a hurry and do not double check their ballot,” added Moynihan. “I cannot say whether or not this was intentional, but Cook County voters deserve better and should not have their right to vote suppressed.”
The 56th District covers portions of Schaumburg, Bartlett, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, Hanover Park, Palatine, Rolling Meadows, and Roselle.