Barack Obama

I'll see your ignorance and raise you some idiocy

To graduate from high school in NYS, students are supposed to have had a semester's worth of economics.  You know, this sort of thing:

Granted, the high school graduation rate in NYS isn't anything to write home about—74%—and it's even worse in specific cities like Rochester, where the rate is an abysmal 46%, so presumably lots and lots of New Yorkers have never seen anything remotely like the above graph.

But what's Shelly Silver's excuse?

In the SOTU address the other night, Barack Obama took the predictably pandering populist path of calling for an increase in the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $9 an hour (and called for indexing it to inflation, too).

Meanwhile, back at the Empire Ranch, Andrew Cuomo had already proposed raising the state minimum wage to $8.75, without indexing. But not to be outdone in the economic illiteracy department, Speaker Silver and

...[t]he Democrat-dominated state Assembly has amended its proposal for a boost in the state's minimum wage to match President Barack Obama's desire to establish a federal $9 per hour wage...
But this never helps the people it claims to.
...The key idea underlying the textbook model of minimum wages is that when something becomes more expensive, people use less of it...
Translation: the real minimum wage is zero.
...It seems that one could still seriously question whether now, when so many are struggling to find jobs, it makes sense to enact a policy that makes it more difficult for them to do so...
Well, yes, we could question it, but we already know why this is being proposed (emphasis mine):
...Because a higher minimum wage is easy to implement, and because a higher minimum wage is a mandate for higher costs on businesses, rather than an item in the budget on which states would have to spend more money, minimum wages are a popular policy for trying to help poor and low- income families...
A three-fer for politicians: appearing to help the relatively poor (and "poverty" is now relative, defined based on income rather than on purchasing power) at no cost to themselves but at significant cost to evil, greedy businesses.  Such a deal.
As for the fact that a higher minimum wage never helps the people it's supposed to?  No matter.  It isn't really about them, anyway. It's a disingenuous exercise in ignorance and idiocy by our moral and intellectual superiors—an ultimately ruinous, self-serving game.




Taqiyya sunrise

From a new contributor, Augustus...the sculptor, however, made an unfortunate error—that's the wrong finger:

Ten months ago, Barry Banyon had been reelected President of the United States.   With confidence in his interpretation of the political forces at work in the nation and his own unerring judgment, he released his Executive Order entitled, “Educational Initiatives for National Security, Economic Prosperity, and a Just Society”.  In it, he set rules that the Department of Education would follow in the teaching of Islam in our nation’s schools.
In a prime-time address to the nation, which was broadcast on all channels - while interrupting Sunday Night Football to increase its audience - he laid out the thrust of his program.
“The Middle East has been a tinderbox of war for centuries.  But it also contains the energy that has fueled the economic prosperity of the United States and the world.  Previous administrations have tried unsuccessfully to defuse the area militarily while still keeping its energy resources flowing.  This approach has been unsuccessful and is, quite frankly, a self-centered approach where America benefits at the expense of the Muslim world.  I have crafted an approach based on my unique study and understanding of Islam which will reverse that situation.”
“Today, I signed an Executive Order that Islam will be taught in all schools, from kindergarten through college.  This cannot be construed as an unconstitutional blending of church and state since its objective is strictly national security and developing a more just attitude toward Islam in the United States.  Our Constitution and our national heritage is one of equality of opportunity for all.  Yet, since 9/11, Muslims have been unfairly characterized as being responsible for an event that was the culmination of years of a colonialist mentality by western nations.”
“We Americans have financially benefited from our previous, self-serving policies and it is time we recycled those benefits into a sustainable policy.  Toward that end, I, in a spirit of reconciliation and appeasement, have ordered that all federal dollars for educational support of any kind will be contingent upon compliance with this order.”
“It is important that we Americans do not focus on our national prejudices when reacting to this, since blind adherence to these prejudices has been responsible for the Middle East’s current unsettled condition.  You must see it, as I do, as the first plan that will bring a lasting peace to the Middle East.”
“To further promote international understanding by reaching out to those some wrongly believe are our enemies, I have further directed that the Department of Education develop the curriculum that will be used, as only the centralized knowledge of this department can insure the proper implementation of this plan.”
“In order to convince the Muslim world of the genuineness of this proposal, I have asked the Ayatollahs of Iran to select an individual who I will appoint to oversee the implementation of this plan.  They have generously agreed and I am announcing the appointment of Grand Mullah Mohammed S. Prophet as the Undersecretary of Education.”
The main stream media were agog at the proposal.  MSNBC’s Chris Matthews declared it, “The first truly original approach and a guaranteed success”.  CNN’s Wolf Blitzer was equally impressed and Tom Brokaw declared, “President Banyon will lead this generation forward to make it the new ‘Greatest Generation’”.   Commenting on Sunday Night Football, Bob Costas declared that, “Before getting back to the game, it should be noted that Americans will finally put the world’s well-being ahead of our own”.
Conservatives immediately labeled this effort as unconstitutional and called for President Banyon’s impeachment.  Even liberal Democrats were appalled by the speech but remained silent.
Immediately after the speech, the Senate Majority leader, Henry Rod (D) met with the House Minority Leader Paula Lossi .  Lossi declared, “I’ve had calls from Republicans to draft Articles of Impeachment and there are some of those religion-and-guns Democrats from the South who will go along”.
“Just tell your caucus”, Rod said, “that there is no chance the Senate will find him guilty.  Impeaching a President for furthering Islam will definitely cost us Muslim votes and other minorities will be empathetic with the oppressed Muslims. Democrats who vote for impeachment could cost Democrats their seats and also our majority position in the House and Senate. That S.O.B. in the White House knows we can’t impeach him on any constitutional issue because it will cost us votes.  Besides, if we spin it right, it would be another suicide attempt by the Republicans if they try to impeach.”
Lossi thought for a moment and added, “I’m no constitutional scholar, but this surely seems like a violation of the First Amendment”.
Rod tried to suppress a laugh as he thought, “You’re no scholar, period”.  

“This is political survival”, Rod asserted, “And that always trumps the Constitution.”
Back in the family quarters, President Banyon spoke with wife, Millie, while they sipped a seventy-five-year-old bottle of champagne, courtesy of Congresswoman Lossi’s winery.  The President’s wine cellar was renowned for its quality while few realized that Banyon had never had to spend a cent on it; political supporters and cronies realized that the man who felt the pain of the masses had very egalitarian tastes.
Millie laughed as she spoke, “I suppose Rod and Lossi have it figured out by now; they can’t impeach you without imperiling their jobs.”
“Yeah”, Barry added, “Rod has figured it out but I wonder if he can explain it in words of a single syllable for Lossi?”
“Oh, she’ll get it.  She may not be the sharpest tack in the box for most things, but she has a nose for power.  Politics activates brain cells that were long ago given up for dead”.
The President and First Lady giggle as they clink glasses in a toast to themselves.
Millie Banyon wasn’t a bit worried when she said, “Aside from those crazy Tea Partiers, there aren’t ten other politicians in Washington with the balls to stand on a Constitutional principle.”
Banyon replied, “Yeah--so now, how soon after my term ends should I announce my ‘conversion' to Islam?
“Why wait that long,” Millie replied.  It would add zest to your last year if you did it then.  And it would focus attention back on us instead of those silly people in the primaries.”
Just a preposterous parody?  Not so much. At CNS:
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) says that he believes President Obama in his second term will drive the progressive agenda forward with a more aggressive use of executive power.
“We’re going to see a president of the United States use his executive powers as much as he’s allowed to under federal law and under the Constitution, in a more aggressive way than last time,” Brown said in an interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow....
And click on the image to read about the Egyptian magazine article that inspired this graphic:
Think of it this way:
And then there are the other three Horsemen of the Apocalypse, Chuck Hagel, John Kerry, and John Brennan:
Regarding Hagel, at PowerLine:
It is quite remarkable that President Obama has nominated a Secretary of Defense who is applauded by eccentric opponents of American strength like Mike Gravel, and bitter enemies of the U.S. like the government of Iran. In a parallel universe inhabited by reporters, this would be a news story.
You might find this blurb from early in Barry's reign presidency about now-Secretary of State Kerry's hearings on "Engaging with Muslim Communties Around the World" intriguing.
And let us not forget CIA Director-nominee Brennan gushing over his favorite city, al-Quds.  Where the hell is al-Quds, you ask?  It's better known as...Jerusalem.
So it looks as though ol' Augustus has hit the nail on the head.  Not bad for a dead Roman.

Dunkirk redux

From one of our ace contributors:

Unmitigated Defeat

By Publius

On New Year’s Day, the House of Representatives voted for a fiscal package that included a ratio of about forty times as much in tax increases as in spending cuts.  The United States government will continue to spend far more than it takes in with about forty percent of every dollar it spends borrowed money.  The impact of the withdrawal of hundreds of billions in new taxes from the private sector, with only token spending cuts, will likely send our economy into a tailspin. The fiscal cliff, as awful as it would have been, would have been more responsible than the fiscal package just enacted.  At least, going over the cliff would have cut spending along with raising revenue.
Throughout the process, Republicans bent and kept trying to reach accommodation with the President and the Senate.  Moving toward the center, Republicans offered alternative plans for consideration, while the President actually added to his demands.  His negotiation pattern resembled that of last century’s totalitarian regimes, ratcheting up demands instead of moving toward the center and insisting on revenues without meaningful cuts.  Yet the mainstream media blamed Republicans for the lack of progress.  Seldom has an indictment been so off base.
Spending far beyond our means is the problem, not revenue.  Who will bail us out from the price of our own folly?  Who will save us when our politicians lack the moral fiber to stand up and say “no more,” even should it mean they will go home in two years?  Why are there no profiles in courage?
We are like a family out of fiscal control, making sixty thousand dollars a year but insisting on living a one hundred thousand dollar a year lifestyle.  The issue is not whether we are running through our children’s inheritances, but will we have anything left to live on in dignity and self sufficiency.
The Republican Party and our nation have suffered an “unmitigated defeat,” made all the more galling because it would not have been possible without Republican votes in the House of Representatives.  
For those who say the Republican Party was made irrelevant by the election of 2012, they should remember Republicans control two thirds of the state governorships and the House of Representatives and lost the presidency by only a small number of votes in a few key states.  Yet, the Republican Party’s leadership has lost its voice. The leadership of the Republican Party is driving more and more of its members into the Tea Party; these leaders are the architects of the party’s demise.
To be relevant, a political party must offer the nation a choice of policies.  Republicans cannot and must not become Democrat “me toos.”  Why is it that when we Republicans elect people to office, they abandon the fundamental fiscal principles of our party?  What is it about the water in Washington, DC or in Albany that makes our office holders forget fiscal responsibility?  Republicans can matter, but only if they have guiding principles and if they stick to them.  Fiscal discipline needs to be the top priority.
Part of the latest deal kicks the spending problem down the road a few months.  Putting off what should not be avoided is irresponsible at best, criminal at worst.  Until war preparations bailed him out, Franklin Roosevelt presided over a great depression for the better part of eight years while continuing to blame his predecessor.  We are repeating that pattern.  Does anyone really think enhancing government revenue and the public sector at the cost of the private sector where the real work is performed will improve our economy?  If so, they are among those who are not learning from history and, thus are doomed to repeat it.
Rome failed to meet the fiscal and moral challenges of its day.  Make no mistake about it, we are witnessing the decline and fall of the United States.  We have indeed been tried in the balance and found wanting.  The future we’re heading for does not work.   Unless we change these shadows of things yet to come, we are forging a very long chain to bear for us, our children and grandchildren.

Declaring independence...from Barack Obama

At the Cornell Review (click on the image below to embiggen this 21st century Declaration):

...The history of the present President of the United States is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused to govern within the confines of the powers granted to him under the Constitution of the United States.
He has misused the Executive Privilege to withhold information from the American people regarding Operation Fast and Furious. He has forgone the War Powers Act to commit United States troops without the consent of the Senate.
He has been weak against outspoken adversaries of America.
He has piled mountains of debt upon the people; borrowing against the productivity of future generations to pay for today’s frivolous

Treason any way you look at it

Democrat Pat Caddell's comments begin about the 1:15 mark. This is not manufactured outrage:

What's all the buzz about?  In case you haven't been paying attention, here you go:

That timeline first aired over two weeks ago—other things have transpired since—but you get the idea.

Personally? I think we may be looking at a "Fast and Furious" style gunrunning operation in Libya—wherein we give guns to people who really don't like us—or a bungled "kidnapping" of the ambassador in order to appear to "save" him in exchange for the blind sheik...immediately before Election Day and so that our Islamophilic administration can continue to kiss up to people who really don't like us:

And our esteemed Vice President (keeping it classy, as always) said to the father of one of the Navy SEALs killed in the attack on our Benghazi consulate (sovereign territory, I remind you), "Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?"

Bizarre and disgusting.
Have you seen much, or any, of this get covered by the MSM? Me neither. They're all complicit.  As Caddell pointed out (emphasis mine):
...This White House, this president, this vice president, the secretary of state...the leading mainstream media…they have become a threat, a fundamental threat to American democracy and the enemies of the American people.
And all this is with respect to only one aspect of our foreign policy.
What about domestic policy? Well, the President said at the end of the second debate
...I believe that the free enterprise system is the greatest engine of prosperity the world's ever known.
I believe in self-reliance and individual initiative and risk takers being rewarded...
Coulda fooled me. And I think there are some other folks who aren't fooled, either:
...The biggest dirty trick of all is fooling voters into thinking there is no difference. The huge voter surge in 2008 elected President Barack Obama, the first African American president. In the face of non-stop opposition, he pushed through:
+ Affordable Health Care..
...Many people wanted more. In 2010 they failed to turn out to vote. Tea Party Republicans won a sweep. President Obama---and all the rest of us--- have been fighting a defensive battle ever since...
...This is a fight by “We, the people!” against the secret minions of great wealth. The 99% of us are fighting back against the wealthy 1%...
These statements are from a GOTV flier published by—are you ready?—the Communist Party of the USA. For all intents and purposes, an Obama endorsement.
Can you imagine the CPUSA strongly favoring a genuine "free market guy," as the President has described himself numerous times? But the CPUSA wouldn't have any problem at all with some well-placed taqiyya that enabled a fellow traveler to attain a second term where he would have "more flexibility":



Alternate universe

Do you feel like you're living in one?  I do.  So does Dorothy Rabinowitz at the WSJ:

In the 1967 film "A Guide for the Married Man," a husband, played by a peerless Walter Matthau, is given lessons in ways to cheat on his wife safely. The most essential rule: "Deny! Deny! Deny!"—no matter what. In an instructive scene, he's shown a wife undone by shock, and screaming, with reason: She has just walked in on her husband making love to a glamorous stranger.

"What are you doing," she wails, "who is that woman?"
"What woman, where?" the husband serenely counters, as he and the tart in question get out of bed and calmly dress.
So the scene proceeds, with the distraught wife pointing to the woman she clearly sees before her, while her husband, unruffled, continues to look blankly at her, asking, "What woman?" Confused by her spouse's unblinking assurance, she gives up. Two minutes later she's asking him what he'd like for dinner.
For much of the past four years, the Obama administration's propensity for asserting views of reality wildly at odds with those evident to most rational citizens has looked increasingly like a page from that film script.
All administrations conceal, falsify and tell lies—this is understood—but there's no missing the distinctive quality of the prevaricating issuing from the White House in these four years...
Such lies.  And here's the peerless Michael Ramirez's take:
As they say, OMG—Obama Must Go.

Obama & Co.'s campaign song

You lie like a priceless Persian rug on a rich man's floor
And you lie like a coon dog basking in the sunshine on my porch
Well, you lie like a penny in the parking lot at the grocery store
It just comes way too natural to you
The way you lie...Well it's what you do, it's who you are
Click on those links—it's an education.  And there are many, many more many, it's nearly impossible to keep track of them all.
But—it is Friday night after all...time for a little music from The Band Perry.  I think we here at Redneck-Mansion-to-be and Kimberly Perry use the same interior designer:

Oath? What oath?

A great guest viewpoint by Henry Kramer in this morning's Ithaca Journal (not yet linked on the website—UPDATE: It's linked now.):

U.S. presidents take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, which provides in Article II, Section 3, that the president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” The provision does not say “the president is ex­cused from executing laws with which the president disagrees,” or “the president may aid and abet violators of the laws,” or the presi­dent may bypass Congress and issue executive orders when Congress will not pass legislation the president desires.” When a president ignores that oath, he un­dermines the legitimacy of his power.
The current president did all three of those things. He refused to fully enforce immigration law. He encour­aged defense employers to ignore the provisions of federal law (WARN) protect­ing workers that require 60 days’ notice of mass layoffs and plant closures. He then further encouraged lawless behavior by announcing that our tax dollars will pay for violators’ defenses and fines they may incur by not giv­ing notices. He enacted by presidential directive legis­lation (Dream Act) he could not get through Congress and, by setting age param­eters for this program, he engaged in age-based dis­crimination.
The Constitution of the United States, one of the oldest in the world still func­tioning, is the “glue” that holds us together. Provided our duly elected leaders follow constitutional rules, they have the consent of the governed, even their oppo­nents. The Constitution has kept us together even in the closest presidential races, including Hayes-Tilden and Bush-Gore. Its one outright repudiation resulted in our fratricidal Civil War.
The wisdom of our foun­ders was to divide power and to provide checks and balances in order to limit government, not to empow­er it. Congress can seem ineffective, but it is still the main check we have on a runaway presidency. We may excuse Abraham Lin­coln for violating the Consti­tution to keep the nation intact, but we must condemn the view of presidents such as Woodrow Wilson and Barack Obama to whom the Constitution is merely an outdated charter of negative liberties.
When the Constitution is involved, the president’s policies aren’t the issue; it is the violation of the Constitu­tion that matters. Whether or not you favor the presi­dent’s objectives is irrele­vant. The precedents being set create a constitutionally dangerous, imperial presi­dency, one in which the chief executive is a dictator, unilaterally enacting laws by executive order rather than enforcing existing laws. The authors of those precedents today may well regret them tomorrow when the political winds shift and the power is held by those with a different vision.
The loss of liberty is not always a single discrete outrageous act. It is time for a new president who honors our Constitution.

No enumerating those poultry just yet

Nevertheless, this feels good.

You've probably seen this:

After last night, there's this:


Subscribe to Barack Obama