Vocal Minority

Listen & Learn: El Rushbo on the McDonalds Strikes, Minimum Wage, and Basic Economics (8/29/13)

It's been months since I posted one of these, which is my fault. It would be easy to pick my favorite hour from a talk show and simply hit "post," but that's too lazy. When a host talks extemporaneously there is always dispensable stuff, extra long pockets of dead air, extraneous repetition of previous points, stammering and stuttering (even more so from nervous and inexperienced callers) that I feel it's important to edit out before posting. This takes an enormous amount of time but in the end, when I have the time, it's worth it.

That said, on Thursday El Rushbo dedicated well over an hour to the McDonald's minimum wage strikes going on nationwide. During this he takes a call from a man who believes the protesters deserve their demanded 100%(!) wage increase. Putting on his professor's hat, Rush then delivers an Econ 101 lecture that everyone needs to learn (or relearn).

The entire discussion is couched within the Democrat left's and particularly Obama's ignorant view of economics and how their destructive (not to mention oppressive and authoritarian) policies are hurting the county, including the very McDonalds workers -- no doubt mostly Obama voters themselves -- who are protesting.

I think you will enjoy the next 37 minutes. Listen and learn!

Then do something about it! Share, inform, engage, vote, whatever it takes.

(P.S. May take a few moments to download, be patient)

(Download clip here)

(Download clip here)

Obama's Revenge: Day 13 (2/2/13)

"Vote! Voting is the best revenge." - Barack H. Obama, Nov. 2, 2012

"We have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it." 
- Then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, March 9, 2010

CBS-TV's D.C. affiliate reports:

Medical Company Blames ‘Obamacare’ For Layoffs Of Nearly 100 People

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (CBSDC) — A medical company is blaming President Obama’s health care law for the layoffs of nearly 100 people.

Smith & Nephew says a 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices in the “Obamacare” law caused the layoffs in the Memphis and Andover, Mass., offices.

“The nearly $30 billion tax on medical devices that took effect Jan. 1, 2013, has impacted a number of companies across the U.S.,” the company said in a statement to WHBQ-TV.

Joe Metzger, senior vice president of corporate communications for the company, tells the Memphis Business Journal that they were “not immune” to the tax burden.

“Unfortunately, and in order to absorb this cost burden into our business, this has meant less than 100 positions have been made redundant across various departmental functions in our Tennessee and Massachusetts sites,” Metzger told the Business Journal. “The company is providing the affected employees with a comprehensiveseverance package and outplacement support.”

The Business Journal reports that the company announced last February it would lay off 7 percent of its workforce worldwide.

The tax took effect on Jan. 1.

This is just 100 jobs from one company. But opponents of Obama(PretendsTo)Care have been warning about the nationwide damage the tax will create, such as American Action Forum:

But don't worry: Not all medical companies will be closing up shop due to this punitive tax on their products. Most of them will just pass the tax on to you, the consumer. Next time you buy medical supplies of any shape, size, or price, check the bottom of your receipt. It's been happening for a month already.

 

Obama's Revenge: Day 10 (1/30/13)

Two surprises happened yesterday (NOT!)

(1) The latest economic data reveals the already crappy economy continued to get crappier in the 4th quarter of 2012. (But wait but wait, the Democrat-media complex kept telling us the economy was getting better! And if you believed that tripe, I got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.)

You know who was surprised? Associated Press and the "experts" they interviewed. But people actually paying attention weren't surprised in the least. In fact, some have been predicting it ever since President Golden Calf got into office. Here's El Rushbo on yesterday's show citing the aforementioned AP:

[Y]ou remember what this administration's growth forecasts were for the next three to four years:  Their growth forecasts were anywhere between 3 and 4 1/2%.  Our growth rate is below the ChiComs.  Our growth rate is below Cuba.  We're not growing now.  The 4th quarter we actually contracted.

That means that the employment situation isn't changing. That means wages aren't changing positively. There's no growth in people's incomes.  It's just sad to watch this happening right in front of our eyes.  The inflation rate is at least 2%, probably higher than that.  So a casual calculation here, a 0.1% GDP contraction could mean that for all intents and purposes we're back into a recession.  ... I'll tell you, if there were a Republican in the White House, we'd be in a recession.  If there were a Republican in the White House, we'd never have come out of the recession.  If there were a Republican in the White House, there would be a depression.  If there were a Republican in the White House and all this was going on, we'd be doing impeachment hearings by now.  ...

... Now, listen to this from AP: "That is a sharp slowdown from the 3.1% growth rate in the July-September quarter."  What they're not telling you is -- you may not remember this -- in the 4th quarter there was a whole lot of economic stimulus, quote, unquote, to cover for Obama's tax increases.  There was all kinds of stimulus so his reelection effort wouldn't be harmed, and it still resulted in a contraction.  And listen to this next sentence from these wizards of smart at AP.  "The surprise contraction..."  Are you surprised that our economy is collapsing on itself?  You're not, are you?  The wizards of smart at AP are.  Listen to this: 

"The surprise contraction could raise fears about the economy's ability to handle tax increases that took effect in January and looming spending cuts."  Really?  I thought tax increases were great for the economy.  That's what the news media and the Democrat Party has been telling us.  Same thing with unemployment benefits.  I thought that was great for economic growth.  What happened to that?  The surprise contraction could raise fears about the economy's ability to handle tax increases.  You mean they've known all along at AP that tax increases slow down the economy?  They've known that all along, and they've been lying to us about it, and now that we're contracting they're worried, openly admitting they're worried?

Of course, even if people opened their eyes and finally realized this, it's too late. President Hope&Change was just reelected, given carte blanche to bring four more years of economic disaster.

(2) The incompetent bitterly partisan lying Empty-Suit-in-Chief blamed Republicans for it.

 No more surprised than I, Rick Moran at AT quips:

It doesn't get any more brazen than this. Welcome to the new reality - created, nurtured, promoted, and sold by an administration that doesn't have to work very hard to get it's distorted and skewed version of the truth out to the masses thanks to a press corps that has thrown in with the Democrats.

Being rewarded for acting and governing irresponsibly will only lead to disaster. Good thing the GOP will always be there to take the blame.

Yup. Not only take the blame, but do nothing to counter the lies.

Oh, speaking of El Rushbo, he cited someone who said in an interview to David "I'm from the media so I'm allowed to brandish illegal gun magazines" Gregory that Blacks are doing worse under Obama, much worse. Yes, the same blacks who voted -- twice! -- for President Hope&Change by over 9-1.

Who says this? Some member of the right-wing noise machine?

Nope, that would be Ben Jealous of the NAA(L)CP. Jealous explains that while the general unemployment rate dropped to a still-piss-poor 8%, the black unemployment rate went up from 12.9% to 14%. Black teen unemployment rate was up to nearly 40% by July 2012.

If this data was known by July, why are we just hearing black leaders complaining about it now?

Gee, I wonder ...

Schmuck Republicans: Chris Christie and Peter King [UPDATED 1/4]

Am I the only one who notices just how smoothly and effortlessly the Democrat Party plays the American people and establishment Republican leadership?

Basic timeline:

Last week of October: Hurricane Sandy visited destruction upon the East Coast, most severely New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut.

First week of November: With the presidential election just days away, Obama lands in New Jersey to get bear hugged by Gov'r Chris Christie in order to give off a semblance of "bi-partisanship," and to secure extra votes from stupid Americans who actually thinks Obama caaaares about them. (Indeed it worked: Exit polls showed many still-undecided voters ended up pulling the lever for the president because it look like he cared about Sandy victims). Stupid-ass Christie took the bait.

First week of December: It took the administration over a month to formally request hurricane relief funding from Congress. Requested amount: $60 billion. (But remember: Obama really cares.) By stark contrast, George W. Bush got $51 billion in Katrina relief funding requested, approved by Congress, and on his desk for signing in less than two weeks. (But remember: George W. Bush hates people, especially black people.) 

Mid-December: The Senate releases its first draft of the relief bill, which is laden with pork and goodies for items and locales not remotely related to Sandy! Such expenditures include:

• $500 million to the NOAA (one full tenth of its annual expenditures nationwide). Part of that includes $150 for fishery disasters, including those having taken place as far as Mississippi and Alaska;
• $50 million for the National Park Service’s Historic Preservation Fund (double its yearly funding);
• $5.4 billion to the Army Corps of Engineers and $12.1 billion to the Transportation; Department, mostly to rebuild public transit in the affected areas or to pay for projects that could prevent problems in other transit systems;
• Over $200 million for the VA Manhattan Medical Center;
• $100 million to Head Start programs;
• $41 million to fix up eight military bases along the storm’s path, including Guantanamo Bay, Cuba;
• $4 million for repairs at Kennedy Space Center in Florida;
• Over $3 million for the Plum Island Animal Disease Center, a federal research facility on Long Island, N.Y.
• $1.1 million to repair national cemeteries;
• $2 million to repair roofs on the Smithsonian in D.C.;
• Over $7 million to replace vehicles and/or repair buildings and equipment belonging to an array of federal agencies, including the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Secret Service, the FBI, and the Drug Enforcement Administration;
• Nearly $11 billion for public transportation, which FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe explains is mostly "allocated to future construction and improvements, not disaster relief";
• $17 billion for Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), which Kibbe says "has become notorious for its use as a backdoor earmark program" and which Heritage Foundation's Patrick Louis Knudsen describes as an embarrassingly transparent slush fund."
• $13 billion for “mitigation” projects to prepare for future storms.

That's not all, but when you add this all up, not even half of the $60 billion would be going to help private citizens whose lives were uprooted by Hurricane Sandy.

Last two weeks of December: Despite criticism of Congressional Republicans and some of the news media, the bill sat languishing on the Hill without one penny of pork being stripped.

It bears noting that not all, but the lion's share of this pork was put in there by Senate Democrats. Indeed, the bill was co-sponsored by Chucky Schmucky Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Bob "Dominican prostitutes? What Dominican prostitutes?" Menendez (D-N.J.). Democrats knew that when it came to the Republican-led House voting, there would be one of two outcomes:

(A) The bill would be passed and all their cronies, home states, and pet agencies would get their taxpayer-funded goodies, all the while conning the American people into thinking they really care about them.

(B) The House Republicans would refuse to sign the bill, making them look really callous and cold for holding up such an urgent bill out of ideological spite and petty politics.

First week of January: As we catch up to the present tense, one of the above predictions comes true. Yesterday outcome (B) happened: GOP House leader Boehner and enough Republicans refuse to sign the bill, and it goes down in the defeat.

(That would make it the second time in one week Boehner and the House Republicans got played by the Democrat Party, the "fiscal cliff" "deal" being the first time.)

Here is where N.J. Gov'r Christie and N.Y. Congressman Pete King come in. Not only did Boehner and the House Republicans get branded Scrooge of the Century by the usual suspects (Democrats in Washington and the lib media), but both Christie and King took to the mic to lambaste their fellow Republicans for playing petty politics and putting their own interests above the people.

At his press conference yesterday, Christie said, 

"Unfortunately people are putting politics ahead of their responsibilities... You do the right thing. Enough with all the politics ... We respond as Americans, at least we did until last night... it was disgusting to watch. ... In our hour of desperate need, we've been left waiting for help six times longer than the victims of Katrina with no end in sight ... Sixty-six days and counting, shame on you. Shame on Congress."

On the House floor, Rep. King even more hostile. He threatened not to support the reelection of Boehner as House Speaker and said Americans shouldn't even donate money to House Republicans. He used the words "betrayal" and "cruel knife in the back."

These might as well have been Democrats talking!

Sorry, guys, but you are both sorely mistaken. It's the Democrats, who over two weeks ago presented a $60 bill filled over 50% with pork, who are playing petty politics and not putting the American people first.

Instead of bashing Boehner, Christie and King should be castigating the Democrats. This pork had no business being in there in the first place. If they didn't stick it in there, the bill wouldn't have been voted down!

Unfortunately, Christie and King played right into the hands of the Democrat-media complex: They're now being used as pawns to further paint the Republican Party as cruel and heartless. And, may I add, Mr. Christie: You, sir, have an election coming up this November. You wouldn't happen to be playing Mister Bi-Partisan, Mister Populist right now for that reason, hmmmm? If so (And I, for one, do believe that to be so), then it is you who are putting your own personal political interests over the people.

As for you, Mr. King: In the arena national security/defense you are a patriot and deserve respect. In this instance, though, you are playing the boneheaded self-interested politician you accuse Boehner of doing.

So where are we now? Well, as of late last night, it was already being reported that Boehner was starting to cave and will approve an initial installment of the requested funding.

What of the rest of the $60 bil? Will it contain the pork, or will Democrats be asked to remove it?

What difference does it make? The damage has been done and the Democrats got what they wanted:

A Republican Party whose strength and influence in D.C. have been severely damaged and whose popularity with the American people is sure to plunge even further from the gutter-level depths it has already been.

And a Democrat Party who, knowing full well our nation is already $16 trillion in the hole, has no problem adding tens of billions of pork into a bill intended to help hurricane victims, and who will come out of this, no matter what happens, squeaky clean.

No thanks to Chris Christie and Peter King.

UPDATE (1/4): I can't believe who actually has the same opinion as I on this issue ... Nanny Bloomberg! Well, sorta. He thinks both sides are to blame. How egalitarian.

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/04/bloomberg-blame-pork-not-boehner-for-sandy-relief-delay/

Liberal Hypocrisy: Meet the Obama-Supporting Tax Evaders of the Year

From Michelle Malkin.

[W[hile millions of small-business owners, struggling entrepreneurs, inventors and investors brace for a double whammy of fiscal cliff tax hikes and new Obamacare taxes, the class-warrior in chief's richest pals are getting a pass.

It's a Golden Pass for liberal millionaires and billionaires who support higher Obama taxes for everyone but themselves. Meet the Democratic tax evaders of the year.

From Breitbart too. Hollywood TV and filmmakers getting sweet breaks. Cue the loopholes.

Listen & Learn: Mark Levin Continues Discussing the Democrats, Class Warfare, and the "Fiscal Cliff" (11/27/12)

UPDATE: Welcome, Mark Levin fans! Mr. Levin, it is truly an honor to have this post linked by you. If I had known today this site would be getting the most hits in its 5-year existence, I would've been a little more eloquent! - ETR

Wow, I was barely done posting excerpts of Mark's Monday show, when I decided Tuesday's show was too full of gold not to post stuff as well.

So here's the Great One, continuing his discussion on the Democrats, taxing the so-called "rich" and other class warfare demagoguery, and the "fiscal cliff."

The first clip below is from Tuesday's first hour, the second clip from the second hour:

[Edited for commercials, long pauses and other extraneous content]

Download clip here

Download clip here

 

Listen & Learn: Mark Levin on the "Fiscal Cliff" (11/26/12)

It's been a long time since I've done one of these but when I heard the Great One last night, I just had to spend some time getting this one out.

Here's practically his whole first hour -- edited down to 30 min after cutting commercials, bumper music, long pauses, and any other extraneous content. It addresses the "fiscal cliff" and Mark attacks both Democrats for politicizing it and weak-kneed RINO Republicans for playing along.

At risk of spoiling it for you: He thinks we should go over the fiscal cliff. Better that in the short term than the crisis that will happen long from now when all these opportunistic politicians are dead and buried.

Send this one far and wide!

Download clip here

Download clip here

 

Debunking Obama's Phony Economic Claims

Every time I hear Obama say Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place," it makes my skin crawl. So thank you, John Merline at IBD, for writing this piece tearing apart that and four other bogus claims: Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims

 

Liberal Media Bias: NYT Blog Calls Romney/Ryan's Reform "Tax Evasion"

David Firestone at the NY Times' editorial blog "taking note" is suspicious of Paul Ryan's tax plan. In fact, the folks at the Times have been suspicious of everything Romney and Ryan are proposing.

So just getting this straight ... We have a president who:

- promised to lower the deficit yet has instead increased it by 50%;

- promised with a $trillion "stimulus" to bring unemployment down to 6% yet has made it stay above 8% and yield anemic GDP growth;

- promised job opportunities for any American willing to work yet has spent less time with his jobs council than he has at 40,000-per-plate celebrity fundraisers, campaign events, TV show junkets, and golf outings;

- gave billions of said stimulus cash to cronies whose businesses have gone bankrupt;

- promised transparency yet has invoked executive privilege to hide his and his Attorney General's involvement in the 200+death "Fast and Furious" scandal, and has yet to come clean in knowing about yet failing to prevent attacks on our consulate in Libya which killed four Americans;

- promised his "health" "care" plan would lower premiums by $2,500 while instead they have increased by $3,000;

- not to mention that members of the Obama administration itself owes $800,000 in back taxes

... and you're spending time screaming about supposed flaws of Paul Ryan's tax plan?

Careful, NYT - Continue carrying on like this you might be accused of some sort of media bias.

Perish the thought.

 

Big Lie in Politics (T. Sowell)

Big Lies in Politics

By THOMAS SOWELL on 7.31.12 @ 6:07AM

The Nazi philosophy of lying to the public prevails in the current administration.

It was either Adolf Hitler or his propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, who said that the people will believe any lie, if it is big enough and told often enough, loud enough. Although the Nazis were defeated in World War II, this part of their philosophy survives triumphantly to this day among politicians, and nowhere more so than during election years.

Perhaps the biggest lie of this election year, and the one likely to be repeated the most often, is that the income of "the rich" is going up, while other people's incomes are going down. If you listen to Barack Obama, you are bound to hear this lie repeatedly.

But the government's own Congressional Budget Office has just published a report whose statistics flatly contradict this claim. The CBO report shows that, while the average household income fell 12 percent between 2007 and 2009, the average for the lower four-fifths fell by 5 percent or less, while the average income for households in the top fifth fell 18 percent. For households in the "top one percent" that seems to fascinate so many people, income fell by 36 percent in those same years.

Why are these data so different from other data that are widely cited, showing the top brackets improving their positions more so than anyone else?

The answer is that the data cited by the Congressional Budget Office are based on Internal Revenue Service statistics for specific individuals and specific households over time. The IRS can follow individuals and households because it can identify the same people over time from their Social Security numbers.

Most other data, including census data, are based on compiling statistics in a succession of time periods, without the ability to tell if the actual people in each income bracket are the same from one time period to the next. The turnover of people is substantial in all brackets -- and is huge in the top one percent. Most people in that bracket are there for only one year in a decade.

All sorts of statements are made in politics and in the media as if that "top one percent" is an enduring class of people, rather than an ever-changing collection of individuals who have a spike in their income in a particular year, for one reason or another. Turnover in other income brackets is also substantial.

There is nothing mysterious about this. Most people start out at the bottom, in entry-level jobs, and their incomes rise over time as they acquire more skills and experience.

Politicians and media talking heads love to refer to people who are in the bottom 20 percent in income in a given year as "the poor." But, following the same individuals for 10 or 15 years usually shows the great majority of those individuals moving into higher income brackets.

The number who reach all the way to the top 20 percent greatly exceeds the number still stuck in the bottom 20 percent over the years. But such mundane facts cannot compete for attention with the moral melodramas conjured up in politics and the media when they discuss "the rich" and "the poor."

There are people who are genuinely rich and genuinely poor, in the sense of having very high or very low incomes for most, if not all, of their lives. But "the rich" and "the poor" in this sense are unlikely to add up to even ten percent of the population.

Ironically, those who make the most noise about income disparities or poverty contribute greatly to policies that promote both. The welfare state enables millions of people to meet their needs with little or no income-earning work on their part.

Most of the economic resources used by people in the bottom 20 percent come from sources other than their own incomes. There are veritable armies of middle-class people who make their livings transferring resources, in a variety of ways, from those who created those resources to those who live off them.

These transferrers are in both government and private social welfare institutions. They have every incentive to promote dependency, from which they benefit both professionally and psychically, and to imagine that they are creating social benefits.

For different reasons, both politicians and the media have incentives to spread misconceptions with statistics. So long as we keep buying it, they will keep selling it.

The Fastest Facebook Friend I've Ever Had

My Facebook page is always alight with passionate political debate. When 75% of your friends consist of liberal-Democrat Jews, how could it not! Many a never-to-be-recovered  minutes have been spent pointlessly debating issues like the state of the economy, the Obama(Doesn't)Care ruling,  Wisconsin governor Scott Walker's recall election, presumptive GOP candidate Mitt Romney, and everything in between.

So, yesterday I got "friend-ed" by one of those aforementioned liberal-Democrat Jew types from college. Within minutes of accepting his request this morning, my news feed was adorned with liberal talking points and those annoying graphics purportedly debunking "GOP lies" and the "right-wing propaganda machine".

Here's one of those posts:

Because I distinctly remember Rush saying this, and because it was being taken maliciously out of context, I responded to it:

I remember exactly when Rush made this statement. He was responding to a statement made by Obama or one of his spokespeople (Carney, Geithner maybe) who told a news reporter that hiring more police, teachers, and firefighters constitute *private* sector employment. Rush has no animus toward firefighters, as falsely implied by this graphic! His point was that firefighters make up *public* sector jobs and paying them doesn't contribute to the economy b/c, like any public sector job, paying them requires taking money out of the *private* sector via taxation.

Watch out for snippets like this that take people's statements out of context to paint them as something they're not.

Having checked the Rush archives after the fact, I discovered  it was David Axelrod who (along with Obama) said it. It was mid-June, soon after Obama ridiculously claimed that the private sector was doing fine and that it was the public sector was in trouble. Rush argued, correctly, that, like police and teachers, firefighters are mainly public sector jobs. In addition, while Obama and Axelrod (and Biden at one point earlier this year) were incorrectly claiming that there is a dearth of police and firefighters and teachers, Rush pointed out that these jobs are virtually all municipal and state responsibilities; the federal government should have little to no responsibility for such hirings.

That's why I responded to my very new very liberal Facebook friend. I knew he didn't know the context within which Rush made that comment.

One minute later he posted this retort:

If you're going to defend Rush, we really don't have anything to discuss.

So I wrote back:

OK, then. Adios.

And de-friended him.

So much for another day in Real-ville.

There are a lot of conservatives that complain about getting de-friended by liberal Facebook friends who weren't tolerant and open-minded enough to handle that someone else would have the audacity to have an opinion that doesn't match their own. I am one of them.

Well, here's an instance of me de-friending a liberal Facebook friend because of his political opinions.

And ya know what? I can live with that.

Hope and Change Baby! (Economy Edition)

Let's see ... 10.9 U-3 unemployment rate, private sector growth of only 84,000 jobs, 14.4% black unemployment rate, 20.9% unemployment rate for white youths (16 to 19 y.o.), 39.3% unemployment rate for black youths?

Must be time for another ...

RECOVERY SUMMER!

The Left: Where Greed Meets Envy

The other day I was contemplating why the Ten Commandments has "Thou Shall Not Covet." Murdering, stealing, committing adultery, honoring parents, observing the Sabbath, not taking G0d's name in vain, etc. -- those are all actions. Coveting is not an action; it's a feeling, an emotion. Then it dawned on me: A lot of the world's human evils stems from the emotion of covetousness (= envy).

I've also made the observation that to be an illiberal/Democrat is to willingly violate the Tenth Commandment. Virtually all Democrat policy is motivated by envy of others, and is sold by Democrats to the American people by appealing to their base feelings of envy.

Lo and behold ... From today's American Thinker: The Left: Where Greed Meets Envy.

Thank You Letter from a Wisconsin Taxpayer

Well done!

A Thank You Letter to the Left
June 6th, 2012 at 3:57 pm

To all leftists, occupiers, unionistas and malcontents, Thank you!

What an election! We couldn’t have done it without you. Without your tantrums, outbursts and boorish behavior we might have stayed home for this election. Without your filthy, pot smoking hemp -headed minions occupying and violating the Capitol we might have been complacent. Without your obnoxious protests, boycotts and other actions from your union playbook, we might have sat this one out.

But you couldn’t hold back. You couldn’t restrain yourselves and behave like adults. You couldn’t accept the 2010 election results. We sat and watched as you erupted in a juvenile hissy fit that embarrassed Wisconsin. The spectacle you created is what motivated us. And thanks to your ill-mannered behavior, we won. We turned out. Big time! And now we are organized and energized. Committed. “All in”. And we aren’t going away. We now have our own organizations (no dues required), an army of volunteers and the means to communicate. And countless new sources of funding, including a donor base from all 50 states. And we have “iverifythe recall” to ferret out your infiltrators in our future local elections.

So thank you Mike Tate, Graeme Zielinski, Fred “Loonie” Levenhagen, Ismael Ozanne, Maryanne Sumi, Noble Ray, Charles Tubbs, Joanne Kloppenberg, Segway Boy, John Chisolm, public employee union members, UW TA’s, WEAC, SEIU, MTI, AFSCME Council 24 in Union Grove and WI prison guards,. Thanks for the death threats, the intimidation, the bullying, belligerence, thuggery and goonish behavior.

The lack of ethics and the failure to enforce rules and laws.

Thank you for putting your selfish, greedy motives on display for all taxpayers to see.

Your antics might have made you feel good but they didn’t make you look good.

They sickened the rest of us.

Thank you Shirley Abrahamson and Ann Walsh Bradley. Your petty politics woke us up.

Thanks you Miles Kristan for dumping the beer on Robin Vos’s head.

Thank you University doctors for writing the phony excuses; Madison teachers for calling in sick or dragging your students to the protests without permission.

Thank you Katherine Windels for making death threats against the Governor.

The noontime capitol singers who taunted Sheboygan high school students.

Thank you WEA Trust for raping Wisconsin taxpayers.

Thank you Gwen Moore for your embarrassing minstrel show.

And thanks all of you for harassing the Walker family at their private home.

You have all been exposed.

Your tactics have been rejected.

Your bad behavior has been forever captured on You Tube.

Thank you Peter Barca and fellow Assembly members for donning your foolish orange T-shirts and screaming “shame” at legislators just doing their jobs.

Thank you Mark Miller and all 14 senators for fleeing the state and making fools of yourselves in the process. Illinois need a few more village idiots.

Thanks for showing us what democracy doesn’t look like.

And Mayor Barrett. How grateful we are that you chose one low road after another in your issue-less campaign against the Governor. This was your strike three. You are out. Take a seat on the bench and stay there. I have a hunch this was your final at-bat.

All of you helped turn Wisconsin permanently red.

Your Governor, Scott Walker, will not just complete his first term, he is all but assured as many future terms as he seeks. He will be your governor for a long, long time. Get used to it. And his national “rock star” status just might lead him to be your President some day.

Just think, it couldn’t have happened without you!

So to all of you blue fisters, thank you from the bottom of my happy, red heart.

Sincerely,

A Wisconsin taxpayer

Liberal Hypocrisy: Senate Dems--Including Women--Pay Female Staffers Less Than Men!

Remember that "war on women" the GOP is allegedly waging? And remember that meaningless politically-charged "Paycheck Fairness Act" Obama signed when he became president?

Well, you just can't make this stuff up:

SENATE DEMS BETRAY LILLY
SENATE DEMOCRATS PAY FEMALE STAFFERS LESS THAN MALE STAFFERS

Andrew Stiles - May 24, 2012

A group of Democratic female senators on Wednesday declared war on the so-called “gender pay gap,” urging their colleagues to pass the aptly named Paycheck Fairness Act when Congress returns from recess next month. However, a substantial gender pay gap exists in their own offices, a Washington Free Beacon analysis of Senate salary data reveals.

Of the five senators who participated in Wednesday’s press conference—Barbara Mikulski (D., Md.), Patty Murray (D., Wash.), Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.), Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) and Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.)—three pay their female staff members significantly less than male staffers.

Murray, who has repeatedly accused Republicans of waging a “war a women,” is one of the worst offenders. Female members of Murray’s staff made about $21,000 less per year than male staffers in 2011, a difference of 35.2 percent.

That is well above the 23 percent gap that Democrats claim exists between male and female workers nationwide. The figure is based on a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, and is technically accurate. However, as CNN’s Lisa Sylvester has reported, when factors such as area of employment, hours of work, and time in the workplace are taken into account, the gap shrinks to about 5 percent.

A significant “gender gap” exists in Feinstein’s office, where women also made about $21,000 less than men in 2011, but the percentage difference—41 percent—was even higher than Murray’s.

Boxer’s female staffers made about $5,000 less, a difference of 7.3 percent.

The Free Beacon used publicly available salary data from the transparency website Legistorm to calculate the figures, and considered only current full-time staff members who were employed for the entirety of fiscal year 2011.

The employee gender pay gap among Senate Democrats was not limited to Murray, Boxer, and Feinstein. Of the 50 members of the Senate Democratic caucus examined in the analysis, 37 senators paid their female staffers less than male staffers.

Senators elected in 2010—Joe Manchin, Chris Coons, and Richard Blumenthal—were not considered due to incomplete salary data.

Women working for Senate Democrats in 2011 pulled in an average salary of $60,877. Men made about $6,500 more.

While the gap is significant, it is slightly smaller than that of the White House, which pays men about $10,000, or 13 percent, more on average, according to a previousFree Beacon analysis.

The pay differential is quite striking in some cases, especially among leading Democrats. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.), who runs the Senate Democratic messaging operation, paid men $19,454 more on average, a 36 percent difference.

Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) paid men $13,063 more, a difference of 23 percent.

Other notable Senators whose “gender pay gap” was larger than 23 percent:

• Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.)—47.6 percent
• Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D., N.M.)—40 percent
• Sen. Jon Tester (D., Mont.)—34.2 percent
• Sen. Ben Cardin (D., Md.)—31.5 percent
• Sen. Tom Carper (D., Del.)—30.4 percent
• Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.)–29.7 percent
• Sen. Kent Conrad (D., N.D.)–29.2 percent
• Sen. Bill Nelson (D., Fla.)—26.5 percent
• Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore)—26.4 percent
• Sen. Tom Harkin (D., Iowa)—23.2 percent

Sen. Sanders, who is an avowed socialist who caucuses with the Democrats, has the worst gender gap by far. He employed more men (14) than women (10), and his chief of staff is male. Like many of his fellow partisans, he has previously accusedRepublicans of “trying to roll back the clock on women’s rights.” ...

Just another in a long list of Democrat "Do as I say, not as I do". 

Belated Listen & Learn: Mark Levin on Obama's "Silver Spoon" Remark (4/18/12)

Finally finished trimming this important clip from Mark Levin one week ago, responding to Obama's obnoxious "silver spoon" comments. Listen to the Great One tear the Class-Warmongerer-in-Chief a new one:

 [Edited for commercials, long pauses, and other extraneous content]

Download clip here

Good economists - HUMAN EVENTS

Good economists - HUMAN EVENTS.

It's difficult to be a good economist and simultaneously be perceived as compassionate. To be a good economist, one has to deal with reality. To appear compassionate, often one has to avoid unpleasant questions, use "caring" terminology and view reality as optional.

Another Day, Another Administration Witch Hunt - HUMAN EVENTS

Another Day, Another Administration Witch Hunt - HUMAN EVENTS.

So many imaginary villains and so little time.

Trayvon Martin: Just Another Leftist Pawn

As a father, I weep for the parents of Trayvon Martin and can't even imagine what they are going through right now.

But as an American citizen and human being, I am appalled by what the Left has done with this tragic shooting. The lies being spread by black "leaders," the pandering by President Hope&Change, the hate being spread by Obama's friends the New Black Panthers and the unabashed refusal of Obama's (in)Justice Department to do one damn thing about it. Websites dedicated to finding and killing a private citizen, George Zimmerman. The tweeting of said private citizen's (wrong!) addresses by Obama-connected Hollywood celebrities. The error-filled reporting, doctored photos, and deliberate editing of 9-1-1 tapes by the mainstream media.

Actual photo                            MSM's photo

The rash of stores being ransacked, yet more Occupy destruction, and violent attacks by blacks against non-blacks all around the country after this story went national.

I am just appalled.

Do not think for one second that President Hope&Change, the professional race hustlers Jackson and Sharpton, the opportunistic clowns in the Black Congressional Caucus, or the hateful Hollywood Left like Spike Lee give one rat's ass about Trayvon Martin. The only reason his death made national news -- a whole month after his shooting, by the way -- is because he has exactly the same thing in common with Sandra Fluke. And Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. And Debbie Bosanek (Who? I know, right?). And Crystal Mangum (Who? I know, right?). And that is: they are pawns. They are pawns used simply to score political points and to advance their political agenda.

The Left claims that Trayvon Martin is a victim of persistent white racism (even though the shooter George Zimmerman was half Hispanic, half white) and that blacks are being "hunted down like dogs". Despite substantiation that emotion-based claim, thousands have taken to the streets and even to the floor of Congress in hoodies to stand in solidarity with this purported victim of white racism!

But what of the thousands of blacks who are killed by other blacks and minorities every year? 

Rich Lowry at National Review Online spells out the Martin shooting issue well:

The Murders That Don’t Count 
In America, the lives of young black people are cheap, unless they happen to fit the right agenda.

Everything about the Trayvon Martin case is a matter of contention. About this, though, there should be no doubt: If Martin had been shot by a black classmate, if he had been caught in a random crossfire, if he had looked at a gang member the wrong way, his death would have been relegated to the back pages of the local newspaper. Not a cause, not even a curiosity: Just another dead young black man. Nothing to see here. Please, move on.

Jesse Jackson is right that “blacks are under attack.” According to a 2005 FBI report, blacks accounted for 13 percent of the population and 49 percent of all homicide victims. In 93 percent of the cases, the killer was black. Half of the victims were ages 17 to 29. That works out to 4,000 murders of young blacks in one year, overwhelmingly at the hands of other blacks. In the communities where these killings occur there is, to put it in Jackson’s inimitable terms, no justice and no peace.

There is no comparable epidemic of half-Hispanic neighborhood-watch volunteers like George Zimmerman shooting young black men. Nor is there an epidemic of cops doing the same. Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute notes that in New York City, there were nine civilian victims of police gunfire last year, whereas there were “several hundred black homicide victims in the city, almost all shot by other blacks or Hispanics, none of them given substantial press coverage.”

An allegedly racially motivated killing, though, gins up the outrage machine in a way the routine murder of young blacks doesn’t. Cable-TV outlets get to host fiery debates. Chin-stroking commentators get to urge more “dialogue.” Black leaders get to relive the glory of a civil-rights cause that won its major victories decades ago when it took real courage to be on the front lines. And everybody gets to evade the intraracial mayhem that blights the country’s inner cities.

An injustice may well have been done in the handling of the Martin shooting, but let’s not fool ourselves. Zimmerman could be arrested, convicted, and hanged tomorrow, and it will have no effect on the lives of young black people in communities beset by social disorder. Whatever happens to Zimmerman, the drip-drip of spilled blood will continue, all but ignored except in the police blotter. In America, the lives of young black people are cheap, unless they happen to fit the right agenda.

One such example of a minority victim unusable as Leftist political fodder is Aliyah Shell, age 6. She was killed St. Patrick's Day weekend while sitting on her Chicago porch with her grandmother, caught in the crossfire of a gang shooting. The Chicago Tribune writes:

From Jan. 1 through Sunday [Mar. 18], homicides soared 42 percent, to 94 from 66 a year earlier, according to a police spokeswoman. ... That continues a troubling trend that started in the last quarter of 2011. Police say gangs are to blame for much of the violence, including Aliyah's killing.

This leaves blogger Doug Ross to wonder:

So where are the professional race-baiters like Al "Not So" Sharpton and Jesse Jerkson? Where is MSNBS, ABS, CBS and NBS Nightly News? Where are the New Black Panthers and the other thugs seeking to profit from Trayvon Martin's death?

They don't give a crap about Aliyah Shell, or the hundreds of others killed and wounded every year in Obama's hometown of Chicago.

No, they care only about fomenting hatred, division and dissent.

P.J. Salvatore at Breitbart.com picks it up from there, arguing that the exploitation of Trayvon Martin's death by the Left has all the familiar political motives:

“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” 

Why? Why would the president weigh in on this specific case at this specific time? 

It’s not about wrong or right. It’s not about justice. It’s not about Trayvon Martin.  

“The despair is there; now it’s up to us to go in and rub raw the sores of discontent, galvanize them for radical social change.”- Saul Alinsky

An interesting quote to consider, from the man who shaped the minds of those who shaped President Obama.

Now consider Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel’s notorious statement: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” 

The meaning is the same. It is calculating and it is dangerous, part of a bigger picture--a multi-faceted war to divide America for the sole purpose of securing Obama's re-election and subsequent radical social change. 

Look at the contrived conflicts on the left wing's political chessboard:

Move 1   Occupy Wall Street: the (self-appointed) 99% versus the 1% 

Move 2   Contraceptive/abortifacient mandates: government versus religion

Move 3   Sandra Fluke: women versus conservatives (supposedly)

And now…

Move 4   Trayvon Martin: black versus "white" (so-called)

This is not complicated. President Obama is organizing. It’s that simple, and it’s straight out of the radical playbook:

“Once you organize people, they’ll keep advancing from issue to issue toward the ultimate objective: people power. We’ll not only give them a cause, we’ll make life goddamn exciting for them again — life instead of existence. We’ll turn them on...” – Saul Alinsky

This is not about Trayvon Martin. This is about divide and conquer. Hope and Change has been replaced with Us vs. Them. This about pitting Americans against Americans.

Yup.

Interestingly, all the people I mentioned above -- Martin, Fluke, Bosanek, etc. -- are extremely flawed specimens in the Left's utopian tinkering with America. Every one of their stories concocted and promulgated by the Left -- including our own preisdent! -- false apart after just a mere examination of the actual facts.

But the Left is allergic to facts. Facts prevent them from "fundamentally transforming" America, as one particular president has put it. So they use these "victims" all the same. The rewrite history just as quickly as history occurs. They point fingers at imaginary culprits (e.g., Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, right-wing Islamophoooobia, right-wing homophoooobia, etc.).

And millions of Americans buy in to their fallacious stories because the Left knows that enough Americans have been dumbed down enough to believe anything they are told.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Trayvon Martin deserved to get shot or even that George Zimmerman is not guilty of a crime! But let's face facts: Despite the attempts of the mainstream media to paint him as a boy scout, he had multiple suspensions from school and was clearly well-steeped in the drug-filled, profanity-laced, sex-abusing, bling-sporting gangsta thug lifestyle that has claimed many a young African-American's life.

This is where we are, folks: A country where blacks are at war with whites, women with men, Muslims vs. non-Muslims, the 99% with the 1%, the uninsured vs. the insured, etc. There is rioting in the streets from Manhattan to Oakland. This is Obama's America. And don't tell me for a second that he does not love this. He and his closest relations have purposely opened up this can of worms. What better way to distract the populace while he and his administration continue to tear down the foundations of this republic bit by precious bit.

Just above P.J Salvatore argued that "Hope and Change has been replaced with Us vs. Them." I disagree: Hope and Change is and has always been Us vs. Them.

Welcome to the future, suckers.

Some New Vids: The Great One and a Great American

Everyone should watch this video taken at the Reagan Library last Friday. It is Mark Levin at last Friday's book signing -- Levin's last for his latest book "Ameritopia."

There is also this young up-and-coming great American by the name of Kira Davis. She's the one whose "Apology" video went viral last month. Here she is again doing a "Smart Phone Smart Minute". Go get 'em, Kira!