Obama makes speeches, once you hear a few you realize he isn't very good at it, there's no substance, and the same things are repeated - and there's no execution. Gallop shows that Obama's poll numbers fell after the SOTU.
But you know that - since your schtick is schilling for the Democrats who knows if you believe the nonsense you write? It is hard to believe that there is anyone who would choose to be be a Democrat unless there is money in it.
And that's the root of the problem for the most corrupt organization on planet earth - the Democratic Party. How to ensure that there is enough money to keep the people in the Party happy.
The example of black Americans captures perfectly just how corrupt - and corrupting - the Democratic party really is. In the late 1960's African Americans made the fateful decision to put all their eggs in the Democratic basket. Obviously, if this had been a good decision then blacks would be wealthy, with happy prosperous families, living in crime free communities, with good jobs that require little government support, high educational achievements, and they would have a leadership that looks out for the community.
Right?
WRONG! Far from it - Black Americans have done poorly in the last 50 years on almost every level, and - no surprise - Democratic media has made any mention of this equivalent to racism. Why? How did that happen? It's not hard to figure out since implementation of a political correctness standard provides protection for the dismal failure of Democratic sponsored policies in the black community. So, to even mention that the emperor has no clothes brands you a racist which that same media has conditioned us to consider mention of the statistics the worst insult in the world.
Do we really need to go through how poorly black Americans have done over the last 50 years in terms of education, crime, families, economics and the rest of it? Just who is in those flash mob videos? Is it racism to even mention it? Democratic media would have the fingers pointed at everyone but the real culprit for this - Democrats, Democratic - Democratic policies which have destroyed the black family, put a quarter of its men into the criminal justice system, destroyed - not education opportunity which is there, but the will to be educated, or to seek wealth and all the rest of it. DEMOCRATS - no one else!
In Newark, NJ juvenile court where I represented children, or in Paterson, New Jersey, when the high school that is nearly all black gets out there used to be a rolling crime wave - shopkeepers close their stores and restaurants, people clear the streets -until a homeless man was just beaten to death by these kids in Paterson. Why? In a city that has been under Democratic control for a century it comes to this? How can anyone defend the people that caused this?
So black leaders sit up from on high and tell us all about how terrific the Democrats are, how terrible the Republicans are, it is like Alice in Wonderland, and everyone but those affected know it. There is no hope - none - for these children, because thanks to Democratic media we can't even talk about what's really going on, and there are people like you defending the very people responsible for this! You see any chance - any shot at all that the inner city black community will ever get out of its hole when the government subsidizes the current situation, and refuses to acknowledge that those subsidies are the problem? That children need a mother and father at home because it can't be done any other way.
But wait, being pro-family is something that those right wing Republicans do. But Republicans have nothing to do with running things in the black community, and that it is Democrats who run things and are alone responsible for the awful situation. Democrats who put leaders like Sharp James and Marion Barry in charge. How can anyone possibly think that any of this can ever change when the Democrats are the ones who benefit the most for continuation of the current dismal situation.
In other words, since they get 100% of the vote now why change anything?
Friday, January 27, 2012
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
The Democratic Party - The Most Corrupt Organization on the Planet: Part 2
In today's article, we discuss public unions, and how Democrats have used these organizations, which are also premised on corruption, as a method by which taxpayer funds can be directed to Democratic Party coffers.
There is an inherent evil in public unions, when such unions are able to contribute money to the campaigns of the very people and party responsible for hiring, salary and benefits.
When there are public unions the entire political system is corrupted, especially since such unions only give only to Democrats, which in return for the money gives the unions whatever they want. It doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to see how destructive this is - as can readily be seen in solid blue states, which are plagued by a combination of poor educational achievement and high taxes.
In short - and I've never heard any response to this - if there has to be public unions (and there doesn't have to be, as the right of public employees to unionize is entirely statutory and what the legislature can give it can take away) why not forbid them to make political donations, or at the very least force unions to split donations between the parties? After all, it is essentially taxpayer funds that are being transferred.
Of course, since the Democratic Party benefit from such a corrupt system the Party would never agree to forbid donations. It's not even talked about. But, isn't there is something inherently wrong with funneling tax money through public unions? Heck, why not skip the unions and have the money go right from the treasury to the Democratic party coffers? (that's sarcasm). After all it's not much different from what's happening in New York, California, Illinois and other blue states.
Don't count on major media to echo what is in this article - such media is most certainly already working on the story that Wisconsin Republicans have destroyed the local school system. That this story is false is irrelevant to Democratic media.
What's especially puzzling is the relative silence of the Republican leadership on the corrupting influence of public unions. Even Christie never discusses public unions in terms of its corruption of the political process. This silence confirms the expression that Republicans, when it comes to their own self interest, are truly the "party of stupid." One example among many, why else would the Republicans continue to fund public broadcasting when it is so hostile to Republicans, and looks at every issue from a Democratic point of view (and, with Pacifica a radical Democratic point of view)?
As for Wisconsin, it is but a small and fragile victory in a depressing political landscape. Well entrenched public unions will not be so easy to remove in other states, especially when the Republican leadership does not recognize this for the critical issue that it is. Without strong leadership support the voters will never be told how corrupting such unions are to the political process, and a difficult task becomes impossible.
There is an inherent evil in public unions, when such unions are able to contribute money to the campaigns of the very people and party responsible for hiring, salary and benefits.
When there are public unions the entire political system is corrupted, especially since such unions only give only to Democrats, which in return for the money gives the unions whatever they want. It doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to see how destructive this is - as can readily be seen in solid blue states, which are plagued by a combination of poor educational achievement and high taxes.
In short - and I've never heard any response to this - if there has to be public unions (and there doesn't have to be, as the right of public employees to unionize is entirely statutory and what the legislature can give it can take away) why not forbid them to make political donations, or at the very least force unions to split donations between the parties? After all, it is essentially taxpayer funds that are being transferred.
Of course, since the Democratic Party benefit from such a corrupt system the Party would never agree to forbid donations. It's not even talked about. But, isn't there is something inherently wrong with funneling tax money through public unions? Heck, why not skip the unions and have the money go right from the treasury to the Democratic party coffers? (that's sarcasm). After all it's not much different from what's happening in New York, California, Illinois and other blue states.
Don't count on major media to echo what is in this article - such media is most certainly already working on the story that Wisconsin Republicans have destroyed the local school system. That this story is false is irrelevant to Democratic media.
What's especially puzzling is the relative silence of the Republican leadership on the corrupting influence of public unions. Even Christie never discusses public unions in terms of its corruption of the political process. This silence confirms the expression that Republicans, when it comes to their own self interest, are truly the "party of stupid." One example among many, why else would the Republicans continue to fund public broadcasting when it is so hostile to Republicans, and looks at every issue from a Democratic point of view (and, with Pacifica a radical Democratic point of view)?
As for Wisconsin, it is but a small and fragile victory in a depressing political landscape. Well entrenched public unions will not be so easy to remove in other states, especially when the Republican leadership does not recognize this for the critical issue that it is. Without strong leadership support the voters will never be told how corrupting such unions are to the political process, and a difficult task becomes impossible.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
THE MOST HYPOCRITICAL ORGANIZATION ON PLANET EARTH
Hypocrisy, now there's an overused word - there are always people who say one thing and do another, making this case is the easiest way to pretend to be witty.
But, there is one issue that illustrates the hypocrisy of the Democratic left and its media supporters more than any other. We already know that this media is filled with cowards, who are deathly afraid to do or say anything to offend the Muslim world because they think that it could lead to some maniac slicing them in half with a curved sword. But there is one issue in particular on which one would expect even the craven Democratic left to show some spine.
That is, of course, how the Muslim countries of the world treat homosexuals. You see, in the Muslim world, being gay isn't a lifestyle choice. It isn't simply a crime either.
No, in the world of the "Religion of Peace" homosexuality is a capital offense punishable by death - a speedy death. And in Muslim countries this isn't just some old law that's on the books, which everyone ignores. In the Muslim world, you get caught doing something homosexual, and it's time for a hangin'. Let's take Iran. In Iran, like in many Muslim countries, homosexuality is punishable by....death. In Iran this is one law that is enforced proudly and eagerly - not only does Iran round 'em up, put 'em to the noose, all of it is broadcast on what in Iran is network TV - the videos are readily available on the internet. It wouldn't be surprising if there is color commentary as well - someone is talking over the video.
In other words, when the leader of Iran came here and said there were no homosexuals in Iran he spoke the truth - but he didn't add that there weren't any gays in Iran because they all had been executed.
And Iran is typical of the way gays are treated in the Muslim world, where other countries have similar laws and do the same thing. Iran, however, appears to be the only one which makes its executions downloadable.
So...what would you think is the left's reaction would be to Iran's wholesale persecution and slaughter of gays for doing something that is considered a basic human right in Western countries? Something that could be considered worse than apartheid, since the people involved are hung in the public square and the whole thing is put on the nightly news? Do we have mass demonstrations, the usual celebrity suspects wringing their hands on the news, screaming out for the rights of the oppressed, calls for boycotts, UN investigations, human rights trials in the Hague, do we have Occupy the Iranian Embassy?
Nope. Nada. None of that, we hear no condemnation, nothing, just...silence.
How is it possible that there is nothing from the left on an issue which appears to be on par with South Africa's racist policies, much less Israel's "treatment" of the Palestinians, all of which creates far more noise, especially since the Muslim world's stand on homosexuality generates....silence?
Really, it's not hard to figure out why there is nothing out there. Here's two reasons. First, Iran hates the United States, the Democratic left hates the United States, ergo Iran can't be all that bad - and to criticize Muslim countries for executing gays could not only lead to some nut declaring a fatwa, but it could also be viewed as support for the United States, which no one on the Democratic left would ever do.
Second, and more important, and let's face it, the real reason: Democrats believe that homosexuals are repressed in the United States, and that both places treat gays equally bad. That's right - here homosexuality is a protected right, but because some state haven't given gays an unequivocal right to marry, this is somehow the same as countries that make homosexuality a crime punishable by death. In other words, the Boy Scout's refusal to allow gay scout leaders, is the same as persecution - by execution for the "crime" of homosexuality. To be a Democrat is to not to see any difference between executing someone and....inconveniencing someone.
The result of all this? Iran and other nations who murder homosexuals get a pass, a complete pass from the West. The hypocrisy here is nauseating - all the more so since Columbia University, the same place where an anti-illegal immigration speaker was literally tossed off a stage, actually gave the head of Iran a forum to speak and even applauded the speech!
Lord knows, and he does know - see my post on how the Democratic party is going to hell - heck, we all know that it takes an enormous amount of intellectual dishonesty, arrogance, hypocrisy, and just plain stupidity to be a Democrat.
But....for sheer naked hypocrisy this here takes the cake.
But, there is one issue that illustrates the hypocrisy of the Democratic left and its media supporters more than any other. We already know that this media is filled with cowards, who are deathly afraid to do or say anything to offend the Muslim world because they think that it could lead to some maniac slicing them in half with a curved sword. But there is one issue in particular on which one would expect even the craven Democratic left to show some spine.
That is, of course, how the Muslim countries of the world treat homosexuals. You see, in the Muslim world, being gay isn't a lifestyle choice. It isn't simply a crime either.
No, in the world of the "Religion of Peace" homosexuality is a capital offense punishable by death - a speedy death. And in Muslim countries this isn't just some old law that's on the books, which everyone ignores. In the Muslim world, you get caught doing something homosexual, and it's time for a hangin'. Let's take Iran. In Iran, like in many Muslim countries, homosexuality is punishable by....death. In Iran this is one law that is enforced proudly and eagerly - not only does Iran round 'em up, put 'em to the noose, all of it is broadcast on what in Iran is network TV - the videos are readily available on the internet. It wouldn't be surprising if there is color commentary as well - someone is talking over the video.
In other words, when the leader of Iran came here and said there were no homosexuals in Iran he spoke the truth - but he didn't add that there weren't any gays in Iran because they all had been executed.
And Iran is typical of the way gays are treated in the Muslim world, where other countries have similar laws and do the same thing. Iran, however, appears to be the only one which makes its executions downloadable.
So...what would you think is the left's reaction would be to Iran's wholesale persecution and slaughter of gays for doing something that is considered a basic human right in Western countries? Something that could be considered worse than apartheid, since the people involved are hung in the public square and the whole thing is put on the nightly news? Do we have mass demonstrations, the usual celebrity suspects wringing their hands on the news, screaming out for the rights of the oppressed, calls for boycotts, UN investigations, human rights trials in the Hague, do we have Occupy the Iranian Embassy?
Nope. Nada. None of that, we hear no condemnation, nothing, just...silence.
How is it possible that there is nothing from the left on an issue which appears to be on par with South Africa's racist policies, much less Israel's "treatment" of the Palestinians, all of which creates far more noise, especially since the Muslim world's stand on homosexuality generates....silence?
Really, it's not hard to figure out why there is nothing out there. Here's two reasons. First, Iran hates the United States, the Democratic left hates the United States, ergo Iran can't be all that bad - and to criticize Muslim countries for executing gays could not only lead to some nut declaring a fatwa, but it could also be viewed as support for the United States, which no one on the Democratic left would ever do.
Second, and more important, and let's face it, the real reason: Democrats believe that homosexuals are repressed in the United States, and that both places treat gays equally bad. That's right - here homosexuality is a protected right, but because some state haven't given gays an unequivocal right to marry, this is somehow the same as countries that make homosexuality a crime punishable by death. In other words, the Boy Scout's refusal to allow gay scout leaders, is the same as persecution - by execution for the "crime" of homosexuality. To be a Democrat is to not to see any difference between executing someone and....inconveniencing someone.
The result of all this? Iran and other nations who murder homosexuals get a pass, a complete pass from the West. The hypocrisy here is nauseating - all the more so since Columbia University, the same place where an anti-illegal immigration speaker was literally tossed off a stage, actually gave the head of Iran a forum to speak and even applauded the speech!
Lord knows, and he does know - see my post on how the Democratic party is going to hell - heck, we all know that it takes an enormous amount of intellectual dishonesty, arrogance, hypocrisy, and just plain stupidity to be a Democrat.
But....for sheer naked hypocrisy this here takes the cake.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)