How is it that Obama gets to decide how ObamaCare will be administered? As he keeps saying, it’s the law of the land. So where does he get off unilaterally granting waivers to his supporters while forcing everyone else to abide by the rules? And how is it that the GOP hasn’t forced the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of what he’s doing? No one is going to convince me that he has the legal authority to grant waivers to big businesses while forcing individuals to toe the line.
Obama reminds me of the sort of sneak who goes around cheating on his wife. When he’s on TV, talking to crowds of the working class and the underclass, he pretends to be a blue collar guy. He’s invariably in shirt sleeves, with the sleeves rolled up as if he’s about to work on a car engine or an assembly line, dropping his “g’s” as if he never made it through high school, let alone college or law school.
And just who are those mooks who are always standing on stage behind him, ready to laugh and clap on cue, just like those shills getting minimum wage to fill the seats at TV cooking shows?
But when he’s not in front of the TV cameras, Obama spends all his time playing footsies with the rich and powerful, whether on the links or at $35,000-a-plate dinners. Those are the people getting waivers from the Affordable Care Act. Democrats always claim to be the party of the underprivileged, but it’s no accident that under Obama, the lower 93 % of the population have seen their wealth decrease by about five percent, while the fortunate few have seen their wealth increase by 30%.
The truth is, liberals aren’t really concerned with guns; it’s law-abiding gun owners they despise. That’s because they know that most of them are conservatives. Otherwise, they would make a real effort to disarm inner city punks, who never register their weapons, but commit most of the cold-blooded murders in America. At the very least, they would add years to the sentences of felons who use guns in the commission of their crimes. But that’s a non-starter for criminal defense attorneys, who are major donors to the DNC.
At the very least, you would think that liberals would refrain from embarrassing themselves by insisting that if only there were stricter gun laws, gun violence would fade away. Chicago and Washington, D.C., two cities run entirely by Democrats, have two things in common: the strictest gun laws in the nation, and two of the highest murder rates. I suppose you could safely list a third; namely, the most corrupt politicians this side of Iran.
For all their blather about gun violence, it’s the liberals who account for most of it. Not only are most street criminals registered Democrats, it was Bill Clinton who decided that military bases should be gun-free zones, making him an accessory to the murders committed by Nidal Hasan and Aaron Alexis at Fort Hood and the Navy Yard.
It might be a good idea if all so-called gun-free zones, including schools, malls and movie theaters began posting those little yellow signs we’ve all become accustomed to, indicating to drivers where pedestrians and deer might be expected to cross a road. The ones I have in mind would depict a group of sitting ducks.
What astonishes me about liberals is that they don’t seem to have a threshold when it comes to embarrassment. Whether it’s Dianne Feinstein caught packing a heater in her purse, the House and Senate Democrats excluding themselves from ObamaCare or Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn) explaining to Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn), in 2010, why Corker’s proposal that borrowers be required to make a 5% down payment in order to qualify for a home loan was a foolish idea: “Passage of such a requirement would restrict home ownership to only those who can afford it.”
Finally, it’s not just the politicians who are creating all the mischief in the world. The World Council of Churches, which is nearly as left-wing as the Politburo, recently organized a four-day conference in Volad, Greece, where the discussions centered around Israel, which it decided is an occupying power guilty of oppressing the Palestinians. The Council did everything but declare a fatwa against the Jews.
They were joined by England’s senior Catholic, the Archbishop of Westminster Vincent Nichols, in demonizing Israel for its harsh treatment of Palestinians, with nary a word about Hamas, about suicide bombings, the kidnapping and torturing of Israeli soldiers or even their hatred of Christianity!
The Geneva-based Council referred repeatedly to Israel’s security wall – actually a fence – without ever mentioning the reason for its existence; namely, the suicide-bombing of discos, pizza parlors and school buses by their vile neighbors.
Frankly, I was surprised that the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei wasn’t the keynote speaker at the conference, but I guess the old puppet master was busy elsewhere, pulling the strings of his new and improved Pinocchio, Hasan Rhuhani.
Obama in Wonderland
When Alice followed the White Rabbit down the hole, she got to meet a very strange group of individuals. Besides the Rabbit, who was always in a hurry and had a pocket watch to remind him he was late, she encountered a dormouse, a blue caterpillar, the obnoxious Queen of Hearts and a host of other very boring oddities. For the life of me, I never understood why anyone ever claimed to enjoy the book. I always figured those were the same people who pretended they thought the madcap comedies the Marx Brothers churned out for Paramount were funny.
But for weird characters, I don’t think the gang in Wonderland could hold a candle to the bunch currently running the world. Take Pope Francis. For all I know, he may be a nice guy, but I personally wouldn’t trust him to bring potato chips to a tailgate party. I mean, it’s one thing for him to say that he opposes military action in Syria or anywhere else. One expects religious leaders to suggest that diplomacy and negotiations are always the way to settle things. However, when he goes on to say “Never has the use of violence brought peace in its wake,” Pope or no Pope, I’m throwing a penalty flag.
I mean, really?! Well, perhaps because he was born in Buenos Aires in 1936, and Argentina, having been a place of refuge for Nazis after WWII, Francis has a skewed view of past events. But I would suggest that the employment of violence against Nazi Germany brought a great deal of peace to a great many people.
I am also a bit surprised that, having no doubt heard that the jihadists in Syria had beheaded one of his priests and paraded a number of his nuns through the streets, it would have at least earned the Islamists a stern rebuke from His Holiness.
But when passing out insults to people in high places, one should never overlook our own self-proclaimed messiah. After warning Assad about red lines for over six months, His Schmoliness announced that he didn’t set the red line. Of course not. The world set it. Congress set it. I fully expected him to say that Malia and Sasha had set it while fooling around on Martha’s Vineyard. “Those darn kids! You have to keep your eye on them every doggone minute. Just last week, I caught them up in Sasha’s room passing around the nuclear football.”
According to John Kerry, some of the Arab states have offered to defray the costs of an attack on Assad. But, naturally, we wouldn’t take a dime from them. We also didn’t get any money or free oil for defending Kuwait, deposing Saddam Hussein or fighting the Taliban for the past decade. Just because we act like mercenaries doesn’t mean we want anyone to think we are mercenaries. Besides, our economy is flourishing. We’re rolling in money. That’s why we keep gift-wrapping our tax dollars and sending them off to our enemies.
If you actually listen to what Democrats say — and why would you? — it can drive you nuts. Not too long ago, Kerry called Bashar al-Assad a generous man and Hillary Clinton reported that he was a reformer. But lunacy on the left is a contagious disease. Why else would Obama keep referring to our common interests with Russia, unless he was finally confessing that, like Putin, he, too, would like nothing better than to destroy America?
Getting back to things nuclear, it recently occurred to me that our nuclear arsenal serves no actual purpose except that by periodically diminishing its size, left-wing presidents can appease both Russia and their liberal base.
But even conservatives aren’t perfect. For one thing, they tend to be too nice. Liberals hit them with every name in the book, and far too often conservatives respond by saying, “Sorry, I won’t do it again.
Instead, they should be confronting liberals, including friends and relatives, and responding in kind. Sitting back and taking it doesn’t make them morally superior, as they seem to believe; it makes them wusess and traitors to their cause.
It won’t tilt the world off its axis if conservatives start giving the morons a piece of their mind. For one thing, we can afford to be generous. For another, they are sorely lacking and need all the pieces they can get.