Monthly Archives: March 2012

Obamacare – Where Are We?




We are all aware that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly called Obamacare, is being debated this week at the US Supreme Court. While I am not a lawyer (or even played one on TV), I want to bring two points to your attention.

Justice Elana Kagan

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan was present to hear arguments about Obamacare. She gave no indication she would recuse herself from judging Obamacare, even though she had cheered its enactment, is an Obama political appointee, and personally assigned her top deputy in the Obama Justice Department to defend the law in federal court. Federal law 28 USC 455 says a Supreme Court justice must recuse from “any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned” or anytime he has “expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy” while he “served in governmental employment.”    [emphasis mine]

During her confirmation process in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kagan assured the committee in written responses to its questionnaire that she would follow the “letter and spirit” of 28 U.S.C. 455. And here is some information that Kagan supplied during her Senate confirmation hearing after being nominated for the Supreme Court. She was given a 13 question questionnaire, and she responded in writing: Had she ever been asked her opinion about the merits or underlying legal issues in Florida’s lawsuit against Obamacare, and: Had she ever been asked her opinion regarding any other legal issues that may arise from Pub. L. No. 111-148? To both questions she responded “no.” But evidence suggests otherwise.

So the question is, “What part of 28 USC 455 does she not understand?” She qualifies for recusal under at least three provisions of 28 USC 455. Further, she said that she would follow the letter and spirit of the law. Further, when asked if she had been asked about Obamacare, she said no. Yet her responses were demonstrably false.

When questioning attorney Paul D. Clement (who was presenting an oral argument on behalf of 26 states seeking to have the federal health care law declared unconstitutional) Kagan said, “The exact same argument so, so that really reduces to the question of: why is a big gift from the federal government a matter of coercion? In other words, the federal government is here saying: we’re giving you a boatload of money. There are no, is no matching funds requirement. There are no extraneous conditions attached to it. It’s just a boatload of federal money for you to take and spend on poor people’s healthcare. It doesn’t sound coercive to me, I have to tell you.” She actually said that!

The Individual Mandate

Yesterday (March 28, 2012) Justice Antonin Scalia asked Obama’s solicitor general a fundamental question about the Obamacare mandate: “What is left? If the government can do this, what else can it not do?” Scalia asked the question of Solicitor General Donald Verrilli on the administration’s claim that forcing people to buy health insurance is justified by the clause in Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution, specifically the third clause, which states: “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” In the “stretch” department, Verrilli argued that by not purchasing health insurance Americans are really participating in health-care commerce because by not buying insurance they are having an “effect” on interstate commerce in health care. Verrilli’s unstated assumption is that not buying health insurance is an “economic activity.” Scalia pointed out to Verrilli that the administration’s argument seemed to take no cognizance of the Tenth Amendment.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said that “…you don’t have the duty to rescue someone if that person is in danger. And here the government is saying that the Federal Government has a duty to tell the individual citizen that it must act, and that is different from what we have in previous cases and that changes the relationship of the Federal Government to the individual in the very fundamental way.”

So, following Kennedy’s reasoning, an ambitious and aggressive government, would literally be able to require anything, as long as it was for the “common good.” Where would this power end? Justice Sam Alito asked Verrilli if Congress could force young people to buy burial insurance because everyone is going to die someday. Chief Justice John Roberts asked Verrilli if Congress could force people to buy cell phones because it would facilitate contacting emergency services in the event of an accident. And Justice Kennedy asked Verrilli: “Can you create commerce in order to regulate it.”

Justice Scalia wondered if the mandate was confirmed, could destroy the very concept of limited government.

Where are we? With Kagan not recusing herself, who knows. We know that Kagan, Sotomayor, and Ginsberg are political hacks. All we can do is hope that at least five Justices view the mandate as unconstitutional, and therefore illegal.

But that’s just my opinion.

Rick Santorum and His Uphill Battle to the Convention

Aaron Blake almost got it absolutely right today, when giving the run-down on what Rick Santorum needs to do to survive in this primary. The five states mentioned are definitely must-wins. However, that goal does not exist in a vacuum, and is probably going to be affected by at least a few things that will be utterly out of Santorum’s control.

Santorum Caricature

Donkey Hotey (CC)


But there’s at least one thing Blake missed that was theoretically under the candidate’s control. Pennsylvania won’t be very easy for Santorum, no matter which way you cut it. While he could win the day in the popular vote, that won’t necessarily get him delegates, since Pennsylvania delegates are not bound to vote for specific candidates. Add to that the fact that his campaign failed to organize properly in the Commonwealth by recruiting loyal delegate candidates for the upcoming election, and he is in trouble. Throw in the fact that his last experience in Pennsylvania was a double digit loss of his seat in the Senate, and it’s not likely that he has many friends left in the state’s GOP establishment. The screw-up with the ballots really can hurt Santorum, because beyond being disorganized on the ground, he is also giving the impression that his former home is an afterthought for his campaign.

Beyond the Keystone State, it’s doesn’t bode well for Santorum that Newt Gingrich met with Mitt Romney. While there wasn’t an agreement made, it would be foolish to rule one out entirely going forward. Gingrich is already running in the red, and if he is realistic about his options, he is not going to be looking very kindly on an alliance with the relatively cash-strapped Santorum. Romney is the most likely candidate to be able to offer Gingrich a deal that would clear his campaign debts. And all of these problems are not taking into account the increasing number of endorsements for Romney coming from heavy-hitters in the GOP.

Off the cuff prediction: Look for more endorsements for Romney, of course. Also, don’t be surprised if there are more “secret meetings” between Gingrich and Romney, particularly after April 24th, if not sooner. Also, expect a close race in Pennsylvania, but don’t expect the delegates to follow those results, at least not if it falls to Santorum’s favor.

The Purpose of Government

Government does have a purpose, but it is limited. A proper understanding of the purpose, role and scope of government as envisioned and established by our founding fathers is essential to the future well-being of this country. America is not a pure democracy, but a republic under democratic rule by representation. The founding fathers envisioned government as a protector of the people, in times of war and in protecting the individual liberty of people, and specifically their inalienable rights. The role of government is not to provide healthcare, jobs, education and the overabundance of what it has been providing for decades. Government is simply not supposed to be providing the majority of programs it provides. In order for the government to provide anything to anyone, it must first take from someone else. Government is an empty entity that does not produce or generate anything in and of itself independently.
The average high school student will probably struggle to name the three branches of government, their responsibilities, and how they relate to the Constitution. The Constitution is supposed to be the standard which guides elected officials (Legislative Branch-Congress) as they make laws. The Constitution is supposed to be the rule of law for the Executive Branch (President) as he governs. The Judicial Branch (Supreme Court) exists for the purpose of reaching decisions in court cases to determine whether or not a matter is Constitutional. The Judicial branch is not supposed to make laws; that’s the job of the Legislative Branch. The Judicial Branch is supposed to rule on whether or not the Constitution has been upheld or violated.
It has been said that at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, upon leaving the building, Benjamin Franklin was asked by a woman on the street, “Well what do we have Mr. Franklin, a republic or a monarchy.” Benjamin Franklin replied, “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it.” Are we still the same republic today in 2012 that Benjamin Franklin had in mind? As government expands and continues in an unprecedented takeover of private businesses and corporations, we are quickly becoming a monarchy of tyranny. Elected officials no longer care about the desire of their constituents. They vote their own agenda with an arrogant “We know more than you little people” and “This is for your own good” attitude. It is time to clean house….and the senate and replace every official who goes against the will of the people who elected them. When a rule “of the people, by the people and for the people” ceases, then rule by an elite few is inevitable and that day has come. It has been in the making for many years as both Democrats and Republicans in power have facilitated its progress.
When taxes are extracted (like a tooth, but more painful) from the people and they have no control on how the revenue is spent, this is equivalent to taxation without representation. Frederic Bastiat, a French economist of the 1800’s right before the French Revolution, called taxation legalized plunder. President Calvin Coolidge called excessive taxation legalized larceny. The nature of government, left unchecked is to grow, consume and engulf, characterized by massive fraud, thievery and corruption. An all-powerful government has historically been the tool of fascists, tyrants and dictators who enriched themselves and their cronies at the expense of the common people. While promising liberty, fairness and equality for all, liberty and fairness disappear, but equality shines as all suffer equally in misery. Socialism does not work and it has been proven repeatedly to be a failure. It denies the existence of individuality and human depravity and kills any incentive for creation and innovation. When government takes from those who have, to give to those who have not, the cycle has to continue. If wealth could be distributed equally among all tomorrow, some would be broke the next day…….and need more again from those who have. The have-nots have not because they keep not. Once again, the Bible rings true: the poor we will have always.
As we look to government to provide our all, such as medicine, food, shelter, etc. we need to be reminded that in order for government to provide for all, it must be big enough to do so. What most do not seem to realize is that a government big enough to give everything to everyone is also big enough to take it all away. That includes liberty as well as material goods and services. In order for government to provide anything at all, we the people must first give. The more government provides, the more we give……. and give up. Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society pales in comparison when measured up against this Frankenstein socialist state built by our law makers and the current president and administration. It’s not so obvious now, but the years will reveal the truth when pay day arrives.
Thomas Jefferson said, “My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”
We can blame Obama ’til the cows come home, but congress is supporting the current massive growth of government. It’s time to clean house. IS ANYONE LISTENING?
Joseph Harris has been a college professor and pastor since 1987 and his writings have appeared on WND, Sword of the Lord, Intellectual Conservative, Conservative Daily News, Canada Free Press, Land of the Free, and The Post Chronicle. [email protected]

The President, Gas Prices, and the Use of Deception.

Gas prices in the United States are an ongoing concern. Prices for food, clothing, and shelter are also sky rocketing, but the cost of gas is getting higher and higher. Clearly the rising prices are a reflection of many things including our failing economy and out outrageous spending by a government out of control, but intentionally tying to manipulate the American people through deception seems to be the ongoing theme of this president.

President Obama would love the American people to believe we are producing more oil in the United States awhile giving oil companies taxpayer money. The president wants to invest more money on “wind-power and solar power, and bio-fuels, investments in fuel efficient cars and trucks, and energy efficient homes and building’s that’s the future”(Obama speech 3/29/2012). There was a recent study which proved that global warming is not the result of mankind. Evidence was found in a rare mineral that records global temperatures warming was global and NOT limited to Europe which throws doubt on orthodoxies around ‘global warming.’ (Ted Thornhill: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2120512/Global-warming-Earth-heated-medieval-times-human-CO2-emissions.html#ixzz1qWYrjVX5), so why are we spending astronomical amounts of money, we DON’T have on these things? That is one of many questions you should be asking.

The president wants congress to strip oil companies of some of the tax breaks they currently receive while pushing his own failed green energy bills. He said, “I think its curious that some folks in congress were the first to belittle investments in new sources for energy are the ones that are fighting the hardest to maintain these giveaways for the oil companies. That is the only way to break the cycle of high gas prices that happened year, after year, after year. As the economy is growing the only time you start seeing lower gas prices is when the economy is doing badly. We can’t just drill our way out of this problem as I said, “Oil production here in the United States is doing very well.” And its been doing well even as gas prices are going up. The reason is: we are using 20 percent of the worlds oil but we only have 2 percent of the worlds known oil reserves. That means we could drill every drop of the American Oil tomorrow, but we would still have to buy oil from other countries to make up the difference. We would still have to rely on other countries to meet our energy needs.” (Obama Speech 3/29/2012). He wants to continue to invest in wind-power and so on all those things that now have a proven record of being unsuccessful, by manipulating the American public. Green energy has cost taxpayers billions of dollars over the years, there is literally no record of success, and yet money continues to be spent.

According to Eric Bolling (Fox Business Network) Congress is not giving oil companies a penny, they are allowing them to keep more of their profits. “So, if that is taken away your raising taxes on oil companies.” It is not as the president tried to portray. What we are doing is taking tax payer money to subsidize green energy companies that our president outlined in the sum of more then 100 billion dollars.

With the onset of rising prices, the jobless rate at an all time high, and with a government bankrupting this country it is time to engage, do research, and wake up to the realities of what is going on in this country. When you have people running this country who can look you in the eye, and lie, it is time to make a change and get involved. Do you really think we are drilling and producing oil to our capacity? Do you really think this government is helping you by taking control of health care, banking, auto, education, and so on? Every aspect of your life is being infiltrated by government including your children and what they see, learn, eat, as well as the morals and values they are being taught. Just this one short speech by the president, regarding the oil industry, was deceptive – do you really think that is all that he lies about?

The only thing George Zimmerman didn’t do is play lacrosse.

Vultures fly in to feast on the carcass of Trayvon Martin

Neighborhood Watch celebrity George Zimmerman graduated from a high school not too far from where I live in Virginia. I certainly hope he made it to the 10–year reunion of the Osbourn Park Class of 2001, because it doesn’t look like he’s going to be attending many in the future.

Not that Zimmerman is necessarily guilty of anything, but after one has been processed by the MSM’s reputation shredder, the thought of appearing in public and defending yourself for the umpteenth time is not appealing.

Particularly when the President joins the race–baiters and says, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” Well, Mr. President, if your mother had married a Mexican instead of a Kenyan you would have looked like George. So what?

If only Zimmerman — a Spanish speaker registered as a Democrat — had been marching in a La Raza protest or a Mexicans Without Borders demonstration. Then national Democrats, including the President, would be happy to claim him as their own. But when George made the mistake of getting a concealed carry permit and dabbled on the fringes of law enforcement, Zimmerman became a “white Hispanic” member of the conspiracy designed to keep the black man down.

Why couldn’t Zimmerman have been like those progressive employees at the Apple store in Bethesda, MD. When they heard a woman screaming in the yoga store next door, they had the decency to mind their own dang business. You didn’t see them barging in on what might have been a private matter. They didn’t even tie up valuable public resources by calling 9–1–1.

Wait, maybe that’s a bad example. Jayna Murray died after being stabbed 330 times.

In Zimmerman’s case, there actually was crime in the area he volunteered to patrol. Police records show there were eight burglaries, nine thefts and one shooting in the prior year. Cynthia Wibker, secretary of the homeowner’s association, observed, “He once caught a thief and an arrest was made. (Zimmerman) helped solve a lot of crimes.”

A rule of thumb to remember in these “white Hispanic” vs. black controversies is the first lawyer to get in front of a TV camera is lying. Benjamin Crump and Natalie Jackson, the Martin legal brain trust, prove my point.

Begin with the photo of an angelic Trayvon wearing a red shirt. It’s a great picture, but he was 14 when it was taken. Trayvon was 17 when he was shot, almost 6’ 3” tall and weighed about 150 lbs. He also boasted tattoos, a gold mouth grill and went by the Twitter ID of “@NO_LIMIT_NIGGA.”

Martin was in the neighborhood visiting his father because he was serving his third suspension from high school. This time for possession of a marijuana pipe and an empty baggie with traces of drugs. In October, Martin had been found with 12 pieces of women’s jewelry and a “burglary tool,” but was suspended for a graffiti offense.

Once this information came to light, Martin’s mother complained, “They killed my son and now their trying to kill his reputation.” Which means it’s okay to demonize Zimmerman, but Trayvon should remain beyond reproach.

In lie number two, Crump declares, “We have to maintain over and over and over again that Zimmerman is the aggressor.”

George may have been an annoying busy–body, but he was not the aggressor. Zimmerman left his SUV to follow Martin on foot, but lost sight of him. George had turned around and was walking back to his vehicle when Trayvon sucker–punched him, breaking his nose and knocking him down. Martin jumped on top of Zimmerman and began smashing his head into the sidewalk.

During the assault there was a struggle over the gun holstered at Zimmerman’s waist and Martin was shot and killed.

This brings us to lies three and four. Jackson says, “You hear a shot, a clear shot then you hear a 17-year-old boy begging for his life then you hear a second shot.” There was only one round fired and Martin wasn’t yelling for help either. He was too busy slamming Zimmerman’s head on the sidewalk, which produced a cut requiring stitches.

The person yelling for help was George.

Although the Martin legal team has proven they are quite capable of prevaricating on their own, they get help from the media. Early stories claimed the dispatcher told Zimmerman not to follow Martin. What he actually said was, “Okay, we don’t need you to do that.” This is not a command and barely qualifies as a suggestion, but that’s not how the story was covered.

Zimmerman, like the Duke lacrosse players, now has the media baying for his blood and as a result a majority of the public believes he should be arrested. But none of that changes the fact that if Trayvon Martin hadn’t punched George Zimmerman in the nose, he’d be alive today.

AP Spins Obama's Unanimously Destroyed Budget as GOP Obstructionism

Ridiculously, the Associated Propagandists (AP) have tried to pin the Ø-414 slamming of the $3.4 Trillion “budget” Obama submitted to The House on an obstructionist GOP trying to make political hay in an election year. Oh, they didn’t write that, but let’s “deconstruct” the AP’s headline (via Yay-hoos):

GOP-run House easily rejects Obama budget

Normally, left-wing AP bias is about as unsurprising as a late-season Mets collapse, but in this case we’ll explore it a little further. What is a little surprising is that the AP would expose themselves as being totally in the pocket of the Democrat Party, instead of just being fellow-traveling left-wing ideologues. This is because the outfit is running cover for a president whose bill was shot down in flames by his own party, and yet the AP is trying to blame this solely on the Republican Party.

The intended reader inference from placing “GOP-run House” at the front of the headline is to frame the current event in the context of implied GOP obstructionism. There’s really no other way to read it, because the headline should logically read “House unanimously rejects Obama budget.” This obvious headline would be both more accurate and have around the same number of characters as the AP’s. Thus, there is no reason to cram “easily” in the headline when “unanimously” would convey more accurate information (unless you are an AP reporter with a limited vocabulary, which is entirely possible).

Another interesting aspect of the headline and the story is that the AP is trying to provide political cover to pretend “blue dog” Democrats up for re-election who don’t want to look like “left-wing extremists” unconcerned with deficits and debt spending. As a bonus the AP also gives cover to left-wing insaniacs who think the bill should go even further to restore “economic justice” (a catch phrase for plundering unearned wealth). How is this possible?

It’s possible because if the bill is defeated Ø-414 people will believe that there was a consensus in each party that something was wrong with the bill. But how can it be that some Democrat lawmakers voting against the bill would think that total spending was too high, and others would think that it was too low, while none would think that it was “just right”? The odd voting suggests a strategic public relations maneuver by the Democrat Party.

The Congressional Black Caucus, for example, proposed an alternative budget that sought $4 trillion more, which would be financed by tax increases on the rich (like that will help create jobs, right?).  This was defeated 107-314. So it stands to reason that the 86 Democrats who did not vote for the bill withheld support because they wanted to posture as relatively fiscally responsible to the voters in their district.

Understanding a few basic facts about the voting makes the AP narrative look absolutely absurd. Read the first few paragraphs from the AP piece:

The Republican-run House has overwhelmingly rejected President Barack Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget for next year after a vote forced by GOP lawmakers to embarrass Democrats.

Republicans have opposed Obama’s budget all year, criticizing its tax increases on the wealthy and saying it lacks sufficient spending cuts.

Democrats have defended Obama’s budget priorities but they largely voted “no” Wednesday night.

Let’s take this one at a time in rapid-fire succession. First, Harry Reid has forced votes on the Senate floor countless time. A quick Google search of ‘harry reid forced vote’ yields nearly 8 million hits. If the vote is “embarrassing,” then that makes the bill embarrassing, and the president an embarrassment. Also, the Republicans opposed Obama’s budget “all year”? So they are being obstructionist for still opposing it, even though Obama didn’t submit a balanced budget? Finally, every single Democrat present voted no on the bill, not “largely.” The Democrats who don’t show up, don’t count.

In conclusion, it is hard for an analyst to react to a left-wing media intentionally distorting the news without wishing to resort to satire, though this is becoming increasingly hard to do. The left is notoriously difficult to parody nowadays. In some cases, it is more useful to deconstruct the story.

Mitt Romney: The Establishment Candidate

The Republican Establishment says Romney’s our man

“Vote for him” even if you’re no fan

“He’s the most conservative of them all”

“Vote for him,” and Obama will fall

 

Ann Coulter writes “Three Cheers for Romneycare”

And bootlicking is how we fight Obamacare?

What do Establishment Republicans stand for today?

As America’s freedoms fade away

 

The Tea Party is fighting the Republic’s fight

As the Establishment watches in fright

Must today’s conservative throw his principles away?

To one day see a brighter day?

 

We’ve all heard the party line before

As our candidates were shown the door

Dole and McCain were crowned

And soon thereafter we saw our hopes drowned

 

Time is now to slash the government in size

Or our great Republic will sink in demise

The welfare state Dragon must be slain

No time for another moderate to posture in vain

 

House Budget Proposal Votes Tell an Interesting Truth

On Wednesday, March 28th 2012, the U.S. House of Representatives voted on 3 different budget proposals, all that ended up with the same results of being shot down by huge numbers. One budget proposal went down in flames by an astounding vote of 0-414.  Rick Mulvaney (R-SC) proposed an alternative budget plan based on President Obama’s 2013 budget numbers and it went down in an historic 0-414 vote. Not one vote in support of Obama’s 2013 budget. Mulvaney went on to explain that “The budget that the President offered and that is contained in this amendment never balances,” he said. “It is a balanced approach to reach a never-balancing budget.”

 Thus Obama’s budget proposal is exposed as nothing more than increased government spending under the guise of Obama’s often-used motto stating his desire to a “balanced approach in creating a budget.” And don’t forget the always-included tax hikes present in every Liberal Democrat [balanced] budget proposal of the past 5 years.  Nothing proves these points more emphatically than the Obama-Democrat yearly deficits since 2007, which have averaged over $1 trillion dollars in increased national debt since the year Democrats took over complete control of the U.S. Congress.

The CBC (Congressional Black Caucus) put forth their own pathetic attempt of a  budget proposal also on Wednesday. It went down in flames by a vote of 107-314.  Republicans stated that the CBC budget proposal would spend far more money than the U.S. government has available. No surprise there. Why does the U.S. Congress even have a Black Caucus anyway? There isn’t an Asian caucus, or even a White caucus, even though white people still make up a huge majority of the population today.  With the current race-baiting media circus of the Trayvon Martin tragedy being used by fake Democrats to further divide the nation this week, maybe it’s high time Americans call for the immediate disbanding of the discriminatory CBC.

The third budget proposal voted down in The House on Wednesday was a bi-partisan proposal put forth by Steve LaTourette (R-OH) and Jim Cooper (D-Tenn) that was modeled after many aspects of the Obama-created Bowles-Simpson deficit reduction commission. This proposal too went down in flames 38-382. Instead of responsible governing by enacting solid cuts in big government debt-spending, 382 members of The House have now been exposed as being the main engine of America’s plunge off the Greek-style debt-cliff.

Up next will be the passage of the Paul Ryan House budget proposal 2.0. Chris Chocola breaks down Ryan’s new proposal as follows: (emphasis added)

There’s a lot to like about Paul Ryan’s budget proposal. It cuts some spending. It flattens the tax code down to just two individual marginal tax rates. It also includes some innovative policies designed to halt the unsustainable growth of health care entitlement spending. However, on balance, the budget is disappointing for fiscal conservatives for two main reasons: It waives the spending restraint that was agreed to in last year’s debt limit deal, and it doesn’t balance the budget until 2040. Broken promises and unbalanced budgets as far as the eye can see are neither good policy nor a good campaign rallying cry.

As informed Americans stand on the edge of the Greek-style debt cliff looking out across the debt-laden landscape of their children’s future,when looking at the current budgetary buffoonery of Congress today, they are being left with 2 simple choices: Vote for Obama and the Democrats in 2012 and jump to their deaths right then and there, or vote for Republicans and hop on back of the slow-moving freight train that is on the exact same track of financial disaster as the Obama high-speed train to financial hell and chaos.  One kills you this decade, while the other slowly pushes you off the debt-cliff to the inevitable chaotic collapse of America and the Armageddon that financial insolvency brings with it. Not much of a choice there is it?

 

Demz in Da Hood

The entire Democratic House minority has adopted a “wear your hoodie to work” day in solidarity with Congressman Bobbi Rush, who was dragged off the House floor by “da man” after delivering a stirring and extremely lucid speech on the late Trayvon Martin. Rush caused a scandal by breaking House rules on decorum when he sermonized from The Bible while wearing a gray hoodie.

The tragic shooting of Trayvon Martin led to an outcry for justice by those who believe Martin’s shooter Zimmerman was wrongfully released in accordance with Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law.  According to 9-11 tapes, the neighborhood watchman Zimmerman, who is a Democrat with hispanic heritage, suspected Martin and followed him in part because he was wearing a hoodie and presumably because he was black.

The Democrats issued the press release for the “hoodie day,” which was attained by an anonymous source:

My Democrat brothas and sistas!

Tired of being pushed around by white Republikkkan crackers who think they run this joint? Are we a bunch of House *redacted* to put up with the forcible removal of our brotha Bobbi Rush by the Klan members who run the GOP?

It is time to rise up and speak Truth to Power!

We demand that the Republikkkans back off their thuggish tactics or we will mobilize our allies in the New Black Panther Party, Media Matters and the Southern Poverty Law Center to mount a ferocious campaign condemning them for their actions!

That is, unless the GOP is willing to amend the $3.4 trillion budget just submitted by us compassionate Democrats to the racist, bigoted, hoodiephobic Republikantz by adding a $200 billion remembrance fund, which will be distributed to our non-partisan allies in the media to keep hate crime victims’ memories alive!

Giving the Democrat rebuttal to those “Republican crackerz” who would dare cut off a black man in mid-diatribe will be Maxine Watters, Sheila-Jefferson Lee, and Hammerin’ Hank Jackson.

We cordially invite you to wear your official Obama 2012 gray hoodie in solidarity with Congressman Rush (and Trayvon Martin, of course). All proceeds go toward the re-election of Dear Leader.

With your help, we can defeat racism by taking the fight to the evil white oppressors in the Republikkan party!

Sincerely, Nanci Pelosi

The Republicans plan on holding a moment of silence in the tragic victim’s honor.

Author’s note: The above is satire. It is a fictionalized account intended to elucidate certain ideas and principles by taking them to absurd lengths. It is not intended to be taken literally.

Kyle Becker blogs at RogueGovernment, and can be followed on Twitter as @RogueOperator1. He writes freelance for several publications, including American Thinker and Own the Narrative, and is a regular commentator on the late night talk show TB-TV.

The President's Budget Fails: 414-0

From The Washington Times

President Obama’s budget was defeated 414-0 in the House late Wednesday, in a vote Republicans arranged to try to embarrass him and shelve his plan for the rest of the year.

The vote came as the House worked its way through its own fiscal year 2013 budget proposal, written by Budget Committee Chairman Paul D. Ryan. Republicans wrote an amendment that contained Mr. Obama’s budget and offered it on the floor, daring Democrats to back the plan, which calls for major tax increases and yet still adds trillions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade.

“It’s not a charade. It’s not a gimmick — unless what the president sent us is the same,” said Rep. Mick Mulvaney, a freshman Republican from South Carolina who sponsored Mr. Obama’s proposal for purposes of the debate. “I would encourage the Democrats to embrace this landmark Democrat document and support it. Personally, I will be voting against it.”

But no Democrats accepted the challenge.

They have their own alternative they wrote, which closely tracks the president’s deficit numbers, though it changes the details of his plan. That plan will receive a vote on Thursday, as will Mr. Ryan’s proposal.

Senate Democrats have said they will not bring a budget to the floor this year, though Republicans in the chamber have talked about trying to at least force a vote on Mr. Obama’s plan there as well.

Last year, when they forced a vote on his 2012 budget, it was defeated 97-0.

The Radical History of Rush

He’s done it again. Justen Charters of Dear Citizen TV exposes the radical history of Bobby “Wear-A-Hoodie-On-The-House-Floor” Rush including his involvement with the Black Panthers, his criminal background and his affinity for communist leader of Cuba Fidel Castro.

Representative Rush was escorted off the House floor today for dress code violations. He wore a hoodie and gave a speech about Trayvon Martin, the 17 year old boy that was recently killed in South Florida. Rush won the “Anti-Gun Congressman of the Year” designation from the National Association for Gun Rights in 2010. Fidel Castro also has a history of disarming his nation…

The Black Panthers: Sissy Boys Acting Like Tough Guys

It seems that whenever “Rev.” Al Sharpton and “Rev.” Jesse Jackson crawl out from under their rocks they bring this bunch of fools called the “New Black Panther Party” with them. What a bunch of clowns. Where did these chocolate crackers come up with the idea they are the “tough guys on the block”? They prance around with their billy clubs and scowls on their faces talking trash like they are something to fear. The only people they scare are the senior citizens, mostly those above 80, who cannot even begin to defend themselves against a bunch of billy club carrying morons wearing sissy black berets.

Now they have come out with a “Wanted Dead or Alive” poster on George Zimmerman, complete with a huge reward for anyone who will deliver Zimmerman. Well HURRAH!!!! for them. What are they going to do if someone cashes in on this “reward” they are offering? Do they plan to take Zimmerman out and beat him to death? Hang him? Shoot him? Imprison him? What a bunch of boastful B S!!!

If you “tough guys” are such bad asses why don’t you go get him yourselves instead of offering a “bounty” for someone else to do your dirty work? Actually that is a rhetorical question because I know the answer, cowardice. I guess that wouldn’t work out because they would have to step out from behind their mommy’s skirt and do more than talk tough from a safe distance. This is more of the same crap we have heard from this type for years. Like Jackson and Sharpton they come out from hiding to pose for the cameras like they matter, but only when they smell a profit. They don’t really want to do anything other than be seen in public and rake in as much money as possible.

They won’t actually do anything because they don’t care about Trayvon Martin just like they didn’t care about Tawana Brawley, the Duke lacrosse hooker, or any other “black victim of racist attacks”. Of course, most of these “racist attacks” turn out to be a lie anyway but they get their face time on television and then crawl back under their rock until the next opportunity comes around.

Hey Malik Grand Poobah Mohammed (or whatever your stupid name is) I have an idea for you. If you and your sissy boys are so concerned about blacks being murdered, go to Chicago and stop the gang violence there. So far this year, in less than 100 days, 100 blacks have been killed by other blacks in gang related violence. Take your racist attitudes, your sissy black berets, and your sissy billy clubs to Chicago, or Detroit. Do some real good for black people being ravaged by violence instead of posing like statues and talking tough for the television cameras.

These insipid morons don’t really impress anyone, especially white people who know where racism actually lives. Punks like the panthers, Sharpton, Jackson, Spike Lee, and Farrakhan are a dime a dozen. They mean nothing in the long run of American history. They come and go without ever doing any more than lining their pockets at the expense of the victims of real crimes. This showboating over the Florida incident is just that, showboating for publicity.

The real concern for the black community comes from Dr. James Manning, Bill Cosby, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Lloyd Marcus, Alveda King, Herman Cain, and others like them. These people recognize the true problems and seek to solve those problems in a manner that will actually make life better for those living in poverty and in the ghettos. They truly care about the black community. These black leaders, true leaders, try to educate blacks about the true history of America and the legacy of black people in this nation. They explain how to prosper and urge others to make something of themselves, acknowledging the truth of how to succeed in life.

I find it sad that when it comes down to knowledge of the history and heritage of blacks in America this “cracker” knows more than 90% of the black population. How many black people know that the Civil War was fought by white men who were willing to die, and many did, to put a stop to the slavery and exploitation of black men, women, and children? How many black people know that it was southern Democrats who formed the Ku Klux Klan? (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_events_kkk.html ) How many know that it was a Democrat, Governor George Wallace, who stood on the steps of the University of Alabama and stated that “no ‘nigger’ would ever step foot in a white institution of higher learning”? (http://www.who2.com/bio/george-wallace )

How many black people know that the Jim Crow laws were drafted and passed by Democrats who had control of Congress and that Republicans tried but could do nothing to stop it? How many black people know that the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act were forced through Congress by Republicans and fought vigorously by Democrats such as Al Gore Sr. and Robert Byrd? Lyndon Johnson had fought tooth and nail to prevent similar legislation from being passed while in Congress but signed these as President when he realized he had no other choice, then and only then did he sign the legislation. How many “crackers” have marched, protested, and fought for the civil rights of black people?

It is way past time for black people in America, at least those still blind to the truth, to wake up and realize that I am not their enemy. Jesse Jackson is their enemy, Al Sharpton is their enemy, Louis Farrakhan is their enemy, The New Black Panthers (and the old ones too) are their enemy. All of the racist hate mongers who keep racial strife stirred up are the enemy http://www.wnd.com/2010/07/175817/“>.

We are all being enslaved by those who use race and the Zimmerman/Martin incident to divide us into warring camps. They don’t care about black people, they don’t care about “crackers”; they only care about stirring up strife to benefit themselves financially and politically. Until we all can see what is happening and unite against this tyranny we will continue down the road to despotism, slavery, poverty, imprisonment, and death. As I stated in a previous article, this was a tragic situation that could have been avoided if either one of these young men would have acted differently. It is tragic but I don’t believe it to be criminal on the part of Zimmerman from what I know right now.

Criminal act or not isn’t the most serious issue facing us in this matter. Either way the end result is that We the People, of all ethnic backgrounds, must come together to fight off this attempt by hate mongers to destroy our nation and our ability to live in peace. The race hustlers are after sectarian strife such as we find in the Muslim world. Shiite Muslims kill Sunni Muslims because they aren’t Shiite’s. Sunni Muslims kill Shiite Muslims because they aren’t Sunni’s. We cannot let this happen to America just to provide a payday for the likes of Sharpton, Jackson, Farrakhan, and these New Black Panther Party sissy boys.

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility to Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.
Bob Russell
Claremore, Oklahoma
March 28, 2012