FORWARD!

   iMakism.com

_______________________

The Joy of Being Uninformed

DiploMad 2.0

"Mark Twain generally gets credit for, "If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." Predating that piece of century-plus old wisdom by another century or so, we have Thomas Jefferson's still relevant observation that, "The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers."

This got me thinking about the joy of living the uninformed life.

Temporarily in California, I run into Obama voters galore, and occasionally ask them, especially the wealthy ones, why they voted for Obama. The answers prove very mixed. They don't really know why, except, well, he is black, and against the "war on women," etc. They have no remedies for the imploding economy or the collapsing federal government. They only vaguely know of Benghazi, and most haven't heard of "Fast and Furious." They already complain about high taxes--and the election saw yet another state income tax raise passed by voters here--but don't seem very aware of what's bearing down on them in the next few months.

They, in other words, live like H.G. Wells' Eloi, wealthy, happy, healthy, and blissfully unaware of the Morlocks about to eat them. Maybe, however, that's the way to go: Driving your Lexus to the Morlocks' slaughterhouse with a smile on your face."

_____________________________________________

Linden Borden: A Retrospective

From Capitalist Preserevation

A Man for Our Time: Linden Borden. We Got Screwed!

__________________________________

Obama Considering Earl of Ketchup for Defense Secretary

Sen. John Kerry - Heinz (D-Mass)

Keeping with his theme of America as a defender of freedom and a Military Power in the world, the Washington Post  hints President Obama is considering the appointment of The Duke of Heinz / The Earl of Ketchup - U.S. Senator John Kerry (D-Mass) to the cabinet office of Secretary of Defense.

One of the wealthy 1%, Sen.Kerry, a Navy veteran turned anti-war activist and critic of the use of the military by Reagan, Bush 41 and 43, campaigned for the presidency in part against Bush 43's efforts at waging of war on terror (while never criticizing the bombing of civilians during Clinton's misuse of the air force in Kosovo and ignoring the rivers of Rwanda running red with blood and headless bodies). Testifying in 1970 to a Senate Committee, he accused the US of war crimes.  

Before his anti-war days, Sen. Kerry spent a four-month tour of duty in Vietnam receiving 3 Purple Hearts from a grateful nation for wounds, including shooting himself in the leg and the most serious suffered using an MRE can opener in Saigon in 1969. It is believed he was sent home for his own protection.....

With a former first lady as Secretary of State and Senator Kerry as Defense Secretary I'm sure our enemies in the world will certainly fear America enough to behave themselves while we fix our own problems here at home.  

_____________________________________________

Starry Starry Nights......

_____________________________________________

No More Dodging Benghazi

LFR

It’s time for President Obama, Secretary Clinton, CIA Director Petraeus and Defense Secretary Panetta to be grilled extensively on their decisions, or lack thereof, during the terrorist attack of Sept. 11, 2012. We don’t want this hearing to be about a ton of peripheral topics. Citizen journalists will sort through Susan Rice’s and Jay Carney’s spin.

This shouldn’t even be about President Obama attending a Vegas fundraiser the day after the terrorist attacks. Again, that’s something citizen journalists can sort through. Here are the things this hearing must be about:

* Who was the first senior administration official to get real time reports from the consulate the day of the terrorist attack? Did this senior administration official report this immediately to President Obama? If not, why not?

* When did President Obama’s national security team first tell him about the terrorist attack? Was this during his afternoon meeting with Defense Secretary Panetta the day of the terrorist attack?

* During his meeting with Secretary Panetta, did President Obama order Panetta to send troops to protect the diplomatic staff in Benghazi? If he didn’t order protection for these American patriots during his meeting with Secretary Panetta, did President Obama order military support later in the day? If not, why not?

* Secretary Panetta said that he didn’t send troops in because they didn’t know what they’d be jumping into. Mike Baker dispelled that myth by saying the CIA and military are receiving a “glut of information” in real time from the CIA, specifically the Global Response Staff. Did Secretary Panetta recommend to President Obama that the military jump into the firefight/terrorist attack? If he did, what was President Obama’s response? If he didn’t, why didn’t he make that recommendation?

* When did Charlene Lamb first tell Hillary Clinton about the terrorist attack? When she was told about the terrorist attack, did Ms. Clinton immediately contact President Obama? If not, why not? If she did, what time was it that she contacted him?

* President Obama was the only person with the constitutional authority to order troop deployments during an act of war. Terrorist attacks on American consulates are without question acts of war. Did he order spec-ops troops to be deployed to Benghazi to protect the diplomats from the terrorist attack? If he didn’t, why didn’t he?

These hearings need to start with focusing in on a single subject so the American people get a detailed understanding of President Obama’s national security team operations and his decisions to protect or not protect Christopher Stevens and his diplomatic staff.

Once that base of information is established and the American people understand President Obama’s failings, then the hearings can expand into other areas. Until then, they must stay focused.

_________________________________________________________

A Good Monday Morning

________________________________________________

Okay, Lets Raise Taxes!

After Obama carried 8 out of the 10 riches counties in the country, obviously they don't mind their taxes being raised (even though I doubt they were thinking it would really happen while standing in the voting booth). And of course, Obama carried California and New York state, the homes of some of the most wealthy Americans (not to mention most of the hypocritical leftist entertainment and media industry). So here it comes, like a train with a head of steam. Debt Reduction... 

Business Insider:

"Reverting to pre-Bush tax rates on incomes above $250,000 – as the President and many Democrats have long advocated – would raise about $1 trillion over the next ten years. In order to achieve approximately the same amount of deficit reduction, the limitation on deductions would have to be set at 15%. In other words, taxpayers in marginal tax brackets above 15% would lose some of the benefit of their itemized deductions. Obviously, such a change would have the greatest impact on taxpayers in high brackets with a lot of deductions. In particular, the limitation on deductions would hit taxpayers in high tax states – such as NY and California – particularly hard......."

Personally, I am in a high tax bracket, I own my own business.  Fortunately, it's a fairly recession proof business so I'm prepared to absorb a small hit. 

So Mr. Speaker, let's just forget your tepid support for the Tea Party and grow a pair. Mr. Boehner, double down on B-Rock and propose raising taxes at a much greater rate than him. Let's see how Mr. Schumer and Ms. Gillibrand of NY, and Mrs. Boxer and Feinstein,  and former speaker Nancy Piccolo of California vote and explain that to their constituents.

Yeah, the wealth will have a little less to put into their over educated slacker kids trust funds....but I think they'll survive.

____________________________________________

Irony x2

______________________________________________________________

"We pick Our politicians by the way they look on TV, and our Miss Americas on how they stand on the issues." - Jay Leno

______________________________________________________________

The New and Improved Obama Media

___________________________________________

The Death of Principle

BHL

"Obama and the Democratic Party platform of 2008 promised a new era of accessible, open, non-secretive government, government which limited rather than expanded the discretionary power of the executive. None of these promises were kept. Maybe Obama and the Democrats were lying to us in 2008, or maybe on January 20, 2009, they changed their minds.

Executive power increased under Obama. Obama persecuted whistleblowers who threatened to expose his administrations misdeeds. Obama continued the regime of torture and abuse. He even claimed for himself—and for all future Republican presidents—the right to assassinate American citizens. Obama terrorizes and murders innocent Pakistani citizens. Obama fights battles and commits acts of war against foreign nations without Congressional approval, even when there is no imminent threat to national security.

Still, Americans decided they didn’t care, and re-elected him anyways. Why?

Let’s be clear—some Americans did care. Some Americans are very troubled by Obama, but find him preferable to Romney despite that. They vote for Obama with heavy hearts.

However, over the past four years, polls have shown that most Americans have simply become comfortable with warrant-less wire-tapping, torture, bullying, and assassination. 2012 Obama supporters have a different moral outlook from 2008 Obama supporters. Most Obama supporters just don’t care that Obama does this kind of stuff, even though when Bush did it (and did less of it), it made them furious. Why?........"

Read More 

____________________________________________________________ 

Now It All Makes Sense......

________________________________________

Hispanic group demands national amnesty for 11 million illegals….

Talk Straight

"They helped get you another term, B-Rock. Looks like they want something in return."

The Daily Caller: "Hispanic amnesty activists are expanding their goals beyond the so-called “DREAM Act” youth amnesty, towards a national amnesty for roughly 11 million Hispanic illegals.

President Barack Obama and Congress “need to come together to deliver change on immigration policy, and by that we mean … a roadmap to citizenship for our parents and communities,” said Cristina Jimenez, direct of an advocacy group, United We Dream.

Their demand is an opening salvo in a post-election campaign to persuade the House GOP to provide “a path to citizenship” for roughly 11 million illegal immigrants, most of whom are low-skill laborers who compete for jobs against low-skill Americans.

The amnesty goal is supported by many progressive groups, in part, because most Hispanics prefer generous welfare policies, and so usually vote for Democratic candidates.

In contrast, many Republican advocates and legislators favor high-skill immigration, partly because high-skilled workers spur the economy and lower unemployment."

No one can say they didn’t see this coming. Obama sucked up to this community, promising them the moon and stars if they voted for him (whether they legally could or not) and they did. Obviously, they haven’t been paying attention over the last four years or they would have figured out he was bullshitting them the whole time.
But hey…at least they sold their Catholic souls and made sure that ObamaCare continues and their churches (at least the American ones) will be spending its money on birth control instead of needy communities.
________________________________________________

PARTY OF THE RICH: Obama Wins 8 of 10 Wealthiest US Counties

What? The evil 1%ers voted for Obama .....just like in 2008.

Go figure.

CNBC - "In an election that often focused on debates about class warfare, President Barack Obama was favored over multimillionaire businessman Mitt Romney in eight of the nation's 10 wealthiest counties. And his margin of victory in all eight counties was greater than that of the national vote, in which Obama was leading by 50 percent to 48 percent with 97 percent of precincts reporting. 

The findings are based on a CNBC.com analysis of Census Bureau numbers on average annual household income from 2006-2011 and results from Tuesday's elections.

The 10 richest counties accounted for 1,337,700 votes, or about 1.1 percent of the national popular vote.

In the richest, Massachusetts' Nantucket County, where average annual household income is over $137,000, Obama won by 63 percent to Romney's 36 percent with all precincts reporting. The richest county in Romney's home state is also where, just prior to accepting the Republican nomination, the former Massachusetts governor held a $75,000-per-person dinner fundraiser. 

In none of the richest counties was the margin of victory wider than in California's Marin County, just north of San Francisco, where the president won by 74 percent to 23 percent, with all precincts reporting. In Marin, the average annual household income is $128,544....." 

__________________________________________

Ain't No Cheap Wighat Gonna Cover That......

_____________________________________________