Thursday, October 15, 2009

--Mangina --

Today's Questionable Content
Men Only

--Target-Rush Limbaugh--

"I see that Ted claimed to have ****ed a thousand women.  S**t, I ****ed more Chicago White women than that.  Half the time their husbands wanted to watch.  White liberals have a very ****ed-up guilt complex.  Ask anyone.  The bros laugh at it and just swim in that white P***y." - Barack Obama (source)

Rick Sanchez - Liar

   How drive-by media source their news.

Fweg Shay

Starbucks Memories


Limbaugh and Double Standards

watched a game on TV- wins Heisman

 It really does no good to complain about Liberal outrages anymore.  I have a friend who gets Newsweek, and bristles at my contention that it's  leftist agitprop.  ("They cover both sides equally!").  So, in a very real sense the nation has two languages now, with one group unable to communicate with the other.  Belay that.  Conservatives cannot escape hearing, and reading, the left's version of things, such is the death grip Liberals have on the media.   Still, the NFL's rejection of Limbaugh's bid to buy the Rams pisses me off.   You know what's coming don't you?  That's right.  Another example of Liberal hypocrisy. 

One day after NFL commissioner Roger Goodell noted the NFL's "high standards" and expressed concern about "divisive" language hurting the league, Rush Limbaugh was dropped from a group of investors looking to buy the St. Louis Rams. Goodell's comments followed similar remarks from DeMaurice Smith, new head of the NFL players association and a lawyer who worked on the Obama transition.

Now that Goodell has asserted himself as the arbiter of acceptable political speech for the NFL, perhaps he'll take another look at Stacy "Fergie" Ferguson, singer for the Black Eyed Peas. As we noted yesterday, one of the group's most popular songs is "Let's Get Retarded." And one reader points out, in the lyrics to the song "Where's the Love," the U.S. government includes "terrorists" just like the ones we're trying to stop overseas, and the CIA is like a street gang:

    Overseas, yeah, we try to stop terrorism
    But we still got terrorists here livin'
    In the USA, the big CIA
    The Bloods and The Crips and the KKK

The NFL voted to allow Fergie to become part owner of the Miami Dolphins earlier this week. So it's not really "divisive" speech that troubles the NFL, apparently, but a certain kind of "divisive" speech.

As noted, there is a standard at work here, but it's not a high one.[Weekly Standard]


The Dangers of a Value-Added Tax

 Speaking for myself, short of committing mass suicide,  there is nothing this government could do, suggest, enact, or impose that I wouldn't feel safe to call oppressive, unconstitutional at some level, and criminal.  Like the VAT. 
On its way out of the recession, the economy may encounter a VAT blocking its way.

Last week on PBS's "Charlie Rose Show," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she thinks "it's fair to look at a value-added tax." And the Congressional Research Service just published a lengthy new paper on the value-added tax that tends to obscure the fact that the middle class will bear the majority of its burden..
  • At a 17% tax rate, for example, he can quickly increase taxes by $1.5 trillion a year in a partially hidden way. A VAT is by its nature hidden, because no one files a tax return.
  • Obama could {most certainly would] also increase the income tax on "the rich," saying that they and the middle class get a nearly free ride under the VAT compared to less affluent people who must spend everything on purchasing "taxable" essentials. Not so, but the VAT lends itself to spin.
  • Mr. Obama and Mrs. Pelosi might also use the VAT to fund "free" government-run medical care and hospitals for everyone, as well as "free" college education and "free" home mortgages.
  • The one certainty about a VAT is its enormous revenue-producing potential. At a rate of 17% to 18%—about average for Europe—it could increase total federal taxes to 30% of GDP or more from 15% now, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
At the moment I'd support the VAT, if ...
  • The IRS was dismantled entirely
  • The 17% rate was protected by a 90% vote requirement  to increase, and a simple majority to decrease that rate.
  • No exemptions, rebates, exclusions for anyone, for any reason.
  • The VAT  replaces  the payroll, FICA, all medical care taxes, and no additional tax scheme can be imposed for any reason.
  • It would have to be enacted by a congress controlled by Republicans, and Obama's veto overridden else there would assuredly be a poison pill embedded someplace.  Poison for us.

Re: Yarmulkes


In Passing
 Stuff that makes me think bad things

Disillusioned liberals yearn for Hillary Clinton

Where were you when you came to the panicky realization that Hillary Clinton was right?
(Answer: Hopinng Obama would get the nomination because he was unelectable)

Obama’s embarrassing, pompous war with Fox News
Perhaps Obama and Dunn think that a clumsy attempt to link Fox News with Republicans will cause independents to abandon the channel for White House Comfort Zone MSNBC or even CNN, which still commands viewer dominance in airport terminals. That won’t happen. Having the White House for an enemy is ratings gold for the network.

Graham-Paul Dispute Highlights GOP Fissure

“We're not going to be the party of angry white guys," liberal Republican Senator Lindsay Graham told a Greenville, South Carolina, audience at Furman University where some supporters of Congressman Ron Paul were heckling him.

Russia takes Obama to the Cleaners

What a difference a few weeks make. On September 24, the New York Times reported this:... and  today in the New York Times we read this

Academic Freedom
There is no more unaccountable group in America today than academics. This is true even when they work for public institutions. This is clearly on display in this story about the American Association of University Professors arrogantly claiming that anyone who seeks to bring academics’ work out into the sunshine threatens their “academic freedom”.

A special bonus quote of the day. Butters, we hardly knew ye. Content warning. (via South Park Studios)


But, Maine does have lots of nice trees
 How can you give away a $1 trillion new entitlement and argue with a straight face that it won't involve new costs?
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), on the  AHIP report: prepared  by
Pricewaterhouse Coopers. "It wasn't based on any valid assumptions."

Many Democrats have unanswered questions about the bill that was passed by the Senate Finance Committee Tuesday on a 14 to 9 vote: How can you give away a $1 trillion new entitlement and argue with a straight face that it won't involve new costs? How could the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score it accurately last week ($829 billion over 10 years) when it's merely a phantom bill with no legislative language in it yet? How can they vote for a bill that hasn't factored in the cost increases that will occur when businesses offload their insurance responsibilities by throwing their employees into the ranks of the uninsured, paying the new fines instead of continuing to provide insurance?

Even if you take the CBO's numbers at face value, what about the exponential costs that will explode in the second 10 years? What about the approximately 25 million people left uninsured by the bill? Won't we still have to pay for their medical care if they walk into a hospital emergency room? How will the legislators sell a bill to voters that includes significant tax increases on the middle class (in the form of stiff penalties for non-coverage, higher premiums, and on medical devices like wheelchairs and new mothers' breast pumps) while the "benefits" don't kick in for three years? And how about reading the bill before voting on it? [Supermajority fight club]