Monday, June 14, 2010

Another Obamian 'Tough Guy"

That's why you should vote
for me, Bob Etheridge

Brietbart comments covereed everything I might have added.
That was a criminal assault. He should be charged and proscuted. And he should be immediately impeached. Even if the college student does not wish to press charges, the congressman should STILL be impeached for that type of conduct.
Steely Irony   June 14th, 2010 - 7:11 am

The student has every reason and right to file a police report and have this congressman charged with assault. Maybe a few of his more enterprising constituents might stage a “fake kidnapping” and rough the congressman up a bit – you know what I mean – give the man a taste of his own medicine. Then release him naked some hot summer’s night just near the White House. Hmm… I think that sounds like a plan! If I lived in North Caroline, I just might…
skipper99   June 14th, 2010 - 7:12 am

Is anyone besides me, starting to get the feeling that an awful lot of Dem’s are starting to feel their rear ends cramp up, when asked about their support for Obama and his corrupt agenda.
jmf_stl   June 14th, 2010 - 7:13 am

What a shame. If only a Republican or Tea-Partier would have done this. But since he is a democrat it will be totally acceptable behavior. The poor man was just defending himself.

Bet you don’t see this on MSM.
SubjectoftheUSSA   June 14th, 2010 - 7:16 am

perfect length for a campaign commercial
Tagging on the video of Eheridge telling young people "they should get invoolved," is almost unsporting. :).

This Man I Call Monster

If You Like Your Doctor,
You Can Pound Sand

It does seem to me that every time I visit Verum Serum, one of the four contributors will have just finished a thought for me.  In this instance, John Sexton.
     Internal administration documents reveal that up to 51% of employers may have to relinquish their current health care coverage because of ObamaCare.

    Small firms will be even likelier to lose existing plans.

    The “midrange estimate is that 66% of small employer plans and 45% of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfathered status by the end of 2013,” according to the document. (Continued)
Later in the piece, a White House spokesperson says the final draft will be changed to uphold Obama’s promise. We’ll see. Still it’s interesting that the first draft apparently didn’t take that into account whatsoever.

A Real Corker!


Boned Jello

Wicked Thoughts

Lotta people never seen thsi before ...

A timely reminder

Wasted Akbars

Deep Thoughts

Obama's newest "subtlety " - Civilian Drones

An idea so bad it must be
destroyed in the hanger

WASHINGTON (AP) - Unmanned aircraft have proved their usefulness and reliability in the war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq. Now the pressure's on to allow them in the skies over the United States.

Boned Jello

I began marking-up this post after reading just the first ¶ of FAA under pressure to open US skies to drones.  "Now the pressure's on ..." is code for "this is a trial balloon from Obamunist central ."  Paragraph #6 contains the the next slice of meat.

There is a tremendous pressure and need to fly unmanned aircraft in (civilian) airspace," Hank Krakowski, FAA's head of air traffic operations, told European aviation officials recently. "We are having constant conversations and discussions, particularly with the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, to figure out how we can do this safely with all these different sizes of vehicles.

I don't have to spell out the implications for y'all; but there are plenty of un-thinkers out there who will scratch their collective asses and say, "sounds good to me." 

Obamunists are shrewdly packaging this to appeal to cash strapped state governments; i.e., a new revenue [tax] source.  However, what's the different here from using the United States military as a domestic law enforcer?   It fits neatly into Obama's "civilian national security force" gambit.  "Piloting"  the drones will give the Obama Youth something constructive to do, too.   I hope there's a huge stink over this, beginning now.

A good spot here to reintroduce this thought.  If the Second Amendment was formulated  to give us citizenry the means to defend against excesses by our own government, as it certainly was, this question needs answering.  Oughtn't we have access to the same weapons a rogue government can use to repel us?  I'm just saying.  

Five turds a week

Good Thinking