We wiinin'; they hatin

Exposed: Why Boehner And The GOP Want To Kill The Tea Party… What is now called the Tea Party began in 2007 as a loosely-organized yet highly-motivated grassroots  support effort for Congressman Ron Paul’s bid for the  White House. Since those early days, a lot has happened  to the Tea Party. “ Republican leaders such as John Boehner, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Peter King, etc. have made it one of their missions in life to defeat Republican Tea Party candidates–even if those candidates are incumbents. This is for good reason: the establishment Republican Party is diametrically opposed to the goals and principles of the Tea Party. Based on the positions of most Tea Party candidates (which is all we have to go on as the Tea Party is not a real political party but only a grassroots activist effort being conducted mainly within the Republican Party), the goals and objectives of the Tea Party can be summarized generally as follows: *They support a non-interventionist foreign policy. *They support the Constitution and recognize the current attacks against the Constitution, especially against the Second, Fourth, and Tenth Amendments. *They oppose the NSA spying on the American citizenry (including the use of drones for such purposes). *They oppose the Patriot Act and the militarization of the Department of Homeland Security as well as local and State law enforcement agencies. *They oppose the Import-Export Bank. *They oppose the Federal Reserve Bank. *They oppose CISPA. *They oppose the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA. *They support ending the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). *They support limited government spending–especially at the federal level. One can easily see that many, if not most, of these goals and objectives are diametrically opposite the goals and objectives of the establishment Republican machine. And more than anything else, the Republican leadership in Washington, D.C. wants GOP congressmen and senators to be “team players.” Of course, by “team players,” they mean good little Republican robots that will not buck party leadership. Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/boehner.blows Karl Rove has repeatedly lambasted Justin Amash. House Speaker Boehner has spearheaded well-financed opposition to Amash’s reelection campaign this year. Senator John McCain (the GOP standard bearer in 2008) recently called Amash, Paul, and Cruz “wacko birds.” Huh? I feel like I just read an account of how I met my wife that began: "He met his wife MoSup—a Korean/Navajo Peta activist—during an elephant hunt on the Serengeti in 2001.   The  part about me being married is right.  The WJC  author did get the GOP/Tea Party animus right, if not it's founding.  Libertaian Ron Paul may have aligned with the Tea Party, but I'll bet money that 8 of 10 self-identified Teapartiers (I am one) don't give squat about thoseWJC listed (Libertarian) objectives, save for the the Second, Fourth, Tenth (and First) Amendments thing  and  spending limits.   Now,  Sarah Palin's someone who knows a Teapartier when she sees one, and she knows how to punch. If Chris McDaniel defeats six-term incumbent Sen. Thad Cochran in Mississippi, it will be in no small part due to Sarah's  influence. ”

Reality Bites

BEAT MY CAPTION! Win fame What illegals think America will be like (Rollover) “ The Humanity T. Mann ”

DREAMERS

Sometime I'm thinking, "you know—I have no right to be so happy. I need me some bitch slapping."  I'm sure you feel the same way, so here's a Dreamers  wallpaper to remind you that we're all fckd.

Yur welcome.

Memorial Memory

Oh My

"George"

Refused 59 Mil

How Now Brown Cow “ Billionaire Donald Trump has revealed he offered Barack Obama a $50 million donation to the president’s favorite charities in exchange for releasing his personal records, but Obama never responded. “I would take it, and I’d give it to Chicago charities, and I would give it to all sorts of charities,” Trump said at a recent appearance at the National Press Club. “And they can use the money.” Trump originally offered to give $5 million to Obama’s pick of charities if he would release his college and passport records. MORE If yur not a birther yur not a critcal thinker.  End of story. ”

Pumping Iron?

Gizmos and Gadgets                      We Have Liftoff “ I remember this scene, from the Once Upon a Mattress episode of the 1980's series Saint Elsewhere,  as one of the top 2-3 funniest things I've ever seen on television.   Dr. Fiscus was played by Howie Mandel, and remember, this was a drama about a hospital.   Here's a synopsis of the scene .... Allow me to summarize the Dr Fiscus sub-plot of this episode. In the previous episode (After Life) Fiscus was shot and experienced an out of body preview of the afterlife and was brought back by open-heart surgery. The character of Fiscus was a clown (like wearing an examination glove on his head like a cock's comb during surgery), but after his near-death he is a sober, somber man. Having the med students come in to examine his scar just depresses him further. Add to this, the fellow in the bed next to his is in for a penile implant ("It's for my wife, you understand...") who votes for the inflatable implant, rather than the 'goose-neck' model ("Nothing's too good for my old lady...") After the surgery, with Fiscus still drowning in self-pity, the roommate announces that he's going to "Take this baby out for a test-drive!" and pulls the curtain between them shut. From behind the curtain, Fiscus hears "Fwish, fwish, fwish" and the roommate's amazed comment of: "Wow! My wife's gonna LOVE this!" "Fwish fwish fwish" "Holy Cow! That's amazing!" Fiscus is sitting up higher and higher in the bed, reacting to the sounds and comments emerging from behind the curtain.  "Fwish fwish fwish" "Jeez! The old lady ain't gonna BELIEVE this!" "Fwish fwish fwish - BANG!" "OW! OH! OW!" Fiscus reacts in shock, and then begins to laugh, holding his aching ribs as the curtain pulls aside and the roommate displays the paper bag he's just popped. "Gotcha!" he grins, and Fiscus is in tears as he laughs and suffers the pain of his incision... Great TV (IMDB commentary) Going back to that scene, I was reminded yesterday that I still had no idea about how penile pumps actually work.  There were some brainal visions of a man in the bathroom with a tire pump, but the whole thing sounded quite contraptionary.  Why yesterday? Last night I was scanning You Tube's "Popular Videos," when up pops what can only be described as  a side of porn film-full length.   WTF?  I thought YouTube was the last bastion of PG video.  I did do a bit of browsing of the "Life Guide" to "21st century sex"  series.   This series, however, actually has some pretty interesting stuff, and the people parading around as "doctors" might actually be, because a lot of the people are quite plain, and even unattractive.  This is an extremely explicit case history.  Poor guy. ”

What Rule of Law?

Oh My

I annex Crimea and get away with it thoR~                                                                               But, Wait! I stole the US and got away with it

Light Switches. Who Knew?

Oh My

But Wait!  You want Bizarre?

The Money Box

art is everywhere The Damndest Thing You'll See Today How artist Randall Rosenthal turned a block of wood into a box full of cash I feel so small

Connecting the Dots

“

Connecting Dots I've been getting e-mail from an entity called Connectivity.  This morning I opened one.  Turns out that it's a Roll Callventure.  Roll Call is of course a news paper "Covering Capitol Hill Since 1955."  Because the congressional seat of power has pretty much been a Democrat bailiwick (until Newt), like most news organizations covering the "Hill," Roll Call's Rolodex is, I'll guess,  pretty much a Who's Who of the Democrat party.  Their point of view then has been, in my observation, DNC centric.  So, even without  this preamble I'll guess that most readers will come immediately to the same conclusion after reading this blurb *he said jumping up and down*.  Lunch Links: Net Neutrality, Email Acquisition, Google+ Hangouts The significant online coverage of net neutrality has not spilled over into traditional media channels, the Pew Research Center has found. Studying 23 newspapers and 30 news programs, Pew researchers found only a handful of mentions of net neutrality between Jan. 1 and May 12 of this year. The issue came up only 25 times over 2,820 news broadcasts on network and cable TV — and six of those mentions were on (Algore's) Al Jazeera America. Was I right?  My reaction is here—in, invisible ink. You stupid twats.  Of course the traditional media are not going to rail against anything the freaking Democrat party supports!!! Sheesh!

”

And the survey says ....    “ Bill O'Reilly on the black race issue I have been waiting for someone on a National Level to finally speak the truth, and it happened. Wait until you hear this monolog given by Bill O' Reilly on his show. He tells it like it REALLY is. This is the topic that no one (aside from 75% of the American public) would ever touch with a ten foot pole. I kind of like O' Reilly, but after this, I have a lot more respect for him. I'm sure he is putting his career on the line after this one. What he says is the TRUTH and most of America knows it, but like the "Emperor with no clothes", no one will dare speak the truth in public. This video should go viral. Thanks Bill, someone finally had the 'BALLS" to say it. http://www.cnsnews.com/video/national/oreilly-americas-race-problem Cuzzin Ricky Esquire ”

Selling Serfdom

Oh My

A POX on All of Them

Liberal Culture                       Memorial Day...saw google displaying a tiny Memorial Day "flag" Late In The Day...an afterthought TODAY....this same gaggle of rabble is displaying a quaint little tribute banner to the first known Green Queen, the woman who may have had the [m]ost to do with the banning of DDT....worldwide... Carson may be the largest Mass Murderer that the world has known. She’d give Pol Pot and Stalin a run for their money, for certain.  (Free Republic) MASS MURDERING DO-GOODER

Mary Landrieu is asking for only 7.9 days' worth of the American economy ...

WHAT GUMMINT DOES          Pretty soon we're talking serious money - Dirksen Not enough colors though “ This is too true to be funny. The next time you hear a politician use the Word 'billion' in a casual manner, think about Whether you want the 'politicians' spending YOUR tax money. A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, But one advertising agency did a good job of Putting that figure into some perspective in One of it's releases. A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959. B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive. C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were Living in the Stone Age. D. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet. E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, At the rate our government Is spending it. While this thought is still fresh in our brain.... let's take a look at ... New Orleans ... It's amazing what you can learn with some simple division. Louisiana Senator, Mary Landrieu (D) Is presently asking Congress for 250 BILLION DOLLARS To rebuild New Orleans . Interesting number... What does it mean? A. Well .. If you are one of the 484,674 residents of New Orleans (every man, woman, and child) You each get $516,528. B. Or... If you have one of the 188,251 homes in New Orleans , your home gets $1,329,787. C. Or... If you are a family of four... Your family gets $2,066,012. Washington , D. C HELLO! Are all your calculators broken?? Building Permit Tax CDL License Tax Cigarette Tax Corporate Income Tax Dog License Tax Federal Income Tax (Fed) Federal Unemployment Tax (FU TA) Fishing License Tax Food License Tax Fuel Permit Tax Gasoline Tax Hunting License Tax Inheritance Tax Inventory Tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax) IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax) Liquor Tax Luxury Tax Marriage License Tax Medicare Tax Property Tax Real Estate Tax Service charge Taxes Social Security Tax Road Usage Tax (Truckers) Sales Taxes Recreational Vehicle Tax School Tax State Income Tax State Unemployment Tax (SUTA) Telephone Federal Excise Tax Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Tax Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax Telephone State and Local Tax Telephone Usage Charge Tax Utility Tax Vehicle License Registration Tax Vehicle Sales Tax Watercraft Registration Tax Well Permit Tax Workers Compensation Tax (And to think, we left British Rule to avoid so many taxes) STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY? Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago.... And our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt... We had the largest middle class in the world... And Mom stayed home to raise the kids. What happened? Can you spell 'politicians'! And I still have to Press '1' For English. I hope this goes around the U S A At least 100 times What the heck happened?? I'm wary of facts presented in those harlequin colored, gigantic sized font e-mail blasts we all get, because it's likely that at least some of the content is misstatement, or outright falsehood.  This one (from Metzger- who was just a relay and not the designer) was intriguing enough to throw it against the Google wall and see what stuck.  I got only as far as this from  Daily Kos.  A Conservative Email, And A Polite Rebuttal.  Of all the charges made I expected the numbers would be picked apart, probably using SNOPES, a favorite agitproppist tool.  But no.  Here is the crux of the response. Yes, a billion seems like a very large number, especially as presented in the email below. Let's not forget, however, that the U.S. economy generates 11.5 trillion dollars in output every year - that's practically $365,000 every second of every minute of every hour of every day of every week of every year. By the method below of reckoning how much a billion is, Mary Landrieu is asking for only 7.9 days' worth of the American economy to rebuild one of its formerly premier cities. 7.9 days is not much! That's a vacation to a lot of people. The rest of his screed travels the same state road (to serfdom, ahem).  - There was no Social Security.  If you had no money when you got too old to work, you lived off of your family, or you starved. - There was no Medicare.  If you got sick and couldn't afford to pay the doctor, you died before your time. - There was no Medicaid.  If you were poor and sick and couldn't afford to pay the doctor, you died. - There were no governmental administrations mandating workplace safety; if you got injured on the job, and hundreds of thousands did every year, tough luck - your employer didn't have to take care of you and you couldn't sue them.  They got off scot-free while you starved. A chasm so wide as to be unbridgeable,  I'd say.    ASIDE: It's been brought to public attention several times during, and since Katrina,  that pre-Nanny State hurricanes (like the one in 1915, that similarly devastated New Orleans)  were handled by Louisianan's without a farthing's worth of assistance  from the Federal government.   ”

*TWEAKS*

Although I haven't used it much lately, in the past I loved to use the boob *TWEAK* device I stole form Cyanide and Arsenic as a term of saucy endearment to the ladies,  or whatever amused me.  I think it may be time to modernize, so I offer the  rollover TWEAK for your consideration. *TWEAK*

Spiral Cut WHAT?

Why You Should Spiral-Cut Your Wiener

A Metziger Hat Dance

Brats with Guns

“

Brat Kids With Guns So Elliot Rodger decided that all that money and privilege was not enough, the bitches and ho's weren't servicing him. They weren't doing his bidding. He was a 22 year old VIRGIN!!! Oh the horrors!!!! (I ponder whether he'd met his right hand yet?) So he decides that instead of maybe seeing a shrink to figure out why his narcissistic personality disorder was effecting his prowess with the "sluts" of UCSB (and there are a crap load of sluts there), he decided to kill. I watched his video manifesto thingy and this guy was seriously a total asshole. Elliot was the epitome of the liberal elite progeny. Spoiled rotten, entitled and stupid. In his mind he deserved sluts of his own. I would hazard a guess he attended primary schools where he was told every day how awesome he was. The full post Anybody yet mention our toxic culture?  As an aside, MoSup wonders whether there heve been any studies done on hippy drug culture parents and progeny?  Why not? She wonders.   H/T Metzger

”

Share Feelings

Oh My

Merrily

Moving Forward ...

Oh My

Ohio Replaces Lethal Injection With Humane New Head-Ripping-Off Machine     Cuzzin Ricky

Them What Defend Der Reich

Hitler's Mustache                NYT and WaPo Rush to Defend Thomas Piketty's Socialist Economics Book Perhaps unsurprisingly, Obama has feted the socialist author, the Council on Foreign Relations has hailed him, and so have the International Monetary Fund and the United Nations. And just last week, it was announced that Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren is going to appear with the Frenchman to extol the virtues of his confiscatory "global wealth tax." Warren is, of course, one of the most extremely liberal--or "progressive," as they like to say--members of the U.S. Senate. She is so liberal, in fact, that she is constantly dogged by rumors that she is herself a socialist. On May 23, the left's favorite new socialist-themed economics book was criticized in one of the world's leading business newspapers. This sharp criticism caused both The New York Times and The Washington Post to rush to defend the book and criticize the criticism.   A new critique by the Financial Times of Thomas Piketty's book, Capital in the 21st Century, insists that the author's findings are "undercut by errors"--mistakes in his spreadsheets that skew the results toward supporting his thesis. One NYT columnist ... decided that even if Piketty is wrong, it doesn't matter because the Frenchman highlighted income inequality, something that every liberal just feels in his bones is the real problem in this world today. This criticism has alarmed the left, as Piketty's book is their favorite new endorsement of confiscatory taxation, socialist economic policy, and an exposition on the efficacy of massive growth in the power of government. Piketty's book has been hailed by big government fans the world over and has become their newest explanation of why capitalism is bad. Much to the left's applause, Piketty says capitalism inevitably causes income inequality, a problem that can only be fixed by a "global wealth tax" and massive government regulations. But the Financial Times says that "the rock-star French economist appears to have got his sums wrong." "The data underpinning Professor Piketty’s 577-page tome, which has dominated best-seller lists in recent weeks," FT columnist Chris Giles writes, "contain a series of errors that skew his findings. The FT found mistakes and unexplained entries in his spreadsheets, similar to those which last year undermined the work on public debt and growth of Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff." Reinhart and Rogoff are famous, or perhaps infamous, as influential economists whose work was later shown to have major spreadsheet errors, which called into question their whole body of work. It was quite a controversy among economics professors last year. FT goes on to say that "there are transcription errors from the original sources and incorrect formulas" in Piketty's spreadsheets. Worse, the paper charges that some of the data was "cherry-picked or constructed without an original source." The latter is a dire accusation if proven accurate. "The central theme of Prof. Piketty’s work," FT concludes, "is that wealth inequalities are heading back up to levels last seen before the first world war. The investigation undercuts this claim, indicating there is little evidence in Prof. Piketty’s original sources to bear out the thesis that an increasing share of total wealth is held by the richest few." This was all too much for The New York Times. First, the Gray Lady's own celebrated economist, Paul Krugman, was effusive with his praise of Piketty's book on March 23. After that, the Times, unsurprisingly, was quick to blast the Financial Times for daring to criticize Piketty's work. One NYT columnist seemed too decided that even if Piketty is wrong, it doesn't matter because the Frenchman highlighted income inequality, something that every liberal just feels in his bones is the real problem in this world today. Justin Wolfers briefly explores some of the criticism of Piketty's work but concludes, "The clearest effect of Mr. Piketty’s efforts is that he has brought new attention to the distribution of wealth." "I believe that interest will continue to improve and refine our understanding of the evolution of wealth inequality," Wolfers insists. So, for the Times, even if everything Piketty wrote is wrong, it's okay because the seriousness of the issue is bigger than the mere facts. Matt O'Brien seems to come to a similar conclusion as Wolfers, but also avers that even if Piketty's numbers are wrong, "they don't change the big picture." In The Washington Post, O'Brien insists that the errors in Piketty's work are not really big deals. Asking if the problems are serious and if they should "change what we think about inequality," O'Brien answers his own query, saying that "the answer seems to be" that the errors are "not too serious." Journalists such as Wolfers, O'Brien, and Krugman have also defended Piketty's book by claiming that there has been no legitimate criticism of the book. But in fact there has been quite a lot of criticism. Just to name a few, one such critic is Kevin A. Hassett, director of Economic Policy Studies at American Enterprise Institute. Hassett points out that a major flaw in Piketty's numbers is that they do not seem to recognize that much of the observed increases are attributable to increases in housing. And if housing is excluded, Hassett says, the sharp increase in capital is almost eliminated, and the imminent collapse of capitalism Piketty assumes disappears. James P. Pinkerton also points out flaws in Piketty's thinking, saying that Piketty--and his liberal fans--view income inequality as a simple matter of math: the evil rich just have too much. But simple math does not ask or answer the question of what might cause income inequality. Is it born of the various levels of technological expertise of individual workers, their education, their culture, their intellect, their motivations? These are important questions that need to be asked. Additionally, Hunter Lewis of AgainstCronyCapitalism.org points out that even if this “global wealth tax” is a one-time tax, it would force "the rich" to begin trying to divest stocks, bonds, real estate, and other holdings to pay the tax. "But how will that even work?" Hunter asks. "How will markets absorb all the selling? Who will be the buyers? And how will it help economic growth for markets and asset values to collapse under the selling pressure?" he wonders. Clearly, such a tax would cause chaos. Still, Piketty has a plethora of fans, but naturally, those fans are made up of those who want to grow the power of government. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Obama has feted the socialist author, the Council on Foreign Relations has hailed him, and so have the International Monetary Fund and the United Nations. And just last week, it was announced that Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren is going to appear with the Frenchman to extol the virtues of his confiscatory "global wealth tax." Warren is, of course, one of the most extremely liberal--or "progressive," as they like to say--members of the U.S. Senate. She is so liberal, in fact, that she is constantly dogged by rumors that she is herself a socialist. Still, instead of being the economics answer the left have been waiting for, it seems the debate over Piketty's assertions is far from settled. Der Skoonj When Michael A. Bellesiles published in 2000 his "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture," it was a progressive's prayer answered.  Columbia University awarded him its prestigious Bancroft Prize, and  gun nuts everywhere gushed  like a teen age boy on his first petting experience.  Alas, it was soon proved that Bellesiles had made it up. FT goes on to say that "there are transcription errors from the original sources and incorrect formulas" in Piketty's spreadsheets. Worse, the paper charges that some of the data was "cherry-picked or constructed without an original source." The latter is a dire accusation if proven accurate. Columbia revoked its prize, and his employer, Emory University, fired him. A rare thing for a puppet master wannabe.  Not rare that he was found out, but that there was a penalty imposed.  Others, like climate gurus Paul R. Ehrlich and Al Gore, et. al.,  have been proved wrong, and guilty of making stuff up so many times that rational thought can no longer explain why they are still academically alive. It falls to  understanding that we are actually living in an Orwellian world, where government and allied media "firstly create the problem; then secondly fan the flames  to get a reaction; then thirdly (like Johnny-on-the-spot)  provide  a solution.  The solution is what they wanted to achieve in the first place, but wouldn't have been able to achieve under normal circumstances."   Does it matter when people discover they've been lied to?  No, because it's now the law, either through farcial legislative process (see Obamacare), or  "stroke of the pen" (Exec. Order) by a "Dear Leader." Click-Click