Tag: Barack Obama

Ariana Grande’s high-IQ thoughts on the President

joan_grande_2

The progressive celebrity viewpoint of the world never ceases to amaze or entertain me. The Yahoo! Entertainment story about Grande’s insightful thoughts is literally nothing but Twitter posts from sycophantic fans of Grande and former President Obama. Apparently I don’t use enough newspeak to know that “imy” stands for I miss you. Silly me, I didn’t realize what language and human interaction has been reduced to:

In even more vapidity from the Puffington Host/Yahoo! Entertainment a song by Grande entitled “thank u, next” is supposedly “throwing shade” at President Trump for enforcing immigration laws. The music video looks like a low-brow teen breakup song but I guess that since Grande holds some books that she’s never read on topics that she’s never studied in detail I should care about what she thinks. I wonder how many illegal immigrants Grande has invited into her own home?

My, what big-brained thoughts spew forth from the mind of a progressive celebrity:

I suppose that when you view of complex issues comes from Harry Potter novels and allows for no granularity you just know that you’re right and everyone else is a Nazi:

Look at all that President Obama has accomplished

Good evening comrades, today’s post will go over all the wonderful deeds and accomplishments that President Obama has achieved for the United Socialist States of America. Our current piece of pictorial propaganda comes from the fine folks at Occupy Communists Democrats:

12193389_10156234818655327_1440978989817912249_n

When looking at the Unemployment rate, please don’t take into account that the Labor Force Participation Rate has also dropped. Like all good Party members, the folks at Occupy Communists don’t properly represent the data (or cite their sources). Taking a quick look at some Bureau of Labor Statistics data puts some insight into how the Unemployment Rate has dropped.

participation_trend
Take note of the constant downward trend during all of President Obama’s tenure.

I selelected the years of 2000-2015 from the BLS to generate the graph; you can adjust the years as you see fit. SeriesReport-20151122232319_878ef9

I thought that proud progressive like the ones at Time Magazine claimed that President Obama had nothing to do with gasoline prices and oil imports? But of course, those evil oil companies drilling for oil in the U.S. must be because President Obama demanded it. Didn’t Obama Administration officials want gas prices to go up to $10 per gallon like it is in Europe to force proles citizens to give up their cars? I also thought that President Obama recently rejected the Keystone XL pipeline citing “national interest” as his reasoning? I guess that we’ll keep using trains and oil tankers to import oil that we are using from Canada. Makes total sense and is much safer than using a pipeline…

s-1 c-1

Never forget comrades, Dear Leader has nothing to do with gas prices unless they are cheap...
Never forget comrades, Dear Leader has nothing to do with gas prices unless they are cheap…

The teen pregnancy statistic is really interesting and insightful. President Obama is most certainly responsible for ensuring that teenagers have less sex and/or use birth control more often. Don’t look at the Health and Human Services Department’s description of the data though:

In 2013, there were 26.5 births for every 1,000 adolescent females ages 15-19, or 273,105 babies born to females in this age group.[1] Nearly eighty-nine percent of these births occurred outside of marriage.[1] The 2013 teen birth rate indicates a  decline of ten percent from 2012 when the birth rate was 29.4 per 1,000.[1] The teen birth rate has declined almost continuously over the past 20 years. In 1991, the U.S. teen birth rate was 61.8 births for every 1,000 adolescent females, compared with 26.5 births for every 1,000 adolescent females in 2013. Still, the U.S. teen birth rate is higher than that of many other developed countries, including Canada and the United Kingdom.[2]” (emphasis added)

teenbirthsgraph2011
I guess that President Obama is responsible for a twenty year trend?!

If you look down the article a little further you see that it’s Southern states that have the highest teen pregnancy rates. But before comrades use this as evidence that the dumb, gun and religion clinging, xenophobic, KKKonservatives and Rethuglicans are hypocrites let’s take a look at some state data. In this case, I’ll use Texas.

Let's accuse the racist white folks of hypocrisy without looking at the data...
Let’s accuse the racist white folks of hypocrisy without looking at the data more closely…

Of all teen pregnancies in Texas, only 21% are from Non-Hispanic, White mothers. I know that I don’t have to look this statistic up, but more than 21% of Texas is made up of those evil white people.

Texas1
We can still blame whitey for this…

Texas2

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action surely is a great diplomatic achievement courtesy of John Kerry. Just as Iran honored the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty they will also another piece of paper in which provisions expire after ten to fifteen years anyway. Do not look at how Iran’s Uranium stockpile continues to grow. You should also ignore how Iran is testing ICBM’s in violation of a U.N. treaty that they are already party to. To quote Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehqan, Iran’s Defense Minister:

To follow our defense programs, we don’t ask permission from anyone,

I think that such language is pretty clear, but when you’re a proud progressive words mean whatever you want them to. I suppose that all of those “Death to America” chants are also just meant for domestic consumption and have no real meaning.

The GDP growth only goes over a single quarter of the Obama Administration and ignore all the others. It’s amazing what you can do with numbers when you ignore all the ones that are inconvenient. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis U.S. GDP growth has been low or negative for many quarters during President Obama’s tenure, but reading that data is thoughtcrimeAny reports that Obama Administration GDP growth estimates have been way too high are also completely and totally false. Flag your own lying eyes. It’s amazing what you can do with some Common Core math.

goodgrowth GDP

Concerning the Dow Jones Industrial Average, since when did followers of the Church of Socialism want the wretched “1%” and big corporations to make a bunch of money? I mean the Dow Jones represents just 30 of those evil and large corporations and not the “working class” right? I suppose that the Federal Reserve using trillions in quantitative easing to inflate the economy counts as real growth right? What the Federal Reserve is doing is totally different from what Zimbabwe did to itself. It’s really interesting to look at Federal Reserve Monetary Policy Reports to get an idea of whether there has been real economic growth or not.

selectrate balancesheet compensation

As always, don’t be shy and share this post with your friends.

12278865_422832827921550_4644439739053117008_n

 

 

 

What’s going on in Afghanistan?

12AFGHANISTAN-master675
Remember, according to Josh Earnest and the Obama Administration the Taliban is not a terrorist group.

Just as importantly, who actually cares anymore? The only news story that seems to be making any waves is the bombing of a Medicins Sans Frontieres hospital. How many U.S. citizens are worried about how Afghanistan is simply falling apart? The number of Afghan security force deaths is averaging over 300 per week now, more than double the same time last year. Afghan Interior Minister Nur ul-Haq Ulumi stated “We are taking so many casualties,” and “That is the reality.” Here’s another gem from the U.S.A. Today article:

Because the Taliban are not able to muster groups of more than several dozen fighters, they have been unable to mount offensives on anything more than small checkpoints.

Afghan and coalition officials said security forces have been able to hold terrain despite the high casualty rate among soldiers and police.

A short time ago the Taliban captured the city of Kunduz in northern Afghanistan, displacing 20,000 families. The United Nations Assistance Mission evacuated four out of thirteen provincial offices along with cities like Charchino, Oruzgan are under constant siege by the Taliban and unable to safely leave the city. The police chief of Charchino, Wali Dad, stated the following:

We do not have any way to escape,” and “If we get any means of escaping, I will not stay for a second in the district. The government is failing in their governing, and it’s better to let the Taliban rule.

The “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan” is using such news in their propaganda website with amazing articles such as “93 hireling troops surrender in Char Chino” and “The liberation of Kunduz showed military capability and moral magnitude of the Mujahideen.” It seems apparent that the will of the Taliban to restore their rule has not been broken. The will of the Afghanistan National Army to fight for the central government certainly seems to be falling apart though. The city of Kunduz was only occupied by the Taliban for three days before an A.N.A counter-offensive took control of the city back, but I have a hard time believing that this will be the only such occurrence.

Islamic_propaganda Islamic_propaganda_2

I think that a good question to ask would be what is the purpose of U.S. military forces in Afghanistan? Are we there to break the will of the Taliban? Are we there just to help the Afghan government hobble along? Is victory the goal? Who are we even calling our enemies in Afghanistan?

One of the things that I must disagree with in the following video is the idea of a “War on Terror.” Terror is a tactic, a means to an end; not an entity to be fought, broken, or conquered. One could declare a war on a country, or the Taliban, or some actual group of people. But a war on the tactic of terror makes no sense and would be never-ending.

I’ve always found the idea behind “rules of war” as seen by many to be most curious. War by its very nature is not something that lends itself to nice rules. No matter what kind of Rules of Engagement you attempt to enact, innocent people will die. Quite horrible things often have to be done to break the enemies will to fight. A war effort should be a “Total War” effort to break the enemies will to fight, or simply not be fought at all.

I wonder if the President really thinks that he can control events in the Middle East with “red-lines”, drone attacks, and bombing campaigns, or if he’s simply doing what he must to show that he cares about what happens? If the threats in the Middle East are not going to be taken seriously, why waste the time, money, and lives on fighting a war where victory is never intended to be achieved?  Perhaps the President will turn to the U.N. for help? Afghanistan seems to be falling back into the hands of the Taliban, and few really seem to care.

Nobel-Obama-copy

Bonus Round: Can you tell the difference between real news and satire?

 

Dear Leader and Her Empress are angry

12112073_895078830583684_840898951155581513_n

Dear Leader and Shillary Hillary are angry about gun violence in the United States. The most recent crime to be politicized by progs nationwide was the shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, OR. The man responsible for the killings singled out the Christians for death. When walking up to his victims, he reportedly told his victims the following after they responded to a question about being Christian: “Good, because you’re a Christian, you’re going to see God in just about one second…” Of course, we can’t jump to conclusions even though Rula Jebreal argued on CNN that: And in the realm of possibility, in a country that is very armed, that somebody, that will be carrying [a] weapon will go to a mosque tomorrow, or after tomorrow, and will start shooting people, and then these people will have blood on their hands, all of them. Carson, Trump, and Ted Cruz.

I suppose that Hillary and the President won’t talk about the religious angle of the shooting. They’ll talk about “common sense” gun controls laws. But of course, Dear Leader hasn’t actually said during his speeches what such legislation would look like. He just complains that Congress isn’t doing what he wants it to and that the majority of citizens want “common sense” gun control laws.

Let’s hear Dear Leader Obama discuss his thoughts on the shooting:


Let’s break down some of what the President had to say about this matter:

It’s not enough. It does not capture the heartache and grief and anger that we should feel. And it does nothing to prevent this carnage from being inflicted someplace else in America,

What about the carnage inflicted by Americans with cars every year? Over 30,000 people die from motor vehicle collisions in the U.S. every year. With more strict car control laws, I’m sure that the Federal Government could end death by automobile also. Next, we’ll have crime control like in Baltimore, MD.

Somebody somewhere will comment and say, ‘Obama politicized this issue,'” and “This is something we should politicize. It is relevant to our common life together, to the body politic.

At least this part of his speech is honest. Is the President going to politicize the gunman’s hate for Christians? Silly thought, only Muslims and persecuted LGBT party members receive such consideration from progressives.

The notion that gun laws don’t work, or just will make it harder for law-abiding citizens, and criminals will still get their guns – it’s not borne out by the evidence,” and “We know that other countries in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings.

Of course, Dear Leader doesn’t take the time to cite any evidence. I wonder how citizens of Chicago feel about this? In 1997 Australia enacted the National Firearms Agreement in response to the Port Aurthur massacre. There were actually “mass shootings” in Australia prior to  In the years immediately following the extremely tight (though not complete ban) gun control laws, violent crime didn’t go down. Perhaps the reasons for crime are more complex than simply allowing citizens to carry guns?

figure_03

For some more data from Australia, let’s look to a publication by the Australian Institute of Criminology entitled: No. 61 Violent Crime in Australia:Interpreting the Trend.

figure 1

Let’s take a look at some of what is written in this document:

Because of the large proportion of violent crime that is unreported (that is, what criminologists call the “dark figure of crime”), the dramatic increases observed in violent crime as measured by the police may be directly related to improved effectiveness and efficiency with which the police record crime. In other words, the police may be recording more crimes of violence because they are recording crimes that in previous times would not have been recorded. Increases in police records of violent crime might reflect the shrinking of the dark figure of crime rather than an increase in underlying violence in the community.

So with better technology and better enforcement crimes are simply being reported more often? Seems reasonable enough.

Furthermore, the increase that did occur between the 1951-70 period and the 1971-88 period is most likely explained by the changing demography of the Australian population. The proportion of the population accounted for by young males was at an historically low ebb during the middle part of the century and the resurgence in the strength of this sector is the most conservative explanation for the observed change in the homicide rate.

People commit crimes, not guns. People can commit crimes with blunt objects, knives, vehicles, or make bombs with common chemicals. Crime occurred before the advent of handguns, shotguns, and “assault rifles”. One needs to look at why people are committing crimes, not just say that they did so because they had guns.

A number of criminologists have argued that it is police productivity and not real increases in violence that explain increases in police recorded violence. For example, and most recently, O’Brien (1996) examined the differences between police records and victimisation survey findings in the United States. As in Australia, it is only the police figures that are suggesting increasing levels of violence, both the homicide rate and victimisation survey findings suggest the level of violence has not changed over the last 20 years.

As stated earlier in the publication, changes in data collection and police enforcement can also affect crime statistics.

Compared with other similar western countries such as New Zealand and Canada, Australia’s homicide rate is moderate, suggesting the prominent role of socio-cultural factors rather than any particular or peculiar aspect of Australia’s policy, practice or population.

Progressives would apparently disagree with this statement. According to them, we could stop murder if we could just pass some laws.

Australia’s homicide rate increased by a third between the 1951-70 period and the 1971-88 period. Similarly, between 1955 and 1971 the proportion of Australia’s male population that was aged 18 to 24 increased by a third. It is interesting to note that throughout the 20th century the proportion of Australia’s population accounted for by this sector has been steady or falling slightly.

I’m OK with blaming rises in crime on baby boomers.

figure 3

Gartner and Parker’s analysis is important in illustrating that violence is not the result of a single cause or even a single category of causes. Rather, the rate of violence, as reflected in the homicide rate, is an expression of multiple factors and complex interactions. The pressure to conceptualise violence as the result of simple or singular phenomena needs to be resisted. Some of the relevant factors may be changing in such a way as to reduce violence while others are pushing in the opposite direction.

Someone needs to inform the President of this. I would think that a college educated man would’ve heard that “correlation doesn’t prove causation” at some point. That’s not important when you need to politicize something before you have any facts though.

This brief consideration of trends in violent crime in Australia has emphasised the complexity of the task and the inadequacy of the data. The limitations discussed point to the need for cautiousness in interpreting the rates. Certainly, and most importantly, the popular understanding that violence in this country has increased dramatically and consistently in recent years is unfounded.

Really, someone needs to inform Mothers Demand Action about this. I guess that reason and logic aren’t as important as emotion though.

Back to what the President has to say though.

I would ask that news organizations put facts forward, have news organizations tally up the number of Americans who have been killed through terrorist attacks over the last decade and the number of Americans who have been killed by gun violence; and post those side by side on your news reports. This won’t be information coming from me it will be coming from you.

Why would the President care to present his own data or evidence on this matter? He’ll get the media to do it for him. I’m sure that MSNBS will be more than happy to comply.

ge-obama-msnbc-general-electric-keith-olbermann-the-peoples-cube-peoplescube.com-sad-hill-news1

If you think this is a problem, then you should expect your elected officials to reflect your views. And I would particularly ask America’s gun owners who are using those guns properly, safely, to hunt, for sport, for protecting their families, to think about whether your views are properly being represented by organizations that suggested speaking for you.

Considering that the Democratic Party did horrible in the 2014 election, I think that it’s safe to say that the Republican gains in Congress were a refutation of the policies Obama has instituted and wants to enforce upon the American people. I’m still wondering what “modest” gun control would look like to the President?

Let’s hear Hillary discuss her thoughts:

 

Actually, is there even any point in discussing what Hillary “thinks” about gun control? She’ll just change her opinions to match public opinion or korrect progressive thinking as deemed by focus group studies.

hillary-confusion-copyqresize580p2c341-pagespeed-ce-qmfiib1cixwpuoysifwa

Washington Post-Oregon shooter said to have singled out Christians for killing in ‘horrific act of cowardice’

CBS News-Obama on Oregon shooting: “Our thoughts and prayers are not enough”

NDTV-Oregon State Had Recently Tightened Gun Laws

The University of Melbourne-The Australian Firearms Buybackand Its Effect on Gun Deaths

12118694_831241226997164_2017506767329866869_n
Clock boy is more important than Chris Mintz who actually saved some lives during the Oregon shooting.

Bonus Round-If you want to get a good laugh, watch this:

Feminist thoughts on gender quotas, the wage gap, and guaranteed equality

Embedded below is a video from the U.K. concerning whether governments should force private companies to guarantee equality between men and women and enforce gender quotas:

If it’s equality that feminists are interested in, why aren’t they calling for equal death? 92% of workplace deaths in the U.S. are men.

death

One can take a quick look through some U.S. Department of Labor statistics and see that there are some fields that women are simply avoiding. Amongst civil and aerospace engineers women make up about only ten percent. Electrical, electronic, and mechanical engineers are staffed by about only seven percent women. Women make up about only one percent of professions such as: heavy equipment operators, electricians, and automotive mechanics. Some quick research shows that women seem to be shunning physics and engineering degrees. Perhaps it’s personal choices that are the reason for women preferring a degree in education or nursing over engineering and science fields rather than discrimination? But the narrative of personal choice doesn’t fit the progressive-feminist view of the world though. Progressives will just continue to conflate liberty with a guaranteed equality of results.

0301_mens-college-majors_398x370 0301_womens-college-majors_398x370 3031968-inline-i-percent-bachelors-degrees-women-usa

I took a quick look on the progressive website ThinkCommunist ThinkProgress where leftists were decrying the “gender wage gap” in a typical feminist manner. The author used the usual tropes such as: women make less even when they have the same degree, get paid less on their first job, and made the profound observation that women who have children make less money. The author claimed that “women get paid less in their first job than men who graduate with the same grades, majors, and choice of occupation“. The link is dead and leads to the American Association of University Women’s (AAUW) website, so I can’t verify the veracity of this claim. But I wonder if that report accounted for the number of hours worked per week?

Some other specific claims that the authors makes are “A woman makes less than a man no matter much education she gets, what job she chooses, or where she lives“. Concerning the source cited for education, the document only looks at what educational attainment was achieved and no other factors were controlled for. The number of hours worked and experience were not accounted for, just gross averages comparing the wages of all men and women with the same education received (scroll down to page 11 of the document for the applicable portion). A Bureau of Labor Statistics infographic was cited for the “job she chooses” statement. Once again, this document only controlled for a single factor, in this case, the industry chosen. Education, experience, and the number of hours worked were not considerations, just the average of all men compared to women in a field. Concerning the “where she lives” statement, the same fallacy has once again been committed. The source is a Slate article that compares the earnings of women and men by state and controls for no other factors.

Further down the line, the author claims: “While some of the wage gap can be explained by things such as work patterns, job tenure, race, and marital status, some of it just can’t be explained by different life choices or characteristics and instead is likely thanks to discrimination“. The citation for this little gem is a General Accounting Office (GAO) report concerning gender differences in pay. While the author of the ThinkProgress article may claim that discrimination may be the cause for differences in pay (and for once, his source actually controlled for more than one factor) she offers no proof to substantiate this claim. I guess I’m just supposed to take her word on this, because the GAO doesn’t offer proof that discrimination is the cause. On page six they write the following:

gao1

In other words, Ms. Covert is implying a conclusion that the data does not claim. The Factual Feminist (a.k.a Christina Hoff Sommers) wrote an interesting piece on the Huffington Post concerning the “gender wage gap” that progressives just can’t ever shut up about. This article uses data from the fine folks at the AAUW to disprove the claim that women make 77% of what men do for the same work. As it turns out, you really do have to control for relevant factors to fully understand what the data is telling you. A man who has to support a wife and several children might work a few extra hours, which would explain the extra money made by married men that ThinkProgress laments so much. Let’s hear some more fun facts about the gender pay gap from Dear Leader and Comrade Carney:

Let’s here some more thoughts on why the wage gap exists and how it’s not the way feminists portray it:

Isn't it amazing what you can do with statistics?
Isn’t it amazing what you can do with statistics?

One of the last things the ThinkProgress article goes on to decry is the fraction of working mothers who take time off work compared to working men. The author didn’t even make an attempt to look at why this might be true, the statistics simply didn’t fall in line with a guaranteed equality of results that progs demand. If men didn’t lose custody of children so much during divorce, perhaps the amount of time taken off by working fathers and mothers wouldn’t be so different?

custody_breakdown_sex1 perc_cust_parents_awarded_support

For all of the feminists who claim that life is easier just because you’re a man, have you ever tried to live as a man does? A lesbian woman who decided to become a man for over a year turned back into a woman. Feminists certainly aren’t interested in liberty, but do they even want equality or just special privileges? Do progressives actually care about the suffering of all people equally? Or is it just special interest groups, votes, and power that matter to socialists/feminists/progressives?

Bernie Sanders, Jerry Seinfeld, and gun control

Alright everybody, I’ll just be posting up a few pictures to share with all of your friends and family with. As is usual, your progressive friends will find them to be the most enjoyable. Have fun!

What’s a progressive to do when choosing between Bernie Sanders and Billary Shillary Hillary Clinton?

fifty-shades-of-bernie-sanders index Prog_Choice_2016_Candidates

What was Jerry Seinfeld thinking when he dared to insult our very sensitive, lighthearted, progressive, and understanding college students? How dare Mr. Seinfeld level any criticism against being politically correct!

Jokes_Not_Funny_Students

Most likely, you’ve heard about the murders in Charleston by now. But of course, Dear Leader has used this as an opportunity to clamor for more gun control legislation, without specifying what such legislation would actually contain or differ from current law. Remember, tragedies such as the murders in a church in Charleston don’t occur in otheradvanced countries“. Remember fellow progressives, the police are racist, prejudiced, and out to get you yet only the military and police should be trusted with guns

carrey-shoot-foot-tpc progressive_matching_game leland-yee-and-gun-control1

Another victory for Obama’s foreign policy…

Good news concerning Iraq, Ramadi has fallen to the Islamic State! Dear Leader’s policies of “leading from behind” and backing off of the world stage are progressing well. A few days ago Iraqi government forces left Ramadi and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff stated: “The ISF (Iraqi Security Forces) was not driven out of Ramadi. They drove out of Ramadi,”. So obviously, it must not be a big deal right? The Islamic State is just the JV team right? The State Department is also claiming that Iraqi forces are simply “regrouping” and “consalidated”. So I guess what is happening in Iraq isn’t that big of a problem. Many current and former military members are wondering why the current administration has executed their policies on Iraq. Why don’t these men understand the glory of current U.S. foreign policy? Obviously, everything is going as planned…

RT_ramadi_01_jef_150520_16x9_992 1432133193912.cached

Why don't these people understand that living under the Caliphate for the Religion of Peace is a good thing?
Why don’t these people understand that living under the Caliphate for the Religion of Peace is a good thing?

In other Caliphate news, the Islamic State captured the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra from the Syrian government. Various groups are worried about the antiquities contained in the city, there’s been no communication with a Syrian Army outpost for a while, and a military prison was also amongst the spoils conquered by the Islamic State, or JV team. The Islamic State has spread the Caliphate all over Syria and is even nearing Israel and the Golan Heights. Indeed, the Islamic State can be desperate at times, but is still very resourceful and intelligent. The Islamic State may even accomplish the administration’s stated goal of regime change, isn’t it just wonderful?

Look, it's the size of the United Kingdom!
Look, it’s the size of the United Kingdom!
Danger close? Nonsense...
Danger close? Nonsense…

I’ll end this post just full of wonderful news with a video of Dear Leader and some propaganda photos to share with all of your friends. Enjoy fellow dhimmis!

34377 ISIS_Flag_JV_Real

Fruits of the “Arab Spring”

I recently happened to stumble upon a video depicting just how successful the Arab Spring that President Obama was a big proponent of, is going. The video depicts Salafis in Tunisia and what they believe in. Just watch how much they want to live in peace and stand in awe of how they want to be in a prosperous, free republic.

By really any measure, Tunisia has had the least violent revolution and amount of bloodshed. The Tunisians live in a constitutional republic now. Compared to pretty much everyone around them, Tunisia is doing pretty well. If we turn our attention over to Libya the government that was formed after Gaddafi was removed from power no longer controls the two main cities of Benghazi and Tripoli. A civil war rages on and the body count continues to rise in Libya, probably safe to say that Libya is a failed state. But hey, the internationally recognized government is trying. One of the interesting things I should point out is that the Pentagon did more to try and stop the U.S. from entering the war in Libya than the State Department under Hillary Clinton did. The Washington Times piece on this aspect of the story is well worth your time. As we can all see, the 110 Tomahawks fired at Libya were for a good cause. I guess Hillary would respond to this criticism by saying something like “What difference does it make“.

kyhcrE0.0 44b03f6cb0b342bebae706b18cc2aff0_18

We can then focus on Egypt for a few minutes, where President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton thought supporting (and still do actually) the Muslim Brotherhood was a fabulous idea. If you work at the New York Times, you even think working with the Muslim Brotherhood, who considers the United States an enemy, to be a great policy idea. Mohammed Morsi was elected president of Egypt, for a short time anyway. After millions of Egyptians decided to march in the streets and suffer under the Muslim Brotherhood no more, he was deposed and al-Sisi was elected as president. At least the Muslim Brotherhood is no longer in power and Egypt is avoiding the type of war that Libya, Syria, and Iraq are dealing with. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translated some of the Egyptian Government’s thoughts on U.S. State Department officials entertaining meetings with the Muslim Brotherhood. The Egyptians couldn’t be happier that this is actually be allowed to happen. On a side note, President al-Sisi is one of many Arab leaders who doesn’t trust President Obama and is looking towards Russia for support. Is this how leading from behind works?

Russia's President Putin and his Egyptian counterpart Sisi attend a welcoming ceremony onboard guided missile cruiser Moskva at Sochi meal-reuters

We could also talk about how a certain genius came up with “red lines”, said he was going to get involved in the Syrian civil war, and then (thankfully) backed off. I wonder if progressives count that as a foreign policy victory? As we all know, Iraq and Syria are still in the middle of a war that doesn’t seem to be ending anytime soon. Both the Syrian and Iraqi governments are nominally supported by Iran now, which is always a good thing right? Is it even proper to say that Iraq and Syria are countries anymore? I wonder how many people genuinely believe that the Arab Spring is working out well? Perhaps it’s also time for some progressives to take Obama for peace bumper stickers off of their car. If we’re not really going to finish a war why fight at all? What’s the point in risking American lives if the current administration isn’t going to take it seriously? I suppose that Iraq is doing as splendid as Yemen right now, a real foreign policy victory. I also wonder if I should believe that no American soldiers are in danger in Iraq?

jayvee-obama bild211 bild102

The Economist put together this map showcasing the condition of various Arab states. Doesn’t look promising does it? One thing not reflected upon the map is how the Yemeni government was toppled. If any information on this post is out of date, please let me know.

20140705_FBM936_0

Thoughts on Illegal Immigration and the coming DHS “shutdown”

Some of you have heard of a coming “shutdown” of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). If your one of the socialists at say Salon, you’ll claim that Speaker Boehner is ignoring political reality and shutting down the DHS. In reality during the last so-called government shutdown over 200,000 out of 231,000 employees continued to work and non-essential employees were out of luck for a short time. Based upon the most recent oversight report issued by the Senate the DHS could stand to spend money more efficiently anyway. Many leftists will say that a DHS shutdown will be disastrous for Republicans, yet reality may say something different. Everyone’s totally going to remember that time part of the DHS shutdown for a short time in 2016. Why should local governments be so beholden to the Federal Government anyway?

   Do you guys remember just how poorly Republicans did in the last election? How would any of you reading this be affected? Are the borders suddenly going to be secure? Are any illegal immigrants going to be deported? Here are a few comments on the Yahoo! News article linked to in the previous sentence:

immigration immigration2

I suppose that myself and anyone else not interested in President Obama’s Amnesty is not patriotic and doesn’t care about border security. People wanted the President’s policies enacted so badly that Democrats lost nine seats in the Senate and thirteen in the House last election. I suppose that time will tell if the Republicans cave on this issue. If we’re lucky, courts will continue to side with the states on Amnesty. President Obama is continuing to enact his Amnesty in spite of the most recent court order though, I wonder how that will turn out? I really do wonder why progressives believe that the Senate minority party should dictate all legislation regarding spending?

One of the videos I’ve watched about immigration recently was put together by progressives and decries those who support any enforcement of border control. You know that the guys at Brave New Films must be worth watching if they’ve succumbed to Koch Derangement Syndrome.  Below is the video and my own critique of it for anyone who’s interested.

   This film ignores many facts. If the Federal Government actually enforced border security perhaps there would be fewer people to detain. A large portion of illegal immigrants never show up to court or ignore court orders. http://cis.org/Immigration-Courts http://www.judicialwatch.org/…/doj-lies-about…/ http://www.prnewswire.com/…/illegal-immigrants-present… http://www.powerlineblog.com/…/mystery-of-the-missing… Most progressives desire amnesty even though it was already tried once in 1987. It was a complete and total failure since border security wasn’t taken seriously. At least when President Reagan signed his Executive Action into law he was enforcing the will of Congress which passed the Immigration and Control Act of 1986. http://thefederalist.com/…/no-reagan-did-not-offer-an…/ The current administration seems to be doing many things to encourage illegal immigration, stopping such activities might lower the number of people that try to get smuggled in the country. President Obama is actively ignoring current Immigration law contrary to his duty to “take Care that the Laws will be faithfully executed,”. http://www.powerlineblog.com/…/the-obama-administration… http://www.powerlineblog.com/…/obama-demonstrates-why…

   It’s funny how the video states that Russell Pearce Pearce has “obscure ties to Neo-Nazi” groups. What does that mean? What source are they citing? Robert Bryd was a U.S. Democratic Senator of West Virginia until 2010. He was among other things, the Senate Majority leader for a time. He was also a KKK member and actively recruited people to join up with him. So much for the Democratic Party and progressives defending minorities. http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/28/sen-robert-byrd-not-only-was-a-kkk-member-but-led-his-local-klan-chapter/ This video points towards how money has been spent on some conservative candidates, yet acts as if progressives have donated no money. Some simple research will show that leftists donate large amounts of money to their own causes. Plenty of rich liberals like George Soros and Tom Steyer donate money to their causes, ignoring this influence while decrying money spent by others is simply disingenuous. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php http://www.politico.com/…/blue-billionaires-on-top…

   The video cites the story of a man who died in prison, are prison administrators or guards in government-run prisons not ever incompetent? Do people not die in such prisons for preventable reasons?http://www.jailsergeant.com/Prison_Inmate_Deaths.html http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=194 I wonder if these people would protest against Mexican prison conditions or their treatment of illegal immigrants? http://www.washingtontimes.com/…/mexicos-illegals…/… http://www.examiner.com/…/mexican-military-police… Overall, this video is very simplistic and selective with its evidence. Hey, I’m all for border enforcement and sending some people back home so that fewer prisons are necessary for illegal immigrants.

Since progressives are good at pulling heartstrings I suppose that I can too. Do black lives matter to progressives, or is it just the votes? Here’s the case of Jamiel Shaw’s murder by a “dreamer” for you.

Read about the murder of Vanessa Pham by another illegal immigrant dreamer. Nothing bad ever happens when someone overstays their visa right?

Take a look at the death of Drew Rosenberg.

Grant Ronnebeck was murdered by an illegal immigrant, Apolinar Altamirano, after Apolinar was freed on bail.

“Affordable” healthcare and the national debt and deficit

Many democrats/leftists/socialists have claimed that the “Affordable” Care Act, including real winners like Paul Krugman is working well. For anyone who’s not interested in asking a socialist how it’s going look at one of the following links:

Forbes-Is Obamacare Working?

NY Times-Cost of Coverage Under Affordable Care Act to Increase for 2015

Forbes-Now There Can Be No Doubt: Obamacare Has Increased Non-Group Premiums In Nearly All States

PremiumIncreasesKowalski

Okay, the NY Times might not be the best source for news, but you get my point. If you’re a leftist, you’ll make claims that you support affordable healthcare and that republicans are evil.

ACA2 10850235_838510946191222_2838916834929889085_n

The Affordable Care Act, it’s so great that Congress and the President aren’t required to sign up for it! For those of you like me who are racist, xenophobic, bigoted, capitalistic and evil pigs whom tolerant liberals will never be able to educate, here’s some pictures for you, enjoy!

obamacare_system_down obamacare_pajamas_boy_as_che_12-22-13-3 404-care-obamacare-glitch  Obama-2-faced cover_20131111_toc ACA1 deficit4ACA4

Just think of the Affordable Care Act as a five-year plan.

fiveyearplan

On Facebook pages such as Being Liberal you’ll see them post up pictures about how leftists are somehow responsible for the drop in the deficit (not debt) in the last few years even as they decried “Austerity“. Aside from the fact that in the last six years eight trillion has been added to the debt, just look at this CBO data that shows how the deficit is about to go back up. For those of you who still believe that leftists/Keynesians have anything to do with spending less, just look at the President’s most recent proposal to spend more money. If you’re a leftist you’ll post photos such as these without looking at the actual amount of cash the deficit is:

deficit deficit2

For those of you who don’t think that adding eight trillion to the debt or that having a deficit of only $506 billion is a great accomplishment, here’s some photos for you:

obama-debt-ceiling-economic-marxist-failure-state-of-the-union-2014-unpatriotic-e1389068536736 deficit3US-Debt-Ceiling45653-land-table

I’ve already posted this one, but here it is again for good measure. Those Keynesians really do have some funny economic ideas.

Keynesians

Bonus Round: Paul VS Paul, Fight!