Author: kingsjester

64 year old Christian Conservative husband, father, and grandfather who has been writing since April 2010.

Obama’s Gun Control Announcement: “So, This is How Liberty Dies…”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

guncontrolToday is the day that President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) is going to announce his plan to disarm law-abiding Americans. (If any of y’all think that anything he proposes today will keep guns out of the hand of criminals, I have two bridges over the Mississippi River at Memphis to sell you.)

The Washington Post has the story:

President Obama on Wednesday will formally announce the most aggressive and expansive national gun-control agenda in generations as he presses Congress to mandate background checks for all firearm buyers and prohibit assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips.

The announcement will set off a fierce confrontation with Congress over an issue that has riven American society for decades. Obama’s far-reaching firearms agenda has at best tepid support from his party leaders and puts him at loggerheads with Democratic centrists.

Days before his second inauguration, Obama is seeking to drive the guns debate in a way that contrasts with the accommodating approach he often took during his first term. In the weeks ahead, he will attempt to rally popular support to bend the will of lawmakers to vote for what he considers the ideal, not merely the possible.

“Yes, we can reduce gun violence, but it’s something we have to do together,” White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters Tuesday. “It’s something that cannot be done by a president alone. It can’t be done by a single community alone or a mayor or a governor or by Congress alone. We all have to work together.”

Obama will begin this effort Wednesday in the presence of children who wrote him letters after last month’s mass shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., and who have been invited to Washington to attend the rollout.

When news leaked out that ol’ Scooter was going to use children for props for his gun grabfest tomorrow, Conservatives’ ire got raised.  I know that mine sure did.

Megyn Kelly tackled the subject of Obama using children as props on her Fox News Program.

After it was revealed that tomorrow’s announcement on gun control will feature children standing beside the president, Fox News’ America Live panel debated whether those kids are being used “as props” to help the White House advance its desired policies.

Conservative radio host Chris Plante kicked off the debate by lamenting that this sort of move “has become de rigueur in American politics, but it’s clinical, it is shameless, it is the use of children as props to advance an agenda that existed long before the Sandy Hook tragedy.”

He continued to tear into the idea: “[The children] will be stacked according to skin color and ethnicity to frame the president’s face because it’s essentially part of the propaganda package as they present their bill of goods that will not solve the problem that we’re attempting to solve,” he said.

Host Megyn Kelly then brought up the fact that the children wrote to the president and were given permission by their parents to appear at the event, but asked if Obama was trying to “guilt the opposition.”

Liberal contributor Leslie Marshall responded that “I don’t think he’s trying to guilt anybody,” and that having children stand with the president is unlikely to sway minds on an issue so divisive as gun control. However, she cited the fact that previous presidents, left and right, have used children for major bill signings, including the Americans with Disabilities Act and Megan’s Law.

Kelly then challenged Plante to consider whether he’d be as outraged “if a Republican president came out and pushed an anti-abortion bill and had a bunch of children standing behind him.”

“Yeah, surrounded by infants, by preemies, when speaking against abortion,” Plante snarked. This is just how cynical things have gotten in this town, quite honestly. It’s purely for the imagery, which they recognize is probably more important than what’s in the legislation.”

Kelly then asked Plante whether he’d be more open to the president’s announcement if it included, in addition to some gun control measures, planned steps for “looking at” how the mental health care system and violent video games have contributed to a violent culture.

“There are cultural factors that most of us would acknowledge and accept also contribute to the state of affairs in the United States when it comes to young people and their willingness to kill a whole bunch of people,” Plante replied, before pointing the finger at “Hollywood movies” which he believes contributes to our culture “treat[ing] human life in a trivial fashion in a panoply of ways.” However, he said, “I don’t see the president pushing back against Hollywood or video game makers.”

He then went after the “macro-cynicism” of the Obama camp for essentially proposing stricter gun control laws “they wanted to propose before Sandy Hook and getting it through, essentially, on the backs of the tragedy and then using children as props to back up their essentially phony arguments that this is going to reduce the likelihood that something like this is going to happen again in the future.”

While researching the use of children by politicians, I happened to come upon a pdf article titled “Children and Politics”. I have no idea as to whom the author is, but they definitely got it right:

The (mis)use of children for political and propaganda purposes is linked mainly to the 20th century and mass political parties and movements such as communism and fascism. Sports, culture and other organizations for children and young people became tools in the hands of national political and religious movements and leaders.

National propaganda, particularly prior to the Balkan wars, was also spread through schools, textbooks, pupils’ organizations, choral societies, etc. Schoolchildren’s compulsory attendance at public events of national and political character was also a form of the involvement of children and young people in politics and the diffusion of political propaganda. The dissemination of books on national history, patriotic poetry, maps showing the territorial pretensions of the individual nations, and popular pictures of national heroes were methods used to raise the ”national awareness“ of the younger part of the population both in those countries that had gained independence (Greece, Montenegro, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria) and in those countries within the borders of Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire (Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary, Albania).

Nonetheless, the politization of children and young people and their (mis)use for political purposes assumed particular significance after the First World War under the influence of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes.

All evidence, as I  stated in yesterday’s Blog, points to the fact that Obama’s gun-grabbing announcement, being made today, has been years in the making, lying dormant, like an Alligator Snapping Turtle on the bottom of a lake, just waiting to grab a fish innocently swimming by.

Just as Obama and his minions are using the children standing up there on the podium today, they are also using the deaths of those sweet, innocent children, murdered by a madman in Newtown, Connecticut, as an opportunity to take away the guns of innocent, law-abiding Americans. Meanwhile, the MSM cheerleaders will spend the day trying to sell Americans on what a great speech their Dear Leader just gave.

I am sadly reminded of a classic line from a movie:

So this is how liberty dies…with thunderous applause.

– Padmé Amidala, Star Wars III, “The Revenge of the Sith”

Until He Comes,

KJ

Gun Control: Biden Announces Obama to Implement 19 EOs. The Constitution Cries.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics7 Comments

secondamendmentToday’s the day Vice-President Biden will present the recommendations of his Gun Control Task Force to President Barack Hussein Obama. However, these results appear to be worth about as much as one of Obama’s promises.

You see, gentle reader, Crazy Uncle Joe let the cat out of the bag, yesterday.

Politico.com has the story.

The White House has identified 19 executive actions for President Barack Obama to move unilaterally on gun control, Vice President Joe Biden told a group of House Democrats on Monday, the administration’s first definitive statements about its response to last month’s mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Later this week, Obama will formally announce his proposals to reduce gun violence, which are expected to include renewal of the assault weapons ban, universal background checks and prohibition of high-capacity magazine clips. But Biden, who has been leading Obama’s task force on the response, spent two hours briefing a small group of sympathetic House Democrats on the road ahead in the latest White House outreach to invested groups.

The focus on executive orders is the result of the White House and other Democrats acknowledging the political difficulty of enacting any new gun legislation, a topic Biden did not address in Monday’s meeting.

The executive actions could include giving the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention authority to conduct national research on guns, more aggressive enforcement of existing gun laws and pushing for wider sharing of existing gun databases among federal and state agencies, members of Congress in the meeting said.

“It was all focusing on enforcing existing law, administering things like improving the background database, things like that that do not involve a change in the law but enforcing and making sure that the present law is administered as well as possible,” said Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.).

The White House declined to comment on the details of what Obama will propose.

Remember what the Second Amendment to OUR Constitution says?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Evidently, OUR Constitution doesn’t matter a hill of beans to the Manchurian President. Ladies and gentlemen, the Great One, Mark Levin, is right: We have an imperial president:

I’m not into imperial presidents who act imperial and speak imperial and Obama forgets there’s a Constitution. Yes, he keeps telling us he won reelection. Congratulations, but guess what? The Constitution wasn’t up for election, it’s not up for a referendum. He has to comply with it, too.

He was sent back to Washington, but he’s got a strict list of rules that he has to follow as president. When he gets up there and starts saying, if Congress doesn’t do this, I’m going to do this unilaterally, it violates separation of power a lot of the times. And this is a man pushing the edge of the envelope as far as i’m concerned, whether it’s the appointment clause, whether it’s his unilateral action on immigration, whether it’s trashing the commerce clause and the tax clauses under Obamacare. Now they’re talking about executive orders on the Second Amendment. They’ve issued regulations on First Amendment attacking religious liberty. This notion that he might be able to lift the debt ceiling, you know, unilaterally under the Fourteenth Amendment.

What the hell is this? He was elected president. Congratulations. This guy makes Richard Nixon look like a man who followed the law all the time. I think we have an imperial president, he sounds imperial, he’s arrogant as hell and I’m furious about this and I’m going to tell you why. We are a magnificent country. We don’t need to be turned upside down. We don’t need to run from crisis to crisis to crisis. He’s bankrupting this country.

President Obama seems determined to circumvent the system of checks and balances which Our Founding Fathers have so wisely put in place, in order to prevent exactly what our imperial president is attempting to do.

Therefore, one can say that the president’s proposed actions are no less than tyrannical.

What did our Founding Fathers have to say about Tyranny?

The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men. –Samuel Adams

Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.- Thomas Jefferson

And, this final quote, which is amazingly prophetic:

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing [a people] to slavery.- Thomas Jefferson

Our Liberal friends, as President Reagan used to call them have been camouflaging the issue, calling it “Gun Safety”instead of Gun Control. They insist that any draconian measures taken by Obama is “for the good of the country”. They claim that they’re coming after our assault weapons, but they’re nebulous in describing exactly what an “assault weapon is”…because there is no such weapon class.

And, finally, they have decided that they are the final arbiter of what the Second Amendment means. They claim that it is referring foreign enemies, only, and therefore, since we have the finest Armed Forces in the world, American Citizens do not need to be armed. Or, that it is just meant to allow guns for hunting, only…and, the “State” is more than adequate to provide for the safety of  American Citizens.

Right. Tell that to all of the murder victims in Chicago, Detroit, Memphis, etcetera, ad infinitum.

I have three answers to these claims which we have all heard from Liberals:

1. It’s not “Gun Safety” or “Gun Control”. It’s Gun Confiscation.

2. American citizens will decide what is is appropriate and safe for our families…and how to protect our children. 

3. We are quite confident in the abilities of our Brightest and Best to protect us from our foreign enemies.

It is the domestic enemies  who we seek to protect our families, friends and neighbors from.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama to Propose “Pathway to Citizenship”…and the Voting Booth.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

illegalsmarchIn preparation for Obama’s In-Your-Face Second Term Blitz, word has escaped that our Manchurian President and his minions are going to tackle the “issue” of Illegal Immigration…and create a lot of Democrat Voters.

The New York Times reports

President Obama plans to push Congress to move quickly in the coming months on an ambitious overhaul of the immigration system that would include a path to citizenship for most of the 11 million illegal immigrants in the country, senior administration officials and lawmakers said last week.

Mr. Obama and Senate Democrats will propose the changes in one comprehensive bill, the officials said, resisting efforts by some Republicans to break the overhaul into smaller pieces — separately addressing young illegal immigrants, migrant farmworkers or highly skilled foreigners — which might be easier for reluctant members of their party to accept.

The president and Democrats will also oppose measures that do not allow immigrants who gain legal status to become American citizens one day, the officials said.

Even while Mr. Obama has been focused on fiscal negotiations and gun control, overhauling immigration remains a priority for him this year, White House officials said. Top officials there have been quietly working on a broad proposal. Mr. Obama and lawmakers from both parties believe that the early months of his second term offer the best prospects for passing substantial legislation on the issue.

Mr. Obama is expected to lay out his plan in the coming weeks, perhaps in his State of the Union address early next month, administration officials said. The White House will argue that its solution for illegal immigrants is not an amnesty, as many critics insist, because it would include fines, the payment of back taxes and other hurdles for illegal immigrants who would obtain legal status, the officials said.

The president’s plan would also impose nationwide verification of legal status for all newly hired workers; add visas to relieve backlogs and allow highly skilled immigrants to stay; and create some form of guest-worker program to bring in low-wage immigrants in the future.

A bipartisan group of senators has also been meeting to write a comprehensive bill, with the goal of introducing legislation as early as March and holding a vote in the Senate before August. As a sign of the keen interest in starting action on immigration, White House officials and Democratic leaders in the Senate have been negotiating over which of them will first introduce a bill, Senate aides said.

“This is so important now to both parties that neither the fiscal cliff nor guns will get in the way,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, a Democrat who is a leader of the bipartisan discussions.

A couple of years back, the following allegorical story went viral.  You may have seen this already, but it explains illegal immigration as succinctly as anything I have come across:

Let’s pretend I broke into your house.  When you discover me there, you insist I leave.  But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yardwork, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.

Good plan..don’t you think?

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children.  We are all immigrants in this land, except for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight.  But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

Former Texas Democratic Representative Barbara Jordan was a big believer in assimilation. During her time on Capitol Hill, she chaired the US Commission on Immigration Reform.

In their 1997 Report, which they dedicated to Rep. Jordan, published after her passing, they wrote the following principles:

We believe these truths constitute the distinctive characteristics of American nationality:

*American unity depends upon a widely-held belief in the principles and values embodied in the American Constitution and their fulfillment in practice: equal protection and justice under the law; freedom of speech and religion; and representative government;

*Lawfully-admitted newcomers of any ancestral nationality—without regard to race, ethnicity, or religion—truly become Americans when they give allegiance to these principles and values;

*Ethnic and religious diversity based on personal freedom is compatible with national unity; and

*The nation is strengthened when those who live in it communicate effectively with each other in English, even as many persons retain or acquire the ability to communicate in other languages.

As long as we live by these principles and help newcomers to learn and practice them, we will continue to be a nation that benefits from substantial but well-regulated immigration.

The great Michelle Malkin recently added,

Those principles have been abandoned, scorned, and sabotaged. You have not heard an iota about them from Washington. It is the erosion of Americanization and the ascendancy of the collectivists that helped create the conditions for Election Day.

Amnesty instead of assimilation is a recipe for even greater GOP losses at at the ballot box.

Amnesty instead of assimilation is a recipe for the furtherance of American decline.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish.  But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War Against Christianity: Battleground: The National Cathedral

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics6 Comments

gay marriageAs all Americans are aware, one of the hot button issues for the Democratic Party and the Obama Administration, has been the “issue” of Gay Rights. At the forefront of their push is the normalization of gay marriage.

And now, their push has led  to the involvement of our nation’s National Cathedral.

Here is the history of the sixth largest cathedral in the world, courtesy of the National Parks Service:

On January 4, 1792, descriptions from President Washington’s disclosed plan for the “City of Washington, in the district of Columbia” were published in The Gazette of the United States, Philadelphia. Lot “D” was set aside and designated for “A church intended for national purposes, …, assigned to the special use of no particular sect or denomination, but equally open to all.” The National Portrait Gallery now occupies that site. A century later in 1891, a meeting was held to revive plans to build the church intended for national purposes. It was to be a Christian cathedral.

In 1893 the Protestant Episcopal Cathedral Foundation of the District of Columbia was granted a charter from Congress to establish the cathedral and the site on Mount Saint Albans was chosen. Bishop Satterlee chose Frederick Bodley, England’s leading Anglican church architect, as the head architect. Henry Vaughan was selected to be the supervising architect. The building of the cathedral finally started in 1907 with a ceremonial address by President Theodore Roosevelt. When construction of the cathedral resumed after a brief hiatus for World War I, both Bodley and Vaughan had passed away; American architect Philip Hubert Frohman took over the design of the cathedral and is known as the principal architect. The Cathedral has been the location of many significant events, including the funeral services of Woodrow Wilson and Dwight Eisenhower. Its pulpit was the last one from which Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke prior to his assassination. The Cathedral is the burial place of many notable people, including Woodrow Wilson, Helen Keller, Admiral George Dewey, Bishop Satterlee and the architects Henry Vaughan and Philip Frohman.

ABC News reported that

The wedding bells will chime in the 106-year-old Washington National Cathedral as Rev. Gary Hall affirmed that, effective immediately, same-sex weddings may be celebrated at the Cathedral of the Episcopal Church located in the northwest quadrant of Washington D.C.

The National Cathedral has welcomed hundreds of thousands of visitors and held both celebrations and funerals for U.S. presidents past.

In August 2012, the church approved the ceremonial use of a rite adapted from an existing blessing ceremony to acknowledge same-sex marriage. The Episcopal Church will be among the first to recognize marriage for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender couples.

“For more than 30 years, the Episcopal Church has prayed and studied to discern the evidence of God’s blessing in the lives of same-sex couples,” Rev. Gary Hall of the National Cathedral said. “We enthusiastically affirm each person as a beloved child of God—and doing so means including the full participation of gays and lesbians in the life of this spiritual home for the nation.”

The District of Columbia and Maryland (as well as eight other states) have adopted the legality of civil marriage for same-sex couples. The Rt. Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde, whose Episcopal Diocese of Washington includes D.C. as well as four counties in Maryland, decided this December to follow suit expanding the sacrament of marriage to same-sex couples in her diocese as well.

But the decision to institute the same-sex rite at the Washington National Cathedral was ultimately made by Hall who serves as the Cathedral’s dean.

“In my 35 years of ordained ministry, some of the most personally inspiring work I have witnessed has been among gay and lesbian communities where I have served.”

Hall continued, “I consider it a great honor to lead this Cathedral as it takes another historic step toward greater equality—and I am pleased that this step follows the results made clear in this past November’s election, when three states voted to allow same-sex marriage.”

The same-sex weddings that will be conducted at the Cathedral will fulfill the same role as Christian marriages. Eligibility to marry in the National Cathedral follows the protocol of the Christian faith.

At least one of the members in the couple must have been baptized and the couple must be active, contributing members of the congregation unless otherwise specified by the dean.

Another one of our nation’s symbolic structures, the Chapel at West Point Academy,  is already hosting gay marriages.

Additionally, on December 7th, 2012, USA Today reported

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to take up the explosive issue of same-sex marriage, thrusting itself into a policy debate that has divided federal and state governments and courts, as well as voters in nearly 40 states.

The high court’s long-awaited decisions to hear challenges to the federal Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage move the issue to the top of the national agenda following a year in which advocates scored major legal and political victories.

The court likely will hear the cases in March and rule by late June on a series of questions, potentially including one of the most basic: Can states ban gay marriage, or does the Constitution protect that right for all couples? It also will decide whether gay and lesbian married couples can be denied federal benefits received by opposite-sex spouses.

As all this is happening, the majority of “national” polls tell us that around 53% of Americans approve of Adam and Steve getting hitched.

However, you know what puzzles me? 

If that’s true, shouldn’t the majority of Americans have voted for it in previous state elections?

Instead, 41 states do not recognize gay marriages. Gays can only legally reside as husband and…err…husband, or wife and…ummm…wife in only 9 states.

Even California, a bastion of Liberal ideology, voted it down, only to have a Liberal judge overturn the voters’ decision.

First West Point, now the National Cathedral. I see a pattern of Political Propaganda and Government-backed and forced, secular Liberal ideology growing here.

Reminds me of Obamacare…and, we all know how that turned out.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama/Lincoln: Fore Score and Several Mulligans Ago…

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

obamalincolnEver since Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) became president, Liberal pundits have desperately attempted to compare The Manchurian President to Abraham Lincoln.

Back on November 14, 2008, Evan Thomas, an Obama sycophant,  posted an article for Newsweek/The Daily Beast, titled “Obama’s Lincoln”, in which he wrote

It is the season to compare Barack Obama to Abraham Lincoln. Two thin men from rude beginnings, relatively new to Washington but wise to the world, bring the nation together to face a crisis. Both are superb rhetoricians, both geniuses at stagecraft and timing. Obama, like Lincoln and unlike most modern politicians, even writes his own speeches, or at least drafts the really important ones—by hand, on yellow legal paper—such as his remarkably honest speech on race during the Reverend Wright imbroglio last spring.

…During the Civil War, Lincoln was able to brilliantly manage his team of rivals. His secretary of state, William Seward, came into office thinking “he would actually be controlling Lincoln,” notes Goodwin, but Lincoln was able to sit Seward down, remind him who was president—and ultimately make him his close friend. Lincoln, in some ways, had it easier than Obama will. Cabinet secretaries in the 1860s could not step out on the White House lawn and hold press conferences with cable-TV networks. But Goodwin, who has spoken with Obama about her book, thinks he has absorbed the deeper meaning of Lincoln’s leadership style. “I think he’s got a temperamental set of qualities that have some resemblance to Lincoln’s emotional intelligence,” Goodwin tells NEWSWEEK.

On November 10th, after ‘”Baracky Claus” was re-elected, the following conversation occurred on the NBC Nightly News.

LESTER HOLT [anchor]: Finally tonight, days after our nation’s 44th president was re-elected to a second term, this weekend the spotlight turns to America’s 16th president – at the movies at least. Abraham Lincoln getting the big screen treatment courtesy of Steven Spielberg.

KEVIN TIBBLES [correspondent]: The film has been a decade-long labor of love for director Steven Spielberg.

STEVEN SPIELBERG: Lincoln advocated things we hold dear today. He advocated that government can be a positive force for the good of all people.

TIBBLES: No coincidence, perhaps, the film opens the week America’s 21st century President won re-election in difficult times fraught with partisan bickering. Times in which many ask what would Lincoln do?

MICHAEL BESCHLOSS: Well, in Lincoln you had a president who was very eager to unify the country, dealing with a congress that had all sorts of acrimonious factions. Somehow Lincoln had the genius to get everyone to work together.

The Lincoln lie continues… 

The Weekly Standard Reports

President Barack Obama will deliver this year’s State of the Union Address on February 12, which is the same day as Abraham Lincoln’s birthday.

“Our nation continues to face immense challenges, and the American people expect us to work together in the new year to find meaningful solutions,” House speaker John Boehner writes in a letter to Obama, inviting him to deliver the address. “This will require a willingness to seek common ground as well as presidential leadership. For that reason, the Congress and the Nation would welcome an opportunity to hear your plan and specific solutions for addressing America’s great challenges. Therefore, it is my privilege to invite you to speak before a Joint Session of Congress on February 12, 2013 in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol Building.”

It’s been reported that Obama has accepted Boehner’s invitation to speak on Lincoln’s birthday.

And, if that wasn’t enough…

Per CNN

What do the 16th president, a civil rights leader, and Michelle Obama’s grandmother have in common? Their Bibles will be used in the second inauguration of President Barack Obama.

The Presidential Inaugural Committee made the announcement on Thursday that Obama will take the oath of office on the Robinson family Bible on Sunday and on the Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. Bibles on Monday.

The 20th Amendment designated Jan. 20 as Inauguration Day. But traditionally, when inauguration falls on a Sunday, the president takes the oath privately on Jan. 20 and in a public ceremony on Jan. 21.

“President Obama is honored to use these Bibles at the swearing-in ceremonies,” said Steve Kerrigan, President and CEO of the Presidential Inaugural Committee. “On the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington and 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, this historic moment is a reflection of the extraordinary progress we’ve made as a nation.”

The first lady’s father Fraser Robinson III gifted the Bible to his mother LaVaughn Delores Robinson for Mother’s Day in 1958. The King Bible was the civil rights leader’s “traveling bible,” the holy book he used as he prepared for sermons and speeches on the road. And the Lincoln Bible, on loan from the Library of Congress, was originally purchased by William Thomas Carroll, clerk of the Supreme Court, for use during Lincoln’s inauguration on March 4, 1861.

Obama took the oath on the same Lincoln Bible at his first inauguration in 2009.

That’s nice, because just like Lincoln, Obama is facing a divided nation.

Sean Hannity said on his radio program recently;

People that are fed up with a power hungry, radicalized, abusive federal government intruding into every aspect of our lives.People are going to say they’re fed up, and states are going to want more liberty and more freedom. They’re not going to want to tax their citizens to death anymore. If this pattern continues and gets worse and worse and worse, I can see at some point the states saying, ‘Forget it. I don’t want to be a part of this union anymore.’

The Great One, Mark Levin, is less than enamored with Obama and his Administration, also:

…We have evidence over one decade after another of how the very same people pushing for gun control against law-abiding American citizens support radical left-wing judges who are soft on criminals, support weakened sentencing rules, decriminalizing this and that. Since when was Obama strong on fighting crime? Since when has Obama supported law enforcement? But here he is, you know, ‘we have to stop gun violence.’ No, we have to stop violent criminals.

Now, there’s a fury in me — I’m just being honest with you — that I’m trying to contain. Biden, the moron Senator from Delaware, taking his train back and forth and back and forth on Amtrak. Oh wow, what a guy. Anyway, so they may do by executive fiat — I’m trying to read between the lines — a national gun database. Now, why would we need a national gun database? Well, listen, we need to know who has the weapons, at all times, and how many weapons they have and what weapons they have. How come? Why? The guy that killed all those people in Newtown, Connecticut, we know who he was and we know who had the weapons, his mother. So what does this national database have to do with anything? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Oh, okay, but we need one anyway, right? To prevent what exactly? To prevent what?

So, here we are, 150 years after Lincoln, standing on a precipice, looking down into the abyss of a divided nation, with a poor imitation of Abraham Lincoln sitting in the Oval Office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

There is no comparison between Abraham Lincoln and Barack Hussein Obama.

Abraham Lincoln actually loved America.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Bloomberg Limits NYC Hospitals Use of Pain Pills. Palin Was Right.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics13 Comments

palin-newsweekRemember when Sarah Palin warned Americans about the Death Panels that were coming with Obamacare?

As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we’re saying not just no, but hell no!

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion.

That was posted on her Facebook Page on August 7, 2009, and the Libs are still arguing with her! For instance, here is an article published Wednesday in the Washington Post:

Nearly three years after the Affordable Care Act passed, the law’s non-existent “death panels” are still alive and well. Search Google News and you’ll find more than 8,000 recent news articles, with headlines like “More evidence of “death panels” in Obamacare” and “Democrats crank up death panel talk.”

The health care law does have a board that recommends ways to cut Medicare spending. It does not have any board, as former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin suggested, that would decide whether certain Americans are “worthy of health care.”

Dartmouth’s Brendan Nyhan has new research that looks at why the death panels won’t die. He finds that providing readers with a corrective information to dispel an Obamacare myth can actually strengthen belief in death panels.

Nyhan had 948 survey participants read an article from 2009 about Palin’s statement on death panels. Some had favorable opinions of the former governor of Alaska; others did not. The respondents ran the gamut in their knowledge of current politics.

All read a story about Palin’s 2009 statement, which brought death panels into the mainstream debate. Some had this correction appended to the end of the story:

Nonpartisan health care experts have concluded that Palin is wrong. The bill in the House of Representatives would require Medicare to pay for voluntary end-of-life counseling sessions, but there is no panel in any of the health care bills in Congress that judges a person’s “level of productivity in society” to determine whether they are “worthy” of health care.

For Palin supporters and opponents alike, low-information voters’ belief in the death panels decreased after reading this correction.

But something different happened among high information voters. Those with cold feelings towards Palin acted like the low information voters, with their belief in death panels dropping.

For high information Palin supporters though, the correction backfired: They appeared more likely to believe in death panels after reading the appended information, and have less favorable opinions of the Affordable Care Act.

So, the high information voters sided with Sarah Palin? I’m shocked, I tell you. Shocked!

How could they? After all, Obama and his cadre of Liberal sycophants know what’s best for us. Just ask them…or witness how they are proceeding to disassemble the second amendment, in preparation to confiscate law-abiding Americans’ guns. But, I digress….

Anyway…it appears that Obamacare was just the beginning. 

From the Mayor who banned Big Gulps in New York City…

Some of the most common and most powerful prescription painkillers on the market will be restricted sharply in the emergency rooms at New York City’s 11 public hospitals, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said Thursday in an effort to crack down on what he called a citywide and national epidemic of prescription drug abuse.

Under the new city policy, most public hospital patients will no longer be able to get more than three days’ worth of narcotic painkillers like Vicodin and Percoset. Long-acting painkillers, including OxyContin, a familiar remedy for chronic backache and arthritis, as well as Fentanyl patches and methadone, will not be dispensed at all. And lost, stolen or destroyed prescriptions will not be refilled.

City officials said the policy was aimed at reducing the growing dependency on painkillers and preventing excess amounts of drugs from being taken out of medicine chests and sold on the street or abused by teenagers and others who want to get high.

“Abuse of prescription painkillers in our city has increased alarmingly,” Mr. Bloomberg said in announcing the new policy at Elmhurst Hospital Center, a public hospital in Queens. Over 250,000 New Yorkers over age 12 are abusing prescription painkillers, he said, leading to rising hospital admissions for overdoses and deaths, Medicare fraud by doctors who write false prescriptions and violent crime like “holdups at neighborhood pharmacies.”

But some critics said that poor and uninsured patients sometimes used the emergency room as their primary source of medical care. The restrictions, they said, could deprive doctors in the public hospital system — whose mission it is to treat poor people — of the flexibility that they need to respond to patients.

“Here is my problem with legislative medicine,” said Dr. Alex Rosenau, president-elect of the American College of Emergency Physicians and senior vice chairman of emergency medicine at Lehigh Valley Health Network in Eastern Pennsylvania. “It prevents me from being a professional and using my judgment.”

While someone could fake a toothache to get painkillers, he said, another patient might have legitimate pain and not be able to get an appointment at a dental clinic for days. Or, he said, a patient with a hand injury may need more than three days of pain relief until the swelling goes down and an operation could be scheduled.

Dr. Rosenau said that the college of emergency physicians had not developed an official position on the prescribing of painkillers in emergency rooms and that he appreciated Mr. Bloomberg’s activism in the face of a serious public health problem. But he said pain clinics in states like Florida and California, states where prescription drug abuse is rampant, as well as the household medicine cabinet, were probably a more common source of unneeded painkillers than emergency rooms.

How can Liberals be sooo stupid, and yet, believe that they are the smartest people in the room?

Evidently, it is an overestimation of their own intelligence, brought on by a misguided, egocentric view of reality.

In other words, don’t hold your breath waiting for Obama and his “Party of Death” to ever admit that Sarah Palin had it right the first time.

Until He Comes, 

KJ

Gun Control by Executive Order? Constitution Ignored.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

gun rightsA well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

– The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

Yesterday, the Vice-Idiot, errr, I mean President, gave Americans a warning, that his boss, President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) is about to ignore the Constitution of the United States.

The Weekly  Standard reports the story:

Vice President Joe Biden revealed that President Barack Obama might use an executive order to deal with guns.

“The president is going to act,” said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence. “There are executives orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.”

Biden said that this is a moral issue and that “it’s critically important that we act.”

Biden talked also about taking responsible action. “As the president said, if you’re actions result in only saving one life, they’re worth taking. But I’m convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of americans and take thousands of people out of harm’s way if we act responsibly.”

Biden, as he himself noted, helped write the Brady bill.

Yeah. Crazy Uncle Joe is a legend in his own mind.

While researching this post, I found some truth from a very unexpected source: Pravda.

(That’s pretty bad when Pravda is telling the truth and America’s Main Stream Media is not. But, I digress…)

Before the Revolution in 1918, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on Earth.

This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.

Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lying guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense. Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere….but criminals are still armed and still murdering and too often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.

While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.

For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them”, it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.

The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.

Wow. I never thought that I would see our country, the Home of the Free and the Brave, in this situation.

Pop quiz, Hot Shot.

a) Has the avarice of the 47% so stupefied their minds that they cannot see rampant Marxism about to sublimate them into servitude?

b)Has their greed taken the place of their love of freedom?

c) Or, have they been so indoctrinated over the last 4 years, that they don’t give a rat’s rear end if they live the rest of their life in a Marxist nation…as long as the freebies keep coming?

d) All of the above

Of course, the answer is d).

What we are witnessing is a result of the indoctrination of a generation. 

Russian Marxist Revolutionary Vladimir Lenin said:

One man with a gun can control 100 without one.

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.

Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.

Elections have consequences.

Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. – Galations 6:7 (ESV)

Until He Comes,

KJ

Unmanned Drones: Big Brother’s Eyes in the Sky

On By kingsjesterIn Politics4 Comments

obamabigbroDo you remember the end of the third “Terminator” movie? John Connor was watching helplessly from a mountain bunker as a fully autonomous software system launched nuclear missles and devastated the planet.

Far-fetched, you say? Au contraire.

The Washington Post reports that

The United Nations, looking to modernize its peacekeeping operations, is planning for the first time to deploy a fleet of its own surveillance drones in missions in Central and West Africa.

The U.N. Department of Peacekeeping has notified Congo, Rwanda and Uganda that it intends to deploy a unit of at least three unarmed surveillance drones in the eastern region of Congo.

The action is the first step in a broader bid to integrate unmanned aerial surveillance systems, which have become a standard feature of Western military operations, into the United Nations’ far-flung peacekeeping empire.

But the effort is encountering resistance from governments, particularly those from the developing world, that fear the drones will open up a new intelligence-gathering front dominated by Western powers and potentially supplant the legions of African and Asian peacekeepers who now act as the United Nations’ eyes and ears on the ground.

“Africa must not become a laboratory for intelligence devices from overseas,” said Olivier Nduhungirehe, a Rwandan diplomat at the United Nations. “We don’t know whether these drones are going to be used to gather intelligence from Kigali, Kampala, Bujumbura or the entire region.”

Developing countries fear Western control over intelligence gathered by the drones. Some of those concerns are rooted in the 1990s, when the United States and other major powers infiltrated the U.N. weapons inspection agency to surreptitiously collect intelligence on Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s military.

The growing American use of drones in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere to identify and kill suspected terrorists has only heightened anxieties about their deployment as part of multilateral peacekeeping missions.

U.N. officials have sought to allay the suspicions, saying there is no intention to arm the drones or to spy on countries that have not consented to their use.

The U.N. drones would have a range of about 150 miles and can hover for up to 12 hours at a time. They would be equipped with infrared technology that can detect troops hidden beneath forest canopy or operating at night, allowing them to track movements of armed militias, assist patrols heading into hostile territory and document atrocities.

“These are really just flying cameras,” said one U.N. official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic. “Our best method of protection is early warning. We recently had a patrol ambushed in Darfur. If you had a drone ahead of the patrol, it could have seen the ambush party.”

“If you know armed groups are moving in attack or battle formation early enough, you can warn civilians,” the official added.

The United Nations, which manages a force of more than 100,000 blue helmets in 15 peacekeeping missions, views drones as a low-cost alternative to expensive helicopters for surveillance operations.

Wait a cotton-pickin’ minute. Did that report say that unmanned drones were in use in OUR country, the good ol’ U.S.A.?

You betcha, Red Ryder.

As foxnews.com reported on May 14th, 2012

Unmanned drones could soon be buzzing in the skies above many U.S. cities, as the federal government green-lights the technology for local law enforcement amid widespread privacy concerns.

The Federal Aviation Administration on Monday began to explain the rules of the sky for these newly licensed drones at potentially dozens of sites across the country. The agency, on its website, said that government “entities” will have to obtain a special certificate in order to fly the aircraft, adding that the FAA is “streamlining the process for public agencies to safely fly (drones) in the nation’s airspace.”

In doing so, the government is taking a tool that has become synonymous with U.S. counterterror warfare in countries like Pakistan and Yemen — and putting it in the hands of U.S. law enforcement.

Unlike some of the drones used overseas, these will not be equipped with missiles. They are to be used purely for surveillance. But that alone has raised serious privacy concerns on Capitol Hill and beyond.

“Our Founding Fathers had no idea that there would be remote-control drones with television monitors that can feed back live data instantaneously — but if they had, they would have made darn sure … that these things were subject to the Fourth Amendment (protecting individual privacy),” Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, told Fox News.

Drones have already been employed domestically. In what was described as the first case where an unmanned drone was used to arrest an American citizen on U.S. soil, a North Dakota SWAT team reportedly borrowed a Department of Homeland Security drone to monitor Rodney Brossart — who was involved in a 16-hour standoff at his North Dakota farm over six cattle that had wandered onto his property and which he claimed as his own. The SWAT team apparently used the drone to make sure it was safe to arrest him, though his lawyer has since claimed Brossart was subjected to guerrilla-like police tactics and had his constitutional rights violated.

Advocates, though, say the drones are a force-multiplier for local cops.

“They’re not going to be used for constant surveillance — typically they can stay in the air for about 30 minutes, so they’re only going to be used for specific missions,” said Gretchen West, executive vice president of the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International.

She said the drones would help law enforcement have “more eyes in the sky to help … assist them when they’re going into potentially volatile situations.”

Lawmakers like Barton say there are “legitimate uses” for drones on U.S. soil, but that strict privacy standards will be needed.

“It would be okay for a drone to be used in order to make sure that all the cattle on a ranch are identified on an ongoing basis. It’s okay … to survey a forest to make sure there are no forest fires. But it would not be okay if that individual who purchased the drone then decided ‘I think I’ll go and check and see what’s going on over in my neighbor’s backyard’,” Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said. “That would be wrong and that has to be protected against.”

And, if the thought of spies in the sky is not enough to scare you, how’s this story reported by the BBC grab ya?

A laser weapons system that can shoot down two drones at a distance of over a mile has been demonstrated by Rheinmetall Defence.

The German defence firm used the high-energy laser equipment to shoot fast-moving drones at a distance.

The system, which uses two laser weapons, was also used to cut through a steel girder a kilometre away.

The company plans to make the laser weapons system mobile and to integrate automatic cannon.

The 50kW laser weapons system used radar and optical systems to detect and track two incoming drones, the company said. The nose-diving drones were flying at 50 metres per second, and were shot down when they reached a programmed fire sector.

If these lasers can shoot down unmanned drones, what, or who else can they be aimed at?

Waging war by pushing buttons. How…sanitary.

Unmanned Drones watching our every move. Will “Skynet become self aware”?

Until He Comes, 

KJ

If I Wanted to “Radically Change” America…

On By kingsjesterIn Politics8 Comments

obamaburningconstitutionLet’s go on a flight of imagination for a little while, shall we?

You’re the President of the United States…and you have just barely won your second term, by promising to lasso the moon (a la George Bailey in “It’s a Wonderful Life”).

So, now that the suckers actually believed your Santa Claus impression , you’re in the catbird seat and you rightfully feel that you can do any doggone thing that you want to.

As you sit there, reveling in your glory, you remember what you promised the suckers when you were running for your first term,  in 2008. Back then, you promised that you would radically change America.

You also told some guy named Joe in Ohio, who said he was a plumber that “when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody”.

But, how do you get to the point to where you can realize your plans? After all, this isn’t a bunch of weak-kneed Europeans you’re dealing with.These are freedom-loving Americans, whom, as you said at a fundraiser, were “bitterly clinging” to their Bibles and guns.

You’ve already thrown a ton of money at the ones who already support you. At this point, they’ can’t live without all the “Hope and Change” you’ve been giving them, like a pusher gives addicts free drugs until they’re hooked.

But, what are you going to do with the rest of the citizenzy…the ones who see you for who you really are, are not impressed, and refuse to “get with the program”?

At this point, you have what you believe is a brilliant idea: You remember that lessons you learned from your grandparents and your next door neighbor in Hawaii, Frank Marshall Davis: When in doubt…refer back to Marx and Lenin.

1. Ridicule the Proletariat’s religion and regulate it out of everyday life. Make sure any laws you pass, accomplish this.

Obamacare was a good start. Force those Christians to offer contraception and abortiafacients in the  Health Insurance they offer to their employees. And, while you’re at it,  force them to accept deviant sexual behavior as “normal” and “natural”.

It would be bourgeois narrow-mindedness to forget that the yoke of religion that weighs upon mankind is merely a product and reflection of the economic yoke within society. No number of pamphlets and no amount of preaching can enlighten the proletariat, if it is not enlightened by its own struggle against the dark forces of capitalism. Unity in this really revolutionary struggle of the oppressed class for the creation of a paradise on earth is more important to us than unity of proletarian opinion on paradise in heaven.

That is the reason why we do not and should not set forth our atheism in our Programme; that is why we do not and should not prohibit proletarians who still retain vestiges of their old prejudices from associating themselves with our Party. We shall always preach the scientific world-outlook, and it is essential for us to combat the inconsistency of various “Christians”.

…The revolutionary proletariat will succeed in making religion a really private affair, so far as the state is concerned. And in this political system, cleansed of medieval mildew, the proletariat will wage a broad and open struggle for the elimination of economic slavery, the true source of the religious humbugging of mankind. –  Lenin

2. Convince the Middle Class (Proletariat) that the Wealthy (Bourgeois) are holding them down and are evil. And, all good things come from the State. (Politboro)

The deal we are about to strike will raise taxes on the rich. But, the fiscal imbalances we face remain unsatisfactorily large. So, I will ask for more tax increases on the rich later. President Barack Hussein Obama

Between equal rights force decides. Hence is it that in the history of capitalist production, the determination of what is a working-day, presents itself as the result of a struggle, a struggle between collective capital, i.e., the class of capitalists, and collective labour, i.e., the working-class. – Marx, Das Kapital

3. Indoctrinate the children

…I know that for many of you, today is the first day of school. And for those of you in kindergarten, or starting middle or high school, it’s your first day in a new school, so it’s understandable if you’re a little nervous. I imagine there are some seniors out there who are feeling pretty good right now — (applause) — with just one more year to go. And no matter what grade you’re in, some of you are probably wishing it were still summer and you could’ve stayed in bed just a little bit longer this morning.

I know that feeling. When I was young, my family lived overseas. I lived in Indonesia for a few years. And my mother, she didn’t have the money to send me where all the American kids went to school, but she thought it was important for me to keep up with an American education. So she decided to teach me extra lessons herself, Monday through Friday. But because she had to go to work, the only time she could do it was at 4:30 in the morning. – President Barack Hussein Obama, September 8, 2009. Address to America’s School Children

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted. – Lenin

4. Disarm the citizenry. – A man with a gun is a citizen, a man without a gun is a subject. – D. Michael Wiechman May 14, 1996

I’d like to get it done in the first year. I will put forward a very specific proposal based on the recommendations that Joe Biden’s task force is putting together as we speak. And so this is not something that I will be putting off. –President Barack Hussein Obama

One man with a gun can control 100 without one. – Lenin

Okay, by now, you may be saying, “Well, KJ’s  officially a couple of fries short of a Happy Meal.”

Perhaps.

Then again…

Norman Matoon Thomas (1884-1968) was a six-time Presidential Candidate  representing the Socialist Party of America.  In a campaign interview in 1948, he said the following:

The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.

Always remember…

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.- Ronald Reagan

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Raises Taxes…on Everybody!

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

monopoly2As I picked up my check last Friday, I did a double-take. My weekly take-home pay was sixteen dollars less than the week before. Our accountant had sent us a warning e-mail earlier in the day, the only “surprise”, really, was the amount Obama took from me.

I guess I should have checked out bloomberg.com, 5 days ago:

The budget deal passed by the U.S. Senate today would raise taxes on 77.1 percent of U.S. households, mostly because of the expiration of a payroll tax cut, according to preliminary estimates from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington.

More than 80 percent of households with incomes between $50,000 and $200,000 would pay higher taxes. Among the households facing higher taxes, the average increase would be $1,635, the policy center said. A 2 percent payroll tax cut, enacted during the economic slowdown, is being allowed to expire as of yesterday.

The heaviest new burdens in 2013, compared with 2012, would fall on top earners, who would face higher rates on income, capital gains, dividends and estates. The top 1 percent of taxpayers, or those with incomes over $506,210, would pay an average of $73,633 more in taxes.

Much of that burden is concentrated at the very top of the income scale.

The top 0.1 percent of taxpayers, those with incomes over about $2.7 million, would pay an average of $443,910 more, reducing their after-tax incomes by 8.4 percent. They would pay 26 percent of the additional taxes imposed by the legislation.

Among households with incomes between $500,000 and $1 million, taxes would go up by an average of $14,812.Top Tax Rate

The bill, being discussed by House members today, would raise the top tax rate to 39.6 percent from 35 percent last year, starting with income over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for married couples.

The top tax rates on capital gains and dividends would go up to 23.8 percent, from 15 percent last year. The new rate includes a 3.8 percent tax from the 2010 health-care law that took effect today.

The Tax Policy Center’s definition of income is a gross measure that includes items such as the employer’s share of payroll taxes, making it larger for many households than the adjusted gross income shown on tax returns.

Joseph Curl, writing for The Washington Times, chronicles the Shock and Awww….!@#t, experienced by Obama voters, who thought that their “dawg” wouldn’t raise their taxes…or sumpin’…

Sometimes, watching a Democrat learn something is wonderful, like seeing the family dog finally sit and stay at your command.

With President Obama back in office and his life-saving “fiscal cliff” bill jammed through Congress, the new year has brought a surprising turn of events for his sycophantic supporters.

“What happened that my Social Security withholding’s in my paycheck just went up?” a poster wrote on the liberal site DemocraticUnderground.com. “My paycheck just went down by an amount that I don’t feel comfortable with. I guarantee this decrease is gonna’ hurt me more than the increase in income taxes will hurt those making over 400 grand. What happened?”

Shocker. Democrats who supported the president’s re-election just had NO idea that his steadfast pledge to raise taxes meant that he was really going to raise taxes. They thought he planned to just hit those filthy “1 percenters,” you know, the ones who earned fortunes through their inventiveness and hard work. They thought the free ride would continue forever.

So this week, as taxes went up for millions of Americans — which Republicans predicted throughout the campaign would happen — it was fun to watch the agoggery of the left.

“I know to expect between $93 and $94 less in my paycheck on the 15th,” wrote the ironically named “RomneyLies.”

“My boyfriend has had a lot of expenses and is feeling squeezed right now, and having his paycheck shrink really didn’t help,” wrote “DemocratToTheEnd.”

…“_Alex™” sounded bummed. “Obama I did not vote for you so you can take away alot of money from my checks.” Christian Dixon seemed crestfallen. “I’m starting to regret voting for Obama.” But “Dave” got his dander up over the tax hike: “Obama is the biggest f***ing liar in the world. Why the f*** did I vote for him”?

Of course, dozens of posters on DemocraticUnderground sought to blame it all (as usual) on President George W. Bush. “Your taxes went up because the leaders need to dig us out of this criminal deficit hole we are in which has been caused because taxes were too low during the Bush years. Everyone has to help by spreading the wealth around a little. Power to the correct people!” posted “Orinoco.”

But in fact, it was Mr. Obama who enacted the “holiday,” and, to be clear, the tax cut that he pushed throughout the campaign — remember? 98 percent of Americans will get a cut under his plan? — was really the extension of the Bush tax suts. Thus, it was Mr. Obama who raised taxes on millions of Americans, not Mr. Bush.

…Hilariously, the tax burden will rise more for someone making $30,000 a year (1.7 percent) than it does for someone earning $500,000 annually (1.3 percent).

A whole new wave of Obama supporters still don’t even know: They’ll get their first 2013 paychecks on the 15th of the month. So when you’re shooting the breeze in the lunchroom with your grumbling co-workers on the 16th, just ask them, “Who’d you vote for in November?” When they say Mr. Obama, just tell them: “Well, you got what you voted for. You did know he was going to raise taxes, right?”

The looks on their faces will be priceless.

The greatest President in my lifetime put it very succintly:

The problem is not that people are taxed too little, the problem is that government spends too much.

Ronald Reagan

Why is it Liberals always have to learn things the hard way, at the expense of all of us?

Until He comes,

KJ