Reflections From a Murky Pond

The US House of Representative voted yesterday, Thursday, June 29, 2012 to hold Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder in Contempt of Congress for his repeated refusal to provide Congress with the needed information about his and Obama’s involvement in the criminally stupid Fast and Furious debacle that murdered some 200 Mexican civilians and one unlucky US Border Patrol Agent, Brian Terry.

The vote was 255-67 with 17 Democrats putting partisanship aside and doing the right thing in charging Holder for defying the subpoena that he was served. That vote, however, did not happen until the grifters, shufflers, and thugs of the Congress Black Caucus walked out en mass.

This is simply because with these sorts it’s race first, last, and always and it’s only race. The scandal of Fast and Furious specifically centers on the murder of a White man, Brian Terry, through the actions of a Black POTUS and a Black Attorney General. That being the case, the CBC simply doesn’t care what crimes were committed by Holder and/or Obama. Frankly, Holder and Obama could have personally gunned down Brian Terry and then taken turns on his sisters and nieces and the vermin of the CBC would still claim that it was racist to investigate and/or prosecute them because, and only because, Holder and Obama are Black.

Be assured, if Terry had been Black and the Attorney General and POTUS White, these shiftless thugs would be hooting, hollering, an beating drums on the floor of the House, screaming and jabbering for those White’s to be strung up post haste.

These misborn bastard sons and daughters of the ghetto are just thugs in suits for whom it’s race first, last, and always and to whom no Black can commit a crime – except to not hold to each and every iota of their ill-thought racial solidarity.

Fortunately, this is an election year and they can be removed from the public sphere and sent back where they belong.

~*~

They will be responsible for letting a condition develop in this country which will create a climate that will bring seeds up out of the ground with vegetation on the end of them looking like something these people never dreamed of. In 2012, it’s the ballot or the bullet.

Tags: Blacks | Brian Terry | CBC | Congress | Crime | Fast and Furious | Grifters | Gun Control | Gun Rights | Holder | Obama | Race Baiting | Racism | Thugs | US House of Representives | Vermin

This entry was posted on Friday, June 29th, 2012 at 12:13 pm and is filed under Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

It’s no fluke that Pelosi brought in activist-cum-student Sandra Fluke to give “testimony” before a House Committee that had absolutely nothing to do with Obama’s planned violation of the First Amendment. It was well-staged theater designed to distract people from the unpleasant truth.

Obama Full Circle – From BS to Jobs to BS Again

Faced with years of continued and unabating unemployment and upcoming elections, Pelosi chose to distract the People with the tried and true, “Oh look, a slut” gambit in order to change to public debate to something other than Obama’s and his Liberals’ utter and massively costly failure to stimulate job growth in America.

Pelosi’s not stupid twat. She knows that her job is on the line since all 435 seats in the United States House of Representatives are in play during the 2012 elections along with 33 seats in the Senate, 23 or which are current filled by Democrats (21) or Left voting Independents (2) – and, almost as an afterthought, Obama’s presidency.

Don’t even bother bitching about my language. I used a rude word about a public figure who gives as good as she gets, who’s called people “hostage-takers” and “unAmerican,” Nancy Pelosi.

The First Amendment was specifically designed for citizens to insult politicians. 😉

The “hearing” not being a court, I’d even posit that Pelosi specifically coached Fluke on just what to say in order to have the best chance to be the biggest distraction possible, not that I’d put illegally coaching a witness in trial beyond Pelosi.

It’s the economy and jobs that are important issues at hand, not Pelosi’s and the LSM’s manufactured “War on Women.” Keep that firmly in mind, especially since Pelosi’s specific opinion on controlling and limiting births is well-documented.

Tags: 2012 Elections | America | Contraception | Debt | Economy | Employment | Feminism | Jobs | Pelosi | Politics | Sandra Fluke | Stimulus | Unemployment | US House of Representives | US Senate | Women

This entry was posted on Friday, March 16th, 2012 at 10:28 am and is filed under Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Recently the Obama Regime’s chief baby-killer, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius stood before the the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health and brazenly said her boss’ plan to force insurance companies to provide any and all contraceptive and sterilization procedures for free wouldn’t cost them anything.

The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception.

There has been much and cry as a result of her distracting comment, as would be expected in this soundbite-driven world.

Largely this outrage is due to most people either not contextualizing Sebelius’ comment or having been provided the context in the first place. Hence, they’re distracted and outrage because Sebelius’ comment, if applied to the larger milieu, would be heinous and quite disturbingly similar to other recent atrocities.

Things are, while still deeply in the realm of WTF, much different when the proper, narrow context is applied to Obama’s HHS Secretary’s controversial Congressional testimony. The actual exchange in question that has generated the uproar was between Sebelius and Rep. Tim Murphy (R-PA)

Murphy: “Who pays for it? There’s no such thing as a free service.”

Sebelius: “The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for cost of contraception.”

Murphy: “So you are saying, by not having babies born, we are going to save money on health care?”

Sebelius: “Providing contraception is a critical preventive health benefit for women and for their children.”

Murphy: “Not having babies born is a critical benefit. This is absolutely amazing to me. I yield back.”

Sebelius: “Family planning is a critical health benefit in this country, according to the Institute of Medicine.”

What Sebelius was claiming was that it was OK for the Obama Regime to force health insurance companies to give all approved forms of birth control away for free because doing so was supposedly cheaper for them than paying for the pregnancies.

It’s always fun the watch a Liberal faced with real questions.  Never having an actual answer, they fall back on one or more of their cult mantras. Can’t think? Chant.

Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY), a member of the subcommittee, later summed up the rational response to Sebelius’ statement better than I could.

Their argument is this: Health insurance companies will offer it for free because they make money. You reduce the number of people getting pregnant therefore you reduce the cost of pregnancy, or low birth weight pregnancies or other kind of pregnancies.

If you think about it, why don’t health insurance companies provide it now if the argument is health insurance companies are going to make a lot of money? If the health insurance companies were really acting in their own best interest, they would be giving these pills out for free, if it really saved money?

That about sums it up. If the “oh-so-greedy” insurance companies would make money off of giving contraceptives and sterilizations for free, wouldn’t they already be doing it?

Think about it objectively! If the insurance companies are as heartless and greedy as the Leftists portray them to be and giving away contraceptives was a cost benefit wouldn’t they already be doing so and using it as a reason not to cover prenatal, birth, and postnatal procedures since those were easily and freely avoidable medical conditions and are ones even Institute of Medicine supposedly says are critical to control?

No. Be outraged at Sebelius’ perfidy, stupidity, and mindless following of the Liberals’ dogma. Don’t be suckered into being outraged over things that, in context, were never said or implied.

Tags: America | Babies | Capitalism | Children | Congress | Contraception | Economics | Feminism | Health | Healthcare | Insurance | Media Bias | Sebelius | US House of Representives

This entry was posted on Wednesday, March 7th, 2012 at 6:30 pm and is filed under Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Predating the explosion of angst against SOPA and PIPA was all the screaming, moaning, and hand-wringing over the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 – specifically those sections dealing with detainee matters.

Hordes of people, on the Left and the Right, were screaming about how those sections of the NDAA 2012 would allow the government to indefinitely imprison Americans without charges or trial – a gut shot to the Constitution.

Truth be told, I was close to being one of them. The only reason that I didn’t join in the ranting was that there were two versions of the bill in question, one in the House and one in the Senate, and both were being rewritten and reworded too rapidly for me to keep up with them.

When you have to redo a draft post three times in five days, it’s time to step back and wait till things settle – if one cares at all about posting reasonably accurate information.

By the the time the dust settled the issue was laid to rest, despite Obama’s campaign statement upon signing the NDAA 2012 into law.

My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens … Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.

— President Obama, January 1, 2012
NDAA 2012 Signing Statement

The dangerous language that had been in earlier, working versions of both the House and Senate versions of the bill was removed and specific exceptions for American citizens, legal residents, and anyone apprehended within US borders were coded into the final, Enrolled bill which Obama signed into law at the beginning of the year.

Yet the insanity continues, further fueled by Obama’s useless signing statement, as if these very much needed corrections were never made.  Disinformation continues to be spread and the ignorant masses keep lapping it up.

To debunk this idiocy all one has to do is to read the relevant sections (1021 & 1022) of the final version of the 2012 NDAA:

NDAA 2012, Title X, Subtitle D, SEC. 1021

Affirmation of Authority of the armed forces of the United States to detain covered persons pursuant to authorization for use of military force

AUTHORITIES. — Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.

— NDAA 2012 p. 265

Under NDAA 2012 the US military still doesn’t have the right to indefinitely detain any US citizen or legal resident. It wasn’t even granted the right to indefinitely detain illegal aliens who are captured or arrested within US borders.

NDAA 2012, Title X, Subtitle D, SEC. 1022

Requirement for military custody

(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS. — The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS. — The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

— NDAA 2012 p. 266

The NDAA 2012 has not in any way called for the requirement of military custody of American citizens or expanded those requirements for legal residents.

But over three weeks after the NDAA 2012 was signed into law and longer since its final version was enrolled people are still ranting and raving over it – all of them referencing admittedly heinous verbiage that was in earlier versions of the bills.

Yes! Earlier versions of the NDAA 2012 included some of the most dangerous language I’ve seen in proposed legislation and, again yes, that language was made even more chilling in context due to some of the rhetoric by individual legislators who obviously didn’t want to abide by the Constitution and had no qualms about “disappearing” American citizens.

Those dangerous and unconstitutional provisions did not, however, survive the final writing of the law. Let me repeat that – Those dangerous and unconstitutional provisions did not survive the final writing of the law

If one wants to continue complaining about the NDAA 2012 and not look like an idiot while doing so, different arguments will have to be raised.

Possibly Valid Complaints

Depending upon your sensibilities the complaints below would still be valid:

• NDAA 2012 keeps Gitmo open and prevents Obama from moving detainees into the US civilian prison or courts systems
• NDAA 2012 calls for detention of enemy combatants until the end of hostilities, which is an unforeseen and unforeseeable date in the War on Terror
• NDAA 2012 could be interpreted as formally legalizing Extraordinary Rendition

But, for the sake of providing some evidence that the American people aren’t a ignorant as many claim us to be, quit ranting about things – no matter how horrific they were – that never saw the light of day as law.

Tags: Civil Liberties | Congress | Constitutional Law | Freedom | Gitmo | H. R. 1540 | NDAA 2012 | Obama | Politics | Terrorism | The Constitution | Tyranny | US House of Representives | US Military | US Senate | War | War On Terror

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 19th, 2012 at 4:34 pm and is filed under Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

There’s a lot of whinging, whining, ranting, and raving over SOPA and PIPA. My guess is that very, very few – perhaps as low as 1% – of the people engaging in these histrionics have bothered to read either bill.

That fundamental, self-imposed ignorance, of course,  never seems to stop these cretins from yammering about things about which they know nothing or next to nothing.

Most hilarious reaction is the SOPA Strike or Blackout protest going on today (January 18, 2012).  Well over 99% of the sites choosing to “go dark” are so inconsequential that their permanent loss would go utterly unnoticed by the internet public at large.

NOTE: This blog would also most definitely fall into that 99%, as would virtually all personal websites. I have some comforting illusions but this blog’s importance isn’t one of them.

On the slim chance that you, my dear reader, wish to be one of the 1% who isn’t bleating in ignorance born rage, links to the full text of both SOPA and PIPA can be found below:

Texts of SOPA & PIPA

• Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) [H. R. 3261]
• Protect IP Act (PIPA) [S. 968]

At least after reading the bills in question one can, if one still has an issue with one or both of them, have complaints and arguments based upon actual verifiable facts as opposed to the drivel certain agendists spoon feed their drones. And it’s not inconceivable that you would still take issue with SOPA and PIPA; like all laws, there’s room for argument over the details – especially over the various amendments and riders that are always added to bills in Congress.

Tags: America | Congress | Copyright | Copyright Infringement | Crime | H. R. 3261 | Intellectual Property | Internet | IP | Law | PIPA | Piracy | S. 968 | SOPA | Technology | Theft | US House of Representives | US Senate

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 18th, 2012 at 4:17 pm and is filed under Politics, Technology. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.