Obamaisms and Outright Lies:

Can you imagine if Pres. Bush had said something like the following? The midstream media would never stop calling him an idiot, stupid, moron, retard, ect, ect...

Pres. Obama in Ohio two days ago:

How many people are getting insurance through their jobs right now? Raise your hands. All right, well, your employer, it's estimated, would see premiums fall by as much as 3000%, which means they could give you a raise!

-President Obama in Ohio Monday afternoon.

Really? Let's just say that it costs your employer $4000 per year to insure you. A 100% decrease would see the premium at $0. So, a 3,000% decrease would mean that the insurance company would be paying the employer (if my math is correct) $116,000 to insure you.

More leftist logic?

All things considered over the last year, I believe I have found the new Democratic Party theme song:

Dhimmitude on the Down-Low:

Here's one I'll bet you didn't get from the talking heads on 24 hour news channels:

From this source, all emphasis mine:

Atty. Gen. Eric Holder Jr. made a well-publicized visit to Los Angeles this week to announce stimulus grants to help fight drug trafficking and to help the victims of domestic violence. But in a quieter event not announced to the news media or public, Holder stopped at a mosque to meet with Muslim American youths.

Really? Why so quiet about this little side stop, Mr. Holder?

And WTF is a "Muslim American?!?" Did we seriously just create another group of hyphenated Americans this time not based on race but on a socio-political religious system?

Does the MSM do this for any other such group? Do you ever hear "Catholic-American" or "Baptist American"? How about "Buddhist-American", "Hindi-American", or "Wiccan-American?"

I think not.

“The point was to engage the Muslim community here in Los Angeles and make sure they understand this administration’s commitment to work with that community,” Justice Department spokesman Matthew Miller said.

Isn't this administration's job to work for ALL Americans? Why are Muslims getting special consideration?

The relationship between the Muslim American community and the department has come under increasing strain. This year, a coalition of the nation’s largest Muslim organizations issued a statement demanding that the Obama administration address FBI actions, including what they described as the “infiltration of mosques,” the use of “agent provocateurs to trap unsuspecting Muslim youth” and the “deliberate vilification” of one of the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights organizations.

"Agent provocateurs to trap unsuspecting Muslim youth?" What does that even mean? Are the trying to insinuate that the Fed is using undercover agents to provoke Muslim teens to commit jihad?

And to what large Muslim civil rights organization are they referring? CAIR? They don't need any help being vilified...

Thursday’s meeting was at 4 p.m. at the Omar Ibn Al Khattab Foundation, a mosque and community center near USC, said Dafer Dakhil, the foundation’s director. It lasted about an hour, during which Holder gave prepared remarks and answered questions from an invited audience of about 200 people ages 18 to 33.

Questions posed at the event covered such topics as concern about law enforcement profiling of Muslim Americans, the sanctity of mosques, hate crimes and the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, Dakhil said.

Profiling is a long-standing law enforcement tool. It's not as if we get our panties all in a bunch when a serial killer or rapist is profiled... And not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists these days sure to seem to be Muslim. It kinda makes sense to look in that direction when rooting out potential terrorists.

“The attorney general got to meet face to face with a generation of Muslims born and raised in this country,” he said. “He didn’t have to depend on what he reads in the papers or what his staff tells him. He got to see them face to face. . . . I don’t believe that ever took place in the previous administration.”

Really? So Bush didn't reach out to Muslims on September 17th, 2001?

Was he such a bad guy towards Muslims that a group of them somehow inexplicably decided to form a re-election campaign on his behalf, saying, "Given a similar amount of time and patience, I’m confident that only positive results will start showing in Iraq. Any man or woman who vigorously fights for the creation of peace in the Muslim World is a person who has our unquestioned support! After the tragic 9-11 attacks, there was only one politician (George W. Bush) out there, defending Muslims.”

Yeah. Other than bow before the Saudi king and give empty speeches to "Muslim Youths," what do you think the Obama administration is really going to do for you?

So, to make matters clear, Holder is kissing Muslim butt over here, and releasing horrifying statements such as this one to Muslims overseas:

Here is a link in case you need a larger version.

Folks, this isn't looking pretty.

Marxism For ALL!

From this source: 

Obama’s campaign has written the Department of Justice demanding a criminal investigation of the “American Issues Project,” the vehicle through which Dallas investor Harold Simmons is financing the advertisements. The Obama campaign — and tens of thousands of supporters — also is pressuring television networks and affiliates to reject the ads. The effort has met with some success: CNN and Fox News are not airing the attacks...

Bauer’s letter called on the Justice Department to open “an investigation of the American Issues Project; its officers and directors; and its anonymous donors, whoever they may be.” [...] The Obama campaign plans to punish the stations that air the ad financially, an Obama aide said, organizing his supporters to target the stations that air it and their advertisers. [...]

One large group of network affiliates, the Sinclair Broadcast Group — which aired an documentary attacking John Kerry in 2004 — has been running the ads, Obama aides said. The campaign has launched a special effort to pressure Sinclair.

“Obama supporters have now sent more than 93,000 e-mails to the Sinclair stations that have decided to run the ad,” said Obama’s spokesman Tommy Vietor. “Other stations that follow Sinclair’s lead should expect a similar response from people who don’t want the political discourse cheapened with these false, negative attacks.”

See, it isn't fascism when the left tries to silence any political discourse. When they do it, it's protecting discourse. After all, we plebes are clearly too damn stupid to do any research or figure it out for ourselves.

Mormons=Muslims?

Go to Tammy Bruce's site and  check out this post.

Take a nice, calming drink first, I'm tellin' 'ya.

PISSED!

OK, I was just listening to the radio and heard terrorists in Iraq called, "militia men" during the top of the hour news break.

I swear, I'm living in a parallel universe. I must be. 

Let's compare.

Militia men:

Terrorists:

Yeah. Big difference, I say.

Human Rights Activists?

Hat tip again to the Religion of Peace:

Unbelievable dhimmitude! 

Time's "Person of the Year"

By now, I'm sure that most folks have heard that Time Magazine's Person of the Year is Vladamir Putin.

The leftist rag is in question seems enamored of leftists and communists, with the runners-up this year being, in this order:

 

"RUNNER-UP

Al Gore

Nobel laureate, minding the environment"  

Green being the unrequited love of the left, of course.

"RUNNER-UP

J.K. Rowling

Harry Potter creator, finally telling secrets" 

 ...Because it takes a lot of courage to make a fictional character "come out of the closet" for no apparent reason. Gay agenda? Check.

"RUNNER-UP

Hu Jintao

China's leader depends on both ancient wisdom and communist doctrine as guides to action"   

Maaaaan, Time sure is in love with Communism. No surprise, considering the leftists are exactly that: Reds in Green clothing.

And last but not least: 

"RUNNER-UP

David Petraeus

The commanding general in Iraq fought America's most difficult foreign war — and one at home"   

Oh. Well, I guess conservatives don't have any reason to complain, seeing that someone with infinitely more honor than any of the aforementioned made the last runner-up under commies and fiction authors. Yeah.

And what, you may ask, was Time's reason for picking Putin? (Emphasis mine.)

He stands, above all, for stability—stability before freedom, stability before choice, stability in a country that has hardly seen it for a hundred years. Whether he becomes more like the man for whom his grandfather prepared blinis—who himself was twice TIME's Person of the Year—or like Peter the Great, the historical figure he most admires; whether he proves to be a reformer or an autocrat who takes Russia back to an era of repression—this we will know only over the next decade. At significant cost to the principles and ideas that free nations prize, he has performed an extraordinary feat of leadership in imposing stability on a nation that has rarely known it and brought Russia back to the table of world power. For that reason, Vladimir Putin is TIME's 2007 Person of the Year.

As Mitt Romney said on the Glenn Beck show yesterday, it seems any good dictator is eligible. 

Romney hadn't heard the news before the interview and was "disgusted". Here's the transcript:

GLENN: Give me your thought on Petraeus not being Time magazine's man of the year but instead Vladimir Putin.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Oh, you are kidding. Did they put Vladimir Putin on the cover?

GLENN: Yeah, Time magazine.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: That really, that's disgusting. I'm absolutely -- I mean, are you -- I mean, I haven't seen Time. Are you serious?

GLENN: No, I'm serious. It is Vladimir Putin, Time magazine man of the year. A guy who, you know, with all of the KGB stuff in the past, Time magazine says has transformed the country and congratulations. Time magazine man of the year, Vladimir Putin.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, you know, he imprisoned his political opponents. There have been a number of highly suspicious murders. He has squelched public dissent and free press. And to suggest that someone like that is the man of the year is really disgusting. I'm just appalled. Clearly General Petraeus is the person or one of a few people who would certainly merit that designation and I know Time magazine makes a distinction. They say, well, people who had an impact, whether it's good or bad, is the man of the year. I think that's a --

GLENN: No, no, hang on.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: -- a false --

GLENN: Before you go too far down this road -- wait a minute. Before you go down this road, this is the quote why he's the man of the year, "For bringing stability and renewed... what was it, impact? Status. Renewed status to his country. That's why.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Isn't that something. So a good dictator -- I guess Raul Castro will get it next. A good dictator that imprisons or murders political and media opponents and therefore brings stability, I mean, there's nothing like the stability that martial law provides or dictatorship provides. I find it a truly appalling designation.

GLENN: And the stability that he's bringing to the Middle East with the transfer of this last few days of nuclear technology to Iran.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Yeah. I mean, he's once again supplying nuclear material to the Bushehr power plant and it's another example of Russia trying to destabilize the world, destabilize the Middle East. It does tell you something about Time magazine. I'm really -- I must admit I'm really disappointed. That's a real shock.

GLENN: I was --

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Our mainstream media I think has just showed its hand.

Respectfully, Governor, the MSM has been doing just that for quite some time. They just haven't any shame any longer.

Closed Captioning Brought to You By...

...Someone who clearly had other things on their mind!

Read all about the mistake, which occurred on November 24th, here.

Department of the Obvious

From the department of "Well, DUH!" comes a startling news report from the London Times which accuses the BBC of bias toward the left in nearly every aspect of its reporting.

Read the whole story here.

The BBC acknowledged the bias, saying that they would figure out ways to "face the challenges of impartiality in the modern world."

Um... Call me crazy, but why not try hiring a few conservatives, or busting the butts of reporters that bring clearly leftist stories to the table?