Liberal Projection

Seriously, Florida? Seriously? – UPDATED

by

Why does Florida keep sending Alan Grayson back to Washington DC time and time again? Are the people in Grayson’s congressional district really of like-mind with this unmitigated, uncivil, uncouth buffoon? Or are they just eager to get him off their streets and out of town?

Here is Grayson’s latest email…

grayson email

What a propagandistic, agent provocateur, embarrassment this guy is.
Grayson is the epitome of a useful idiot assclown for the progressive/socialist/communist/Marxist democrat party agenda whose designated job is to go on the TV screen to slobber and spew ugly vitriol, playing to the most willfully ignorant among us … which is why the majority of TV gigs Grayson does are either on that assclown car wreck called MSNBC or HBO’s Bill Maher show. The problem is, the nation is led to believe Alan Grayson is the mirror image and resolute voice of his constituents that sent him to DC. Think hard and carefully in the election, FL-9. You do have a serious choice for sane and dignified representation on the floor of the US Congress … and on TV. “Stop the insanity!” The guy really does write the political ads for his own election opponent(s).

By the way, there are many minority members of the TEA Party, and growing, so, the above disgusting image is, I find, a not-so-subliminal threat to them by Grayson. Yet, people such as Grayson strip them of their skin color and heritage because they are not good little zip-lipped comrades for the “Progressive” cause. They must not think for themselves and expect others to do so as well. Minorities must have a political lobotomy or be skinned alive by the left. The jaded racist history of the nation’s democrat party is something the current democrats and the MSM try very hard to bury every moment of the day. However, since a republican POTUS broke free the chains of slavery, the liberal/leftist democrat party has slapped on new chains of oppression through endless entitlement baiting and addiction, and through ridicule and personal destruction for daring to have and practice free thought and free will … For stepping off the democrat party plantation.

HT: Weasel Zippers

UPDATE:

Grayson is defending his remarks and the KKK analogy citing erroneous claims of racism of the TEA Party (some of which were discovered to be interloping outside ‘plants’ at TEA Party rallies deliberately there for the MSM to do gotcha slams against the TP, and other claims having nothing to do with TEA Party affiliations).

Rep. Grayson blasted over anti-Tea Party email showing burning cross

Keep Ignoring This Particular Problem Until It Swims Up and Bites Us … Again

by

Shooting At Washington DC Navy Yard Reportedly Leaves Several Woundedmass_shooters

The MSM (and liberals with Twitter accounts) resorted to the typical template with last week’s Washington DC Navy Yard mass murder shooting:

First, get the facts completely wrong, even the person’s name/identity … Just be first with the dirt
Second, continue to push the lie(s) because it fits the gun control agenda
Third, barely, if that, correct the error(s)
Fourth, still push the blame on the gun, even if it is not the gun used
Fifth, find somebody else to blame (always first blame the NRA, then the GOP and/or “Bible-thumping Second Amendment law-abiding Americans)
Sixth, stupidly and wrongly blame the TEA Party/conservatives/”rightwingers” (even though some of the recent shooters have been democrat/liberal-leaners … and Obama and gun control supporters)
Seventh, (“He played video games? Thank Gaia!”) Blame the video games!
*Eighth (continued below the fold), completely ignore the fact that almost all of the mass shootings are happening in “Gun Free Zones” … Yes, even military bases

You see, it is never the shooter’s responsibility, or their history of mental illness and its occasionally volatile medications. It is always a deflection of responsibility and blame and condemnation of the gun(s), the Second Amendment, those who persist in defending the Constitution’s Bill of Rights, the other political party, violence-based entertainment, global warming/climate change…

However, while we are grasping at blame cards, Ann Coulter does find a viable source of blame that absolutely does connect with the mass murderers in America over the last four decades:

There’s been another mass shooting by a crazy person, and liberals still refuse to consider institutionalizing the dangerous mentally ill.

[…]

But Alexis couldn’t be institutionalized because the left has officially certified the mentally ill as “victims,” and once you’re a victim, all that matters is that you not be “stigmatized.”

But here’s the problem: Coddling the mentally ill isn’t even helping the mentally ill. Ask the sisters of crazy homeless woman “Billie Boggs” how grateful they were to the ACLU for keeping Boggs living on the streets of New York City. Ask the parents of Aaron Alexis, James Holmes (Aurora, Colo., movie theater shooter), Jared Loughner (Tucson, Ariz., mall shooter) or Seung-Hui Cho (Virginia Tech shooter) how happy they are that their sons weren’t institutionalized.

Tellingly, throughout the last three decades, the overall homicide rate has been in free fall, thanks to Republican crime policies, from 10 per 100,000 in 1980 to 4 per 100,00 today. (You might even call them “common sense” crime policies.) But the number of mass shootings has skyrocketed from 4 per year, between 1900 and 1970, to 29 per year since then.

Something seems to have gone horribly wrong right around 1970. What could it be? Was it the introduction of bell-bottoms?

That date happens to correlate precisely with when the country began throwing the mentally ill out of institutions in 1969. Your memory of there not being as many mass murders a few decades ago is correct. Your memory of there not being as many homeless people a few decades ago is also correct.

But liberals won’t allow the dangerous mentally ill to be committed to institutions against their will. (The threat of commitment is very persuasive in getting disturbed individuals to take their medicine.) Something in liberals’ genetic makeup compels them to attack civilization, for example, by defending the right of dangerous psychotics to refuse treatment and then representing them in court after they commit murder.

[…]

In the decades since the deinstitutionalization movement began, more and more people kept being killed as a result of that movement — including the deinstitutionalized themselves. According to Torrey, between 1970 and 2004, the mentally ill were responsible for at least 4,700 murders in California.

Liberals will pretend to have missed the news that the Washington Navy Yard shooter was a paranoid schizophrenic. They refuse to acknowledge that the mass murder problem — as well as the homeless problem — only began after crazy people were thrown out of institutions in the 1970s. They tell us crapping in your pants on a New York City sidewalk is a “civil right.” They say that haranguing passersby on the street about your persecution by various movie stars is a form of “free speech.”

Only after a mass murder committed by a psychotic with a firearm do liberals spring to life and suggest a solution: Take away everyone’s guns.

Read in full…

Read more

“Phony Scandals”

by

Last week, while on his continuing campaign trail, Obama complained about “phony scandals” keeping republicans in the U.S. Congress too busy to pass his economy-wrecking socialist agenda. Shortly after the unconscionable gaffe crossed the live airwaves a large percentage of Americans took a collective gasp. Exactly what is phony about the Obama administration’s scandals, and precisely which of those scandals does Obama consider “phony”?

Benghazi – Christopher Stevens – Sean Smith – Glen Doherty – Tyrone S. Woods + (David Ubben x 20 hours/severely wounded on roof) = phony scandal.

Now, about that phony IRS scandal…

tyranny

Embattled Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner and an attorney in the Federal Election Commission’s general counsel’s office appear to have twice colluded to influence the record before the FEC’s vote in the case of a conservative non-profit organization, according to e-mails unearthed by the House Ways and Means Committee and obtained exclusively by National Review Online. The correspondence suggests the discrimination of conservative groups extended beyond the IRS and into the FEC, where an attorney from the agency’s enforcement division in at least one case sought and received tax information about the status of a conservative group, the American Future Fund, before recommending that the commission prosecute it for violations of campaign-finance law. Lerner, the former head of the IRS’s exempt-organizations division, worked at the FEC from 1986 to 1995, and was known for aggressive investigation of conservative groups during her tenure there, too.

“Several months ago . . . I spoke with you about the American Future Fund, a 501(c)(4) organization that had submitted an exemption application the IRS [sic],” the FEC attorney wrote Lerner in February 2009. The FEC, which polices violations of campaign-finance laws, is not exempted under Rule 6103, which prohibits the IRS from sharing confidential taxpayer information, but the e-mail indicates Lerner may have provided that information nonetheless: “When we spoke last July, you had told us that the American Future Fund had not received an exemption letter from the IRS,” the FEC attorney wrote.

The timing of the correspondence between Lerner and the FEC suggests the FEC attorney sought information from the IRS in order to influence an upcoming vote by the six FEC commissioners…

[…]

House Ways and Means Committee chairman Dave Camp and oversight-subcommittee chairman Charles Boustany are calling on the IRS, in the wake of these revelations, to provide all communications between the agency and the FEC between 2008 and 2012. “The American public is entitled to know whether the IRS is inappropriately sharing their confidential tax information with other agencies,” …

Read in full…

phony

Fallout: Pro-Abortion Groups Try to Smear The Gosnell Blood from Their Hands onto The Pro-Life Movement and Fail

by

ALERT: Kermit Gosnell agreed to forfeit his right to an appeal and will get life in prison.

How long before the pro-abortion talking heads and the media start referring to the Gosnell jury as an “activist” jury? Well, that dog just won’t hunt because 9 of the 12 jurors that found Kermit Gosnell guilty were “pro-choice”.

First-degree murder – a killing which is deliberate and premeditated … in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child …) or with certain weapons…

The country’s pro-abortion groups are having a hard time dealing with the guilty first-degree murder verdicts yesterday against one of their bishops, Kermit Gosnell. So much so that they are finding ways to blame his horrific murders on anti-abortion folks. Truth be told, the left/pro-abortion factions in this country were slapped down hard by the jury formally recognizing 3 aborted “fetuses” as babies, little human beings/persons and NOT just clumps of disposable cells … and by recognizing the medical tools Gosnell used in his procedures as his murder weapons. Yesterday it was Planned Parenthood’s disgustingly lame post-verdict statement:

Planned Parenthood applauded the verdict on Monday, saying in a statement that “The jury has punished Kermit Gosnell for his appalling crimes.”

“This verdict will ensure that no woman is victimized by Kermit Gosnell ever again,” said Planned Parenthood spokesman Eric Ferrero. “This case has made clear that we must have and enforce laws that protect access to safe and legal abortion, and we must reject misguided laws that would limit women’s options and force them to seek treatment from criminals like Kermit Gosnell.”

And here is NARAL’s response to the Gosnell guilty verdicts via their Twitter account…

However, where there is one defeat for the pro-abortion lobbyists, there is a victory as of another as “The Butcher of Germantown”, abortionist LeRoy Carhart, will have no charges filed against him in the death of a woman whose abortion he botched.

Both PP and NARAL are full of crap. Pennsylvania allows abortion until 24 weeks (6 months pregnant). Given abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s late term practices beyond the 24 weeks, that these two pro-abortion entities are supposedly condemning, exactly what are PP and NARAL griping about? On one hand they are supposedly in agreement with the murder verdicts in the Gosnell trial, yet, they are complaining, it seems, that what he did should not be illegal. They celebrate these abortion “monsters” providers who dare carry-out the same late term/born alive abortions. They are trying to have it both ways. The fact is, their ire at Kermit Gosnell is NOT with what he did for over 20 years, but for getting caught and bringing it (abortion) to a court of law under the charge(s) of “murder”. They are pissed the 3 most severe verdicts involed his guilt in cold-blooded-murdering babies. This is why neither of these pro-abortion groups view/address the littlest and mos innocent victims of Gosnell. Just about every few weeks there is a story of abortion provider doctors doing the same things Gosnell did and botching procedures, some resulting in the death(s) of their patients … some of them employed at Planned Parenthood clinics. But you have to find these stories on the back pages of the news feeds. The abortion champions in this country demand NO rules or regulations on abortion, when everything else in this country is becoming regulated to death. They claim the women that went to Gosnell for over 20 years had no choice. However, there was a PP clinic less than 3 miles from Gosnell’s abortion factory…

The false narrative of the pro-abortion groups in this nation is despicable. The (local) reporter that spent everyday at the Gosnell trial said he went into the trial “pro-choice”, and is no more. THAT is why the MSM refused to cover the trial with all its unavoidable stark details.

Here is Rev. Marcel Guarnizo’s most recent article on Gosnell: “Late Term Abortionist Kermit Gosnell and the Banality of Evil”

Jim Treacher @ The DC Trawler: “Dear New York Times: If Kermit Gosnell was convicted of murder for killing fetuses, how is he different than any other abortionist?”

The Heritage Foundation: “Serving Justice to Gosnell”

A complete package of evil

by

The DiploMad writes another winner:

Words evolve. They take on new meaning over the years. Social and political movements appropriate certain words, redefine them, and then use them to shape the ideological battlefield. The classic example of that, of course, is “bolshevik” and “menshevik.” The Bolsheviks were, in fact, the Mensheviks and vice-versa. The word bolshevik, derived from the word meaning “majority,” was appropriated by the radicals who were in reality the minority of the old Social Democratic party. The minority labeled the majority the minority and got away with it. Clever. There are many other examples of this in history such as the insistence on calling nazis and fascists right-wing when they are clearly left-wing products.

In our once great, still beloved, but evermore daft United States, precisely those who are not liberal, as in broad minded and generous, in their attitudes towards others have appropriated “liberal” as theirs. The political philosophy of this “liberalism” is one which portrays life as a series of problems that needs addressing by the state–the state guided and run, mind you, by the “well-educated liberal elite” produced by our increasingly decrepit “liberal” universities and informed by “liberal” Hollywood and “liberal” Big Media. Modern U.S. liberals are a variant of European social democrats who believe in a big state and mistrust the individual; the big difference being that US liberals have much more power in the world than their European co-religionists ever could hope. They advocate the “positivist” attitude so aptly summed up in the motto emblazoned on the national flag of Brazil, “Ordem e Progresso,” so long, of course, as they are in charge of imposing the order and defining the progress. They take positivism’s emphasis on rational thought and logic, and its opposition to superstition and fantasy, and turn it on its head into a “science-based” fantasy that somehow just so happens to lead to more power for them and their state. Global climate change is one stirling example of how liberals have taken a legitimate scientific-based concern over pollution, and turned it into a monumental hoax, known as Manmade Climate Change. That hoax somehow, just somehow ends up demanding more money and power for–guess who?–the liberals and their state. As we will discuss, this philosophy comprises followers who proclaim a great love for humanity while in practice exhibiting a great hatred for people. […]

Liberal utopia fall down go boom

by

From The American Spectator, if you read one thing today, read “Jihad Blows Up the Liberal Utopia.”

Jihad has blown up The Liberal Utopia.

The visionary liberal land of political and social perfection.

President Obama is not happy — and he isn’t alone.

You know the place.

  • The Liberal Utopia is a land where gun background checks prevent mass murder.
  • The Liberal Utopia is a land where Islamic fundamentalists have changed their perception of America because the President travels to Muslim nations to give lovely speeches, believes that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere is a wonderful sign of an Arab Spring, and refuses to use the word “terrorist” whether his administration is investigating Ft. Hood, Boston, or Benghazi.
  • The Liberal Utopia is a land where a 2009 presidential video proclaiming a “new beginning” in American relations with Iran will halt the effort to build a nuclear bomb.
  • The Liberal Utopia is a land where the good intentions of Social Security will never bankrupt the Social Security Trust Fund.
  • The Liberal Utopia is a land where the good intentions of Medicare could not possibility result in trillions of unfunded liability.
  • The Liberal Utopia is a land where the War on Poverty was supposed to end poverty — and instead winds up sending violent crime skyrocketing, and, in the words of Thomas Sowell, setting up the American black family for rapid disintegration in the liberal welfare state “that subsidized unwed pregnancy and changed welfare from an emergency rescue to a way of life.”

One could go on …and on and on….spotting those will-o-the-wisp glimpses of The Liberal Utopia (Obamacare here, the Obama stimulus over there, the promise to close Guantanamo way back there) with example after example of this miserably failed attempt to find or create a Liberal Utopia.

Or what our friend Mark Levin deftly calls Ameritopia.

The search for this Liberal Utopia has been going on in this country since at least 1932 and in fact before that when one keeps going on back to Woodrow Wilson’s progressives and beyond to the late 19th century when the progressive movement began to gain political steam with the likes of William Jennings Bryan and a whole host of other if lesser known figures.

The idea is always the same. To quote Levin: “Utopianism is the ideological and doctrinal foundation for statism.”

Or, to simplify: if only Americans are made to do X, The Perfect Society will manifest. […]

Earth Day, Shmearth Day

by

The great Stevie J West expounds on the real celebration going on today — hint: it ain’t about the Earth:

Happy “We’re really celebrating the birthday of one of our leftist heroes, Lenin, in addition to the eco-tyranny we’re pushing, but we don’t want to advertise our love of the Bolsheviks to the aggressively ignorant masses, so we’ll call it ‘Earth Day’” Day.

Find any leftist cause that gives the plebeians warm and fuzzy feelings in their over-sized hearts and woefully empty heads, peel back the pretty top layer, and you will find a cesspool of stomach churning reality. Most people celebrating the fact that they’ve purchased a special garbage can for their discarded microbrew beer bottles and Starbucks cups don’t realize, for example, that recycling typically wastes more energy and resources than it saves. The symbolism over substance crowd that opposes logging because trees have feelings don’t realize that over forestation leads to drying up of aquifers, rivers, and streams which not only kills off more trees, but also affects wildlife populations and contributes to massive wildfires every year. And not only is the hemp wearing patchouli brigade hilariously unaware of how ridiculous they look driving a “smart car” that’s smaller than a pack of gum, they also don’t get that they’re contributing to the “destruction” they’re pretending they can halt.

We can highlight the inconsistencies and outright hypocrisies of the “green” movement all day long. We can also talk about the unfathomable arrogance a person must gather about himself in order to believe that he can affect the temperature or overall “health” of the earth, either positively or negatively. Indeed, the arrogant hypocrisy of the willfully ignorant is a thing to behold. But that’s not the ugliest part of Earth Day. The reality of what we’re “celebrating” today is much, much darker. […]

Isn’t that an awesome paragraph?

The left’s obsession with demonizing us fails again

by

The rush to judgement by the mainstream media and leftist pundits on who the Boston Marathon bombers was just the latest in a long sick tradition. The left, incapable of rational and logical thought, and lacking even the slightest bit of deductive reasoning, continues to make the same mistake over and over again, proving they are, of course, insane.

[…] The Sparkman accusations were based on nothing more than a desire to demonize the newly formed and rapidly growing Tea Party movement as terrorists and un-American.  It was as if they were hoping for an act of Tea Party violence.

Yet there was a theory behind the madness, the Eliminationist Narrative created by Dave Neiwart of Crooks and Liars about an “eliminationist” radical right seeking to dehumanize and eliminate political opposition.  It was a play on the over-used narrative of Richard Hofstadter’s “paranoid style” in American politics.

The Eliminationist Narrative was aided and abetted by an abuse of the term “right-wing” to include groups who are the opposite of conservatism and the Tea Party movement.

In the case of Sparkman, the accusations were just Another Failed Eliminationist Narrative.  And the Eliminationist Narrative would fail time and time again […]

For a more detailed picture of this sick state of mind, read “10 Depressing, Morally Confused Reactions to 4/15/13, the Boston Jihad” in the PJ Tatler.

Cruz Control and Powerless DiFi

by

Have you heard about how that horribly ignorant, misogynist upstart freshman Sen. Ted Cruz made veteran Sen. Dianne Feinstein feel patronized during their exchange yesterday in the Senate on her current attempt to take away our right to own guns by picking, choosing, and chipping away at the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution…

Allahpundit at HotAir points out the video viral exchange between the two senators is only a small part of what went on, and that there is far more to this story than the “rude” Ted Cruz, ‘who knows not of the cited Heller case‘, the liberal MSM (MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough in this instance) is now trying to project … and here it is:

KrisAnne Hall is an attorney and former prosecutor. The following video excerpts (below) are from a recent townhall meeting on future gun control held in Pensacola. Here she addresses the pure and clear meaning of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and the now unbalanced thinking of the federal government on their balance of power vs. the U.S. Constitution. She points out the US Supreme Court does not have the power to grant power to the federal government outside the Constitution. THAT, according to Jay Norlander of NRO, is exactly how Sen. Dianne Feinstein (the White House and the democrats in the Congress) is operating on this matter…

In the matter of Ted Cruz versus Dianne Feinstein, I’d like to make one point … I believe that Feinstein believes what a lot of people believe, in error: Congress and the president can do basically whatever they want. And if it’s unconstitutional, well, the Supreme Court will say so, and all will be well. That’s what a system of checks and balances is all about.

Here is DiFi: “Congress is in the business of making the law. The Supreme Court interprets the law. If they strike down the law, they strike down the law.”

We can go wild and crazy, here in Congress, and if we overstep constitutional boundaries, the Supreme Court can strike us down. We’ll go whatever speed we want on the highway, and if a copper should happen to catch us, so be it.

Thing is, congressmen and the president swear an oath to the Constitution too. The justices of the Supreme Court are not the only arbiters of the Constitution. They might be the ultimate arbiters, but others have a responsibility too. Members of the legislative and executive branches have a custodial role. A black robe does not confer a unique constitutional burden on you, and the absence of such a robe does not exempt you from a burden, or a responsibility.

This should be elementary. In my observation, however, it is the erroneous view that is widespread, and well entrenched…

Get it? The thinking of DiFi and the democrats is, We’ll just pass the law, they can see what’s in it, and then take it to court. Dr. Ben Carson is correct. We need far fewer lawyers in the U.S. Congress.

Here KrisAnne backs up her government overreach warning regarding disarming the American people with the recent example of the Obama administration’s usurping of powers in their DOJ “white paper” admission of assumed power and ability to use drones to kill American citizens anywhere on the globe, including in the USA, without due process…

So, if the White House and the DOJ believe they can do that without cause or court, what is to stop them from banning citizens from owning guns? Perhaps Sen. Feinstein isn’t smarter than a sixth grader after all.

BTW, I too am growing quite fond of fearless GOP freshmen such as Sen. Ted Cruz.

You can find more videos of this townhall and hear more of what this woman has to say, especially in the face of the liberal lawyer on the panel.

Another magnificent rant

by

I come across a large amount of reading material every day thanks to my RSS reader and Twitter. Form time to time I discover beautiful little gems of punditry. Such is case today from a blog called The Sacred Cow Slaughterhouse. It is a brilliant piece that, in 1,735 words, dissects and exposes the rotten internal organs of liberalism/”progressivism”:

“The Post in Which I Piss Off EVERYBODY” by Michael Z. Williamson

Or, How I Learned To Stop Caring.

By way of introduction, I’d like to explain some of my former positions. Please do not reply and tell me why I’m wrong. That’s not relevant to this post. These WERE my positions, for right or wrong.

I used to believe women had a right to reproductive choice. As a male, I will obviously never have an abortion. I supported access because birth control is cheaper than abortions, abortions are cheaper than welfare, welfare is cheaper than jail. And I don’t believe the government is capable of legislating for every circumstance. Most of the time, a woman and her doctor will make a decision that works for the situation, and until a baby is an independent organism, it’s a parasite. This was also important to me because my wife was warned that a further pregnancy could kill her. That’s been surgically remedied and is no longer a problem.

I used to believe gays were entitled to relate as they wished, including marriage. What two people do together doesn’t affect me unless I’m one of them.

I used to believe it was wrong to treat people differently based on their skin color. Even if a few people fit a stereotype, millions of others do not.

I used to believe there should be a strong division between church and state, that any support of a religious entity using property of the state constituted endorsement and was wrong.

I used to believe people had a right to protest, campaign, rant and create non-violent incidents to express themselves and their positions. I also believed they had a right to publish as they chose. I believed they were entitled to burn the Flag in protest, to make a statement.

I have obviously been at odds with conservatives over these positions. There have been loud arguments, heated discussions and occasional insults.

Read the rest below the fold. It’s worth your time…

Read more