Tag: Democrats

September 6, 2011

What ‘New Tone?’ Obama Vs. Himself & Other Democrats (VIDEO)

No words are necessary to describe this. Just watch and be repulsed. Yes, O is repetitive, but apparently so must his detractors like myself be, in order to get the message across that the Democrats and their supporters are a bunch of hypocritical fools who do NOT practice what they preach. After I saw Hoffa’s despicable performance yesterday, I had to assemble this montage for you. Watch and fume, watch-and-fumers!


What a load of horse squeeze from the lot of them! Especially from the Union Thugs at today’s Labor Day rally in Detroit, Michigan. And not only did Obama let Hoffa get away with his “take ‘em out” comment, he LAUDED him during his part of the speech, thanking him for his support. What a tool.

July 15, 2011

Understanding Obama in 2011 Through the Eyes of a 60s Radical

If you’re like me, and you’ve been somewhat perplexed by some of the things the Obama Administration has been doing, you need look no further than a blog posting from 2008 by one of the founders of the Weather Underground; Mark Rudd.

Mark Rudd

Back in ’08, it appears Rudd was trying to assure his fellow radicals and progressives that what Obama was going to do would have reason, and in the end, they would all be able to understand it in retrospect. Believe me. Nothing this president has done has been without reason, either by action or inaction. His choices, after reading Rudd’s piece, are all very clear to me now.

To begin with, Rudd explains how Obama got elected in the first place, and why he positioned himself the way he did in his piece titled “Let’s Get Smart About Obama:”

Obama is a very strategic thinker. He knew precisely what it would take to get elected and didn’t blow it. He used community organizing methods to mobilize a base consisting of many people who had never voted before or who regularly don’t vote.

But he also knew that what he said had to basically play to the center to not be run over by the press, the Republicans, scare centrist and cross-over voters away. He made it.

I’ve often wondered what the Obama governing doctrine was, and it appears at times he’s wandering aimlessly without purpose. Au contraire – it is completely intentional.

…he has a narrow mandate for change, without any direction specified. What he’s doing now is moving on the most popular issues — the environment, health care, and the economy. He’ll be progressive on the environment because that has broad popular support; health care will be extended to children, then made universal, but the medical, pharmaceutical, and insurance corporations will stay in place, perhaps yielding some power; the economic agenda will stress stimulation from the bottom sometimes and handouts to the top at other times.

Sound familiar? Remember, Rudd wrote this piece back in ’08 just after Obama’s election. It was like Rudd had a window into the future; perhaps a “playbook” he knew well and understood Obama also knew well. Coincidence? I think not.

What about his decisions to keep some of the original players in place?

On foreign policy and the wars and the use of the military there will be no change at all. That’s what keeping Gates at the Pentagon and Clinton at State and not prosecuting the torturers is saying.

Rudd then goes on to explain the small, incremental steps Obama must take to get to the point where he will have everything in place to release the progressive hounds across the land, to set in motion a completely new “fundamentally transformed” America.

Move on the stuff you can to a small but significant extent, gain support and confidence. Leave the military alone because they’re way too powerful. For now, until enough momentum is raised. By the second or third year of this recession, when stimulus is needed at the bottom, people may begin to discuss cutting the military budget if security is being increased through diplomacy and application of nascent international law.

If memory serves me correctly, aren’t they currently all discussing exactly how much we’ll have to cut from the military budget? The only problem with this thought process is things aren’t going the way Rudd planned – there is no increased diplomacy or security. The rest of the world hates us now more than ever before, and Obama’s rating in the Muslim world is now lower than W’s was. Let’s hope this unfortunate state we’re in stops the “application of nascent international law.” But as we’ve all noticed lately, Obama seems to bow before the U.N. more often than he comes to Congress on issues of foreign policy.

And what about all the nonsense the news is reporting on? Seems like we have constant news breaking on Friday nights, all the small issues seem to be the big “news” stories, but nobody’s really talking about the real things that are going on. Sheer luck or bad timing? Nope… part of the plan.

…you have to be able to look like you’re doing one thing but do another. That’s why all these conservative appointments are important: the strategy is feint to the right, move left. Any other strategy invites sure defeat. It would be stupid to do otherwise in this environment.

Look to the second level appointments. There’s a whole govt. in waiting that Podesta has at the Center for American Progress. They’re mostly progressives, I’m told (except in military and foreign policy).

Don’t you all remember the elites on both the left AND right saying “Glenn Beck is crazy,” he’s just a “conspiracy theorist” with all of his shows about the people the president surrounds himself with? Crazy? Really? It is and was part of the plan. It’s like Glenn previously said: it’s like they’re trying to break down the entire makeup of our society, all the while building a gigantic structure to just hang in place until all the internal pieces of the progressive puzzle have been assembled, and then a switch will be flipped on, giving life to the exoskeleton that exists and the rest will fall in place. Seriously, I want you to stop reading this for just a moment, think about all the things Rudd said in his piece, what’s really happening in this country right now, and ask yourself – was Glenn right? He always said he hoped he was wrong, and I did, too, but it appears he was too close to the progressive sweet spot. Perhaps that’s why he left Fox to pursue this beast with his own machine.

Rudd puts the final call out to top off Beck’s predictions and observations about what’s happening:

Our job now is to organize both inside and outside the Demo (sic) party. There’s already a big battle in the Demo party at every level. Here in the New Mexico State Legislature, the progressives are challenging the conservative Dems for leadership; the same is true in Congress. If you can’t stand to work in the party, work on putting mass pressure on issues such as healthcare and jobs and the war from outside.

ACORN, SEIU, AFL-CIO anyone?

We should all say a prayer of thanks to Glenn for awakening a previously sleeping citizenry. And let’s hope he has much more success with Mercury Radio Arts in combating this cancer that is the progressive movement, as it has metastasized throughout this country. It must be defeated by whatever means. Rudd’s call to action must be met by equal and opposite action by the Tea Party and other grassroots movements. We cannot rest for one moment. The progressives surely won’t.

January 9, 2011

Lefties Respond to AZ Shootings: ‘Kill Jesse Kelly, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, & Glenn Beck’

It’s amazing what I’m finding on the web tonight, seeing the libs and progressives jumping to conclusions about the motives of Jared Loughner, when nobody can really know what was in his mind. We do know, however, from other details, that he’s most probably not a tea party afficionado or devotee. Nevertheless, teh oh-so-tolerant lefites have some warm affection and love to send to the Tea Party conservatives.

I’ll begin with my favorite of all tonight:

“The Tucson Tea Party will be made to pay for the blood on their hands. An eye for an eye. You want a civil war, you got one. KILL Jesse Kelly for his role, then KILL Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Gleen Beck. Whoever puts BULLETS in ther HEADS shall be a NATIONAL HERO.”

That’s just from one commenter in a story in The Hill today. Here’s a screenshot of the entire comment – I’m hoping that someone will share this with the appropriate law enforcement personnel.

Threats To Sarah, Rush & Glenn

Here are some more gems I’ve found, with corresponding annotation:

“Tea Party followers think before you speak. This organization is just motivated by hate and has no agenda except instigating violence, but remember you reap what you sow.”

BY Tea Smoke Screen on 01/08/2011 at 15:51

“The anger and hatred of the Tea Party as shown in the comments section of many online news sources are irresponsible and are likely catalysts much like the radicals of the sixties. Violence is the next step… and because of health insurance?” (This one just cracks me up, it’s so ludicrous…radicals of the 60s?)

BY no tea party on 01/08/2011 at 16:11

“It’s time to call the Tea Party and Sarah Palin what they are: fascists. Militant violent rhetoric will result in militant violent actions. If you’re a Tea Party sympathizer, it’s time to walk away from them or own the fact that your politics has resulted in the murder of a child.” (Seriously? Tea partiers would cause the murder of a child? No… that’s more along the lines of the libs who favor abortions, even late-term ones.)

BY Mark Parker on 01/08/2011 at 16:39

“The government should take all citizen’s guns. By force, if necessary. Now that’s the kind of free society that I’d like to live in.”

BY TYPICAL LIBERAL on 01/08/2011 at 18:55

This is all just crazy talk crap. These knee-jerk reactions are posited without tought or research. They should be regarded with as much care and thought that went into creating them – none whatsoever.

January 7, 2011

Glenn Beck: Why Did Congress Censor the Constitution During Its Reading Today? (VIDEO)

Today, as the first session of the 112th Congress started, they began by a reading of the U.S. Constitution. Well, at least parts of it. They left out portions of it because apparently they felt some might find those sections offensive, so it wasn’t done for brevity. What section might you think they left out due to sensitivity? Why, it’s the “3/5th’s Clause” part, silly!

This clause falls into the same category as the following items:

  • Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
  • The D.R.E.A.M. Act
  • Petition to Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide
  • Petition To End Womens Suffrage
  • American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
  • On their face, these all sound nice and reasonable, but they’re all misnomers. If not misnomers, they’re at least deceptively named to the average uneducated American (which, by some accounts, is a large percentage of folks everywhere).


    Boiling it down, the “3/5th’s Clause” in the Constutition does state the black men were three-fifths of a man. Bad, right? Well, if you don’t know the background and reason for the clause, then you would be correct. Sadly, a lot of Americans stop right there. And apparently an educated man like Lanny Davis is also ignorant of the truth behind this clause. Concurrently, the Republicans in the House who decided to skip this clause for fear of offending anyone are also ignorant of the same facts. It’s a very sad day for those of us out here who are familiar with the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and all the other Founding documents.

    You see, the “3/5th’s Clause” was written as a really ingenious way for the Founders to begin the end of slavery in America. Here is why the clause was written:

    The Three-Fifths compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the population of slaves would be counted for enumeration purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives. It was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman.

    Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College. The final compromise of counting “all other persons” as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but increased it over the northern position.

    It is a very sad day that not only folks like Lanny Davis have no clue about the Founders’ intent in the Constitution, but worse than that, members of Congress are sworn in thusly:

    “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God. ”

    So help me God, indeed. Help US God if these fools don’t learn the Constitution before they start legislating. I will give them some leeway this time; both Democrats and Republicans. I have some hope that the new classes on the U.S. Constitution that are going to be held for all freshmen Congressmen and women will help resolve these issues. Now if we can only get the more senior congress-critters to attend, that would be sweet.

    NOTE: I focused this editorial on the 3/5th’s Clause and not on Huck Finn being edited. That part is self-explanatory in the video and I agree the books should not be changed or censored in any way. If we don’t know our history, we are doomed to repeat it. Leave the lessons on morals and culture to the parents, not the teachers.

    August 20, 2010

    Red Eye Slams Emily’s List New Anti-Palin ‘Mama Grizzlies’ Pitiful Ad (VIDEO)

    On Wednesday night’s Red Eye, guests included Matt McCall, Kimberly Guilfoyle, and Joe DeVito. Point of discussion was the new “Emily’s List” ad attempting (poorly, I might add) to parody and lambast Sarah Palin’s “Mama Grizzlies” ad.


    If this is all the left has to fight with, I almost feel pity for them. And “almost” is not quite correct, because I don’t really pity them. LOL @ PDS from the left.

    © 2012 MsUnderestimated All rights reserved - Wallow theme v0.46.5 by ([][]) TwoBeers - Powered by WordPress - Have fun!