The Old Red Lady of the Old Gray Lady Lashes Out the Other Old Red Lady and Billy too.

We can always   derive some new slants on current political themes and get feedback on errant trail balloons from reading the political essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]. The Old Red Lady, that moniker given the Maureen Dowd, owning more to her electric hairdo than her latent Leninism, is attempting to change ‘change public opinion’ using, what else, the “c” [change] word. If she was a warrior in one of her past incarnations, her trophy belt would sport a bale of scalps from her political enemies. In the print world, few others have a body count more impressive than  hers. Today, the Dowdy Dowd hammers the Clintons and particularly Billy Jeff.

Here we go:

“Unity was spared the banality of unanimity.” [2]-- ‘It’s Over, Lady!’ By Maureen Dowd

Whatever this might mean, and there are legions of interpretations, we are not spared such spurious wordsmithing by this author along with her oblique literary antecedents. This opening line is almost redundant, but, then, this is the New York Times.

“Just as Hillary was testing out the unfamiliar familiarity “Barack and me” Friday and talking about “his grace and his grit,” Carmella began loudly booing and waving her sign.

“We want Hillary!” screamed the 57-year-old retired ad saleswoman and Clinton delegate.”

Well, the quest for unanimity part has been deciphered.  So, what do we say about those who support one who got essentially half the votes in the primary??

““It’s over, lady!” yelled some Obama supporters a few yards away.” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Now, what does this mean?

“Standing between the Sharks and the Jets, David Axelrod took pity on an older friend of Carmella’s who was suffering from aridity in the Unity humidity. The chief Obama strategist fetched a glass of water and brought it to the woman, who was wearing five Hillary buttons.

This amenity did not stop the disunity. Carmella and her friends continued to cry, “Nobama!” “We love you, Hillary!” and “We need Hillary!” as Barack Obama sat onstage on a stool behind his former rival, his finger studiously at his lips.”

What this appears to be is division and unrest amongst the Democrats. This is apparently a nasty fracture in the monolithic racist facade erected by The Changeling and his Jeremiah Wright Homies. We need some crack repair or some mouth plugs or to run some mandatory sensitivity courses for disgruntled Democrats who think Obama is really Hussein O’Bozo.

So, what does at the NYT suggest they [or we?] do about that?

There are now described and documented some unseemly antics by some Hillary activist named Carmella who refused to genuflect in the golden glow of Obama and her unsophisticated words are recounted drably in this referenced text, but  the outcome was:

“Afterward, Carmella got her idol to autograph her sign, telling the smiling Hillary, “You’re going to be the next president.”

She told The Times that she and her friends were all voting for John McCain and that Hillary was just doing what she had to do.” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

If we recall the exciting 2000 election history of the Ralph Nader Circus, the nadir[3] of EcoNazism[4] of recent history, we can calculate that a mere 2% dissent in the party will give the election to McCain. Thus, the NYT elves must plaster this crack in the dike and keep the simpletons and droolers buried in the leftist sack crafted by Obama and his overt racists.  Didn’t this happen during the George McGovern Era?? Bill Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro[5] are the two highest visibility racists in the Party of Democrats.

““But I have a gut feeling,” she said with macabre faith, “that something’s going to happen so that she becomes the nominee.”

This could mean several things.

“It’s hard to fathom why Obama should be mau-maued[6] into paying off the debt that Hillary and Bill accrued attacking and undermining him, while mismanaging the campaign and their nearly quarter-billion-dollar war chest so horribly that one Hillaryland insider told The New Republic that it bordered on fraud.

But the former president can’t stand being a loser, so he’s taking it out on the winner. When it comes to Bill, there’s a lot of vanity but very little humility in Unity.”

I think he and Hill won 8 straight and now they spent 250 big one and lost?? No IOUs left?

The Old Red Lady has NO solution to this mess other than to tell Billary to shut up and flake off as she has done in the past.[7] Together they have 30 years of political victories and they should just fade away as old soldiers might? Sure.

B. Hussein O’Bozo has torpedoed the party and now the fires of reverse racism start to burn. All the Old Gray Lady can think to do is crank out protoobamic Pinch Pustules [8]on the op-ed pages and hope they can avoid bankruptcy before November. Recall that they endorsed Hillary in the beginning. A new little taste of overt racism suddenly appeared on the political block that forced them to switch to the candidate with the farthest left stance and the one whose toadies raved about racism like rabid dogs. Jeremiah Wright certainly has more sway with the New York Times than Bill Clinton, now sour in the grape and thought. Al Sharpton has now gained respectability.

Let us frolic thru the follies!!

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Krugman of the NYT Condones, Predicts and Celebrates High Gas Prices.

We can always   derive some historical and future political theorems  from  the political essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- as they attempt to ‘form public opinion’          or justify the antics of their ideological partners in Congress by suggesting new and sweeping changes that ultimately lead to socialism and the loss of Constitutional Rights.  Today, the notion that oil prices may decline is pooh-poohed.

“Congress has always had a soft spot for “experts” who tell members what they want to hear, whether it’s supply-side economists declaring that tax cuts increase revenue or climate-change skeptics insisting that global warming is a myth.”[2]-- Fuels on the Hill By PAUL KRUGMAN June 27, 2008.  [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Read “stooges” for experts here as in the case of Alar where some dim bulb from Hollywood named Meryl Streep, mounted the stand and  testified using her what—talents?[3] She must be some kind of ‘expert’ on something. But, she was wrong.  Using Krugman as an analogy, she is probably as good or betters a biochemist or pharmacologist as our krugmaniacal writer for the NYT is skilled in elementary economics.

Notice that the only two ‘expert theories’ mentioned in his opening burst are implicitly counterfeit as they favor the unacceptable supply-side economics or dump on climate-change critics who expose the phony science[4] in their plans.[5] This is typical in a propagandistic screed where some hot points are included in the opening verses and used to misdirect the reader. The New York Times is skilled in such propaganda. [6] These theorems are false as supply-side economics works well but to the detriment of the left and the EcoNazis are a phony as a Frank the Crank Rich [7]op-ed piece.

So, the propagandistic props are set up for the freak show:

“Right now, the welcome mat is out for analysts who claim that out-of-control speculators are responsible for $4-a-gallon gas.”

This is as phony as writing long essays that disprove that Barack O’Bozo is not a Muslim. All leftists celebrate the high gas prices and are going to the mat on this one.

“Back in May, Michael Masters, a hedge fund manager, made a big splash when he told a Senate committee that speculation is the main cause of rising prices for oil and other raw materials.”

This is like saying that howling dogs are responsible for the high cost of dog food. Masters is nobody and everybody knows that. His opinions are worthless except for those who foolishly bought shares in his scam. The role of speculators is usually to flatter out highs and lows in markets and the impact of speculation on ‘bubbles’ is unclear[8] They are not to blame, but what is the truth worth in politics and especially the New York Times in an election year?

“And it was John McCain, not Barack Obama, who recently said this: “While a few reckless speculators are counting their paper profits, most Americans are coming up on the short end — using more and more of their hard-earned paychecks to buy gas.”

Why are politicians so eager to pin the blame for oil prices on speculators? Because it lets them believe that we don’t have to adapt to a world of expensive gas”

McCain is a moron who needs a nose ring and mindlessly mouths political points. But, the central point of this screed is that we have to adapt to a world of expensive gas!!

Let us stay focused on the leftist dogma here.

We will not have expensive gas if we drill and expand our oil supply. Krugman has major problems with supply and demand schedules as he prefers a command economy that reeks of the famous Moscow Central Planning Circus [9]that wrecked the USSR and its disnimble satellites. We have perhaps ¼ of all the oil on the planet available to us, but the left needs an economic crisis to blame on capitalism and get control. Their phony tax dodge is Climate Change, a transparent version of EcoNazism.

There was even a call to nationalize the oil companies by leftists such as Maxine Waters.[10]  Cruz Bustamanteof CA also called for the state to seize oil companies. He is a hate-twisted Stalinist-style Hispanic supremacist. [11]They seem to have backed off this nationalization campaign temporarily. It will return. Maxine is not the brightest star in the leftist orbit, but she is as vindictive and hateful  as Cruz and will do her part to grunt and grab some wealth for her party.

“O.K., let’s talk about the reality.”`

O.K., let’s talk about the ‘reality’ of the situation after the stipulations and preconditions have been set up by Krugman.

“In any case, one thing is clear: the hyperventilation over oil-market speculation is distracting us from the real issues.”

A fact. This is precarious as our krugmaniacal propaganda artist gives up a neat leftist political vector to sally forth on something else. But, all is well.

The prediction that conforms to the leftist dreams:

“Regulating futures markets more tightly isn’t a bad idea, but it won’t bring back the days of cheap oil. Nothing will. Oil prices will fluctuate in the coming years — I wouldn’t be surprised if they slip for a while as consumers drive less, switch to more fuel-efficient cars, and so on — but the long-term trend is surely up.”

This is a notion that resembles sulfurous swamp gas or perhaps the glitter of fireflies in the night. Our ‘economist’ here ignores the wild antics to drill and drill by everybody else in the world except us even including Cuba. Eric Sevareid, in his closing piece for CBS News after the Peanut Jimmy Follies , predicted an ‘oil glut.’ That happened and oil went down to $14 a barrel for a long while. Where there is money some bozo will put diamonds or guns or furs on the drum and do some bidness. The supply will increase and world prices will fall unless politicians impose huge taxes on fuels, which they will certainly do. Capitalism is fueled by fuel and energy and that must be severely limited so socialists can wreck the US as they did most of Europe.

And the tautological finale!

“But we won’t have even the beginnings of a rational energy policy if we listen to people who assure us that we can just wish high oil prices away.”

High oil prices no matter what!! That is what the leftists want and they derive high taxes now and those will soar with their phony Cap and Trade Follies.[12]

As the dog returns to its vomit, [13]the leftist returns to the sacred Tax Base for their survival and future.  And, this goes on as long as people are foolish enough to vote for the idiot Marxist stooges known as liberal Democrats.   All the Democrats have is your money and they want a lot more.

The liberals will say and do anything to get more political power and grab more wealth. Anything at all.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The Road to Social Success, Peace and Justice: California has NO Vision!

Government Cannot Solve Society’s Problems.

This is a general refutation to an errant satire-oriented blog post entitled:  The Road to Social Success, Peace and Justice: California has the Vision![1] and refutes the inane and vapid  Marxian logic and phony social theorems and propaganda  trumpeted  therein.  Modern government should rely upon its citizens to provide talent, services and taxes in exchange for its governance. California has not conducted any proper experiments in this social arena lately and San Francisco is now the model for a fraudulent and debauched society. The government is obviously obligated to supply all the needs of its citizenry in one limited form or another, almost always indirectly, and to educate the polis as to the correct or preferred conduct for all.  The government should enable individuals to achieve success with their own resources and form their own identities with their own property and private wealth. Although violent crime, sloth, sodomy and drug addiction are crimes against humanity, they are frequently hailed as progressive in San Francisco and must be punished by strict laws, public executions and incarceration.   Nancy Pelosi[2], the Queen of the Massage Parlors protects any and all of her subjects who participate in degeneracy, theft, illegal immigration and worse.

Any form of indecent conduct must be accepted as a perverted individual choice thus damaging the fundamental rights of every citizen.  Somehow, sodomizing children or forcing them into slavery and prostitution is not considered a crime or even indecent in the City by the Bay. [3] San Francisco ranks among the most evil places in the world for social tribulations and surpasses even the legendary excesses of Sodom and Gomorrah. Government should address this problem—not support and celebrate evil. But, certain unacceptable social actions degrade the quality and inefficiency of any government by creating the need for special and unnecessary services to correct these evils.   This is a perverted source of tax revenue. Sloth, sodomy, drug addiction and political activism in educational institutions along with AIDs infections and their public celebrations are examples of these general social diseases that create excessive government.  San Francisco has made essentially no progress in the social arena since the arrival of the Spanish Conquistadors that might be construed as above the minimal levels of barbarism compared to most other places in the world.  This city is a financial and medical burden to America. The government can not satisfactorily address any pressing problems in our society if the wealth is confiscated by leftist and so-called egalitarian governments as they attempt to do in the City by the Bay. Taxation, always the first action of leftist government, is the road to inefficiency, waste and corruption in our society. Taxation of the confiscatory sort allows the incompetent to make decisions. Education could show us the way to peace and prosperity, but all persons in our society must be educated about spending and taxation and the evils of liberalism and the squandering of the common wealth.  San Francisco has the worst imaginable plans to for their citizens and that malfunction needs to be made public along with a monolithic transformation of the current government.

The Needs of the Citizen Comes First.

Every citizen has certain strengths and weaknesses as defined by accepted norms of conduct, inherited skills, home training and are analyzed in detail by well-defined by standardized test scores patterned from the scientifically verified Bell Curve[4].  This process has been verified and has been used with success since 1906. There is an obvious distribution of cognitive skills among all individuals in all societies that serves to convincingly refute the notion of ‘equality’ as the leftists define the term. It turns out that certain leftist views of social conduct, particularly the choices to appease the Marxists and socialists and cause the labors of citizens to be misdirected, are socially and intellectually bankrupt and this fact need to be emphasized in government and education.  The political term ‘equality’ is used to enlist the votes and support of the lower classes and criminal elements thus confounding the simple notion that we are all equal. We are not equal.  The tautological and perpetual quest for ‘equality’ actually generates and validates the gross equalities they hypocritically harp about. These inequalities produce self-designed opportunistic cracks in the social fabric and thus create false strata in our society that are conveniently utilized by the overt racists and far leftist radicals who desire power.

Equality and Inequalities caused by Bad Government.

The far left invents and celebrates inequalities using poverty, racism, sodomy and capitalism.  They exploit these differences and promote the struggles in this farce as they inflict this wreckage upon society. They deal successfully in political agitation and unrest. The Marxists have murdered 100,000,000 people since 1917 and this salient fact ought to provide us with a comprehensive narrative of their notions of government.  Cuba and North Korea receive only praise from the left. They are out to corrupt our society. Those who trumpet a perverted view of love and society and those who think that the personal choice of using drugs,  boundless sex with anonymous partners in bath houses  and the criminal theft of misappropriated property or abortion are regarded as  crimes and their views  appear to be in the vast  majority of our society in places like San Francisco.  They believe that government can actually solve many social programs. They will vote to change our entire society if they can for their own aggrandizement as Stalin did.  The liberal courts in California will transform the laws if the voters stray too far towards the narrow leftist path. The left would ruin our world as they have effectively done in Europe and Asia and Africa.  The left-liberals and their Marxian cousins cannot survive in a successful economic environment as they cannot generate wealth on their own. They must act as functional parasites to exist and gain power.

While the most important duty of government is education—second only to  law enforcement as one would expect --the resources devoted to the desperate criminal actions of a few provide unnecessary and wasteful  jobs for many citizens who must be enlisted to serve to clean up this mess.  Crime, sloth, sodomy, venereal disease, AIDS, the homeless and illegal aliens produce thousands of useless jobs for the city.  San Francisco has attained an incredibly negative score on the health and social services issues with an unimpressive  and an  outlandish list of phony ‘social services’ is listed  in the footnotes. [5] We need more efficient jobs and fewer limitations on our individual life styles. The leftists want to control essentially everything especially speech and would hungrily burn this essay if they c0uld.  They cannot stand open criticism and dangle on revenge as part of there psychological constitution. Government is limited in the services it can supply without consuming too much of the domestic product—thus government should be as small as possible.  We can have a great society with full employment and benefits for all if we force the far left to yield most of their ill-gotten controls on our society and force them to work for a living.  They can probably perform acceptable menial tasks in many areas but never in education, administration or in the courts. They are the epitome of failure. They are societal parasites.

The essential services required to support individuals who wish to run their own lives without government interference are only provided by small revenues and fees and by lightly taxing those who have worked hard for their families and society. We do not want this money to be instantaneously wasted by liberals or diverted to degenerate activities.  Workers, tourists and businesses should pay appropriate taxes so that the city can provide agencies and services for the criminals and the poor. They could pay much less and have even better government without the drug-induced leftist government. The minimum wage in San Francisco is an excessive $9.36/hour, [6] which is so high as to burden the tax base revenues and forces the government to improperly function. This is not, however, even a reasonable wage as it is arbitrarily and politically determined by political fiat and guessing and does not include any due consideration of business costs, fees, taxes and profits so it might be much lower, probably $6 or $7 an hour.  The proper rate, of course, is always determined by supply and demand. The tax rate on payroll expense is 1.5%.[7] The city sales tax is 8.50%.[8] A high minimum wage and subsequent high progressive taxes now degrade the city services and they must beg money from federal funds to escape the inevitable turmoil of bankruptcy. Typically, the leftists run up high debt and then pander for a bailout as New York City did.  We expect California to financially collapse and then have the federal government pay for their perversions.

Taxes

Higher taxes are always destructive as they give power and unwarranted resources to the incompetents in the left.  A detail account of leftist financial policy is essentially one long brown streak. We need very low marginal tax rates to recover the money and land that the leftists have stolen from the decent working people. The individual is more than competent to direct his or her own funds and the notion that government programs can solve social programs is a farce notably grounded in the ugly history of failures of such notions.   Social Security is a disgrace and is hailed the summit of a leftist social program.  We must always be reminded of Moscow Central Planning in the USSR for examples of how to ruin a society.  Many on the left think Karl Marx had the proper method for addressing wealth and its distribution.

For the rich, we need a 20% tax rate, or so, and 5% cap for all profits over 1 million dollars per year.  It is only the financially successful person than can direct resources to growth, new business opportunities and to engender prosperity.  The notion that the socially unfit, perverts, criminals or the cognitively disnimble can effectively address finances, business and taxation is a sad joke. Giving profits to the frequently drug-besotted and intellectually degrading left always wastes precious resources. We can cut costs and lower tax revenues by eliminating most social programs.  The object of a social program is to create dependency—not to solve social problems. Many people have to be shown, forcefully if necessary, that they can work, even in the menial arena and avoid taking drugs.  But, as long as drug addicts can vote, a mistake, they can vote for sloth and drug rehab programs. Degenerates should not be given the vote.

Profits by individuals in the current San Francisco paradigm are achieved only after excessive coddling of the poor, enduring the burdens of socialist and Marxian governments and toleration of sadistic criminals that is the central resource of liberalism.  Leftist governments induce inequalities in our lives with the obvious purpose of partition and chaos and these notions need to be controlled by the voters.  It is a good ideal to vote against any leftist in any form of government.  Egalitarianism should be considered a crime against humanity.

 Personal Freedoms, Drugs and their Use.

Citizens must be able to choose their lifestyles and recreational modes of life. But, the celebrated illicit drugs and their proffered mind-expanding effects are destructive and a wasteful individual choice that ruins lives and the government should strongly supervise those druggies in all personal and public matters. San Francisco has a Drug Court (SFDC)[9] and the court prevents any substantial progress of the treatment of those persons who elect to abuse themselves with recreational substances. This is a crime of bad government. Many who are arrested for choosing this disgusting and perverted lifestyle that satisfies only them are let loose uncured and unattended and that is inhumane.  San Francisco has a Drug Court has a phony record as stated:

“Since 1996, over 900 participants have graduated from the San Francisco Drug Court.  Among them, ninety-three percent of the graduates had a stable source of income upon program completion, 91% had obtained stable housing, and several participants enrolled in school or vocational training while participating in the program. Twenty-percent of the graduates had reestablished contact with their minor children upon graduation.”

This is a phenomenal disgrace and this synthetic legal circus requires hundreds of redundant jobs to supply incompetents for kangaroo courts and unnecessary city employees. The actual rate of recidivism is about 98% so this does not include repeats.  Drug addiction is the surrogate for religion in San Francisco.  They want to feel good as a first response to any issue. The government wants to legalize or decriminalize drugs to keep their supporters happy and focused on their addictions. Drugs and stronger than people, rehabil9ition is not a reality, so the high drug addiction rates support leftist governments. Most of our administrative jobs should be oriented so as to help our citizens avoid such disgusting and destructive personal choices and lifestyles. We need fewer such inefficient and perverted social services that trumpet perversions and drug addictions and those agencies and the attendant task forces should consume fewer resources. Using illicit drugs is a basic affront to humanity and the medical treatment of the predictable and unfortunate side effects is an excessive burden of government. Drug addicts should be given menial jobs and forced to pay for the costs of their social perversions. We have to admit after decades of research and futile attempts that drug addicts have no hope of a cure and need to be closely supervised and prevented from infecting the rest of society with their repulsive afflictions.  Drugs are stronger than people.

While considered legal, chic and socially desirable by some progressive cities and counties and certain elements of the federal government, the drug sharing, fellowship, camaraderie and the concomitant personal choice to enjoy dangerous recreational substances actually degrades our society.  The pursuit of whatever ‘feels good’ is a social defect and psychological aberration, a serious mental affliction and can be considered as the general notion of a parasite. The ‘addict,’ a medical  definition  of a practice  that  destroys  individual freedom, needs special education, counseling, and the cooperation  of law enforcement, medical services and many other special services at low cost.  All these services are now, unfortunately, paid for by the government and thusly create worthless jobs for liberals. They degrade and waste the resources of the cities to ‘correct’ what some citizens voluntarily do to themselves. Societies need to be socially content and recreational drugs bring sorrow and despair and amplify hopelessness. Those persons who thrive in criminality such as drug traffickers need to be hunted down and incarcerated or deported. Liberalism is a societal disease.

We need to eliminate all illegal drugs and provide counseling for their use among those who suffer from the ills of liberalism and racism and the abuse they hurl at the white majority as they practice capitalism.  Drug addicts need to be isolated from society and reallocated in distant lands if necessary.  Drug cartels need to be obliterated by force. We need mandatory sensitivity courses for those who cannot appreciate capitalism and business and moral social conduct.

Immigration

There are thousands of human boundaries and fences in this world. The world is not supposed to be a system of societies with open doors and welcome wagons designed to coddle, praise and extract political support from the criminals who sneak into our society to plunder and burden our system.  All persons must be allowed to own private property in concert and harmony with the plants and animals on this globe and no leftist or environmental group should prevent the successful from enjoying a decent life in the US or elsewhere.  We have made the world rich with capitalism. We can make it richer. To protect the working class and the successful and support their human rights, no San Francisco city tax revenues or any other kind of money should be spent in assisting authorities in enforcing unfair or excessive tax laws.[10] Those laws are forms of institutional racism, paternal essays in crude bigotry, leftist greed and a crime against a good society. The influx of illegal aliens means that new jobs must be created to keep and protect our citizens from the evils of those   who come from other countries and who would normally be considered to be felons and perhaps deported.  San Francisco has found the way to become a haven for illegal aliens, some even fictional [like Joaquin Murietta for whom some street was named[11]], thugs like Cesar Chavez [I was a witness to his works in Tulare County[12]] and adherents of a degenerated society through unacceptable government and by ignoring the law.  All this crime brings power to the far leftists who are perpetually elected by degenerates, the homeless, illegal aliens and worse.

We have enormous wealth and we must use it to create a new society for those young people and redress the criminal sins of the socialist past. Crimes committed by undocumented workers and other persons are really unnecessary crimes, and they do waste a large number of government jobs and corrupt the tax base by high city taxes.  Those who embezzle the money and property using phony tax methods and fees from the upper class are committing crimes against society; they are simply stealing their self-determined share of prosperity that was created by the successful. They are parasites. Persons have no right to steal resources provided by business and a decent government. This criminal system is as obtuse as the racist notion of reparations and its remedy is way overdue.

Prostitution

Love is not usually a crime but those people who choose to enjoy sex at any age or with any person, child or their pets are perverted criminals. Tax hikes are crimes. The city of San Francisco has a phony social plan to “Stop the Enforcement of the Prostitution Laws and Bring Protection to Sex Workers”[13] The city has a Task Force on Prostitution that considers such practices by citizens and others as a basic human right and the apprehension, persecution and incarceration of those persons who are merely plying their craft as costly, unjust and ineffective. [14] The sex workers suffer ‘humiliation’ from being apprehended by the police and also their clients, which happens in proper police enforcement of the laws.[15] Sex is sold cheaply on the streets on the streets of San Francisco and police actions to enforce the prostitution laws are reasonable and just. We can wonder if muggers are ‘humiliated’ when apprehended by police.

Sex workers need reeducation and rehabilitation t o live productive lives in a just society.  Those who are infected must be isolated from society until shown to be disease free and then retrained with close supervision before being allowed back into a decent society.

Murder and Other Crimes.

The use of force is always unfortunate. Violent force and murder is frequently excused by leftists as a form of protest and economic self defense against capitalism and a perverted way to express outrage and envy against those persons who are successful and acquire wealth.  Criminals conspire with egalitarian legal forces to harass and harm the citizens for money and assets and force them into litigation and frustration. Violence is caused by drugs, sloth and liberalism, inter alia, and the unfortunate suppression of conservative rights as the criminals seek to share drugs and other nefarious activities among themselves at our expense.  The murder rate is expectedly rising,[16] but this only calls for more prisons and social services for the perpetrators, police, health services, counseling and education. This secretive criminal society is a major source of income and political power for the sordid left in social dung heaps like San Francisco and Chicago and Baltimore.  Drugs need to be eliminated and drug addiction cured by abstinence. Guns need to be carried [17]by all non felons for personal protection, especially when associating with the criminal forces that annoy the citizens.

We must provide our citizens with all resource s they require so as to prevent more violence. Honest citizens who intervene during the commission of violent crimes and dispatch muggers, felons, thieves and other parasites must be held innocent and free of any legal actions. Those who kinetically dispatch perverts or criminals during violet or perverted criminal acts should be eligible for tax rebates depending on the seriousness of the case.  Many existing laws must be repealed and the police forces need to be strengthened and their focus redirected toward the real criminals of our society: drug dealers, crooked politicians and illegal aliens.[18] The FBI, DEA, IRS and other agencies need to be honored and celebrated in California. Capital punishment should be used for all second offenders of violet crimes or drug addiction or sexual predation with no chance of appeal. No pervert ever returned from the dead to commit another crime.

As to crime, San Francisco needs to be considered not a city or a county but a temporary containment facility for perverts, lunatics, criminals, the mentally disnimble, Marxists, Islamo-Fascists and other social parasites.  Those who are leprotically attached to the sordid society in San Francisco should be exported to remote containment facilities in Africa, South East Asia or perhaps French Guinea for isolation and retraining. To minimize costs and prevent the outsourcing of perversion, the drug culture and worse, we could pay certain governments in  Africa, say Sierra Leone  or the Katanga Province to care for our ‘citizens’ at low cost. We could relocate them to social and drug reeducation camps in those places and pay the local government $100 per San Francisco citizen per annum with the proviso that if they escape or die the payments will cease the next year. For those who die of natural causes or while attempting to escape can be buried by the local government under contract for a fee of $250 after submitting proof of identify and the death of their clients . The degenerates need to be isolated from decent citizens.

AIDS

Love is frequently a crime depending on the way it is expressed.  Free love should be considered a perversion and the practice severely encumbered by laws and agents of the government. HIV infection and the diseases associated with this personal and private pursuit of individual social preferences are disgusting choices with expensive and disastrous social consequences.  Perversions remain some of the main attractions in San Francisco and these degenerate practices and celebrations have destroyed hundreds and thousands of decent jobs, infected thousands with lethal STDs and caused untold deaths. The CIA did not create AIDS. Any belief in this outrageous, but leftist endowed cowardly lie should not be tolerated.  AIDS was celebrated as a ‘progressive’ life style and the bath houses that were temporarily closed were opened with much fanfare so the disease could be spread around the world. The decent citizens need fewer encounters with infected persons so that they can enjoy a better and longer life and avoid this disease forced upon them by perverts and evil left-wing government. People need a way to express their love and affection without oppressive liberal government interfering with their lives.  There are numerous abnormal sex acts—that degrade the concept of love. There are numerous social and legal aid societies who support those who want to exploit and enjoy their particular disgusting sexual preferences.[19]  City commerce is degraded and tourism sours as drug treatment and other unnecessary social services create more and more taxes and create new and worthless problems.  Out of deferred concern, there are numerous services for assisted dying and other options in the city. [20] The age of consent for love should be strictly enforced by law with a zero-tolerance. Love is not ageless and children need parental love not sexual exploitation for money. Tourists and police forces should be outfitted with nets and yellow gloves for their personal protection when they confront AIDS activists and their supporters.

Education of the Appropriate Masses.

‘Education’ is the phony paradigm of the left and is merely the tautological intonation of political slogans that are based in belligerent ignorance, socialism, reverse racism and prevarication. Social degenerates like Dianne Feinstein want to ban criticism against the left on talk radio. [21] They teach only primitive leftist politics that reek of tribalism, totalitarianism and bigotry. The liberals and all far-left persons need to be firmly diseducated from their narrow Marxian training and their attention redirected to an examination of their intrinsic social evils by a new form of education.  They should be prevented from voting. They should take extensive retraining courses and then pass strict oral and written exams on decent and moral conduct.  Honest and decent and productive citizens must be appreciated and the leftists and their victims  reeducated as to how their phony leftist utopian and egalitarian  adversaries  have created a society  that has caused misery, financial bankruptcy and suffering around the world. They should not be eligible for voting privileges until they pass extensive psychological standardized tests. The citizens have a fundamental right to get as much education as they desire to pursue their own careers without government interference. The government should provide educational facilities only to those who can pass strict standardized exams as explained in detail in the Bell Curve. Educational resources must not be wasted on those who do not posses the cognitive skills for advanced learning and skilled jobs and careers.  IQ levels and the highly-correlated SAT scores should be used to select individuals for higher education so they can be properly matched to jobs and careers. Educational facilities that teach leftist politics, reverse racism, the racist and black supremacist Black Liberation Theology, socialism and political confrontation must be abolished or defunded and severely taxed as a cancer upon the capitalist society. The socialists and their lesser qualified Marxian fellow-travelers need to be reeducated as to the following:

[1] If you have money and wealth and property above the median that is proof that you attained these gains fairly and the government commends you for your success.  Those persons who live below the median are satisfactory and must be considered successful if only moderate contributors only  if they are not involved in drugs, criminal activity or perverted activities or lifestyles. The successful  must invest in the future of the capitalist society   by forming new businesses and funding moral charities and schools that teach integrity and good sense and the work ethic and reject  the  leftist teachings and their social sins of the past.  Those who are successful must lead our society.  The druggies and losers should not vote or have any voice  or jobs in government or business. Inheritances taxes must be abolished but all property and wealth derived from perversions and crimes by the left and their victims must be returned to the government before or shortly after death.

[2] Marxism and its various congeners such as socialism and progressive liberalism are evil as they exploit the masses and create poverty and disease. The government needs to control commerce, jobs and taxes so that the general elements of capitalism can enhance and expand our society. The government can provide food and shelter to degenerates in limited cases as a temporary charity.  Major corporations must be celebrated as the key growth engine of our society by the government.

[3] Education is the key to a great society and those who prefer to accept the delinquent teachings of egalitarian government must be reeducated until they agree with the proper and correct goals of capitalism and limited government or remanded to a reeducation center. Education must be free and open to all persons at all ages and for any length of time provided they have the minimal intrinsic cognitive skills. This is about 1/5 of our society by population fraction. Colleges should be enlightened societies devoted to skill development and free from counterfeit leftist rules and phony academic demands such as racial sensitivity courses and the phony theatre of the lunatic global warming types. Examinations, particularly standardized tests, should be mandatory for the continuation of education and sloth and ignorance must not be allowed to poison inquiry and self expression. There is every reason to publicly issue grades and test results. Capitalists should use grades as a metric to rehabilitate the poor, the lazy and criminal elements, and assist persons of color with good jobs and appropriate training programs.

[4] The rights of the people must not be abridged and personal choices about recreational drug use, sex, are self-expression should subject to strict laws and penalties.  Jobs must be based on cognitive skills with no association with agendas, skin color, political connections or quotas. Certain professions or businesses or government may never be forced to select students or employees based on quotas or skin color and certainly not by any race-normed academic metrics. Only the arrogant or insane or those consumed with leftist toadyism think that the average citizen could ever be a great brain surgeon, court judge or engineer.

[5] Health care and rehabilitation for disease must be provided at reasonable costs to the user and available to all only in limited cases such as charity. Capitalism has enhanced and expanded our foods and air and created numerous wonders and growth so workers and entrepreneurs can pay for their health care avoiding socialist punitive taxes.  Those who cannot effectively contribute to society should enjoy only minimal health care.

[6] Persons of color who claim they have been suppressed and marginalized for the last 500 years in the Western Hemisphere must be held responsible for their lack of education, sloth, and criminal activity if appropriate.  Those persons of color who have been brainwashed by slick propaganda to believe that their deficiencies and failures are caused by decent citizens must be reeducated. The reparations movements that hold white males responsible for events that happened 300 to 7000 years ago must be expunged and an accurate history incorporated in their training so that they can correct and remediate unfair and biased view of our society.  All persons should have a vote count determined by dividing their tax returns by $10,000 after rounding down. Half our citizens are not contributors and should not be allowed to vote.  This will restore peace and justice to our society and form an inclusive and modern society by discounting the votes of degenerates and the unsuccessful. Failure is celebrated by liberals, but is a burden upon our society.

[6] Crimes that are committed by the ‘poor’ people with the excuse that they are forced to commit them for survival are the worst of criminals and mere cannon fodder for the sordid left.  Many people simply steal money for fun, drugs and sex and proffer the phony excuse that they need food for their families as they cannot get jobs in business. This is really theft supported by politics; it is social injustice. Any bum or parasite can use this excuse and collect nothing but praise from the leftists in power. Persons who are felons should have their voting rights suspended forever after the first offense.

[7] Private property is a privilege for all those enlightened persons who earn their own living.   Private property should be limited to those who are not a burden on society. Property unfairly attained from the evils of government by seizing the assets of honest citizens or businesses must be returned to those same people with ample tax credits and profusely written regrets. Appropriate tax credits should be issued with the apology. Corporations are the financial and social basis for any just society and all common stocks and bonds should be reserved for the people who purchased them and be free of taxes.  Those societies that do not permit corporations [Cuba, North Korea and the remnants of the USSR and now Venezuela] have police states, ration food and shoot their citizens for holding opposing political views. This is the ultimate vision of the leftists in San Francisco. This must change.

Retirement accounts and IRAs, particularly of the tax-free Roth type, must be assigned to the people for redistribution to themselves or family or friends according to their particular decisions   without government interference.  We have to eliminate double or multiple taxation.  The proceeds from all tax-paid investments should be tax free.  Proceeds from Social Security, a Marxian wreckage of the Roosevelt Era and a demonstrated failure, must be tax free. Social Security should be privatized and optional for all persons to decide. Social Security is going broke and must be ultimately terminated as the ultimate failure of socialism.

[8] Capitalism and business have created the best societies on our planet and the oceans and forests and savannahs will continue to be bountiful with proper care. The phony scare chronicles that predict we will be forced into poverty and cannibalism[22] because of corporate greed and rising temperatures appeal only to liberals and their mentally sluggish victims. This is just a phony tax gimmick. [23]The air is already loaded with carbon dioxide because this is a natural part of human and plant metabolism.  Phony correlations between temperature changes and CO2 levels are simply propaganda and a favorite social poison of liberalism. The excess use of energy is irresponsible and we should not waste resources. Energy production must be only slightly taxed so that profits cannot be made from this precious resource and reinvested in nuclear energy and more drilling for oil.  Corporations must be celebrated and government controls minimized in almost all cases.

[9] The government is never the preferred employer and any person who wants a job should have one that fits their personal preferences and is commensurate with his or her education and work ethic.  The government should always be of a minimum size and have very limited powers.  Most laws now in effect except those for the control of crime should be revoked or vacated.  A ‘livable wage’ is a political slogan derived from the failures of socialism. The notion that people ought to have equal and free medical care and retirement benefits is a socialist theme that has been discredited in  Europe and elsewhere.  Persons should be able to compete for jobs that they like and not be burdened with quotas, sensitivity training sessions that pander to the mentally disnimble or contribute to other gross inefficiencies of socialism.  Employers and particularly the governments should demand that potential employees demonstrate certain minimum competencies in math, reading, history and other skills.  Workers need to assume responsibility for their own investments, profits, homes and hobbies or any other legal goals as capitalists and invest or found new businesses as they wish.  The work week should be as long as it needs to be with the consent and cooperation of workers and management. Excessive vacations and other fluff benefits, an evil of socialism, must be strictly limited for those employees in government. Government employees must take and maintain acceptable scores on standardized tests to retain their jobs.  Those employees who fail random drug tests must be terminated and their status as a drug taker made public as we do for sexual predators and other perverts.  Government employees must be responsible for efficient work, conduct and work output. Taxes on all forms of capitalism must be used to create new jobs and restructure our society and not wasted on ineffective or racist social programs. Capitalism must finally be celebrated so that peace and justice and prosperity can be attained for all.

[10] The military must be encouraged and sustained in all forms to protect us from the social barbarians such as communists, perverts, Islamo-Fascists, socialists, illegal aliens and other undesirables. We want peace not war—but we must retaliate against any threat even in a preemptive mode and hunt down and destroy terrorists and their governments and backers.

Conclusion:

California has shown us the obvious destructive pathway to moral and economic serfdom and offers a phony and perverted system of war, degenerated society and injustice. Our slogans to change our society must include words or phrases like: hastiest ironist[24]. 

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com

The Old Red Lady of the Old Gray Lady Translates Rove for Us with the Usual Liberal Spin

Maureen Dowd[1], never a convert to moderation or any meaningful   for m of objectivity, it seems we  can comfortably  conclude  after a limited  inquiry of her NYT articles [see Ref 1 for a lengthy list], has published a translation of what Karl Rove said for our education.

We read from a previous post about Hillary on one of her characterizations of Hillary and Obama, now designated O’Bozo after his antics with Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and the Tax Zombie:

“The lioness of Chappaqua is hot on the trail of the Chicago gazelle, eager to gnaw him to pieces, like a harrowing scene out of a George Stubbs painting.”[2] 

The lioness has crawled back to her lair to wait for the jungle to take its toll. She now designs for 2012 where she can pick up the pieces of the Obama Wreckage and    tell us all ‘she told us so.’

From the current piece from the New York Times —aka the Walter Duranty Papers[3]-- we read:

“Karl Rove was impressed with Barack Obama when he first met him. But now he sees him as a “coolly arrogant” elitist.”-- More Phony Myths By MAUREEN DOWD June 25, 2008.[4] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]This link references all quotes in this essay unless otherwise stated.

Really? So, he is not an elitist and racist enabler?

“Obama can be aloof and dismissive at times, and he’s certainly self-regarding, carrying the aura of the Ivy faculty club. But isn’t that better than the aura of the country clubs that tried to keep out blacks? It’s ironic, and maybe inevitable, that the first African-American nominee comes across as a prince of privilege. He is, as Leon Wieseltier of The New Republic wrote, not the seed but the flower of the civil rights movement.”

Here, the Old Red Lady concedes the point with the school yard taunt that elitism of the Ivy League sort soars beyond the arrogance of the country club set. My guy is a snake, but he is a smaller snake than your guy. She just amplified Rove’s comments. He is an elitist! Shall we review:

“"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."[5]—Barack Obama off camera in what he thought was a safe environment to express his views.

What could be more arrogant or elitist than that comment from the Chicago gazelle??

She drones on:

“Conservatives love playing this little game, acting as if the “elite” Democratic candidates are not in touch with people like themselves, even though the guys doing the attacking — like Rove, Limbaugh, O’Reilly and Hannity — are wealthy and cosseted.

Haven’t we had enough of this hypocritical comedy of people in the elite disowning their social status for political purposes? The Bushes had to move all the way to Texas from Greenwich to make their blue blood appear more red[sic][6].”

We must presume that FDR, the Kennedy Kluster, Vinegar John Kerry[7] and are not elites and above the confused mumblings of the unwashed. This was called slumming in the 40s. Vinegar didn’t drive a SUV—that was the family car.

 And then, addressing the penchant of liberals to embrace our enemies since the Korean Conflict:

““Charlie Black crassly argued in Fortune that a terrorist attack would “be a big advantage” for John McCain. And what’s scary is, Black is the smartest adviser McCain’s got.”

We are waiting for two things here:

[1] For some liberal to tell us that the left want to win the War on Terrorism.

[2] To explain why the terrorists, including Hugo Chavez, support Obama, now known as O’Bozo. We all recall the 60s radicals who cheered Ho and wanted us to lose in Viet Nam.

A loss in Iraq would provoke a long celebration in the streets of San Francisco. Any increase in unemployment is proof that Bush’s capitalism is failing and we need more taxes for any reason.

“Rove’s mythmaking about Obama won’t fly. If he means that Obama has brains, what’s wrong with that? If he means that Obama is successful, what’s wrong with that? If he means that Obama has education and intellectual sophistication, what’s wrong with that?”

There is no myth here. Rove stated the facts. Dowdy Dowd has not debunked anything and returns to the original premise as the dog returns to its vomit. The facts here are that Obama has 20 speech writers and tracks the narrow left liberal line. That does not require brains or style; it is the path of a political stooge. Obama is a racist enabler and a tax whore and would support the Islamo-Fascisti if he had a chance. His desire to talk with Iran without conditions is more urgent that his desire to talk to our soldiers. He would give money and aid to Castro and Kim given a chance and celebrate their achievements.

O’Bozo is just another Marxist stooge poured form the old rusty moulds of the far left and devoid of any novelty. He could come in a plastic box, battery included, with a slick zoot suit, a candy cane for his song and dance and some Dylan tunes for $19.95 and the liberals would buy him for parties as they snort Angel Dust.

Obama has not personality: he is a leftist political construct. He has no identity.

But, what else do we expect from liberals, mere stooges of Marxism?

RycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com

Krugman of the NYT Knocks Private Property: Home Ownership Should Not be a National Policy.

We can always  learn from  the political essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- as they attempt to ‘form public opinion’ by suggesting new and sweeping changes that ultimately lead to socialism and the loss of Constitutional Rights.  Today, the notion that the ultimate American dream is home ownership is pooh-poohed.

Private property is an affront to leftist tenets and more structured societies like the USSR and People’s Republic and even more elegantly the Cambodian Khmer Rouge took great pains to scrutinize private property and make sure it was not used to exploit the masses. Many progressives believe that:

“Private property is a privilege reserved only for those enlightened persons who dedicate their lives to improving government and its proper relation to the people. Property unfairly gotten thought the evils of capitalism or business must be returned to the people. Corporations are an affront to a just society and all common stocks and bonds should be reserved for the people. Excessive retirement accounts and IRAs, particularly of the fascist Roth type, must be assigned to the people for proper redistribution.”[2] From a previous rycK essay given in satire.

 In this episode of the non-equilibrium economics favored by the left that seek only to attack capitalism and shower the wealth upon the elites [The Trotsky Problem] we find suitably political postulates to demand  alternative s to private home ownership.  Gee, Feinstein, Pelosi, Kerry and the Kennedy Klan are rich and powerful. Did they contribute to the problem? No, they are compassionate and ‘sensitive’ to the potential voters whose lives they have wrecked with phony social programs and propaganda.

To wit[lessness]:

““Owning a home lies at the heart of the American dream.””[3]—President George Bush 2002

This affront must be refuted:

“Oops. While homeownership rose as the housing bubble inflated, temporarily giving Mr. Bush something to boast about, it plunged — especially for African-Americans — when the bubble popped.”

Oops. We wonder if the fact that 1/3 of all black males are in prison[4] or will be there for a time has something to do with low  home ownership by African-Americans [ with 858,000 black prisoners[5]]? Obama could use these votes in his second term if he pardoned his brothers. [6]What about low standardized test scores, drug addiction and sloth?? Could this be part of the equation? All this is to be blamed on Republicans, as usual, by the Walter Duranty Papers.

We now come to the point in this typical far leftist piece of propaganda:

“But here’s a question rarely asked, at least in Washington: Why should ever-increasing homeownership be a policy goal? How many people should own homes, anyway?” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Indeed, and following the Communist Manifesto Paul Krugman is krugmanically correct and in line with far leftist politics and touts the Neanderthal urge to enslave people and steal their wealth using any scheme, especially with the help of  criminals, racists and revolutionaries. That worked in Russia and Cambodia and Cuba. Why not here?

The system is unfair and benefits capitalists:

“And the belief that you’re nothing if you don’t own a home is reflected in U.S. policy. Because the I.R.S. lets you deduct mortgage interest from your taxable income but doesn’t let you deduct rent, the federal tax system provides an enormous subsidy to owner-occupied housing. On top of that, government-sponsored enterprises — Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks — provide cheap financing for home buyers; investors who want to provide rental housing are on their own.” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Damn capitalists are to blame and so are their unfair government policies. That must change and Obama is the instrument of such change: High Taxes.

And, there are risks!!

“First of all, there’s the financial risk. Although it’s rarely put this way, borrowing to buy a home is like buying stocks on margin: if the market value of the house falls, the buyer can easily lose his or her entire stake.”

“O.K., I know how some people will respond: anyone who questions the ideal of homeownership must want the population “confined to Soviet-style concrete-block high-rises” (as a Bloomberg columnist recently put it). Um, no. All I’m suggesting is that we drop the obsession with ownership, and try to level the playing field[7] that, at the moment, is hugely tilted against renting.

And while we’re at it, let’s try to open our minds to the possibility that those who choose to rent rather than buy can still share in the American dream — and still have a stake in the nation’s future.”

More handouts on the way!

Didn’t we take pleasure in this splendor with the projects and high-rise slums like Cabrini-Green.?[8] Didn’t the idiot mayor try to live there with hoards of police to protect her sorry behind and she lasted only three weeks in that urban toilet?[9] I think Jane Fonda lasted a bit longer in Santa Monica.  Not even the mayor was safe in this dung heap. Krugman actually wants more subsidized housing with tax breaks for renters as he clearly states above.  Such monstrosities as the Cabrini-Green are the perfect model for failure and they can always blame Republicans.

If you can’t get through high school, have a narcotics problem, are involved in violent crime and cannot read enough English to understand your credit or home finance contracts then the government owes you a living.

We saw this kind of thing in Moscow and other leftist experiments and the same old leftist stylites are moaning and howling for more government subsidies and higher taxes for ‘education’ and worse.

Actually, if the liberal social programs actually worked and most if not all of our citizens were able to get through high school and secure jobs then this problem would be minimal. But, with the celebration of drug addiction, sloth and sodomy we have a large segment of society that aids the leftists with their sordid pilfering of other people’s money using failed social programs that they designed. It looks like they set them up to fail just to stay in power.

Let us compare the Krugman hints with the leftist political reality of the past:

“The bourgeoisie keeps more and more doing away with the scattered state of

the population, of the means of production, and of property. It has

agglomerated population, centralized the means of production, and has

concentrated property in a few hands. The necessary consequence of this was

political centralization. Independent, or but loosely connected provinces,

with separate interests, laws, governments, and systems of taxation, became

lumped together into one nation, with one government, one code of laws, one

national class interest, one frontier, and one customs tariff.”[10]

As the dog returns to its vomit [11]the leftist returns to the sacred Manifesto for their tenets and eternal lessons.  I think we have seen this 300 times in Africa since 1950.

The liberals will say and do anything to get more political power and grab more wealth. Anything at all.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Obama Calls for More Taxes to Pay for the Irresponsibility of Black Fathers

We can always appreciate the political essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- as they attempt to ‘form public opinion’ by posing serious social problems, blaming them on white males if possible and finding new and uniquely maudlin ways to beg for federal funds.

 The theme: Black fathers desert their children.

““We need fathers to recognize that responsibility doesn’t just end at conception.”“[2]  [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]This link references all quotes in this essay unless otherwise stated.

““They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.”“

One might think that this is a new phenomenon after listening to this. It seems that Obama [ called O’Bozo now in my blogs] has uncovered some dark social secret known only the black community and his does have the proper solution to the problem: more money from white tax payers. What else? As Rush Limbaugh wonders, what would have happened if a white person would have said this? That would be racist as Geraldine Ferro found out. She has now the second-highest visibility of all white racist[3] in American following, of course, David Duke. Bill Clinton is a distant third.

““Don’t get carried away with that eighth-grade graduation,”“ he said, bringing many members of the congregation to their feet, applauding. ““You’re supposed to graduate from eighth grade.”“

““We need families to raise our children,”“ he said at the service on Sunday. ““We need fathers to recognize that responsibility doesn’t just end at conception. That doesn’t just make you a father. What makes you a man is not the ability to have a child. Any fool can have a child. That doesn’t make you a father. It’s the courage to raise a child that makes you a father.”“

We can wonder which one of his 20 speech writers wrote this tear-jerking taunt.

All this is very progressive and also very stale. This ‘responsibility’ essay dates back before the Roman times. The major factor is that we have several thousand ‘studies’ that describe this problem and supply numerous remedies along with complicated, ineffective and always expensive social ‘programs.’ Of course, the education bandwagon is launched, as always, with kazoos and song as the victims and their mentors flock to the mail box to get their federal checks.

So, after massaging a failed social issue we wonder where   the punch line might be.

Al Sharpton takes some umbrage with this as Obama treads on his turf:

““There are a lot of those who will say that he should not be airing dirty laundry, those that will say he’s beating up on the victims,”“ Mr. Sharpton said in a telephone interview. ““This will not be something that will be unanimously applauded, but I think that not discussing it is not going to make it go away.”“—Al Sharpton.

A double negative, the opposite of which presumes that talking about it will accomplish something. It has not in the last 60 years.

Here is one theory on the basis of this speech from the author of this NYT piece:

““The remarks Sunday were Mr. Obama’s first since he claimed the nomination that has addressed the problems confronting blacks in a comprehensive and straightforward way. While Mr. Obama’s remarks were directed at a black, churchgoing audience, his campaign hopes they resonate among white social conservatives in a race where these voters may be up for grabs.””—Anon NYT writer.

 All we can say here is ‘here we go again.’ We have had more than 50 years of busing [a failure], affirmative action programs [all failures], educational experiments [all failures], special schools [all failures], Head Start [a failure] and midnight basketball, outcome unknown. The worst school system in the US is in Washington DC [4], some argue Cleveland [5], Detroit [6] or Los Angeles [7], where they spend twice as much on students as any place else.  Many of these cities are on the Top Ten Murder List as well. [8]The academic achievements of black students in all black, mostly white and mixed white and black schools and colleges are abysmal.  More money is clearly not the answer. [9]We should note that this speech is unnecessary when Asians and Jews are considered as they have managed to excel in education without all these phony social programs.  Money cannot change IQ levels. Obama [O’Bozo in this case] wants to ignore IQ and SAT scores. [10] The reasons are obvious. [11]

The sad fact here is that most black Americans cannot succeed in school. We can wonder how immigrants from Nigeria, Viet Nam, India, Cambodia, China, Philippines, Sudan, Korea, Japan, Liberia and Haiti [in Miami for instance] can do well in all levels of education in the US and the descendents of black slaves somehow cannot manage to participate in the process.

So, this is not a plan to accomplish any goal other than to promise more money to blacks for their ‘education’ and to, again, push the tautological theorem that more money can solve education problems in the black communities in the US. It never has to date.

There are many ways to get whites to vote for higher and higher and higher taxes and this one is a slick construct from some Ivy League think tank.

And, when the ‘new’ social program fails to encourage black fathers to take ‘responsibility’ for their frequently unwanted offspring then what? Of, of course, we need another social program!

The majesty of this tax pitch is that the problem never goes away and the welfare programs merely create more disorder in the black communities and that calls for more programs.  The problem regenerates itself. This circular essay is a political winner for the urban left where Obama learned his politics.

And the tax whoring cranks on……….[12]

All these people have is your tax money and they think theyneed more. The solution to their problems is spendingyourmoney on phony social programs that will fail so they can bawl and beg for more.

This is hopeless.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Propaganda Gem:  Krugman Distorts History as He Grubs for More Taxes.

We can always appreciate the propagandistic essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- as they attempt to ‘form public opinion’ by scaring the dolts that read and believe their fluff. The current experiments on  the existing disinformation methods are always a treat to read from the Times and some of their staff.  It is difficult to believe that so many people are so simple, but we have to respect their reported daily circulation numbers although they are losing money and are in danger of bankruptcy. Today, we are treated to an economic Doom prediction from their m0st famous non-economist one Paul Krugman.  Woe is us. Let us all call for a tax hike to save us!

 The theme: An evil plot has been hatched to burden future administrations with fewer taxes! Such an outrage! Such nasty capitalism!

Here it the pitch:

“A poison pill, in corporate jargon, is a financial arrangement designed to protect current management by crippling the company if someone else takes over.

The Conscience of a Liberal As I read the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center’s analysis of the presidential candidates’ tax proposals, I realized that the tax cuts enacted by the Bush administration are, in effect, a fiscal poison pill aimed at future administrations.”[2] -- Fiscal Poison Pill by Paul Krugman [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]This link references all quotes in this essay unless otherwise stated.

This is an incoherent glubberance as we must expect from a Marxian-Revisionist leftist who cannot control his rage at the mention of tax cuts. Taxes on the masses are the only source of money and power for the sordid left so we can expect an explosion of emotion whenever they are prevented from converting our society into a dung heap like their ideological brothers did in the USSR, Cuba and North Korea. Those guys knew how to properly handle the capitalists and entrepreneurs with murder, famine and death.

But, to be fair and to show some ‘sensitivity’ to the leftists in our country, we have to realize that they are frustrated, very emotional and need a way to vent their miseries in many ways. Unfortunately, the only soothing balm for a leftist is the hope for a new and wonderful tax hike so they can waste the proceeds and confirm for the tax payers their belligerent ignorance and trumpet their eternal spite. As such, they must rely on the most privative of political methods. Some have likened liberalism to the folly of probing some primate’s orifice in the glorious search for diamonds, which compares well with the up-to-date history of liberal social programs. Follies like this are absurd, but typical liberal and the eternal quest continue for wealth to waste in defiance of success. [3]

Now, the expected lies and distortions factor into the leftist logic here:

“Exhibit A of the poison pill in action is the sad case of John McCain, part of whose lingering image as a maverick rests on his early opposition to the Bush tax cuts, which he declared excessive and too tilted toward the rich.

Since then the budget surpluses of the Clinton years have given way to persistent deficits, and income inequality has risen to new heights, vindicating his opposition.”

This is ancient history and a sad distortion of reality.  Krugman does not realize that McCain would be in the Executive Branch and his Senate vote would be moot.

This is also a lie for several reasons. [1] Clinton, a plurality president with only 43% of the vote, merely rode on the Reagan Revolution Prosperity Wave, but tried to spend as much as he could. His surpluses were not of his doing. His consort, Colonel Klebb[4], proposed an enormously expensive socialized medicine program that would, if allowed, have swamped our economy with inefficiencies. [2] Clinton was stopped from his wild spending in 94 when he lost control of the House, a whore house of tax mongering for 30 y ears of Democratic Party abuse. [3] Recall that Reagan spent what he did with on the promise that the left would cut spending, and they, lying as always, did not. [4] Ronald Reagan had to fight to end the useless Great Society programs that were a drag on society, [5] Clinton was forced to sign the Welfare Reform Act and that cut welfare costs by 26%, something the liberals are still fuming about.  [6] Clinton cut spending only on the military but did manage to use them in a pogrom to wipe out children in Waco because they offended and failed to respect and trust Slick Willie.

Here is some more revisionism:

“But instead of pointing this out, Mr. McCain now promises to make those tax cuts permanent — and proposes further cuts that are, if anything, tilted even more toward the wealthy. And how is the loss of revenue to be made up? Mr. McCain hasn’t offered a realistic answer.”

Well, where is the explanation of how O’Bozo would pay for his socialized medicine and we always wonder where he Highway Trust Fund went and then there is the matter of a trillion dollars missing from Social Security that seems to exist as IOUs the taxpayers would have to pay for to get this back, thus double taxation. What happened to the 5 trillion dollars that went into social programs since 1950? What did we get from welfare? More poor? Higher crime rates? When you offer  liberals free rein to create a city of their liking you get cesspools like Philadelphia, New Orleans, Detroit, Oakland and St. Louis.[5] The liberals refuse to answer questions like this.

Here is the big lie:

“Barack Obama’s tax plan is more responsible than Mr. McCain’s: relative to current policy, the Tax Policy Center estimates, the Obama plan would raise revenue by $700 billion over the next decade, compared with a $600 billion loss for Mr. McCain.”

The problem with this picture is that leftists, animated on skinny little strings by their Marxian masters, cannot conceive of economic growth induced by lower taxes. They believe that any tax cut is a loss and the money is lost. So, any tax hike actually raises revenues although history shows that most excessive tax hikes return less revenue. The left must pursue this lie because to tell the truth here would simply expose their lies and follies.

The rest of his propaganda screed is crap and not worth reading, but the inevitable conclusion is worth at least a cursory examination and comment:

“Anyway, back to my main theme: looking at the tax proposals of the two presidential candidates, it’s remarkable and disheartening to see how effective President Bush’s fiscal poison pill has been in restricting the terms of debate.

Progressives, in particular, have to hope that Mr. Obama will be more willing [6]to challenge the Bush legacy in office than he has been in the campaign.”

A lie. There is noting to prevent the tax whores[7] from whoring the halls of Congress day and night. The truthful part is that O’Bozo has been rather quite on his tax details as tax mongers do not usually win elections in the US as we saw from HHH, George McGovern, al gore, Vinegar John Kerry [8] [9], Yo Yo Dukakis and other front parlor fluffers.

As usual, we find only a sophomoric  krugmaniacal screed with the mandatory foaming at the mouth and drooling on the dingy claws from the New York Times. To say that these themes are hackneyed and stale would be accurate but redundant. These political operatives will say and do anything to get more tax monies to waste while they celebrate and assist our enemies and purr as our brave soldiers are killed in wars protecting our county.  They love our enemies and celebrate Islamo-Fascism and excuse the freeloading criminals who cross our borders and commit felonies while condemning others of the Christian faith who live in the US but don’t vote for phony leftists disguised as liberal Democrats.

Isn’t the New York Times wonderful? Raise taxes and bring prosperity: “All the Propaganda that is fit to Print!” The New York Timesis a poison pill, but fortunately poisons the minds of the undesirables.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Propaganda Gem: Frank the Crank Clarifies Anger for the Women Voters and the Polls Show Obama Wins the Most Women!

We can always appreciate the propagandistic essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- as they attempt to ‘form public opinion’ by cherry-picking and   redacting history and attempting to persuade voters who are not liberals to vote for their candidate. [Oooops. Did the NYT endorse Hillary?]. Somebody once said that history must be carefully rewritten to justify the candidates for the next election.[2] We women who “love” McCain  are the epicenter of  this episode of Frank the Crank as he cranks out more little disinformation snippets sausage machine style. He even puts a black heart into his title! How macabre, but appropriate of him.

 In the tasteless style of the one of Pinch’s most delectable pustules[3], we read this today:

“TEN years ago John McCain had to apologize for regaling a Republican audience with a crude sexual joke about Hillary and Chelsea Clinton and Janet Reno. Last year he had to explain why he didn’t so much as flinch when a supporter asked him on camera, “How do we beat the b*t*h?” But these days Mr. McCain just loves the women” [4]-- Angry Clinton Women ♥ McCain? By Frank Rich. [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

His answer should have Obama and the New York Times—they will handle this nicely.  Obama fixed that b*t*h.

Jingo Janet Reno, the Mad Burner, is a joke, but the sexual part of her persona is  an essay in beggaring description in human terms. She is famous for gassing children with military CS gas dispersed in Methylene chloride while in a psychotic tirade against some persons who were thought to having illegal sex but she would purr with delight as full term babies have their brains sucked out of their heads as they scream. Clinton was not part of this sexual war on America, strangely, as Janet must not have read the newspapers about his antics with the sink in the Oval Office study. We should not tell off-chemical jokes about Janet or off-sink jokes about M0nica.

We turn the crank some more:

“One of the few visible women in the McCain campaign hierarchy, Carly Fiorina[5], has declared herself “enormously proud” of Mrs. Clinton and is barnstorming to win over Democratic women to her guy’s cause.”

Fiorina’s performance in destroying Hewlett Packard’s bottom line makes here a prime choice to go after Hillary’s supporters.  Maybe she can destroy Obama or O’Bozo as I now call him after his phony economics and tax policies. She has more testosterone than John McCain  has.

“New polls show Mr. Obama opening up a huge lead among female voters — beating Mr. McCain by 13 percentage points in the Gallup and Rasmussen polls and by 19 points in the latest Wall Street Journal-NBC News survey.

How huge is a 13- to 19-percentage-point lead? John Kerry[6] won women by only 3 points, Al Gore by 11.”

“Only an earthquake — the Iowa results, for instance — could shatter such previously immutable story lines as the Clinton campaign’s invincibility and the innate hostility of white voters to a black candidate.”

 Oh, were the polls wrong on I0wa??

Gee, some polls had Hillary winning? Only the local newspaper got close. But, Frank wants us to believe the new polls? Really?

Wasn’t all this Iowa stuff before Obama made his bigoted and racist remarks about ‘typical white people’ who ‘cling to their guns and religion’ in standard Harvard paternalistic prose?[8] Too bad we cannot repeat this to see if Iowa voters were offended.

Didn’t this also come before Jeremiah Wright’s national appearance upon the stage for us to ‘clarify’ is position on whites?

“But the notion that all female Clinton supporters became “angry white women” once their candidate lost — to the hysterical extreme where even lifelong Democrats would desert their own party en masse — is itself a sexist stereotype. That’s why some of the same talking heads and Republican operatives who gleefully insulted Mrs. Clinton are now peddling this fable on such flimsy anecdotal evidence.”

Did Frank the Crank read the exit polls in KY, WVA and PA?? And, these were Democrat women! The New York Times would never deal with sexist stereotyping as they do in this piece.

More on polls:

“Since that poll [“NBC Nightly News” and The Wall Street Journal presented their new poll results last week (Obama, 47 percent; McCain, 41 percent) ..ed]gives Mr. Obama not just a 19-point lead among all women but also a 7-point lead among white women, a 6-point deficit in one sliver of the female pie is hardly a heart-stopper. Nor is Mr. Obama’s showing among white men shocking news. No Democratic presidential candidate, including Bill Clinton, has won a majority of that declining demographic since 1964. Mr. Kerry lost white men by 25 points, and Mr. Gore did by 24 points (even as he won the popular vote).”

Well, it looks like the polls have it and we should ignore the next five months. From the Crank’s writings here, there is no way McCain is going get more than 40% or so and will probably only get 20 electoral votes.  Maybe he can beat McGovern’s record as a loser? Was John Kerry really white?

The New York Times has looked into the past and the future and has pr0jected that a 100%, racist, elitist, black liberal will sweep the country along with his angry black wife.[9]

I am not even going to bother to vote as Frank has now  convinced me. I can save gas by staying at home. But, then, there is David Brooks, the Dr of Doom who wonders about Obama even winning.[10]

And finishing up:

“The ludicrous idea that votes from Clinton supporters would somehow make up for McCain defectors is merely the latest fairy tale brought to you by those same Washington soothsayers who said Fred Thompson was the man to beat and that young people don’t turn up to vote.”

Didn’t many Washington soothsayers say Hillary was the anointed?? Did the New York Times say that? Did they endorse Hillary?

A little NYT history lesion by the New York Times!

“By choosing Mrs. Clinton, we are not denying Mr. Obama’s appeal or his gifts….

The next president needs to start immediately on challenges that will require concrete solutions, resolve, and the ability to make government work. Mrs. Clinton is more qualified, right now, to be president….

When we endorsed Mrs. Clinton in 2006, we were certain she would continue to be a great senator, but since her higher ambitions were evident, we wondered if she could present herself as a leader to the nation.

Her ideas, her comeback in New Hampshire and strong showing in Nevada, her new openness to explaining herself and not just her programs, and her abiding, powerful intellect show she is fully capable of doing just that. She is the best choice for the Democratic Party as it tries to regain the White House.”[11]

Gee, was all that bubbly from the New York Times? Does Frank Rich work there?

Frank forgot to mention that is was Bill Clinton who said Obama’s run was a fairy tale. Is this a fairy tale about fairy tales or fairy tails? There are polls, trolls and fairy tails and songs. Let us cherry pick among the fray and design our own predictions! Such fun.

Isn’t the New York Times wonderful? Raise taxes and bring prosperity!

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The New York Times Counsels Us on Economic Fears in the Middle Class and the Urgent Need for Higher Taxes, Again.

We can always study the economic opinions of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- as they attempt to ‘form public opinion’ about frequently non-existent economic factors that turn out to be some political statement or                                                   a reinforcement of a stogy left-liberal tenet. Somebody once said that economic history must be controlled to justify the economic future.[2] “

Today, we are treated to an essay on economics and tax policy by the second-best known non economics at the Old Gray Lady, Bob Herbert:

“Despite the focus on the housing crisis, gasoline prices and the economy in general, the press has not done a good job capturing the intense economic anxiety — and even dread, in some cases — that has gripped tens of millions of working Americans, including many who consider themselves solidly middle class.”[3]

Really? Then we have not heard about the economy crushing cap and trade circus, the stagnant energy supply schedule induced by liberal Democrats and the potential for enormous tax hikes by Barack Obama and others on the far left? Maybe I was dreaming.

A lament from a victim of Bernie Sanders [Socialist parasite, Vermont[4] [5]] who writes a sad song and dance, which is probably true, although many of these maudlin screeds read like the Lincoln Letter and ends with:

““Today I am sad, broken, and very discouraged. I am thankful that the winter cold is behind us for a while, but now gas prices are rising yet again. I just can’t keep up.”” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

You can always get some liberal Democrat activist to bawl on national TV about any issue that needs a good heavy tax penalty. Are our voters so simple minded as to believe in the current energy ‘plan’ from the Democrats? When will they wake up and realize that farces like Global Warming—not modified to read Climate Change because their models incorrectly predicted that the temperature would increase last year—As if any leftist would allow any more drilling or exploration![6] Let us search for a solution here from Bernie Sanders, a socialist, particularly from his website:

“In filibusters No. 74, 75 and 76, Republicans blocked Senate consideration of bills to lower gasoline prices, promote alternative energy and protect Medicare.”[7]

How many times did Ted Kennedy filibuster oil exploration and nuclear energy expansion? Liberals do not use filibusters on court appointments like Senator Schumer? Really?

Every one of these bills involved punitive taxes on the oil companies and provided nothing that would lower gas prices. We wonder how tax increases; always the leftist solution to any and all social evils[8] might lower prices. These measures would have increased costs and brought in revenues for Congress to spend on their pet projects. The person who wrote the letter to Bernie is going to be sadder and totally broken if he believes in what the sordid left have to offer. 100,000,000 ignoranti died in the gulags and along the roads when they trusted the far left.

The facts are that this is a smear:

“The Democratic energy package would have imposed a 25% tax on any "unreasonable" profits of the five largest U.S. oil companies, which together made $36 billion during the first three months of the year. It also would have given the federal government more power to address oil market speculation that the bill's supporters argue has added to the crude oil price surge.

Republicans, however, have said the bill would do nothing to ease soaring gasoline prices in the United States”.[9]

We can wonder what the word "unreasonable" means here as profits from capitalism are always considered the work of fascists by the left. [10] The EcoNazis consider capitalism, SUVs and other facets of our society as unacceptable.[11] They would not hesitate to destroy our society and make another futile attempt to give us a utopia as they did in the Soviet gulags and the wildness of Cambodia. They are like the Cheka and wish to complete the fine work of the Bolsheviks.

Why doesn’t the New York Times just show us HOW taxes and restricted production could lower prices at the pump? Wouldn’t that be fair? They cannot do this. These parasites will say or do anything to hike taxes and the middle class, despised by Barack Obama especially if they are white, are to pay the price. Do you think the leftists would cut funding of their phony social programs in the major cities?? No.

Herbert rambles on about the woe and misery caused by Republicans of the last few years and concludes with a final letter comment:

“The letters to Senator Sanders offer a glimpse into the real lives of ordinary people in an economic environment that was sculpted to favor the very rich. One of the letters was from a woman in central Vermont who said she and her husband are in their mid-30s, are college-educated and have two young children.

“We are feeling distraught,” she said, “that we may never ‘get ahead’ but will always be pedaling to just keep up.”

This is so hopeless that we obviously need the government to step right in and raise taxes to the roof. That will cure the middle class problems like it did in the Jimmy Carter Malaise Era with high gas prices, huge tax rates to 70% marginal rates and his groveling at the feet of the Iranian Islamo Fascists.

No Democrat will explain to the voters how tax increases and punitive tax measures could ease gas prices or accomplish anything other than feathering the scurvy nests of the leftist parasites like Bernard Sanders.

The Times deals in sorrow, tears, and incessant attacks on the mean old Republicans and offers us a society that is wholly dependent upon the government.  Perhaps they admire France or Germany with their socialism, high unemployment and hoards of Islamo Fascists burning cars at night. Al Gore[12] wanted to banish the internal combustion engine with punitive standards and laws and somehow the left with the aid of the New York Times rushes to speed up this disaster.

 Another maudlin screed from the Times.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Propaganda Alert: The New York Times Axes the Right Questions and then Answers Them with the Left Answers.

We can always appreciate the propagandistic essays of the  NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- as they attempt to ‘form public opinion’ thus  redacting  history and settling the matter of the lesser masses who are not liberals. . Somebody once said that history must be controlled to justify the future.[2] We hear about the Obama Change from the Babbling Brooks today.

“Is Barack Obama really a force for change, or is he just a traditional Democrat with a patina of postpartisan [sic] rhetoric? ”[3] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Ah, a new word! Postpartisan is defined [4] as something like pulling together a coalition of various people in a national consensus or other such fluff. Hillary denounced this in the link in the footnotes. This is some snake oil political  notion that we can transcend politics and ‘work for the common good.” That was back in January David—please try to keep up.

Now, David, do we know what the answer will be after you conscientiously search out the matter and ponder numerous matters? Is this a circular essay where the punch line grows like a slow bladder tumor along the way and then we are instantly enlightened with sunshine and have the primordial urge to rush out and vote for a liberal Democrat with a 100% far left voting record? That would be so wonderful and so progressive.

“That question is surprisingly hard to answer. When you listen to his best speeches, you see a person who really could herald a new political era. But when you look into his actual policies, you often find a list of orthodox liberal programs that no centrist or moderate conservative would have any reason to support.”

Brooks has broached the outer limits of betrayal and rabble-rousing and other anti- liberal sins before and we wonder if he still has a job after asking this question in this manner? Is he a spy for Rush? Did he just say that the Obama plans were just leftist clichés? Did Frank Rich have to rewrite most of this?

We quiver with excitement to see how he can break away from this snake pit he has built for himself. The rule in manufacturing snake pits is to select those specimens that look nasty but do not actually bite. I wonder if his supervisor had to rewrite some of this.

“To investigate this question, I looked more closely into Obama’s education policies.”

Ah, we restrict the field so our ‘answer’ cannot conflict with leftist elitist dogma. Slick. You could have looked at his voting record on terrorism, foreign aid, taxes and attacks on the military.The pie shrinks.The conclusion is then obvious.

Our Babbling Brooks now babbles for several paragraphs [read filler as in meat extenders and such] about ‘two camps’ of educational thinkers: those status quo types who think the current system is working and those  reformers who want brutal changes in the process. This now broaches the old cliché: which of the two choices appeal to you? That is like asking a condemned man to dig his own grave facing either North to South or East to West to be fair. Brooks does not mention the Jeremiah Wright Christian ‘education’ that Obama and Michelle got in the pews for 20 years. What did he learn from Jeremiah? Minister Farrakhan. [5]? Michael Pfleger.[6]? Ayers?

“The question of the week is: Which camp is Barack Obama in?”

Here it comes!! A decision!

Then, he mumbles and sez, effectively that Obama has endorsed both sides!!

“He proposes dozens of programs to build on top of the current system, but it’s not clear that he would challenge it. He’s all carrot, no stick. He’s politically astute — giving everybody the impression he’s on their side — but substantively vague. Change just isn’t that easy.”

Whammo! Obama is a mealy mouth mumbler!! [Political vagueness = mealy mouthism]

Brooks sum up:

“Obama endorses many good ideas and is more specific than the McCain campaign, which hasn’t even reported for duty on education. But his education remarks give the impression of a candidate who wants to be for big change without actually incurring the political costs inherent in that enterprise.”

Does that mean he is a phony baloney tax whoring Democrat??  Does that mean he does not how to pay for such a new program? Duh? Hike taxes! We did read that he favors new ‘programs’ that are always costly and ineffective in the hands of liberals. Does that count? How about: choose either one and your taxes will soar! Brooks got it left when he mentioned that the new Obama plans do not suit centrists or moderate conservatives. Does he need the votes of these Nazis? Maybe Obama can take his plan ‘to the people’ and let them decide.

Tax whoring by any other name is tax whoring. That is all the liberals have left.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The New York Times Essays Us on ‘Values?”!! This is Really Just a Propaganda Piece on Taxation and Control

We can always appreciate the mental gymnastics of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- as they redact history and create new and novel visions of history. Somebody once said that history must be carefully controlled to justify the future.[2] We hear about the seduction of money from the Babbling Brooks today. “The people who created this country built a moral structure around money. The Puritan legacy inhibited luxury and self-indulgence. Benjamin Franklin spread a practical gospel that emphasized hard work, temperance and frugality. Millions of parents, preachers, newspaper editors and teachers expounded the message. The result was quite remarkable. ”[3]

Does David forget that the colonies were strategic and profitable capitalist ventures? Were the Dutch scrounging for wealth? I wonder if Brooks can tell us all about the Spanish Gold ethic that brought back untold wealth to the continent and  provided a ‘moral structure’ to Europe and England, where they coveted the wealth above all else. Read about the English pirates Hawkins and Drake and then wonder about piracy, slavery, morality and money. Hollywood has created an immoral structure around money.

Benjamin Franklin spread a practical theorem in the work ethic, a phenomenon that most of the world rejected then and does so now in LA, Boston, Baltimore and Philly. Tell us all about industry and education in the top ten biggest cities in the US run by black liberals in league with the dope dealers. Third world cannot operate in a world of morality and the work ethic. We have 7,000 years of proof of this in Africa alone.

This is an essay that wants to convince us that the whites who worked hard for their money have cheated the rest of the world out of their ‘fair share.’

“Over the past 30 years, much of that has been shredded. The social norms and institutions that encouraged frugality and spending what you earn have been undermined. The institutions that encourage debt and living for the moment have been strengthened. The country’s moral guardians are forever looking for decadence out of Hollywood and reality TV. But the most rampant decadence today is financial decadence, the trampling of decent norms about how to use and harness money.”

 We can wonder what Brooks thinks about the big money in Hollywood. Here, Brooks obliquely criticizes the credit and investment markets. Most of this view comes from the fact that private property and monetary independence[4] fly in the face of the leftists who would control of much of that as they could. They have little else than other people’s money.

“The deterioration of financial mores has meant two things. First, it’s meant an explosion of debt that inhibits social mobility and ruins lives. Between 1989 and 2001, credit-card debt nearly tripled, soaring from $238 billion to $692 billion. By last year, it was up to $937 billion, the report said.”

Has The Babbler forgotten how FDR spent an entire year’s GDP fighting a mess that he created in Asia and one that his friends had been working on for 1000 years?  What does Brooks think about spending the bottom out of Social Security and then refusing to fix the mess at the beginning of Bush’s second term? Where is the 2 trillion missing dollars from the phony Trust Fund? Is that debt? The illegal drug trade in the US runs more than a trillion dollars. Where is the mention of this? What happened to the Balanced Budget Amendment? Oh, the liberals wouldn’t have that??  We spent 5 trillion dollars on welfare since 1950. What was the ‘value’ of that?

Brooks essays into the sunset with blame for peoples, government and more and winds up with this fluff:

“There are dozens of things that could be done. But the most important is to shift values. Franklin made it prestigious to embrace certain bourgeois virtues. Now it’s socially acceptable to undermine those virtues. It’s considered normal to play the debt game and imagine that decisions made today will have no consequences for the future.”

Tell us about the ‘values’ in California, heading for certain bankruptcy![5] Tell us all about New Jersey and their wild spending on salaries and benefits for union employees. NJ is going to charge nearly $50 to cross their state North to South and that is what kind of ‘value?’[6] Gov Spitzer [Spitball #9] had a neat plan to shake down the insurance companies to support his bloated state budget.[7] NJ is going broke over their liberal ‘value system.’

If we returned to the moral values of Franklin then the hangman would be the most sought after public official. The stocks would be full every day with the howls of perverts, rapists, thieves, muggers and drug peddlers.

There are ‘values’ in the leftist handling of the top ten cities in the US with 3500 murders last year?[8] How much money is wasted on ‘education’ in the inner cities on crime?

This essay of today is just a deceptive propaganda piece and a routine call for higher taxes and control of credit. There is little the liberals can do about investment and such that create these problems in the population with people who cannot think for themselves. The liberals created Greenling[9], so that the ‘poor’ could have homes and ignore the standard norms of credit.  The Berkeley green liners fixed up the laws so that mortgage loaners could not identify deadbeats, druggies, felons and parasites. Where is the NTY praise of such ‘values?’

Tax whoring by any other name is tax whoring. That is all the liberals have left.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The Old Red Lady of the NYT Sets up a Firebase for Michelle

We understand  that the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- selects any far-leftist political candidate, cloaks them in splendor, offers soggy chants of praiseworthiness  and attempts to fight their battles in the political arena. After dekulakizing[2] Colonel Klebb and her Consort, the winner, not exactly the first endorsement of the New York Times [but what the heck!], is now blackwashed for us in public and outfitted with official political protection.

The Old Red Lady launches off the pad:

“Hillary and Bill are busy updating their enemies lists. And Obama is racking his brain trying to figure out where to stash his erstwhile rival.”[3] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Is this news? Didn’t Bill give us the ‘fairy tale speech’ and tell us that ‘he cannot be elected?’ That comment needs to be retracted.

On the Obama Phenomenon we read: “This thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen,” the former president said.”[4]—William Jefferson Clinton

Fairy tales have trolls, ugly warts on the noses of witches, skulking familiars and others crawling around so we wonder how Obama and Michelle might stay off the enemies list? Ask Hillary to watch his back in the White House? That is like asking a pack of coyotes to manage the security in the hen house.

 Speaking of witches:

“It’s good news for Obama that Hillary’s out of the race. But it’s also bad news. Now Republicans can turn their full attention to demonizing Michelle Obama. Mrs. Obama is the new, unwilling contestant in Round Two of the sulfurous national game of “Kill the witch.”

Oh, the sugar and the salt! Zoroastrianism again?

“There are creepy Web sites, like TheObamaFile.com, dedicated to painting Michelle as a female version of Jeremiah Wright, an angry black woman, the disgruntled, lecturing “Mrs. Grievance” depicted on the cover of National Review.”

Every heard of Moveon.com or dailykos.com or nytimes.com or the huffingtonpost.com? The NYT now truncates and sanitizes the blogs in the blogosphere  that would taint their second choice for our potential leader’s leading lady. There is nothing creepy about the New York Times or Ariana Huffington[5]?

So, bias bursts forth from the electric red pen of our heroine at the Times as she closes ranks about poor Michelle.

“On that site and others around the Internet, the seamy rumors still slither that there’s a tape of Michelle denouncing “whitey,” a rumor that Barack Obama disdained last week as “scurrilous.”

 Is that like Joe  Wilson going to Niger and not finding yellow cake? I frequently read Paul Krugman’s works on the times and sometimes cannot find even a hint of supply and demand economics. Is it a seamy rumor that he studied economics somewhere? Did the Times defend Clinton in the Lewinsky Affair? I forget. How did that seamy rumor still slither for in terms of truth? Negative evidence is the best kind for the NYT.

“That’s a good preview of how Republicans will attack Michelle, suggesting that she does not share American values, mining a subtext of race.”

I wonder if the Times shared American Values when they printed the lies of Walter Duranty or when they still insist that the Rosenbergs were not USSR spies [code name Liberal!]? Is reverse racism an “American Value?”

“Unlike her husband, who wrote in his memoir that he had learned at a young age to smile and charm and disarm whites of the notion that he might be a bristly black militant, Michelle has not always hidden her jangly opinions so well. She has spent more time dwelling on the ways in which society can pull down the less privileged and refers a lot to a callous but unnamed “They.””

Is that like saying “you people?”

“Obama begins with a broad assessment of life in America in 2008, and life is not good: we're a divided country, we're a country that is "just downright mean," we are "guided by fear," we're a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. "We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day," she said, as heads bobbed in the pews. "Folks are just jammed up, and it's gotten worse over my lifetime. And, doggone it, I'm young. Forty-four!"[6]

“"You're looking at a young couple that's just a few years out of debt," Obama said. "See, because, we went to those good schools, and we didn't have trust funds. I'm still waiting for Barack's trust fund. Especially after I heard that Dick Cheney was s'posed to be a relative or something. Give us something here!"[7]

This is a ghetto garbled rant. We wonder if she is ‘mining a subtext of race’ here. We could ask to see Michelle’s SATs and see if she was merely some kind of token in school. Universities are like that sometimes elevating those with insufficient cognitive skills to high and exalted platforms in the Ivy League. Isn’t her them on the Internet somewhere? Or, is that hidden like Hillary’s to avoid embarrassment?

I didn’t have no trust fund—I worked my way trough college. Where is my trust fund? Oh! The government will give me one?

“Michelle,” as one political observer puts it, “is a target-rich environment.”

 Viet Nam lingo. Yes, and we gots five long months to go.

“She’s going to take her big microphone on “The View” as a co-host next week, when she will no doubt try to put her remark about her belated pride in her country in context.”

With 20 speech writers and a scripted performance maybe she can hold her ideological Marxist hatred for America in check.

We shall see and will be watching with interest.

The Old Red Lady may be trying to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear in this essay.  Dowdy Dowd was always against Hillary. [8]Michelle will have to wear a tight muzzle and ‘play whitey’s game’ for a while for if she launches off with her hate whitey tone she will turn off more voters than her husband did with his contempt of white middle class voters and their penchant for guns and how they cling to religion.

“All white people are racists.“[9]-University of Delaware.

The only voters that can stand blatant racism and bigotry are leftists who read the New York Times and their lackeys. Typical white people don’t like overt racism.

"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."[10]—Barack Obama off camera in what he thought was a safe environment to express his views.

Just who do Obama and Michelle think these bitter people are? Voters??

Maureen Dowd is now in some kind of damage control mode.

The NYT customarily rewrites or spins history in cases like this. This in their area of expertise: propaganda. [11]It will be interesting to see how they will proceed if Michelle’s handlers slip and let her sally forth in a new tirade. Jeremiah Wright would be proud of her racist remarks and so would her dear friend Michael Pfleger.[12]

Politicians and their lackeys at work: Watch out for the antipathy and bitterness from voters over the concept of higher taxes. This game is a freeloader’s acid flash circus.  Higher and oppressive taxes are not fairy tales—they can sink the economy with no loss to the inner-city celebrants that will vote for Obama.

Five long months to go………..

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com

Racism, the Basis of the Party of Democrats as Explained by Paul Krugman of the NYT

We know that the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- always praises and anoints some person[or puppet] who could find a way to raise taxes under any and all possible pretenses. He now proclaims that the country has changed and Obama is agent of that change. Racism is now not an issue!?

“Fervent supporters of Barack Obama like to say that putting him in the White House would transform America. With all due respect to the candidate, that gets it backward. Mr. Obama is an impressive speaker who has run a brilliant campaign — but if he wins in November, it will be because our country has already been transformed. “[2]--It’s a Different Country By Paul Krugman

This is written in the future past perfect conditional tense. While we are butting, let us analyze the but word and ask: Gee, whiz Mr. Economist, what happens if he loses?? The title already asserts that we have a different country, but then there is some question. Such circular logic and the confusion it spreads is a diversion away from the salient issues that will conclude the outcome in November such as: high taxes, high fuel costs, racism and disproportionate government and the urgent leftist prerequisite for votes from illegal aliens.

“Mr. Obama’s nomination wouldn’t have been possible 20 years ago. It’s possible today only because racial division, which has driven U.S. politics rightward for more than four decades, has lost much of its sting.”

Does this sting anybody:?

“And they will not only attack you if you try to point out what's going on in white America, the U.S. of KKK A."[3]-- Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr.

A sting in the racist sense must be unidirectional[4]. Uncontrollable hatred by blacks is okay if whites grovel to Obama and his TrinityChurch it seems. Such hatred is encouraged and saluted by the left as it keeps the black  votes at the 95% level in favor of the Democrats. If the race vote is split, the Dems will lose election after election. Because of racism, he deserves to win—even if he uses racism! This is a ‘mean country’ we hear from Michelle Obama as she trash talks in the bubba dialect and pushes the hate whitey button. [5] If you don’t vote for a black racist with a history of Marxism and surrounded by terrorist, racists and close and cozy criminal friends they you must be a racist.

He raves on with:

“For Americans have never disliked Big Government in general. In fact, they love Social Security and Medicare, and strongly approve of Medicaid — which means that the three big programs that dominate domestic spending have overwhelming public support.”

Well, if we love big government how can we pay for it? OH HIGHER TAXES!! I almost forgot. Sure, we all  loved the Great Society, HUD, HHS, Dept of ED, Social Security [going broke fast—only 7-9 years left and the Democrats refused to change the funding.] and of course welfare!! How about food stamps for everyone?

The krugmaniacal summation:

“But if Mr. Obama does win, it will symbolize the great change that has taken place in America. Racial polarization used to be a dominating force in our politics — but we’re now a different, and better, country.”

This is all fluff. The Party of Democrats have nothing left but racism and hopelessness. Maybe the Times thinks they can convince us that notable leftist blacks like Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Jr., “Cold Cash” William Jennings Jefferson[6]of LA, Jesse Jackson, Spike Lee, Barbara Lee, Minister Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright, Otis Moss, Angela Davis, Al Sharpton and the great philosopher and poet Mumia Abu-Jamal[7]

The second most notorious white racist afer David Duke is now Geraldin Ferraro![8]

This is a pitiful  and phony piece of progaganda  on the utility and need for more reverse racism and is characteristic of a mental disease known as Cryptomisoxeny. [9] We expect this kind of stuff from the New York Times and here it is.  They have little else and are headed for bankruptcy.

Racism, high taxes and big government are all the left have left [pun intended] and they are going to push the Race Card as hard as they can. The New York Times leads the charge against whites their version of Racial polarization.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com

 Frank The Crank of the NYT Glubbers and Toots over Obama.

We know that the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- always praises and anoints some person, frequently chosen at random or who wandered in from a race riot to elevate to the position of messiah or higher if there is a corresponding leftist term Today we are treated to a little celebration party that toasts the future if socialism and other random desired of the left. Today we get a lesson from Frank the Crank [Rich][2]

In an article entitled [3] One Historic Night, Two Americas we swim in the luxuriance and honey of his prose:

“WHEN Barack Obama achieved his historic victory on Tuesday night, the battle was joined between two Americas. Not John Edwards’s two Americas, divided between rich and poor. Not the Americas split by race, gender, party or ideology. What looms instead is an epic showdown between two wildly different visions of the country, from the ground up.” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

This is a serious cognitive coagulation of opposing elements of circular logic. Here we have some nots that were strewn around like crack vials on the walkways of Central Park that fly in the faces and limited mental spaces of those who believe in the basis tenets of liberalism: take the money and wealth from the rich and keep most of the governing elites while manufacturing hollow speeches about the poor. [a paraphrase of Trotsky.] The first not negates liberal history and the second not negates the ever-present and prescient racism that is celebrated by the leftist, particularly at the New York Times. Perhaps he wants us to consider the opposite of what he preaches here.

This reminds us of the ‘but monkey’ syndrome liberals use frequently, a nifty analysis toolwe learned from Laura Ingraham.[4]  The ‘not’ apparently oozes from Times past with a twist of terms.[5]

He gushes on with this:

“On one side stands Mr. Obama’s resolutely cheerful embrace of the future[6]. His vision is inseparable from his identity, both as a rookie with a slim Washington résumé and as a black American whose triumph was regarded as improbable by voters of all races only months ago. On the other is John McCain’s promise of a wise warrior’s vigilant conservation of the past. His vision, too, is inseparable from his identity — as a government lifer who has spent his entire career in service, whether in the Navy or Washington.”

This is like Zoroastrianism where there is an eternal battle between light and darkness.[7] The light is high taxes and the darkness is capitalism. What is not mentioned here in Frank’s soggy salutes to the most far-left candidate since Eugene Debbs[8] is Obama’s racism and intimate associations with psychotic religion mongers and criminals like Rezko not to mention terrorists like Bill Ayers? Where is the discussion of Obama’s antipathy comments and elitist contempt of whites?[9]

“Mr. McCain only reminded voters that he, like Mrs. Clinton, thinks that change is nothing more than a marketing gimmick. He has no idea what it means. “No matter who wins this election, the direction of this country is going to change dramatically,” he said on Tuesday. He then grimly regurgitated Goldwater and Reagan government-bashing talking points from the 1960s and ’70s even as he presumed to accuse Mr. Obama of looking “to the 1960s and ’70s for answers.”

“Change” has not been identified by Obama in terms other than high taxes and punishment of the wealthy and corporations for their alleged greed. Our government is a failure and acts like a pack of baboons trailing behind a slaughter house truck for what falls off in the road. Change here can only meant that MORE money is needed, as usual, by the sordid left and their elites will be more than happy to dissect the gains of the ‘rich’, keep much of this for themselves and then chuck a few crumbs to the mentally disnimble who will vote for them and believe in their screeds because they are really besotted with ignorance, sloth, sodomy and drugs. The left cannot explain or even recommend a different course other than to peruse their old, stale, phony quests for more ‘education’ and social programs that have failed. They will try to clone the Great Society and repeat that disaster as long as the ‘rich’ pay for the exercise. They want to legalize drugs.

Frank offers us nothing but a restroke of past leftist disasters. Perhaps he ignored the Jimmy Carter Era.

Here are the issues that Frank the Crank will not put on the table.

[1] Obama is a racist and so is his wife.

[2] Obama is an elitist who believes that he can direct the flow of wealth and resources better than anybody else.

[3] Obama is intimately connected with flagrant and outrageous racists in his church and will not state publicly that he rejects the overt racism he listened to for 20 years. He lies about his knowledge of Jeremiah Wright’ hateful remarks about whites and must have missed his psychotic rants. Frank Rich will print excerpts of his macaca mumbo but not mention the comments of Obama?[10]

[4] Obama will not reject his friend Ayers of 20years.

[5] Obama will not discuss his Saul Alinsky communist background and gutter-grade activism that he began his career with.

[6] Obama will not discuss how he might pay for expensive and foolish social programs.

[7] Obama insists on using ‘diplomacy,’ decoded as appeasement, of our enemies and how he will not pursue the terrorist that bombed the TwinTowers. Did he recently reverse himself on the Jerusalem issue?? He lied and will not support Israel.

[8] Obama will not discuss what he intends to do about illegal immigration.

[9] Obama will not discuss his cap and trade taxation program that will certainly ruin our economy.

Frank Rich will not broach these snarly issues; the complete explanation of several would sink the Obama Ship.  Rich mumbles about ‘change’ in his changeless manner.

The Final Turn of the Crank:

“The selling point of Mr. Obama’s vision of change is not doctrinaire liberalism or Bush-bashing but an inclusiveness that he believes can start to relieve Washington’s gridlock much as it animated his campaign.”

Big time lies here. This is doctrinaire liberalism and Obama’s senate voting record is 100% left liberal. We can translate the word gridlock here as the opposition to confiscatory taxes.

The New York Times is so based in baseless economics and hopeless Marxism that they will suborn lies and the complete swathing of their Marxist candidate in moderate or messianic clothing. No doctrinaire liberalism here!

“This is a fairy tale”—Bill Clinton.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The Babbling Brooks of the NYT Babbles about Lincoln, Mercury Pills and The Grip of Emotions. [?!]

We know that the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- always praises and anoints some person or clustered cabal that is farthest to the left of the left but today the essay transcends both reason and any identifiable attribute of politics.

Brooks begins with some ancient history:

“Lincoln was taking three mercury pills a day, the remedy in those days for people who either suffered from syphilis or feared contracting it. “Lincoln could not eat or sleep,” Daniel Mark Epstein writes in his new book, “The Lincolns.” “He appeared at the statehouse irregularly, hollow-eyed, unshaven, emaciated — an object of pity to his friends and of derision to others.”[2] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Okay, so what is the point? Is Obama on the Gonjo?

“Over the course of his young adulthood, Lincoln built structures around his inner nature. He joined a traditional bourgeois marriage.”

Has Brooks been reading Freud?[3] Where is the sex angle here?

“In the last few years, we may be shifting toward another vision of maturity, one that is impatient with boomer narcissism. Young people today put service at the center of young adulthood. A child is served, but maturity means serving others.”

This reads like a public relations piece. Is this an oblique attack against Hillary?

“Obviously, it’s not fair to compare anybody to Lincoln, but he does illustrate the repertoire of skills we look for in a leader. The central illusion of modern politics is that if only people as virtuous as “us” had power, then things would be better. Candidates get elected by telling people what they want to hear, leading them by using the sugar of their own fantasies.”

Well, yes. The low class wants to hear that the government will tax the pants off the ‘rich’ and give the loot to the ‘poor.’ The freebies abound! Lincoln also had his troops burn crops and farms, steal animals and left many Southerners to starve.  Is this a shot at the rednecks that Obama insulted in San Francisco?

In the hood, gonjo is sugar is fun.

“Somehow a leader conversant with his own failings wouldn’t be as affected by the moral self-approval that afflicts most political movements. He’d be detached from his most fervid followers and merciful and understanding toward foes. He’d have a sense of his own smallness in the sweep of events. He or she would contravene Lord Acton’s dictum and grow sadder and wiser with more power.

All this suggests a maxim for us voters: Don’t only look to see which candidate has the most talent. Look for the one most emotionally gripped by his own failings.”

I don’t have a clue what this means and I wonder if our Babbling Brooks does.

We are looking at some guy who floated up from the criminal confusion of Chicago politics and embraced Saul Alinsky Marxism and associated half of his life with activists, terrorists and psycho racist hate mongers in his church along with seasoned criminals like Rezko[4] who fixed him up with some sugar-coated land deals. Tony Rezko was in tight with the Islamo-Fascists like Elijah Muhammad and a pack of hack Daley Machine black operatives like: Bishop Arthur Brazier, Leon Finney Jr. and Allison Davis.

Is he emotionally gripped? Or does he fear the past.

Maybe Brooks is preparing us for some negative linkages with organized crime, Marxism in the gutters or that supposed video where Michele and the wife of Louis Farrakhan trash whitey. Is Obama an impatient post-boomer with a hidden affliction of narcissism?

Apparently, the New York Times is asking us to give Obama some kind of break here and leads us down the rose petal strew path in classic misdirection, a standard turn-of-the-crank propagandistic trick.

Who knows? After meeting with Hillary last night, somebody needs to take some mercury pills.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com