VIEW MY LATEST SLIDE SHOW

VIEW THE OBAMA COLLECTION

VIEW MY DEMOCRATIC PARTY COLLECTION





Archive for the ‘Democrat retards’ Category

Retard Gore makes appearance on Meet the Press, Liberals outraged!

Monday, July 21st, 2008


complete_idiots_globalwarmi.gif
Ok I had to spit this out before I forgot. I did manage to watch Meet the Press yesterday, the first one I have watched since Tim Russert’s death.
I was shocked to see Al Gore on there. Immediately I turned to Mrs. Snoop and said this is the best example of the impact of Russert’s death and his influence on politics.
There is no way Al Gore would have gone on Meet the Press if Tim were alive.
Al Gore is such a phony piece of shit and reeks of contradictions and utter hypocrisy that Ruseert would have buried his retarded ass.

Gore clearly thought that the liberal Brokaw would go easy on him. Well not according to this moronic liberal blogger.
This particular dude have a hissy fit and is offended that Brokaw actually tried to play partisan questioner and made Gore address some issues that this dude saw as “Rove talking points”.

This is why true liberals are such manic idiot fucks. The point of shows like Meet the Press is to address topics and answer tough questions ones that critics from both sides of the political isle routinely talk about on other talking head shows in particular the online world and talk radio.
This dickhead was actually offended and in his indignation chastised the questioning as “triviality and nonsense.”
Never mind that Brokaw questioned Gore on his energy eating 10,000 square foot mansion, and the fact that most scientists are refuting most of the bullshit in his tard movie that most liberals still process as environmental gospel forget about the fact that many of the scenes in the movie were CGI’ed to provide the viewer with high quality special effects bullshit propaganda.
This blogger along with Al Gore is symptomatic of the problem I have with most hyper hypocrite phony liberals.
Simply questioning them on their illogical mental and intellectual political and social processes is unacceptable.
This blogger quickly loses credibility as he cites Gore’s fraud accomplishments Oscar, Emmy, Nobel Peace Prize and as he states “legitimately the office of the Presidency.”
Can you imagine this jackass STILL at the end of G Dub’s presidency grinding his teeth over the fact that Gore was denied the presidency?
Amazing!

Here is the post, link here.

************

Somewhere in the darkest recesses of the RNC (or from Norquist’s or Rove’s office, your pick) the fax machine was working over time making sure that Tom Brokaw had the latest GOP talking points to discredit Al Gore for his appearance on Meet the Press. You know Al, that over-achiever that managed to win an Oscar, an Emmy, a Nobel Peace Prize and legitimately the office of the Presidency before the Supreme Court overreached and gave it to George W. Bush, the lifetime underachiever. That kind of superiority niggles at a party that believes that government can’t do anything well, so they’ll find anything–and I do mean anything–to detract from Al Gore’s message.

This one is especially laughable though, and truly beneath Brokaw in its clear partisan bent. When the “Draft Al Gore” movement was in full gear, Gore demurred from running again, saying that he wasn’t interested in the political gamesmanship necessary to mount a campaign. Tom Brokaw confronts Gore, worried that he’s sending the wrong message to the children:

BROKAW: Let me ask you about your attitude towards politics these days. I was a little surprised. You’re a man who was in politics at the highest level in this country: in the House of Representatives; in the Senate; Vice President for eight years and yet you said recently, “What politics has become requires a level of tolerance for triviality and artifice and nonsense that I have found in short supply.” Is that the right kind of signal to send to the young people of this country who more than any time in recent memory are deeply involved in the political decisions that we’re making this year? And young people who want to get into the political arena look to Al Gore and he said ‘it’s all about trivia and nonsense.’

Oh good lord. That’s so head-poundingly stupid that I’m surprised that Al Gore took the time to respectfully respond. My first inclination would have been to laugh in Brokaw’s face and point out that those kinds of questions are exactly the kind of triviality and nonsense I have little tolerance for. But it gets worse. Gore’s response merits the concern troll follow up of “but I can hear Rush Limbaugh saying this about you…”

BROKAW: With all due respect, Mr. Vice President, I can already hear your critics and I don’t do Rush Limbaugh, so I will not attempt to. But I can hear him saying on radio, “Well there’s Prince Albert. There he was, 25 years hanging out with lobbyists, raising big money, then he lost and now he’s above the process, calling it trivial and nonsense.”

Tom Brokaw = Concern Troll. Gore goes on to encourage Americans to be on the forefront of alternative energy development and to raise awareness of the ramifications to our environment if we don’t and Tom Brokaw–elder statesman of NBC News–wants him to be worried about Rush Limbaugh poking fun at him.

Sphere: Related Content

55 MPH: No Blood for Oil

Friday, July 11th, 2008


carter55.jpg
This from The American Thinker

The Seventies have returned in all of their glory, with inflation looming, high gas prices, alternative fuels, CAFE standards, and now, you guessed it, an attempt to bring back the 55 mile per hour speed limit. RINO John Warner wants to return the era of Disco, ostensibly to save gas at the expense of human freedom and of lives.

James Baxter, President of the National Motorist Association, is perplexed by this retro attempt at mindless stupidity:

“The same forces that resisted the use of fire many thousands of years ago are still with us, only now they are advocating the return of the national maximum speed limit of 55 miles per hour.

“Anyone who endured the last 22 year long “experiment“ with the “folly of 55“ knows that this proposal goes beyond being absurd.

“The only likely beneficiaries are insurance companies (ticket surcharges), local governments that live off speed traps, P.R. firms (the genius creators of public service ads like “Save Gas Save Lives, Drive 55“) and perhaps the radar detector industry. In return, the driving public is treated to aggravation, maddening traffic flow, tickets, bloated insurance premiums, and billions of hours of lost time.

“As in 1973, the justification for a snail’s pace speed limit on major highways is that it will save gasoline (and now reduce global warming).”

READ THE REST

Sphere: Related Content

Remember In 1976, America called for “Change”.

Sunday, June 29th, 2008

Does America really want this type of Obama “CHANGE”

Friday, June 27th, 2008


brick.jpg
Oooo another story exposing phony ass corrupt Obama and his homies. Your next president, Lincoln bedroom occupants !

Found this via the Boston Globe on just what Obama’s leadership on developing government-private housing projects did to public housing in Chicago.
I would say that this story should open eyes and send up huge red flags but I won’t hold my breath.
Obama supporters won’t believe the story anyway cause the most important aspect of his candidacy is his Negroness.
Who cares that he fucked over the very people having daily orgasms over his pending occupation of the White House.

****

The squat brick buildings of Grove Parc Plaza, in a dense neighborhood that Barack Obama represented for eight years as a state senator, hold 504 apartments subsidized by the federal government for people who can’t afford to live anywhere else.

But it’s not safe to live here.

About 99 of the units are vacant, many rendered uninhabitable by unfixed problems, such as collapsed roofs and fire damage. Mice scamper through the halls. Battered mailboxes hang open. Sewage backs up into kitchen sinks. In 2006, federal inspectors graded the condition of the complex an 11 on a 100-point scale – a score so bad the buildings now face demolition.

Grove Parc has become a symbol for some in Chicago of the broader failures of giving public subsidies to private companies to build and manage affordable housing – an approach strongly backed by Obama as the best replacement for public housing.

The campaign did not respond to questions about whether Obama was aware of the problems with buildings in his district during his time as a state senator, nor did it comment on the roles played by people connected to the senator.

Among those tied to Obama politically, personally, or professionally are:

Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to Obama’s presidential campaign and a member of his finance committee. Jarrett is the chief executive of Habitat Co., which managed Grove Parc Plaza from 2001 until this winter and co-managed an even larger subsidized complex in Chicago that was seized by the federal government in 2006, after city inspectors found widespread problems.

Allison Davis, a major fund-raiser for Obama’s US Senate campaign and a former lead partner at Obama’s former law firm. Davis, a developer, was involved in the creation of Grove Parc and has used government subsidies to rehabilitate more than 1,500 units in Chicago, including a North Side building cited by city inspectors last year after chronic plumbing failures resulted in raw sewage spilling into several apartments.

Antoin “Tony” Rezko, perhaps the most important fund-raiser for Obama’s early political campaigns and a friend who helped the Obamas buy a home in 2005. Rezko’s company used subsidies to rehabilitate more than 1,000 apartments, mostly in and around Obama’s district, then refused to manage the units, leaving the buildings to decay to the point where many no longer were habitable.

Campaign finance records show that six prominent developers – including Jarrett, Davis, and Rezko – collectively contributed more than $175,000 to Obama’s campaigns over the last decade and raised hundreds of thousands more from other donors. Rezko alone raised at least $200,000, by Obama’s own accounting.

Read the full story: Grim proving ground for Obama’s housing policy

Sphere: Related Content

Democratic Party Platform of 1980 - August 11th, 1980

Thursday, June 19th, 2008

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Compare what is being said today with what was said almost 28 years ago…

But first listen to another tard Democrat

(LINK)
Our current economic situation is unique. In 1977, we inherited a severe recession from the Republicans. The Democratic Administration and the Democratic Congress acted quickly to reduce the unacceptably high levels of unemployment and to stimulate the economy. And we succeeded. We recovered from that deep recession and our economy was strengthened and revitalized. As that fight was won, the enormous increases in foreign oil prices—120 percent last year—and declining productivity fueled an inflationary spiral that also had to be fought. The Democrats did that, and inflation has begun

Energy—Our dependence on foreign off has decreased—in 1977 we imported 8.8 million barrels of oil per day, and our nation is now importing approximately 6.5 million per day, a decline of 26 percent.

Our citizens see their family budgets stretched to the breaking point by an explosion of energy costs, while the profits of oil companies multiply to record levels. Last year’s 120 percent increase in energy prices by OPEC led to a drastic decrease in the ability of needy families to pay for other necessities of life. The recently enacted low income energy assistance legislation is helping, but it is providing only $1 of help for every $4 in increased costs that have been imposed upon the poor.

Incentives for energy conservation by residents, business and industry in urban areas including incentives to convert oil facilities to coal and the construction of new coal-fired replacement plants;

For the past four years, the Democratic Party’s highest legislative priority has been the development of our nation’s first comprehensive energy policy. Our actions were necessitated by the Republican Administration’s policy that fostered dependence on foreign oil. This Republican legacy led to America’s petroleum paralysis, which weakened our security, undermined our strength abroad, threatened our environment and endangered our economic health.

In perhaps no other domestic area did we inherit such a dangerous situation:

—Domestic production of oil and natural gas was steadily declining, with price controls discouraging exploration and production;

—Natural gas shortages were regularly plaguing parts of our country;

—Our dependence on foreign oil was increasing every year;

—Wasteful energy practices existed in our industries, homes and transportation;

—Solar and other renewable energy resources were being almost completely ignored;

—Synthetic fuel production had been stalled;

—The federal government was not promoting energy conservation;

—Our allies were unwilling to make adequate efforts to reduce their energy consumption; and

—Our energy policy was being made by nearly a dozen different agencies and bureaus throughout the federal government.

The struggle to develop an energy policy was difficult and time-consuming. Tough decisions, especially in the area of oil price decontrol, were necessary to reduce our dependence of foreign oil.

Not all of our energy problems have been solved. Yet the achievements of the past four years leave little doubt that we are finally serious about the problems caused by our excessive reliance on foreign oil. As a result of our national energy policy, oil imports will be cut in half by the end of this decade, saving our nation hundreds of billions of dollars. A framework is now in place that will permit further progress in the 1980s. Our economic security demands that we drastically reduce the massive flow of dollars into the OPEC treasuries and oil company bank accounts at the expense of American consumers and business.

Our progress on energy has been realized because we have achieved four principal goals:

—Incentives have been provided for the production of new energy sources;

—Incentives for new oil production have been added, together with a windfall profits tax, which will fund low income energy assistance and energy research and development;

—Incentives have been provided to encourage conservation of our existing energy resources; and

—Improved international energy cooperation has reduced our dependence on OPEC.

These actions have produced enormous energy benefits to our nation:

—We are importing one million barrels of oil a day less than last year;

—Domestic natural gas exploration and production are at record-high levels;

Domestic oil exploration is at a 20-year high, and the decline in domestic production has been averted;

—Per capita energy consumption is decreasing;

—Use of solar energy has increased considerably, and gasohol production has increased by 600 percent;

—Coal production has increased, and foreign markets for our coal have been developed;

—Gasoline consumption is 8 percent less than last year.

In the 1980s, this program can be improved, as the framework laid in the last four years is used to ensure our energy security for all time.

America’s energy future requires a continued strong national policy based on two fundamental principles: efficient use of energy that will conserve our resources, preserve our economy and create jobs for Americans; and development of secure, environmentally safe and reasonably priced energy sources.

It is—and must be—the goal of the Democratic Party to mobilize this nation to use energy efficiently without asking Americans to suffer the loss of our strong economy and hard-earned standard of living. Energy efficiency, especially in buildings, transportation, and industrial production, must be made this nation’s top priority.

The following specific actions must be taken.

We must make energy conservation our highest priority, not only to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but also to guarantee that our children and grandchildren have an adequate supply of energy. If we can convince one of every four drivers exceeding the 55 mile per hour speed limit to reduce their speed, we can save 100,000 barrels a day. Conservation is the cheapest form of energy production.

We must establish a massive residential energy conservation grant program. We must provide subsidized loans, direct financial assistance, and other substantial incentives to make all residences in the United States energy efficient, through upgraded insulation, heating, cooling and waterheating. Special incentives should he afforded for the use of renewable energy resources such as passive and active solar energy systems. Our goal should be to ensure that all economically justified energy efficiency investments are made by 1990.

We should use our energy programs to aid in rebuilding the industrial heartland. Industry must be given financial incentives to improve the energy efficiency of industrial processes and to build substantial amounts of generating capacity through co-generation.

We must implement mandatory Building Energy Performance Standards (BEPS) to encourage the design and construction of energy efficient buildings. Energy efficiency standards should apply to all new construction. Implementation of energy efficiency standards should begin with federal government buildings. In addition, the federal government should lead the way in implementing solar and energy efficiency improvements programs through its loan and insurance agencies by requiring energy conservation standards for federally assisted properties.

In recognition of the potential for substantial energy savings if our most efficient methods of transportation are utilized, we must provide direct economic assistance where private capital is unavailable to improve those means of transport.

Major new efforts must be launched to develop synthetic and alternative renewable energy sources. In pursuing a strong program of synthetic fuel plants we must also be sensitive to environmental and water concerns. The federal government must help eliminate red tape involved in the construction of vital energy facilities. The Energy Mobilization Board, an essential mechanism to speed the construction of vital energy facilities, should be able to override state and local substantive law only with the consent of Congress and the President.

The Democratic Party regards coal as our nation’s greatest energy resource. It must play a decisive role in America’s energy future. We must increase our use of coal. To accomplish this, we must see that shippers are not overburdened with excessive rates for transportation. Severance taxes levied for depletion of natural resources should be equitable. We must make clean coal conversion a reality. To this end, we will assist utilities that are large enough to permit coal conversion while maintaining or improving air quality. We must also provide incentives for industrial boiler coal conversion. Goal conversion can and must be accomplished in a manner that protects public health, nationally, regionally and locally. It can and must increase the use of coal, reduce the demand for oil, and provide employment where jobs are needed the most.

The federal government should accept its responsibility as trustee for the American Indian and Alaska Native tribes to ensure that tribal resources develop at a pace that preserves the existing life-style and that the tribes participate in the contracting process for resource development with full knowledge of the environmental tradeoffs. The federal government must continue to cooperate with tribal governments in such matters as changes in the use of sacred and religious areas. The Democratic Party believes that American Indian and Alaska Native reservations should remain the permanent homeland for these peoples.

We recognize that Hawaii, U.S. territories and Trust territories in the Pacific Basin are particularly vulnerable because of their total dependence on imported oil for meeting their energy needs. These insular areas do not have access to the alternative sources of energy that are available elsewhere. Consequently, the Democratic Party recommends that these areas, where feasible, be chosen as sites for demonstrationand/or pilot alternative energy projects, especially ocean thermal energy conversion, solar and wind.

We must lead the Western World in developing a program for increased use of coal in Europe, Japan, and the developing nations.

Oil exploration on federal lands must be accelerated, consistent with environmental protections.

Offshore energy leasing and development should be conditioned on full protection of the environment and marine resources. Lease sales should proceed only after appropriate safeguards necessary to preserve and protect vital natural resources are put in place. The determination of what safeguards are needed must be based on a complete assessment of the effects of offshore activity on the marine and coastal environment, and must be made in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency, the federal agencies charged with protecting our nation’s fisheries and other environmental resources.

Solar energy use must be increased, and strong efforts, including continued financial support, must be undertaken to make certain that we achieve the goal of having solar energy account for 20 percent of our total energy by the year 2000.

To ensure that we reach the 20 percent goal, the Democratic Party commits itself to a federal program for solar or other renewable resources that exceeds the federal commitment to synthetic fuels. A greater share of federal funds should be committed to basic research and must be devoted to the development of renewable energy resources and fusion research and development. Moreover, we support the commercialization of solar, wind, low-head hydro, biomass and other renewable resources as quickly as possible through direct assistance, investment and loan guarantees in addition to monies available from the solar bank. The Democratic Party vigorously supports substantial funding for the construction of an engineering test facility for fusion technology. Fusion energy is a safe, clean alternative source of energy which can be used to generate electricity efficiently.

We must encourage research and development of hydrogen or electric powered vehicles. We must fully commit ourselves to an alcohol fuel program. The federal government should expand its use of alcohol fuels in government and military vehicles. This will help reduce surplus feed grain and help to stabilize prices. The Democratic Party pledges that production of fuel-grade alcohol will be increased until at least a target of 500 million barrels of ethanol by 1981 is achieved.

A stand-by gasoline rationing plan must be adopted for use in the event of a serious energy supply interruption. In times of supply interruption, rationing is essential for equitable and prompt distribution of gas to the public. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve should be filled as market conditions permit, consistent with the requirements of existing law.

We must impose a moratorium on the acquisition of competing coal companies and solar energy companies by major oil companies.

Legislation must be enacted to prohibit purchases by oil companies of energy or non-energy companies unless the purchase would enhance competition.

The major oil companies must be responsible and accountable in their production, importation and distribution of fossil fuels. Oil is as basic to our economy, defense, and general welfare as electric power and money. Consequently, the oil companies must be invested with public purpose. To accomplish this objective, we support strengthened leasing regulations, reporting requirements and monitoring by the departments of Energy and Justice.

Thorough investigations of the compliance of the off companies with energy price laws and regulations must be continued, and tough penalties imposed in the event of non-compliance. The Department of Energy, consistent with the law, should share its energy data with the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission.

We must make conservation and renewable energy our nation’s energy priorities for the future. Through the federal government’s commitment to renewable energy sources and energy efficiency, and as alternative fuels become available in the future, we will retire nuclear power plants in an orderly manner.

We must give the highest priority to dealing with the nuclear waste disposal problem. Current efforts to develop a safe, environmentally sound nuclear waste disposal plan must be continued and intensified.

The NRC shall issue no licenses or permits for new nuclear plants until the Kemeny Commission recommendations are fully implemented.

Existing plants must be required to meet the safer recommendations of the Kemeny Commission. The Democratic Party supports prompt implementation of their recommendations. No plant unable to meet these standards can be allowed to operate.

Safe permanent disposal of all high-level radioactive waste and transuranic waste should be the primary responsibility of the federal government, in consultation and concurrence with state, local, tribal, and territorial governments throughout the entire decision-making process, including the actual siting and operation of repositories. Neither the federal government nor the state or tribal or territorial governments should be permitted to act in a manner that forces an unsafe resolution of this problem or prevents a safe resolution from being accomplished. It is, therefore, essential that state and tribal governments, acting according to their constitutional processes, have the power to reject unsafe sites within their borders. Clear standards should be developed so that the courts may determine whether the federal government or a state or tribe is acting in an arbitrary manner. Every state should be responsible for the management and disposal of all low-level waste generated by non-defense sources within its boundaries. Where appropriate, this responsibility should be exercised through state regional compacts. There should be more federal funding for research and development of safer, more efficient methods of radioactive waste disposal.

Funds generated by the Windfall Profits Tax must be used to expand mass transit. Federal assistance should be provided for construction and operation costs.

Sphere: Related Content

Al Gore’s mental capacity is clearly diminishing; he is confusing the US with Cuba

Thursday, June 19th, 2008


goremadsr1.jpg
This is from the blog Frankly Speaking

Post: Let’s Have Some Perspective Here

Perhaps you’ve been under a rock recently and didn’t hear the following quote by Gore Vidal.

“The president behaved like a virtual criminal but we didn’t have the courage to sack him for fear of violating the American Constitution. We live in a dictatorship. We have a fascist government… which controls the media.”

It is idiots like Gore Vidal that make America look bad to the rest of the world, not conservatives. But I’ll get back to that in a minute. First, let’s talk a little about just what Vidal has to hate about America.

Maybe it’s the fact that he can walk in to any supermarket in America on any day of the week and find more food than your average Ethiopian city.

Or maybe it’s the fact that you are free to attend any worship service you want, of any religion you desire, at any time. Or not attend. The choice is yours, and it’s guaranteed in our constitution.

If you wish to help defend this country, you are free to join any of the branches of service. If, on the other hand, you wish to live under the protection provided by the men and women who serve this nation, you don’t have to serve. Because we are an all voluntary military, unlike most countries in the world.

If you decide that you don’t agree with one of our elected officials, you are free to protest, write letters to the editor, or spout off your insanity to a news organization like old Gore Vidal did above. And here’s the best part, jack booted thugs are not going to show up at your home and drag you off in the middle of the night, never to be heard from again. Try that in Cuba. Or Venezuela. Or Zimbabwe. Or one of a dozen other utopian’s societies that are idolized by those on the left.

READ THE REST HERE

Sphere: Related Content

Another RETARD Democrat proposes nationalizing the US oil industry

Thursday, June 19th, 2008

re·tard

Slang: Disparaging. a. a mentally retarded person.

b. a person who is stupid, obtuse, or ineffective in some way: a hopeless social retard.

***********

Since I was criticized for using such an offensive term towards Barack Obama I figured I should post the definition.
I specifically use the term for a reason.
Again just think about the Maxine Waters video and now watch this fucken idiot.
Any politician who would contemplate nationalizing the oil industry is simply a retard.
The notion is not even remotely logical.
And just think, this dude is dumb enough to have a press conference displaying his ignorance.
I’m just amazed at just how inept these elected officials are and just think Obama I bet agrees with these people and he could be YOUR next president. LOL!
Anywho, found this on Wizbang.

This is the second Democrat who thinks Marxist and tyrannical thug Hugo Chavez has all the right ideas. I know there are people out there who are pointing fingers and screaming “Communists!” as if doing that would scare the Democrats into backtracking, but what they may not realize is that these folks probably don’t have a problem with being called communists because, based upon what they’re calling for, they obviously seem to think communist ideals are the right ones.

Link: sevenload.com

READ THE FULL POST HERE

Sphere: Related Content

Dear Democrats: Why Does The Saudi King Know What To Do About Gas Prices, And You Don’t?

Wednesday, June 18th, 2008

King Abdullah seems to GET IT about how to deal with the crisis at the pumps…while our friends in the majority on the Hill continue to have no freaking clue.From The Independent:

Next month, the Saudis will be pumping an extra half-a-million barrels of oil a day compared to last month, bringing total Saudi production to 9.7 million barrels a day, their highest ever level. But the world’s biggest oil exporters are coupling the increase with an appeal to western Europe to cut fuel taxes to lower the price of petrol to consumers.

You hear that Democrats?

CHECK OUT THE REST FROM HICK POLITICS


you_suck_and_thats_sad2.JPG

Sphere: Related Content

Rasmussen: Plurality of TARD Democrats support … nationalizing America’s oil industry

Tuesday, June 17th, 2008

This Via Hot Air

I was going to lead with something about McCain wanting to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling — duly qualified, of course, with conservationist panders about leaving the final decision up to the states, keeping ANWR off-limits, etc etc — but this is bigger news, isn’t it?

Suddenly that infamous Maxine Waters clip seems less funny than ominous. Great Society II fever — catch it:

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 29% of voters favor nationalizing the oil industry. Just 47% are opposed and 24% are not sure.

The survey found that a plurality of Democrats (37%) believe the oil industry should be nationalized. Just 32% of voters in Barack Obama’s party disagree with that approach. Republicans oppose nationalizing the oil industry by a 66% to 16% margin. Unaffiliated voters are opposed by a 47% to 33% margin…

Data released yesterday showed that Americans believe developing new energy sources is the best long-term solution to the nation’s energy problem. Forty-seven percent (47%) said private companies were more likely to solve the nation’s energy problem than government research programs. But, at the same time, only 52% said companies should be allowed to keep the profits from the discovery of any alternative fuel sources.

READ THE REST

I posting this again because maybe it did not sink in how retarded some of these Democrat liberal hacks are…

Sphere: Related Content

Congressman Kanjorski doesn’t apologize to anyone

Thursday, June 12th, 2008

MUST SEE VIDEO

Retard Liberal Barack Pushes Windfall Profits

Tuesday, June 10th, 2008


1d.jpg
This is by Neal Bortz from the Nealz Nuze section

Barack Obama has been toying with the idea of imposing a tax on windfall profits on US oil companies, and it will definitely be a part of his presidential platform.

Take a look at this latest statement he made in Raleigh, North Carolina. He said,

“I’ll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we’ll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills.”

Gee, that sounds like a wealth distribution plan if I’ve ever heard one. Rob from the rich to give to the “poor.”

Ok .. first of all, just what are “windfall profits?” Does anyone have a handy definition? Might I offer one? Damn right I might. Try this: “A tax levied on a industry by a politician eager to pander to economically ignorant voters who, for whatever reason, are upset with that industry.”

This term “windfall profits” has become another buzzword for liberals, and particularly the Barack Obama campaign. A majority of Americans probably couldn’t tell you the first thing about windfall profits … but the word inflicts these feelings of evil and wealth envy. Therefore, the Obama campaign will continue to use this fancy term to get you all riled up. Politicians are good at that.

Once again we run up against the economic ignorance of the American people. Most people couldn’t tell you the difference between a profit and a profit margin if their flat-screen TVs depended on it. The profit margins – the amount of money they earn for a dollar of sales – have actually declined a bit. Banking institutions, cosmetics companies and pharmaceutical companies are just part of a long list of businesses that earn more than the evil oil companies.

Hopefully most Americans have enough economic smarts to know that the profits from these oil companies belong to the shareholders. Problem is, these people probably think that the shares in these oil companies are fat-cat insiders just reaping millions a year from their investments.

Wrong.

Throughout the oil and natural gas industries only about 1.5% of the stock is owned by company executives. Now this statistic doesn’t come from the oil companies themselves, the numbers – and the numbers that follow – come from Bill Clinton’s undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs; one Robert J. Shapiro.

Here’s what Shapiro has to say about the ownership of the other 98.5% of oil company shares: “The data show that ownership of industry shares is broadly middle class, with the majority of industry shares held by institutional investors, often on behalf of millions of Americans through mutual funds, pension funds and individual retirement accounts.”

So … when Barack Obama talks about a windfall profits tax, just who’s money is he going to seize? He’s talking about taking the savings, investments and retirement funds of middle class Americans.

Pardon my language … but would you folks please wise up out there? Quit being so damned ignorant to what is really going on!

You want more details on just who owns the shares? OK, I have those details. Just remember, when Obama talks about windfall profits — THESE are the people who’s money he plans to seize:

Again … from the Shapiro study:

Almost 43 percent of oil and natural gas company shares are owned by mutual funds and asset management companies that have mutual funds. Mutual funds manage accounts for 55 million U.S. households with a median income of $68,700.
Twenty seven percent of shares are owned by other institutional investors like pension funds. In 2004, more than 2,600 pension funds run by federal, state and local governments held almost $64 billion in shares of U.S. oil and natural gas companies. These funds represent the major retirement security for the nation’s current and retired soldiers, teachers, and police and fire personnel at every level of government.
Fourteen percent of shares are held in IRA and other personal retirement accounts. Forty five million U.S. households have IRA and other personal retirement accounts, with an average account value of just over $22,000.

You see? The people listed in this study are … YOU! Not fat-cat oil company executives. Not George Bush and Dick Cheney. This is YOUR money he’s after … YOUR money he wants to seize to create yet another government entitlement program … helping people buy gas and pay electricity bills.

Someone (perhaps John Wayne) once said that it is too bad stupidity isn’t painful. Well, in this case is just might be. Look at those median incomes above. That’s you, my friends … and if you sit by and let this anti-capitalist leftist rail against the oil companies; if you sit by and let him pander to the ignorance of the American voters with this idiotic “windfall profits tax” crap … then try not to bitch when your retirement doesn’t turn out to be as sweet as you thought it would.

By the way … if you want to call BS on me with these numbers and statistics, by my guest. Here’s the link for you to read the study for yourself.

Knock yourself out, sport.

Sphere: Related Content

Remember when even the Democrats questioned Obama’s “experience?”

Wednesday, June 4th, 2008


Exactly why today Hillary is losing her mind!
kickingandscreaming.jpg

This from Red State 

And it is not just Hillary Clinton questioning Barack Obama’s judgment and experience. We have this whole host of Democrats who were and probably still are concerned:

Sen. Biden: ABC’s George Stephanopoulos: “You were asked is he ready. You said ‘I think he can be ready, but right now I don’t believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training. Sen. Biden: “I think that I stand by the statement.” (ABC’s “This Week,” 8/19/07)
 
Sen. Biden: “Having talking points on foreign policy doesn’t get you there.” (”Biden Lashes Out At Obama,” ABC News’ “Political Radar” Blog, blogs.abcnews.com, 8/2/07) 

Sen. Dodd: “Over the past several days. … Senator Obama’s assertions about foreign and military affairs have been, frankly, confusing and confused.
He has made threats he should not make and made unwise categorical statements about military options.” (Anne E. Kornblut, “Obama Again Stirs Up Rivals With Statement On Use Of Nukes,” The Washington Post’s “The Trail” Blog, blog.washingtonpost.com, 8/2/07)

READ THE REST HERE

Remember “The Inevitable Hillary”

Sphere: Related Content

Who is a bigger liar fraud bastard, Obama or Hillary? It’s a damm coin flip!!

Tuesday, May 27th, 2008


obamapinnochio.jpg

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama admitted on Tuesday he was wrong to say his uncle helped liberate the Nazis’ Auschwitz concentration camp after Republicans said Soviet troops freed the camp.

Obama’s campaign said the candidate meant to say that his great-uncle, Charlie Payne, had helped liberate a part of the Buchenwald camp, not Auschwitz.

“Yesterday he mistakenly referred to Auschwitz instead of Buchenwald in telling of his personal experience of a soldier in his family who served heroically,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

Burton said in the statement that Obama’s great uncle served in the 89th Infantry Division that entered Germany in 1945 and on April 4 overran Ohrdruf, a subcamp of the Buchenwald concentration camp.

Obama had made the Auschwitz reference in a Memorial Day speech on Monday.

More than 1 million people, most of them Jews, were killed at Auschwitz, an extermination camp in Poland. Buchenwald in Germany was mainly a forced labor camp, where some 56,000 people are believed to have died.

“I had an uncle who was … part of the first American troops to go into Auschwitz and liberate the concentration camps,” Obama said.

“And the story in our family was is that when he came home, he just went up into the attic and he didn’t leave the house for six months,” he said.

The Republican National Committee quickly pointed out that the Red Army had liberated Auschwitz in 1945, not American forces.

Sphere: Related Content

Maxine Waters: Socialize the Oil Companies

Tuesday, May 27th, 2008

This from Stop The ACLU


gas.jpg
Glenn Beck: Government isn’t the solution, its the problem. 

Guess what this liberal will be all about? Socializing!


Link: sevenload.com

Kim Preistap breaks it down:

Now, if the US government and the Democrats like Ms. Waters were truly interested in erasing the oil companies’ record profits and helping the American consumers, then they would be doing everything they could to increase oil and gasoline production so as to saturate the market. The price of oil and gasoline would then drop through the floor. Remember when oil was $8 a barrel and gasoline was a mere $.95? Oil companies were merging left and right because they couldn’t stay in business on their own and the price of gas wasn’t on the American people’s radar. If punishing the oil companies is truly what Democrats like Maxine Waters really want to do, then they would glut the market. They would change the law so that the supply of oil and gasoline vastly outpaced demand and oil and gas prices dropped.

But they won’t do that because they don’t care about the American consumers. They don’t want the American people using more oil or gasoline. They want the American people to hurt at the pump so they don’t drive as much. Why? Because Democrats actually think the America people are the problem in all of this to begin with.

The oil executive’s answer?: We’ve heard this before, its called Hugo Chavez. This is a hero of the left. Note to Congress: Read Atlass Shrugged.

Also read the Astute Blogger’s post on the slipping mask of the Democrats.

Sphere: Related Content

Obama’s Memorial Day Tard Moments

Tuesday, May 27th, 2008


obama_dope.jpg

This from Powerline video via Michelle Malkin, Gateway Pundit subject Line: Zombie Time!… Obama Sees Dead People at New Mexico Speech LOL!!!! - The Roadkill Diaries has: Raising The Dead - Is there nothing Obama can’t do?

Barack Obama must be the most gaffe-prone politician in memory. Today, he delivered a Memorial Day speech in New Mexico. After greeting the local Democratic Party dignitaries, he began:

On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today — our sense of patriotism is particularly strong.

Memorial Day honors those who have died in our nation’s military service. Is it possible that Obama does not know this? Sometimes the things that come out of his mouth defy understanding.

What was really offensive about Obama’s New Mexico appearance, however, was what followed his very brief, but generally appropriate, tribute to America’s war dead. He continued with a town hall-style question and answer period that cast veterans in the only role with which the Democrats are comfortable–victims–and sought to politicize the holiday. A few excerpts:

OBAMA: We’re going to have hundreds of thousands of new veterans coming in, many of them who suffer post-traumatic stress disorder. They are not being diagnosed quickly enough, they’re not getting the services that they need quickly enough.And, sadly, the group of veterans that are probably being most neglected in this area are women veterans. We’ve got to do a better job of creating facilities…

(APPLAUSE)

… specifically for women veterans.

Read the rest of this Powerline post here 

The video

##################

Malkin also has: Obama’s uncle did what?

Obama also spoke about his uncle, who was part of the American brigade that helped to liberate Auschwitz. He said the family legend is that, upon returning from war, his uncle spent six months in an attic. “Now obviously, something had really affected him deeply, but at that time there just weren’t the kinds of facilities to help somebody work through that kind of pain,” Obama said. “That’s why this idea of making sure that every single veteran, when they are discharged, are screened for post-traumatic stress disorder and given the mental health services that they need – that’s why it’s so important.”

Purple Avenger, blogging at Ace of Spades:

Auschwitz of course is in Poland. It was liberated by the Red Army on Jan 27 1945. Poland, on most maps is usually placed to the east of Germany, although we may need to investigate the geography textbooks the Messiah used as a child…The Allies were wrapping up the battle of the bulge in late January of 1945 — the Rhine crossings were still well into the future when Auschwitz was liberated.

Either Obama’s uncle served in the Red Army, or he’s spinning Clintonesque lies about Auschwitz to sell his government programs. Hey, it’s for a good cause…but it’s not enough for him. It has to be personal. It has to be all about him.It’s like Bill Clinton whining about those Arkansas church burnings he witnessed as a child–church burnings which never actually happened.

I think the Obamessiah just out Tuzla’d Hillary. The man is…nefarious.

Sphere: Related Content

‘Remember Bobby Kennedy’ Racist Hillary Clinton hoping for “magic bullet” to steal the nomination.

Friday, May 23rd, 2008

This bitch is psychotic. The people who support this nutty retarded skank for president should be ashamed of themselves.
I’m seeing way too many people making excuses for her comment just like they did when she lied about the “sniper fire” crap.
I swear if something happens to Obama she would have to be at the top of the list of suspects.

Sphere: Related Content

Obama is definitely NOT smarter than a 5th grader, someone please send this dude a map!

Monday, May 19th, 2008

“What it says is that I’m not very well known in that part of the country,” Obama said. “Sen. Clinton, I think, is much better known, coming from a nearby state of Arkansas. So it’s not surprising that she would have an advantage in some of those states in the middle.”

Read all about it here


ky.gif

Sphere: Related Content

McCain’s Assault on Reason - Another Al Gore for president.

Wednesday, May 14th, 2008

book2.JPGBy Dr. Roy Spencer - From National Review

John McCain’s global-warming speech on Monday made it clear that there will be no presidential candidate this year willing to question the assertion that global warming (a.k.a. “climate change”) is manmade, or the assertion that we can fix global warming by passing a few laws.

Along with Clinton and Obama, McCain’s proposal to attack global warming now gives voters three choices for a car color — as long as it is black. Like Clinton and Obama, McCain’s proposal involves a “cap and trade” mechanism to legislatively limit CO2 emissions in the coming years, with the free market minimizing the economic damage by allowing a trading of emission credits between companies. He also includes an allowance for carbon offsets, although everyone (except Al Gore) believes this to be more smoke-and-mirrors than a real-world strategy for reducing carbon emissions.

What worries me is the widespread misperception that we can do anything substantial about carbon emissions without seriously compromising economic growth. To be sure, forcing a reduction in CO2 emissions will help spur investment in new energy technologies. But so does a price tag of $126 for a barrel of oil. Finding a replacement for carbon-based energy will require a huge investment of wealth, and destroying wealth is not a very good first step toward that goal.

When the public finds out how much any legislation that punishes energy use is going to cost them, with no guarantee that anything we do will have a measurable impact on future climate, there will be a revolt just like the one now materializing in the U.K. and the EU. At some point, as they are faced with the stark reality that mankind’s requirement for an abundant source of energy cannot simply be legislated out of existence, the public will begin asking, “Just how sure are we that humans are causing global warming?”

And this is where the science establishment has, in my view, betrayed the public’s trust.

Even though there has never been a single scientific paper published that has ruled out natural variability for most of the warming we’ve seen since 1850, Big Science has managed to convince politicians and much of the public that the science is settled. Apparently, our addition of nine molecules of carbon dioxide to each 100,000 molecules of air over the last 150 years can now be blamed for anything and everything we choose. Hurricanes, tornadoes, heat waves, floods, glaciers flowing toward the sea…. all of these used to happen naturally, but no more.

The warming that allowed the Vikings to farm in Greenland 1,000 years ago was surely natural. But we are now told that warming in Greenland today is surely manmade. Glaciers retreating in western Canada have revealed evidence of previous forests, showing that warming and cooling cycles do indeed occur, even without SUVs. Yet the SUV is now the scapegoat for retreating glaciers.

McCain pointed to shrinking Arctic sea ice and collapsing Antarctic ice shelves as obvious evidence that humans are to blame, even though the sea ice did the same thing in the 1920s and 1930s, and those ice shelves must break off eventually, as new glacial ice flows toward the sea to take their place.

But McCain has made it clear that the science really does not matter anyway because, even if humans are not to blame for global warming, stopping carbon-dioxide emissions is the right thing to do. And if we had another choice for most of our energy needs, I might be willing to accept such a claim as harmless enough.

But carbon dioxide is necessary for life on Earth, and I have amccainb.jpg difficult time calling something so fundamentally important a “pollutant.” Maybe the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is higher now than it has been in hundreds of thousands of years. So what? I am increasingly convinced that its influence on climate pales in comparison to the influence that natural climate events like El Niño and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation have on regional climate. Indeed, most of the warming we’ve seen in the last century might well be due to these natural modes of climate variability alone.

The trouble is that no one has been funded by the government to investigate such a possibility, and the mandate for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is to address manmade climate change — not natural climate change.

So, here we are with bad science ready to support bad policy decisions that will lead to bad economic times ahead, and no presidential candidate who is willing to ask the hard questions. While we hate to be pandered to by politicians, in this case I can only hope that they really are pandering — that this is hot air and not prospective policy.

— Dr. Roy W. Spencer is a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He is author of the new book, Climate Confusion: How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians, and Misguided Policies that Hurt the Poor.

Sphere: Related Content

Look for Obama to plagiarize this old Jimmy Carter energy speech

Tuesday, May 13th, 2008

Primary Sources: The “Crisis of Confidence” Speech July 15, 1979

obamasmilegif.gif

Carter: What I have to say to you now about energy is simple and vitally important.Point one: I am tonight setting a clear goal for the energy policy of the United States. Beginning this moment, this nation will never use more foreign oil than we did in 1977 — never. From now on, every new addition to our demand for energy will be met from our own production and our own conservation. The generation-long growth in our dependence on foreign oil will be stopped dead in its tracks right now and then reversed as we move through the 1980s, for I am tonight setting the further goal of cutting our dependence on foreign oil by one-half by the end of the next decade — a saving of over 4-1/2 million barrels of imported oil per day.

Point two: To ensure that we meet these targets, I will use my presidential authority to set import quotas. I’m announcing tonight that for 1979 and 1980, I will forbid the entry into this country of one drop of foreign oil more than these goals allow. These quotas will ensure a reduction in imports even below the ambitious levels we set at the recent Tokyo summit.

Point three: To give us energy security, I am asking for the most massive peacetime commitment of funds and resources in our nation’s history to develop America’s own alternative sources of fuel — from coal, from oil shale, from plant products for gasohol, from unconventional gas, from the sun.

I propose the creation of an energy security corporation to lead this effort to replace 2-1/2 million barrels of imported oil per day by 1990. The corporation I will issue up to $5 billion in energy bonds, and I especially want them to be in small denominations so that average Americans can invest directly in America’s energy security.

Just as a similar synthetic rubber corporation helped us win World War II, so will we mobilize American determination and ability to win the energy war. Moreover, I will soon submit legislation to Congress calling for the creation of this nation’s first solar bank, which will help us achieve the crucial goal of 20 percent of our energy coming from solar power by the year 2000.

These efforts will cost money, a lot of money, and that is why Congress must enact the windfall profits tax without delay. It will be money well spent. Unlike the billions of dollars that we ship to foreign countries to pay for foreign oil, these funds will be paid by Americans to Americans. These funds will go to fight, not to increase, inflation and unemployment.

Point four: I’m asking Congress to mandate, to require as a matter of law, that our nation’s utility companies cut their massive use of oil by 50 percent within the next decade and switch to other fuels, especially coal, our most abundant energy source.

Point five: To make absolutely certain that nothing stands in the way of achieving these goals, I will urge Congress to create an energy mobilization board which, like the War Production Board in World War II, will have the responsibility and authority to cut through the red tape, the delays, and the endless roadblocks to completing key energy projects.

We will protect our environment. But when this nation critically needs a refinery or a pipeline, we will build it.

Point six: I’m proposing a bold conservation program to involve every state, county, and city and every average American in our energy battle. This effort will permit you to build conservation into your homes and your lives at a cost you can afford.

I ask Congress to give me authority for mandatory conservation and for standby gasoline rationing. To further conserve energy, I’m proposing tonight an extra $10 billion over the next decade to strengthen our public transportation systems. And I’m asking you for your good and for your nation’s security to take no unnecessary trips, to use carpools or public transportation whenever you can, to park your car one extra day per week, to obey the speed limit, and to set your thermostats to save fuel. Every act of energy conservation like this is more than just common sense — I tell you it is an act of patriotism.

Our nation must be fair to the poorest among us, so we will increase aid to needy Americans to cope with rising energy prices. We often think of conservation only in terms of sacrifice. In fact, it is the most painless and immediate way of rebuilding our nation’s strength. Every gallon of oil each one of us saves is a new form of production. It gives us more freedom, more confidence, that much more control over our own lives.

So, the solution of our energy crisis can also help us to conquer the crisis of the spirit in our country. It can rekindle our sense of unity, our confidence in the future, and give our nation and all of us individually a new sense of purpose.

You know we can do it. We have the natural resources. We have more oil in our shale alone than several Saudi Arabias. We have more coal than any nation on Earth. We have the world’s highest level of technology. We have the most skilled work force, with innovative genius, and I firmly believe that we have the national will to win this war.

I do not promise you that this struggle for freedom will be easy. I do not promise a quick way out of our nation’s problems, when the truth is that the only way out is an all-out effort. What I do promise you is that I will lead our fight, and I will enforce fairness in our struggle, and I will ensure honesty. And above all, I will act. We can manage the short-term shortages more effectively and we will, but there are no short-term solutions to our long-range problems. There is simply no way to avoid sacrifice.

Twelve hours from now I will speak again in Kansas City, to expand and to explain further our energy program. Just as the search for solutions to our energy shortages has now led us to a new awareness of our Nation’s deeper problems, so our willingness to work for those solutions in energy can strengthen us to attack those deeper problems.

I will continue to travel this country, to hear the people of America. You can help me to develop a national agenda for the 1980s. I will listen and I will act. We will act together. These were the promises I made three years ago, and I intend to keep them.

Little by little we can and we must rebuild our confidence. We can spend until we empty our treasuries, and we may summon all the wonders of science. But we can succeed only if we tap our greatest resources — America’s people, America’s values, and America’s confidence.

I have seen the strength of America in the inexhaustible resources of our people. In the days to come, let us renew that strength in the struggle for an energy secure nation.

In closing, let me say this: I will do my best, but I will not do it alone. Let your voice be heard. Whenever you have a chance, say something good about our country. With God’s help and for the sake of our nation, it is time for us to join hands in America. Let us commit ourselves together to a rebirth of the American spirit. Working together with our common faith we cannot fail.

FULL TEXT HERE

Sphere: Related Content

Liberal Democrat racism hypocrisy exposed…. AGAIN!

Tuesday, May 13th, 2008

Shocker!… Dems Scream Racism Over Republican Ad Then Are Busted Passing Out Bogus KKK Flyers!

This is suppose to be a racist ad…

Now, the Democrats and their lackeys in the media are screaming “RACISM!”
The New York Times reported:

Hoping to hang on to a Congressional seat in a tight special election here on Tuesday, Republicans in this mostly white and very conservative district are trying to make the vote more a referendum on Senator Barack Obama than on the candidates themselves.

In advertisements and speeches, Republicans have repeatedly associated Travis Childers, the white Democrat threatening to take the seat away from the Republican Party, with Mr. Obama. Republicans say Mr. Obama’s liberal values are out of place in the district. But for many Democratic veterans here, the tactic is a throwback to the old and unwelcome politics of race, a standby in Mississippi campaigning.

Former Gov. William Winter, a Democrat, expressed shock at the current campaign.

“I am appalled that this blatant appeal to racial prejudice is still being employed,” said Mr. Winter, who lost the 1967 governor’s race after his segregationist opponent circulated handbills showing blacks listening to one of his speeches. Mr. Winter went on to win the governor’s office 12 years later.

MUCH MORE HERE…including the 411 on the flyer below being passed out by Democrats!


kkkflyer.jpg

Sphere: Related Content

What happened to the La Raza/The Race earmark?

Friday, May 9th, 2008
Here’s an update on the La Raza/The Race $25 million earmark that had been tucked into Barney Frank’s massive housing bailout bill. (Previous coverage here and here.)

It was stripped out of the final version of the bill that passed the House yesterday. But that doesn’t mean they won’t get their money:

The original bill directed $100 million to four community groups, including $25 million each for housing programs run by the National Council of La Raza and the Urban League. Republicans balked, saying the money was meant to help Democrats in an election year.

The language was stripped out before the bill came to the floor. But La Raza, the Urban League and scores of community organizations are still in line for housing-development money, plus $230 million for the remainder of this year and another $230 million for fiscal 2009 for mortgage counseling.