Left on the Civility War Path Again

In case you were unaware, the anniversary of the shooting in Tucson, AZ which claimed the lives of six people and wounded many others, including Rep Giffords was yesterday. To mark that occasion, the chairman of the DNC, Rep Debbie Wasserman-Schultz decided now would be a good time to blame the Tea Party for the shootings.

“We need to make sure that we tone down things, particularly in light of the Tucson tragedy from a year ago, where my very good friend, Gabby Giffords – who is doing really well, by the way – [was shot],” Wasserman Schultz, the Democratic National Committee chair said during a “politics and Eggs” forum this morning. “The discourse in America, the discourse in Congress in particular … has really changed, I’ll tell you. I hesitate to place blame, but I have noticed it take a very precipitous turn towards edginess and lack of civility with the growth of the Tea Party movement.”

She goes on to say:

“You had town hall meetings that [the Tea Party] tried to take over, and you saw some their conduct at those town hall meetings,” Wasserman-Schultz said today. “When they come and disagree with you, you’re not just wrong, you’re the enemy.” (Source: Washington Examiner)

This really takes some gall for a person who completely blanketed the Republican party as racist just a few months ago over the Voter ID laws currently being discussed and debated in various states across the nation.

Of course there was no mention of the rhetoric of the Occupy movement that she and her democrat colleagues were so willing to support. No mention of the Bush-Hitler signs. No mention of the movies that depicted the assassination of President Bush. No mention of the rapes, assaults, vandalism, death threats, breaking and entering, and various other lawless acts.

I dare any liberal or media member (one in the same) to find any evidence of actual of perceived violence that has occurred at a Tea Party event. I would also like to point out that the big Tea Party gatherings that occurred across the US before the 2010 elections were pretty mellow affairs (does using mellow date me?). Many gathering venues were actually cleaner after the Tea Party members left than when they arrived. Can the Occupy protesters claim the same? If I recall, the Tea Parties cleaned up after a gather of anti-tea party protesters who had left the Washington DC WW II memorial a mess. Somebody correct me if I am wrong.

Meanwhile, the New York Times double-downed on Wasserman-Schultz’ comments in a recent editorial. The author tried to give the appearance of not being biased, but that only lasted for a paragraph or two.

It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But it is legitimate to hold Republican and particularly the most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge. Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing immigrants, or welfare recipients, or bureaucrats. They seem to have persuaded many Americans that the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the people. (Source: New York Times) (h/t: Big Journalism)

So, the Republicans and Tea Partiers have history of violent rhetoric? What about the left? Is no one going to hold their feet to the fire for the violent protests conducted by occupy participants or the rhetoric stated on signs that were so common at the “gatherings?”

That the whirlwind has touched down mot forcefully in Arizona, which Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik described after the shooting as the capital of “the anger, the hatred and the bigotry that goes on in the country.” Anti-immigrants sentiment in the state, firmly opposed by Ms. Giffords, has reached the point where Latino studies program that advocate ethnic solidarity have actually been made illegal. (Source: New York Times) (h/t: Big Journalism)

Of course, the editorial didn’t bother to mention that Dupnik will more than likely lose his job over the very heated rhetoric the linked article goes after. And the author says that the reason for the ending of the Latino Studies program was because people in Arizona are basically racist and bigots. How come he didn’t bother to mention that the program has been determined illegal by a court of law? How come he didn’t mention the court decided the course promoted the overthrow of the US government, promoted resentment towards another race, was designed only for Latinos, and advocated ethnic solidarity instead of people as individuals? And did he bother to report on the bigotry and racism that greeted an Arizona school official who visited after a Hispanic civil right activist told these Latino Studies students that “Republicans hate Latinos?” Of course you are most likely aware that a White Persons Study program would be attacked immediately as racist and bigoted. I wonder as white men (and women) become a minority over the next several decades will we be allowed to have a course that studies white history and contributions (good and bad) like blacks and Latinos have now.

Its gun laws are among the most lenient, allowing even a disturbed man like Mr. Longhner to buy a pistol and carry it concealed without a special permit. That was before the Tucson rampage. Now, having seen firsthand the horror of political violence, Arizona should lead the nation in quieting the violence of intolerance, demanding an end to the temptations of bloodshed, and imposing sensible controls. (Source: New York Times) (h/t: Big Journalism)

And no editorial or column about conservative rhetoric would be complete without a screed against gun rights. And I wonder what type of “sensible controls” Mr. Columnist would propose. It has already been made fairly clear that very few gun control laws anywhere in the nation would have prevent Longhner from obtaining the weapons he used that tragic day one year ago. At least he didn’t call it an assault or automatic weapon like others.

The events of 10 Jan 2010 were beyond pale. Six people lost their lives and many others had their lives change irrevocably. Why can’t the press and other liberals just mark the day as a date that deserves respect and tribute for those who died and were wounded and just leave it at that?

Never let a crisis go to waste.

Some Things to Think About

Some interesting tidbits picked up today through a friend.

Nearly every president since the turn of the previous century has had people on their staff that had business experience. While some of the progressive democrats had as little as 30% of their staff with business experience it pales in comparison to how much business experience can be found within the Obama Administration. Warp your hands around this figure: 8%. That’s right people; only 8% of Obama advisors have any sort of private sector business experience.

And we expect these people to lead us out of our economic troubles?

To further point out just how inept Obama is when it comes to picking out people to provide him with economic advice take a look below

Franklin Raines was a Chairman of Chief Executive Officer at Fannie Mae. Raines was forced to retire from his position with Fannie Mae when auditing discovered severe irregularities in Fannie Mae’s accounting activities. Raines left with a “golden parachute” valued at $240 million in benefits. The government filed suit against Raines when the depth of the accounting scandal became clear.

Raines now works for President Obama as his Chief Economic Advisor.

What A Difference

What a difference a few decades means.  So true, and the change is actually more rapid than indicated at the link. I remember get the thirde degree from my folks when my grades fell off and I was in grade school in the early '70's.

Is California Getting Smart?

Very interesting state of affairs in California. California has long lived up to its nickname, The Golden State, with golden-type welfare benefits, state-employee retirement and benefit plans, and a secondary education subsidized like no other.

The economy, which has hit California very hard with the nation’s second highest unemployment rate, has been extremely slow to recover. This means tax revenue have fallen well short of needs and projections.

It now looks like Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown has finally realize the state government can no longer afford to carry everyone who desires to be on welfare.

The friend who sent me this link is doing his retirement travels. He started in Washington, then down along the Oregon coast to California. He noted that once they crossed the Cal-Ore state line, the increase in homelessness was noticeable. While much of that can be attributed to the economic times, it should also be pointed out that with the great welfare benefits the state doles out, it is a mecca for those who wish to live off of taxpayer money. It looks like those days might be over.

This is very interesting. A friend of mine has pointed out what really should be obvious.

The democrat party has become the Lawyers’ Party

Barack Obama is a lawyer.
Michelle Obama is a lawyer
Hillary Clinton is a lawyer
Bill Clinton is a lawyer
John Edwards is a lawyer

Every democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate). Every democrat presidential nominees since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.

Look at the leaders of the democrat party in Congress:

Harry Reid is a lawyer.

Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different.

Something to Think About

A friend of mine sent me this. As he said in his email this should be required reading for everyone as the elections approach at the end of this year. This was in response to President Obama threats during the debt ceiling and budget crisis that went on this past November.

Did you notice who President Obama threatened when he wasn’t getting his way on raising the debt ceiling?

He threatened to not pay: Social Security Retirees, Military retirees, Social Security disability and Federal Retirees.

Now… Let this sink in really good:

He did not threaten to stop payments to illegal aliens.

He did not threaten to take frivolous benefits such as internet access away from violent inmates.

He did not offer to fire some of the thousands of unnecessary federal employees that he hired.

He did offer to cut down on his or his wife’s frivolous gallivanting around.

He did not threaten to not pay the senators and representatives or any of their staff.

He did not threaten to take benefits away from welfare recipients.

He did not threaten to not pay foreign aid.

He did not threaten to cut back on anything that involves his base voters!!!

Olbermann Out of His Current (TV) Job?

After a while, you would think that a person would begin to think that the common denominator was the individual staring back at you from the mirror. When you have the number of opportunities laid in your lap, yet you can’t seen to stay for more than a few years, maybe the problem isn’t those who you work for, but maybe it is you.

Over the years, Keith Olbermann has left under less than desirable conditions posts at a larger Los Angeles TV station, ESPN, MSNBC, and now possibly Current TV.

Other than his departure from the Los Angeles TV station each departure has been rather acrimonious due to his petulant and childish behavior.

Several years ago, not long after I had been promoted, I was assigned to supervise an individual who had a reputation as a difficult person to work with. During the course of my initial get-to-know and expectations meeting, this individual brought up the subject of his past supervisors. There was a common thread. Nearly all of them sucked, according to this young man. One was too demanding, another was a jerk, and still another was an @$$hole. Of course, my new charge did not realize that I had reviewed his records (like any good supervisor). I had also contacted a few of his previous supervisors and spoken with them to get the scoop.

Almost without fail, each previous supervisor that I spoke with did not think real highly of this individual. He was combative, unfriendly towards co-workers, and his weather forecasting skills were not strong enough to make of for his other shortcomings. His records backed up these comments. His job performance ratings were sub-par on nearly all of his reports. When it came time to do his performance report, he once again received weak ratings and a couple of negative comments from me.

A few years later, while visiting the work section he was assigned to (I had been promoted again and moved elsewhere within the organization), I overheard him ranting away about past supervisors. He was now including me in his tirades.

I had had enough. I called him into my office (with his supervisors OK). I didn’t read him the riot-act, but rather calmly sat him down and reviewed his career with him. I pointed out that at each and every turn where he felt he had a jerk for a supervisor, the rating given were poor to weak, with each containing a negative comment or two. I also pointed out that each of the previous supervisors were as different, personality-wise, as grains of snow (I knew a goodly portion of them). And then I pointed out that there was one common thread throughout his entire career. That was the man looking back at him in the mirror each day. The last thing that I ever said to him was he could continue to blame everyone else for his troubles or he could decide the man in the mirror was going to change. As I was moved to a completely different branch and then later moved overseas, I never saw him again although I asked about him from colleagues who had more recently worked with him.

Had he changed? The reports that I received were that he had mellowed somewhat. Can I take credit? Not really. All I could do was point out the obvious. It was up to him to make the changes.

Liberal Civility Rises Again

For most of my politically active life I have always been pounded by the democrats, progressives, and the main stream media that conservatives and Republicans are heartless and cruel, not caring one iota for the “little people.” According to the democrats, they were the only party for those who were oppressed by “the man.” They and they alone are the party of the little people, the working class, the down-trodden.

But how can this be so when there are so many examples of just how heartless and out of touch they truly are?

The primary example of this supposed culture of caring is how they court and keep the black vote. The word racist has been used so many times in recent years that it has come to the point where the word has almost no meaning. Plus, while I am sure most in the democrat party are very much aware of their own party’s racist past (Civil Right legislation opposition, several key democrats were KKK members), the main stream media has thus far refused to report on this racist past. They have even gone as far as to lend their (MSM’s) incredible reach to further the fallacy that conservatives are the racists.

Eric Holder: The Dark Cloud

Over the past few months as the Republican race has heated up and candidates came and went, there has been an uneasiness floating around in the dark recesses of my mind. For a while, I thought much of the disquiet had to do with the fact that we Republicans and Conservatives can’t seem to settle on a candidate. While we kept chasing the flavor of the month (Perry, Cain, Bachmann, et al), the Obama White had to certainly feel both comfort and concern.

Comfort: If I were Obama I’d look at the seeming dysfunction within the Republican Party and rub my hands with mild glee. It has to feel somewhat encouraging to Obama and his crew that we can’t seem to settle on a candidate.

Concern: Somewhere within the apparatus that is the Obama White House there has to be one individual with a level head that looks at the back and forth going on in the Republican nomination process and says to him/herself “This might not be all wine and roses.” Unlike what the mainstream press did with Obama back in 2007/8, our candidate is going to be thoroughly vetted by the same press that swooned over a certain first-dude born in Hawaii. Once the nomination process has run its course and focus switches to denying Obama another four years, there will be little “surprise” news that could derail the Republican nominee, allowing whoever it is to fire away on all cylinders.

Getting back to the main point here, I soon decided that the dark cloud that I could see on the horizon was not the nomination process and the rumble and tumble going on there. What brought clarity for me was the recent spat of suits brought by the Eric Holder Justice Department against cities, towns, and states that were implementing some form of voter identification. Recently Mr. Holder stated that these voter ID laws are taking America back to the days of Jim Crow and “the same disparities, divisions and problems” that affected America prior to the 1965 passage of the Voter Rights Act.

Keep in mind that Obama recently hailed from Chicago and that region has a notorious reputation for bending, to the point of breaking, election laws. After all the term “vote early and vote often” has its roots in Chicago. Any laws on the books that could suppress repeat voting and voting by non-existent and dead persons and is not the “Chicago way.” Based on many recent polls that are not very favorable for his re-election, Obama is going to need all the help he can get in 2012 if he wants to continue to occupy the White House and send Michelle on lavish vacation to the far-flung reaches of the global.

Holder has already proven that he will do anything to maintain his place at the Justice department, including “not remembering” any memos, e-mails, talk, scuttlebutt, rumors, and just plain old news on “Fast and Furious.” I have no doubts that Holder will do everything in his power to redact any laws that will prevent dead people and Mickey Mouse from voting several times over.

Obama has also proven over again that his feeling towards the rule of law and the Constitution are nothing more than lines in a speech.

If Obama wins re-election at the end of this year, I would not be surprised that it happens with many shenanigans at various locations around the nation. Remember, all he has to do is carry certain districts in certain key states to win the Electoral College totals. I think we can safely assume big states like California and New York are already in the bag. Take those and he has a quarter of the electors needed for victory. But in a few others states where the vote could be closer like Illinois, Pennsylvania, and even Texas all that has to happen is districts near the larger cities like Pittsburg, Houston, and Chicago vote early and often in favor of Obama and the tide could change. This might actually be a first. A presidential nominee who is not above 45% approval gaining re-election.

So the dark cloud remains on the horizon and feels menacing.

Any means necessary.

BTW: To all of those who'll call me a racist for putting dark cloud and Eirc Holder in the same sentence I'll say it now just so I don't have to in the comments section. Shut the heck up!

2012!!!!!!!!!

Happy New Year from PACNW Righty and his family!!!

May the New Year bring you much happiness and success no matter how you measure it.

And we are one year closer to ending the nightmare.