Hypocrisy

By Wink

It is obvious the next Democrat presidential candidate must come up with a different game plan. The last one certainly didn’t work. Here are my suggestions:

– Don’t pay federal tax, and never show your tax returns.

– Dump your spouse for a younger model, then dump that one for an even younger model.

– Cheat on all of your wives, and use sexual assault as part of that process.

– Kiss up to dictators, especially Russians.

– Insult American veterans, prisoners of war, and gold-star families.

– Build fabulous buildings, but declare bankruptcy multiple times to avoid paying the people who build them.

– Make sure your closest advisers are all racist and misogynist.

– Never accept responsibility for anything, including things you have said on live TV.

– Sue, and be sued by, everybody.

– It would help a lot if you are born rich and live a completely self-centered life, then declare yourself a friend to the working-class.

This seems to work with many voting blocs but, most interestingly, it also works with those who declare themselves to be ‘Christian voters.’

Read more

By Wink

Do you think todays’ kids are part of the pampered generation? Do you think they expect to get great rewards without much effort? Me too.

This also perfectly describes the Republican party.

The American press has forever, forever, since the beginning of politics in this country, asked hard, pointed, slanted (and sometimes very stupid) questions of politicians.

They have, forever, asked these same questions of Democrats and Republicans alike.

Conservative think-tanks, tired of watching so many of their candidates come across as morons, decided to formulate the storyline that all press is liberal, that anyone who asks hard questions must have a liberal bent. Since newspapers and TV networks sometimes have nosy reporters, they must all be liberal! Never mind that they ask the same stupid questions to Democrats.

Republicans have beat this drum and beat this drum and beat this drum until ‘liberal press’ is actually an accepted axiom.

The press is so fearful of being branded liberal that they quake when every (and I mean every) GOP candidate drops the ‘liberal press’ line. (This is similar to another conservative insult… ‘intellectual elite.’ God forbid someone should be intellectual.)

The American press became so soft on conservatives that, when Cheney/Bush decided to declare war on a country not at war with us, the press was too afraid to ask “What the hell does Iraq have to do with 9-11?” By the time anyone brought it up, we were waist-deep in a worthless quagmire that led to 4000+ American deaths, and a much-worsened situation in the entire middle east.

==========================

When he/she can’t answer a question, or comes across looking like an idiot for saying something stupid, Republican candidates will inevitably blame the press. “No! I am not a moron! The liberal press is twisting my words!”

This deep-seated crap has turned all GOP candidates into pansies. They all brag how they can stare down Putin, and then say the questions they receive from the press are ‘too hard.’

Pansies!

For Pete’s sake, you want to be President of the U.S., but are afraid of pointed questions? As an alleged adult (with solutions!) any half-assed candidate should be able to handle pointed/stupid and even yes, slanted questions. Be an adult just answer the question. Stop whining already.

Please give me a GOP candidate, just one, who says “The press is just doing their job.”

Grow up already. Stop blaming your own inadequacies on somebodies hard questions. You hate the welfare state and preach self-reliance, but are not self-reliant enough to handle the press?

Pansies!

It is not the job of the press to be patriotic or pro-America, it is their job to get at the truth (Fox excepted).

Read more

On three separate occasions last night I witnessed three different outcomes to the newly applied targeting rule. Under the new targeting rule, any time a referee perceives a player going after the head of another, it is an automatic personal foul flag and an automatic ejection. The play immediately goes to review to be certain that the play was indeed targeting. If the review confirms targeting, the flag and the ejection are upheld. If the review overturns the call, the ejection is overturned, but the review still stands.

Here were the 3 different scenarios I witnessed:

Nebraska at Purdue

In my admittedly biased interpretation, I see defender Stanley Jean-Baptiste leading with the shoulder and driving into the chest of the receiver. However, because the hit was so explosive, the referees immediately threw the flag and declared targeting. The review showed that there was marginal contact between helmets (it’s football), so by the wording of the rule the ejection must be upheld. I know Jean-Baptiste personally and know that he is not a dirty player. He is one of the quietest kids you’d ever meet. It is simply wording of the rule (in review, any helmet contact) that caused the upholding of the ejection.

Nebraska is familiar with wording of rules screwing over actual play. Last basketball season Brandon Ubel was being heavily guarded by two Penn State players and barely touched the nose of one while trying to pass the ball away. They reviewed the play, refs saw that the contact would barely scratch an itch, but declared a flagrant 1 because of the wording of the rule, instead of interpreting the rule for its intent.

In the second situation that I witnessed, Ole Miss was taking on, and leading, #9 Texas A & M. Late in the game, Texas A & M’s Johnny Manziel waited a little too long to get rid of the ball and was hit as he threw it. Incomplete pass bringing up (I believe it was) 2nd and Ten from about the 20. Referees throw a flag because the defender targeted the head. Refs eject, go to review. After review, they declare that it was not targeting, and that the player shall not be disqualified from the game. So, 2nd and 10 from the 20 right? Nope, the penalty still stands, because you can’t review a penalty (even though that’s literally what they just did), so it’s first and goal. Texas A & M scores on the very next play, and ends up winning the game. I’ll bet there are some sour Ole Miss fans out there Sunday morning.

In the final situation, late in the North Texas-Middle Tennessee State match up, the MTSU quarterback was scrambling down field and was hit hard enough for his helmet to fly off. He was hurt on the play, and a flag came in from literally the farthest referee from the play (I was there I know which ref threw the flag). My problem with this play is that the QB got hurt due to his own ineptitude. Your helmet should never pop off that easily. If it does it means that it is not strapped on right, and it is your own fault if you sustain a head injury from improperly used equipment. The referees debated for about 5 minutes in a small huddle. After this, they declared there on the spot that there was no foul for targeting. I stood up and cheered for the refs on that one. This season especially, it takes serious knowledge of the game and situation to wave off a flag.

So, Big Ten referees make a bad call. SEC referees make a bad call. Conference USA has the highest quality referees out there? Something is wrong here…

Compare all these potential ejection situations with the actions of Texas’ Mike Davis last week against Iowa State.

Because he targeted the knees, he got a talking-to almost as stern as Oregon’s slap on the wrist. I’ve seen seasons and careers end on blown knees, but going after the knees after the play is over is still OK. God forbid you try to make a proper tackle at game speed during live play. The NCAA is targeting the wrong players.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (3 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

By Wink

You know the story: From his ‘neighborhood watch’ car George Zimmerman spots a suspicious-looking (black) kid walking down the street, probably up to no good. He calls 911 to report a suspicious person and is told, by the 911 operator, NOT to confront the kid.

Repeat: The 911 operator told him NOT to confront the kid.

Hey, what good is carrying a gun around if you can’t use it on bad guys? Zimmerman gets out of his car, and confronts the ‘suspect.’ (Note: Since no crime had been committed, there were really no ‘suspects’ anywhere, except in Zimmerman’s head.)

For some crazy reason 17-year old Travon Martin is frightened by a total stranger running up on him waving a gun. Presumably, and according to Zimmerman’s version, Martin started to beat up Zimmerman, so George shot Trayvon in self-defense. (Needless to say we don’t get Martin’s version of the events.)

Since Zimmerman was found not guilty we can make this determination about the ‘Stand Your Ground’ law: In Florida it is legal to ‘defend’ yourself if you have a gun, but wrong to defend yourself if the other guy has the gun. Deadly wrong.

The defense successfully argued that the person without a weapon, the one simply walking down the street after a trip to the convenience store, was the aggressor. On Anderson Cooper one juror said “both were responsible, both could have walked away.” Really? The boy with the gun pointed at him could just walk away?

I would love to see that juror just turn and walk away when someone points a gun at her.

Try this on for size: A 17-year old white kid is walking home on a quiet street when a black guy walks up and pulls a gun on him. The white guy fights back but is shot dead by the black man.

How does that trial end?

This is what we call a rhetorical question.

Read more

By Wink

 

Dinking around, delaying raising the debt ceiling, has cost us money. The U.S. taxpayer is now on the hook for $1.7 billion that we never would have owed had we simply acted more timely to do something we were going to do anyway….

I told you so. Economists told you so.  This was not a prediction, it was a fact.

Teabaggers turned a simple housekeeping maneuver into a civil war. I would say they didn’t care about the consequences, but ‘care’ is not accurate. ‘Care’ would imply they knew what they were doing.

Teabaggers don’t know what they are doing. They don’t know government, They don’t know economics. They don’t know history.

They are, by definition, morons.

They fuss about ‘taxpayer money’ because the one thing they DO know is that they hate paying tax.

I repeat….. one-point-seven-billion-dollars.  This should be called ‘Teabagger Tax.’

They could read the link attached to this article and STILL not get it.  Most of them don’t believe photo proof of the president’s birth certificate, so why would they believe this needless delay would cost the taxpayer $1.7 billion?

By leveraging the threat of the nation’s first-ever default, they crushed Obama into accepting trillions of dollars in spending cuts. This is no way to pull out of a recession. Obama knew it, but he caved anyway. Anything to avoid defaulting and REALLY screwing up the U.S. economy.

Teabaggers don’t seem to know this or care.

We are NOT overtaxed. This country is at a 50-year LOW for tax collected to GNP.

The lack of tax income is one reason we are horribly in debt.

Remember, when Clinton was the president the wealthy were paying two percent (2%) more, and we were running surpluses and paying down our debt. ‘W’ and a Republican congress gave all of that away to the wealthiest. They flushed the surplus and, ultimately, the economy.

So what now?

The new budget cuts will do nothing to help the economy. In fact, a second recession is likely. Unemployment, already high, may get worse. The unemployed/underemployed pay little to no tax, further exacerbating a poor economy. .

If you are unemployed or underemployed, expect to stay that way. Make sure to thank the GOP, and specifically the teabaggers. Their ignorance is costing you, and America.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

By Wink

The GOP talking point to regain the House in 2010 was the following mantra: “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs.” Nothing else…just ‘jobs.’

It worked fabulously. They took complete control of the House and narrowed their deficit in the Senate.

What have their objectives been SINCE the election?

 

  • Embarrass President Obama.
  • Protect the extremely wealthy from a massive two-percent tax increase (back to what they paid in the 90’s)
  • Embarrass President Obama.
  • Cut Budgets (on social programs, and anything else that helps the poor)
  • Embarrass President Obama.

Notice what is missing? Jobs.

After the 2010 elections, the GOP’s first act when taking office was to ensure continued tax cuts for the very most wealthy. Priority number one.

Was anyone surprised?

In the ensuing 20 months they have done nothing to create jobs. Not a single bill. Do you know why? Because cutting tax for the wealthy is their only ‘jobs program.’

They keep beating this drum and it keeps NOT WORKING.

It didn’t work when the economy spiraled out of control under Bush, and it isn’t working now, after the GOP majority in the House forced Obama to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

Giving money to the wealthy does not create jobs. Didn’t then, doesn’t now. (Ironically though, it DOES increase deficit spending)

Know what would create jobs? Fixing things, like our roads and bridges. These would be real jobs, not the minimum wage jobs the GOP is so fond of.

Republicans will oppose any real jobs program, no matter how desperate our economy, no matter the crumbling state of our infrastructure, if an upsurge in jobs might make Obama look good. Republicans would do anything, including tanking our economy, rather than make Obama look good.

Balancing budgets is normally a great idea, but not when jobless rates are high. Excessive fiscal tightening does not create jobs, it slows job growth or, worse, creates more unemployment.

Budget cutting is not a solution to all problems, but the GOP (which is being driven by the tea-baggers) is laser-beam focused on budget cuts.

Tea-baggers know nothing, and care nothing, about economics or creating jobs, they just want to pay less tax. What this tells you is that most tea-baggers have jobs, and don’t give a damn about those that don’t.

Wanna know what the newest GOP legislative goal is? Jobs? Don’t make me laugh. They now want to repeal the law requiring government use of energy-saving light bulbs. Republicans are pro-choice when it comes to which type of light bulbs we use. God-forbid we should save millions of dollars in energy costs.

—————-

If the budget is ever lowered to the satisfaction of the tea-baggers (and it never will be), then their next priority will be helping the jobless.

Ha!!! Just kidding! The only concern for these loons, after tax, is abortion.

They don’t care about the unemployed, and the ‘Highway and Bridge Fairy’ will probably take care of those problems.

But when election season comes around, they will TALK about jobs, like they did in 2010. And morons will buy it again….

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 4.50 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

By Wink

Republicans refused to provide additional health benefits for 9-11 responders.

The above statement is not made up, is not from ‘The Onion’.

What guiding principle would cause the GOP to delay any sort of aid for 9-11 responders?

Let say it all together now…… “Tax Cuts for the wealthy!”

For years you have heard that only the GOP cares about 9-11 and, by extension, America.

Fact: Everybody everywhere agreed with the Obama plan to reduce taxes for all income less than $250,000.

This would never be enough for Boehner, etc. All government would stop unless tax cuts were extended to those over $250G.

Obama caved, and offered tax cuts to those making less than $1,000,000 per year.

Even THAT was not enough. To repeat, tax breaks for all income less than $1,000,000 per year was still not enough.

They talk about veterans, they talk about 9-11, but, when push comes to shove, which 2% of Americans do they really-really-really care about?

Their argument tends to be ‘tax breaks for the extremely wealthy stimulate the economy.’

This is so obviously wrong. The tax rates they are defending are the same ones that have been in place for the last 10 years. The same ones that lead us into our current recession. These rates are NOT pulling us out of this recession.

When did we last have a booming economy? During the 90’s, the Clinton era, when the tax rates were higher on the upper class.

GOP hatred of all things ‘Clinton’ is so strong, that they simply deny that obviously provable fact.  Okay, maybe it is not simply a hatred of Clinton. Maybe it is just an overwhelming compulsion to gift the very most wealthy among us.

Brief Summary….
Clinton Era:  Higher taxes for the wealthy – economy booms, plenty of jobs.
Bush Era:  Massive tax breaks for the wealthy – economy crashes, years of poor job growth.

It is mystifying that anybody anywhere thinks the GOP cares about the ‘little guy.’  They do not care about the poor, even the poor who make only $249,000 each year.

————————

John McCain found more that 6000 earmarks in this most recent budget, totaling more than $6 billion.

Horrible, right?

The tax breaks for the wealthy will cost the U.S. $700 billion.

$6 billion versus $700 billion.

Go ahead, guess which dollar figure Sen. McCain is more apoplectic about…

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

by Wink

Virginia Thomas might be willing to forgive Anita Hill if she apologizes to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for what ‘she did’ to him.

Mrs. Thomas’ message, left on Miss Hill’s answering machine, said “I would love you to consider an apology some time and some full explanation of why you did what you did with my husband. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did.”

According to Mrs. Thomas, there is only one possible liar here, and it is Anita Hill.

And, just like God, Mrs. Thomas is willing to forgive!

Isn’t righteousness a wonderful thing?

Mrs. Thomas, are you naïve enough to think your husband could not possibly have sleazed on a woman a long time ago?

Imagine that. A man in a position of power, making suggestive comments to a beautiful young coworker in his office. Naaaaaah !

I don’t know for certain that Clarence Thomas sleazed on Miss Hill, any more than I ‘know’ OJ killed his ex-wife. The evidence though, is pretty compelling.

Mrs. Thomas, have you ever doubted someone else when you heard them say… “My husband/wife/child would NEVER ___________(fill in with a random bad act)” ?

Love is blind, and pretty stupid, and ‘denial’ is a very powerful force.

Plenty of sleazes and scalawags have held high office though. Ben Franklin was known to be ‘grabby,’ if you catch my drift.

So, distasteful as it is, I don’t know if his (alleged) lewd behavior should preclude Thomas from holding high office.

My frustration with Clarence Thomas is not his sleazy behavior, it is the fact that, at best, he was an average litigator. At best.

There were thousands of other lawyers or judges who would have been much more qualified for this very important position.

If President Bush felt obligated to pick a black candidate, I am sure there were a few hundred intelligent, capable and proven candidates. “Proven” means more than 43 years old, with many years of actual decisions under their belt.

Thomas was not just young, he was, and is, shallow. His ABA rating was the least favorable of any confirmed Supreme Court nominee since the Eisenhower administration.

His selection was the beginning of downward trend in U.S. politics. We have stopped insisting that the candidates be smarter than us.

The new American political reality:
Science – bad.
Snooty colleges – bad.
People who enunciate – bad.

Give me somebody who doesn’t know squat, as long as he agrees with me… Give me Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court. Give me G. W. Bush in the White House. Give me Sarah Palin.

All national candidates should submit to an IQ test and an American history exam.

It will never happen, and the pinhead parade has only just begun….

Read more

By Wink

News is breaking that Al and Tipper Gore are separating.

The reasons have not yet been divulged and, frankly, I hope they never are. The private lives of public figures should be private.

This is sad

It is not sad because he is a public figure.

It is not sad because he is a former Vice President who has accomplished blah-blah-blah.

It is not sad because I happen to agree with him on climate change.

It is sad because it is sad.

They seemed genuinely meant for each other.

But I can’t wait to hear the FOX take on this.

I am sure they can work some ‘global warming’ jokes into this story.

Rush? Are you kidding? This multiple-divorcee is sure to treat this with some sort of glee. To Rush, all topics are part of the political game, and the sadness of the separation will not be apparent to him. After so many divorces, he probably thinks ‘separation’ is for sissies.

Certainly he can work in some “Love Story” jokes. The fact that Al and Tipper really were the models for the “Love Story” characters never stopped Rush from telling people it was a lie. Presumably Rush has no staff, and no time to fact-check.

To Rush, there is nothing sacred except executive mega-salaries.

I promise you I would be equally saddened if George and Laura Bush were separating. They too seem like they belong together, and ‘better’ each other.

To be consistent, if George and Laura were separating or getting a divorce, I would NOT want to know why. It is none of my (or your) damned business.

Sorry. I don’t care what happens to Dick Cheney.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Read more

By Wink

White House Communication Director Anita Dunn will be leaving her post soon. She is best-known for saying that Fox News was acting as an arm of the Republican Party.

In spite of (or perhaps as proof of) the obviousness of that comment, the collection of Fox commentators ripped into her for those sentiments.

Now that she is leaving, Foxophiles on the web are giddy….

Foxophile: “It’s about time Dunn step down. Her attempt to cripple freedom of speech was detrimental to this countries founding principals. The last time this was attempted by a political party was in the 1930s prior to WWII.”

W-L COMMENT: Her attempt to cripple freedom of speech? Did the government shut down Fox? How did I miss that? And whatever will happen to Rush now that his freedom of speech has been crippled?

W-L COMMENT #2: I did not know ‘principals’ founded our country. What schools were they from?

Foxophile 2: “Let (Dunn) go do some soul searching, guided by her hero Mao.”

W-L COMMENT: I am not a Maoist, but that doesn’t mean everything he ever said is illegitimate. Is the argument that we should never read anything written by someone we disagree with?

Thomas Jefferson had slaves, and bedded some, yet Glenn Beck quotes him all the time. Does that make Beck a slave-owner? Yep, it does, if you follow Beck-type logic.

Anyone who has read Mao and/or quotes Mao is a Marxist, or is it communist? (Help me out here, Glenn).

By this line of logic, only the uneducated should run America. On the positive side, Mr. Beck is well-qualified to be the leader of the un-read!

And what about the fortune cookie that comes with my Chinese food? Is it safe to read that? (Hint: Chinese food originated in China!!)

Is it okay to listen to Mozart? C’mon Glenn, you KNOW there are hidden Nazi messages in there. Would our Fuhrer Obama like to hear “Eine Kleine Nachtmusik” again?

I am saddened when liberals throw around the word ‘fascist’ to describe various conservatives. I still hear it now and again.

But not NEAR as much as I hear “communist/socialist/Maoist” from the right. Now they are throwing in ‘fascist’ and ‘Nazi’ to describe liberals! This is pretty clear evidence that these people don’t have an idea of what ANY of these words mean.

But I understand. It fits nicely with the Beck-ian philosophy that, to be a true American, you must NOT read anything from any leader that was not born in America.

Side note: It is also not safe to read America-born communist authors like JFK & Obama.

Safest bet: Don’t read anything of a historical nature, and let Beck and Rush do all of your thinking for you.

Fox can supply the bumper-stickers…”Ignorant and Proud!”
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...

Read more