Friday, October 24, 2014

Iraqi Officials: ISIS Militants Used Chlorine Gas

by JASmius



In a country that the Left assured us had no weapons of mass destruction?  How is this possible?:

Iraqi officials say Islamic State militants used chlorine gas during fighting with Iraqi security forces and Shiite militiamen last month north of Baghdad.

The use of chlorine gas as a weapon adds a new concern to the turmoil in the country.

Obviously Iraqi officials are lying to try to lure the United States back into Iraq.  Because there aren't any WMDs in Iraq, there never were any WMDs in Iraq, Bush lied, people died, it was the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong ti.....

Oh.

Um, never mind.

Election 2014: Voter Fraud Returns as Dems Run from Obama

By Douglas V. Gibbs

In the 2012 Election, after President Barack Obama beat Republican Challenger Mitt Romney with a mere 5% or less in the swing States, and as strange strange stories about ACORN's unlawful registration tactics, The New Black Panthers committing voter intimidation, 100% Obama wins in some inner-city districts, massive local wins for Republicans in areas where Obama still wound up on top, and Florida's inconsistent numbers that defied imagination, it was pretty apparent to many GOP voters that Obama did not win the 2014 Election. . . he stole it.  We knew there was fraud, because the numbers did not add up.  But, except for a few cases where the fraud could not be ignored by the media (like with the woman caught voting 6 times), the allegations of monkey-business were ignored.

Welcome to the 2014 Election, where the Democrats are looking at possibly losing the United States Senate because of the failures of the Obama Presidency.  Election fraud, suppression, and intimidation has already begun.  The stories emerging are downright ridiculous. . . but the liberal media remains silent.

A Voting Machine in Chicago is Hardwired to Vote Democrat

Voter fraud and Democrats go together hand-in-hand. So it’s perhaps not surprising to find out that a voting machine in Chicago (of all places!) is shockingly hardwired to vote Democrat.

A Republican candidate in Chicago, Jim Moynihan, tried to vote for himself in early elections and was surprised to find that the voting machine registered a vote for his opponent, a Democrat:

While using a touch screen voting machine in Schaumburg, Moynihan voted for several races on the ballot, only to find that whenever he voted for a Republican candidate, the machine registered the vote for a Democrat in the same race. He notified the election judge at his polling place and demonstrated that it continued to cast a vote for the opposing candidate’s party. Moynihan was eventually allowed to vote for Republican candidates, including his own race.

Hey, Democrats get dead people to vote, so this is just another one of their cute little party tricks, right? Consider this proof that voters need to be extra cautious and remain on the lookout for shenanigans at the polls on election day.

-- Read about the Chicago Voting Machine on American Thinker, as well.  The local Daily Herald also has the story.

Busted on undercover video: Dems encourage voter fraud, it’s not ‘like lying or stealing’

Undercover journalist James O’Keefe has done it again. . . and this time he gave the targets a fair warning.

The guerilla reporter released a Project Veritas Action video that showed three Colorado Democrats on hidden camera advocating voter fraud in the state’s all mail-in ballot election.

O’Keefe, who is probably best known for the undercover videos that led to the disbandment of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, this time targeted Colorado, a state with several tight political races.

Among those caught on tape was Meredith Hicks, a director for the nonprofit group Work For Progress.

“If they are not eligible to vote, and all these people are throwing out ballots, let’s use those ballots to vote. So we can get as many votes as possible,” O’Keefe suggested to Hicks.

“Yes, definitely,” she replied.

“We don’t just want to discard the ballots. So I think that that’s what we’re going to do,” O’Keefe pressed on. “And I think that can make the difference in this election.”

“I agree,” Hicks said. “You’re totally right.”

“I mean they cheat and lie and steal all the time,” O’Keefe said, apparently speaking of the Republican opposition.

“I mean, that’s not even lying and stealing,” Hicks replied.

We note that Hicks didn’t argue that such a process wasn’t cheating.

“If someone throws out the ballot, if you want to fill it out, you should do it,” she added.

In fact, Hicks appeared to like the idea so much, she offered the undercover journalist a job at Work for Progress.

Watch the entire video here, via YouTube:

Surveillance video captures man stuffing ballot box with hundreds of ballots
“A person wearing a Citizens for a Better Arizona T-shirt dropped a large box of hundreds of early ballots on the table and started stuffing the ballot box as I watched in amazement,” said A.J. LaFaro, chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Party.

LaFaro confronted the man and was told to perform an anatomically impossible act upon himself, according to an account he provided to the Arizona Daily Independent. La Faro then submitted a request and received surveillance video.

It was between 12:54 and 1:04 that LaFaro said he was seated at one of the cubicles, heard a loud thud and turned around to see the man who he claims was caught on tape stuffing “hundreds” of ballots. LaFaro described the man as a “vulgar, disrespectful, violent thug” with “no respect for our laws.” He said he would have followed the man to his car to get his tag number but “feared for [his] life.”

According to Gateway Pundit, the ballot-stuffer was a Democrat Party operative.

INELIGIBLE DACA BENEFICIARIES DISCOVERED ON NC VOTING ROLLS

With the North Carolina U.S. Senate race in a dead heat, state election officials say they have discovered 145 names on the voting rolls who are ineligible to vote because they are illegal immigrants who have been granted President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status.

DACA beneficiaries in North Carolina are able to obtain drivers licenses, but they are not able to vote.

It is likely more ineligible people may still remain on the voting rolls.

“We want to know how such a large number of non-U.S. citizens were ever registered to vote in the first place,” Jay DeLancy, executive director of the Voter Integrity Project of North Carolina, told Watchdog.org. “There is clearly a system failure here and we need the Board of Elections and the DMV to help the Legislature and the public understand where the problem lies.”

850 voters in NYC are officially 164 years old

A single Bronx voter listed in official records as being 164 years old led Board of Elections officials to review their files — where they turned up another 849 New Yorkers who were supposedly alive when Abe Lincoln was president.

The stunning discovery came after The Post reported last week that the birth date of Luz Pabellon, a spry 73-year-old who has been living and voting in The Bronx since the 1970s, was recorded as Jan. 1, 1850.

This week, a search of the records in all five boroughs found 849 more voters with the same wacky birth date.

Board officials chalked up the implausible age snafu to previous practices that allowed residents not to provide their exact birthdays when registering to vote.

Some of the new voters — mostly women — simply wrote that they were “21+” — above the legal voting age.

There was a reason to be vague. Voter registration records are open to the public, so anyone with the inclination can discover the real age of anyone in the files.

“It’s a leftover vestige from a bygone era,” explained Board of Elections executive director Mike Ryan.

“They were all listed as age 164. This was no accident. It’s a little quirk in the system. It’s not widespread,” he added, noting there are more than 4 million registered voters.

The board switched to computerized databases in 1999 and 2006.

One wonders if they can't even get the ages of legal voters in the system, how is it they are able to guard against illegal voter activity?

---------------------
---------------------

Why all of this illegal activity?  Why are the liberal left Democrats willing to go to any length, even illegal ones, to influence the election?

Could it be because they know they are in big time trouble because of the embarrassment of a President that inhabits The White House?


Years of disappointment and tension between Democrats and their president are now on open display as politicians, party leaders and strategists worried about their chances in the midterm elections begin casting about for someone to blame.

A party and its president often go their separate ways during the final years of a second term, and Democrats say they appreciate Obama's decision to avoid campaigning in competitive states. But that doesn't do much to soften frustration with what they describe as near-political malpractice by the White House, basic missteps that some blame on an insular president who they say takes advice from aides with little campaign experience. “Folks are beginning to scapegoat and second guess, but there are plenty of reasons to do that,” said strategist Jim Manley, a former aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “President Obama doesn't like to get his hands dirty. He seemingly floats above it all.”


Because everybody knows that drunk pieces of a-waste-of-human-flesh will vote democrat if only a friend will tell them where in the heck the voting booth is.

Senate Democratic Officials Start Lashing Out at White House

"The ineptitude of the White House political operation has sunk from annoying to embarrassing," said one Democratic Senate strategist.

As the relationship between the White House and Senate Democrats hit a new low, the democrats are running for the hills as far away from Obama as they can get. . . hoping the voter fraud will get them into office.

The White House is now making dumber errors than how they handle the issues, or the inability to keep fence jumpers off the White House lawn.  Now, they are calling Senators, "Governors."

"The ineptitude of the White House political operation has sunk from annoying to embarrassing," one senior Senate Democratic aide told National Journal. Another Senate official told the Washington Post that Obama's comments were "not devised with any input from Senate leadership."

Democrats are growing increasingly pessimistic about their chances of holding onto the Senate, with most close races trending in the GOP's direction in a nationalized political environment. Republicans are now in position to net more than the six seats necessary to take the majority.

President Obama hasn't been invited to campaign in any battleground Senate races, with the exception of Michigan, where Democrats have long held a comfortable lead. Instead, he's spent most of his time headlining fundraisers for the Democratic campaign committees.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Thursday, October 23, 2014

Doctor In New York City Has Ebola, Contacts Quarantined

by JASmius



And now the Big Apple will start to bake:

A New York City doctor has tested positive for Ebola after returning from work in West Africa with an aid agency, the first case of the deadly disease diagnosed in the most populous U.S. city.

The doctor, Craig Spencer, 33, is being treated in an isolation unit at Bellevue Hospital Center.

And does Bellevue Hospital Center know how and is it equipped to treat ebola?

Nope:

Samples of Spencer’s blood will be sent to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta for confirmation, the CDC said.

A CDC team will help health workers at Bellevue safely care for him while trying to track down anybody he may have had close contact with while he was sick.

“We have a team that’s readying to deploy to New York,” said Tom Skinner, a spokesman for the CDC. “It’s composed of epidemiologists, infection control, data management, and communications officers.” [emphasis added]

In a city of over eight million people in a very small area.  Did Dr. Spencer drive, or take the subway?  Or public transit buses?  How many people did he interact with or closely pass at JFK?  On the flight back from Guinea?  He probably exposed hundreds of people to ebola.  How does the CDC track all those people down?  How do they know which ones to contact?  Or if they can find them all even if they know who all to contact?  This is like Where's Waldo? on steroids.  It's insane.  It can't be done.

And then there are the people closest to him, who are already presumed exposed:

The four are Spencer’s fiancee, two friends, and an Uber car service driver who had Spencer as a passenger, New York City Health Commissioner Mary Bassett said.

God willing, none of these four persons will have contracted ebola.  But suppose one does.  Or two.  Or all four.  It's the scenario above squared, or cubed, or quadrupled.  The Uber car service driver is considered a low risk, and Gotham health officials better hope and pray so, because otherwise everybody that's been in that vehicle adds to this logarithmic baseline.

Shouldn't it be standard operating procedure for all U.S. personnel, civilian or military, going to West Africa to serve in combatting this epidemic that once their "tour of duty" is complete, they be assumed to have been exposed and go into mandatory quarantine for the incubation period (twenty-one days) and not be released to return Stateside until that period is completed without exhibiting any symptoms?  Or maybe an extra week tacked on, just to be on the safe side?  Absolutely no exceptions?  God bless Dr. Spencer, but why was he allowed to return without ensuring that he didn't have the virus?

I do not relish being the bearer of bad news, folks, but isn't it pretty clear that ebola is now loose and completely out of control in this country, the authorities haven't the foggiest notion who has it or where or who and how many have been exposed?  That they've been completely reactive, taken it appallingly lightly, vastly underestimated the virus's communicability and grotesquely overestimated their ability to deal with it?  That it's going to boil right through the U.S. population until approximately 70% of us are dead or, hopefully, it burns itself out first?

The only factor to be determined is how quickly ebola will spread.  Will it be the wildfire-like three weeks of the "Captain Trips" superflu in The Stand?  Four weeks as with the zombie virus in 28 Days?  A few months?  Nobody knows.  All we can to is hope and pray for the best and prepare for the worst.

And remember who was responsible for needlessly letting a highly communicable, 70% fatal disease into this country in the first place - and ponder the reasons why.

Sick Stay In School Commercial. . . By Liberal Left?

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs

Actually, this is a Stay in School ad from Australia, but I could see the liberal left putting something like this out here in the States.  They will do anything to keep the Obama Youth goose-stepping in their public indoctrination system. . .



But really, kids, you have nothing to be afraid of.



-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

What's More Toxic To America: Ebola Or Obama?

by JASmius

Ebola is a worry about a potential problem. No one knows yet how much damage Ebola can do to America. On the other hand, we have already experienced the damage, destruction and pain of Barack Obama.



NFL Week 8 Kickoff

by JASmius



This isn't quite the epic (for mid-season) matchup it would have been had the Chargers not run out of steam the past couple of weeks, having to come from behind to defeat the dog mess Oakland Raiders and blowing a lead to the mediocre Kansas City Chiefs at home.  It actually makes me wonder where this San Diego team was in Week 2 when the Champs could have used them.  Instead, it's the AFC titleholders that reap the benefits of momentum and timing.

And let's not leave anything the slightest bit unclear: While the Dallas Cowboys are the best team in the NFC, the Denver Broncos are the best team in the NFL.  The addition of defensive end DeMarcus Ware and the return of Von Miller from last season's six-game suspension and ACL tear have given the Broncos a bona fide pass rush, and the signing of cornerback Aqib Talib has upgraded their secondary dramatically.  The reason Denver got destroyed in Super Bowl XLVIII is the same reason Dan Marino and the Miami Dolphins - their predecessors as a record-setting offense - took a 38-16 pasting in Super Bowl XIX: offensive wins games, but defense wins championships.  And the San Francisco 49ers then, and Seattle Seahawks last February, had superior defenses.  Now the Broncos have the #4 defense in football to go with that record-setting offense.

San Diego isn't going to overcome that tonight, and no other team is the rest of the way to the Glendale Toaster next February 1st.

San Diego
Denver* (-7)

Temecula Constitution Class Tackles First Amendment

Instructor: Douglas V. Gibbs

Note: Lesson Material Below is an Excerpt from Doug's Book: The Basic Constitution.

Tonight at 6:30!!!

Constitution Class Handout, 10/23/2014
Instructor: Douglas V. Gibbs                                      


Faith Armory
41669 Winchester Rd.
Temecula, CA

www.constitutionassociation.com

Lesson 16

The First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

            Freedom of Religion

The first part of the 1st Amendment addresses religion.  The frame of reference of the Founding Fathers was Europe, and more specifically, England.  In Europe, a movement to reform the Church began in 1517, influenced by Martin Luther’s critiques of the Roman Catholic Church.  The movement led to the Protestant Reformation.  After the Pope denied the King of England the permission to divorce his wife, the English king created the Church of England, and established himself as head of the church, so that he may grant to himself the allowance to seek a divorce.  In England the Church of England greatly influenced the centralized governmental system, and the politicians greatly influenced The Church.  There was no separation between powers of the king and the church, a problem that revealed itself with the 1559 Act of Uniformity.  According to the Act of Uniformity, it was illegal to not attend Church of England services.  A fine was imposed for each missed Sunday and holy day.  Penalties also existed if one decided to have church services not approved by the government, which included arrest, and larger fines.  The problem, the Founding Fathers reasoned, was not faith in God, but the establishment of a State Church.  Therefore, to protect the governmental system from the influence of religion, while also protecting the various religious sects from a government that may give preferential treatment to an established religion, the Founders determined that the federal government must not establish a state religion (Establishment Clause).

The second part of that clause, however, was clearly designed to protect the various religious exercises by Americans from the government by instructing government to not prohibit the free exercise of religion.

Freedom of religion was a big deal with those early Americans.  The importance of religious freedom during that time period is common knowledge.  Even the textbooks in today’s public school system reveals the Pilgrims first came to the New World in search of religious freedom.

Through the passage of time secular forces in our society have worked to undermine the first clause of the 1st Amendment.  Americans have been conditioned to believe in a concept known as the Separation of Church and State.  The concept has determined the church is to have no influence, no matter how subtle, on government for any reason.  Therefore, reason the secularists who support the modern concept of the separation of church and state, any mention of God in the same breath with the federal government is in direct violation of the 1st Amendment.

To understand the error of the concept of Separation of Church and State in today's society, we must go back and discover the origination of the idea.  The truth demands we recognize the language used in the writings of the Founders, as well as grasp the history of the colonies - including a series of letters between the federal government and the Danbury Baptists of Connecticut, culminating in the letters to Thomas Jefferson after he became President of the United States after the Election of 1800.

Each of the colonies began as a collection of like-minded religious folk who wanted freedom for their religion (not necessarily freedom of all religions).  In Jamestown, in 1610, Dales Law mandated the Jamestown colonists to attend Anglican worship.  The law went so far as to have provisions against criticism of the church.  Violation of Dales Law could even lead to death.  The Puritan Colonies to the north had similar laws, even setting up their governments in accordance with Puritan Law.  Connecticut was one of those Puritan Colonies, and in 1639 the colony enacted "The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut."  The law set Connecticut up as a theocracy, disallowing non-Puritans from holding office.  The government was the church, and the church was the government.

The practice of religious preference was not limited to Connecticut.  All of the States enforced established religions, except Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.

Though Pennsylvania was largely a Quaker dominated State, William Penn believed that religion should be free from state control, so Pennsylvania did not persecute non-Quakers.  However, in Pennsylvania, in order to hold office, you still had to be a Christian.

Rhode Island, founded in 1636 as a colony, was based on the principle of true religious liberty, and took in folks who were trying to escape the religious persecution of the other colonies.

Connecticut’s Puritan dominated landscape included a group of Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut who were tired of being treated like second class citizens.

Thomas Jefferson drafted the Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia, and with James Madison's assistance, finally got it enacted into law in 1786.  After many letters to President Adams that resulted in no assistance, the Danbury Baptists were excited about Jefferson winning the presidential election in 1800.  Finally, they would have someone in office who would help them in their fight for religious freedoms in Connecticut.

The Danbury Baptists wrote to Jefferson to congratulate him for his win, and to appeal to him for help.  Thomas Jefferson responded with a letter that carries the line, "a wall of separation between church and state," which has become the source from which the infamous concept of Separation of Church and State was eventually derived.

The Founding Fathers desired that Americans be free to worship as they wished, without being compelled by government through an established religion.  The key, however, is that they not only did not want the federal government compelling a person through laws regarding religion, but the government shall not “prohibit the free exercise thereof.”

Thomas Jefferson, as indicated in his letter to the Danbury Baptists, and his other writings, was against the government establishing a “State Church.”  However, he also believed that men should be free to exercise their religion as they deem fit, and not be forced to follow a government mandate that may prohibit religion.

The Danbury Baptists were concerned over local religious freedoms, but Jefferson was clear, the federal government could not mandate anything in regards to religion.  It is a State issue, and the Danbury Baptists needed to address the issue themselves through their State government.  Jefferson’s reference to a wall of separation was an explanation that the federal government cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion for any reason, including on public grounds, but if a State was to prohibit the free exercise of religion, or establish a state church, it was an issue that must be resolved at the State level.

            Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press

The point of including in the Bill of Rights the freedom of speech, and of the press, was specifically designed to protect political speech, though other speech is protected by this clause as well.  The Founding Fathers believed that freedom hinged on the freedoms of political speech and the press.  Benjamin Franklin wrote in the Pennsylvania Gazette, April 8, 1736, regarding the American doctrine behind freedom of speech and of the press:

“Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.”

James Madison in 1799 wrote, “In every State, probably, in the Union, the press has exerted a freedom in canvassing the merits and measures of public men of every description which has not been confined to the strict limits of the common law.”

            Freedom of the Right of the People To Peaceably Assemble, and to Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances

The right to peaceably assemble means that citizens may peacefully parade and gather, and demonstrate support or opposition of public policy.  This part of the 1st Amendment is closely tied to Freedom of Speech, guaranteeing one's ability to express one's views by freedom of speech and the right to peaceably assemble.

The need to protect the right to peaceably assemble was not a new concept during the Constitutional Convention.  Before the Bill of Rights, the Declaration and Resolves of the First Continental Congress declared on October 14, 1774:

The inhabitants of the English colonies in North-America, by the immutable laws of nature, the principals of the English constitution, and the several charters or compacts, have the following rights: They have a right peaceably to assemble, consider their grievances, and petition the king: and that all prosecutions, prohibitory proclamations, and commitments for the same are illegal.

In 1776, Pennsylvania's declaration of rights guaranteed peaceable assembly.  Pennsylvania was the first State to recognize this right.

Originally, the right to assemble was considered less important than the right to petition. Now, many historians consider the two to be equally important, and to actually complement each other.

The Founding Fathers felt that the right to assemble, and petition the government for a redress of grievances, were important keys to protecting States' Rights, and the rights of the people, from the federal government.  The need to assemble, to come together and share common beliefs and act upon those beliefs, is what began the drive for independence, and ultimately what led to the American Revolution.  The right to assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances, the Founding Fathers believed, was one of the primary tools available to the citizens in their drive to stop tyrannies before they could take hold.

The right to peaceable assembly provides the opportunity for all citizens to participate in America's political life and in the electoral process.  A recent example of this inalienable right in action is the Tea Party Movement.  The Tea Party rallies are peaceful assemblies.  These rallies are protected by the Constitution when they are for a lawful purpose, are conducted in an orderly manner, and publicize some type of grievance.  Many groups and organizations use assembly as a way to show support for an idea, or dispute, as characterized by the Tea Party.

Terms:

1559 Act of Uniformity - In Britain it was illegal not to attend Church of England services, with a fine imposed for each missed Sunday and holy day.  Penalties for having unofficial services included arrest and larger fines.

Protestant Reformation - Movement of the Church Reform begun in 1517 that was influenced by Martin Luther’s critiques of the Roman Catholic Church.  The movement led to the formation of the Protestant Christian groups.

Separation of Church and State - Distance in the relationship between organized religion and the nation state.

Theocracy - Form of government in which a state is as governed by religion, or by clergy who believes they are under immediate divine guidance.

Questions for Discussion:

1.  How does today’s definition of the separation between church and state differ from the attitude towards religion by the Founding Fathers?

2.  Why did the Danbury Baptists appeal to Thomas Jefferson for help?

3.  Why do you think that the Founding Fathers believed that our freedoms hinged on the freedoms of political speech and the press?

4.  What are examples of the people peaceably assembling in protest?

Resources:

Danbury Baptist Association's letter to Thomas Jefferson, October 7,
1801: http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/dba_jefferson.html

Jefferson’s Final Letter to the Danbury Baptists, January 1, 1802:
http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

Joseph Andrews, A Guide for Learning and Teaching The Declaration of
Independence and The U.S. Constitution - Learning from the Original Texts Using Classical Learning Methods of the Founders; San Marcos: The Center for Teaching the Constitution (2010).

Philip B. Kurland and Ralph Lerner, The Founder’s Constitution –
Volume Five - Amendments I-XII; Indianapolis: Liberty Fund (1987).

The Declaration and Resolves of the First Continental Congress declared
on October 14, 1774, U.S. History dot org: http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/related/decres.htm

Thomas Jefferson, The Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom,
1786: http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/sacred/vaact.html


Copyright 2014 Douglas V. Gibbs


Hard Starboard Radio: Meet The Serfs



Oregon Republicans will rarely get better opportunities than this year to only get moderately trounced; Subpoenaing ministers for their sermons and correspondences is Big Brother at its worst; Flush a Koran?  That's "Islamophobic".  Depict a Bible raping a woman?  That's "standing up for women's rights"; Accountability is only for the little people; Major consumer media study finds liberals far less tolerant than normal people; and unlike the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, many of the threats we currently face are Obama-created.  Which puts a whole other spin on "Yes!  We!  Can!", doesn't it?

Be careful what you vote for, you may get it at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific.

Behind Enemy Lines

by JASmius

Democrats who love the USA are trapped in a party that is destroying it. Bill has an idea to help.



Is "Obama" Swahili For "Ultron"?

by JASmius

If we can survive the ebola pandemic, economic collapse, ISIS's North American terror offensive, and a Sino-Russian attack in Europe and the Pacific for six more months and change, we'll get to see The One "put on the suit".



Seriously.  James Spader may be providing the voice, but at the end I'd like to see Ultron pull off the helmet and reveal Barack Obama's CGI head, kind of like how the Silver Samurai was revealed to have been Ichirō Yashida at the end of The Wolverine.  Then maybe a CGI Scott Walker would bludgeon him with Thor's hammer.

Hey, he's from Wisconsin, so that would be apropos.

Questioning the Democrat Vote

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs

After the last election, I wrote that Obama won because of fraud. . .

It turns out I was in the ballpark.

From Drudge:

CO VOTE FRAUD: 'If someone throws out ballot, if you want to fill it out you should do it'...

O'KEEFE STRIKES AGAIN: VIDEO...

'Harvesting'...

850 NYC voters over 164-years-old...

Illegals discovered on N Carolina Voting Rolls...

Lawyer Army Ready...


-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

White House Freed Illegals Charged With Violent Crimes

by JASmius




Shocking:


Illegal immigrants charged with violent crimes and serious felonies were among the hundreds of criminals the Obama administration released from jails across the country in February 2013, newly released documents show.

According to records obtained by USA Today, the government released inmates charged with offenses ranging from kidnapping and sexual assault to drug trafficking, armed assault, and homicide.

The evidence contradicts previous assurances by the administration that the 617 criminals who were released as part of a cost cutting exercise were low risk offenders charged with misdemeanors "or other criminals whose prior conviction did not pose a violent threat to public safety," USA Today reported.

Wait for it....wait for it....

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency admitted to the newspaper that numerous dangerous criminals had been released but denied direct responsibility.

"Discretionary releases made by ICE were of low-level offenders. However, the releases involving individuals with more significant criminal histories were, by and large, dictated by special circumstances outside of the agency's control," ICE spokeswoman Gillian Christensen told USA Today. [emphasis added]

"We won't do X, and after it comes out that we did do X, we won't know who did X or why or how until we figure out a way to smear it on Republicans, and if you pursue it, you're a racist."  Pure, undiluted, classic Obama.

J-Ger says it well today:

The allegedly cruel, xenophobic, and ignorant border security crowd said that if we stopped deporting children who came to the United States illegally, it would create an incentive for more of them — and this summer they were proven right. Those same critics, mostly but not entirely on the right, argued that the administration saw illegal immigrants as a source of future votes, and put that goal over all other priorities and considerations. For this claim, they were mocked and derided; administration defenders insisted our government would never do that.

As they steal another election twelve days from now on the strength of unprecedented tidal waves of voter fraud.

I don't know why Senators John McCain and Tom Coburn didn't blither demands for an inspector general investigation a year and a half ago when the Regime made its pre-emptively bogus claim.  Why not save a year and a half?  Or better yet, start demanding that the House begin an impeachment inquiry after Election Day?  If we're gonna go down anyway, might as well do so with both barrels blazing.

James O’Keefe Exposes Democrat Voter Fraud In Colorado

by JASmius

"Awesome" is a very common word used by Democrat operatives in Colorado when discussing potential voter fraud. Project Veritas Action went undercover in the Centennial State to reveal just how prone their mail-in ballot system is to likely voter fraud.

This video exposes workers from these three organizations condoning voter fraud:

Work For Progress Greenpeace Representative Joe Salazar campaign

This is proof that the Democrats will engage in voter fraud. The question is what will the GOP do about it? Eric Holder and Barack Obama don't seem to have problem with it. Their silence is deafening.



There's nothing the GOP can do about it when those responsible for policing voter fraud are the ones aiding and abetting it, and at the very least turning a blind and approving eye to it.

This is why I include a "low" prediction in my Senate scoreboard each Sunday morning.  It's gotten to the point where any Republican polling lead of five points or less has to be assumed as a loss because any race even that close will almost certainly be either stolen outright by the Democrats or "recounted" or sued away from the GOP in the "post-election campaign".

When we wake up on November 5th and see that Dirty Harry (G)Reid is still master of the U.S. Senate, you'll know why.  Everybody will know why.  But only we'll be saying it, and being ruthlessly ridiculed as "sore losers" for our trouble.

Ferguson: Mob Rule Explosion

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Five times in his Federalist Papers writings, James Madison felt it necessary to define "republic," carefully explaining what the principles are in a republic, and how we are not a pure democracy.  Madison's attention to defining "republic" was encouraged by the tactics of nationalists during his time who argued that the United States Constitution did not give enough power to the new federal government.  Aware that in history direct democracies were transitional governments, always committing a violent suicide as the political system used democracy to gather the pieces for an authoritarian oligarchy to gain prominence, the supporters of a stronger national government argued that there was no difference between a "republic," and a "democracy."

Since the late eighteen-hundreds, the tactic of confusing the terms by the nationalists, who had changed their names to "progressives," and who had added to their platform the socialist principles of the Fabians, emerged once again.  As a society we have been conditioned to replace the term "republic" with the term "democracy," and now that we have become so accustomed to the term, we demand that we become a more democratic society.  In 1913, with the passing of the 17th Amendment, we did, as a nation, truly become more democratic, as the progressives had hoped.  In today's society, we have been pushing to eliminate more of the protections in our system against the excesses of democracy, such as the liberal left's call for the end to the Electoral College.  A key aspect of a representative republic is the bicameral Congress, and even that important part of our system is being made more irrelevant, as the executive branch increases its activities "with, or without, Congress."

Thomas Jefferson called democracy the "tyranny of the majority, where 51% can take away the rights of the other 49%."

In a direct democracy, if the majority of the people believe you should lose your home, or become convinced that they must take away from you your place of business, your personal possessions, or your children, it can be done by a simple majority vote, and the arrival of a mob to take those things from you.  If a person is accused by the mob of a crime, a majority vote can seal the fate of the accused, without evidence, without due process, and without a fair trial.  And note that means the majority vote by those who participate, and non-participation can be encouraged through fear tactics.

In Ferguson, Missouri we have seen the emergence of mob-rule, where a majority, or perhaps maybe just a very loud and violent minority that has kept many people holed up in their homes in fear, have decided to dictate what the law is or says regardless of due process, and regardless of the other aspects of our system that make us a republic.  It doesn't matter to them what the evidence says, that Michael Brown was the aggressor and that the police officer that shot Brown was acting in self-defense.  They have been conditioned by progressive political thought since their birth that the history of slavery never ended, and that America remains a racist country. . . therefore, the cop is guilty because he's white.

The Democrats have incited the violence with their rhetoric.  They have condoned it with their support.  They are using racism as a tool to achieve their agenda.  The liberal left progressive democrats want an end to the rule of law, and encourage the rule of man, no matter how violent it may be, because they seek power and wealth, even if it means destroying a society with their tactics of race-baiting and class warfare.

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide." - John Adams

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

The American Form of Government - YouTube

REPORT: Autopsy Reveals Michael Brown Did Not Have Hands Up When Shot...

Police Chief: 'Very Unlikely' Officer Wilson Charged In Ferguson Shooting...

Protester: 'All Hell Going To Break Loose'...

AUNT: 'They Will Feel And See The Wrath Of God's Vengeance Come Upon Them In A Mighty Way'...

CNN Reporter Chased Off Live Broadcast...

David Stockman: Central Banks Are "Sick"

by JASmius



I had very little use for David Stockman thirty-two years ago when, as OMB Director, he was demanding that President Reagan abandon his tax cuts that pulled the U.S. economy out of the Carter recession on Keynesian budget-balancing grounds.

But I love the guy now, because he keeps echoing me:

Wall Street is "one sick puppy," but the world's major central banks are even sicker as they throw impossible mountains of money at intractable problems, according to David Stockman, director of the Office of Management and Budget in the Reagan White House.

The outspoken Stockman said a stock market correction appeared to have taken hold last week until the Federal Reserve deliberately stopped it with some hints about a possible extension of quantitative easing (QE).

The comment from St. Louis Fed president James Bullard (who Stockman dubbed "Dullard") promptly caused Wall Street to buy the dip, and stocks came roaring back.

"And it's no different anywhere else in the central bank besotted financial markets around the world. Everywhere state action, not business enterprise, is believed to be the source of wealth creation — at least the stock market's paper wealth version and even if for just a few more hours or days," Stockman asserted on his Contra Corner blog. [emphasis added]

Gee, I can't imagine where they could have gotten that cockamamie idea, can you?

Stockman noted that the U.S. also remains in precarious shape, thanks to ultra-easy monetary policies by the Fed. He said Bullard's suggestion that the Fed could put the end of QE on hold shows Bullard has been "drinking the central bank cool aid."

"Never mind that the Fed has pinned the money market rate at zero for 71 months and unleashed the greatest carry trade gambling spree in recorded history; or that $3.5 trillion of debt monetization during that period has deeply deformed yields and pricing in the entire fixed-income market," he stated.

"No, the job of the monetary politburo is apparently to sift noise out of the in-coming data noise — even when it is a feedback loop from the Fed’s own manipulation and interventions. So the stock market rallies strenuously because an incoherent central banker starts randomly gumming about self-evident financial noise."

That, and to maintain the façade of "economic recovery" while the U.S. economy remains mired in permanent economic depression, plus prevent the federal budget from melting down in the eruption of interest payments that higher long-term rates would trigger.

"Monetary politburo"; I'm going to have to shamelessly glom that line.  Seeing as how Mr. Stockman is echoing me, he really shouldn't mind a little quid pro quo.

John Kerry: "Israel & Climate Change Created ISIS"

by JASmius



Five months ago it was "poverty".  Before two weeks from next Tuesday it'll be the Tea Party as well.  It's like a lazy-Susan of pathetically lame dhimmi excuses attached to a zero-point energy battery:

Commissar of State John Kerry [last] Thursday rejected any link between Islam and extremism practiced by the likes of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, pointing instead to factors like poverty among youthful Mideast populations, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – and climate change.



What about evangelical Christians, Lurch?  You can't leave out us "crusaders".  And the rich.  And the "War on Women".

Whoa.  I have to stop there, folks.  The sardonic irony is making me woozy.

Pity I can't just short-cut to when it's my turn to stand on Mr. French's face, and then go launder my shoes.

Canada Parliament Gunman Was Convert To Islam

by JASmius



Hmmm; he almost reminds me of the Winter Soldier....



....except for the bionic left arm and the fact that Michael Zehaf-Bibeau was a "holy warrior" instead:

Canadian police were investigating a man named Michael Zehaf-Bibeau as a possible suspect in the shootings, a source familiar with the matter said. Two U.S. officials said U.S. agencies had been advised the suspect was a Canadian convert to Islam.

“Canada will never be intimidated,” and will redouble efforts to combat terrorism, Harper said in a televised address tonight. “We will learn more about the terrorist and any accomplices he may have had” in the days ahead, Harper said.

Assuming Zehaf-Bibeau was a lone wolf, Mr. Prime Minister.  If, on the other hand, he was a jihadist Bucky Barnes, you, and we, may not have the luxury of time to figure everything out to our satisfaction.

Security in Ottawa came under criticism after the gunman was able to run through the unlocked front door of the main parliament building. Police said an operation was under way to make parliament safe. [emphases added]

Meaning that the Canadian Parliament wasn't safe before and hasn't been for at least as long as they've been leaving their bloody front door unlocked.

Mon dieu, I know Canada is just....Canada, but in this day and age of rampaging Islamic Fundamentalism metastasizing across the globe like stage-4 cancer, can't they even keep their doors locked?  Maybe spring for an ADT security system or something?  Merde, I've had both of these security measures at Hard Starboard Galactic Headquarters for twenty years, and I'm not even Canadian.

But Wolverine is....



....and the Sentinel takeover is still a few years away, so he might have some time to lend Ottawa a hand.

"It caught us by surprise. ... If we had known that this was coming, we would have been able to disrupt it," Gilles Michaud, assistant commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, (RCMP) told a news conference.

How can a jihadist shooting up Parliament not be something the RCMP can anticipate?  This kind of scenario never occurred to any of them?  Seriously?

OTOH, it does explain why Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau was able to shoot his way almost to the door of the room in which Prime Minister Harper was meeting with his Conservative Party caucus.  Imagine if he'd had a little more success, or Sergeant-At-Arms Kevin Vickers's aim had been a wee bit off.  One jihadist, lone wolf or not, could have decapitated the Canadian government.

A shrunken head, admittedly, but a decapitation nonetheless.  Who needs Islamikazes or suitcase nukes, right?

But it's the home-grown nature of the gunman that should be the primary cause of worry:

It was unclear whether there was any connection between Wednesday's shootings and an attack on Monday when a convert to Islam ran down two Canadian soldiers with his car, killing one, near Montreal, before being shot dead by police in the first fatal attack on Canadian soil tied to Islamic militants.

Canada's prime minister called the Ottawa shooting the country's second terrorist attack in three days.

No group, Islamic or otherwise, claimed responsibility for either the attack in Ottawa or the one near Montreal. Monday's attacker, 25-year-old Martin Rouleau, who converted to Islam last year, was among 90 people being tracked by the RCMP on suspicion of taking part in militant activities abroad or planning to do so. [emphases added]

No "Islamic group" has to claim responsibility.  When Islamic Fundamentalism is sweeping across the de-Christianized "infidel" West, sweeping up a militant-secularist-created godless, directionless generation like Legion cast into the herd of pigs, and who are flocking to the ISIS banner like yellowjackets on a camp ground dumpster, all Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has to do is sit back with a frosty mug of Christian blood and watch the impromptu "auditions".  It's no setback that Messrs. Zehaf-Bibeau and Rouleau are already canoodling with their 144 virgins; there'll be a lot more where they came from.  That, and the Hosers' idea of "security," is why al-Baghdadi personally entering that caucus room and sawing off the noggin of every member of the Canadian government is only a matter of time.  Heck, Barack Obama will probably be his "caddy".

In the mean time, let us salute the aforementioned heroism of Sergeant-At-Arms Kevin Vickers, who put forth action as opposed to faux blustery rhetoric:

MPs and proud members of the public were quick to thank Kevin Vickers, a former Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officer, as authorities hunt Ottawa for other suspects.

Veterans affairs minister Julian Fantino, himself a former policeman, said: "All the details are not in, but the Sergeant-at-Arms, a former Mountie, is the one that engaged the gunman, or one of them at least, and stopped this.

"He did a great job and, from what I know, shot the gunman and he is now deceased."

He later tweeted that he was "profoundly grateful" to Mr. Vickers.

Craig Scott, an NDP Member of Parliament for Toronto-Danforth, said: "MPs and Hill staff owe their safety, even lives, to Sergeant-at-Arms Kevin Vickers who shot attacker just outside the MPs' caucus rooms."



Good thing Mr. Vickers is Canadian; if he were one of us, the Obama Regime would have already arrested him for his "violent Islamophobic actions".

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Another Fence Jumper. . . at the White House

By Douglas V. Gibbs

No wonder Obama doesn't want to secure the border.  His people can't even keep people from jumping the White House fence, much less the crossing the border with Mexico.  This time, however, the jumper barely got his feet on the grass before he was detained.  The Secret Service and two trained dogs brought the man down quickly, long before he could ring the doorbell.

According to the police, one of the two dogs from their K-9 unit got him.  The jumper was identified as 32-year-old Dominic Adesanya of Bel Air, Maryland.

This incident follows a jumper a little over a month ago that got all the way across the lawn to the White House before he was captured.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

White House fence jumper quickly detained - CNN

Gunfire Inside Canadian Parliament Caught On Tape

by JASmius

A gunman shot a Canadian soldier standing guard at the National War Memorial in Ottawa, then entered Parliament and shots rang out, police and witnesses said. Ottawa police said shots were fired at three places in the Canadian capital, the National War Memorial and near the Rideau Centre Mall.



Hard Starboard Radio: Around The States



The Left would rather forget its old slogan, “Bush lied, thousands died," since even the New York Times admits he was telling the truth; ISIS won’t stop until it achieves its mission — or until the United States smashes it.  Which means....until it achieves its mission; Wendy Davis's results-oriented rhetoric is a threat to important American values; Wendy Davis deserves to join the ranks of utter flops, but she's a Democrat, so better pastures await; Oregon Republicans will rarely get better opportunities than this year; and to unseat Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker - and keep him out of the White House in 2016 - Democrats resort to making stuff up.

MSU is not a school in Minnesota at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific.  No matter what my brother-in-law says.

The Ebola Wars

by JASmius

Obama asks "whodunit?" "Dr." Frieden to the "rescue." And ISIS still lives large.



Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Dodges Obama's Name

by JASmius




My goodness, DWS is a "sturdy" "woman," isn't "she"?  To say nothing of all but providing the captions for every picture in which she appears.

These days, like pretty much every other Democrat, she just can't seem to remember the name of that gawky, spindly "guy" on the left above:

Democratic National Committee Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz joined the list of Democrats dodging President Barack Obama by not using his name when asked about the president's policies.

Wasserman Schultz sidestepped questions on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" about whether a vote for Democrats in the 2014 midterm elections was a vote for Obama's policies, referring instead to particular Democratic initiatives, such as increasing the minimum wage and strengthening the economy.

With the same policies that sank it in the first place.  Not a good plan.

After repeated questions by host Joe Scarborough, a former Republican Florida-1 congressman, about whether a vote for Democrats was a vote for Obama's policies, Wasserman Schultz instead pivoted away from the president.

"If you vote for Democrats, you are voting for candidates who are focused on creating jobs....

Like they have the past six years?

....getting the economy turned around....

Like they have the past six years?

....and continuing to move us forward....

Toward what?  Do you even realize that Halloween is next week?  You must, since you have to look in a mirror once in a while, even if just for penance.

....creating more opportunities for people to succeed," the Florida Democratic congresswoman said Wednesday.

Which Democrats have been taking away ever since You-Know-Who has been running the show.  And while you implicitly consider him political ebola, Debbie, he's sitting next to each and every one of you jackasses on the political bus:

Despite the distance some Democrats were seeking from Obama, the president maintained in a radio interview Monday that Democratic candidates running for office were "folks who vote with me" and were "strong allies and supporters of me."

Yes!  They!  Are!   And there is no possible way, after the garishly idolatrous excesses to which the American public has been insufferably and interminably subjected since 2008, that Democrats can don hooded Sith cloaks and campaign incognito on a platform of noisome generalities and malodorous bromides that amount to "Vote for us: We made things this crappy, but we promise not to make them THAT much worse!"  Sorry, petaQ'pu, but that cake ain't gonna bake.

And if there's one thing DWS's thighs know about intimately, it's cake.

Ebola: The Muslim Disease

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Ebola, and its ease of infection in West Africa, is less about the disease itself, and more about the local cultures and practices that are a part of Islamic Tradition.  The Islamic Burial Ritual is especially among the culprits contributing to the ease of the spread of Ebola throughout Africa.  Upon death, rather than being handled by experts with modern equipment, and safety protocols, the dead in Islam are handled by the family, washed from head to toe.

The cleaning includes family members pressing down on the abdomen to excrete fluids still in the body, a collective duty for those involved, where all are expected to participate to ensure the deceased has been left pure, so that the faithful’s ascension into Paradise is not jeopardized (unless he died in jihad).

Before the body is buried, Muslims attending the funeral typically pass a common bowl for use in ablution or washing of the face, feet and hands, compounding the risk of infection.

These customs are prescribed by Shariah law.

Ebola victims can be more contagious dead than alive. Their bodies are covered in rashes, blood and other fluids containing the virus, and the family literally covers themselves with the virus during the burial ritual.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Wealth Disparity Greater Than Any Time Since 1929

by JASmius



Fascinating, isn't it?  Wealth disparity, income inequality, these are the bread & butter of socialist classism.  They propelled FDR's landslide election triumph in 1932, his "New Deal," and the ensuing eighty years of "progressivism" (with the lone capitalist breather of the Reagan years), culminating in the hardcore Marxism of the Obama Ascendancy.  And after all that, all the tax hikes, all the runaway deficit spending, all the suffocating regulation, all the income and wealth theft, all the trillions of dollars "redistributed," here we sit in 2014 and....wealth disparity hasn't narrowed at all since 1929?

Seriously?:

Wealth inequality is greater than anytime since 1929, new research from Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, and Gabriel Zucman of the London School of Economics reveals.

"The share of wealth held by the top 0.1% of families is now almost as high as in the late 1920s, when 'The Great Gatsby' defined an era that rested on the inherited fortunes of the robber barons of the Gilded Age," the economists write in a blog post for the Washington Center for Equitable Growth.

Wealth concentration has followed a U-shaped trend in the last hundred years, Saez and Zucman write. Wealth disparity was high in the beginning of the 20th century, fell from 1929 to 1978 and has increased since then.

The bottom 90% of the population held 15% of total wealth in the late 1920s, they write in their paper, "Wealth Inequality in the United States since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Tax Data." The share rose steadily rose to 35% in the mid-1980s, the economists say, pointing to rising pensions and housing wealth. The share then fell to 23% in 2012 due to increasing mortgages and other debt.

Meanwhile, the wealthiest 10% is taking a larger share of the economic pie, as incomes at the top surged and savings rates between top earners and the rest of the population diverged.

The return of wealth inequality is almost entirely due to the top 0.1%, a small group of about 160,000 with net assets over $20 million in 2012, getting richer. The overall share of total household wealth owned by that small group increased from 7% in 1979 to 22% in 2012, creating a level of disparity not seen since 1929.

I really detest this sort of garish envy.  It never fails to amaze me how the same people who admonish evangelical Christians to stop "peeping" into their bedrooms had no qualms whatsoever about reaching into the wallets of those that they imperiously deem to "have too much".  You want us to leave your sex lives alone?  You keep your hands off our bank accounts.  Deal?

I have a pile of money.  A remarkably large pile, given the struggles and adversities of my career, though molehill-sized compared to "the top 0.1%" (who are almost all "progressive" Democrats, BTW).  And you know what?  I earned every dime of it.  So do almost all of us who don't live "paycheck to paycheck".  Those that have more than most worked correspondingly harder, were more talented, took fuller advantage of their opportunities.  They shouldn't be begrudged, and have their "stashes" plundered; they should be celebrated and held up as examples to be emulated.  Rather than wanting to tear down "the wealthy" (who have the resources to resist that sort of thing, or there wouldn't still be any "rich"), the orientation of public economic policy should be to encourage and facilitate the entrance of greater numbers of Americans into their ranks.

In a free-market, capitalist economy, the rich do get richer - but so does the middle class, the working class, and the poor.  Upward economic mobility is the coin of that realm, and income and wealth levels are a fractal chaos of constant movement, with the general trend moving ever upward.  My career exemplified that: it started out slow, but there were always opportunities to advance, move up, and I eventually found my niche and had a nice twenty-year run to middle/upper middle class range.  That, combined with old-fashioned frugality and thrift, has yielded me my "pile" and afforded me the luxury of not having to panic during this time of transition to a new career.

Which brings us to why income inequality has spiked at four times the rate under Barack Obama that it ever did under George W. Bush.  And the answer is simple: No jobs.  No upward economic mobility.  Economic opportunities have vanished, and the "wealthiest Americans" can either hunker their fortunes down in "shelters" and wait for better times or corruptly sell out to the Obama Regime.

You cannot amass wealth if (1) you cannot earn it and (2) you're not allowed to keep it.

Given that one half of the aforementioned study came from UC-Berkeley and the name of this outfit - "The Washington Center For [No] Growth" - you can probably guess what their policy prescription is:

To reduce wealth inequality, or at least to slow growing income inequality, the economists recommend progressive income taxes, estate taxes, providing quality, affordable education, controlling healthcare costs, minimum wage policies and "policies shifting bargaining power away from shareholders and management toward workers."

In other words, more of the disease.  Make the rich a little poorer (unless they sell out) and the middle and working classes a lot poorer, and correspondingly more dependent on animal pols of the poisonous mindset of Messrs. Saez and Zucman.  The perfect formula for exacerbating income inequality and wealth disparity.

Here's a clue for you, guys: Most people know they're never going to be rich.  What most people care about is to be able to earn a comfortable living.  Have a nice house, couple of cars, a few PCs, maybe a plasma screen TV, go out to eat once in a while, see a few pro sporting events, maybe vacation at Disneyland annually, and be able to save a nice retirement nest egg.  We get that and we'll be content, no matter how much lucre Bill Gates or Warren Buffet amasses.

And you jagovs want to stand astride that path, stick your hands out at us, and yell "STOP!  Welfare line is that way!"  See the problem?

Exit question: How much do you two earn a year?  What's the size of your respective estates?  What's your job security level?  Indignant minds want to know.

Canadian Soldier Shot at War Memorial, Gunshots in Parliament Buildings

By Douglas V. Gibbs

[1] The City of Ottawa is the capital of Canada.  In Ottawa at a War Memorial, a uniformed Canadian soldier has been shot.  Gunfire has also been reported inside the Parliament buildings where the national government's representatives meet.

The soldier has been hospitalized, and the parliament buildings are on lockdown. The Prime Minister, it is being reported, remains safe and "off the hill."

No information regarding the shooter, or the details of the incident, are available at this time.  Check back with Political Pistachio for updates.

[2] UPDATE: Gunman Killed, Police Suspect Multiple Shooters. The incident comes two days after a Canadian soldier was struck by a car and killed by a man with jihadist sympathies.

[3] UPDATE: Shots were fired near an in-progress cabinet meeting in parliament. Canada recently raised threat level in response to an increase in online "general chatter" from radical groups including Islamic State and al-Qaeda. Earlier this month, Canada announced plans to join the US-led campaign of air strikes against Islamic State (IS) militants in Iraq.

[4] UPDATE: At least 30 shots heard inside Parliament Building. People fled Parliament by scrambling down scaffolding erected for renovations. The shooting Wednesday comes two days after a recent convert to Islam killed one Canadian soldier and injured another in a hit-and-run before being gunned down by police.  The suspect had been on the radar of federal investigators, who feared he had jihadist ambitions and seized his passport when he tried to travel to Turkey.

[5] UPDATE: Police state there was only one shooter, identified as Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, a convert to Islam with a history of drug use before he converted.  His passport was confiscated by Canadian authorities when they learned he planned to go fight overseas.  The shooter was killed by police inside the Parliament Building where the gunman opened fire.  The Canadian soldier shot at the War Memorial was shot in the back in cold blood, and has died.  A connection to terrorism has not been ruled out.  The attacks on Monday and Wednesday followed an announcement by Canada that they would be joining the United States in the fight against ISIS in the Middle East.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary