Those Who Sow to the Wind Will Reap the Whirlwind

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

This sweet vignette of liberal love and tolerance bore fruit today, as two police officers were shot by a lowlife thug from Baltimore, who set out to kill policemen, regardless of who they were or how diligently they performed their duties, simply because they had both taken the oath to 'protect and serve'.

The two officers were stationed outside a housing project, in a predominantly African American neighborhood, that had been plagued by violent crime. To all of you semi-deranged folks who think that somehow these two "got what was coming to them", tell me, do you think that the people in that housing project will be more safe or less safe after these two murders?

One Tweeter remarked:
"I truly don't care that cops just got shot in head in NYC. It'll take drastic measures to change a racist nation that murders its citizens."

Blazing Diplomacy

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Fans of "Blazing Saddles" will remember Cleavon Little as the sheriff taking himself hostage. That was the impression that fist came to my mind after hearing President Obama's plan to normalize relations with Communist Cuba.

But, did the President take himself hostage? Just his credibility (if there were any left!) Step into the Wayback Machine with me to 2009:
President Obama marked his 100th day in office Wednesday by holding a prime-time news conference from the White House. Obama said the Bush administration’s use of waterboarding was torture...
OBAMA: What I’ve said — and I will repeat — is that waterboarding violates our ideals and our values. I do believe that it is torture. I don’t think that’s just my opinion; that’s the opinion of many who’ve examined the topic. And that’s why I put an end to these practices.
At the very beginning of his presidency, Obama made known his erroneous and disparaging views on enhanced interrogation, falsely calling it torture, which has specific meaning and connotation around the planet, casting the 'land of the free and the home of the brave' as being morally equivalent with nations that pr actice genuine torture.

There was much public debate about the subject in 2009. A number of reporters volunteered to be waterboarded, (more reporters were waterboarded than terrorists, it turns out!) The lines were drawn. The Left disparaged everything George W. Bush did, so there was no reasoning with them. The furor eventually died down and people were soon inundated with a barrage of scandals, economic malaise and foreign policy debacles unabated by a White House obsessed with celebrities and golf, with an occasional funeral selfie.

The Mary Jo Kopechne "I Can't Breathe" T-shirt

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

The signature collection shirt is now available at the Punditry_Place store at Zazzle.

I Can't Breathe - Mary Jo Kopechne
I Can't Breathe - Mary Jo Kopechne by Punditry_Place
Browse more Satire T-Shirts at Zazzle

Motives and Whistleblowers

By Grant Davies

Recently there have been two cases of people blowing the whistle on the US government for wrongdoing. Both cases exposed significant violations of the public trust, not to mention the rights of the citizens.

Both people who exposed the wrongdoing deserve credit for helping the American people. All the citizens are better off knowing what is really going on and how the government deceived them.

One, Edward Snowden, seems to have had the intention of doing so for what he thought of as his duty as an American. The other, Jonathan Gruber, seems to have done so inadvertently and for all the wrong reasons, even if those reasons are not very clear to me. I could speculate about what motivated him, but I'm not sure that would be helpful or enlightening. When it comes to whistleblowing, I'm also not sure motives matter.

Meanwhile, in both cases the government is scrambling to respond. Below is a video that shows some of what the response to the Gruber truth telling has been.

Mr. President: There is No 'Shot Clock' in the Constitution

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
President Obama and his sycophantic supporters have made the argument ad nauseum, that since the House failed to pass a certain Senate bill, within a certain amount of time, that President Obama was free to act on his own to unilaterally "fix" the immigration problem. Conservatives, however, keep bringing this "Constitution" thingy into the argument.

Where in the Constitution does it say that any particular piece of legislation passed in the Senate must be voted on in the House within a certain amount of time, or the President gets a free pass to write his own legislation? Moreover, all the faux indignation and self righteous intonation of "two whole years", "seventeen months*", or "514 days", since the Senate passed an immigration bill, completely overlooks the fact that the House did pass a number of immigration reform bills which Senator Harry Reid (Dimbulb- Searchlight) refused to bring up for a vote in the US Senate. The fact that your opponents will not necessarily vote on a bill they disagree with,  also does not give you carte blanche to do whatever you please.

Even though there is no "shot clock", "pass them or else" time limit on Senate bills, you'd think that sooner or later, the US Senate might get around to actually passing a budget.