Liberals are whining about republican criticism

Since the failed attack on the American airline by a Moslem jihadist, the right-wing politicians strongly criticised president Obama for his failure to take terrorism seriously. Liberals turned up the highest whining levels and started to complain that they've been treated unfairly. After all, Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia liberals always took the war on terrorism seriously, and they were ready to do anything to defend this country from jihadists.

Now, this is a strange response, given that Obama's head of security, Janet Neapolitano rejected the term "war on terror" as too aggressive. Not satisfied with this extravaganza, she decided to seek literary awards and and introduced one of the most bizarre term to describe a terrorist attack - "man caused disaster". It was same Janet that could not make up her mind if her priority was the domestic terrorism or Islamic terrorism. And it's same Janet that believed the security system worked perfectly, when asked if there was any failure during the latest attack.

One should also not forget that the CIA was defending itself from the concentrated attacks by the Obama's administration - the attacks led by Eric Holder, who previously worked as a senior partner in a pro-terrorist law firm Covington & Burling (and which represents multiple terrorists pro-bono), the same man who personally fought for freeing 15 FALN terrorists - and who is now the attorney general. And yet, liberals are stunned than anyone who be questioning their desire to fight terrorism alleged man-caused disasters?

While this drama was unfolding, the republicans were not silent. Back in May of 2009, Cheney was adamant that Obama's approach will lead to more attacks on US:

"It is recklessness cloaked in righteousness and would make the American people less safe....
The administration has found that it's easy to receive applause in Europe for closing Guantanamo. But it's tricky to come up with an alternative that will serve the interests of justice and America's national security."

In August, Cheney forcefully attacked Obama for his prosecution of CIA - a prosecution which deeply wounded this organization and made a lot of CIA operatives openly afraid to deal with terrorism.

During same time, liberal justices and lawyers worked hard to undermine any protections against terrorism that airlines could have - suing the companies that aggressively protected the passengers from jihadists and the passengers who reported suspicious behavior.

After the second terrorist attack on America in just a few months, Republican heavy-weights are strongly criticising Obama for his abysmal record on terrorism. Just yesterday, Dick Cheney made a very strong statement, which is undoubtedly true:

"As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war... He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core al Qaeda trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, “war on terror,” we won’t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe."

And then Cheney goes for the kill: "Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency – social transformation—the restructuring of American society."

Indeed few people, who watched the political developments in the last year would question the fairness of Cheney's claim that Obama's main goal is social transformation of the country, not the war on terror. There is little argument that for the last half year, Obama's main objective was to get unpopular Healthcare bill through Congress. It can be even speculated that Obama paid more attention into getting the 2016 Olympic games to Chicago than the war on terror (at the time the Copenhagen Olympic committee had more time tet-a-tet the president than the Chief commander of the US troops in Afghanistan).

And now, the liberals are whining that they've been unfairly attacked. The funny thing is that they fully understand that if they attempted to emulate Obama's rhetoric they would look silly. I haven't seen any liberal using the term "alleged attacks" or "alleged terrorist" when discussing the attack. I hope all republicans must insist that liberals should use Obama's terms - just so that the stupidity of the current administration became more obvious.

Rush Limbaugh hospitalized...

I am not into conspiracies, but I remember the time when all influential opponents to president Putin started dying for all kinds of causes. I believe the doctors should check him for poisoning - just in case. I mean, there are a lot of supporters of president Obama, and maybe one of them became a tad too enthusiastic and decided to take an extra step in helping Obama to "fundamentally change America"...

This is outrageous...

In Berkley, California, the epicenter of liberalism in America, the local leftists decided to close high-school science labs because evil White students (and quite possibly evil Asian students) spent inordinate time learning science, while some minorities (Blacks and Latinos) did not bother to do so. It's part of the social justice "thing" - if a kid is better than others in physics or math, the liberals will try to bring him down. Instead of promoting talented students (irrespective of their race and ethnicity), the liberals would rather blockc their path to knowledge. This is a disgrace! I cannot find the words to explain how evil it is what they do. Instead of growing kids into new Einstein and Landau, the liberals would rather turn them into lazy bums and ignoramuses. It's like these people have a death wish...

Smart foreign policy...

Back in 2008, it was enough for Bush to whistle, and the leaders from all major countries jumped into the planes and flew to Washington DC to meet with him.

In 2009, Barack Obama begs the governments of China, India, Brazil to see him – and they refuse.

I guess Texas cowboys are better at diplomacy than community organizers. Who could have known this? Absolutely amazing. Hope and Change, Ladies and Gentlmen.

The best come back in world's history....

This exchange I read on Reason in response to an article critising Obama...

Liberal: You doctrinaire right-wing hack. What could Obama do that you would approve of?
Libertarian: Bend your mom over the kitchen table.

I propose this song to become the official anthem of the Tea Party Movement!

"Taxman" by George Harrison, Beatles
(The song that was written in anticipation of the presidency of Barack Obama)

Let me tell you how it will be
There's one for you, nineteen for me
Cos I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman

Should five per cent appear too small
Be thankful I don't take it all
Cos I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman

If you drive a car, I'll tax the street
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat
If you get too cold I'll tax the heat
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet

Taxman!
Cos I'm the taxman, yeah I'm the taxman

Don't ask me what I want it for
If you don't want to pay some more
Cos I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman

Now my advice for those who die
Declare the pennies on your eyes
Cos I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman

And you're working for no one but me
Taxman!

You can listen to the tune HERE

I believe the activists of the Tea Party movement should not shy away from bringing the boom-boxes to the local, state and federal buildings and playing this tune. Lets make it fun!

When public option meets public opinion....

The current debacle with Obama-care aptly demonstrates what happens when liberal philosophy collides with common sense. The tastiest part of the failure to promote the so-called "public option" is that it was the public opinion that killed it, by forcing the moderate liberals to abandon their support for it. Is it not ironic that the public hates the "public option"? By all means, the term "public option" is now sharing the pantheon of infamous code words with "public radio" and "people's democracy"...

What should conservatives do now?

At this point in time we are all breathlessly watching the amazing spectacle of descent of the Anointed One from the Garden of Eden into the crap-hole of history. What should the American conservatives do to accelerate this fall and make sure that our country gets back on track?

Firstly, they must follow the Napoleon's maxim "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." The Medical Care Bill is a major mistake, and Obama will come to regret it. The bill is already unpopular with nearly 60% of the population, and this is even before the republican operatives went through it with a fine net, found all the hidden new taxes, regulations and handouts to the politically connected and made them public. The next year will be very exciting...

The second goal is to follow Sun Tsu "If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him." Obama conceded in his memoirs that he is constantly in a state of rage – and there are only a few things more dangerous for a politician than losing his temper. There will be nothing more satisfying that watching Obama angrily react to mockery and criticism, which in turn would lead to more mockery and criticism. Republicans should use every opportunity to irritate Obama – and this goes from political speeches to the most basic moves on the human level. Nothing will upset him more than such treatment – which is why it is necessary to use it in large portions.

By now, Obama the president got all the major legislations he desired (save for the official proclamation of his divine nature) – two worthless (but very expensive) stimulus packages, the health care bill, two bloated budgets, and a major surge in Afghanistan (American soldiers will be have both hands tied behind the backs to make the war more fair to the taliban) – and it was all for nothing. He refused to ask American people if they agreed with his radical agenda – and now he will start paying the price.

Most Americans are not satisfied with the job he is doing as president, and his incessant speechifying while the country is falling apart is turning them against him – permanently. As someone said – “Obama is a one trick pony” – and his only trick is his ability to read heart-felt speeches from the teleprompter. When those speeches stop to work, he is finished. Luckily, Obama cannot follow Napoleon’s maxim “One must change one's tactics every ten years if one wishes to maintain one's superiority.” He is all we have seen so far. There is nothing to him that he has not already shown to us in public - except the rage and hate, which he should start oozing in large quantities very soon.

What is even more important for republicans is to cleanse their party from RINOs – Republicans in Name Only. The GOP must become a conservative party, not the party of appeasement and compromise. The only way for republicans to present a unified front against the liberals and prevent the break up of the GOP through massive desertion of conservatives to a Third Party is to become the party of discontent. And the republican establishment should get it in their heads that their political future is very bleak if they do not move decisively to the right.

Lastly, the republicans must use all the available resources to defend two main pillars of democracy - freedom of the press and honesty of our electoral process. There can be no compromise on these two issues, and no step by Obama to mess with them should go without a thunderous response from republicans.

All in all, things are going quite well. I believe America is on the way to recovery. It will only take a few years now. But surely these will be very tumultuous years. Don't forget to purchase popcorn and beer. Stay tuned, America.

President commits political suicide by jumping from the "precipice"

A few days ago, our Glorious Leader, Barack Hussein Obama has sobered up and made a surprisingly astute observation about his Medical Care bill: "From the discussions we had, it's clear we are on the precipice of achievement that's eluded Congresses, presidents for generations -- an achievement that will touch the lives of nearly every American." For those unclear about the usage of the word "precipice" - let me remind you that it means either "an overhanging or extremely steep mass of rock, such as a crag or the face of a cliff" or "the brink of a dangerous or disastrous situation".

It is clear that Obama's understanding of the implications of the Health Care Reform is very much attuned to the views of nearly 60% of Americans, who are against this travesty. Nevertheless, Obama decided to publicly jump of the cliff, the same "precipice" he was talking about - confirming once again the wisdom of an old proverb: "Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad." The funny part is that Obama did not jump alone - luckily for us he persuaded the entire Democratic Party and the media to follow him. It's as if madness is contagious.

How did we arrive here? It's amazing if one remembers how well the Obama's presidency was starting - the media adored him, the crowds loved him. Newsweek proclaimed that Obama was a "some kind of God", while MSNBC’s commentators were climaxing every time they mentioned his name. Barry photos were on all newspapers and magazines – even pet stores featured his portraits. And lets not forget my favorite - remember a youtube video of a liberal activist proclaiming that "I wont have to worry about putting gas in my car, I won't have to worry about paying my mortgage.. You know, If I help him, he's gonna help me." How’s that working for you, babe?

Back then, Barack Obama was confidently following Napoleon's maxim that "A leader is a dealer in hope." But pretty soon things starting going South. Firstly, Obama demonstrated that he had no inclination to take his job seriously, which was obvious when one were to watch how slowly and ineffectively he was forming his administration. At times of severe economic crisis, he took nearly a year to fill up the positions that had to do with economics and finances. He also managed to over-hype the stimulus package, which was supposed to keep the unemployment below 8%. And then, there were constant parties, golfing tours, and speeches, speeches, speeches - speeches about everything and nothing.

What was even worse, is that Obama continued to push the most left-wing agenda in the US history, both domestically and abroad. In his vanity, Obama forgot that “The great proof of madness is the disproportion of one's designs to one's means." America is essentially a center-right nation, and its population is still far more progressive than the Western European people. In the end, Obama’s attack on the fundamental principles of this nation could not succeed. To me, an immigrant from theformer Soviet Union, Obama’s regime represents the most consistent attempt to destroy this nation, more dangerous than the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. And still, I believed in 2008, and I believe now that Obama is destined to fail. Sure, he will/was be able to run wild for a couple of years, but after that there is little expectation of success for him.

I am confident that the only thing Obama did was to awaken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve.


And last but not least, Obama himself proved to be a far less capable politician than was previously advertised. He revealed himself to be a snarky arrogant fool, whose minute of fame is over, and whose time of eternal infamy has just begun. As Napoleon said: "When small men attempt great enterprises, they always end by reducing them to the level of their mediocrity." And I say – Amen to that!




Note 1
In 1940, the Imperial Japanese Navy Admiral Isoruku Yamamoto, spoke to the Japanese Cabinet during planning for war with the United States in 1940 and said "I can run wild for six months... After that, I have no expectation of success.”


Note 2
In 1941, after successfully executing the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto was still very pessimistic: "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."

Never let a good crisis go to waste

And so it seems that the Obama’s administration was able to locate or purchase the 60 imbeciles in the US Senate that were ready to support the Healthcare Bill. I believe this is very good for America in the long run. As Lenin said – “the worse, the better.” Don’t forget that the massive tax increases kick in instantly, while the multiple free handouts won’t be offered until years from now. There will be a lot of pain and gnashing of teeth – with no apparent gain to the public.

And note that the healthcare plan is not yet known to the people (actually, even the DNC leadership did not read it) – and the public already hates it. It is beyond any doubt that the bill is filled with special treats, pork and corruption, so I hope conservatives will make sure that the most disgusting parts of the new law will be shown one after another (like the ACORN videos) to the outraged public before the 2010 elections.


And conservatives must use this opportunity twofold. Firstly, they must clean up the Republican Party and throw away the sell-outs and the moderates. As Lenin said – “we must split before we unite”. After that, GOP must present itself as the only alternative to the insane and possibly treasonous leftist regime. No compromises this time.

Conservatives cannot let this crisis go to waste. Personally, I believe that the election of an extreme left-wing president was the only way for the American people to wake up from sleep-walking into socialism. If we want a drastic turn from the path to hell, we may need a very loud wake up call. And Obama is pretty loud these days. Back in November 2008 I explained why I welcomed Obama’s presidency. It seems like my predictions are coming true.


There are a few dangers that lie ahead. Right now, conservatives must defend two things above all – freedom of the press and our electoral process. I predict that Obama’s next target will be either the media or the fairness of elections. It is absolutely critical for conservatives to man the walls against any encroachment on the foundation of our democracy. And secondly, as I said, GOP must cleanse itself and get ready to drastically change the country in 2011. American economy cannot survive an Obama-lite in 2013 – it needs Thatcher or Reagan to drastically change the course of the country.

But all in all, I am quite optimistic. I believe the better days lie ahead.

It's the Vietnam War

This is Vietnam War Redux. The troops are sold out for political correctness AGAIN. Their blood is worth nothing. Things will get much worse, and Taliban will now always use civilians as their shields. And the US military will become even more cautious, and Taliban will be emboldened.

I am curious when Obama will be personally choosing the bombing sites and specifying the exact amounts of ordinance allowed to use - as LBJ did in the 60ies.

For all intents and purposes, the war is lost until we change the president. It's only a matter of time before US troops will start losing more personal than they did at the height of the Iraq War.

How to quickly collect raw temperature data...

I am sure everyone but the legacy media is now familiar with the so-called "Climate-Gate" - a clear record of government financed scientists, who were sexing up the climate data in order to create an impression of climate catastrophy. At this point, I don't trust any data coming from the official sources, and I propose a simple and effective method to bypass the government agencies altogether. Here it goes.

It is necessary to collect the newspapers in most or all Western countries for the last 100 years, and carefully record all the reported local temperatures. While the government agencies can falsify or make inaccessible the raw data, I believe the newspapers will most likely report the correct information. I am sure there will be some effects due to urban heating, but these should have less impact on the later data. It is also plausible, that some newspapers will be reporting the air temperature outside of the urban zones.

All in all, it's an interesting experiment, and I am sure there should be enough enthusiasts with time on their hands to do this.

A few points on civilian trial of KSM

There are plenty of reasons why using civilian court for KSM is a very bad decision - and is an illogical one. Lets go one by one.

1. Obama publicly prosecuted, convicted and sentenced KSM. If the court agrees with Obama - then it would be difficult to prove to anyone outside US that the trial was fair, that Obama had no influence on the jury or the judges. In short, the usual suspects will simply proclaim this was a kangaroo court - and there is nothing Obama can say to change this impression. In short, the entire rational for the civilian court is lost already.

2. Obama and his lackeys explained that one of the reasons KSM is being brought to a civilian court is because they have enough evidence on him to convict him. In other words, the administration publicly proclaimed that military tribunals are kangaroo courts, and that they will be used to convict possibly innocent people. In short, the usual suspects will assertain that Obama is using military tribunals to kill innocent moslems. And sure enough - Obama agrees with them - military tribunals are not fair.

3. Lastly, if KSM has same rights and priviliges as any American accused of criminal behaviour - then it is clear that the current policy of targeted assasinations practiced by the US military is illegal. I would want to see a single liberal trying to square their claims about KSM's Constitutional rights versus their support for assasinations of Al Qaeda leaders. After all, does the US Constitution allow the police or the military to assasinate common criminals?

As I predicted before - Obama is bailing out liberal media...

As reported by Michele Malkin, Obama's administration leaned on Goldman Sachs Group to force it to "renegotiate" the loan with the ultra left-wing City Broadcasting Corp, the Air Americas "Sugar Daddy". If this is not the corruption of a highest level (government using a tax-payer subsidized bank to bail out a media outlet friendly to the government) - I don't know what is corruption then.

The remaining question is - when will Obama bail out the rest of the media lapdogs? Will this come in 2010?

Why I don't believe in the global warming ...

Global Warming is one of the most hotly debated issues in the political arena. And finally I decided that I could not be silent any longer and add my 5 cents to the debate. As an attentive reader of this blog could have guessed, I don't believe that Global Warming is a burning issue and I don't think that American people to sacrifice their living standards in order to stave off the impeding crisis of cosmic proportions.

First of all, it is necessary to dispel any doubts and announce that I personally want our planet to prosper, I do not wish the mankind to become extinct, and, moreover, that I am smart and educated to understand the basics of the debate between the skeptics and the alarmists. This preamble is necessary, since it is often maintained that people skeptical about the Global Warming are either stupid, ignorant or evil - and I am surely neither.

Secondly, I want to make it obvious - in order to justify the need for massive measured to reverse the global warming, the alarmists must indeed prove four assertions. The failure to prove either of these assertions should immediately put an end to any and all measures promoted by the alarmists.

1. There indeed exists measurable and consistent increase of global temperature;
2. The warming is caused in most part (more than 90%) by human activity;
3. The proposed methods to stop this increase by regulating CO2 emissions will be less costly than allowing the increasing trend to continue for some time (50 years or so) until new technologies will cheaply reduce CO2 emissions;
4. Harmful effects of global warming are larger than the sum of positive effects of global warming and the costs of drastically lowering the CO2 emissions.

Anyone following the debate on Global Warming can easily see that there is scarce evidence to support each and any of the above mentioned assertions - let alone all of them. The measurements of global temperature are quite unreliable, and it's clear that only small number of people (who's job security is strongly dependent on maintaining the Global Warming scare) have access to raw data - and their honesty and integrity are very questionable .

Moreover, there is little direct evidence that the temperature increase is indeed caused by human activity.

Lastly, the costs of lowering the CO2 emissions are staggering, while the actual danger of Global Warming to society is quite unclear.

It is also obvious that the current plans include drastic increase of government power, impoverishment of billions of people, creation of super-governmental elite, which will be given arbitrary power to control economies of whole nations. Last but not least, the proposed efforts to confront Global Warming will result in an unprecedented weakening of the Western World with unpredictable foreign policy ramifications. For example, it is beyond doubt that drastic cut in CO2 emissions will cause the de-industrialization of United States, Western Europe, Japan and Australia, while the communist China, Islamic World and India will be allowed to continue the CO2 emission. I am not sure anyone pondered the actions of China if it becomes the lonely manufacturing superpower - while its population demonstrates an explosive mixture of extreme nationalism and unbridled desire for world domination. It is also known that China's "one child policy" resulted in two very dangerous consequences:
1. There are far more men than women in China - which surely results in a lot of sexual frustration for young Chinese men;
2. The country cannot afford to support its older population due to relatively small number of young people;

It is indeed quite plausible that China will at some point engage in military expansion, with Taiwan and Russia, and possibly Middle East and Japan becoming their targets. The de-industrialized West will be unable to contain China, and it is very possible that India will be forced to act. All in all, the foreign policy implications of a drastic CO2 reduction are very dire, and it is quite a surprise to me that few people dare to discuss them.

On a more personal level, I cannot possibly reconcile the words of famous Global Warming activists and their dids. For example Al Gore, probably one of the most renown alarmists, shows a complete disconnect between his doomsday rhetoric (we all going to die if we don't cut CO2 emissions - and anyone doubting this is a criminal) - and his rather lavish life style. I find it hard to believe that a man seriously concerned about CO2 emissions, and who believes the West must drastically cut its consumption, would live like a Middle Eastern despot - with his huge house, private jets and expensive life style.

And surely Al Gore is hardly an exception - it is reported that the Global Warming alarmists recently rented 1200 limousines and 140 private jets in order for the Copenhagen meeting. Does this sound to you like these guys believe their own rhetoric? Would they travel in private jets and have their own chauffeurs drive them in limousines if they believed that would destroy the planet?

Moreover, it is interesting to note the bifurcation of opinions on Global Warming among American people. It is fair to say that there is a close correlation between the support for Global Warming scare and the attitude towards the role of the government in the country's economy. Clearly, the more likely the person to support liberal causes (higher taxes, more regulation, more handouts to the poor) - in other words, the more socialist one is - the more likely he is to believe in the Global Warming Scare. On the other side, it is also quite noticeable that very few libertarians or conservatives support the alarmists. In short, there is a close correlation between one's political views and the support for Global Warming - with income, education and sex being of no regard. From this analysis, it is clear that Global Warming can hardly be a purely scientific issue - given that the sides are so clearly divided by their political outlook.

I hope this short essay will be of some use to aspiring freedom loving activists. Please don't hesitate to comment on it.

Liberals want to control the media - is anyone surprised?

According to this article, a high-ranking liberal congress-person Henry Waxman wants the government to have more control over the media. Or, as the weasel said -"Government's going to have to be involved, in one way or the other," to save journalism from an ongoing "market failure" that will only worsen without intervention..."

Moreover, the Reuters says that Waxman claimed ""quality journalism was essential to U.S. democracy," and that "eventually government would have to help resolve the problems caused by a failing business model."


Now, do you feel comfortable knowing that some years from now, a government strongman (or woman) would be personally deciding what is "quality journalism" (read - left-wing) and, therefore should be funded by the state, and what is "non-quality journalism" (read - right-wing) and, therefore should be severely taxed by the state?

And the liberal lapdogs in the media are applauding this, of course - after all, they are losing a lot of money because American people are turning away from the the left-wing propaganda machine. All of this is going according to the plan that I predicted a year ago. How boring...

BTW, don't we have a wall of separation betwen the state and media? That's what the Bill of Rights says - just read it. It is all there, right between the "Wall of Separation between State and Religion" and the "Abortion Clause".