Via the Hermeneutic of Continuity and Patrick Madrid
Be sure to check out the photos at this post as well, the 2nd photo is the best.
Funny christmas Picture time
Posted: December 24, 2009 by datechguy in fun, odditiesTags: christmas, fun, silly
A: Because it beats having taking action that loses votes…
Posted: December 24, 2009 by datechguy in UncategorizedTags: glsen, kevin jennings, q & a
Q: Why will the president neither address nor remove Kevin Jennings from his safe school Czar position?
Gay activists are already very upset at the president’s inaction on several fronts that they have demanded action on. The White house doesn’t take this action because said actions are political losers. Every Democrat in congress knows this or they would have taken action on these items years ago.
The White House needs to pacify this group that supplies cash without actually taking action. In Kevin Jennings they have found the perfect vehicle for this goal.
Gay activists know they have been played for suckers, but they also understand that the Jennings matter is potentially more dangerous than any other to them.
This person has been lionized and held up as an example by their community, so much so that he got the White House appointment. However like the University of East Anglia Scientists (Go Polar Bears!) they also know what the result of the widespread publicity of the GLSEN agenda would be. Attitudes have changed over the decades but not THAT much.
They understand that any acknowledgment of the Jennings scandal puts their entire agenda out before the public in a way that is impossible to address in a positive light. And unlike some national agenda it is a local agenda, something that a state rep or even a city council deals with. That’s something that can people if roused can do something about from the bottom up. It would cause rollbacks on the state and local level faster than an overstocked WalMart.
The White House understands this and by standing behind Jennings they give the radical Gay community what they need rather than what they want without political cost…at least for now.
As long as the media continues to use the same investigative prowess it used on the John Edwards story the White House can duck it and play this game. Since the MSM has embrace the Jennings agenda it is in their own best interest to play it down too. So don’t expect it to crossover to the MSM anytime soon.
Thus Jennings serves a vital interest for the president. He keeps the Gay community in check simply by staying right where he is.
This is the reality and unfortunately the yeoman work of Jim Hoff is unlikely to change it.
Answer: Because my 85 year old New Dealer mother is actually going to city hall to re-register as a republican because of them.
Posted: December 23, 2009 by datechguy in elections, opinion/news, personalTags: election 2010, obamacare, q & a, sarah palin
Q: How do we know the following take from Bill Kristol is correct:
First: the reaction to the deal-making. One friend e-mails, “uncharacteristically, I’m getting calls from relatives who want to talk about all the unseemly deals being cut to get the health bill through…that seems to have hit a nerve, as much as the price-tag.” That’s my sense too.
The belief that the fix is in is so contrary to the American concept of fair play that it’s going to make a huge difference. Sarah Palin closed her facebook post today with this:
The administration’s promises of transparency and bipartisanship have been broken one by one. This entire process has been defined by midnight votes on weekends, closed-door meetings with industry lobbyists, and payoffs to politicians willing to sell their principles for sweetheart deals. Is it any wonder that Americans are so disillusioned with their leaders in Washington?
This is about politics, not health care. Americans don’t want this bill. Americans don’t like this bill. Washington has stopped listening to us. But we’re paying attention, and 2010 is coming.
When an 85 year old lifelong democrats expresses an intention to go to City Hall to change their registration over this in the bluest of blue states that means trouble.
This is going to implode this congress.
Sarah Palin right again on death panels…
Posted: December 23, 2009 by datechguy in internet/free speech, opinion/newsTags: conservatism fights back, death panel, obamacare, sarah palin
Our friends on the left continue to call it the “lie of the year” but for some reason these non-existent death panels are being protected by specific and extraordinary legislative language:
“it shall not be in order in the senate or the house of representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.”
What does that section deal with? The Independent Medicare Advisory Board. These guys are going to determine what will be covered and what will not, who will get treatment and who will not. Dare I say it a “death panel”?
Sarah Palin dares to say it. Explicitly:
In other words, Democrats are protecting this rationing “death panel” from future change with a procedural hurdle. You have to ask why they’re so concerned about protecting this particular provision. Could it be because bureaucratic rationing is one important way Democrats want to “bend the cost curve” and keep health care spending down?
The Congressional Budget Office seems to think that such rationing has something to do with cost. In a letter to Harry Reid last week, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf noted (with a number of caveats) that the bill’s calculations call for a reduction in Medicare’s spending rate by about 2 percent in the next two decades, but then he writes the kicker:
“It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved, and if so, whether it would be accomplished through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care.”
Though Nancy Pelosi and friends have tried to call “death panels” the “lie of the year,” this type of rationing – what the CBO calls “reduc[ed] access to care” and “diminish[ed] quality of care” – is precisely what I meant when I used that metaphor.
Amazing how this stuff that doesn’t exist keeps being propped up by the democrats in legislation. Her willingness to stand out front and say these things aloud is the primary reason why she is so hated and why she must be destroyed.
BTW look at google news, isn’t it odd that a a readers survey of a web site is being trumpeted as fact in paper after paper?
