Washington, DC – Today, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) issued the following statement regarding the Internal Revenue Service informing the Committee that they have lost Lois Lerner emails from a period of January 2009 – April 2011. Due to a supposed computer crash, the agency only has Lerner emails to and from other IRS employees during this time frame. The IRS claims it cannot produce emails written only to or from Lerner and outside agencies or groups, such as the White House, Treasury, Department of Justice, FEC, or Democrat offices.
Well- isn't that something that no one who is intellectually honest believes...
But the NSA can collect data in every American?
You are being lied to. Just swallow it. Not a smidgen of corruption at the IRS...
Awight, boys and girls. Here it is in all its Twitter immortality. Miriam Elder. Leftist. Foreign Editor at Buzzfeed.
Here-- wishing George W. was back involved in the new Iraq meltdown.
Let me go on the record and say that at the end of his term... I will never wish Obama to be involved in any of the Dooker he stirred up while he was president.
The most important point about all this is: Miriam is out of her mind. This administration is clueless (either on purpose or on accident) of the seriousness of militant Islam around the world. Its no big deal to them. "Seriously, dude. Chill."
Obama: That’s true, Johnny. You listen to your teacher.
Johnny: I will, Mr. President.
Teacher:If you have
2 apples here and you add 2 more… you have 4 apples. Do you see?
Johnny: Yes, ma’am.
Obama: it’s 5.
Teacher: Actually it’s 4. Do the math on your hands, Mr. President.
Obama: I don’t need to use my hands! I can count to 5!
Obama: Johnny-- let me tell you something. I’m the president. I
can do whatever I want… I have fundamentally transformed the United States of
America. Ask anybody at Fox. I’m fixing to change the rules of Math. Write 5 if
you want to get the answer right.
Teacher: Mr. President, I think you need to leave.
Johnny: well, wait. You
say ‘4’ Mrs. Wright… and you say ‘5’ Mr. President… how do I make the right decision?
Teacher: Trust the laws of Mathematics.
Obama: *taps the paper and whispers* write ‘5’..
Johnny: *writes 5*
Obama: Excellent… where do your parents get their insurance
Obama:Are you not
feeling well? You got to keep your doctor, ya know? I did that…
“They think they have
a better idea for what you need, as far as health insurance, than you do. That’s
the root of it, this is Progressive Liberalism.” –Dana Perino
That’s true. And here’s the reason. Progressives look to
those who are downtrodden as their army. They see them as those they can rally
to their cause. Progressives tell them that THEY are their cause, but that is
not true. Socialism’s rallying cry of “Power to the people” is alluring, but
historically speaking- the first thing that is discarded once Socialism is
implemented is “Power to the people”. Progressives (socialists, communists) don’t
want people to have the power. They want to hand out power as they see fit.
They want to hand out resources as they see fit. Prosperity as they see fit. Life
as they see fit.
Progressives see themselves as the intellectual elite. No
one is smarter than them. They can’t be wrong. It’s inconceivable to consider
error associated with their ideology. So they deflect logic with cognitive dissonance
(See MSNBC). Cognitive Dissonance is the excessive mental stress and discomfort
experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs,
ideas, or values at the same time. Perhaps you’d like an example? Sure… happy
to help. The left is anti-Israel/pro-Palestine. They are also pro-gay.
Palestine ain’t pro-gay. They string them up from cranes. Get it? “tonight on
the TSA channel- 2 policies enter the death cage and only one will emerge
victorious… Foreign V. Domestic!”
Now… don’t call progressives on this. #1 – they aren’t
wrong. And #2 – you’re a racist.
Can you hear me now?
Don’ttake my word
for it. You can ask my friend. He knows all about this stuff. He’s called
I hated history in school. Now I love it. Not because
history agrees with my world view- on the contrary it shapes it. No I love
history because I can learn lessons from it without having to go through the
same trials other have gone through to learn. There have been many test beds
for Socialism and Communism. If you THINK you are a socialist because its NEW and HIP, think again. Socialism is old news. It's as old as the Pharoahs. But time and time again it's implemented-- "this time it will be different"! It is always an abject failure. They try to dress it
up… but in the end, reality kicks you in the teeth.
they were seeing Potemkin villages—the term derives from Prince Gregory
Potemkin, said to have built model villages to impress Catherine the Great on
tours of her overextended domain—because that is how they prepared to receive
important visitors in their own country: Clean up everything, put
undesirable elements out of sight, show the best, and persuade visitors that what they were
seeing was typical. Such suspicions reached to the highest levels of the
Soviet government. When Soviet president Nikolai Podgorny visited Austria in
1966 and saw the bounty of Viennese markets, he remarked, "Look how well
they set things up for my visit."
Boris Yeltsin reacted
somewhat differently to a Houston supermarket in 1989. He expressed
astonishment at the abundance and variety of the products he saw, but in his
autobiography Against the Grain
he describes the experience as "shattering": "When I saw those
shelves crammed with hundreds, thousands of cans, cartons, and goods of every
possible sort, for the first time I felt quite frankly sick with despair for
the Soviet people. That such a potentially super-rich country as ours has been
brought to a state of such poverty! It is terrible to think of it."
After Yeltsin visited
that Houston supermarket, says Lilia Shevtsova of the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, "he became a
reformer." Bill Keller, a former New York Times Moscow correspondent and now the Times's executive editor, sees
Yeltsin's visit to the United States in even broader perspective: "The
prosperity, the rule of law, the freedom and efficiency [Yeltsin] witnessed in
America, catalyzed his notions about
the fraud of communism."
Communism, Socialism, Progressivism. They are all frauds.
They never lead to prosperity. Except for the elites.
Capitalism has the power to raise people above their station
to greater prosperity.
[From "Eighty-Fourth Day,
Monday, 3/18/1946, Part 16", in Trial of the Major War Criminals Before
the International Military Tribunal. Volume IX. Proceedings: 3/8/1946-3/23/1946.
Nuremberg: IMT, 1947.]
[Testimony on 3/18/46]
THE PRESIDENT: Do the Chief
prosecutors wish to cross examine?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You are perhaps
aware that you are the only living man who can expound to us the true purposes
of the Nazi Party and the inner workings of its leadership?
GOERING: I am perfectly aware of
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON You, from the
very beginning, together with those who were associated with you, intended to
overthrow and later did overthrow, the Weimar Republic?
GOERING: That was, as far as I am
concerned, my firm intention.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And, upon
coming to power, you immediately abolished parliamentary government in Germany?
GOERING: We found it to be no longer
necessary. Also I should like to emphasize the fact that we were moreover the
strongest parliamentary party, and had the majority. But you are correct when
you say that parliamentary Procedure was done away with because the various
parties were disbanded and forbidden.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You established the Leadership Principle,
which you have described as a system under which authority existed only at the
top, and is passed downwards and is imposed on the people below; is that
GOERING: In order to avoid any
misunderstanding, I should like once more to explain the idea briefly, as I understand
it. In German parliamentary procedure in the past responsibility rested with
the highest officials, who were responsible for carrying out the anonymous
wishes of the majorities, and it was they who exercised the authority. In the
Leadership Principle we sought to reverse the direction, that is, the authority
existed at the top and passed downwards, while the responsibility began at the
bottom and passed upwards.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: In other words,
you did not believe in and did not permit government, as we call it, by consent
of the governed, in which the people, through their representatives, were the
source of power and authority?
GOERING: That is not entirely
correct. We repeatedly called on the people to express unequivocally and
clearly what they thought of our system, only it was in a different way from
that previously adopted and from the system in practice in other countries. We
chose the way of a so-called plebiscite. We also took the point of view that
even a government founded on the Leadership Principle could maintain itself
only if it was based in some way on the confidence of the people. If it no
longer had such confidence, then it would have to rule with bayonets, and the
Fuehrer was always of the opinion that that was impossible in the long run-to
rule against the will of the people.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: But you did not
permit the election of those who should act with authority by the people, but
they were designated from the top downward continuously, were they not?
GOERING: Quite right. The people
were merely to acknowledge the authority of the Fuehrer, or, let us say, to
declare themselves in agreement with the Fuehrer. If they gave the Fuehrer
their confidence then it was their concern to exercise the other functions.
Thus, not the individual persons were to be selected according to the will of
the people, but solely the leadership itself.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, was this
Leadership Principle supported and adopted by you in Germany because you
believed that no people are capable of self-government, or because you believed
that some may be, not the German people; or that no matter whether some of us
are capable of using our own system, it should not be allowed in Germany?
GOERING: I beg your pardon, I did
not quite understand the question, but I could perhaps answer it as follows:
I consider the Leadership Principle
necessary because the system which previously existed, and which we called
parliamentary or democratic, had brought Germany to the verge of ruin. I might
perhaps in this connection remind you that your own President Roosevelt, as far
as I can recall-I do not want to quote it word for word-declared, "Certain
peoples in Europe have forsaken democracy, not because they did not wish for
democracy as such, but because democracy had brought forth men who were too
weak to give their people work and bread, and to satisfy them. For this reason
the peoples have abandoned this system and the men belonging to it." There
is much truth in that statement. This system had brought ruin by mismanagement
and according to my own opinion, only an organization made up of a strong,
clearly defined leadership hierarchy could restore order again. But, let it be
understood, not against the will of the people, but only when the people, having
in the course of time, and by means of a series of elections, grown stronger
and stronger, had expressed their wish to entrust their destiny to the National
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The principles
of the authoritarian government which you set up required, as I understand you,
that there be tolerated no opposition by political parties which might defeat
or obstruct the policy of the Nazi Party?
GOERING: You have understood this
quite correctly. By that time we had lived long enough with opposition and we
had had enough of it. Through opposition we had been completely ruined. It was
now time to have done with it and to start building up.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: After you came to power, you regarded it
necessary, in order to maintain power, to suppress all opposition parties?
GOERING: We found it necessary not to permit any more opposition, yes.
Since most people who vote in this country are totally
clueless, I say that in the nicest way possible, I’ll spell this out.
In congress, right now… there are about 7 or 8 conservative
Republicans. All the others are stuck. Stuck between siding with the Rebel
Alliance of 7 or 8 ---- or migrating to the left-center (until election time).
We call these others- RINO’s. Republicans in name only. They
don’t hold with the ideals they once did. They are weak and then need to go.
In congress, right now… there are about 4 or 5 JFK
democrats. All others are Communists.
NOW you are either really reading or preparing to stop
reading. Oh… you are crazy. Another sucker who thinks there’s a communist
conspiracy! Get a load of this clown.
I know some of you are thinking this… because *whispers* I
used to be just like you.
And if you don’t know anything about politics or history and
how the two mingled over the last 50 years… you’ll tend to disregard the
rantings of, well, me.
But they can’t call themselves “communists”. So they call
themselves “Progressives”.See what they
did there… they changed their name. brilliant. I know some still aren’t
convinced and rightly so… I haven’t even started yet. But consider this…
There is a book. It has a dust jacket.
The book is Treasure Island.
The dust jacket says Treasure Island.
Now along comes someone and takes the dust jacket off and
puts another one on the book.
The dust jacket says Curious George Rides Again.
What book is it? If all you look at is the dust jacket, you
think it is Curious George Rides again.
And if you never look any closer, you’ll be tricked.
They are counting on you know looking any closer.
We’re nice: we’re called Progressives! Progress! Forward!
When you vote democrat now… you are not voting for Harry
Truman or JFK Democrats.
Not even close. You’ve been duped.
Republicans aren’t much better… They mostly worship at the
altar of re-election.
Every member of Congress and our President *swears* to
protect the constitution.
I invite you to read the constitution.
I then invite you to tell me what member of Congress or if
the president defends the constitution.
Go on… I’ll wait.
Here’s the deal. The one’s that do- are made to be demons in
the media. You know who they are.
With the election cycle coming up again… be prepared from
people to start tearing them down.
It’s started with Christie… and I’m glad- didn’t like him
He’s a bully. Like Obama.
Obama passes Obamacare. Not one Republican voted for it and
they didn’t need any of their votes.
Time and time again, he’s granted waivers. Time and time
again, he’s delayed it- now to 2016 after the next 2 elections. Isn’t that
strange? This wonderful law is so wonderful that they can’t enact it totally,
because they know they’d be toast in those elections.
AND- now the white house and the Justice Department say that
you cannot, if you are a business owner, cut staff and hours because of
Obamacare. If you make cuts to your staff or cut hours BECAUSE of
Obamacare-you will be prosecuted. You have to swear to the DOJ and probably the
IRS that you cut hours NOT because of Obamacare.
*can’t have Obamacare looking like the reason for the
decrease in hours – EVEN THOUGH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE SAYS THAT HOURS
WILL BE CUT!!!!*
So the President can break the law, but if you try to
augment your business model to absorb new taxes that affect your business- you
will be prosecuted. NEWSFLASH: That’s
what businesses do. They try to keep their profits up. Now the Government is
trying to force people to adhere to an unconstitutional law (I don’t care what
the SCOTUS says) that is so bad that they have to delay its implementation to
keep control of Washington.
Get it? You better.
Tyranny. This is what Kings do.
To me… this is like trying to re-teach 2+2=4.
It’s simple people. The Leadership Principle is being
enacted here. Plain as day. Our President believes he can do whatever he wants.
He lied before being elected (scolding Bush for all his executive orders) by
writing his own at every whim. He lied after being elected (if you like your
healthcare, you can keep it).
History is a great teacher. If you pay attention to it, it
will impart great knowledge to you.
If you neglect the past, it will sneak up behind you and
conk you on the head with the Frying Pan of Ignorance.
People are talking about the ending of Man of Steel.
IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN IT> STOP READING.
Go see it before reading this. Right now. It’s awesome. Take
it from someone who’s read Superman comics for 30 years. I’m telling you, being
happy with a Supes movie was a tall order for me. I walked out thinking the
movie was Magnificent on almost every level. Loved it.
There is much going on in this movie. Some big ideas that you
don’t really get the gravity of and discover the far-reaching implications of,
until the end.
This is the problem with big ideas in a movie that is being
viewed by people who were not ready for big ideas… they need time to think
about it. Maybe another viewing.They
think about what they might have missed.
Kind of like taking a test that you thought you were ready
for but when you get your paper back, your grade isn’t all you hoped it would
be… you tear through the paper and try to find out what you missed. And WHY you
It could all come down to one question. One tiny aspect of
the movie that you disregarded as just a plot Lilly pad --- instead of a plot
stepping stone. Perhaps that one line of dialog was more important than you
realized. Perhaps those words you overlooked, were meant to bear more of the
weight of the plot than you realized… Words have meaning and power. Especially
when they are used correctly.
What if a child dreamed of becoming something other than what society
This is one of the BIG ideas in this movie. So much of what
happens is founded upon this.
Jonathan Kent tells a young Clark to find out who he is.
Jor-El tells an older Kal that he was the first natural
birth in a very long time on Krypton. Thereby, giving him a release from what
Kryptonians, for ages, have leaned on for assurance and structure. Kal would
not be created for a specific purpose.
He would have the ability to CHOOSE.
It is this power of choice that is the ultimate crux of the
most controversial moment in the movie.
Clark is faced with a choice. In my opinion, an impossible choice. Neither is
good. Some are mad that he made the choice he made. I wonder if, if they would be
happier if he’d allowed to happen- what would certainly have happened, had he
NOT acted? I think not. (that may not make sense, but go see the movie)
His opponent, General Zod, is not however a person with a choice. He will do whatever he has to do to
accomplish his goal in life. He was bred for one purpose. And one purpose
Zod will kill humanity. He has stated as much.
Clark’s solution to the situation is to… SPOILER.
Just go see the movie.
It is this power of choice that this movie is ripe with.
Some say it violates Superman’s character to accept the choice he made. I do
not believe it does. He made a choice. He is pulled in 2 directions in this
movie… between humanity and Krypton. There is a time when he doesn’t really
like either choice.
Make no mistake. This is a big idea movie. Big idea movies
stand up will to the years of scrutiny. I suspect this one will as well.