Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Monday, September 26, 2016

RandPaulChristieBeer

  • ObozoMustGo

    Looks like that Benghazi “phony scandal” seems to keep on coming back with more and more information.

    http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/

    And now…. The REAL Cartoon Of The Day!

    Have a nice day!

    “I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video,” – Barack Hussein Obozo lying to the world in his speech to UN General Assembly 2 WEEKS following the Benghazi attack

    • disqus_LcxpBv2uzz

      That must be the dead horse that you keep beating!

      • ObozoMustGo

        Even according to Obozo’s own media arm, CNN, that horse aint dead yet, dope! I’ve been saying since October that Benghazi was a cover up for arms dealing to Syria. Now even the leftist media is starting to hear the same thing. Why else would the CIA be strong-arming and threatening the agents that were there and witnessed the attacks, and what was going on? Because they have something to hide, that’s why.

        Read the article, dope. Before you can comprehend it, however, you’re going to have to extricate your head from Obozo’s arse.

        Have a nice day, dope!

        “I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video,” – Barack Hussein Obozo lying to the world in his speech to UN General Assembly 2 WEEKS following the Benghazi attack

        • highpckts

          Shoot! I thought you were on permanent vacation!

  • taylorRod

    Chris Christie is trying to blather and bully his way forward. He’s already done the inexcusable. Like a quisling he’s embraced and partially legitimized the conqueror, the Imperial president Obama, during an election year. There can be no forgiveness ever for anyone supporting this fascist dictator who, through the subverted and subverting mass media, has successfully pulled off a coup and now rules a once free USA. His ultimate template for totalitarian power is the monstrosity about to be implemented, ObamaCare. He’ll pay any price to keep that legislation moving forward. Of course it’s the signature legislation of this fascist leader. It is the legal takeover of the United States, now and forever. All by itself without the thousand and one other atrocities put upon the people it will end freedom and wreck our economy and extend the surveillance state to the farthest reaches of the nation. It is a DECLARATION of DEPENDENCE. Mister Christie, hasn’t Michele Obama contacted you and suggested you adopt her health-conscious school diet, the one the kids don’t want because it’s insufficient to satisfy their screaming metabolisms? She really should. You’re important to her husband’s continuing success. We won’t forget.

    • disqus_LcxpBv2uzz

      You might want to understand the definition of the word fascist before you toss it around so casually. Your use of the word indicates that you have no clue as to its meaning.

      • taylorRod

        You know, you’re half right. Fascism isn’t a strong enough term. Fascists are usually nationalistic, whereas Obama’s cabal is internationalist in an effort to evade the will of the people, the constitution, and the traditional tri-cameral nature of our government. You may assume that fascism is so-caleld right wing, but it isn’t and never was. It also appeals to the Obamanista’s warped utopianism, and proves, their internationalism, that they haven’t the slightest clue as to the character of humankind, nor the unique quality of America (Obama rejects American exceptionalism, pretending to misunderstand the meaning of the question, as if it means – better than others.) He knows what that is and he doesn’t agree that our nation is conceived as something set apart. He is for a top down, ultra-regulated and directed economy. He does have a favored political class and seeks to enrich them financially and to serve them with legal favoritism at every turn (see Eric Holder). He is for disarming the people, like all other fascist leaders of the past. Why? Because he knows we don’t want what he’s pushing and doesn’t want to risk blowback. Naziism, which was national socialism, the German Worker’s party and all that — is extremely similar in all its particulars to Obama-ism. No, he hasn’t come after the Jews but he’s sure done major disservice to Israel. He’s made good Americans feel like strangers in their own country. Now maybe you’re referring to the Roman origins of the term fascism. I assure you I’m an expert on fascism, and certainly know more than you. In what area of American life has Obama not directly asserted his interest and control where possible. What area does he consider none of his business? The answer is obvious: there is no nook or cranny that he considers private. All must bow to the power of the central government whose laws and edicts come increasingly from executive orders either directly or through the apparatus of the bureaucracy, controlled by him. See IRS as political weapong. Not fascist? Not totalitarian. They fact that he doesn’t enjoy the same opportunities or hasn’t yet accumulated enough power to be out front about his aims doesn’t diminish what he is. He said he be post racial. He’s a racialist first class, using it politically. He said he would not take away our guns. He hasn’t, not that he isn’t trying like hell. He said he’d run a “transparent” administration. It’s the most secretive in history. He spies on Americans, because — after all we’re the enemy far more than Islam. They had to pry an answer out of Holder regarding not using drones to execute without trial Americans in America. He was loathe to saying the government didn’t have that right. He and Obama think they do. As I said, if you prefer the term totalitarian that might be better. Totalitarian collectivist. It’s obviously you’re snooty m.o. to tell people they don’t understand the terminology they’re “tossing around,” but it’s you who don’t understand. Anyone who defends Obama is only expressing a clinically psychiatric condition, not proving themselves sophisticated and progressive. And don’t label me with Michael Savage and Anne Coulter. I formed that opinion on the compulsive irrationality of “liberalism,” ie. communist totalitarianism — long before either of them articulated a similar, though I daresay less well integrated version of the theory. You better check yourself. You’re on the wrong side of everything.

        • disqus_LcxpBv2uzz

          As I wrote previously, before your long-winded diatribe, which sounds for all the world like a drug-fueled fever dream, you clearly do not have a clue as to the correct meaning of the term fascist.

          • taylorRod

            I can tell you are one. You relying on the fact that outwardly Obama talks like a non-miltarist? I let my “long-winded diatribe stand.” Other than your baseless assertions I note you refute no facts, just pose as being cool and above it all. You don’t want to bother arguing, so self assured are you of your righteousness. Does the argument really come down to my epistemological attainments? Or shouldn’t you be answer the numerous charges I’ve listed against your messiah? Typical liberal (fascist) trick, focus on an irrelevancy. Next you’ll say — Republicans do it too. You guys are pitiful. (I’m not a Republican because most of them are “liberals” too.)

          • disqus_LcxpBv2uzz

            Your assertion that I am a fascist speaks volumes for your inability to apply even the barest fundamentals of logic. In reality (a state with which you do not seem to be acquainted) I am not close to being a fascist. I do not refute any facts in your “long-winded diatribe” because there are none to be found.

          • taylorRod

            PS. The drug I’m on is disgust with your team. It fuels me far better than meth or cocaine.

      • taylorRod

        Ohs ddisqus_LcxpBv2uzz — maybe some of the readers here would like to go look up Fascism on WikiPedia (I just did to see what you could be talking about.) They’ll be amazed that it’s a description of modern Democrat philosophy down the line. Please — go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

        • ralphkr

          Well, taylorRod, your post about WikiPedia & Fascism is absolutely correct as long as you replace the word “Democrat” with “Republican”. Fascism and the current Republican party are for big business over everything, a ruling class with everything and serfs with nothing, my nation and Aryan citizens must rule the world.

          • taylorRod

            Check the statistics. Wall Street overwhelmingly supported Obama.

          • ralphkr

            Wall Street ALWAYS overwhelmingly supports the winner. They start out with mild support to both sides (somewhat slanted to conservative) and, as soon as the handwriting is on the wall, they boost the winner so they can tell the winner what to do. After you looking at the history of the US I am amazed that Wall Street doesn’t always overwhelmingly support the Democrats since the economy & Wall Street boom with Democratic leadership and lag into recessions with Republican leadership.

          • taylorRod

            Well, then Ralph, why’d you say the Republicans are for big business over everything. Looks like the Dems would be, since they’re in the back pocket of Wall Street. Is there any business bigger? Now you have to admit there are two, at least, strains of Republicanism — the big business side, which wants the immigration bill — and the libertarian side — which is opposed to the encroachment on our individual liberties by the creeping totalitarianism of big government. But the modern Democrat party is one monolithic thing. On all the important issues they all vote the same way.

          • ralphkr

            Well, Rod, evidently you have never listened to the Republicans or read WSJ or the Chamber of Commerce news (both the voices of big business) or you would know that Wall Street is definitely Republican but is nefarious enough to buy Democrats when it is obvious that Republicans shall lose. The big difference is that the Republicans are always looking for ways to help big business & the wealthy by screwing over the middle class while the Democrats do haltingly try and curb the worst abuses of big business from time to time.

        • disqus_LcxpBv2uzz

          I would suggest that you read the entire Wikipedia entry very, very carefully. You certainly seem to be prone to misinterpretation, or maybe that is how you define facism in the parallel universe that you inhabit.

          • taylorRod

            I didn’t get my definition from Wikipedia, I offered that for those who weren’t as savvy. The article is biased in that it struggles to distinguish Fascism from Communism and Socialism. It seems obvious it was written by a left leaning academic. In the most important area, and the one relevant to our conversation, they are absolute similar, all three being collectivist, all three being totalitarian, all three being statist, all three authoritarian, all three putting the interests of a powerful central government over any rights of the people. Would you rather call Obama a communist or socialist? Moslems are also authoritarian and totalitarian as they are a theocratic religion-law system that is run from the top down. This is why, though he may not support each plank of their platform, Obama seems at home with their general structure, just as he is with Latin American dictators. The artwork in which Obama’s perpetual campaign excels, and the failed attempts to get school children to start each day singing songs about the wonderful leader (and Nobel laureate who has actually done nothing, not even win a fully contested election till the last two, which may have been decided by fraudulent votes — all states with voter ID laws he lost, all states without voter ID laws he won) all point to the egocentric mind set of a man who sees himself as the embodiment of the nation. He is very uncomfortable with the constitution, which he says is a document of negative rights, meaning it impedes his desire to make radical changes without gaining the support of congress. That you want me to read the wikipedia article “very very carefully” is an indication of the weakness of your position. If the difference between what Obama is and the textbook definition of fascist are so finely differentiated, I’d say you have a problem. If this was a spelling bee, so to speak, you might win a point or two. But like the old saying goes — if it quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck — it’s a duck. Are you seriously proposing that he doesn’t advocate state control of everything? He’s constantly being rebuffed but he’s constantly and repeatedly attempting to do exactly that. And yet you contend that a “careful” reading of the definition will reveal that he’s something other than a fascist. Well, what name would you like to put on it? Big government, redistributionist, authoritarian, usurping, czar-appointing, executive order issuing, bureaucratic department subverting, constitution evading, king? His flagrant vacationing is enough to condemn the man for, but bottom line is he’s done nothing good. His “signature” legislation was passed through one of the most flagrantly dishonest and corrupt processes on record. It’s still reviled, revealed to be deeply flawed and potentially ruinous — but would he consider changing or eliminating it. He’d rather die. It’s his ticket to total control. If that is fascist medince, all controlled from the top, with unappealable death panels as final authorities, with doctors downgraded to functionaries and patients to victims of actuary tables so his numbers would come out right – then what the hell would you call it? A decent reform? No, a hideous misrepresentation that will make the costs go up (not maybe. It already has. THe premiums for everyone have gone up. And it will mean the quality of medicine and the advancement through researhch will diminish. But what does definitely go up is the government’s control of the people. If you support that then there’s no use in further discussion — because you’re the same bag he’s in — a collectivist totalitarian and a fascist. For so many years the left misused the term calling Reagan a fascist when he was the opposite. They can’t believe their fair haired half-black president might actually be a fascist. It kind of ruins the word for them. Look up all of Hitler’s proposals, national health, health and beauty, national education standards, vegetarianism, Hitler Youth, community action, controlled press, disarmament, synfuels program (they did it because they had to, but in Nazi dogma, in part derived from German paganism, is the notion of the earth as an organism, so there we see environmentalism. There was even a strongly gay element until the night of the long knives when Ernst Rohm was assassinated, the Brown Shirts being at that time a challenge to the power of the rising SS. Germans expressed their fascism (invented chiefly in Italy) in a German way, militaristic, pagan, nationalistic, etc. Obama has the same impulses filtered through the American culture — but derived from the same polluted well. We must all do this! We must all think that! In fact, the Nazi’s had a slogan — “Alle Sagen, Ja!” Meaning everyone say YES! How chillingly close to YES WE CAN! — an orgy of unity in the pursuit of vague goals. And those who do not say YES are to be marginalized and disenfranchised. No, Obama hasn’t had the success that would allow him to be Hitler, but if he had such a wave of energy behind him, as he and the media have tried to cultivate, he’d do some extremely damaging and dangerous things. He is now, but he’s faltering a bit. He’s not a failure. He’s a success. His damage to the American system will never be fully repaired. So there’s a bit of carefully discriminating comparison of Obama to the concept of fascism.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Rod… one of the better posts on Obozo and fascism that I have read. Nice work. This one and your earlier long post above. I’ve tried to dumb it down for the leftist freaks floating around in this sewer called The Memo by pointing out that Nazi is simply an acronym for National SOCIALIST Party. Which party in the US most closely identifies with socialist ideals? That’s right, the DemonRAT party. Therefore, if they’re going to throw the fascist label around, they should at least be aware of the fact that they are lying while doing it. Ralphie seems to like to argue that socialist doesn’t mean socialist, but it’s a strained argument he makes. He’s actually a decent guy that I have chatted with on many occasions, but when you break it down, he’s just a committed socialist that doesn’t know any better and fights against the reality that his political ideology and Hitler’s fascism are so intimately affiliated. I understand why a reality check makes him uncomfortable, but he should at least just accept the truth. The other guy (disqus_LCB…..) is a mental midget, a leftist drone and useful idiot that doesn’t know his a$$ from the hole in head…. well….. maybe they are one in the same.

            Have a nice day!

            “Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.” ―
            Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

          • taylorRod

            Thanks for the note of encouragement. The left, it seems, has spent a hundred (maybe thousands of) years perfecting argument methodology, all non-sequetor stuff like you point out. I answered one this morning where they said — Republicans (and I’m sure you’ll agree, they’re not untainted either) are all about anti-women, anti-equality, anti — anti — and they went on listing all the idiotic Democrat talking points. When an argument is merely facile or actually trashes logic to make a point — it’s a lie. I don’t want to sound like a religious fanatic but the father of lies — the shining one — the Nachosh — is called the subtlest creature in the book of Genesis (or book of the beginnings if you’re Jewish). These poor students of his aren’t very subtle. But another name that Lucifer bears is “accuser.” The two things combined, subtle subversion of logic and ready accusation that we’re haters, racists, anti-education, anti-planet-earth …. in addition to being contemptibly ludicrous, are the earmarks of non-reasoning. They attempt to divert the argument in any way possible. They don’t want to take the chance that if they’re boxed into a corner logically speaking, they might have to re-think their entire world view. That’s why “global warming” is an issue of faith, not science. And they will not tolerate argument concerning it. They will only label anyone who resists their thoroughly discredited pseudoscience as a fool, a greedy capitalist pig, a shill for big oil. I love that one. The fact is – they are all shills for big one world collectivism, an all-ecopasing philosophy for which the word greed is inadequate. Well, I’m sure you know I could go on – but thanks again for remarks of support. I always fear the world can be swept away by unreasoning sycophants of the evil leaders intent on enslaving us all — and they are, whether they know it or not.

  • Marvin P James

    replugs just like to hate.

    • DurdyDawg

      Small wonder as that’s the only profession their adequate in. You should visit some of the bull sites in order to get your fill of hate mongering and personally I think these bozos should join them and keep our opinions along that is, unless they just don’t know where they are at any given time (being brain dead and all).