November 30, 2013

Laugher of the Day

Michelle Obama on President Lemon: "He Keeps His Promises."

Posted by Hube at 08:23 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

"A body"

Indeed:

Posted by Hube at 08:13 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 29, 2013

Marvel upsets Hindus

Geez, ya'd think what with the way guys like Ron Marz, Dan Slott and Tom Brevoort were all high and mighty about what people asked regarding the new [Muslim] Ms. Marvel, the company would be more sensitive. Guess not:

A Hindu group has called on ABC to apologize following an episode of Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. that suggested the god Vishnu, like the hero Thor, might be an alien.

In the Nov. 19 episode, which tied into the events of Thor: The Dark World, Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg) and hacker Skye (Chloe Bennett) have an exchange designed to deliver exposition about the Asgardians, who in the Marvel Universe are ancient aliens who were mistaken for gods when they visited Earth thousands of years ago. “Do you think other deities are aliens, too?” Skye asks. “Vishnu for sure, right?”

Normally this would be a non-story despite what the group thinks (it later states that it "believes in free speech, but..."), but considering the ridiculously PC nature and rabid manner in which many of the company's creators go after any fan (or non-fan) who dares utter something critical of their characters, creators or stories, I frankly hope this ruckus kicks them in their pompous asses.

That said, Universal Society of Hinduism? Get a life. And I'm certain just about any other religious group, Christian included, would have objected had the actors referenced their religion. I doubt, however, that Marvel would have been brave enough to mention a Muslim deity or figure since to do that would have brought on death threats. Hindus aren't known for doing that sort of thing. (Just recall MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell's remarks regarding criticizing the "right" religion.)

Posted by Hube at 07:29 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Y'know what's really wrong with ObumbleCare?

You. You're too f***ing stupid:

Are consumers doomed to make poor choices about health plans? Maybe our brains just aren’t wired to use a site like HealthCare.gov, whether it works or not.

The exchanges are based on a laudable idea: that competition, transparency and consumer choice will lead to higher-quality, more affordable products. The decisions consumers make will thus have significant implications for their own personal and financial health, as well as the overall sustainability of the exchanges. But despite the good intentions behind the website, behavioral science research suggests that many consumers may be ill equipped to make good decisions in the insurance marketplaces.

Choosing health coverage is particularly challenging. Humans have difficulty making optimal choices under conditions of uncertainty, when weighing probabilities of long-term risks and benefits, and when analyzing complex products with multiple components of unclear relative values. We’re bad at assessing the likelihood of low-probability events, like winning the lottery or getting in a car accident. We overestimate our ability to repay loans and spend more with credit cards than we would with cash. We struggle with decisions about how to invest our retirement savings and are highly susceptible to the number and types of 401(k) plans we’re offered. In short, we have trouble with precisely the types of issues involved in choosing the right health coverage.

1) You know the 'ol adage about "good intentions," and
2) Humans "have difficulty making optimal choices," so naturally we should cede those choices to the government. Because their track record is so damn good, right?

By the way, article author Dhruv Khullar once worked for the Boss Obama administration, something Politico didn't see fit to inform us about.

Posted by Hube at 12:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Kill-mington

Homicide in Wilmington is 20th of year.

RELATED: Kaiheem White's violent life ends as a Wilmington statistic. Part (most?) of the problem?

“He was rough on the outside, but like on the inside he had a soft heart,” his brother David Owens said.

“Not just my brother,” Owens said. “But any of these kids in these urban communities. It’s hard for them to just take that road of doing the right thing when they have all that influence there where they are looked upon as being soft or looked upon being not normal.”

And why is that, Mr. Owens?

Posted by Hube at 10:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Watcher's Council winners

The non-Council winner was The Weekly Standard with Abject Surrender by the United States.

Full results are here.

Posted by Hube at 10:03 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Acceptable bigotry

The risible Kanye West has claimed that Boss Obama is failing because "he doesn't have 'connections' like those of 'Jewish people.'”

Always "lovely" to hear anti-Semitism during a Jewish holiday, eh?

Posted by Hube at 09:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 28, 2013

Happy Thanksgiving

As I approach ten years of blogging (ten!) I am thankful for many, many things. Topping that list are my daughter and my fiancé, followed closely by my family and friends.

With regards to my blogging family, I am thankful for those who got me started here at Colossus (Rhodey, Philip and Felix), the guy who got us set up at mu.nu (Greg at Rhymes With Right), my current co-bloggers (Duffy, Paul Smith and Felix), and my favorite commenters/like-minded bloggers/Delawareans: Carl, Doug Ernst, Avi Green, Fred Gregory, Dana, Hitch, Hoagie, Steve Newton, Arthur, Jeff the Baptist, Kilroy, Nate Winchester, my blog "godfather" John Rosenberg, Mike Matthews, Dana Garrett, John Young, Vic, the wonderful folks at the Watcher's Council, the folks at Newsbusters, Al Mascitti ... and many more.

All the very best to you.

Posted by Hube at 11:59 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

November 27, 2013

Throwing a little Thanksgiving cheer to a moron ...

... because Lord knows, he could use the hits. And you can use the laughs as you gaze upon our 'ol pal Perry's headline: Prediction for the Affordable Care Act: Resounding Success.

Posted by Hube at 06:41 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Today in What If a Republican Said It?

Didn't the so-called Birthers get in trouble for saying Obama "didn't look like he was from here?" Didn't people get called "racist" for it? Ah, but this is President Lemon, natch. The rules are different:

I guess we shouldn't be surprised. Considering how people think him some sort of god (himself included), they probably think he can deduce who's an immigrant and who's not!

(h/t Twitchy)

Posted by Hube at 11:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 26, 2013

Just do what they do at colleges

Y'know, even though the story is made up, just state Hillary Clinton-like "What difference does it make?" Hate exists in this world and it's entirely plausible that this could happen!

Did gay NJ server concoct denied tip story?

A gay waitress claimed a couple left her no tip and scrawled a message on their receipt stating “I’m sorry but I cannot tip because I do not agree with your lifestyle.” However, the couple in question has produced the receipt and their credit card bill which shows they did indeed tip the server -- fairly well, too, in fact.

The server, Dayna Morales, sent a "copy" of the receipt to the organization Have A Gay Day, which promptly posted it on their Facebook page. Morales then got national attention ... not to mention over $2,000 worth of "tips." But when confronted with the actual receipt by a local news organization, Morales said "That's not my handwriting," she said. "I don't know."

"I don't know"??

It's not as if this sort of thing doesn't happen. And when ferreted out, a common retort is "Well, we know this happens, so it's important to bring the issue to the fore and deal with it."

Right.

RELATED (via Insty): A similar instance from almost a month ago.

Posted by Hube at 04:46 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Trafficking in fantasy

Did anyone catch Macklemore's & Ryan Lewis' ludicrous claim at the American Music Awards this past weekend? It should come as no surprise, really, but here it is:

“I was talking to my friend before the show, and he reminded me of a great Martin Luther King quote: ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’ And due to the fact that we are in Florida tonight accepting this award, I want to acknowledge Trayvon Martin and the hundreds and hundreds of kids that are dying each year due to racial profiling and the violence that follows it.

“This is really happening — our friends, our neighbors, our peers, our fans — and it’s time that we look out for the youth and fight against racism and the laws that protect it,” Macklemore concluded, as the audience watching inside Los Angeles’s Nokia Theater applauded appreciatively.

Really? Really?? This sort of utter crap is just what I was talking about here -- we're supposed to outright ignore racial aspects when it's patently obvious, but clamor about it when it's patently dubious.

*Sigh* Always remember this, for example, when some "progressive" demands we have "real" conversations about race. They do not really want such. They want you to shut up and listen ... and then accept what they say. Period.

Posted by Hube at 04:23 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

The No Sh** Sherlock, Story of the Day

Screen time again linked to kids' extra weight.

Posted by Hube at 04:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

New at the Watcher's Council

Forum: What Is Your Reaction To Harry Reid’s Using the Nuclear Option To End Filibusters?


Posted by Hube at 04:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 23, 2013

Correcting grammar, spelling = racial "micro-aggression"

Nothing of this sort surprises me anymore:

In a letter sent to colleagues in the department after the sit-in, [professor emeritus Val] Rust said students in the demonstration described grammar and spelling corrections he made on their dissertation proposals as a form of "micro-aggression."

Student demonstrators alleged that there is a “toxic” racial climate in the graduate school, including in Rust’s classroom. Organizers told the Daily Bruin last week that they decided to host the demonstration after a recent report examining racial discrimination among the university’s faculty stated that UCLA’s policies and procedures do not sufficiently address racially motivated instances of discrimination.

Yes, you understood that correctly -- minority graduate students are claiming racism because their professor emeritus had the gall to correct them.

The hilarious thing is, such departments are staffed and headed by some of the most "progressive" individuals you will ever encounter -- people who would be eternally cognizant of such "micro-aggressions" in and out of the classroom -- but they still get eaten alive by the very "philosophies" they guard and/or espouse.

(Via Fausta's Blog.)

Posted by Hube at 05:28 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

"An element to who wants to see this through the lens of race"

'Ya gotta love the ever-predictable NY Times. They have an article up today about the supposedly new "game" dubbed "Knockout" where solitary victims are cold-cocked into unconsciousness by an individual (who's usually part of a larger group). The uncomfortable fact (for the NY Times and other "progressives") is that the attacks have largely been carried out by young black men.

Now, the article quotes several in law enforcement who caution that "Knockout" may not be an organized effort, nor an "epidemic." Which is certainly the prudent thing to do. However, leave it to the academic to utter the following:

Jeffrey Butts, director of the Research and Evaluation Center at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan, said much of the fear sown by the reports may have racial roots.

“There’s an element to who wants to see this through the lens of race,” he said. “The kids in Jersey probably set off racial alarms.

In other words, since the attackers are black, only racial (i.e. white) opportunists are making a big deal out of this.

Curiously, I don't recall hearing this sentiment from the unfortunately named Butts and many others when, for example, the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin affair was in the headlines, and we were treated to "alarms" of it being "open season" on black men in America. Do you? The "alarms" are precisely what the MSM trafficked then, as they typically do when the races are in the "correct" attacker-victim position.

Posted by Hube at 12:00 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

In defense of Arne Duncan (sort of)

Duncan, who is now apologizing for his remarks about "white suburban moms" being worried that their kids aren't as bright as they thought (due to the "increased rigor" of the new Common Core standards), may not have been as completely far off the mark as some have been clamoring.

Now, I certainly think the Common Core standards are pretty much BS, won't "raise" standards or improve education whotsoever, and represent still more federal overreach into an area better left to the states and localities, Duncan's comment, while racially insensitive, hit a nerve among the group he was criticizing. Teachers will tell you that, on the whole, less affluent parents (who don't show up for open houses, PTA meetings, etc.) are rarely heard from about their kids' grades and/or behavior. More affluent parents (who do show up for open houses, PTA meetings, etc.) are heard from about their kids' grades and/or behavior. And, taken comprehensively, this is not a bad thing. However, sometimes that parental concern can come with a high degree of entitlement. What do I mean by this? Badgering about grades. Excuse-making for discipline infractions. Demands for higher placement in ability level "tracking." Do not misunderstand -- inquiries about all of these are very legitimate. What I am talking about is going beyond when everything has been explained to them to the Nth degree ... and more (if that's even possible).

I believe many teachers will tell you that that is more debilitating to them than the parent who just doesn't care at all. Perhaps this is what Duncan was expressing -- again, very poorly and out of frustration. Then again, how would he know? He never taught a class in his life.

Posted by Felix at 10:48 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Promises

Posted by Hube at 09:10 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 22, 2013

Watcher's Council winners

The non-Council winner was Mark Steyn with Thus Spake Obama.

Full results are here.

Posted by Hube at 09:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Comics news site does what blogger did, creator silent

I sent word of this to Doug Ernst, because he's the blogger to whom I'm referring in the title. You may recall that Doug wrote a post back in May titled "Is Dan Slott’s ‘Superior Spider-Man’ really a Superior anti-Semite?" and had originally included a photograph of the Holocaust in it. Upon seeing the post, Superior Spider-Man writer Dan Slott went ballistic, ripping Ernst for the post, most particularly due to the fact that Slott is Jewish.

Fast forward to today: The comics news site Bleeding Cool has an article up about this year's Superior Spider-Man Annual. It highlights a couple of panels where Spidey -- remember, it's now actually Dr. Octopus in Peter Parker's body -- is torturing a captive by extracting his teeth. But perhaps the most ironic thing about it all is that article author Rich Johnston writes

In today’s Superior Spider-Man, the character goes a little further. Into full blown Nazi-like torture/experimentation on his victims. By ripping out teeth and fingernails…

Say wha-a-a-a-a-t? Did Johnston just use the term "Nazi-like"? The article was originally posted on Wednesday, but there's since been nary a complaint from Slott (on Twitter, at least) about Johnston's "reprehensible" choice of words. Granted, Slott did not script this annual, but make no mistake -- the whole premise of this "superior" Spider-Man is his.

There's been no request from Slott to "avoid" Bleeding Cool, and to "block" Rich Johnston on Twitter. In other words, exactly what he did to Doug Ernst ... for making the same sort of analogy as Johnston!

Doug's reaction to all this is here.

Posted by Hube at 08:17 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

November 21, 2013

Multiple choice

Posted by Hube at 08:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Wanna know why folks are fleeing public schools (if they're able?)

Just look here.

Policies originally designed to keep guns out of schools have instead kept excessive numbers of Pennsylvania students out of their classrooms as educators applied the rules in an overly broad manner, says a new report by the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania.

And black students, Latino students, and students with disabilities are more likely to be suspended than their peers, says the Nov. 14 report, which is based on a statewide, district-by-district analysis of Pennsylvania data on suspensions, expulsions, and school referrals to police.

The implication being, of course, that such policies are racially motivated. But ... I thought the education industry is among the most progressive of institutions? How can this be?

The answer is, such policies are not racially motivated, but are borne out of a desire to protect students and maintain order. [For] all students. Certainly, "zero tolerance" policies in anecdotal cases have been taken to ridiculous extremes. There are plenty of examples. But consider:

But in practice, the law's reach extended beyond its original intentions as districts expanded the definition of "weapons" beyond firearms and removed students from the classroom for more minor, discretionary offenses, such as school uniform violations and talking back to adults, the report said.

"I understand the mentality that you've got to get the bad kids out of school so the good kids can learn, but when you actually look at who's doing what in schools, it really doesn't break down that cleanly or that simply," report author Harold Jordan said in an interview.

Actually, it does in most cases, Mr. Jordan. And while I can certainly sympathize with not suspending a student for a dress code violation (unless it involves repeated violations and/or highly inappropriate dress), talking back to teachers/administrators isn't supposed to warrant a suspension in certain cases? Saying "F*** you!!" wouldn't warrant such? And, exactly how have such disciplinary policies evolved from the 1995 federal Gun-Free Schools Act? Such student code of conduct policies have existed for long before that.

This is yet another flawed "disparate impact/proportionate representation" argument. Instead of focusing on making students behave better, the onus is on teachers and administrators to be more "accepting" or "forgiving" of [chronically] disruptive behavior. The article proposes "positive behavioral interventions" and no removal of any student unless "there is a real and immediate threat to safety." Which means that, a student could run up and down the hallway for a half hour screaming obscenities, and since there wasn't "a real and immediate threat," this pupil shouldn't be suspended. And an administrator or counselor would have to spend time "advising" and discussing with this student why what he/she did was "inappropriate." Not to mention, as we've written about many times here, it wouldn't be surprising if the staff was required to undergo "diversity" or "cultural sensitivity" training which, condescendingly, would propose that [minority] behavior is "misunderstood" by [white] teachers and other school personnel.

Ironically, whereas once liberals wanted the same rules to apply to all, regardless of background, now we have to take "certain things" into consideration. But these "certain things" must always be of a benign, or positive, vein. You know, that African-American students as a whole, "are loud", for example. it's anathema to ask hard questions or mention uncomfortable points.

Your average parents who actually care about their child's education don't give a hoot about the above nonsense, and/or they guffaw at it. And where such ridiculously PC school policies are in effect, such parents will vote with their feet -- if school choice is allowed where they live. I'm sure people like Mr. Jordan above would then label these parents as "racist," or at least "classist" or "elitist" ... merely for desiring a decent, chaos-free education for their kid, when, all in all, it's folks like Jordan whose advocacy results in such parental decisions.

Posted by Felix at 05:23 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

New at the Watcher's Council

Forum: How does your family traditionally celebrate Thanksgiving?

Posted by Hube at 05:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The NarrativeTM a.k.a. Delusion

Just like our illustrious president whose words are, well, just that, on the 50th anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy some "real" journalists at those "real" news outlets are doing same: Blathering with a lot of words, but nothing of substance. Case in point: The NY Times and San Francisco Chronicle are taking to blaming ... the Right for the killing of our 35th president. Yep, conservatives. Despite the fact that the killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, was a Communist.

Here's Joe Garofoli of the Chronicle:

The authors describe how the intense anti-Kennedy atmosphere in Dallas at that time created a "hothouse" where an unstable, malleable loner like assassin Lee Harvey Oswald could germinate.

But historian Michael Lind said it is "nonsense" that the atmosphere in Dallas allowed Oswald to surface.

"His communism had nothing to do with his location. He had just moved to Dallas," said Lind, the co-founder of the New America Foundation and author of "Made in Texas: George W. Bush and the Southern Takeover of American Politics."

That aside, Lind said, "The radical right has always been there for the last 50 years. It just never had a national presence. Now it does."

See? Oswald's communism was irrelevant. He was just "overcome" by the "radical rightist" atmosphere permeating Dallas at the time. (Lind, by the way, is fairly well known as a revisionist historian. No kidding.)

Likewise, here's the NY Times' Manny Hernandez:

In the early 1960s, a small but vocal subset of the Dallas power structure turned the political climate toxic, inciting a right-wing hysteria that led to attacks on visiting public figures.

Lee Harvey Oswald was a Marxist and not a product of right-wing Dallas. But because the anti-Kennedy tenor came not so much from radical outcasts but from parts of mainstream Dallas, some say the anger seemed to come with the city’s informal blessing.

Meaning, just like liberal politicians (and the MSM) have done predictably for the last 50+ years, those nasty conservatives "created" an ambiance of hate which "provoked" a guy like Oswald to do what he did. Even though he was a left-wing Marxist. Just like Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols were "victims" of guys like Rush Limbaugh, according to Bill Clinton. Like how just about every killer on a rampaging mass shooting can, beyond all reason, be linked to talk radio, Fox News, the Tea Party (this may be the most classic example), and/or the Republican Party. Not to mention there's the race angle, perpetuated by dolts like Chuck Rangel who most recently said that "there’s a Confederate general in every damn [Republican] living room." Y'know, despite the fact that it was the Democratic Party that led the secessionist movement prior to the Civil War, and was the GOP which promoted the abolition of slavery.

The revisionism continues today with Democrats -- (rightfully) embarrassed by their past -- attempting to promote the idea that the two major political parties "have done a 180" on [minority] civil rights. It's ridiculous. What's the old saying? "Say a lie enough and it becomes truth?" Don't let it happen.

Posted by Hube at 05:06 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Bitcoins and capital flight

I've talked before about China's systemic problems. Demographics and capitol flight are key risks for them. The latter is noted in a quote below:

One striking thing about the map: Bitcoin is increasingly a Chinese craze. Even at the height of the American and European trading days, when it’s 3 a.m. in China, Chinese transactions far outstrip activity in euros.

Didja get that? The Renminbi is non-convertible so the only way to get your money out of China is precious metals or other fungible good. Bitcoin appears to be a value store for people hedging against instability in the Renminbi. If China adopts this widely and their government doesn't block access to it (if they can) Bitcoin may have a future that is not in North America. Either way it looks like the cat is out of the bag for cryptocurrency and this may well be the future. I cannot imagine what happens when you divorce money from the state. How will the state fund itself if they have a significant number of citizens that have opted out of their currency. We live in strange days.

Posted by Duffy at 09:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 20, 2013

Running

Posted by Hube at 05:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Here's something "new": Right-wing bad guy in comics

Check out the synopsis of the new Killweather graphic novel:

It’s a story as old as time: Extremist right-wing radio host gets legislation passed to criminalize sex reassignment surgery, then surgeons kidnap him and forcibly do a sex-change operation on him.

Yeah, I'm totally sure that sex reassignment surgery is on the top of every "extremist right-wing" radio host's list of things to worry about. Then again, maybe I spoke too soon: after all, would it be any surprise if a future Obama successor demands that everyone's health insurance cover such surgery ... and that you and I pay for it?

Here's a challenge for these "original" comics creators: How about, say, an extremist left-wing Occupation-style activist gets legislation passed that outlaws all religion ... and then operatives from the Vatican kidnap him ... and perform an exorcism on him?

Posted by Hube at 05:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The No Sh**, Sherlock Story of the Day

Black Caucus Sees Race as Factor in Filibusters, Eyes Rules Change.

Posted by Hube at 04:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Because at this point, why the f*** not?

So, as you may have heard, President Lemon didn't attend the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address. Apparently, there was a good reason for that:


That would be Boss Obama advisor Dan Pfeiffer, by the way, actually claiming that that Prez Lemon can't take a little time to attend the marking of one of the most important historical events in American history ... because three years wasn't sufficient enough time to get a website up and running, so naturally he's needed NOW to make sure all gets done ... never mind all the golf, y'know. That is sacrosanct.

Speaking of the Gettysburg Address, shock of shocks Boss Obama used a version of the speech that omitted the words "under God." As noted in the post's title, at this point, does anything this dope says (or does) surprise you anymore? It seems Obama used the "Nicolay copy" of the speech, an early draft that does not contain the reference to God. But why not use what President Lincoln actually said? I certainly agree that in the whole scheme of things this matters not much at all, but a few points: 1) It's not as if Boss Obama hasn't done something like this before, but ... 2) then again why not read the early draft so as to piss off the Right? It's easily conceivable Prez Lemon chose to read the Nicolay version on purpose to do just that -- which helps, however little, to distract from the absolute debacle that is ObumbleCare.

Remember: There's nothing this dolt does that isn't totally calculated and/or is a straight middle finger to some group.

Posted by Hube at 04:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 19, 2013

Further proof why Ed.D.s ain't worth squat

Journey over to this HuffPo article by Matthew Lynch who, amazingly, has a published book. I say "amazingly" because after reading his "12 Reasons Why Obama is One of the Best Presidents Ever" you'll wonder how a guy who is published -- and has an Ed.D. -- can be so stupid. This entire list looks like it was composed by an undergraduate freshman who's still swayed by empty words and gestures.

1. He is for The People. Say what you will about Barack Obama, but unlike the many presidents who preceded him, he cares about what is best for the greater good. He truly does represent The People. His actions have always been motivated by a sincere desire to do what is best for the majority, even if it meant losing ground with the wealthy, influential or powerful minority.

Could there possibly be a more vacuous statement? But it actually makes sense being that we know who it comes from; being an Ed.D. means Lynch gives (or gave) teacher inservices which are about the most vacuous things on planet Earth.

2. He is for civil rights. He has consistently spoken on behalf of the disenfranchised, the underdog and the most controversial members of society -despite the fact that it was politically unpopular to do so at the time. His outspoken support of gay marriage is an excellent example. Gay marriage is, and has always been, a legal and civil rights issue -not a moral one as conservatives would have you believe. Obama's open support of gay marriage speaks to his core values and his inherent belief that there truly should be justice for all.

Complete poppycock. Obama's "open support" for gay marriage didn't come about until well after he had become president (same with Hillary Clinton, FWIW) -- because it was politically unpopular to be for it in 2008.

3. He is for one race -the human race. In just a few short years, Obama's professional achievements and continued demonstration of equality and integrity have done wonders for race relations. America has never been more unified as a people than it has been under the direct leadership of Barack Obama. Finally, the racial lines that have divided blacks and whites for decades seem to be narrowing.

This might be the most ridiculous of the twelve. Lynch doesn't offer a single example to support this BS. What "professional achievements?" What "continued demonstration?" Such statements are as empty as those which Obama has foisted upon the American public itself.

Perhaps Lynch forgets the Professor Gates matter? "If I Had a Son He'd Look Like Trayvon" Martin? A Justice Department that gives little credence to complaints made by Caucasians? Support for the preposterous "disparate impact" theory? DOJ refusing to prosecute a couple of New Black Panthers for voter intimidation outside a Philly polling place? Making calculated efforts to label anything anti-Obama as "racist?"

How have these made us all more "unified?"

4. He is for a healthcare system that brings hope and healing to the hurting. Obama's healthcare plan has allowed uninsured Americans to reap the benefits of a universal healthcare system. A suffering child should never be turned away because his or her mother doesn't have health insurance. To deny medical assistance to people who desperately need it is barbaric. Obama's health care plan has placed America among the world's greatest superpowers who demonstrate care and compassion toward its constituents with healthcare that serves all.

Obama is for a healthcare system "that brings hope and healing to the hurting" ... and hurts millions of Americans by forcing their insurance companies to drop them precisely because of ObumbleCare's rules ... despite what Obama told us numerous times, too: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Period."

Demonstrating "care and compassion" by outright lying to the public doesn't seem very caring nor compassionate to your typical thinking person.

This is all way too easy; be sure to check out the remaining hilarity here.

UPDATE: Unbeknownst to me, it seems this Lynch guy has taken a beating (and rightly so) for his preposterous nonsense.

Posted by Hube at 06:01 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

Yet another view on Orson Scott Card and political correctness

Here: The Boycott on Normalcy.

Posted by Hube at 05:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Too Good Not to Post

Obama is my Shepherd; I shall not work.

He maketh me to lie down and watch Oprah:

He leadeth me beside the still factories.

He restoreth my bling:

He leadeth me in the paths of idleness for Barracks name sake. Yea, though I walk through the valley of the sharing of the wealth, I will fear no workfare: For thou art funding me;

Thy lies and thy blade, they comfort me.

Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of people who actually produce;

Thou annointest my teeth with gold;

My pipe runneth over.

Surely rebates and Earned Income Credits shall follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the House of the Obama forever.

Posted by Duffy at 10:27 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

November 17, 2013

Racism

The Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers goes after Delaware Treasurer Chip Flowers again. Bet they wouldn't do so if Flowers was white.

Posted by Hube at 03:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Watcher's Council winners

The non-Council winner was Mark Steyn with The Drift Towards Depotism.

Full results are here.

Posted by Hube at 08:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 16, 2013

It's two, two, two Marzes in one!

Comics dunce Ron Marz on November 4th:


Comics dunce Ron Marz on November 15th:


"Glad people are talking. Wish they were nicer to each other." Right. Got it.

Posted by Hube at 08:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 15, 2013

The only difference being ...

... that 1) Bush didn't force an "Affordable Hurricane Act" on the public, and 2) Bush didn't have three years to prepare for the hurricane. ABC News: 'White House Fumble' Leaves President 'Exactly' Like Bush After Katrina.

(With apologies to the e-mailed [Jonah] Goldberg File.)

Posted by Hube at 04:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Clinic

(h/t to Fred Gregory)

Posted by Hube at 03:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Be dumb as a brick, get your own MSNBC show

The one-named wonder known as Touré is back, this time with this, well, whopper:

Let's just look at members who are supporting this Landrieu bill, right. Mary Landrieu from a red state. Senator Kay Hagan from a red state. Joe Manchin from a red state. Senator Pryor from a red state. Senator Mark Begich from a red state. Do you notice anything? We see red state Democrats who are dealing with the challenge of living and governing in a gerrymandered world where sometimes they have to deal with what the folks on the right - very low support from the Republican side for this – what the folks on the right want.

Mary Landrieu and Joe Manchin are also US senators.

Did you catch the problem yet? Yep -- how in the hell can gerrymandering affect the election of senators ... when an entire f***ing state elects them?? Gerrymandering deals with the election of representatives ... y'know, to the US House of Representatives.

Noel Sheppard wonders, "Do prospective MSNBC hosts have to fail a civics test in order to be hired?" Check the vid of Touré's genius:

Posted by Hube at 11:31 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

November 14, 2013

Wheelchair

Posted by Hube at 03:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

An exercise in "oops"

Or, "payback for being a complete douche really sucks." Delaware Dunce of the LGOMB back on October 1st:

With only six hours of the government shutdown that has been long desired by the Republican Party, the Democrats have jumped up to a nine point lead in the generic congressional ballot.

Fast forward to yesterday:

In just six weeks, Republicans have completely erased a 9-point deficit in a generic congressional ballot question and are now running even with Democrats. Independent voters favored Democrats in October, 32 percent to 30 percent, but now favor Republicans by a 37 percent to 26 percent margin.

In a word, "heh." Meanwhile, currently they're busy being duped.

Posted by Hube at 03:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Doesn't fit the NARRATIVETM

Why minimal coverage? Victims not the "right" religion, attackers not the "right" hue.

Then there's this from the HuffPo:

The three men who died at Al's Place on Wednesday were Elaine Williams' son, brother and nephew. But Williams hasn't been profiled by any national media outlets. Her story hasn't been widely shared yet, and it probably won't be, because the shooting happened in Detroit.

Shootings involving low-income people don't often become national media stories ... Gun crimes often occur in low-income neighborhoods with largely non-white victims, but, from the news, you’d think every shooting put the white and affluent at risk of violence ... it doesn’t reflect the reality of gun violence in the United States, where black people are far more likely to be victims of gun homicides compared to their white counterparts.

Uh, right ... but who exactly jumped on the bandwagon, say, when George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin in Florida, and for weeks we were lectured about how "racism isn't dead in America," and how "brown kids aren't safe to walk the streets," etc? And when right-leaning outlets did just what the HuffPo quotes above (from the "progressive" ThinkProgress, no less), what did we hear?

Hint: It begins with an "R."

Posted by Hube at 03:21 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack

November 13, 2013

Dental plan

Posted by Hube at 05:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Watcher's Council nominations

Honorable Mentions:

And the non-Council nominations are here!

Posted by Hube at 05:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Just make sure you ask the right questions!

Wow. As I noted yesterday here and here, with today's comicbook bunch, it's only OK to ask the "right" questions. Case in point: Kieron Gillen, the writer who completely shredded Tony Stark's/Iron Man's origin, was pissed -- pissed, I tell you! -- at Frank Miller's classic 300. Why? Well, Miller pretty much ignored the Greek underclass, so naturally, a modern creator like Gillen, being the good "progressive" that he is, set out to rectify the "mistakes" of 300. And what better way to give Miller a big "f*** you?" (Rich Johnston's words, not mine) By making the he-man Spartans homosexuals.

So ... "setting the record straight" is perfectly acceptable when it deals with the homosexuality of ancient Greeks and that society's underclass, but when someone dares to ponder whether a new Muslim superhero will ask legitimately tough questions about Islamic societies and the faith itself, well, how DARE you!! That is "hateful" and "bigoted!!"

Or, The NarrativeTM, natch. *Yawn*

UPDATE: Be sure to check out John C. Wright's take on the new Ms. Marvel and how the Left reacts to any questions/comments/quips about her.

Posted by Hube at 04:42 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

The Obama presidency in one image

This is a real ad for ObumbleCare. And what a "message": Don't worry, keep drinking, and don't worry about "beer money" ... because the good 'ol government got your back, dawg. I swear, I feel like Roddy Piper in They Live ... and when I put on my sunglasses Boss Obama, Joe Biden and the whole gang look like this, and plastered everywhere are these such messages.

Unreal.

MOST RELATED: Latest Obamacare Ads Are an Insult to All Americans.

Posted by Hube at 04:27 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

The American "center"

Recall what I wrote yesterday: "We know we're not some misanthropomorphic miscreants; in fact, a majority of Americans share our values on any number of topics today." Esquire magazine had a poll recently, what it called "The New American Center." In it (via Jim Geraghty), the mag found

  • 57 percent of folks in "the Center" support ending affirmative action in hiring decisions and college admissions. Only 19 percent oppose it.
  • 54 percent oppose a path to citizenship for those who have come to the country illegally. Only 32 percent support it. What's all this pressure to get the House to take up the Senate bill?
  • 75 percent support requiring photo ID to cast a vote. Only 15 percent oppose. (This still won't matter to hyper-dogmatic dolts like our old buddy Perry, however.)
  • Even abortion! The survey found 38 percent of "the center" support abortion for any reason… but only within the first three months of pregnancy, which would represent a giant step in the pro-life direction from our current laws. Another 29 percent support abortion only in cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother -- indicating that two-thirds of "the center" would support abortion laws significantly stricter than they are today. Most media coverage suggests the opposite, obviously. Only 12 percent believe a woman should be able to get an abortion for any reason at any point in her pregnancy.


    WAAAAY out of the mainstream.

  • Given only two options, 78 percent said the bigger problem for the United States is people aren't accountable for their decisions and actions. Only 22 percent said that the bigger problem was "people aren't compassionate toward one another."
  • Finally, 77 percent support amending the Constitution requiring the federal government to balance its budget every year. Only 11 percent oppose. This is one of those ideas that sounds great in theory but is challenging in practice. For starters, we would need to make up the $670 billion current deficit in either spending cuts or tax hikes, and the public would loathe either of those options. (Some day, a Democratic president and Democratic Congress would use that constitutional amendment to justify gargantuan tax hikes.) A little deficit spending isn't such a bad thing, but you have to keep it and your overall debt in proportion to your annual gross domestic product. Having said that, Republicans would be fools if they didn't loudly embrace such a popular idea.

As I noted above, people like Perry (yeah, I know, I know ... I shouldn't have linked to his sorry-ass blog ... just call me a "compassionate conservative," OK?) will always insist -- with perpetual assistance from the mainstream media, natch -- that no matter what, they are right. Three-quarters of the American public (in this case) be damned, not to mention myriad court decisions, including those by the US Supreme Court. "Progressives" like Perry just know better than you and me -- they can feel it deep within themselves, and they'll do virtually anything to make you "get it." Which, in the Internet's case, means trolling and off-topic comments, and when you still refuse to accept what they say, that's when the epithets start flying: "racist," "hater," "bigot," "un-American," "heartless," blah blah blah.

What they constantly fail to grasp is how their "Great White Hope" paternalism is what's really "racist," "bigoted," etc.

Posted by Hube at 04:12 PM | Comments (795) | TrackBack

Obamacare gets fixed

How horrible is the ACA website? So bad it took three guys in their 20's several hours of their free time to fix.

I don't know which is worse. The fact that they fixed it so easily or the idea that once they get it working we're really going to see how bad this thing is.

Posted by Duffy at 02:03 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

November 12, 2013

Just as I said ...

... the "most maligned and misunderstood" group in America today by comicbook creators is conservative Americans. Check it: Just imagine how these creators would react if the hashtag was "Ghetto Star Wars."


Simone retweeted numerous others, like


Note that I personally find none of the tweets with this hashtag (that I saw) offensive. (I'm not a "country boy," but I am male and white). My point, again, isn't to take umbrage with the tweets, but to note the hilarious hypocrisy of these oh-so "tolerant progressives" -- y'know, those who became all self-righteously indignant because I and a few others asked whether Marvel's new Muslim female hero will dare to go beyond the usual PC nonsense. As I said above, imagine if the hashtag was "Ghetto Star Wars." Or keeping with the rage du jour, "Muslim Star Wars" and the comments were all terrorist-related stereotypes.

Think Simone would be laughing then?

Posted by Hube at 06:36 PM | Comments (36) | TrackBack

The Tyranny of Belief

Once again, the politically volatile name of Orson Scott Card has surfaced, now because his popular story, Ender's Game, has been turned into a film and is currently in theatres. As we've shown here previously, Card's story for Superman was put on hiatus due to controversy. Oh, "what controversy" you ask? If you didn't already know, Card does not believe in gay marriage. Some argue that his beliefs aren't the issue, but his actions as a member of the National Organization for Marriage.

Ace details a former colleague of Card's who now detests him for his beliefs (which this associate claims never to have known), and urges everyone to shun him. We've shown how various comicbook creators have ostracized Card, so much so that the artist with whom Card was to work on Superman quit over the whole imbroglio (and helped shelve the story, at least for the nonce). You can be the judge about Card's words and actions, about whether they're detestable enough for you not to support his creative work. But keep in mind, Card is not getting any cash from the film version of Ender's Game, (he had already sold the rights to the story) so any boycott you favor will only really end up hurting the cinema owners and their employees for the most part.

Don't misunderstand me -- I'm in favor of keeping your cash in pocket if you don't believe in/agree with something or somebody. Creator Ron Marz is at least (supposedly) consistent on this (though his desire for civil conversation online is laughably inconsistent). If writers like Marz, Mark Waid and Gail Simone are vehemently opposed to Card's work being published or used, then they should not complain if someone eventually does the same to them. (To be fiar, Waid, for one, has stated online that he understands exactly that.)

But the overall issue surrounding Card and his beliefs is who determines just what is "controversial" ... or "hateful," and it's here that the Left, as with many other aspects of popular culture, has the upper hand. Like the every-day main page of Philly.com, for example, the mainstream media by what it covers (or doesn't cover) helps to determine for us what we should get uptight and concerned about. Like, Orson Scott Card's "homophobia," for instance. It's all the usual "phobias" and "-isms" with the MSM, and all directed overwhelmingly at conservatives and Republicans. Just recall when the Tea Party supposedly uttered racial epithets at members of the Congressional Black Caucus -- despite absolutely no evidence. Every conceivable "racial" angle is considered when a criticism is hurled towards President Obama. Sarah Palin and others using "target" language are to blame for a US representative getting shot ... but Democrats using precisely the same figurative lingo are blameless. Chick Fil-A restaurants and Barilla Pasta are evil incarnate because their owners are against gay marriage ... even though said owners harbor absolutely no ill will towards gay Americans. Recently, just querying whether Marvel's newest superhero, a Muslim female named Ms. Marvel, will ask hard questions about her faith gets one branded a "bigot" and a "hater." (I mean, it's not as if Marvel and comics in general have a history of political correctness and disdain for conservatives now, right?) College "progressives" (and the supporting faculty) continue to "honor" free speech by shouting down anyone with whom they disagree, and liberal groups like the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund call it "chilling" for free speech that some private publishing companies might object to putting out radical anti-war comics.

As I've noted here and at various comics-related sites, unlike what some say, it's conservative/Republican Americans who're "the enemy" of contemporary "progressivism." Astonishingly, it is actually debatable that radical extremist Islamist organizations get treated better by our current administration than does the GOP. Way too many contemporary libs fall prey to the "False-Consensus Effect;" that is, the "tendency for people to assume that their own opinions, beliefs, preferences, values and habits are 'normal' and that others also think the same way that they do." Thus, conservatives'/Republicans' beliefs and values aren't just alien, they're actually evil in certain cases.

So, then, Hube ... what do we do? The answer is quite simple: Don't cede anything. Keep fighting. Respectfully when possible, but nastily if we must (meaning, when we are so treated). We know we're not some misanthropomorphic miscreants; in fact, a majority of Americans share our values on any number of topics today. Don't be bullied into submission; part of the reason "progressives" are so ridiculously hostile in the current era is because of the Internet -- everyday folks who're right-of-center now have a voice ... and use it. Comicbook creators used to be able to laugh at and mock snail-mailed letters which were critical of them; now, blogs like Colossus [remarkably] piss them off when they challenge these writers. Not to mention, the "progressive" monopoly of the MSM is (has been) in jeopardy thanks to the meteoric rise of outlets like Fox News and the continuing popularity of talk radio.

Remember: Being a conservative and/or libertarian is tough. You actually have to think about issues and topics to formulate ideas and questions. Being a "progressive" is easy -- you just say "yes" to everything.

Posted by Hube at 04:25 PM | Comments (642) | TrackBack

So it has come to this

"Still, before we fully castigate the President for his rhetorical flights of fancy, it’s important to keep in mind that Obama was — to a large degree — telling Americans what they wanted to hear."

So it's the fault of the American people? They wanted to be lied to? To be deceived?

Let's do some editing:

"Still, before we fully castigate the President for his rhetorical flights of fancy, it’s important to keep in mind that Bush was — to a large degree — telling Americans what they wanted to hear. There were WMD's in Iraq and we could not wait for them to be launched at us. After 9/11, America wanted blood and it was his job to deliver."

Doesn't that sound a teensy bit insane?

Seriously, I'm this close to a Godwin's Law violation now that I have to stop.

Posted by Duffy at 02:45 PM | Comments (43) | TrackBack

November 11, 2013

Today

Posted by Hube at 11:59 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

Hint: It ain't conservatives

An oldie but goodie paragraph from Jonah Goldberg:

Seriously, who else do people think are behind efforts to ban big sodas or sue hairdressers for charging women more than men? Who harasses little kids for making toy guns out of sticks, Pop Tarts, or their own fingers? Who wants to regulate the air you breathe, the food you eat, and the beverages you drink? Who wants to control your thermostat? Take your guns? Your cigarettes? Heck, your candy cigarettes? Who's in favor of speech codes on campuses and "hate crime" laws everywhere? Who's in favor of free speech when it comes to taxpayer-subsidized "art" and pornography (so long as you use a condom, if liberals get their way) but then bang their spoons on their high chairs for strict regulations when it comes to political speech? Who loves meddling, finger-wagging billionaires like Michael Bloomberg when they use state power and taxpayer money to herd, bully, and nudge people but thinks billionaires like the Koch brothers who want to shrink government are the root of all tyranny?

Posted by Hube at 11:25 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

New at the Watcher's Council

Forum: What’s Your Reaction To The News Of The Pending Deal With Iran?

Posted by Hube at 08:20 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

November 10, 2013

Watcher's Council winners

The non-Council winner was Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion with LBJ: Return to pre-1967 borders “not a prescription for peace but for renewed hostilities.”

Full results are here.

Posted by Hube at 08:55 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

November 07, 2013

After getting $4 million in federal money

... to set up its ObumbleCare website, our very own state of Delaware has enrolled ... FOUR PEOPLE via its website. That's right, FOUR.

Posted by Hube at 06:31 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

Must-see Post of the Day

And that's Geoffrey Dickens' compilation of the "20 Worst Chris Matthews Quotes Calling Obama Critics Racist."

Posted by Hube at 06:22 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

A "petty rant" indeed

Or, if you prefer, the ObumbleCare Insanity of the Day. Take your pick. Salon.com's Brian Beutler says -- wait for it! -- that the GOP are the "real lying liars" when it comes to ObumbleCare. He also says Boss Obama told a "noble lie" when he fibbed about keeping your insurance/doctor.

You can pretty much stop reading about there.

Posted by Hube at 06:15 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

A "black eye" story to be sure, but ...

... did dad really have to contact the school board over such supposed "slanted" questions?

Last week, his daughter’s eighth grade American History class at East Pennsboro Middle School was asked to analyze a New York Times story about the recent government shutdown. Barry, who said he is a registered independent, read the story and then read a list of questions his daughter was required to answer and he immediately determined the assignment was “grossly slanted.”

The worksheet included questions like “To what issue do House Republican leaders insist on tying the federal budget?” and “Whom do you hold most responsible for the government shutdown?”

The dad, Josh Barry, sent a letter to the teacher (right thing to do) but also, as noted, the school board. Like, why? And how exactly are those questions "slanted?" I'm the first to complain about [liberal] bias in media, education or anywhere, but I just don't see it here. Was there a question about Democrats on the assignment? Even so, how is the question about the GOP biased? It seems pretty straight-forward. Ditto for the second question. In my view, based on the info from this article alone, Mr. Barry overreacted.

Then there's what the head of the district's teachers union did afterwards: She allegedly made calls around the district accusing Barry of being a "neo-Nazi." Barry happens to be Jewish, so you can imagine how he felt upon hearing that.

Way to go Cydnee Cohen, president of that union. As if teachers unions needed more bad PR.

Posted by Hube at 06:09 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

Refreshing to see

I'm not a fan of country music by any means, but it sure was refreshing to see a couple country stars (at the CMAs last evening) mock a Democratic president. Check out what Brad Paisley and Carrie Underwood did regarding ObumbleCare:

As could be predicted, "progressives" were not happy, some (most?) with little sense of irony:


Apparently Ms. Betts has never seen the VMAs, the Grammy's, the Tony's, the AMA's and especially the Academy Awards.

Posted by Hube at 06:01 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

November 06, 2013

Marvel's newest hero is a Muslim woman

The Outhousers report that the new Ms. Marvel will be a Muslim chick -- "Kamala Khan, a Muslim American teenage girl with the ability to shapeshift."

The book will be written by G Willow Wilson, herself a convert to the Muslim faith. She says "The comic will ... see Khan struggle with her faith, although ... she won't evangelize her faith in the comic." I am indeed curious to see what those "struggles" will entail. Knowing modern comics as we do, the safe bet is that we'll be treated to what Geoff Johns did with the Muslim Green Lantern. Also, recall what transpired when Frank Miller wanted Batman to go after al Qaeda. Will we see Khan "struggling" to deal with American "Islamophobia?" The stereotypes of terrorism? Or will Wilson really be daring and delve into how her faith treats women, for instance? Will she question actions such as these? We will see. That is, if the book makes it to ten issues, which I highly doubt.

Meanwhile, our ridiculously politically correct pal Ron Marz of course chimed in on the subject:


I always get a real kick out of the all-consuming need "progressives" possess for "diversity." Why doesn't Marz, say, freely give up some of his writing jobs to people of the "correct" hue/religion/sexual orientation? I mean, if it's sooooo important? Doesn't Marz acknowledge his "white privilege," for heaven's sake? And, who exactly does this announcement "upset," Ron? Aside from extreme hardcore racists (of which there are pitifully few, if any, in comic fandom), who's miffed? I personally couldn't care less, but there will be those like myself who question what Wilson will write of Khan's "struggles," as I noted above, like will they cover a broad cross-section, or will they merely be the same PC tripe that comics have given us for over a decade or so, now?

ELSEWHERE: As you'd expect, Comics Alliance loves this news. It says of Muslims: "... one of the most maligned and misunderstood minority groups in America today." Actually, for contemporary comicbook creators and many opiners, that title should be awarded to conservative Americans.

Newsarama interviews writer Wilson. At article's end Wilson notes "It’s not at all a serious reckoning on religion in the U.S. or a clash of civilizations. I’m not interested in that."

Sounds like a good idea, Ms. Wilson.

UPDATE: Avi at FCMM notes that creator Wilson has a questionable history:

Wilson is the same writer who attacked Holland for taking security steps to prevent terrorist attacks, spoke disrespectfully of apostates, among others, and even interviewed an Islamofascist from Egypt named Ali Gomaa, who himself wrote an anti-Israel screed in the WSJ.

If she uses such antics in Ms. Marvel I give the book four issues, max.

UPDATE 2: Douglas Ernst has some thoughts.

Posted by Hube at 04:57 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

Daily Caller senior editor agrees with Colossus

Back on Oct. 30 yours truly wrote Mistake vs. Lie comparing George W. Bush's claims about WMD in Iraq to Boss Obama's claims about keeping your health insurance/doctor. Today, the DC's Jamie Weinstein, who must read Colossus (I jest) writes "Obama Lied, Bush Was Mystified" and lays out pretty much what I did last week (albeit more meticulously).

I highly recommend the article.

Posted by Hube at 04:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Line of the Day

Via the Daily Caller on socialist Mayor-Elect Bill de Blasio's win in New York City yesterday: "The Mets will play in Che Stadium."

And there's a lot more good lines (via readers' tweets) at the link.

Posted by Hube at 04:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Must see video of the day

Enjoy DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Idiot pronounce -- or, that is, MISpronounce -- the word "misled." The hilarity begins around the 1:05 mark:

Yep, she said something like "myzulled."

Here's another classic dopey lib/MSNBC illiterate moment for your pleasure:

Posted by Hube at 04:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Why the GOP deserves to lose

GOP Gives Up Virginia To Democrats Instead Of Giving Tea Party and Social Conservatives A Win

"The Republican National Committee spent three times as much in 2009 on the same race as they did this year. The Chamber of Commerce spent one million dollars in the last Governor’s race, and not one dime on Cuccinelli. While its often claimed that Tea Party candidates do poorly among independents, Cuccinelli actually won independents by 9 points, 47 percent to 38 percent. “McAuliffe outraised Cuccinelli by almost $15 million,” and in the last weeks of the campaign, this left Cuccinelli with nearly no media exposure. Even Politico wonders if Cuccinelli was beginning to turn the tide against the “War on Women” narrative, as he drove down McAuliffe’s lead among women from 24% in polling to 9%."

If the Republican establishment had thought it important enough to carry Virginia into the “R” column instead of using the loss as a cudgel to beat the grassroots Tea Party insurgent movement, perhaps it would have devoted more resources towards winning this crucial election.

Emphasis mine.

This is exactly the problem. The GOP has been split into the Establishment GOP and The Tea Party/Regular people.

The Establishment seeks only to remain insiders who don't make waves. They don't stand on principles, they make speeches about togetherness and conviviality and "go along to get along" is their mantra. They are careerists who don't want to be seen as judgmental or intolerant of "hateful" or in any way disliked by their peers across the aisle or reporters. These are the very same people who gave Chris Wallace oppo research on Ted Cruz. Think about that. One of two senators with a backbone who stood on principle on issues they fully expected to lose. Rand Paul and Cruz are not interested in being popular in DC. They are interested in doing what they believe is right. The Establishment (c.f. McCain) only believe in getting re-elected and showing up on talk shows.

The GOP is at war with itself. If the Establishment GOP wins they will continue to be a minority party who manages to lose to idiots like Nancy Pelosi. Frankly, they'll deserve it but the damage that they do to country will continue.

Posted by Duffy at 03:06 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

November 05, 2013

Laugher of the Day 2

That'd be courtesy of Democrat Rep. Jim Moran (VA) who excused Boss Obama's lies about keeping your healthcare plan as "presidents engag[ing] in a little hyperbole," and the fact that "he's human." Not to mention, "the president, Moran said, was 'rightfully excited' about the law when he made his promise."

Got it.

Posted by Hube at 05:39 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Laugher of the Day

Comic writer Ron Marz, he of "STFU" infamy, wishes people would be -- wait for it! -- nicer to each other on the Internet:


The Shelf Life column he references is in regards to why he won't see Ender's Game (because the story was written by Orson Scott Card).

Posted by Hube at 05:29 PM | Comments (27) | TrackBack

Why we will never win the "War on Drugs"

Add this video to the thousands of hours of books and videos explaining the futility of the "War on Drugs."

We ain't gonna win it folks. Not now, not ever. Decriminalize, legalize (some of it), tax it, regulate it and the rest is a public health problem, not a crime.

Posted by Duffy at 12:26 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

November 04, 2013

Don't let the lemon get away with it

The latest:


Uh uh. Here's what was sold to us:

The only "if" was "If you like your plan ..." "Period."

Posted by Hube at 08:31 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

New at the Watcher's Council

Forum: What’s Your Earliest Childhood Memory?

Posted by Hube at 04:25 PM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

"Chilling repercussions?"

The Comic Book Legal Defense Fund highlights a story that supposedly has "chilling repercussions" on free speech. You be the judge:

Across the Atlantic Ocean in the United Kingdom, Darren Cullen is currently fighting for his freedom of speech while he struggles to get his new comic book, (Don’t) Join the Army to the printers. The comic is a satirical depiction of the British Military in the form of an “anti-recruitment leaflet.” Multiple printers have refused to print the comic due to the fact that they find it offensive. Despite the fact that this suppression of speech is not by a governmental agency, and therefore not under the protection of the First Amendment or Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, it still has chilling repercussions.

Uh, what?? Let's see -- this dude Cullen wrote his own comic without any hassle from anyone, getting it fully funded via the popular Kickstarter site a couple months ago. Yet, because some private printing entities refused to publish it because they exercised their First Amendment/Article 10 rights, this somehow equates to Cullen "fighting for his freedom of speech."

Nope.

As way too many a "progressive" fails to recognize, freedom of speech does NOT mean that other private individuals have to grant you a platform for your speech. Period. The article goes on to note that "Cullen was eventually able to find a printer that did not object to the content of the comic book ..." Well how 'bout that? Isn't that terrific? The very essence of freedom and democracy actually worked.

You can bet your bottom dollar that if someone wrote a pro-military comic and pacifist printing companies refused to publish it, guys like Cullen and column author Eric Margolis wouldn't be clamoring about "suppression of speech" then. They'd be championing the printers for their freedom of association rights. And they'd be right!

Don't believe me? Just check out how "progressives" treat conservatives' freedom of speech on just about any college campus. The rationalizations for their actual suppression of speech usually are comprised of "because it's 'hate speech," it's "intolerant," it's "racist," and/or it "doesn't add to the dialogue."

Posted by Hube at 04:16 PM | Comments (31) | TrackBack

Comicbook Geek Post of the Day

So I was reading Essential Fantastic Four #4 yesterday which, if you don't know, is a black and white collection of old 1960s issues -- some of the very best FF issues ever put out by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. In the #60s we're treated to our first encounter with the popular Kree alien race, first via Sentry 459 (#64) who's protecting an ancient Kree base, and then in #65 'ol Ronan the Accuser shows up to punish the FF for defeating the Sentry.

What cracks me up is Stan's [over]use of the English version of a Spanish possessive phrase via the word "of." For example, there is the Kree's "Aura of Negativism" which is basically an invisibility cloak. And Ronan makes use of his "Cone of Impenetrability" which, well, is a cone-shaped structure which cannot be broken.

Why not go even further? Why not keep the term structure consistent for all things Kree? Y'know, like

Posted by Hube at 04:13 PM | Comments (16) | TrackBack

Just don't apply that to Boss Obama!

Cassandra over at the LGOMB titles her post about Delaware Treasurer Chip Flowers "Yeah, He Lied."

Be sure to read through the entire thing and replace "Chip Flowers" with "Barack Obama." It fits perfectly. But you have to do it because, of course, none of the LGOMB will.

Posted by Hube at 04:08 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

ObumbleCare update

Sen. Diane Feinstein said that Boss Obama meant that if you like your healthcare plan you could keep your healthcare plan ... until ObumbleCare is enacted.

Soon to be a common phrase? Obama lied, people died."

Remember the "grandfather" clause in ObumbleCare that would supposedly allow you to keep your healthcare plan -- that is, unless it was changed ever so slightly that the feds would then deem it a "new plan?" Well, the Republicans in the Senate wanted to block its implementation in 2010 ... because they worried it could lead to cancelled policies. Senate Democrats nixed the GOP resolution ...

Here's a local story about one's family's ObumbleCare sticker shock.

There's a new account on Twitter worth following: My Cancellation. It details what's happened to victims of ObumbleCare.

Posted by Hube at 04:05 PM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

Laugher of the Day

Philly.com's Will "Panties In A" Bunch thinks reviving the Bill Clinton-era blaming of right-wing "hate" talkers somehow makes a "point." I mean, it didn't work then, but people like Bunch who live in comfy "progressive" bubbles have inflated senses of self-worth so maybe he's convinced himself he'll actually sway some views this time.

Meanwhile, never expect Bunch to devote a column to guys like this, nor about guys like Bill Ayers who only, influences our president.

Posted by Hube at 04:00 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

November 03, 2013

The ultimate soft bigotry of low expectations

Bill Maher blames the GOP for Boss Obama lying about ObumbleCare.

Posted by Hube at 12:48 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

All you need to know about liberal media bias

Right f***in' here. The NY Times, with a straight face, merely says that Boss Obama "misspoke" when he said if you like your doctor/insurance you can keep him/it. He didn't lie ... he "misspoke." Again and again and again.

And again.

RELATED: Be sure to read David Cutler's memo detailing his concerns about ObumbleCare implementation.

Posted by Hube at 11:05 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

November 02, 2013

At least Ron Marz is consistent on this

... if he means it. The comic writer on CBR today:

There are likely people who will avoid my work because of this column. There are certainly those who already do so because I don't hide my convictions or my politics on Twitter. And that's fine. Orson Scott Card didn't hide his beliefs either. This is what I'm doing about it.

Isn't that big of him? It's "fine" if you skip his work because of his obnoxiousness on Twitter. What a guy. But at least (on paper) he doesn't have a beef if you say "F*** you" to him by thumbing your nose at his product. And as we've noted here ad nauseam, there's plenty of reason to do just that if you're right-of-center with your politics. For instance, he tweets


In other words, you who believe in gun rights should "STFU" because we have people like those in the TSA to defend us.

His column is on Orson Scott Card, by the way, whose Ender's Game just hit theatres. Card, as you may recall, isn't particularly fond of gay rights.

UPDATE: As pointed out in the comments section by Andrew, Marz's fellow (and much better) writer Peter David takes him to task for his column. I can't say I agree 100% with David, but he's spot on regarding the radical left and their boycotts and [political] pressure.

UPDATE 2: Check out this interview with Card, via Nate Winchester.

UPDATE 3: Marz has finally opined on the ObumbleCare disaster -- and it's the GOP's fault! But of course!


Remember: "There are certainly those who already do so because I don't hide my convictions or my politics on Twitter. And that's fine."

It sure is.

Posted by Hube at 10:31 AM | Comments (12) | TrackBack

November 01, 2013

Watcher's Council winners

The non-Council winner was Mark Steyn with ObamaCare’s Magical Thinkers.

Full results are here.

Posted by Hube at 05:16 PM | Comments (18) | TrackBack

Nixbama

Posted by Hube at 04:42 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

Citizenship

Posted by Hube at 04:41 PM | Comments (11) | TrackBack

Where you should stop reading

Todd Purdum in Politico today says that ObumbleCare suffered from "calculated sabotage by Republicans at every step." He follows with "That may sound like a left-wing conspiracy theory ..."

You should stop reading right there.

Purdum details GOP opposition to the bill/law from the beginning, and -- wait for it! -- makes an analogy to the 1954 Brown v. Board of Ed. decision just to "remind" you that ... Republicans are racists. All it boils down to is that Purdum is miffed that the GOP acted like an opposition party in the whole healthcare debate. Y'know, what they were supposed to be. To Purdum, once the law was passed, Republicans were supposed to just sit back and do whatever the new law -- passed without a single GOP vote -- required.

*Yawn*

RELATED: Former DE blogger Dana Garrett (sadly) echoes the party line claiming that Boss Obama did not lie. In a word: C'mahn.

ALSO RELATED: The Boss Obama admin was also lying about not having exact numbers available for how many folks were signing up for ObumbleCare. In actuality, they were keeping daily tallies of them. And the numbers were ridiculously ridiculously small. For instance, by the end of the second day (Oct. 2), there were ... 248 sign-ups. This is nation-wide.

ALSO ALSO RELATED: Those we've heard about so far who've lost their insurance have had individual plans. What about those who have plans via their employer? Well, those plans' cancellations are coming.

Posted by Hube at 04:30 PM | Comments (661) | TrackBack