Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Shrillary condescends to black reporter who asked about “universal health care”

As Say Anything puts it: “Hillary Clinton: How Dare You Call Universal Health Care Socialized Medicine?” Excerpt:

Hillary goes off on a reporter at the National Association of Black Journalists Presidential Forum for daring to call socialized medicine…well…socialized medicine.
…
What do you think she’s angry about more, that she’s essentially being called a socialist or that a black man dared wander off the liberal plantation to question her “we liberals know what’s best for you” policies?

A couple of choice quotes from the accompanying article. First up, Hillary objecting to the “socialized medicine” label:

…the audience question came from a freelance writer named Kiara Ashanti, who wanted to know why the Democratic White House hopeful was pushing for, what he called, “socialized medicine.”

“Why are you still insisting upon moving that system in here when particularly it will hurt African American communities more than anyone else?” Ashanti asked.

“Oh, man – that was a string of misrepresentations about me and the systems in other countries,” Clinton began her response. “Number one, I have never advocated socialized medicine, and I hope all the journalists hear that loudly and clearly because that has been a right-wing attack on me for 15 years, and it is wrong.”

But, it’s not wrong. The health care system Hillary Clinton and her fellow Democrats support consists of taking wealth from everyone (or, more accurately, the top 50% of wage-earners who pay all the taxes) and redistributing it to everyone in the form of medical care. Wealth redistribution, put simply. And what is socialism if not wealth redistribution?

That Hillary and her fellow populist commissar-wannabes find this label inconvenient for their political agendas is neither here nor there.

He’s got a link to the video of Her Highness addressing her insolent subject, and does she get her briefs in a bunch or what? She also tells the reporter, in the most down-her-nose manner possible, to “come introduce yourself to my staff and we will try to give you some information if you’re interested in being educated instead of being rhetorical.” In other words, she considers him to be an idiot for not agreeing with her.

There is more in there about Her Highness referencing Medicare as a successful model of health care in this country! Sure, it only takes up over half a trillion bucks of our GDP (i.e. from American paychecks) every year and is rife with fraud and waste, but if you can just get past all that, it’s a virtual paradise. She also references countries that have socialized medicine (just don’t call it “socialized medicine”, even if those countries do), like England, where you will die waiting for a routine MRI. No thanks, Hilldawg.

Exit question (and you know you saw this coming): Can you imagine the backlash that would have come if a Republican had belittled a black journalist like the Hildebeast did? A Republican would have been “racist” or at the very least “racially insensitive”. But in Her Highness’ case, she’s just “passionate” about the issue. Oh, well, at least she didn’t serve us up some of her manufactured Southern drawl again.

August 10, 2007 Posted by | Hillary, socialism | 18 Comments

Another federal immigration screw-up: fence built in Mexico!

From the Houston Chronicle:

Vehicle barrier built on wrong side of border to be removed

Part of a vehicle barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border was erected in the wrong country and soon will be removed and rebuilt on American soil, federal officials confirmed Monday.

“We respect our international boundary, and we want to be good neighbors,” U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman Michael Friel told The Associated Press. “…We want to move quickly to ensure that we place the vehicle barrier where it should be, which is north of the border.”

The barrier, 17 miles west of Columbus, was built in 2000 by Joint Task Force North out of Fort Bliss, Texas. It encroaches into Mexico territory between one and six feet south of the border along a 1.5-mile stretch.

The U.S. government did not intentionally erect the 5-foot-tall barrier in Mexico, Friel said. But an aerial survey conducted in March revealed that parts of the structure crossed over the border.

“The construction was based on what was understood to be the international boundary at the time,” he said.

The International Boundary and Water Commission, which determines the official boundary between the U.S. and Mexico, said the barrier had raised concern with Mexican officials.

“Mexico had indicated that it is not appropriate for this type of United States structure to be located in Mexican territory, and we agree,” said Sally Spener, a spokeswoman for the commission.

On Monday, Mexico’s Foreign Relations Department said it has sent a diplomatic note to the United States protesting the barrier.

I know that Mexico actively encourages and assists their citizens in breaking our immigration laws, but if we are to lead by example, we need to correct this ASAP. After all, how can we rightly complain about border integrity if we don’t respect it ourselves?

That said, do our elected officials now see one of the reasons we don’t want them trying some “comprehensive immigration reform”? When they screw up something as simple as a fence being in our own country, is it not unreasonable to expect that with “comprehensive” reform, they will “comprehensively” botch things up?

August 10, 2007 Posted by | illegal immigration | 7 Comments

UPDATE: Two criminal aliens rape and strangle 15-year-old girl

UPDATE: Add this nearly identical story to the ever-growing stack:

A Peruvian national in the U.S. illegally and who was previously charged with raping a 5-year-old girl pleaded not guilty Friday in the execution-style slayings of three young college students, a day after he surrendered to the Newark mayor.

FOX News has learned Carranza, who has a fake Social Security number, had been arrested on charges of raping a 5-year-old girl and then threatening the child and parents. In that case he faced a 31-count indictment.

In another, he was arrested on assault charges stemming from a bar fight.

Immigration officials apparently were aware of Carranza’s illegal status since his prior arrests, according to Essex County Sheriff Armando Fontoura.

The sole survivor of Saturday night’s shootings, 19-year-old Natasha Aeriel, provided information from her hospital bed after being shot in the head.

Aeriel was with her brother, Terrance Aeriel, 18; Dashon Harvey, 20; and Iofemi Hightower, 20, who were forced to kneel against a wall and were shot execution-style outside a Newark school.

The students had been planning to attend Delaware State University.

I wonder: would raping and strangling a 15-year-old girl to death qualify for Jorgé W. Bush’s “jobs Americans won’t do”? Probably so, because I sure as hell wouldn’t do it. This didn’t have to happen:

Two suspects charged with aggravated murder in the killing of a Texas teen admitted they came to the United States illegally.

Police said 15-year-old Dani Countryman was trying to fight off Alejandro Rivera Gamboa and his cousin, 23-year-old cousin Gilberto Javier Rivera Gamboa when they strangled her at a Milwaukie apartment in late July.

Alejandro was taken into custody last Saturday on an outstanding warrant for an unrelated probation violation involving drunk driving. The murder charges were later added.

Gilberto Javier Rivera Gamboa was arrested Monday on aggravated murder charges at the Balboa apartment complex where he lives just a few doors from where Countryman was discovered.

The two also faced an immigration hearing after the murder investigation was complete. According to immigration officials, both of the suspects admitted to entering the country illegally six months ago.

Court records showed Alejandro admitted to stepping on the girl and holding her down and that the two tried to sexually assault her.

According to reports, as “Countryman struggled beneath Gilberto Arellano Gamboa, pinned to the floor with her pants down, he called on his cousin to help subdue the girl. Alejandro Rivera Gamboa responded by stepping on Countryman’s throat until she stopped moving.”

But hey, if you can just get past that whole “breaking our immigration laws” thingy, these are just a couple of poor schmoes looking for a better life here in the good ol’ U.S. of A.

August 10, 2007 Posted by | illegal immigration | 7 Comments

“NASA quietly fixes flawed temperature data; 1998 was NOT the warmest year in the millenium”

More proof that global “warming” is a hoax, and that an American agency is participating in (nay, aiding and abetting) the perpetrating of said hoax. From Michelle Malkin:

Some big environmental news that you haven’t heard much about: NASA has revised much-publicized US temperature data that have been used to claim 1998 as a record-breaking hottest year in the millenium. Michael Asher at DailyTech reports:

My earlier column this week detailed the work of a volunteer team to assess problems with US temperature data used for climate modeling. One of these people is Steve McIntyre, who operates the site climateaudit.org. While inspecting historical temperature graphs, he noticed a strange discontinuity, or “jump” in many locations, all occurring around the time of January, 2000.

These graphs were created by NASA’s Reto Ruedy and James Hansen (who shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change). Hansen refused to provide [McIntyre ]with the algorithm used to generate graph data, so McKintyre reverse-engineered it. The result appeared to be a Y2K bug in the handling of the raw data.

[McIntyre] notified the pair of the bug; Ruedy replied and acknowledged the problem as an “oversight” that would be fixed in the next data refresh.

NASA has now silently released corrected figures, and the changes are truly astounding. The warmest year on record is now 1934. 1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record-breaking) moves to second place. 1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II. Anthony Watts has put the new data in chart form, along with a more detailed summary of the events.

The effect of the correction on global temperatures is minor (some 1-2% less warming than originally thought), but the effect on the US global warming propaganda machine could be huge.

Then again– maybe not. I strongly suspect this story will receive little to no attention from the mainstream media.

… McIntyre also debunked the famous “hockey stick” analysis linking human activity to global warming, which turned out to be an artifact of poor mathematics.
…
Bottom line:

According to the new data published by NASA, 1998 is no longer the hottest year ever. 1934 is. Four of the top 10 years of US CONUS high temperature deviations are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900. (World rankings of temperature are calculated separately.)

In other words: Four of the top ten are in the 1930’s, before mainstream scientists believe humans had any discernible impact on temperatures.
…
More reax on the James Hansen factor:

Ace: “So James Hansen, who claimed Bush was politicizing Global Warming, refused to provide his algorithms to other researchers so they could simply check his work, hiding his own errors from them and distorting the science he claims to care about oh-so-much until some persistent researchers went to the great trouble of reconstructing his algorithms themselves. Fire him. Immediately.” …

There’s more there, for those who are interested in some more of the scientific findings, but the bottom line is simply this: there is no proof that global “warming” is real or man-made, this finding proves that, and NASA’s attempt to hide contradictory data also proves it.

August 10, 2007 Posted by | global warming | 10 Comments

Columnist says another 9/11 would be good for America

Read his words for yourself:

ONE MONTH from The Anniversary, I’m thinking another 9/11 would help America.
What kind of a sick bastard would write such a thing?

A bastard so sick of how splintered we are politically – thanks mainly to our ineptitude in Iraq – that we have forgotten who the enemy is.

It is not Bush and it is not Hillary and it is not Daily Kos or Bill O’Reilly or Giuliani or Barack. It is global terrorists who use Islam to justify their hideous sins, including blowing up women and children.

Iraq has fractured the U.S. into jigsaw pieces of competing interests that encourage our enemies. We are deeply divided and division is weakness.

Most Americans today believe Iraq was a mistake. Why?

Not because Americans are “anti-war.”

Americans have turned their backs because the war has dragged on too long and we don’t have the patience for a long slog. We’ve been in Iraq for four years, but to some it seems like a century. In contrast, Britain just pulled its soldiers out of Northern Ireland where they had been, often being shot at, almost 40 years.

That’s not the American way.

In Iraq, we don’t believe our military is being beaten on the battleground. It’s more that there is no formal “battleground.” There is the drip of daily casualties and victory is not around the corner. Americans are impatient. We like fast food and fast war.

Americans loved the 1991 Gulf War. It raged for just 100 hours when George H.W. Bush ended it with a declaration of victory. He sent a half-million troops into harm’s way and we suffered fewer than 300 deaths.

America likes wars shorter than the World Series.

Bush I did everything right, Bush II did everything wrong – but he did it with the backing of Congress.

Because the war has been a botch so far, Democrats and Republicans are attacking one another, when they aren’t attacking themselves. The dialog of discord echoes across America.

Turn back to 9/11.

Remember the community of outrage and national resolve? America had not been so united since the first Day of Infamy – 12/7/41.

We knew who the enemy was then.

We knew who the enemy was shortly after 9/11.

Because we have mislaid 9/11, we have endless sideshow squabbles about whether the surge is working, if we are “safer” now, whether the FBI should listen in on foreign phone calls, whether cops should detain odd-acting “flying imams,” whether those plotting alleged attacks on Fort Dix or Kennedy airport are serious threats or amateur bumblers. We bicker over the trees while the forest is ablaze.

America’s fabric is pulling apart like a cheap sweater.

What would sew us back together?

Another 9/11 attack.

The Golden Gate Bridge. Mount Rushmore. Chicago’s Wrigley Field. The Philadelphia subway system. The U.S. is a target-rich environment for al Qaeda.

Is there any doubt they are planning to hit us again?

If it is to be, then let it be. It will take another attack on the homeland to quell the chattering of chipmunks and to restore America’s righteous rage and singular purpose to prevail.

The unity brought by such an attack sadly won’t last forever.

The first 9/11 proved that.

He makes several great points, especially how sickening it is that a mere six years after the ruthless attack on our soil that claimed about 3,000 of our brethren, we’re right back to bickering and politicking. While I see what he’s saying about how another 9/11 would help, I think (a) that’s a pretty sick thing to hope for; and (b) his conclusion that it would help is false.

Look, if we were back to bellyaching a mere year after the attacks, and a mere three years after the attacks we almost vote out our commander-in-chief in favor of a liberal Massachussets blueblood who (a) saw terrorism as a mere nuisance and (b) would have subjected our interests to the UN’s “global test”, and we complain about how we’re treating the camelhumpers who want us dead while we detain them at Club Gitmo…then I don’t think another attack is going to unite us. Americans have short attention spans, and it would take repeated attacks and thousands more deaths at semi-frequent intervals to steel our national resolve. I, for one, don’t want to see that.

August 10, 2007 Posted by | religion of peace | 6 Comments

Night and Day

Is Hilldawg trying to mimic Jean-François Heinz-Kerry (who is rumored to have served in Vietnam)? From the Washington comPost:

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, who chastised rival Barack Obama for ruling out the use of nuclear weapons in the war on terror, did just that when asked about Iran a year ago.

“I would certainly take nuclear weapons off the table,” she said in April 2006.

That was then, but this is now:

Her views expressed while she was gearing up for a presidential run stand in conflict with her comments this month regarding Obama, who faced heavy criticism from leaders of both parties, including Clinton, after saying it would be “a profound mistake” to deploy nuclear weapons in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“There’s been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That’s not on the table,” he said.

She actually did support leaving nukes on the table…before she didn’t.

August 10, 2007 Posted by | Hillary, Night and Day | Leave a Comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers