Larry Elder hits one out of the park while filling in for Dennis Prager last week. Per the “Sage’s” modus operandi, the left’s double-standard is brought to bare. This is what Larry Elder is best at… that is, showing how the Democrats are two-faced hypocrites. (Larry calls out a couple of Republicans as well.) Enjoy!
Isis FINALLY did it… they have gotten the attention of liberals. The Left/Democrats now see ISIS as a threat! Hallelujah!
What E-V-I-L did ISIS/ISIL commit that has battle plans ready?
(CNN) — Did ISIS use a notorious former CIA interrogation technique on Western hostages?
At least four ISIS hostages in Syria were waterboarded during their captivity, the Washington Post reported Thursday, citing unnamed sources familiar with the treatment of the abducted Westerners.
Among those waterboarded was James Foley, the American journalist who was beheaded by the terror group….
This caused lefty cartoonist to remind us all about one of the big issues of the left… moral equation:
Here is my post on John’s blog:
…not really… but… if racism is invoked against those who take a counter position against Obama’s positions, then why not the other-way??
This is an excerpt from Ann Coulter’s, Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama (New York, NY: Sentinel, 2012), 78-83.
Just a quick note on Matt Damon’s mantra about rich people not sending their kids to war. The first excerpt is a breakdown of racial diversity of death in Iraq:
The latest census, of Americans, shows the following distribution of American citizens, by Race:
1. European descent (White) ….. 69.12%
2. Hispanic ……………………..…… 12.5%3.
3. Black………………………………. 12.3%
4. Asian ……………………..………… 3.7%
5. Native American ……………….. 1.0%
6. Other ……………………..………. 2.6%
Now… here are the fatalities by Race; over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom:
1. European descent (white) …74.31%
2. Hispanic ……………………..… 10.74%
3. Black ……………………..……… 9.67%
4. Asian ……………………..……. . 1.81%
5. Native American ……………… 1.09%
6. Other ……………………..……… .33%
You do the Math! These figures don’t lie… but, Media-liars figure then distort these numbers to try and sway public opinion!
(From: 4,000 Combat Deaths)
This is an also from my old blog (also a response to a liberal friend) responding to a Charilie Rangel video (Video Link) about him wanting a draft so more rich kids would be drafted and thusly, the war in Iraq wouldn’t happen (a non-sequitur by the way):
Another piece O’ information Rangel cannot see through the political forest is that most of the volunteers are from affluent neighborhoods, as the following Washington Times (November 8, 2005) article points out:
◆ The Heritage Foundation research paper found that a higher percentage of middle-class and upper-middle-class families have been providing enlistees for the war on Islamic militants since the September 11 attacks on the United States. Researchers matched the ZIP codes of recruits over the past five years with federal government estimates of household incomes in those neighborhoods. Contrary to complaints from some liberal lawmakers and pundits, the data show that the poor are not shouldering the bulk of the military’s need for new soldiers, airmen, sailors and Marines. The poorest neighborhoods provided 18 percent of recruits in prewar 1999 and 14.6 percent in 2003. By contrast, areas where household incomes ranged from $30,000 to $200,000 provided more than 85 percent…. About 98 percent of all enlistees from 1999 to 2003 had a high school diploma, compared with 75 percent of nonrecruits nationwide.
Sorry Charlie, your “Bumper-Sticker Slogans” aren’t working out for you to well, at least those who can type into Google the words, “military record number middle-class”, which apparently your staff cannot.
This from the Heritage Foundation:
- U.S. military service disproportionately attracts enlisted personnel and officerswho do not come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Previous Heritage Foundation research demonstrated that the quality of enlisted troops has increased since the start of the Iraq war. This report demonstrates that the same is true of the officer corps.
- Members of the all-volunteer military are significantly more likely to come from high-income neighborhoods than from low-income neighborhoods. Only 11 percent of enlisted recruits in 2007 came from the poorest one-fifth (quintile) of neighborhoods, while 25 percent came from the wealthiest quintile. These trends are even more pronounced in the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program, in which 40 percent of enrollees come from the wealthiest neighborhoods-a number that has increased substantially over the past four years.
- American soldiers are more educated than their peers. A little more than 1 percent of enlisted personnel lack a high school degree, compared to 21 percent of men 18-24 years old, and 95 percent of officer accessions have at least a bachelor’s degree.
- Contrary to conventional wisdom, minorities are not overrepresented in military service. Enlisted troops are somewhat more likely to be white or black than their non-military peers. Whites are proportionately represented in the officer corps, and blacks are overrepresented, but their rate of overrepresentation has declined each year from 2004 to 2007. New recruits are also disproportionately likely to come from the South, which is in line with the history of Southern military tradition.
And from the American Forces Press Service,
…. On the socioeconomic side, the military is strongly middle class, Gilroy said. More recruits are drawn from the middle class and fewer are coming from poorer and wealthier families. Recruits from poorer families are actually underrepresented in the military, Gilroy said.
Other trends are that the number of recruits from wealthier families is increasing, and the number of recruits from suburban areas has increased. This also tracks that young men and women from the middle class are serving in the military.
Young men and women from urban areas are not volunteering, Gilroy said. In fact, urban areas provide far fewer recruits as a percentage of the total population than small towns and rural areas.
I think we conservatives should all be happy that the Obama administration is in complete and irreparable meltdown. We can add to Hugh Hewitt’s great rant the one judge in California overturning 7,000,000 voters, to Maxine “Marxist” Waters and Charlie “in a pinch” Rangels ethics charges, to the Commander in Chief supporting a Mosque and Imam who has terrorist ties and dirty money to build his project with. This is all coming up to bite the Dems in the ass in November. I already posted this, but look at all this with the eyes that the Dems are sealing their defeat.
Here is how Politico.com wrote about it:
President Barack Obama’s endorsement of the Ground Zero mosque has transformed an emotion-laden local dispute in New York into a nationwide debate overnight, setting nervous Democrats on edge and creating potentially dramatic political implications in the upcoming midterm elections.
Key Republicans think the president bought himself some political trouble by using his White House bully pulpit to announce his support for a controversial plan to build an Islamic center just blocks from nearly 3,000 people died in Manhattan at the hands of Islamic extremists on 9/11.
Obama has put Democrats from coast to coast in the tough position of having to weigh in on an issue they’d rather duck. Prior to his speech, a few candidates tried with limited success to make the proposed mosque an issue outside of the tri-state area around New York City. Now any Democrat facing an election – less than three months away – can be put in the uncomfortable position of being asked to reject the president’s stand or side with him.
Several New York Democrats either involved with members of Congress or strategists said privately that they are not happy about the speech because it puts them in a bind. A recent CNN polls found two-thirds of Americans oppose building the mosque in the neighborhood around Ground Zero.
They’re afraid to be up front in the same way as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who got national press for supporting the mosque but who is not facing a reelection campaign.
It’s going to be one of the most memorable – and debated statements – of the president’s first two years in office….
Besides all the presidents tying together bad lines of non-related thinking. He also said something about U.S. History at this speech that was just flat wrong! A twisting of the truth.
Embattled Rep. Maxine Waters on Friday blamed the Bush administration for her ethics problems — saying she had to intervene with the Treasury Department on behalf of minority-owned banks seeking federal bailout funds — including one tied to her husband — because the Treasury Department wouldn’t schedule its own appointments.
The California Democrat said in a Capitol Hill news conference — an event rarely held during a congressional recess — that she reached out to then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson in late 2008 when his department failed to respond to the National Bank Association’s request for a meeting.
“The question at this point should not be why I called Secretary Paulson, but why I had to,” she said. “The question at this point should be why a trade association representing over 100 minority banks could not get a meeting at the height of the crisis.”
But [*long drawn out emphasis added*] the House ethics committee, which is investigating Waters for allegedly improperly using her position for personal gain, says in its report of charges that when the meeting was held, the officers of only one bank came — OneUnited.
That’s a problem for Waters since her husband, Sidney Williams, served as a member of OneUnited’s board of directors from January 2004 until April 2008, and was a stockholder in the bank….
….Waters, who holds a senior position on the Financial Services Committee, is the second prominent Democrat lawmaker facing ethics charges during a fiery election season. New York Rep. Charles Rangel of New York is facing 13 charges, including failing to disclose assets and income and delayed payment of federal taxes.