31.5.09

Obama "Shocked and Outraged" by Tiller Murder: What About Innocent Lives Lost to Abortion?

By John W. Lillpop


Vigilante justice is never acceptable, even when the target is an immoral and unethical physician who, for a fee, will crush open the skull of a soon to be born fetus and claw the innocent being's brains out until death ensues.

As reported at Yahoo.news, in part:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090531/ap_on_re_us/us_tiller_shooting


"Dr. George Tiller, one of the nation's few providers of late-term abortions despite decades of protests and attacks, was shot and killed Sunday in a church where he was serving as an usher.

The gunman fled, but a 51-year-old suspect was detained some 170 miles away in suburban Kansas City three hours after the shooting, Wichita Deputy Police Chief Tom Stolz said."


People on both sides of the debate can agree that the man who murdered Dr. Tiller must be punished to the full extent of the law, including use of the death penalty if warranted by the facts and law in Kansas.

President Obama made his feelings known when he said, as reported in the same reference, that he was "shocked and outraged" by the murder. "However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence," he said.

No one can fault the president for those sentiments; however, why is there no "shock and outrage" from people like Barack Obama about the 50 million innocent lives that have been willfully terminated since the Supreme Court sanctioned abortion with the Roe v. Wade ruling in 1973?

Why are liberals more concerned with promoting death than receiving and celebrating God's greatest gift of all time, Human life?

How to Say Ku Klux Klan in Spanish? La Raza!








By John W. Lillpop



Once again, American patriot and intellectual giant Tom Tancredo has acted boldly and without fear in advocating the truth.

As reported, in part, at Politico, Tancredo said the following:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/Tancredo_La_Raza_is_Latino_KKK.html


"If you belong to an organization called La Raza, in this case ... which is from my point of of view any way ... nothing more than a ... Latino KKK without the hoods or the nooses. If you belong to something like that in a way that's going to convince me and a lot of other people that it's got nothing to do with race. Even though the logo of La Raza is "All for the race. Nothing for the rest." What does that tell you?"

Bueno!


Now that is what you call real transparency. Are you listening, President Obama?

Tancredo's point is a great one: Given her racist words AND membership in La Raza, Sonia Sotomayor is clearly unfit to serve on the Supreme Court, or any other court for that matter.

Ms. Sotomayor should withdraw her name from consideration or be forced to by President Obama. She should also be disbarred and banned from serving in any capacity in the judiciary at any level.

To allow a known racist to serve as a judge is nearly as bad as being a racist.

America can do better--much better!

Just say no to, "For the race everything, outside the race nothing!"

And just say no, hell no!, Soto must go!

Kalifornia's Voodoo Economics: State Parks Out, Illegal Aliens In!










By John W. Lillpop


Governor Schwarzenegger and Sacramento Democrats have repeatedly refused to acknowledge, much less confront, the $10.8 billion gorilla in California's state budget.

That is the annual cost of proving public services (from education to health care) to illegal aliens who have no business being here.

Schwarzenegger dismisses those who breach the subject as anti-immigrant ignoramuses, and claims that illegal aliens are not the problem.

Apparently, state parks maintained for citizens and those here legally are the problem, which is why Schwarzenegger is set to shut down 90 percent of those treasures just in time for the summer vacation season.

Other liberals have decided that proposition 13, the so- called taxpayer revolt passed in 1978, is the source of all evil and budget shortfalls.

The governor and his co-conspirators in Sacramento are missing a major point: We the People are fed with up the invasion of our once bountiful state by illegal aliens and by programs that reward invaders with free health care, welfare, food stamps, and education.

In 1994, by a margin of 2-1, Californians passed Proposition 187 which, had it not been sabotaged by a judge and liberal politicians, would have solved the illegal alien problem by cutting off services to illegals 15 years ago.

Had 187 been enforced as the people voted, California's annual deficits would have been dramatically reduced, perhaps even eliminated.

Until the governor addresses the $10.8 billion illegal alien issue head on, he and the Democrats will never be taken seriously when it comes to the budget.

Perhaps it is time for another go at Prop. 187? The truth is that the measure would pass, probably by more than 2-1, if presented to the people for a decision in 2009.

30.5.09

Does America Need an Old Spinster with Diabetes & Bad Temper on the SCOTUS?









Satire by John W. Lillpop

Sonia Sotomayor may have a brilliant intellect and a fair to meddling understanding of the law. But, is that enough?

Pressing questions about her personal life are starting to surface and must be answered before this circus moves on to the next freak.

She must respond to these pertinent questions:

Why did she divorce and not remarry?

Did she have children out of wedlock? How many and where are they now?

Is she a lesbian or bisexual?

Is she a registered Democrat? Did she vote for Barack Obama?

Can she produce a valid birth certificate? In English?

How much insulin does she inject every day? Is her judgment impaired during diabetic seizures?

Has she ever been to a beauty parlor as a patron? How many years ago? Why did she stop going?

Is she adamantly opposed to lipstick and makeup because of religious convictions or because of feminist belligerence?

Has she ever considered a career in door-to-door sales for brillo scrub pads? She has the head for it!

Other than the Race card, what card games does she enjoy playing?

Why has she no grandchildren?

Oscar Collazo was a Puerto Rican nationalist who attempted to assassinate President Harry S. Truman. What connection if any does Sotomayor have to the murderer from Puerto Rico? Can she prove that?

Has she always paid all her taxes?

Other than family and friends, has the nominee ever employed illegal aliens?

Can she provide transcripts for all formal confessions she has given to a Catholic Father over the past 10 years?

Inquiring minds demand to know: Just whole in the holy hell is Sonia Sotomayor?

Just a "Poor Choice" of Words?









By John W. Lillpop

According to President Obama, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor is guilty of nothing more serious than a "poor choice of words" when she said:

""I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

As reported at the Washington Times, in part, the White House attempted to dismiss Sotomayer's racist rhetoric:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/30/nominees-remark-poor-word-choice/?source=newsletter_must-read-stories-today_photo_feature

"The White House said Friday that Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor now regrets saying in 2001 that a Hispanic woman would tend to arrive at a 'better conclusion' in making legal decisions than a white male.

"Her word choice in 2001 was poor," spokesman Robert Gibbs said, seeking to settle what has become an early stumbling point for President Obama's nominee as she prepares for her Senate confirmation battle. "


Excuse me? We are talking about a nominee whom the president described as "brilliant" and yet she is not sufficiently bright to avoid words riddled with the passions of racism and bigotry?

Either Sotomayor is far less than "brilliant" than Obama believes, or she is an unrepentant racist.

Regardless of which happens to be true, this unwise Latina simply does not belong on the Supreme Court.

Surely, that cannot be all that difficult to understand?

For example, what if the record of Chief Justice John Roberts revealed a similarly poor choice of words? What if Roberts was on videotape saying:

""Because of educational and cultural advantages, I would hope that a wise white male with the richness of his education and experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a female person of color who hasn't lived that life."

Would John Roberts have been confirmed to the Supreme Court with that quote in his dossier? Even more to the point, would he still be employable in the legal profession?

Surely, President Obama knows full well that the furor is not about Sotomayor's choice of words. Rather it is about the racism and hatred that underlies those un-American and unprofessional blatherings.

With so many genuinely "brilliant" and ethical judges to choose from, why is Obama trying to saddle America with a woman who lacks the sensitivity and insight needed to serve on the highest court of the land?

More critically, why is this president intent on supplanting the gold standard of judicial temperament and restraint with "empathy" rooted in racism and sexism?

Once again, the liberal "solution" is to rely on the travesty of affirmative action and PC quotas rather than excellence.

29.5.09

Are Tanning Booths Racist?







Satire By John W. Lillpop


Think back to the last time you visited a local tanning booth. If your memory serves you correctly, you will realize that tanning stores are exclusively white, save the occasional person of color swabbing the floors, administering rum, or answering telephones.

What's up with the lack of diversity?

Why are there no technological miracles, which would allow a Hispanic like Sonia Sotomayor to slip under a bright red light for twenty minutes or so, and come with all the yellow radiance and skin texture of Miss Japan, 1952?

A little yellow might help Sotomayor think twice before uttering foolish remarks based on sexism and racism. Mind you, thinking twice is NOT a trait commonly found in intemperate, hot headed Latinos!

How is it that Maxine Waters is denied the opportunity to plop down in a booth for $10,000 and emerge 30 minutes later with Madonna's chalky-white hue?

Why is this blatant discrimination allowed to continue under the fascist regime of Barack Obama?

Truth will out: Tanning booths are racist holes that deny women of color their Constitutional right to be white, if only ever so briefly.

That right to be white, incidentally, is on the very same page of the Constitution that guarantees a woman the right to abortion AND which details, in glorious specificity, the separation of church and state.

I confess to not really understanding the whole tanning mania.

For instance, my ex-wife was blessed with the complexion and soft, lily-white skin one would expect in one of the Lord's fairest and most blessed handmaidens.

Combined with her ocean -blue eyes and golden hair, Mrs. Lill was the envy of the soap opera demographic in our humble neighborhood.

Should I live to be 100, I will never understand why Mrs. Lill deliberately nuked her natural beauty in a damn tanning booth just to end up with the skin pigmentation of an abused illegal alien!

The fact that Mrs. Lill paid a huge sum of money for the browning makes it all the more mysterious and painful!

Radicalism Running Amuck: Black Panthers in, Returning Vets Out!








By John W. Lillpop

In the new Obama paradigm for justice, the Department of Homeland Security warns that returning veterans, those who oppose illegal immigration, higher taxes, uncontrolled spending, gun control, and infanticide are "right wing extremists," scoundrels of the sort that government has an obligation to keep a wary eye on.

Conversely, intimidating voters with violence on Election Day appears to be acceptable, provided the intimidator is black and an Obama supporter.

As reported by the Washington Times, in part:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/29/career-lawyers-overruled-on-voting-case/?feat=home_cube_position1

"Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for self-defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.
"The incident - which gained national attention when it was captured on videotape and distributed on YouTube - had prompted the government to sue the men, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring would-be voters with the weapon, racial slurs and military-style uniforms.

"Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as "the most blatant form of voter intimidation" that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago.

"The lawyers also had ascertained that one of the three men had gained access to the polling place by securing a credential as a Democratic poll watcher, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Washington Times.
The career Justice lawyers were on the verge of securing sanctions against the men earlier this month when their superiors ordered them to reverse course, according to interviews and documents. The court had already entered a default judgment against the men on April 20."


"Blatant form of voter intimidation?" How can that possibly be, given the fact that people of color are genetically incapable of racism and discrimination?

If any good comes from this outrageous behavior, perhaps it will be in the form of an urgent message to all decent and honorable Americans:

We the People must acknowledge that our government no longer respects the values and freedoms that this nation were founded on and which make America special.

Be afraid--very afraid!

jwl 5-29

A "Progressive" Checkist for Culling Out Racists










By John W. Lillpop

As a point of reference, racist is formally defined as follows:

Racist - a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others.

In the on-line dictionary from which that definition was derived, the word "white" was omitted before the word "person," no doubt the product of biased editing by a red-necked scalawag from the Old South still immersed in denial.

Keeping the formal definition above in mind, compare it to the applications used by politically correct progressives, ever watchful for wedge issues with which to divide the American people.

According to progressives, you are a racist if you:

*Are on record as believing that American culture, including contributions made by angry white Christian men, has produced the greatest and most successful society in human history;

*Get goose bumps and shivers up and down your spine when Old Glory is feted or when the Star Spangled Banner is performed;

*Believe that America is a sovereign nation and, as such, perfectly justified in securing our borders against invasion by illegal aliens and other criminals;

*Believe that the rule of law is a basic tenet of American democracy, and, as such, inviolable;

*Support enforcement of the Immigration Reform Control Act of 1986;

*Are proud of the English language, and support making English the official language of commerce, law, education, and culture in America;

*Oppose affirmative action, bilingualism and other reverse discrimination outrages;

*Believe that the federal government should prevent illegal aliens from taking over American streets to demand rights and benefits reserved for U.S. citizens;

*Believe that Uncle Sam has an obligation to round up and deport illegal aliens, particularly during time of war;

*Believe that legislation is urgently needed to prevent illegal aliens from using "anchor babies" to circumvent U.S. law;

*Adamantly oppose amnesty, defined as anything short of deportation;

*Regard "Sanctuary Cities" as serious violations of federal law that should cause city officials to be arrested and prosecutedl

*Believe that in-state tuition breaks, driver's licenses, and other progressive hand outs serve only to attract even more illegal aliens and should be unlawful;

*Oppose the use of taxpayer funds to print ballots, government information, and educational materials in languages other than English;

*Own two or more American flags and participate in tawdry displays of excessive Americanism on Flag Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, and other patriotic holidays;

* Have knowingly registered or, perish the thought, voted Republican within the past 50 years; and


*Are Caucasian, or look suspiciously like a Caucasian.

Please note that this checklist does not apply to African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, or Native Americans because people from those racial and ethnic backgrounds are genetically incapable of being racists!





jwl
5-29

Gas Prices Soar: Media and Dems in Tank for Obama?









Satire by John W. Lillpop

To the few Americans who still have jobs to drive to, and to the unwashed millions who must motor about to pick up unemployment checks, foreclosure notices, welfare payments, food stamps, and other fruits of CHANGE gone amuck, there is an eerie undoing of the law of supply and demand taking place at gasoline pumps these days.

As reported, in part, at Yahoonews.com:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090529/wl_time/08599190144600


"Storage tankers across the globe may be brimming with oil that no one is buying because of the global economic downturn, but the traditional laws of supply and demand don't always apply to oil prices. Drivers have faced rising prices at the gas pump in recent months, as investors and oil-producing countries hoard supplies in anticipation of a global economic recovery later this year."

Back in the good old days--prior to noon, January 20, 2009, leftists like Barbara Boxer and Dennis Kucinich would be hogging the floor in their respective bodies of Congress to demand immediate investigations into the price gouging being ordered from the Oval Office by W. himself.

Liberals would bleed non-stop in front of C-Span cameras to demand that W. be impeached for his sleazy family ties to the kings and princes of Saudi Arabia.

All in all, it would be a festival of opportunity for the Left to lambaste Bush, Dick Cheney, Texas, the entire south, the Republican party, the 2nd Amendment, Exxon, Shell, SUVs, and that old gas bag himself, El Rushbo.

But that was then, this is now!

Since post-noon, January 20, We the People have been blessed with an omnipotent new age Messiah who: cares about the little guy, holds big oil companies in utter contempt, and believes that profits are the handiwork of the devil when it comes to the corporate board rooms of big oil and Republican auto dealerships.

Best of all, Obama has no family or spiritual ties to Saudi Arabia, right?





28.5.09

Rachel Maddow Zeroes In On a Lying Hypocrite Named Obama

By John W. Lillpop

Rachel Maddow of MSNBC is about as far to the left as is legal, and way beyond the point that is logical.

Still, despite her liberal bias she was able to see Barack Obama's hypocrisy and lies very clearly.

This YOUTUBE video says it all.






Obama Says "Now or Never" on Commie Scheme: Let's Give NEVER a Chance, Prez!














Satire By John W. Lillpop


There he goes again.

When is this Obama fellow going to grow up and realize that with the exception of illegal aliens, ACORN felons, and ding bats in the liberal zoo, no one wants his commie health care scheme.

As reported, in part, at Breitbart.com:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98FE3B00&show_article=1

"WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama warned Thursday that if Congress doesn't deliver health care legislation by the end of the year the opportunity will be lost, a plea to political supporters to pressure lawmakers to act.

"If we don't get it done this year, we're not going to get it done," Obama told supporters."


________________________

Promises, promises!

Socialized medicine is just one of the bizarre, far out leftist changes that Americans do not need or want. Other Obama agenda items that should be shredded immediately include these dillies:

Closure of Guantanamo Bay

Revocation of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

Reckless spending and higher taxes (including VAT)

"Stimulus" bills that stimulate nothing but earmarks frenzy

Amnesty for 12-40 million invading criminals

Government interference in private enterprise, support for corrupt labor unions

Nomination of a racist, sexist twit to the Supreme Court

Advocacy of a judge who does not understand the difference between legislative and judiciary

Resurrection of the "Fairness Doctrine" to stomp out conservative opinion

Kinder, gentler treatment of terrorists

For all of these, President Obama, give us NEVER!

Do it for the children.

Los Angeles Gay Community Takes on Brenda Lee!



Two allegedly gay body guards lift Ms. Lee (not an easy chore!) and prepare to place the hanging noose around her chubby, black throat.




SATIRE by John Lillpop

Although the media is reporting that Ms. Brenda Lee was forcibly removed from Los Angeles airport for trying to deliver a letter to President Obama, the truth is far more severe.


In the photo, two allegedly gay body guards (satire) lift Ms. Lee (not an easy chore!) and prepare to place the hanging noose around her chubby throat.

Her offense? Lee wanted to encourage Barack Obama to stand a stand FOR traditional marriage.

Those gay dudes sure play ruff and tumble here in the Golden State!

Satire. Repeat, satire. Get it?

27.5.09

How Do You Say "Bork" In Spanish?



























By John W. Lillpop


Robert Bork is described, in part, by Wikipedia as follows:

"Robert Heron Bork (born March 1, 1927) is a conservative American legal scholar who advocates the judicial philosophy of originalism. Bork formerly served as Solicitor General, acting Attorney General, and judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit."

*********

Because of his brilliant mind, scholarly achievements, and understanding of the proper Constitutional role of the judiciary as intended by the founding fathers, Bork was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Ronald Reagan in 1987.

*********

The narrative from Wikipedia continues:

"Within 45 minutes of Bork's nomination to the Court, Edward Kennedy took to the Senate floor with a strong condemnation of Bork in a nationally televised speech, declaring:

"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is -- and is often the only -- protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy... President Reagan is still our president. But he should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice."

*********

Kennedy chose to omit mention his fear that Bork would champion the cause of poor, innocent young women murdered by drowning at the hands of a drunken leftist senator who, because of his name and wealth, escaped virtually unscathed after leaving Mary Jo Kopechne to die at the bottom of a river.

It's called the Chappaquiddick incident and remains one of the most egregious examples of the abuse of wealth and power in our history.

Back to Robert Bork.

Because he believed so fervently that Congress, rather than the Courts, was responsible for making "policy," Bork's nomination was defeated and America lost a magnificent and powerful voice for judicial restraint.

In contrast to the brilliant legal scholar that was and is Robert Bork, President Obama has elected to nominate a racist, sexist Hispanic woman who has stated publicly that the proper role of the judiciary includes making "policy."

Sonia Sotomayor is also on record as saying, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

Surely, Sonia Sotomayor is not the best that you can do, President Obama? Where is the moderation of temperament and judicial restraint one seeks in a nominee?

Have those qualities been completely obliterated by the left's politically correct obsession with gender and race?

To Republicans in the Senate, the question of the day must be: How do you say Bork in Spanish?

Sonia Sotomayor: Another Wretched Legacy from the Bush Family


















By John W. Lillpop

While conservatives wring their hands in despair over the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the US Supreme Court, a quick peek at the resume of the nominee is in order.

Turns out that Sotomayor was nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by none other than President George H. W. Bush in 1991 and confirmed in 1992.

If confirmed to the US Supreme Court, Sotomayor will replace David Souter, another flaming liberal who made it to the highest court in the land courtesy of Bush 41.

Sotomayor is credited with remarking that policy is made in the courts, and "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

With the nation bursting at the seams with racial discord, President Obama selects a raving Hispanic racist and sexist, and does so only because of her ethnicity and gender!

How utterly brilliant. NOT!

Whatever happened to the "post-partisan" era that Obama promised?

Back to the collateral damage inflicted on America by Bush 41 and 43.

A review of their combined legacies reveals a startling pattern including:


* Two wars in Iraq, one in Afghanistan

* Two recessions, one depression

* Two economic meltdowns involving S& Ls and banks

* Open borders and 12-40 illegal aliens in America

* Election of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as US Presidents

Has there even been a more despicable father-son combination in the history of American politics?

Of course not!

Let the Bush legacies serve as a warning to real conservatives hither and yonder: There is so such thing as a conservative in the Bush family tree--no one named Bush should ever again be entrusted with an important role in the Republican party.

By the way, has anyone bothered to vet Sonia Sotomayor's birth certificate?

Or will she be the first illegal alien nominated to the Supreme Court by the first illegal alien to serve as president?

North Korea's Nuclear Tantrum: Wither America's Commander-in-Chief?

By John W. Lillpop

As reported, in part. at Yahoo.com, North Korea continues to make a mockery of Obamamania by pushing the nuclear envelope further and further into the face of America's alleged Commander-in-chief:

"SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea has restarted a weapons-grade nuclear plant and fired five short-range missiles in two days, news reports and South Korean officials said Wednesday, deepening the North's standoff with world powers following its latest nuclear test.

"The missile launches came as the U.N. Security Council debated possible new sanctions against the isolated communist nation for its nuclear test on Monday. Retaliatory options were limited, however, and no one was talking publicly about military action."


*****************************
Recognizing that America is now under the command of an uninformed leftist wuss, the North Koreans added to their frivolity by threatening to nuke South Korea.

As reported, in part, at Bloomberg.com:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=awBTCPe7S2gw&refer=worldwide

"North Korea threatened a military response to South Korean participation in a U.S.-led program to seize weapons of mass destruction, and said it will no longer abide by the 1953 armistice that ended the Korean War.

“The Korean People’s Army will not be bound to the Armistice Agreement any longer,” the official Korean Central News Agency said in a statement today. Any attempt to inspect North Korean vessels will be countered with “prompt and strong military strikes.”


**************************************************************
While North Korea runs undeterred and unafraid on the international stage, concerned folks everywhere wonder, "Wither America's Commander-in-Chief?"

In other words, just where is this Obama fellow and what is he doing to make every thing right?

For the record, President Obama was too preoccupied with destroying the Supreme Court and halving advertising budgets for auto firms to even notice the nuclear naughtiness coming from North Korea, or Iran for that matter.

It's called CHANGE, brother, and its all the rage, at least to America-hating leftists!

26.5.09

To Be Fair, Everyone Should be on the Supreme Court









Satire by John W. Lillpop

When you really think about it, the law (US Constitution) that established the Supreme Court is blatantly unfair, un-American, and, if adjudicated in today's leftist courts, unconstitutional.

This is so because in those mostly wrinkled old 18 hands lies the irreversible fate of over 300 million Americans, plus the impact of those Americans on the entire globe and its six billion residents.

How is that nine individuals are consecrated to lifetime positions of power with essentially zero accountability, from which they will decide how our youth are educated, how wealth can be garnered, what powers are conferred upon the president and Congress, the value of innocent unborn life, if separate but equal is really equal, and on and on?

Monumental questions that touch every aspect of life for all Americans are left to the dictates of nine un-elected dictators who can have their way for 50 years or longer without ever answering to We the People.

One wonders why the Founding Fathers did not even attempt to "spread the wealth" a bit when it comes to the powers of Supreme Court judges?

As it is, the romanticized notion that we Americans are empowered by virtue of self-governance is mocked by the Supreme Court.

Still, it is sort of cool that President Obama has nominated Sonya Sotomayor to the bench. If nothing else, Sotomayor gives Ruth Bade Ginsburg a sympathetic femi-nazi pal with whom to exchange recipes and juicy gossip!

jwl/sat/f

25.5.09

Scoring the Obama -Ahmadinejad Debate





































Satire by John W. Lillpop

Just who in the hell is that goofy tinhorn dictator with the big mouth and forked tongue whom is creating chaos with his radical and revolutionary agenda for change?

No, fellow conservatives, I am not referring to Barack Obama although he certainly matches most of the characteristics.

In fact, I am referring to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who rocked the world with his proposal to debate president Obama, face to face, at the UN.

As reported at bloomberg.com, in part:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a2WCDzDHASdk&refer=worldwide

"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who faces re-election next month, said he considers the dispute over his country’s nuclear program “over.”

"Ahmadinejad, at the press conference, also offered to debate U.S. President Barack Obama at the UN on “world problems and collective cooperation.”

As of this hour, no official word concerning rejection or acceptance of Ahmadinejad's challenge has been forthcoming from the White House.

However, an unidentified source, speaking on condition of anonymity, opined that Obama would be likely to accept the challenge in order advance the "opportunity for meaningful and mutually beneficial discussions between the two leaders."

According to the same sleazy source, the sole pre-conditions from Obama would be that accommodations be made for his teleprompter and that all discussions, including follow up questions from the media, be conducted in Arabic only.

Naturally, interest in the Obama-Ahmadinejad debate would be massive, with perhaps as many as two billion people tuning in to watch the action on television.

There would also be plenty of sidebar arguments as to who actually won the debate.

To assure uniformity and fairness, the Democratic National Committee in collaboration with FAIR and other objective Muslim organizations have released a guide for scoring the debate.

The guide consists of the following evaluations of the two individuals and their debate performance:

( )The extent to which the debater was able to build support for the premise that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, George Tenet, Donald Rumsfeld, and others in the Bush administration were guilty of war crimes for their participation in the illegal invasion and occupation of the sovereign nation of Iraq.

( )The quality of arguments made to convince the world that the Jewish bankers behind the current economic meltdown and depression in the U.S. were the same Jews who conspired to attack the World Trade Center and Pentagon on September 11.

( )The extent to which the debater was able to convince the world that water boarding and other EITs used by the CIA, with the approval of Nancy Pelosi, against helpless Jihadists at GITMO were more heinous and a greater violation of basic human rights than the videotaped beheading of lying Jews like reporter Daniel Pearl, and

( )The ability of the debater to make the case that the nation of Israel and all her citizens should be transferred to Guantanamo Bay as soon as the innocent detainees currently held captive on the island can be moved to San Francisco, Chicago, New York City, Los Angeles, and other American cities known for compassion and diversity.

As of now, professional gamblers in Las Vegas and other major betting venues see the debate as close to even money, with a slight edge going to Obama if former President Dick Cheney continues to speak out on national television.

Obama Inherits "Axis of Evil" and "Road Map" Messes from W.

By John W. Lillpop

Despite President Obama's best efforts to remain cool, calm and collected while confronting world calamities created by, and left behind by, former President George W. Bush, playing "nuclear chicken" with both Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are starting to exact a toll.

North Korea brought a sour note to the President's Memorial Day holiday by conducting a powerful underground nuclear test followed by test firing of several short range missiles, all during the same news cycle.

Thus, in spite of Obama's "speak softly and carry no stick" CHANGE mantra, North Korea continues to march relentlessly towards nuclear mayhem, unafraid and undeterred.

The story is pretty much the same in the Islamic state of Iran, another mess left in Obama's To Do bin by the president whom liberals regard as a fundamentalist Christian nut ball on steroids.

Under the shaky hand and unsteady mind of President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran continues to work toward becoming a "nukkler" power.

Ahmadinejad takes his nation down that slippery slope with little or no regard for America's precocious leader who actually believes that he can remedy thousands of years of feuding and blood letting between Jews and Muslims with simplistic dialogue coaching and "make nice" diplomacy.

Moreover, the disemboweling of Obamamania is not limited to "bad Axis" on the world stage. Indeed, Israel, one of America's most dependable allies, is boldly proclaiming its recovery from Obamamania, and doing so loudly and clearly.

After receiving marching orders from President Obama which would have caused Israel to unilaterally surrender to the Palestinians, learn to live with a nuclear Iran, and accept the future of Judaism in the middle east as quite bleak, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu discovered that excrement is not Kosher, thus he declined to further ingest said substance just to assuage Obama.

In defiantly refusing Obama's orders, Netanyahu was quoted as saying, "The demand for a total stop to building is not something that can be justified and I don't think that anyone here at this table accepts it," the PM told his cabinet, referring to Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Even like minded leftists from his own party have parted ways with President Obama when it come to his foolish plans to close GITMO without having thought the process through.

Transferring 248 world class terrorists from an isolated naval base in Cuba to the U.S. homeland is change of the sort that America can definitely do without.

A stinging 90-6 rebuke in the US Senate put Obama's ill begotten GITMO plans on hold, and forced the president to duck "friendly fire" from otherwise adoring leftists.

The decline and fall of Obamamania in foreign lands makes perfect sense. After all, this president seems obsessed with dismantling America's defenses against terrorism; defenses, by the way, which have kept the nation safe for seven plus years.

Why should any foreign leader, whether friend or foe, respect a president who is committed to making his own nation weaker, more vulnerable?

The Obama presidency will surely be recorded in the annals of American political history as the greatest snake oil fraud ever perpetrated on a presumably well educated and sophisticated electorate.

With barely more than the charisma of a rock star going for him, Barack Obama managed to convince over 65 million voters that he possessed the intelligence, mental toughness, determination, and leadership skills needed to protect and defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic while serving as the nation's Commander-in-chief.

As painful as it is to admit anything even approaching agreement with Hillary Rodham Clinton, one must agree that the Hildabeast got it right on Obama:

This is a man without any notable accomplishment or experience.

Alas, he is NOT the one who should be taking those 3 AM red phone calls.

Has Obamamania Given Way to the "Rodney Dangerfield" Presidency?









Satire by John w. Lillpop

In the just over 120 days since the fate of 300 million Americans and the totality of western civilization itself were thrust upon the unqualified, yet defiantly arrogant, community organizer from Illinois, America's chickens are coming home to roost, to paraphrase a Wright who was hardly ever right.

The latest example that Barack Obama is quickly becoming more like Rodney Dangerfield than an omnipotent Messiah comes from North Korea where the very sick Kim Yong Ill has conducted a powerful underground nuclear test AND has test fired short range missiles during the same news cycle.

Thus, in spite of tough talk from the President of the United States and his ferocious Secretary of State, an amiable sort completely in over her head, North Korea marches towards nuclear mayhem, unafraid and undeterred.

As Dangerfield would say, " I tell ya, I get no respect!"

The story is pretty much the same in the Islamic state of Iran, another "Axis of Evil" that President George W. Bush tried to warn the world about in 2002, only to be ridiculed and disparaged by liberals as a fundamentalist Christian nut on steroids.

Under the shaky hand and unsteady mind of President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran continues to work toward becoming a "nukkler" power.

Ahmadinejad drives his nation in that perilous direction with little or no regard for our very well tanned Rodney Dangerfield president who actually believes he can dissolve thousands of years of feuding between Jews and Muslims with dialogue and diplomacy.

Moreover, the disemboweling of Obamamania is not limited to "bad Axis" on the world stage. Indeed, Israel, one of America's most dependable allies, is proudly proclaiming its recovery from Obamamania, and is doing so loudly and clearly.

After receiving marching orders from President Obama about surrendering to the Palestinians, abiding a nuclear Iran, and accepting the rather bleak future of Judaism with good cheer, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided that excrement is not Kosher, thus he declined to further ingest said substance on behalf of Israel.

In defiantly refusing Obama's orders, Netanyahu was quoted as saying, "The demand for a total stop to building is not something that can be justified and I don't think that anyone here at this table accepts it," the PM told his cabinet, referring to Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Even like minded leftists from his own party have parted ways with President Obama when it came to his foolish plans to close GITMO without having thought the process through.

Transferring 248 world class terrorists from an isolated naval base in Cuba to the U.S. homeland is change of the sort that America can definitely do without.

A stinging 90-6 rebuke in the US Senate put Obama's ill begotten GITMO plans on hold, and forced the president to duck "friendly fire" from otherwise adoring leftists.

The decline and fall of Obamamania in foreign lands makes perfect sense. After all, this president seems obsessed with dismantling America's defenses against terrorism; defenses, by the way, which have kept the nation safe for seven plus years.

Why should any foreign leader, whether friend or foe, respect a president who is committed to making his own nation weaker, more vulnerable?

The Obama presidency will surely be recorded in the annals of American political history as the greatest snake oil scheme ever perpetrated on a presumably educated and sophisticated electorate.

With barely more than the charisma of a rock star going for him, Barack Obama managed to convince over 65 million voters that he possessed the requisite intelligence, mental toughness, determination, and leadership skills needed to protect and defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic while functioning as the nation's Commander-in-chief.

As painful as it is to admit anything even approaching agreement with Hillary Rodham Clinton, one must concede that the Hildabeast got it right on Obama:

This is a man without any notable accomplishment or experience.

Alas, he is NOT the one who should be taking those 3 AM red phone calls.

24.5.09

Pelosi in China to Discuss Warming, Or to Escape CIA Heat?

















Satire by John W. Lillpop

After driving her rock-bottom approval ratings down even further, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi escaped to China where she is not all that well known, AND where hardly anyone can understand a word she utters.

Being indecipherable is critical to the future of the 69-year-old granny-Speaker because it gives her a built in excuse for advancing multiple versions of the same story.

While In China, Pelosi is free to make all sorts of outlandish and contradictory claims about whether or not she was briefed by the CIA about water boarding, why she did not immediately report her concerns to the Justice Department, and how she was lied to and deceived by the man with the lowest IQ to have ever exhaled in the White House, that being former president George W. Bush.

Pelosi's ploy works because she can always claim that the Chinese press mistranslated her remarks, even though most of the press are more articulate in English than the bug eyed air head from San Francisco.

As reported at Yahoo.news, in part:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090524/wl_asia_afp/chinausclimaterightscongresslead_20090524135128

"BEIJING (AFP) – US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a longtime critic of Beijing's rule over Tibet and its rights record, arrived in China on Sunday for a trip focused on energy and climate change.
"US embassy spokeswoman Susan Stevenson confirmed Pelosi had arrived in Shanghai but could not say who the top US official was going to meet in the country's financial hub.

"Pelosi is scheduled to attend a clean energy forum in Beijing on Tuesday along with Senator John Kerry, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Other details of her itinerary were not immediately known."

Strange, is it not, that Pelosi spokeswoman Susan Stevenson cannot say who the person third in line for succession to the U.S. presidency is "going to meet in the country's financial hub," and could not provide other details about the Speaker's itinerary?

Wild guess: The Democrat Party is paying to have Pelosi's mouth permanently sewn shut so as to prevent a repeat of the PR drivel she slurped over the past two weeks, OR she is being fitted for a teleprompter similar to the one that keeps President Obama from being transparent or truthful.

Either way, Pelosi is definitely on a mission to escape the heat that she brought upon herself with those zany and inconsistent statements about CIA briefings.

Dishonoring the Memory of Memorial Day













By John W. Lillpop

As originally conceived, Memorial Day was more than just a day off with pay, barbecued hot dogs, slow-pitch softball and ice-cold beer.

Indeed, the last Monday in each May was set aside to commemorate all U.S. men and women who lost their lives while serving in the military and, whom, while so doing, helped preserve the liberties and freedoms that bring felicity to the American experience.

In order to fully appreciate those who gave their all for the grand American experiment, patriots should take time away from the BBQ grills, beer, and softball diamonds long enough to ponder the impact that President Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress are likely to have on our democracy, values and way of life.

Specifically, would those American heroes who sacrificed so much be as willing to risk life and limb for a president and Congress that:

Ridicules and shuns the faith and values upon which this great nation was founded?

Speaks critically of America while on foreign soil, even stooping so low as to apologize for our values and elected leaders?

Considers returning veterans "right-wing extremists" along with those who oppose infanticide, gun control measures that violate the 2nd Amendment, out of control spending and taxes,and invasions of American sovereignty and soil by illegal aliens from third-world, failed states?

Bows before foreign kings and declares that America is "not a Christian" nation?

Deliberately neuters homeland security measures, which have kept the nation safe following the most deadly attack in U.S. history?

Jeopardizes Americans in order to bestow "kinder, gentler" treatment on brutal terrorists completely committed to destroying the United States and its allies?

Seeks to enact a "Fairness Doctrine" to choke off free speech, particularly dissenting opinions critical of the Obama administration and Democrat Congress?

Considers "empathy" more important than judicial restraint and strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution in selecting Supreme Court nominees?

Seeks to replace capitalism and free markets with universal health care, rigid government control of private businesses, and other socialist schemes long ago proven fiscally ineffective?

Calls the enforcement of immigration laws "un-American" and accuses the CIA of lying and deliberately misleading the Congress?











God Bless those who gave their lives that We the People might survive while bundled in liberty.

God willing, Americans will honor their memories by taking our nation back, and by demanding sanity, common sense, and morality in those we elect to serve We the People in the future.

Have a Blessed Memorial Day!

23.5.09

Obama's Disingenuous Promise to Youth Serving in U.S. Military


















By John W. Lillpop

Seeking to reassure increasingly queasy kooks on the far left as to his anti-war credentials, President Obama pledged to send American troops into harm's way only when absolutely necessary.

As reported, in part, at Yahoo.com:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090522/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_naval_academy_11


"ANNAPOLIS, Md. – President Barack Obama promised graduating midshipmen at the U.S. Naval Academy on Friday that, as their commander in chief, he will only send them "into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary."

"I will only send you into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary, and with the strategy, the well-defined goals, the equipment and the support that you need to get the job done," the president told more than 1,000 graduates during a sun-splashed ceremony at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium."


Unfortunately, the president's message is fraught with deception, Constitutional fraud, and petty partisanship.

To begin with, Obama's "promise" implies that a previous president(s) dispatched young men and women into harm's way when doing so was unnecessary.

To whom might Obama be referring?

Perhaps he was reminding midshipmen of President Clinton's inclination to launch a few rockets hither and yonder when news headlines became too cluttered with allegations of presidential sexual misconduct in the Oval office?

No, that would be a slap in the face of America's "first black President." Not prudent.

It is far more likely that Obama was taking yet another petty partisan swipe at the man who kept America safe and secure for nearly eight years following the 9.11 terrorist attack.

That would, of course, be the honorable George W. Bush whom has apparently taken up permanent residency in the muddled psyche of Barack Obama.

As to Constitutional fraud, as any scholarly professor, or former professor, of Constitutional law will attest, declarations of war are the sole province of the U.S. Congress.

Which means that even if he wished to do, President Obama would not be authorized to send troops into harm's way without congressional approval.

It's called Constitutional balance of power and co-equal branches of government, Mr. President, and is a fascinating subject to read about should you have some spare time.

Finally, President Obama's speech was riddled with deceit as he and his liberal colleagues in Congress plot to cut the defense budget by at least 20 percent, perhaps more.

By emasculating the U.S. military, scores of billions of dollars can be diverted to funding amnesty for the 12-40 million illegal aliens whom Obama and liberals are counting on to vote Democratic in the 2010 mid-term elections.

Just how is it that a presidential speech fraught with deception, Constitutional fraud, and partisan sniping is somehow CHANGE that America needs?

Barack Obama's non-stop Mea Culpa--For W. Bush!

Satire by John W. Lillpop

During his two-term presidency, George W. Bush was often faulted for not owning up to his mistakes and admitting his failings.

If Democrats had had their way, W. would have spent his entire eight years in office doing nothing but apologizing, rather than wandering out of the Oval Office now and again to muck up the planet even further.

Whereas W. was disinclined to admit his mistakes, President Obama is more than willing to apologize, and apologize again, and apologize again, to anyone who will listen.

Indeed, Obama has become quite skilled at apologizing-- for W.'s mistakes!

Were one to take Obama seriously (not likely for anyone with a memory going back at least 30 days), W. is personally to blame for global warming, all category 5 hurricanes to ever haunt the world, the economic meltdown, the housing crisis, the imminent collapse of Social Security and Medicare, all budget deficits to date as well as all forecast through the year 2050, the Mexican swine flu, the decline and fall of the domestic auto industry, lack of cures for AIDS and breast cancer, California's descent into a third-world cesspool, greed and sloth on Wall Street, kids who cannot read their high school diplomas, the SUV craze, excessive bovine flatulence, Al Gore's depression and 57" waist, Bill Clinton's wonky heart, the Enron scandal, the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), Lance Armstrong's trouble with drugs in France, Barney Frank's inability to find a nice young Jewish boy to marry and settle down with in south Texas, rampant obesity, Ted Kennedy's brain cancer, overly smoky BBQ grills, all of those awful lies told to Nancy Pelosi by the CIA, strained U.S. relations with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and, now, that awful mess at Guantanamo Bay which Obama proposes to fix by moving 248 of the most notorious murderers in the world to America's bedroom communities.

The bottom line question: When will Barack Obama grow up and assume his rightful responsibility as U.S. President?

And if, perish the thought, something untoward should afflict W., whom would Obama blame for his own mediocrity, incompetence, and arrogance?

22.5.09

Making We the People of America Less Safe: Change We Need?

By John W. Lillpop


One of the oddest items on President Obama's CHANGE agenda is his unflinching (bone headed?) obsession with trashing polices which have kept America safe and secure for nigh onto eight years.

According to Obama and the Left, shock and awe should be replaced with talk and coo in dealing with Islamofascists who would gleefully cut your throat from ear to ear for no reason other than your standing as an "infidel," meaning anyone not committed to Jihad against all non-Muslims.

As reported, in part, at Politico:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22804.html#ixzz0GI4H7yQP&B

"President Barack Obama declared defiantly Thursday that the U.S. "went off course" in fighting terrorism over the past eight years, and said his policies will "better protect" the country against al Qaeda."

What in the hell can the president possibly mean by "went off course" and "better protect?"

With all due respect, Mr. President, there have been NO attacks on American soil since September 11, 2001.

How can anyone reasonably conclude that preventing another terrorist attack is going "off course"? Or that being perfect signals a need to " better protect"?

True, American policies have pissed off and scared some Jihad dudes out of their wits as a result of Extreme Interrogation Techniques (EITs), including the politically incorrect practice of water boarding.

However, thanks to the policies of former President George W. Bush, as articulated so very well in recent months by former VP Dick Cheney, Los Angeles is still standing.

Therein lies the real problem for Obama and the left: Their bitter hatred for George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and the Left's wicked compulsion to usurp everything that the Bush administration accomplished, even if positive and beneficial.

Keeping America safe and secure IS the hall mark achievement of the Bush-Cheney terms, which makes it ripe for attack from the left, regardless of how illogical and pointless.

From the same reference as above, President Obama added these words, in part:

"Decisions that were made over the last eight years established an ad hoc legal approach for fighting terrorism that was neither effective nor sustainable – a framework that failed to rely on our legal traditions and time-tested institutions; that failed to use our values as a compass," Obama said. "And that is why I took several steps upon taking office to better protect the American people."

Neither effective nor sustainable, Mr. President? Excuse the impertinence, but those decisions have been effective in keeping our nation attack free.

Why is successfully protecting the American people so offensive, other than the fact that the purveyors of protection were mostly Republicans?

PLAYING THE "V" CARD

On Friday, President Obama continued his assault on the Bush administration's perfect record since 9/11 by playing the "V"--values--card.

As reported at breitbart, in part:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.bd0713f4765981d1edbe5b522ce08354.3e1&show_article=1

"President Barack Obama Friday warned America risked its security when it compromised its values, seeking support for his bid to sketch a new legal framework for anti-terror policies.

"We uphold our fundamental principles and values not just because we choose to, but because we swear to -- not because they feel good, but because they help keep us safe," Obama told 30,000 graduating navy cadets and family members.

"When America strays from our values, it not only undermines the rule of law, it alienates us from our allies, it energizes our adversaries and it endangers our national security and the lives of our troops."

By that logic, no doubt gleaned from sitting though thousands of brain washing "sermons" delivered by Reverend Jeremiah Wright, those airplanes were rammed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon because America "strayed from our values."

America's evil come home to roost, to paraphrase Wright.

By Obama's logic, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks planned to level Los Angeles because of America's a shortfall in values, right?

Again, with all due respect to the president, two of the most important "values" to most Americans are safety and security.

Dismantling the policies that have delivered those qualities to America is profoundly idiotic, and quite possibly, treasonous!

Bay Area Bleeding Hearts Lament Defeat of Higher Taxes








Satire by John W. Lillpop

Following California's rip-roaring Tea Party at the polls Tuesday, newspapers in the Bay Area have been inundated with letters from bleeding heart liberals aghast at the very idea that paying higher taxes is not a source of orgiastic joy for all potent adults.

Two letters (partially repeated below) from the May 22 edition of the San Francisco Chronicle illustrate the pain and suffering that lower taxes can inflict on those in possession of a liberal mindset:

From bleeding heart number 1:

"I beg the governor and the Legislature: Please, raise taxes - my taxes and those of everyone who can afford them, including corporations - so that I can contribute to the essential operations of the state of California."

Bleeding heart number 2 complained that the ballot did not include a proposal to raise gasoline taxes:

"The only additional choice which should have been available is to be able to vote to raise the state gas tax by 50 cents or so.

Without doing the math, I'm sure that this would go a long way toward financing the budget shortfall. Also, since we all can agree that California's state and city roads are not in tip-top shape, shouldn't the gas tax at least pay for all ongoing needed maintenance?"


Bleeding heart 2 got one thing right: "Not doing the math" is essential when arguing for higher taxes!

After reading these weepy lamentations, I was driven to respond with all of the charity and compassion available to a mean spirited, right-wing extremist.

Hence this letter to the editor:

"Dear SF Chronicle Letters Editor:

"Bleeding heart numbers 1 and 2 (Letters May 22)should co-found a Foundation Against Reduced Taxes (FART) to campaign for higher taxes on income, gasoline, sales, luxury, death, moon bats, vehicle, entertainment, small business, large business, medium business, and any aspect of living or dying that Democrat politicians have overlooked in their tax and spend mania.

"It goes without saying that FART should NOT be tax exempt, although bleeding hearts 1 and 2 should be unpaid volunteers and should be personally responsible for paying taxes on behalf of FART.

"FART should call for another special election to allow like-minded bleeding hearts throughout California to voluntarily sign up for higher taxes.

"Call it the anti-tea party for FARTs special election, and let people who think like bleeding hearts 1 and 2 pay for it!"


I meant to add that FART could probably count on VP Joe Biden to hold several town hall meetings in San Francisco to point out that paying higher taxes is just about the most patriotic thing that an anti-American leftist can do!

Who better than Joe Biden to advocate an untenable position "without doing the math"?

21.5.09

GITMO Missteps Expose Obama's Teetering Invincibility

















By John W. Lillpop

Throughout the presidential campaign and 120 days or so into the Obama fascist dictatorship, mainstream media types have celebrated the personage of Barack Hussein Obama non-stop, hailing his "cool and calm" demeanor as evidence of both superior intelligence and extraordinary management ability.

Which, of course, makes Obama the perfect choice for those 3 AM situations that the Commander-in-chief must deal with.

However, evidence is starting to mount which suggests that Obama is more about ego-mania, arrogance, and closed-minded stubbornness than cool and calm.

An example is the president's mindless pandering to the far left concerning GITMO, which has resulted in a stinging, but well deserved, defeat in the Halls of Congress.

As reported, in part, at Yahoo News:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090521/ap_on_go_co/us_congress_guantanamo_38

"In a rare, bipartisan defeat for President Barack Obama, the Senate voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to keep the prison at Guantanamo Bay open for the foreseeable future and forbid the transfer of any detainees to facilities in the United States.

"Democrats lined up with Republicans in the 90-6 vote that came on the heels of a similar move a week ago in the House, underscoring widespread apprehension among Obama's congressional allies over voters' strong feelings about bringing detainees to the U.S. from the prison in Cuba."

And how did our new president take this public flogging from members of his own political party?

With the good grace, aplomb, and dignity one would expect from the new age Messiah?

Not exactly, Comrade!

As reported, in part, by AP:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5juui7didNwh_vzBmJyrbjxkeF-IgD98ANOLO0


"WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama forcefully defended his decision to close the Guantanamo detention camp Thursday and said some of the terror suspects held there would be brought to top-security prisons in the United States despite fierce opposition in Congress.

"He insisted the transfer would not endanger Americans and promised to work with lawmakers to develop a system for holding detainees who can't be tried and can't be turned loose from the Navy-run prison in Cuba. He spoke one day after the Senate voted resoundingly to deny him money to close the prison.

"There are no neat or easy answers here," Obama said in a speech in which he pledged anew to clean up what he said was "quite simply a mess" at Guantanamo that he had inherited from the Bush administration.

"Obama conceded that some Guantanamo detainees would end up in U.S. prisons and said those facilities were tough enough to house even the most dangerous inmates.

"Obama decried arguments used against his plans.

"We will be ill-served by the fear-mongering that emerges whenever we discuss this issue," he declared.

When you think about, Obama may have a point about fear mongering.

However, how does one thwart a demented Majority leader named Harry Reid who is still trying to find a way to "lose" the war?

And how does one handle those other annoying Democrats who refuse to fund whatever Obama wants, when he wants it? Who the hell do they think they are?

After all, Barack Obama won the election, right?

Co-equal branches of government and other silly protestations notwithstanding, Obama is THE man--and the only man, right?

Perhaps all of those wandering Democrats should be reminded of that reality with a visit from ACORN hoods bearing a gentle warning such as, "That is NOT the way things are done on the streets of Chicago, brother!"

20.5.09

Just Where in Hades Is Obama's "Exit Strategy" for GITMO?

















By John W. Lillpop

Candidate Barack Obama's campaign for the presidency was waged in large measure on the premise that President George W. Bush pushed America into an unjustifiable and immoral invasion of Iraq, followed by years of agonizing mismanagement of the war.

In particular, Obama constantly chided the Bush administration for failing to develop and implement a coherent "exit strategy," for leaving the Iraq theater of the war on terror.

Obama and leftist colleagues in Congress constantly pounded W. on the issue until discrediting the president nearly became more important than the primary military objective: To fight the war on terror in Baghdad and Fallujah, rather than New York City and Los Angeles.

However, Obama's headstrong obsession with an "exit strategy" seems to have gone missing recently, at least with respect to closing Guantanamo Bay.

Although one of his first official acts as president was to sign an executive order to shut down the controversial Guantanamo Bay detention center "as soon as practicable," neither Obama or his staff devoted much thought to the logistics, probable ramifications, or alternatives.

Rather, pacifying moon bats on the far left seems to have been a greater priority to the new president than the safety and well being of American citizens.

Republicans were not amused by Obama's grandstanding to liberal nut balls. As reported, in part, by ABC on January 22, 2009, Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio had strong words of doubt about closing GITMO:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/LawPolitics/story?id=6707095&page=1

"I think the first thing we have to remember is that we're talking about terrorists here," Boehner said at a press conference this afternoon. "Do we bring them into our borders? Do we release them back into the battlefield, like some 61 detainees that have been released we know are back on the battlefield? And do we release them to get back and rejoin this fight? ... I'm concerned that some will be let go too soon, could end up back on the battlefield."

In the four months since Obama issued his tragically flawed executive order and Rep. Boehner shared his sage warnings, Team Obama still has not come forth with intelligent plans for dealing with 248 of the most vicious and deadly terrorists on the face of the planet.

Obama's complete and utter incompetence regarding GITMO has cost the president needed support from Democrats in Congress. Indeed, Congress has refused to authorize the funds needed to implement the president's unwise decision.

As it turns out, no politician, regardless of how liberally insane, wants to go before his or her constituency and explain why it is necessary to transfer deadly terrorists from an isolated military base in Cuba to their own home communities.

It simply makes no sense! And since Obama has no intelligent alternative, his mindless pandering to the far left is officially on hold.

Future irony?

Imagine how ironic it will be if this president who fought tooth and nail against a war intended to keep the war of terror from being fought on American soil, may actually be instrumental in bringing terrorists to American cities and towns.

A word of advice: Next time, have your "exit strategy" in place before acting, Mr. President!

Obama to Ax "Don't Ask, Don't Tell?" Says Who?








By John W. Lillpop

If President Obama really intends to terminate "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as official U.S. military policy, he needs to apply some transparency to the issue by letting Pentagon officicials in on his plans.

As reported, in part, at Kansas City.com:

http://www.kansascity.com/437/story/1205399.html

"The Pentagon says it has no plans to repeal the don't ask-don't tell policy for gay troops.

"Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Tuesday that the military's top leaders have only had initial discussions with the White House about whether gay troops should be open about their sexuality.

"Under current rules, openly gay troops can be discharged from the U.S. military.

"Morrell said the White House has not asked for the 1993 policy to be scrapped.

"I do not believe there are any plans under way in this building for some expected, but not articulated, anticipation that don't ask-don't tell will be repealed," Morrell told reporters at the Pentagon."

Wow!

Now that Obama is in a position to actually implement change, certain of those campaign promises are being reviewed carefully and subjected to CHANGE themselves!

Previous reports indicated that, although repealing the ban is still on the CHANGE agenda, the president wants to confer with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his new political appointees at the Pentagon.

Consult with the Joint Chiefs of Staff? What the Hades do those military fanatics know about discrimination and civil rights, from a gay perspective?

What if the Joint Chiefs of Staff tell the new commander-in-chief, in no uncertain terms, that trashing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is an awful idea?

Then what?

In California, Voters Stage Massive "Tea Party" at the Polls!










By John W. Lillpop



Despite the threat of being dismissed as right wing extremists by left wing extremists, California voters staged a massive "tea party" at the polls on Tuesday to protest proposals by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state Legislature (mostly Democrats) to raise taxes without derailing runaway spending.

As reported, in part, at the link below:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/19/MN8317LBQS.DTL&tsp=1


"California voters on Tuesday soundly rejected a package of ballot measures that would have reduced the state's projected budget deficit of $21.3 billion to something slightly less overwhelming: $15.4 billion

"The defeat of the measures means that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state Legislature will have to consider deeper cuts to education, public safety, and health and human services, officials have said.

"Propositions 1A through 1E - which would have changed the state's budgeting system, ensured money to schools in future years and generated billions of dollars of revenue for the state's general fund - fell well behind in early returns and never recovered.

"The only measure that voters approved was Proposition 1F, which will freeze salaries of top state officials including lawmakers and the governor during tough budget years."

This bitter pill should be enough to convince Schwarzenegger along with a couple of RINOs and all Democrats in the Assembly that the people of California are fed up with incompetent politicians who continue to spend taxpayer money recklessly and foolishly.

Proposition 1F, the lone measure that passed, will freeze politicians salaries in years in which a budget deficit exists. This is a good thing and should have been done years ago.

President Obama and his gang of spend and tax socialists in the U.S. Congress would do well to take note of the special election in California.

There IS a message here that could swell into a national movement against mindless spending and higher taxes, and culminate with a rousing defeat of Democrats in the 2010 mid-term elections.

Yes, of course, Schwarzenegger is a Republican. Yet it is widely recognized that the governor is not really a conservative, one of the hazards of sleeping with a Kennedy clan member.

Keep your tea bags at the ready, conservatives. This worm is staring to turn in favor of common sense and fiscal restraint!

19.5.09

Brit Speaker Resigns: Hint, Hint, Nancy Pelosi!

















Satire By John W. Lillpop

Although Nancy Pelosi probably does not give a tinker's damn about political protocol in jolly old England, she could do well to mimic recent developments on that wretched island.

As reported at Yahoo News, the powerful speaker of the British House of Commons resigned his post for an offense far less serious than being an "accomplice to torture" and a liar to boot, charges currently hovering around the vacated head of America's Speaker Pelosi.

The story, in part:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090519/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_lawmakers__expenses


"LONDON – The powerful speaker of the British House of Commons resigned Tuesday because of a backlash over excessive expense claims by lawmakers, marking the first time in three centuries a speaker has been forced out.

"Though Michael Martin has not been caught up in recent revelations about lawmakers expenses — reimbursements for chandeliers, moat cleaning and mortgage payments have outraged taxpayers — he was blamed for creating a climate in which such excesses were allowed.

"In an extremely short statement to the House of Commons, Martin said he would leave the post June 21 to maintain "unity" in Parliament's lower chamber.

"This will allow the house to proceed to elect a new speaker," Martin said. "This is all I have to say on this matter."

Of course, Pelosi's farewell will need revision in order to suit the bloody mess she has fostered here in the states. To help expedite Pelosi's departure, I have faxed the following draft for her review:

"Thanks to the likes of Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and George W. Bush, the US House can no longer be cleaned by a woman, even a dedicated, courageous, and honest one.

"Accordingly, I will resign as Speaker of the House at the end of Barack Obama's second term, or on the occasion of my 85th birthday, whichever comes first.

"Unity really sucks and there is no need for this body to elect a new speaker. This is all I have to say on this matter."


Michael Martin may be a Commoner, but our Nancy Pelosi is even more common--dead common in fact!

Flying In the Face of Safety: Airline Mechanics Unable to Read English








By John W. Lillpop


With all due respect to liberals stuck on politically correct stupidity, English is one hell of a language, a favorite all across the globe, on the moon, and in the not -so-distant past, places like Texas and California.

English is also the international language of aviation. Which means that if you intend to be a pilot or an airline mechanic, you must master English.

Contrary to what moon bats on the left allege, demanding English proficiency is NOT a bigoted expression of racism.

On the other hand, refusing to learn English in deference to one's native tongue, say Spanish for instance, is racist and a serious threat to the lives and safety of airline passengers.

As reported, in part, at wfaa, mechanics that do not read English are a major problem in Texas:

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/localnews/investigates/stories/wfaa090515-_lj_harris.7a4a7d4.html

"News 8 has recently revealed serious flaws in the way the FAA licenses mechanics who fix planes.

"There is evidence of years of problems in testing these mechanics. There is also evidence that hundreds of mechanics with questionable licenses are working on aircraft in Texas.

"Now there is evidence of repair facilities hiring low-wage mechanics who can't read English.

"Twenty-one people were killed when U.S. Airways Express Flight 5481 crashed in Charlotte, North Carolina in 2003. The plane went wildly out of control on takeoff.

"One reason for the crash, investigators found, was that mechanics incorrectly connected the cables to some of the plane's control surfaces in the repair shop. The FAA was cited for improper oversight of the repair process.

"Repairing airplanes is a complicated business. Airplanes have many manuals. Typically, when mechanics repair a part, they open the manual, consult the book, and make the repair step-by-step, as if it were a recipe book.

"They make a list of every action they take, so the next person to fix the plane (as well as the people who fly it) will know exactly what has been done.

"If mechanics don't speak English, the international language of aviation, they can't read the manual and they can't record their activities.

"There are more than 236 FAA-certified aircraft repair stations in Texas, according to the FAA's Web site. News 8 has learned that hundreds of the mechanics working in those shops do not speak English and are unable to read repair manuals for today's sophisticated aircraft.

"Former FAA inspector Bill McNease told News 8 he regularly encountered applicants for pilots’ licenses who tried to pretend they could speak English — but could not.

"When I was based in Dallas, I had that happen every week," McNease said. "It was not uncommon at all to have foreign flight students. We had mechanics, but I handled the pilot end of it.... and I turned down people every week because they couldn't speak English."

"There are people [where I work] who do not know how to read a maintenance manual as they are spelled out, because they don't have a clue," said one certified aircraft mechanic who works at a Texas aircraft repair station. He wished to remain anonymous to protect his employment.

"To certify a part for flight or repair an engine, a mechanic must be licensed by the FAA as an Airframe and Powerplant mechanic, known in the business as an "A&P."

"News 8 discovered that mechanics at one licensing center in San Antonio were being tested in Spanish as late as last fall. The FAA ultimately shut the facility down.

"Supervisors in Texas repair stations say they are supposed to oversee the repairs of dozens of untrained mechanics who can't read the manuals and can't write down the work they've done.

"But the FAA does not require every person working at a repair station to be a certified A&P. One certified A&P can sign off on the work of dozens of uncertified mechanics.

"That creates a huge problem, another certified mechanic told News 8. "I need an interpreter to talk to these people," he said. "They can't read the manuals, they can't write, and I have so many working for me I can't be sure of the work they've done."

"To be sure of proper quality, the supervisor has to either re-do the work himself or take the chance that no mistakes have been made. There is a push to get work out the door and planes back in the air. But when he signs his name to certify the repair for flight, he is legally responsible for it.

"The root of the problem is money, mechanics say. A certified mechanic can earn upwards of $25 an hour in Texas. Technicians who can't speak English are often hired for less than $10, according to mechanics interviewed by News 8.

"I've been wanting to leave this company since the day I got there," said one certified A&P. "But with the economy the way it is, I've got kids to feed and I have to stay there. I don't want to be anywhere near one of those planes when it kills somebody."

"The FAA is supposed to police repair stations, but insiders say the agency is more focused on looking at paperwork than inspecting the facilities. Insiders also say inspectors warn repair stations when they're coming.

"In Dallas, most of them would map it out and tell them what day they were going to be there," said Gene Bland, a former FAA inspector.
Safety, mechanics say, is at risk. "In my opinion," said one, "company owners should all be locked up because someone's going to die eventually, if it hasn't already happened."

During the presidential campaign last fall, Barack Obama arrogantly addressed the English versus Spanish conflict by exhorting Americans to "learn Spanish."

That sort of reckless belligerence does not belong in presidential politics or in the Friendly Skies.

?Comprehende, el presidente

18.5.09

Nancy Pelosi's Lie Detector Results





Satire by John W. Lillpop

In a remarkable show of good faith and commitment to hard-edged transparency, Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently agreed to take a Polygraph test.

Pelosi made this unprecedented concession as public pressure mounted concerning her knowledge about water boarding and the extent to which she was briefed by CIA officials.

In order to protect the confidentiality of the polygraph examination and to safeguard Pelosi's privacy, the test was conducted in a remote, undisclosed location.

For added security, the location selected was deliberately kept from Joe Biden.

Unnamed sources have leaked unedited transcripts from the Pelosi Polygraph Probe, which are repeated herewith for the common good and to raise funds or the next Republican revolution scheduled for November, 2010:

THE PELOSI POLYGRAPH PROBE:

Polygraph Technician:

Good afternoon, Madam Speaker.

As you have been informed, we will ask you a series of six questions concerning the briefings you received from the CIA about water boarding.

All of the questions are straight forward and simple, requiring only a Yes or No response in each case. None of the questions is intended to trick or confuse you in any manner.

Polygraph technology measures your blood pressure and heart rate after each answer and determines the probable veracity of your answers in accordance with advanced statistical methodology.

This technology has been proven to be 95 percent accurate, 95 percent of the time, during thousands of examinations going back 30 years.

OK, I guess that is it. Before we get started, are there any questions, Madam Speaker?

Speaker Pelosi:

Thank you for your time and professional attitude, Paul.

To begin with, we need to put this entire torture business in perspective. In 2002, right wing extremists, lead by George W. Bush, were pushing to torture anyone who spoke Arabic or was a 25-50 year old male with middle eastern features. The idea was...

Polygraph Technician:

Excuse me, Madam Speaker. The purpose of this exercise is to determine your responses to pre-determined, germane questions. We are neither mandated nor equipped to handle opinions, speculation, or partisan bickering.

That being said, our first question is as follows: CIA memoranda indicate that you attended a top secret briefing in 2002 at which time you were advised as to the planned use of waterboarding.

Did you, in fact, attend that meeting and were you briefed on waterboarding?

Yes or No?

Speaker Pelosi:

You see, that is why America so desperately needs Barack Obama and his CHANGE formula, Paul.

George W. Bush would have tortured his own mother if Dick Cheney had ordered it for national security reasons. Dang it, Paul, Bush lied about WMD in Iraq and was trying to get innocent Muslim fellows to lie about everything. He used torture to get Muslims to lie!

You do know that there were NO weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq, right? George W. Bush lied and then spent a trillion dollars on an immoral war to cover up his lies!

Polygraph Technician:

I am very sorry, Mrs. Pelosi. We are not communicating properly and I am forced to suspend the Polygraph exam at this point.

Let me get the security people in here.

Speaker Pelosi(Beaming):

Really? How did I do, Paul?

As the Pope told me in Rome recently, "The truth will set you free!"

Who would have thought that the old boy could be so right on that after being so wrong on abortion?

Polygraph Technician:

Thank you, Speaker. The security people will be here to discuss the results with you in a moment.

Good evening!