AWGBlog

July 20, 2011

From the New York Times news service, January 30, 1967

Filed under: WTF — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — AWG @ 6:28 pm

This is the New York Times news service, January 30, 1967:

LBJ’s “Secretary of the Treasury Henry H. Fowler told Congress today that the government would be unable to pay all its bill if the ceiling on the national debt was not lifted within 30 days. Fowler ran into Republican hostility in day-long testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee… Fowler asked that the ceiling be raised by $7 billion to $337 billion to cover the period until June 30. Further legislation covering the period after June 30 will be needed later he said. Fowler said that payments for such things as old age benefits, veterans pensions, public assistance benefits, tax refunds, and the salaries of government workers would be threatened if the ceiling were not raised.”

Rush commented…

I am reading to you from the New York Times 1967. It is identical other than the numbers to what we are being told today. “Fowler said unless the debt limit is increased by the end of February at which time our outstanding obligations would exceed that which we could legally borrow the possibility of an economic and monetary derangement will be a reality.” This is 1967 and they were threatening default. In 1967 the Democrats told us it was a crisis. They created chaos. The Democrat handbook can be traced all the way back to 1967, LBJ’s Treasury secretary. I have another example. Jimmy Carter’s Treasury secretary, April 3rd, 1979: “The US House of Representatives passed legislation yesterday that extended the debt ceiling. It came after the House rejected a Republican-led attempt to tack on a strong amendment calling for a balanced federal budget.”

Are you hearing this? 1979.

“The US House of Representatives passed legislation yesterday extending the debt ceiling … came after the House rejected a Republican-led attempt to tack on a strong amendment calling for a balanced federal budget. The House vote came after Carter Treasury Secretary Michael Blumenthal claimed in a letter that the Treasury was on the verge of a default and that retired persons would be hit first. ‘About $8 billion in Social Security checks already had been mailed to 35 million Americans,’ Blumenthal said, ‘and there would be no funds to cover them if the House failed to act.’ In addition, he said that the Treasury would not be able to pay civil service retirement benefits, veterans’ benefits, railroad retirements benefits. Blumenthal last week ordered that no further income tax refund checks be mailed until the House acted.”

Ladies and gentlemen, we are being paid for the biggest saps on the face of the earth. We are being insulted and treated like the biggest dolts. This is the way the Democrat Party has been doing things since at least ’67

The song and dance is the same only the date changes…

h/t Rush Limbaugh

November 25, 2010

Dead White Guys or What Your History Books Never Told You

Filed under: FYI,Uncategorized — Tags: , , — AWG @ 9:11 am

Love this tie.

Here is the link from my post last year on Thanksgiving – it still works for this one.

This year we have from an unwitting guest poster Rush Limbaugh this one…

On August 1, 1620, the Mayflower set sail. It carried a total of 102 passengers, including forty Pilgrims led by William Bradford. On the journey, Bradford set up an agreement, a contract, that established just and equal laws for all members of the new community, irrespective of their religious beliefs.

Where did the revolutionary ideas expressed in the Mayflower Compact come from? From the Bible. The Pilgrims were a people completely steeped in the lessons of the Old and New Testaments. They looked to the ancient Israelites for their example. And, because of the biblical precedents set forth in Scripture, they never doubted that their experiment would work.

“But this was no pleasure cruise, friends. The journey to the New World was a long and arduous one. And when the Pilgrims landed in New England in November, they found, according to Bradford’s detailed journal, a cold, barren, desolate wilderness,” destined to become the home of the Kennedy family. “There were no friends to greet them, he wrote. There were no houses to shelter them. There were no inns where they could refresh themselves. And the sacrifice they had made for freedom was just beginning.

During the first winter, half the Pilgrims – including Bradford’s own wife – died of either starvation, sickness or exposure.

“When spring finally came, Indians taught the settlers how to plant corn, fish for cod and skin beavers for coats.” Yes, it was Indians that taught the white man how to skin beasts. “Life improved for the Pilgrims, but they did not yet prosper! This is important to understand because this is where modern American history lessons often end. “Thanksgiving is actually explained in some textbooks as a holiday for which the Pilgrims gave thanks to the Indians for saving their lives, rather than as a devout expression of gratitude grounded in the tradition of both the Old and New Testaments.

Here is the part [of Thanksgiving] that has been omitted: The original contract the Pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, and each member of the community was entitled to one common share.

“All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belong to the community as well. They were going to distribute it equally. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well. Nobody owned anything. They just had a share in it. It was a commune, folks. It was the forerunner to the communes we saw in the ’60s and ’70s out in California – and it was complete with organic vegetables, by the way.

Bradford, who had become the new governor of the colony, recognized that this form of collectivism was as costly and destructive to the Pilgrims as that first harsh winter, which had taken so many lives.

He decided to take bold action. Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage, thus turning loose the power of the marketplace.

“That’s right. Long before Karl Marx was even born, the Pilgrims had discovered and experimented with what could only be described as socialism. And what happened?

It didn’t work! Surprise, surprise, huh?

What Bradford and his community found was that the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else, unless they could utilize the power of personal motivation!

But while most of the rest of the world has been experimenting with socialism for well over a hundred years – trying to refine it, perfect it, and re-invent it – the Pilgrims decided early on to scrap it permanently.

What Bradford wrote about this social experiment should be in every schoolchild’s history lesson. If it were, we might prevent much needless suffering in the future.

“‘The experience that we had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years…that by taking away property, and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing – as if they were wiser than God,’ Bradford wrote. ‘For this community [so far as it was] was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense…that was thought injustice.’

Why should you work for other people when you can’t work for yourself? What’s the point?

“Do you hear what he was saying, ladies and gentlemen? The Pilgrims found that people could not be expected to do their best work without incentive. So what did Bradford’s community try next? They unharnessed the power of good old free enterprise by invoking the undergirding capitalistic principle of private property.

Every family was assigned its own plot of land to work and permitted to market its own crops and products. And what was the result?

‘This had very good success,’ wrote Bradford, ‘for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.’

Bradford doesn’t sound like much of a… liberal Democrat, “does he? Is it possible that supply-side economics could have existed before the 1980s? Yes.

“Read the story of Joseph and Pharaoh in Genesis 41. Following Joseph’s suggestion (Gen 41:34), Pharaoh reduced the tax on Egyptians to 20% during the ‘seven years of plenty’ and the ‘Earth brought forth in heaps.’ (Gen. 41:47)

In no time, the Pilgrims found they had more food than they could eat themselves…. So they set up trading posts and exchanged goods with the Indians. The profits allowed them to pay off their debts to the merchants in London.

And the success and prosperity of the Plymouth settlement attracted more Europeans and began what came to be known as the ‘Great Puritan Migration.’”

Now, other than on this program every year, have you heard this story before? (AWG NOTE – Yes I told it last here last year.) Is this lesson being taught to your kids today — and if it isn’t, why not? Can you think of a more important lesson one could derive from the pilgrim experience?

So in essence there was, thanks to the Indians, because they taught us how to skin beavers and how to plant corn when we arrived, but the real Thanksgiving was thanking the Lord for guidance and plenty — and once they reformed their system and got rid of the communal bottle and started what was essentially free market capitalism, they produced more than they could possibly consume, and they invited the Indians to dinner, and voila, we got Thanksgiving, and that’s what it was: inviting the Indians to dinner and giving thanks for all the plenty is the true story of Thanksgiving.

The last two-thirds of this story simply are not told.

Now, I was just talking about the plenty of this country and how I’m awed by it. You can go to places where there are famines, and we usually get the story, “Well, look it, there are deserts, well, look it, Africa, I mean there’s no water and nothing but sand and so forth.”

It’s not the answer, folks. Those people don’t have a prayer because they have no incentive. They live under tyrannical dictatorships and governments.

The problem with the world is not too few resources. The problem with the world is an insufficient distribution of capitalism.

September 15, 2010

Maybe she too should be fired for being too HOT

Filed under: Random Thoughts — Tags: , , , , , — AWG @ 8:25 am

Remember back in June when “Miss Curvalishous”  – Debrahlee Lorenzana said she was fired from Citibank for being too HOT? Yes she was so HOT her lawsuit went nowhere and her 15 minutes of fame was up in about 5 – nonetheless another Hispanic women showing off her curves claims she…

UPDATE – I think she has walked back her story and complaint as it’s pretty clear she is using her looks and body to get places  and everyone knows it – from what I’ve seen and heard it was some OTHER WOMEN complaining that she was getting attention from the players and some of those female reporters might have been upset that they weren’t getting stared at too and that Ines was not wanting to sue somebody or trying to get someone fired. I think that is what upset the drive-bys… like I said I didn’t pay much attention to this story.

Ines Sainz, Mexican reporter covering NY Jets, says she felt ‘uncomfortable’ with sexual comments at practice

NEW YORK  — Ines Sainz, a reporter for a Mexican TV network, says on her Twitter account she felt “very uncomfortable!” in the Jets’ locker room following a practice Saturday during which a coach appeared to throw footballs in her direction.

Jets players also called out to the reporter in the locker room, while she waited with two co-workers to do an interview.

“I feel very uncomfortable! I’m at the lockers of the Jets waiting for Mark Sanchez while trying not to look anywhere!!” reporter Sainz tweeted in Spanish on Saturday night. Sainz is a reporter for Mexico’s TV Azteca.

Bubblicious Ines Sainz Used Her Assets to Get Access to Sanchez

Let’s take a look at a few of images of Ms Sainz, frankly I haven’t paid any attention to this story all I was just point out that Ms Sainz in not the most conservative dresser around – after all that’s about the only reason I’m posting these …

It kills me that women will wear skimpy, skin tight clothes and then complain when men look at them – what the hell did they expect to get? And one last thought on this is why is it that all the women coming to this country from Mexico never look like this – nope they are all those little short chunky native Mexican women and never the tall curvaceous Latin hotties – why?

July 13, 2010

F.A. Obama: “Dessert is not a right.” – NAACP: “Tea Party is racist.”

I’ll let you figure out what F.A. Obama means…

Michelle Obama: “Dessert is not a right.”

Later, she added, “As I tell my kids, dessert is not a right.”

Wait a minute isn’t she one of the idiots that said healthcare is a right, housing is a right, high speed internet is a right, gay marriage is a right, pretty much everything is a right except the right to bare arms and freedom of speech those they have a problem with… well those and dessert.

This women… and I use that term loosely is under the impression – much like her idiot husband – that we care what they think or say. Oh I guess there are a few lemmings out there that do fawn over every word they say but that is a quickly shrinking number. She says dessert is not a right – well who ever said it was? For that matter who ever said healthcare, housing, internet, transportation was a right? I checked the constitution and it’s just not there. Hell, I thought dessert was a food – so wait a minute – the liberals think that food is a right otherwise we wouldn’t have food stamps, WIC, commodities etc so if food is a right and dessert is a food, ergo dessert is a RIGHT DAMMIT now bring me a piece of pie women, NOW!

But in addition to her babbling about fat kids all while her wide ass blocked out the sun – the NAACP a single race oriented group is condemning the non race specific groups of the Tea Party of being racist despite the lack of evidence. Well, the lack of real provable evidence…

Michelle Obama Rouses NAACP Before Vote Condemning ‘Racist’ Elements of Tea Party

The resolution of the NAACP says…

Tea Party members have used “racial epithets,” have verbally abused black members of Congress and threatened them, and protestors have engaged in “explicitly racist behavior” and “displayed signs and posters intended to degrade people of color generally and President Barack Obama specifically,” according to the proposed resolution.

However an ABC poll said…

The poll also found that 57 percent of people who opposed the Tea Party suspected its members of racial prejudice specifically against Obama. Only 10 percent of Tea Party supporters expressed such a sentiment.

Interestingly enough the MSM repeatedly fails to mention black or other minority Tea Party members or show them in news reports, in fact the MSM goes out of their way to exclude them – remember when a protester in Arizona with a AR-15? You saw the footage ran in a continuous loop on the drive-by media channels but what they didn’t show you despite their efforts to convince you otherwise was that the protester was Black.

Come to think of it the NAACP has been long involved with the New Black Panthers (who are by the way members of the Nation of Islam) and the Old Black Panthers (who are also member of the Nation of Islam) and numerous other all Black racist groups and have yet to condemn them – I guess racism is only possible if you are White… or video edited to look White. Lord knows that Blacks are never ever racist – right?

I find the NAACP cries of racism against the Tea Party laughable – because in the NAACP eyes Black-Americans are suppose to be Black first, Black second, Black third etc. never does national unity cross their lips. It’s always divided down the White/Black line with them, always.

YouTube Preview Image

NAACP Condemns Tea Party “Racist Elements”

Moore reported that Jealous then turned his attention to the national tea party movement and called out its leaders.”Expel the bigots and racists in your ranks or take the responsibility for them and their actions,” Jealous said.

Moore reported that Jealous spoke to tea party members and said some have taken things too far.”

We will no longer allow you to hide like cowards and hide behind signs that say ‘Lynch Our President’ or anyone else,” Jealous said.

Jealous even mentioned the tea party’s most well-known figure, Sarah Palin.”Sarah Palin says, ‘Let’s party like it’s 1776.’ My white daddy would say be careful what you wish for because the 18th century, Sarah, wasn’t good for anybody, even folks like you,” Jealous said.

Sounds to me like Jealous is just jealous the Tea Parties success of being able to rally people and assemble large groups from all walks of life and races with government handouts and taxpayer freebies. But the real issue is the fact the clown is just making up his own reality as there have been on signs calling for the lynching of Obama or Holder as Jealous promoted – if there was wouldn’t it be plastered all over the mainstream media and the liberal blogs? Wouldn’t the Secret Service and Eric Holder be all over it? Would Robert Gibbs be out there reminding the public everyday? It’s not – so where is it? Prove it or STFU! Am I going to have to pull a Andrew Breitbart and offer a $100,000 bounty for video proof? I’m betting my money isn’t going anywhere.

But then again being called racist by the NAACP is akin to being called fat and ugly by Rosie O’Donnell.

Oh by the way did you know that the NAACP was founded by WHITES.

From El Rushbo today…

The birth of the NAALCP (National Association for the Advancement of Liberal Colored People), founders of the NAALCP were white, Mary White Ovington, journalist William English Walling (the last son of a former slave-holding family) and Henry Moskowitz.  Met in New York City January 1909 in what is credited to be the original meeting that led to the founding of the NAACP.  They were all white, and they were all socialists.  It wasn’t until later that W.E.B. DuBois from Harvard and others were brought in.  Even so, the majority of the founders of the NAACP, later to become the NAALCP, were white.

One last thing the NAACP’s mission statement is…

To promote equality of rights and to eradicate caste or race prejudice among the citizens of the United States; to advance the interest of colored citizens; to secure for them impartial suffrage; and to increase their opportunities for securing justice in the courts, education for the children, employment according to their ability and complete equality before law.

Seems that’s all been achieved… guess they can disband now.

Will NAACP repudiate their own racist comments about Kenneth Gladney, caught on tape?
NAACP Anti-Tea Party Resolution Is Cheap, Cynical Politics
Your Daily Flaming Dumbass: The NAACP
Breitbart Exposes N-Word Lie on Hannity

April 18, 2010

Why Thank You Mr. President! Thank you soooo much!

Filed under: FYI,lies,WTF — Tags: , , , , , , , , — AWG @ 9:46 am

YouTube Preview Image

I guess you heard Dumbass say that we should be thanking him, many have talked about it and I’m just getting over laughing from what I heard him say – he is either in complete denial of the debt he has ran up or he is a complete idiot – I’ve said before I do not think Obama is a stupid man, I think he is a clueless man and just doesn’t get it, I don’t believe he has ever been around non-millionaires that pay taxes and the amount they pay is a lifestyle change.

Obama makes light of anti-tax protests

Obama told a fundraiser in Miami that he’s cut taxes, contrary to the claims of protesters.

“You would think they’d be saying thank you,” he said.

Excuse me… where? Was the increase in cigarette taxes by 156%? (yes I said 156%) Was it the 10% tanning bed tax that effects mainly White people? Was it the letting Bush tax cuts expire promise? Was it the 15% increase in capital gains tax? Which tax did you cut? Oh you gave some tax credits but that’s not a tax cut – see a credit is one time and a cut is all the time. I know – I’m suppose to thank you for all those tax cuts in the Healthcare bill… oh wait there wasn’t any but there was a bunch of tax hikes. You know like the Medicare tax increase from 1.45 percent to 2.35 percent and a couple of dozen more tax increases are those the taxes we should thank you for?… No?

Maybe it was the spending? The $1.85 debt you ran up this year? The wasted $875 billion stimulus failure? Maybe it was all the booze for Nancy Pelosi and various other offices? I know I was suppose to thank you for the great picture of Air force One flying low over Manhattan, right? Was that it? … No?

Maybe I was suppose to thank you for the Wagu beef you bought for the White House at a $100 a pound? I didn’t get any – where is my share, Mr. Share the Wealth?

Maybe it could have been all the apologies around the world – or the slaps in the faces of our allies maybe that was it? Or the jetting around on our tax dollar to collect unearned prizes and beg for the Olympics – maybe that’s was it? … No?

All told Obama has raise various taxes since he took office totaling $670 million in his first few months in office and that doesn’t count the ones not yet in effect… so thanks for that.

Gee you know Barry I can’t think of a damn thing to thank you for…. wait a minute I’ve got it! Thank you Mr. President, thank you for the Tea Parties, the conservative rebirth and the awaking of the sleeping giant – so thank you for that.

Obama mocks tea partiers: You should thank me for cutting taxes

But Rush said exactly what I was thinking Friday on the radio…

Obama Mocks American People, Demands a Thank You for His Work – El Rushbo

RUSH:  Ladies and gentlemen, this is a classic illustration of authoritarian mocking control.  He hasn’t cut anybody’s taxes.  The Recovery Act, stimulus bill, it’s more like loaves and fishes.  There are no tax cuts in that.  There were some tax credits.  It’s all bogus.  But he wants to be thanked.  Okay, I will oblige.  Mr. President, I want to thank you for seizing General Motors and Chrysler.  I want to thank you for appointing a pervert as our safe schools czar.  I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for the generational theft that you have committed with all of this borrowing and spending.  You have spent the wealth of two to three, maybe four generations in the future, before they’re even born.  I want to thank you, Mr. President, for insulting and endangering Israel.  I want to thank you, Mr. President, for driving up the unemployment rate to near double digits for years to come.  I want to thank you, Mr. President, for telling everybody that it’s going to be double digits as the new norm.  I want to thank you, Mr. President, for exploding the annual deficit to the level where it can never be repaid.

I’d like to thank you, Mr. President, for targeting and destroying private health insurance companies.  I want to thank you, Mr. President, for pushing for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to stand trial in New York City and receive full constitutional rights at a cost of $200 million per year.  I want to thank you for that.  I want to thank you for helping to destroy the housing market, Mr. President.  And, Mr. President, I would love to thank you for your arrogance, because arrogance is part and parcel of an authoritarian leader of a regime.  I would like to also thank you, Mr. President, for your divisiveness.  I would like to thank you for ignoring the public union pension time bombs waiting to explode out there.  I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for mocking and disrespecting the American people.  And I’d like to thank you for your never ending support of the New Black Panthers and for ACORN.  I’d like to thank you, Mr. President, for embracing our enemies and snubbing our allies.  But most of all, Mr. President, thank you for arousing the sleeping silent majority because we have been asleep too long.  November is coming, Mr. President.  That is when we will really thank you.

More here…

Obama mocks, we remember

March 26, 2010

MSNBC’s Ed Schultz Time For “Socialism” In Talk Radio

Filed under: FYI,Liberals,lies — Tags: , , , , , , , , — AWG @ 9:12 am

YouTube Preview Image

Does this idiot not see the hypocrisy he spews? If campaigns for Progressive Democrats, he campaigned for Obama and yet anyone that is on the other side MUST BE SILENCED! Ed called it what it is “SOCIALISM” and it must be stopped. In the liberal mind it’s fine to campaign for your candidate just don’t campaign for yours.

Oh and for the record the total number of radio stations owned by Rush Limbaugh – ZERO!

So Ed is a liar, but he is a Democrat so that should come as no surprise as the Party of Lies can’t help but lie it’s what they do.

MSNBC’s Ed Schultz calls for govt takeover of radio
Ed Schultz Calls for ‘Socialism’ of Airwaves With Return of Censorship Doctrine

January 28, 2010

El Rushbo’s open letter to the man child

Filed under: FYI,Random Thoughts — Tags: , , — AWG @ 6:26 pm

From the January 28, 2010 edition of the Rush Limbaugh Show: Rush reads his letter to President Obama.

YouTube Preview Image

October 15, 2009

No Rams for Rush

Filed under: FYI,Liberals,lies,Media,Random Thoughts — Tags: , , , , , , — AWG @ 12:03 pm
Love this tie.

Love this tie.

Well the Justice Brothers (or more aptly named the Poverty Pimps) Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson along with the Left-wing media of MSNBC, CNN, NBC et.al. were able to get Rush Limbaugh booted from his part of the bid to buy the St Louis Rams.

Ah but the Justice Brothers are without sin…
The Truth About Jackson, Sharpton and CNN’s Sanchez (with Sources)

Here is what I have been thinking… Rush may not be able to sue for slander as he he is a public figure, even though the quotes being attributed to him all false and un-sourced and proven fabricated so while I’m not a lawyer I do not think he can sue for that… BUT there is this thing called “tortious interference with a business transaction or contract.” Well what’s that you may ask…

In short it’s “generally, business torts are claims for either intentional or negligent wrongdoing in a business relationship. These claims can either be based on statutes or common law. One such tort is known as interference with contract or interference with prospective economic advantage. Though the elements of this tort vary from state to state, generally, a plaintiff must establish the existence of a contract or some economic relationship between the plaintiff and a third party; that the defendant knows about that relationship; intent by the defendant to disrupt or harm that relationship; actual disruption of the relationship; and damage to the plaintiff. Other business torts include unfair competition and conversion.”

So according to Find Law…

A claim of tortious interference with contract requires (1) the existence of a contract, (2) the alleged wrongdoer’s knowledge of the contract, (3) intentional procurement of the contract’s breach, (4) without justification, and (5) damages resulting from the breach. Kjesbo v. Ricks, 517 N.W.2d 585, 588 (Minn. 1994).

So…

(1) Rush was involved in a contract with a group of buyer to bid on the St Louis Rams.
(2) This agreement was noted by those in congress, Shelia Jackson Lee those in the media, CNN, MSNBC, NBC and others and acknowledge by the Poverty Pimps Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.
(3) I think that’s obvious.
(4) what was their justification on? Race?
(5) Rush was dropped by the bidding group. (Note: Wisely Rush told them they would have to kick him out instead of him withdrawing.

So while there wasn’t a contract to buy the Ram’s there had to be a contract to bid on the Ram’s as you are talking about millions and millions of dollars and I seriously doubt that was set up on a verbal agreement and a handshake and therefore it would meet the interference of a contract.

As I said… I’m not a lawyer… but a lot of the lawyers I know aren’t either.

So what can Rush do? Sue the hell out of them and likely win as everything that was done against him is on tape and broadcast over the public airways. And I would like nothing better than to see Sharpton and Jackson brought down as these two race hustlers do nothing to help society and in fact hurt society. Wouldn’t be real sad to see Olbermann, Matthews and Jackson-Lee shut up either… sick of these idiots.

more here…
Breaking: Limbaugh to be dropped from NFL bid for Rams
The anti-Rush revival revisited Updated

June 25, 2009

Congress exempt from National Health Care Plan

Filed under: Politics,WTF — Tags: , , , , , — AWG @ 7:18 pm

obamahealthBeware Obamacare’s Fine Print

As the U.S. Office of Personnel Management notes, Members of Congress “enjoy the widest selection of health plans in the country.” According to page 114 of the Kennedy bill, a similar array of choices would not be available to other Americans in the future. Instead, they would be shunted into health insurance plans under the straightjacket of whatever the government decides is a “basic” plan.

What’s that mean? It means congress keeps their gold-plated plan while they tell you that want you can have and if you can live or die.

More here are El Rushbo…
Ask Your Congressman If He’ll Join the Obama Public Health Care Plan

Under the Obama plan some government pouge will decide if you get health care or not, Obama said last night on the Obama-infomercial it doesn’t matter if the treatment or care is avialable it will come down to are you worth treating, are you worth saving… it’s all very Gattaca.

Obama was asked if his family was ill if would want the very best care for his family and not some government regulated plan, Obama talked for about, I don’t know 15 minutes and never answered the question (should come as no surprise he never does), facts are it doesn’t matter because Obama would be exempt from his own plan that’s so great for everyone else he thinks he’s to great for his own plan.

Did President Obama Make His Case on Health Care?
ABC ObamaCare Special Turns Into Presidential Filibuster

Let me post a little Limbaugh here….

Obama’s Government Will Decide If You Deserve Medical Treatment?

Jane Sturm: “My mother is now over 105. But at 100, the doctors said to her, ‘I can’t do anything more unless you have a pacemaker.’ I said, ‘Go for it.’ She said, ‘Go for it.’ But the specialist said, ‘No, she’s too old.’ But when the other specialist saw her and saw her joy of life, he said, ‘I’m going for it.’ That was over five years ago. My question to you is: Outside the medical criteria for prolonging life for somebody who is elderly, is there any consideration that can be given for a certain spirit, a certain joy of living, a quality of life, or is it just a medical cutoff at a certain age?”

Obama: “I don’t think that we can make judgments based on people’s ‘spirit.’ Uh, that would be, uh, a pretty subjective decision to be making. I think we have to have rules that, uh, say that, uh, we are going to provide good quality care for all people. End-of-life care is one of the most difficult sets of decisions that we’re going to have to make. But understand that those decisions are already being made in one way or another. If they’re not being made under Medicare and Medicaid, they’re being made by private insurers. At least we can let doctors know — and your mom know — that you know what, maybe this isn’t going to help. Maybe you’re better off, uhh, not having the surgery, but, uhh, taking the painkiller.” Do you realize how cold and heartless that answer is? This woman is asking about her mother. And everywhere she went, except one doctor, refused to put in the pacemaker. “Nah, she’s too old; she’s going to die anyway.”

So they found a specialist: “Maybe this woman really loves living. I’ll put it in.” She’s lived five years with the pacemaker, and still Obama: “Maybe you’re better off to tell your mother to take a pill, take a painkiller.” See, we have to have rules. “We have to have rules. Your mother should have died five years ago, lady. She would have been better off taking that painkiller.” Who says we have to have his rules? The President of the United States is not a king. He’s not an autocrat. He’s not a ruler. He doesn’t get to set the rules. Obama has taken it upon himself to do so. This woman found a way to get her mother a pacemaker. With Obamacare, you just heard the answer: It wouldn’t have happened. I know how this stuff works.

Did you catch that?

Obama said “I don’t think that we can make judgments based on people’s ‘spirit.’ Uh, that would be, uh, a pretty subjective decision to be making.”

What we can’t judge based on spirit? Why not? You want to appoint Supreme Court Justices for their empathy, what the hell is that if it’s not spirit… oh yeah that’s right Obama doesn’t want real empathy he wants racist.

A little more Rush here… I hate quote others so much but todays show was excellent. Really and I rarely say that…

Caller’s Brilliant Catch on Empathy

CALLER: So we’re not able to judge the spirit of someone in order to determine the financial outlay that we’re committing to them based on this health care standard. So we don’t have the ability to quantify our empathy for this health care recipient under my new plan, but I will appoint a Supreme Court nominee who must, in even more black-and-white ways, that is applying the law, must have empathy to gray the law out. So I’m not really sure I understand the message coming from President Obama.

RUSH: You know what, let me tell you something, Paul, that is a brilliant catch. That is a brilliant get. In case you are just joining us, President Obama, in his infomercial last night on ABC that came in last in its time slot, was asked a question by a woman who had a mother who is 100 years old who needed a pacemaker, and the plan that she had said, no, no, no, she’s too old, no, no, no, but the daughter said, “But she’s got so much spirit. She’s got so much spirit. So we found a doctor that would put the pacemaker in. She’s still living at 105.” So Obama was asked: “What about the human spirit?” Well, we can’t judge spirit in making decisions. We can’t take spirit into it. That’s right. Obama is trying to kill human spirit throughout the American economy. Yet you’re right, he wants judges who use empathy totally in rendering legal decisions. Empathy is nothing more than spirit or feelings or what have you. But there’s one caveat to this. Empathy is a code word. When Obama talks about judges having it, all he means by it is: I want people who are racists and bigots on my Supreme Court who are always going to find for minorities and the underprivileged simply because they’ve gotten the shaft all their lives. I want people on my court who are going to rule against the so-called rich and the so-called powerful, because they have carried the day for too long. So empathy is just a code word for somebody who has sympathy for the downtrodden.

Call your congressmen and ask them if they are going to give up their health care? Ask them who decides who lives and who dies and tell them to vote against this abomination or is that Obamanation?

January 24, 2009

Obama tell GOP to abandon el Rushbo

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , — AWG @ 10:23 am

Obama has told the Republicans on Capitol Hill to dump Rush Limbaugh. Obama just pick a fight that he does not have the mental capacity to win, there is a old saying that goes “Never come to a battle of the wits, unarmed” and Obama has done just that.
If you listen to el Rushbo you know that he wants Obama policies to fail as they have socialist tenants, the drive-byes have been all over this misreporting Limbaugh’s statement as if Rush want’s Obama to fail. Well Rush said and I quote …

Look, what he’s talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don’t want this to work. So I’m thinking of replying to the guy, “Okay, I’ll send you a response, but I don’t need 400 words, I need four: ‘I hope he fails.’”

That’s what he said in reply to a man requesting a 400 word reply to the question “Do you want President Obama to succeed?” If Obama has socialistic programs he want to enact in this country, that I want him to fail too … and I have 57,000,000 other Americans and growing that agree with me, but more importantly agree with Rush.

A note to Ears Obama, listen up … all you are going to do is fire up the base and stoke to fires and you will look back on this day a day you should have kept your thoughts to yourself, Bush knew this perhaps you should have taken some lessons. It might take a while for the mainstream media to turn on you, but they will (some will) soon enough. You are setting a dangerous president here, might want to thing twice in the future. Truly I look forward to hearing el Rushbo Monday it should be quite entertaining.

UPDATE: RUSH RESPONDS~

Obama picking a fight with the wrong people.

Powered by WordPress

19 visitors online now
8 guests, 11 bots, 0 members
Max visitors today: 38 at 06:20 am UTC
This month: 67 at 05-08-2013 12:05 pm UTC
This year: 95 at 04-19-2013 07:09 pm UTC
All time: 365 at 03-16-2012 03:55 pm UTC

© 2008-2013 The Angry White Guy All Rights Reserved