Like Slimey Cockroaches & their crooked President, Liberals Spread Disease

[Warph]

     

"ROMNEY NOW MORE RIGHT-WING THAN BUSH II, REAGAN AND NIXON COMBINED"
....Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma

At least if you believe sleazy liar Insane-Hussein's latest crazy lies.

Insane-Hussein made one of his strongest pitches to date to rally the women's vote that is crucial to his re-election, telling a mostly female crowd estimated at 4,000 in the swing state of Colorado on Wednesday that "Republicans led by Mitt Romney would take them back to the policies of the 1950s."

So if I understand this correctly, Obuma is claiming that Mitt Romney would be the most right-wing Republican president in 60 years?

That's a pretty impressive claim.  Romney is going to do what Bush II, Reagan and Nixon who are suddenly liberal moderates, didn't do.  Romney, the most liberal nominee in decades, who was on record at one point as supporting abortion and who hardly mentions social issues, is going to take America back to the 1950's.

So there are two possibilities.  Either Mitt Romney is more right-wing than Reagan, Bush II and Nixon... or Obuma is just making up crazy lies and hope his supporters have the collective IQ of a turnip.

[Warph]

President Reagan's: 1984 - Morning In America:

       

President Obama's: 2010 - Mourning In America:

       

[/font][/size][/b]

[Warph]

In an appearance on Fox News Sunday morning, top Obuma advisor David Axelrod... last seen peeping out from under a rock and muttering that he's hardly even heard of "CNN employee" Hilary Rosen... delivered a stunning endorsement of Mitt Romney for President.

Axelrod told Fox host Chris Wallace: "The choice in this election is between an economy that produces a growing middle class and that gives people a chance to get ahead and their kids a chance to get ahead and an economy that continues down the road we're on."

Wow....  Hope and Change, 2012 edition: Vote Mitt Romney!  And this is the guy who's normally in charge of getting people's divorce records leaked to the media so Obuma can win dirty!

Team Romney welcomed Axelrod on board by uploading video of his endorsement to YouTube:

Axelrod will also receive a welcome package of valuable Romney campaign merchandise, including a roof-mounted dog carrier, and a set of Ann Romney's signature limited-edition "Stay-at-Home Mom " bunny slippers.

Obviously this was an epic slip of the tongue, but the way it exposes the intellectual poverty of the Obuma 2012 campaign is fascinating.  Axelrod was trying to paint Obuma as the figure of "hope and change," as though the Oval Office has been vacant since 2009, and everything hasn't gotten horribly worse since George Bush left office.  They really are going to expect America to forget the last four years completely, and give this failed President a mulligan.

In other words, David Axelrod really did endorse Romney for President on Sunday.  His actual campaign strategy is even funnier than his gaffe.[/font][/size]

[Warph]

            

Biden forgets what state he's in, tells voters Republicans want to 'put y'all back in chains'
By: John Hayward  
8/14/2012 03:12 PM

[Standard Joe Biden disclaimer: this man is the Vice President of the United States.  He was placed in that position by Barack Obama, who is fully accountable for making that decision.  It is not unreasonable to quote Biden just because everyone knows he's not playing with a full deck.  If he's not responsible for what he says and does, he doesn't belong anywhere near the White House.]

Joe Biden gave a rip-snorting campaign address in Virginia on Tuesday, in which he apparently forget what state he was in, telling Virginia voters that "with you – and I mean this – with your help, we can win North Carolina again."  Either he's terribly confused, or he's encouraging vote fraud.  

       

Biden also regaled his audience with a little slavery metaphor, saying of his Republican opponents: "Look at their budget, and what they are proposing.  Romney wants to let–he said in the first hundred days, he's going to let the big banks once again write their own rules.  Unchain Wall Street.  They're going to put y'all back in chains."

     

       

You might have missed the part of Mitt Romney's campaign platform where he said he'd let banks write their own rules.  It's right next to the part where he says he wants to bring slavery back.

This is your campaign, Democrats?  This is your "new tone" of high-minded civility?  This is how you're going to deal with the economic and fiscal crisis Barack Obama has inflicted on this nation through his policies – by telling them Republicans want to "put y'all back in chains?"

When Barack Obama spoke in Arizona, after the awful shooting rampage that left so many innocent people dead, he said it was "important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we're talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds."  It was a big applause line, even though it was thin gruel, considering that Obama knew perfectly well liberals – all the way up to the New York Times – were openly blaming conservatives for inspiring that killing spree, merely by expressing their ideas.  The Obama campaign now seems dead-set on making a fool of everyone who applauded his hollow, meaningless rhetoric.[/font][/size]

[jarhead]

Warph,
I still expect Odumbo to dump that idiot Biden before Nov and replace him with Hillary. I hope not. Really looking  forward to him and Ryan going at it in the VP debate. I still think Biden was formally Dick Martin of Rowan & Martin's Laugh In.

[srkruzich]

YOu know i got a question. Why is it that if we were to say the hell with obama and go up there and toss his ass out of the whitehouse by force, that it would be considered treasonous and anti-government.  Thinkingabout it, its not anti government nor is it treason. It is tossing a inept, bumbling fool, out of the office of president.  IT would not be attacking the office just the fool that occupies it. 

Same question with the thieves in congress. They have committed theft, extortion, embezzlement, many high crimes against this country.  I think it would be a good precedent to set to hold them accountable and toss their ass out too.  Put in some honest decent folks. Like 10% farmers, 10% blue collar, 10% service industry workers, 10% of each type of representation of the individuals in this country except for lawyers and only allow 1% lawyers or judges. 

IF we managed to do that, i think there would be a real change in this country for the better AND we could actually provide for those who cannot provide for themselves.  Just need some farmers sense in there.

[Warph]

                     

Obama Campaign Goes Racist, Anti-Semitic
By Ben Shapiro
8/15/2012

Mitt Romney's selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate has utterly unhinged the Obama campaign. Last week they were happily jabbering about Romney's record at Bain Capital, implying that he had killed a man's wife, stating that he was a tax cheat and blaming him for outsourcing jobs. This week they're stuck defending Barack Obama's $700 billion cuts to Medicare and spending addiction.

That leaves the Democrats with one solution: get ugly.

Joe Biden led off the festivities in Virginia this week, where he informed the population of 49-percent-black Danville that "he said in the first 100 days, he's going to let the big banks once again write their own rules -- unchain Wall Street. They gonna put y'all back in chains." That last line is a direct transcription -- Biden lapsed into a heavy southern accent, clearly making a slavery reference. According to the Obama campaign, then, Romney's Wall Street plans are the same as placing Americans in chains. If that isn't insulting to black Americans, nothing will be.

But the Obama campaign wasn't done. The same day Biden unleashed his inner race-baiter, the Obama campaign's Julianna Smoot send out a mass email accusing Ryan of "making a pilgrimage" to Las Vegas to "kiss the ring" of Jewish mega donor Sheldon Adelson. This was an obvious attempt to drive a wedge between Ryan and blue-collar Catholics by invoking anti-Semitic imagery; the implication is that Ryan, instead of making a pilgrimage to Rome to kiss the ring of the Pope, was heading to Vegas to kiss the ring of a wealthy Jew. Ryan, the email implied, was a Judas willing to sacrifice religion for money in the Sodom and Gomorrah of Vegas.

This isn't just nasty campaigning. It's vile campaigning.

It wasn't surprising, of course -- not after the Obama campaign seemingly worked hand-in-glove with a super PAC to release an ad accusing Romney of murdering Joe Soptic's wife of cancer after Bain Capital fired Soptic and Soptic lost his health insurance. It wasn't surprising after the vulgarities that seem to spout daily from the Obama headquarters; their emails suggest that they must win the "damn" election and their staffers call Obamacare opponents "mother---ers." No hope and change to be found here -- just vulgarity and racism.

Just because the Obama campaign is running a disgusting campaign doesn't mean it will hurt them. Negative campaigns remain extraordinarily effective. But it won't work against the revitalized Romney-Ryan ticket. Ryan is simply too likeable -- 50 percent of Americans like him, as opposed to 32 percent who don't -- and he is highly intelligent and scrupulously honest. That means he'll be tough to categorize with the left's three favorite anti-conservative insults: stupid (Palin), corrupt (Nixon) and mean (Bush). Ryan isn't extreme; he's praised by people like ... Barack Obama and Erskine Bowles.

The question that remains for the American public is whether they can be polarized by the divide-and-conquer rhetoric of the Obama campaign.

If Obama can't convince Americans that Romney-Ryan will destroy America, he'll have to destroy America himself to ensure re-election by separating Americans by race, sexuality and religion. That's precisely what he's doing.

[Warph]

               


Pennsylvania judge refuses to block voter ID law
By: John Hayward
8/15/2012 09:37 AM

In another big victory against vote fraud, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson has refused to block a law requiring voters to show photo ID at the polls.

Check out the ridiculously biased lead paragraph from the Associated Press story: "A Pennsylvania judge on Wednesday refused to stop a tough new voter identification law from going into effect, which Democrats say will suppress votes among President Barack Obama's supporters."


You don't hear anything about what supporters of the law say until a single sentence in the fourth paragraph, which is immediately countered: "Republicans defend the law as necessary to protect the integrity of the election. But Democrats say the law will make it harder for the elderly, minorities, the poor and college students to vote, as part of a partisan scheme to help the Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, beat Democratic Obama."

Way down at the end of the piece, readers learn that "the state is planning to begin issuing a special photo ID card for registered voters who are unable to get a PennDOT-issued ID and lack any other photo ID that is acceptable under the law, such as a passport or active-duty military ID," and also beginning a large-scale P.R. campaign to make sure citizens understand the law. Why, those scheming, disenfranchising monsters.

The remainder of the article is entirely concerned with relaying complaints from critics of the law. The only person quoted in the story is ACLU laywer Witold J. Walczak, who vowed, "We're not done, it's not over. It's why they make appeals courts."

Thus is the impression created that this judge must be some sort of blind fool or partisan operative, to allow such a patently obvious outrage to remain in effect. (In fact, the article makes a point of noting that Judge Simpson is a Republican.) Why, Pennsylvania is going to ask voters to show the same kind of ID they're expected to present when they purchase beer! Can't everyone see how that's racism?

Here's another howler from the AP story: "The original rationale in Pennsylvania's Republican-controlled Legislature for the law – to prevent election fraud – played little role in the case before Simpson since the state's lawyers acknowledged that they are 'not aware of any incidents of in person voter fraud.' Instead, they insisted that lawmakers properly exercised their latitude to make election-related laws when they chose to require voters to show widely available forms of photo identification."

In other words, our legal system does not cease to function simply because liberals don't like the results. It's the same old Catch-22 argument vote fraud defenders love to fall back on: we can't detect and punish fraudulent voters, because that's racism; and since we can't march any convicted fraudsters before the camera, we can't institute common-sense procedures to detect them.

At any rate, it looks like there will be no temporary injunction blocking the law, but appeals will be filed, and Eric Holder's Justice Department – which has been very active in blocking sensible voter identification laws – is still mulling over an intervention.

Update: Horace Cooper, adjunct fellow of the National Center for Public Policy Research, hailed the Pennsylvania decision: "Once again critics of Voter ID lost in court over a legal claim that they knew or should have known was invalid. Today the district court in PA ruled that opponents of Voter ID were wrong to claim that Pennsylvania's Voter ID law was unlawful and should be enjoined. The court recognized that Pennsylvania acted within its authority to prevent voter fraud and we're confident this fall the commonsense requirement for Voter ID will be in full effect on election day."

Cooper went on to say that "the argument put forward by the Left was so weak it didn't meet the lower threshold necessary even to grant an injunction."

"The Pennsylvania standard for an injunction is similar to the federal standard," Cooper explained. "The plaintiff 'must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits [i.e., win at trial], that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.' In this case, the arguments put forward by the ACLU and other critics of voter ID were not likely to prevail on the merits and demonstrated no irreparable harm, and so the judge recognized that granted relief was not in the public interest. This is a devastating critique of the arguments of the opponents of Voter ID in Pennsylvania."

[Warph]

Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma and team had
much to say about Mitt Romney placing a dog in a car top kennel.





There are numerous cartoons and mocking pieces
about it in the news and on the net.
This comes  from the man who munched on Indonesian Grilled Puppy.








The Presidential dog must live in constant fear in the
White House where Obuma salivates every time he see's him.







The campaign is getting stupid and vicious. The
White House does not have answers or real discussion,
they just like to attack.




Joe Biden, who was shocked that a black man like Obuma could be clean and articulate and who said "You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.", declares to a room full of people that the Romney want to put  'y'al back into chains'.   He is known for making some outrageous comments based on race.  But racist and cruel comments are okay if you are an extremist on the left.

This is not like the campaign of Jimmy Carter or John Kennedy or most Democrat candidates.   Those campaigns were not vicious  and cheesy like this.  The cheap shots are flying around quickly.

This is the old school Chicago thug style by this thug, Obuma in Capone's Hat:



The campaign this thug waged against Hillary Clinton was dirty and desperate, probably the worst in modern politics.   I wondered at the personalities of those who saw what went on and still voted for Obuma.  I especially wondered at their view of women.  It is, as they say, Chicago style thug tactics.  

Issues lie by the side of the road in favor of smears and innuendo and lies.  This characterized other campaigns run by this crew as well.  That is on record.  And there are lies and distortions about what the other side says and believes and maintains.  Again, outrageous.

I would like to think that people would want better candidates than Obama and the thuggish men he brings along with him, but, I am not sure anymore.

Standards are so low today because of Chicago Style Thug Politics!

[Warph]

               

Obama's Medicare Fear Mongering Will Drown in the Facts
By David Limbaugh
8/17/2012

Analysts may be correct that the presidential election won't primarily turn on entitlements reform, but by choosing Paul Ryan as his running mate, Mitt Romney can, contrary to conventional wisdom, make it a winning issue and lay the foundation for a reform mandate when he wins.

Besides, the economy and entitlements are wholly integrated issues: We cannot ultimately fix the economy long term without entitlement reform, and we can't balance the budget or retire the debt without a growing economy.

Democrats appear jubilant about the Ryan pick, believing his close association with entitlement reform provides an opening for them to scare seniors into thinking they'll lose Medicare and Social Security benefits. But what they haven't factored in, or are pretending to deny, is that Ryan's presence on the ticket ensures that Romney and Ryan will tackle the entitlements issue head on and that Democrats will not have the luxury of merely fear mongering. They'll have to deal with the substance of these issues, and this is a battle they cannot win, because the facts are their foe. Let's examine these facts briefly.

No one can reasonably deny that Medicare is headed for insolvency, and that Medicare's insolvency, if not rectified, will lead to the federal government's insolvency. President Obama has admitted that Medicare is on an unsustainable course and that no amount of tax increases can fix it. The Congressional Budget Office tells us that Medicare spending has increased fivefold in the past 42 years, dramatically more than all other categories of federal spending.

Short of severe price controls ordered and enforced by Obamacare's Independent Payment Advisory Board, which common sense and the history of such controls demonstrate will not work to reduce costs absent rationing and radical reductions in access to care, Obama has no plan to restructure entitlements. Only a restructuring of the program can work.

The Ryan-Wyden plan (Sen. Ron Wyden is a Democrat), which Romney has essentially embraced, is a type of hybrid system that includes market reforms while guaranteeing comprehensive coverage for Medicare beneficiaries. That is, the law would provide guaranteed coverage, but the costs for such coverage would not be unilaterally determined by the government and thus open-ended, out of control and manageable only by rationing boards (resulting in reduced access to care), but by a competitive process.

Under the current system (and under Obamacare), the government sets the price (the reimbursement), and the absence of competition guarantees spiraling costs and/or rationing. Under Ryan-Wyden, a bidding process among insurance providers, including a federal insurance provider, would determine the government's premium-support payment to Medicare beneficiaries and would ensure that their out-of-pocket costs won't exceed those under the current system unless they choose a more expensive option. This bidding process -- competitive by definition -- would contain or reduce costs.

Recent studies have shown that such competition works. The Medicare Advantage program, which was far less ambitious than Ryan-Wyden, produced a 9 percent cost reduction. The savings under Ryan-Wyden should be substantially greater.

Team Obama has no plan of its own and no credible rebuttal for the Ryan-Wyden model, so they have begun a vigorous disinformation campaign to distort the Romney-endorsed plan.

They say his plan would end Medicare as we know it. To the contrary, it is the only plan on the table that has a chance of saving Medicare from insolvency. Those now 55 and older would receive Medicare benefits as they currently exist. As for all others, they would receive the same type of comprehensive coverage (though the costs of that coverage would be reduced through market forces), and the older, sicker and poorer would receive preferential treatment.

In fact, it is Obama, not the GOP, who has assaulted Medicare, robbing it of $716 billion to shore up Obamacare. Obama can't deny that he's pilfered this money from Medicare, but speciously argues that it is a cut to health care providers, not Medicare beneficiaries. But cuts to health care providers always result in a reduction to access. Indeed, Obama's own Medicare actuaries have warned that these cuts could result in providers discontinuing their participation in Medicare.

Obama also fraudulently claims that Ryan's original plan didn't put Obamacare's stolen $716 billion back into the Medicare fund, either. But Ryan's plan never took that money out in the first place because it involved a full repeal of Obamacare. Romney, for his part, clearly doesn't contemplate robbing the Medicare fund. Obama doesn't believe in market reforms and so has no ideas other than to impose top-down cost controls, which cannot work. His re-election guarantees the insolvency of Medicare -- and ultimately of the entire federal government.

The Romney-Ryan plan preserves benefits for current and future seniors and would drive costs down through competition, thereby shoring up Medicare's solvency and averting the principal driver of national insolvency. This is a debate Obama can't win on the merits, so expect increasing demagoguery, fear and stridency. But the truth will prevail.