Sunday, March 23, 2014

Revolution: It Starts With Toilet Paper



The wonders of modern day plumbing, we all take it for granted.  Hardly anyone stops to think and appreciate the porcelain throne.  If you’re like me, once that door shuts, it’s time to do business.  This ain’t no party, this ain’t no disco, this ain’t no foolin around.  It’s game time! 

Others will disappear for hours.  Those people I don’t understand.  What are they doing in there, appreciating the ambiance?  Are they planning to redecorate?  What could they possibly be doing that could take up that much time?  Could it be long term financial planning?


But no matter what our proclivities are, all of us know what it’s like when there’s no toilet paper.  First reaction is surprise, followed by despair, and finally anger.  Now experience that realization every day.  It would be enough to start a revolution.  And indeed, that’s what’s happening in Venezuela.  The plebeians have had enough of chapped asses.  They want toilet paper, even if it’s the kind that turns your rump into Peter Cottontail.







It seems that Latin Americas second most revered religion is the Goddess Socialism.  Once the populace discover the wonders of everything “free,” they come to find out their goddess wants sacrificial offerings, such as private property, self-determination, and finally the staples of life.  Yes, Goddess Socialism can be a real bitch.  Or better yet, liberalism’s new word de jour:  bossy.  Look at the lines these people have to endure just to get the basics in life.








Did you notice there wasn’t one portable toilet anywhere along those lines?  I guess those in charge decided since there wasn't any toilet paper to be had, what difference does it make?  Hillary Clinton anyone?

Source:


http://capitalismisfreedom.com/joys-socialism-venezuela/

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/02/21/Venezuela-The-Toilet-Paper-Revolution

Rep. Renee Ellmers Berates Constituents on Illegal Aliens



What is it with North Carolina’s 2nd Congressional District?  The previous representative, Bob Etheridge, manhandled a student on a Washington D.C. street for simply asking a question.  The citizens had enough of that brutish behavior.  They replaced him with Renee Ellmers, who has just as much contempt for the plebeians as did Etheridge.

Ron Woodward of NC Listen and a handful of constituents met with Rep. Renee Ellmers.  Needless to say they ran into a hostile environment.  Here is an excerpt of that meeting.  You can read the rest by clicking the links below:

                                      
I have arranged 11 group trips to Washington, DC over the last 12 years to meet with US House members and US Senators from North Carolina to discuss immigration reform, not to mention other trips I made to DC myself and local trips, so I have had a lot of experience meeting with members of Congress. Today's meeting with Congresswoman Ellmers was the most contemptible meeting with a member of Congress I have taken part in. From the beginning she showed a sense of arrogance and disdain for meeting with us.

  
If you heard the audio clip from the Laura Ingraham radio show of Laura interviewing Renee Ellmers, today was deja vu. When she wasn't interrupting me she was constantly changing the subject, with a look of glee in her eye as if she thought she was being clever. I have studied immigration and immigration policies for nearly 20 years, and she was the most misinformed and uninformed member of Congress I have ever spoken with on the matter of immigration reform.....and that is saying something.

   
Just as Congresswoman Ellmers called Laura Ingraham ignorant during their interview, Congresswoman Ellmers went a few steps further by calling me ignorant, a racist, and dense during our meeting.......these insults were sprinkled through our discussion which was about immigration policies and her own statements about immigration reform. I refrained from any personal name calling. As we know, these kinds of insults are usually used by those who have weak arguments or are under the age of ten.

   
Below is a recap of some of the matters I tried to discuss as she attempted to change the subject approximately every 30 seconds.  Our meeting eventually lasted about 40 minutes.


PJ Media has video clips of the meeting.  Conservative HQ has the transcript as related by NC Listen.  Both are worth the time.
Source:



Saturday, March 22, 2014

50 States of Obamacare Victims

Obama's Constitutional Violations Bracket


















Since Obama is using his time picking teams for his NCAA bracket, others are doing the same, except they are seeding his constitutional violations.  One republican congressman is using his picks as a campaign promotion.

Conservative Nebraska Senate candidate Ben Sasse, who has been surging since being labeled the anti-Obamacare candidate, has released a "Constitutional Madness" bracket to highlight the lawlessness of the Obama administration. 
"Which is President Obama's worst constitutional violation?" the bracket says. "Make your picks!"
Pairings include "allowing congressional Obamacare subsidies" versus "forcing taxpayers to violate religious conscience by funding abortion through Obamacare" to "Using the IRS to suppress free speech" to "Secret monitoring of Fox News and the Associated Press."
Sasse, who has vowed to take on the permanent political class and has already clashed with the Washington establishment, was most recently endorsed by former Alaska. Gov. Sarah Palin

Does Warren Buffett have any bets on this one?


Libtards Co-opt Gadsden Flag





















Shameless sociopaths are the best way to describe liberals.  They destroy the health care industry, co-opt the Gadsden flag which is the symbol of the Tea Party, who by the way, is against Obamacare, and then act incredulous when others criticize them.


You have to wonder about these people.  Either their clueless, or they're just trying to piss people off.

Friday, March 21, 2014

Dissolution of the American Creed



The world is witnessing a wave of secession movements.  Eyes are currently on the Crimean Peninsula.  Its majority Russian speaking residents voted in referendum to come home to mother bear.  This movement first started after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.  Those in the know weren’t surprised when this began to happen.  That’s why the Obama administration looks like a bunch of incredulous fools.

Scotland is also in the process of seceding from the United Kingdom, along with Catalonia from Spain.  But the big surprise is Venice.  It seems they and their northern brethren are tired of Rome’s fiscal mismanagement: 

For decades there has been deep-seated dissatisfaction in the rich northern regions of Italy with what is widely regarded as inefficient and venal rule from Rome, as well as resentment that hard-won tax revenues are sent south and often squandered.
About 3.8 million people in Veneto are eligible to vote. Campaigners want a future state to be known as Repubblica Veneta — the Republic of Veneto.
They acknowledge that the vote is not binding on the national government in Rome and could cause a big constitutional upheaval, but insist that if it passes, they will start taking steps to withhold taxes, in what would effectively be a unilateral declaration of independence.
“If there is a majority yes vote, we have scholars drawing up a declaration of independence and there are businesses in the region who say they will begin paying taxes to local authorities instead of to Rome,” Lodovico Pizzati, the spokesman for the independence movement, told The Daily Telegraph.


Will the United States witness another secessionist movement?  We have just as much to complaint about as the aforementioned.  I would say even more.  Our founding principles and Constitution have been forsaken.  And it all started with the Civil War.



When the South seceded from the Union, Northern aggressors violated the tenets of the Declaration of Independents.  That was the first salvo of dismantling our founding principles.  Yes, slavery – an evil institution, was a factor in the South’s contention for parting ways, but so was the mercantile policies of Washington D.C.

The South first threatened to secede during President Andrew Jackson’s tenure due to unfair trade practices.  He squashed that movement in its cradle.  Vice President John C. Calhoun and South Carolina trembled from fear of Old Hickory.  Everyone knew Jackson meant business, unlike our current president.


War eventually came and the South lost.  And despite the crimes of Northern occupiers, who raped, murdered and pillaged the vanquished, the country coalesced around a common core of culture, language, God and the principles established in our Constitution.  Those tenets are the pillars of our prosperity.  Progressives have been on a mission for over the past 100 years to topple them.  Here are a few their initiatives:


The 14th Amendment allowed the federal judiciary to impose its will upon the States in violation of the 9th and 10th Amendments.

The 16th Amendment allowed the federal government to extort States with “free money” and punish them if they don’t comply.

The 17th Amendment excluded States’ legislatures from the political process in shaping federal law.

Then Congress made themselves irrelevant with the advent of the 1946 Administrative Procedures Act, now we have unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats imposing rules and regulations without our consent.  This is a complete violation of separation of powers as outlined in our Constitution. 

The systematic dismantling of our founding principles is enough to ensure the dissolution of the United States.  But the Progressives aren’t satisfied with that.  They have embarked on an even more destructive path, and that is dividing the population into squabbling subset groups vying for political advantage.  So much for E pluribus Unum.  Progressives laugh at the notion.








Source:


Thursday, March 20, 2014

Republican Establishment Proposal Leaves Obamacare Head in Body Politic



When a federal government program is firmly established, it’s near impossible to get rid of it.   It’s like a tick.  Once it gets under your skin, you have to take care to completely remove it.   If the head snaps off and you ignore it, the body politic can be infected. 

Fannie Mae, a New Deal program, is a perfect example of how good intentions can cause havoc on our economy.  This once government sponsored entity is now owned by the taxpayers because of mismanagement and malfeasance.  Congress has made proposals to wind it down, but chances are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will never go away.

So it will be with Obamacare.  Even with all the disasters that heralded this Democratic Party nightmare and the unpopularity amongst the citizenry, the Republican establish is doing its best to salvage this failed government program.  The John Locke Foundation reported the following:

Moreover, on the eve of the president's latest State of the Union Address, three Senate Republicans released an Obamacare alternative proposal.  The Patient Choice, Affordability, Responsibility, and Empowerment Act (CARE) sponsored by Republican Senators Richard Burr (NC), Tom Coburn (OK), and Orrin Hatch (UT) seeks to execute the same goals as Obamacare: lower health care costs, fix the pre-existing condition dilemma, and reduce the number of uninsured Americans.  A key difference, however, is that the CARE Act operates on incentives, not mandates.  Carrots, not sticks.  It does this by injecting consumer-driven principles and patient choice into the health care delivery system.
     
Listed below are just a few of the many consumer-driven, semi market-oriented provisions of the CARE Act:


CARE Act would repeal Obamacare exchanges and extirpate both the employer and individual mandates. Health insurance plans would not be required to include the 10 essential health benefits like current health insurance exchange plans.
 A tax-credit would be distributed to individual policyholders and employees of businesses with less than 100 workers who make an income of less than 300% FPL ($35,010 for an individual).  The tax-credit would be distributed directly to the consumer -- not the insurance company.
If an individual did not enroll in a health plan, that person could be auto-enrolled in a high-deductible plan where the premium matches the tax-credit amount.  If so desired, that person could still opt out of coverage.  
A one-time open enrollment period would allow the uninsured and those with pre-existing conditions to purchase coverage without insurers being able to adjust rates according to one's health status.
Policyholders who maintained continuous coverage for at least 18 months would be allowed to switch plans and not be denied or burdened with skyrocketing premiums due to a change in health status.  


 Here are three more components to this CARE Act as reported by The John Locke Foundation:


Medicaid Reform: States would be given broader flexibility to redesign their Medicaid programs.  If this were to occur, it would be wise for North Carolina to risk-adjust Medicaid patients or enforce per-capita block grants to ensure better budget predictability.  Furthermore, the proposal offers Medicaid recipients the option to access private coverage with a refundable tax-credit (these would be available to individuals with incomes up to three times the poverty level, around $35,000) when purchasing private coverage.  In addition, the CARE Act would bring back Health Opportunity Accounts (HOAs) that made an appearance back in 2005 under the Deficit Reduction Act.  With a high-deductible health plan, the state and federal governments could contribute an annual $2,500 into each Medicaid patient's HOA.  This model of health care financing is more compatible with consumer-driven health care.     

Age-Rating Ratio: Under Obamacare, a high-risk, older individual cannot be charged more than three times the amount of a low-risk, young policyholder.  As a result, the "young invincible population" is burdened with higher premiums to subsidize the cost of the high-risk population on the exchanges.  The CARE Act would initially ease this price control from a 3:1 age-rating ratio to a 5:1 ratio.  Power would be decentralized to states to manipulate community rating standards.

Capping the Tax-Exclusion: Removing this exclusion for employer sponsored health insurance is probably the most controversial component


 What these politicians don’t seem to realize is they are the problem.  The health care industry is overregulated, over mandated, and overtaxed.  The third party payer system has completely distorted the market.  Yet, with the aforementioned proposals, as you can probably see, Obamacare is going to be with us for some time in one form or another.