The Zero Fears His Superpower

Or, at least The Zero would if he could count to five without taking his shoes off.

 

 

 

 

Check out The Zero’s face in this video. “WTF?!? What’s he talkin’ ’bout, Willis? Is that MATH?!?” If you’ve ever wondered what Odumbo’s face looks like when confronted with numbers, well, here ya go:

http://youtu.be/o1yTY2MciOk

Oh, and during all the demonizing of Ryan and his budgetary proposals, do remember that they guy who was THE ZERO’S PICK to head up his “deficit committee” and represent the administration’s policies, Erskine Bowles (Clinton SBA head, later WH chief of staff), über-Democrat, had a different view:

Just sayin’. Serious policy wonks don’t share the views of Mass MEdia Podpeople like Rachel Maddow and Michael Moore. *sigh* The only real negative I can see in having Ryan as a vice presidential candidate is that he’ll be wasted “debating” Cwazy Unka Joe (if The Zero’s campaign even lets that massacre happen). At the top of the ticket, he’d have a chance to obliterate The Zero, metaphorically nuking him from orbit.

Oh, fun. Jerry Pournelle suggests (in my words, not his) that with the Romney/Ryan strengths on  economic policy against The Zero’s (and zero-cubed, Cwazy Unka Joe) profound weaknesses, some Dhimmicraps might be tempted to play the “no foreign policy experience” card… and that that would be a real tarbaby for the Dhims, as

 

“…anyone including Elmer Fudd has more experience in foreign affairs than the current President had on taking office.”

Bazinga!

Consider the DMV (and Some People Think It’s a Good Idea to Have Government Manage Health Care?)

Sarah Hoyt posted yesterday about her experiences with “gummint bureaucrappy” (my neologism applied to her descriptive narrative on bureaucracy), and that prodded one of my two active brain cells to simulate something like life.

Her youngest son had to trek (with Mom, for reasons Hoyt skewers) to the DMV for his license.

“…which will then be mailed to him, in a week or two…”

Good Sharkey, Colonel God! That’s worse than I’ve experienced from any DMV in 40+ years’ experience driving! Most recently, it took me 15 minutes and I walked out with my new license. BUT, it did chap my gizzard that for the VERY FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE, thistime, although I have a 40+ years’ easily-trackable record with four states’ DMVs (20 years in this state alone), THIS time I had to have my birth certificate to “prove” I am me. (WTF? How does my birth certificate prove that I am me, unless the whorls on my baby footprints were to be matched up with my adult footprints?) The funny thing? (No, not “funny ha-ha” but “funny gag-gag”.) My birth certificate was temporarily unavailable (long story), so I sent off for a duplicate (yes, a photostatic duplicate that was as exact a duplicate as can be produced, as comparison with my original later demonstrated). To obtain it I had to include a scanned copy of… my current driver’s license.

So, my (then) current driver’s license was all I needed to obtain a duplicate birth certificate… which was needed to renew that driver’s license.

Complete, absolute and total paper-shuffling B.S.

I draw from this sort of thing–and from Hoyt’s post, to which you can surely add your own examples–an extended lesson:

Governments cannot run without some form of bureaucracy, but since bureaucracies are subject to both Parkinson’s Law and Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy, perhaps that’s an argument for anarchy. *heh* The bureacrappic anarcho-tyranny that is now strangling our economy, castrating our liberty and aiding in stultifying society is certainly the most potent argument against surrendering health care to the “tender mercies” of yet more “gummint bureaucraps”.

Just sayin’

Individual Mandate Picking On Individuals to Tax: UPDATED

[SEE THE FOOT OF THE POST–in the “more” section–FOR AN UPDATE FROM FAIRTAX.ORG]

This post will be pinned to the top of the blog for a week or so. Newer posts will appear below this one.


 

 

 

It seems to me that “individual mandates” as delineated by Justice Roberts’ majority opinion in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius [pdf file] (the “Obamacare” decision) have long been with us. The “feddle gummint’s” taxation power, exercised through the IRS, has long treated different people differently, taxing some more than others, excluding some from taxation because of behaviors the “feddle gummint” wants to encourage, while taxing those “others” more because they don’t do something the “feddle gummint” wants them to.

It seems to me that the two Very Good Lessons we can draw from this decision are

1. ALL the Dhimmicraps (The Zero and his co-conspirators and the Mass MEdia Podpeople Hivemind and all the Academia Nut Fruitcakes, et al) who promoted Obamacare deliberately, maliciously and wittingly LIED THPOUGH THEIR TEETH to get the thing passed.
2. Justice Roberts very wisely (Niccolò Machiavelli would’ve handed him a gold star) didn’t leave it at obliquely pointing out what liars the Obamacare supporters are but placed the responsibility for fixing the mess where it belongs when he said of the Court:

It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.

Bingo!

My exegesis? If you abhor this law as much as you should, then get up off your fat lazy asses and WORK to elect representatives who will overturn it, and in the future pay more attention to electing representatives who genuinely have the republic’s interests at heart.

Continue readingIndividual Mandate Picking On Individuals to Tax: UPDATED”

The Zero Has No Shame

P-resident “Obama” (Why the scare quotes? Because there is strong evidence that “Obama” is a former name, assumed for whatever purposes by the adopted son of Indonesian citizen Lolo Soetoro–make of the readily available facts whatever you will) has no shame. In a bratty tantrum against the SCOTUS, The Zero, self-proclaimed constitutional scholar that he is, uttered the following nonsense,

I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress. And I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.

“…strong majority”? What fairlyland is The Zero living in? “…unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed… by… Congress”? Unprecedented, Extraordinary? This comment certainly puts the definitive nail in the coffin of The Zero’s constitutional “scholarship” since even casual students are aware of Marbury v. Madison, 1803 and likely aware that the 209 years between now and then are certainly not empty of the SCOTUS voiding laws passed by Congress. Indeed, in one recent eight year period (1994-2002) the SCOTUS struck down 32 federal laws, voiding them wholly or in part. No, only the “constitutional scholar” who goes by the name of Barack Hussein Obama seems to view the SCOTUS striking down a law passed by Congress as “unprecedented” and “extraordinary”.

Dumbass.

Hamilton explained the thinking of the Founders on the matter in Federalist 78:

The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution. By a limited Constitution, I understand one which contains certain specified exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance, as that it shall pass no bills of attainder, no ex-post-facto laws, and the like. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing. [emphasis added]

The Zero is a sham and a shame, and anyone thinking he has anything useful or helpful to say about anything has fewer working brain cells than a 10-year-old cracked crock of spoiled kimche.


Sidebar: I truly love it that my spell checker flags “Obama” every time I type it.

BTW, no, I did not link to Federalist 78. You should have your own copy in hardcopy and be able to get to it with no problem via any of the links on the first page of a search for “Federalist Papers,” so why link? My hardcopy is an arm’s length away from me as I type this, along with copies of the other American State Papers, and, IMO, if you are a citizen of the US, so ought yours to be. Just sayin’

The Parable of the Kosher Deli

Before I insert the meat of the post (you may groan now; you certainly will once the pun hits you :-)), a question: has anyone asked about the effect of HHS rulings about Obumascare requirements on Muslim health organizations? Or are they exempt? And who would care anyway?

The Parable of the Kosher Deli, as told by William Lori, the bishop of Bridgeport, CT, in testimony before the House Oversight Committee, February 16, 2012

Continue reading “The Parable of the Kosher Deli”