Racist Al Sharpton Rushes to Florida with Black Militia to Fan Trouble in Trayvon Martin Death.

“This Is Not About A Black Or A White Thing…” Yet Some Want To Make It That”

by Lawrence Sinclair:

“Yet Some Want To Make It That

No matter what the media, Al Sharpton, the NAACP, or  New Black Liberation Militia (NBLM), have said and done to incite racial embers in the shooting death of Florida teen Trayvon Martin, we have to acknowledge the parents of Trayvon, Tracy Martin & Sybrina Fulton for their stance opposing any such racial divide. Mr. Martin told reporters yesterday “I don’t care if he’s white, black, hispanic…” Mr. Martin is correct. Despite the medias intentional efforts to paint the tragic shooting of Trayvon Martin as being a racist act committed by a “white” man for shock value and to incite racial confrontation, the facts show that Zimmerman is NOT white, and in our opinion should most certainly be arrested and charged in the shooting. FOX News Latino is the first mainstream media we have found to report Zimmerman is Hispanic instead of the media fixation with calling him white for racial purposes only.

Despite the Parents opposing any acts of racial unrest you have an organization out of Georgia the New Black Liberation Militia who has appeared on Orlando’s FOX 35 News announcing they would travel to Florida to take George Zimmerman into custody using a citizens arrest. We understand the concern that many have expressed in how they “perceive” the investigation of Trayvon’s death has been carried out, but it is important to understand that NO law enforcement agency can perform their duties when individuals and groups immediately start interfering in their investigation and certainly not when you have individuals and groups who immediately accuse those Law Enforcement agencies of being racist.

Opinion: Trayvon Martin Case: Does Race Play a Role, Though Zimmerman’s Not White?

Trayvon Martin did not deserve to die the way he did. Do we think George Zimmerman should be charged in his death, YES. Do we think the Sanford Police department has engaged in racist practices in this case, NO. Do we agree with the Sanford Police department recognizing that no matter what they did they were going to be attacked and used for others political purposes whereby deciding to turn the matter over to the State Attorney’s office, YES.

Feds  To Investigate Killing of Black Teen by Florida Latino

LS News Group believes the involvement of the Justice Department at this stage of the investigation is being done clearly for political purposes and those in the Justice Department should be called out for making Trayvon Martin a political badge.

Sanford city commissioners on Wednesday voted 3-2 to express “no confidence” in  Police Chief Bill Lee Jr. over the handling of the fatal shooting. The  commission can’t fire Lee, however, because the police chief reports to the city  manager. Many critics of the police say they were too quick to accept  Zimmerman’s version of events and statement that he felt threatened by  Martin.

Even though we agree that George Zimmerman should be charged in the shooting of Trayvon Martin, we also understand that Sanford Police had to follow the laws of Florida and short of eye-witnesses contradicting Zimmerman’s claims, the Sanford Police were restricted in what they could do.

We again ask that Al Sharpton, the New Black Liberation Militia, the Orange County NAACP, WESH 2 NBC affiliate in Orlando, and the national media follow the example and honor the wishes of Tracy Martin & Sybrina Fulton and stop trying to make this horrific incident into a race war and assist the State Attorney and Sanford Police in putting together a criminal case against George Zimmerman which will result in a conviction. Please understand there is a reason why people do not want others to incite emotions and try to make this a race issue, you do not want to pressure Law Enforcement or the State Attorney into doing something out of emotion that could come back and allow a defense attorney to have cause to get charges dismissed against Zimmerman when they are filed!

Trayvon’s mother said it best at a rally in New York last night: “This is not about a black or a white thing,” she said. “This is about a right  or wrong thing. Justice for Trayvon.”

While Mrs. Fulton is correct in saying “this is a about a black or a white thing,” sadly the audience she made that statement in front of have and will continue to do everything that they can to make it “a black and white thing.” The Sharpton scripted “No Justice No Peace,” being shouted in the New York rally will most certainly be Sharpton’s rallying cry in Sanford later today when he brings in his National Action Network on MSNBC’s dime to incite further racial sentiment in Sanford. If Al Sharpton and the media were truly motivated by justice for Trayvon they would stop making statements such as “black men in Orlando have to feel unsafe just walking down the street,” or repeatedly publishing headlines like “17 year old black teen killed by 28 year old white man.”

Comment:   Dennis Prager spoke about this case during his radio show today.   

Whereever the Left secures positions of influence in any society it become effective in controlling language.   Language is central to learning, to communication, and to control thought and to use crises for political advantage.

The American Left has rallied its forces since the  end of the Vietnam War behind minorities by developing and expanding  enmities against the majority ‘Christian white culture’….. stirring  anger, bitterness, resentments, and even hates among Jews, Muslims, blacks, women, Latinos, laborers, gays and lesbians,  the young and unrich, and atheists, all of whom deserve ‘entitlements’ for not being members  of the despised majority group.

Marxism in America depends on racial divide.    The spirit and institutions of America’s E Pluribus, In God We Trust, and Liberty, must be destroyed to create the dictatorship of the Equal.

Dennis referred  to a today’s  New York Times article about the Trayvon Martin death.   The reporter wrote that the man who allegedly shot the young Martin was a “White-Hispanic”…….a contradiction of terms in the American Leftwing Language Police.

American Leftwing insitutions, especially those representing the nation’s black population have a long record craving for racial strife where whites can be made to appear ‘racist’.     Many minorities, especially blacks have been programmed to believe only members of the white race can be racist.

Yet by all standards in reality,  today’s most racist community in America is the inner city black plantation culture with Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity following  in Chicago being an excellent example.   Hispanics  fresh from Mexico settling in Arizona and California, many, if not most illegals are further examples of fervent racists making noise today.

Dennis noted the deviation from Lefty reporting, the describing of the shooter as a White-Hispanic and clarified that the folks at the New York Times are politically motivated to believe only whites can be racists and so have decided to alter their lexicon on such racial matters with the “White-Hispanic” invention.

Howabout White-Black president Barack Hussein Obama.

Prager often reminds his listeners that the crime of using such racial/racist epithets in communication and education are left wing motivated and not consistent with America’s tradition of advancing the tenet of E Pluribus Unum……that we are all American and that is the end of the matter.

Santorum slips into the small and petty…..with “maybe America’s better off with Obama”…

Santorum: Maybe America’s better off

with Obama than taking a risk

on an “Etch-a-Sketch” candidate

 by Allahpundit    at HotAir:

Faced with the reality that his chances have collapsed, the Sweater Vest begins to unravel:

“You win by giving people a choice. You win by giving people the opportunity to see a different vision for our country, not someone who’s just going to be a little different than the person in there. If you’re going to be a little different, we might as well stay with what we have instead of taking a risk with what may be the Etch A Sketch candidate of the future,” Santorum told a crowd at USAA.

During a press avail following the event, Santorum, who carried the Etch A Sketch during his speech, argued that Romney knows he can’t win in the general election.

“All the things that allow Romney to win the primary are unavailable to him to win the general and that’s why you see these Etch A Sketch comments because he knows he can’t win,” said Santorum.

Romney issued a statement later saying he’s “disappointed to hear that Rick Santorum would rather have Barack Obama as president than a Republican.” Question for Team RS: What “risk” is there, exactly, that President Etch-a-Sketch would be worse than Obama? Even if his political instincts carry him towards the center, he knows he can’t stray too far from the base on big-ticket items like, oh, say, Supreme Court appointments. That’s a big difference, not a little difference, and a pro-life advocate as passionate as Santorum surely knows it. I’m no Romney fan, yet the only argument I can come up with in which The One is possibly maybe supposedly conceivably theoretically preferable to Romney is some sort of “only Nixon can go to China” reasoning. Only a Republican like Nixon could make nice with Mao because a Democrat would have been accused by the right of harboring secret communist sympathies. Nixon’s party ID immunized him from that; by the same token, you could argue that if an attack on Iran is inevitable it’s better that Obama gives the order than Romney because the anti-war left will roll over like puppies for him (again). You could, if you’re really daring, even argue that only a Democratic president can sign entitlement reform because partisan loyalty will help defang some of its many, many, many, many liberal opponents. I don’t buy the latter argument, though — I think it’s one of the few policy areas in which the left will be ferocious even in opposing a Democratic president, if not quite as ferocious as they’d be towards a Republican. (That’s one reason Obama hasn’t been aggressive about it despite his campaign promises about entitlements.) And as for Iran, are you willing to purchase relative liberal silence on an attack at the high price of trillions more in debt and a few new stridently liberal SCOTUS justices? I’ll pass.

I’m actually amazed he’s making this argument given the hard feelings it’ll engender among Republicans who’ll soon be rallying around Romney in an “anybody but Obama” fervor. Santorum’s sunk this time but he’s raised his profile significantly for 2016. Time to start thinking ahead strategically instead of letting bitterness run away with that yapper of his. Exit quotation from Byron York: “Asked what other plans Santorum had to call attention to the [Etch-a-Sketch] matter, [Santorum spokesman Alice] Stewart said, ‘Lots.’”

Comment:   While Newt Gingrich has a nasty side to accompany the better tones of his intelligence and quickness of tongue.   Rick Santorum however the good soul that he is,  has a pettiness, a small side to his verbalizing which makes onlookers doubt his breadth of understanding,  creativity, and self control.     Mr. Santorum is a betterman than the his loser moment dreaming about the better Obama.    Both of these gentlemen in honesty and general character  are miles ahead of this deviant American president, devious, dishonest and often when unable to control his favor for Marxist tyranny, antiAmerican stranger from Indonesia, Columbia, and Harvard, and the Illinois senate where he shined expressing himself with “present” instead of  bothering to vote on measure large and small.

 

 

Is Pelosi Nuts? or is she just a dime a dozen Lefty who never bothers to think?

Pelosi: Obamacare Guarantees “Life, Liberty, And The Pursuit Of Happiness”

 

Pelosi’s organized thought process regarding the Declaration of Independence’s “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness……http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/03/22/pelosi_obamacare_guarantees_life_liberty_and_the_pursuit_of_happiness.html

 

Related Videos | expand      (Check out President Obama’s lie that Soyndra was fault of Congress.)

 

…..Wasserman-Shultz’s idea of telling the truth:  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/03/22/wasserman-schultz_denies_comparing_voter_id_laws_to_jim_crow_laws.html

 

Playingwasserman schultz obamacare a boon to small businesses442578

Playingobama anybody who says were suppressing domestic oil production isnt paying attention442568

Playingobama blames congress for solyndra not our program per se442566

 

 

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi cites the Declaration of Independence in her defense of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on the House floor on the eve of its second anniversary.

Santorum and Gingrich……For the Good of America, QUIT YOUR QUESTS NOW AND BACK MITT

DeMint on Romney: “There’s a lot to like there”

 by Tina Korbe  at HotAir:

“South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint all but called for Mitt Romney’s GOP opponents to drop out of the race today, according to Alex Burns and Jon Allen of Politico.

“We all need to look at this presidential primary and encourage the candidates to do a little self-reflection here on what’s good for our country,” the influential South Carolina conservative told reporters in the Capitol after attending a group meeting with Romney. “The sooner we can make a decision, the sooner we can focus on the real problem, which is Obama.”

Asked if he was making a diplomatic case for former Sen. Rick Santorum and former Speaker Newt Gingrich to drop out, DeMint said “You can take from that what you will.”

“There’s no need to drag this to a convention if it’s pretty clear who our nominee is,” DeMint said.

DeMint also said he has “always been impressed” with Romney. “There’s a lot to like there.”

Meanwhile, BuzzFeed’s Zeke Miller reports that the Obama campaign almost relishes the prospect of facing Romney in the fall:

They are afraid of everything from a spike in gas prices to the possibility of war with Iran; from unemployment to the Supreme Court’s striking down the health care law. But one thing Barack Obama’s expensive war machine isn’t afraid of right now is Mitt Romney. …

“The things that I worry about are all the outside money,” Burton said. “Mechanics wise — the things that our out of our control —I think there are real issues for Democrats,” Burton said. “But from an issues perspective, we’re ready to go on offense.”

“There is nothing about Mitt Romney himself [that scares me],” Burton added, “it’s the resources that are at his disposal.” (Burton’s Super PAC recently received the explicit backing of the Obama campaign to raise money to counter Republican independent expenditure groups.)

Another veteran Democratic operative compared Romney to his predecessors as governor of Massachusetts, Mike Dukakis, who beat what many saw as a weak field for the nomination.

“This is their year of the seven dwarfs,” Trippi said. “He’s just the tallest dwarf.”

In a way, though, the Obama campaign’s disdain for Romney points the way for the former Massachusetts governor — or any GOP candidate — to be victorious. Obama is right to be afraid of the issues — and, in the end, the election will be about him and his failed policies. At this point, it doesn’t matter so much who the GOP nominee is as that he not let Obama off the hook.

Tags: 2012 elections, Barack Obama, Jim DeMint, Mitt Romney“

 

Comment:    Thank you Senator De Mint for your wisdom and your love for America.   Please do  what you can to persuade Americans to restore American values, American standards, and American dreams to the White House and Congress.  

Help END  the Obama-George Soros   government ownership of the American mind twisting it to create  Marxist racism, sexism, atheism,   and class hatred  against fellow American countrymen and women.   

 

 

Mark Steyn on…..”Ever Heard of Mohammed Merah?

 LATHER, RINSE, REPEAT  

 

by Mark Steyn    at   National Review Online:

The killer of French schoolchildren and soldiers turns out to be a man called Mohammed Merah. The story can now proceed according to time-honored tradition:

Stage One: The strange compulsion to assure us that the killer is a “right wing conservative extremist,” in the words of NRO commenter ExpatAsia, echoed by Chrisman and Galt’s Bain. Up north, this view was shared by Canada’s most prominent establishment Jew and the Liberal Party attack poodle Warren Kinsella (whom NR readers may recall from my free-speech cover story, which mentioned the groveling apology he was forced to make to “the Chinese community” after an unfortunately sinophobic cat joke). The insistence that the killer was emblematic of an epidemic of right-wing hate sweeping the planet is, regrettably, no longer operative. Instead, the killer isn’t representative of anything at all.

So on to Stage Two: Okay, he may be called Mohammed but he’s a “lone wolf.” Sure, he says he was trained by al-Qaeda, but what does he know? Don’t worry, folks, he’s just a lone wolf like Major Hasan and Faisal Shahzad and all the other card-carrying members of the Amalgamated Union of Lone Wolves. All jihad is local.

On to Stage Three: Okay, even if there are enough lone wolves around to form their own Radio City Rockette line, it’s still nothing to do with Islam. I’m sad to see the usually perceptive Ed West of the London Telegraph planting his flag on this wobbling blancmange.

And then, of course, Stage Four: The backlash that never happens. Because apparently the really bad thing about actual dead Jews is that it might lead to dead non-Jews: “French Muslims Fear Backlash After Shooting.” Likewise, after Major Hasan’s mountain of dead infidels, “Shooting Raises Fears For Muslims In US Army.” Likewise, after the London Tube slaughter, “British Muslims Fear Repercussions After Tomorrow’s Train Bombing.” Oh, no, wait, that’s a parody, though it’s hard to tell.

Look, pace Ed West, isn’t it just a teensy-weensy little bit to do with Islam? Or at any rate the internal contradictions of one-way multiculturalism? No, it’s not a competition. Most times in today’s Europe, the guys beating, burning and killing Jews will be Muslims. Once in a while, it will be somebody else killing the schoolkids. But is it so hard to acknowledge that rapid, transformative, mass Muslim immigration might not be the most obvious aid to social tranquility? That it might possibly pose challenges that would otherwise not have existed — for uncovered women in Oslo, for gays in Amsterdam, for Jews everywhere? Is it so difficult to wonder if, for these and other groups living in a long-shot social experiment devised by their rulers, the price of putting an Islamic crescent in the diversity quilt might be too high? What’s left of Jewish life in Europe is being extinguished remorselessly, one vandalized cemetery, one subway attack at a time. How many Jewish children will be at that school in Toulouse a decade hence? A society that becomes more Muslim eventually becomes less everything else. What is happening on the Continent is tragic, in part because it was entirely unnecessary.     

Comment:   Nearly all Europe, nearly all American Marxists and its other left wingers, and  among these often its most active members and donors, the dogmatic lefty Jew,  there seems to be no difference between   Muslim Mohammed Merah’s slaughter of an innocent  rabbi,  his three children,  and innocent military personnel in Toulouse, France,  and them be struck by lightning……a bad luck of the draw  of nature.

Such poison reminds us of the American lefty who viewed and still views the fanatic Muslim attack on the World Trade Center in 2011 as a ‘TRAGEDY’, a mere consequence of a mood of nature.

It shouldn’t be surprising.   Based on the general vocabulary reflecting the mind of the  American lefty, neither she nor he any  longer appear to be  among the educated in general AND  the specific or they have become  immoral in their atheism, noting  no  difference between classic good and classic evil……..perhaps both.

NoNoNoNo Expanding of the Export-Import Bank’s Mandate!!!

Expanding the Export-Import Bank’s Mandate Is a Big Mistake

from the National Center for Policy Analysis:

“The Export-Import Bank has been focused throughout its existence almost exclusively on export assistance for American companies.  Proponents justify this mandate through four chief rationales, yet each of these actually demonstrates the injurious nature of the bank, says Sallie James, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute.

• Supporters argue that by financing companies, the bank creates jobs; however, because it essentially diverts national savings away from market-selected projects toward specific niche goals, the bank is actually inefficient in job creation.
• It is also supposed that by improving exports, the bank helps correct America’s trade imbalance; this fails to consider that the exports of products is only a small component of the trade balance, and that the resources to help some companies are allocated at the expense of others.
• Proponents emphasize that the bank provides assistance to companies when the private sector won’t, but this line of thought actually emphasizes the inherent risk in the bank’s objectives — if the private sector won’t step in, the risks likely outweigh the benefits.
• Finally, the bank is justified on the grounds that by subsidizing certain exports, it allows domestic exporters to compete fairly with foreign firms who receive their own subsidies.

This last justification is perhaps the most crucial.  This is because it is so contrary to the stated trade goals of the United States, which seek to eliminate barriers to trade and free up international commerce.  Thus, reactionary subsidies in response to foreign subsidies undermine American objectives.

Additionally, the Obama administration has stated in a recent press release that the president would like to expand this subsidized assistance to domestic sales as well, thereby compounding the creation of trade barriers and distorting free trade.

• Data provided by the bank show that between 2002 and 2010 just under 40 percent of its transactions by value were authorized to “meet competition.”
• Given that these allocations constituted just 4 percent of the bank’s transactions, it becomes clear that this financing is given in large amounts to a small number of firms.
• That the president wishes to expand this mandate would further exacerbate this problem, putting taxpayers at risk while allowing federal bureaucrats to pick winners and losers.

Source: Sallie James, “Expanding Ex-Im’s Mandate Is a Big Mistake,” Cato Institute, March 14, 2012.

For text:

http://www.cato.org/publications/free-trade-bulletin/expanding-exims-mandate-is-big-mistake

For more on Economic Issues:

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=17“

Our America’s Travels with Truth-challenged Barack Hussein Obama

‘The Road We’ve Traveled’ With Obama

Three dismal years are spun into 17 minutes of fact-challenged campaign film

 By KARL ROVE            at the Wall Street Journal:

This month, Barack Obama’s re-election campaign released a 17-minute film, “The Road We’ve Traveled,” that previews the Democratic general election narrative. Directed by Academy Award winner Davis Guggenheim and narrated by actor Tom Hanks, the film explores Mr. Obama’s most important decisions.

Viewers are told Mr. Obama deserves re-election for restoring America to prosperity after a recession “as deep as anything . . . since the Great Depression.” He accomplished this in part, so the film says, by bailing out the auto companies—deciding not to just “give the car companies” or “the UAW the money” but to force them to “work together” and “modernize the automobile industry.” The president, we’re told, also confronted “one of the most worrisome problems facing America . . . the cost of health care.”

Abroad, Mr. Obama ended the Iraq war and, in the “ultimate test of leadership,” Osama bin Laden was killed on his watch. The film heralds Mr. Obama as a leader committed to “tough decisions” and as someone who “would not dwell in blame” in the Oval Office.

Where to begin? Perhaps with the last statement: Mr. Obama has spent three years wallowing in blame. His culprits have ranged from his predecessor, to tsunamis and earthquakes, to ATMs, to Fox News, to yours truly. If you Google “Obama, Blame, Bush” and “Obama, Inherited,” you’ll get tens of millions of hits.

As for inheriting the worst economy since the Great Depression: Perhaps Mr. Obama has forgotten the Carter presidency, which featured double-digit inflation, double-digit interest rates, and high unemployment.

The film is riddled with other inaccuracies and misleading claims. For example, the United Auto Workers may not have gotten “money” in the bailout, but as an unsecured creditor, the union received a 17.5% ownership interest in General Motors and 55% of Chrysler, while the companies’ bondholders got hosed.

The film asserts that the auto companies “repaid their loans.” But they still owe taxpayers $26.5 billion, and the Treasury Department’s latest report to Congress noted that nearly $24 billion of the bailout money is gone forever.

Assistant editorial page editor James Freeman on Jeb Bush’s endorsement of Mitt Romney. Plus, how President Obama reckons that he’s only responsible for 12% of the deficit and George W. Bush is to blame for 59%.

The film includes Mr. Obama’s 2008 claim that the death of his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, from cancer “could have been prevented” if only she “had good, consistent insurance.” But earlier this year, a biography of Dunham by Janny Scott, “A Singular Woman,” revealed that she had health insurance that covered most all her medical bills, leaving only a few hundred dollars a month in deductibles and uncovered costs. For misleading viewers, the Washington Post fact checker awarded this segment of the film “Three Pinocchios.”

The film also offers up numerous straw men. For example, opponents of Mr. Obama’s auto industry bailout, we’re told, just wanted to “let it go,” as if an orderly bankruptcy of GM and Chrysler in the courts rather than by presidential fiat was never an option. It was.

Almost as important as what the film says is what it doesn’t. There’s not a word about the failure of the president’s stimulus to produce the jobs he pledged—according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, fewer Americans are working today (132.7 million) than when Mr. Obama was sworn in (133.6 million).

There’s nothing about his promise to cut the deficit in half by the end of his term—according to Treasury’s Bureau of Public Debt, the administration has piled up more debt in three years and two months ($4.93 trillion) than his predecessor did in eight years ($4.8 trillion).

Nothing is said about the centerpieces of last year’s State of the Union—green energy jobs (Solyndra anyone?) and high-speed rail (fizzled). Nada on the president’s promises about how ObamaCare would lower premiums and lower the deficit while allowing people to keep their existing coverage (all untrue).

There’s nothing about the crumbling situation in Afghanistan, strained relations with allies like Israel, Mr. Obama’s unpopularity in the Islamic World, the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, multiple missteps with Iran (from failing to protest the stolen Iranian elections in 2009 to the mullahs’ unchecked pursuit of nuclear weapons), and Mr. Obama’s flip flops on closing the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and providing civilian trials for terrorists.

As for the killing of Osama bin Laden, Mr. Obama did what virtually any commander in chief would have done in the same situation. Even President Bill Clinton says in the film “that’s the call I would have made.” For this to be portrayed as the epic achievement of the first term tells you how bare the White House cupboards are.

Mr. Rove, the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush, is the author of “Courage and Consequence” (Threshold Editions, 2010).

A version of this article appeared Mar. 22, 2012, on page A13 in some U.S. editions of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: ‘The Road We’ve Traveled’ With Obama.

The Dishonest Obama trains Dishonest Hirelings…..Wasserman-Schultz, for instance

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz: I totally didn’t say

that thing that I said on camera on television last year

 by Allahpundit   at HotAir:

 

To cleanse the palate, fun and games via MRC TV with America’s favorite lifelike talking-points robot. I’ll give you two theories on what happened here. One: She had just finished speaking at a forum on a different topic and was confused by the question, thinking that the MRC interviewer had misheard something she said. Then she realized no, this was in reference to something else and she was about to be put on the spot, which meant it was time to smile, turn, and quickly walk away. Two: The sudden change of subject from women’s history month (the topic of the forum) to her cheap, lousy attack about the GOP bringing back Jim Crow caused a momentary glitch in her talking-points processing software and she shorted out. She went back to DNC headquarters for repairs and now she’ll be happy to explain if you’d care to listen why Mitt Romney is dead set on returning us to the antebellum dark ages.

Exit question via Jonah Goldberg: Don’t Democrats want to incentivize people to apply for photo ID? Whether you vote or not, it’s kind of important to have if you want to participate in the economy.

Obama Lies are so Regular, his occasional Truthspeaking appears to be another LIE

by John Hinderaker in Crony capitalism, Energy Policy, Obama administration

Obama Lies About Oil AGAIN!

from PowerLine:

Barack Obama has repeatedly embarrassed himself by lying about America’s petroleum resources. He loves to tell audiences that we need to invest billions in “green” energy because we only have 2% of the world’s oil reserves, and consume 20% of the oil. We and many others have called Obama on this misrepresentation many times. His fibbing has been so persistent that even the Washington Post has called him on it. “Reserves” in the United States (unlike other countries) include only petroleum that can profitably be recovered at current prices, and that it is legal to develop under existing laws and regulations. So Obama’s reasoning is circular: if we opened up ANWR, for example, to drilling, our “reserves” would expand dramatically, overnight.

But despite the fact that everyone who is at all knowledgeable about energy knows he is lying, President Obama did it again today. Speaking at the Copper Mountain Solar 1 Facility in Boulder City, Nevada, Obama claimed that enormous “green” energy development is a must because the U.S. has “only 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves.” The man is absolutely shameless.

Meanwhile, White House press secretary Jay Carney railed against the House Republicans’ budget today, claiming that “Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and the Republicans who support his budget plan are ‘aggressively and deliberately ignorant’ when it comes to the need to invest in clean energy.” Actually, it is Obama and his minions who are “aggressively and deliberately ignorant” when it comes to America’s petroleum resources. As always, they count on the voters to be ignorant, too.