• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Kerry Wormily to Putin: Didn’t Mean ‘Threat’ for Invading Crimea “a Threat”

Is there a greasier mouth and presence in Washington than John F. Kerry? “Greasy” by tradition describes a certain kind of guy, a sleazy one, one who smells like rot even when viewed via television and proves it when he speaks. It the word provided room for human females, certainly Nancy Pelosi would lead the list! What do you think?…..or would you vote for Harry Reid?

These are the Democrat Party’s power trio today dancing for Barack outside Hussein Obama’s White House.

There is so much grease oozing, sliming throughout the Barack Hussein Obama truthless administration’s lefty networks and its Congress, it would be comic if it weren’t so damaging to every neighborhood of America’s interest at home and abroad.

Crime begins at the top where its standards are set.

The following article from the Washington FreeBeacon was sent by California Cole. It has to do with the power and honesty of the verbal con-artist U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, this time with his manhandling of Russian aggression into Crimea:

Kerry: Possible Sanctions Against Russia Not a ‘Threat’ Or Meant In a ‘Personal Way’

http://freebeacon.com/kerry-possible-sanctions-against-russia-not-a-threat-or-meant-in-a-personal-way/

Liberals Like ObamaPast Created Today’s Urban Black Plantion of Violence and Ignorance

Since the rise of the collapse of nearly everything good in the nation’s urban black communities, the local and National Democrat Party organizations have had nearly total political economic, political, and social control over its ‘colored’ populations.

Why is it, then, that civilized folks in this community haven’t noticed this political dictatorship? How can it be that 96% of the American black voting community backed Democrat autocrat, Barack Hussein Obama in the 2012 anxious to bribe for more Federal payments and control over their plantation lives?

Why is it, then, that the America’s Republican Party has never dared to offer any criticism of the development of Democrat ownership of the urban black community as a plantation…..with its local Democrat Party political boss to corral votes and offer bribes? A trillion dollars of buildings built in early 1950s sold as affordable housing, destroyed by the occupants in the 1960s, and RAZED in the 1970s?

It is a matter of nearly 60 years of censorship; censorship primarily of whites by whites. The National Democrat Party and its universities, churches, newspapers, teachers, fellow bleaters in Republican circles, all in feminized impulses, declared that any and all criticisms of anything black, no matter how true, was an example of WHITE RACISM.

Only blacks were permitted the luxury of freedom to announce and/or discuss a corpuscle’s objection to America’s black population misbehavior, misthinking, or misspeak, no matter how violent, how asocial or antisocial the result. They were silent, for whatever leadership which might have seemed adult, practical, and reasonable, didn’t exist…..Instead, they were Democrats…boss men securing their own interests by selling government projects for Democrat votes.

Government projects and money destroyed the urban black family. Teaching knowledge in inner city schools disappeared. Ownership of corner markets, drugstores, shoe shops disappeared.

The races competed racelessly in the military, in sports, and in popular entertainment……in the American way.

Instead of the uneducated becoming educated in schools devoted to learning knowledge, the uneducated went to the streets stumbling on violence, sex, and drugs.

This very article is deemed RACIST by Democrat RACISTS from WASHINGTON, the press, news, and television, public radio, Hollywood, and university.

More recently there have been some hints mentioned in these lefty citidels of obedience and communication police that inner city schools are having some difficulties with….we’ll call it, ‘attendance’…..for the wording can’t be too offensive because of lefty rules politically correct speech.

Marxist control of speech on the the American black condition is in its 60th year of practice. I have written truths in this article…..truths as I see truth from my experiences being educated, teaching, and working in mixed racial institutions and communities since elementary school. All truths must be aired in challenge and defense.

The Democrat Party has won many an election exerting Marxist speech control to buy black votes. The election of the least American of all American presidents, Barack Hussein Obama is proof of my article. Mr. Obama spent 22 years in the church of antiWhite racist, Jeremiah Wright. Mr. Obama acknowledged in his own writings, Mr. Wright was his father figure…his mentor of life. When questioned about the rank hate of whites in his parish and its sermons….Mr. Obama claimed he didn’t notice.

Please read the following article at the American version of the British Socialist gazette, the Guardian ….an attack on conservative Paul Ryan regarding some words he uttered which might be, just might be…….might be……violating Marxist speech on racial matters:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/13/paul-ryan-inner-city-comment-working-poor

Obama Expands Sleaze Expanding ObamaCare

OBAMACARE’S INDIVIDUAL MANDATE UNMANDATED FOR OBAMA FAVORITES

The following article from the Wall Street Journal was sent by Mark Waldeland:

“ObamaCare’s implementers continue to roam the battlefield and shoot their own wounded, and the latest casualty is the core of the Affordable Care Act—the individual mandate. To wit, last week the Administration quietly excused millions of people from the requirement to purchase health insurance or else pay a tax penalty.

This latest political reconstruction has received zero media notice, and the Health and Human Services Department didn’t think the details were worth discussing in a conference call, press materials or fact sheet. Instead, the mandate suspension was buried in an unrelated rule that was meant to preserve some health plans that don’t comply with ObamaCare benefit and redistribution mandates. Our sources only noticed the change this week.

That seven-page technical bulletin includes a paragraph and footnote that casually mention that a rule in a separate December 2013 bulletin would be extended for two more years, until 2016. Lo and behold, it turns out this second rule, which was supposed to last for only a year, allows Americans whose coverage was cancelled to opt out of the mandate altogether.

In 2013, HHS decided that ObamaCare’s wave of policy terminations qualified as a “hardship” that entitled people to a special type of coverage designed for people under age 30 or a mandate exemption. HHS originally defined and reserved hardship exemptions for the truly down and out such as battered women, the evicted and bankrupts.

But amid the post-rollout political backlash, last week the agency created a new category: Now all you need to do is fill out a form attesting that your plan was cancelled and that you “believe that the plan options available in the [ObamaCare] Marketplace in your area are more expensive than your cancelled health insurance policy” or “you consider other available policies unaffordable.”

This lax standard—no formula or hard test beyond a person’s belief—at least ostensibly requires proof such as an insurer termination notice. But people can also qualify for hardships for the unspecified nonreason that “you experienced another hardship in obtaining health insurance,” which only requires “documentation if possible.” And yet another waiver is available to those who say they are merely unable to afford coverage, regardless of their prior insurance. In a word, these shifting legal benchmarks offer an exemption to everyone who conceivably wants one.

Keep in mind that the White House argued at the Supreme Court that the individual mandate to buy insurance was indispensable to the law’s success, and President Obama continues to say he’d veto the bipartisan bills that would delay or repeal it. So why are ObamaCare liberals silently gutting their own creation now?

The answers are the implementation fiasco and politics. HHS revealed Tuesday that only 940,000 people signed up for an ObamaCare plan in February, bringing the total to about 4.2 million, well below the original 5.7 million projection. The predicted “surge” of young beneficiaries isn’t materializing even as the end-of-March deadline approaches, and enrollment decelerated in February.

Meanwhile, a McKinsey & Company survey reports that a mere 27% of people joining the exchanges were previously uninsured through February. The survey also found that about half of people who shopped for a plan but did not enroll said premiums were too expensive, even though 80% of this group qualify for subsidies. Some substantial share of the people ObamaCare is supposed to help say it is a bad financial value. You might even call it a hardship.

HHS is also trying to pre-empt the inevitable political blowback from the nasty 2015 tax surprise of fining the uninsured for being uninsured, which could help reopen ObamaCare if voters elect a Republican Senate this November. Keeping its mandate waiver secret for now is an attempt get past November and in the meantime sign up as many people as possible for government-subsidized health care. Our sources in the insurance industry are worried the regulatory loophole sets a mandate non-enforcement precedent, and they’re probably right. The longer it is not enforced, the less likely any President will enforce it.

The larger point is that there have been so many unilateral executive waivers and delays that ObamaCare must be unrecognizable to its drafters, to the extent they ever knew what the law contained.”

EPA America’s Political Bubonic Plague?

UNLIMITED EPA?

Craig Rucker of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow asks:

Is there any limit to how far EPA can go?

EPA is promulgating new regulations at an astounding rate. It is expanding its power by stretching environmental laws beyond the recognition of the legislators who adopted them.

When regulatory agencies enlarge their power, they distort our constitutional system of checks and balances. When EPA moves beyond sound science and policy, it burdens our fundamental private property rights and distorts and slows our economy, killing jobs and stifling industry. Sadly, the country receives no meaningful environmental benefits, despite the staggering costs imposed.

James Madison wrote in Federalist 48 that, “it will not be denied that power is of an encroaching nature and that it ought to be effectually restrained from passing the limits assigned to it.”

The job of restraining government falls to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments and will render decisions on matters which we hope will place EPA in check.

CFACT senior policy adviser Paul Driessen briefs us on what’s at stake at CFACT.org.

Paul and other legal scholars recently drafted two legal briefs which CFACT submitted to the Court.

It is time for the Supreme Court to do its job and as Madison told us, “restrain” EPA from “passing the limits assigned to it.”

For nature and people too,

Americans Living Overseas Owe Billions in Unpaid Taxes

(from the National Center for Policy Analysis)

Americans Renouncing Citizenship Due to Taxes
March 14, 2014

In just a few months, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) will go into effect to attempt to deal with Americans living abroad who owe taxes to the federal government. But as it stands now, the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) is the law in operation, requiring Americans with foreign accounts of $10,000 or more to report the account’s highest balance to the IRS every year. The 2010 law requires all non-U.S. financial institutions to provide the IRS with detailed information about American account holders. If they do not, they could face severe penalties. FATCA is designed — using a controversial dragnet-like method — to catch those Americans thought to be evading taxes by hiding their wealth in foreign bank accounts. The way FATCA does this is by requiring that all non-U.S. financial institutions pass along detailed information about American account holders, or potentially face steep penalties, says USA Today.

•Six million Americans live abroad, yet fewer than 1 million of them regularly file tax returns.
•The IRS estimates that they owe somewhere between $40 billion and $123 billion in unpaid taxes.
•In 2013 alone, 3,000 Americans renounced their citizenship, a 221 percent increase from 2012.
•In 2008, only 231 people renounced their U.S. citizenship.
•A financial consultancy firm, the de Vere Group, conducted a poll finding that 68 percent of expatriates have considered giving up their American citizenship because of FATCA.
The United States is one of only two countries in the world that base their taxes on nationality rather than residence — Eritrea is the other one.

•For example, if a French citizen lives and works in Germany, paying taxes there, France does not require him also to file French taxes. Americans, however, are obligated to file a tax return no matter their residence and no matter how much tax they have paid to that other nation.
•The United States does have reciprocal tax agreements with other nations that can reduce an expatriate’s American tax liability down to nothing, however.
•A study by H&R Block found that one third of Americans abroad were simply confused by how they were supposed to file taxes.
Source: Kim Hjelmgaard, “Americans Abroad Find Citizenship Too Taxing to Keep,” USA Today, March 8, 2014.