The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Say Good-Bye to Old ObamaCare Lies, and Say Hello to New ObamaCare Lies!

Posted on | November 6, 2013 | 85 Comments

When you catch a liar lying, what else do you expect, except a new lie offered as an explanation of the old lie? “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” — repeated endlessly by Obama during the past three years — is now defunct, so President Blame-Shifter and friends are now trying to say that this falsehood was not their fault.

It was those slutty insurance companies, all tarted up in short skirts, high heels and lipstick, drunk on profit and practically begging to be raped.

Ace of Spades explains what common sense should tell us:

On Megyn Kelly last night, Judge Napolitano pointed out the power of adding Period to the end of most of these vows. When one says “Period,” one means there is no fine print. There are no caveats, conditions, or qualifications. “Period” means that the vow you just heard is self-contained; there is no extraenous material elsewhere you have to check to determine what the promise means.
But that’s exactly what he’s saying “Period” doesn’t mean now. Now he’s claiming “Period” meant — actually, he’s claiming “we” said this, which is a lie — “unless there have been any changes [whatsoever] to your policy.”
Such as $5 increase in your copay to keep pace with rising medical costs. Yes, a $5 change in your copay ungrandfathers your policy. The HHS deliberately wrote these rules to terminate as many policies as possible.

Read the whole thing, because the new lie is in some ways worse than the old lie. The old lie merely insulted our intelligence. The new lie insults our dignity. Basically, this is Obama saying, “Sorry about doing that in your mouth, America.”

Except, of course, he’s not the least bit sorry about it.

Obama has no remorse, because he has no conscience.

He is, after all, a Democrat.

 


Category: Barack Obama, Health Care

When Virginia Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin, The Victim Can Blame Itself

Posted on | November 6, 2013 | 79 Comments

by Smitty

UPDATE: Mis-attribution fixed. Sorry, Adjoran. Blame Robert Sarvis. 🙂

Stacy put about the best possible spin on matters last night. As with Lonegan in NJ, saying the candidate “beat the spread” is thin gruel.

I disagree with Adjoran[‘s responder]:

Nope, you can blame Robert Sarvis of the Libertarian Party for Cuccinelli’s defeat. He and Cucinelli have a combined 53% of the vote. If Sarvis has not been a spoil sport, Cucinelli could have won.

No, you can’t.

(a) Sarvis is a free moral agent. It’s his state and he can run if he wants to, run if he wants to. The results show the degree to which the Republican party must alter course to capture those votes.

(b) This was not a high-turnout election. I served in a polling station supporting adjacent precincts covering ~8k voters, with ~30% turnout. If you’re going to beat up the Democrats for nominating a no-talent rodeo clown for office, blame the lazy conservatives who were just to lazy to turn out and do something about it. Oh, my dog/car/wife/long line/leaves/traffic–SHADDUP! I put in a 17 hour day supporting this election, and earn roughly minimum wage for those hours. That is, it ain’t about the frogskins. Furthermore, I had to eat vacation time to do it. Thus, my opportunity cost was high. Which is by no means a complaint, but I know first-hand that (a) it was a clean election, and (b) voters are getting what they wanted.

Mataconis was hasn’t got a happy-dance post up yet:

Still disagree, Doug. Cuccinelli is an able public servant who articulated reasonable plans to an audience that doesn’t bother to vote, or votes for a guy whose main plan for anything seems to be ‘get liquored up’.

The GOP, at Tea Party insistence, conducted a nominating convention this year. The GOP nominee in a primary, had such occurred, might have been Bowling, who certainly showed his worth during this gubernatorial campaign. Entertaining the counterfactual: would Bowling have beaten McAuliffe? He could have just as easily done worse.

Mataconis himself supported Sarvis, nominally as a protest vote. Maybe the lesson for the GOP concerning Sarvis is that, if the party is driving matters, and winning is everything, then brass knuckle politics is fine:

A major Democratic Party benefactor and Obama campaign bundler helped pay for professional petition circulators responsible for getting Virginia Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Robert C. Sarvis on the ballot — a move that could split conservative votes in a tight race.
Campaign finance records show the Libertarian Booster PAC has made the largest independent contribution to Sarvis’ campaign, helping to pay for professional petition circulators who collected signatures necessary to get Sarvis’ name on Tuesday’s statewide ballot.
Austin, Texas, software billionaire Joe Liemandt is the Libertarian Booster PAC’s major benefactor. He’s also a top bundler for President Barack Obama.

So, a possible “conservative” strategy would be to fund some godless Commie sodomite, to rail against private property and capitalism, and pick off some Democrat votes. The word “conservative” in the previous sentence is scarequoted because people of good conscience tend not to engage in subterfuge.

No, it’s far easier to just turn out the base and win properly.

As for Virginia, well, four years of Detroitification stand to suck. Norther Virginia will do OK; this is the land of homo bureaucratus, that species which excels in regulating others. As for the rest of the state, well, if you liked Healthcare.gov, you’ll love the gubernatorial equivalent, and slather that lotion the heck on. Right now. Or else it gets the hose again.

Category: Election, Virginia

Christie Re-Elected in NJ Landslide; McAuliffe Squeaks Past in Virginia

Posted on | November 5, 2013 | 34 Comments

The Big Man from Jersey won big — everybody knew that was coming — but the surprise of the night was how strong Republican Ken Cuccinelli finished in the Virginia governor’s race. Experts had predicted Democrat Terry McAuliffe to win by 7 points, but as the results came in, Cuccinelli was ahead most of the night. It was not until past 9:30 p.m., with about 90% of precincts reporting, the the Northern Virginia/Richmond vote helped put the Democrat in the lead. As of 10 p.m., it was McAuliffe 47% to Cuccinelli’s 46% — a margin of about 25,000 votes.

A narrow loss for the Republican in Virginia is bad news, of course, but it is far from the massive blowout defeat that the media was prepared to blame on the Tea Party. Cuccinelli clearly gained a lot of ground in the final week of the campaign, as the ObamaCare failure became evident. Because opposition to ObamaCare has been a touchstone of the Tea Party movement all along, the result in Virginia, while disappointing, actually bodes well for the GOP going forward.

 


Category: Election, New Jersey, Virginia

Police Seek Drug Trafficking Network Inside New Mexico Man’s Rectum

Posted on | November 5, 2013 | 110 Comments

A guy named David Eckert of Deming, New Mexico, was suspected of concealing an entire drug cartel in his colon. Or maybe he just ran a stop sign and some cops with nothing better to do decided they had probable cause to get all up into David Eckert’s ass:

Eckert’s attorney, Shannon Kennedy, said in an interview with KOB that after law enforcement asked him to step out of the vehicle, he appeared to be clenching his buttocks. Law enforcement thought that was probable cause to suspect that Eckert was hiding narcotics in his anal cavity. While officers detained Eckert, they secured a search warrant from a judge that allowed for an anal cavity search. . . .
Eckert was subjected to repeated and humiliating forced medical procedures. A review of Eckert’s medical records, which he released to KOB, and details in the lawsuit show the following happened:
1. Eckert’s abdominal area was x-rayed; no narcotics were found.
2. Doctors then performed an exam of Eckert’s anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.
3. Doctors performed a second exam of Eckert’s anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.
4. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.
5. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema a second time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.
6. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema a third time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.
7. Doctors then x-rayed Eckert again; no narcotics were found.
8. Doctors prepared Eckert for surgery, sedated him, and then performed a colonoscopy where a scope with a camera was inserted into Eckert’s anus, rectum, colon, and large intestines. No narcotics were found.

All because “he appeared to be clenching his buttocks.” Like he was hiding Pablo Escobar and the Cali cartel in his butt or something.

 

Category: Crime

‘Hating Breitbart’ for Christmas

Posted on | November 5, 2013 | 30 Comments

We’re about three weeks away from Black Friday, the official start of the holiday shopping season. You can help support the blog by shopping for specials via our Amazon.com links, and I’d like to encourage you to consider giving an excellent gift, the DVD of Andrew Marcus’s awesome documentary, Hating Breitbart.

 

 

If you haven’t seen this movie yet, you simply must, and if you have seen it, you’ll want to share it. I think Hating Breitbart would be especially instructive for a high school or college student on your Christmas list. There is some strong language (which is cut or bleeped in the PG-13 version), but there is also an inspirational message about how an individual can make a difference in the fight for freedom.

 

Category: Amazon, Andrew Breitbart

Teacher Calls Parent ‘Neo-Nazi’ for Criticizing Eighth-Grade Project

Posted on | November 5, 2013 | 97 Comments

A Pennsylvania father objected when his daughter’s middle-school history teacher assigned a project about a New York Times article blaming Republicans for the government shutdown. His complaint apparently made him the target of an orchestrated response by faculty at Camp Hill Middle School, and an English teacher named Cydnee Cohen left a voicemail message for one of the parent’s Facebook friends:

“We’re having some problems with a parent in our school district and on his page you are one of his friends…but I would like to know, some of it seems like he is a neo-nazi…call me…”

Bonus absurdity: The allegedly “neo-Nazi” parent, Josh Barry, is Jewish. Cohen is president of the local teachers union. Barry told the Daily Caller, “Her method is to go after the concerned parent and discredit and slander them.” He called it “big-time union thuggery on display.”

What’s happening here? Well, for one thing, we have further confirmation of what every intelligent American already knew: Public schools are staffed by Democrats, who not only vote Democrat and contribute money to Democrats through their unions, but consider it their professional duty to teach children to be Democrats, too.

But what about Cohen’s tactics? What’s up with that?

What Cohen was doing is consistent with a method of consensus building known as the “Delphi technique.” Originally developed as a way of organized discussion among experts, this method has been adapted and taught to school administrators. It is used to quell criticism of school policy by isolating and marginalizing critics, while creating the appearance of consensus in support of the policy.

Here’s what happens: You, the concerned parent, raise a question about some element of the curriculum or pedagogy. You contact the teacher who will then tell you there’s nothing to worry about, and that you’re the only parent who has complained. (Isolation.)

Suppose you’re not satisfied with the teacher’s answer, so you arrange a meeting with the principal. By the time you get that meeting, the teacher has already briefed the principal, so that he has a prepared defense of whatever it is you’re complaining about. The principal’s goal for the meeting is to placate you by convincing you that you are over-reacting because, after all, you’re the only parent who has complained.

It’s at this point that you start feeling like you’re in the Monty Python sketch, trying to get a refund for your dead parrot and being told by the pet shop owner that the Norwegian Blue is “pining for the fjords.”

You will encounter variations of this tactic no matter how far up the chain of command you take your complaint — the superintendent’s office, the PTA, the school board, etc. — and no matter what it is that you are complaining about. If you persist in your criticism, you will be labeled a troublemaker, an extremist, a kook, because the bureaucratic imperative is to marginalize critics, so that the bureaucracy can operate without scrutiny or opposition. (About 10 years ago, a slightly eccentric lady named B.K. Eakman published a book about this, How to Counter Group Manipulation Tactics: The Techniques of Unethical Consensus-Building Unmasked, which you might wish to examine.)

What every concerned parent eventually learns is this: The American public education system is profoundly undemocratic. The system is organized for the benefit of those who run the system. It’s not about teaching kids, it’s about providing lifetime employment, generous benefits and extraordinary political influence for education majors.

Keep this in mind: Whatever it is you’re complaining about — whatever specific grievance you have with the system — is merely a symptom of the disease. The problems of public education are not episodic, but systemic in nature. Public schools are not about teaching facts and skills, but rather are about teaching attitudes and beliefs, and the most important lesson they teach your kids is that you, the parent, are an ignorant idiot who should be ignored. No matter how many degrees you have, no matter how competent and skilled you are in your own profession, if your opinion about what constitutes an appropriate education differs from what the education system wants to provide, you will find you are regarded as inferior to the credentialed “experts” whose job is to undermine your authority as a parent.

You are only a “good” parent if you agree with the experts.  You can have no autonomous influence over your child’s education, because your child exists only for the benefit of the system.

“In the hands of a skillful indoctrinator, the average student not only thinks what the indoctrinator wants him to think . . . but is altogether positive that he has arrived at his position by independent intellectual exertion. This man is outraged by the suggestion that he is the flesh-and-blood tribute to the success of his indoctrinators.”
— William F. Buckley Jr., Up From Liberalism (1959)

Why aren’t you homeschooling your children yet?

 

 


Category: Culture, Education

President Blame-Shifter Wants to ‘Pivot’ Away From ObamaCare Debacle Story

Posted on | November 5, 2013 | 58 Comments

Yeah, that story is so . . . October.

Here we go: President readying for another
pivot — far away from Obamacare
— Twitchy

Shock: Obama, Biden Stop Mentioning Obamacare
in Speeches; Obama Hopes to, Get This,
Pivot to a Different Subject
— Ace of Spades

New White House ObamaCare strategy: Let’s
talk about something other than ObamaCare
— AllahPundit, Hot Air

You know what this reminds me of? President Clinton claiming that the Lewinsky scandal was distracting him from “doing the work the American people sent me here to do,” as if sodomizing interns was not a distraction. The Wall Street Journal:

Problems with the government’s health-care website are forcing President Barack Obama to redraw his plans for the rest of the year as he looks for ways to regain political momentum.
Scrapping a planned push to drive people to the balky website, the White House is organizing a flurry of events on the economy and immigration, as well as health care, a senior administration official said. . . .
The president’s senior aides had at one time planned for him to be holding events aimed at encouraging Americans to shop for insurance on the new federal health-care website, with stops in places with high numbers of uninsured people.But the problems plaguing the site have forced them to shift strategies.

It’s amazing how the media cooperates in these administration propaganda campaigns: “Senior aides” tell reporters what the White House message strategy is and the reporters then help push the White House message. Then the media report the story of how successful the White House message strategy was — as if they were covering something other than their own coverage. It’s a Mobius loop of bullshit.

 


Category: Barack Obama, Health Care, Media Bias

Things I Have Not Done

Posted on | November 5, 2013 | 30 Comments

I have not defamed Brett Kimberlin. I have not maliciously prosecuted Brett Kimberlin. I have not harassed Brett Kimberlin. I have not stalked Brett Kimberlin. I have not invaded Brett Kimberlin’s privacy. Nor have I conspired to do any of these things to Brett Kimberlin.

What I have done is to tell the truth about Brett Kimberlin. Insofar as the perjuring bomber does not like anyone telling the truth about him, this may have resulted in “emotional distress,” but the infamous criminal’s absurd $1 million lawsuit is doomed to fail anyway.

“These people are so intentionally and profoundly dishonest,” someone said in regard to Bill Schmalfeldt specifically, and more generally in regard to the collective known as “Team Kimberlin.”

Today, the judge in the case granted Brett Kimberlin’s motion to compel Google to supply the identity of the anonymous blogger Kimberlin Unmasked and you would have thought, witnessing the online reaction of Schmalfeldt and his Team Kimberlin comrades, that this was Game, Set and Match of the lawsuit. Ever since Kimberlin sued, his foolish admirers have been claiming that everything the vicious liar says is a proven fact and that he is certain to prevail, and that anything the defendants say about the suit is just adding to the damages.

This is all a mere continuation of Brett Kimberlin’s attempts to intimidate the innocent. I am not intimidated in the least.

“Be not thou envious against evil men, neither desire to be with them. For their heart studieth destruction, and their lips talk of mischief. . . . Fret not thyself because of evil men, neither be thou envious at the wicked . . . For their calamity shall rise suddenly; and who knoweth the ruin of them both?”
— Proverbs 24: 1-2, 19-22 (KJV)

BomberSuesBloggers.com

 

Category: The Kimberlin Files
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin