No Más Mierda, Mitt, Por Favor

Mitt Interrupted

Romney’s Believe in America or Don’t!

The News Magazine Shock Doctrine

A GOP Gaffes Triple Play!

The Lying of the Right: The Bush Taboo

Judo Joe Obama

Left click on image to enlarge.

D.C. Establishment Does the Usual Obama-Jama on Osama Drama

Left click on image to enlarge.

Advice To Obama On The Rope-A-Dope

Left click on image to enlarge.

FDR to Obama: Listen to the Past

Left click on images to enlarge.

What a Difference Two Words Make

Al-Qaeda operatives attack several states in the southern US, causing the deaths of 11 Americans outright, poisoning many others, destroying fishing, tourism and other businesses for generations to come and costing America billions of dollars. CIA spy satellites immediately identify the Al-Qaeda home base that masterminded and launched the attack, and bipartisan voices are raised in Congress and throughout the land demanding the president call in air strikes to destroy the base and send in the Marines to kill off any terrorists left alive. With the world's support, President Obama acts that very day, ordering the military to bomb the Al-Qaeda base 'back to the Stone Age' and putting the Marines on alert. "I will not sit still," says President Obama in a speech to the nation, "While organizations that plot and profit from destructive acts and cause vast devastation to our nation exist and thrive. We will take every available course of action to put them out of business permanently."

Replace 'Al-Qaeda' with 'British Petroleum' and it makes all the difference, doesn't it?

© 2010 RS Janes. LTSaloon.org.

Would Palin Really Like to Compare Her Experience on Nukes with Obama's?

Left click on image to enlarge.

"Now, the president, with all the vast nuclear experience that he acquired as a community organizer and as a part-time senator, and as a full-time candidate, all that experience, still no accomplishment to date with North Korea and Iran."
-- Sarah Palin at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, April 9, 2010, as quoted by Media Matters.

In fact, as Media Matters points out, as a US senator, Obama traveled overseas to investigate nuclear stockpiles in other nations, co-sponsored a nuclear non-proliferation bill with Republican Sen. Richard Lugar in 2005, introduced another bill, the Nuclear Weapons Threat Reduction Act (S.1977) in 2007, and did his college thesis on Soviet nuclear disarmament long before entering politics. Actually, the Nobel committee cited Obama's lengthy record of trying to limit nuclear weapons as one of the reasons he received the Nobel Peace Prize last year.

What experience does Sarah Palin have in this area? Zip, zilch and zero.

If I were an inexperienced beauty pageant contestant like Palin I wouldn't get snarky about anyone else's lack of experience in anything – it only tends to remind the public – that large majority who aren't part of your personality cult – of how vacuous and ignorant you really are.

BTW, Bush, Cheney and the GOP had eight years to 'accomplish' something in regards to Iran and North Korea. What did they have to show for it? Increased atomic and missile warhead testing by the N.K. and an accelerated nuclear program by Iran, in response to Republican threats of invasion. Obama's been in office for a year; let's see what he accomplishes in eight.

Obama's Radical Liberal Socialist Agenda Revealed

Is this his horrible liberal socialist agenda laid bare?

“The legitimate object of Government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done but cannot do at all, or cannot so well do, for themselves in their separate and individual capacities. But in all that people can individually do as well for themselves, Government ought NOT to interfere."

“In all those things which deal with people, be liberal, be human. In all those things which deal with people’s money, or their economy, or their form of government, be conservative."

“The purpose … is to establish and maintain a peaceful world and build at home a dynamic prosperity in which every citizen fairly shares. We shall ever build anew, that our children and their children, without distinction because of race, creed or color, may know the blessings of our free land."

“We believe that basic to governmental integrity are unimpeachable ethical standards and irreproachable personal conduct by all people in government. We shall continue our insistence on honesty as an indispensable requirement of public service. We shall continue to root out corruption whenever and wherever it appears."

“We are proud of and shall continue our far-reaching and sound advances in matters of basic human needs—expansion of social security—broadened coverage in unemployment insurance —improved housing—and better health protection for all our people. We are determined that our government remain warmly responsive to the urgent social and economic problems of our people."

To find out what left-wing radical wrote this socialist manifesto, read Comments below.

GOP Populism: Hey! It's Fake!

Left click on image to enlarge.

Obama's Tender Trap or, Checkmate, GOP?

Left click image to enlarge.

Palin to 'Lip Sync' Future Speeches Says Aide

Palin to 'Lip Sync' Future Speeches Says Aide

By E.T. Mandible
Nashville Journal-Advertiser
February 8, 2010

Exclusive to the Journal-Advertiser

NASHVILLE – In the wake of her speech last Saturday to the Tea Party convention held here, an aide to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told this reporter that her future speeches would be lip-synched. (Lip-synching is a technique where the speaker mouths the words live to a pre-recorded tape or CD.)

An aide to the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate, who asked to remain anonymous, said that Gov. Palin was "deeply concerned" that she might make a "boo-boo" that could be exploited by what the aide described as the liberal national news media.

Palin camp spokeswoman Meagan McCurdle, while refusing to confirm the story, dismissed questions by claiming that lip-synching is now a standard practice for anyone who appears before large audiences. "If you want to be heard in the balcony seats, you have to lip synch," Ms. McCurdle said, "and everyone does it."

When asked if those who have paid to hear Gov. Palin speak might be disappointed if she lip-synched instead, Ms. McCurdle offered, "I don't think real Americans care if Gov. Palin actually speaks live. They are there to hear her message of freedom, and to be a part of a movement that is coalescing around her, to be part of the atmosphere of pee-in-your-pants excitement that surrounds Gov. Palin wherever she goes."

Mrs. Mindy Snook, chairwoman of the Memphis Belles for Sarah organization, who attended the Saturday speech, said, "I don't care if she talks standing on her head! She's just so fabulous I can't stand it! Sarah's like doing the whole football team in one night! Who cares if she lip syncs?"

Her husband Ben, who is also the vice chair of the Tennessee Republican Party, added, "Sarah's cutting edge and this is that kind of technology. Soon, all the politicians will be doing it. Anyway, she's the whole package of sexy looks and beauty pageant charm, so what's not to like even if her voice is on tape?"

When reminded of Gov. Palin's criticism of President Obama for using Teleprompters in his speeches, Mrs. Snook replied, "This is an entirely different ballgame, it's mixing apples and zebras with oranges and whiskey. Sarah can talk for hours with just some stuff scribbled on her hand, and I'm sure she won't use a script or anything in the original recording. Let's see that Kenyan Marxist in the White House do that!"

Before leaving Nashville, Gov. Palin is scheduled for a book signing at the Dixie Dog Breakfast Hut and Book Nook, Route 5 at Forrest Rd., tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m. to noon, where she is slated to be joined by local favorite Dickles the Singing Cat.

Telling the Truth About the Blue Dog Democrats

Think President Obama had a 60-vote majority in the Senate that was spoiled by the election of Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts? Think again. Aside from 'Independent' (McCain Republican) Joe Lieberman, There are ten die-hard 'ConservaDem' Blue Dog Democrats, as well as another five senators who tend toward Blue Doggerel. That means progressives would have had trouble getting even fifty votes on any important reform legislation.

Left click on image to enlarge.

Watch a clip from The Rachel Maddow Show, March 18, 2009:

"Evan Bayh and the ConservaDems"

The finance/insurance/real estate sector, responsible for the devastation of the economy is especially close to [Indiana 'Democratic' Sen. Evan] Bayh and many of the members of his ['ConservaDem'] bloc. These industries have donated more legalized bribes to members of Congress than any other sector -- $2.2 billion since 1990. [A]nd while most of the money has gone to actual Republicans (55%), take a look how some of the very worst Democrats have raked in the tainted money in return for voting against their constituents' interests (the 10 worst listed in order from corrupt to even more corrupt):

Jeanne Shaheen ($997,310)

Mark Udall ($1,669,706)

Blanche Lincoln ($1,671,292)

Tom Carper ($2,160,628)

Mary Landieu ($2,399,134)

Mark Warner ($2,431,066)

Ben Nelson ($2,667,406)

Bill Nelson ($3,056,968)

Evan Bayh ($3,987,896)

Joe Lieberman ($9,981,924)
-- From "The ConservaDems -- Evan Bayh's New Anti-Obama Bloc," Down With Tyranny blog, March 19, 2009.

Republican Magazine Celebrates Black History Month

Left click image to enlarge.

The Tattlesnake – The Reality Behind Obama's Afghanistan Policy Edition

First, forget Obama's purported reasons for staying in Afghanistan; those are just easily understood anti-terrorist bromides for the media and the viewing audience. He supposedly knows we aren't fighting any real threat to the US in Rock City, nor are there enough Al-Qaeda hanging around the Af-Pak border waiting to be captured to make it worth the billions we are pouring into this new 'surge'.

Word is the real reasons – the 'clinchers' presented by the Pentagon chieftains and the president's staff – for maintaining an American and NATO military presence there are threefold:

1. Pakistan's government, contrary to Obama's speech, is weak and has little sway in the northern and western parts of the country, the same regions where various anti-American groups operate with impunity. Ostensibly, the Pakistan military has the country's nuclear arsenal under tight control but, then, it's known Muslim extremists have infiltrated the army. The nightmare scenario, barely touched on by Obama, is of a band of Islamic fundamentalists getting their hands on nukes. The thinking is that, if such a scary scenario unfolded, the US and NATO troops in Afghanistan could move to secure Pakistan's nuclear weapons before the wackos could launch. Obama could not say this publicly without offending the Pakistan government, damaging our relationship with them, and causing a diplomatic furor. He also allegedly privately promised India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that he would not hesitate to use American troops to keep Pakistan's military in check, if need be.

2. The Pentagon believes that a large military force on both Iran's eastern and western perimeters will staunch any ambitions they may have in Iraq or Afghanistan. Forget the nuclear distraction; the fear is that Iran will try to fill the power vacuum left by US withdrawal from either nation. Whether this is a valid concern, the groupthink in Washington convinced Obama of this even before he started his run for the presidency.

3. Obama's most trusted advisors and the Joint Chiefs believe he must not be trapped into a test of his resolve and willingness to employ force. While he has extended the olive branch of peace with one hand, and repaired most of the damage done by George W. Bush's my-way-or-the-highway foreign policy, the world must know he will be ready to use the sword that's in the other. In order to avoid another 'Cuban Missile Crisis' test of wills, it's believed by this faction that he has to show that he's capable of bucking the peace faction in his own party and US public opinion in order not to appear weak and invite challenges. Afghanistan is a chess move to establish his readiness to use force to avert future, potentially more disastrous, tests of his strength. Another example of Washington groupthink with dubious legitimacy, but a theme Obama has embraced entirely.

If you think we will be withdrawing from Afghanistan completely in 2011, put down that crack pipe. There may be some troop withdrawals by then, but a sizable US military force will remain in the country until, like the USSR, we are forced out by economic circumstances and/or insurgents, a highly probable outcome historically.

© 2009 RS Janes. LTSaloon.org.