3. February 2010 by Satire V.

Colorado Senators Bennett and Udall presented the name of William J. Martinez along with 5 others to President Obama to fill a vacant seat on the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.  This choice is revealing of the philosophy that Bennett, Udall, and Obama have toward the judiciary.

Martinez is a partner in the law firm of McNamara, Roseman, Martinez, and Kazmierski.  His experience is largely in the realm of equal opportunity law.  This alone certainly shouldn’t disqualify him, but there are other factors that make him a poor choice at best.

There is a standard that applies to the employment and equal opportunity, and is the law in Federal employment.  Creating a hostile work environment or an appearance of bias is a violation.  The appearance of bias or preferential treatment is considered to be as bad as proven bias.  Indications of predetermination can raise legitimate questions regarding the fairness of decisions in which the bias could play a part.

This is important because Martinez has shown a marked tendency toward a very particular point of view that a thinking person would assume will color his decisions from the bench.  Unfortunately, this predeliction is not one of Constitutional originalism.  To the contrary, Martinez is a member of some organizations that have shown marked hostility toward the Constitution, and support of liberal judicial activism.

 Martinez is a member of Greenpeace, USA; Amnesty International; the Sierra Club; Colorado Public Radio; the National Resources Defense Council; and worst of all, the ACLU of Colorado.

One can only assume that Bennett, Udall, and Obama are aware of these memberships.  The well known liberal agendas of these organizations could not have escaped the attention of Martinez or his nominators.  The appearance of bias alone should disqualify him from this nomination, but if it doesn’t, he should be questioned vigorously by Congress in regard to his potential bias.  Most importantly, if he is seated on this bench, President Obama and Senator Udall should be held to account for the affect of his opinions and rulings.

Martinez has promised to end his membership in most of these organizations if he is given the seat, but trusting a liberal to leave his ideology at the court room door is like trusting the current administration to be as tranparent as promised.

 Not gonna happen.

 (As of this date, no nominee is listed in the Judicial Committee vacancies http://www.uscourts.gov/judicialvac.cfm?WT.cg_n=Newsroom)

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

22. November 2009 by Satire V.

Obama has done it again.  During his Far East trip he has almost simultaneously embarrassed and denigrated our Country while displaying his typical arrogance and egotism.

The Apologizer in Chief has once again shown either a fundamental lack of understanding of international protocol, or a belief that America holds a subordinate position to yet another foreign power.  Ignorance, incompetence, or servility are not acceptable.  We (and sovereign nations in general) don’t dip our flag for that of another nation, and our head of state should never display such obsequious behavior.  Perhaps he was confused about whether the emperor was standing before him, or behind him?

Moving to China, Obama displayed his typical arrogance.  He actually lectured the Chinese about allowing full access to the Internet, saying that they shouldn’t be afraid of some criticism.  This is the same man that attempted to ban Fox News from the White House press pool because he couldn’t handle the criticism.  How egotistical to believe that his reasons for his attempted censorship are somehow OK, while it is not acceptable for the Chinese. 

Although the left and the press often tried to make us think that we should be embarrassed by our last Commander In Chief, at least President Bush never appeared to be embarrassed by this great Country.  How far the left has taken us that not only is our President apparently ashamed of his Nation, but that he gives us so much reason to be ashamed of him.

Posted in Things Obama Doesn't Understand, Its Only Hypocrisy If The Right Does It | Print | No Comments »

21. August 2009 by Satire V.

Although the Obama administration has never behaved in a particularly mature manner, the President has fallen to the level of kindergarten playground immaturity.  Up to this point, he and others in his administration had exhibited the behavior of authority figures attempting to sound ‘cool’ for a much younger crowd.  Typically, this plays well when coming from aging hippies and directed at like-minded youth.

This same sort of behavior would envince snorts of derision if it came from a conservative, particularly a white conservative.  Liberals get more acceptance for this sort of behavior because the crowd is unreasonably willing to attribute greater sincerity to attempts to ‘connect’ with younger generations.  Observers who have functioning visual organs can see through this.  The behavior of Obama and his election staff was more akin to an aging mother dying her hair, wearing midis, and going to get a tattoo with her daughter than to any attempt at understanding.  This comes across as more of a desparate attempt to hang onto failing youth than an attempt to ‘connect.’  There is certainly no sincerity in these attempts.

Now, Obama hits a new low.  On Thursday, during comments about the pending failure of his health careless plan he said “There is something about August going into September where everybody in Washington gets all wee-wee’d up!” Most children wouldn’t be caught using such infantile terminology by the time they reach 4th Grade.  To imply that people are wetting themselves, and to use such childish wording is not the behavior of a chief of state.  Taken with his Special Olympics comment, the latest shows the type of insensitivity that fades with true maturity.  Obama seems to think this sort of comment is funny, and the hardcore leftists that are his core supporters were laughing right along with him.  This exposes their immaturity as well.  Perhaps B.O. should spend some time studying the speeches of his predecessor who used humor with far more class.  Or, he could take a master’s course and take notes from the speeches of Ronald Reagan, who defined maturity, class, optimism, all while displaying an admirable sense of humor.

Regardless, with any luck the sand box can be carted out of the Oval Office at the end of one term.

Posted in Things Obama Doesn't Understand | Print | No Comments »

5. August 2009 by Satire V.

Once again, someone has passed on the Democracy For America email below to me.  The hypocrisy rampant in this one is nothing short of astounding.  As usual, the left believes the debate on the issue should be the sound of one hand clapping.

You may have seen it: An angry mob in Texas carrying fake tombstones with Rep. Lloyd Doggett’s name on it. Signs with an “SS” symbol on it calling Obama a Nazi. A cardboard version of Rep. Frank Kratovil hanged in effigy outside his district office by “Teabaggers” in Maryland.The Right-Wing Scream Machine is back. Who are they? So-called “Birthers” who think President Obama’s birth certificate is a fake. “Teabaggers” who don’t want to pay taxes for schools, police, or roads. And they’re backed up by insurance industry and right-wing funded front groups who are encouraging Republicans to disrupt healthcare townhalls anyway they can throughout August. Their goal isn’t to debate or get their voices heard. Their goal is to stop any kind of civil dialogue. That’s not how we enact thoughtful reform. It’s important that we aren’t drawn into their divisive tactics and discredit our broad-based bipartisan support for real reform. And it’s up to us to make sure they don’t drown out America’s support for the choice of a public healthcare option. Will you join me in taking the high road and sign the Public Option Action Pledge?

ADD YOUR NAME AND SPREAD THE WORD NOW

 As reported by TalkingPointsMemo, here’s an outline of their tactics from a recently circulated right-wing plan: “pack the hall… spread out” to make their numbers seem more significant, and to “rock-the-boat early in the Rep’s presentation…to yell out and challenge the Rep’s statements early… to rattle him, get him off his prepared script and agenda…stand up and shout and sit right back down.” In response, I’ve signed the Public Option Action Pledge.Will you join me? SIGN THE PUBLIC OPTION ACTION PLEDGE RIGHT NOW It’s going to be a long, hot August. But we’re going to keep our cool and represent the 76% of Americans who support one of President Obama’s top priorities — a public health insurance option. Working together, we’ll beat the Right-Wing Scream Machine and pass healthcare reform that gives America a choice. Thank you for everything you do.

-Jim
Jim Dean, Chair
Democracy for America

I suppose it would be best to start with the outright lies in this email, and work our way down to through the misrepresentations and finish at ridiculous.

First, the assertion that 76% of Americans support a public health insurance option is completely unsupportable, and untrue (otherwise known as a lie).  DFA has been using this same number since the start of this effort to wrest control of America’s medical decisions from the individual.  Assuming that this number was ever correct, the tide has been turning against ANY public option in every published poll.  One wonders where this 76% number comes from.  Keep wondering, as DFA never backs up such statements with verifiable data.

Next, the ‘talking points memo’ paragraph is typical liberal-speak, and obvious misrepresentation.  Notice where quotation marks are included and excluded in this paragraph.  You aren’t actually supposed to notice that.  For example, “pack the hall…spread out” followed by a phrase that is meant to be taken as part of that suggestion, ‘to make their numbers seem more significant.’  Also notice the fact that no complete sentence is quoted.  This is a sure sign of words taken out of context.  Finally, once again, only a vague reference.  That seems strange when linking to a web post is so simple. 

Maybe we should link to some of the more interesting points on their web site, even though they take steps to try to prevent copying and pasting to provide quotes from their sites.  Here’s an example.  The same TalkingPointsMemo.com that DFA is so pleased with, provided this little gem.  “Assign people to greet the media and to stay close to reporters both as they enter and leave the event.  It’s important that you take away right-wingers (sic) opportunities to talk with reporters by making sure that your staff or leaders are in constant contact with media who attend.”  (emphasis added)  This is how easy it is to link to source documents, the text can be found in context here.  Interesting that organizations such as this want to make sure that the counter-socialist message does not get out.   They know that the more people are exposed to the truth, the more support they will lose.

 Now to the ridiculous.  More accurately, childish, disgusting, and ridiculous.  The repeated use of the term ‘teabaggers’ by the left, what apparently passes as ‘civil dialogue’ to them.  Many of them feign ignorance of the common meaning of this term.  Although it is too vile to describe, most of us and certainly they know this disgusting definition.  Anderson Cooper wasn’t chuckling at his own wit when he used the term, and the intent is clearly to try to connect those with a legitimate concern over runaway taxation with an immature and grotesque practice.  They are the only ones laughing about this sick joke, and are exposing their character through this behavior.  This lack of character goes hand-in-hand with the lack of reason and consideration that should inform their arguments.  Name calling is debate to them.

One additional point:  the left’s talking points regarding the backlash on this freedom-stealing bill have included the hackneyed accusations of shrillness, and accusing the protestors of being shills for right-wing corporate money.  The right has rarely engaged in shouting down opponents, a by-the-book tactic of the left.  Unlike the left, most of us on the right feel an obligation to work for a living.  We believe that working to pay our way is the obligation of every able-bodied individual or head of a family.  To put it simply, we don’t usually do protests, because we have jobs.  Think about how upset, how angry, how concerned we have to be to take time our vacation time, or time off without pay, to attend these meetings.   The organizations that are involved with providing Conservatives with the information about where and when these town-hall events will take place are truly the definition of grass roots.  There are no Soros-like billionaires supporting these protests.  When Conservatives take this kind of action, and arrive in significantly larger numbers than the statists that ARE paid to protest, it should be a wakeup call to our elected representatives. 

Jim and Howard Dean and the other statists at DFA aren’t interested in a debate on this issue.  They are typical of the leftist mindset.  If the right is in power, it is an aberration and the will of the people is meaningless.  They believe that the people’s wishes have been and will be ignored unless they protest everything the right tries to do.  If their friends are in power, it is the will of the people, and the right better shut up and sit down.  The people have already spoken and your protests are therefore meaningless.

We know better.  Now is the time to ensure that our government remains a government of the Constitution, and of the law.  This is not the time to be silent.

Satire V

Posted in DFA Watch, Its Only Hypocrisy If The Right Does It, Retruthing the Debate | Print | 1 Comment »

16. July 2009 by Satire V.

The brain trust over at DFA has come up with a series of questions they want their thralls to pass on to their Senators regarding the health care reform debate.

1. Do you support a public healthcare option as part of reform?
2. Do you support a public healthcare option that is ready on day one?
3. Do you support a public healthcare option that is national, available everywhere, and accountable to our government?
4. Do you support a public healthcare option that has the clout to establish rates with providers and big drug companies?

(Thank you to the friend that forwarded the email.)

There are obvious problems with the thinking (or lack of) that went into this group of questions.
Number one; the repeated reference to a “public option.”. This is a knowingly dishonest description. I will use the more common term “lie” from here on. This is not an option. We will not have a checkbox on our W4s asking whether it is OK with us to take some additional money from our paychecks to fund this monstrosity. Therefore, our only options are whether to pay for government health care alone or whether to pay for government health care for others and an additional amount out of pocket for actual health care.
Even the word “public” in that description should be considered a lie.  There is very little that is public regarding this Congress and Presidential administration.  BO thinks things as trivial as his birth certificate are worth spending hundreds of thousands to keep secret, and that the people don’t have any right to know how much he spends on a date to Broadway.
Number two; the following clause is loaded with more lies: “national, available everywhere, and accountable to our government.”  “National,” in this case means that States rights will be trampled or ignored.  “Available everywhere” is missing the implied words “and to everyone” ensuring that benefits won’t be limited to only the legal residents of this country, and perhaps the most telling “accountable to our government.”  The DFA shows their Socialist pedigree with this one. Perhaps they need to be reminded that the government is supposed to be accountable to the people of this Country, not another arm of the government.  We the people are supposed to be the arbiters of what is acceptable from any government entity or program.

In light of the useless nature of the questions suggested by DFA, I decided it would be more productive to ask the following instead:

As a constituent, I have a few questions I’d like you to answer. I’m looking for answers to these questions specifically so I can understand clearly your position.

Do you support substantive tort reform (limitations) as part of healthcare reform?

Will you pledge to stop using the misleading term public “option” as regards the current health care bill to ensure integrity of the legislative process? If ANY tax dollars are used to pay for a program, it ceases to be an option for any taxpayer.

Will you pledge to use ONLY the government program under this bill for yourself AND your family if you vote for this legislation and it passes? This question is crucial. Your answer to this will reveal how strongly you believe that massive government involvement will improve health care.

As a constituent, I would really like to know the answers to these questions. Please respond to these questions in writing via email.

Thank you.

In particular I believe that we should all be asking our Senators and Representatives the last question.  Please take the time to ask questions of yours regarding this issue.

Satire V

Posted in DFA Watch, Retruthing the Debate | Print | No Comments »

12. July 2009 by Satire V.

The Obamination displayed his worrisome level of all things America again in his recent CNN interview while in Ghana, reported by Fox News here.   Linking America’s past slavery issues with the genocide happening in Darfur and the Congo is only possible for someone completely unfamiliar with the facts of the institution in this country, or a person with a conspiracy theorist level of paranoia and logic mangling.

America gave up slavery a long time ago, due in some part to a civil war but largely due to the earnest efforts of dedicated people that recognized how evil it was (the Republican Party).   That period of our history has no connection to the atrocities that are being committed in these distant countries.   The horrors that are happening there are all about political power.  Murders, rapes, beatings, burnings, and many other terrible things are not being done because people were held in cruel bondage here hundreds of years ago.  These acts are committed for the purpose of gaining and maintaining political power.

The only common thread tying these events together is the willingness of people to harm those who are most like themselves.
Many of the slaves that were brought to America were members of African tribes captured by other rival African tribes and sold to slave traders.  The idea that white European slavers went into the jungle to capture blacks is not inaccurate, but is certainly not the whole story.  Often, they simply went shopping on the beach and were brought captured enemies by the capturing tribes.
Today, the genocidal activities in these African countries consists almost entirely of blacks killing, maiming, and raping other blacks based on tribal, political, and religious affiliations.  This time, white European involvement is even less significant.

It isn’t clear from the story who Obama believes needs the lesson in slavery as it relates to these other events.  It is my guess that he thinks this is needed for our schools.  American schools already dedicate a significant portion of available time to slavery in our Country.  I saw the entire Roots miniseries in class in 1977 or 1978.  Spending more time trying to make a tenuous and inaccurate connection to these other tragedies is neither helpful nor educational.

The ignoramus in chief has shown that regarding slavery, the Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, he lacks experience or credibility.

Just like in everything else.

Posted in Things Obama Doesn't Understand | Print | No Comments »

23. February 2009 by Satire V.

In keeping with the need to point out the hypocrisy of the left:

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences decided to continue theire trend of granting their highest awards to those that meet their political agenda.  One of their shining stars decided to make the most of his soap box last night, and showed typical leftist hypocrisy in the process.

Sean Penn, receiving the Oscar for his portrayal of Harvey Milk, decided that he would use the presentation of his award to spotlight tolerance.  His tolerance of the protestors’ viewpoint that Heath Ledger’s portrayal in Brokeback Mountain had earned him a place in hell was very touching.  Although I don’t agree with the protestors, the response from Penn was just as intolerant.

Agree with the left and be declared progressive and enlightened, but disagree, and be labeled an intolerant bigot.

How very tolerant of them.

Posted in Its Only Hypocrisy If The Right Does It | Print | No Comments »

23. February 2009 by Satire V.

The first true salvos in the fight for control of the Repbublican Party have been exchanged.  Most political observers across the spectrum, from die-hard conservatives to the far-left have seen it coming.  The left has generally realized something that many on the right have not; this fight is about much more than who runs the Grand Ole Party.

The recent comments from Republican Governors have defined the debate pretty clearly.  On one side there are those such as Bobby Jindal, who believe that Conservatism is the best hope for the Party.  On the other side are those such as the governor of Florida that believe that we must broaden the base.

The answer, unlike many, does not lie somewhere in the middle.  The party needs to return to, and most importantly live, the ideals of the Conservative movement.  The desire to regain seats that have been lost in the last two election cycles leads some to believe that we must invite those with widely different views into the “big tent.”  The problem is not a lack of diversity in the Party, it is a failure to present, explain, live, and prove the ideals of limited government and fiscal responsibility.  Republicans don’t need to move to the center, we need to show America why it should move to the right.

This is not the time to water down our ideals to try to gain votes.  Although the last election cycle proved that Americans aren’t necessarily the clearest thinking voters in the world, the electorate is not stupid.  A party that doesn’t stand for anything will not appeal to much of anyone, nor should it. 

We as members of this party must explain to our neighbors, friends, and co-workers why liberalism will fail all of us in the long run.  We must teach our children why taking more and more wealth from those that create it makes most of us poorer.  We need to help others understand how increasing taxes and regulatory burdens on businesses causes them to send more and more jobs and corporate assets out of this country.  Most of all, we need to teach them the principles of Conservatism that will enable them to think through political and social questions and come to correct conclusions on their own.

Our children are learning knee-jerk liberalism in our public schools and by watching TV.  We must teach them to think for themselves, to resist peer pressure, and to challenge the liberal and socialist messages they are bombarded.with.  We should point out the hypocrisy of the left, and teach them to spot it on their own.  We must not let the left define fairness for us.  Our children should understand that they are the better judge of how to distribute any of the fruits of their labor, and that government rarely makes the right choices in this regard.

It is also up to us to ensure that the Party’s leaders are fully aware that watering down the principles that made us strong is not acceptable.  Contribute to the Repbulican Party, but be sure to let them know that you don’t want the money to go to candidates that move to the left.  Participate in local party meetings, and express your insistence that the party stand on principles.  We must hold our representatives to high standards and not allow them to violate the principles of responsibility and accountability.

The fight is on, and we must choose our side.  The center is not an option.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

23. February 2009 by Satire V.

The elections got me down.  I found it hard to write anything, even in the face of obvious targets.

 I suppose I should have said something when Obama decided that his first Executive Order would be to fund the killing of children in other countries.

I should have spoken up when Nancy Pelosi espoused ideas that would have made any Nazi eugenicist proud when she told us that birth control was econimic stimulus.

 The passing of the stimulus package, which probably had many on the left weeping with joy about how Barack was going to stimulate them was truly a package of ammunition for any writer of the right.

 Unfortunately, it was just too depressing.  I have recovered enough though, and have decided that it is time to help move the Right in the right direction. 

So, onward…..

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

18. December 2008 by Satire V.

Barack Obama’s recent attempt at his administration’s promised transparency with reporter John McCormick revealed an interesting tendency on the PE’s part.  He occasionally engages in a practice sometimes referred to as “uptalk.”

Uptalk is the use of a rising inflection at the end of a statement.  This is normal for interrogatory statements, but not for declarative statements.  Although this practice is fairly common among Left coast residents, it is not the norm for the Midwest.  Also of note is that he doesn’t use this speech pattern very often.  In many speeches and interviews he ended his declaratives with the even inflection that denotes the completion of the statement.  When comfortable with the subject, or when interviewed by anyone left of Fox News, he rarely used uptalk.

Outside of those who use this speech pattern regularly, engaging in uptalk is potentially a sign of internal dissonance.  Most often, it indicates discomfort with, or unsureness about the statement being made.  Another common reason it comes out is that the speaker is unconsciously making a question out of the statement.  Think about when a child is questioned about doing something naughty, like the hand in the cookie jar.  When asked why or if he or she did it, the child will often try out answers, ending his or her statement with the rising inflection of a question.  Its as though the child is trying out the answer to see if the adult will bite.

I don’t think that I’m biting on this one.  Let’s see who left their prints on the Blagojevich cookie jar.

Posted in Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »