The Steno Pool for Obama, Dems, Leftists

Every single time there's violence, TEA Partiers, Conservatives, Christians, are assumed to be the perps. Never have they been with the obvious exception of abortion center bombings. The latter is immediately announced and shunned by Christians and Conservatives.  Fort Hood mass murders was done by a registered Democrat and Muslim. Columbine murderers were raised by Leftists/Democrats. Virginia Tech mass murderer wrote hate mail to GW Bush and was a registered Democrat. The murderer that shot up the theater in Colorado was a registered Democrat, worked on the Obama campaign, and was an Occupy Wall Street guy. The Newtown murderer was a registered Democrat and anti Christian bigot. For days after Gabby Gifford was shot, the Obama/Democrat steno pool (aka mainstream media) kept repeating it was right wing extremist, which to them is anybody that doesn't adhere to their Leftist lockstep ideology. Not one shooting or terrorist act has been done by a Republican, Tea Partier, Conservative, or Christian.

The Left is all about deconstruction, rejection of the Constitution, destitution, powerlessness for citizens, forced poverty except for the few that support Statism. This is the best summation of how the mainstream media handles all these tragedies.

"The Little Blue Book" Leftists\Democrats Political and Cultural Playbook

Communist (self proclaimed), Racist and Truther Van Jones who served, along with several other Communists and Racists in the Obama Administration, said the following:

"Shouldn’t we have the right and the liberty to be energy producers and not be dictated to twelve times a year by energy companies that dictate how much we’re going to pay for energy, when we’re going to pay it, how many asthma inhalers we’re going to have as a consequence?  Shouldn’t we have the liberty as Americans to power this country in a new way?

If all you care about is individual economic liberty and you don’t give a hoot about justice, you get a different type of tyranny.  You get corporate tyranny.  No, no.  They say, 'Well, Obama is a socialist, you see?  The government is trying to take over the economy.'  BS.  The corporations are trying to take over the government!  That’s what’s happening!"

The wording is key. Working for a corporation that you can walk away from, buying from a company you can walk away from is tyranny. Submitting to a government that can fine and jail you if you don't comply with their rules, is liberty.

Notice how Leftists always call a baby in the womb a fetus? Women's right to choose or reproductive rights is the languaging. Bring up there's a baby in there, a human being, they get all in a tizzy. No it's not! Control the language, control the debate. It's why it's so hard to talk to these people. They refuse, by design, to use normal language, but "reframe" it into their own. 

The source of this idea of using language to alter reality, put the debate in one's own terms is from "The Little Blue Book". Like Mao's "Little Red Book". Guides to effective totalitarianism.  A character named George Lakoff is the author of this, and it turns out he's as exalted by the Left as much as Saul Alinski.   

In an interview with Leftist Charlie Rose a few days ago Obama said: “When I think about what we’ve done well and what we haven’t done well, the mistake of my first term – couple of years – was thinking that this job was just about getting the policy right. And that’s important. But the nature of this office is also to tell a story to the American people that gives them a sense of unity and purpose and optimism, especially during tough times.”…  Ummmm, so it's not so important to have policies that work, but to have a good message?  More of Our Dear Leader: "It's funny - when I ran, everybody said, well he can give a good speech but can he actually manage the job?" ... "And in my first two years, I think the notion was, 'Well, he's been juggling and managing a lot of stuff, but where's the story that tells us where he's going?' And I think that was a legitimate criticism". 

Notice whenever a Dem loses and election they never say the issue was the content of their policies, but they didn't get the message out? That idea comes from "The Little Blue Book". You know, the one kinda like the Communist "Little Red Book",  the latter of which several in the Obama Administration openly admire.

This has to do with his concepts of "labeling" and "frames". You just create a frame to fit your message, people will start believing it. One can throw in a lot of false metaphors to give the false impression of  'this is the truth'. Thus, if you fail, it's because you used the wrong frames and labeling, creating the wrong message, so people misunderstand. So you can then label a program as cost reducing when it isn't, and say it still is, we just didn't say it right. Yeah, I know, they actually believe that. Really and truly. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it's a dog. Labeling. Framing. 

Lakoff and his coauthor Elizabeth Wehling view conservatives as stupid and desirous of a controlling father figure government, i.e. totalitarian. This is because Conservative families have strict overbearing fathers, even controlling their submissive wives. Liberal families have co-equal moms and dads, and the result is liberty loving smart kids. Really, he says these things. Leftists live by it, even if they don't know the guy or his book.

That Conservatives are totalitarian and Leftists the liberty lovers gets turned on its head by the evidence noted even by citizens paying little attention to the culture wars or politics. Backfire.

Here's the backfire, noted by Zombie, his full article here. [It's a detailed analysis of the book.]

"There’s a new frame in town: The nanny state. In a masterful maneuver of political aikido, conservatives have taken Lakoff’s antediluvian “strict father conservatism” frame and completely reversed it. Conservatism now stands for freedom from authority, while is it progressivism that seeks to implement the new scolding parent metaphor, now known as the “nanny state.” It’s liberals who want to tell you what to do and what is allowed, not conservatives. 

 And this frame is widely accepted by the general public not simply because of superior conservative messaging, but because there is evidence backing it up. It is mostly liberal politicians, not conservative politicians, who pass laws and regulations telling citizens what they can and cannot do, what they must and must not buy, what they are and are not allowed to say. 

Who seeks to impose the “strict parent” paradigm now? Liberals. And everyone knows it. Yet still there’s George Lakoff off by his lonesome still pounding his fists about “strict father conservatives.” All the rhetoric in the world can’t hide the fact that conservatism now stands for unintrusive small government, and that progressivism stands for intrusive big government. The “nanny state” frame is so powerful and self-evidently true that it can’t be ignored away, and can’t be euphemized away."

As noted earlier, Obama still blames the message. Come November when he looses to Romney, he'll still claim his policies were correct, evidence to the contrary, and his message was flawed. He'll think too, like Leftists do, that the citizens are stupid and just didn't get it, how good they had it under Our Dear Leader's Regime.

Berserk? Death and Destruction? Blame a Conservative That Wasn't There

Michell Malkin

This is a total hat tip to the brilliant Michelle Malkin, and has to do with the vicious libelous (shall we say blood libel?) attacks by the Left on the Right whenever some nut gets violent. Side note here, Shelly Berkley, a Nevada representative, was one of the first to pop off after the Arizona Shooting, talking about ‘wingnuts’, the Statist codeword for Conservative.   

Malkin laid out a chronology of Leftist libel (blood Libel) against Consertatives, you know, those crazy people that think there should be limited government, low taxes, the right to practice religion, the right to bear arms, and crazy stuff like that.

"In April 2009, a disgruntled, unemployed loser shot and killed three Pittsburgh police officers in a horrifying bloodbath. The gunman, Richard Poplawski, was a dropout from the Marines who threw a food tray at a drill instructor and had beaten his girlfriend. Was this deranged shooter who pulled the trigger to blame? Nope. Despite evidence that Poplawski’s homicidal, racist tendencies manifested themselves years before Obama took office, lefty publications asserted that the real culprits of the spree were the “heated, apocalyptic rhetoric of the anti-Obama forces” (according to mainstream liberal Atlantic Monthly pundit Andrew Sullivan), along with Fox News and Glenn Beck (according to mainstream liberal journalist Steve Benen of the Washington Monthly online).

That same month, a sick, evil man named Jiverly Voong ambushed an immigration center in Binghamton, New York. Recently fired from his job, Voong murdered 13 people, critically wounded four others, and then committed suicide. The instant psychologists of the Left knew nothing about the disgruntled man of Vietnamese descent of undetermined political affiliation. But within hours of the shooting, liberal mega-website Huffington Post commenters had overwhelmingly convicted GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, the National Rifle Association, Fox News, Lou Dobbs, and yours truly. Liberal radio host Alan Colmes pointed his finger at the “huge anti–immigrant backlash in this country” – never mind that tens of millions of legal immigrants and naturalized citizens have coped with hardship, overcome racism, and embraced assimilation without going bloody bonkers.

In June 2009, a depraved, elderly anti-Semite named James von Brunn gunned down a security guard at the Holocaust Museum in D.C. Washington Post blogger Greg Sargent and lefty Center for American Progress think-tank fellow Matthew Yglesias immediately invoked the Obama administration’s report on right-wing extremism, leading to a wider chorus of condemnations against the Tea Party, talk radio, and the entire GOP. The truth? Von Brunn was an unstable, equal-opportunity hater and 9/11 Truther conspiracy loon who bashed Jews and Christians, George W. Bush and Fox News, and had also threatened the conservative Weekly Standard magazine.

In February 2010, ticking time-bomb professor Amy Bishop gunned down three of her colleagues at University of Alabama-Huntsville and suicide pilot Joseph Andrew Stack flew a stolen small plane into an Austin, Texas, office complex that contained an Internal Revenue Service office. Mainstream journalists from Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart to Time magazine reporter Hilary Hylton leaped forward to tie the crimes to Tea Party rhetoric. Never mind that Bishop was an Obama-worshiping academic with a lifelong history of violence or that Stack was another Bush-hater outraged about everything from George W. Bush to the American medical system to the evils of capitalism to the city of Austin, the Catholic Church, and airlines."

Full article here. 

Dialog With A Dem

In several venues, I've had discourse with Libs, and pretty much it ends with ad hominem attacks. I'm narrow minded, stuck in my way of thinking, don't have enough schooling, don't know what I'm talking about (while they just make up stuff whole cloth). Of course I can show vids of people saying what I said they said, show hard cold numbers to support my contentions, provide first person accounts of events, and none of it matters.

Here's pretty much how a political discussion goes with a Democrat or any of their Statist fellow travelers.

Conservative: We're about $14 trillion in debt, about $2.5 of it generated in the first eighteen months of the Obama administration. How to you justify running up so much debt? That's more than Bush in eight years, and he was a big spender too.

Dem: See, it's Bush's fault.

Conservative: Okay, that may have started it, but you guys have basically tripled down. How do you justify that? I mean, that can't be paid off in a couple of generations even if we just quit spending.

Dem: It's Bush's fault.

Conservative: Okay, moving on then. The BP oil spill in the Gulf. That rig had passed on all the Federal inspections and regulations, and was given the go ahead by the Federal Government. Really, both the company and the government were at fault, causing the most horrific environmental catastrophe in US history. Obama and you guys say you had nothing to do with it. How do you justify such a statement?

Dem: It's Bush's fault.

Conservative: Okay. Well, by law, getting the mess cleaned up is the Federal Government's responsibility, yet nothing was done for nearly two months after the disaster. Why not?

Dem: It's Bush's fault.

Conservative: I get the picture. Let's change up a bit. While the economy is tanking, there's a huge environmental disaster, foreign leaders are mocking the president, he's been to over a hundred political fund raisers, taken several vacations, played more rounds of golf in a year and a half than Bush did in eight years (for which he was roundly and soundly mocked and criticized), plus parties and concerts galore at the White House. How can you justify this kind of behavior in light of all the problems this country faces?

Dem: You're a racist.

Conservative: Indeed, and a cracker too. Obama and you guys have taken control of a huge sector of the automotive industry, health care and health insurance industries, indeed well on your way to controlling all insurance companies, and today it looks like the take over what's left of the financial industry that you don't already control, will be completed with new financial regulatory legislation. Much of the energy industries are so heavily regulated by you guys, I'd be safe in saying the energy sector of the economy is also government run. How do you justify the government controlling everything?

Dem: People are stupid and they must understand we know what's best for them, including how to spend their money. Senator Boxer was right when she said that even though email to her office ran about 85% against health care reform , she said it was only because people just don't understand we are doing what's best for them. She's absolutely right.

Conservative: About 70% of people were against the health care bill, 70% side with Arizona SB1070 to protect their border with Mexico, about 60% are against your "Cap and Trade" legislation, about 70% against the Financial reform bill due to be passed today...overwhelmingly your legislation is against the will of the American people. Doesn't it bother you that you're, for the most part, ruling against the will of the American people?

Dem: They're racists.

Conservative: Thank you for your time. I'll be on my racist, liberty loving way. Maybe go to a racist TEA party rally with my cracker friends. Thanks for your time.

History of the World

For those that don't know about history ... Here is a condensed version:


Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.


The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:


1 . Liberals, and

2. Conservatives.


Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to BBQ at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement..


Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly BBQ's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.

Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. Those became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, engineers, corporate executives, athletes, members of the military, airline pilots and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans... That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America . They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.

Here ends today's lesson in world history.

Satire Anyone?

"Conservative arguments against President Obama are becoming increasingly silly. They oppose Obama rescuing businesses despite all the jobs on the line, they're against government taking control of health care from soulless insurance companies, and they oppose increased taxes on energy consumption despite the sorry state of the environment. And why do they oppose these most sensible actions? Because of their irrational, brain-dead obsession with liberty. Of course, everyone likes freedom -- to a point -- but there are a number of loud, stupid Americans who just take it to ridiculous extremes. They hoard their freedoms like greedy little dwarfs hoarding gold when they have little actual use for most of it. People need rules and order and guidance, but they hardly ever need liberty. Liberty doesn't feed your family. Liberty doesn't heal you when you're sick. Liberty doesn't educate your children. A strong government can do all those things, but apparently that's against liberty. ... Just look at this ludicrous debate over health care reform. Of course the government should provide health care for everyone; how obvious can anything be? The government has the money and smart people working for everyone's interests to make sure all get health care, so why would anyone be against that? Because apparently people aren't 'free' to make their health care choices for themselves. ... Real freedom is not having to worry about health care, and that's what you get when you have the government take it over. Yes, you'll have little control over who gets what kind of care, but some people will just have to suffer some for the betterment of the whole. The advantage of having the government in control is that it makes sure the fewest number suffer, and those that do aren't particularly important. ... Most of the civilized world has moved beyond this uncompromising view of 'freedom' -- if they were ever foolish enough to adopt it in the first place. Can you think of any other country that would permit its citizens to have guns like America does? Of course not; that's beyond moronic. People know freedom is a dangerous, scary thing, and you have to be careful how much you tolerate." --Frank J. Fleming

The whole satirical article here.