The Liberal War Against the Littleist Women

The Liberal War Against the Littleist Women

In their desperate attempts to distract voters from Barack Hussein Obama’s 3 1/2 year record of abysmal failure, the president, his mainstream media, and Obama’s administration minions have resorted to every outlandish slander conceivable.




Among other lies, they have falsely claimed that Mitt Romney mistreated his dog Seamus, that Ann Romney “never worked a day in her life,” and that Republicans hate women.



As with their other pathetic strategies, all the shameless Democrat attacks have fallen flat, especially the canard that the GOP is engaged in a war against the fair sex.



Liberals seem to love wars, as evidenced by their wars against religion, against “the rich,” against anyone and anything that displeases them.



Disregarding an epidemic of attacks on women by libs, the Left focuses on conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh and on specious allegations that congressional Republicans are “out to get” women.



Liberals ignore the incessant abuse of Sarah Palin, forgive Bill Maher for referring to Palin and other conservative women as c*nts, overlook Ed Schultz’ denigration of Laura Ingraham as “a right wing slut,” and excuse Keith Olbermann for saying S. E. Cupp should have been aborted.



The Left chooses to grant their resident misogynists a pass and instead have honed in on Limbaugh’s apt, if unfortunate, observation that Sandra Fluke is a slut.



There is indeed a war in progress against women, a war being waged by liberal Democrats and they’re taking no prisoners. In fact, libs are literally executing the most vulnerable and innocent females in American society, future women, the pre-born variety.



The Left regards abortion, what Ann Coulter called a liberal sacrament, as sacrosanct. They also have long endorsed, subsidized, and protected the nation’s most prolific abortionist, Planned Parenthood of America.



Apparently, killing pre-born girls (and boys) is perfectly acceptable to liberals, just as long as we protect the mysterious constitutional “right to privacy” of mothers-to-be and their unwritten right to choose if they want to give birth to girl babies as opposed to boy babies.



Whether potential moms opt for baby blue eyes over brown for their progeny or for no progeny at all, seems to be fine with the Left and for PPoA.



Neither vivid exposés of PPoA’s illegal activities–such as facilitating pimps when they want to abort the babies of their underaged prostitutes–nor Planned Parenthood’s exorbitant profits derived from murdering the pre-born, nor PPoA’s concerted efforts to seduce teenagers into accepting the normality of homosexual relations and promiscuity have deterred the Left from championing the efforts by PPoA to honor their sacrament.



Since the liberal MSM shows no interest in exposing what PPoA really does, it falls to independent sources to out the organization. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=25112.)

Scott Walker's Recall, a Battle for Sanity

Scott Walker's Recall, a Battle for Sanity

Tuesday, June 5th might be the day that determines the future of the state of Wisconsin and offers a glimpse of America’s future post-November 6th.




The results of the misbegotten, hugely expensive, recall election of the Badger State’s duly elected Republican governor at the instigation of Big Labor and civil service unions will effectively serve as a barometer of nationwide voter sentiment on economic realities, despite Democrat efforts to play down the significance of the outcome.



At this late stage, with conservative Scott Walker leading liberal Tom Barrett by as many as eight percentage points in various polls, it appears Walker will still be the governor after the dust settles and the ballots are honestly counted. Democrats are notorious for minimizing the importance of contests they think they will lose, a habit perfectly illustrated by their president’s failure to support their candidate or even visit Wisconsin in the closing days of the election.



The state’s Republican Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch nailed the truth of the significance of a probable Walker victory: “How can they [Obama's Democrat Party] possibly spin this? There is no consolation prize here. It’s clear–the path to prosperity is paved with fiscal responsibility. And everyone shares in prosperity.”



The supreme irony in the unprecedented recall attempt is that Walker was elected primaily on his pledge to return his state to fiscal sanity after years of Democrat reckless spending. To the chagrin of Democrats and their union supporters, Walker has largely fulfilled that pledge and they despise him for his achievement.



The Wisconsin recall has been described as “the battle of our times,” which it is and isn’t.



It is undoubtedly a battle.



Last spring, the nation witnessed the disgraceful lengths to which Walker’s opponents would go in that battle when teachers abandoned their classrooms in order to trash the Capitol building in Madison, slander and threaten the governor and his family, employing tactics more befitting Third Worlders than Americans.



Complementing those mindless displays, Democrat legislators literally ran away from their legislative responsibilities in Madison and state troopers had to be sent to round them up.



For the second time in two years, this election pits . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=25034.)

Unemployment Smoke and Mirrors

Unemployment Smoke and Mirrors

“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have.” (Thomas Jefferson)

Based on mainstream media reports and liberal pundit commentaries, one would think that America’s economy had turned a corner, that massive numbers of people were getting back to work, that the re-recession was over, that God’s in His heaven and all’s right in Obamaworld.

Much as all Americans would love to believe that rosy picture, it would be as accurate as believing Obama reveres the United States Constitution.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics released data on Friday showing that 120,000 jobs opened up in March and that the official unemployment rate declined from 8.3% in February to 8.2% last month, the lowest rate in over three years.

That was the good economic news, deceptively good and the only good news.

In point of fact, those 120,000 jobs represented a 107,000 decrease from February’s numbers and far less than the expected 205,000 and were the fewest jobs added in five months, people are leaving the workforce in droves with a record 88,000,000 now not employed at all, the Institute for Supply Management’s factory index was 53.4 in March, down from a high of 59.9 in January, 2011, and Americans are working fewer hours and earning less money.

If this is a recovery, what’s a recession?

CNBC’s voice of reason, Rick Santelli, . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=20864.)

Vote Early and Often!

Vote Early and Often!

The City of the Big Shoulders didn’t originate the idea of voting early and often, that is, subverting the electoral process by voters assuming false identities and casting numerous ballots to inflate final election tallies to help insure the Democrat candidates’ victories, but the Windy City perfected the scam.

Fifty-two years ago, Democrat Mayor Richard Daley’s Chicago succeeded in electing John F. Kennedy president of the United States with the help of thousands of dead people who amazingly found their way to the polls to vote for Jack and every other Democrat on the ballot.

This is not to suggest dirty politics is a phenomenon confined to the Democrat Party nor that it began in the twentieth century.

Dick Nixon is up there with the best in the dirty pantheon although, to his credit, he chose not to precipitate a constitutional crisis by challenging the 1960 election results and some have suggested that even Thomas Jefferson circulated incriminating pamphlets to trash his political opponents.

Being devious by nature, politicians have historically used other underhanded, unethical, and technically illegal electoral tricks of the trade including forgery, slander, libel, and payoffs to supplement ballot stuffing and elect their favorites, rarely resulting in legal consequences since the opponents had lost and authorities weren’t much interested in pursuing the guilty.

Even more rare is a pol not only admitting to voter fraud but brazenly claiming the practice is ”a normal political tactic” employed by Democrats and Republicans alike.

Taking their cues from Chicago, Troy, New York Democrats Anthony Renna, already found guilty of second-degree forgery, and Anthony DeFiglio, found guilty of falsifying business records, are now accused of ballot fraud but claiming, ”Voter fraud is an accepted way of winning elections, and faking absentee ballots was commonplace.”

Despite the fact there is no evidence that Troy Republicans have been engaged in any fraud, Renna and DeFiglio are obviously arguing that their conduct is defensible on the basis that besmirching the opposition will exonerate them.

And I always thought the childish defense of, “Mom! Everyone is doing it!” expired with puberty.

Notwithstanding that two of their fellow Democrats have pled guilty and that a total of eight Democrats have been indicted in the case centering around alleged fraudulent attempts to get Democrat candidates on the ballot for the Working Families Party, the WFP, in 2009, . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=12186.)

Panem Without the Circenses: Food Stamps

Panem Without the Cicenses: Food Stamps

Before the collapse of the Roman Republic, politicians were no less devious than contemporary pols.

One way or another, they tried to buy plebeian votes, to ply the rabble with goodies in hopes of winning their approval come election time. The tactic came to be known as providing panem et circenses or bread and circuses. Our politicians call it food stamps.

There is no doubt many Americans are hurting in President Barack Hussein Obama’s dismal economy with a continuing high rate of unemployment unrelieved by multi-billion dollar federal stimulations and a climbing poverty rate. Reflecting that failure, the Census Bureau reported in September that the number of people in the United States living below the official poverty line rose in 2010 by 2.6 million bringing the grand total of America’s poor to 46.2 million, the highest number in 52 years.

Way to go, Barack!

There is also no doubt that most of those poor would be considered rich by half the world and that some Americans take advantage of the system. Anyone standing in line to buy staples at the local A&P behind someone purchasing lobsters with a food stamp card can attest to that abuse.

Haphazardly throwing more and more money at a problem has never changed anything but the Obamians have no clue what else to do. They could just get out of the way of the chained giant that is the American capitalistic industrial base, lift restrictions and regulations and let it roar but that option is a non-starter with socialists.

However, there are those pesky things called elections so how do they make the discontented more content?

Why, bribe them, of course! . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=9840.)

It's Gingrich Time!

It's Gingrich Time!

All things come to those who wait and now it’s Gingrich’s turn. With the race for the Republican nomination for president seemingly narrowed to a pack of two, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, it was time for the Obama attack team to zero in on Newt since he has been waxing of late and Mitt has been stagnating.

Adhering to the military strategy of focusing on offing the leader, the Obamians have been dismantling the front runner until he is beaten to a pulp then deal with the remnants of the field. It worked with Bachmann, Perry, and Cain so why not go with whatever works?

Of course, even when he was bringing up the rear, Gingrich received his allotted share of undercutting but it’s a whole new ballgame now that he’s in the lead. The Big Guns are being trotted out to reduce him to size, if not to a quivering shadow of his former self.

However, with all his faults and baggage, Newt represents a lot of candidate to cut down and he’s not known to quiver much.

And, to utilize a tempting pun, his quiver is chock-full of arrows with which to bring down Obama, chiefly his knowledge, experience, intelligence, and debating expertise, all of which constitute fearsome forces to reckon with and the re-elect Obama team has evidently been doing a great deal of reckoning.

The latest Democrat stalwart to join the Democrat attack machine isn’t known for her intelligence or expertise in anything other than winning her own re-election in a super-safe congressional district and just launched her initial salvo of innuendo intended to inflict damage on her former House colleague.

House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi didn’t really say anything of substance to Talking Points Memo but rather, in her sly fashion, tried to smear and intimidate Gingrich with a threat.

As she inelegantly put it without elaboration, “When the time is right. . . I know a lot about him. I served on the investigative committee that investigated him, four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff.”

Just think about it. An investigative committee of four so far un-identified individuals investigating an arch political enemy for twelve months behind non-transparent doors and compiling “a thousand pages of his stuff.” It’s a wonder they didn’t find Newt guilty of pulling grandma’s plug and tossing babies into wood chippers!

Imagine any committee secretly investigating Barack Hussein Obama for a year! They could determine he was born in Nairobi, his father was a confirmed Marxist drunk, and his mother had this peculiar thing for Muslim men. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=9629.)

Barney Frank, R.I.P.

Barney Frank, R.I.P.

No, Barney Frank isn’t dead. He isn’t among the deceased but he is being virtually canonized by Long Island’s resident nitwit congressman Steve Israel as “a champion of American families.”

Rep. Israel has one peculiar concept of “family.”

Called “the most powerful homosexual in Congress,” Barney is merely retiring so he can rest up in peace, away from the slings and arrows of political infighting, his scandal-plagued career, and those meanie Republicans who keep dredging up his complicity in the 2008 banking debacle that led to Obama’s continuing Great Recession.

Barney is surrendering his position as ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, the same committee he headed during the banking meltdown when he and then-Senator Chris Dodd forced financial institutions and their buddies at Frannie Mae and Freddie Mac to loan vast sums of money to people who barely had a pot to pee in.

However, Frank and Dodd felt they should have a shot at the American Dream, and then vote for Frank and Dodd.

Barney’s dream and one of America’s nightmares will be over next year since he has unexpectedly announced he won’t run for re-election after 32 years representing the good, people of the most liberal state in the union, Massachusetts. Democrats will probably turn over his committee job to another class act, Rep. Maxine Waters.

Barney’s reasons for packing it in, so to speak, are debatable.

Although his advancing years and the re-districting of his ultra-safe 4th c.d., home to the leftist bastions of Dartmouth and Wellesley, may have played a part, Barney was somewhat vague in his announcement saying only that he didn’t want to introduce himself to new voters and that he had “other things I’d like to do.”

Good thinking, Barn!

Convincing a whole new electorate that he is still “the liberal lion of the House” and thereby worthy of their vote would be challenging enough for 71 year old Barney. Persuading them that a former owner of a homosexual bordello should represent them could pose an even greater obstacle, even in Massachusetts. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=7818.)

The Unconscionable Lack of Liberal Conscience

The Unconscionable Lack of Liberal Conscience

“Let your conscience be your guide” is an outdated axiom for Catholics in the Democrat Party, as is the concept of moral and ethical conduct as they apply to their religion.

True and unfortunately, morality and ethics are antithetical constructs in any political context and “ethics committees” seem out of place in political bodies and largely exist as pro-forma charades to satisfy a gullible public but many liberal Catholic Dems go further by overtly flaunting their contempt for ethical behavior.

Of course, relativists reject the idea of any absolutes in life, which is a nifty excuse for avoiding condemnation for violating established societal norms of decency since they absolutely disagree with those dictates.

Thus, Catholic and non-Catholic Democrats alike are able to campaign against what reasonable individuals understand intuitively, the existence of living, human life in the womb, on the bases of debatable claims that it is not a human life, that it’s not viable, that a woman’s right to privacy takes precedence over pre-born life.

The moral-ethical relativists absolutely believe all that and, though I think their beliefs are absurd, I can consider the source and accept them. If their faiths condone the murder of innocent pre-borns, who am I to disagree? The prudent approach of opting for sparing lives when there is any doubt as to when life begins in-utero is inapplicable to relativists.

You see, it’s all relative, whatever that means.

What I find totally unacceptable are politicians, especially ostensibly-Catholic politicians, who preach civil rights yet advocate in favor of denying the most fundamental civil entitlement, the constitutionally-guaranteed “right to life” through abortion. When they complain about Catholic consciences inhibiting their unorthodox views, they are hypocrites verging on apostasy.

Dozens of current Catholic politicians have been lectured . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=6647.)

Democrat Extremism in the Defense of Extremism

Democrat Extremism in the Defense of Extremism

Barry Goldwater’s line from his 1964 Republican presidential nomination acceptance speech is often misquoted and more often intentionally misinterpreted.

What Goldwater actually said was, “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!” What the founder of modern conservatism and inspiration for Ronald Reagan meant was that Americans should value their freedoms enough to struggle for them, as long as those liberties were virtuous.

Lyndon Johnson refused to debate Goldwater during the ’64 campaign for the presidency. Instead, with no substantive basis, Democrats painted the senator from Arizona as an extremist of the worst kind who would start World War III and deploy nuclear weapons in Viet Nam.

Toward that end of smearing Goldwater, Democrats deployed the most infamous, extremist advertisement in national political history, a picture of a young girl picking daisies with an atomic explosion in the background.

The ad also featured Johnson saying, “These are the stakes. To make a world in which all of God’s children will live, or to do into the dark. We must either love each other or we must die” and concluded by showing “Vote for President Johnson on November 3rd.”

The ad ran only once but once was sufficient. Mission accomplished. Johnson defeated Goldwater in a landslide and went on to send 63,000 American soldiers to their deaths in ‘Nam.

If we define extreme as the outer limits, most removed from the center, beyond the average sense of moderation, that one minute ad was the epitome, not only a bald-faced lie but a distortion which helped cause those needless fatalities.

Having learned the effectiveness of lies and distortions though not their immorality, many statements and actions by liberals and indeed by today’s Democrat Party must be labelled extremist yet, practicing the same underhanded techniques as those employed against Goldwater, they succeed in establishing them as truth thanks to a complicit media.

There have been so many examples of extremist Democrat rhetoric and actions during the brief reign of President Barack Hussein Obama rivaling the venom of the Goldwater campaign that it’s impossible to detail them all in the limited space available here.

Virtually all of them, from MSNBC commentators wishing death for conservatives, to union thugs visiting mayhem on opponents, to administration functionaries preaching racial hatred and defying authority, to the Wall Street Occupiers creating social chaos, are designed with one goal in mind: re-electing the president.

The thinking seems to be that anything, any words or activities that serve to subvert the American value system, also serve to undermine the Republican Party and to insure four more years of the extremist, socialist domestic policies and foreign policies which cater to the most extreme elements in America.

Why else would Obama and other Democrats wink at their vile MSNBC lackeys, their invective-spewing unionists, their un-elected officials making a farce of law, and endorse the OWS anarchists?

Thanks to liberal brainwashing as to the rightness and entitlement to legal abortion and residency in the White House of the most pro-abortion president in history, there is no more contentious issue on the American scene today.

For Democrats, the abortion issue fills their needs to appear sensitive, at the same time they conceal their gross insensitivity to life. It enables them to lock-in a powerful segment of the electorate, at the same time it constitutes an infringement on the rights of the pre-born. It affords them the opportunity to claim a sense of superiority, at the same time it satisfies the contemporary fixation on selfishness.

As such, the liberal sacrament of abortion has become the domestic foundation of the Democrat Party. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=6007.)

To Recuse or not to Recuse?

To Recuse or not to Recuse

At long last, the Supreme Court of the United States has officially announced that it will review the constitutionality of President Barack Hussein signature legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare.

More specifically, SCOTUS will decide the merits of a lawsuit brought by 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business that contends Congress exceeded its power by imposing an annual penalty of $95 or 1% of gross income, whichever is greater, on individuals who do not secure insurance by 2014. The penalty is scheduled to rise to $695, or 2.5%, by 2016 with a family limit of $2,085.

The limit was indeed benevolent of Democrats who rammed the PPACA through Congress with no assistance from Republicans and now it would be fair of them to insist that Obama’s Justice Elena Kagan recuse herself from the case.

Rare on the SCOTUS level, recusals refer to situations in which a judge or prosecutor is removed or voluntarily steps down from a legal case, most often when the judge or prosecutor has a conflict of interest.

Justice Kagan clearly has a major conflict of interest in determining the constitutionality of the PPACA and should recuse herself from deliberations and a decision on the matter, or be forcibly removed from the bench and be seated in the court along with other known proponents of Obamacare.

Those scenarios, however, are as likely as Democrats admitting that seizure by the federal government of Americans’ health care and one-sixth of the national economy was a screwball, socialistic idea in the first place.

Kagan’s job prior to being confirmed to the Supreme Court was service as Obama’s Solicitor General in which position she was charged with representing the Executive Branch in cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and acting as the chief courtroom lawyer for the government, preparing legal briefs and making oral arguments in that court.

At Kagan’s 2010 confirmation hearings, she dodged key questions and swore she played no part in crafting government responses to anticipated lawsuits contesting the legality of the newly-passed Obamacare legislation, swearing under oath that she merely ”attended a meeting where the cases were discussed, but that she wasn’t involved in the government’s filings.” (http://tiny.cc/p2njk)

If you believe that whopper, the Brooklyn Bridge is unavailable but I can make you a very good deal on the Queensboro.

In a just-released email exchange between the Solicitor General and Justice Department attorney Lawrence Tribe, they discussed the pending legislation and in one Elena exclaimed, “I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing.”

What’s even more amazing is that Solicitor General Kagan was able to dissociate herself . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5968.)

The MSM Discovers the OWS

The MSM Discovers the OWS

The mainstream media, currently Barack Hussein Obama’s mainstream media, has long specialized in selective reporting and commentary, highlighting stories and events which comfortably mesh with their liberal slant, overlooking or otherwise minimizing those that don’t.

The liberal print media has perfected that science of unethical journalistic malpractice by squeezing non-meshing stories into inch and a half boxes on pages 49 or 71 which few people read while the liberal broadcast and cable media simply ignore them since, after all, their time is limited.

Matt Drudge unearthed and publicized the whole, sordid Bill-Monica tale weeks before the MSM ever mentioned sleaze in the Oval Orifice and stained blue dresses. Bubba was their boy and they would do nothing to tarnish his aura. Sound familiar? Time reporter Nina Burleigh even offered Clinton a Lewinsky during his impeachment saga to thank him for keeping abortion legal.

Bubba wisely passed, I think.

Former presidential hopeful Jumpin’ Johnny Edwards didn’t pass on much in his pursuit of the 2008 Democrat nomination, least of all with Rielle Hunter. While his wife lay dying, he was kicking up his tarheels for months with Rielle, fathered her child, and paid her off, all under the unknowing noses of the keen investigative staffs of the MSM who didn’t want smarmy facts to get in the way of Edwards’ candidacy.

Ultimately, it took the National Enquirer to expose Edwards publicly after he exposed himself privately.

Yet, two years later, the mainstreamers were all over Republican Mark Sanford’s scandal when he was caught doing an Edwards with an Argentinian floozie instead of governing South Carolina or hiking the Appalachian Trail.

To paraphrase the motto of the degraded Old, Grey Lady, The MSM covers all the news it sees fit to cover.

In the latest example of skewed reporting, mainstream newsers covered the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations from Day One, but there’s MSM coverage and then there’s honest coverage.

Since the protests against greed were occurring in the belly of the greed beast–where at least half of Americans have invested their futures–and were taking place in the economic capital of the world and spreading like a plague throughout the country, the MSM could hardly avoid noticing, even if it was noticing selectively.

Now seven weeks old in New York, from the outset the demonstrations had an anarchic streak. Within days they began attracting more and more dregs of civilized society and as they contaminated the land they drew more and more neo-Nazis, neo-Communists, and those good, old-fashioned stalwarts of every social upheaval: revolutionaries, anti-Semites, cop-haters, skinheads, perverts, thieves, and vagrants.

However, what has become curiouser and curiouser in the past week is the liberal mainstreamers’ awakening to the growing chaos, not to the anarchic elements of that chaos but mainly to the rapes, the molestations, and the thievery going on in various OWS encampments when representatives of the so-called 99% took time outs from protesting and disupting to violate the human rights of their fellow ninety-nine percenters.

Those attacks on individual rights and safety were considered newsworthty, radical efforts to undermine the foundations of the nation were not. . . (Read more and see OWS photos at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5895.)

Why They Fear and Hate Herman Cain

Why They Fear and Hate Herman Cain

They came for Donald Trump and buried him under a birth certificate. They went after Tim Pawlenty and ridiculed him as Mr. Milquetoast. They attacked ignored Ron Paul into a nonentity. They abused Michelle Bachmann for virtually everything she said or did. They convinced Chris Christie he was too fat to be president.

Because of his race, Herman Cain presented a very sensitive target to openly castigate so they mostly just called a black man anti-African-American and a token stooge for the Republicans, all the while concealing the fact they both feared and hated him.

“They,” the Democrat establishment, the Democrat mainstream media, their flacks, hacks, and lackeys in the news and entertainment world, were terrified to the core by this phenomenon, an independent, conservative, pro-life, pro-business, self-reliant Republican black man who threatened to turn their liberal world upside down.

They hate him for the threat he poses.

They hate Herman Cain because he represents a clear and present danger to the very foundations of today’s Democrat Party, to the class warfare Democrats have chosen as their primary campaign strategy, to the racial divide they have carefully constructed, to the parasitic dependency they have created, to their lock on African-American and other minority constituencies.

They fear and hate Herman Cain because he exposes Democrats for what are.

For the most part, Cain’s fellow African-Americans were delegated the task to smear him. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5889.)

Deconstructing Marco Rubio

Deconstructing Marco Rubio

They’re done with Michelle Bachmann who was successfully painted as just another stupid, Republican woman like Sarah Palin despite her law degrees and stint as an IRS attorney.

They ignore Gary Johnson, Buddy Roemer, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, and Ron Paul because none of them stand a chance of snagging the GOP nomination. They buried Donald Trump under a still-suspect birth certificate and have labeled Herman Cain as nothing more than a token, a pizza store owner. They’re still in process of dismantling Rick Perry with charges of stupidity and blood lust and have made Mitt Romney an Obamacare accomplice.

However, Obama’s Democrats never feared any of them with the gut terror they experience with a 40 year old son of an immigrant, the newly-elected United States senator from the State of Florida, Marco Antonio Rubio.

Right now, Senator Rubio poses the major threat to President Barack Hussein Obama because he’s the anti-Obama, the embodiment of everything the president isn’t–pro-life, pro-balanced budget, pro-family and normal marriage, pro-charter schools, pro-drilling, pro-Second Amendment, pro-strong national defense, pro-real government and tax reform, and pro-border security.

If that were not sufficient to scare the pants off liberals, Rubio opposes Obamacare, amnesty for illegal aliens, phony economic stimuli, endless death row appeals, federal intrusions into public education, crippling cap and trade legislation, card check legislation, and punitive taxation.

Oh, and he loves his country, he’s an hispanic Catholic, and he doesn’t have Dumbo ears, a definite cosmetic plus in our looks-obsessed culture.

What Marco Rubio also has are credentials and credibility, features sorely lacking in the current White House resident.

Born in 1971 to Cuban immigrants–legal immigrants, not the kind Obama favors–graduate of the University of Florida, University of Miami School of Law (cum laude), 5-term member of the Florida House of Representatives, elected Speaker of that body in 2007, published author (without Bill Ayers’ ghostwriting), elected to the United States Senate in 2008, Rubio outshines Obama across the board but isn’t a candidate opposing him.

The reason then for the Obamian fear, terror, and loathing? . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5767.)

The Many Faces of Domestic Terrorism

The Many Faces of Domestic Terrorism

The incidence of domestic terrorism in America, the commission or threat of violence against civilians by political, religious, or other ideological fanatics, actually pre-dates the establishment of the United States.

Domestic terrorism has many faces, all of them ugly, all of it carried out by U.S. citizens.

Defined by the FBI in 1994 as,”the unlawful use of force or violence, committed by a group(s) of two or more individuals, against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives,” that definition of domestic terrorism was expanded by the Patriot Act to incorporate actions of “mass destruction, assassination, and kidnapping occurring within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”

The British may have construed the Boston Tea Party as domestic terrorism even before the term existed. However, most of us are more familiar with contemporary incidents, those perpetrated by the KKK, the Black Liberation Army, the Jewish Defense League, the Weather Underground, the Unabomber, the Fort Hood Muslim, and the deadliest of all, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombers.

Depending on one’s sociopolitical perspectives, almost any domestic crime can be considered an example of domestic terrorism.

Thus, the 2009 senseless murder of the abortionist Dr. George Tiller by Scott Roeder, a man crazed by the inhumanity of late term abortions, has been termed by some as domestic terrorism. Conversely and perversely, gays who proudly attack a gathering of normal people with bricks are accorded an MSM pass. (http://tiny.cc/ifhnt)

Go figure.

On the other hand, transparent efforts at coercion by the Wall Street Occupiers, efforts clearly aimed at intimidating our government and civilian population “in furtherance of political or social objectives” aren’t being classified as terroristic by our governments or by the mainstream media.

If violence and murder constitute the requisite distinctions in determining what is and what is not domestic terrorism, what of the threat of violence and murder posed “in furtherance of political or social objectives”?

No murders by the OWS protestors have been reported so far but widespread violence has been committed against the public weal and against public sensibilities, overt threats have been directed toward individuals, institutions, and Jews in general, and rapes, thefts, and clashes with police. . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5758.)

The Things Liberals Get Away With!

The Things Liberals Get Away With!

No political party or philosophy has a monopoly on stupidity but with the stranglehold liberal Democrats have on the mainstream media most of the American public never gets to hear about ignorant, stupid, racist, and otherwise bigoted utterances and actions of Leftists and if and when they do become public knowledge, they are usually soon buried by the MSM and never resurrected again.

We heard fast and furiously when Ronald Reagan said trees caused more pollution than cars, when Dan Quayle misspelled “potatoes,” when George W. Bush committed his countless gaffes, when Sarah Palin swore she could see Russia from her porch, even when Jerry Falwell speculated that Tinky Winky must be gay because he was purple and triangulated.

We rarely if ever heard of Democrat Rep. John Conyers’ admission that he hadn’t a clue what the Obamacare bill contained before he voted for it, of Democrats Joe Biden’s or Nancy Pelosi’s numerous exercises in inserting feet into mouths, of liberal commentator Anderson Cooper slandering the Tea Party with a homosexual reference to “teabagging,” or of Democrat entertainer Sheryl Crow’s environmentalist advocacy of the one sheet of toilet paper rule.

One of President Barack Hussein Obama’s earliest gaffes, his claim to have visited 57 of America’s 58 states during the 2008 campaign, went unreported and unnoticed for almost two years before it was given grudging attention by the MSM after everyone else was aware of it thanks largely to Fox News and the conservative branch of the blogosphere.

Instances of vicious idiocy, the vile things America-hating, “freedom-loving,” diversity-plugging Leftists say, do, and get away with lately could fill volumes.

A select few:

. At Achieve Early College High School in McAllen, Texas, situated 10 miles from the Mexican border, students were required to stand and recite the Mexican national anthem and Mexican pledge of allegiance in a Spanish class.

To her enviably patriotic credit, 15 year old Brenda Brindson refused and said later, “I just thought it was out of hand, I didn’t think it was right. Reciting pledges to Mexico and being loyal to it has nothing to do with learning Spanish.”

Young Ms. Brindson deserves the Medal of Freedom. Repercussions for her Mexican native teacher? None.

. President Barack Hussein Obama, aptly characterized as “The Gaffe Machine” by Michelle Malkin, often ventures beyond mere mental and verbal lapses into the realm of downright venomous–and dumb–attacks.

Our perpetually-campaigning president on the non-campaign road again re-launched an ancient Dem canard when he said that the Republican jobs plan boiled down to “Dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance” as opposed to his plan to put people back to work.

Aside from our scholar-leader’s grammatical faux pas in saying “less” when “fewer” is the correct usage, that tired crowd-pleasing line presupposes Republicans revel in the idea of breathing foul air and drinking fetid water, want their kids and grandkids to do the same, and get off by depriving Americans of proper medical attention and unemployment lines.

Will the media rebuke Obama for his mud-slinging? That’s as likely as the MSM condemning Nancy Pelosi for saying “women can die on the floor” if House Republicans passed the Protect Life Act. (They did; no dead women on any floors, yet.)

. The full story of arch-Leftist actress Susan Sarandon may never be told although she recently displayed her extreme liberalism and bigoted anti-Catholic spleen in Long Island’s elitist Sag Harbor. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5741.)

Wall Street Occupiers Bare Their Fangs

Wall Street Occupiers Bare Their Fangs

I was roundly chastised on October 8th by an indignant critic who took great umbrage at my early criticism of the self-proclaimed Wall Street Occupiers.

I must admit that my preliminary observations on the WSO were premature and only semi-accurate. I had suggested they were out of touch with reality whereas the truth could be that they are in close touch although their view of reality doesn’t approximate the beliefs of the 99% of Americans they claim to represent.

Kheaven1942 acerbically commented on my article, “Wall Street, the Numbnuts not the Movie” (http://tiny.cc/x2pnt) by saying, “Congratulations, this is the most delicately fabricated story I have ever read. It’s amazing to what lengths you went to make sure you capture only the very, very few in this movement who make it look uneducated and stupid. You, and everyone else following this story know very well how much more organized this is than what you are trying to portray in this sad excuse for journalism.”

In rebuttal, I would like to thank Kheaven for calling my writing “delicately fabricated” since I’m rarely delicate about anything but I have to correct him on his fabricated fabrication.

Kheaven went on to explain, “The movement is only a few weeks old. It is completely normal that it is still growing with no concise and clear direction and motivation–that would be asking too much. Give it a few more weeks, months, maybe even years, and this could be the new face of democracy.”

On that, I would have to agree and disagree. The demonstrations on Wall Street and yesterday in Times Square and across the nation may be growing without clarity of purpose but are “normal” only if normality is now defined by gross abnormality despite efforts by the mainstream media to depict them as a grassroots movement akin to the Tea Party.

For one important thing, Tea Partiers are law abiding people who respect the law, the rights of others, and common decency.

Sorry, Kheaven, but thousands of people exhibiting placards declaring hatred for and supporting the violent overthrow of my country, copulating in a public park, trampling on American flags, disrupting commerce and civil order, defying and intimidating legal authority, endorsing Nazism, Marxism, and anti-Semitism, and defecating on patrol cars among other outrages do not constitute the norm in any normal context.

Did I focus on the ”very, very few in this movement who make it look uneducated and stupid”? Hardly. The vast majority seem relatively educated but educated in public schools . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5729.)

Obama's Zuccotti Gamble

Obama's Zuccotti Gamble

Perhaps feeling they have little to lose at this stage of his failed presidency, Barack Hussein Obama and his band of merry mutilators of the American Dream have decided to risk everything and throw their lot in with the people who most closely represent the president’s political and social philosophies.

No, it’s not the labor unions whose support is in the bag as long as this administration endorses salary and benefits in lieu of fiscal sanity. No, it’s not African-Americans who though outwardly disenchanted with the president will still cast over 70% of their ballots for him next year. And no, it’s not his other core constituencies, the homosexuals, hispanics, Jews, and the Wall Street moneybaggers.

Obama knows that gays are still giddy over the repeal of DADT, hispanics are aware his failure to put legalizing illegals on the front burner is a ploy to be remedied in his second term, many Jews think he doesn’t really hate Israel, and that enough of the people he called “fat cats” will open their fat wallets sufficiently wide to enable him to fill his billion dollar campaign war chest.

Still, the Dems are taking a terrific gamble.

It may be that the dogmatic Obama and his ideologically-driven advisers are so consumed by their arrogant sense of Alinskyite superiority that they have been blinded to the folly of offering tacit approval and advocating for the nihilism of America’s nouveau hippies, the twenty-first century’s version of Woodstock, the so-called “Occupy Wall Street” crowd.

Dems are so confused over the protestors that pols such as Vice President Biden have compared them to the conservative Tea Party movement. Such a comparison only holds water if they somehow see similarities between the slovenly, insurrectionist, nihilistic Occupiers and the clean, respectful, patriotic Tea Partiers who wave American flags while the protestors wave dirty underwear.

Nevertheless, I hope the Obamians hang in there with their support. Their backing of the anarchic groups who have infested Zuccotti Park in New York City for weeks and their compatriots throughout the country is a virtual endorsement of next year’s Republican ticket.

Tuesday’s march movin’ on uptown to the deluxe pads of the rich in the sky won’t get them a piece of George Jefferson’s pie but should provide further insight into the extremist motives of the protestors and another boost to GOP prospects.

To be sure, the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators have some valid gripes; no society is perfect and any conscious human being has at least a few complaints, valid grievances over something or other. In a democratic republic, bellyaching is properly addressed at the ballot box.

The illegitimacy of the Occupiers’ complaints is best illustrated . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5696.)

Wall Street, the Numbnuts Not the Movie

Wall Street, the Numbnuts Not the Movie

Egged on by a knowing wink from the president of the United States, other Democrat politicians, wealthy Hollywood celebs, and SEIU labor union goons, the children and grandchildren of sixties’ anarchists and probably not a few of those grizzled, old lefties themselves and the philosophical heirs of earlier radicals have discovered a new cause to occupy their time: trashing the capitalist system that has made America the richest, most powerful, nation on the planet.

There’s no point in staging massive demonstrations against the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya since George W. Bush is long gone and those unending conflicts are now their mentor’s wars so, what to do, where to go? Why, the epicenter of American capitalism, Wall Street, the place where over half of Americans invest for their future, of course!

The new hypocritical, insurrectionist crazies of the twenty first century have taken on the roles of the old twentieth century hypocritical, violent, insurrectionist crazies and titled their movement “Occupy Wall Street” as if titling their protest gives it some focus, a focus their forebears could boast of even if it involved defeatism, nihilism, and revolution.

To be sure, the Occupy Wall Street crowd and their fellow protestors in various other American cities share those same defeatist, nihilistic, revolutionary sentiments. However, unlike their predecessors who craved defeat and retreat in Viet Nam–and got their wish–who strove to reduce the American Dream to nothingness–and came close–whose deepest desire was the overthrow of our government–which failed–the Wall Street occupiers have no clear goals, no overriding doctrines, no logic or common sense to guide them.

They’re just generally malcontented with what they feel are societal inequities and angry over what they call “corporate greed” as they live in filth in Zuccotti Park with one of their slovenly number photographed defecating on an NYPD patrol car.

Consider that their cost-free encampment at Zuccotti is situated on private land owned by Brookfield Office properties; Brookfield is a multi-billion dollar commercial real estate corporation with offices worldwide which prides itself on its capitalistic successes.

Consider the anarchic and senseless and signs the Occupy Wall Streeters display; placards declaring, “Occupy Everything,” “Yo I Fucking Hate Cops,” “I Am Here Because of the Monsters on Wall Street” are just a few examples.

Consider the giddy chants of topless young white women . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5678.)

Obamacare, the Stealth Abomination

Obamacare, the Stealth Abomination

A Democrat friend, (yes, I do have a few of them), said to me yesterday, “Well, I’ll at least be able to keep my own insurance when Obamacare kicks in, right?”

Her question demonstrated what is one of the slickest aspects of the intentionally-mislabeled Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 which few in Congress read before voting on it and passing it: Few Americans outside Congress know what’s in it, either.

The very questionable constitutionality of the PPACA will, hopefully, soon be settled by the United States Supreme Court. The issues on SCOTUS’ docket include but are not limited to whether our federal government can legally–forget morally–order citizens to purchase health insurance or be subjected to financial penalties.

Constitutionality aside, assuming Associate Justice Elena Kagan fails to recuse herself in the proceedings and the Court decides in favor of President Barack Hussein’s signature statute designed to seize control over one-sixth of the nation’s economy, another issue becomes almost as significant, my friend’s and millions of others’ ignorance of PPACA’s provisions.

Justice Kagan has as little integrity as the president and despite having labored on behalf of Obamacare during her employment as Solicitor General is unlikely to choose honor over Democrat loyalty by recusing herself.

To bolster her anticipated non-recusal and the unethical Obama administration, Democrats launched a smokescreen pre-emptive attack on the financial ethics of the lone African-American (conservative) member of the Supremes, Clarence Thomas, but that’s a whole other story.

Back to my friend.

She’s not a stupid person, despite being a Democrat . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5621.)

Bill Maher and Real Time Liberal Racism

Bill Maher and Real Time Liberal Racism

“I thought when we elected a black President, we were going to get a black President. . . . I want a real black president. I want him in a meeting . . . where he lifts up his shirt where you can see the gun in his pants [and says] ’We’ve got a ‘mother@!#$%ing problem here.’ Shoot somebody in the foot.”

The implications in that now infamous spleen-venting were perfectly clear: Real African-Americans packed guns, had foul mouths, were prone to violence, and shoot people. The only racist insults missing are that they’re all lazy and on welfare.

Were Rick Perry or Rick Santorum to utter such slurs during a debate, with or without the mother@!#$%ing, they would be forced to end their candidacies for the Republican nomination for president before you could say mother@!#$%ing. However, the utterer wasn’t a conservative politician but a very liberal loser, Bill Maher and therefore it was perfectly okay and not because Maher wasn’t a politician but because he’s a lib.

You see, liberals aren’t racists, or so they would like us to think. In point of fact, virtually every social policy liberals have articulated, proposed, and passed over the last fifty years has been either race-based, designed to stir the racial or some other pot, or calculated to foster conditions, (unemployment and poverty for example), to exacerbate racial tensions.

The ultimate Democrat goal has been to create a dependency on government and a rock-solid black constituency despite have been the party that fought tooth and nail to defeat Civil Rights legislation in the fifties and sixties. They have largely succeeded and have paved the way for Barack Hussein Obama to carry those goals to fruition.

The chief accomplishment of the granddaddies of social manipulations–LBJ’s Great Society and his War on Poverty–was to substantially destroy once-strong African-American families yet Democrats escaped condemnation for that as well by skillfully employing smoke, mirrors, and an excellent if offensive offense that people like Bill Maher still use today.

It’s believed that the adage “The best defense is a good offense” originated with the 19th century Prussian military theorist, Carl von Clausewitz, but whatever its origins the line has become a staple of countless sports analysts as an observation on how best to win games. It assumes the defense isn’t as porous as that of this year’s Atlanta Falcons.

To be successfully employed in the political arena, the good offense strategy assumes the public won’t scratch beneath the veneer of attack rhetoric and discover all the talk is just a cover for lies and hypocrisy, as with tediously-constant liberal references to conservative racism to conceal liberal bigotry.

Maintaining the good offense while counting on viewers not to look behind the curtain of pretense, just previous to his bigoted description of blacks as gun-slinging hoods, Maher had hypocritically attacked Republicans and Bill O’Reilly . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5571.)