House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who has used the term “Obamacare” in the past, chided a reporter at her weekly press conference on Thursday for using the term.
If what you believe is wrong, shouting about what you believe doesn’t make it less wrong. Democrats seem to be the party of Unapologetically Grateful Liberal Yelling women (UGLY for short.) When I think back to Hillary complaining about those who attacked President Bush being declared unpatriotic, and yelling that we have the right to attack people in power, the image of a red-faced woman screaming to the people in front of her comes to mind. They don’t need to yell. They just need to have the attitude of someone yelling to be considered that.
Those who sit in front of a Congressional or Senate hearing and say they spend too much on birth control and need it to be given to them for free are UGLY women. Can’t they say no to men who want to have intercourse with them? That two-letter word would save them a four-figured bill. But if we attack women for their lack of morality, we are attacked for our lack of understanding. And we don’t dare say that avoiding sexual encounters that could bring on pregnancies is common sense. We can’t bring back the days of Victorian morals where decent women waited until marriage to have sex, while men could go to a house of ill repute and go to bed with any woman if the price was right. Remember, while Queen Victoria reigned, slavery, prostitution, and drug usage were legal. The UGLY women were those who opposed these evils and other sins of society like drinking, poverty, unfair working conditions, and the inability to vote. Republican and Democrat women were often UGLY women.
One example of an UGLY woman that just came to mind is a feminist who shouted out, “WE’RE FIERCE, WE’RE FEMINISTS, AND WE’RE IN YOUR FACE.” Rush Limbaugh used that for his feminist update and had it audibly manipulated to make it sound funnier. A song against men was played as the theme music. UGLY women are the ones who support Obamacare the most, even with all the problems associated with the law. It doesn’t matter that Obama lied to the people. As long as contraceptives, abortion services, and other things they support are covered, UGLY women don’t care how much Obamacare costs.
The UGLY woman from California we know as Nancy Pelosi said that they needed to pass the Affordable Care Act to read what it said. If it had said all people above 60 are to be given cyanide, would she have read the bill first before voting since it would mean she would have to commit suicide? UGLY women sometimes put their mouths into overdrive before turning on their brains. And many UGLY women are beautiful. But when they oppose things like inoculating children from childhood diseases, and children die from diseases that are preventable, I question their common sense. When beautiful UGLY women oppose genetically modified crops that could feed millions, yet support organic farming that has caused sickness and death when toxins have been allowed to infect their crops, I wonder if the women think or are just mouthpieces for other Liberals.
I’ve seen beautiful Conservative women with a yelling attitude. But they are not UGLY. Liberals rail against them and want them silenced. But Liberals trot out their UGLY women to oppose Conservative women if they are committed to Liberal causes and can speak well. It also helps if they are beautiful when they appear on FOX News, since that is the news network famous for its foxy-looking ladies. Actually, as a FOX News watcher, I admire their brains more than how they look. If I wanted to listen to UGLY women, I would watch the Liberal-leaning news networks. With programs like “The Five” and “Red Eye” seating beautiful women in the “leg chairs,” their ratings are high probably for that reason, and also because those women are generally not UGLY women.
UGLY women support abortion, which I refer to as prenatal extermination. They oppose the restrictions men present to keep them from succeeding, which often causes me to support these UGLY women. They force certain physical requirements to be eliminated to help them succeed. I wouldn’t mind if a woman flew the plane I was on or drove the subway train I was on. But if I weighed 300 pounds, and a 120-pound female firefighter had to carry me down from the tenth floor of a burning building, I would consider my life in danger.
UGLY women may march for a living wage for poorly-paid workers, especially if they are one of them and can take off from work. They would more likely march in favor of better public schools than for the chance to send their child to a better private school, even if they are given a voucher to pay for the education. If Liberals believe there are dangers that can’t be proven to be dangers, as long as UGLY women side with them, they have spokespeople they can rely on to spout the party line. If UGLY women say that Obama is proud of Obamacare, as long as they believe it, Liberals will use UGLY women to push the system of government-controlled care. If voters elect more Republicans than Democrats in November 2014, it won’t be because voters didn’t like Obamacare. It will be because they either didn’t know the “facts” about Obamacare, or the UGLY women didn’t convince them Obamacare was good for them. If you mix a spoonful of sugar to make cyanide go down better, it will still kill you. And having an UGLY woman administer the “medicine” won’t make it less lethal.
Photo Credit: roniweb (Creative Commons)
There are three things certain about our immigration system.
1) It is broken and desperately needs to be fixed.
2) There can be no fix until we are capable of stopping illegal immigration and come to the simultaneous realization that we are NOT going to deport 12 and a half million people.
3) There can be no fix until we whack any politician on any side of the issue who seeks to make a fix that results in a political advantage.
Let’s start with our President, the Senator Majority Leader, and the House Minority Leader. You would have to go a long way to convince me that Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi have a humanitarian bone in their corrupt bodies. They see this purely as a political way of ensuring the long-term survival of the Democrat Party.
On the other hand.
There are a whole lot of Republicans who represent constituents who find it very profitable to bring illegal immigrants to America to work for them because they work cheap and they’re scared of being deported.
Those folks are every bit as reprehensible as Harry Reid, whose only concern about illegals is how they might vote if the Democrats were to grant them citizenship.
The ONLY way to solve a problem that has been created by a dithering Congress, four dithering Presidents of both parties, and politicians of both parties seeking political advantage is to simultaneously seal the border, come up with a workable employment visa program, and grant a limited amnesty program to the good citizens among the 12 and a half million people who are already here (the vast majority) because of—let’s face it—our implicit encouragement.
Now is a good time to do it since the economy can only go in one direction from where it is today, taking the numbers of people wishing to emigrate to America in search of jobs with it.
I’ve come a long way on the subject of immigration over the years.
I started at “what part of illegal didn’t you understand?”
And then I realized that my own parents are first generation Americans whose parents came to America because it was a) the land of opportunity and b) an ill wind was blowing through Europe in the early 20th century—especially for Jews in eastern Europe.
Like it or not, there is no Ellis Island on the South edge of San Diego. Or El Paso or Tucson.
We may not have welcomed the Irish, the Italians, the Jews, and the rest of the Europeans who streamed to this nation in the early part of the 20th century with completely open arms; but we didn’t treat them like we treat Mexicans today.
The truth is that the stream of immigrants—both legal and illegal—bears some resemblance to the stream through Ellis Island in the early 1900s.
Because the other reality is that Mexico is almost irretrievably broken in terms of allowing its own citizens to accomplish with their lives what America allows its citizens to accomplish with theirs.
Simply put, maybe we do need an Ellis Island in San Diego.
Whatever we decide along those lines, we need to gain control of the border if for no other reason than to keep the Mexican equivalent of the La Cosa Nostra out more effectively than we did in 1915 in New York.
And we need an immigration policy that is clear and can be understood by everybody.
Those are bi-partisan objectives. There is nothing here that a Harry Reid can contribute to because he doesn’t care about anything that isn’t political.
And the folks at La Raza (who keep blathering about ‘taking back the southwest’) should, perhaps, concentrate their efforts on fixing the Mexican side of the equation. They would have a lot more credibility if Mexico’s government wasn’t controlled by a bunch of mobbed up drug lords.
It would also be nice if the Republicans would stop worrying about a fundamentally conservative group of people (mostly Catholic, pro-life Hispanics) voting Democrat if we give them a path to citizenship.
We are where we are as a result of abject stupidity on the part of both parties.
Don’t you think that it is time for the grown-ups to fix the problem idiots like Reid and Obama are striving to make worse once and for all?
What The End Of The Filibuster Could Mean For America
A person can win every game they play if they can always change the rules to their advantage. Harry Reid decided to do that for President Obama.
There were three judges Obama wanted to place on the Washington, DC federal bench to tip the advantage toward the Left. Many of the same Democrats, who thought the Republicans were wrong when they were in the majority and wanted to approve of judge selections by a simple majority of Senators, now want what they wouldn’t give to Republicans and President Bush. I call the cancellation of the filibuster the “Dictatorship of the Majority Act.”
Remember how Nancy Pelosi complained about Republicans obstructing what needed to be done when they were in the minority? I guess crashing the economy was something the Democrats needed to do when they regained control of Congress in 2007.
They also needed to pass Obamacare, which is now creating havoc in this country. I heard former Congressman Barney Frank complain about Republicans in Congress voting in favor of things they knew would not pass in the Senate. You could call his desire to have Republicans go along with the Democrats in the Senate the “Since Everybody Is Jumping Off A Bridge, You Should Do It Too” Strategy. When President Bush wanted to examine Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae and their lending policies to see if they were fiscally sound, Barney Frank told Bush there was nothing wrong. Frank sounded like a stock trader during the second week of October 1929 telling everybody that investing in stock was a sure bet to get rich since the stock market was sound.
Here is a scenario that is possible since filibusters are no longer a weapon to prevent the majority from easily getting its way. It is 2019, and President Hillary Clinton decides she has too many political opponents. The Senate passes the Federal Anti-Defamation Act, which declares all people who protest against the government as criminals subject to fines and imprisonment. A federal judge appointed by the President decides it’s Constitutional; and the Supreme Court that is then split into six Liberals and three Conservatives (since the mysterious death of Justice Scalia) leans leftwards.
Conservative broadcasters and programs are shut down. Even common citizens who dare talk against the President and government are imprisoned because Democrats who control the Senate say it’s for the good of the country. The Public Safety Act of 2019 which is declared Constitutional by a judge appointed to the federal bench, and the Supreme Court allows camps to be built to “re-educate” those who oppose the government. People are disarmed because another judge feels that only the police and military deserve to be armed.
Millions revolt against the government and march toward Washington and state capitols. President Clinton declares marshal law and orders the troops out to confront the protesters around the nation. The DC federal court says the police and troops have the right to shoot and kill protesters if they feel that Washington and government entities are being threatened. Some of the judges that make that decision would have been filibustered by Republicans in the Senate. But with a majority of Democrats in the Senate, the filibuster is no longer a threat.
What if a Republican Congress and President gain power in 2033 after the state of emergency declared by President Clinton in 2020, and judged Constitutional by the DC federal court and Supreme Court, is ended to allow Hillary to serve four full terms? Don’t you think the Republicans will want revenge? The internment camps formerly occupied by Conservatives are now being occupied by Liberals who hate the new government. And with Obamacare being dismantled and the high tax rates coming down or abolished altogether, the economy soars. But the ones who most depended on Obamacare are more likely to die. America goes from being a Liberal police state to a Conservative police state; and it started with the Dictatorship of the Majority Act, as it has been nicknamed.
The Electoral College hasn’t been abolished so that small states still matter at election time instead of a handful of heavily populated states deciding who should be the President. The filibuster was meant to prevent the “wrong” people from controlling the justice system and perverting justice. Destroying a tradition that has worked for nearly two and a quarter centuries may bring down the Democrats because the public will consider them a bunch of dictators, with the “Dear Leader” being the most threatening. And if one day the Republicans regain total control of the government, you know the Democrats will want the law changed. And since many Republicans respect the Constitution and many traditions more than most Democrats do, the filibuster will make a comeback. Just hope and pray that the tyranny of the majority doesn’t have irreversible consequences.
Photo credit: CTPEKO3A (Creative Commons)