… President Obama and liberals in both the Republican and Democratic Parties seem to have thought he was giving them a suggestion to follow and have.

This was the goofy thought process used to dismiss the obvious racial intent:

“They just didn’t have that in this case,” [Tasha Jamerson, D.A. spokeswoman] said. “If they had somebody who, two blocks before, heard them say, ‘We’re going to beat somebody up because they’re white, brown or purple,’ it might be different.”

Ok, so the racial slurs hurled in at the location of the assault were not enough? But if they had been hurled “two blocks” away they would have been? The cabbie affriming that such statements were made at the scene is not enough? This is just mindless justification on the part of the District Attorney.

This is one reason why “hate crime” laws are bad ideas because they are so subjective. The other reason they are bad is because crime is crime is crime and all who commit crime should be treated equally before the law. Having special subsets of the law that make a crime more of a crime for political correctness taints our entire justice system.

Questions:

1) If Obama really believes the words that flap out through his gums then why is he employing so many deadbeats?
2) Obviously these people are not that hard to find so why hasn’t the IRS gone and gotten them yet?
3) Mr. Obama likes to promote redistribution of the wealth. I am sure he is more wealthy than any of the deadbeats on his staff, so why doesn’t he just pay the tax bills for them? You know, practice what you preach?

The government has been trying to “help” people for decades.  Their success rate?  Below dismal.  Millions of people are poor and suffering and doing so on government programs designe to make them not suffer.

So maybe, instead, we should adopt a different approach?  Perhaps we should listen to a wise man like Benjamin Franklin?

“The best one can do for the poor is to make them feel uncomfortable in their own poverty”

Oh, no – liberals would never abide by such a “mean-spirited” stance.  Instead they will just go on printing money and demanding it be thrown around to their constituents to keep them loyal little slaves.

But, as fate would have it, reality would not be denied. As always, when reality is bent, it snaps right back to thwack the knuckles of those who foolishly try such an impossible feat.

Earlier this month Boeing announced that, due to costs, it would shut down its unionized plant in Wichita, Kansas. The aftermath? 2,160 employees, including many union employees, are going to be shown the door and given pink slips. It does not escape notice that perhaps some of these jobs in Wichita might have been able to be saved had Boeing been allowed to go ahead with its original plans for operations in South Carolina and saved money in that regard.

Some of the work from the Kansas plant will be diverted to Oklahoma City. Boeing operates a non-union facility there according to published reports on the company’s plans moving forward. Sounds to me like, if they are going to be consistent, the NLRB should be prepared to meddle here too. That is if they value the union workers in Wichita as much as the ones in Seattle. Or was this part of the deal all along? Was it decided that the union workers in Kansas would be sacrificed to save the union workers in Seattle? It is hard to say with as secretive as the Obama Administration is. But if the NLRB does not act on behalf of the Wichita union members it is a very real question that must be asked.

The union machinists and engineers at the Kansas facility are obviously upset by the news of their plant closing. As are some elected officials in Kansas who went to bat for Boeing over the issue with the South Carolina plant. They thought they could buy them some good will and that this good will would prevent Boeing from touching the local plant.

The tiff between Boeing, the Seattle union and South Carolina was front page news for the longest time. Outside of Kansas, however, the end of an 85-year era with Boeing as a major employer in the State is barely garnering any news. Almost as though the hypocrisy is so blatant that not even the mainstream media wants to draw attention to it. After all, they cannot dare cast President Obama as uncaring about the plight of union workers in America after they spent months pumping him up and trumpeting his interference with Boeing’s “sinister” plans to undercut organized labor. Right?

In the end it seems as though Boeing gets the last laugh. It still gets to cut costs. It still gets to shed itself of untenable labor agreements which it allowed itself to be strong armed into accepting. And most importantly it still gets to make airplanes.

Where is your union now? And where is your messiah to save you all of you? All of you who put your faith in President Obama as the one man capable of distorting reality should ask yourself these questions. The answer will not be to your liking. But you should still ask the question.

He claims that he would match, even donating at a 3:1 rate, donations of Republicans like Mitch McConnell to the fund. The problem? That’s just an excuse for Mr. Buffett to not put his money where his flippant, liberal mouth is. It was, after all, not McConnell that complained his taxes were too low. It was Buffett. McConnell gave him the ability to rectify that feeling. And Buffett blinked, looking for an excuse to not take advantage of the solution presented to him.

“There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. You built a factory out there? Good for you!” Wow, thanks I guess. Then she bumbled on, “But I want to be clear, you moved your goods to market on roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.”

Uh, Elizabeth, sweetheart, darling, I hate to break it to you but many factories and places of business in America DO need indeed hire their own security forces to protect their property. Why? Because the police cannot be there to protect it at all times for them from the spawn of liberalism who think they are entitled to just take whatever the factory has. Time to change that burned out bulb in your head toots.

And the larger point here is that she is totally out of touch with reality claiming that people other that the wealthy built the roads of this nation and educated our children. If she would look at the actual numbers in terms of taxes paid and which cover such services she would see that indeed the rich themselves carry that burden almost exclusively.

But Ms. Warren is not one to let the facts get in the way of a good class warfare rant. She might as well wear a hat advertising the space available between here ears which says, “Room for rent – logic and truth need not apply.”

Their latest foray into controlling the lives of residents is a plan to force students to apply to college and trade schools. Yes, even if they don’t want to. How Soviet!

D.C. Council Chairman Kwame Brown, who introduced the bill, said the proposal would establish a “mandatory workshop” to teach teenagers how to apply for aid and admission. It would then require everybody to apply to at least one post-secondary school before graduation.

“I believe that every child should have the opportunity, even if they don’t go, to at least apply to a college,” he said as he introduced the bill Wednesday.

Of course that statement once again shows the problems with wacko leftists like Mr. Brown. They think that unless the State intervenes then no one can have opportunity. And so they regulate, regulate and regulate some more. Then, decades later, they are still dumbfounded as to why nothing has gotten any better.

It is the liberal way.

A conservative on the other hand wants currently illicit drugs to be legal because we understand how shallow and pathetic the life of a liberal is and do not want to deny them their ability to escape into La La Land. So long as their drug use infringes on no one else’s rights, we don’t believe there should be any interference. But when they steal, assault, murder or do other illegal things either to get their fix or while under the influence of their drug of choice we already have a plethora of laws on the books to deal with them.

It is so simple a caveman could understand it. Apparently however there are some of you out there who feel the need to email me on this issue who are not as smart as a caveman.