Democrats: Border Enforcement Is Lip Service So We Can Make More Democrat Voters

From HotAir the short short version:

Glorious candor from lefty Greg Sargent. Granted, this message is aimed at liberals by liberals in hopes of selling them on an immigration bill they won’t completely like — damn it, why can’t we have even weaker borders?? — but it has the virtue of being true. Remember, the big security concession in the new bipartisan bill is a blue-ribbon commission made up of southwestern governors, attorneys general, and “community leaders” who’ll collectively decide when the border is secure enough so that we can proceed to the citizenship phase of the project. This is, in other words, supposed to satisfy immigration hawks who prefer the “enforcement first” approach. A good-faith effort by Democrats to meet the right in the middle? No, not really:

Democrats realize that they can’t “allow the commission to have a real veto” over setting in motion the path to citizenship. He noted that Dems see the commission as “something that gives the Republicans a talking point” to claim they are prioritizing tough enforcement, giving themselves cover to back a process that “won’t stop people from getting citizenship.”

As usual:

Dissecting Obama’s Gun Control Speech

From the transcript here, I’m just going to hit the last page or so right now, because some things jumped out at me.

That’s what these reforms are designed to do. They’re commonsense measures. They have the support of the majority of the American people.

No, they aren’t.  No, they aren’t.  No, they don’t.

 More of our fellow Americans might still be alive, celebrating birthdays and anniversaries and graduations.

Brian Terry and Jaime Zapata would still be alive if Obama’s Justice Department under Eric Holder and his ATF hadn’t been sending guns and ammunition to the Mexican narcoterrorist cartels with the intention of murdering Mexican citizens so they could discover them at crime scenes and say “see, look how bad the Second Amendment is!”  His active, murderous conspiracy killed 10 to 100 times the number of people in Mexico as were killed in Connecticut.  For once, I can see how someone would say America is a racist nation – based on the media coverage (there was none) by most networks about Fast and Furious, you’d think American doesn’t give a rat’s ass about dead Mexican kids.  Of course, it doesn’t really matter what color the kids they murder are, what matters is that Americans are disarmed.  The FBI and ATF conspired to let felons pass the NICS background checks so they could send guns south to cartel hitmen.  They used taxpayer money to fund cartels that couldn’t buy their own.  Individual ATF agent supervisors lied on 4473 gun background check forms – committing felonies – only to have their guns turn up at murder scenes in Mexico.

This administration has less than zero credibility.

This will be difficult. There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty, not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes, they’ll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever.

This is the interesting part, and where myself and two other coworkers heard a Freudian slip.  The pause there where he said “that’s true” struck us, as though he had suddenly told the truth – acknowledging that yes, this is a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty.

This is a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty.

Now, let me be absolutely clear: Like most Americans, I believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. I respect our strong tradition of gun ownership and the rights of hunters and sportsmen. There are millions of responsible, law-abiding gun owners in America who cherish their right to bear arms for hunting or sport or protection or collection.

We already know that when Obama says “let me be clear”, the next words he says will be flat out lies.  Here he says “absolutely clear”, so these are astonishing whoppers.  (I can imagine him telling Michelle “let me be clear, I love the food out of your garden” and her giving him the death-stare.)

The Second Amendment says nothing about hunting, or sport, or collection, or even about self-defense against thugs.  It’s about the security of a free state – it’s about security against government.  Individual self defense is a great benefit (and recognized by the Founders), but ultimately the Founders prefaced the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms by noting that a well-regulated militia (as in free, armed citizens) are necessary to the security of a free state – as opposed to a tyrannical state – and whether against oppression from within or without.

The purpose of the Second Amendment is to argue against the “necessity” pleas of tyrants, and against liars who say “common sense” is having a natural right respected by the Constitution abolished in regulation.

Mexico, Obama’s favorite nation to murder innocent people in, has a 10th Amendment that says the people have the right to bear arms, subject to “reasonable” restrictions.  Which means, according to any government, that there will be no guns for the serfs.

If the same argument were being used against violent video games, what would that sound like?  If there were 23 executive actions taken against the rights of people to play and own violent video games, how would that sound?

This will be difficult. There will be blogs and gamers and special interest lobbyists publicly warning of a tyrannical all- out assault on liberty, not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes, they’ll do everything they can to block any commonsense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever.

Now, let me be absolutely clear: Like most Americans, I believe the First Amendment guarantees an individual right to free speech. I respect our strong tradition of gaming and TV entertainment. There are millions of responsible, law-abiding gamers in America who cherish their right to play Frogger or Pac-Man, or even Wii Tennis.

I also believe most gamers agree that we can respect the First Amendment while keeping an irresponsible, law-breaking few from inflicting harm on a massive scale. I believe most of them agree that if America worked harder to keep violent video games out of the hands of dangerous people, there would be fewer atrocities like the one that occurred in Newtown.

First, it’s time for Congress to require a universal background check for anyone trying to buy a video game.

(APPLAUSE)

The law already requires licensed video game dealers to run background checks, and over the last 14 years that’s kept 1.5 million of the wrong people from getting their hands on a violent video game.

But it’s hard to enforce that law, when as many as 40 percent of all video game purchases are conducted without a background check. That’s not safe. That’s not smart. That’s not fair to responsible video game buyers or sellers.

If you want to buy a video game, whether it’s from a licensed dealer, or a private seller, you should at least have to show you aren’t mentally defective, and that you pose no threat to society under our definitions. This is common sense. And an overwhelming majority of Americans agree with us on the need for universal background checks for video games, including more than 70 percent of readers of Game Informer and Wired according to one survey. When we asked them “should people like Ted Bundy be allowed to play violent video games?”, they said no.  So there’s no reason we can’t do this.

Second, Congress should restore a ban on all violent video games, and a 10 minute play-time for all games.

The type of video games that drove the killer to murder in Aurora, for example, when paired with long-duration games has one purpose: to drive a person to as much violence as possible, to do as much damage to their psyche and designed to inflict maximum madness. And that’s what allowed the maniac in Aurora to hurt 70 people, 70 people, killing 12.  The bombs he set at his home because of trap games he played had taught him how to kill many more, and it was only by luck that his bombs didn’t kill hundreds more.  And this is all due to violent video games.

Violent video games designed to glorify violence and war have no place in American homes. A majority of Americans agree with us on this. And, by the way, so did JFK, one of the staunchest defenders of the First Amendment, who wrote to Congress in 1963, urging them — this is JFK speaking — urging them to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further creation of violent films and entertainment that drive people to violence.

We have to ban video games for the good of the children.  We have to do this, because we must do this.  We cannot let anyone else be harmed by the madness inflicted on our society by these death-pornography merchants.  We have already seen the carnage that these madmen cause, whether with guns, bombs, knives, or fire, and we can only use common sense to come up with common sense solutions that will embrace what the public has already demanded.  All violent video games must be banned.  We must urge congress to ban all violent video games for the children.

Obama Hopes for New Gun Control in 2013

Let’s preface this appropriately by a quote from Sportsmen for Obama:

President Obama supports the rights of gun owners as guaranteed under the Second Amendment, and believes that the Constitution guarantees an individual’s right to bear arms.

Today from The Hill, as quoted on Meet The Lawbreaking Press:

President Obama on Sunday said he would make gun control a priority in his new term, pledging to put his “full weight” behind passing new restrictions on firearms in 2013.

The president is putting his “full weight” behind passing new restrictions on firearms.  Contrast that with what the Constitution says: the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  Now read the full weight quote again.  This president is violating his oath of office as much as if he said he were putting his “full weight” behind passing new restrictions on free speech.

“I’m going to be putting forward a package and I’m going to be putting my full weight behind it,” Obama said in an interview aired on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I’m going to be making an argument to the American people about why this is important and why we have to do everything we can to make sure that something like what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary does not happen again.”

Disarming the innocent does nothing to change anything.  But again, this isn’t about guns, it’s ultimately about control.

But he has also called on Congress to move quickly to reinstate the federal assault weapons ban and a ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines.

I’ve addressed “Why High Capacity Magazines” just recently, but to touch on it in the shortest way possible, would you end up the victim of a home invasion robbery by five guys, would you rather have 6 rounds, 10 rounds, or 30 rounds?

“I’ve been very clear that an assault-rifle ban, banning these high capacity clips, background checks, that there are a set of issues that I have historically supported and will continue to support,” the president said.

And banning handguns, and all guns that don’t belong to his government.  Yeah, we know.  “Shall not be infringed” means “a ban, banning these other things, background checks to exercise a right are all things I have historically supported.”  Yes, his oath of office is as meaningless now as it was when he was an Illinois senator.

“I’d like to get it done in the first year.  I will put forward a very specific proposal based on the recommendations that Joe Biden’s task force is putting together as we speak. And so this is not something that I will be putting off.”

Translation: “I have to do this before people catch on to it and realize it’s a feel-good measure that does nothing but expand government power.  I put Joe Biden in charge because he’s a mindless ideologue who doesn’t care about facts, and doesn’t listen to the other side, and can be trusted to ram this crap through and f*** the citizen back into the serf they should be.”

“I am not going to prejudge the recommendations that are given to me.  I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools.  And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem,” he said.

Wait, what?

We joke sometimes about how Malia’s getting to the age now, and boys start calling and, you know, sort of, I always talk about how one of the main incentives for running again was continuing Secret Service protection to have men with guns around at all times

It’s not really a joke, though.

And the president who sent thousands of guns to narcoterrorist cartels to kill our Mexican neighbors then goes on:

“I think there are a vast majority of responsible gun owners out there who recognize that we can’t have a situation in which somebody with severe psychological problems is able to get the kind of high-capacity weapons that this individual in Newtown obtained and gun down our kids,” Obama said.

Of course, the leftist-logic solution to this is…

And of course, with regards to this statement:

“I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools,” Obama said. “And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem.”

David Gregory, who interviewed him, and is a gun law breaker himself, has kids who go to school with Obama’s kids.  And they have 11 armed guards at the school.  The rest of you, the little people, don’t need your kids protected.  Guns are bad, m’kay, while the President and David “High Capacity Stupid” Gregory, have a squad of armed security who specialize in CQB.

Because now, as it was for the thousands of years of human civilization before the American experiment began, laws are once again for you, not for the elites.  Welcome back to serfdom.

The Founders disagreed vehemently.

Gunwalker Update: Election Omissions

During election season and with Benghazi being the latest chapter in “Obama lied, people died, media hushed it up”, some reporting on Operation Fast and Furious was easy to overlook, especially after the lackluster OIG reports.

From Oversight and Reform’s Youtube channel, on Obama outright lying about Fast and Furious on the national stage:

Worth watching to see all the nonsense cleared up by SC Congressman Trey Gowdy.

And Trey Gowdy on Lou Dobbs show, clearing it up and explaining other things found in the Inspector General’s report.

EPA’s Secret Email Accounts

The most transparent administration ever strikes again.

A House committee has launched an investigation into whether EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson used an email alias to try to hide correspondence from open-government requests and her agency’s own internal watchdog — something that Republican lawmakers said could run afoul of the law.

The science committee has asked Ms. Jackson to turn over all information related to an email account under the name of “Richard Windsor,” which is one of the aliases identified by a researcher looking into the EPA.

The committee has also asked the White House’s lawyer and EPA’s inspector general to look into the matter and report back by the end of this month, saying that the secret email accounts could have been used to keep key information from official watchdogs as well as the public.

EPA did not respond Friday night to a request for comment.

Remember this is the same EPA that’s declared particulate matter a pollutant to the point that they’ll blow diesel fumes down unknowing volunteers’ throats.

Also from the story:

Federal open-records laws are designed to make information available to the public now, and to posterity at the National Archives, which collects official correspondence. There are strict rules on the use of email addresses, and the rules prohibit using private emails to try to circumvent open-records laws.

Rules apply to the little people.  Not to the rulers.

Paul Krugman, Keynesian Idiot: Part 6

Mary Matalin calls Krugman out as a liar, in addition to him being a Keynesian idiot.

Satisfying to see it said to his face.

Previously: Part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, and part 5.

Every day I am consistently amazed at the number of searches done with the phrase “paul krugman is an idiot” or some variation thereof.  If you came here with those search terms, you are so very, very, not alone.

Words Matter: Obama In His Own Words

An interesting collection of quotes and news footage.  Ends with a 30-second ad for Dinesh D’souza’s “2016″ documentary, which is getting quite a reception as it expands to more theaters.

Gunwalker Update: The Third Gun, White House Targeting Investigative Journalist Katie Pavlich

Via the Washington Free Beacon:

The Department of Justice is using the liberal “watchdog” group Media Matters for America to deflect questions about the Fast and Furious scandal, including those regarding a gun that might have been used in the murder of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

A new book raises questions as to whether the FBI hid the existence of a weapon recovered at the scene of murdered U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry. Conservative commentator and author Katie Pavlich lays out evidence she says points to a FBI cover-up to protect a confidential informant in her recently released book, Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and Its Shameless Cover-up,

In response to an inquiry from the Free Beacon, a Justice Department spokeswoman said in an email that she “was told to direct your questions to the FBI, and also to provide you with a link to this story: http://mediamatters.org/research/201204190011”

The link was to a story at the George Soros-funded Media Matters for America supposedly refuting many of Pavlich’s claims. Media Matters is a partisan organization whose founder, David Brock, is also running a pro-Obama super PAC.

In Operation Fast and Furious, federal agents allowed more than 2,000 weapons to be smuggled across the U.S.-Mexican border and into the hand of violent drug cartels, with the intent of tracking them to learn more about the cartels.

Two weapons connected to Fast and Furious were discovered at the murder scene of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, who was gunned down in the Southern Arizona desert in 2010 by five criminals armed with AK-47s.

However, Pavlich asserts there was a third gun. The book details three separate pieces of evidence that point to a third weapon being recovered and then covered up by the FBI and the Justice Department.

Border Patrol agents, who have since been issued gag orders, were overheard at Terry’s funeral discussing the third gun.

The White House redirected people to Media Matters, infamous for being so far left that they’re treading in traditional socialist anti-semitic waters, and now they’re referring to it to slander Ms. Pavlich.  From Media Matters lie center:

In her new book, Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and its Shameless Cover-up, Townhall news editor Katie Pavlich offers up a number of false and misleading claims about the ATF’s fatally flawed Operation Fast and Furious. In doing so Pavlich baselessly suggests that high-ranking Justice Department officials were aware of that operation’s use of the tactic of gunwalking, in which agents knowingly allowed guns to be trafficked across the border to Mexico in order to identify other members of a trafficking network.

Of course, Media Matters lies.  All the things they’re trying to refute with lies have been proven over and over and over and over again.

Holder “Stopped” Fast and Furious

Via HotAir:

“But, I think one thing that also has to be understood is that once this was brought to my attention” — Holder said before slamming his hand on the committee room table he was sitting at — “I stopped it. I stopped it.”

Daily Caller has a piece on this as well.

The 1% Tip

HotAir brings you up to date:

The story was too good to be true.  A wealthy banker runs up a three-figure bill, only tips 1% (!), and writes a note to the server to “get a real job” as a parting insult.  CNN, Huffington Post, and other media outlets ran with the story of the arrogant banker and his miserly recompense to the help.  There was only one thing wrong — it really was too good to be true.

Video at HotAir.

The infamous photo, from the now-defunct blog “Future Ex-Banker”:

Except it was completely fabricated.

From Huffpo’s “correction”:

Photo Purportedly Showing Banker’s 1% Lunch Bill Tip ‘Altered And Exaggerated’ [UPDATED]

CORRECTION:On Monday evening, True Food Kitchen in Newport Beach released an official statement based on their investigation (described below in Update I) into the authenticity of the purported receipt showing a 1% tip. The restaurant’s statement reveals that their hard receipt copies do not, in fact, match the photo (shown below) that was initially posted on futureexbanker.wordpress.com (since taken down). Scroll down for the complete statement from True Food Kitchen.

What would you take from that?  Altered and exaggerated?  Would you take it to mean there was a 20% tip, a bill of $33.54, and the whole thing was fabricated?  Well that’d be the actual facts here.

The restaurant told CBS2/KCAL9 that they have been receiving hundreds of phone calls and e-mails from people outraged over the reported story. They have confirmed that the receipt was changed and that the original receipt lists the meal as just over $30, with a 20 percent tip and no message aimed at the waitress.

From Laist:

Well, it was fun while it lasted, but apparently the notorious “1% tipper” was all made up.

That first part of the sentence really is the problem here.  Lies are “fun” while they last.  Lies are “fun” because we don’t need facts to back up our claims.  Lies are “fun” because we can smear people with them – and they don’t get to say anything about it.  Lies are “fun”.

From the comments below:

zombiebobTop 100

even if it was a partial set-up ( I don’t believe that personnaly, dude is just trying to save his ass, as is the restaurant, don’t want to piss off our overlords, that would be VERY bad for business), just like w Dan Rather and the Bush debacle… there is still a truth to it: Bush WAS a draft Dodging piece of shit, and the 1% are still for the most part obnoxious scum buckets.

—
furytrader

… proof? Oh wait, you don’t need that because there is “still a truth to it” which you define based on something other than truth.

Sigh … at least you found a use for all of those post-modern literature courses you took …

At least there’s a rebuttal to it.  But the mentality pervades:

Ezra HorneTop 50

The thing is, it’s hard to say that this wasn’t made up by a banker to make people less sympathetic to the uprising of the working class that is brewing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag#Ideological

Remember, these people are VERY smart and are VERY frightened that people are waking up to the abuses of the “job creators” to borrow a term from the GOP.

—

Tafter

Actually, it’s easy:  this wasn’t made up by a banker to make people less sympathetic to the working class uprising.

Look out!  Behind you!  It’s a conspiracy!

—

Ezra HorneTop 50

I’m just saying, it hardly proves either side is responsible, it’s an isolated incident.  We really don’t know.

*SIGH*

Therefore, it must be an evil banker.  This is clearly a clever banker out to slander the 99%, who have been fine upstanding citizens throughout all of the Occupy protests, and since the person who would most benefit from this slander would be the leftist OWS movement, of course when they are found out and their blog suddenly vanishes, it must be the other side that did it in an attempt to slander them.  Caught in the act, blame the other side, claiming they did it and you didn’t.

From the Consumerist:

fpage77
February 27, 2012 9:14 PM

Restaurant could easily have faked the “real” one so the banker wouldn’t sue them.

J-Sap
February 27, 2012 9:34 PM

This is just the 1% trying to cover up for one of there idiots. Don’t be fooled.

user-pic
LanMan04
February 28, 2012 10:28 AM

Bullshit, I don’t believe the restaurant for a second. They just don’t want bad press.

Now, normally just quoting a bunch of idiot leftist’s comments seems like a waste of time.  But it’s actually kind of a barometer of what these people are thinking and what they’re willing to say, attaching it to their screenname for all posterity.

One poster did go out and generate rebuttals to the other commenters, worth reading for the original leftist vitriol and rebuttals:

10,000 Hours
February 28, 2012 1:08 PM

Time to call people out on yesterday’s vitriol:

MMD: “But, for me, this photo works quite well as a symbol of everything that’s wrong with the conservative/libertarian/tea party mentality that we should stop taxing the “job creators”. Wealth does *not* trickle down.” —> Now that its proven a hoax, is this a symbol of everything that’s wrong with agenda-driven lefties who believe and promote lies?

MMD, again: “It may be inconvenient for you to admit this, but this photo doesn’t help conservative causes much.” —> So now that this photo is a fake, how does this help liberal causes?

OnePumpChump: “I think it’s safe to say that THIS banker is a conservative.” —> Now that its shown to be a fake, and the actual tip was above 20%, is it still safe to say this guy is a conservative? If not, why not? And is it ‘safe to say’ the hoax was done by a lefty, and therefore all lefties will lie as long as it helps their cause?

Cat has been freebasing Folgers Crystals: “There is no “class warfare”. That’s impossible when the “upper class” has no class” —> Is forging receipts to continue class warfare considered a “classy” thing to do?

zantafio: “well why oh why blacking out the name of that douchebag? Come on let’s publicly shame that a$$. Oh and if waitressing is not a “real job” then I guess bars and restaurants would do perfectly fine with no waiters.” —> Will you get behind publicly shaming the people behind this hoax, or should they not come forward because the “overall message” still rings true?

nocturnaljames: “This person does have a real job, providing a valuable service. On the other hand, the banker doesn’t have a real job, doesn’t create anything, just destroys lives.” —> Would you consider forging a fake receipt in order to increase hatred against other Americans solely because they make more money than you “creative” or “destructive”?

marc6065: “I have a ‘real job” it is beating the shit out snobby asshats like this jackoff. Let me know where he is , he is past due for his “tuneup”!!!” —> Does your job description for “Internet Tough Guy” include beating up asshats who fake receipts in order to lie about other Americans?

ancientone567: “I would actually love to beat the shit out of this guy to within 1 inch of his life and I am not a violent person. Then I would give him a “TIP” and tell him to try to keep breathing, through the blood, if he wants to live.” —> Now that ‘this guy’ probably doesn’t exist and whoever actually signed the bill gave a 20%+ tip, who will you beat up as “Co-Internet Tough Guy”? The hoaxer? A random banker?

Sisterfunkhaus: “They should ban the customer from the restaurant. That is disgusting. It seems almost like sociopathic behavior to treat someone that way.” —> Is it sociopathic behavior to hate the 1% so much that you have to resort to forging a receipt to “prove” how evil they are? Is it sociopathic to pass this along as 100% true without any bit of skepticism?

Again, the comments are worth noting because they go to mindset.  They go to people who are willing to believe any lie without substantiation.  When caught in a lie, they accuse the other side of setting the lie up, therefore making it still correct in their own minds.