Of course, these people failed to bring other necessities, such as provisions for restrooms or provisions for trash disposal. Thus, after a few weeks of their “protest,” the park reeks of urine and crap, while the garbage is piling up so high as to constitute a health hazard. When the owner of  the park, concerned about public health and safety, decided to remove the protesters to clean the place up, the mob howled and threatened all kinds of mayhem. Finally, the city made a deal with the owner to leave them alone. As far as I can tell, the place still reeks and the garbage is just getting piled higher.

So, what exactly is it that these people want to accomplish with this demonstration? Several reporters from several different news operations have all gone down to the protest site and asked protesters this question, and have failed to get a coherent answer from anyone, even the “organizers.” Say what you want about the 60′s hippie protesters, they at least had an identifiable goal (to end the war, to end the draft). This group says they are against corporate greed. OK, while I don’t particularly agree that a corporation that makes a lot of money is greedy, I can certainly see that some in the corporate world have clearly crossed the legal line in their dealings. So, how exactly will this occupation/ protest/ demonstration/ camp out do anything to end corporate greed? Sure, they have brought a lot of attention to Wall Street, but most of that attention is focused on the lack of sanitation in the park and smorgasbord of fringe liberal groups infiltrating the protest for their own ends. Nothing these people have done during the past month and a half has accomplished anything worthwhile.

As more and more time passes, the various occupation groups across the country are starting to break down and become violent. This was seen most recently in Oakland, where the police had to resort to tear gas and rubber bullets to remove protesters from the area they were set up on because they were pelting officers with rocks and bottles. If the mob in New York decides to get violent, there’s no telling how bad it will get.

So, when this movement has passed and the protesters have all gone home, what will they have accomplished? What will be different? What difference will they have made?

None.

All this energy, enthusiasm, and effort will have been spent for nothing. Corporations will still be conducting business and making tons of money doing it, Wall Street will still be trading stock and making tons of money doing it, and those protesters who are unemployed will still need a job. Nothing done by these protesters has done anything to address the problems they are complaining about.

Maybe that says more about the protesters than anything else.

Newsalert has posted a chart from a Wall Street Journal blog titled “Recession and the Rich.” The chart, based on 2009 IRS figures, shows that the number of taxpayers reporting annual income over $1 million fell 39 percent between 2007 and 2009; the number of super-wealthy individuals making over $10 million annually plunged 55 percent.

Here’s the aforementioned chart:

On the one hand, Obama needs the rich to fund his wealth redistribution social justice policy agenda; on the other hand by raising taxes to ridiculously high levels on the people who provide the jobs our economy needs, he is destroying the country’s ability to recover from the economic abyss he has put it into.

President Downgrade’s domestic economic policies are destroying the capitalist engine which drives the economy of this country. There is no way the economy can recover without this engine running at peak power and efficiency. Unless Obama’s odious regulatory burdens and life-sucking tax policies are removed and/or reversed soon, the economy may never be able to recover.

So, how’s that hopey-changey stuff working out for you?

In response, when this legislation came up for a vote in the State Senate, 14 Democrats ran across the border to Illinois, denying the Senate a quorum and therefore preventing the vote. After two weeks of back and forth arguing across the state line, Republicans in the Senate finally stripped the bill of all budgetary provisions, while leaving in the provisions stripping the unions of their bargaining power, which allowed them to take a vote without the Democrats present. Shortly thereafter the State Assembly quickly passed the new bill and sent it to the Governor for signature.

Now, if you know anything about unions, especially public sector unions, you know what their first response was: they started a protest at the state capital building. Now had this protest lasted a day or two and then subsided, there wouldn’t have been any problems. However, as is usually the case with these types of events, the unions called in their thugs to start pushing people around and threatening anyone who dared disagree with their position.  A sympathetic press core portrayed the protesters as people who were being railroaded by the State out of their retirement and health care benefits; rarely did they show the signs comparing Walker to Hitler or the union thugs hitting people with protest signs. In fact, the press, with the exception of Fox News, failed to report on any of the union’s thuggery during the protest.

So, just to remind you about the type of people these union thugs are, you need to read this:

From: XXXX
Sent: Wed 3/9/2011 9:18 PM
To: Sen.Kapanke; Sen.Darling; Sen.Cowles; Sen.Ellis; Sen.Fitzgerald; Sen.Galloway; Sen.Grothman; Sen.Harsdorf; Sen.Hopper; Sen.Kedzie; Sen.Lasee; Sen.Lazich; Sen.Leibham; Sen.Moulton; Sen.Olsen
Subject: Atten: Death threat!!!! Bomb!!!!

Please put your things in order because you will be killed and your familes will also be killed due to your actions in the last 8 weeks. Please explain to them that this is because if we get rid of you and your families then it will save the rights of 300,000 people and also be able to close the deficit that you have created. I hope you have a good time in hell. Read below for more information on possible scenarios in which you will die.

A couple of things to keep in mind here: Most of the people who were protesting were teachers, so the person responsible for this more than likely is in daily contact with school children. We can’t tell for sure, because the name was withheld. Also, when you read the entire thing, you realize that these animals are perfectly fine with injuring or killing innocent people to achieve their political ends. There is a word for that:

World English Dictionary
terrorist
— n
a. a person who employs terror or terrorism, esp as a political weapon
b. ( as modifier ): terrorist tactics

Collins English Dictionary – Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition 2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 Cite This Source

What was it that Obama was saying recently about bullying? I think Aleister at American Glob got it right when he said Liberals don’t like guns, but they sure do like death threats.

I remember when the Grammys officially Jumped the Shark: 1988. That was the year they gave Jethro Tull the Best Metal Performance award, and fans all around the world knew instantly that whomever was in charge had no clue. The takeover of the music industry by MTV was complete, and style had triumphed over substance.

When you think about it, the only question remaining is: Which is the bigger joke, the Grammys or the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame?

As the world is now aware, a psychotic loner named Jared Loughner opened fire on a crowd of people in a supermarket parking lot on Saturday morning. When the shooting stopped, six people were dead and thirteen were wounded, including Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords who was shot in the head at point blank range. Rep. Giffords continues to fight for her life in the hospital and remains in critical condition.

Amid the chaos of the 24-hour news cycle, the left mobilized to immediately make political hay out of the tragedy by literally blaming the shooting on conservatives, conservative political rhetoric, and even specific individuals. Of course, they did this without even one shred of evidence of any ties between the shooter and any of these conservative entities. One of the first to do this was Paul Krugman on his New York Times blog:

We don’t have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was. She’s been the target of violence before. And for those wondering why a Blue Dog Democrat, the kind Republicans might be able to work with, might be a target, the answer is that she’s a Democrat who survived what was otherwise a GOP sweep in Arizona, precisely because the Republicans nominated a Tea Party activist. (Her father says that “the whole Tea Party” was her enemy.) And yes, she was on Sarah Palin’s infamous “crosshairs” list.

…

You know that Republicans will yell about the evils of partisanship whenever anyone tries to make a connection between the rhetoric of Beck, Limbaugh, etc. and the violence I fear we’re going to see in the months and years ahead. But violent acts are what happen when you create a climate of hate. And it’s long past time for the GOP’s leaders to take a stand against the hate-mongers.

This moron has absolutely no proof that Republicans, Conservatives, or anyone else for that matter, had anything to do with this shooting. He is simply lying his ass off in an attempt to engage in political muckraking of the most disgusting kind. Apparently, Krugman is so enraged by the results of the recent midterm elections that he feels justified in outright lying about this event to vilify his political opponents.

Not to be outdone, even Hollywood is mobilizing:

Well, it is Jane Fonda, right? When was the last time she did or said anything which indicated that she has a functioning brain. I guess she got tired of insulting the US Military and their families and decided to try something new. It’s surprising to see that she is just as stupid and disgusting now as she was back in the Sixties.

All the usual suspects from the Lame Stream Media, including the New York Times, MSNBC and CBS all jumped on the bandwagon to see who could fabricate the link which would benefit the left and the Democrats the most. It was a liberal media feeding frenzy, and given the blood spilled, it was the most repugnant thing I’ve ever witnessed.

Keep your eye on the ball, folks. Six people are dead and many others are severely wounded. It seems to me that the most important thing to do here is to let the police and the feds do their job and investigate the shooter so we can proceed with some factual basis. If all you’re worried about is how you can use this to damage your political opponents, you’re no better than the shooter.

To be clear, no one is questioning whether or not people have a right to build a house of worship on any private property which they own. This issue does not concern rights or laws. Rather, it concerns propriety.

The World Trade Center site and its immediate surrounding area is hallowed ground, consecrated with the blood of innocents. Those innocents were murdered by radical Islamic terrorists who believed that by killing these innocents their God would honor them. Upon learning of the events of September 11, 2001 the vast majority of Muslims world-wide looked the other way and kept their mouths shut. Whether they meant to or not, by doing so they gave their tacit approval to the atrocity.

The Muslims involved with this project claim that they are building this “community center/mosque” to foster understanding and facilitate dialog between all faiths and peoples. Yet, by insisting on building this mosque on the Ground Zero Site, these very same Muslims display a complete lack of sensitivity towards the feelings of a majority of the people of New York as well as America. It seems that Muslims, for the most part, are unwilling to show a sensitivity to the culture of Americans, while at the same time demanding that Americans show sensitivity to Islamic culture.

None of this even begins to cover the Islamic tradition of building mosques on the sites of their conquered enemies.

If you must build a mosque, build it elsewhere. Just as with a Christian church, a mosque is nothing more than a building. What counts is what the people inside the building are doing.

The son of the U.S. Air Force pilot who dropped the first atomic bomb in the history of warfare says the Obama administration’s decision to send a U.S. delegation to a ceremony in Japan to mark the 65th anniversary of the attack on Hiroshima is an “unsaid apology” and appears to be an attempt to “rewrite history.”

Gene Tibbets, son of Brig. Gen. Paul W. Tibbets, Jr., says Friday’s visit to Hiroshima by U.S. Ambassador John Roos is an act of contrition that his late father would never have approved.

“It’s an unsaid apology,” Tibbets, 66, told FoxNews.com from his home in Georgiana, Ala. “Why wouldn’t it be?  Why would [Roos] go? It doesn’t make any sense.

“I know it’s the anniversary, but I don’t know what the hell they’re trying to do. It needs to be left alone. The war is over.”

While controversial, America’s use of the Atomic Bomb to end World War II has been almost universally acknowledged to have ended the war sooner than other strategies available at the time, while at the same time saving thousands of American soldiers’ lives.  Apparently, Obama is ashamed of this and feels the need to apologize to a country who, at the time was guilty of killing a couple thousand Americans in a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.

When asked about it, the Obama Administration did what it does best; it passed the buck:

White House officials on Wednesday referred calls to the State Department, which did not  respond to several inquiries about how the decision was made or if national veterans organizations were contacted prior to the announcement that a delegation would attend the commemoration.

Would you expect anything else from someone who spent most of his time in political office voting “Present” on important issues? This is yet another example of how the Obama Administration’s lack of Foreign Policy experience is destroying America’s reputation and credibility around the world. By the time The Obamasiah© leaves office in January of 2013, the world’s sole remaining super-power will be regarded as no more than a third-world banana republic by other world powers. This will be the lasting legacy of  Barack Obama.

In emotional and personal testimony, an ex-Justice official who quit over the handling of a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party accused his former employer of instructing attorneys in the civil rights division to ignore cases that involve black defendants and white victims.

J. Christian Adams, testifying Tuesday before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said that “over and over and over again,” the department showed “hostility” toward those cases. He described the Black Panther case as one example of that — he defended the legitimacy of the suit and said his “blood boiled” when he heard a Justice official claim the case wasn’t solid.

“It is false,” Adams said of the claim.

“We abetted wrongdoing and abandoned law-abiding citizens,” he later testified.

If you’ve seen the video from the polling station that was the center of the investigation, you can’t help but wonder what else the higher-ups in the Justice Department think they needed to proceed with the case, especially given this:

The Bush Justice Department brought the first case against three members of the group, accusing them in a civil complaint of violating the Voter Rights Act. The Obama administration initially pursued the case, winning a default judgment in federal court in April 2009 when the Black Panther members did not appear in court. But then the administration moved to dismiss the charges the following month after getting one of the New Black Panther members to agree to not carry a “deadly weapon” near a polling place until 2012.

That’s correct — the Justice Department had already won default judgments in the case before it dismissed the charges. You say, “Maybe they were just observing the polls to make sure everything was on the up-and-up”? Here is a picture of what we’re talking about:

Notice, please, the night-stick and military-style footwear the thug in front is wearing.

Yeah, he isn’t trying to intimidate anyone.

The attorney in charge of the case was ready to go to trial, but word came down from above that cases involving black defendants would not be prosecuted. So, the Civil Rights Commission is investigating. I can’t wait to see what they find, especially given the Holder is refusing to let his lawyers testify to the commission. Adams says that the other lawyers from his section will verify what he has claimed. How convenient is it that Holder won’t let them testify?

For many years, whenever the left wanted to discredit someone on the right, all they did was start calling them racist whether it was true or not. Then, by shear repetition the perception was created. Now, when it is leftists who are black, and who are leaving no doubt that they are racist, what do they do? Are they denouncing them on the TV? No. Writing posts and articles denouncing them? No. Instead, they are ignoring them and continuing to smear people on the right:

The statement, which was submitted by the NAACP’s Kansas City, Mo., branch, did much to get a hot debate going. It says members of the movement have “displayed signs and posters intended to degrade people of color generally and President Barack Obama specifically” and says “the racist elements” within the tea party are “a threat to progress.”

Authors of the statement cite as examples the reports by some black members of Congress that they were spat upon and subjected to racial epithets before they voted on the health-care overhaul. No charges were filed, and some tea party supporters have denied the claims, saying there is no evidence that they occurred.

Desperate times require desperate measures, I guess. Ever since Obama won election, the NAACP has been trying to prove that they are still relevant and should still exist. It seems that they have chosen to gin-up charges of racism against whomever is prominent on the right, to wit Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

Why is it that people on the left seem hell-bent to destroy Martin Luther King’s dream of people being judged on the content of their character and not the color of their skin? Why is it that people on the left are so quick to ignore or overlook things done by blacks which, if done by whites, would be immediately chastised? Why are blacks getting a free pass when they engage in racism by liberals and the press? These, my friends, is the $64,000.00 questions.