Tag Archives: joe

Say it Ain’t So Sherriff Joe

Say it Ain’t So Sherriff Joe

This is a follow up to my earlier article on Sherriff Joe Arpaio and the controversies surrounding him. He appears to have some sewer maggot supporters, like neo-nazi Vito Lombardi and his White Nationalist friends. Neo Nazis tend to be narcissistic  and love to get photo ops with politicians. Wise politicians have someone vette who gets those photo ops and more importantly, who doesn’t, so they don’t get caught with politician stalker scum like Kyle Bristow, Don Black, and the like. Here you see that Sherriff Joe not only got snapped with a Neo nazi, but it was also proudly posted at Stormfront.

Conservatives take note: If the only people you can get to show up for counter demos are nutballs, it’s better not to counter protest.

*** Warning**** Video footage of WN’s and Neo Nazis. This is disgusting.

If you watch the videos at the Flaming Basterd links you will also see another camera view of this at 4:48 in, and the WN filmer earlier mumbling about how it’s too bad you can’t shoot (suspected) Obama supporters.

So Joe, say it ain’t so…. ( but so far there’s just been a short statement that the Sherriff can’t control who shows up at demonstrations. True, but a short sentence in that statement condemning white nationalism would serve better to disassociate yourself from these miserable mewling pukes. I waited a few days to post this in case there were more statements forthcoming, but I haven’t seen it if it’s out there.)

The bottom line is that his constituents love him and he’s not really in danger of becoming unelected – he does his main job well even with the occasional grandstanding. He doesn’t need scum like this to stay in office, and he should take the step to completely disavow them because he won’t be losing a thing by doing so.

Update: Vito says he wants deportations… here’s one for him.

Sherriff Joe on PBS

Sherriff Joe on PBS

In this segment from a PBS documentary Maria Hinojosa tries to pin Sherriff Joe Arpaio’s ears back on local immigration law enforcement. They have a couple papers in Joe’s area that are gunning for him because he does work with ICE on local immigration reinforcement. The reporter in this segment flounders a bit, and ends up by going “Godwinian”, comparing what Sherriff Joe is doing to what Nazi Germany did.

This is egregiously wrong especially since I can’t recall any illegal immigrants burnt in ovens. Bottom line: if you have to dig out Hitler and make comparisons in a discussion you are definitely on the weaker end of it, and you should always be called on it because it really diminishes the true horror of the Holocaust through trivialization.

You can see the rest of the documentary here, where they actually bring up valid points about the Sherriff’s propensity for populist grandstanding at election times, and the possible effects on response times.

It’s a thorny issue for both sides and the extremes of both parties tend to go overboard on immigration issues – with Janet Napolitano in charge, look for a different approach to the problem. It will be interesting to see in these economic times whether the Democrats downplay the problem or grandstand upon it to distract Republicans from efforts on the economy.

To me it’s wisest at this point for both parties to put this issue aside for now- on the Dem side of the debate the face of the issue has become surly La Raza Reconquistas carrying Mexican flags and wearing Che shirts, on the Republican extreme end the face has become equally surly militia members with ties to the Neo-Confederacy, and never the twain shall meet. This issue harms both parties at this point when it becomes nationalized.

Obama’s Greatest Hits

A concise compilation of the things that should raise doubts about an Obama Presidency. H/T Patterico

Fred Thompson Says it Best: Why All Americans Should Vote McCain

Fred Thompson boils the key elements of this election down to essential principles so this is a must watch for everyone:

Obama’s Budget is a Giveaway Grab Bag; You Don’t Know What Will Come Out of It

We’ve already seen how Barack manages large programs, under the Annenberg Challenge with Bill Ayers he gave away a total of 150 million to gaggle of community activist groups to improve schools. Some of those groups were radical, but putting that aside a moment you can see that the vague “feel good” instead of results-oriented direction under Obama just created monumental waste with zero results. The other cities given these grants saw improvement, Chicago stands alone with zero improvement.

His proposed budget for the country should give everyone pause, especially with Annenberg as the only real executive track record to judge by. Traditional media has ignored this because of the Ayers weather underground terror connection and Marxist ideology, but it’s essential to examine Annenberg because it’s the only executive “achievement” that Barack Obama has. The MSM failure to examine the results and goals of Annenberg in detail is journalistic and moral bankruptcy.

The McCain-Palin campaign has critized his tax plans as welfare, so Barack’s campaign has come back and tweaked it to add a work requirement. (They will materialize things out of thin air as needed to get elected.) This comes from the New Hampshire Union Leader in reply:

“Facing criticism from John McCain that his tax plan constitutes ‘welfare,’ Barack Obama recently added a work requirement to one of his proposals. ‘They started saying this was welfare,’ said Obama adviser Austan Goolsbee. “So, just so they would absolutely not be able to say that, we decided that for the last two percent we’ll simply add a work requirement.’ …’When did this change? I’m just curious,’ an incredulous Holtz-Eakin asked Goolsbee. ‘About two weeks ago,’ replied Goolsbee, adding that when the proposal was announced in September 2007, 98 percent of its benefits went to workers.” — ABC News

“The bottom line is that Obama is not being honest about his tax and spending plans. It is impossible — impossible! — for him to finance his giveaways by taxing only those making $250,000 or more. He will have to raise taxes substantially on people making much, much less than that. If you think you are going to avoid a tax increase on Obama’s watch because you aren’t ‘rich,’ remember this: A government that arbitrarily picks $250,000 as a dividing line can, using the same purely political considerations, pick any number as a dividing line.” — New Hampshire Union Leader

 

Kudos to the NH Union Leader for pinning down the specifics on this, as we know Obama prefers to be vague — he puts forth sweeping general statements that sound good, and we are not supposed to question. Barack is running for president however, and it’s every journalist’s duty to question.

So once again you see that the Obama campaign is a weather vane moving in the wind, and as everyone knows you don’t need a weatherman to see which way the wind blows…

Spreading the Joe’s Wealth Around – Obama’s New Welfare Plan

There are quite a few things wrong with Obama’s new Tax plan, but I’m going to focus on two that are egregiously wrong. The worst thing about it is the built-in socialism, he would tax most busineses in America and pass the money on in the form a of check to the thirty percent of taxpayers who pay no taxes now. Ignore Obama’s protestations about business owner income taxation, it’s a dodge, a smokescreen –most businesses are incorporated and must file their own return and they would be Taxed. It’s welfare revisited, as outlined in this Fox and Friends segment:

On top of taxing most businesses in the US, Obama would also hit the large corporations that just lost huge chunks of net worth; which directly impacts your pension and 401 K plan during a recession. Besides the huge raid on your pension or 401K net worth, Obama’s trickle-down taxation would tax Joe the plumber, Jill the hairdresser, Bill the baker, Bob the butcher and hosts of others who you depend on day in and day out for goods and services.

Do you think you might end up paying a bit more next time you call a plumber, a furnace repairman, shop for groceries, buy gas, or get your hair done under Obama’s plan? Whatever segment of society is taxed you will pay the end. Thus has it always been, thus it will always be until death do you part from the IRS.

Obama will tax the engine of america’s productivity while we are in a recession to re-introduce welfare, make no mistake: no matter how much he talks about the middle class he’s talking about spreading your wealth around. Last point: if Obama is elected he might initially cut your tax, but it would all be washed away as a Democrat congress and a Democrat president let the Bush tax cuts expire in 2011 — so don’t be fooled by Obama’s shell game with your tax dollars.

This next video spells it out and is hilarious, so I expect the Obamabots to get it flagged down at Youtube pretty quickly, watch while you can:

UPDATE: This is one of those posts I look back on in horror – “Joe the plumber” turned out to be the standard christian fundamentalist zealot and RWNJ everyone was warning me about…

Three Ring Alaskan Political Circus; Weasel-Eyed Joe

Since it’s Saturday it’s time for some Political Humor with the following two videos:

Then there was the humorous send up of what Weasel-Eyed Joe might say in the debate, I got tied up at work and missed this one:

Patriotic Acts: Taxes!

I nearly busted a gut watching this, but it was a sad kinda laughter since people really don’t get how taxes on others always trickle down…. Obama and Biden’s “tax cuts” will give to a small sector while stealing much much more from everyone by allowing repeal of the Bush Tax cuts.

Just a reminder from Lawhawk — the Democrats think taxes are patriotic for you, but not for Charlie Rangel. The Democrats in control are crass cowards who took time to block investigation into Rangel’s tax issues, but who are recessing before taking on the financial crisis created by thirty years of their policies that steadily weakened the home loan mechanisms in this country. The Democrats always go overboard if they figure they can have taxpayers pick up the tab that results from their destruction of US institutions. When it’s time to face the music, they run away – in the words of Senator Harry Reid:

“no one knows what to do”

Why is Whoopi Naive?

In case you didn’t catch it, Senator John McCain was on the view the other day, and in a discussion of Supreme Court justices and the import of appointing strict constitutionalist judges Whoopi took the opportunity to make a wise crack about having to worry about being a slave again. Not like there’s been slavery here since 1865, but more on that in a minute. She put on quite a show of being flustered by that thought, and John McCain graciously ceded the point.

What else can you do without seeming boorish in the face of such blazing ignorance? (or such carefully crafted theater…)

Whoopi seems to think it was the Supreme Court that stopped slavery, however it was not. It was Republicans, and some War Democrats  who put the future of the country ahead of party, you know Whoopi, war Democrats like Joe Lieberman. Together with President Lincoln they ended slavery in the United States.

The first step was issuing the two part Emancipation Proclamation — it was one of those dreaded Executive Orders that the extreme left and right always condemn nowadays; if Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul were around back then they probably both would have been calling for impeachment of President Lincoln.

The second part of ending slavery since executive orders are sometimes impermanent was ammending the Constitution of the United States of America, adding the thirteenth ammendment. Doing that ended slavery for all time here. It was followed by the fourteenth ammendment that secured the rights of the ex-slaves, and the fifteenth ammendment that ensured their right to vote. Now since all of the ammendments are part of the constitution, what part of strict constitutionalism is Whoopi in fear of?

I mean doesn’t she want judges who interpret these ammendments strictly? If there weren’t a long history of judges doing just that we could still have shades of slavery today in some states, I guess strict is a good way to interpret the constitution when it comes to individual rights.

What part of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth ammendment doesn’t Whoopi get? Is this really naivete, or is this calculated political posturing and hysterical theater? I guess Whoopi’s the only one who can tell us which it is: just ignorance or just theater.

Thirteenth Ammendment:

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Fourteenth Ammendment:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No one shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Fiftteenth Ammendment:

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Kerry is Clueless

Apparently willing and able to talk about an ad he hasn’t even seen. John F’in Kerry – Reporting for duty!

 

Just in case you are not getting this, the original “Celeb” ad is here. You can see that the narrator not only says Obama’s not ready to lead and says no to offshore drilling, but that it’s also in bold text across the screen. John F’in Kerry, clueless again.