SCOTUS rejects NJ public employee unionistas' demand for excessive pension fund payments

Memo to NJ public employee unions: You can't get blood from a stone.

Promises that can't be kept won't be kept.

And not to put too fine a point on it, but NJ is broke. We don't have the $55 billion the unionistas want. We're never gonna have the $55 billion either.

Oh, but we had it, once, they'll tell us! Give it back!

Sorry, it's gone. Spent. Borrowed. Lost on crummy investments. Or a combination of all 3. A parade of governors and legislatures, Democrat and Republican alike, repeatedly raided and / or failed to fund the pension system.

And the unions went along, for the most part, because they were promised even bigger payouts in "the future." Those payouts weren't funded, but hey, they were promises and we all know that politicians always keep their promises, right?

So now Senate President Steve Sweeney (D-Ironworkers Union) wants to enshrine the pension payment into our state constitution. Ahead of everything else like schools and hospitals and police and snow plowing. Because what's important is protecting public workers' cushy retirement packages.

Unless you're a taxpayer, of course.

He'll probably get his wish. The legislature is overwhelmingly Democrat. And the Democrats believe in government of the unions, by the unions, and for the unions. The folks who pay the bills don't get a vote. At least until basic services stop being provided while unionista retirees live high on the hog.

Then the pitchforks are gonna come out...

Posted at 12:35 by Chris Wysocki   [/nj_politics]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: SCOTUS NJ-Politics unions pensions public-employees   |   Tweet

A guy claiming to be Jeff Sessions just endorsed Donald Trump for president

Mass psychosis. The only possible explanation for conservative stalwart Jeff Sessions endorsing reality-TV charlatan Donald Trump is mass psychosis.

C'mon, no sane conservative would go there, right?

Please tell me it's an imposter.

The real Jeff Sessions is smarter than that, isn't he?

At a warm and windy rally here with thousands present in a packed football stadium just outside Huntsville, Sessions appeared on stage with Trump to back him for president. Sessions' endorsement provides Trump with even more legitimacy as Trump's two remaining serious opponents — Sens. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) — attempt to undermine him in a desperate bid by the donor class to regain control of the party from populists revolting in elections around the country. Sessions backing Trump is a significant blow to both Rubio and Cruz, as now the powerful Alabamian will be putting his entire operation all in behind Trump.

"The donor class?"

If "the donor class" is behind Ted Cruz, who by the way is the only real conservative in this race, I'm a monkey's uncle.

So either the guy endorsing Trump and claiming to be Jeff Sessions is an imposter, a not altogether improbable scenario given Trump's show business proclivities, or the real Jeff Sessions has been replaced by a pod person.

Because before today I was happy to believe in two absolute truths.

(1) Jeff Sessions is one of the leaders of the conservative movement. And, (2) Donald Trump is about as far from "conservative" as a candidate can get.

The negation of those truths should not be possible.

And yet...

Jeff Sessions, we hardly knew ye.

But while you're standing there kissing Trump's ring, answer me this. Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the KKK?

Posted at 21:09 by Chris Wysocki   [/election]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Donald-Trump Jeff-Sessions Conservative pod-people mass-psychosis   |   Tweet

The security breach at Obama's IRS is 7 times worse than they originally said

When you devote all your resources to persecuting enemies of the state you don't have anything left over to protect your subjects' personal information.

Lois Lerner's IRS compatriots are not only incompetent, like her, they're liars too.

Remember when they said "only" 100,000 tax returns were compromised?

Feh. Try 700,000, at least until they inevitably "revise" the totals upward again.

WHEN THE IRS first reported a hack that exposed taxpayer accounts. vulnerable information, it pegged the number of affected people at a little over 100,000. Today, in its second upward revision, the number of affected people now stands at over 700,000.

Oops.

As WIRED originally reported last spring, the hack gave attackers access to entire tax returns, which means people's social security numbers, address, and incomes were all compromised. The hackers used personal information already in hand to get unauthorized access through an IRS application called "Get Transcript."

Don't worry though. If you're one of the 700,000, Obama's gonna send you a letter, some time after February 29th, which'll tell you you're screwed, but don't panic, because he'll front you Equifax identify theft protection for a whole year!

And, bad guys have never waited a year before exploiting personal information for profit, right?

Once your info is out there, it's out there forever. The Internet never forgets. And if you're one of the unlucky 700,000 everything about your financial life was laid bare by a bureaucracy that's more worried about its own survival than it is about your ability to sleep at night.

They. Don't. Care.

And you can't make them care.

I assure you, no one at the IRS will be fired over this. No one at the IRS will even be reprimanded over this. The culpabable parties have probably already been promoted. That's how it worked at the VA, and their malfeasance affected far more people.

It's the Chicago way.

Hey, do you know who's in charge of keeping all your health care records secure?

The IRS. The same guys who didn't secure 700,000 tax returns.

I betcha can't wait until they screw that up too!

Posted at 22:07 by Chris Wysocki   [/tech]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: IRS hackers cyber-security identity-theft Obama Lois-Lerner   |   Tweet

Good grief, Chris Christie throws his support behind Donald Trump

Any remaining vestige of respect I had for Chris Christie is now gone.

Donald Trump? He seriously endorsed Donald Trump? For president?

Yup.

Some "conservative" Christie turned out to be, eh?

In 2012 his bromance with Barry sunk Mitt Romney.

And now his endorsement of Obama's GOP doppelganger lends instant establishment credibility to Trump's campaign. Which signals to me that the GOPe flirtation with Marco Rubio is officially over. Because Chris Christie is one of the real GOP insiders. Remember, he was briefly "their guy" when Jeb! first faltered, until, of course, Christie fell flat too.

Whether this means Trump has made peace with the establishment remains to be seen. But it seems likely that he has, and Chris Christie has opened the door for Reince Priebus and the rest of the RNC to get on board the Trump Express.

Which from our perspective means that yes, the light at the end of tunnel is indeed an oncoming train.

UPDATE 26 Feb 2016 15:50:
Not to be outdone, the "other" Christie (Whitman) endorses John Kasich.

C'mon guys. Try hard to care.

Posted at 13:40 by Chris Wysocki   [/election]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Chris-Christie Donald-Trump election 2016   |   Tweet

Only one presidential candidate has pledged to end H1-B visa abuse

The stories are hauntingly similar. Tech worker lands a good job, builds her skills, compiles an impressive litany of customer accolades, garners years of favorable performance reviews, and when she least expects it, she's replaced by a Pakistani brought in by a foreign outsourcing company.

Adding insult to injury? She's gotta train Habib to do her job.

It's a scene repeated countless times across the American technology sector. Cheap foreigners, with no discernable skills, are replacing seasoned American workers.

And in addition to the humiliation accompanying having to train your language-challenged replacement, there's the "non-disparagement clause" in your termination agreement, in which you certify that you, your family, friends, and acquaintances, will never speak ill of your former employer, including any complaints about H1-B visa abuse.

It's almost as if they've got something to hide.

"I started to think what kind of American was I becoming? Was I going to become part of ruining our country by taking severance pay in exchange for training my foreign replacement? How many other American families would be affected by the same foreign worker that I trained?" he said through tears.

A better question is, what kind of "American" sells his soul to foreign outsourcers?

I'll bet you're thinking right about now, Wysocki is going to tell us that Ted Cruz will protect American jobs.

And with God as my witness, I sincerely with I could say that to you.

Alas, it would be untrue.

Because Ted Cruz loves the H1-B visa scam. He's all-in for foreigners. It mars, perhaps fatally, his otherwise examplary record of conservative fortitude.

Don't count on Marco Rubio either. Senator Amnesty wants to triple the number of foreigners coming here to take our tech jobs.

So, who's the only candidate who says he'll return American jobs to Americans?

Donald Trump.

You guys know I'm no Trumpeter. In fact, I find him to be obnoxiously execrable.

But on this issue he has a point. He's firmly out in front of protecting American jobs. And as it happens, the issue of H1-B visa abuse could sway my vote. So if Donald Trump is serious, if he's really going to send foreign carpetbaggers back to Bangalore and Timbuktu, well, I could see myself holding my nose and pulling his lever in November.

It occurs to me that if a candidate wanted to build a broad-based coaliton, he'd emphasize a bunch of disparate issues that appealed to disaffected swaths of the electorate. And he'd cobble together those swaths into a force that exuded inevitability.

Then he'd sit back and wait for the electorate to coalesce in favor of his platitudes. Who knows, it might be enough to send him across the finish line.

Am I on the Trump Train?

Not yet.

But I'm thinking about taking an Uber to the station.

Posted at 22:43 by Chris Wysocki   [/immigration]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: H1-B immigration Disney   |   Tweet

Too little too late: Rick Perry vindicated by Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

His prosecution was politically motivated from the get-go, but it's nice to see that Rick Perry really didn't do anything wrong.

The process is the punishment. It's known as "lawfare," and it's how Democrats roll. Perry, and Wisconsin governor Scott Walker before him, were targeted, marginalized, and victimized, all to ensure they couldn't garner the 2016 GOP presidential nomination.

You know what? It's past high time for our team to play by their rules. Let's start with Essex County Executive Joe DiVincenzo. Among other questionable things, he uses campaign funds to take his buddies to a Super Bowl party in Puerto Rico every year. That doesn't pass the smell test, and you and I both know it. So far he's evaded prosecution, mostly because Chris Christie appoints Democrats as Essex County prosecutor.

What's up with that?

Can't we find someone to hold the corruptocrats accountable?

And with Cory Booker's name being floated for Hillary's Veep, shouldn't we know more about his association with Linda Watkins-Brashear and the totally corrupt Newark Watershed Commission? And there's still the matter of the payments he received from his old law firm while steering city contracts their way.

But with a Democrat as his Attorney General, and her protege as County Prosecutor, Chris Christie isn't exactly poised to root out malfeasance in Essex County.

Maybe that's one reason his presidential campaign failed to gain traction.

Look, I'm glad Rick Perry's nightmare is over. On the other hand, I'd be even gladder if he was still contending for the GOP presidential nomination.

The process is the punishment.

The Democrats never needed to convict him. They only needed to sow FUD.

So, they threw mud on the wall, and waited to see what stuck.

Politics ain't beanbag. And if the Democrats want to throw out the rulebook, well, why in the world are we still trying to be nice guys? Fuck 'em. Take no prisoners. Find an out-of-the-way county prosecutor to indict Hitlery. When her media sycophants cry fowl, indict them too. God knows the New York Times is guilty of violating the Espionage Act. Lock up Pinch Sulzberger and Carlos Slim and every reporter who jeopardized national security.

It's what their team does to Conservative journalists.

And Lois Lerner would be proud.

Posted at 21:58 by Chris Wysocki   [/news]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Rick-Perry Democrats Texas Wisconsin Scott-Walker lawfare   |   Tweet

Senate GOP ups the ante, reaffirms there will be no hearings on Obama's SCOTUS nominee

The Constitution says Barack Obama can nominate someone to replace Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court.

The Constitution also says the Senate provides advice and consent.

Today the Senate Judiciary Committee said that advice won't be forthcoming, and consent will indeed be withheld.

And why shouldn't they stand firm? After all, it was originally Joe Biden's idea.

If you're keeping score, this means that the current president, current vice president, current Senate minority leader, and incoming Senate minority leader have all gone on record in the past in favor of obstructing a Supreme Court nominee.

Inconvenient, that. But funny!

Of course the only fly in the ointment is who gets elected as our 45th president. As of now there are 5 people with a reasonable shot at the title, and I gotta tell ya, at least 3 (probably 4) of those 5 aren't exactly predisposed to nominating someone with Scalia's intellect, principles, or disposition.

This election is for all the marbles kids. Don't screw it up.

Posted at 16:38 by Chris Wysocki   [/gop]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Senate GOP Republican Lindsay-Graham Mitch-McConnell Obama SCOTUS   |   Tweet

Today's Star-Ledger editorial: Peach pits are more deadly than Islamic terrorism

Once again I am damn glad I no longer subscribe to Tommy The Commie's Star-Ledger. Today's editorial chastising opponents of Islamic Sharia law is arguably the most idiotic item he's ever published.

After getting himself into a lather over folks who can't see themselves rewriting the Constitution to please Allah, he comes up with this gem:

Good. Freaking. Grief.

Ten years? As in after that little incident involving some planes landing in Lower Manhattan? I'm sure the Star-Ledger covered it; although probably not on Page 1, seeing as how that's usually devoted to their never-ending series extolling the virtues of gun control.

But, still… Someone there should have thought to mention 9/11, right?

Nope.

Their zeal to slander Ted Cruz (and all Republicans) while sucking up to the enemies of freedom means they, like their messianic president, can't bring themselves to admit the existence of Islamic terrorism. Even when it kills 3,000 innocent victims on national television.

Peach pits. There's the Real Menace.

I suppose that if I were to invent a gun that fired peach pits, the Star-Ledger newsroom would convulse in synchronized apoplexy.

One can only hope that Obama has asked Joe Biden to take the lead on eradicating the Peach Pit Scourge. We must act, and act now! Because surely that's more important than curing cancer, or defeating the Mohammedan hordes.

Or so Tom Moran would have us believe.

I wonder what color the sky is on his planet.

Posted at 21:27 by Chris Wysocki   [/media]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Star-Ledger Islam terrorism Ted-Cruz Ronald-Dancer Sharia Tom-Moran   |   Tweet

This could be big: Ted Cruz now leads the GOP pack as Trump's support falters

It looks like GOP primary voters are finally waking up to just how much of a charlatan Donald Trump really is.

Notably, this latest poll was conducted after Trump's New Hampshire primary win and after that circus of a debate put on by CBS in South Carolina.

Which means most people now see the real Donald Trump, and his New York Values, for what they really are.

Because when you get the Code Pink endorsement, sane people start to wonder about your commitment to conservative principles.

And when you angrily spout Democrat talking points, Republican voters begin to question your dedication to stopping progressive Democrats in their tracks.

Then there's this graphic, which is making the rounds on Facebook. Notice anything unusual?

Who's the last Republican you've met who gave that much money to so many far-left liberal Democrats?

Ted Cruz is the consistent, constitutional, conservative choice.

And I have a feeling the voters of South Carolina and Nevada are going to make that fact abundently clear to Donald Trump real soon now.

Posted at 18:46 by Chris Wysocki   [/election]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Ted-Cruz Donald-Trump GOP Republican   |   Tweet

Chuck Schumer: Hey, stop using my words against me!

Ole Chuck doesn't like it when people take him at his word.

Uh, that's not what you said Chuck. Let me refresh your memory.

Schumer told the American Constitution Society in 2007 that Democrats "should reverse the presumption of confirmation," because the court was "dangerously out of balance." At the time, George W. Bush was president.

Guess what Chuck? We're gonna "reverse the presumption of confirmation."

Thanks for the idea!

Oh, but now Chuck is saying he'd only oppose an "extreme" nominee.

Left unsaid is that Chuck's idea of "extreme" is anyone to the right of Bernie Sanders.

Also left unsaid is how Democrats have been playing outrageous games with the appointment process for a quarter century.

When Robert Bork was defenestrated by Joe Biden, despite Biden's having said he would have no choice but to vote for someone so well-qualified, he was setting the table for payback. When Harry Reid pulled the trigger on the nuclear option (on lower court appointments) he was warned that this would come back to haunt him. When Democrats disgustingly blocked Miguel Estrada from the bench solely because he was a Hispanic, they set the table to be turned. When Barack Obama voted to filibuster Alito, he set the table to be turned.

Your team made the rules Chuck. Don't come crying to me when we start playing by them.

From where I sit it's about damn time we stood up and shouted "no!"

And if you don't like that? Well, in the immortal words of Dick Cheney, Go fuck yourself.

Posted at 17:44 by Chris Wysocki   [/democrats]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Chuck-Schumer Antonin-Scalia SCOTUS filibuster Mitch-McConnell   |   Tweet

That time Chuck Schumer said "we should not confirm any Bush nominee"

My Facebook timeline is filling up with Democrats in high dudgeon over Mitch McConnell's vow to block anyone Barack Obama nominates to succeed the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Cry me a river kids.

Because you've obviously forgotten when Chuck Schumer said the same thing back in 2007 while George W. Bush was in the White House.

The Internet never forgets. Even when it's inconvenient for Democrats.

And if the Senate does filibuster his nominee, Obama won't be in any position to complain either. Because a certain Illnois senator named Barack Obama filibustered Samuel Alito. Which makes him the first president in U.S. history with that dubious distinction.

I'm pretty sure he hoped the Internet would forget that too.

Obama still does have one ace up his sleeve though, the recess appointment. Except Democrats are on record opposing that ploy too.

Thanks to a Volokh Conspiracy commenter, I discovered that in August 1960, the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a resolution, S.RES. 334, "Expressing the sense of the Senate that the president should not make recess appointments to the Supreme Court, except to prevent or end a breakdown in the administration of the Court's business." Each of President Eisenhower's Supreme Court appointments had initially been a recess appointment who was later confirmed by the Senate, and the Democrats were apparently concerned that Ike would try to fill any last-minute vacancy that might arise with a recess appointment.

Darn that Internet, exposing Democrats' rank hypocrisy since 1960!

There's also a New Jersey angle to all this, Democrat State Senate President Steve Sweeney has avoided holding confirmation hearings on Chris Christie's NJ Supreme Court nominees for more than 3 years now. But that's not a crisis, because a "temporary" Justice, who just happens to be a flaming liberal, serves as a placeholder.

None of these facts will stop Democrats from whining of course. Nor will they stop Obama from invoking every Alinskyite dirty trick in the book in pursuit of putting another far-left progressive onto the Supreme Court. "The ends justify the means" is their motto, except when it's Republicans who are using their rules against them. Mitch McConnell had better be ready, and steadfast.

Posted at 12:21 by Chris Wysocki   [/news]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Antonin-Scalia Chuck-Schumer SCOTUS Obama   |   Tweet

At least they're consistent: Black Dems say Bernie Sanders is a racist for criticizing Obama

For 8 years we've heard how Republicans are racist for daring to criticize Barack Obama. It's every Democrat's favorite retort, especially when she's losing an argument.

Yesterday, the Congressional Black Caucus leveled the same charge against Socialist upstart Bernie Sanders, because he's aligned himself with Democrats who criticize Obama.

Yowza! This is starting to get good!

See, it's not enough to promise everyone Free Stuff. Nope. You have to promise Black Americans more Free Stuff than anyone else in order to garner the CBC's endorsement.

Then there's Rep. John Lewis, attacking Bernie for claiming to have fought for civil rights in the 1960s.

Sorry Bernie, it's all about what you've done for them lately. And sucking up to Al Sharpton when you should have been pandering to the CBC, well, that's not how the game is played.

Nevermind that according to Larry Elder writing at Real Clear Politics Blacks are worse off under Obama. In most cases far worse off. And nevermind that the former Chairman of the CBC has this to say about Obama in 2011:

The chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., in 2011, complained about the economic plight of Black America. He said, "If (former President) Bill Clinton had been in the White House and had failed to address this problem, we probably would be marching on the White House." He repeated the statement 12 months later, when black unemployment stood at 14.1 percent: "As the chair of the Black Caucus, I've got to tell you, we are always hesitant to criticize the President. With 14 percent (black) unemployment, if we had a white president we'd be marching around the White House."

Instead they've sold their souls to Hillary Clinton, who has promised to be the realization of Obama's 3rd term. Whether or not that's good news for Black America, or for that matter America in general, is very much in doubt.

Posted at 11:10 by Chris Wysocki   [/democrats]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Obama racism CBC African-American Bernie-Sanders Hillary-Clinton   |   Tweet

Bernie Sanders rails against corporate greed while pushing the politics of greed and envy

Bernie Sanders' New Hampshire victory speech in a nutshell: We want what you've got.

For the life of me I can't understand how any red-blooded American can sit there and stomach such nonsense.

The guy's never worked a Real Job in his life. Or rather, he failed miserably at every job, except politics. Yet he believes he's entitled to take from those of us who didn't fail and live large off our efforts.

You can call it Socialism. You can dress it up as "fairness," except it really isn't all that "fair" to the guy forking over his hard-earned money.

What it really is, is Theft.

And what is theft but greed by another name? The Bible calls it "coveting." And that's the essense of Bernie's socialism. He covets his neighbor's goods. He envies your and my success. And his goal is to take what we have, by force.

How that is somehow better than the system we have now is left unanswered. Hipsters don't do irony, right?

So, riddle me this. Why should Bernie stop at Free College and Free Health Care and Free Housing and Free Drugs and Free Love? Why not Free Flat Screen TVs? Or Free Cars?

Bernie's vision of government is to meet everyone's "needs" without regard for their efforts or abilities. Marxism 101. Go ahead, look it up.

That's not "fairness." It's never been about "fairness." It's always, and I mean always resulted in abject misery, except for the Chosen Few.

Look at North Korea. Or Cuba, Venezuela, China, and of course Bernie's favorite dictatorship, Soviet Russia. Because that's Democratic Socialism in action.

I want to take every one of these deluded kids lining up to kiss Bernie's ring, the kids that swear they want to be "just like Sweden" and get them to sit down and read about the Holodomor.

I want them to understand what forced redistribution of wealth really looks like, up close and personal.

Alas, they won't believe it, will they. Not these kids. They're smarter than me; their professors told them so.

They won't believe that Sweden is no paradise either. Or that Sweden is backing away from Bernie-style socialism as fast as it can.

To them, Bernie Sanders is Santa Claus, albeit with armed reindeer and a naughty list a mile long. They're gonna ride Santa's sleigh to the promised land, because it's easier than getting up and going to work every morning.

But then, by the time Bernie gets around to screwing them over too, it'll be too late.

Too late for them. Too late for Freedom. And too late for America.

Which of course they'll characterize as "bad luck."

Posted at 10:12 by Chris Wysocki   [/democrats]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Bernie-Sanders socialism Democrats class-warfare   |   Tweet

Hillary lost the NH primary, to an unrepentent socialist moron

When everybody gets a trophy, "everybody" votes for Bernie Sanders.

What do they put in the coffee up in New Hampshire?

Because "Free Stuff or die" is not a reasonable state motto.

So what can we conclude?

Hillary Clinton is such a flawed candidate that Bozo The Clown could beat her in a head-to-head race?

Or the residents of New Hampshire are batshit insane?

I'm not optimistic that Basement Dwelling Progbots for Bernie isn't a real thing. That is, these kids actually don't understand (a) math, and (b) how to make it in the real world.

They're going all in for Other People's Money.

Sadly you can't argue with such abject ignorance. The BernieBots don't have the necessary frame of reference to be cognizant of the flaws in their hero's worldview. Their professors ensured they never learned how to critically deconstruct the logical fallacies of socialism. And they're not interested in learning the lessons of history.

When I was young petulant toddlers were simply told "no." And when they grew up they had garnered enough self-awareness along the way to understand why "no" was the correct response.

Except, growing up has now become optional. And apparently frowned upon.

How else can one explain the allure of this socialist charlatan?

It can't be his promise of "equality," not unless you believe in equality of misery.

It can't be his promise of "free" college, health care, housing, food, and weed. Not unless you're too stupid to read a balance sheet.

Here's a guy who's basically a professional bum telling all the wannabe bums they're entitled to everything all the rest of us have. Work is for suckers, because Bernie's gonna take from the hoarders and give to the slackers.

What happens when the workers give up is something Bernie and his sycophants never want to talk about. But if you Google Venezuela, it ought to be instructive.

Or not.

200 years ago Alexis de Tocqueville penned the definitive takedown of so-called "Democratic Socialism."

If only the people who vote for Bernie Sanders would bother themselves to read it.

Posted at 22:45 by Chris Wysocki   [/election]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Hillary-Clinton Bernie-Sanders New-Hampshire socialism   |   Tweet

The Obama Doctrine: Fight Climate Change, not Islamic terrorism

Remember when General Patton minimized his carbon footprint before defeating the Third Reich?

Because Franklin Delano Obama wanted to ensure Operation Overlord didn't contribute to Globull Warming, right?

I'm sure it was one of Eisenhower's main goals. Unfortunately he forgot to write it down. Probably because he was a Republican.

Fast forward 72 years. Having defeated all of our current enemies, Barack Hussein Obama has decided the U.S. military should devote its might to combating Climate Change. ISIS? Not so much.

A key scene in the movie Patton is when he asks the chaplain to come up with a prayer for better weather. In the new Obama Army, such a prayer would be disallowed, because snow makes Mother Gaia happy.

You win wars by breaking things and killing the enemy and letting the sea levels take care of themselves. You don't win by worrying that destroying an enemy's infrastructure might melt a glacier in a hundred years.

Who here still believes Barack Obama wants to "win" against ISIS?

Me neither.

Because Climate Change is a greater threat than Islamic terrorism dontcha know.

Obama actually called off bombing ISIS to save the planet.

I'm sure Obama's directive sounds much more rational in the original German.

Alas, Obergruppenfuhrer John Smith was unavailable for comment.

Posted at 21:04 by Chris Wysocki   [/obama_watch]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Obama Pentagon Climate-Change military terrorism   |   Tweet

Obama hates cheap gas so he wants a $10 per barrel oil tax to fund green energy boondoggles

Remember when high gas prices were bad?

Yeah, me neither.

But cheap oil means Obama's green energy buddies need even more subsidies to compete, so he's suddenly decided to impose another gas tax.

It's almost as if he doesn't want us to catch a break, because he really wants gas to cost $10 a gallon. But he'll settle for an additional $10 a barrel for oil as a good start.

For those of you who are bad at math (ie, Democrats), with oil currently trading around $34 a barrel, Obama is proposing what amounts to a 30% tax.

Does anyone here want to pay 30% more for gas? Besides all the shysters hawking solar panels and windmills of course…

Fortunately, Congress won't go along.

It'll be interesting to see Hillary Clinton defend this latest assault on consumers, seeing as how she's now running as Obama's 3rd term and all.

That is if anyone in the palace guard media bothers to ask her about it.

Posted at 12:39 by Chris Wysocki   [/agw]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Obama gasoline oil energy taxes green-energy   |   Tweet

Irony alert: In the NJ State Senate chamber, Lady Liberty is depicted holding a gun

I spent most of today in Trenton, because my daughter won an award for Catholic Schools Week and it was presented to her at the State House by a member of Governor Christie's staff. Yes, it was pretty cool.

But that's not why I'm writing this post.

As part of the festivities we were given a tour of the State House. While seated in the Senate chamber, the tour guide pointed out the beautiful paintings of Liberty and Prosperity adorning the window alcoves. And she took particular note of one which showed Lady Liberty holding a musket, saying it represented our state's role in fighting for freedom during the Revolutionary War.

That's Lady Liberty in red, and she is indeed holding a gun.

She's also perched directly above the Senate President's desk. The desk at which Steve Sweeney sits as he works tirelessly to eradicate the Second Amendment rights of New Jersey's citizens.

And who said irony is dead?

Maybe instead of looking down at the latest polls Senator Sweeney (and his evil henchwoman Loretta Weinberg) should look up. Because then he'll see Lady Liberty reminding him that Prosperity is nothing without the right to protect our basic freedoms.

If Sweeney and the Democrats had had their way in 1776, we'd still be a colony of Great Britain. Because muskets would have been as scarce back then as respect for Liberty seems to be now.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

I think I'll suggest they mention that on the tour.

Posted at 18:08 by Chris Wysocki   [/nj_politics]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: gun-control NJ-Politics liberty guns   |   Tweet

Our Muslim in Chief visited a radical mosque and bashed America

In case you hadn't heard, the Founding Fathers were Muslims. Obama said so today, it must be true.

Jefferson vanquished the Barbary Pirates.

Obama gave Iran the atomic bomb.

I'm sure that's the same thing, right?

And it's no coincidence he said it at the Muslim-Brotherhood linked Islamic Society of Baltimore. When it comes to coddling terrorists, Obama is a terrorist's best friend. Just look at all the mutts he let go from Guantanamo.

So naturally he took the opportunity to lambaste "anti-Muslim rhetoric."

Did you notice any mention of the Christians massacred by Muslims? Me neither.

There's a climate of fear alright, fear of the next San Bernadino. Because the Muslim Brotherhood isn't exactly known for it's sympathy to infidels.

In fact, it's Muslim countries that exhibit the most religious intolerance.

When was the last time you saw a highway sign that said "All Muslims Exit Here" or "Christians Only?"

Muslims are welcome in Vatican City. Christians in Mecca? Not so much.

Muslims are welcome in Jerusalem. Jews in Mecca? Islam teamed up with the Nazis to send Jews to the gas chambers, and not much has changed since then.

Their Koran is clear — kill the infidel.

While Obama is worried about hypothetical "anti-Muslim" activities, Muslims are busy killing Christians with ruthless efficiency.

How many of Obama's young Muslim friends have been burned alive?

How many beheadings are carried out in churches across America?

Where are the Jewish rape gangs?

Obama tells us Islam means "peace." Meanwhile, Islam is anything but peaceful, but, hey, maybe he doesn't always read the papers.

"The very word Islam comes from 'Salam' — peace," he said. "The standard greeting is 'As-Salaam-Alaikum' — 'Peace be upon you,'" he explained.

Except the practictioners of Islam say, Islam means "Submission." As in, we will submit to Islam's rule, or die.

Obama knows this of course. He was raised as a Muslim in Indonesia. But he pretends otherwise. Who knows what he really believes, he's a malignant narcissist, so he probably only believes in his own munificence. And he may even be right when he says "we" are not a war with Islam, because by "we" he means himself.

But make no mistake, Islam is at war with us. Islam is at war with America, and all of Western Civilization. Islam and its barbarians are at the gates. We open those gates at own peril.

Posted at 22:38 by Chris Wysocki   [/obama_watch]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Obama Islam Thomas-Jefferson   |   Tweet

Rand's last stand got canned, Santorum slinks away, and Trump goes full grump

Iowa doesn't always pick the winner, but it tends to weed out the losers.

Rand Paul is headed back to Kentucky to salvage what's left of his Senate career.

The barbarians are at the gates and Rand's isolationist foreign policy isn't what America needs right now. Speak softly and carry the gold standard won't keep us safe. Buh-bye!

Then, although Rick Santorum tried his best to get the band back together, sequels and reunion tours never do as well as the original.

Take another shot at the Senate Rick. You can still do some good there.

Seen on Twitchy:

I caught some Jim Gilmore action during the last debate. He reminded me of James Stockdale, only less coherent.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump has decided to be a sore loser.

Somebody call the waambulance. And get Trump a baby bottle, STAT!

Because, really, this is presidential?

First he throws a hissy fit at Megyn Kelly, and now he's concocting conspiracy theories and demanding a do-over? Is he serious?

Ah, you hang out with Sarah Palin and pretty soon you start to sound like Sarah Palin. And not in a good way.

What's next? The full Ross Perot?

We already have a thin-skinned narcissist in the White House and look how well that's worked out for us. Sorry Mr. Trump, but you're fired.

Posted at 15:57 by Chris Wysocki   [/election]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: Republican GOP Rand-Paul Rick-Santorum Donald-Trump   |   Tweet

Iowa's youth lined up behind Bernie, because it's easier than getting a job

Hillary won the coin toss, and Bernie still hasn't decided which end zone he'll defend in New Hampshire. Probably the left one.

OK, so it's actually a statistical tie, which Hillary is spinning as a win, but the fact that almost every Democrat in Iowa under 35 caucused for Bernie has gotta hurt.

And she's not the only one who's confused today. I am too. What exactly is the allure of Bernie? It's like these kids have never learned how to think.

There's a young guy I know, a twenty-something who considers himself an up-and-comer in NJ politics, running for a council seat in a neighboring town. Nice enough fellow, just got his MBA from Rutgers. And he's gung-ho for Bernie. He even reposted that idiotic meme about student loan interest rates.

I can understand Bernie being economically illiterate. He's an imbecile. And a bum. But dude, you have an MBA. If you didn't learn anything about collateral or risk management you really should ask Rutgers for your money back.

Sadly though, this guy is not alone.

It's disheartening that an avowed socialist is a viable candidate for president of the United States. Socialism is a dead end. For hundreds of years, it has failed everywhere it's been adopted. The enthusiasm of our youth for the candidacy of Bernie Sanders is a symptom of our failure to educate them, not only in history, government and economics, but also basic morality.

But everybody got a trophy, so there's that.

Which of course is Sanders' schtick. Everybody gets a college education. Everybody gets health care. Everybody gets food, housing, broadband internet, and presumably a pony, or at least a bus pass. No one stops to think about who's paying for all that.

Or rather, they think "the rich" are gonna pay for it. Because it's their birthright or something. Until it all inevitably comes crashing down.

Every time some kid whines to me that life needs to be "fair" or she "deserves" something I want to scream and whack them upside the head.

Life. Is. Not. Fair.

And, Life is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.

Here's pro tip Berniebots. You don't deserve anything. You're a pimple on the asshole of progress, as my grandfather used to say.

You want something? Get off your ass and work for it.

While you're complaining about big banks, or corporate greed, or evil Republicans, or whatever Bernie's bugaboo is these days there's some kid who's putting his nose to the grindstone and cranking out The Next Big Thing. It's called "hard work." And, contrary to what your professors told you, it's The American Way.

In a sane world Ted Cruz will mop the floor with Bernie in a debate and cruise into the White House.

Alas, I'm not so sure we live in a sane world anymore.

Posted at 13:54 by Chris Wysocki   [/election]   Comments | Perm Link |
Technorati Tags: election Iowa Bernie-Sanders Hillary-Clinton Ted-Cruz   |   Tweet