Half of Catholics voted for Obama last night. Over half of Jewish folks. I haven’t found a stat for Christians yet, but I do know that millions of evangelicals didn’t vote at all, after 30 million failed to do so four years ago. They may as well have voted for Barry.
Everyone on the right is trying to find people to blame. Many are blaming the stupid people that voted for Barry. While the stupid people are always an easy target, I don’t fault them for voting for the guy they believe has their best interests in mind (even when he doesn’t). There are plenty of freeloaders who are perfectly happy not working when they can. There are plenty of women who believe Romney actually wanted to take away their womanly “rights,” whatever those may be. There are plenty of union members who are unemployed because of the Obama economy. But I’m not going to blame them. Instead, I’m going to blame every single Christian, Catholic, and Jew who voted for Obama, when he and his party support positions that are immoral and contrary to the Bible.
While I’m going to play the social issues card today, I’m not going to tell you you’re going to hell for voting for Barry. I don’t get to make that call. What I am going to tell you is that abortion is murder. I’m guessing I wouldn’t find many of you willing to vote for a guy hoping to institute a second holocaust. But yet, millions of Judeo-Christian folks just voted for a guy who supported legislation in Illinois that allowed a doctor to throw a live baby in the trash if he/she survived an attempted abortion. What’s your justification? Women’s rights? Public education? Just wanted to be different? You’ll have some explainin’ to do.
Gay marriage? The Bible’s pretty clear on what constitutes marriage. The Dems? I think we all know where they stand on the subject. Polygamy isn’t legal, why should gay marriage be? What’s your justification for supporting it? Fairness? Rights? At some point you have to decide what side of the line you’re on.
Oftentimes, we leave God when we walk out of church…myself included. We all need to bring Him with us into every area of our lives, including our political lives. John Adams once said that our Constitution was made only for a moral or religious people. Without the independent code of ethics provided by religion, moral decay would destroy this country as a result of the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution. That is precisely what is taking place now, and many of the people who are obligated to fight against the decay are actually voting in favor of it.
“But Nash, aren’t you getting just a little bit drama-rama over this?” No, my imaginary friend, I am not. This stuff matters. A lot. I was ticked off last night. And while I was ranting and raving, my wife wisely told me to focus on what mattered. God has a plan, and that plan involves more President Barry. My dad, who has the misfortune of today being his birthday, told me something similar. We’re in the world, not of the world. Four more years of Barry isn’t the worst disaster ever. At the same time, however, we have the responsibility to vote the same way we are to live: as morally as possible. Unfortunately, we all too often fail in doing what we ought. There’s always next time though, God willing.
Well, apparently it’s going to be raining in New York for the next several days. Atlantic City is already underwater, or so the media reports. While some are quite concerned about Sandy, I view it as an opportunity to clean out some of the trash that resides in the Northeast.
Don’t worry about me though. I’m ready for Sandy. Any potential looters should be on notice that I am bitterly clinging to my guns and God. And Sparky’s riding shotgun.
Lots of interesting things happened over the weekend…some sad, some not so sad. One sad thing that happened was the Tigers forgot they needed to score runs in order to win at baseball. The second thing is a combination of happy and sad. I went to Benihana on Saturday night to celebrate one of my kid’s birthdays. Hibachi always makes me happy because I get to drink a comically large beer while watching some guy in a big hat make a train out of an onion. Friggin’ genius, that is. It was also sad though, because said guy did not let me catch a shrimp in my mouth. See, I’m really awesome at catching stuff in my mouth, and I lost out on the opportunity to totally impress my wife and give her another reason to be proud of me.
What else….oh yeah, there was this Catholic Bishop in Green Bay, WI, who wrote a letter to his parisioners about the upcoming election. In it, he advised his flock that one’s religious beliefs should actually impact one’s life outside of church. Novel concept, I know. As a result, the Bishop recommended that voting for a pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia, pro-gay marriage candidate should probably not be done, since all three positions are in stark contrast to what the Bible teaches. The only reason this is news is because Catholics have an inexplicable history of voting for
baby killers liberals.
And let’s not forget about the dumpster fire that is Benghazi. On Saturday, Retired Army Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer told Fox News that he has sources in the military that told him Obama watched the entire attack go down via live feed from a drone flying over the scene. No word on whether Barry had butter on his popcorn though. Yes, my many liberal readers, I can hear you now: “Oh, but that’s Fox News. You can’t believe them.” Well, usually I would attempt to corroborate their reporting with “objective” media outlets, except that hasn’t been possible in this case.
And then there’s the report going around the interwebs about General Carter Ham, commander of the U.S. Africa Command, being forcefully retired because he attempted to disobey orders and send military assistance to Benghazi. By now you know that everybody and their mother received real-time emails from a CIA outpost that an attack was taking place, and when some Navy Seals attempted to go and help, they were repeatedly told to stand down. Of course, the Seals went anyway, and saved approximately 30 people before being blown up by terrorists after seven hours of fighting. The new rumor is that Gen. Ham, who was in a position to provide assistance, was fired when he attempted to do something other than complain about running out of Goobers. These may just be rumors, but it is a strange coincidence that he would “retire” at this specific point in history.
Of course, the best person to ask about what happened in Benghazi on September 11 would be the Commander in Chief. He’s too busy “bringing folks to justice” to take questions though. Exit quote:
Ultimately, as commander in chief, I’m responsible, and I don’t shy away from that responsibility. My number one responsibility is to go after folks who did this and we’re going to make sure that we get them. I’ve got a pretty good track record doing that.
In other words, the Prez is responsible. The buck stops with him. And at some point, long after the election, he’ll let everyone know that there was a serious communication breakdown somewhere, that absolutely positively did not involve him, and it will never happen again. But please don’t ask him about it right now, because he’s busy. Why don’t we all just do him a favor, and remove the heavy burden of being president from his shoulders. After that, he’ll no longer have to go through the strain of dodging questions.
I split-screened the Tigers-Yankees game and the presidential debate last night. Actually, I had the debate on t.v. with the game on the computer. I did the best I could to keep up with both, but with Verlander being Verlander, there wasn’t a whole lot going on in the game. Here’s a list of the things I learned last night:
1. Justin Verlander is a stud, and obviously worthy of Kate Upton’s love and affection. Tigers one win away from World Series.
2. Gas prices are low when the country is about to go into a horrible recession. Prices are apparently 100% higher when the economy is still terrible. If you don’t understand this, it’s because you’re stupid. Obviously.
3. Barry hasn’t actually been our president for the past four years. It’s been Congress…or Hilary Clinton…or maybe the CIA. Except for that whole killing Bin Laden thing. That was all Barry.
4. Barry has a fantastic economic plan that, while entirely devoid of details, is way better than Mittens’.
5. Barry definitely used the word “terror” the day after four Americans were killed in Libya. While it wasn’t used in the context of actual terrorism in Libya, it is possible he was referring to Sharktopus.
6. Mittens has a binder full of women.
7. Automatic weapons should be illegal in America. They’re ok in Mexico.
8. Barry’s private answer on why his administration failed to provide adequate security for our embassy in Libya was apparently better than his public answer, says the guy who asked the question:
Obama’s retail politics left an impression on Ladka: ‘I appreciate his private answer more than his public answer,’ he says.
9. Rich people suck , and they should be taxed more.
10. Mittens stared into the soul of the kid asking the first question. No, seriously,
‘Mitt Romney’s first answer — I felt like he was staring into my soul, just right through me, when he was asking me the question.’
11. Barry raged against the alleged Gender Pay Inequality Machine with the Lilly Ledbetter Act. This resulted in absolutely no change in the alleged inequality.
12. Barry’s love and respect for his single mother has lead to him paying female employees less than male employees at the White House.
13. People who are threatening to assassinate Mittens if he wins like to leave a papertrail for the Feds.
14. Mittens has more money in his pension than Barry does, and spends more time looking at it…just like this guy:
15. Barry’s economic plan is not built on government creating jobs.
16. Barry’s “jobs bill” involves taking tax-payer money and giving it to govt. agencies to hire people.
17. Barry kept his promise to pass a comprehensive immigration law by doing nothing about immigration.
18. Phil Coke has a filthy slider. I added that because my wife hates it when I use the term “filthy” to describe a pitch.
It’s been a period of inactivity here at Why Not Nashville? I’m busy watching the RNC, getting ready for watching football (yes, that does take preparation), and doing some other very important things that you will get to hear about in the near future. Despite my failure to write you love letters for some time, don’t think I have forgotten about you, my loyal readers.
Much has taken place since last we spoke. For one, Paul Ryan, who this blog often discusses with reverence, has been tapped as The Mitt’s VP pick. I was, not unexpectedly, elated. Two nights ago, Mr. Ryan gave his VP acceptance speech at the RNC. Despite “not watching,” or “not caring,” or “actually taking a shower,” the libs are all up in arms about certain claims made about The One. The talking points have obviously gone out about Lyin’ Ryan and his, well, “lies.” Let’s look at those lies, shall we?
1. Ryan accuses Barry of closing down GM plant.
During his speech, Ryan recalled one of Barry’s moving 2008 speeches. During his monologue, then-candidate Barry, stood in front of a GM plant in Janesville, WI and said the government would keep the plant around for 100 years. As you likely guessed, it shut its doors about four months into the Obama presidency. The knee jerkers on the left then proceeded to claim that the plant had been closed in December 2008, during the Bush presidency, and therefore, Ryan LIED. You’ll note one thing about these claims: they’re all entirely unsupported. Is it a lie? Well, let’s ask the local news:
So, yeah, it’s true. Next.
2. Taxpayers didn’t get anything from the stimulus
Ryan didn’t say we didn’t get anything out of the stimulus. He said we got debt. Which is something. It’s something that sucks. Of course, the left claims this is a lie because, according to the CBO, 3.3 million jobs were created. What Ryan said isn’t so much a lie as an opinion. If we created 10 temporary jobs, but spent $25 million of taxpayer money to do it, is that a success? I guess it depends on what side of the aisle you’re on. Being that I’m on the right side, I don’t see how spending almost $800 billion to get 3.3 million temporary jobs is worth it. If I accept the CBO’s numbers as a fact, which I don’t since I don’t know what constitutes a “job created,” we still spent a ridiculous amount of money per job. And was it all worth it? Not even economists can agree:
Economists are less unified, however, on the question of whether the short-term benefits of the stimulus were worth the long-term cost. In the same February survey, only 46 percent of economic experts agreed that ‘the benefits of the stimulus will end up exceeding its costs” — including “the economic costs of raising taxes to pay for the spending.’
I guess we should ask Barry if it was a success. Let’s remember, it was The One who sold us on the stimulus, claiming unemployment would not rise past 8% if enacted. That estimate was a bit off. Bottom line: whether the stimulus was worth it is in the eye of the beholder, but Ryan’s statement is certainly not a lie.
3. Obamacare puts the Feds in charge of healthcare
Again, it depends on how you want to view Obamacare. It is a single-payer, socialist system? No. Not yet anyway. Let’s not forget when Barney Frank said it was the first step towards single-payer. In any event, what is Obamacare? It’s a system that forces private insurance companies to take on all comers, regardless of the fact that they might have scurvy, while not charging them for the limes in their Corona. In fact, the insurance companies can’t even raise rates without the federal govt. okaying it, regardless of whether there’s a lime shortage due to global climate change/warming/cooling. And the plan provides govt. subsidies for, well, almost everyone. While the feds may not be in charge of healthcare yet, Obamacare has certainly given them a substantial seat at the table.
4. Ryan blames Obama for the credit downgrade
The lefties claim it wasn’t Barry, but instead, was the dirty House Republicans playing chicken with the fiscal cliff, or because of chickens coming home to roost, or something about Chik-Fil-A. Well, what Standard and Poors actually said was:
The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics.
* * *
Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government’s debt dynamics any time soon.
In other words, America has a giant debt problem and the morons in charge of our govt. don’t care and won’t do anything about it. And if we all remember, it wasn’t the Republicans who were saying no to spending cuts (at least not this time). So, not a lie.
5. Ryan hints that Obama’s a Socialist
What the hell does that mean? Did he wink or something when talking about how much Barry loves suitcases of unmarked bills? In any event, it sounds like he was just saying what we’re already thinking. In any event, not a lie; it’s an opinion. Just kidding. It’s a fact.
I thought the left’s response to Ryan’s speech awesome, by the way. It shows they’re scared. In fact, they’re so terrified that people are going to like Paul Ryan that they have to invent lies that are easily debunked by the Google.
And then there’s Clint Eastwood. The libs are furious. I’m not sure why. For a guy everyone says was embarrassing, they’re sure spending a lot of time criticizing him. What’s so objectionable about a bumbling actor saying, hey, the guy in the White House is kinda’ stinkin’ up the joint, so why don’t we hire the guy with the sterling business record? Sounds pretty reasonable.
So what have we learned? When you mix Paul Ryan and Clint Eastwood, you get this:
Supreme Court Strikes Down Most of Arizona Immigration Law Because Federal Govt. is Taking Care of It.
The ruling sucks. And don’t let anyone tell you that the “key provision” is still alive. No it isn’t. The only part that’s left is the provision that allows officers to try and figure out if someone they arrested for something else is here illegally. Big Deal. They still can’t arrest someone for being here illegally. Why? Because that’s the federal government’s job. And don’t get me wrong; it is the federal government’s job. The Constitution states that immigration is the job of the federal government. What happens when the federal government fails in its job, however? In his dissenting opinion, Justice Scalia offers the following:
A Federal Government that does not want to enforce the immigration laws as written, and leaves the States’ borders unprotected against immigrants whom those laws would exclude. So the issue is a stark one. Are the sovereign States at the mercy of the Federal Executive’s refusal to enforce the Nation’s immigration laws?
Scalia is obviously calling out the Obama Administration here, although it could be equally levied at the Bush Administration. The obvious problem with only allowing the Feds to handle illegal immigration is that they aren’t doing it. And to be more specific, the Executive Branch, i.e., the Barry Administration, isn’t doing it.
Civics flashback: The Legislative Branch creates law. The Executive Branch enforces law. Congress has passed legislation regarding illegal immigration. In fact, the language of Arizona’s law is virtually identical to federal law dealing with illegals. It’s Obama’s job to enforce the immigration laws that are on the books. And we’re not just talking about tossing the illegals out, but taking steps to keep them out. While it has been deporting people, it has taken no steps to control the border. And let’s not forget Obama’s proclamation made last week about no longer deporting anyone who meets certain qualifications. In other words, in his effort to pander to the growing Latino population, Barry has decided to stop enforcing the law.
All of this creates an intriguing issue for the States, particularly the ones on the border. They can’t build their own wall, they can’t patrol their own borders, and now they can’t arrest illegals for being there illegally. What is to be done about an administration that has expressly told everyone that it is no longer going to enforce the law? I’m not sure. It will probably involve several States suing the Department of Homeland Security, for its willful failure to enforce the law. Whatever happens, it’s going to take a lot of time and money, and all because we have a radical President who only enforces the laws that suit his ideology.
Well, everybody else is saying it, so why not us? “Most Transparent Administration Ever.” Hahahahahaha. Not quite.
We’ve commented before about “Fast and Furious,” the Dept. of Justice operation that resulted in large numbers of guns landing in the hands of Mexican drug cartels, that ultimately killed a U.S. border patrol agent. Well, the House of Representatives has been trying to get to the bottom of whether Eric Holder, head of the DOJ, knew about the operation. In its effort to figure that out, the House subpoenaed records from the DOJ…which was met with a lot of inaction. So the House is about to have a vote on whether to hold Holder in contempt for failing to produce required docs. So what does Holder do? He calls up his boss. And what does the Most Transparent President Ever do? Be completely transparent, if by “transparent” you mean the exact opposite:
President Obama on Wednesday invoked executive privilege to withhold from a Congressional oversight committee some documents and communications among his advisers regarding the failed gun enforcement operation known as ‘Fast and Furious,’ in which weapons purchased in the United States were allowed to cross into Mexico.
And by “some documents,” we mean thousands. Why would the President do this? Well, a letter from Holder to The One may shed some light on it:
In a letter to Obama seeking the assertion of executive privilege, Holder said the documents involved related to the Justice Department’s ‘response to congressional oversight and related media inquiries,’ and that release of internal executive branch documents would have ‘significant, damaging consequences.’
You know what the letter doesn’t say? What those “significant, damaging consequences” are. I think that’s pretty telling. You know what else is telling? The fact that the President hasn’t even seen the documents for which he’s asserting the privilege. If this were happening in a court of law, such shenanigans are sanctionable.
Personally, I find all of this to be interesting, hilarious, and infuriating all at the same time. Interesting: What happens if the head of the DOJ is found in contempt (probably not much)? Hilarious: Obama asserting a privilege over documents he’s never seen, and that obviously contain some juicy info. concerning a bone-headed, Obama Administration program, won’t help him any with independent voters. Infuriating: That none of the records are actually privileged; that nothing significant will happen to Holder (or Barry); and that we’ll never actually find out anything of substance about how everybody, from Holder to Obama, knew about Fast and Furious, since no one will actually challenge the asserted privilege in court…despite the fact that we, as taxpayers, own every single piece of paper they’re all arguing about in the first place!
At the end of the day, however, this is just one more entry in what will go down as one of, if not the, most corrupt administrations this country has ever seen. So I guess we have that going for us.