This is what former Vice President Al Gore might say after being injected with truth serum.
(Click picture to enlarge)
With a population of about 2 million, King County, Washington is the 13th most populous county in the country. Since liberals like to fixate on matters of race, here is part of the racial makeup of the county. There are more Asians than Latinos or Hispanics, and the black population is less than half that of either Asians or Hispanics. It could be said that King County is one of the most white counties in the entire country.
The county seat is the city of Seattle, a city that would be less liberal if some of its residents would only return to the places where they were born.
In late 1882 King County was formed and named after William Rufus DeVane King who was Vice President at the time. There is some indication that Rufus King was gay.
In 1986 a disgraceful and racist motion introduced by Ron Sims (a black Democrat and a crook) changed the naming of the county in disrespect of Rufus King and in honor of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
- Excerpt from motion:
A MOTION setting forth the historical basis for “renaming” King County after the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., instead of William Rufus DeVane King for whom King County is currently named.
WHEREAS, the County of King in the State of Washington was named after William Rufus Devane King by the Oregon Territorial legislature in 1852, and
WHEREAS, William Rufus DeVane King was a slaveowner and a “gentle slave monger” according to John Quincy Adams, and
WHEREAS, the citizens of King County believe that the ownership of another human being is an injustice against humanity, and
WHEREAS, William Rufus DeVane King earned income and maintained his lifestyle by oppressing and exploiting other human beings, and
I’ll bet you thought that only Communists and Bolsheviks showed disrespect for their historical figures, pulled down statues and renamed places according to the latest political whim. But remember it is the Seattle neighborhood of Fremont where a statue of the Communist scumbag, Vladimir Lenin, stands.
So we dis Rufus King, and honor MLK because Rufus King owned slaves. But wait a minute, are we not going to rename the State of Washington? After all, George Washington owned slaves most of his life.
But it gets better, Chief Seattle owned slaves too, he owned eight of them when white men first arrived in the region. I guess we will have to create another shameful motion that disrespects Chief Seattle, and renames the city to some new politically correct figure. How about Mumia Jamal City?
Since when do we hold the people from our past to the more enlightened standards of today? Welcome to “Political Correctness Gone Wild”.
Let’s have a look at The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., an affirmative action plastic god if ever there was one.
MLK visited King County only once, to deliver a speech at the University of Washington. He was only here for a few days. His scholastic record is tarnished with charges of plagiarism. It is alleged that he used the works of others without attribution.
We have had many famous people in our history. Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln were arguably far more important than MLK. But MLK has a holiday in his honor, and these other great men share a single holiday.
White liberals attempt to assuage their white guilt by elevating MLK to a status the man does not deserve. White liberals are terrified of black people becoming violent. So MLK’s non-violence was something they desperately wanted to promote as well. Granted MLK made some fine speeches, but the only reason so many things are named in his honor was because of the color of his skin.
Former King County Executive, Ron Sims, left another enduring mark upon King County, Washington. He changed our voting method to mail-in only. Now, liberals need not fear conservative voters. And conservative voters in King County can no longer be confident their votes will be counted.
“It’s not the people who vote that count. It’s the people who count the votes.” (Sometimes attributed to Josef Stalin)
If someone were to ask you whom King County, Washington was named for, just tell them it was ORIGINALLY named in honor of William Rufus DeVane King.
Mention mandate, directive, or requirement and many progressive liberals have a Pavlovian reaction, they salivate and some even drool.
What is it that causes them have this apparently irresistible and neurotic desire for centralized government control?
Conversely, mention self reliance (especially self defense), or self determination and many liberals will visibly bristle. Their emotional reaction to such a notion is consistent with someone who perceives a personal threat.
Why is it that progressive liberals so strongly favor a tightly controlled population? Why are liberals such central control freaks?
One possible reason is that progressives and liberals are “order freaks”.
Liberals and progressives may be suffering from Ataxophobia, the fear of disorder.
For them society is much too chaotic, much too disorderly. A chaotic society is more difficult to understand, perhaps impossible to understand. The chaos of free capitalism is a fearsome thing for them. The order of Marxism, Communism, or Socialism (even Fascism) is far less fearsome. Thus it is much easier to comprehend and understand.
Never mind that these systems never seem to function as planned. Never mind that such concentrated power inevitably becomes dictatorial and even brutal and murderous. Never mind that personal freedom and individual rights are usually sacrificed for some notion of a “common good”. The liberal/progressive mind has such a neurotic fear of chaos that none of these horrible side effects seem to matter.
The choice is one of almost pure emotion, a knee-jerk reaction to the fear of chaos and disorder. Logical arguments, like the history of concentrated government power are simply ignored. Liberals are so afraid of chaos and unpredictability that they are virtually blind to the threat of big government tyranny.
Liberals often cite the fallibility of human beings, the fact that capitalism is driven by greed, and that greed and ambition often drive people to exploit and abuse others. But they seem oblivious to the fact that strong authoritarian statist systems suffer from the same human fallibilities. The same humans who run big corporations also run big governments. To varying degrees, a lot of the same greed and ambition drives all of these people.
It can be argued that when comparing political leaders to corporate leaders, corporations are considerably better at attracting talent. Corporations are somewhat less likely to attract the corrupt, and corporations considerably better at attracting natural leaders.
There is a reason why we strive to distribute authority, and why we try to create systems with checks and balances. This is because we recognize that humans are imperfect, and that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The fear of chaos and disorder is emotional and irrational, and it leads people toward the false security of big government tyranny.
You have to laugh at these terminally stupid Seattle liberals. But it really isn’t funny, this is the kind of stupidity that gets people killed. Sandy Hook Elementary School was a Gun Free Zone, the Century 16 multiplex in Arizona where 12 people died and 70 were injured was also a Gun Free Zone.
Most armed robbers and mass murdering nuts are also cowards. They want to avoid any place where someone is likely to shoot back. Gun-grabbing NAZI states like New York have rendered their citizens helpless and incapable of defending themselves. The cowardly racist nut who opened up on the passengers of a Long Island Railroad commuter train knew he was less likely to encounter return fire.
If you live in Seattle and find a business displaying this sign, perhaps you should inform them that it makes both patrons and employees less safe, not more safe. Tell them you will try to minimize the time you spend in a place which advertises that everyone is unarmed.
This is so typical of liberal lunacy. They set out to solve a problem, but the idiotic way in which they go about it usually exacerbates the problem. When the solution involves government, the attempt at a solution often wastes a lot of money while simultaneously making the problem worse. Liberals also seem to salivate at any solution that curtails individual rights and freedoms.
“Please allow me to come in and demonstrate the 1935 Marx-O-Matic Suckmaster Deluxe, the vacuum that didn’t work then and doesn’t work now. Let’s just pretend it really works. And if it doesn’t work we can always blame someone else.
Let’s also ignore the fact that it has already killed over 100 million people.
This model is guaranteed to make you Hope for Change.”
This is a familiar claim made by some on the left, and it does not stand up to scrutiny.
Remember that many on the right are supply-siders. We know that reducing taxes will often spur an economy. We know this because it has been proven out a number of times. The most recent example would be the Bush tax cuts of 2003. GDP growth increased considerably after these cuts.
Income and Capital Gains tax revenue also increased. These cuts did not cost us, they did not increase the deficit, that is another common liberal lie.
Conversely, tax hikes are often recessionary, this is basic Economics 101 stuff.
If I were in the GOP controlled congress and I really wanted to sabotage the economy, I could do it easily. All I would have to do get a bill passed that increased the upper marginal income tax rate (and only the upper rate) to 40%. Then I would increase the Capital Gains tax to 25%.
By the way, for those of you who are (NEA union goon) math challenged, that is a 67% increase, not a 10% increase. Here is the math:
((25/15) -1) * 100 = 67% increase
If the Republicans in congress were not patriots, and if they were willing to make the country suffer to damage Barack Obama that is all they would have to do, raise taxes. Isn’t this what Barack Obama says he wants?
Do you really think the Democratically controlled Senate would be stupid enough to actually pass a similar bill? Do you actually think Barack Obama would sign it?
I tend to think that even these poor misguided demand-side Keynesian fools would know better than to increase these taxes. But these hypocrites will still attempt to make people believe that tax increases would help reduce the deficit.
I think Barack Obama is clearly an economic illiterate, he must have been cutting class and smoking crack when he should have been attending lectures. So it is possible that he would go along with such foolish increases.
The result would be dramatic, and Americans would suffer economically far more than they are suffering now.
This silly claim is probably a matter of projection on the part of liberals and progressives. For them their cause is more of a pseudo-religion. Progressives would be far more likely to take action that would do great harm to the country, if they thought it would further their “noble” cause. Progressives are notably more un-American and anti-American. They are quite capable of putting their ideology ahead of their country. Republicans and conservatives are far less likely to put their ideology ahead of their country.
The most important question is: Who broke the economy?
The best evidence is that this is more the doing of a big and intrusive government than it is Wall Street.
But dishonest leftist progressives are desperate not to be blamed for the mess they did so much to help create. If voters swallow this dishonest spin, more progressives will be elected and the economic suffering will be prolonged.
How long must Americans suffer before they get wise to the failure of big-government liberal policy? If we want less government corruption, we need to work for a smaller government.
It is foolish to expect a party that is so vehemently anti-business to have a clue about how to encourage business. It is foolish to expect people as dishonest as many of those on the far left to admit their own culpability.
It is insanity to suggest raising taxes on anyone in a soft economy. If the GOP really wanted to sabotage the economy they would do exactly what Barack Obama is asking. The Barack Obama presidency will go down in history as a huge economic failure.
Perhaps some of these protesters can read and comprehend signs.
America is the only West left. Europe has never been big on guaranteeing freedom and individual rights.
Europe can rejoin the West after they have deployed their own Tea Parties. Over the decades the New World has robbed Europe of too many of their best thinkers and doers. What remains in Europe is a statistically higher incidence of lazy, non-thinking, corrupt losers, and freeloaders. (Europe may be slowly recovering from this brain drain, but it could take a very long time, maybe forever. The huge influx of Muslims, and their lack of assimilation does not bode well for the EU either.)
Socialism/Marxism/Progressivism always fails. Obama has given America a priceless gift, a graphic demonstration of the failure of leftist/statist policies.
America exists (and thrives) to a large degree because of the failures (over time) of Europe.
(The writer dumped on the US, so Izzy decided to dump on the EU a bit. ROTFL)
Check out this choice quote:
“Take the Tea Party, which has enjoyed godfather-like bankrolling from brothers and billionaire industrialists David and Charles Koch and found a mouthpiece in Rupert Murdoch’s populist, hatred-stirring Fox News.”
Hah! The Tea Party is one of the most grassroots movements recently seen in the USA. And this leftist whiner from the political side of George Soros has the chutzpah (and the familiar leftist dishonesty) to accuse the Tea Party of being funded by some evil force. The writer is obviously way-off on the uber-left and angry at the US right-wingers.
(Give it up. Show us some real evidence or stop wasting our time.)
I listen to Progressive Talk Radio a lot. Liberals are livid and whining loudly. This is a very positive indication for the future of the West, and maybe even the EU.
Imagine someday in the future we will have a balanced budget, smaller government, and lower taxes. Visualize limited government, a very important aspect of preserving our freedom.
Join me, and hold my hand brothers and sisters. Close your eyes, and visualize. Visualize (and imagine) true human compassion has once again replaced involuntary seizure and redistribution.
Maybe not in my lifetime, but the Tea Party is headed in the right general direction.
The “Buck Passer in Chief” once again illustrates his dishonesty and his typical liberal cowardice. Liberals are desperate to avoid any blame for the current economic conditions, even though they are to a large degree responsible.
This is what liberals are about:
1) Unabashed dishonesty in support of their cause
2) Always attempting to blame others for the consequences of their disastrous policies
3) Total inability to take responsibility for their actions
4) Promoting policy that is anti-growth, anti-business, and anti-employment
How long must America suffer before throwing these leftist bums out?
Will the Democrats ever abandon their liberal/progressive “religion” in favor of honest, intelligent, rational, and logical thought? (I had to laugh as I typed that.)
Nuking yet another liberal lie, “Medicare is more cost-efficient than those evil for-profit private health insurance plans.”
Oh those evil corporations, making a disgraceful 4% average profit.
The truth is when you look at administrative costs correctly Medicare is more expensive, and less money gets to the patient. This is true even though private insurers incur taxes of about 2-4%.
And when you factor in the cost of fraud, then there is no contest, about 10% of Medicare cost is wasted in fraud.
Honestly now, how often have you ever seen a public sector service that could out-perform the private sector?
Given the fundamental importance of maintaining a limited government, how much more cost-efficient would the public option need to be for it to be justified? Even if Medicare were more efficient (instead of less) how much additional efficiency over the private sector would a public option need to achieve in order to make it worth the risk? Is there no risk imposed by growing government by that much? The consequences are things like tyranny and corruption, the historically familiar symptoms of a government that has grown too large and powerful.
When liberals and progressives try to tell you Medicare is less expensive, and a public option would be more efficient, just tell them they are once again lying their slimy butts off.
Want another (even more dramatic) comparison? Contrast Social Security with the ordinary interest of an insured bank account. If you had put all the money you and your employer contributed over your working life into an insured bank account instead of Social Security, you would have a comfortable retirement income, not just a measly back-up income. Social Security is an inefficient government gyp, and an enormous waste of money. Government has no business being directly involved in retirement plans, back-up or otherwise. Nor does it have any business getting directly involved in health care or health insurance.
To learn more, read these articles: