"N-n-nooooooo!  Our Narrative...

Our Beautiful, Beautiful Narrative...

You're HURTING It....

Stop It! Go AWAAAAAAY!!!!"

[Note: Title must be read in your best LOTR 'Gollum ' voice]

"White Hispanic" George Zimmerman. Make that "White[r] Hispanic"

Say, remember just 2 months ago when the MSM was relentlessly flogging the Narrative of the TrayVon Martin shooting that:


A large hulking [& possibly intoxicated] 'white Hispanic' stalked, chased, beat up and then shot dead a small tiny black teenager who looked like he was 12 years old?


Yeah. THAT narrative.  The past 2 months as the real evidence has come out has been most unkind to it.  

Yes, just your average big hulking racist cracker there. 

The latest developments:


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/15/Zimmerman-medical-report


Yeah. About all they have left is the futile hope the screaming for help on the 911 audiotapes turns out to be Martin wailing for help while he was breaking Zimmerman's nose, blackening his eyes and smashing his head off the sidewalk/street.  


Good luck with that.  


Earlier in this blog post post I discussed how we could be watching the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case all over again.  This new evidence only compounds that impression. How in the world prosecutor Corey could leave Zimmerman's broken nose and bloody head gashes off this affidavit is beyond me.  It's more likely than ever now that Zimmerman's lawyer is going to get this case thrown out before it even reaches trial.  

Hell of a job there, Angela.

The MSM tried to use it's power and influence to racially inflame this case and the New Media didn't let them do it.  Time and time again the past 2 months they've been exposed & forced to retreat, retract, try again, and fail again.  


Let's hope they got the message: that kind of BS is over.  You can't hype a false narrative for months or weeks any more now that there's a New Media that can show what you are deliberately distorting, omitting & denying.

Just When  You Start To 

Think You Have A Pretty 

Good Grasp Of The

Gargantuan Size Of

Obama's Ego.......

....he's gotta go and do something like this and prove that you still are underestimating it. 

[Gargantuan. Great word. I so rarely get to use it in a sentence.]

It's not enough that this empty suit pontificates on how deeply flawed the US Constitution is because it didn't 'solve' race & gender issues or allow the SCOTUS to get into the wealth redistribution business and all the other stupid stuff he's been saying.  


We apparently still can't grasp just how awesome he is so he has to go and insert himself into the actual effective policies of every President that came before him from Calvin Coolidge onward with the exception of Gerald Ford.  Apparently all of their successes are now Obama's too, at least according to the White House's official website. 


[Nobody wants to remember the Ford Presidency except for the really cool falling down videos.  Oh and the weird Manson family assassination attempts.]

He was, apparently, completely SERIOUS about that claim

As you read the newly inserted blurbs about Obama photo-bombing other President's real accomplishments in this Commentary article by Seth Mandel, try to grasp how arrogant & pathetic this is at the same time: 


http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/05/15/obama-drops-his-name-into-presidential-biographies/

That's Mandel just hitting some highlights there.  Ed Morrissey at Hot Air has a much longer list: 

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/05/15/obama-in-history/

This sort of lame-ass resume padding just underscores that even Obama's own administration knows what a lightweight he is when it comes to actual accomplishments.  Nothing new here, anybody who's watched his career is well aware he's advanced up the ladder without ever really leaving a mark behind him anywhere. 

Remember this priceless moment? 

"Well he did write two awesome books about himself. 

So there's that."

And now 3 1/2 years into his term as President of the United States even his own team knows how inconsequential he's been so they are trying to pad his resume this way. 

Please. Think of the children!

Yeah, About that Evil Drone Strike Program Developed & Implemented Under The Bush Administration

It wasn't.  

Anybody else catch this on 60 Minutes this past Sunday night?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/05/14/60-minutes-clinton-administration-passed-opportunity-kill-bin-laden-1

Lara Logan, CBS: That mission actually began five years before 9/11. That's when the CIA set up what became Hank Crumpton's special unit tasked with finding Osama bin Laden.

Hank Crumpton, Former Deputy Director of the CIA'S Counter-Terrorism Center: From '98, '99 all the way up to 2001, the warnings were there, the in--

Lara Logan: So through the Clinton administration, to the Bush administration? 

Hank Crumpton: Yes, yes. We had extensive human networks in Afghanistan, Afghan sources that had been reporting on al Qaeda, on the presence of bin Laden. 

[But Crumpton says the Clinton White House didn't trust the CIA's Afghan sources alone and they wanted U.S. eyes on the target. ]

Hank Crumpton: So we were driven to look at various technical options. And we looked at a range of things. Long-range optics, they were too heavy, too cumbersome to get over the mountains. We looked at balloons. The prevailing winds would take those balloons to China. That would be a bad thing. We scrapped that. And then we stumbled across the UAVs, particularly the Predator. And sure enough, wasn't long before we had the Predator in theater over Afghanistan, the Predator unarmed at the time. And our human sources took us to a village-- far-- not far from Kandahar. 

Lara Logan: And what did you see there? 

Hank Crumpton: We saw a security detail, a convoy and we saw bin Laden exit the vehicle. 

Lara Logan: Clearly?

Hank Crumpton: Clearly. And we had-- the optics were spot on. It was beaming back to us, CIA headquarters. We immediately alerted the White House. And the Clinton administration's response was, "Well, it will take several hours for the TLAMs, the cruise missiles launched from submarines, to reach that objective. So you need to tell us where bin Laden will be five or six hours from now." The frustration was enormous. 

Lara Logan: So at that moment you wanted to kill him? 

Hank Crumpton: Yes. 

Lara Logan: But you couldn't get permission? 

Hank Crumpton: Correct. 

[He couldn't get permission to do anything, including allowing the CIA's Afghan agents on the ground to attack bin Laden's compound. That missed opportunity in the late summer of 1999, led Crumpton and his CIA team to figure out how to arm the Predator drone with hellfire missiles. ]

"Er...what?! What are you telling me here?

Hold on...I need to second to process this...."

Lara Logan: So the Predator drone strikes that take place in the tribal areas of Pakistan today are a direct result of what happened when you had Osama bin Laden in your sights in Afghanistan and no way to kill him yourselves? 

Hank Crumpton: It was a response to the lack of response on the part of the administration or DOD. So the handful of CIA officers that we had, in great frustration, we began the discussion of, "Okay. We find him again we will have to engage ourselves. And we'll have to do it right then, right there."

So the CIA launched it's own initiative to arm drones with missiles before Bush even entered office.  And Clinton's refusal to take any risks in getting Bin Laden was the impetus.

In fact, not only did Predator strikes with Hellfire missiles start as a direct result of the Clinton administration's refusal to move against Bin Laden, someone in the comments at NewsBusters points out something ELSE Bush is always blamed for starting up when that wasn't the case: 

I've been Googling trying to find examples of the Bush admin trying to blame Clinton for the drone & rendition policies.  Not having much luck.  After Clarke released his book there was a tacit, fast acknowledgement about rendition starting under Clinton and then the media train just passed it right by and memory-holed it.  

With all the grief Bush got for over 6 years over these policies, and the fallout from the Left Obama has dealt with for continuing the selfsame policies, the fact they actually began on Clinton's watch is relevant.  

Over 46,000 Visitors In Less Than 

2 Months!

Thanks To Every One Who Visited!

Since the blog went up late on the afternoon of March 16th, here's how it's done: 

Thought it'd take me me this long just to get to 100 regular visitors a day.  It's clearing about 450 a day right now.  Thanks again to all my followers on Twitter for RT'ing post announcements and sending eyeballs my way! 

Let's keep pressing on to November & beyond because the stakes could not be higher! 

The Associated Press Is Up To It's 

Old Tricks In It's Polls

The oldest trick in the book when slanting your polls to create the results you want is to oversample one party over another and then report the results as 'news'.  


Party ID between Democrats & Republicans is currently pretty close.  In 2008 Obama won by 7 points.  

Note that out of 7 national polls, only 2 give Obama a lead outside the margin of error of 3 - 3.9% (MOE).  Romney leads, ties or is within the MOE in five of them. 


So what was the sampling/weighting in the AP poll that presently claims Obama has a +8 advantage? 


http://surveys.ap.org/data/GfK/AP-GfK%20Poll%20May%202012%20Topline%20final_2012eln.pdf


How about a whopping 12+ point advantage to Democrats?  

Remove the leaners and the results look like this: 

So with leaners a +12 pt advantage for Dems, and without leaners a +9 pt advantage.  

To get an idea of how much Party ID fluctuates between elections, here's Gallup's results on that the past few years: 

2008:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113947/Democrats-2008-Advantage-Party-Largest.aspx

Dems hold a +8 advantage, their biggest since 1983. 

2009: 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/123362/Independents-Lean-GOP-Party-Gap-Smallest-Since-05.aspx

Poll taken in Sept. 2009 & Dem advantage has shrunk to +6.

2010:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145463/Democratic-Party-Drops-2010-Tying-Year-Low.aspx 

From that high in 2008 to a 22 year low in 2010. Lead shrinks from +8 to just +2, thanks to Obamacare, the Stimulus Bill, etc. Thanks Barack, Pelosi & Reid! Awesome job there! With Indies swinging to the Republicans, Dems get handed a historic shellacking in the 2010 mid-terms. 

2011: 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/151943/Record-High-Americans-Identify-Independents.aspx

According to Gallup, Dems +4 in late 2011

So - quick recap.  Democrat's Party ID advantage:

2008: +8

2009: +6

2010: +2

2011: +4

So the AP expects people to believe that the Democrat Party advantage has surged to over double what it was last year to +9 or more?  

Laughable.  Note as you read the end of the PDF the AP mentions they also weighted their sample but does not say HOW or in which direction.  How much did they swing the weighting of the sample to get a +9 Dem advantage & how much did that affect the +8 lead the poll gives Obama over Romney?

To get an accurate poll they need a sample that mirrors the current electorate, which would give Dem's a +4 Party ID advantage at best.  Instead they more than double that to an absurd +9.  

To get Obama above the 3.9 MOE, they have to resort to this?  Can't wait to see how big the skewing of the sample gets the next few months.  

This Just In: 

Progressives Shocked 

[SHOCKED!!11!!] 

To Discover Yet AGAIN 

That Jacking Up Tax Rates 

Does NOT Increase Tax Revenue

Alternate Headline: Dems In CA Plan To Raise Taxes Again To Create New Tax Revenue After Last Year's Tax Increases Failed To Generate Any New Tax Revenue

How do I convince Californians this happened because

the rich still aren't paying their fair share? 

They actually make this amazing new discovery every single time they raise the tax rates.  It's almost as if they can never learn anything from experience or something.


http://news.yahoo.com/california-facing-higher-16-billion-shortfall-213905732--finance.html

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's budget deficit has swelled to a projected $16 billion — much larger than had been predicted just months ago — and will force severe cuts to schools and public safety if voters fail to approve tax increases in November, Gov. Jerry Brown said Saturday.

The Democratic governor said the shortfall grew from $9.2 billion in January in part because tax collections have not come in as high as expected and the economy isn't growing as fast as hoped for. The deficit has also risen because lawsuits and federal requirements have blocked billions of dollars in state cuts.

"This means we will have to go much farther and make cuts far greater than I asked for at the beginning of the year," Brown said in an online video. "But we can't fill this hole with cuts alone without doing severe damage to our schools. That's why I'm bypassing the gridlock and asking you, the people of California, to approve a plan that avoids cuts to schools and public safety."

Brown did not release details of the newly calculated deficit Saturday, but he is expected to lay out a revised spending plan Monday. The new plan for the fiscal year that starts July 1 hinges in large part on voters approving higher taxes.

Got that? Just 4 months ago the politicians in Sacramento figured their budget deficit this year would top 9.2 billion. It's MAY and they just got around to realizing, oh hey turns out we were off by about 7 billion or so.

"Look, I know we said $9.2 billion just 4 months ago. 

That was before the taxpayers of this state f**ed up our plans....."

So what's Gov. Moonbeam's solution to getting those darn tax revenues higher again? You'll NEVER guess: 

The governor has said those tax increases are needed to help pull the state out of a crippling decade shaped by the collapse of the housing market and recession. Without them, he warned, public schoolsand colleges, and public safety, will suffer deeper cuts.

"What I'm proposing is not a panacea, but it goes a long way toward cleaning up the state's budget mess," Brown said.

Democrats, who control the Legislature, have resisted Brown's proposed cuts so far this year. Republican lawmakers criticized the majority party for building in overly optimistic tax revenues.

CA. Gov. Jerry Brown stunned to find out all that 

new $ from last year's tax hikes that they already spent never materialized

So without getting any cuts done, Democrats in CA have continued to spend like drunken sailors without bothering to notice - or care if they did notice - businesses & rich taxpayers are fleeing their state in droves.  Their taxable base is shrinking. So they'll just...keep raising taxes on the suckers that are left.  

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/03/companies-leaving-california-in-record.html


For most Progressives, raising tax rates isn't about generating more revenue for the State to use in the first place. It's about 'fairness', not results.  But even the Progressives in CA. are being forced to realize that when you raise the rates you change people's economic activity and you end up collecting less.  


Bruce Bartlett wrote a long and definitive refutation of the belief that raising tax rates generates more tax revenue for the State to spend: 


http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-192.html


Tom Trinko at American Thinker also investigates the idea that higher taxes = greater revenues. 


http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/raising_taxes_not_revenue.html


Progressives don't learn from the actual history of what happens when tax rates go up because they are THEORY-oriented people who fall in love with an IDEA.  The study of actual RESULTS - experience - does absolutely nothing to float their boat.  Despite all the evidence to the contrary, they will continue to insist there is no valid reason why their theory won't work THIS time.  


Even with the evidence staring them in the face in CA. that tax rates are already too high, all the Progressives can come up with is raising the rates yet again as they refuse to understand the people with the money will simply either change their economic activity or leave the state altogether.  

When CA collapses financially, they had better not be expecting a bailout from Washington.  What really WOULD be unfair would be expecting taxpayers from states like Texas and Wisconsin who have taken steps to wisely handle their own finances to send billions of their tax money to rescue a state where taxpayers insisted on putting Progressives in charge that refused to practice any sort of fiscal sanity at all.  Voters in CA kept putting these big spenders/big taxers in charge.  They'll have to live with the consequences of that.  

So How's The 'Shiny Object' 

Distraction Strategy Working 

For Obama?

Not too good.


Romney's Lead Now Up To 8 Points

That sound you hear is the nice safe cocoon-like bubbles that Progressives live in popping loudly all over the country.  After almost a full year of their chort-chort-chortling that nobody in the Republican field had even the remotest chance of beating Prince Hope N' Change, a big heaping dose of reality is starting to land on them.  

Now if  you'll look where I'm pointing, instead of seeing 

the economy, you'll be looking at Mitt Romney holding a pair

of scissors 50 years ago.........

So after months of

1. The War on Women
2. Ann Romney's clothes
3. The Car Elevator
4. The Swiss Bank Account
5. Eeeevil Bain Capital
6. The Sudden Fascination With Mormonism
7. 50 Year Old High School Pranks

THIS is where we're at?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! AAAAAH.......HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!

Keep up the good work, you spinning idiots!

Can't wait to see what shiny objects they come up with over the next 5 months.  

How about you?

UPDATE:  In the top 7 national polls looked at by Real Clear Politics, Romney has a lead, is tied or is within the margin of error (+/- 3%) in 5 of them.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html