View all posts filed under 'Sarcastic'

Not As Far-Fetched As You Might Think…

Wednesday, 19. January 2011 23:27

At a party in Bristol, Connecticut, a 21 year old man named Marc Higgins became so crazed after some teasing that he “went berserk” and stabbed his friend to death. It seems that Marc’s drinking caused a flatulence problem, one that bothered the other guests at the party. As the “farting” and teasing persisted, Marc got frustrated and called a female friend “a tramp”- she then slapped him. He left the party, came back with a few knives and proceeded to stab a number of the party-goers, one of whom died.

The mainstream media is now investigating as to whether or not Sarah Palin was behind the stabbing. They feel that since this happened in Bristol, Connecticut- and she has a daughter named “Bristol”- there is a better than average chance that she is to blame. They also believe that Marc may been inspired to use a knife to stab his friends when he watched Palin “dress” a moose on a recent episode of her TV show.

Keith Olbermann had another take on this situation. Since Marc stabbed five people and Palin has five children, he believes that Marc was a Palin fan. He also noted that both Marc and Sarah Palin have dark hair. Keith was overheard saying, “Coincidences like that just don’t happen. Barack Obama can’t be blamed for the stabbing because he only has two kids.”

Chris Matthews thought that the influence of right-wing talk radio was to blame. “Glenn Beck was a self-avowed alcoholic. He often talks about his drinking problem on his talk show. These kids were all drinking at this party, proving my point that these kids were Beck followers and that Marc was just another angry Tea Party member.”

Liberals are taking to the airwaves to call for an end to all use of knives. In a show of “civility”, they also want to distribute free bottles of “Beano” to anyone making under $250,000 per year.

No word yet on whether or not this will have an effect on the State of the Union seating chart.


Category:Sarcastic, lsm | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Free Speech Comes In Many Shapes And Sizes

Saturday, 4. December 2010 9:57

Did you see the guy in Idaho who built a snowman in his front yard- one that looked an awful lot like a KKK member?

Yup, it was all there, the white robe, the pointy hat, the noose…..

My first impression was to gasp.

I felt a similar reaction when I saw the video of the New Black Panthers at the election place in Philadelphia 2 years ago. They were dressed in black, had on black berets, night sticks in hand….. The only difference between the snowman and the Black Panthers is that the Panthers were REAL and they were intimidating voters, not just physically, but verbally.

The snowman was in a private yard and didn’t speak.

I wonder how Eric Holder feels about the snowman? My gut feeling?….he wouldn’t like it.

The County Sheriffs weren’t too pleased, either, and they gave the “artist”, a guy named Mark, a little visit. It seems that there is a statute in their county that disallows nooses, so Mark was forced to take the noose off of his sculpture.

Let me be clear. This “Mark” guy sounds like a loony-bird. He has a history of doing crazy things like hanging offensive flags in his yard and handing out bullet casings to young children on Halloween. He is not your perfect neighbor. But in a world where our government condones Black Panthers and their night sticks at polling places, can we really press charges against a man who wants to build an offensive snowman in his yard?

Isn’t it just “art”? Liberals are always defending offensive “art”- like the “Piss Christ” exhibit of the 1980′s, the one that depicted a crucifix in the artist’s own urine and won a $10,000 prize from the National Endowment of the Arts. Or how about the offensive piece of “art” which depicted the Virgin Mary in cow dung? Catholics were told to “suck it up” on that one- the artist had every right to depict Mary however he wanted.

There’s been more. A recent exhibit in the Smithsonian which received an incredible amount of publicity before it was removed, showed another crucifix, this one covered in ants.

This, folks, is our tax-payer dollars at work.

At least the KKK snowman didn’t cost us anything and wasn’t given an award by the National Endowment of the Arts.

Here’s another angle: Maybe Mark was merely making a tribute to the late Senator Robert Byrd, a man who wore the Klan hood and was praised at his funeral by Bill Clinton as a great American. You see, according to Clinton, Byrd was “just a country boy from the hills and hollers of West Virginia, he was trying to get elected.”

He was trying to get elected so it was OK for him to wear the hood and recruit others to this racist cause?

Read that again.

Maybe Mark should run for mayor.

Most of us would like to see hate removed from the world. But I’d rather see a KKK snowman standing tall in someone’s private yard than watch our government come in an knock down our freedom of speech brick by brick- snowman by snowman.

Those who live in Idaho, drive by the KKK snowman with your kids and show them what freedom of speech can look like. It’s not always pretty, not always politically correct, not always easy to see, but it’s American….and it’s essential if we want this country to survive.

We, as taxpayers, don’t have to fund it, but when it’s on a man’s private land, we have to respect it.



Category:Sarcastic, constitution, lsm | Comments (58) | Author: lsm

Michelle Obama: A Life Of “Hell”

Monday, 20. September 2010 7:22

Theologians have debated the question for years- “What is Hell” ?

Thanks to Michelle Obama, now we know.

“Hell” appears to be a big white house, a personal staff of 24, a chef, a vegetable garden, a private plane to fly you on 8 vacations in one summer, a $2000 handbag, a pair of $500 sneakers, a couple of kids, a dog, and a white picket fence.

Wow. Sign me up.

Yes, Michelle Obama must have been having a bad day when she told Carli Bruni, the “First Lady” of France, that her new life was “hell”.

Maybe a broken nail put her over the edge.

Actually, it shouldn’t surprise us that Michelle has trouble understanding the meaning of “hell”- after all, she’s been having trouble with the meaning of the word “sacrifice” for years now.

For example, we’ve heard repeated stories about Barack’s “sacrifice” when he worked as a community organizer- taking a lower-paying job that “serves” people instead of using his law degree to join the ranks of the wealthy.

That, my friends, is not “sacrifice”, it’s called “free choice.”

I suppose that Michelle “sacrificed”, too, when she took a job making $350,000/year working for 20 hours a week at a Chicago hospital , steering non-urgent patients OUT OF the emergency room at the University of Chicago Medical Center and into local clinics. This little “sacrifice” only paid Michelle $350/hr.

You’d think the job of “one-woman death panel” would pay better than that.

And don’t forget the “sacrifice” this couple made when they flew to Copenhagen with their dear friend, Oprah, and made an appeal to the Olympic Committee on behalf of the city of Chicago. Michelle reminded us of her generosity during her speech to those representing the Chicago Project: “As much of a sacrifice as people say this is for me or Oprah or the president to come for these few days, so many of you in this room have been working for years to bring this bid home.”

Wow. Rarely do we see this kind of generosity from our elected leaders.

Now “generous”, selfless Michelle has proclaimed that she’s willing to forgo her beloved french fries for the good of the collective. Yes, folks, Michelle “loves” her fries, but she believes that they should no longer be the standard side dish to chicken fingers and burgers. She’d like to see restaurants offer us apples and carrots instead.

It will be “hell” for her, but she’ll “sacrifice” for the good of the country.

Bless her heart.

French fries, according to our First Lady, should be a requested item, not a default item. All Americans, even those without a weight or cholesterol problem, should not be subjected to the fat in fries- unless of course, they’re willing to pay for it.

Once again, we’re too stupid to know what’s good for us. We need Michelle, Barack, and their communist czars to tell us how to live.

By the way, your french fries aren’t the only things that Michelle wants to control. No, the french fries are merely the tip of the iceberg. You see, once the government rids us of the fat in fries, then they can rid us of the fat in other foods, like deep-fried chicken, onion rings, and donuts. How? They’ll keep increasing the tax on items with too much fat, just the way they’ve taxed cigarettes and alcohol.

It’s not that Americans won’t be able to have these things, it’s just that they will cost them more.

Americans will be healthier, the government will make a few bucks, and everyone will be happy.

No more hell.

We can only hope and pray that Michelle’s world of “sacrifice” and “hell” will be extinguished in 2012 when her husband is thrown out of office by common sense Americans who like their fries, their cigarettes, their salt, their fatty foods, and their freedom.

What a celebration we will have on the day that the Obamas exit the big White House. We’ll have a big, old national party where we can eat fries, drink, smoke, and be merry. We’ll drape ourselves in the flag, sing songs like “Mmm, Mmm, Mmm, Barack Hussein is gone”, play “pin the tail on the outgoing czar”, have an SUV race, light up the gas fireplace, and dance all night to “God Bless America.”

Sometimes it takes a little “hell” to appreciate how good we had it.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Sarcastic, Uncategorized, government policies, lsm, socialism | Comments (1) | Author: lsm

Universal Pet Care

Monday, 26. April 2010 7:02

Anyone who’s had a sick dog, one that needs surgery or an extended stay in the hospital, can appreciate this story.

I came home late one night to find our dog, a small Yorkie- Chihuahua mix named “Mia” extremely lethargic. Her eyes looked glazed over and I knew that she needed immediate care, so I threw her into the car and headed to the emergency animal hospital located about 20 minutes away. I was told that she was hypoglycemic (her blood sugar was VERY low) and they would need to keep her overnight. The cost? The low-end was $819.

I agreed to pay for her care and headed home. At 2:30 AM, I was awakened by the vet who claimed the dog was bleeding from the rectum and needed a blood transfusion. Would I agree to it?

At 2:30 AM, I would agree to just about anything.

The next day, I called the vet, only to discover that while Mia seemed better, they needed to do an x-ray and an ultrasound to see what was happening in her stomach. They had a glucose drip in her, a feeding tube down her nose, and a catheter inserted into her bladder. The bill now stood at around $1800.

But our dog was improving.

Long story short, Mia needed 4 more days of tests, tubes, and TLC. She was too sick to take home, but improving everyday.

Everyday, the bill increased. Everyday the vet would ask me if I wanted to keep her alive.

I’d look in Mia’s sad eyes, the ones that brightened when I walked into the room, and the answer was the same.

$5600 later, I was able to bring Mia home and she’s back to her old 6 year old self.

I know it’s insane, but she’s part of our family….

Like most pet owners, I do not have health insurance for my dog. When I bring her in for her shots and her general care, I usually walk out having spent about $65. That doesn’t include her heartworm pills or her flea collar. I had her spayed and she’s had her stomach pumped on two occasions when she got into the chocolate bars left around by my kids. I have her groomed occasionally to the tune of another $50.

And we haven’t even mentioned things like food, bedding, a crate, leashes, toys, and other good stuff….all of it expensive.

This leads me to the question of health care- oh, not health care for animals, but health care for people.

Walk into urban areas of town and you will see dogs, dogs, and more dogs. Many low-income folks take in a stray puppy or actively buy a dog because, let’s face it, puppies are “cute.” Gang members find status with their pit-bulls, dogs which require lots of food and lots of care.

These same folks are on Medicare or Medicaid. They are the first to complain if their prescription drug isn’t paid for or if they have a “co-pay” for a doctor visit. They want their children to have free health care, protesting that it is a “right”.

They cannot understand why they should have to pay a dime to give birth to a child, or pay for that child’s doctor care- after all, they claim to have no money.

Yet, when their pet is sick or needs a government-required vaccination, these same individuals reach into their pockets and find the money.

I’m not implying that they would spent $5600 on a sick dog, but they manage to find cash when they need it for their dog’s health, their dog’s food, their dog’s grooming.

A $20 bottle of amoxicillin for their child’s ear infection is “too expensive” and should be paid for by the government, yet that $50 bag of dog food is affordable.

Which leaves us with this question….Should we allow folks on Medicare to have a pet? Should we allow folks who can’t pay for their child’s regular health exams to have a dog or a cat?

Shouldn’t they have to pay off their medical bills BEFORE they pay for their dog’s medical bills?

And with animal activists looming around our liberal politicians, how much longer will it be before taxpayers are picking up the bill for sick animals? In the eyes of PETA, humans are no better than a cockroach.

I swear.


Two young men may be facing prison time for torturing a hamster and putting the video on Youtube. While I’m not beginning to defend their actions, I’m simply perplexed.

You see, not long ago, a Minnesota man repeatedly raped an 11 year old girl and was given probation- no jail time.

Maybe it’s because he didn’t put in on Youtube.

The world of liberals does not include rational thought. Much of medical research involves the necessary, yet horrible torture of mice to help the future of man…

No one likes it, but we need to at least agree that sacrificing a mouse for the life of a human is rational behavior, right?

Especially when that human is YOUR family member.

In a liberal’s warped world, the torture of a hamster can be equated to the torture of a child and deserves equal billing. They believe that although individuals can find the means to pay for a sick pet, we should not ask them be responsible for paying part of the expense of their sick child.

Ask a liberal to rationalize that one. They can’t.

Yet, they will fight for the right for everyone to own a dog, even if that person can’t afford it.

And their next step will be Universal Pet Care.

Wait and see…..

Go to Home Page:

Category:Sarcastic, children, ethics, government policies, health care, lsm | Comments (1) | Author: lsm

Helping Unemployed Liberals

Tuesday, 20. April 2010 7:33

Since it has now been determined by a Federal court judge that we can no longer celebrate the National Day of Prayer, I was brainstorming about what we could celebrate in its place.

And then it came to me.

Let’s create a new day called “Take your Unemployed, Liberal Friend to Work Day.”

This is a day that everyone could get behind, atheists and religious alike. It would be beneficial to society, allowing the non-productive to have a “day in the life” of someone who’s productive. It would allow those who are unsuccessful to understand how the “filthy rich”- those who work for a living- feel for a day.

It makes me smile just thinking about it.

You see, when “Take Your Daughter to Work Day” first began, it was an attempt to allow young girls the opportunity to watch their parents at work, to show them a good example of work ethic, and boost their confidence. It also helped them to dream- to dream of what they wanted to do with their lives and what they wanted to be when they grew up.

Some urban kids were forced to sit home and watch TV with their mommas on that day, even during the years of 5% unemployment. They may have experienced a “teachable moment” if the welfare check came in the mail, or if their momma went to the grocery store and bought something yummy with government food stamps.

This feminist program was eventually found “discriminatory” because boys were not included, so it morphed into another day: “Take Your CHILD to Work Day.”

Whew. Things were finally equal, just the way liberals like.

What I’m proposing is another evolution of this concept. You see, many unemployed, liberals have never really grown up, never had a job, therefore, they still have many characteristics of children. Our new health care bill allows “Junior” to stay on his parents’ health care until his 27th birthday.

Thank God we now have a firm definition of when it’s time to untie the apron strings.

Hey, wait a minute…if your 26 year old has 4 out of wedlock kids he must support, can they also stay on momma’s insurance? Nancy Pelosi didn’t make that very clear, did she?

“Take Your Unemployed Liberal Friend to Work Day” could actually teach some of these twenty-somethings what “work” looks like. There could be a morning lesson for our friends called, “Writing a check TO the government instead of cashing a check FROM the government.” It might take a few hours to teach them how to “give” instead of “receive”, but it’s time well-spent. You could save them the emotional distress that they will feel someday if they employed and are expected to contribute to things like first class air fare for our elected officials or a bridge to nowhere.

Lesson #2 could be: “Setting your alarm clock.” This would help the non-worker understand that if they ever get a job, getting to their new place of work on time is important. Lesson #3, “What to wear to work” could quickly follow, since a sideways hat won’t cut it. Expect to spend a few extra minutes explaining why most employers don’t want to see your butt crack or your underwear.

Oh, the unemployed liberals will be tired after a long, tedious day of productivity, but they will rapidly recover as their unemployment benefits are extended month after month by Congress, the folks who haven’t paid attention to our budget deficit in years. If they did, they would see that our children, the same ones who are sitting in school everyday, are going to be paying for the extension of benefits for years to come.

In fact, the kids who go to college are fools. Why do we go to college? To get a better job, right? To become more successful, right? To have a better life…..right?

Not so fast. With the liberal intent to continue to tax those who are successful to the max, there will soon be a day where it will not be worth the extra work, the extra stress, and the extra time needed to get to “the top.” You see, getting to the top will mean that Uncle Sam sees you as a source of wealth. Proud mothers used to brag about their sons and daughters who became doctors. Now, success comes at a price.

A price to the government.

How dare you financially profit from your own, hard work. How dare you profit from years of education. How dare you balk at sharing your wealth with those who are drug dealers, illegal immigrants, lazy coach potatoes, or those who “would find a job if I had to” but choose to stay on unemployment for a little longer.

The Left would have you believe that all of those who are unproductive are disabled, old, or homeless.

Not so. Most of those who are unemployed have 2 strong legs, a strong mind, and an ulterior motive- it’s called “getting something for free.”

“Take your Unemployed, Liberal Friend to Work Day” is clearly the answer.

The only other answer would be to pray for these folks.

A federal judge just took that privilege away from us.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Sarcastic, communism, education, ethics, government policies, health care, lsm, political, socialism | Comments (1) | Author: lsm

An Energy-Efficient Death Ride

Wednesday, 14. April 2010 7:17

A few years back, I sat in a classroom with one of my children who was taking drivers ed. It was required that parents attend the first meeting, so I sauntered myself into the back of this room, slumped into a desk, and tried to zone out for 3 hours.

I’d been through this before.

Much to my surprise, 5 minutes later, I was sitting up in my chair and actually paying attention. The instructor began to educate us, not on rules of the road, but on the ways parents could help keep our kids safe on those roads. You see, this instructor used to be an automobile insurance adjuster, and he had personal knowledge of the statistics that determine how best to keep our kids alive.

His first and most important piece of advice: Make sure your child is driving a big, safe car.

We proceeded to watch video of test crashes and saw the difference between small, compact cars and their SUV counterparts. While not all large vehicles had great crash ratings, by and large, the majority of 4 wheel drive vehicles fared much better in crashes. Even at low speeds, the small cars couldn’t compete.

It was amazing. An old clunker, the cars Americans recently traded in because they are “gas guzzlers”, are the types of vehicles which keep our kids the safest.

Environmentalists like Barack don’t really care about safety; they care about gas mileage. Most parents, if given the choice, would rather have a healthy child than a few extra bucks in their pocket.

Unfortunately, they don’t always vote that way.

Obama has just added new restrictions to his newly-acquired auto companies, requiring fuel efficiency standards that will be unattainable for most large, heavy vehicles. On April 1, the Obama administration raised mileage levels for cars and light trucks to 35.5 mpg. The EPA also added a stricter tailpipe emissions standard to these new cars, hoping to combat that phantom phenomenon called “global warming.”

I guess no one gave Obama the memo which reads: “Global Warming found to be a Hoax.”

The result of these new standards will be a new breed of cars, ones that are lighter, smaller, more compact, and more energy efficient.

They will also be more deadly.

You have to wonder how many people these cars will kill before the “greenies” will admit this was a failed experiment.

I’d like to invite Barack Obama to visit Duluth, MN., during a good, old fashioned snowstorm. For those of you who have never been to Duluth, it is quite literally, a city built on a hill. It is also a city that gets its share of cold days and winter storms. The hills become death-defying during these storms, and the locals, even those who have learned how to maneuver their SUV’s down these streets, are at times gripping the wheel as their cars slide through stop signs and street lights on their journey down the icy slope.

I cringe thinking of the young UMD students on those roads. One of those students belongs to me.

I cringe even more thinking of these students trying to navigate these hills in an energy-efficient “smart car”.

Will someone be keeping the statistics? Will our government proudly boast the fatalities caused by smart cars the way they boast statistics of gas savings? Will Barack let his children drive one of these cars on icy, snow-packed roads?

I doubt it.

The idea of energy efficient automobiles began back in 1975 when gas prices were high and the environmentalists were starting to make an impact. The car companies had no choice but to make smaller engines and lighter cars to fit the new regulations. Strangely, once these small cars were introduced, folks began driving more. Large families needed to take two cars to an event instead of one. While cars got better mileage, gas consumption doubled and defeated the purpose of the initial regulations.

Oh, and more people died.

How many? Well you were up to twelve times more likely to die in a small, compact car than in a larger “gas guzzling” model.

Twelve times less likely to make it home on a snowy night.

Twelve times less likely to make it home for Thanksgiving.

They say that the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over, hoping for a different result.

They also say that wise men learn from the past, learn from their mistakes. Morons do not.

Which explains Congress.

Hey, here’s an idea. Let’s invite them ALL to Duluth- ironically, the home of transportation chairman Rep. Jim Oberstar- during a raging snowstorm. Let’s pile them into smart cars and send them sailing down the hills, alongside semis and other large trucks. Let’s give them a dose of what “energy efficiency” feels like to those of us who don’t live in Florida or Alabama. Let’s give them the death ride that they’ve imposed on our children.

And let’s not weep over the casualties.

They’re just statistics, you know. Just a few numbers.

The planet will be better off for it.

In more ways than one.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Sarcastic, children, environment, government policies, lsm | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

A Proud People No More

Friday, 26. March 2010 9:18

I’m sitting at my computer this morning reading the headlines and my head is swimming.

Where to begin…

Should I write a blog about Health Care and the fact that Castro has just praised Obama’s new mandate and his ability to pass it? I assume that Michael Moore is also smiling this morning because his two favorite dictators will both have achieved his dream of socialized medicine.

No more “Sicko” for us.

It doesn’t matter that doctors will leave their practices in droves, it doesn’t matter that incentives for prescription drug companies to continue researching new drugs has been diminished, it doesn’t matter that insurance rates will skyrocket for most of us and patient care will go down.

What matters is that there will be more 26 year old unemployed, couch potatoes, still living with their mommies, who can stay home and play video games the whole day while collecting free health care.

By the looks of Michael Moore, he used to be one of those guys.

But there are other disconcerting headlines today, too. Let’s see, we now find out that it’s cheaper for us to give homeless folks free apartments than it is to put them in homeless shelters.

Hmmm… can this be? What are the overhead costs of a homeless shelter? And if we give the homeless a free apartment, will they still go to the homeless shelter for their meals and other necessities or will they suddenly learn to cook? Should they get a free cell phone in case they slip and fall and need an ambulance? Do we furnish these apartments? Do we give them towels and soap and maybe a flat-screen?

Gosh, there are just so many decisions to make.

So let’s see, if someone decides not to work or if they pursue their dream of being a struggling artist, even if they are able-bodied, we are now going to give them a furnished apartment, food, a cell phone (it’s already happening throughout the country), and free health care.

I suppose there is a program that will also provide them with free brushes and canvas so they can “work” at their craft.

On top of all of this, we now want to expand unemployment benefits for those who have lost their jobs.

Sounds nice, doesn’t it?

I know someone who’s just had a baby and gets 12 weeks of maternity leave, much of it unpaid, so that she can care for the child. Since having her bundle of joy, she’s questioning whether or not she wants to go back to work, but her family needs the income. If she went back to work and was laid off, however, she could collect unemployment for a couple of years and would be paid to stay home and raise her baby- something she wants to do, anyway.

Where is the incentive to work when you can get paid to stay home?

Since when has losing your job been so close to winning the lottery?

Oh, and if you can’t quite make ends meet with the free health care, the free apartment, the unemployment benefits and other entitlements, then you will now be given a 3 month reprieve from your mortgage payment.

Yes, that’s right, a new bill is going through congress that will allow folks to stay in their homes an extra 3 months without paying their mortgage so that we can keep foreclosures to a minimum.

It’s important, you see, for the President to be able to stand in front of the public and announce that “Foreclosures are Down!! ” Those are the types of stories that our mainstream media pick up on and plaster as headlines for all of the simple-minded to read and believe.

Where is the incentive to work, to produce, to succeed? If you are skilled enough and ambitious enough to make over $200,000 per year, you are screwed. Not only are you called names like “filthy rich”, you are repeatedly taxed to the point where you have to finally question your ambition. Why not find a job where you make less, there is less stress, and in the end, you come out about the same?

Think this isn’t going through people’s heads? Think again. Any doctor who has worked his tail off for years and is nearing retirement will simply quit his job, buy a house in Florida or Nevada (where taxes are low) and move on with his life. Why not? Social Security is around the corner. Medicare is around the corner. The golf courses are beautiful, even in the winter, and the stress of caring for patients is over. This Health Care Bill has single-handedly made more people question their futures than any single piece of legislation in the history of this country.

We used to be a people who were “too proud” to take from the government.

Now average Americans walk around town in t-shirts, stretched over their imploding bellies, that read, “If it’s Free, It’s for Me!!”

What happened, folks?

Where did our country go?

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Sarcastic, communism, ethics, government policies, health care, lsm, political, socialism | Comments (3) | Author: lsm

Thugs in the White House

Wednesday, 10. March 2010 8:28

I always wondered what happened to “Rosemary’s baby.”

Now I know.

“The Son of the Devil’s Spawn” has now been located and it seems he works in Washington DC- in that big, white house- the one that Obama calls “home.”

At least, this is what Rep. Eric Massa is telling us. You see, Massa, a congressman from NY, went on record, revealing a few recent encounters he has had with Obama’s right-hand man, Rahm Emanuel. Although Massa is a democrat, he doesn’t always see eye to eye with Emanuel and Obama….

That doesn’t sit very well with the dynamic duo.

Emanuel called Massa after a vote last year on the Cap and Trade bill when Massa chose to side with the conservatives. I guess the NY representative didn’t think it was a good idea to raise electricity rates on the entire nation and put millions of people out of work. This warranted a phone call from the thug that Obama hand-picked to be his top adviser. Massa claims that expletives were used during the conversation which should not be repeated outside of a Navy warship.

Massa also claims he held his own in that department.

Rahm was also ticked off with Massa when he failed to support the President’s budget. In fact, he paid Massa a little visit, Chicago-style, in the showers of the congressional gym, where Massa was lathering up. According to Massa, Emanuel approached him when he was “naked as a jaybird” and “put a finger in my chest because I wouldn’t vote for the president’s budget.”

Emanuel didn’t have “so much as a towel around his tush.”

It’s all very strange. Most civilized people conduct business in a suit and tie.

Even drug dealers are wearing hats and sneakers.

The fun didn’t stop in the shower. Rahm has continuously harassed Massa for his voting record to the point where Massa described him as the kind of man who “would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to the front end of a steam locomotive.”

Hmmm… wouldn’t want to be one of his relatives.

Sounds a bit like the Mafia, doesn’t it? Sounds a bit like Chicago politics, doesn’t it? Sounds like the White House is in the business of harassing, coercing, bribing, and threatening members of Congress who don’t vote their way.

It makes you wonder…..Could this be happening to other members or is Massa just a single member who is getting “picked on”?

Hey, I seem to recall Joe Lieberman’s wife getting some heat…and didn’t Ben Nelson from Nebraska get paid off…and how about Mary Landreiu…?

The latest series of events in the Emanuel/Massa conflict came when Massa voted against the health care bill. It seems that Ms. Pelosi needed 217 votes in the House to pass her precious bill and Massa was standing in her way because she only had 216.

What’s a Speaker to do? Maybe, just maybe, a few strong-arm tactics would convince Massa to change his vote….

So the rumor mill started with allegations that Massa was gay.

Isn’t Barney Frank, the celebrated member of the House who had a prostitution ring in his basement, gay?

The ethics committee, yes, the same ethics committee that can’t get around to prosecuting Charlie Rangel for his tax-evasion, was put to work, investigating Massa for “inappropriate comments” he made to a male staffer at a wedding.

According to Massa, “I have to come find out that on New Year’s Eve, I went to a staff party — it was actually a wedding for a staff member of mine. I was with my wife, and in fact we had a great time. She got the stomach flu, I went down to sing “Auld Lang Syne.” And with cameras on me — I’m talking three of them — filming me, I danced with the bride, and I danced with the bridesmaid. Absolutely nothing occurred.

“I said goodnight to the bridesmaid. I sat at down at the table where my whole staff was, all of them, by the way, bachelors. One of them looked at me and — as they would do after, I don’t know, 15 gin and tonics and goodness only knows how many bottles of champagne — a staff member made an intonation to me that maybe I should be chasing after the bridesmaid. His points were clear, and his words were far more colorful than that.

“And I grabbed the staff member sitting next to me and I said, ‘What I really ought to be doing is frakking you,’ and then tossled the guy’s hair and left, went to my room, because I knew the party was getting to a point where I shouldn’t be there.”

Really? The ethics committee is investigating this?

In a strange turn of events, Massa was a guest on the Glenn Beck show, where he had promised to “air details about the corruption in this administration.” Instead, he retracted his comments about Rahm, stating that he went a bit overboard with the “Spawn Devil” analogy. He blamed the corruption in Washington on BOTH parties, and refused to “name names” of those who were the worst offenders. He blamed his departure from Congress on his health, not on the current events, and took sole responsibility for his “inappropriate actions” with staffers.

I wonder who got to him. I wonder who threatened his family. I wonder who let him know that he needed to shut up.

It seems Massa got the message. Loud and clear.

It’s Chicago through and through. It’s gangster politics. The Mafia has arrived in Washington.

The Godfather sits in the Oval Office, hands wiped clean because he has “people” who do the dirty work for him.

“People” like Rahm “Corleone” Emanuel.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Sarcastic, Uncategorized, corruption, ethics, lsm, political | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Charlie Finally Faces Some Music

Friday, 26. February 2010 8:19

In September, 2008, The New York Times was recommending that NY Congressman Charlie Rangel should resign from his position as chairman of the Ways and Means Committe while his “ethical problems” were investigated.

That was 2008.

What was his latest indiscretion? Well, it seems that Charlie, the head of Congress’s tax-writing committee, was “irresponsible” in failing to disclose $75,000 in rental income and pay federal and state taxes on a villa in the Dominican Republic.

You mean that a guy who writes the tax law forgot to pay his taxes?

Yup, that’s right.

Oh, but there’s more. You see there were earlier controversies involving Charlie that had already caught the eye of the Ethics Committee in the Senate. One was Mr. Rangel’s favored treatment in occupying four rent-stabilized apartments in Manhattan, and another was his improper use of official letterheads to solicit support from charities and corporations for an academic center to memorialize his career in public service. It was also disclosed that Rep. Rangel filed a grossly misleading financial-disclosure report for 2007 — failing to report at least $500,000 in assets.

You see, Rep. Rangel had a credit-union account worth at least $250,000 and maybe as much as $500,000 — and didn’t report it. He had investment accounts worth about the same, which he also didn’t report. He also forgot to report three pieces of property in New Jersey.

The NY Times was pretty hard on Charlie, stating that a quick resignation was in order: “The tax issues are significant enough, in toto, to require federal and state investigations into whether this was not merely negligence, but willful fraud. We’re talking about a pattern of tax avoidance that has gone on for more than a decade.”

Anyone that knows The NY Times, knows that they usually err on the side of the liberals, so this was a scathing review.

Ironically enough, in 2006, when Nancy Pelosi proudly took on the prized position of “Madame Speaker”, she promised us that she was going to rid Washington of this type of corruption. She was going to be “ethical.”

It didn’t last long. She actually supported Charlie when the first indiscretions were brought to light.

And Nancy couldn’t be bothered when she heard about the latest 2008 problem with Charlie forgetting to pay taxes on those villas, Nancy was busy trying to get Barack Obama elected, but she did promise the public that she would take care of the “Rangel issue” by January 3, 2009, once Obama was securely in place and Congress could breathe.

It never happened.


Over the past year, Rangel’s name has come up for ethical debate, and every time it seems to get swept under the proverbial rug. Meanwhile, Rangel has been allowed to remain as the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, writing tax law for the rest of us. He’s been able to vote on bills, like the TARP Bill, the Health Care Bill, the Stimulus Bill, and others- all which influence the American public. He’s been allowed to spend OUR TAX DOLLARS, while not paying his fair share.

Well, it seems that some of Charlie’s indiscretions caught up with him when an ethics panel recently accused him of accepting Caribbean trips from a corporation in violation of House rules. This might finally force old Charlie to give up the Chairmanship of his Tax Committee.

So how did Charlie take the news? According to Yahoo News, Ranel said, “I don’t want to be critical of the [ethics] committee but common sense dictates that members of Congress should not be held responsible for what could be the wrongdoing or mistakes or errors of staff unless there’s reason to believe that member knew or should have known, and there is nothing in the record to indicate the latter.”

The mistakes of staff? He’s blaming this on his staff?

What an upstanding guy.

Here’s the good news- I guess that additional ethics investigations of Rangel’s finances and fundraising are still under way.

Whew. Glad to know they haven’t forgotten about them.

The guy is 79 years old. What in the heck are they waiting for?

Charlie Rangel has been in the middle of corruption for years, yet he hasn’t only retained his seat in Congress, he has been promoted and been considered a valuable democrat in the House.

He won’t admit to wrong-doing, won’t admit that he’s at fault.

And he retains his write to vote.

No wonder the democrats want to rid Judeo-Christian values from our public buildings.

It’s hard for them to carry on their immoral dealings when facing a stone tablet which states: Thou Shalt Not Steal.

They’d much rather look at a stone tablet which professes the philosophy of someone like Lenin: ” If you must lie, then you lie. The end justifies the means.”

Go to Home Page:

Category:Sarcastic, communism, corruption, ethics, lsm, political | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Liberals Say the Darndest Things…

Monday, 8. February 2010 8:14

It seems that Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s right-hand man, had a problem with his choice of adjectives.

He called his fellow democrats, “F*cking Retards.”

The word “f*cking” didn’t seem to bother anyone, although I DO remember that it created quite a bit of controversy when Dick Cheney uttered it under his breath a few years back.

Things have “changed” in the current White House so I guess the “f- word” is now acceptable….along with a few other things -like Mao ornaments on the White House Christmas tree.

It was the word “retarded” that caused some problems.

I’m not sure what it is with Obama’s administration and their dislike of the mentally challenged. Maybe these White House employees, those who have always surrounded themselves with the “intellectuals” at Columbia and Harvard, can’t understand those with inferior brains.

If they were honest, they would admit to thinking that all of us who attend state schools, are stay at home moms, work in a gas station, or drive a truck are “retards.”

Last Summer, Obama went on the Tonight Show and told Jay Leno that he had bowled so poorly, he looked like someone from the Special Olympics.


Funny, but this was shortly after winning an election against a pretty formidable opponent in Sarah Palin, who coincidentally has a Down Syndrome baby.

Actually, not that funny.

Oh, Obama immediately called up the Shriver/Kennedy clan and gave his excuses and apologies. I guess the Shrivers are the “keepers of forgiveness” on all matters involving the disabled.

If you apologize to them AND if they grant you forgiveness, then you’re one of the lucky ones.

Obama got the “All Clear” signal from the Shriver group.

Whew….although, come to think of it, he never had that party he promised to the Special Olympics kids….I suppose that will happen soon….

Rahm wasn’t quite as lucky. While he DID meet with the Shrivers, looking for the forgiveness wand to grant him absolution, word has it from the Special Olympic crowd that they weren’t quite as forgiving as they had been of Barack. That didn’t stop Rahm from publicly claiming that he had been forgiven by the group.

You mean Rahm lied?

Obama and Rahm aren’t the only liberals to make a few gaffes this year. Harry Reid was quoted as saying that Barack Obama was a “light-skinned black” and that he “only talks with a negro accent when he wants to.”

Negro? Light skinned? I thought that liberals LOVED all minorities, regardless of skin tone and dialect…..

Barack quickly forgave the Senate majority leader because Harry “always votes the right way.”

Joe Biden must “vote the right way”, too, because he got a pass for calling Barack a “mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.”

Oh, but there’s more.

Joy Behar, host of “The View” was in a discussion about a football player who is alive today because his mother didn’t listen to some advice to abort her baby when she was pregnant with him. Tim Tebow, the famous football player, was trying to show women that the children they abort may someday grow up and do great things.

Joy, of course had a different take on things: “He could have just as easily become a rapist pedophile….”

Leave it to a woman named “Joy” to look at the glass and find it half-empty….

We’ve also seen Rosie O’Donnell, the previous, bullish host of The View, argue on air that President Bush purposefully brought down the Twin Towers. This was shortly after she blasted gun owners, including Tom Selleck, for exercising their second amendment rights. During the April 19, 1999, broadcast of her talk show, Rosie stated, “You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun, I think you should go to prison.”

We then discovered that Rosie’s bodyguard carried a gun. Rosie claimed that their were “threats” on her families’ lives and they needed protection.

Last I looked, she wasn’t in jail. Neither was her bodyguard.

The list goes on and on. Whether Jesse Jackson says that he’d like “to cut off” Barack’s “nuts”, or Michelle Obama talks about our “downright, mean country”, liberals are allowed a very long rope, indeed.

Dan Quayle, on the other hand, wasn’t allowed to spell the word “Potato” wrong.

George Bush was forever criticized for things like bumping his head on the door of Airforce One or dropping his dog on the ground. Sarah Palin has taken extreme heat for the antics of her daughter’s boyfriend. Yet, Barack Obama can tell us that there are 57 states and we are supposed to cast it off as “fatigue.”

Yes, folks, there are a different set of rules for liberals. The media, including TV shows like Saturday Night Live, set the rules. They decide who to criticize, and who to give a “pass” to.

Conservatives, in general, get very few passes.

It seems, we “don’t vote the right way.”

And never will.


Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Sarcastic, Uncategorized, ethics, gun control, lsm, media, political, racism | Comment (0) | Author: lsm