Bold Colors Blog

Stickin’ it to the libs, one day at a time

Posts Tagged ‘Liberal hypocrisy’

Liberal hypocrisy at its finest

Posted by Liberty on March 18, 2009

AIG bonuses: Some repaid, Congress to vote on tax

While AIG has been roundly criticized, attacked and demonized for awarding bonuses [per contract] to some of its employees, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae’s outrageous bonuses haven’t gotten much play.

Fannie plans bonuses of $1M for 4 execs

Advertisements

Posted in Innate hypocrisy, Liberalism | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Obama’s budget plan calls for increased tax enforcement…just not within his own cabinet

Posted by Liberty on February 22, 2009

Obama’s First Budget Seeks To Trim Deficit

So many things to write about within this article but so little patience for all things Obama!  He knows a lot of  people are outraged about the deficit spending stimulus plan.  By unveiling this latest plan to reduce the deficit, he’ll at least fool some of the huddled masses into thinking he’s not a big spender.  Of course, it doesn’t hurt that the useful idiots in the MSM are continuing their laudatory, incurious coverage of Obama.

I especially like how he’s made a couple of financial policy announcements this weekend–when the markets are closed.  Could it be that Obama has realized that the markets don’t seem to have much confidence in his abilities?  How much has the Dow tanked since America’s first true socialist president took office? 

Obama’s budget calls for higher taxes on businesses and the wealthy [a smart recession move, eh?] and spending cuts.  Of course, Obama has not targeted wasteful spending, layers of bureaucracy and redistributive programs–those things will only grow throughout his administration.  Obama’s spending cuts will be from our ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.  More for food stamps, more to keep uncreditworthy buyers in homes they can’t afford, more for health care [but only if the government deems it cost-effective] and less for defending America against Islamic terrorism.  The bright side of all of this nonsense is that at least Obama is making it easier for Conservatives to make the distinction between their policies and those of the socialist liberals currently in charge.

The real kicker for me in this article was this quote:

“Obama also proposes “a fairly aggressive effort on tax enforcement” that would target corporate loopholes…”

Now why is it that he cares whether or not corporations pay their fair share of taxes while nominating a bunch of tax cheats for positions in his administration?  Geithner, Daschle, Killefer, Solis…those are just the ones we know about so far.  Hypocrisy, any one?

Posted in Arrogant politicians, Conservatism, Future of the GOP, Innate hypocrisy, Just plain dishonest, Liberalism, Main Stream Media, National Security, Obama, Redistribution of wealth, Slavish media bias, Social engineering, Socialist economics, Stupid legislation, Taxes | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Stimulating the destruction of health care as we know it.

Posted by Liberty on February 10, 2009

Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey

The Senate is poised to pass Obama’s massive “socialize America” stimulus plan.  Thanks to human jellyfish pseudo Republicans like Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, news blips everywhere will praise the bill’s passing as “bipartisan.”  The unfortunate thing is that there is policy buried in this stimulus that will change the course of our society as we know it. 

Most people don’t even have a clue–they’ve bought the Obama bill of goods that the stimulus will build roads and schools.  Obama has done this country a major disservice by doing his best to shut down discussion on this bill.  If there had been a more honest, open debate, perhaps more people would know about the back-door transition to socialized medicine that’s been included under the guise of improving our economy.  Here I reference a piece that was published yesterday on Bloomberg.com.  Betsy McCaughey has done the work that the celebutard pre-occupied main stream media has refused to do.  Debate rages about Jessica Simpson’s weight gain, Alex Rodriguez’s steriod use and whether or not some R&B artist beat up his girlfriend when it should be focused on the fraud being perpetrated upon us all.  The numbers included in the quotes I’ve pulled from Ms. McCaughey’s article are the page numbers in the  H.R. 1 EH, pdf version.

“The bill’s health rules will affect ‘every individual in the United States’ (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and ‘guide’ your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what [Tom] Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis.” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and ‘learn to operate less like solo practitioners.’”

I don’t know about you but I trust my doctor.  That’s why I go to her instead of down to the DMV when I need medical care.  If you’re wondering what exactly it means to have the federal government “guide” your doctor’s decisions, read on.

 

“Hospitals and doctors that are not ‘meaningful users’ of the new system will face penalties.  ‘Meaningful user’ isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose ‘more stringent measures of meaningful use over time’ (511, 518, 540-541).

What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the ‘tough’ decisions elected politicians won’t make.

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept ‘hopeless diagnoses’ and ‘forgo experimental treatments,’ and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.”

Is this what you want?  To accept a “hopeless diagnosis” like a European?  To just give up?  What about hope?  Isn’t hope the very thing we’re supposed to have now that Obama has been elected?

“Daschle says health-care reform ‘will not be pain free.’ Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.”

Quick, can somebody tell me who the AARP endorsed in the 2008 Presidential election?

The hypocrisy here is simply appalling.  These same “compassionate” liberals that don’t believe in killing terrorists and think that every child should start the day with taxpayer-funded Lucky Charms are implementing policy that will deny medical treatments for the elderly.  How long is it going to be before the doctor approaches the family gathered around dear old aunt Mary’s bedside and says, “The Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research says there’s nothing more we can do.  I think it’s time to put her down.”

“If the Obama administration’s economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration’s health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. ‘If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,’ he said. ‘The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.'”

Arrogance!  Unbelievable arrogance!  Not only does Daschle think that he is above paying taxes, he believes you should not have a say on the implementation of socialized medicine.  Don’t comfort yourself for a second by thinking that at least Daschle has withdrawn his nomination.  That isn’t going to slow this plan down in the least.  The Senate is scheduled to vote today.  You can still call them.

Update, 11:22 am

The bill passed.  Our only hope for stopping this is in the conference committee now.  I thought of two things since I originally posted this morning.  Liberals whipped themselves into a hysteria over the Bush administration’s wire taps on suspected terrorists.  Civil libertarians were absolutely crazed over it.  Do you think they’ll have a problem with a federal bureaucracy over-seeing our health care? 

Also, what about the “my body, my choicer’s?”  They want choice when it comes to killing babies and under Obama’s plan, that’s one option that will probably always be there.  But what will your choices be when the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research dictates your treatment for diabetes, arthritis, kidney stones or any other condition to your doctor?  Why is it important for you to have the choice to kill babies but not to choose what course of treatment is best for cancer, MS or neo-natal care?

Posted in Arrogant politicians, Bureaucratic ineptitude, Celebutards, Constitutional Rights, Health care, Innate hypocrisy, Just plain dishonest, Liberalism, Main Stream Media, Obama, Slavish media bias, Social engineering, Socialist economics, Socialized medicine, Stupid legislation | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

An Obama appointee with integrity–she’s withdrawing!

Posted by Liberty on February 3, 2009

Performance Czar Killefer Withdraws Candidacy

I’m experiencing that feeling of deja vu this morning.  Yet another Obama appointee has tax issues!  Wow!  Let me predict what is going to be said about performance czarina Nancy Killefer’s tax problem.  “It was an honest mistake.”  Or perhaps, “She had a little glitch with her Turbo Tax.” 

“Ms. Killefer, 55 years old, failed to pay employment taxes on household help for a year and a half, the Associated Press reported. In 2005, the AP said, the District of Columbia filed a $946.69 tax lien on her home for failure to pay the unemployment compensation tax. The error was resolved five months later.”

Oh…the old employment taxes on the household help.  Well, we’ve all had that problem, right?  I couldn’t find the box on the 1040 for that one, either.

As it turns out, though, silly excuses probably won’t be necessary.  Nancy Killefer is withdrawing her candidacy, saying that she doesn’t want her tax problems to be a distraction for the new administration.  There goes the only Obama appointee [so far] who possessed an ounce of shame.  Tom?  Tim?  What about you guys?

Oh, and one more thing.  How badly would the MSM be savaging tax-challenged appointees to a Republican administration?

Posted in Arrogant politicians, Innate hypocrisy, Just plain dishonest, Liberalism, Main Stream Media, Obama, Slavish media bias, Taxes | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Will Obama voters notice the hypocrisy here?

Posted by Liberty on February 3, 2009

Obama is forced to bend firm rule on hiring ex-lobbyists

Remember hearing Obama bashing lobbyists out on the campaign trail?  He used to say that he didn’t take their money and would not provide them with positions in his administration.  He used to accuse lobbyists of being part of the problem with how business works in Washington D.C.  He even went so far as to publicly make a rule against lobbyists in his administration. 

And now, the bait and switch has been done all over again.  Notice the use of the word “forced.”  The A.P. headline writer has made a subtle effort to absolve Obama of responsibility.  What I have to wonder is this:  how will this play with the Hope-n-changer’s?  Will they even notice that Obama is now governing against his own campaign rhetoric?

Posted in Arrogant politicians, Innate hypocrisy, Liberalism, Main Stream Media, Obama, Slavish media bias | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

“Make no mistake, tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter. ”

Posted by Liberty on February 2, 2009

Michelle Malkin has brought this salient quote to the public forefront today.  The question is, does Tom Daschle regret these words?

“Make no mistake, tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter. ”

Or, are tax laws advocated by uber-libs like Daschle only for us little people?

Posted in Arrogant politicians, Bureaucratic ineptitude, Crime and Punishment, Innate hypocrisy, Just plain dishonest, Liberalism, Obama, Socialist economics, Taxes | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Liberal hypocrisy and an inauguration speech: Ann Coulter’s view

Posted by Liberty on January 22, 2009

Have you had it up to here [you can’t see this but my hand is approximately two feet above the top of my head] with the fawning, ridiculous coverage of Obama’s inauguration?  Sounds like you need a little factual information and tongue-in-cheek cynicism from Ann this morning.

More Boos Than Balls

“So maybe liberals can stop acting as if the entire nation could at last come together in a “unity of purpose” if only conservatives would stop fomenting “conflict and discord” — as Obama suggested in his inaugural address. We’re not the ones who booed a departing president.”

Well said.  The way some of those “tolerant” and “open-minded” libs behaved towards President Bush this week was an absolute disgrace.

“Liberals always have to play the victim, acting as if they merely want to bring the nation together in hope and unity in the face of petulant, stick-in-the-mud conservatives. Meanwhile, they are the ones booing, heckling and publicly fantasizing about the assassination of those who disagree with them on policy matters.”

Posted in Conservatism, Innate hypocrisy, Liberalism, Main Stream Media, Obama, Slavish media bias | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Baltimore mayor indicted–guess which party?

Posted by Liberty on January 9, 2009

On the way home from the grocery store this afternoon, I heard a quick blip on the indictment of Baltimore mayor, Sheila Dixon.  Because the newscaster did not mention a political party in connection with Dixon, I deduced that she must be a Democrat and made a mental note to check it out when I got home.  Of course, my supposition was correct.  Sheila Dixon is a Democrat and she has been indicted on 12 counts resulting from a corruption investigation.  The radio station I was listening to carries ABC news but they weren’t the only ones leaving the word “Democrat” out of the broadcast.  According to Newsbusters, CNN anchor Kyra Phillips failed to identify Dixon as a Democrat…inadvertently, I’m sure.

CNN Omits Democratic Party Affiliation of Indicted Baltimore Mayor

Posted in Crime and Punishment, Liberalism, Main Stream Media | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Stop the presses! The New York Times got it wrong

Posted by Liberty on December 23, 2008

From Newsbusters:

New York Times Blames Housing and Financial Crisis on Bush

The New York Times published a story the other day blaming the mortgage market crisis solely on President George W. Bush.  I clicked on the headline, skimmed the first page of the article [it was six pages long], determined it was as biased and inaccurate as the New York Times generally is and moved on.  I’ve decided to revisit that article because, for once, The President is defending himself from attack.  Here’s the NYT hit piece:

White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfire

“Today, millions of Americans are facing foreclosure, homeownership rates are virtually no higher than when Mr. Bush took office, Fannie and Freddie are in a government conservatorship, and the bailout cost to taxpayers could run in the trillions.”

And here’s a Fox News story about the response from the White House:

 White House Fires Back at Times Over Housing Meltdown Story

“The White House is pushing back hard against a New York Times article that essentially blamed President Bush for the sub-prime mortgage mess and the Wall Street collapse by linking those crises to a policy goal he stated more than six years ago. 

That goal? 

‘We want more people owning their own home,’ as Bush said in December 2003.”

The Times goes on to claim that Bush encouraged sub-prime lending to lower income and minority families as a way to win more voters.  The Times is conveniently ignoring the complicity of Democrats, including Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.

“…the Times made no mention over the weekend of President Clinton’s aggressive deregulation of the financial services industry, which empowered banks, brokerage firms and insurance companies to engage in some of the very practices — such as credit default swaps — that contributed most to the current fiscal crisis. 

While the Times mentioned that mortgage bankers and brokers donated almost $850,000 to President Bush’s 2004 re-election campaign, the newspaper omitted the fact that the top three recipients of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and its sister organization Freddie Mac over the last two decades were all Democrats. 

Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, head of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs; President-elect Barack Obama; and Bush’s 2004 opponent John Kerry all benefited from Fannie and Freddie.”

And, as Noel Sheppard points out in the Newsbusters article:

“housing policies encouraging lax lending standards have existed in this nation since Jimmy Carter signed the Community Reinvestment Act in 1977. This required financial institutions to make loans to lower-income individuals in the communities they served. Non-compliance with this Act would prevent a bank or savings and loan from being able to expand within the states it was currently in and beyond.”

Posted in Liberalism, Main Stream Media, Redistribution of wealth, Socialist economics | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Seattle’s eco-friendly snow strategy…the city’s latest colossal failure

Posted by Liberty on December 23, 2008

Seattle refuses to use salt; roads “snow packed” by design

“To hear the city’s spin, Seattle’s road crews are making ‘great progress’ in clearing the ice-caked streets.

But it turns out ‘plowed streets’ in Seattle actually means ‘snow-packed,’ as in there’s snow and ice left on major arterials by design.

‘We’re trying to create a hard-packed surface,’ said Alex Wiggins, chief of staff for the Seattle Department of Transportation. ‘It doesn’t look like anything you’d find in Chicago or New York.'”

Seattle is fore-going the use of salt and de-icing chemicals over concerns of run-off.  In a city of hills, they are deliberately transforming streets into ice rinks.  Smart.

“The icy streets are the result of Seattle’s refusal to use salt, an effective ice-buster used by the state Department of Transportation and cities accustomed to dealing with heavy winter snows.

‘If we were using salt, you’d see patches of bare road because salt is very effective,’ Wiggins said. ‘We decided not to utilize salt because it’s not a healthy addition to Puget Sound.'”

Typical.  Let’s risk human life instead.

“By ruling out salt and some of the chemicals routinely used by snowbound cities, Seattle has embraced a less-effective strategy for clearing roads, namely sand sprinkled on top of snowpack along major arterials, and a chemical de-icer that is effective when temperatures are below 32 degrees.

Seattle also equips its plows with rubber blades. That minimizes the damage to roads and manhole covers, but it doesn’t scrape off the ice, Wiggins said.”

Update 10:11 am:

In the article, the strategy is described as plowing  “the roads enough for all-wheel and four-wheel-drive vehicles, or those with front-wheel drive cars as long as they are using chains.”  Rush pointed out something ironic when he discussed this story.  Liberals want to force us into tiny, gas-sipping, hybrid, alternative, green [insert politically correct buzzword here] vehicles.  Where are the Smartcars and Prius’s today in Seattle?!  Libs want to get rid of the popular, functional SUV’s and trucks [that Americans want and need] so that we may all comply with their environmental agenda .  Meanwhile, Seattle, a bastion of liberal insanity, is paralyzed by snow and their own incompetence.

Posted in Bureaucratic ineptitude, Liberalism, Washington State | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

Chicago thug politics and the liberal double standard

Posted by Liberty on December 9, 2008

Details Of Complaint Against Blagojevich

First of all, just more evidence of how corrupt Chicago politics are.  Eventually more of us are going to regret electing a president that comes from this kind of farm team.  Also, if Blagojevich were a Republican, the headline would be “Details of Complaint Against Republican Blagojevich” and the words “Republican,” “GOP,” “Right-wing” and Conservative would be used copiously.  Because he’s a Democrat and this story is bad news about him, the fact that he’s a Democrat is buried.  In fact, just using Ctrl+F to search the text of this story, I didn’t find the word “Democrat” anywhere!

Posted in Arrogant politicians, Crime and Punishment, Liberalism, Obama | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Liberal hypocrisy–just one example

Posted by Liberty on November 13, 2008

Democrats eye BIAW cash source

The BIAW backed GOP candidate Dino Rossi in the past two governor’s races, therefore that makes them a target of free speech smothering liberals.  My question today is, why is the BIAW smeared as an evil “special interest group” by the Democrat party while their candidates take massive contributions from unions, environmentalist groups and Indian tribes?  Aren’t those “special interest groups” also?  Do these same Democrats have a problem with union dues from SEIU and WEA being used for political purposes?

Washington Republicans, you had better start fighting back hard against these hypocrites or we are going to be stuck under the Dem’s thumbs forever.  It’s called a press conference, you should try it.

Posted in Washington State | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »