We have to agree with various fellow right thinkers and, no doubt, a few of the less sanity challenged Democrats out there that Obama did indeed look sort of foolish campaigning on The View while SecState Hillary Clinton was going tooth and nail, so to speak, with the Mohammedans at the U.N.

But what can you do, right?

Here’s a president that, in our opinion here at Hard Astarboard is far and away the worst choice the American people have made in the entire history of our great nation, even surpassing the “worstness” of the former holder of that mantle, Jimmy Carter.

This one’s all about lies, capitulation in the face of the most insanely ruthless enemy we’ve ever faced as a country, the trampling underfoot of the Constitution, coverups…

Did I say cover-ups?

How’s this one grab you?

From Breitbart.com:

Cover Up: Report Says U.S. Knew Al-Qaeda Behind Libya Attack Within 24 Hours

If these reports are true, and I suspect we all know they are — what we have here is nothing more than a scandalous White House cover up and Obama’s Media Palace Guards so terrified of Obama losing, they refuse to give it the coverage it demands, the attention it deserves, or to make Obama pay a political price for his role and responsibility.
According to Eli Lake of the Daily Beast, 24 hours after the assassination of Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens, and a four full days before Obama sent UN Ambassador Susan Rice out to all the Sunday shows to blame what happened on a protest gone bad over a YouTube video, the American government had already concluded al-Qaeda was behind the attack:

Within 24 hours of the 9-11 anniversary attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies had strong indications al Qaeda–affiliated operatives were behind the attack, and had even pinpointed the location of one of those attackers. Three separate U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said the early information was enough to show that the attack was planned and the work of al Qaeda affiliates operating in Eastern Libya. …

The intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast did so anonymously because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. They said U.S. intelligence agencies developed leads on four of the participants of the attacks within 24 hours of the fire fight that took place mainly at an annex near the Benghazi consulate. For one of those individuals, the U.S. agencies were able to find his location after his use of social media. “We had two kinds of intelligence on one guy,” this official said. “We believe we had enough to target him.”

Every day it becomes more and more obvious that fearing headlines that screamed “Al-Qaeda Assassinates American Ambassador,” the Obama administration and the media colluded to push the narrative about a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video.

Moreover, the media aided and abetted this cover up by turning Romney’s valid criticism of the Cairo Embassy apology into a week-long narrative meant to distract from Obama’s collapsing foreign policy in the Middle East, the ignoring of direct threats from al-Qaeda in advance of the attacks, and not beefing up security on the anniversary of 9/11..

As a result, thus far, the Obama Administration has gotten away with outright lies, likely security lapses that proved fatal, and the trotting out of our UN Ambassador to look Americans and the media in the eye and say what she and the government knew wasn’t true.

We expect this from politicians.

What we don’t expect is for the media to be such a willing a co-conspirator.

My emphasis there.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say that bit about the media, not in light of their performance in recent years as more a propaganda outlet for the far left than a legitimate source for fair and impartial reporting. They got Obama elected, for example, by duping a lot of Americans whom, we believe, should now be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for casting votes for good ol’ Barry O, though not nearly as ashamed as the media themselves ought to be for sticking to their guns even after seeing what the current administration has wrought in the last painful 44 months of “hope and change”.

In their war on America and all it stands for, I suppose that the liberals’ Hope & Change is their version of “Shock & Awe”.

Meanwhile, back at the raunch, the Obama administration’s scapegoating of “the film that rocked the Islam-Once-Again-Offended world” for what they knew darn well was organized well beforehand by al-Qaeda opened the doors for the Muslim Brotherhood Islamofascist now running Egypt to call for restrictions on Americans’ — yes, our — First Amendment rights.

The sooner we can get this veritable enemy of the state out of the White House, the safer we’ll be and the quicker we’ll be able to start making our country look more like America again, rather than the third world country the left is turning it into.

First, I want to make a brief observation regarding President Obama’s utter contempt for the hard earned tax money taken from hard working Americans.

He (The Communistander-in-Chief) has so far, as President, taken something like 38 fund raising trips here to New York. This is to raise money for HIS PERSONAL CAMPAIGN, yet is he, or is his campaign warchest, financing these trips?

“Of course not!” You exclaim, “Don’t be silly!”

We, the taxpaying American people, are paying for these trips, and we’re not simply financing a Greyhound bus ticket and a couple of nights at Motel 6, maybe a small per diem for lunch.

Oh, no.

We’re paying for a lot of aviation fuel, accommodations for His Majesty’s inevitable large entourage at the Waldorf Astoria, where they do a heck of a lot more than just leave the light on for ya’, travel, accommodations and deployment of O’s Secret Service detail and Lord only knows what other federally (taxpayer) funded expenses. Oh, yeah, and then there’s the cost to New Yorkers for all the police overtime and related costs.

All that so the president, who vowed “change” when he ran for office (we’ve gotten “change” alright), can panhandle here for further spare change.

Alright, having said that, on to the post at hand, which is courtesy of a great column by David L. Goetsch at Patriot Update.

One of the principal strategies of the left for the past 40 years has been the dumbing down of America’s public schools. Dumbing down public education at all levels is how the left is transforming Americans into a flock of naïve, ill-informed, easily-led sheep. A major component of the dumbing down process is historical revisionism. Historical revisionism is the concept liberals use to revise America’s past to suit their agenda in the present.

One of the most prolific practitioners of historical revisionism is President Obama. When it suits his purposes to do so, the president will simply make up history that never happened or distort what did happen until it appears to support his agenda. President Obama’s most infamous act of historical revisionism came when he claimed that not only is American not a Christian nation, it is one of the world’s largest Muslim nations. To make such an absurd statement, Barack Obama had to ignore more than 200 years of historical evidence, evidence that is readily available and clearly contradicts him.

Historical revisionists such as President Obama employ one or more of five methods for distorting America’s history to suit their purposes: 1) deconstructionism, 2) post-structuralism, 3) modernism, 4) minimalism, and 5) academic cronyism. Thinking people who respect and admire the truth no matter where it leads need to understand these five methods, recognize when they are being employed, and challenge the liberals who use them to distort the truth. The best way to challenge historical revisionists is to call the world’s attention to their use of these five wrong-headed, deceitful, and intellectually lazy methods.

Read the rest here.

This, as they say, hits the proverbial nail right on the head.

What’s this world coming to?

From the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA):

Disinformation Continues as U.N. Arms Treaty Takes Shape
In New York this week, the U.N. Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty continued trying to draft a treaty to impose worldwide controls on small arms, including civilian-owned firearms.

The NRA has made clear its opposition to any treaty that includes civilian firearms, and continues to note that a majority of the United States Senate stands with American gun owners in opposition to such a treaty. We have led the effort to mobilize opposition to the treaty in Congress, and not only a bipartisan majority of the U.S. Senate, but also 130 House members, have voiced strong opposition to the treaty. Ignoring that reality, U.N. conferees are working to regulate not only civilian small arms, but also ammunition and firearm parts.

Anti-gun treaty proponents continue to mislead the public, claiming the treaty would have no impact on American gun owners. That’s a bald-faced lie.

A bald faced lie? Coming from what Seth calls “the port side?”!? Nahhhh…..

Yeah, right…

For example, the most recent draft treaty includes import/export controls that would require officials in an importing country to collect information on the “end user” of a firearm, keep the information for 20 years, and provide the information to the country from which the gun was exported. In other words, if you bought a Beretta shotgun, you would be an “end user” and the U.S. government would have to keep a record of you and notify the Italian government about your purchase. That is gun registration. If the U.S. refuses to implement this data collection on law-abiding American gun owners, other nations might be required to ban the export of firearms to the U.S.

And even if the U.S. never ratifies–or even signs–the treaty, many other nations will. The cost of complying with the treaty would drive up the price of imported firearms and probably force some companies to take their products off the U.S. market.

That’s not all. This week, the delegates focused on an endless series of drafts that would either ban exportation or require states to consider the risk of exporting, if the arms could be used to commit crime, or could “be diverted to unauthorized end users” or “the illicit market.” Exports could also be blocked if they would “support” or “encourage” terrorist acts or “provoke, prolong or aggravate acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace,” or could be used in “gender-based violence” or to inflict “human suffering.” Anti-gun activists here and abroad have long claimed that gun ownership in general does all of these things, so any of these provisions could be abused by foreign governments to shut off exports to law-abiding Americans

The article is here.

Thank the Lord for organizations like the NRA, there to confront the liars of this world who, in emulation of the communists who so inspire those who lie to the people in order to deprive us of our freedom so they may rule, never cease to chip away at the liberty that is the foundation of our great nation.

Ha ha! And ha!

Actually, it’s more pitiful criminal than amusing. Criminal with just a hint of treason, but then whoever (except the Democrats, that is) said the party on the left side of the aisle cared about “the means” when it comes to achieving “the end”?

An investigative report from a media watchdog group reveals that the left is involved in a systematic strategy to undermine the ability of election officials to effectively manage elections and prevent voter fraud.

As previously reported on OneNewsNow, Accuracy in Media (AIM) has published a report that exposes the history, current tactics, and implications of left-wing voter fraud and intimidation. “The Left’s National Vote Fraud Strategy Exposed” reveals a “deliberate, premeditated, comprehensive plan to win the 2012 presidential election at all costs.”

James Simpson was commissioned by AIM to author the special report. He says vote fraud is widespread and typically occurs in areas where the enticers can get away with it — places like inner-cities where few people care to venture.

“They do whatever they want, and what they want to do is stuff the ballots,” he explains.

Simpson alleges another tactic involves flooding polling places with fraudulent voter registrations, as the controversial group ACORN has done in past elections.

“They created chaos in the local electoral offices by swamping them with huge numbers of registrations,” he reports. “And, of course, when they’re so overwhelmed with all that, it’s kind of hard to keep track of who of these registrants is a legitimate real voter and who isn’t.”

According to Simpson, two Democrats recently caught in a vote fraud scandal told police that “voter fraud is an accepted way of winning elections.”

Like it or not, this kind of thing constitutes attempting to tamper with our electoral system and that, in turn, is an attempt to illegally shape the leadership of this nation and that, in turn, has got to be some kind of treason.

On the other hand I did say, “but then whoever (except the Democrats, that is) said the party on the left side of the aisle cared about “the means” when it comes to achieving “the end”?

Ahem….

Of course, as we know, honesty is the best policy

Obama Denounces Republicans For “Bamboozling Folks” Into Thinking He’s a Big-Spender

Bamboozling folks? Even the left-leaning Politifact labelled him the “undisputed debt king” of the last five presidents.

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. — At a fundraiser for his re-election campaign in Denver tonight, President Obama set out to upend conventional Republican wisdom that his administration has been defined by excessive government spending.

“I’m running to pay down our debt in a way that’s balanced and responsible. After inheriting a $1 trillion deficit, I signed $2 trillion of spending cuts into law,” he told a crowd of donors at the Hyatt Regency. “My opponent won’t admit it, but it’s starting to appear in places, like real liberal outlets, like the Wall Street Journal: Since I’ve been president, federal spending has risen at the lowest pace in nearly 60 years. Think about that.”

Continue Reading on weaselzippers.us …

“Aw, leave Obama alone,” you say, shaking your head, “Anyone who doesn’t believe every lie that comes out of his head and support his reelection is obviously a racist!”

Tuesday night, Barack Obama was handed two more embarrassing near-defeats in the Democratic primaries held in Arkansas and Kentucky. In the Arkansas primary, challenger John Wolfe won nearly 42% of the vote, and in Kentucky 42% of Democrats selected “uncommitted” over President Obama. So far, four states — AR, KY, WV, and OK — have given over 40% of their primary vote to someone other than Barack Obama. All of these races were closed primaries, meaning that only Democrats were eligible to vote in them.

If this kind of inter-party rebellion had struck a Republican presidential incumbent (and I’m specifically thinking of George W. Bush) it would be the lead story on every cable news network, and an above-the-fold front page story on every major newspaper for the remainder of the week. Yet it barely gets mentioned these days, with the exception of this curious headline from the Washington Post: “Kentucky, Arkansas primaries: Is it racism?”

Ha-ha. And by the way, have you stopped beating your wife yet?

Naturally the article brings up the infamous “Bigot Belt” graphic that showed Redneckland to be the only area of the nation that rejected Barack Obama outright in 2008. Certainly it wasn’t Obama’s elitism, or his anti-Americanism, or his sleazy Chicago cronies, or his youthful infatuation with cocaine and Marxist professors, or his long-time association with a radical domestic terrorist, or his membership in a church led by one of the most inflammatory Black separatist pastors in the country. Nah, it couldn’t possibly be any of those things that disinterested voters in the South. It must be because he is half African. Because that’s all we ever think about down here.

You know what? I’m actually kinda proud of that map. Seems we Okies ain’t as dumb as they think we is.

Thanks for that one from Wiz Bang.

Hmph! All this talk about dishonesty coming forth in the same breath as liberals and their useful Democrat idiots…

On the subject of the liberal conception of honesty, there’s some very timely commentary here from Ann Coulter.

Figures don’t lie: Democrats do

It’s been breaking news all over MSNBC, liberal blogs, newspapers and even The Wall Street Journal: “Federal spending under Obama at historic lows … It’s clear that Obama has been the most fiscally moderate president we’ve had in 60 years.” There’s even a chart!

I’ll pause here to give you a moment to mop up the coffee on your keyboard. Good? OK, moving on …

This shocker led to around-the-clock smirk fests on MSNBC. As with all bogus social science from the left, liberals hide the numbers and proclaim: It’s “science”! This is black and white, inarguable, and why do Republicans refuse to believe facts?

Ed Schultz claimed the chart exposed “the big myth” about Obama’s spending: “This chart — the truth — very clearly shows the truth undoubtedly.” And the truth was, the “growth in spending under President Obama is the slowest out of the last five presidents.”

Don’t stop there, keep reading…

Later.

Y’know, it’s truly becoming tiresome that virtually every single day when one reads of news and current events someplace (other, of course, than the liberal media), there is unfailingly at least one item about something else the administration of Barack Hussein Obama is doing or saying that goes against the Constitution or is otherwise a threat of some kind to the U.S. economy, our national sovereignty, our country’s morality, our national security, sound foreign policy or something… always something, every day…

This time, it’s back to an issue best left to dry up and blow away.

Morning Bell: The Danger of Article 82 and Obama’s Latest Treaty

Back in 1982, President Ronald Reagan decided not to sign a treaty known as “Law of the Sea” (LOST), a United Nations convention that would raid America’s treasury for billions of dollars, then redistribute that wealth to the rest of the world by an international bureaucracy headquartered in Kingston, Jamaica. But today, the Obama Administration has revived that treaty, and tomorrow Senator John Kerry (D-MA) will hold hearings designed to illustrate its supposed benefits and generate support for its ratification. Without a doubt, Reagan’s decision should stand, and LOST should remain relegated to the trash bin of history.

The rationale for LOST is that it supposedly brings order to the world’s oceans, defines the rights and responsibilities of nations as they navigate and conduct business across the seas, protects the marine environment, and allows for the development of natural resources of the deep seabed. On the surface, these all sound like worthwhile goals. The thing is, the United States doesn’t need to join another United Nations treaty to make it happen.

For more than 200 years before LOST was adopted in 1982 and for 30 years since then, the U.S. Navy has successfully protected America’s maritime interests regardless of the fact that the United States has not signed on to the treaty. The United States’ navigational rights and freedoms have been secure, and they are best guaranteed by a strong Navy.

But of course, for some reason fathomable only to the left, America’s sovereignty is low on any priority lists and treasure rightly belonging to us needs to be divided with every tinpot dictatorship and all others the United nations sees fit to distribute the hard earned dollars of the U.S. taxpayer among.

They also seem to believe that it is in our best interests to allow other countries to come in and tell us how to conduct the business of the United States of America.

We need none of that.

LOST is not without consequences, either. One of the more nefarious and insidious of its provisions is Article 82, which requires the United States to forfeit royalties generated from oil and gas development on the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles – an area known as the “extended continental shelf.” That money, which one estimate says could be worth many billions, if not trillions of dollars, would go to the International Seabed Authority, a new international bureaucracy created by the treaty and based in Jamaica. Heritage’s Steven Groves explains that from there, America’s money could be shipped to the Middle East, Africa, China, and even state sponsors of terror:

LOST directs that the revenue be distributed to “developing States” (such as Somalia, Burma … you get the picture) and “peoples who have not attained full independence” (such as the Palestinian Liberation Organization … hey, don’t they sponsor terrorism?). The assembly – the “supreme organ” of the International Seabed Authority in which the United States has a single vote to cast – has the final say regarding the distribution of America’s transmogrified “international” royalties.

The assembly may vote to distribute royalties to undemocratic, despotic or brutal governments in Belarus, China or Zimbabwe – all members of LOST. Perhaps those dollars will go to regimes that are merely corrupt; 13 of the world’s 20 most corrupt nations, according to Transparency International, are parties to LOST. Even Cuba and Sudan, both considered state sponsors of terrorism, could receive dollars fresh from the U.S. Treasury.

Continuing:

In addition to shipping America’s money overseas to unsavory recipients, LOST could have other negative consequences, as well, by exposing U.S. industry and manufacturing to baseless international lawsuits. In fact, environmental activists and international legal academics are actively exploring the potential of using international litigation against the United States to advance their agendas. And for those who say LOST is a tool for mediating international disputes, take a look at the Philippines, which signed on to the treaty and yet today is finding itself browbeaten by China and its claims in the South China Sea.

If America truly wants to preserve its rights on the sea, then it needs to bolster the one tool that has guaranteed those rights throughout history — a strong U.S. Navy. Unfortunately, under President Obama’s watch, the United States is seeing its fleet diminished in size and ability. A lone piece of paper will not defend America’s interests on the sea, and neither will transferring billions of dollars to an international authority in Jamaica for redistribution the world over. LOST should not be ratified and signed, and instead Washington should turn its attention to ensuring that the U.S. Navy has the resources it needs to protect America’s interests on the high seas.

Why would anyone empowered with governing this country want to even consider the “Law of the Sea” for even fifteen seconds!?

Given that these are supposedly intelligent men and women, we have to conclude that they know what they’re doing and, as such, intentionally want to subscribe America to destructive programs of this caliber.

Shame on them…

Sorry, sometimes I can’t help but get a little bit silly, but perhaps that’s because when our country’s so-called “leaders” expect me to believe a load of silliness as justification for a senseless act on their part, I get to feeling, well, silly.

I mean…

From Weasel Zippers

Bring Out Your Dead! Obama Regime Launches National Drive to Counter Voter-ID Laws

President Obama’s reelection campaign launched a national drive Friday to counter new restrictive voter-access laws, which advisers said threaten his electoral chances in November.

Organizers will fan out in key swing states this weekend to teach volunteers and voters how to navigate a series of laws passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures imposing stricter identification requirements, limiting early voting and making it harder to organize voter-registration drives.

It is the beginning of a months-long effort, campaign officials said, to combat what they described as a Republican effort to stifle voting among young people and minorities, two groups that traditionally tend to vote Democratic. . . .

This is downright dumb, not to mention as transparent as a freshly cleaned window.

Anyone who is legally in America has a way to obtain identity documents, whether we are talking about a driver’s license, a state ID, a passport, a green card, some sort of legal picture ID that proves who he or she is.

Even homeless people, tattered and dirty on the streets, pushing shopping carts, begging on corners, sleeping in alleys, have to have some definitive way to prove who they are, or they couldn’t obtain such benefits s welfare, food stamps and whatever else they get (I looked into this before posting, and yes, people who dwell on the streets can get most of the same benefits as poor people living in subsidized housing and so forth), but THEY HAVE TO HAVE ID, regardless of race, religion, birthplace and other such statistics. Therefore, all those undomiciled people who receive government benefits of one kind or another don’t seem to have a problem obtaining ID.

Getting back to the issue at hand, so to speak, THE VOTE, through which we in this nation elect our leaders, constitutes a right whose eligibility extends solely to American citizens.

The Democrats, who champion the cause of illegal immigration, know that because of this illegal aliens would vote for them in a heartbeat if they could get to the polls.

“Bummer”, they can’t vote because they’re not eligible.

Despite the fact that whenever Democrat politicians are caught abusing their positions, cheating or blatantly violating other ethical rules of thumb or outright federal laws their proponents say “both parties do it”, the fact is that Democrats do it more, something like 90% - 10%.

Just look at any list of politicians caught committing corrupt practices, for example, and this will stand out like a beacon.

“So,” you inquire, “What’s yer pernt?”

My point is that casting votes using the registrations of people who have passed on, as they say, to their rewards, is more in line with the Democrats’ “win at any cost” campaigning philosophy than with that of the Republicans, who tend to respect the rule of law and accept it for what it is: The Law.

So, yes, the transparent silliness of Obama and the rest of those clowns over there on the left side of the aisle in expecting any intelligent person to believe their motives herein are to prevent Republicans from being able to “stifle voting among young people and minorities” and the way the liberal media supports them as though they, too, were as dumb as they evidently believe we, the people are is just… silly.

Is that pitiful, or what?

The Obama campaign’s “weekend of action” is part of a field effort that in 2008 helped identify, register and turn out millions of new voters. Those new voters gave Obama wins in unlikely places, including North Carolina and Virginia, where young and minority voters helped make the difference. Turning out those voters again this year is key to the president’s reelection strategy, but it is also more challenging this year in part because of the new voting laws.

Right.

“Over the past century, we expanded this fundamental right, making sure no one’s race, gender or economic status is ever used to deny this fundamental right,” said campaign strategist Michael Blake in a call with reporters Friday afternoon. “Unfortunately,” he added, “Republican-controlled legislatures in many states have been taking us backward, not forward.”. . .

You mean, Republican-controlled legislatures in many states have been preventing Democrat voters’ engaging in voter fraud.

According to Project Vote, a voting-rights advocacy group, about 15,000 people voted without identification in Virginia in 2008.

And how do we know how many of these were legally eligible to vote?

We don’t!

The Left: If it moves, regulate it. If it doesn’t move, regulate it anyway. Control, micromanage, apply every dollar of taxpayer funds available (or not, just keep the spending going!)

There’s an informative Op-Ed in today’s Washington Times on-line by Representative Jeb Hensarling (R, Texas) about the Dodd Frank Act and what it means in the Real World as opposed to the one occupied by today’s Democrats and their liberal mentors.

The news of J.P. Morgan Chase’s recent trading loss has raised the cry of “I told you so” from proponents of the almost 2-year-old Dodd-Frank Act. They say the law’s Volcker rule would have prevented such a loss and that without more regulation, financial institutions will continue to make poor investment decisions.

As an opponent of Dodd-Frank and one of many who have warned against the politicization of our economy, the threat of future bailouts and attempts by the government to eliminaterisks, I also wish to say, “I told you so.”

Within Dodd-Frank’s 2,300 pages are provisions allowing the government to designate certain financial firms “systemically important financial institutions” - otherwise known as “too big to fail” (TBTF). The law then empowers the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) to seize a troubled TBTF firm for the purpose of winding it down. In doing so, the FDIC can borrow up to the book value of the institution from taxpayers, an amount that could be astounding, as Bank of America, Citigroup and J.P. Morgan are all $2 trillion institutions.

Because private financial firms such as J.P. Morgan inevitably will blunder regardless of their size or sophistication, designating any firm TBTF is bad policy and worse economics. It causes erosion of market discipline and risks further bailouts paid in full by hardworking Americans. It also becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, helping make firms bigger and riskier than they otherwise would be. Look no further than Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their taxpayer-funded bailout to the tune of nearly $200 billion.

Unfortunately, Dodd-Frank codifies TBTF into federal law. Since its passage, the big banks have become larger and the small banks have become fewer. As a nation, we would do well to rethink TBTF’s fundamental premise before it’s too late.

Even if some conclude that certain financial firms are indeed TBTF, it begs the question whether Washington is even competent to manage their risk. A review of the federal government’s track record in this area does not inspire confidence. The Federal Housing Administration’s poor risk management has left it severely undercapitalized. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. has an unfunded obligation of $26 billion. Even the National Flood Insurance Program is $18 billion underwater (pun intended). Then we have Fannie and Freddie.

Yes, then we do.

We have said here before that one of the greatest shortcomings of “progressives” is that they never learn from mistakes: “It failed the first ninety nine times, so it’s got to work the hundredth!”

Of course, as most of us already realize, regulating, along with its partner, taxing, are hand in glove activities for the left, and any mishap of any kind, even one caused by them, provides them with an excuse to pass legislation applying more rules, thereby creating more bureaucracy as people must be brought in as permanent staff to monitor compliance and churn out additional idiocy in order to justify their stuffed salaries, pensions and overblown benefits.

Anyway, the entire Op-Ed is here.

Ah, the land of my birth, which has not been my country since I became an American nearly 40 years ago and the liberal media seem to have the sort of relationship only a Chamberlain could love.

If you listen to “progressives”, Cuba is a true paradise under the Castro regime, with great health care, fair governance, great health care, a benign leader, great health care, liberty beyond belief and, of course, great health care.

They embrace Che as the noble revolutionary while ignoring his status as engineer of the Cuban death camps and view Fidel and Raoul with the reverence they once reserved for Ho Chi Minh.

They overlook the regime’s suffocation of human rights as a mere “detail” that holds little significance in the face of all that Fidelian benevolence they perceive on that island made miserable by what amounts to an oppressive tinpot dictator.

Can you imagine what the New York Times would say if we quarantined all of America’s HIV victims, as they began doing in the late 1980s in Cuba?

From the L.A. Times, 1988

A member of the first U.S. delegation to visit Cuba’s quarantine center for people infected with the AIDS-causing human immunodeficiency virus Thursday described the detention facility as “pleasant” but “frightening in its implications.”

The first detailed picture of what the Cuban government calls its “sanitarium” for all identified HIV carriers was painted by Ronald Bayer, associate professor at Columbia University’s School of Public Health, in an interview with The Times.

Cuba is the only nation in the world that has mandated universal HIV testing and enforced isolation of all virus carriers. Bayer said he was told by Cuban health officials that one-third of the nation’s 10.2 million people have been tested so far and that 240 Cubans–171 men and 69 women–have been placed in the camp, where they are required to spend the rest of their lives. They are removed from their jobs but continue to be paid.

“We were shown groups of nondescript apartments that looked like typical Cuban suburban housing,” Bayer said. “It was neither barracks-like nor dungeon-like, although I have to assume we were shown the best. It was impossible to tell whether the complex was surrounded by a wall or a fence.

“But even if it all looked as good as what we saw, it does not resolve the moral justification of incarceration based on supposed future behavior,” said Bayer, a medical ethicist who has long specialized in AIDS, or acquired immune deficiency syndrome.

My emphasis above.

Well, that sentiment came from an L.A. Times journalist 24 years ago. That paper is a member, in good standing, of the liberal media.

How times have changed since then.

From Times Watch:

So Much for Civil Liberties: Communist Cuba’s Mandatory AIDS Quarantine Defended in New York Times, Dictator Castro Praised

New York Times “global health correspondent” Donald McNeil Jr. made a rare trip to Cuba and filed a report praising the Communist island’s handling of the AIDS epidemic for Tuesday’s “A Regime’s Tight Grip on AIDS – In Cuba, rigorous testing, education, and free condoms help keep the epidemic in check.” Conspiciously absent from that headline, especially for a newspaper that prides itself on defending civil liberties, were the involuntary quarantines of AIDS patients that took place in Cuba until 1993.

McNeil also downplayed concerns about the sanitarium prisons for AIDS patients (”life inside was not brutal”), a policy the Times would no doubt find dangerous and repellent if done in America. He also praised Cuba’s “universal health care” and free condoms and credited “socialism” for Cuba’s success.

(The same edition of the Science Times was much harder on American health policy, featuring medical writer Tara Parker-Pope talking to a doctor angry about the medical tests selfish Americans demand, a theme well-suited to the Times’ call for cost-cutting via universal health care: “Plenty of Blame in a Health System ‘Designed to Fail.’”)

McNeil opened with the case of Yudelsy García O’Connor, the first Cuban baby known to have been born with H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS, and downplayed the quaranatine policy.

Ms. García is alive thanks partly to lucky genes, and partly to the intensity with which Cuba has attacked its AIDS epidemic. Whatever debate may linger about the government’s harsh early tactics — until 1993, everyone who tested positive for H.I.V. was forced into quarantine — there is no question that they succeeded.

Cuba now has one of the world’s smallest epidemics, a mere 14,038 cases. Its infection rate is 0.1 percent, on par with Finland, Singapore and Kazakhstan. That is one-sixth the rate of the United States, one-twentieth of nearby Haiti.

The population of Cuba is only slightly larger than that of New York City. In the three decades of the global AIDS epidemic, 78,763 New Yorkers have died of AIDS. Only 2,364 Cubans have.

Other elements have contributed to Cuba’s success: It has free universal basic health care; it has stunningly high rates of H.I.V. testing; it saturates its population with free condoms, concentrating on high-risk groups like prostitutes; it gives its teenagers graphic safe-sex education; it rigorously traces the sexual contacts of each person who tests positive.

{rigorously traces the sexual contacts of each person who tests positive — I’ll just bet Cuba’s “healthcare” system does}

You’ll notice how the Times writer justifies (because it worked) the quarantine system.

Now, again imagine if the U.S. Government did the quarantine number on Americans with HIV. What are the odds the same journalist and, in fact, the entire body of N.Y. Times writers wouldn’t begin immediately pummeling Washington with a massive editorial crusade condemning such offensive violations of human rights.

Apparently what would constitute “dastardliness” here in the U.S. of A. is perfectly acceptible in a nation governed, as our media seems to believe, in a more enlightened way.

What stupidos these liberals are… Ooops, sorry; It’s just all those things they know that aren’t so.

From PJ Media:

(Legal Editor Note: Not long ago, the Left had a monopoly on rallies and protests. Republicans and conservatives, more enamored with scholars instead of brawlers, shunned displays of political muscle in the streets. That’s all changed. A few months ago, Attorney General Eric Holder went to the LBJ Presidential Library in Austin, Texas, to announce an aggressive attack on state election integrity measures like Voter ID. This election-year strategy is designed to stoke the leftist base but risks alienating everyone else. To greet Holder that day were hundreds of citizens at a rally sponsored by True the Vote.

I will never forget the disoriented look on Holder’s face as he emerged from the black SUV to the large crowd of people who came out to confront him. “Signs? Bullhorns? Multitudes? And they aren’t here to support me?” — that was the look.

ACORN whistleblower Anita Moncrief delivered a powerful speech that day, and PJ Media has finally been able to obtain it and publish it.)

Something like this was long overdue for complete access by the public. It doesn’t shock those of us who know just how far the left will sink to spread their paracommunist disease through our political system to our social, education, economic systems and even our family lives, but those who do not believe such a malevolent force could exist in our society should be informed as to just how wrong they are.

I speak from the heart and I speak plain, so if I offend some of you I’m sorry. But it’s an honor to be here today, especially to be at the LBJ Library, the father of the Great Society, the father of the social programs and the welfare state, and then the dissolution of the black family and our communities.

When LBJ signed in the Voting Rights Act in 1965, he said: “We’ll have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 40 years.” And that needs to be said. People need to understand that. That’s the legacy that Holder brings here with him tonight by holding his speech here. It’s not just about coming here to talk about voting rights. It’s to talk about how they’ve taken race and turned it in to something that is unrecognizable.

I grew up in Birmingham, Alabama, in the heart of the civil rights movement. I could have walked to the 16th Street Baptist Church that was bombed during the civil rights era. And I have to tell you, the racism that I experienced, the evilness that came at me, it wasn’t from Birmingham, Alabama. It was from when I moved to the liberal north, and I got to see how things really were, and part of that was working with ACORN.

And that’s why I’m here today, to let you know what you guys are up against. This is not just something that has come out recently. This is something that started in the ’90s when Bill Clinton was in office. Not many people realize this, but ACORN helped get Bill Clinton elected, and the National Voter Registration Act was Clinton’s gift to ACORN.

And so for 10 years, ACORN and its sister organization Project Vote were going around the country and forcing Section 7 of the NVRA, which is the part about registering voters in public assistance agencies. They coordinated openly with the Clinton Justice Department during the ’90s, and during that time they had voter registrations coming out of these public assistance offices in the millions. This was their demographic.

Imagine a government, a federal mandate targeting a certain demographic. What if we were to say that by federal law you have to register people in churches and gun stores across the country? You don’t think liberals would lose their mind?

They are targeting their demographic, the people that are getting them elected, and this Obama gravy train has gotten out of control. We have more people on public assistance and welfare and unemployment than ever before, and they are coordinating to get Obama elected.

I have proof that Obama and Project Vote and ACORN were coordinating illegally in 2008 to get Obama elected. Do you not think that they would do the same thing in 2012 to get this man put back in office?

If there is proof that the Department of Justice ignored an ACORN investigation because they knew it would lead right to the White House, do you not think they would try to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests that show collusion between Project Vote, who has been pushing this project for years, and now the DOJ has all of a sudden started back filing lawsuits across the country under Section 7 violations.

This is a coordinated effort by ACORN and its people to push the same agenda that they’ve been doing for 20 years. We have the proof, we can connect the dots. They’ve been contacting the Department of Justice up until 2004 to force them to file lawsuits; even when Bush was in office and Antonio Gonzales was the Attorney General, they were still trying to get them to collude with them and to work.

So now, now, when they publicly acknowledge working with the Department of Justice in those previous administrations, why are they denying it and hiding it now? Could it be because it’s illegal collusion? Could it be because they’re trying to work to get Obama elected?

These are the questions we need to ask. We have — and I say “we” because there are people I’m working with — over 55,000 documents that could indict some of these people from ACORN and Project Vote, the same people that are out there right now meddling around in New York with Occupy Wall Street and across the country.

Why won’t Darrell Issa and his people call for a congressional investigation of ACORN when there are enough documents to bury these people? Why won’t we get them to take the stand?

We need you guys to step up and do this. I am today calling for two things: one, a Congressional investigation into the activities of ACORN and Project Vote, the Obama administration, and its relation to the Department of Justice in these Section 7 lawsuits across the country; and two, I am calling on you guys to help me with this, to not only call for Holder’s resignation but his impeachment.

I am so tired of race being a dividing factor in our communities. I grew up poor in Birmingham, Alabama, and I will tell you, in the black community they don’t have a lot of opportunities, there’s not a lot of banks, so where are you going to get your check cashed at? The liquor store, or you go to a check cashing place.

You can’t do anything without an ID in the black community. Sometimes they won’t even let you use your debit card unless they can verify you are who you are, because they lose money on fraudulent purchases every year. These are the realities of being poor and being black in America. Why is Sharpton ignoring this? He knows exactly what I’m talking about, but he’s a professional race-baiter. He smells that 8mm camera film and he comes running out there and he pulls out that platinum race card.

I’m tired of the platinum race card, and that’s why I’m here today — to let you know it’s a lie, it’s something they have used to divide this country, and we have got to get together and stop it. And the only way we can do that is to unite our voices and call for these investigations, and to let people know that we are tired of this race card and we’re not going to put up with that in 2012.

Every black voter in America who has been hoodwinked by the Democrats needs to read that one line of Lindon Baines Johnson’s: When LBJ signed in the Voting Rights Act in 1965, he said: “We’ll have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 40 years.”

Disgusting!

When you give liberals an inch, they will not be satisfied to take a mere mile and, like terrorists, they will continue pushing the envelope to see how far they can get. Such is the case with political correctness, and the way the left keeps pushing more and more of it on the rest of us as a way of knocking down our defenses against their various agendas, none of which are in the least bit friendly to America and the American way of life.

Here we have yet another example of this phenomenon in action;

In yet another case of Orwellian political correctness run amok, a video posted at MoveOn.org says calling illegal immigrants “illegal” fits the definition of a hate crime and calls for the word to be banned when used in the context of immigration.

The headline at the MoveOn page screams “One word we hear too often on Fox News,” as if only Fox News calls illegal immigrants “illegal.”

As usual, they alter the context to make “illegal” aliens out to mean that the peoples, their existences, are illegal rather than their undocumented presences in the United States, semantics intended to villify enforcement of federal law.

It irks me to no end that this practice is allowed to continue, but I suppose that this is the essence of a country like ours, one endowed with freedom for all, including those that would destroy us from within, taking away those same liberties that allowed them to do so.

Having said that, here is the article quoted above, complete with video.