The Onion: Andrea Barret & Piper Cahill- 'Mitt Romney: To Travel Back in Time to Kill Liberal Versions of Himself'

Source:The Onion- A Mitt Romney 2012 campaign rally.

"Seeking to dispel accusations of flip-flopping, Romney unveiled plans to use a time machine to kill earlier versions of himself who believed in universal health care and gay rights."

From  The Onion 

This just in from the Romney Campaign: “America doesn’t want consistency when it comes to their politicians, otherwise they would vote for honest people to represent them. Therefor we’re announcing the Romney For America Time Machine that will allow Governor Romney to travel back in time to change any positions from the past, that might be unpopular today. Thank you.”

Source:The Onion- Flip Flopper, I mean Mitt Romney (understandable mistake) announcing the Romney For America Time Machine, that will allow Governor Romney to travel back in time to change whatever positions that he may have had in the past, that might be unpopular with the right-wing base of the Republican Party today. You heard this first from The Onion.

Imagine if Mitt Romney could travel back in time to change more liberal positions he use to have, that me as a Liberal respect. Like when he supported civil unions for same-sex couples just six years ago. Just one position that has pissed off the Christian Right when he was Governor of the Democratic State of Massachusetts. Or back in 1994 and I’m guessing even before that, when he was running for U.S. Senate against Senator Ted Kennedy. Being pro-choice on abortion, or back in 2005-06, signing the twin brother or sister of the Affordable Care Act. Better known as ObamaCare.

But telling the difference between ObamaCare” and RomneyCare, is like telling the difference between the Olsen twins, seeing them for the first time. Or better yet imagine if Mitt could clone himself, when he’s running in Massachusetts. He’s the Liberal Mitt, when he’s running for president in a Christian-Conservative GOP. He’s a more Conservative Mitt, but not far enough for the Far Right. That he scares off independent voters, which is where he is right now.

If Mitt could clone himself, he would be the perfect unbeatable politician: Liberal on social issues, conservative on economic policy. Keeps your taxes and spending down, somewhere in between depending on if he listens to himself, or his clone. On foreign policy, he would be exactly where independent voters are. The Christian-Right, would hate him because he’s not trying to tell Americans how to live their lives. Socialists would hate him because he’s not spending every dollar Uncle Sam takes in, or increasing taxes on everyone. But if this were 1988 or 1980, the Romney Campaign wouldn’t even have to consider creating a time machine, or cloning Mitt. Because this is where the Republican Party use to be politically.

The GOP, so much liberal or classically conservative on social issues, pre-Christian-Right, but took the attitude that government shouldn’t be telling Americans how to live their lives. Which is actually conservative politics as well. Could the time machine be Mitt Romney’s secret weapon to winning the presidential election? What happens after he’s nominated by the GOP and sees independent voters that liked his liberal positions on social Issues? Wait! It’s a time machine, so he would be able to go back in time and delete his ass-kissing of Christian-Right Voters in the Republican primaries. A time machine would be a hell of a secret weapon, if only it existed. The problem is Mitt is stuck with whoever he is. At times its hard to tell with his flip-flopping. I’m not sure even he knows who he is at this point.  

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily Review, on Blogger. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Review, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on Blogger. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

Socialist Francois Hollande Defeats Conservative Nicholas Sarkozy in French Election: The Socialists Are Coming!

Source:Associated Press- democracy in action in France.

"Socialist candidate Francois Hollande defeated conservative Nicolas Sarkozy to become France's next president, heralding a change in how Europe tackles its debt crisis and how France flexes its diplomatic muscle around the world."  

From the Associated Press 

"François Hollande's victory in France offered a stiff rebuke to Germany's austerity regime, but the new president faces challenges in delivering on his campaign's pro-growth rhetoric. 

French president-elect Francois Hollande reacts to supporters with his companion Valerie Trierweiler while celebrating his election victory in Bastille Square in Paris, France, Sunday, May 6, 2012. France handed the presidency Sunday to leftist Hollande, a champion of government stimulus programs who says the state should protect the downtrodden - a victory that could deal a death blow to the drive for austerity that has been the hallmark of Europe in recent years. 

Speaking from the Bastille last night, Hollande gave a clear sense of how he sees his victory: It signaled, he said, a "fresh start for Europe"- an indication that austerity is not be the continent's destiny. The new French president has set off tremors in Berlin by arguing for stimulus spending to revive Europe's ailing economy and calling for eurobonds to finance large infrastructure projects. Hollande has also pledged to veto the German-inspired fiscal compact, which would bind its 25 signatories to stringent budgetary rules, unless it is complemented by measures to promote growth and employment.

All this will doubtless be on the table when Hollande meets Angela Merkel after being sworn in on May 15 or 16. Merkel worked closely with Sarkozy in tackling (or failing to) the European debt crisis and openly supported him against his socialist challenger. As leader of Europe's economic powerhouse and its reluctant financial rescuer, she has proved a stubborn player. Her government's commitment to austerity and structural reform as the only medicine for the eurozone's ills has been adamantine-it will be hard for Hollande to find ways to crack her. On the other hand, he has invested too heavily in his credentials as an anti-austerity champion (on a pan-European level) to yield easily; he is mindful, among other things, of past instances in which French political candidates promised a change of course only to quickly bow to Berlin once elected. Parliamentary elections on June 10 and 17, in which Hollande hopes the socialists will earn an absolute majority, will also contribute to a robust negotiating stance." 

Source: The American Prospect- Francois Hollande, the next Socialist President of the French Republic-

From The American Prospect

The Socialists are coming! The Socialists are coming! Everyone hide your wallets and mattress's and bank accounts, Swiss bank accounts while they're still available! Quick, hurry before you see the Socialists take what's ever left of your personal finances.

Well, this is France, so the French are use to having Socialists in power, perhaps even like it. They pay high taxes with smiles on their faces and then complain when they are only taxed 50, 60 or 70%. And say: "No, I can give you more, I'm not completely broke yet. Quick, take the rest of my money, before I do something with it like pay the rent, buy groceries or actually enjoy life."

This is France with a lot of opportunities to do that, most of them legal by the way. If Socialists came to power in America or someone who is not a Socialist, but where there are millions of Americans dumb enough to believe he is a Socialist, ( are you getting warmer, have you figured out who I'm talking about yet ) there would be riots in the streets.

If there were actually real Socialists coming to power in America, let's say the so-called Progressive Caucus (another way of saying Democratic Socialists of America, to me more accurate ) came to power in Congress and one of their members gets elected President and if we are going to imagine this, (let's also imagine a July blizzard in Phoenix, Arizona about the same odds) there would not only be riots in the streets but people fleeing to other countries. And to them a foreign country would be Hawaii or Puerto Rico. And then they would be shocked that the people there speak English.

Americans, go out-of-their-way to not pay taxes, wouldn't surprise me if most of the Swiss bank accounts are owned by Americans. With Americans shoving the Swiss out-of-the-way to get a Swiss bank account. We cry for days after filing our tax returns, going: "If only I had that money that Uncle Sam took from me, what I could've spent it on." Just some of the differences between France and America.

When Socialists come to power in France, it's a cause of celebration. When Conservatives come to power in France, the people there freak out and complain about the Populist Party trying to transform France into America. And freak out about having to make more decisions about their lives. "Oh no, more freedom! What am I going to, I can't take this! I need the Federal Government telling me what to do!" Just some of the differences between the two countries. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Jamie Trudel: The Today Show- Katie Couric vs. Ann Coulter (2002)

Source:Jamie Trudel- NBC News anchor Katie Couric interviewing Far-Right political commentator and author Ann Coulter.

"Today Show interview with Katie Couric and Ann Coulter. Things definitely get tense."

Source:Jamie Trudel

Ah my first piece about Ann Coulter and hopefully my last. Maybe she'll grow up or gain some sense in the future. And maybe the Pacific Ocean will go dry, whatever happens first. Don't plan your schedule around either of those things happening.

Listening to Katie Couric do this interview, is what I like about her professionally with her ability and willingness to not only interview ignorant people, but people who quite frankly lie to advance their careers and to put down the other side. And there are people on both sides of the isle who do these things. Thats what Anne Coulter is in the business to do. She clearly dislikes and that might be putting it lightly anyone to the left of her, which is about 250 million people. Which puts her in a lonely but loud faction in American politics of people who love expressing their First Amendment rights but can't stand people who disagree with them, which is again most of the country when they express there's. 

What Katie Couric was doing in this interview was bringing and ignorant, hateful person out into the public, to show the country how ignorant some people are. Similar to what Bill Buckley did in the 1960s and 1970s on Firing Line by interviewing people on the Far-Left and Far-Right in America.

Just to lay out what Ann Coulter thinks about Liberals, according to her:

We are Un-American, Atheist, Socialists, who love criminals. Or see it as our role to defend them and who are looking to destroy America as it is. So we can transform it into some fascist, socialist utopia, where people who disagree with us aren't welcomed. Thats Ann Coulter's view of liberalism, or at

least what comes out of her writings.

Ann Coulter sees her politics, that she would describe as conservative, but her politics are only conservative in the sense, that she wants to conserve and protect peoples ability to live and think just like her, not the whole country. And that the First Amendment is for people who think just like her according to the Pluto size planet The World According to Ann Coulter. Again, a lonely small world, where the whole country would think and probably look just like her. Even though liberal comes from the word liberty, she sees it as communist. And probably couldn't tell the difference between the two. Thats what's called a blind political eye, not being able to tell the difference between one faction and the other.

Again, if you follow my blogs, you know that I'm a big believer in the First Amendment, as well as education. That when both are working, there's room for the Ann Coulter's and Bill Maher's of the world. Because people will have the knowledge to know who these people are and what they are doing, trying to advance their careers at the expense of others. People they seriously dislike and perhaps to advance the political ideology they follow. They are essentially political hatchet men and women and this is how they make their living. And there are enough people in the country, that follow them to keep them in business.

The Onion: 'Report- Every Potential 2040 President Already Unelectable Due To Facebook'

Source:The Onion- They can probably also forget about ever doing undercover work, unless they're playing drunk club hoppers.

"A troubling report finds that by 2040 every presidential candidate will be unelectable to political office due to their embarrassing Facebook posts."

From The Onion

This whole satire is about the fact that employers are now demanding to see their employees Facebook passwords, to see what they are up to on Facebook. And perhaps what they are up to online as a whole. What videos they post of themselves, as well as other videos, what they are doing while they are not at work.

To me this is an invasion of privacy, which is currently legal but I believe it should be illegal. Employers will argue that they need to know this info, to be able to judge their employees to get a better idea of their character and how they conduct themselves in their free time. And that they represent the company and organization, even when they are not at work.

But unless you are a public official, law enforcement officer, a doctor, something like that, you're not always on call. You have your work time and your free time. You have certain control over your schedule and your time. And what you do on your time, is your business, what you do on your employers time, is also your time but your work time is also your employers time. And that they can and should be able to use to judge you as an employee.

With the current system as it, everyone out there who social network's, be careful what you post. And how you carry yourself in public, because now unless this is changed, it could be used to hold against you, now and into the future.

It's not longer Uncle Sam and Aunt Jane as I would call her but Big Daddy and Big Momma, the people you work for, that have their eyes on what you do in your own time. Perhaps having spies out there patrolling their employees, that they feel may be suspicious of what Rick Santorum would call, immoral behavior and a threat to our national morality. In other words having a good time. Getting drunk, going to wild party's, having your photo taken of you as you are doing these things.

So the next time you are at a party like this and you see someone with an I-phone taking a picture of someone at the party, keep in mind, this person my be a corporate spy and you should be on your best behavior. Unless you are a Republican and you are thinking about running for office in the future. And you may need Christian-Conservative to vote for you. The Republican Cult as I call them, who by the time you are looking at public office, would've by then had hopefully of died off.

I wouldn't worry about what you do now, as long as you stay out of trouble. And don't hurt anyone, as far as it hurting a future career in public service. But if you are not looking at public office and work in the private sector, think twice about being drunk in public and what you say online. It could come back to bite you in the ass. A big bite from Big Daddy and Big Momma, the people you work for.

BBC: Jon Stewart, Bill Maher & Rory Bremmer

Source:Chinese Fan Share- political satirist Jon Stewart.

"What are the inner workings of The Daily Show or Real Time with Bill Maher?    The interviews give a small slice of insight into what the leading satirists in America believe they are doing and why they do what they do.   Also, Rory Bremner, from the UK is also mentioned.  I’ve never heard of him until now but it seems he occupies the same space as Stewart and Maher. I’ll see if I can dig up some of Bremner’s work, for the sake of curiosity." 

From Dead Wild Roses 

"The BBC almost makes me want to watch Television again – On Satire" 

From BBC

The Onion: 'Democrats- Barack Obama Has Dicked Us Around For Four Years, Now It's Our Turn'

Source:The Onion- President Barack Obama: 44th President of the United States.

"While most Democrats plan to vote for Obama in November, they continue to tell pollsters they're "undecided" just for the fun of messing with the president's head."

From The Onion

People who are called Progressives are stereotyped as intelligent, well-educated, open-minded, reformers and willing to look and try new things. As well as living in either a big Northeastern city, like Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, Boston. Or living in Seattle or San Francisco or Los Angeles and look down at people who don't. I'll grant where so-called Progressives tend to live, which is why their political candidates don't tend to do very well outside of these areas.

But the way these Leftists (Or Socialists, but not real Progressives) treated President George W. Bush, someone I voted against twice and consider him to be the worst President, at least in my lifetime, it's hard to label these left-wingers as a group, open-minded. As well as things like on education reform and other issues. Where they tend to be for the status-quo.

As open and reform minded, as well as supporting someone like Barack Obama as strong as they did in 2008, because they saw him as one of them, a Socialist Democrat, thats common in Europe. Someone who would try to make America like Europe, which is what Socialist have been trying to accomplish since the 1930s, at least. They saw Candidate Obama as the new George McGovern or Dennis Kucinich. But someone who could get elected.

If Socialist Hippies are so intelligent and open-minded as a group and I'll admit they have their share of intelligent people, as well as ignorant people who say the wildest things. And have their own conspiracy theories, they would've done their research on Barack Obama. And instead of finding the next George McGovern, would've saw Bill Clinton or Jack Kennedy. Someone who doesn't believe the Federal Government has all the answers. And that we have to be creative and intelligent and how we deal with these issues.

And that raising taxes or creating a new Federal program or spending more money on a current Federal program, isn't always the best way to solve these problems. You would think with all the Leftists that go to Ivy League schools, they would've bothered to of do their research on then Senator Barack Obama. And wouldn't now be so disappointed with him today.

I have my own issues with Barack Obama, he's not liberal enough for me on social issues. And doesn't have enough respect for civil liberties on national security. On things like the Patriot Act and indefinite detention and the War on Drugs. But I didn't vote for him in the Democratic primary in 2008. And had a pretty good idea what we were getting from him as President.

I've never seen Barack Obama as a Saint or a God or voted for him because he's cool. Which is the main reason why a lot of young people voted for Senator Obama for President. I feel no remorse for Socialists that worked as hard as they did and voted for him as President. And are now disappointed in him now.

Charles Manson: 'Denied Parole, With Next Parole Hearing Set For 2027’

Source:CNN- convicted serial murderer Charles Manson.

“Corcoran, California CNN —

Notorious killer Charles Manson, 77, was denied parole Wednesday after a California parole panel “could find nothing good as far as suitability” for his being paroled, a commissioner said.

Manson didn’t show up for his parole hearing, which was held at a state prison in Corcoran, California, where he is serving a life sentence.

Manson’s next parole hearing was scheduled for 15 years from now, meaning he could die in prison.” 

From CNN

"Charles Manson once more was put up before the California parole board and was denied freedom." 

Source:Daily Worldwide News- convicted serial murderer Charles Manson

From Daily Worldwide News  

“Infamous mass murderer Charles Manson just lost his last real shot at freedom … the parole board just denied his latest request for release.

The hearing took place at Corcoran State Prison in CA…where Manson– who was convicted of 7 murders in 1969 … including Sharon Tate’s– was previously denied parole 11 times.

Now … at the ripe old age of 77 this is most likely the murderer’s last stand…since his case cannot be heard again for another 15 years … putting him well into his 90s.

Only one Manson Family member convicted of murder has been paroled — Steve Grogan–who was granted his freedom in 1985 for aiding the authorities and good behavior.

If you recall…Manson was originally sentenced to death in 1972 but it was commuted after the California death penalty was declared unconstitutional." 

Source:TMZ- convicted serial murderer Charles Manson is exactly where he belongs for the last 42 years.

From TMZ

Charles Manson has been in prison for his current sentence of forty-two years. After being convicted for his part in the Manson Family murders of the late 1960s. He is now 77 years old, so just for is current prison sentence alone, he’s been in prison for more than half of his life.

The last time Manson was a free man from the mid 1960s, after being paroled from prison in Washington State, to the time he was arrested in 1969, for his role in the Manson Family murders, that’s really the longest stretch he’s ever been free at any point of his life.

It’s not just that Charlie Manson has spent most of his adult life in prison he’s spent most of his life period in prison. He’s exactly where he belongs, he’s never shown the ability to be productive on the outside, without hurting innocent people, or having them killed. Charlie Manson is not in Prison for actually physically committing the murders. He’s in Prison for conspiring the murders, for inspiring others to do his evil work.

Charlie Manson was originally sentenced to death for the role in the Manson Family murders from 1969. So were his co-defendants Leslie Van Houten, Patricia Krenwinkel, Charles Watson and others. But then California outlawed the death penalty shortly after their sentences. So their sentences were changed to life in prison with the possibility of parole. None of the convicted murderers have been paroled and they will never be.

Imagine that you are responsible for intentionally killing not just one innocent person, but innocent people and not only is your life spared, but you actually have a shot as small as it is, of one day being free. Even though your victims will never be free from the crimes you committed against them.

The Manson Family is lucky to even be alive right now and that’s the best they’ll ever do. You can make a good case that sparing the lives of Leslie Van Houten and Pat Krenwinkell, was a a good move. Both have made productive use of their prison sentences. Both completed college in prison, both hold good prison jobs. Both have shown they are now rehabilitated and probably no longer represents a threat to society. And both have shown remorse for their crimes.

Charlie Manon is exactly where he belongs and is lucky to have whatever time he has left to be alive in Prison. He’s shown no remorse or admitted any responsibility for his crimes. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.