A little bird told me that you might not be backing down from running for your Senate seat in 2016. I’m here to ask you to please excuse yourself from the political conversation in our state.
No one likes you.
You are old, you are senile, and you sell out conservatism every chance you get.
Come out of the closet already and admit you are a Democrat, you’ll feel much better, I swear.
Or don’t, I don’t really care what you do, as long as you stop trying to pretend you represent conservative ideals.
I personally don’t think anyone could have beat Obama in 2008, but it must have been some collective delusion or some extreme blonde moment that led Republicans to choosing you as the candidate.
I hate to tell you this, but you’ve been “one of these old guys that should’ve shoved off” for a goddamn long time.
In April of this year your approval ratings in the great state of Arizona were abysmal. 67% of those polled we need someone new in office. Only 21% thought you deserved another term and your job approval rating was at the lowest it’s been in 21 years.
Stick a fork in yourself, because you are done.
Liberals are the ones defending you now and you’d rather concentrate on your poker app than on important issues of foreign policy. We didn’t send you to Washington to play games and crack jokes about after you get caught. This isn’t just your job, it’s the future of the United States. It’s shameful that you would be so irresponsible.
You think that supporting the constitution passionately makes someone a “whacko bird” and you’d rather be at dinner with Obama than representing the interests of your constituents. You’re from Arizona, a red state populated by people that don’t appreciate your attempts to sell freedom down the river in order to win brownie points with the administration.
Oh and your daughter isn’t doing your reputation any favors.
In short, please “shove off”, because I promise that I and many other fellow Arizonans will make your next campaign a huge embarrassment for you. We don’t need or want a power hungry, opportunistic, fake Republican representing our state.
Sincerely NOT yours,
Most of the State of Arizona
I watched Common Core: The Great Debate for the second time today and I noted some things being said by the anti-Common Core side that the Fordham Institute side did address, but I’d like to give my own point of view on.
The first was that Common Core does not indicate actual content.
Fordham Institute’s President, Chester Finn, did deliver quite a smack down on this himself, but I wanted to go one step further and, similar to Common Core, address the issue in conjunction with the need for school choice.
As Finn says in the debate, people who are anti-Common Core and people who are in favor of school choice should BOTH be pleased that Common Core does not dictate much in the way of content.
I don’t think anyone on either side of this debate is anti-school choice and how can you have school choice if schools are all required to teach from the same curriculum and book list? It wouldn’t be impossible, but it certainly wouldn’t be as effective.
Why do I compare atheists to giant babies? It’s simple, they take everything so personally and they try to force people to change their personal thoughts to make them more palatable for Atheists.
They are also wimps. I have heard them complain about how “bad” someone’s opinion of Atheism makes them “feel” and I can’t help laughing.
How thin is your skin? Not everyone is going to like you, especially when you constantly attack their religion and beliefs.
There’s nothing that annoys me more than someone placing the blame for their stupidity on an inanimate object. Especially an inanimate object like “the internet”. I’m not exactly sure why I’m surprised that Anthony Weiner found a new way to annoy me.
Saying that you probably wouldn’t have sent pictures of your junk to women if the internet didn’t exist (or worse: wouldn’t have got caught if the internet didn’t exist) is like saying “I wouldn’t have cheated on my wife if she put more effort into looking attractive”
You’re trying to excuse your actions, but it just ends up revealing even more flaws in your own character.
Today the Supreme Court will be deciding if Michigan has the right to outlaw race discrimination in their universities.
Yeah, you read that right.
You know a case is going to be interesting when even the oppositions attorney is questioning whether the entire court case is obtuse.
Affirmative action opponents persuaded Michigan voters to outlaw any consideration of race after the Supreme Court ruled a decade ago that race could be a factor in college admissions.
That state’s constitutional amendment is now being examined by the high court to determine whether the change the voters sought is in fact discriminatory.
It is a proposition that even the lawyer for civil rights groups in favor of affirmative action acknowledges is a tough sell, at first glance.
“How can a provision that is designed to end discrimination in fact discriminate?” said Mark Rosenbaum of the American Civil Liberties Union. Yet that is the difficult argument Rosenbaum will make on Tuesday to a court that has grown more skeptical about taking race into account in education since its Michigan decision in 2003.
- Fox News
I have a very low opinion of affirmative action myself. Race should never be a factor in a job application or university admissions application. Never.
How in the world can you say that it’s okay to discriminate in favor of a minority, but then turn around and sue someone for discriminating against a minority? A bit hypocritical don’t you think.
Oh wait, liberals are the ones who love Affirmative Action. Why am I surprised by hypocisy?
So I applaud Michigan’s decision on this. The voter’s chose and now, somehow, it’s being said that this decision is discriminatory.
Discriminatory against who exactly?
People argue that minority enrollment has gone down since the amendment was passed in Michigan, but what they don’t talk about is the real question.
What was the quality of the students that were turned down? Their GPAs? Their SATs and ACTs? Their recommendations and extracurriculars?
Why should a school consider anything other than the above when deciding who is a good fit for their schools?
How is it discrimination to say “your race does not matter to us, we don’t care what your skin color is, the only thing that matters is your merit”, that’s racist?
No, no it’s not.
So here’s hoping that the Supreme Court will make the smart decision tomorrow.
I’m keeping my fingers crossed.
New Jersey Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson ruled on Friday that gay couples must be allowed to marry as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Jacobson claimed that refusing to recognize same-sex marriages would be depriving couples of their rights.
No New Jersey, that is not how the Supreme Court’s decision on DOMA works. Maybe Mary Jacobson didn’t even bother to read the ruling or something, because nothing in the ruling says anything about state’s being required to allow gay marriage as a result. In fact, the SCotUS ruling isn’t about whether states should make gay marriage legal at all.
Then came a second episode of Weiner’s sexting this summer, blindsiding the Clintons, obliterating Weiner’s mayoral ambitions, and greatly complicating Abedin’s future with the Clintons. With Weiner’s ignominious loss and parting bird-flip, “Huma has a choice to make,” says a close associate of hers. “Does she go with Anthony, or does she go with Hillary?”
One might have good reason to ask Hillary if this ultimatum isn’t a tad bit…hypocritical coming from a woman who played the dutiful political wife through more public accusations (and proof) of infidelity** on the part of her husband than we have seen with any other President in the last 3 decades.
In recognition of this most auspicious holiday (and because I’m a nerd) I have decided to celebrate Talk Like a Pirate Day by reminded the reader’s of this website of one very important part of the War Powers Clause of the Enumerated powers of our government.
[The Congress shall have Power...] To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water
Do you know what a Letter of Marque is and why it’s got anything to do with Pirates?
If you know this without googling it then you are one up on me, because when I was doing my latest in-depth reading of the Constitution I took one look at it, cocked my head like a confused puppy, and pulled out my smartphone for a quick search of Google.
For those of you who aren’t up on your maritime law/history, here’s what I’m talking about.
In the days of fighting sail, a letter of marque and reprisal was a government licence authorizing a person (known as a privateer) to attack and capture enemy vessels and bring them before admiralty courts for condemnation and sale. Cruising for prizes with a letter of marque was considered an honorable calling combining patriotism and profit, in contrast to unlicensed piracy, which was universally reviled.
Yeah, that’s right. Our Congress has the right to give letters of Marque to legally sanctioned pirates.
I say it’s high time they practiced this power and gave me a ship, a spare peg leg, and enough rum to keep my crew in high spirits.
I’d make a fantastic Pirate (ahem) Sorry…Privateer.*
*Even though I know nothing about sailing…whatever. Rum has magic powers, I’ll be an expert sailor in no time.
Indonesia – Miss Islam: “What is the one most important thing our society needs?” “That would be more Jihad, Mohammed”
Muslims in Indonesia, apparently greatly displeased with the Miss World pageant being held there, have launched an alternate event entitled “Muslimah World”.
“Muslimah World is a beauty pageant, but the requirements are very different from Miss World — you have to be pious, be a positive role model and show how you balance a life of spirituality in today’s modernized world,” Muslimah World pageant founder Eka Shanti tells AFP.
According to Al Arabiya, choosing the 20 finalists from 500 applicants included “competitors reciting the Quran and sharing anecdotes of how they can to wear the headscarf, which is a requirement of the show.”
(most of this was originally posted on my tumblr, but I wanted it on here as well)
FreedomWorks has reached the same point as me on the issue of Obamacare. They have started to work on a program called Burn the Card, which is:
This is a symbolic gesture to refuse government coercion by not purchasing health insurance through the exchanges. This doesn’t mean we want students to go without health insurance, we just want their insurance to actually be affordable, and most of all, voluntary. Students can purchase health insurance from a third party, an option that is not only legal, but in most cases, much cheaper.
The most exciting part is that we’re taking this message to college campuses. We’re partnering with Young Americans for Liberty; the largest pro-liberty organization on college campuses in the country, and the College Republicans. We are encouraging student groups to send us their best video of them burning their cards and simply saying no to government coercion. We also need them to educate their fellow students about ObamaCare.
Okay, so I actually may have reached a step further on my “can’t even” scale than they have, because I’ve reached the point where I stick my tongue out at the government and say “I’m not going to buy this and I’d like to see you try to make me pay the fine for it”.
What are you going to do about it Obama?
Garnish my wages?
HAHAHAHA! You can’t get blood from a stone.
Put a lien on my property?
I have no property morons. No house, no car, not a single thing for you to confiscate or put a lien on.
Confiscate my tax return?
Put me in a minimum security security prison against constitutional rules about debtor’s prison?
Oh please do. I’ll get 3 square meals a day, a bed, and probably a cake decorating class and yoga.
Not to mention free healthcare. Shooting yourself in the foot there.
You can’t do anything to me at this point.
So the jokes on you I guess.
I took a little lesson from both Martin Luther King jr. and Henry Rearden of Rearden Steel.
Civil Disobedience and refusing to give the government your voluntary cooperation in your own destruction.
“That is the flaw in your theory, gentlemen,” said Rearden gravely, “and I will not help you out of it. If you choose to deal with men by means of compulsion, do so. But you will discover that you need the voluntary co-operation of your victims, in many more ways than you can see at present. And your victims should discover that it is their own volition – which you cannot force – that makes you possible. I choose to be consistent and I will obey you in the manner you demand. Whatever you wish me to do, I will do it at the point of a gun. If you sentence me to jail, you will have to send armed men to carry me there – I will not volunteer to move. If you fine me, you will have to seize my property to collect the fine – I will not volunteer to pay it. If you believe that you have the right to force me – use your guns openly. I will not help you to disguise the nature of your action.”
- Hank Rearden (Atlas Shrugged)
So who’s with me? I hope you all are, because we have to be together on this. That’s the only way civil disobedience can work.
You just have to stop being afraid of what they can do to you and then they no longer have power over you.
If you are working toward a principle and you refuse to given in to their threats and bullying and endless paperwork and anger, eventually they realize they have lost the cooperation of the people. Their only option from there is force and then they have truly lost.