Congress is like a Bi-Cameral Sclerotic Body, It Gets Elected To Do Something, then It Does the Opposite or Nothing

SPEAKER BOEHNER PUSHES FOR BUDGET DEAL BEFORE LEAVING HOUSE News from The Associated Press

Double Irony, Visitors to Marx’s Grave Balk at Fee

Marxism as Religion

Death to Capitalism? Visitors to Marx’s Grave Balk at Fee - WSJ

By  ALISTAIR MACDONALD and  ESE ERHERIENE  
Oct. 25, 2015

London cemetery charges fee to see late communist’s memorial

HIGHGATE CEMETERY, LONDON—On a summer visit to the grave of Karl Marx, Ben Gliniecki found that he would have to pay £4, or about $6, to pay respects to the man who sounded the death knell for private property.

Mr. Gliniecki, a Marxist, said no.

“Personally, I think it is disgusting,” the 24-year-old political activist said. “There are no depths of irony, or bad taste, to which capitalists won’t sink if they think they can make money out of it.”

The charity that looks after this cemetery has long taken swipe at a different irony: Karl Marx’s decision to buy a burial plot in a private London graveyard over the then state-provided alternatives. They say their cover fee subsidizes the upkeep of a cemetery where 170,000 other people rest.

The two sides have squabbled since the early 1990s, when the Friends of Highgate Cemetery began charging to fund the conservation of a burial ground whose elaborate gothic tombs and winding paths had fallen into disrepair. Now, the charge is infuriating a new generation of Marxists. Interest in his legacy is gaining fresh legs in Britain following September’s election ofJeremy Corbyn, a self-described Marx admirer, as leader of the opposition Labour Party.

-go to links-

Is the Fix In, Is Washington Now All Sham?

How OUTRAGES IS THIS?
[Ryan's provision to become Speaker] "wanted was to eliminate the House rule written by Thomas Jefferson that speakers can be recalled." m/r

Speakstakes: Paul Ryan Situation Remains Murky - The Rush Limbaugh Show

Rush Limbaugh, from the 10-23-15 Broadcast

My only point is that it didn't happen that way.  Washington news is a
script.  Washington politics is a script.  It is written for people in
Washington, in the media, and people in political parties, those that
are famous and have a role in talking and reaching the public, they have
roles to play.  The short version of this is that I think, you know,
Ryan had these two demands.  And I think these demands were dealt with
long before anybody ever heard about them.  His demand was that he be
elected unanimously by the Republican caucus. He didn't want any
disagreement.  And that was to further unity.

And the second thing he wanted was to eliminate the House rule
written by Thomas Jefferson that speakers can be recalled.  And the
third thing, he didn't want to have to travel on weekends.  He wanted to
be able to maintain his time with his family.  Now, that was presented
to us in one day.  My contention is this was all done days and maybe a
week prior, the negotiations, the expressive Paul Ryan telling people
what his demands were, people approaching him to do this, and that
processes were put in place to make those things happen.  So that takes
us to this. Well, let me close the loop on it.

Here's the dream, from the Republican donor side.  The Republican
donor side is that Jeb Bush or, if not Jeb, somebody else acceptable to
the Republican establishment, gets elected president, Paul Ryan is
Speaker of the House, and the donor class thinks that if they can make
that happen, that within 12 to 18 months their entire agenda will be
implemented.  ...

-go to links-

Ignore that Man Behind Curtain, He Just Takes His Biggest Cut From Losers

BULL-frog Murphy

Paid Millions for the Insanity of Doing the Same Thing Over and Over and the Losers GET the Same Results! m/r

Murphy's Law :: SteynOnline

by Mark Steyn   Steyn on America  October 24, 2015

As we come to an end of another grim week in politics, two views of how Campaign 2016 is going from Team Bush:

First, the dean of the consultant-industrial complex, the man who gave us Presidents McCain and Romney and is now seeking to make it a hat-trick as head of Bush's SuperPac; Mike Murphy explains why Donald Trump doesn't matter:

He's dead politically, he'll never be president of the
United States, ever. By definition I don't think you can be a
front-runner if you're totally un-electable. I think there's there an
a-priori logic problem in that.

So that's great news for Jeb. Because if you discount the front-runner, and the runner-up to the front-runner, and Cruz and Rubioand whatnot, then the real front-runner is Jeb, who's totally electable even if no actual electors want to elect him. Why is that?

-go to links-

Why would you expect the Gutless Republicans to do anything but Cave-In?

A "Humanitarian Crisis" or Just Bad Government? by Steven Malanga, City Journal October 25, 2015

Obama wants to rescue Puerto Rico; Republicans should call his bluff and demand some real reforms.

Earlier this week, the Obama administration doubled down on efforts to aid Puerto Rico. The administration proposed to change American law to allow the territory and its municipalities to seek bankruptcy protection. The “Roadmap for Congressional Action” on Puerto Rico seems more calculated to embarrass Republicans than to find an actual solution to the deeply indebted island’s problems. Republicans had serious concerns about previous Puerto Rico bailout proposals. Rather than addressing these concerns, Obama simply cast the issue as a “humanitarian crisis.” The implication? Rejection of his plan would be heartless. But instead of dismissing it, Republicans should demand more substantial concessions on union-friendly federal policies that have helped deep-six Puerto Rico’s economy. Then we’ll see how serious Obama is about this “humanitarian crisis.”

Earlier this year, in a report commissioned by Puerto Rico’s government, three international economists authored a described the territory’s woes. While the report scored the territory for its lack of fiscal controls in the face of a struggling economy, the economists also argued that Puerto Rico suffered because it was forced to adhere to federal laws that have “gnawed at growth.” The “single most telling statistic in Puerto Rico,” they wrote, is that only 40 percent of the working-age population is employed. The biggest obstacle to jobs, the report argued, is that the territory must observe federal minimum-wage law, even though incomes in general are far lower on the island than in U.S. states. A full-time worker in Puerto Rico making minimum wage earns 77 percent of the average wage on the island, compared with just 28 percent in U.S. states. The cost of paying even an unskilled worker is so high that “employers are disinclined to hire.” Even more foolishly, welfare benefits on the island—including food stamps, Medicaid, and subsidies for utility bills—approach mainland levels. Recipients can garner benefits equal to $1,743 a month, more than the average wage on the island. “The result,” the report notes, “is massive underutilization of labor, foregone output, and waning competitiveness.”

Puerto Rico also suffers from the ill-effects of the union-friendly Jones Act—a 1920 law that drives up the cost of goods by forcing ships traveling between U.S. ports to be built and manned by Americans. The restrictions have a particularly devastating effect on the cost of transporting goods to and from U.S. island territories or states, such as Puerto Rico and Hawaii.  ...

-go to links-

They are Both Right!

What Do Democrats and Pansies Have in Common? This Jeopardy! Contestant Thinks She Knows | Mediaite

Mediaite Staff | 2:06 pm, October 25th, 2015

Yep, you found a way to insult liberals in this country,” Trebek joked after she gave the incorrect response.

Watch the video above.

[h/t The Blaze]
[Image via screengrab]

What is Wrong with the Bitch-of-Benghazi?... EVERYTHING!

This Chronic Liar waddles to the podium, surrounded by armed security, and has the gaul to ask "What is Wrong with Us?," when the Question Should Be: WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU! m/r

Hillary Clinton & NRA -- Gun Control | National Review Online

by Charles C. W. Cooke October 23, 2015

 ‘What is wrong with us,” Hillary Clinton inquired bitterly in Florida this month, “that we cannot stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby, and the gun manufacturers they represent?” She struck a hero’s pose: “We need to act and we need to build a movement. It’s infuriating!” 

 Implicit in Clinton’s lament was a serious charge: That the “us” in the equation represents the majority of American voters, and that the “NRA” represents an insidious force that has been successful in thwarting that majority’s will. Such presumptions are all-but ubiquitous in progressive-leaning circles. The NRA, President Obama told Marc Maron confidently in August of this year, has developed such an “extremely strong” “grip” on Congress that even “common-sense” reforms cannot make it into law. This, Obama submits, is democratically unjust. “I would particularly ask America’s gun owners,” he griped in a recent press conference, “to think about whether your views are being properly represented by the organization that suggests it is speaking for you.” 

 Seductive as it might be, there is little within the facts to recommend this approach. As Gallup confirmed just this week, the NRA is not a fringe organization that has managed somehow to impose a greatly undeserved octopus’s grip, but a mainstream plank of American civil society with approval ratings of which the vast majority of national politicians could only dream. “Despite a year of blistering criticism,” the polling firm notes, “58% in the U.S. have a favorable opinion” of the NRA — a number that “includes the highest recording of ‘very favorable’ opinions (26%) since Gallup began asking this question in 1989.” That trend line is moving upwards.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426014/hillary-clinton-nra-popularity-gun-control

The New "N"- Word: Neo-Puritans under the guise of 'Black LIES Matter'

A Refreshing Blast from the Past, "No Future in Apologizing":

This was a week before Donald Trump announced his candidacy. At the time, I did not even know he was running. Apparently, though, he and Ben Carson both were thinking along the same lines.
Not since S.I. Hayakawa stared down the Black Panthers at San Francisco State in 1968 has a university president distinguished himself for his courage. That stand got Hayakawa elected U.S. senator.

The campus crusade for conformity (or else!)

from October 21, 2015

Exclusive: Jack Cashill on how 1 university president stood up for real diversity

Wesleyan University sophomore Bryan Stascavage knew he would ruffle a few feathers when, just a week ago, he wrote an op-ed for the campus newspaper, the Argus, on the subject of the Black Lives Matter movement.

Although supportive of the movement’s goals, Stascavage summed up his painfully balanced piece with this idea: “If vilification and denigration of the police force continues to be a significant portion of Black Lives Matter’s message, then I will not support the movement.”

“Many Americans feel the same,” Stascavage opined. Unfortunately for him, few of them go to Wesleyan. This “cis, het, white man,” as he was promptly denounced, did not just ruffle feathers. He set the whole crazed chicken coop a-cackling.

“Once the article was read by the campus,” said Stascavage, “instead of giving me criticisms, [the reaction] was to call me a racist and totry to get me to never publish again – students screaming at me in public for 15 minutes, people whispering ‘racist’ as I walk by.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/the-campus-crusade-for-conformity-or-else/#bYAVzJyMEkpj0IhD.99

Dullards of D.C.

We’re Governed by Idiots: Vol. 1,000,006 | VodkaPundit

 By Stephen Green On October 20, 2015  - Full Short Post-

CIABigDaddy@aol.com
(Go to link for AP photo)

A pot-smoking teenage hacker may have gotten into top secret files held by CIA Director John Brennan on a freakin’ AOL account.
Seriously:

CIA Director John Brennan’s private account held sensitive files — including his 47-page application for top-secret security clearance — until he recently learned that it had been infiltrated, the hacker told The Post. 

Other emails stored in Brennan’s non-government account contained the Social Security numbers and personal information of more than a dozen top American intelligence officials, as well as a government letter about the use of “harsh interrogation techniques” on terrorism suspects, according to the hacker.

The FBI and other federal agencies are now investigating the hacker, with one source saying criminal charges are possible, law enforcement sources said.

“I think they’ll want to make an example out of him to deter people from doing this in the future,” said a source who described the situation as “just wild” and “crazy.”

How about making an example out of a witless ignoramus like Brennan?

Murder Accomplice Before the Fact: The Bitch-of-Benghazi Liar

"Not only had the siege occurred on the eleventh anniversary of al-Qaeda’s 9/11 atrocities. Not only was Obama informed in the first minutes that a terrorist attack was underway. Not only had terrorist attacks in Benghazi been threatened and executed for months. Not only were mortars deployed by trained jihadists. Not only had Gregory Hicks... directly briefed then-secretary Clinton about the then-ongoing terrorist attack ..."

Hillary Clinton, Benghazi Liar | National Review Online

by Andrew C. McCarthy October 24, 2015

Hillary’s Breathtaking Mendacity

She lied to the nation in 2012, and she’s lying again now. You don’t look surprised. 

 ‘We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with.” 

 Those words, depraved words, were spoken by then–secretary of state Hillary Clinton, with President Obama by her side, on September 14, 2012. This was at Joint Base Andrews, during the most sacred of rites: the return of the remains of Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods, and Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, all slain in the line of duty in Benghazi. 

 And all slain, it must never be forgotten, by jihadists carrying out what Clinton, Obama, and high-ranking national-security officials throughout the United States government knew full well was a planned terrorist attack, not a “protest” run amok and incited by “an awful Internet video.” 

 That obvious fact is now explicit after Mrs. Clinton’s galling testimony on Thursday before the House select committee investigating the Benghazi massacre.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426019/hillary-clinton-benghazi-liar