☰ Menu
All Da King's Men

Liberals Say The Darnedest Things

By Da King Published: February 1, 2011

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has been in Congress for 29 years. He has a degree from Harvard Law School. You'd think Schumer might have some idea about how our government works. You'd be wrong. Here's Chucky, who never met a camera or microphone he didn't like, opining on our three branches of government:

There's your Schumerian civics lesson for today. The three branches of government are the House, the Senate, and the President (if Sarah Palin had said this, it would be on a continuous 24-hour loop on CNN). It's odd that Schumer, a lawyer, would forget all about the Judicial branch of government, but it's not that odd. Democrats aren't too fond of the Judicial branch these days, seeing as how another federal judge just ruled ObamaCare to be unconstitutional. That prompted assorted liberals to claim the judge was engaging in "judicial activism". I've come to learn that to liberals, "judicial activism" is when a judge applies the Constitution to overturn legislation liberals like. It means nothing more than that.

For the record, the three branches of government are the Igneous, the Sedimentary, and the other one.

Back to ObamaCare, here's White House advisor Stephanie Cutter's bizarre take on the ObamaCare ruling:

"The judge's decision contradicts decades of Supreme Court precedent that support the considered judgment of the democratically elected branches of government that the act's individual responsibility provision is necessary to prevent billions of dollars of cost-shifting every year by individuals without insurance who cannot pay for the health care they obtain," White House adviser Stephanie Cutter wrote in an Internet posting.

Allow me to translate. Cutter is saying it's not the job of the judiciary to overturn legislation passed by the legislative and executive branches, because there are decades of precedent in which the judiciary didn't overturn legislation....

Wow. Using Cutter's logic, we wouldn't need a Judicial branch of government at all, or a Constitution either. All we'd need is the "considered judgement" of Democrats. I wonder if Cutter is related to Schumer. Naturally, it is precisely the job of the Judicial branch to overrturn legislative overrreach by Congress and the President. It's their job to insure legislation passes constitutional muster. That's WHY we have a Judicial branch. It's known as checks and balances. Perhaps Cutter, like Schumer, believes that PROPER checks and balances consist of a Democratic-led House, a Democratic-led Congress, and a Democratic President all agreeing that ObamaCare is great, but that type of unilateral rule is what has Hosni Mubarak in trouble in Egypt. In fact, when Democrats aren't in power, they call such things "tyranny of the majority". You may have heard Democrats use that phrase once or a thousand times during the Bush years, though they've stricken the phrase from the English language now. These days, they deem opposition to Democrats to be "obstruction". You've heard that word used by Democrats once or a thousand times since Obama became President. Such intellectual honesty, those Dems.

From the "Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste" files, some liberals are hard at work trying to turn the crisis in Egypt to their political advantage. Like rust, they never sleep. MSNBC's Chris Matthews tried to blame it on Bush and the Iraq war, but the grand prize winner in the Loony Liberal Logic category goes to global warming alarmist Joe Romm, NPR, and John Podesta of the Center For American Progress, who blamed the Egyptian crisis on, you guessed it, global warming:

Political unrest has broken out in Tunisia, Yemen, Egypt and other Arab countries. Social media and governmental policies are getting most of the credit for spurring the turmoil, but there’s another factor at play. Many of the people protesting are also angry about dramatic price hikes for basic foodstuffs, such as rice, cereals, cooking oil and sugar.

This summer’s extreme global weather raised fears of a “Coming Food Crisis,” as CAP’s John D. Podesta and Jake Caldwell warned in Foreign Policy: “Global food security is stretched to the breaking point, and Russia’s fires and Pakistan’s floods are making a bad situation worse.” Earlier this month I discussed how, in fact, “Extreme weather events helped drive food prices to record highs.” Back then, experts were worried about food riots. Now they are happening.

Energy insecurity and climate instability have now become key factors in food insecurity, which in turn has become a key factor in toppling governments

Those who think that the serious impacts of climate change — and our inane energy policies — on the world economy and U.S. national security are decades away are simply not paying attention.

Can anyone remember what floods, fires, droughts, and food shortages were blamed on before global warming ? I'm pretty sure they were just considered natural events, though I don't want the loons to start calling me a flat-earther, a denier, or any of those other "scientific" names they call people. Conservative blogger Michelle Malkin made the observation that the logic the loons use to decide whether global warming is the cause of

everything something is similar to the way Monty Python decided if a woman was a witch. This is too funny not to use:

Update - I've found there is a problem with the Monty Python video playback. Rats. You can view the video on YouTube here.

So, I guess either the Egyptian crisis is caused by global warming....or Egypt is a duck....or made of wood...and is therefore a witch. Burn it !!!

Add This



About This Blog

Prev Next