Quickie Quiz: Guess What Kind of A$$hole Bob Barr is....

(A)       Shit-bird A$$hole

(B)       Dick-bite A$$hole

(C)       Half-wit A$$hole

(D)       “Crying-on-the-Inside” type A$$hole

If you said “Dick-bite A$$hole”, you are almost certainly correct, as your basic half-wit A$$holes wouldn’t know how to trade their so-called (“Libertarian”) principles for cash, your run-of-the-mill Shit-bird A$$holes are generally, at least clever enough not to express any well-defined “principles” and your garden-variety “Crying on the Inside” A$$holes can never seem to make their “minds” up long enough to actually betray any of their so-called “cherished principles”. So Bob Barr seems to be that rarest kind of A$$hole – the vaunted “Dick-bite A$$hole”.

According to CNN News, “Former Republican Congressman Bob Barr said he is not serving as Duvalier's attorney, but is in Port-au-Prince to consult, assist and be Duvalier's voice to the international community.

“Barr represented Georgia's 7th District in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, and was the Libertarian Party's presidential nominee in 2008. He currently practices law and runs a consulting firm based in Atlanta.

"We have been asked by the former president and his family to assist him in his efforts," Barr told reporters in Port-au-Prince....

“Barr "will be representing" Duvalier "in bringing his message of hope to the world," the former Republican congressman's website says.”

While we're pretty much used to liberal American A$$holes cozying up to brutal tyrants (think Joe Kennedy and Hugo Chavez: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/joe_kennedy_hugo_chavez_and_th.html), it's generally (and thankfully) a LOT more rare to see Conservative or Libertarian Pols doing the same....Nice goin' Bob Barr!

Apparently Barr (who was famously “punked” by Sacha Baron Cohen in Borat) doesn’t realize that espousing “Libertarian principles” is (at least somewhat) inconsistent with representing mass-murdering, Left-wing tyrants

I wonder what Bob Barr’s time and talents are going for these days?

If it’s much at all...someone should tell good’ol “Baby Doc” that it’s way too much!

This bit of anti-Libertarian calumny by Barr has been overshadowed (luckily for him) by all the unrest in Tunisia and Egypt over the past week, but it shouldn’t go unnoticed.

The Liberal Fraud....

Many of those who support more government involvement, higher taxes and a more equitable distribution of the wealth are people who themselves refuse to live in accordance with their professed views in real life.

Their lame refrain often goes, “Well, if that’s the rules that are set I’m going to live by them.”

That very view makes both ideological frauds and moral cowards of all such people.

People who believe in something can and should live their own lives by those principles, so long as they don’t violate any laws.

A business owner, attorney, physician or trader who believes in a more equitable distribution of income could very easily live up to that standard by, for one thing, paying his staff, right on down to the janitor significantly more than the market rate, while taking less out of the business for their own compensation.

Henry Ford did that and changed the face of manufacturing in America, by transforming what were once low-wage, dangerous jobs into high paid positions that increased the size of the American middle class.

And while there is no way for an individual to increase the government’s level involvement in our lives, there’s certainly no laws against any individual who truly believes that they are under-taxed from simply donating more monies to the government via their tax returns.

Again, a true believer isn’t obsessed or even concerned with what others are paying, the true believer is focused on living up to their own ideological standards...anything less makes one an ideological fraud.

A GREAT Post by Saberpoint: Moving On

Saberpoint: Moving On#links#links

Free North Carolina: George Washington Statue Hidden In Box By NAACP

Free North Carolina: George Washington Statue Hidden In Box By NAACP

Offended by George......(Washington)???

A "BOXED" George Washington at South Carolina NAACP MLK Observance

The annual Martin Luther King observance at the state house in Columbia, South Carolina had a very odd and somewhat disturbing twist this year. The event was held on the north side steps of the statehouse,  where a large bronze statue of George Washington stands. This year, the NAACP constructed a “box” to conceal the “Father of this Country” from view so that participants would not be offended by his presence...

And they say Leftists love America too...(and there's your proof)

Yeah, I guess...it's just that they "love America" in their own inimical way, I suppose.

SEE: http://www.thestate.com/2011/01/17/1650881/rally-draws-1200-to-state-house.html

AND: http://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2011/01/george-washington-statue-hidden-in-box.html


THANKS to the Free North Carolina Blog:  
http://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.com/

The Vile Aftermath of the Jared Loughner Rampage

.

Jared Loughner burning an American flag on YouTube

.

.

Mere hours after the shootings occurred a number of craven and vile leftists sought to slime the Tea Party, Conservatism and prominent Conservatives from Jared Taylor to Sarah Palin with Jared Loughner's crimes.

Leading this ideological wolfpack was the NY Times’ resident character assassin, Paul Krugman. He was followed by many reliably Leftist media goons from Keith Olbermann, to Bill Maher to Chris Matthews, to Jonathan Altar.

To date, NONE of the leading commentators on the Right (NOT Limbaugh, NOT Hannity, NOT O’Reilly, etc.) has sought to link Jared Loughner’s killing spree to any specific liberals or any Left-wing groups!

Recently, at least one Conservative blogger, HillBuzz, HAS seemed to seek to link Jared Loughner to a specific Left-wing organization – the Daily Kos.

After hours of scouring Loughner’s YouTube videos and the “BoyBlue” postings on the Daily-Kos, HillBuzz has, like a few other investigators, come to the conclusion that BoyBlue IS Jared Loughner.

SEE: http://hillbuzz.org/2011/01/08/my-congresswoman-voted-against-nancy-pelosi-and-is-now-dead-to-me-eerie-daily-kos-hit-piece-on-gabrielle-giffords-just-two-days-before-assassination-attempt-on-her/

There’s no doubt that that actually seems far more a PROBABILITY than a possibility at this point.

So, could Jared Loughner be a Daily-Kos member, linking him further to that Soros-financed netherworld, where vile personal attacks and death threats are actively encouraged (the Daily-Kos relishes such posts and highlights them often...only taking them down when they become overt embarrassments)?

So, now we have at least one blogger linking Jared Loughner to the Daily-Kos, but their research looks sound. Given Loughner’s views, expressed in both his videos and the personal accounts of his former classmates, seem very much in-line with BoyBlue’s and both come from Arizona and BOTH hold a deep antipathy for Rep Gabrielle Giffords.

Certainly HillBuzz DID NOT engage in anything close to the mindless, clueless, even libelous insinuations offered by Krugman, Olbermann, Altar and other Leftists mere hours after the shooting, before ANYTHING was known about this “pot-smoking, flag-burning, liberal” (as described by his classmates).

In short, I believe HillBuzz may well be onto something. They’ve clearly done their homework.

The likes of Krugman, Altar, Olbermann and other leftists, DID NOT do theirs, and have been unable to make a case for their scurrilous insinuations.

The facts are that, “Loughner's friends describe him as an angry liberal pothead who was self medicating and angry at the world since his girlfriend broke up with him in high school.”

“PI at http://upintelligence.com/ states that Jared Loughner and "BoyBlue" of DailyKos are one and the same. He is the one who wrote on the DailyKos that "My Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords voted against Pelosi and is dead to me."

From Jared Loughner’s videos:

“If there’s no flag in the constitution then the flag in the film is unknown.

“There’s no flag in the constitution.

“Therefore, the flag in the film is unknown.

“Burn every new and old flag that you see.

“Burn your flag!

“I bet you can imagine this in your mind with a faster speed.

“Watch this protest in reverse!

“Ask the local police; “What’s your illegal activity on duty?”.

“If you protest the government then there’s a new government from protesting.

“There’s not a new government from protesting.

“Thus, you aren’t protesting the government.”

.

.

.

“The property owners and government officials are no longer in ownership of their land and laws from a revolution.

“Thus the revolutionary’s from the revolution are in control of the land and laws.”

SEE: http://newsone.com/newsone-original/newsonestaff2/jared-lougner-myspace-youtube-videos/?omcamp=NEWSBAR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHoaZaLbqB4&feature=player

.

.

Consider that among the carnage, federal Judge John Roll was killed just days before he was prepared to rule against the Obama administration, denying them the authority to confiscate IRAs and 401Ks without clear criminal intent being demonstrated. He'd made an announcement to that effect a scant 72-hours before his murder.

SEE the full story: http://www.eutimes.net/2011/01/top-us-federal-judge-assassinated-after-threat-to-obama-agenda/

Incredibly enough a "dope-smoking, flag-burning, radical liberal" who murdered a Federal Judge just days before he was to rule against the federal government's claim of a right to takeover IRAs and 401-Ks and attempted to assassinate, NOT some Liberal politician, but a very Conservative Blue Dog Democrat who'd been a Republican from 1988 until 1999, was recklessly and irresponsibly labeled a "Right-winger" by legions of Left-wing hate mongers!
.

And yet NONE of the actual facts have deterred liberals from their vicious, baseless personal attacks.

None of the actual facts have stirred even a shred of introspection among the self-righteous Left...or even to look at some of their own violent political rhetoric.

Given the actions of Krugman and others in the immediate aftermath of this tragedy, that’s probably not all that surprising.


UPDATE:  The Daily Kos' Boy Blue posted an apology to the Daily Kos after Loughner's arrest and incarceration proving that speculation by HillBuzz and others (including the NY Times' Matt Bai), although none of that changes the fact that Jared Loughner is indeed a rabid Leftist. A dope-smoking, flag-burning kook described by former classmates as "extremely liberal" or "radically Leftist", just as Joe Stack III was.

Why Standards?....

The question often asked is, “Why have such high standards”?

The question is often framed as though standards exist as nothing more than an “unfair barrier to employment”, and those who support them are seen as anti-egalitarian bullies.

But standards are vital for every single endeavor, as they measure both basic competency and compare competing candidates in the most cost-effective and deliberate way possible.

Without some basic standards there is no way to determine that any if a worker is even capable of doing the job at hand.

Incredibly defenses of standards are so rare (often those who support them see them as self-evident) that many have never come across one and that is very sad.


What are standards?

Standards are the basis upon which we base eligibility for various positions, from entrance into College and professional programs to various jobs.

Written standards are and always have been an integral part of that process, from written exams like the SATs and GREs, to various exams for various “open competitive” Civil Service exams.

The reason some positions are filled via an “open competitive” process is because they are open to all candidates without the basic requirement of a previously tested “professional certification”.

In lieu of a basic degree requirement or professional certification, an “open competitive” system is the only way to determine the best qualified candidates.

In reality it is no different than the various degree or professional certification requirements that also require written testing as a part of the degree and certification process (ie. via the law boards, CPA Exam, etc.).


What purpose do “open competitive” standards serve?

“Open competitive” exams are used to distinguish between candidates for professions like Police and Fire in lieu of requiring previous professional certifications. The reason such merit-based standards are so vital is that they're the ONLY way to forge the most competitive/competent Civil Service workforces, allowing such government workforces to be as streamlined and cost-effective as is possible. Less competitive workforces tend to be more bloated and costly workforces, as well.

Both the Police and Fire services are professions in which candidates are trained AFTER being accepted for those positions. For that reason, those Departments have traditionally hired in rank order from a series of open competitive exams so that they take “the BEST qualified” applicants over the “basically or minimally qualified”.

Both professions require 4 to 6 month training in their respective training academies and ongoing training thereafter.

There is a tremendous amount of reading required for both those professions and thus reading comprehension, even basic math skills (which applies to basic logic) would appear to be vital areas on which to compare prospective candidates.

For the past three decades a disturbing trend, in which both the written and physical portions of these “open competitive” exams have been diluted or “dumbed down”.

This has been done ostensibly in the name of “widening the prospective applicant pool”, but why and what is the cost of doing that?

First we must ask if the applicant pool has ever been unduly restricted. Going back over a half century, August A. Beekman, a black man who rose up the ranks to ultimately become Chief-of-Department and subsequently Fire Commissioner, scored among the highest applicants on a 1951 FDNY Entrance Exam that was far more stringent than those given since 1977 and Chief Beekman was raised in an orphanage with few, if any advantages in life.

Some may argue that “one exceptional individual doesn’t prove that such standards don’t discriminate against others”, but that assertion belittles all achievement, INCLUDING those of the likes of Chief Beekman! Everyone who competes on an open competitive exam has some strengths and weaknesses and every high grade is a singular personal achievement in that person’s using his strengths and overcoming his weaknesses in that open competitive exam.
 
So it seems that mere environmental disadvantage (poverty, bigotry, poor schools, etc.) can’t keep a motivated individual of any background from achieving. In that case, high standards don’t “discriminate” against anyone!

To even imply that high standards or written exams “discriminate” against any specific ethnic group is to insinuate that group’s innate inferiority!
 
Open competitive exams (both written and physical) don’t “discriminate” against any ethnic groups, they DO “discriminate” against individuals who are poorly prepared or just aren’t competitive enough to score well enough within a given field of applicants.


Can standards be “too high”?

If a given open competitive test were given and too few applicants passed to fill the needs of the Department, then the Department may well be faced with a sub-par workforce. Not everyone can be trained to be police and firefighters, that’s just a basic fact.

Standards cannot really be set too high, so long as there is there are applicants who meet those standards.

The goal of such standards should never be to target the hiring of a workforce that looks a certain way, but to deliver the highest quality workforce available. Candidates with higher reading comprehension levels, superior logic (mathematical) skills, etc. will generally deal with the voluminous reading material during training and beyond far more effectively and better conditioned recruits will tend to be able to handle the physical rigors of the job more easily.

It comes down to the old refrain of putting “QUALITY before QUANTITY”. Standards exist to focus on quality, NOT the quantity of representatives from any specific group.


Has the lack of standards ever resulted in any verifiable major problems?

In February, 2007 a 29 y/o female recruit collapsed and died during a Baltimore training scenario. “A 29-year-old recruit with the city Fire Department died during a training exercise yesterday as she tried to extinguish a blaze set by instructors in a vacant rowhouse in Southwest Baltimore, according to fire officials.

”Racheal Wilson, mother of an 11-year-old son and 8-year-old daughter, was inside a three-story dwelling when she collapsed about noon and was taken to Maryland Shock Trauma Center. She died shortly after she arrived, fire officials said.”

This is the kind of incident that tends to occur more frequently when standards are lowered.

High standards don’t discriminate based on race or gender, the story of Chief Gus Beekman proves that and lowered standards risk lowering the overall quality of such vital services.

It’s all too clear that the risks of lowering standards far outweigh any supposed rewards.

Jared Loughner, Like Joe Stack Has That SAME Marxist Feel About Him

Jared Lee Loughner

Andrew Joseph ("Joe") Stack III

It didn’t take long for the usual media extremists (led by Paul Krugman and Keith Olbermann) to use this past weekend’s Tucson shootings to desperately, even cravenly seek out some political advantage, yes even on the coffins of at least six of the victims.

By now this kind of political assassination has become the expected stock and trade of such Left-wing extremists. It was done in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombings, it was more recently done in the wake of “Joe” Stack (Andrew Joseph Stack III) flying a small plane into an Austin, Texas IRS office last year. In the immediate aftermath of the Austin, Texas IRS incident, the apparently Marxist “Joe” Stack was immediately condemned in many precincts of the left-wing media and blogosphere as a “Right-wing anti-government Tea Partier”.

Turns out those suppositions were exactly WRONG.

Joe Stack made it crystal clear in the concluding remarks of his rambling suicide note, which contrasted communism and capitalism, and made very clear that he very much favored the former: “The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.” Joe Stack was unquestionably motivated by a virulent anti-capitalism.

This guy has the same “Stack-like” feel to him. Jared Lee Loughner is most commonly referred to as an unhappy loner with a significant drug problem. It was reported that Jared Loughner had been rejected by the US Army after failing a drugs test. He’d previously been in trouble with the police over possession of drugs paraphernalia.

A number of former classmates told reporters that Loughner liked to smoke pot, but an even more common comment was how unhappy he came across. Many people noted that they’d never seen him smile. One former classmate, Caitie Parker tweeted, “I haven't seen him since '07. Then, he was left wing”, and “He was a pot head, quite liberal and oddly obsessed with the 2012 prophecy.”

In one of his YouTube videos he’d put music to the burning of an American flag. Among his favorite books he listed Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto. It should endlessly be noted that Hitler was himself an avowed Marxist, who’d famously said, “We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”

I’ve yet to see any semblance of introspection from liberals/leftists about the inevitable Marxist agendas that the likes of Joe Stack and others like him tend to hold. It would be at least a little refreshing to see liberals openly distance themselves from the Stack/Loughner agenda of the violent overthrowing of the ruling class and the forcible seizure of “social justice” by the proletariat.

Since the immediate insinuation by so many liberals has always been that Conservatism leads to violence (though no evidence seems to supports that), given the propensity of most of those who commit such violent acts to hold decidedly and consistently Marxist views, isn’t it conceivable, in fact even more probable that Marxism may actually breed such violence?

Could the immediate reactions by many avowed liberals/leftists (like Keith Olbermann) more likely be projection?

But given that the very same people demanded that Americans NOT “rush to judgment” in the wake of Major Hasan’s jihadist Fort Hoot attacks, what else could be their motivation?

The vast majority of Americans both liberal and conservative are decent people. The Tea Partiers, for instance, come almost exclusively from America’s working class, as do most Union members.

Marxists are of another stripe altogether and while few sane people advocate socialism now-a-days, there are a few.

Marxists are the “radical fringe” within America and that is the ideology that needs to be confronted and isolated, not any held by decent Americans liberal or conservative.