The Daily Gouge, Wednesday, February 27th, 2013

On February 26, 2013, in Uncategorized, by magoo1310

It’s Wednesday, February 27th, 2013….and here’s The Gouge!

First up, as this story from FOXNews confirms, it’s like we’ve always said: there’s nothing….absolutely NOTHING….this Administration won’t do, to you, us, anyone in America, to further its goal of remaking Amerika:

DHS releasing hundreds of illegal immigrants, blaming budget cuts

The Department of Homeland Security has started releasing hundreds of illegal immigrants held in local jails in anticipation of automatic budget cuts, in a move one Arizona sheriff called politically motivated — and dangerous.

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu said Tuesday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement released more than 500 detainees in his county alone over the weekend. A spokesman for Babeu told FoxNews.com that ICE officials have said they plan to release a total of nearly 10,000 illegal immigrants.

The numbers, though, are in dispute. ICE officials said that it’s unclear how many ultimately might be released and that only 303 have been released from four Arizona facilities so far, though all those are in Pinal County. According to ICE, 2,280 detainees are still in custody in those facilities.

Babeu described the move as a “mass budget pardon” and suggested the administration was going to unnecessary lengths to demonstrate the impact of the so-called sequester. “President Obama would never release 500 criminal illegals to the streets of his hometown, yet he has no problem with releasing them in Arizona. The safety of the public is threatened and the rule of law discarded as a political tactic in this sequester battle,” he said.

An ICE spokeswoman confirmed the plans without specifying how many illegal immigrants might be released.

Moving from purposeful political idiocy to just plain stup….well,….perhaps it’s easiest to just let John Kerry speak for himself:

Kerry defends liberties, says Americans have “right to be stupid”

After all, who would know stupid….

….better than….

….John Kerry?

In a related item, James Taranto offers another, more-recent example of Kerry’s intellectual prowess:

In another story reminiscent of the early Reagan years, the Falkland Islands, a British territory whose invasion by Argentina sparked a 1982 war, are holding a referendum on their status next month. Falklanders are expected to affirm their desire to remain British. On a visit to London yesterday, John Kerry, the haughty, French-looking secretary of state who by the way served in Vietnam, was asked to weigh in. Nile Gardiner of the Daily Telegraph has the transcript:

Question: Mr. Secretary, do you believe the democratically expressed will of the Falkland Islanders in their forthcoming referendum should be respected?

Kerry: Well, let me be very clear about our position with respect to the Falklands, which I believe is clear. First of all, I’m not going to comment, nor is the President, on a referendum that has yet to take place and hasn’t taken place.

Our position on the Falklands has not changed. The United States recognizes de facto U.K. administration of the islands, but takes no position on the question of the parties’ sovereignty claims thereto. And we support cooperation between U.K. and Argentina on practical matters, and we continue to urge a peaceful resolution of that critical issue. And I think that’s exactly what our position has been, that’s what it remains, and we look forward to the future.

The first quoted paragraph from the secretary is classic Kerry: “Let me be very clear. . . . First of all, I’m not going to comment.”

For his part Gardiner calls Kerry’s comments “yet another slap in the face for Britain and the Falklands Islanders from a US administration that cares more about appeasing a third-rate, declining socialist regime in Latin America than standing with America’s closest friend and ally.”

It seems to us, too, that a clear U.S. statement of support for the Falklanders and their British protectors would be more effective at defusing any threat of another invasion.

You’ll recall it was just such a careless, seemingly innocuous remark which embolden Saddam Hussein to attack Kuwait. If there are 50 shades of grey matter, Kerry’s is certainly the lightest….or dimmest, as it were.

And since we’re on the subject of stupid, CNSNews.com details the latest inanity uttered by the Queen thereof:

Pelosi: More Gun Control Needed Because ‘We Took an Oath to Protect and Defend’

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said action must be taken in the aftermath of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School because members of Congress took an oath to “protect and defend,” although the actual oath says to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States ….”

Pelosi held a House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee hearing on “Gun Violence Prevention: A Call to Action,” where she endorsed the gun control proposals President Barack Obama unveiled today. “Earlier this month, shortly after Newtown, all members of Congress took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution and the American people,” Pelosi said. “To protect and defend. That is our first responsibility.”

No, you’re sworn to support and defend, not the American people but their Constitution; which includes the 2nd Amendment last time we read it. Oh, and against all enemies, foreign….

….and domestic….though some still maintain The Obamao constitutes both!

Is it really any wonder the country’s in the shape it is when an individual who was once, and might well be again, just 18mm’s away from the Oval Office doesn’t have the faintest understanding of either her oath or the document she’s sworn to defend?

Next up, the latest bit of politically-correct drivel from an Administration which has made it an art form:

Submitted for your perusal, Susan Rice, The Obamao’s first choice to head Foggy Bottom ahead of the man who hasn’t the foggiest, does her best impression of….

….the equally equivocating George Casey:

Why is it with this Administration, and every single one of their myrmidonic minions, the real tragedy never involves the deaths which were the direct result of their appalling imprudent policies?!?

Speaking of appalling, it’s the only term which begins to describe Joe Biden’s ignorance of firearms and his theories of home security:

Ignoring for the moment, if you can, the androgynous nature of the interviewer, Joe knows; PROMISE!

Which of course begs the question posed by this rather insightful young lady:

Then again, nothing Joe Biden says ever makes sense to us, least of all his theories on self-defense. More importantly, what good would Joe’s promise have done the subject of our next item, had all three perpetrators been packing?

Texas man, 21, fatally shoots intruder during home invasion

A 21-year-old Texas man is being credited with protecting his family when he retreated into his family’s bedroom, retrieved a gun and fatally shot one of three intruders who forcefully entered his home, KHOU.com reported.

The family was reportedly baking a cake Thursday night in Harris County when the men knocked on the front door and pushed the father to the ground. KHOU reported that the man thought that the men were friends of his son. The men lunged for the mother, the report said. At that point the 21-year-old, who was not identified, got his father’s gun and opened fire, killing one of the intruders.

Joe’s word; you can depend on it….just like his boss’s!

Or for that matter, Colorado Democrat Rep. Joe Salazar’s, who, along with his views on campus rape, constitutes the subject of today’s Money Quote:

“It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop around at somebody.“

We might be more convinced of the efficacy, let alone wisdom, of call boxes, “safe” zones and whistles versus a solid snub-nose .38 in combating college sexual assaults, were Joe, either Joe, able to list a single incident where a co-ed accidentally shot someone she thought was going to rape her.

Next up, former Secret Service agent and Maryland U.S. Senate candidate Dan Bongino offers as effective a defense of the 2nd Amendment, along with the truth behind gun control, as we’ve ever heard:

In a related item, we present today’s installment of the “MSM Bias….WHAT Bias?!?” segment, courtesy of Bill Meisen:

ABC broadcast edits out Michelle Obama claim that Chicago teen was killed by an ‘automatic weapon’

For the broadcast, ABC’s Good Morning America producers edited out the First Lady’s “automatic weapon” line:

She was standing out in a park with her friends in a neighborhood blocks away from where my kids grow – grew – up, where our house is. ~~She had just taken a chemistry test.~~ And she was caught in the line of fire ~~because some kids had some automatic weapons they didn’t need.~~ I just don’t want to keep disappointing our kids in this country. I want them to know that we put them first.

In the web edition of the story, however, Michelle Obama appears to be quoted in full:

“She was standing out in a park with her friends in a neighborhood blocks away from where my kids…grew up, where our house is. She had just taken a chemistry test. And she was caught in the line of fire because some kids had some automatic weapons they didn’t need,” she said. “I just don’t want to keep disappointing our kids in this country. I want them to know that we put them first.”

For those still not convinced the MSM isn’t wholly-behind The Dear Misleader’s unconstitutional assault on the 2nd Amendment, we offer, courtesy again of Bill Meisen and Bill O’Reilly, People’s Exhibit “A”:

Anyone still unconvinced doesn’t wish to be convinced.

Moving on, though we know what it is if it walks, talks, and acts like one, we cannot answer this next question posed by Best of the Web….

Why a Duck?

Now that he’s lame, Obama sells himself at an exorbitant price.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/when-obama-condemned-selling-access

….except to offer the explanation provided by author James Taranto:

“The difference is that because Obama is a lame duck, the amount of money involved is a lot bigger. (To adapt an old punch line: We’ve already established what you are, Mr. President. Now we’re just haggling over the price.)“

And since we broached the subject of hypocritical whores, one’s the subject of today’s Muslim Moment, and the latest Notable & Quotable from the WSJ, which presents:

Douglas Murray on why Richard Dawkins is so quick to indict the God of the Bible but goes quiet when asked about the God of the Koran.

In a recent Al-Jazeerah interview, Richard Dawkins was asked his views on God. He argued that the god of “the Old Testament” is “hideous” and “a monster,” and reiterated his claim from The God Delusion that the God of the Torah is the most unpleasant character “in fiction.” Asked if he thought the same of the God of the Koran, Dawkins ducked the question, saying: “Well, um, the God of the Koran I don’t know so much about.”

How can it be that the world’s most fearless atheist, celebrated for his strident opinions on the Christian and Jewish Gods, could profess to know so little about the God of the Koran? Has he not had the time? Or is Professor Dawkins simply demonstrating that most crucial trait of his species: survival instinct.