Teacher-led high school students protest fracking in Colorado
By Marjorie Haun | Watchdog Arena
GREELEY, Colo.—The Colorado Energy Task Force, formed by Gov. John Hickenlooper in 2013 to study and make recommendations to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and the state Legislature, held a public meeting in Greeley, Colo. last Thursday.
As one in a series of public meetings on the issues surrounding oil and gas development, specifically fracking, the hearing was held in Weld County, the heart of Colorado’s current natural gas boom. Presented at the Island Grove Regional 4H building, the meeting was open to the public and featured testimony from panelists as well as public comments at its conclusion.
Among the attendees were Jefferson High School teacher Rob Liebman, a paraprofessional aide and about 25 students who attend the alternative-learning campus in the Greeley-Evans School District 6. Liebman’s group arrived early and, initially, sat quietly as they waited for the task force to begin their meeting. According to Mr. Liebman, most of the students were from his Environmental Science class, along with a few from a Government class.
The Task Force meeting was delayed, and after a few minutes, Liebman led his students outside to listen to about 15 anti-fracking activists who stood in front of the entrance to the 4H building, stridently laying out their case against gas and oil development in Colorado. The high school group gathered in closely to listen. Liebman gave no indication that he wanted the students to remain neutral or simply observe.
The protesters indicated that they were associated with Moveon.org and Wild Earth Guardians, but would not disclose their specific identity. Their leader, a young woman, said their website was “cleanwater.org,” but the “Ban Fracking Now” signs they provided to those at the rally showed the URL “foodandwaterwatch.org.”
I attempted to obtain a copy of the printed flyers the activists were passing out, but they refused me. Teacher Liebman, however, obtained some of the handouts which he gave to the students to share among themselves. A few of the students were given “Ban Fracking Now” signs, which they held while the anti-oil and gas protesters gave speeches.
One of Liebman’s students, a young man, shouted the word “immature” at a woman who stood behind the gaggle of anti-frackers holding a sign with the words “I support Oil and Gas.” At no time did Liebman or the paraprofessional aide attempt to calm the students or ask them to return the “Ban Fracking Now” signs to the protest organizers.
A small group of individuals, locals, and those involved in the oil and gas industry, stood near the protesters holding signs in support of oil and gas. Liebman directed his students to stand in front of the pro-energy citizens and block them by holding up their “ban fracking” signs, which they did. He then took out a camera and snapped a number of photographs of them doing so.
After the meeting of the Colorado Energy Task Force was delayed for a few more minutes, the protesters eventually entered the building and sat in the audience. Liebman and his students also sat in the audience for a short time. Despite the rules of the meeting, which forbade the display of signs, some of Liebman’s students held the “Ban Fracking Now” signs on their laps and, at times, held them up for onlookers to see. Only minutes after the meeting began and introductions of the members of the Task Force were made, the Jefferson High teacher, paraprofessional aide, and students left the meeting.
When asked about the occurrence, Larry Green, the principal of Jefferson High, defended Rob Liebman by saying, “The intent of the outing was to see the Task Force and look at both sides of the issue.” Green would not say, however, whether or not he supported students from his high school joining the anti-fracking protest.
In a written statement, Direct of Communications for Greeley-Evans School District 6, Theresa Myers, said, “The intent of the field trip was not for the students to take part in any protest. Our director of high schools has met with the principal, and actions are being taken to ensure this doesn’t happen again.”
This article was written by a contributor of Watchdog Arena, Franklin Center’s network of writers, bloggers, and citizen journalists.
January 16, 2015
EDITORIAL: U.S. solar policy headed in wrong direction
As originally published in the Daily Sentinel
Roan settlement casts a cloud over state’s energy economy
By Sen. Ray Scott
The congratulatory back-slapping which followed the Nov. 21 announcement of a “landmark settlement agreement” on Roan Plateau oil and gas leases was an embarrassing example of life imitating art. A month of mourning for Colorado’s energy economy may be more appropriate.
At one level, the political high-fives from Interior Secretary Jewell, Sen. Bennet, Gov. Hickenlooper and environmental activists are understandable. With the cancellation of 17 of the 19 original oil and gas drilling leases representing about 50 percent of the land area encompassed by the leases, the opponents of oil and gas drilling on the Roan Plateau won a major victory. So, they did a little dance in the end zone after the touchdown. And doubtless, it was also a victory for the pragmatists among us who do not like the prospect of continued litigation that might have extended for a decade.
But many Coloradans have not joined the celebration. What about the impact of this settlement on Colorado’s energy economy, now the second-fastest growing energy economy in the nation? Frankly, the settlement is not a good precedent and may well only encourage additional lawsuits to hold up oil and gas drilling on public lands.
The Dec. 9 announcement by the U.S. Forest Service that more than 90 percent of the 2.2 million acres of land in the White River National Forest will be placed off-limits for future oil and gas development is another indication of how much the federal government cares about the future growth of Colorado’s energy economy: not much.
For these and other reasons, the celebration over the Roan Plateau settlement is premature and highly debatable.
In the first place, the “settlement” is not yet final, and we won’t know the full story for another two years when the Bureau of Land Management issues its revised plan. Moreover, some important “conditions” regarding the impact on local government revenue are not a formal part of the settlement and must be acted upon by the Colorado general assembly. While the governor’s December budget proposal accommodates that “hold harmless” agreement, it will require the appropriation of about $23 million out of the General Fund and depends on legislative approval.
Let’s look at the settlement agreement in the larger context of the state’s energy economy. In announcing the settlement, our governor was excited by the prospect of “orderly development” of the Roan Plateau’s mineral resources. But when we stop to ask who will control and define this “orderly development” and who will guarantee that it will be genuinely “balanced” in allowing expanded drilling, the answer is not all that satisfying.
The reality is that the “orderly and balanced development” of our energy resources is in the hands not of elected Colorado lawmakers but our friendly federal overseers at the Department of the Interior and, of course, unelected federal judges. Now, I ask: What could go wrong?
It is true that the state’s oil and gas industry has endorsed the agreement, and open criticism of the plan has been rather muted. But how much of this absence of open criticism is based on real satisfaction with the plan and how much on either pure exhaustion with the expensive process of litigating and “negotiating” with federal agencies and a fear of retaliation from the same forces that brought the Roan Plateau lawsuits?
There are other troubling questions.
Who is speaking up for the thousands of middle-class citizens who will not be offered new jobs in the development of valuable resources on lands now forever removed from natural gas drilling?
What kind of precedent does this settlement provide for future “negotiations” when well-funded environmental interests decide to challenge already existing mineral leases on federal lands?
Can anyone trust federal agencies to keep their word and implement contracts and agreements when a new lawsuit can open up any agreement to new challenges and threaten additional years of expensive litigation?
Many Coloradans will remember when a newly elected governor pledged to make job creation the “top priority” for his policy agenda. What he failed to tell us is that energy jobs were not included on that menu when challenged by environmental radicals at Earthjustice and the Colorado Wildlife Federation. When challenged, our governor chose to collaborate with the opponents of energy development and Obama administration officials instead of standing tall for Colorado’s economic interests.
It is hard to be confident of our state’s long-term oil and gas development when political appointees in federal agencies control so many of those decisions. More than 36 percent of Colorado’s land is owned by federal agencies, which places Colorado eighth among the 50 states in the extent of federal control of lands. The high-handed Roan Plateau “settlement” is a harsh reminder of that bigger problem.
Contrary to the cheerleaders in the governor’s office, the Roan Plateau settlement is not a “collaborative model” for future development. Quite the opposite is true: It gives added impetus for Colorado joining Utah and other Western states in rolling back that federal ownership of public lands and with it, rolling back federal control of our lives and our economic destiny.
Senator Ray Scott represents Colorado’s 7th District in the State Legislature
Reposted with permission from the author on Reagangirl.com 1/15/15
January 11, 2015
As originally published on the Daily Caller Nov. 12, 2014
The Endangered Species Act Set To Harm Another Endangered Species
By BRIAN SEASHOLES
Today the federal government takes a significant step to reinforce what has become increasingly clear over the Endangered Species Act’s forty-year history: the law’s penalty-based approach causes enormous harm to the very species it is supposed to protect.
The decision today to list the Gunnison sage grouse leaves the bird, its cousin the greater sage grouse, and many other imperiled species facing bleaker futures. Listing deters not only conservation in the Gunnison sage grouse’s Colorado and Utah range, but also conservation in many states, communities and businesses across the country that are working very hard to conserve imperiled species, prevent their listing and avoid the Endangered Species Act’s punitive and expensive regulations.
This is especially true for by far the biggest listing decision in the Act’s history; it seems enormous conservation efforts at a price of more than $1 billion were not able to prevent the greater sage grouse’s listing, which could cost 32,000 jobs and $5.6 billion in annual economic output across eleven western states and 165 million acres.
Greg Walcher, who was heavily involved in sage grouse conservation as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources from 1999-2004, asserts, “Massive investment and local participation was made with the clear understanding that the Gunnison sage grouse would not be added to the federal endangered species list.”
Gunnison County, which contains 93 percent of the grouse’s population, is ground zero for conservation efforts that include hiring the nation’s only full-time municipal endangered species biologist, stringent sage grouse-specific zoning ordinances, forming a working group in 1995 to organize and implement conservation initiatives, and protecting 97 percent of privately owned habitat with various agreements.
This private land is part of the 64,000 acres of sage grouse habitat in Colorado under conservation easements that cost the state $30 million and the 126,500 acres in a federally-approved Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances, which was sold to people, especially the forty-seven landowners who enrolled their land, as key to preventing listing.
The result has been a healthy, slowly increasing grouse population, most notably in Gunnison County. Despite all of this, the federal government has reneged and listed the grouse.
Communities and landowners in Colorado and Utah feel deeply betrayed and anxious because of the Endangered Species Act’s much-feared land and resource use regulations. “The community most impacted — ours — overwhelmingly opposes [listing the grouse]” states Chris Dickey, publisher of the Gunnison Country Times, a weekly newspaper and website. “The Gunnison Basin is a model for a community’s conservation-minded response to an imperiled species.”
The sage grouse also loses due to its listing. “A listing will have a lot of people saying, ‘I’m done,’” Jonathan Houck, Gunnison County Commissioner, told the Post. “I don’t mean we’re going to purposely bring harm to the bird and the habitat. But if you voluntarily alter how you work your land and that’s not enough, it sends a clear shot across the bow. It says, ‘Why put in the effort, why put in the money, why tax your resources? Because in the end it will never be enough.’”
Reposted by Reagangirl.com 1/11/15
January 11, 2015
These graphic representations produced by the House Committee on Natural Resources in 2012 are a window into the nature of the battle for American property rights and the development of natural resources, as well as the identities of the organizations who seek to regulate and control human activity across the nation. Now, in 2015, the battle still rages, and with a president willing to appease the radical environmental movement at any cost, the stakes are higher than ever before.
|Millions of Taxpayer Dollars Spent on Endangered Species Act Litigation and Attorney Fees WASHINGTON, D.C., June 19, 2012 – According to data recently obtained from the Department of Justice (DOJ) in response to document requests, the federal government has defended more than 570 Endangered Species Act (ESA)-related lawsuits costing U.S. taxpayers more than $15 million in attorney fees – in just the past four years. This data provides further evidence that the ESA has become litigation driven, where money and resources are spent addressing endless, frivolous lawsuits instead of species recovery.|
Environmental groups are filing the vast majority of litigation, with the Center for Biological Diversity and the WildEarth Guardians leading the charge.
These groups, and their lawyers, are making millions of taxpayer dollars in profit by suing the federal government. According to DOJ, some attorneys are reimbursed up to $500 an hour and two lawyers have each received over $2 million in attorney fees from ESA cases.
Reposted by Reagangirl.com 1/11/15
January 5, 2015
State policy changes endanger juvenile detention staff, former workers say
By Arthur Kane | Watchdog.org
Colorado Department of Human Services administrators have “coddled” inmates and led to the increase in attacks on staff with a series of policy and procedural changes, former employees told Watchdog.org.
“It was the policies by (CDHS executive director) Reggie Bicha,” said Robert Suiter, who worked for more than a decade as a youth corrections staffer before leaving in August. “They don’t care about staff safety.”
Suiter said he left without another job because he felt the work was too dangerous. Bicha, through a spokesman, declined to comment on Suiter’s allegations.
This month, Watchdog.org stories exposed that inmates injured staff at nearly double the past average rates after a July policy banning most inmate seclusion. Documents also showed how repeat offenders were free to commit multiple attacks on staff and other inmates with apparently few consequences.
The stories prompted the Legislature’s Joint Budget Committee on Monday to grill Bicha and his top staff about the problems at juvenile facilities.
Suiter said the policy that banned seclusion as part of special management plans — plans designed to improve problem youth behavior by taking away privileges and increasing counseling — made inmates realize there were few consequences for violence. And while not an official policy change, the word went out that there would be more scrutiny of staff using physical force or restraint to control violent inmates, he said.
“You can’t touch kids, you can’t lock kids up,” said Suiter, who worked at Spring Creek Youth Services Center, which has had the most violence against staff in recent months. “But these are seasoned criminals who have been committed a number of times — veterans — and if you can’t lock them up, they’re going to start punching people in the face as often as they can get away with it.”
Instead of dealing harshly with hardened juvenile inmates, CDHS this year implemented a “Positive Behavioral Interventions and Support” method designed to “infuse positive reinforcement” into facilities, a CDHS presentation shows. PBIS will be used with prior techniques like placing staff where they can see and control inmates, using verbal deescalation (which staff called verbal judo), setting limits, intervening early in misbehavior that could lead to dangerous situations and developing “meaningful” relationships with youth.
On Monday, Bicha informed lawmakers that youth detention banned SMP seclusion — using seclusion only in emergencies — because the American Civil Liberties Union complained systematic seclusion to control inmates violates state law.
Robert Werthwein, acting director of CDHS Division of Youth Corrections, said the state is using appropriate policies in detention centers.
“We use seclusion when it’s appropriate, but we can’t violate (anyone’s) rights,” he said, adding there is no additional scrutiny of physical force if approved methods are used. “We want to use evidence-based practices so we’re doing good by the youth, treating the youth.”
Larry Farmer, a former teacher and principal at schools in youth detention centers who retired four years ago, said the seclusion ban and other policy changes have led to a decline in discipline.
“I don’t think the kids are held accountable like they need to be,” said Farmer, who contacted Watchdog.org after the first juvenile detention stories were published.
Farmer said closing a center in Pueblo designed to treat severely mentally ill youths and dismantling the positive peer model, where a pod of youths lost privileges if one acted out, have also led to a much more dangerous juvenile detention system.
“Kids live up to or down to the expectations that you put on them,” he said. “If you don’t expect them to behave correctly, they’ll keep pushing those limits and their behavior is going slide.”
Werthwein countered that studies show the peer model isn’t effective, and CDHS ended the technique in 2012.
“We don’t use that model because it promotes the types of hierarchy you see in gangs,” Werthwein said. “It can create power struggles within the group.”
Bicha told the JBC that CDHS moved youths out of the Pueblo facility and made mental health treatment available in all the detention centers.
But Suiter, who Watchdog.org found from a state database of employees who recently left juvenile detention jobs, said the department is treating criminals like innocent school children.
“They’re coddling inmates because (administration is) scared of the ACLU,” he said.
Farmer said youths were allowed to stay in their rooms if they didn’t want to attend class.
“There was no accountability when it came down to saying (youths) must be in class,” he said. “They said it was the schools’ fault they’re not coming to school, but what kid would come school when they can stay in their rooms and sleep?”
CDHS practice is to require mandatory school attendance if the student isn’t sick or misbehaving, Werthwein said. The written policy says education is offered to all juveniles and the director must approve of absences of more than one day.
CDHS is asking the Legislature for nearly $10 million over two years to increase staff, but Suiter said it’s tough to fill positions because of the job’s dangers.
Bicha admitted the same thing to JBC on Monday as he discussed the division’s 23 percent turnover rate in the past fiscal year.
“Recruits think it is one job and were really getting another,” he told lawmakers, adding the staff vacancy rate at juvenile detention is 4.8 percent. “They find the kids in this setting are very different than what they expected.”
Farmer and Suiter conceded that additional detention workers may help stem the violence, but policy and procedural changes are also key to making juvenile detention centers safer.
For example, Watchdog.org found police reports that pointed out how many violent inmates, some over 18 and about to be charged with adult crimes, are taken to a county jail to be booked for attacks at juvenile facilities but then brought back to the youth center. Another report showed how an attacker and his victim were not kept away from each other after the victim filed charges, resulting in more violence.
“That’s someone not doing their job,” Farmer said.
Werthwein said CDHS doesn’t decide where to detain suspects after charges and juvenile staff attempt to place inmates in appropriate circumstances within the confines of state juvenile detention resources.
Bicha also said it’s up to the victim to decide whether to press charges and administrators neither encourage nor discourage prosecution.
Despite a major drop in youth detention population, Bicha and Werthwein attributed the increase in violence to more gang-affiliated and troubled youth coming into the juvenile detention system.
Figures obtained by Watchdog.org show that staff injuries nearly doubled between July and October over any other four-month period since late 2012, but Bicha’s JBC presentations shows all assaults at the state’s juvenile facilities have steadily increased from 133 in 2010 to 176 projected for this year.
“We’ve taken kids that are not as violent and moved them out to the community and now we have a higher concentration (of violent youth) and we’re looking at the best ways to control population mix we do have within the facilities,” Werthwein said.
Suiter said the juvenile system doesn’t protect staff, other inmates or society.
“You don’t have the tools there,” he said. “You have (inmates) in the youth detention that influence and prey on people, and they have nothing to lose.”
January 3, 2015
We have real work to do.
MY REAL RESOLUTION 2015:
There are many of my conservative friends out there genuinely concerned about motes in the eyes of people within the Republican Party. They spend their time suing this Republican and that Republican and plaster social media timelines with gloating comments about how this Republican or that Republican was caught doing something they disagree with, or sometimes downright corrupt. But let’s first pull the beam out of the eye of the American Left! (even if we have to pull out their eyeball doing it)
I have my criticisms of the establishment GOP, no doubt, but they can, and will be changed from within if the Tea Party, Reagan Conservatives, Patriot and Liberty groups stand on principle and STOP TRYING TO TEAR ONE ANOTHER APART!
Therefore, I, Marjorie Haun, in the Year of our Lord, 2015, hereby resolve to put every ounce of spirit I can muster into fighting those on the progressive left who are trying to destroy this country by spreading weakness through immorality, diluting our culture of rugged individualism and self-sufficiency through multiculturalism, and shrinking the power of the people by creating laws that grow government and place shackles of taxation and regulation upon citizens.
I encourage all of my patriotic friends; all who revere the Constitution and reverence God; all who understand that government is of and by the people, not the other way around, to join me in fighting PROGRESSIVES, DEMOCRATS, LIBERALS, SOCIALISTS, COMMIE-PINKOS, MARXISTS, AND ALL OTHER RIFF-RAFF OUR POLITICAL MILIEU HAS TO OFFER from this day until we restore our Constitution and once again establish a moral, civil society where regulation comes from within the hearts of individuals and not the halls of government.
STOP FIGHTING WITH AND DESTROYING REPUBLICANS. LET’S UNITE IN FIGHTING THE REAL ENEMIES OF LIBERTY AND MORALITY.
Much love for God, country, and all ya’ll,
THINGS I DON’T DO, AND NEVER WILL–AT LEAST NOT UNTIL WE SAVE THE COUNTRY:
REAGANGIRL’S LIST OF NEW YEARS RESOLUTIONS THAT WILL BE BROKEN IMMEDIATELY:
1. I resolve to start drinking alcohol to relieve stress and help me better navigate Republican cocktail parties.
2. I resolve to start smoking pot.
3. I resolve to be nice to Liberals.
4. I resolve to pull my punches when debating Democrats about current events and public policy.
5. I resolve not to have a plethora NRA, Fracking, Ruger, and other right-wing propaganda bumper stickers on the backside of my car.
6. I resolve to eat less chocolate.
7. I resolve to watch Jon Stewart.
8. I resolve to cut butter, lard, bacon fat, heavy cream, sausage, and margarine out of my diet.
9. I resolve to cut down on my daily intake of sugar.
10. I resolve to care about what’s on NPR, MSNBC and CNN.
11. I resolve to listen to Alan Colmes’ radio show.
12. I resolve to have faith in Obama.
13. I resolve to give money to Earth First, Wild Earth Guardians and the Sierra Club.
14. I resolve to not get so much pleasure from defeating my political enemies.
15. I resolve to go to a gym.
16. I resolve to become a loose woman.
17. I resolve to abstain from tweeting.
18. I resolve to keep my resolutions.
So there it is. I ask but one question of all my friends who have had considerable life experience, as have I: It’s taken me over 50 years to develop and fine-tune my considerably unique character traits, whether you like them or not, why the heck would I change course now?
HAPPY FREAKING NEW YEAR!
by Marjorie Haun 1/3/15
As originally published in Boston Herald
2015 promises world of flash points, surprises
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
By Peter Brookes
The Danish physicist Niels Bohr is supposed to have said something along the lines of: Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future.
But despite the warning’s obvious wisdom, busying ourselves in prediction is inescapable whether it’s in selecting a spouse for life or a rapid route to work in the morning.
International security is no different.
So while publicly playing a potentate of prognostication may be perilous, it seems that now is a good time to make some plucky predictions about what we’ll face on the foreign front in 2015.
For instance, there’s Russia. My sense is the Kremlin has no intention of caving on Crimea and won’t be cowed by punitive sanctions, collapsing currency or plummeting oil prices.
Besides keeping the eastern Ukraine rebellion at a low boil for leverage with Western-leaning Kiev, Moscow will seek to increase its influence and complicate U.S.-NATO interests globally.
Then there’s Iran. After more than a year of nuclear talks — actually more than a decade if you want to include all talks — there’s still no deal.
For reasons similar to Russia, Iran is facing tough economic times. Despite this, Tehran will play hard to get, believing that Washington wants a deal more that it does.
Of course, if the talks fail, then what?
And don’t think that “The Interview” cyber-fistfight with North Korea will just quietly go away like some bad, Hollywood “B” movie script.
Rather, unable to stand toe-to-toe and trade Internet punches with Washington, Pyongyang will almost certainly insert some missile mayhem and or nuke naughtiness into the evolving cyber-drama.
What about Syria, Iraq and the Islamic State? Between Iranian involvement, the rise of Iraqi Shia militias, the Syrian stalemate, Islamic State brutality, and so on, this mega-mess won’t be tidied up anytime soon.
Closely related is terrorism. Al-Qaeda and its ilk are running amok from Africa to Asia. Besides local fights, Islamist extremists will target the West, including inspiring returning and homegrown terrorists to do their dirty work.
And we just closed combat operations in Afghanistan in favor of a training mission; Afghan forces are questionable against a not-yet dead Taliban/Haqqani Network insurgency.
The question is: Will Afghanistan be a sequel to the “movie” we’re seeing in the Iraq after our pullout there? What effect will it have on neighboring Pakistan, a country on edge from its own Taliban?
China will also vex us in 2015. It’s happy to see America strategically distracted outside East Asia and will take advantage where it can, such as by consolidating questionable territorial claims with its mounting military might.
And, oh yeah, reforms in Cuba will go nowhere fast despite U.S. diplomatic recognition — if that actually happens.
Of course, there will also be events that completely surprise us — and those that shouldn’t have surprised us, but did. Predicting the course of events is a human endeavor after all.
The bottom line is that the international landscape will be a geopolitical minefield full of hotspots and flash points — an unfortunate prediction that doesn’t seem very difficult at all.
Peter Brookes is a Heritage Foundation senior fellow and a former deputy assistant secretary of defense. Follow him on Twitter @Brookes_Peter.
Reposted by Reagangirl.com 1/3/14
December 31, 2014
The worst female reproductive organ of 2014: MARK UTERUS (UDALL)
This hard-left Democrat Senator from Colorado, the scion of the Udall political dynasty, aborted himself by clinging to an ineffective, and ultimately absurd campaign narrative. Mark Udall must have had Rosie O’Donnell advising him because early-on in the race to maintain his seat in the United States Senate, he concluded that to win against the extremely cute Republican Congressman from Yuma, Colorado, he must run 24/7 “Cory Gardner is too extreme for Colorado and hates women and their body parts and wants to keep them barefoot and pregnant on a goat farm in Idaho” campaign ads. Democrat pundits tried to wean Udall from his weird obsession with stuff that was legally
settled in the 1970s, and it was even a left-leaning blogger from the Denver Post who dubbed him “Mark Uterus,” which went viral across the country. Shortly thereafter, Udall’s career in the Senate was terminated. Cory Gardner, who was, and still is too extremely cute for Colorado, loves women, especially the baby daughter, Caitlin Quinn, whom his wife birthed just days ago–after months of not being barefoot.
The worst piece of human rubbish to visit the White House 61 times 2014: AL SHARPTON
Even Webster’s Thesaurus cannot provide words sufficient to describe this most despicable, self-promoting, criminal, race-hustling bodily orifice. The BFF of Barack and Eric, Al stoked the fires of anger in Ferguson, Missouri by inflating the fabricated “hand’s up don’t shoot” version of what happened to Michael Brown into a national issue. Not content to leave a small Missouri town in ruins with the riots he perpetrated, Sharpton took to New York City to incite more mayhem over a tragic case that had nothing to do with racism. Even now, following the cold-blooded murders of several policemen, the desiccated weasel Sharpton has not been called to task by anyone in the Obama Administration, nor the mainstream media. Al Sharpton, in 2014 and beyond, will be known to law-abiding Americans and the men and women who protect and serve them, as the bloody-handed race pimp of the century.
Entitled, cognitively dissonant, feminist dough girl who cried–and lied–rape of 2014: LENA DUNHAM
Lying about the serious, potentially life-destroying crime of rape is what actress Lena Dunham will be remembered for. Despite her otherwise weird behavior; getting naked and showing her doughy body to the world in displays of feminist defiance; obsessing over the fictitious “War on Women;” and lending to the freak show atmosphere of pop culture, Lena Dunham is really just a spoiled rich kid from an artsy-fartsy New York City family with too much time and anger on her hands to be a productive citizen. But beyond her deplorable conduct, Dunham sought to destroy an innocent young guy and taint the “conservative” brand with a false accusation of rape simply to satisfy her unhinged, radical feminist worldview. A word to young women and girls across the nation and the world; Lena Dunham is the worst America has to offer, and exactly what you don’t want to grow up to be.
Commie-pinko, cop-hating, Castro-loving mayor of New York City of 2014: RED BILL DeBLASIO
Wow, I’m ordinarily pretty serene when writing, but listing these loathsome leftists may cause me to blow an aneurysm before I get to the first edit. Anyoo, about Red Bill de Blasio…
This guy was elected mayor of NYC in a landslide in November of 2013. That election also had a record low turnout, which means smart people stayed home and commie morons, performing their civic duty, put an incompetent socialist Utopian in charge. We all knew de Blasio was a clintonian Marxist, left of Hillary and clearly deranged. He ran on an anti-cop platform, appealing to people most likely to have negative interactions with cops–criminals–which turned out to be a winning strategy for Red Bill. But following the the grand jury decision that absolved some New York cops (including a black female police sergeant) of the intentional homicide of Eric Garner, a black father of 6 who was stopped for selling “illegal” cigarettes, de Blasio went full-bore against the thin blue line, which on 9-11, proved itself to be one of the greatest law-enforcement organizations on the planet. Like a good commie, Red Bill inferred that slavery never went away and that racism is systemic in society, and most especially in white cop/black man interactions. Days following his disgusting rants against his own police department and others, two NYPD officers were gunned down while eating their lunches in a patrol car, by a black man who, without a doubt, felt that de Blasio and the other race hustlers; Sharpton, Obama, Holder, et al, gave him permission to take bloody revenge on the cops. The rift between de Blasio and the NYPD grows every time he flaps his mouth. Commie Red Bill’s inexcusable behavior has also managed to widen the rift between law-abiding Americans and the Left-wing, which is a good thing. While Americans draw away from the likes of de Blasio and his race-baiting buddies, we are uniting across all demographics to say #ISupportFirstResponders and #PoliceLivesMatter.
Obamacare architect, simultaneously bumbling fool/evil genius of 2014: JONATHAN GRUBER
It’s easy to hate Jonathan Gruber, but his biggest mistake was being honest. He was transparent in bragging about the “huge political advantage” of being non-transparent. He bragged about how the “tortured” machinations of Obamacare were designed to fool purportedly stupid Americans because they would be smart enough to figure it out if it was plainly written. Jonathan Gruber is a smart guy who was out-smarted by his belief that he could put one over on the American people. This MIT economist/professor, while being grilled on Capitol Hill by the House Oversight Committee, took up the defense that he did said what he said because he’s stupid. But the best irony of Gruber’s assertion that Obamacare was written to fool stupid American voters, is that the only people who bought into its lies were Democrats. If there are stupid Americans out there, it’s not the Republicans who steadfastly opposed Obamacare from the get-go. Congressional Republicans saw through Gruber’s legalistic fog, and not one, NOT ONE, voted for it. So I guess to be fair, Jonathan Gruber should share his Bonehead of 2014 Award with Obama and all the Congressional Democrats who voted for the disastrously stupid and ironically named Affordable Care Act.
Happy New Year to all. May Heavenly Father protect us all against boneheads like these in 2015.
by Marjorie Haun 12/31/14