define('DISABLE_WP_CRON', 'true'); crazy | Conserva-Kat

Because the Obama Administration sees women as nothing but their “bits”

This was on the official Obama campaign Tumblr account:

 

Because, as a woman nothing else matters, right?  Certainly not:

Fast & Furious.
16 Trillion in debt. (That’s $16,000,000,000,000.00!!!)
8+% Unemployment that is really 16% unemployment.
The Obama Administration lying to the American People about the Benghazi Terrorist attack.
Obama’s Attorney General having ties to the Black Panthers & possibly terrorism.

I could go on, and on, and on, and on. But I don’t have enough time right now.

Code Pink, dressed as Giant Lady Parts.

But according to our President’s campaign – the same campaign that has made a 30-something activist law student the star of their campaign because she wants the government to pay for her birth control – according to the President’s campaign, women are nothing more than their “lady parts” and the only issue that matters is Birth Control (read: Abortion).

So, the democrats see me as nothing but a giant walking vay-jay-jay, but it’s the Republicans who don’t respect women and are waging a War on Women?

Because nothing says “Respect for the Presidency” like pounding the President’s face into the ground over & over again.

At yesterday’s Easter Egg Roll at the White House, President Obama’s staff had a very special treat for the kids: a basketball clinic featuring NBA players. And there was a second special treat for the children: the basketball itself featured the stern mug of one Barack Obama, as tweeted by ABC News’ Jake Tapper. As Keith Koffler points out at White House Dossier, “Apparently, the basketball lesson doesn’t include instruction in humility.”

via Breitbart.com.

Seriously?? So much did we the tax payer shell out?  Not just for the custom printed basketballs, but also for the NBA Players’ appearances?

 

Update:  Jake Tapper reports on Twitter that the Obama-Balls were NOT bought using Taxpayer money:

 

Has Senator Dick Durbin ever even read the Constitution?

Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) said in a congressional hearing Tuesday that a young person who is an illegal alien in the United States today may someday become president.

“When I look around this room, I see America’s future, our doctors, our teachers, our nurses, our engineers, our scientists, our soldiers, our congressmen, our senators, and maybe our president,” Durbin said immediately after having asked all young persons in the room to stand if they were currently undocumented aliens who would be eligible to become citizens if the DREAM Act were passed.
via CNSnews.com.

Dude.  I’m pretty sure no one in that group is going to be our future President.  Senators & Representatives, maybe – IF, and that’s a big IF, they get legal. But President… Um… No Dude.  The Constitution, in Article 2, Section 1, says that a person must be 35, and a natural born citizen (read ’em and weep Durbin) – and really, that is heart of the whole Birther thing — what defines natural born citizen.  Whatever that definition…  I’m pretty sure none of those DREAM ACTer’s will qualify.

The TSA can kiss my A-Double Snakes.

This video disturbs me on so many levels.

My vision turned red the first time I saw this little 3 yr old girl kicking at the TSA agents while screaming, “Don’t touch me!”  The Mama Grizzly in me wanted to jump through the screen back in time and stand between that baby girl and that TSA agent.  I wanted to lay some smack down on someone on that child’s behalf.

My next instinct was to scream at the parents.  How could they? How could that father just stand by, running his cell phone cam when his child was in such obvious distress? Yea, there was definitely a story there, but the man should be a father first, reporter second – not the other way around. Arrgghh!!  And the mom…  Maybe my vision is skewed here, being that I’m a mom with a couple of kids on the Autism spectrum, but really?  I can kind of see where she tries to make the best of a bad situation.  She tries to pick up the child and comfort her while the screener keeps grabbing at her. But seriously? I wouldn’t have let them touch my child in the first place.  I would raise holy hell.  They would be dragging my butt to jail, because if some laid a hand on my child, there would be punches thrown.

But my anger and frustration with the parents melted away as I listened to the interview with the TSA Supervisor.  I was absolutely horrified to hear the TSA Supervisor say that they need to “turn it into a game.”  Are you kidding?  TSA is not the best at background checks, even hiring illegals, felons, and kid-touchers.

Indeed, back in March it emerged that TSA worker Sean Shanahan, who was employed at Boston Logan International Airport to pat down passengers, had been charged with multiple child sex crimes targeting an underage girl.” —Prison Planet

So their bright idea is to make these searches – which, by the way, means touching in ways that would get most people sent to prison – into games? WTF? I want to know what this guy is smoking that he thinks it’s ok for anyone to lay hands on a child in such a manner.  Oh, but the alternative is to go through an x-ray machine without the benefit of that lead-lined skirt they give you at the hospital to protect your bits and pieces from radiation.  Oh yea. Lets do that. /facepalm.

My outrage at TSA is only magnified after reading accounts like this – a young mother prevented from making sure her autistic toddler doesn’t wander off – the comments here, and listening to accounts like this one:

After all this testimony, I am more pissed then ever at our ineffective, inept TSA, and the Government, that not only continues to allow this rampant violation of our Constitutional 4th Amendment Rights, but tries to tell us it’s all for our good and we should just go along with the public molestation.  Really, Janet Napolitano, really?  I mean, when the government is in the business of terrorizing children and molesting law abiding citizens who wish to make use of a private enterprise, I think you could almost say that the Terrorists are winning this round. Geez.

I expect nothing less from the state of California.

Actually, this does not surprise me one bit:

Anyone seeking low-wage employment as a fry cook or burger flipper at fast food restaurants in Calif. will soon have to pass a state-administered licensing exam to assure they are skilled in their ‘trades.’

via Calif. Law Will Require License to Flip Burgers |.

Looks like California has found a new method of fundraising.

Feds want the oil well in the gulf reopened.

Pilloried for nearly three months as it tried repeatedly to stop the leak, BP PLC capped the nearly mile (kilometer)-deep well Thursday and wants to keep it that way. The government’s plan, however, is to eventually pipe oil to the surface, which would ease pressure on the fragile well but would require up to three more days of oil spilling into the Gulf.

via FOXNews.com – BP, Feds Clash Over Reopening Capped Well.

Congressman Waxman goes after Vitamin Companies via the Financial Bill

Of all the sneaky tactics practiced in Washington D.C., this recent action by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) is one of the most insidious: While no one was looking, he injected amendment language into the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173) that would expand the powers of the FTC (not the FDA, but the FTC) to terrorize nutritional supplement companies by greatly expanding the power of the FTC to make its own laws that target dietary supplement companies.

Read the whole story here.

Women on Subs = Not a good idea.

Despite concerns from critics over privacy, costs and the possibility of sexual activity, the Navy says it’s ready, willing, able, and now ready to put women on submarines.  (Source)

This is a stupid, stupid, very dumb, not-so-smart idea.

I love that the story points out that Navy wives don’t like this idea at all.  DURRR! Ya think?  Geez.

But some of the sailors’ spouses don’t share that indifference.

“The Navy wives, I think, are the most vocal,” said Linda Cagle, the owner of a restaurant near the Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base. “They do not think it’s a good idea, they do not want women on submarines with their husbands or their boyfriends.”

The Navy hopes the penalties for “fraternizing” — ranging from fines to dismissal and two years’ confinement – will ease some of those concerns.

Because oh yeah… those penalties for “fraternizing” do such a bang-up job of prevent “it” from happening on board co-ed boats now.  Right.  /sarcasm.

Ugh.  I am a Navy Wife.  (Ok, so he’s retired now.  You can take the man out of the Military, but you can’t take the Military out of the man. Same can be said for the spouses. Seriously.)  I am blessed with a husband that I trust, with my heart and my life.  That said, I don’t think women belong on the Carriers, let alone other sea-going vessels.

I have no problem with women in the military.  I have no problem with women in the same shore-duty squadrons as men.  I have a problem with putting a bunch of men and women together in a floating city, and then separating those individuals from their spouses for 6 months plus a year.

I understand the argument that women don’t get the same opportunities to advance their military careers if they aren’t allowed to serve on board.  I have a solution – make a female-only boat/carrier/sub/etc.  But do not make our submarines co-ed.