It’s Thursday, July 3rd, 2014…and we begin a series of interrogatories with the question of the day:

Now, here’s The Gouge!

First up, David Goetsch asks the question we believe was answered LONG ago:

Is Obama’s Apparent Ineptitude Really Intentional?

“…Watching this president’s administration in action, I find myself humming that old tune, “Send in the Clowns.” The gap between Barack Obama’s supposed credentials and his actual performance is so wide that people are beginning to wonder if there might be another explanation.

Sometimes when things do not make sense to thinking people it is because they refuse to see what is staring them right in the face. If one considers that perhaps President Obama’s apple did not fall too far from his father’s tree, his apparent ineptitude can be viewed in a different light, one that actually makes sense. Perhaps the president is not inept at all. Perhaps he is doing precisely what he planned to do all along: purposefully undermine the United States and everything it stands for. Could it be that we elected a president who would welcome the downfall of America? Is it possible that Barack Obama views the United States through the lenses of his father’s anti-colonialism perspective? I will admit to finding this line of thought difficult to grasp as do some other conservatives with whom I have raised the question, but that might be because people of good will always find it difficult to believe that others don’t share their good will…

…Is Obama’s apparent ineptitude really intentional? The truth is, only he knows for sure. However, I can say this: Based on the evidence, if we were in a court of law, I would rather be the prosecutor than his defender.“

Sorry, but we refuse to give The Obamao and his merry band of Marxists even the faintest benefit of the doubt:

In a related item, writing at The Street, Peter Morici explains…

Why I Can’t Be Both an Economist and a Liberal

“Economists should be bound by facts and reason. And I can’t do that and embrace liberal positions on the minimum wage, climate change and gender discrimination.

Raising prices for most anything reduces purchases. Simply, if beef or a plumber’s visit gets too high, folks eat more chicken and fix their own faucets…“

That…and the fact he’s still got an ounce of gray matter between his ears. And who best exemplifies the inevitable consequences of no brains whatsoever?  Hope ‘n Change says it best:

Sí Section

Speaking of Hope ‘n Change, the latest installment offers perhaps the most succinct summary of the Left’s twisted logic following what Progressives can only describe as a… 

Ruthless Decision

In a tight 5-4 decision which has set the Arts & Crafts world reeling, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the 1st Amendment of the Constitution, which states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  In this case, that translates to the fact that Obamacare can not force the owners of religion-centric family-owned businesses such as Hobby Lobby to pay for drugs intended to kill the unborn.

Noted sexual athlete Ruth Bader Ginsburg was on the losing side of the argument, and strongly voiced her opinion that corporations do not have religious rights or a collective “conscience” which requires adherence to a moral code. Rather, she believes, corporations are simply heartless, soulless, blood sucking collections of purely self-interested people, much like the Democratic party.

Obsessive high-office stalker Hillary Clinton also called the Court’s ruling “deeply disturbing” and a “really bad slippery slope”, perhaps not realizing the decision was based on a 1993 piece of law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which was put in place by her husband Bill Clinton. Who, ironically, is also deeply disturbed and familiar with slippery things. While pretending to be outraged by the Supreme Court ruling, Barack Obama and other Leftists are secretly doing backflips (which was, coincidentally, the only method of post-coital birth control available to women until the 1960’s) because it gives fresh life to their threadbare “War on Women” meme just in time for the midterms.

But in truth, rather than being a brutal act of war against womankind, the ruling is barely an inconvenience for anyone at all.  Over 99% of businesses will not be affected by the decision. And at Hobby Lobby, female employees will still have 16 contraceptives included (as always) in their health plans – with only pregnancy-ending abortifacients excluded.

Which is why Ruth Bader Ginburg is basically making up preposterous hypotheticals to attack the majority ruling. “It bears note,” groused the disturbingly bird-like Justice while pecking at a pile of seed corn, “that the cost of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month’s full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage.” Which might be meaningful if Hobby Lobby had any employees working for minimum wage – but they don’t.

And on a side note, how many women really want to use a form of birth control which is said to have been invented by Arab camel traders who jammed small rocks into the wahooties (also an Arab word) of female camels to keep them from getting pregnant? And wouldn’t it have made more sense to teach camels to simply dry hump? Just kidding – if Sandra Fluke couldn’t learn to do it, then camels probably can’t either.

In summary, the Supreme Court ruling does no damage to women whatsoever, reaffirms freedom of religious expression and, not incidentally, tells Barack Obama once again that his executive powers are actually even more limited than his understanding of the Constitution.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch with The Gang Who Still Can’t Shoot Straight, Erick Erickson reveals why it’s so hard to tell what team many Republicans are on, particularly as their primary concern appears to be…

Preserving Power at Any Cost

“…Why Republicans were willing to attack their own base so savagely is eye opening. Former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour left the Governor’s Mansion and returned to his former career as a lobbyist. He ran of the key super PAC’s supporting Cochran. Many lobbyists in Washington have, for years, used Thad Cochran as a marionette, pulling his strings and getting him to spread American tax dollars around.

Years ago, when a Jack Abramoff associate complained that Ann Copland, Cochran’s executive assistant of 29 years, demanded too many things, i.e. tickets to see Paul McCartney and Green Day, Abramoff replied back, “She gets everything she wants.” Abramoff and Copland both went off to jail. Cochran stayed, and the money flowed in other directions.

The Republican establishment in Washington no longer has core principles and values. It has a list of corporate donors and rich men with business interests. The party keeps its elderly leaders in the House and Senate to send American tax dollars to their preferred donors. In fact, all the Republican Party stands for at the moment is telling President Barack Obama “no” and rewarding large donors with tax breaks, government contracts, and our tax dollars…“

And as Der Obafuhrer continues to force America to fall…

The Caliphate Rises

Osama bin Laden’s political project begins to form in Iraq.

“The jihadists of the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS) continue to consolidate their grip on Sunni Iraq. They control most major cities, they took over the border crossings with Jordan this week, and now they’re re-opening banks and government offices and establishing political control.

Welcome to the new Middle East caliphate, a state whose leader is considered the religious and political successor to the prophet Mohammed and is thus sovereign over all Muslims. The last time a caliphate was based in Baghdad was 1258, the year it was conquered by the ravaging Mongols. Now the jihadists aim to do the ravaging, and it isn’t clear that the Obama Administration has a plan to depose them…“

What kind of people are these, you ask?  The WSJ’s Bret Stephens wonders the same thing as he poses the question…

Where are the Palestinian Mothers?

A culture that celebrates kidnapping is not fit for statehood.

“…Abdo provided a portrait of a suicide bomber as a young man. He had an intellectual disability. He was bullied by classmates who called him “the ugly dwarf.” He came from a comparatively well-off family. He had been lured into the bombing only the night before, with the promise of sex in the afterlife. His family was outraged that he had been recruited for martyrdom.

“I blame those who gave him the explosive belt,” his mother, Tamam, told the Jerusalem Post, of which I was then the editor. “He’s a small child who can’t even look after himself.”

Yet asked how she would have felt if her son had been a bit older, she added this: “If he was over 18, that would have been possible, and I might have even encouraged him to do it.” In the West, most mothers would be relieved if their children merely refrained from getting a bad tattoo before turning 18…“

Which brings us to the Follow-Up Segment, and an updated photo of the Black fast-food employee recently videoed kicking the young mother into senselessness as her young son watched.  You’ll recall us wondering why the incident didn’t receive national news coverage; well wonder no longer:

On the Lighter Side…

Finally, Balls Cotton forwarded the following response to an IRS audit which, though it would certainly be an appropriate comeback, likely won’t fly:

Magoo