 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
|
•
• • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • •
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
•
• • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • •
|
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
|
•
• • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • •
|
|||||||||||||
|
PIG
NEWS DIGEST
| ODDS 'n' ENDS
|
|
JUNE 2009
Required Reading Ace of Spades HQ blogger reveals how Messiah Barry’s new military commander in Afghanistan is setting the stage for defeat. [M]aybe the smart ones in the crowd can explain to me the strategic genius in the following:
The enemy prefers to hide among the citizenry, attack from that relative safety, and then, sans any sort of uniform, melt back into that soft protection. Now, I get that there is an imperative to keep collateral damage to a minimum. However, constraining our troops from firing on the enemy under the rule that no civilian be killed creates an impossible situation given the tendency of the enemy to be creative with the word "civilian". These non-uniformed enemy combatants, found dead in the ruins of the houses and schools they were firing from, are often counted among the civilian dead to create outrage. (Not so much among the locals, as in the international media.) This is not only a recipe for ambush, but for ambush that the new General orders must not be responded to with fire unless no other option remains:
If we are not allowed to kill the enemy anymore, why are we even on the battlefield? In states from sea to shining sea, financial houses of cards are destined to come falling down, but the MSM still ducks the hard facts, as explained in this Reason Magazine posting. Here's how a New York Times article today lays out the states' budget crisis:
The only bit in the entire 1,283-word article that even references the widespread and routine state spending increases before the crisis hit is this brief attributed paragraph, presented as if the natural order of things is government growth above and beyond that of inflation and populuation:
Unfortunately, we live in a world where it takes producers of opinion journalism, in this case Reason, to point such basic context as:
Note that this wasn't just attributed off-hand to a participant in the debate; this was counted. It's all in the public record, waiting for truth-seeking news organizations to do their jobs. I understand partisans and rent-seekers not wanting to deal with the uncomfortable fact that states right now would have had enough money for increased recession-triggered services plus a combined half-trillion dollar tax cut if only they had kept spending growth at the rate of population plus inflation for just five recession-free years. But newspapers?
Quotes, Memorable Rants & Other Brain Food President George W. Bush finally, dishes it out, while addressing a business group. ‘..."I know it's going to be the private sector that leads this country out of the current economic times we're in," the former president said to applause from members of a local business group. "You can spend your money better than the government can spend your money." Repeatedly in his hourlong speech and question-and-answer session, Mr. Bush said he would not directly criticize the new president, who has moved to take over financial institutions and several large corporations. Several times, however, he took direct aim at Obama policies as he defended his own during eight years in office. "Government does not create wealth. The major role for the government is to create an environment where people take risks to expand the job rate in the United States," he said to huge cheers...’ ‘...The former president has not commented on Mr. Obama's decision to ban "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding, which the current president has called "off course" and "based on fear." "The way I decided to address the problem was twofold: One, use every technique and tool within the law to bring terrorists to justice before they strike again," he said, adding that the country needs to stay on offense, not defense. On Guantanamo, which while in office Mr. Bush said he wanted to close, the former president was diplomatic. "I told you I'm not going to criticize my successor," he said. "I'll just tell you that there are people at Gitmo that will kill American people at a drop of a hat and I don't believe that persuasion isn't going to work. Therapy isn't going to cause terrorists to change their mind."...’ (NewsMax) Neal Boortz explains how Hugo "Skipper" Chavez is blazing a trail in Venezuela that Messiah Barry is destined to follow, her in the USSA. OK pay attention to this one. Here's a little taste of what it is like to live in a country with entirely too much government. In this case, let's focus on Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, where he has managed to nationalize nearly every major industry. For the next three months, GM is stopping production in Venezuela. Why? Because the Venezuelan government won't give them enough dollars to import parts. Yep the government won't give them enough money to continue production. So they will just shut down. Where does Hugo Chavez get the power to do this? Simple, he had the government implement currency controls. Back in 2003, Chavez started regulating the access that businesses and people had to dollars. Now, if a Venezuelan wants to import goods or take a vacation, they must apply to the government currency agency for dollars. So what started happening? Businesses and citizens started transferring money out of Venezuela to the tune of $72.7 billion since 2003. Clearly this had an effect on the economy ñ inflation, less private investment. So all of this money and investment has left the country. Then what happens? An economic crisis. Oil prices drop, and oil represents 93% of Venezuela's exports. So now, the government has less money for imports. It has to tighten currency controls and ration its dollar supplies. The government starts prioritizing where dollars get spent. Food and medicine take priority while "luxury goods" like liquor, cosmetics and designer clothing are limited or completely shut out. And when it comes to those evil private businesses, they are rationed too. Hence, the closing of the GM plant ñ because the government doesn't view money for GM to import parts and continue production as a high priority. So what happens now? Well when companies can't get government dollars they turn to dollar-denominated government bonds, which sell at three times the official exchange rate. Now more money is entering the system and .. tada the inflation rate continues to climb. Venezuelans suddenly have less purchasing power. What happens when you have less power as a consumer? Economic growth comes to a halt, and the cycle continues. You want the Reader's Digest version of all of this? Hugo Chavez gets too involved with his dreams of regulating the free market and seizing private industry. In short order the market is on its way to hell on a sled. Hugo tries even more intervention. The sled speeds up. Sound like anyone you know? Quick Takes Stranger Than Fiction I The first thing they noticed was the fun fact that he was stark naked. That’s right, naked:
No explanation? Au contraire, Sheriff dude. I have the perfect explanation: it’s Flori-DUH. Stranger Than Fiction II In short order, the Coast Guard was dispatched and found this fool floating along at least 60 yards from shore. The good news is that he was fished out of the water and promptly bagged, tagged, and dragged. The bad new is that nobody can explain why this fool was floating on an air mattress at that hour, in that location. Life is so sucky that way. Quotes of the Week Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty fires off the Elected Tormentor Zinger of the Week. At a meeting of the College Republican National Committee, Minnesota Governor, Tim Pawlenty, nailed The Tingler with this PIG-worthy zinger: “The only thing growing faster than the federal government’s deficit is Chris Matthews’ man-crush on Barack Obama,” Writing in the San Francisco Chronicle, Phil Bronstein gets real about the on-going praise-a-thon that pretends to be journalism in this Obamunist Error. ‘...You can't blame powerful people for wanting to play the press to peddle self-perpetuating mythology. But you can blame the press, already suffocating under a massive pile of blame, guilt, heavy debt and sinking fortunes, for being played. Some of the time, it seems we're even enthusiastically jumping into the pond without even being pushed. Is there an actual limit to the number of instances you can be the cover of Newsweek? If I wanted to see highly manicured image management I'd just take some No-Doz and read Gavin Newsom's tweets. But the Obama-press dance is a more consensual seduction where, in the old-fashioned sense, we're the girl. (In California, there's no other option.)...’ ‘...So we're in love, lust, or just a whole lot of like. Clearly we get something in exchange, whether it's a little reflected exuberance, a sense of history or just some very minor role in a fun movie. If you want to appear in a movie with John Travolta, you go willingly with him to the LA Scientology Center and are happy about it. "I'm clear, man. Hand me the cans." I'm not sure Mr. Obama is necessarily getting away with anything here. In Cairo, when he spoke of the "principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings," more than a few writers pointed out that this meant unless you're the Egyptian government or two gay people wanting to get married. What the President was saying overseas, to mostly purplish commentators' delight over the symbolic significance of the event, Dick Cheney was actually meaning in his own "freedom means freedom for everyone" speech about same-sex weddings. The style-over-substance hit followed him from continent to continent. "While the president is popular among Europeans," the Wall Street Journal wrote, "he returned from his second trip to Europe with little more progress on key issues" than he got on his first visit. That's the Journal. But the Washington Post, where the John Kennedy myth was nurtured like a golden statue, managed a cautionary op-ed column from Robert Samuelson warning that "our political system works best when a president faces checks on his power." He meant checks from the press...’ Neal Boortz gets real about North Korea’s Tyrannical Troll. The Gargoyle in North Korea is apparently preparing to launch new missiles. Here we go .... again. What new stern language will the UN come up with this time to castigate Kim Jong Il? Aren't you glad you aren't Barack Obama right now? Remember the last time this dangerous fool launched a missile? The very next day Obama announced that we were going to curtail work on a missile defense system. Now that's showing strength, isn't it? This menace test a missile that could carry a nuclear warhead, and our defender, our President, stands up and says "Oh, by the way, we're not going to spend all that money on missiles launched by midget menaces from North Korea." In light of Obama's stance, it's rather odd that Defense Secretary Robert Gates says that the United States can shoot down any missile that is fired our way. With what? That program Obama is eliminating? Gee, that is comforting. How about China ... does it have the "high probability" of being able to defend itself? This Kim Jong Il character is a loon, folks. He's a loon with nukes. This is not the type of guy you want with his finger on the trigger. He is training his son to take his place. I assume that the nut doesn't fall far from the tree. Required Reading A Washington Examiner editor, Mark Tapscott, exposes how Messiah Barry’s minions are replacing the First Amendment with a muzzle, when it comes to political speech which paints a bull’s-eye on Porkulus Bill spending. He makes his point, with telling clarity, by serving up this Red Shed blog posting from Norm Eisen, Special Counsel to the President on Ethics and Government Reform. "First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program." "Second, we will focus the restriction on oral communications to target the scenario where concerns about merit-based decision-making are greatest – after competitive grant applications are submitted and before awards are made. Once such applications are on file, the competition should be strictly on the merits. To that end, comments (unless initiated by an agency official) must be in writing and will be posted on the Internet for every American to see." "Third, we will continue to require immediate internet disclosure of all other communications with registered lobbyists. If registered lobbyists have conversations or meetings before an application is filed, a form must be completed and posted to each agency’s website documenting the contact." The key passage is the reference to expanding regulation from registered lobbyists to "anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program." This is the Camel's nose under the tent, being poked because of special circumstances. Let government restrict political expression - i.e. lobbying of government officials regarding policy - in one small, supposedly specialized area and not long after the specialized area starts expanding. Eventually, all political expression regarding all policy will become subject to government regulation. Washington Post scribbler, Robert Samuelson paints a rhetorical bull’s-eye on the alleged journalists who know more about Messiah Barry’s butt than his proctologist. Obama's rhetoric brims with inconsistencies. In the campaign, he claimed he would de-emphasize partisanship -- and also enact a highly partisan agenda; both couldn't be true. He got a pass. Now, he claims he will control health-care spending even though he proposes more government spending. He promotes "fiscal responsibility" when projections show huge and continuous budget deficits. Journalists seem to take his pronouncements at face value even when many are two-faced. The cause of this acquiescence isn't clear. The press sometimes follows opinion polls; popular presidents get good coverage, and Obama is enormously popular. By Pew, his job approval rating is 63 percent. But because favorable coverage began in the campaign, this explanation is at best partial. Perhaps the preoccupation with the present economic crisis has diverted attention from the long-term implications of other policies. But the deeper explanation may be as straightforward as this: Most journalists like Obama; they admire his command of language; he's a relief after Bush; they agree with his agenda (so it never occurs to them to question basic premises); and they don't want to see the first African American president fail. Whatever, a great edifice of government may arise on the narrow foundation of Obama's personal popularity. Another Pew survey shows that since the election the numbers of both self-identified Republicans and Democrats have declined. "Independents" have increased, and "there has been no consistent movement away from conservatism, nor a shift toward liberalism." World Net Daily scribe, Aaron Klein, demonstrates how full of ‘it’, Messiah Barry is when it comes to Jihadikazes. Firstly, he pointed to "violent extremism in all of its forms." He vowed "America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security." "Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace," Obama declared. The U.S. president did not once use the word "terrorism." From his comments, it seems he does not understand Islamic duty is the central motivation for these unnamed "extremists." I can attest from scores of interviews with some of the region's most dangerous terrorists that they are not waging a jihad against the U.S. because they are poor, or angry or desperate, but because they believe it is their Islamic duty to spread their belief system around the world. In an in-person interview with a recruited Palestinian suicide bomber, for example, the wanna-be martyr explained to me he wanted to blow himself up amongst men, women and children "to scarify myself for Allah." "The goal is not the killing of the Jews, but that this is the way to reach Allah. The goal is satisfying Allah and his instructions. No money interests, nothing. No brainwash, no pressure," the potential bomber said. Quotes of the Week Unlike Messiah Barry, Dick "Darth" Cheney doesn’t mince words, when it comes to GLAAD BAAG nuptials. Cheney was asked at the National Press Club, "given recent events in Iowa and elsewhere, is some form of legalized gay marriage inevitable for the United States?" "I think that freedom means freedom for everyone," Cheney said. "People ought to be free to enter into any kind of union they wish, any kind of arrangement they wish,” said the laconic former veep, whose daughter Mary is lesbian, and has a son, Sam, with her partner Heather Poe. Cheney said “I think people ought to be free to enter into any kind of union they wish. Any kind of arrangement they wish. The question of whether or not there ought to be a federal statute to protect this, I don't support. I do believe that the historically the way marriage has been regulated is at the state level. It has always been a state issue and I think that is the way it ought to be handled, on a state-by-state basis. ... But I don't have any problem with that. People ought to get a shot at that." (ABC reporter, Jake Tapper’s, news blog) America’s Obamunists might be deaf, dumb, and blind where their Messiah Barry is concerned, but Venezuela’s jovial jackass, Hugo "Skipper" Chavez sees Comrade Barry for what he really is. "Hey, Obama has just nationalized nothing more and nothing less than General Motors. Comrade Obama! Fidel, careful or we are going to end up to his right," Chavez joked on a live television broadcast. Far from thrilled spitless about Messiah Barry’s Tax Nazi scheme to nail U.S. firms’ foreign profits with a much higher tax, Microsoft’s CEO, Steven "Bull In A China Shop" Ballmer launches some ‘don’t go there’ rhetoric. “It makes U.S. jobs more expensive. We’re better off taking lots of people and moving them out of the U.S. as opposed to keeping them inside the U.S.” MAY 2009
Brain Food PJM Scribbler, Jennifer Rubin, serves up a ‘prayer’ for a pachyderm punk revival in the 2010 midterm election cycle. The political ramifications of the non-stimulative stimulus plan are plain. Republicans opposed the bill en masse and will now run with the “I told you so” argument, pointing out that they had their own plan of tax breaks and infrastructure spending which would arguably have produced better results than the grab bag of liberal spending programs. Democrats on the ballot next year will need to defend their votes and their party’s stewardship of the economy. With unemployment anticipated to hit double digits next year that might not be an easy task. Moreover, Republicans will argue that the stimulus actually did produce something — a sea of red ink. While George W. Bush was no model of fiscal sobriety, Obama is truly in a class by himself when it comes to piling up the debt. And this is of great concern not only to conservatives, but to key independent voters as well. Republicans have been bashed for being the party of “no.” But in 2010 when unemployment and the deficit have soared, there are boarded-up Chrysler and GM dealerships in nearly every large and mid-sized city in America, and the Democrats are trotting out plans for tax increases to close the budget gap (here comes the VAT tax), those “no” votes may look prescient. And as for alternatives, Republicans will point to their suggestions for the stimulus which the president rejected out of hand and items on their agenda (e.g., domestic energy development, corporate and capital gains tax cuts, reasonable budget discipline). Democrats have lined up behind a popular president in 2009. But in 2010 Obama’s poll numbers may be considerably lower and, in any event, do little to insulate them from an angry electorate. After all, “the gold standard is going to be the jobs number.” Brain Chow In a must read Wall Street Journal story, Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore expose the fatal flaws in the mega popular ‘soak the rich’ scheme that’s all the rage among Nanny State Nitwits. Updating some research from Richard Vedder of Ohio University, we found that from 1998 to 2007, more than 1,100 people every day including Sundays and holidays moved from the nine highest income-tax states such as California, New Jersey, New York and Ohio and relocated mostly to the nine tax-haven states with no income tax, including Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Texas. We also found that over these same years the no-income tax states created 89% more jobs and had 32% faster personal income growth than their high-tax counterparts. Did the greater prosperity in low-tax states happen by chance? Is it coincidence that the two highest tax-rate states in the nation, California and New York, have the biggest fiscal holes to repair? No. Dozens of academic studies -- old and new -- have found clear and irrefutable statistical evidence that high state and local taxes repel jobs and businesses. Martin Feldstein, Harvard economist and former president of the National Bureau of Economic Research, co-authored a famous study in 1998 called "Can State Taxes Redistribute Income?" This should be required reading for today's state legislators. It concludes: "Since individuals can avoid unfavorable taxes by migrating to jurisdictions that offer more favorable tax conditions, a relatively unfavorable tax will cause gross wages to adjust. . . . A more progressive tax thus induces firms to hire fewer high skilled employees and to hire more low skilled employees." More recently, Barry W. Poulson of the University of Colorado last year examined many factors that explain why some states grew richer than others from 1964 to 2004 and found "a significant negative impact of higher marginal tax rates on state economic growth." In other words, soaking the rich doesn't work. To the contrary, middle-class workers end up taking the hit. Finally, there is the issue of whether high-income people move away from states that have high income-tax rates. Examining IRS tax return data by state, E.J. McMahon, a fiscal expert at the Manhattan Institute, measured the impact of large income-tax rate increases on the rich ($200,000 income or more) in Connecticut, which raised its tax rate in 2003 to 5% from 4.5%; in New Jersey, which raised its rate in 2004 to 8.97% from 6.35%; and in New York, which raised its tax rate in 2003 to 7.7% from 6.85%. Over the period 2002-2005, in each of these states the "soak the rich" tax hike was followed by a significant reduction in the number of rich people paying taxes in these states relative to the national average. Amazingly, these three states ranked 46th, 49th and 50th among all states in the percentage increase in wealthy tax filers in the years after they tried to soak the rich. This result was all the more remarkable given that these were years when the stock market boomed and Wall Street gains were in the trillions of dollars. Examining data from a 2008 Princeton study on the New Jersey tax hike on the wealthy, we found that there were 4,000 missing half-millionaires in New Jersey after that tax took effect. New Jersey now has one of the largest budget deficits in the nation. We believe there are three unintended consequences from states raising tax rates on the rich. First, some rich residents sell their homes and leave the state; second, those who stay in the state report less taxable income on their tax returns; and third, some rich people choose not to locate in a high-tax state. Since many rich people also tend to be successful business owners, jobs leave with them or they never arrive in the first place. This is why high income-tax states have such a tough time creating net new jobs for low-income residents and college graduates. Neal Boortz serves up a compelling list of egregiously underreported facts about labor unions. * Studies typically find that unionized companies earn profits between 10 percent and 15 percent lower than those of comparable non-union firms. Quotes of the Week Mexas Governor Rick Perry sounds off on the state sovereignty movement that is sweeping the country. "...[This movement goes right to the heart of what the tea parties are all about.” “You are going to see more and more laws like that across the country where states assert their independence from the federal government.” ‘...Perry said that “the Tea Party movement is an example of the growing frustration among hardworking Americans, and it is just going to get bigger.”...’ ‘...“We’ve been watching this liberal love fest that has taken over our country for about a year now,” he said, “and we need to take back our country.”...’ (Politico) Rush Limbaugh excoriates the Elephant Clan for not seizing the moment, when Mexifornia voters bitch-slapped the Terminator on his taxpayer looting scam. "This is not what they want. They want growing government, too. They just want to be power players in it. This vote in California last night, that brings Ronald Reagan back to life and that's the last thing that the Republican Party, the people running it today, want. If the Republican Party's not going to pick this up and run with it, it may as well have not happened." Dick Cheney’s ten best punchlines to Messiah Barry’s jaw from his speech on terrorism. 1. "I've heard occasional speculation that I'm a different man after 9/11. I wouldn't say that, but I'll freely admit that watching a coordinated, devastating attack on our country from an underground bunker at the White House can affect how you view your responsibilities." 2. "The first attack on the World Trade Center was treated as a law- enforcement problem, with everything handled after the fact: arrests, indictments, convictions, prison sentences, case closed." 3. "By presidential decision last month, we saw the selective release of documents relating to enhanced interrogations. This is held up as a bold exercise in open government, honoring the public's right to know. We're informed as well that there was much agonizing over this decision. Yet somehow, when the soul searching was done and the veil was lifted on the policies of the Bush administration, the public was given less than half the truth." 4. "It's hard to imagine a worse precedent filled with more possibilities for trouble and abuse than to have an incoming administration criminalize the policy decisions of its predecessor. Apart from doing a serious injustice to intelligence operators and lawyers, who deserve far better for their devoted service, the danger here is a loss of focus on national security and what it requires." 5. "We had a lot of blind spots after the attacks on our country, things we didn't know about al Qaeda. We didn't know about al Qaeda's plans, but Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and a few others did know. And with many thousands of innocent lives potentially in the balance, we did not think it made sense to let the terrorists answer questions in their own good time, if they answered them at all." 6. "On his second day in office, President Obama announced he was closing the detention facility at Guantanamo. This step came with little deliberation, and no plan. Now the president says some of these terrorists should be brought to American soil for trial in our court system. Others, he says, will be shipped to third countries; but so far, the United States has had little luck getting other countries to take hardened terrorists." 7. "The administration has found that it's easy to receive applause in Europe for closing Guantanamo, but it's tricky to come up with an alternative that will serve the interest of justice and America's national security." 8. "If fine speechmaking, appeals to reason, or pleas for compassion had the power to move them, the terrorists would long ago have abandoned the field." 9. "It's worth recalling that ultimate power of declassification belongs to the president himself. President Obama has used his declassification authority to reveal what happens in the interrogation of terrorists. Now let him use that same power to show Americans what did not happen thanks to the good work of our intelligence officials." 10. "To the very end of our administration, we kept al-Qaeda terrorists busy with other problems. We focused on getting their secrets instead of sharing ours with them. And on our watch, they never hit this country again. After the most lethal and devastating terrorist attack ever, 7- 1/2 years without a repeat is not a record to be rebuked and scorned, much less criminalized." Brain Food Washington Times scribbler, Joe Barton, takes dead aim at Messiah Barry’s globally warmed brain fart. The president and his allies have decided that man-made carbon dioxide is a witch's brew that's killing the planet, and they think that just because the cap-and-trade cure stings doesn't mean we shouldn't have to swallow it. Their solution is embodied in the momentarily stuck Henry A. Waxman-Edward J. Markey global warming legislation, the goal of which is to banish one of the world's most ubiquitous elements from our lives. Its proponents call it "back to the future." They're not kidding, either. Nobody understands exactly what the legislation means in dollars and cents - more on this later - but to experience how it would feel to lower your personal carbon footprint to the size this bill proposes, set the flux capacitor to 1875. That's the last time Americans' carbon emissions matched the goals set by the Waxman-Markey legislation. What, the old DeLorean is up on cinder blocks in the front yard again? In that case you can test drive Waxman-Markey by sailing down to Haiti, because current CO2 emissions are where Waxman-Markey wants America's to be in 2050. Radical environmentalists think such a CO2 level will be heaven on Earth, but the place that has actually achieved it is a nation swimming in bacterial and protozoal diarrhea, hepatitis A and E, typhoid fever, dengue fever and malaria, with 47 percent illiteracy and a life expectancy of 49 years. So excuse me if I remain unconvinced. A Pajamas Media scribbler, Tristan Yate, defines collectivism, which is the cornerstone of the Demoncrats’ neo-Marxism. Collectivism is the belief that we, as individuals, must put the needs, goals, and desires of society ahead of our own. It is a particularly frightening mindset because it appeals to virtue yet can be used to justify so much misery. When most people think of collectivism, they think of communism or socialism. Under these systems the virtue of collective ownership was used to justify the most repressive and brutal environments in the 20th century. But collectivism has many other forms, including fascism, ultra-nationalism, the welfare state, social engineering, political correctness, and internationalism. In each of these varieties, autocrats make and enforce their judgments in the name of the greater good. If these custodians decide that limiting your freedoms or taking your income or savings furthers society’s goals, then that is simply the price to be paid for a better world. But utopia is never reached. The more social objectives the government sets, the more taxes it collects, the more money it spends, and the more laws it passes, the worse the situation becomes. The failure of central authorities to deliver on their noble goals is the ground truth of not only conservatism and libertarianism, but any reputable school of economics, American and world history, political philosophy, or constitutional law. That’s collectivism in four paragraphs. The best sources I have read on the subject lie five decades apart yet are equally effective: Atlas Shrugged and Liberty and Tyranny. Quotes of the Week During an interview on WJR radio, Tom Lauria, an attorney representing some of the Chrysler Corporation bond holders, exposes Red Shed thuggery, plus the ass-kissing antics of the Obamunist press corps. Lauria: Let me tell you it’s no fun standing on this side of the fence opposing the President of the United States. In fact, let me just say, people have asked me who I represent. That’s a moving target. I can tell you for sure that I represent one less investor today than I represented yesterday. One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under the threat that the full force of the White House Press Corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight. That’s how hard it is to stand on this side of the fence. [Radio host Frank] Beckman: Was that Perella Weinberg? Lauria: That was Perella Weinberg. There is a pattern here. Financial institutions holding billions of Chrysler’s secured debt are being held hostage by the TARP loans they are not permitted to pay back. They are being forced to accept just pennies on the dollar for loans they made in good faith less than two years ago. Just like mob loan sharks, the administration wants them under its thumb so they can extort more and more concessions. This is an abuse of power that goes beyond Nixon. Hot Air blogger, Ed Morrissey, posted some telling prose about the Chicago-esque tactics employed by Messiah Barry’s thugs. Creditors to Chrysler describe negotiations with the company and the Obama administration as “a farce,” saying the administration was bent on forcing their hands using hardball tactics and threats. Conversations with administration officials left them expecting that they would be politically targeted, two participants in the negotiations said. … The sources, who represent creditors to Chrysler, say were taken aback by the hardball tactics that the Obama administration employed to cajole them into acquiescing to plans to restructure Chrysler. One person said described the administration as the most shocking “end justifies the means” group they have ever encountered. Another characterized Obama was “the most dangerous smooth talker on the planet- and I knew Kissinger.” Both were voters for Obama in the last election. One participant in negotiations said that the administration’s tactic was to present what one described as a “madman theory of the presidency” in which the President is someone to be feared because he was willing to do anything to get his way. The person said this threat was taken very seriously by his firm. In the Daily Telegraph, a Brit scribbler, Philip Johnston, paints a rhetorical bull’s-eye on the Brit Home Office after it rolled up the ‘welcome’ mat and smacked Michael Savage with it. “...[The Home Office’s banned from Britain] also contains the name Michael Savage, a US "shock jock" talk-show host whose views on Islam, rape and autism have stirred controversy in America. By all accounts, his views are pretty offensive; but is that reason enough to ban someone? The test usually is whether the individual in expressing his views would threaten public order. This is the justification given for refusing entry to the American political leader Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam. But to ban a radio presenter from a democratic country where he is allowed to broadcast freely is a new departure, as was the decision to refuse entry to Gert Wilders, the Dutch MP, a few months back for wanting to show a film about the Koran to British parliamentarians. The Government claims Savage engages in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to provoke others to serious criminal acts and fostering hatred which might lead to inter-community violence. But is not the real reason he is barred because he preaches dislike of other groups rather than violence against them? Home Office officials say Michael Savage, real name Michael Weiner, holds abhorrent views on immigration, Islam, rape and autism, which have caused great offence in America. That may be so. But are we now banning people because we don't like what they think or say; or are we accepting that anyone who responds violently to a view of which they disapprove can effectively veto other people's right to free speech?...” Brain Chow Andrew W. Smith indicts the Broadcast Blowjob Brigade, and their fishwrap cohorts, by citing the Messiah Barry stories that all of them ignored. So here is a small selection of news on the most powerful man on Earth which has been deemed unfit to print: ●Obama’s first two major bills alone, the "stimulus" and "omnibus," cost nearly twice as much as was spent on Iraq over six years – $1.2 trillion vs. $650 billion. ●Obama abandoned his campaign promise of "a net spending cut," his first annual deficit – not counting bailouts – being three times the worst deficit under President George W. Bush. ●Obama’s objective in his first G20 summit – commitments to spend our way to prosperity with massive stimulus boondoggles across the G20 – was rejected out of hand. ●Obama’s objective in his first NATO summit – commitments to combat troops for Afghanistan from "our European allies," which Obama and his party imagined were ready and willing to fight if only someone "enlightened" like him were running things – was predictably refused, with some more European non-combat contingents offered as a token. ●Obama’s Defence Department announced cuts of $1.4 billion to missile defence, the day after North Korea test-fired its long-range, multi-stage ballistic missile. ●Obama’s economics were criticized by Warren Buffet, whose endorsement had been candidate Obama’s highest economic credential. ●Obama reversed the free trade Bush policy that had allowed about 100 Mexican tractor-trailers into the United States, which the Mexican government immediately used as an excuse to levy tariffs on 90 American goods amounting to $2.4 billion in U.S. exports. ●Obama’s "tax cuts for 95 per cent" turned out to mean $13 a week from June to December, to be clawed back to $8 a week in January – as compared with President Bush’s 2008 tax rebates of $600 to $1,200 plus $300 per child, which were notably scoffed at during the election campaign by Michelle Obama. ●Obama’s campaign promise of a $3,000-per-employee tax credit for businesses that hired new workers – repeated ad nauseam for weeks before the election – was discreetly retired even before inauguration day. ●Obama abandoned his campaign promise that "lobbyists won’t work in my White House," waiving his no-lobbyist executive order or conveniently re-defining his appointees’ past lobbying work to allow 30 lobbyists into his administration. ●Obama abandoned his campaign promise to reform earmarks, signing the omnibus bill which contained 8,816 of them. ●Obama took more money from AIG than any other politician in 2008 – over $100,000 – and signed into law the provision guaranteeing the AIG bonuses which later had him in front of the cameras "shaking with outrage" and siccing the pitchfork crowd on law-abiding citizens who had fulfilled their end of a contract and had their payment upheld by Obama’s own legislation. APRIL 2009
Brain Food Ralph Peters excoriates Messiah Barry’s ‘Obama Doctrine’ in this New York Post commentary: The core tenets of the Obama Doctrine to date would make a charter member of the Weather Underground cheer: We're to blame. If there are problems anywhere, they're America's fault. This central conviction of leftist ideology appears to have soaked so thoroughly into our president's consciousness during his lengthy friendships with extremists that it's now second nature to him. Problems can be negotiated away. From Somali pirates to Moscow's belligerency, Obama and his Cabinet see a good chat as the best response to a challenge. Our president got to the Oval Office by talking, not doing, and his faith in his powers of persuasion is unlimited. An acquaintance who may have our government's best grasp of the Russians shakes his head at the tone in Washington. The current mantra: "We have to get over our Cold War thinking." Great -- except that it's the Russians who've revived Cold War hostility. The Taliban devours Pakistan, and we want to talk. President Hugo Chavez destroys Venezuela's democracy, and we want to talk. Iran pursues nuclear weapons with refreshed enthusiasm . . . and we want to talk. Problems that can't be talked out can be bought off. Pakistan, a nuke-armed state of 170 million Muslims seething with anti-Americanism stirred up by our "friends," faces a crack-up as its once-monolithic military splinters. Obama's answer? Send billions of dollars that will disappear and weapons that may soon be used against our troops. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton thinks the solution to piracy is a generous program to rebuild Somalia. (Been there, done that.) She'd also like to hand Hamas a billion bucks. The "Las Vegas law" applies: You can buy sex but not enduring love. We can't defeat terror with welfare checks. Islamist terrorism doesn't exist. The term's even been banned from government departments. As Muslim extremists slaughter innocent victims by the thousands, we're assured Islam's a "religion of peace" that contributed profoundly to our country's development. (Huh?) It's as if 9/11 never happened. The "nonterrorists" drenching the greater Middle East in blood and threatening us as loudly as they can are just victims of our aggression. It's all our fault. Terrorists do exist, though -- among our returning veterans and amid those Americans who don't subscribe to MoveOn.org's revulsion at our country. Israel's the obstacle to Middle East peace. Palestinians are all victims. Hamas consists of struggling community activists. The terrorists are in the Israeli military. Our nukes threaten world peace and we need to get rid of them. Other states only maintain or seek nuclear arsenals because we worry them. If we can get down to zero nukes, peace will reign on earth. Forget that only our nuclear weapons prevented World War III and that they still deter potential enemies. Just get rid of them, OK? Our military is dangerous. Beyond Obama's cynically choreographed appearances with our troops, he and his coterie clearly disdain military advice and uniformed service. The administration views our troops as primitive creatures who must be collared and leashed, not as part of any solutions. Our intelligence services are even more dangerous than our military. The administration's already begun to gut our intelligence capabilities. Carter at least pretended to study the problem. Obama's plunging straight in with the demoralization of our shadow warriors. It's only torture if we do it. Blame President George W. Bush. Should the Obama Doctrine lead to new terror attacks (sorry, Janet: I meant "man-caused disasters") or to foreign-policy humiliations, it won't be Obama's fault, but Bush's. We're becoming a third-world country, succumbing to a sickening (in both senses of the word) culture of blame. And that culture is fostered by breathtaking ignorance. We now have a president who doesn't know that Pakistan was founded as a democracy, a secretary of state who thinks we created the Taliban, a head of the Department of Homeland Security who doesn't believe Islamist terrorists exist and a vice president who claims FDR gave televised speeches during the Depression. If Bush had made such gaffes, the media would've mocked him. But Obama and his entourage excite orgasmic forgiveness among journalists. Which brings us to the Obama Doctrine's final tenet: Our media sluts will portray defeat as victory. Brain Chow Victor Davis Hanson excoriates Messiah Barry’s "America sucks, but it’s not my fault" antics. So far all the Obama apologies for the sins of his own country (note always before he came on the scene), the serial “Bush did it” invective, the promises of a brave new Obama transnational world, the evocation of his middle name, and non-traditional lineage, and shared demagoguery against “them” (Wall Street, the greedy, the unpatriotic who make over the mythical trip wire $250,000), have not, and will not, change much abroad. Has Cuba promised to release prisoners, or apologized for all those killed? Has Chavez vowed to restore constitutional governance and quit subversion of his neighbors? Elsewhere did the “their old America did it, not my new one” Obama approach calm the waters with anything? Russians helping out to prevent a nuclear Iran, or stopping the killing of dissidents abroad, or promises not to bully the former Soviet republics? More European combat units going to Afghanistan? Mexico vowing to curb illegal immigration? Turkey ceasing its new anti-Western Islamic screeds? His supporters would rejoin, “Oh, but give him time. He’s sowing the field with good will for a bountiful harvest of future cooperation”. I do think he’s sowing, but a minefield rather than a crop, whose explosions will be as inevitable as they will be numerous. Sarkozy’s crude dismissal and appraisal of Obama (nothing is worse for a liberal administration than to have their idolized French brethren bite their extended limp hands) are the template of things to come. Porter Goss, former CIA director and one time chairman of the House Intelligence Committee sounds off on the politically-expedient amnesia which has afflicted San Fran Nan and other members of Congress. A disturbing epidemic of amnesia seems to be plaguing my former colleagues on Capitol Hill. After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, members of the committees charged with overseeing our nation's intelligence services had no higher priority than stopping al-Qaeda. In the fall of 2002, while I was chairman of the House intelligence committee, senior members of Congress were briefed on the CIA's "High Value Terrorist Program," including the development of "enhanced interrogation techniques" and what those techniques were. This was not a one-time briefing but an ongoing subject with lots of back and forth between those members and the briefers. Today, I am slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed; or that specific techniques such as "waterboarding" were never mentioned. It must be hard for most Americans of common sense to imagine how a member of Congress can forget being told about the interrogations of Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. In that case, though, perhaps it is not amnesia but political expedience. Let me be clear. It is my recollection that: -- The chairs and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, known as the Gang of Four, were briefed that the CIA was holding and interrogating high-value terrorists. -- We understood what the CIA was doing. -- We gave the CIA our bipartisan support. -- We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities. -- On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda. I do not recall a single objection from my colleagues. They did not vote to stop authorizing CIA funding. And for those who now reveal filed "memorandums for the record" suggesting concern, real concern should have been expressed immediately -- to the committee chairs, the briefers, the House speaker or minority leader, the CIA director or the president's national security adviser -- and not quietly filed away in case the day came when the political winds shifted. And shifted they have. Circuses are not new in Washington, and I can see preparations being made for tents from the Capitol straight down Pennsylvania Avenue. The CIA has been pulled into the center ring before. The result this time will be the same: a hollowed-out service of diminished capabilities. After Sept. 11, the general outcry was, "Why don't we have better overseas capabilities?" I fear that in the years to come this refrain will be heard again: once a threat -- or God forbid, another successful attack -- captures our attention and sends the pendulum swinging back. There is only one person who can shut down this dangerous show: President Obama. This Week's Recommended Reading Walter Williams paints a bull’s-eye on the tyranny of the majority. He dares to ask why it’s majoritarian tyranny to tell you what you must have for Easter dinner, or dictate which make and model of car you should drive, but okey dokey for the majority to mandate such things as "what type of light bulbs we use, how many gallons of water to flush toilets or whether money should be taken out of our paycheck for retirement". Just getting started, he brings up those original rightwing extremists, the Founding Fathers. The founders of our nation held a deep abhorrence for democracy and majority rule. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wrote, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." John Adams predicted, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." Our founders intended for us to have a republican form of limited government where the protection of individual God-given rights was the primary job of government. Alert to the dangers of majoritarian tyranny, the Constitution's framers inserted several anti-majority rules. One such rule is that election of the president is not decided by a majority vote but instead by the Electoral College. Nine states have over 50 percent of the U.S. population. If a simple majority were the rule, conceivably these nine states could determine the presidency. Fortunately, they can't because they have only 225 Electoral College votes when 270 of the 538 total are needed. Were it not for the Electoral College, that some politicians say is antiquated and would like to do away with, presidential candidates could safely ignore the less populous states. Part of the reason our founders created two houses of Congress was to have another obstacle to majority rule. Fifty-one senators can block the designs of 435 representatives and 49 senators. The Constitution gives the president a veto to weaken the power of 535 members of both houses of Congress. It takes two-thirds of both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto. To change the Constitution requires not a majority but a two-thirds vote of both Houses to propose an amendment, and to be enacted requires ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures. The Constitution's Article V empowers two-thirds of state legislatures to call for a constitutional convention to propose amendments that become law when ratified by three-fourths of state legislatures. I used to be for this option as a means of enacting a spending limitation amendment to the Constitution but have since reconsidered. Unlike the 1787 convention attended by men of high stature such as James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and John Adams, today's attendees would be moral midgets: the likes of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Olympia Snowe and Nancy Pelosi. In addition to an abhorrence of democracy, and the recognition that government posed the gravest threat to liberty, our founders harbored a deep distrust and suspicion of Congress. This suspicion and distrust is exemplified by the phraseology used throughout the Constitution, particularly our Bill of Rights, containing phrases such as Congress shall not: abridge, infringe, deny, disparage or violate. Today's Americans think Congress has the constitutional authority to do anything upon which they can get a majority vote. We think whether a particular measure is a good idea or bad idea should determine passage as opposed to whether that measure lies within the enumerated powers granted Congress by the Constitution. Unfortunately, for the future of our nation, Congress has successfully exploited American constitutional ignorance or contempt. Amit Ghate comments on Ayn Rand, and the accuracy of her decades old novel, ‘Atlas Shrugged’, in documenting the fate that befell the America she loved. He rejects the idea that her views were ‘prophetic’. The key here is to realize that although she was well versed in both economics and politics, they were not her focus. Rather, Rand was a philosopher who scientifically developed a radically new philosophical system (which she named Objectivism). This is what enabled her to so accurately forecast today’s events. As she saw it, the vital purpose of philosophy is to equip us with the principles necessary to live successfully. Stated negatively, failing to identify and heed the objective requirements of life results in unsuccessful living. Indeed, the crumbling society in Atlas was a direct consequence of crucial and widespread philosophical errors. Rand’s masterful expose of these errors stemmed from her lifelong dedication to formulating and validating her own groundbreaking views. For ultimately, her concern was with the positive — with understanding and codifying how man should properly live. Given her goal, Rand’s focus was on the individual and his place in the world. In studying these topics, she provided penetrating insight into the nature of reason and knowledge; of the virtues and principles necessary to live; and of the values — both spiritual and material — that men should strive for and achieve. The culmination of her work was to present an entirely new moral code, one based on each man living as an end in himself, using reason to achieve his own success and happiness. It is this overarching system, including her conception of reason, justice, independence, the nature of production, etc., which informs her radically new views on politics. Rand approached philosophy as a science. She held that the world is a natural, lawful place, which can be known if, and only if, we scrupulously follow logical thought processes — i.e., if we use reason. But for her, the role of reason didn’t end with discovering the causal relationships governing nature; it extended to answering the questions of what man should do (ethics) and how he knows it (epistemology). For instance, it extended to choosing appropriate moral values (purpose, self-esteem, etc.), and then discovering the principles necessary to obtain them (integrity, pride, etc.). This is the philosophic knowledge necessary to live successfully. For it to be valid, Rand argued, it must be gained in the same way that scientific knowledge is gained. Even from this brief sketch we can see that there’s a real irony in describing Ayn Rand as “prophet.” Not only did she arrive at all her conclusions and predictions by a meticulous process of thought, she was also the world’s staunchest defender of reason — and deadliest opponent of mysticism. So instead of fixating on Rand as “prophet,” let’s simply resolve to investigate her philosophy so that we too might understand the world in the fundamentally new and powerful way that she did. The American Legion’s response to Homeland Stupidity’s ‘rightwing extremists’ assault on our men and women in uniform. Secretary Janet Napolitano April 13, 2009 Dear Secretary Napolitano, On behalf of the 2.6 million-member American Legion, I am stating my concern about your April 7 report, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence and Recruitment.” First, I want to assure you that The American Legion has long shared your concern about white supremacist and anti-government groups. In 1923, when the Ku Klux Klan still yielded unspeakable influence in this country, The American Legion passed Resolution 407. It resolved, in part, “…we consider any individual, group of individuals or organizations, which creates, or fosters racial, religious or class strife among our people, or which takes into their own hands the enforcement of law, determination of guilt, or infliction of punishment, to be un-American, a menace to our liberties, and destructive to our fundamental law…” The best that I can say about your recent report is that it is incomplete. The report states, without any statistical evidence, “The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.” The American Legion is well aware and horrified at the pain inflicted during the Oklahoma City bombing, but Timothy McVeigh was only one of more than 42 million veterans who have worn this nation’s uniform during wartime. To continue to use McVeigh as an example of the stereotypical “disgruntled military veteran” is as unfair as using Osama bin Laden as the sole example of Islam. Your report states that “Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990s with the perception that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to work at significantly lower wages.” Secretary Napolitano, this is more than a perception to those who have lost their job. Would you categorize union members as “Right Wing extremists”? In spite of this incomplete, and, I fear, politically-biased report, The American Legion and the Department of Homeland Security share many common and crucial interests, such as the Citizen Corps and disaster preparedness. Since you are a graduate of New Mexico Girls State, I trust that you are very familiar with The American Legion. I would be happy to meet with you at a time of mutual convenience to discuss issues such as border security and the war on terrorism. I think it is important for all of us to remember that Americans are not the enemy. The terrorists are. Sincerely, David K. Rehbein Recommended Reading The scribes that the Exurban League site painted a satirical bull’s-eye on Messiah Barry. After maintaining his silence for two days, President Obama will soon make his first public statement about the pirate attack upon an U.S.-flagged vessel off the Horn of Africa. After several inquiries and a few well-placed bribes, Exurban League has received an early transcript of the President's remarks: Good evening. As you know, early yesterday, Somali-based pirates attacked the Maersk Alabama, a freighter carrying relief supplies to Kenya. While we do not yet know all the details, the Alabama's crew re-took control of the vessel and forced the pirates off the ship. Since the pirates are still holding the captain, I have sent FBI negotiators to facilitate his safe and speedy release. I assure his friends and family that I will not stop until this man-made disaster is resolved in a peaceful, tolerant and ecologically-sound manner. Obviously, this incident has raised many concerns among Americans. There have been calls for justice and even violence against the misguided perpetrators. But such an emotional reaction has led to the disparagement of entire groups with which we are unfamiliar. We have seen this throughout history. For too long, America has been too dismissive of the proud culture and invaluable contributions of the Pirate Community. Whether it is their pioneering work with prosthetics, husbandry of tropical birds or fanciful fashion sense, America owes a deep debt to Pirates. The past eight years have shown a failure to appreciate the historic role of these noble seafarers. Instead of celebrating their entreprenuerial spirit and seeking to partner with them to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive. Some of us wonder if our current Overseas Contingency Operation would even be needed had the last administration not been so quick to label Pirates as "thieves," "terrorists" and worse. Such swashbucklaphobia can lead to tragic results, as we have seen this week. To address this issue, I have instructed Vice President Joe Biden to create a cabinet-level Czar of Pirate Outreach and Buccaneer Interrelation. In addition, June 1-7 has been designated as Pirate Awareness Week, during which all federal buildings will fly the Jolly Roger and sponsor sensitivity training. Thankfully, my American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will fund free grog and hard tack for all attendees. Finally, to all pirates listening to international broadcasts, shortwave services and ship-to-shore radio, let me say this: Ahoy, me regret arr relationship has set sail in a scurvy manner. Arr people share many mutual 'alues and concerns on t' raging main. Perchance, could ye handsomely release the cap'n o' the ship and I assure that no harm will come t' ye or ye hearties. Let us smite t' reset button and launch our seabond on a new pegleg. Savvy? Godspeed t' ye and t' ye beauties. Aye, me parrot concurs. USA Today reveals that at least $300 million of the $4 billion poured into the public housing project rathole is going to 61 housing agencies which have REPEATEDLY been black flagged by auditors for mishandling government aid. Congress gave the Obama administration permission to withhold stimulus aid from housing authorities that the Department of Housing and Urban Development lists as "troubled" because of factors such as poor maintenance and financial management. But HUD decided to release the money to these authorities because they "should have the opportunity to improve their housing," spokeswoman Donna White said. Nationwide, about 175 housing authorities are on HUD's troubled list, including many of the 61 that had faced repeated criticism from auditors. "We're watching this extremely closely to ensure that this money gets spent in a responsible way," said Peter Grace, a special assistant to HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan. The stimulus package more than doubled the $2.5 billion the federal government typically spends to maintain public housing each year. Housing agencies have a year to spend it. To speed work, the law lets them bypass some state and local purchasing rules, such as competitive bidding, says James Armstrong, an analyst with the Public Housing Authorities Directors Association. Congressman Quixote? Don’t be fooled by the title of this piece, I fully support U.S. Representative John Shadegg and the 19 co-sponsors of H.R. 450. I support them, but I can do the math, and I see this bill hasn’t got a prayer of passing. What is it? It’s a dose of Constitutionally-correct legislation named the ‘Enumerate Powers Act’, which states:
Since most of his colleagues - on both sides of the aisle - haven’t got a clue about our founding document, Congressman Shadegg explained it to them, when he introduced his bill on January 9th:
This isn’t the first year Congressman Shadegg has tilted this worthwhile windmill. He has introduced his bill every year he has been in congress. If at first you don’t succeed... Quotes of the Week Dingey Harry Reid tells foaming at the mouth Demoncrat Marxists to back off and leave ‘moderate’ Demoncrat Senators alone. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., blasted liberal groups running radio and TV ads pressuring Senate moderates to support President Obama's budget. Calling the ads "unwise and unhelpful," Reid said, "These groups should leave them [Senate moderates] alone. It is not helpful to me and it is not helpful to the Democratic caucus." The liberal group Americans United for Change is running TV ads in 12 states, targeting a group of Senate Democrats led by Senators Evan Bayh, D-Ind., Tom Carper, D-Del., and Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., who have expressed concerns about rising deficits and other aspects of President Obama's budget. Another liberal group, MoveOn.org is running a similar radio ad campaign. Speaking to reporters at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, Senator Reid said the moderates are valuable and constructive members of the Democratic caucus who are not obstructing President Obama's agenda. (ABC) U.S. Congressman, John Shadegg (R-Ariz) paints a bull’s-eye on Messiah Barry’s Jihad against terms like "war on terror" and "enemy combatant". Shadegg said those terms are specifically descriptive so that people can understand what's going on. "I think it is a disservice to the people to somehow not speak with clarity about the enemies we confront," he said. "Clearly when Al-Qaida and other radical Islamists or Islamic extremists specifically express their desire to kill Americans, or wipe America off the face of the earth, let's be realistic in acknowledging that threat." Referring to the term "enemy combatant," he said, "Courts have dealt with that term for quite some time. If we throw that term out, and no longer say we're going to call them enemy combatants, it would create new legal uncertainty about their status and treatment." (WND) Newt Gingrich warns of the forthcoming Elephant Clan split and the emergence of a new third party for disgruntled conservatives. “If the Republicans can’t break out of being the right wing party of big government, then I think you would see a third party movement in 2012,” Gingrich said Wednesday during a speech at the College of the Ozarks in Missouri, the local television station KY3 reported. “Remember, everything Obama's doing, Bush started last year. If you're going to talk about big spending, the mistakes of the Bush administration last year are fully as bad as the mistakes of Obama's first two, three months.” The former speaker also attacked the Democratic president on the economic stimulus package and for what he called his “grotesque arrogance” to oust Rick Wagoner as the head of General Motors. “During the period I was speaker, the U.S. government – for four years – total growth was 2 percent a year. Under Bush, it was 6.1 percent. ... This year, I think it will be 36 percent in one year,” Gingrich said. “It is just literally irrational.” Recommended Reading Rasmussen Reports has some ‘thrilling’ news for the Botox Bitch, and her Demoncrat cohorts. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s popularity has fallen to a new low for the year, with 60 percent of likely voters now viewing her unfavorably according to a Rasmussen Reports poll released Friday. Even worse news for the California Democrat: A whopping 42 percent characterize her job performance as “very unfavorable.” The trend looks bad for Pelosi as well. Just two weeks ago, 53 percent of those surveyed viewed Pelosi somewhat or very unfavorably, and her “very unfavorable” rating was 36 percent. A 7 point favorability decline in two weeks suggests Pelosi’s popularity is in a serious tailspin. Several other findings suggest voters’ patience with Democrats’ handling of the economy could be wearing thin: # Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid is also suffering from weak poll numbers. Of the 1,000 likely voters Rasmussen polled March 24 and 25, some 45 percent rated Reid unfavorably, compared to 23 percent who gave him a favorable assessment. # Even among Democrats, the popularity of both Reid and Pelosi is sinking. A growing number of Democrats are now critical of their performance. # In the past two weeks, Pelosi’s favorability among Democrats has dropped from 65 percent to 57 percent. # Reid’s favorable rating among Democrats has also taken a serious dip, from 51 percent two weeks ago to 43 percent in the survey released Friday. # One issue plaguing Democrats, Rasmussen says, is that two-thirds of Americans now believe Obama is likely to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000 a year. # Democrats have shown recent weakness relative to Republicans in generic-ballot surveys of voters’ partisan leanings. Thomas Sowell opens up on Messiah Barry, the world’s most dangerous untried rookie. Someone once said that, for every rookie you have on your starting team in the National Football League, you will lose a game. Somewhere, at some time during the season, a rookie will make a mistake that will cost you a game. We now have a rookie President of the United States and, in the dangerous world we live in, with terrorist nations going nuclear, just one rookie mistake can bring disaster down on this generation and generations yet to come. Barack Obama is a rookie in a sense that few other Presidents in American history have ever been. It is not just that he has never been President before. He has never had any position of major executive responsibility in any kind of organization where he was personally responsible for the outcome. Other first-term Presidents have been governors, generals, cabinet members or others in positions of personal responsibility. A few have been senators, like Barack Obama, but usually for longer than Obama, and had not spent half their few years in the senate running for President. What is even worse than making mistakes is having sycophants telling you that you are doing fine when you are not. In addition to all the usual hangers-on and supplicants for government favors that every President has, Barack Obama has a media that will see no evil, hear no evil and certainly speak no evil. They will cheer him on, no matter what he does, short of first-degree murder-- and they would make excuses for that. Even former Reagan speech writer Peggy Noonan has gushed over President Obama and even crusty Bill O'Reilly has been impressed by Obama's demeanor. There is no sign that President Obama has impressed the Russians, the Iranians or the North Koreans, except by his rookie mistakes-- and that is a dangerous way to impress dangerous people. What did his televised overture to the Iranians accomplish, except to reassure them that he was not going to do a damn thing to stop them from getting a nuclear bomb? It is a mistake that can go ringing down the corridors of history. Future generations who live in the shadow of that nuclear threat may wonder what we were thinking about, putting our lives -- and theirs -- in the hands of a rookie because we liked his style and symbolism? MARCH 2009
Reading Assignments & Memorable Quotes Hugo "Skipper" Chavez takes his brother in Marxism, Messiah Barry, to the woodshed. Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez said on Sunday his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama was at best an "ignoramus" for saying the socialist leader exported terrorism and obstructed progress in Latin America. "He goes and accuses me of exporting terrorism: the least I can say is that he's a poor ignoramus; he should read and study a little to understand reality," said Chavez, who heads a group of left-wing Latin American leaders opposed to the U.S. influence in the region. Chavez said Obama's comments had made him change his mind about sending a new ambassador to Washington, after he withdrew the previous envoy in a dispute last year with the Bush administration in which he also expelled the U.S. ambassador to Venezuela. "When I saw Obama saying what he said, I put the decision back in the drawer; let's wait and see," Chavez said on his weekly television show, adding he had wanted to send a new ambassador to improve relations with the United States after the departure of George W. Bush as president. In a January interview with Spanish-language U.S. network Univision, Obama said Chavez had hindered progress in Latin America, accusing him of exporting terrorist activities and supporting Colombian guerrillas. "My, what ignorance; the real obstacle to development in Latin America has been the empire that you today preside over," said Chavez, who is a fierce critic of U.S. foreign policy. (Reuters) McCain-Feingold muzzle on free speech is tested, again, in the U.S. Supreme Court. Government lawyers argued that conservative group Citizens United's 90-minute documentary "Hillary: The Movie" is a political ad just like traditional one-minute or 30-second spots and therefore regulated by the McCain-Feingold law, the popular name for 2002 revisions to the nation's campaign finance laws. The test "does not depend on the length or the way it's communicated," Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart said. But Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is often the key vote in any majority decision, suggested the court may be in position to strike down a key part of that law. "If we think that the application of this....is unconstitutional, then the whole statute should fall," Kennedy said. This is the third significant case before the Supreme Court to challenge the McCain-Feingold law, which restricts the flow of money into political races. The government lawyer also suggested that books could be prohibited in the same way McCain-Feingold restricts the airing of certain political advertisements within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. That proposition did not sit well with the court's conservative members. Citizens United lawyer Ted Olson told the court that ruling and the law itself smothered his client's First Amendment rights to free speech. He added the government must have a "heavy burden" in limiting the speech. "The government cannot prove and has not attempted to prove that a 90-minute documentary made available to people who choose affirmatively to receive it..." Olson said. "Indeed, this documentary is the very definition of robust, uninhibited debate about a subject of intense political interest that the First Amendment is there to guarantee." Reading Assignments Ace, at the Ace of Spades HQ blog, skewers Messiah Barry for deflecting any/all AIG blame, by pretending to accept the responsibility. This is great. As soon as I heard "Obama's taking responsibility for the AIG mess," I asked, "Is he really taking responsibility, or dodging it responsibility while he makes a spectacle of graciously accepting responsibility that isn't his?" You be the judge: President Barack Obama said he will take the blame for bonuses being paid at American International Group Inc. if it will settle an intense finger pointing under way over how such payments were possible at a company that has received tremendous taxpayer aid. "Washington is all in a tizzy and everybody is pointing fingers at each other and saying it's their fault, the Democrats' fault, the Republicans' fault," he said at a town hall meeting Wednesday. The Republican's fault? The only Republican in this mess is Olympia Snowe, whose contribution to the bill was language prohibiting the controversial bonuses. It was a Democrat, Chris Dodd, who changed that language to permit the bonuses, at the behest of a Democrat, Tim Geithner, who was appointed by another Democrat, Barack Obama. So who the fuck exactly is saying it's the Republicans' fault except for our graciously blame-accepting president? "Listen, I'll take responsibility. I'm the President." Note: He will take responsibility. Not that he is actually responsible. He'll just take responsibility, because he's a great guy. And he's not taking responsibility because he's actually responsible -- just because he's president. A NY Daily News scribbler explores the question of Messiah Barry’s competence, after a Obamnuist Demoncrat player asked, " Do you think they know what they’re doing?" ‘...The tag of incompetence is powerful precisely because it is a nondenominational rebuke, even when it yields a partisan result. It became the strongest argument against the GOP hammerlock on Washington and, over two elections, gave Democrats their turn at total control. But already feelings of doubt are rising again. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid were never held in high regard, so doubts about their motives and abilities are not surprising. What matters more is the growing concern about Obama and his team. The longest campaign in presidential history is being followed by a very short honeymoon. Polls show that most people like Obama, but they increasingly don't like his policies. The vast spending hikes and plans for more are provoking the most concern, with 82% telling a Gallup survey they are worried about the deficit and 69% worried about the rapid growth of government under Obama. Most expect their own taxes will go up as a result, despite the President's promises to the contrary. None other than Warren Buffet, an Obama supporter, has called the administration's message on the economy "muddled." Even China says it is worried about its investments in American Treasury bonds. Ouch...’ ‘...Which brings us to the heart of the matter: the doubts about Obama himself. His famous eloquence is wearing thin through daily exposure and because his actions are often disconnected from his words. His lack of administrative experience is showing. His promises and policies contradict each other often enough that evidence of hypocrisy is ceasing to be news. Remember the pledges about bipartisanship and high ethics? They're so last year. The beat goes on. Last week, Obama brazenly gave a speech about earmark reform just after he quietly signed a $410 billion spending bill that had about 9,000 earmarks in it. He denounced Bush's habit of disregarding pieces of laws he didn't like, so-called signing statements, then issued one himself. And in an absolute jaw-dropper, he told business leaders, "I don't like the idea of spending more government money, nor am I interested in expanding government's role."...’ Troubling, or Reassuring? According to its spokeshole, Stewart Rhodes, the group - Oath Keepers - is to "teach [members of America’s military services and sworn police officers] more about what they swore to defend so they will be better able to see when an order violates the Constitution and the rights of the people, and is thus unlawful." Oath Keepers seems to see trouble coming America’s way, from within our own government. That’s why the group is sending out an invitation to ‘voluntarily’ pledge to refuse illegal orders. The Oath Keepers group believes that the best way to do that is help them pre-think the issue, so they will have a ready response, when an illegal order comes. By now, you’re wondering what kind of illegal orders Oath Keepers is seeking to nip in the bud. Wonder no more: Among the orders the soldiers are pledging NOT to obey: 1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people. … Any such order today would also be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason. We will not make war on our own people, and we will not commit treason by obeying any such treasonous order. 2. We will NOT obey any order to conduct warrantless searches of the American people, their homes, vehicles, papers, or effects – such as warrantless house-to house searches for weapons or persons. … We expect that warrantless searches of homes and vehicles, under some pretext, will be the means used to attempt to disarm the people. 3. We will NOT obey any order to detain American citizens as "unlawful enemy combatants" or to subject them to trial by military tribunal. … Any attempt to apply the laws of war to American civilians, under any pretext, such as against domestic "militia" groups the government brands "domestic terrorists," is an act of war and an act of treason. 4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a "state of emergency" on a state, or to enter with force into a state, without the express consent and invitation of that state's legislature and governor. … It is the militia of a state and of the several states that the Constitution contemplates being used in any context, during any emergency within a state, not the standing army. 5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty and declares the national government to be in violation of the compact by which that state entered the Union. 6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps. … Such tactics … by the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto, and by the Imperial Japanese in Nanking, turn[ed] entire cities into death camps. Any such order to disarm and confine the people of an American city will be an act of war and thus an act of treason. 7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext. … Such a vile order to forcibly intern Americans without charges or trial would be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason, regardless of the pretext used. 8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to "keep the peace" or to "maintain control" during any emergency, or under any other pretext. We will consider such use of foreign troops against our people to be an invasion and an act of war. 9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies, under any emergency pretext whatsoever. 10. We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances. "We will not make war against our own people. We will not commit treason. We will defend the Republic," the organization's website states. "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually affirm our oath and pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor." If you just inhaled sharply and sputtered "HOLY CRAP!", don’t feel like the lone ranger. Is our country this far down the road to slave of the all powerful state tyranny? The folks at Oath Keepers seems to think so, and so do I. HOLY CRAP!!!! Quotes of The Week The New York president of NOW, kicked over an Islamikaze hornet nest, when she addressed the beheading of Aasiya Zuair Hassan by her Islamikaze hubby. "This was, apparently, a terroristic version of 'honor killing,' a murder rooted in cultural notions about women's subordination to men. Are we now so respectful of the Muslim's religion that we soft-peddle atrocities committed in it's name?" Thrilled beyond words, the Islamikaze apologists ignored the hubby’s Islamikaze motivation and decided to - TA DA - blame the messenger. Elea Mihou from WNY Peace Center says this statement might make women feel that suffering in a violent relationship is partly their fault. "To associate something that's going to happen to 1,300 women this year in this country with one religion not only does a disservice to her faith, but it also does a disservice to women who suffer abuse at the hands of men of many faiths and no faith," Mihou says. The Network of Religious Communities is calling upon people to focus attention on domestic violence, rather than Islam. "We must all unite in condemning anyone, of any faith or culture, who harms the innocent and recognize that the causes of domestic violence are not limited to any religion or culture," writes the Network of Religious Communities Board of Governors. As reported on our Awards pages, Maria Conchita Alonso has some choice words for Sean Penn. "He's an amazing actor. I can't take that away from him," she said of Penn, who worked with her on the 1988 cop film Colors. "It's just that he has no clue at all what's going on in Venezuela. He's been praising Hugo Chavez, who is a dictator and a killer. He should shut up about what he doesn't know." Alonso, who was raised in Venezuela, was apparently upset by a glowing article that Penn had written for The Nation magazine about her homeland's charismatic but increasingly dictatorial left-wing President. (The Independent) Suggested Reading According to this News Max piece, one of the primary, unindicted, perpetrators of the Fanny Mae and Freddy Mack subprime mortgage debacle, Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, is facing a tougher than usual re-election fight in 2010. A new poll shows that longtime Sen. Chris Dodd could face a serious challenge from a Republican in 2010. The Connecticut Democrat and chairman of the Senate Banking Committee trails former Rep. Rob Simmons by a margin of 43 percent to 42 percent in the latest Quinnipiac University poll. “These numbers have to worry Sen. Dodd,” Quinnipiac polling director Douglas Schwartz told The Hill newspaper. "The good news for Dodd is that this is the first poll in a long time where Dodd’s job approval hasn’t dropped.” The poll showed Dodd — who first took office in 1981 — with an approval rating of 49 percent. In an October 2008 poll by the University of Connecticut, only 42 percent of voters approved of his job performance, while 48 percent disapproved. But the poll results are “particularly ominous” for Dodd, because more than half of respondents say they don’t know enough about Simmons to form an opinion, “yet he is still neck-and-neck with the well-known incumbent,” The Hill observed. Dodd has drawn criticism over a “VIP” loan he received from embattled Countrywide Financial Corp. that has been scrutinized as a possible trade-off for political favors. Dodd in his role as chairman of the Banking Committee proposed a housing bailout in June 2008 that would assist troubled subprime mortgage lenders such as Countrywide. Conde Nast Portfolio reported that in 2003 Dodd had refinanced the mortgages on his homes in Washington, D.C. and Connecticut through Countrywide and had allegedly received below-market terms. Recommended Reading After being silent for much too long, Larry Elder is back, with a compelling World Net Daily piece that presents Messiah Barry’s new first line of defense. With Bush and Cheney gone, the DNC and the Marxist Messiah elevated a new name to the top of the ‘all his fault list’, Rush "Darth" Limbaugh. After highlighting all the Obamunist Error stinkers whose failures will be laid at Limbaugh’s doorstep, Larry takes aim at the Elephant Clan with these Sage from South Central rhetorical gems. Republicans deserve harsh criticism for failing to rein in non-defense, non-homeland security spending when they controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress. Republicans helped gut the Freedom to Farm Act (designed to wean farmers from subsidies); OK'd pork-riddled energy and highway bills; expanded the federal government's role in education through, among other things, the No Child Left Behind Act; passed – with the prescription benefits bill for seniors – the largest expansion of Medicare in decades; and increased government regulation as much as or more than under Democratic administrations. But the Obama administration now puts spending on steroids, and all but three Republicans voted against the latest legislation. How does the Obama administration explain its failure to achieve its vaunted "bipartisanship"? Blame Rush Limbaugh. RNC Chairman Steele needs to focus on the merits of the Republican approach – lower taxes, less government domestic spending and fewer regulations. Punishing high achievers by taxing them destroys incentive and thus destroys jobs. Transferring money from one pocket to another destroys the initiative of the giver and the given. Private capital knows best whether, how and when to "invest." The private sector "creates or saves" jobs, not government. When Obama's "new New Deal" fails to achieve the desired objectives, we already know what happens next. Blame Rush Limbaugh, who, by the way, is not just laughing all the way to the bank. At today's bargain-basement prices, he probably owns several. Quotes of the Week The prime movers at a Vatican-backed conference on evolution explain why Creationist and Intelligent Design advocates didn’t make the invitation list cut. Organizers of the five-day conference at the Pontifical Gregorian University said Thursday that they barred intelligent design proponents because they wanted an intellectually rigorous conference on science, theology and philosophy to mark the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's "The Origin of Species." While there are some Darwinian dissenters present, intelligent design didn't fit the bill, they said. "We think that it's not a scientific prospective, nor a theological or philosophical one," said the Rev. Marc Leclerc, the conference director and a professor of philosophy of nature at the Gregorian. "This makes a dialogue very difficult, maybe impossible." (Fox News) As an NFL quarterback, Heath Shuler was never at the top of anyone’s list. The Blue Dog Demoncrat congressman from North Carolina has finally made it onto someone’s list, San Fan Nan’s shit list, and it might serve him well, when he comes up for re-election in traditionally conservative North Carolina. Shuler’s name tops a list of 10 alleged enemies of the speaker. While many are predictable – Rush Limbaugh occupies the No. 2 spot, Virginia Republican Eric Cantor comes in at No. 4 – others are Pelosi’s ostensible compatriots in the Democratic Party. “No Democrat has done quite so much in so short a time to arouse Pelosi’s disdain as the failed-Redskins-quarterback-turned-ambitious-North-Carolina-congressman,” according to Politico. “The conservative, anti-abortion Shuler would have made the list for voting against both bank bailout bills and the stimulus package, but the way he went about it didn’t help; Shuler told an audience back home that “House leadership and Senate leadership have really failed” on the $787 billion package.” What most riles Pelosi, according to several accounts, is that Shuler may be positioning himself for a run against Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., next year. Unless Shuler is planning a long House career, picking a fight with Pelosi may indeed have its advantages: His 2006 opponent, incumbent GOP Rep. Charles Taylor, scored points by portraying Shuler as a Pelosi acolyte. At the his now legendary appearance at CPAC, Rush Limbaugh got real about Messiah Barry. Now, let me speak about President Obama for just a second. President Obama is one of the most gifted politicians, one of the most gifted men that I have ever witnessed. He has extraordinary talents. He has communication skills that hardly anyone can surpass. No, seriously. No, no, I’m being very serious about this. It just breaks my heart that he does not use these extraordinary talents and gifts to motivate and inspire the American people to be the best they can be. He’s doing just the opposite. And it’s a shame. [Applause] President Obama has the ability — he has the ability to inspire excellence in people’s pursuits. He has the ability to do all this, yet he pursues a path, seeks a path that punishes achievement, that punishes earners and punishes — and he speaks negatively of the country. Ronald Reagan used to speak of a shining city on a hill. Barack Obama portrays America as a soup kitchen in some dark night in a corner of America. FEBRUARY 2009
Weekly Reading Assignment Thomas Sowell sounds a final warning about the fate which awaits a once great nation. [L]ooming ahead of us — and our children and their children — are dangers that can utterly destroy American society. Worse yet, there are moral corrosions within ourselves that weaken our ability to face the challenges ahead. One of the many symptoms of this decay from within is that we are preoccupied with the pay of corporate executives while the leading terrorist-sponsoring nation on earth is moving steadily toward creating nuclear bombs. Does anyone imagine that we will care what anyone’s paycheck is when we see an American city in radioactive ruins? Yet the only serious obstacle to that happening is that the Israelis may disregard the lofty blather coming out of the White House and destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities before the Iranian fanatics can destroy Israel. If by some miracle we manage to avoid the fatal dangers of a nuclear Iran, there will no doubt be others, including a nuclear North Korea. Although, in some sense, the United States of America is still the strongest nation on earth militarily, that means absolutely nothing if our enemies are willing to die and we are not. It took only two nuclear bombs to get Japan to surrender — and the Japanese of that era were far tougher than most Americans today. Just one bomb — dropped on New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles — might be enough to get us to surrender. If we are still made of sterner stuff than it looks like, then it might take two or maybe even three or four nuclear bombs, but we will surrender. It doesn’t matter if we retaliate and kill millions of innocent Iranian civilians — at least it will not matter to the fanatics in charge of Iran or the fanatics in charge of the international terrorist organizations that Iran supplies. Ultimately, it all comes down to who is willing to die and who is not. How did we get to this point? It was no single thing. The trajectory of our course leads to a fate that would fully justify despair. The only saving grace is that even the trajectory of a bullet can be changed by the wind...Over the years, we have had our share of miraculous deliverances. But that our fate today depends on yet another miracle is what can turn pessimism to despair. Bobby Byrd criticizes the power grab by Messiah Barry and his Red Shed minions. Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), the longest-serving Democratic senator, is criticizing President Obama’s appointment of White House “czars” to oversee federal policy, saying these executive positions amount to a power grab by the executive branch. In a letter to Obama on Wednesday, Byrd complained about Obama’s decision to create White House offices on health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change. Byrd said such positions “can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances. At the worst, White House staff have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials.” Byrd also wants Obama to limit claims of executive privilege while also ensuring that the White House czars don’t have authority over Cabinet officers confirmed by the Senate. “As presidential assistants and advisers, these White House staffers are not accountable for their actions to the Congress, to cabinet officials, and to virtually anyone but the president,” Byrd wrote. “They rarely testify before congressional committees, and often shield the information and decision-making process behind the assertion of executive privilege. In too many instances, White House staff have been allowed to inhibit openness and transparency, and reduce accountability.” The West Virginia Democrat on Wednesday asked Obama to “consider the following: that assertions of executive privilege will be made only by the president, or with the president’s specific approval; that senior White House personnel will be limited from exercising authority over any person, any program, and any funding within the statutory responsibility of a Senate-confirmed department or agency head; that the president will be responsible for resolving any disagreement between a Senate-confirmed agency or department head and White House staff; and that the lines of authority and responsibility in the administration will be transparent and open to the American public.” Recommended Reading In a News Max article, Lowell Ponte, sheds some light on the on-going drought-mongering in high places. “We're looking at a scenario where there's no more agriculture in California. I don't actually see how they can keep their cities going.” (U.S. Energy Secretary Steven "Chicken Little" Chu) The Chu Effect With little or no planetary warming since 1998, alarmists and climate opportunists point increasingly to brief regional droughts as second-hand evidence of global warming. “It's amazing how many big-mouth global warming alarmists get media attention who were never trained as climatologists,” Patrick Michaels, a research professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, tells Newsmax. Chu is the latest example. He is a brilliant physicist who shared a 1997 Nobel Prize for his research into how to manipulate atoms with lasers. He has been director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and a professor of physics and molecular and cellular biology at the University of California Berkeley. But like most global warming doomsayers, Chu has no degree in atmospheric sciences, meteorology, or climatology. Will the West Run Dry? “Averaged over wet and dry years, most places are getting roughly the same amount of precipitation they did in past decades,” Legates says. “Some recent regional dry spells appear to be caused by a Pacific Ocean cyclic phenomenon called La Niña. But because more people want and need water, we have demand-side 'drought.' ” And Cato Institute environmental fellow Patrick Michaels tells Newsmax: “If anything, the 20th century was a bit wetter than average, and the Pacific Southwest continues to get slightly wetter." “The latest research predicts that more global warming would make California drier in summer, when little or no rain falls anyway, but wetter in winter,” says Michaels, co-author of the 2009 book “Climate of Extremes: Global Warming Science They Don't Want You to Know.” “Surely humans could adapt to that, store increased winter precipitation, develop drought-resistant crops, import water from H2O-rich Canada, or desalinate sea water along California's 800 mile coastline on the Pacific Ocean,” he says. “This doomsayer idea that Californians would be helpless and do nothing innovative to protect their cities and crops from drought is ridiculous and an insult to the human mind and spirit,” Michaels says. “The Obama administration is top-loaded with global warming extremists,” Michaels tells Newsmax, “and we're all going to pay a price for that.” Required Reading In a News Max article, David A. Patten summarizes the winners and losers in the Trillion Dollar Crap Sandwich. The “gang of three” — liberal Republican Sens. Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe, and Susan Collins — who handed President Obama the stimulus bill he so desperately needed, apparently sacrificed billions in tax cuts during final negotiations over the measure in order to reduce its cost. The compromise bill — which may be ready for President Obama’s signature as early as Monday — also stripped America’s ailing businesses of tax benefits and other incentives. “From auto dealers to the home-building industry, big business appears to be the biggest loser in the final economic stimulus plan . . .” The Wall Street Journal online reported, noting that Democrats removed key tax cuts and benefits for business as political payback for Republicans who failed to support the plan. Though Republicans who crossed party lines apparently got rewarded. The New York Times reported Thursday that Sen. Specter got $6.5 billion for medical research. The Senator is ailing from cancer. The bill worked out in negotiations between the House and the Senate reduced the tax cuts from 42 percent of the cost of the $838 billion bill passed by the Senate, to just 35 percent of the $789.5 billion compromise bill. Correspondingly, the spending portion of the bill rose from 58 percent in the original Senate measure to 65 percent. Although the bill is still being tweaked, Congress is on the verge of sending it to President Obama for his approval. Despite the drop in total outlays, the legislation’s total cost is more than the entire cost of the Iraq war since U.S. troops invaded in 2003. Quotes of the Week Joe "Plugs" Biden spouts off on the Porkulus Bill while addressing 200 Demoncrat congress pukes: “But when we do [approve it], I’m sure you’re going to be nailed in ads, ‘Well they voted on that’ 30 second ads. I promise you as [a colleague] once said to me, ‘I’ll come campaign for you or against you, whichever will help you the most in your district.’ And so will the president because, again, we’re all in this together.” (WSJ Blogs) Belatedly, Juan McCain grows a pair, then paints a Porkulus Bill bull’s-eye on Messiah Barry: “The whole point, Mr. President, is to enact tax cuts and spending measures that truly stimulate the economy. There are billions and tens of billions of dollars in this bill which will have no effect within three, four, five or more years, or ever. Or ever.” An unnamed, senior, Elephant Clan Aide sounds off on the White House takeover of the census: "With all of its political implications, hijacking the census from the Commerce Department and letting it be run out of Rahm's office is like putting PETA in charge of issuing hunting permits." Congressman Darrell Issa is equally thrilled about the Messiah Barry’s politicization of the U. S. Census: "Any attempt by the Obama administration to circumvent the census process for their political benefit will be met with fierce opposition. This ill-conceived proposal undermines a constitutionally obligated process that speaks to the very heart of our democracy." Bruce Chapman, director of the U.S. Census Bureau during the Reagan administration explains the political implications of Messiah Barry’s census power grab: "Everyone knows that it is possible to organize a decennial census in a way that benefits one party or another politically. One way to effectuate this otherwise unpalatable departure from the Census Bureau's 200-year history of non-partisanship is to put the Bureau administratively under direction of the politicos in the White House. In reality, that would be a sure invitation to cook the books on the highly consequential count of Americans." "The only reason the White House would want to be involved is in figuring out how to add more voting power to certain states and groups within states." "Simply put, there is no excuse for this idea. It is not true that the Census Bureau has ever been under the direct management of the White House, and for good reason. Even if angels were in charge of the executive mansion, if the nation's premier statistical agency were placed under White House direction, the danger to public trust would be enormous. The Decennial count is one of the few federal functions specifically described in the Constitution itself and must be operated above suspicion of politics." "Power flows from an accurate census count. Everyone involved for years has seen the count therefore as a sacred trust. It must not be polluted with even a semblance of presidential meddling." Required Reading Michael J. Eastman debunks the pay gap myth. The argument that the pay gap must be closed rests on the assumption that the pay gap is largely attributable to employer discrimination. However, if the pay gap is to be used to justify such significant changes in the law, it seems entirely appropriate to examine the pay gap itself. Does it really measure employer discrimination? Do other factors play a greater or lesser role? Economists who have studied the pay gap have observed that numerous factors other than discrimination contribute to the wage gap, such as hours worked, experience, and education. For example, Professor June O’Neil has written extensively about how time out of the workforce, or years spent working part-time, can reduce future pay. Likewise, economist Diana Furchtgott-Roth, in her book Women’s Figures, has written about the decisions that women are more likely to make to choose flexibility, a friendly workplace environment, and other nonmonetary factors as compared to men. Recognizing the importance of unbiased research on the pay gap, the Labor Department recently contracted with [3] CONSAD Research Corporation for a review of more than 50 existing studies as well as a new economic and statistical analysis of the pay gap. CONSAD’s Report, which was finalized on January 12, 2009, found that the vast majority of the pay gap is due to several identifiable factors and that the remainder may be due to other specific factors they were not able to measure. CONSAD found that controlling for career interruption and other factors reduced the pay gap from about 20 percent to about 5 percent. Data limitations prevented it from considering many other factors. For example, the data did not permit an examination of total compensation, which would examine health insurance and other benefits, and instead focused solely on wages paid. The data were also limited with respect to work experience, job tenure, and other factors. The Labor Department’s conclusion was that the gender pay gap was the result of a multitude of factors and that the “raw wage gap should not be used as the basis for [legislative] correction. Indeed, there may be nothing to correct. The differences in raw wages may be almost entirely the result of individual choices being made by both male and female workers.” The Labor Department’s new report is clearly an important contribution to the debate over pay equity. But where is it? Although it was posted on the Labor Department’s web site just days after it was finalized, it was apparently removed as the transition in power was occurring between former President Bush and President Obama. We don’t know why the report was taken down, but certainly the timing is suspicious. (Pajamas Media Commentary) A Times of London scribbler, Sarah Baxter, isn’t impressed with Messiah Barry’s foreign policy. The president’s foreign policy offensive also got off to an uncertain start. Critics claim there are too many czars and special envoys at the White House and State Department, who will end up fighting rather than problem solving. George Mitchell’s first foray into the Middle East as special envoy last week was greeted by the Israeli bombing of tunnels on the Egypt-Gaza border. America’s European allies, including Britain, have shown little interest in helping to close Guantanamo Bay by taking detainees, nor in stumping up the money and troops for a surge in Afghanistan. At home there has been an outbreak of nimbyism over the housing of Guantanamo detainees at US mainland prisons. Obama’s offer of talks with Iran in his first interview as president on al-Arabiya, an Arab television station, prompted a demand from Ahmadinejad that America apologise for its “crimes”. Michael Rubin, an expert on Iran at the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington, said Obama’s approach to Iran was similar to that of Carter, who wrote a personal letter to Ayatollah Kho-meini after a term of office marred by the storming of the US embassy in Tehran and a failed attempt to rescue 52 diplomatic staff held hostage. “It is a little bit naive. The problem hasn’t been a lack of dialogue or the policies of George W Bush. It’s not all about us,” said Rubin. A foreign policy expert who has advised Obama said the president was being challenged on “multiple fronts” - from Guantanamo Bay and Afghanistan to Iraq and Iran: “It is a test of his strength and wisdom. The Republicans found a way to posture against the stimulus bill and it’s even easier to posture against his foreign policy. There is pressure to craft his foreign policy so that it is not seen as weak.” According to the adviser, the public offer to talk to Iran has given opponents such as Ahmadinejad the opportunity to grandstand. “It would be helpful to begin talks privately, as Henry Kissinger did with China before [President Richard] Nixon’s visit,” he said. JANUARY 2009
Quotes of the Week U.S. Congressman John Carter (R-Texas) has some Mexas-size fun with a bill that would make the Rangel Rule the law of the land. Rep. Carter introduced a bill Wednesday to eliminate all IRS penalties and interest for paying taxes past due. The legislation calls for the creation of what he calls the, "Rangel Rule," -- drawing attention to the recent legal issues of House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., enabling citizens who fail to pay taxes on time to do so later with no additional fees. Rangel, who writes the country's tax policies, acknowledged last fall that he failed to pay thousands in real estate taxes for rental income he earned from a property in the Dominican Republic. As of September 2008 the Harlem Democrat reportedly paid back more than $10,000 in taxes but that did not include any IRS penalties. "Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress. You shouldn't be treated any differently under the law than your citizens back home." (John Carter, as quoted by Fox News) "As Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, I believe you set an example for all American taxpayers in your dealings with the IRS, and that you must do so in a way that enforces blind justice without regard to wealth or status." A Nevada university system chancellor, Jim Rogers, thrills everyone, when it gets real about a parent’s role in the Education of their crotch fruit. "Your only relationship with the education system is to ship your unprepared kids to school, not with the expectation of success, but with the demand that an education system, inadequately funded, develop and/or repair children that you as a parent did not prepare for school or support while your children attended school." "You have to take part in your child's education. Your responsibility does not stop as they walk out the door to catch the bus." Victor Davis Hanson gets real about the Obamunist Error. [F]or all the talk of bipartisanship, candidate Obama had the most partisan record in the US Senate, and serially trashed right-wingers like Sean Hannety (and by extension his audience of 10 million) during the campaign. In fairness, I think he proved the nastier gutter fight than ambivalent Hamlet-like John McCain, who seemed at times he wished to lose nobly than sandbag the nation’s historic chance for a gifted African-American healer. But then Obama was elected and as President promised, as most Presidents do, to bring us together. He met with conservative pundits, reappointed Bush’s Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and brought in scores of Clinton centrists to manage his administration. Bravo to all that. Yet the old Obama is starting to appear as most of you astute readers knew he would. Not a word from him about what can, without hyperbole, be called a dishonest Charlie Rangel, a reprehensible Chris Dodd, and the inexplicable Barney Frank who goes barking from one mortgage/banking ethical lapse to another, confident that no Democrat will dare take him on (he enjoys the exemption accorded to the proverbial raving but glib street-corner prophet who accosts you, flips you off on the street, and shouts in your ear and in public all the way to the car before trying to mount the hood and grab the windshield wipers). Obama loftily talked about a new ethics law outlawing lobbyists, even as he tried to get an exemption for Raytheon lobbyist William Lynn. The problems that surrounded Treasury-Secretary designate Timothy Geithner, or the “troubles” with Attorney General Eric Holder, and Gov. Bill Richardson border on old-style greed, careerism and conflict of interest—in other words, the normal sort of controversies that a politician routinely overcomes if he’s not a saint. For all the talk of bipartisanship, Obama like Lord Xerxes on his throne nevertheless has got down and dirty and trashed Rush Limbaugh (and by extension his 20 million listeners) and boasted to the Republican opposition. “I won. I am the President”—in braggadocio that exceeded the “decider” George Bush’s. I suspect if the Blago tapes are ever released in their entirety Rahm Emanuel will sound more like Nixon to Halderman than earnestly discussing the rising oceans with St. Obama. The problem with all this is not that Obama’s trying to wheel and deal and talk out of both sides of his mouth like Bill Clinton and others, but, far worse, is staring to appear ridiculous like Jimmy Carter, divinely talking down to us as mere mortals as he acts like a mere mortal. Required Reading Congressman John Boehner’s widely-distributed e-mail, which exposes the reeking details contained in the Demoncrats’ ‘stimulus plan’. A Dozen Fun Facts About the House Democrats' Massive Spending Bill 1. The House Democrats' bill will cost each and every household $6,700 additional debt, paid for by our children and grandchildren. 2. The total cost of this one piece of legislation is almost as much as the annual discretionary budget for the entire federal government. 3. President-elect Obama has said that his proposed stimulus legislation will create or save three million jobs. This means that this legislation will spend about $275,000 per job. The average household income in the U.S. is $50,000 a year. 4. The House Democrats' bill provides enough spending - $825 billion - to give every man, woman, and child in America $2,700. 5. $825 billion is enough to give every person living in poverty in the U.S. $22,000. 6. $825 billion is enough to give every person in Ohio $72,000. 7. Although the House Democrats' proposal has been billed as a transportation and infrastructure investment package, in actuality only $30 billion of the bill - or three percent - is for road and highway spending. A recent study from the Congressional Budget Office said that only 25 percent of infrastructure dollars can be spent in the first year, making the one year total less than $7 billion for infrastructure. 8. Much of the funding within the House Democrats' proposal will go to programs that already have large, unexpended balances. For example, the bill provides $1 billion for Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), which already have $16 billion on hand. And, this year, Congress has plans to rescind $9 billion in highway funding that the states have not yet used. 9. In 1993, the unemployment rate was virtually the same as the rate today (around seven percent). Yet, then-President Clinton's proposed stimulus legislation ONLY contained $16 billion in spending. 10. Here are just a few of the programs and projects that have been included in the House Democrats' proposal: * $650 million for digital TV coupons. 11. Almost one-third of the so called tax relief in the House Democrats' bill is spending in disguise, meaning that true tax relief makes up only 24 percent of the total package - not the 40 percent that President-elect Obama had requested. 12. $825 billion is just the beginning - many Capitol Hill Democrats want to spend even more taxpayer dollars on their "stimulus" plan. Required Reading Neal Boortz Sounds off on Prompter Punk’s Stimulus Package For those of you who want to see it for yourself, here is a copy of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Basically what you are looking at is a litany of pork-barrel and grow-the-government spending projects under their new and improved label, "stimulus." What you are also looking at is a big fat "thank you" from Barack Obama to any and all people who supported him .. he is going to pay off on his campaign promises, and he's going to do it in the name of "economic stimulus." Rather than waiting four years to work through your proposals, why not just get it all out on the table right from the start and take advantage of this historic economic situation.
I hope I'm getting the point across here. Barack Obama and the Democrats made some pretty hefty spending promises during the campaign. Now that they're moving into power they see a wonderful opportunity to implement virtually all of those promises. They just cite the financial crisis and apply the "stimulus" label to their spending plans. Pretty clever ... but then again maybe not so clever when the realize that the media will go along with the scheme. Pajamas Media columnist, Steve Gill, demonstrates how Messiah Barry’s ascension is riddled with Korrectness. The inaugural parade is also in the target sights of the left. The political correctness police are on patrol to make sure that the parade does not include any expression, logo, group, or sentiment that might create some real or imagined slight. The Roosevelt High School marching band from Wyandotte, Michigan, will be the only group of high school musicians from Michigan marching in the parade. But a letter threatening litigation from Harvey Gunderson, who claims to be president of Religious Americans Against Indian Nicknames and Logos, put a damper on the band’s excitement. The band has been known as the Marching Chiefs since the 1950s, but to avoid controversy the school district agreed to drop their name for the day and sew patches to cover the Chiefs logo on the shoulders of their band uniforms. After the story received national publicity nonetheless, the school district decided to drop the “Chiefs” moniker on their banner but will stop short of covering up the Indian head logo on the uniforms. It is not clear what, if any, connection that Harvey Gunderson has to any Native American tribe, but the actual chief of the Wyandotte Nation in Oklahoma, Leaford Bearskin, is supportive of the use of the logo and “Marching Chiefs” name by the school. But what does Chief Bearskin know? He is just a real Wyandotte Indian chief rather than some liberal nitwit expressing outrage on behalf of others. In fact, Gunderson isn’t very happy about Bearskin’s viewpoint. These ignorant Wyandotte Indians don’t even know when they should be offended; thank goodness Harvey is available to be outraged for them! The Chiefs are not the only parade participants under fire. The Azalea Trail Maids from Mobile, Alabama, are catching flack from the president of the Alabama NAACP. Edward Vaughn believes that the pastel-colored hoop dresses and bonnets worn by the goodwill ambassadors from Mobile serve to promote slavery. Over the past 60 years the Azalea Trail Maids have appeared at events like the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade in New York and at presidential inaugurations in 1985 and 2005. Nearly a quarter of the current Azalea Trail Maids are minorities. But that is apparently not the point for Mr. Vaughn, who says they will be the targets of derision at the inaugural parade. Maybe he and Mr. Gunderson should sit together at the parade and share their joint outrage. Quotes of the Week Some fool kicked over a rock and woke up James Carville. And what, you ask, did Jimmy boy have to say about the status of politics in 2009? The usual crap, but some of it is worth repeating. For starters, he predicts some tough ethical times for his Demoncrat homeboys. "I firmly believe that there are streaks, and that political scandals happen in clusters," Carville said. "The Republican Party had its fair share of scandal and charges of deeply imbedded corruption preceding the 2006 election and leading up to the 2008 elections. It doesn't hurt to point out that these types of things are also more likely to harm the party in the majority -- Republicans had more elected politicians (315 Republican office holders in House, Senate, and state governorships) leading up to 2006." "With two big Democratic elections in a row, Democrats now hold a larger majority -- 340 U.S. representatives, senators and governors. Simple math and history point to the fact that the more elected officials a party has in office, the more likely its politicians will get caught up in some sort of scandal." (Newsmax) Does that mean there’s clear sailing for the Elephant Clan, going into the future? Not necessarily. Carville thinks they’ll have other, even bigger, problems on their hands. "There is no obvious Republican leader on the horizon, and the party is caught between its Southern/talk-radio base and the rest of the country on whether they should oppose or cooperate with [Barack] Obama's administration. The combination of the lack of an obvious leader and the general political combustibility of the Republican Party will lead to a dangerous fissure that will plague it until the 2012 election cycle." (Newsmax) Newly elected Pinal County (Arizona) Sheriff Paul Babeu explains why he just cancelled the contract with, Redflex Traffic System, Inc, the firm which operates the mobile traffic cameras in Pinal County. "I am against it, not only because I'm a strict constitutionalist, but I believe that the main purpose, is it's driven to create money for the government, in this budget deficit that's what the whole design is" Babeu said in a video shot by a group opposed to photo enforcement called Camera FRAUD and posted on its Web site on Friday. "It's corrupting law enforcement for us to be partnered with a private entity that creates revenue. Purely that's their interest. I've never yet seen a photo-radar camera arrest a drunk driver or arrest a person with a warrant, see if somebody has insurance or to just simply give directions to somebody." (AZ Central) Required Reading Here, for what it’s worth, is the item that strayed into my personal e-mail inbox. Hambo] Sender’s Intro To Kit Lange Kit Lange is an Air Force veteran and military writer who specializes in investigating murder cases stemming from actions in combat. Her work was used as evidence in the Lt. Ilario Pantano case, and has been quoted extensively in other news publications for other cases. In 2005, she co-wrote a 10-part series disproving war crime allegations against an elite Army unit; her blog, EuphoricReality.com, was named as one of the top 10 milblogs of the year. She is also the National Web Coordinator for Gathering of Eagles, a nationally-recognized troop support organization. Kit holds a degree in Aircraft Maintenance Technology from Spartan College of Aeronautics, and is currently working on a second degree in Aviation Technology Management. She resides in Tulsa, Oklahoma. My Predictions for the New Obama "Presidency" Now that America has shown us all that affirmative action even works in politics, I've compiled a list of things that you can probably expect to happen. These predictions are 80% gleaned from information all of us have access to, and 15% gut instinct based on many years of research, historical study, and being glued to current affairs. The other 5% is just anger at my countrymen's stupidity--I admit it. - Websites and mass emails offering "free grants," courtesy of the government and "Obama's wealth redistribution." Actually, this one's a freebie, because I have an email with a date and timestamp of literally minutes after Obama was declared the winner, offering exactly that. - Israel will understand this election was the end of any type of assistance, military or otherwise, from the U.S., and will stop holding back their defense at the request of the American administration. Look for a first strike on Iran soon, as well as increased activity by the Israeli military in general. Israel is on her own now, and God help us all because of it. - Look for Iranian retaliation--against American targets. That goes doubly for other terrorist organizations. We just elected a man with the full endorsement of every major terrorist group in the world as leader of the free world. It's the political equivalent of hiring a child molester to baby-sit your kids while you leave for the weekend. Not only is HE going to have fun with your child, but he'll probably sit and watch while his friends come over and do it too. - Look for far-left justices appointed to the Supreme Court, effectively tying up the entire government in a trifecta of liberal humanism, the buzzwords of which remain empty platitudes like "hope and change," and the ultimate goal of which is socialism--and soon, sharia law. - Military cases of troops being tried and convicted for killing the enemy in combat will continue to rise--and the conviction/plea-bargain rate will stay at nearly 100%, as the government seeks to use the best men and women this country has to offer as sacrificial lambs on the altar of global appeasement. Those brave and honorable men who currently reside in prison cells across the country, stripped of their rank, their careers, families, and their good name, will not taste free air again for many years. Their sacrifices and their stories will be forgotten by the general public, remembered only by those of us who continue to fight for them. - Look for the slow but steady erosion of rights you have enjoyed for your entire lives--all the while being told it's "for your own good." Restrictions on gun ownership, home schooling, encouraged dependence on the ever-growing federal government. More nanny-state provisions will be put into place to protect the "disadvantaged" and the "poor," (read: lazy, uneducated, unwilling to better themselves) even while groups like the unborn, the mentally handicapped, elderly, and terminally ill are slowly pushed toward euthanasia. Of course, this will be done with feel-good phrases like "death with dignity," "not wanting to be a burden," and "merciful release from suffering," all of which ignore the basic fact that we are killing people without their consent for the "good of the people." Before you tell me I'm crazy, let's just remember that Barack Obama was the ONLY senator in the Illinois state senate to vote against providing medical care for babies who were inconsiderate enough to survive an abortion. Also, look for taxes to go up. Yes, they'll go up. - You think the economy is bad now? Just wait. You'll have the most expensive "free" health care ever. Bread lines aren't just for Russians anymore. - I watched the faces of those crowded into the mob (excuse the pun) in Chicago. They stared at Obama like he was a god, an idol, a panacea to their every want and need. We have truly failed as a nation if we are at the point where we feel we must look to one man to take care of us all, to be our father figure and our sugar daddy. We have lost not only the "can-do" attitude of past generations, but the "MUST-do" attitude of our forefathers. We have allowed ourselves to become reduced from Patrick Henry's proud cry of "liberty or death" to the sniveling, whining idea that we are owed something. We have gone from being the honorable defenders of freedom, to being told we are the problem. - The eyes of Obama and McCain were also telling. McCain acted with class and grace in his concession speech, offering the most honorable response I've seen yet. I don't agree with all of McCain's positions, but it cannot be denied that the man has served his nation--at permanent and severe detriment to himself--for half a century. His eyes were clear and sincere, honest. His speech underlined the very reasons why, of the two men offered, he was hands down the best choice. - On the other hand, Obama's eyes were cold, calculating. His manner was smug and still carried the arrogance he has always had. His facial expression was one of barely disguised disdain for everything people like me believe in. His body language was smooth, polished--too much so. He talked of patriotism as though it is a value he is familiar with--and yet, his horrifying attitude toward the country he now leads is as well-documented as his friendships with those who seek its demise. He is charismatic to those who don't know what to look for, and he is inspiring to those who cannot or will not think for themselves. However, too many who voted for him are guilty of the most dangerous kind of hypocrisy. You see, we are told daily that we must not see color, just mankind. (We are all family, you know--or so we're told.) And yet Barack Obama was handed the White House on a silver platter by a fawning media, a bevy of foreign donors (who, to this day and in violation of U.S. election laws, remain nameless and unaccounted for), and a populace who voted based on color instead of right and wrong--even in the face of the most damning evidence against a Presidential candidate in many years , perhaps ever. It is said that the people receive the government they deserve. Sadly, I fear that's correct. We have become complacent, unwilling to see the writing on the wall, content to frolic in the warm water without bothering to notice that it's been getting hotter by the minute. We are two seconds from a rolling boil--and perhaps it is already too late. So, liberals, enjoy your victory. Jump around. Have a party, file for your free grants. Scream "Gimme my handout!" and make fun of those of us who fought to make sure your "messiah" didn't get access to the most powerful position in the world. Just remember when it all comes crashing down: You own the White House, the Congress, and soon the Supreme Court. You have no one to blame but yourselves for the mess you just created. As for me, I'm buying my handguns this week so I have an answer for those who will come try to take them. Kit DECEMBER 2008
Quotes of The Week Steve Goddard, from the religious humor site Ship of Fools sounds off on politically correct Christmas carols. "Theologically-modified carols will ring out everywhere this year. Innocents like king, man, son, virgin and Lord have been slaughtered to make carols more modern and inclusive. In some cases, entire verses have been rewritten. How long will it be before we have to sing 'Oh Vertically Challenged Town of Bethlehem' because 'little' is perceived to be politically incorrect?" A Brit bureaucracy, the British Department for Children, Schools and Families offers some timely advice for proper, safe and sane, Christmas revelry in their annual warning leaflet. The leaflet advises revellers to ensure glasses are drained of alcohol - they're a magnet for children who want to savour their first taste of brandy, port or egg nog. And too many people stab themselves with scissors in the scramble to open gifts, children come a cropper when they try out new rocking horses and dolts of all ages trip on cords and cables testing out the electronic goods they find wrapped under the tree on Christmas morn. "Gravy exploding in microwave ovens, hot fat spilled on the cook trying to grapple with a big turkey and nasty cuts when chopping piles of vegetables" are, the leaflet says, among the many perils of the kitchen. "The festive period is for families to enjoy each other's company, gifts and food, so the last thing you want is a trip to the hospital as a result of an accident which with a little thought can be avoided," Minister for Children Delyth Morgan said. "That's why the leaflet we've produced this Christmas will act as a reminder of the small but important things parents can do around the home to make sure Christmas is a time for fun and laughter not tears." Required Reading FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has issued its 2009 report on Ivory Tower speech codes and the news is not exactly thrilling. The report surveyed publicly available policies at institutions ranked in the 100 "Best National Universities" and the 50 "Best Liberal Arts Colleges" in the Aug. 27, 2007, "America's Best Colleges" issue of U.S. News & World Report, as well as at 207 major public universities. The research was conducted between September 2007 and September 2008. "Public universities, as governmental entities, are legally bound to respect First Amendment rights," the report said. "Yet 77 percent of them explicitly prohibit protected speech, as compared to 67 percent of private universities." Among the problems uncovered: * The University of the Pacific defines harassment as "conduct (intentional or unintentional) that has the effect of demeaning, ridiculing, defaming, stigmatizing, intimidating, slandering or impeding the work or movement of a person or persons or conduct that supports or parodies the oppression of others." * Penn State University requires its students to agree that "I will not engage in any behaviors that compromise or demean the dignity of individuals or groups," including any "taunting," "ridiculing" or "insulting." * Texas Southern University prohibits causing "emotional, mental, physical or verbal harm to another person" by means including "embarrassing, degrading or damaging information, assumptions, implications, [or] remarks." The report suggested many of the speech codes likely would not survive legal challenges. FIRE's efforts in that regard already have defeated various speech restrictions at Citrus College, San Francisco State University, Shippensburg University, State University of New York at Brockport and others. The report said the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed restrictions on speech that incite reasonable people to immediate violence, fighting words, harassment, true threats, obscenity and libel. "If the speech in question does not fall within one of these exceptions, it most likely is protected speech," the report said. A developing problem among schools is the application of restrictions on "threatening" language, the report said. "Earlier this year, Colorado College found two students guilty of violating the college's policy on 'violence' because of a satirical flyer – mocking a publication of the college's Feminist and Gender Studies Program – that administrators deemed 'implicitly threatening’," the report said. The original flyer, the "Monthly Rag," included an ad for a lecture by a "world-famous prostitute & porn star" and a reference to "male castration." The mockery, the "Monthly Bag," had articles that dealt with machismo instead of feminism and discussed abusive women. The students who created the parody were found guilty. (World Net Daily) Quotes of the Week Colin Powell wants to remake the Elephant Clan in his own, RHINO, image. "I think the party has to take a hard look at itself. There is nothing wrong with being conservative. There is nothing wrong with having socially conservative views — I don't object to that. But if the party wants to have a future in this country, it has to face some realities. In another 20 years, the majority in this country will be the minority." Powell, who crossed party lines and endorsed President-elect Barack Obama just weeks before the election, said the GOP must see what is in the "hearts and minds" of African-American, Hispanic and Asian voters "and not just try to influence them by… the principles and dogma." "I think the party has to stop shouting at the world and at the country,"Powell said. "I think that the party has to take a hard look at itself, and I've talked to a number of leaders in recent weeks and they understand that." "Can we continue to listen to Rush Limbaugh? Is this really the kind of party that we want to be when these kinds of spokespersons seem to appeal to our lesser instincts rather than our better instincts?" Resident Brit Jihadikaze/cleric, Anjem Choudary paints a Mecca Maniac bull’s-eye on Christmas. In the world today many Muslims, especially those residing in western countries, are exposed to the evil celebration Christmas. "Many take part in the festival celebrations by having Christmas turkey dinners. Decorating the house, purchasing Christmas trees or having Christmas turkey meals are completely prohibited by Allah. Many still practise this corrupt celebration as a remembrance of the birth of Jesus. How can a Muslim possibly approve or participate in such a practice that bases itself on the notion Allah has an offspring?" "The very concept of Christmas contradicts and conflicts with the foundation of Islam. Every Muslim has a responsibility to protect his family from the misguidance of Christmas, because its observance will lead to hellfire. Protect your Paradise from being taken away – protect yourself and your family from Christmas." (Telegraph) Neal Boortz serves up some quotes about Global Warming that will have Al Gore’s fat cave panties in a painful wad. [I]t looks like some scientists are going to launch a bit of an attack on this UN global warming conference underway in Poland. Read the story for details ... but I do want to include some of the quotes from these scientists here in the Nuze. Enjoy: * "I am a skeptic...Global warming has become a new religion." - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever. * Warming fears are the "worst scientific scandal in the history...When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists." - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist. * "The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity." - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico * "It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming." - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA. * "Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will." - . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the Universityof Auckland, NZ. * "After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet." - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review. * "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden. * "Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp...Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact." - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee. Quotes of the Week Dingy Harry Reid tells Americans "YOU STINK", during the gala opening of the new $621 million dollar Capitol Visitors Center. "My staff tells me not to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway. In the summer because of the heat and high humidity, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol. It may be descriptive but it's true." A Brit Holy Roller, Christopher Jamison, the Abbot of Worth in West Sussex, has unresolved ‘issues’ with Disney. While he acknowledges that Disney stories carry messages showing good triumphing over evil, he argues this is part of a ploy to persuade people that they should buy Disney products in order to be "a good and happy family". He cites films such as Sleeping Beauty and 101 Dalmatians that feature moral battles, but get into children's imaginations and make them greedy for the merchandise that goes with them. "The message behind every movie and book, behind every theme park and T-shirt is that our children's world needs Disney," he says. "So they absolutely must go to see the next Disney movie, which we'll also want to give them on DVD as a birthday present." "They will be happier if they live the full Disney experience; and thousands of families around the world buy into this deeper message as they flock to Disneyland." He continues: "This is the new pilgrimage that children desire, a rite of passage into the meaning of life according to Disney. "Where once morality and meaning were available as part of our free cultural inheritance, now corporations sell them to us as products."
|
|
©
Copyright 1993-2008 PIG - The Politically Incorrect Gazette
|
|
|
|
NEWS
DIGEST CONTENTS
|
|
NEWS
INDEX
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • ONLY IN AMERIKA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • BEYOND AMERIKA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • VICTIM - 'HOOD • • • • • • • • • • • • • • EDUCRAP • • • • • • • • • • • • • • KULTURE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • NANNY STATE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • DUMB CRIMINALS FLAT-LINERS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ONLY IN MEXIFORNIA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • MORALITY POLICE HOLY ROLLERS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • COMMENTARY • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ODDS AND ENDS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CLASSICS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ARCHIVES • • • • • • • • • • • • • • |
|
NEWS
LINKS / SITES
|
|
FOX NEWS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ANANOVA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • FREE REPUBLIC • • • • • • • • • • • • • • WORLDNETDAILY • • • • • • • • • • • • • • NEWSMAX • • • • • • • • • • • • • • DRUDGE REPORT • • • • • • • • • • • • • • NY POST • • • • • • • • • • • • • • O.C. REGISTER • • • • • • • • • • • • • • SAN ANTONIO LIGHTNING • • • • • • • • • • • • • • TEXAS MERCURY • • • • • • • • • • • • • • REUTERS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • BLOOMBERG • • • • • • • • • • • • • • BBC.UK • • • • • • • • • • • • • • BOSTON GLOBE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • WASHINGTON TMES • • • • • • • • • • • • • • TOMBSTONE TUMBLEWEED • • • • • • • • • • • • • • SACRAMENTO BEE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • |
