Yo Lawyers.!!! Pelosi and the Dems send hugs and kisses...

Here is a in interesting tidbit that you might not have noticed on page 1,431 of the new Health Bill.....

Pelosi Health Care Bill Blows a Kiss to Trial Lawyers

by Capitol Confidential

The health care bill recently unveiled by Speaker Nancy Pelosi is over 1,900 pages for a reason. It is much easier to dispense goodies to favored interest groups if they are surrounded by a lot of legislative legalese. For example, check out this juicy morsel to the trial lawyers (page 1431-1433 of the bill):

Section 2531, entitled “Medical Liability Alternatives,” establishes an incentive program for states to adopt and implement alternatives to medical liability litigation. [But]…… a state is not eligible for the incentive payments if that state puts a law on the books that limits attorneys’ fees or imposes caps on damages.

So, you can’t try to seek alternatives to lawsuits if you’ve actually done something to implement alternatives to lawsuits. Brilliant! The trial lawyers must be very happy today!

While there is debate over the details, it is clear that medical malpractive lawsuits have some impact on driving health care costs higher. There are likely a number of procedures that are done simply as a defense against future possible litigation. Recall this from the Washington Post:

“Lawmakers could save as much as $54 billion over the next decade by imposing an array of new limits on medical malpractice lawsuits, congressional budget analysts said today — a substantial sum that could help cover the cost of President Obama’s overhaul of the nation’s health system. New research shows that legal reforms would not only lower malpractice insurance premiums for medical providers, but would also spur providers to save money by ordering fewer tests and procedures aimed primarily at defending their decisions in court, Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, wrote in a letter to Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).”

Stay tuned. There are certainly many more terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad provisions in this massive bill.

Hows that for a billion dollar payback for the ABA's support for Dems.... at your expense!!!

Give Obamanation credit..... he learns well....

The top picture on the right shows Candidate O in May of 2008 attempting a hand salute at a campaign rally.






Then after the election, he went to Saluting School.
The bottom picture shows him at Dover AFB saluting the return remains of an Army Sgt KIA in Afghanistan this Thursday.




Now then, if he could just learn those principles that made this United States of America, the last great hope for the world, and salute them! Is that asking too much?

I'm plumb tired of talking about this national health bill...

....and probably won't for much longer --- 'cause fer sure the American folks is gonna pick up their phones, keyboards, cudgels and pitchforks and tell their Representatives and Senators exactly where to stick this legislative, bureaucratic abomination....

Here are a few short words from "Politico.com", on Nancy, Dingy & Bo's bombastic Bill:

1,990 pages at $2.2 million a word
By: Jonathan Allen
October 29, 2009 04:22 PM EST

It runs more pages than War and Peace, has nearly five times as many words as the Torah, and its tables of contents alone run far longer than this story.

The House health care bill unveiled Thursday clocks in at 1,990 pages and about 400,000 words. With an estimated 10-year cost of $894 billion, that comes out to about $2.24 million per word. .

And for some members, that may not be enough.

A “robust” public option can’t be found in the bill. Neither can the word “doctor” – save for a few references to degrees. No “cost curve” is bent. No “blue pill” is dispensed.

“Death” and “taxes” are both in there, but “death panel” is not.

The text defines dozens of words and phrases, including “family” (“an individual and . . . the individual’s dependents”), “health insurance coverage,” “exchange-eligible individual” and “Indian.”

And for those who cry “read the bill,” beware. There are plenty of paragraphs like this one:

“(a) Outpatient Hospitals – (1) In General – Section 1833(t)(3)(C)(iv) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395(t)(3)(C)(iv)) is amended – (A) in the first sentence – (i) by inserting “(which is subject to the productivity adjustment described in subclause (II) of such section)” after “1886(b)(3)(B)(iii); and (ii) by inserting “(but not below 0)” after “reduced”; and (B) in the second sentence, by inserting “and which is subject, beginning with 2010 to the productivity adjustment described in section 1886(b)(3)(B)(iii)(II)”.

The section deals with “incorporating productivity improvements into market basket updates that do not already incorporate such improvements,” if that helps.

Optimistic lawmakers say it could take a week just to get through the bill’s text.

“I’ll have to call an emergency meeting of my staff and drop the customary procedure of me reading and my staff not reading,” joked House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), who famously told filmmaker Michael Moore that lawmakers “don’t read most of the bills.”

“It’s one thing to read it,” said Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.), a lawyer who voted against the first version of the bill on its way through the Energy and Commerce Committee. “It’s another thing to understand it when it’s written in legalese.”

When given the bill’s dimensions, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) noted that some members are faster readers than others.

“That’s one afternoon for Barney Frank,” he said.

Republicans aide said a print-out of the bill weighs more than 19 pounds and stands nearly nine inches tall.

North Carolina Republican Rep. Patrick McHenry, 34 years old and a few inches taller than 5 feet, said the bill could act as a ”booster seat.”

Democrats say the essence of the bill isn’t much different from the three sister bills they moved through committees this summer, which came in around 1,000 pages.

If you read those, they say, you pretty much know what’s in this one.

“It’s almost a complete certainty that we have already discussed and debated almost every element that’s in this bill,” said Rep. Steve Rothman (D-N.J.)

McHenry took issue with the notion that the 2,000-page bill hasn’t changed much from the earlier, 1,000-page versions. To prove the point, he pulled out a Democratic-written summary of the changes.

All eight pages of them.

Asked why the House will vote on the roughly 400,000-word bill in a week when it takes a congregation a year to read the 80,000-word Torah at a synagogue, Rothman, who is Jewish, exhibited the wisdom of a Talmudic scholar.

“It only takes a year because you read one section a week,” he said.

But Republican Rep. Joe Barton, who is Texan, said the bill is “about four reams of paper” that add up to the American public “getting reamed.”

And these are the good words being said......... Wheee Doggies, Give me a break

It's all a matter of priorities.............

This was slipped over my transom during the night -- I offer it without comment!

.Ah but for the good old days..

Harry Truman was a different kind of President. He probably made as many important decisions regarding our nation's history as any of the other 42 Presidents. However, a measure of his greatness may rest on what he did after he left the White House. The only asset he had when he died was the house he lived in, which was in Independence Missouri. His wife had inherited the house from her mother and other than their years in the White House, they lived their entire lives there. When he retired from office in 1952, his income was a U.S. Army pension reported to have been $13,507.72 a year. Congress, noting that he was paying for his stamps and personally licking them, granted him an "allowance" and, later, a retroactive pension of $25,000 per year. After President Eisenhower was inaugurated, Harry and Bess drove home to Missouri by themselves. There were no Secret Service following them. When offered corporate positions at large salaries, he declined, stating, "You don't want me. You want the office of the President, and that doesn't belong to me. It belongs to the American people and it's not for sale." Even later, on May 6, 1971, when Congress was preparing to award him the Medal of Honor on his 87th birthday, he refused to accept it, writing, "I don't consider that I have done anything which should be the reason for any award, Congressional or otherwise." As president he paid for all of his own travel expenses and food. Modern politicians have found a new level of success in cashing in on the Presidency, resulting in untold wealth. Today, many in Congress also have found a way to become quite wealthy while enjoying the fruits of their offices. Political offices are now for sale. Good old Harry Truman was correct when he observed, "My choices in life were either to be a piano player in a whore house or a politician. And to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference! I say dig him up and clone him!!

The "Slippery slope from the Beltway"

Great article in today's American Spectator... needs no comment from me, but needs reading by all America.......

The Individual Mandate Slope

By Christopher Orlet on 10.28.09 @ 6:07AM

Americans are used to the state forcing us to buy things. More than likely your state government forces you to purchase automobile insurance in order to operate your motorcar, just as you must buy a helmet to peddle your bicycle, mud flaps if you drive a tractor-trailer, and trigger locks for your blunderbuss. We have become used to such government mandates. Small wonder the Democrats think they can get away with forcing every American to purchase health insurance.

But until now, the federal government has been largely in the business of telling us things we cannot do. As one constitutional lawyer recently told the New York Times, besides the draft and taxes: "it's hard to think of anything else that the federal government requires you to do."

Doubtless, the federal government has a long list of things it would like to force Americans to do: get more exercise, recycle, stop smoking, turn off the Rush Limbaugh show. After all, why let state governments have all the fun? True, the role and scope of the federal government was somewhat limited by the Founding Fathers, but there are ways to get around that. In particular, there is the Commerce Clause.

The federal government has sought to regulate all kinds of wacky things using the Commerce Clause, from marijuana grown for personal medicinal use to the Gun-Free School Zones Act. The feds' right to trump state medicinal marijuana laws survived a Supreme Court challenge (Antonin Scalia explained his "let's expand federal power" vote this way: "Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce"), but the gun zones act did not. Now Democrats are saying the Commerce Clause gives Congress the right to tax or fine Americans for not buying health care insurance, the so-called individual mandate. It is anybody's guess where the current Supreme Court will come down on this one.

But make no mistake, if the law is passed, it will be challenged, and hopefully on the grounds that it violates the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment, which prohibits the government from taking private property for public use without just compensation. The government is indirectly taking your money and mandating a private purchase, or face a fine.

But the Democrats' perversion of the Commerce Clause pales to the language tricks they're using to mislead citizens. "Democrats in the House and Senate have framed the mandate as a tax provision, which might have the effect of helping the bill dodge some of the constitutional showdowns," notes the website Factcheck.org. Indeed, by calling a fine something it is not -- a tax -- Democrats are purposely misleading the American people. By simply changing the name of something, they think they can change its essential character. Democrats say a goat is a mule, therefore it is now a mule, even though it still headbutts you in the butt like a goat.

Congress, of course, has the constitutional right to tax to its heart's content. So how much will those of us who refuse to comply be fined…I mean taxed? Under a recent Senate plan, Americans who do not buy health insurance would be forced to pay a tax of up to $1,500 per year.

WRITING IN THE Wall Street Journal, David Rivkin Jr. and Lee Casey note that a "tax that falls exclusively on anyone who is uninsured is a penalty beyond Congress's authority. If the rule were otherwise, Congress could evade all constitutional limits by 'taxing' anyone who doesn't follow an order of any kind."

Democrats, however, seem more interested in cutting a deal with insurance companies than in upholding the Constitution. Democrats will require insurance companies to accept persons with pre-existing conditions. Without the mandate there is no incentive to buy insurance until you get sick. The only way the insurance companies will sign on to the Democrat's plan is if young, healthy Americans are forced to buy insurance.

Democrats justify the individual mandate on the basis that uninsured persons use health care services, emergency rooms in particular, and do not pay for the services, thus the cost goes to the insured or the hospitals. But another way to look is this is by contrasting health care policy with our education policy. Doubtless some Americans could not afford schooling for their children if they had to pay for it out of their own pockets, therefore everyone -- or almost everyone -- pays through taxation. There is, obviously, no mandate that requires every individual American to pay for his child's education or face a fine. Democrats are betting that Americans would prefer the individual mandate over a tax increase, because, as noted earlier, Americans have become used to state and local government forcing us to buy things we don't necessarily want to buy.

Feel like you are standing on a slippery slope? Will Democrats first fine citizens who refuse or cannot afford to buy health insurance, and later fine citizens for failing to purchase a rainwater harvesting systems or hybrid vehicles? I would prefer not to find out.

Neither would I Pilgrims, neither would I!!!

For more insightful columns like this- go to:
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/10/28/the-individual-mandate-slope

Either way - it's a tough pill to swallow.......

Obamanation outdoes 'W'!!!!

Breaking news this weekend. Our hard working POTUS, found time between TV appearances, date trips to New York, Paris & London..... to break another of George Bush's records.

Yesterday, he played his 24th round of golf since taking the oath of office, that's 24 rounds of golf in only NINE MONTHS!!

It took George W Bush TWO YEARS and FOUR MONTHS to get 24 rounds in!
Way to go 'O'!!!!

Amazing how different the press coverage is on their relaxation habits, isn't it? For 'O', mums the word! For Bush, it's a flow of coffins.

Hmm didn't I also read that while O was playing yesterday, 14 GI's died in Afghanistan?

Funny thing - how facts get in the way of politics....

I came across this item in APnews-MYWAY this morning. It summarizes the real facts of profits for health insurers in this country ---- as opposed to the prevaricating rhetoric of our demogoguing politicians........

FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat
Email this Story

Oct 25, 8:37 AM (ET)

By CALVIN WOODWARD

Google sponsored links

WASHINGTON (AP) - Quick quiz: What do these enterprises have in common? Farm and construction machinery, Tupperware, the railroads, Hershey sweets, Yum food brands and Yahoo? Answer: They're all more profitable than the health insurance industry. In the health care debate, Democrats and their allies have gone after insurance companies as rapacious profiteers making "immoral" and "obscene" returns while "the bodies pile up."

Ledgers tell a different reality. Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That's anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.

Profits barely exceeded 2 percent of revenues in the latest annual measure. This partly explains why the credit ratings of some of the largest insurers were downgraded to negative from stable heading into this year, as investors were warned of a stagnant if not shrinking market for private plans.

Insurers are an expedient target for leaders who want a government-run plan in the marketplace. Such a public option would force private insurers to trim profits and restrain premiums to compete, the argument goes. This would "keep insurance companies honest," says President Barack Obama.

The debate is loaded with intimations that insurers are less than straight, when they are not flatly accused of malfeasance.

They may not have helped their case by commissioning a report that looked primarily at the elements of health care legislation that might drive consumer costs up while ignoring elements aimed at bringing costs down. Few in the debate seem interested in a true balance sheet.

But in pillorying insurers over profits, the critics are on shaky ground. A look at some claims, and the numbers:

THE CLAIMS

_"I'm very pleased that (Democratic leaders) will be talking, too, about the immoral profits being made by the insurance industry and how those profits have increased in the Bush years." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who also welcomed the attention being drawn to insurers'"obscene profits."

_"Keeping the status quo may be what the insurance industry wants their premiums have more than doubled in the last decade and their profits have skyrocketed." Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, member of the Democratic leadership.

_"Health insurance companies are willing to let the bodies pile up as long as their profits are safe." A MoveOn.org ad.

THE NUMBERS:

Health insurers posted a 2.2 percent profit margin last year, placing them 35th on the Fortune 500 list of top industries. As is typical, other health sectors did much better - drugs and medical products and services were both in the top 10.

The railroads brought in a 12.6 percent profit margin. Leading the list: network and other communications equipment, at 20.4 percent.

HealthSpring, the best performer in the health insurance industry, posted 5.4 percent. That's a less profitable margin than was achieved by the makers of Tupperware, Clorox bleach and Molson and Coors beers.

The star among the health insurance companies did, however, nose out Jack in the Box restaurants, which only achieved a 4 percent margin.

UnitedHealth Group, reporting third quarter results last week, saw fortunes improve. It managed a 5 percent profit margin on an 8 percent growth in revenue.

Van Hollen is right that premiums have more than doubled in a decade, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study that found a 131 percent increase.

But were the Bush years golden ones for health insurers?

Not judging by profit margins, profit growth or returns to shareholders. The industry's overall profits grew only 8.8 percent from 2003 to 2008, and its margins year to year, from 2005 forward, never cracked 8 percent.

The latest annual profit margins of a selection of products, services and industries: Tupperware Brands, 7.5 percent; Yahoo, 5.9 percent; Hershey, 6.1 percent; Clorox, 8.7 percent; Molson Coors Brewing, 8.1 percent; construction and farm machinery, 5 percent; Yum Brands (think KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell), 8.5 percent.

And politicians wonder why our favorite saying is, "You can always tell when a politician is lying - his(her) lips are moving!!"

Damned if you do.... damned if you don't! From the London Times...

Father faces jail after being spotted brewing coffee in the nude... in his own home!!

By Sara Nelson
Last updated at 5:08 PM on 22nd October 2009

• 
  

Eric Williamson says he had no idea anyone could see him in his kitchen as he made coffee in the nude

A father is facing charges of indecent exposure after he was spotted making a cup of coffee in the nude – in his own home.

Eric Williamson, from Springfield, Virginia, was brewing coffee in his kitchen when a woman and a seven-year-old boy walked past the window and saw him.

The woman complained to police who arrested Williamson shortly after the Monday morning incident.

Williamson said: ‘Yes I wasn’t wearing any clothes but I was alone, in my own home and just got out of bed.

'It was dark and I had no idea anyone was outside looking in at me.’

Williamson, who has a five-year-old daughter, said: ‘I am a loving dad. Any of my friends and anyone knows that and there is not a chance on this planet I would ever, ever, ever do anything like that to a kid.'

A spokesman at Fairfax County Police says Williamson was arrested because officers believed he wanted to be seen naked by the public.

The 29-year-old faces up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine if he is convicted. He is fighting the charge and seeking damages from police.

Police are appealing for anyone else who may have seen Williamson naked to come forward.

Officers are concerned because the house is located across the street from a bus stop for school children.

As one commenter to this article said: "If he passed an open window and ogled a naked lady, he'd be arrested as a Peeping Tom. But if he is in the privacy of his home and gets ogled.... he's a bloody pervert!"

Where' the equity in this?

You may have seen this, but it's worth repeating......

Subject: Conservative VS Liberal

If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.

If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.



If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn`t eat meat.

If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.



If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.

If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.



If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.

A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.



If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.

Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.



If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church.

A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it’s a foreign religion, of course!)



If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.

A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.



If a conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.

If a liberal slips and falls, he grab s his neck, moans like he's in labor and then sues.



If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.

A liberal will delete it because he's "offended".

Obamanation's Legacy??

Hell Pardners, we ain't seen 'nothing yet! Wait till your grandkids need a wheelbarrow of greenbacks to buy a loaf of bread!!! Then this administration's real goals of anarchy and rioting in the streets will be truly felt and experienced!!

The Bums pile on Rush...........

Columnist Larry Elder penned a great item on Rush Limbaugh's treatment this morning. I share it here so you don't miss it:

Bum Rush
Larry Elder
Thursday, October 22, 2009

Why lie?

A businessman forming a group to purchase a minority interest in the National Football League's St. Louis Rams approached popular conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh. Would Limbaugh be interested? Yes, said Limbaugh, but he warned there would be a firestorm of protests. The man was assured that this had been thought through. Not to worry.

Au contraire.

"Responsible" cable news outlets CNN and MSNBC "reported" that Limbaugh once spoke positively about both slavery and the assassination of Martin Luther King. What???!!! "News anchors" such as CNN's Rick Sanchez even "quoted" Limbaugh speaking positively about slavery. That alleged quote and another supposedly applauding King's assassination whipped around cable news, newspaper opinion pieces and the Internet faster than you could say "balloon boy."

Never mind that Limbaugh denied saying such outrageous things. Never mind that no record exists of him ever uttering anything of the sort. Limbaugh threatened legal action against the "news" organizations that either "reported" these things as accurate or "reported" about others attributing these statements to him. Sanchez finally issued a retraction -- but never apologized to Limbaugh.

But the damage was done. The man who approached Limbaugh asked the host to remove himself from the group. Limbaugh refused. So he was dropped.

I feel Limbaugh's pain. If he is so offensive and has uttered incendiary, inflammatory remarks that render him unfit to the NFL, why lie in order to make the case?

It's happened to me.

Shortly after I started on radio, my station's account executives -- those who sell radio time to advertisers -- began getting distressing phone calls. Why is Elder so "offensive"? Advertising agencies and sponsors received numerous letters complaining about me from "the black community." These letters included statements I allegedly made, such as:

"Blacks are morally corrupt."

"Blacks are lazy."

"It's okay for white people to call black people (the N-word)."

"Blacks are immoral."

"It is understandable to be racist against blacks."

"Blacks are the cause of all crime in America."

The letter also said, "(Elder) attacks black men, black women and black children almost every day. He also attacks black politicians, ministers, scholars, and other leaders on a regular basis." The letter listed advertisers that sponsored my show, including major national companies. The letter called for a boycott of "companies that finance hate speech against black people."

Of course, I never said those things. Had I done so, I would have -- and should have -- been fired before the next commercial break. Wouldn't anyone with an ounce of common sense know that? No, "corporate America" headed for the hills.

Sponsor after sponsor dropped my program, costing my station a great deal of money. In response to the "controversy" and the loss in revenue, my station cut my four-hour-a-day afternoon drive-time program in half. I wanted to go on the air, talk about this outrageous boycott and fight -- with the truth. But management naively thought that if we didn't respond to the smears, the boycott would simply whither away. The letters continued. Some local sponsors were picketed by protestors carrying signs, with my picture, saying "Hate Radio Must Go!"

After my show was cut, however, my listeners were outraged. Calls and letters of support poured in. Several support groups formed, and people such as conservative activist David Horowitz came to my defense. The boycott leaders refused to make themselves available for comment. It turned out that no more than a handful of people were sending out hundreds of letters on behalf of "the black community." My show was soon restored.

As for Rush, the shameless, morally bankrupt Rev. Al Sharpton helped lead the charge. Check the dictionary for the word "gall." You will find Sharpton's picture. Apart from becoming a national figure by falsely accusing a man of sexual assault and a litany of other race-card gambits, Sharpton once called the then-mayor of New York a "n----- whore."

The NFL commissioner, during the Rush dust-up, said he opposes "divisive comments." This is an interesting standard in a league about which Sports Illustrated once wrote that more than 20 percent of its players had criminal records -- up to and including attempted rape.

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann dons his viciously anti-Republican commentator hat on weekdays yet works NFL television games as an analyst on Sundays. Bob Costas works as an analyst for Major League Baseball games. On his radio show, Costas said about then-President George W. Bush, "It is sad to say, this is a tragically failed administration. That is to me an inescapable fact." Were there demands that Olbermann and Costas lose their sports jobs over their "divisive comments," or were lies spread about what they said?

What happened to Limbaugh is despicable. If Limbaugh had successfully acquired an interest in the team, critics could have chosen to refuse to patronize the product. They clearly choose to avoid listening to his radio show. Otherwise, why lie?

Copyright © 2009 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

Well said, Mr Elder! And great insight on how these losers manipulate from behind the curtain. For more like this folks, go to 'TownHall.com' each morning.

Even I (a transplanted Yankee) get it!!!!

Go green, lose green

Last Updated: October 18, 2009

New York has “green” power, “green” schools, “green” taxis — and, now, “green” jobs. No wonder that color is becoming scarcer in folks’ wallets.

Consider the energy bill Gov. Paterson signed into law last week. It directs some $112 million in taxpayer “green” toward a “green jobs” program designed to make homes and businesses more energy-efficient.

Supposedly, everybody wins: Homeowners get loans to replace drafty windows, old appliances, etc. — and then they repay them with their energy-bill savings. (Assuming those savings materialize, that is.)

There’s even a portion of the money set aside to train workers to do the upgrades — hence, the “jobs” in green jobs.

Alas, New Yorkers have been offered free lunches before — and you don’t have to scratch this one too hard to sense something amiss.

Set aside the sheer oddity of government classes to teach basic home-improvement skills. Turns out, contractors who want in on the program must meet strict pro-labor rules set by state bureaucrats.

Who benefits? Unions, of course — likely to the detriment of folks already in the business.

Then there’s the pot of money for “community” groups to publicize the program. Think ACORN, given that the bill was the brainchild of its ally, the far-left Working Families Party.

And, again, it’s taxpayer money on the line, funding the program.

Wouldn’t it be nice if, just once, Albany sought to spur growth — say, by cutting taxes — rather than using taxpayers’ “green” for yet more boondoggle programs? Dream on.

This is from today's NY POST, can you dig?

Cartoonists are finally getting it!!!

"Do I look fat in this?"

Do y'all recall the brouhaha the Dim's created when they accused the RNC of clothing Governor Palin during the last election campaign? Lookee here at what the Dims did to Supreme court justice nominee Sotoamayor this summer --- in her own words!!

Sotomayor Says White House Even Picked Out Her Clothes

Updated 10:53 AM EDT, Mon, Oct 19, 2009

Sotomayor, poses with her colleagues at the Supreme Court in Washington." class="storyimage1" width="410" border="0" height="307">

AP

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor's nomination process was so controlled that the White House even approved her clothes, she told Yalies when she appeared at her 30th Yale Law School reunion on Saturday.

Sotomayor described her grueling nomination process privately when she spoke to 1,800 alumni, students and faculty , the New Haven Register reports.

State Sen. Ed Meyer attended the event and said Sotomayor became teary at times, but kept the crowd laughing.

The Yale Law School grad talked about shopping for clothes to wear to her acceptance ceremony, but government officials took over the fashion decisions. They told her to bring five suits and then recommended which one she should wear, Meyer said

Seems like we have a minor problem with Democrat Party dyslexia here, don't it!

And the world goes 'round.........

Speaking of which .... I noted today that Putin & Company (and Russia) who suffered the malaise of Communism which brought down their country.... have done a study and decided that to resurrect Mother Russia, they need to adopt "COMMUNISM'!!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/world/europe/18russia.html

It may be a Chinese Capitalist Communism --- but that is their model..... go figure!

BTW, I noted today that in the continuing saga of WTF, the Canadian Dollar is about on parity with the American Dollar! Ain't they laughing up their sleeves......." Bet they can't wait to say, $2.00 Canadian - $2.75 American! LOL

Go Stimulus Go!! Rah Rah Rahm!

My folks woulda spent their life in jail - by todays child rearing standards!!!!

Mom Arrested for Washing Kid's Mouth With Soap

A Florida couple is behind bars for some old school discipline

By TODD WRIGHT

Updated 5:08 PM EDT, Tue, Oct 13, 2009

Getty Images/Rubberball

A Palm Bay woman and her boyfriend were arrested Monday for child abuse after the couple went old school to punish their 8-year-old daughter for swearing.

They washed her mouth out with soap.

We don't know about you, but we would petition President Obama and Congress to make it mandatory for every parent to carry a bar of Irish Spring in their back pockets with all the profanity kids use today.

Police claim Adriyanna Herdener and Wilfredo Rivera went too far by placing a bar of soap in the girl's mouth and letting it stay for 10 minutes. Herdener did not intervene in the discipline.

Dirty Mouth

The girl eventually vomited and Rivera took her to the local hospital, where hospital staff called police.

No one wants a child to be hurt or inhumanely punished, but parents' discipline choices in this country have come down to calling Dr. Phil or hiding the joysticks to the Wii.

Next time your kid has a potty mouth, just give them some gum.

Breaking news.....

This just in..............

The Betty Mills Co., a division of Frito-Lay, announced today they will start placing Nobel Peace Prizes in boxes of their Crackerjack caramel corn treat. Joe Blough, a representative from the company, stated on Friday “We almost did this back in 2007 when Al Gore won the prize for his efforts to promote his lucrative carbon credit scam. Since the Nobel prize has no real meaning anymore, we thought it would be nice to place them in our Crackerjack snack so that everyone could have one."

The new prizes will begin appearing in the company’s product as soon as sufficient copies are available for distribution.

A few words about Lapel Ribbons.....

Lapel ribbons have become a part of our daily life...... and there seems to be a ribbon for damned near every occasion and every cause.

Pink-Breast cancer, Red - aids, Yellow -Military support, Light Blue - Prostate cancer, Black - Mourning, and on and on.

I used to disparage them because I thought they were just a weak attempt to say "I care more about this cause than you do - that's why I am wearing a Ribbon and you aren't" ! Then I realized it was an 'awareness' thing, and folks were just trying to get other folks to think about the cause.. That seemed to make sense. So when I see a ribbon on someones hat or lapel now - I no longer sneer or give 'em the odd wave.

As I was having these deep thoughts, I got to remembering years ago, when we first started running big (or at least we thought they were big at the time) deficits and Rush Limbaugh started a campaign for us all to wear a dollar bill folded like a ribbon on our lapel............ to bring awareness to the destruction of the US Greenback Dollar....

Well Hot Damn, if there was ever a time to bring that fashion back -- with our deficits running over a TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR, and a National Debt approaching $12 Trillion Bucks --this seems like the time. I am going to post a picture of one here, and also link you to a site that shows you how to fold one in case you are origamically challenged....

Why not start wearing one on your collar or hat today --- when folks ask what it's all about -- tell 'em!! Our National Debt is in trouble and getting worse - folks should be aware. I use a mini- U.S. Flag pin to fasten it......

By the way, as of this morning, our National Debt is 'zactly: $11,916,933,366,693.46 !!!

http://www.instructables.com/id/Make-a-dollar-bill-cancer-ri
bbon/

This WSJ Editor will never get his tongue out of his cheek!!!!!

Obama fails to win Nobel prize in economics

Commentary: Michael Moore, Timothy Geithner also passed over

By MarketWatch

LONDON (MarketWatch) -- In a decision as shocking as Friday's surprise peace prize win, President Obama failed to win the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences Monday.

While few observers think Obama has done anything for world peace in the nearly nine months he's been in office, the same clearly can't be said for economics.

The president has worked tirelessly since even before his inauguration to wrest control of the U.S. economy from failed free markets, and the evil CEOs who profit from them, and to turn it over to wise, fair and benevolent bureaucrats.

From his $787 billion stimulus package, to the cap-and-trade bill, to the seizures of General Motors and Chrysler, to the undead health-care "reform" act, Obama has dominated the U.S., and therefore the global, economy as few figures have in recent years.

Yet the Nobel panel chose instead to award the prize to two obscure academics -- Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson -- one noted for her work on managing collective resources, and the other for his work on transaction costs. See full story on the Nobel winners.

Other surprise losers include celebrity noneconomist and filmmaker Michael Moore; U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner; and Larry Summers, head of the U.S. national economic council.

It is unclear whether the president will now refuse his peace prize in protest against the obvious slight to his real achievements this year.

This may be written with tongue in cheek, but like my Daddy used to say -- 'It's a whole lot more truth, than poetry!"

Well Hell's Bells, I thought Chavez was an "Obamanation" fan..

You don't reckon there is a little Nobel jealousy here do you?

Chavez says Obama did "nothing" to deserve Nobel

Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:56pm EDT

CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela's socialist leader Hugo Chavez said on Sunday that U.S. President Barack Obama had done nothing beyond wishful thinking to earn the Nobel Peace Prize.

Chavez, who has mixed praise for Obama personally with criticism of his government's "imperialist" policies, said he thought it was a mistake when he read the U.S. leader had won.

"What has Obama done to deserve this prize? The jury put store on his hope for a nuclear arms-free world, forgetting his role in perpetuating his battalions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and his decision to install new military bases in Colombia," Chavez wrote in a column.

"For the first time, we are witnessing an award with the nominee having done nothing to deserve it: rewarding someone for a wish that is very far from becoming reality."

Chavez said giving Obama the Nobel award was like giving a baseball pitcher a prize simply for saying he was going to win 50 games and strike out 500 batters. [........]

And here I thought Chavez and Castro nominated the "O" man!!! Must have been one of those other Socialist dudes............

Ramirez nails it again....!!

As usual, my favorite editorial cartoonist has nailed it again. With words instead of pictures --- he shows who the true winner of this year's 'nobel peace prize'!

The TOTUS won, running away....... (oh, and by the way Pilgrims, I didn't err by not capitalizing the name of this award up yonder, I reckon the award no longer deserves capital letters.

A whole new meaning to the word..........

Hot Damn..... what a relief..............

I rose out of my bed at 0630, hit the head, then tip-toed in here and cranked up my PC. I closed my eyes as I opened the Drudge Report for today's headlines....... scanned quickly........ and then sighed with relief when I found that it had only been a bad dream.

"He". our Nobel Prize winner yesterday, had not really been appointed Pope last night at midnite!

I'da sworn I saw white smoke coming out of that chimney!!

..... Always within reach of his troops.......

The job of the Secretary of Homeland Security is....?

If you guessed, 'Security of the borders and the homeland', you'd be wrong!! Apparently! This, just reported in USA Today, not exactly a right wing rag:

DHS strips Arizona sheriff of authority to patrol for illegal immigrants

Buzz up!

Like this story? Share it with Yahoo! Buzz

Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio says he will continue his controversial "crime suppression operations" despite a Department of Homeland Security decision to strip him of authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants based solely on their immigration status, the East Valley Tribune reports.

“It’s all politics,” says Arpaio, sheriff of Maricopa County.

Arpaio will still have the power to check the immigration status of people booked by his officers, but not the authority to conduct street patrols looking for illegal immigrants.

His “crime suppression operations” are saturation patrols in designated areas where deputies would find illegal immigrants by stopping them for traffic infractions and minor violations, the paper says.

The department of Justice and other federal agencies are investigating the sheriff’s office on accusations of racial profiling during the operations, the paper says.

Arpaio said he will be able to still conduct the crime sweeps under state human smuggling laws and an obscure federal law that allows local police to arrest illegal immigrants.

A spokesman for the Phoenix office of ICE declined to comment until after pending agreements with the country are signed.

(Photo by Ralph Freso, East Valley Tribune, AP)

Posted by Doug Stanglin at 09:59 AM/ET, October 07, 2009 in Crime, Politics, Washington | Permalink

Buzz up!

Like this story? Share it with Yahoo! Buzz

Now then Pilgrims, if this was the Department of Justice, or the Equal Opportunity for Felons Division of HHS, you could almost understand this zealous effort to quash a hard working American Sheriff and his department...... but the Department of Homeland Security??? Ya' just gotta ask why...... another Obamanational Political Cabinet Appointee!!!

Wishing ........ just doesn't make it go away, does it?

Irish Lasses hauling their own Loo Paper

Pupils at a St John's girls' national school were asked to bring their own supplies of toilet roll Photo: GETTY

Pupils at a St John's girls' national school, in Carrigaline, in the southern county of Cork, were asked to bring their own supplies in one of the starkest examples yet of the death of Ireland's "Celtic Tiger" economy.

Catherine O'Neill, the school's principal, said, in a letter to parents: "From time to time we will request your daughter to bring in a toilet roll to her class teacher. These rolls will be specifically for your daughter's class and will be dispensed by the class teacher."

She said the measure had been taken in order to save money in the face of education funding cuts.

"We are endeavouring to trim down expenses and ensure we use our grants towards [educational needs]," she wrote.

Irish parents are already struggling to buy schoolbooks and uniforms in the face of a deep recession.

Golly Gee Whiz Pilgrims -- why don't they just put Sheryl Crow in charge of the 'Loos"

I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting

Sheryl Crow

Halloween came early to the WH yesterday.....

Many of those doctors invited to the White House rose garden health care photo op yesterday forgot their costumes!

Not to worry, the WH costume department had plenty ready to hand out to those not properly dressed.

Nothing phony in this WH, full transparency!!!

Whee Doggies!!!!

It gets curiouser and curiouser, Alice!!!!

Here is an article from the Washington Times which pretty well speaks for itself, Pilgrims! By the way, whenever you hear somebody quote "Center for American Progress" as their source, now you'll know who and what they are talking about - and it ain't progress!!

Monday, September 28, 2009

BREITBART: Podesta spends Soros' money stupidly

Andrew Breitbart

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

A telling event occurred on Sept. 15, Day 6 of the drip, drip, drip ACORN video rollout. President Obama met for lunch with former President Bill Clinton at trendy Il Mulino in New York City.

For the second consecutive day, the New York Post featured the ACORN scandal on its cover - complete with James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles in their outrageous "pimp and ho" costumes.

Does anyone think the president and the former president were unaware that the city in which they were dining was mesmerized by the ACORN scandal - especially since ACORN had bragged that its employees had kicked Mr. O'Keefe and Ms. Giles out of their New York office?

The Sept. 15 edition of the New York Post explored the political angles and directed attention to the Brooklyn District Attorney's investigation into why an ACORN office in its jurisdiction helped instruct a prospective brothel owner how to hide his prostitution proceeds in a tin in his backyard.

No one in the morally superior media world has asked, why did Mr. Obama have lunch with Mr. Clinton that day? So let me take a guess, and it seems like an obvious answer. Mr. Obama, under siege by a video-a-day expose that was exposing the Democratic Party to an avalanche of consequences (ACORN defunded in the House and Senate, ACORN delinked from the census, etc.), needed advice from the last president to navigate through a major political scandal.

On this day, neither the president or the former president, nor the media knew how many more videos were coming.

The next day, Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta, the Democratic Party's top fix-it guy with control over much of the left's well-funded vast attack machinery (think George Soros, the Tides Foundation, et al.), was among a small advisory group placed in charge of investigating the matter.

With the mainstream media continuing to ignore the evidence on the tapes, Mr. Podesta is now clearly in charge of feeding them information about his well-structured investigation into the investigators. The ACORN internal probe is a "war room" aimed at destroying the messengers and is not meant to clean up major corruption.

Since Mr. Podesta was appointed to investigate ACORN, the only thing investigated has been the investigators, Mr. O'Keefe, Ms. Giles and the publisher of the journalism behind it, yours truly.

Every journalism inquiry from the mainstream media continues to focus on the successful operation that exposed ACORN, not on ACORN itself, as if there is no evidence to sift through or common traits to be found in the videos. Why is the story about journalistic process rather than institutional corruption?

The Washington Post and the Associated Press have had to issue embarrassing retractions for falsely implying Mr. O'Keefe's motives were racist. The New York Times, too, had to issue a retraction on an issue raised to impugn his tactics.

It was so predictable that I actually predicted it - in this column four days before the first video was aired. We needed to document the plan to prove it was a success. And to show that the media's duplicity and institutional biases were directly targeted.

So, who is John Podesta? He runs the Center for American Progress think tank, which in 2004 helped launch Media Matters for America, the well-funded watchdog outfit run by ex-conservative journalist David Brock, which feeds the media reams of anti-conservative documents that attempt to diminish the credibility of alternative media outlets.

Both the CAP and Media Matters sites are focusing their attention on Ms. Giles, Mr. O'Keefe and me.

Does anyone really think Mr. Podesta is investigating ACORN, when his well-greased external machinery is so blatantly investigating us?

To show the Sept. 15 lunch is still bearing fruit, Mr. Clinton showed Sunday that the 1998 "blame the messenger" strategy is back in full force, claiming the "vast right-wing conspiracy" is up to its old tricks.

"It's not as strong as it was, because America has changed demographically," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "But it's as virulent as it was."

Need we remind Mr. Podesta and Mr. Brock and Mr. Clinton and Mr. Obama of Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" rant that should have put an end to the attacks on the messenger: "ACORN appears to be a corrupt organization that aids and abets criminals and gets millions of dollars in taxpayer money."

The left is betting that 2009 is 1998 again and that the media will help them out like last time. Mr. Obama is betting that Mr. Clinton's 1998 strategy and his resources can extricate him from this growing mess. But 2009 has a new set of circumstances, new technologies and new citizen journalists that can now hold the mainstream media in check for its naked partisanship.

Plus, unlike Mr. Clinton's war-room blame-the-messenger excuse - "it's just about the sex" - this year's ACORN scandal won't be pushed aside, because this time it includes 13-year-old sex slaves from El Salvador.

• Andrew Breitbart is publisher of the news portals Breitbart.com and Breitbart.tv. His latest endeavor, Big Hollywood (http://bighollywood .breitbart.com), is a group blog on Hollywood and politics from the center-right perspective.