Apparently, last week the Texas National Guard was put on full alert because of the riots right across the border in Mexico. This Fox News segment broke the news...... and it hasn't appeared since.... on any network or any newspaper!!!
Why was it buried? To protect Obamanation? To keep from offending the Mexican gob'mint? I don't have the answers ............ yet! But when I find them, I'll sure share them.
One answer might be because this young Fox reporter has got to be the goll-durndest most obnoxious reporters on television. More concerned with showing his map toys than the story itself. Talk about 'style over substance'.
Anyway here is the link to the Youtube video -- If you have any updates please click on 'comments' and share them with us.....
Pecozbill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LujvhOiZNFU
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Friday, February 27, 2009
Forgive me if I seem a bit obtuse Pilgrims.....but
.... this item in the Chicago Tribune, WGN site caught my attention this morning. Y'all read it and then I'll comment......
Wal-Mart worker burns self to death in parking lot
February 27, 2009
A 58-year-old Wal-Mart employee who said he "couldn't take it anymore" lit himself on fire outside the Bloomingdale store where he worked late Thursday night and was later pronounced dead at a hospital, authorities said this morning.
The Carol Stream man, who worked the overnight shift, was in a parking lot of an adjacent sporting goods store in the west suburban strip mall when he set himself on fire with lighter fluid around 10 p.m., said Randy Sater, a watch commander with the Bloomingdale fire department.
At least 10 people, including some teenagers, witnessed the suicide and several attempted to help the man by throwing their coats on top of him in an effort to put out the flames, he said.
"He said he didn't want any help and threw the coats off," Sater said.
When one of the first officers tried to speak to the man, who by that time was severely burned, he responded, "I just couldn't take it anymore," Sater said, citing the officer's report.
A manager at the store, who identified himself only as Erwin, said this morning that the man was an overnight stocker at the store. He said the man had not been laid off.
He referred further questions to Wal-Mart's corporate office. A spokesman there could not immediately comment.
The man was rushed to Advocate Good Samaritan Hospital in Downers Grove before being transferred to the burn unit at Loyola University Medical Center in Maywood. The man was pronounced dead there at 12:42 a.m., according to the Cook County medical examiner's office.
Sater said the death remained under investigation.
--Dan P. Blake
The story is sad, not just for the poor guy who felt self-immolation was the way to leave this earth, but also for the slanted reporting. You read the headline and the WalMart managers comments - and it would lead you to believe that WalMart or their management had something to do with this mans death.
But if you read it again -- there is absolutely no connection. He never mentioned WalMart, he hadn't lost his job, as a matter of fact, he didn't even set himself on fire in their doorway. He did it in front of a nearby sporting goods store. I'd have to believe that if his message had anything to do with WalMart, he would have done the deed on their front step!
No mention of wife, love life, financial pressures --- just WalMart! With his dying breath, he didn't even mention his job or where he worked!
My conclusion -- just one more way for the press to bash big business in general and WalMart in particular! What's your opinion?
Wal-Mart worker burns self to death in parking lot
February 27, 2009
A 58-year-old Wal-Mart employee who said he "couldn't take it anymore" lit himself on fire outside the Bloomingdale store where he worked late Thursday night and was later pronounced dead at a hospital, authorities said this morning.
The Carol Stream man, who worked the overnight shift, was in a parking lot of an adjacent sporting goods store in the west suburban strip mall when he set himself on fire with lighter fluid around 10 p.m., said Randy Sater, a watch commander with the Bloomingdale fire department.
At least 10 people, including some teenagers, witnessed the suicide and several attempted to help the man by throwing their coats on top of him in an effort to put out the flames, he said.
"He said he didn't want any help and threw the coats off," Sater said.
When one of the first officers tried to speak to the man, who by that time was severely burned, he responded, "I just couldn't take it anymore," Sater said, citing the officer's report.
A manager at the store, who identified himself only as Erwin, said this morning that the man was an overnight stocker at the store. He said the man had not been laid off.
He referred further questions to Wal-Mart's corporate office. A spokesman there could not immediately comment.
The man was rushed to Advocate Good Samaritan Hospital in Downers Grove before being transferred to the burn unit at Loyola University Medical Center in Maywood. The man was pronounced dead there at 12:42 a.m., according to the Cook County medical examiner's office.
Sater said the death remained under investigation.
--Dan P. Blake
The story is sad, not just for the poor guy who felt self-immolation was the way to leave this earth, but also for the slanted reporting. You read the headline and the WalMart managers comments - and it would lead you to believe that WalMart or their management had something to do with this mans death.
But if you read it again -- there is absolutely no connection. He never mentioned WalMart, he hadn't lost his job, as a matter of fact, he didn't even set himself on fire in their doorway. He did it in front of a nearby sporting goods store. I'd have to believe that if his message had anything to do with WalMart, he would have done the deed on their front step!
No mention of wife, love life, financial pressures --- just WalMart! With his dying breath, he didn't even mention his job or where he worked!
My conclusion -- just one more way for the press to bash big business in general and WalMart in particular! What's your opinion?
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Annie fires at Obamanation, the record setter and the oxymoron - American Public Education!!!
The Cal Ripken President
Ann Coulter
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
As Obama prepared to deliver his address to Congress on Tuesday, the Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner, Fox News' Bret Baier and Charles Krauthammer all gushed that history was being made as the first African-American president appeared before Congress.
Even Gov. Bobby Jindal, whom I suppose I should note was the first Indian-American to give the Republican response to a president's speech, began with an encomium to the first black president. (Wasn't Bobby great in "Slumdog Millionaire"?)
Are we going to have to hear about this for the next four years? Obama is becoming the Cal Ripken Jr. of presidents, making history every time he suits up for a game. Recently, Obama also became the first African-American president to order a ham sandwich late at night from the White House kitchen! That's going to get old pretty quick.
But as long as the nation is obsessed with historic milestones, is no one going to remark on what a great country it is where a mentally retarded woman can become speaker of the house?
Obama spent more than twice as much time in his historic speech genuflecting to the teachers' unions than talking about terrorism, Iraq or Afghanistan. So it was historic only in the sense that Obama is the first African-American president, but was the same old Democratic claptrap in every other respect.
After claiming that the disastrous stimulus bill would create or save 3.5 million jobs -- "more than 90 percent" in the private sector -- Obama then enumerated a long list of exclusively government jobs that would be "saved."
He was suspiciously verbose about saving the jobs of public schoolteachers. Because nothing says "economic stimulus" better than saving the jobs of lethargic incompetents who kick off at 2 p.m. every day and get summers off. Actually, that's not fair: Some teachers spend long hours after school having sex with their students.
As with the Clintons, Obama so earnestly believes in public school education that he sends his girls to ... an expensive private school. He demands that taxpayers support the very public schoolteachers he won't trust with his own children.
It is one thing to tell voters that school choice is wrong, because, you know, the public schools won't get better unless Americans sacrifice their children to the teachers' union's maw. But it is quite another for Democrats to feed their own kids to the union incinerator.
Consequently, no Democrat since Jimmy Carter has been stupid enough to send his own children to a public school.
And yet the stimulus bill expressly prohibits money earmarked for "education" to be spent on financial aid at private or parochial schools. Private schools might use it for some nefarious purpose like actually teaching their students, rather than indoctrinating them in anti-American propaganda.
The stimulus bill includes about $100 billion to education. By "education," Democrats don't mean anything a normal person would think of as education, such as learning how to talk good. "Education" means creating lots of useless bureaucratic jobs, mostly in Washington, having nothing to do with teaching.
Apparently, nothing irritates public schoolteachers more than being asked to teach. While 80 percent of the employees of private schools are teachers, only half the employees of public schools are. The rest are "coordinating," "facilitating" or "empowering" something or other.
The Department of Education alone provides more than 4,000 jobs that haven't the faintest connection with teaching. And now the stimulus bill will double the Education Department's funding. (For those of you who went to a public school, that means it will become twice as big.)
We've come a long way from Ronald Reagan promising to eliminate the Education Department, which itself was a Jimmy Carter sop to the teachers' unions.
Federal meddling in education has been an abject failure, so the Democrats' plan is to keep doing more of the same. If only there were some aphorism about people who fail to learn from history -- oh, well!
It can't be easy to reduce the educational achievement in America year after year, but the education establishment has done it! Yes they can!
Thanks to the hard work of thousands of government workers at the Department of Education and well-paid teachers' union employees, American schoolchildren perform worse on education tests for every year they spend in a public school.
It turns out that being in U.S. public schools has the same effect on people as hanging around Paris Hilton does.
In fourth grade, the earliest grade for which international comparisons are available, American students outperform most other countries in reading, math and science. Fourth-graders score in the 92nd percentile in science, the 58th percentile in math and the 70th percentile in reading, where they beat 26 of 35 countries, including Germany, France and Italy.
But by the eighth grade, American students are only midrange in international comparisons. (On the plus side, by the eighth grade they're noticeably fatter.)
By the 12th grade -- after receiving the full benefits of an American education -- Americans are near the bottom. Let X represent the number of years spent in U.S. public schools, and Y represent average test scores in math and reading -- oh, never mind.
With an additional eight years of a public school education under their belts, Americans fall from the 92nd percentile in science to the 29th percentile. While American fourth-graders are bested only by South Korea and Japan in science, by 12th grade, the only countries the American students can beat are Lithuania, Cyprus and South Africa.
Which suggests that if public education were extended all the way through college, by the time a student gets to graduate school he might very well be qualified to be ... speaker of the house!
Ann Coulter
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
As Obama prepared to deliver his address to Congress on Tuesday, the Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner, Fox News' Bret Baier and Charles Krauthammer all gushed that history was being made as the first African-American president appeared before Congress.
Even Gov. Bobby Jindal, whom I suppose I should note was the first Indian-American to give the Republican response to a president's speech, began with an encomium to the first black president. (Wasn't Bobby great in "Slumdog Millionaire"?)Are we going to have to hear about this for the next four years? Obama is becoming the Cal Ripken Jr. of presidents, making history every time he suits up for a game. Recently, Obama also became the first African-American president to order a ham sandwich late at night from the White House kitchen! That's going to get old pretty quick.
But as long as the nation is obsessed with historic milestones, is no one going to remark on what a great country it is where a mentally retarded woman can become speaker of the house?
Obama spent more than twice as much time in his historic speech genuflecting to the teachers' unions than talking about terrorism, Iraq or Afghanistan. So it was historic only in the sense that Obama is the first African-American president, but was the same old Democratic claptrap in every other respect.
After claiming that the disastrous stimulus bill would create or save 3.5 million jobs -- "more than 90 percent" in the private sector -- Obama then enumerated a long list of exclusively government jobs that would be "saved."
He was suspiciously verbose about saving the jobs of public schoolteachers. Because nothing says "economic stimulus" better than saving the jobs of lethargic incompetents who kick off at 2 p.m. every day and get summers off. Actually, that's not fair: Some teachers spend long hours after school having sex with their students.
As with the Clintons, Obama so earnestly believes in public school education that he sends his girls to ... an expensive private school. He demands that taxpayers support the very public schoolteachers he won't trust with his own children.
It is one thing to tell voters that school choice is wrong, because, you know, the public schools won't get better unless Americans sacrifice their children to the teachers' union's maw. But it is quite another for Democrats to feed their own kids to the union incinerator.
Consequently, no Democrat since Jimmy Carter has been stupid enough to send his own children to a public school.
And yet the stimulus bill expressly prohibits money earmarked for "education" to be spent on financial aid at private or parochial schools. Private schools might use it for some nefarious purpose like actually teaching their students, rather than indoctrinating them in anti-American propaganda.
The stimulus bill includes about $100 billion to education. By "education," Democrats don't mean anything a normal person would think of as education, such as learning how to talk good. "Education" means creating lots of useless bureaucratic jobs, mostly in Washington, having nothing to do with teaching.
Apparently, nothing irritates public schoolteachers more than being asked to teach. While 80 percent of the employees of private schools are teachers, only half the employees of public schools are. The rest are "coordinating," "facilitating" or "empowering" something or other.
The Department of Education alone provides more than 4,000 jobs that haven't the faintest connection with teaching. And now the stimulus bill will double the Education Department's funding. (For those of you who went to a public school, that means it will become twice as big.)
We've come a long way from Ronald Reagan promising to eliminate the Education Department, which itself was a Jimmy Carter sop to the teachers' unions.
Federal meddling in education has been an abject failure, so the Democrats' plan is to keep doing more of the same. If only there were some aphorism about people who fail to learn from history -- oh, well!
It can't be easy to reduce the educational achievement in America year after year, but the education establishment has done it! Yes they can!
Thanks to the hard work of thousands of government workers at the Department of Education and well-paid teachers' union employees, American schoolchildren perform worse on education tests for every year they spend in a public school.
It turns out that being in U.S. public schools has the same effect on people as hanging around Paris Hilton does.
In fourth grade, the earliest grade for which international comparisons are available, American students outperform most other countries in reading, math and science. Fourth-graders score in the 92nd percentile in science, the 58th percentile in math and the 70th percentile in reading, where they beat 26 of 35 countries, including Germany, France and Italy.
But by the eighth grade, American students are only midrange in international comparisons. (On the plus side, by the eighth grade they're noticeably fatter.)
By the 12th grade -- after receiving the full benefits of an American education -- Americans are near the bottom. Let X represent the number of years spent in U.S. public schools, and Y represent average test scores in math and reading -- oh, never mind.
With an additional eight years of a public school education under their belts, Americans fall from the 92nd percentile in science to the 29th percentile. While American fourth-graders are bested only by South Korea and Japan in science, by 12th grade, the only countries the American students can beat are Lithuania, Cyprus and South Africa.
Which suggests that if public education were extended all the way through college, by the time a student gets to graduate school he might very well be qualified to be ... speaker of the house!
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Michelle Malkin pulls back the 'tarp' hiding the truth on foreclosure foolishness!
Those Foreclosure "Victims" Deserve No Sympathy
Michelle Malkin
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
It shouldn't be long before ACORN recruits "Octomom" Nadya Suleman to serve as the radical left-wing group's foreclosure poster child. The jobless, unmarried mother of 14 faces eviction from her home in two weeks. Suleman's mother, who owns the residence, h
asn't sent a mortgage check in 10 months and owes $23,000 in back payments. Nonetheless, the plastic surgery-enhanced, welfare-dependent Octomom was photographed this week at a video store splurging on games for her brood.
With her warped financial priorities, Suleman fits right in with the militant moochers at the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. As I reported last week, ACORN launched a lawless "civil disobedience" campaign across the country to demand their housing entitlement rights. With this well-oiled propaganda campaign buoying his efforts, President Obama used his State of the Nation address last night to advance his push for a massive government home foreclosure plan that will help "responsible homeowners avoid foreclosure."
But a closer look at ACORN's sob stories shows that the prototypical foreclosure "victims" don't deserve an ounce of sympathy -- or a cent of our money.
Earlier this week, ACORN activists broke into a foreclosed home in Baltimore. With a mob cheering and camera crew taping, Baltimore ACORN leader Louis Beverly busted a padlock and jimmied the door open at 315 South Ellwood Ave. The home once belonged to restaurant worker Donna Hanks, who assailed her evil bank for raising her mortgage by $300 and leaving her on the street. "This is our house now," Beverly declared with Hanks by his side at the break-in.
What ACORN didn't tell you: Hanks' house was sold in June 2008 for $192,000. She bought the two-story home in the summer of 2001 for $87,000. At some point during the next five years, she refinanced the original home loan for $270,000. Where did all that money go? (Hint: Think house-sized ATM.)
The property initially went into foreclosure proceedings in the spring of 2006. Hanks soon filed for bankruptcy and agreed to a Chapter 13 plan to pay back her bank and other creditors. In September 2006, the bankruptcy court ordered Hanks' employer to deduct $340/month from her salary to pay down the debt. Hanks did not comply with the legally binding plan. In December 2007, the loan servicer issued a notice of default on nearly $7,000 past due.
While she was reneging on her mortgage IOUs, she somehow managed to collect rent on her basement (for which she was taken to court) and rack up a criminal record on charges of theft and second-degree assault. The house was sold seven months ago after two years of court-negotiated attempts to allow Hanks to dig herself out of her debt hole.
Beverly, who claims to be a foreclosure victim himself, was charged with burglary for the break-in and released. He is literally a housing thug -- having been separately charged with second-degree assault and property destruction earlier this year; battery, assault, handgun possession and possession of a deadly weapon with intent to injure in 1992; and slapped with a peace order issued against him in 2006.
The Washington Post spotlighted Beverly's and Hanks' activism without following up on their criminal records and financial negligence. The paper also shilled for ubiquitous ACORN foreclosure "victim" Veronica Peterson of Columbia, Md., recycling uncritically her accusation that she had been tricked into buying a $545,000 home by a broker who inflated her income and misrepresented her assets. "These loans were weapons of mass destruction," the single mom of three and home day care provider who couldn't keep up with her mortgage bills told the Post reporter. "They destroyed our credit, our lives, and they blew up in our face."
But a look at court and real estate records exposed the truth. Edward Ericson Jr., a reporter for the independent Baltimore City Paper, discovered that the "victim" -- who took out a full mortgage with no down payment on a house she couldn't afford -- looks more like a predatory borrower. And amazingly, Peterson lived in the home more than year without paying rent or mortgage.
"The online court and land records show that Peterson closed on the house on Nov. 3, 2006, with two loans from Washington Mutual. The main mortgage, for $436,000, had a starting interest rate of 8.5 percent, adjusting in December. … The second loan, often called a 'piggyback,' totaled $109,000 with an interest rate of 11.25 percent. … Those two payments together would have totaled $3,386.17 per month. That's before property taxes, upkeep, utilities, etc. Peterson would have to earn at least $50,000 per year just to make her house payments."
The foreclosure was filed in July 2007. "The balance on the main note then was $435,735.86," Ericson reported, plus unpaid interest and late fees -- suggesting she made at most one payment on the house. "Had she made all of her payments, Peterson would have spent about $64,335 so far. Had she rented a similar place, she would have been charged around $2,500 per month -- a total of $47,500 -- since January 2007. Instead, she apparently paid nothing."
Who are the real suckers? Who are the true victims? If only the reporters swallowing their stories were half as diligent about background checks of ACORN thugs as they were with Joe the Plumber.
Stay tuned Pilgrims, it can only get worse ------- before it gets better!!
Michelle Malkin
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
It shouldn't be long before ACORN recruits "Octomom" Nadya Suleman to serve as the radical left-wing group's foreclosure poster child. The jobless, unmarried mother of 14 faces eviction from her home in two weeks. Suleman's mother, who owns the residence, h
asn't sent a mortgage check in 10 months and owes $23,000 in back payments. Nonetheless, the plastic surgery-enhanced, welfare-dependent Octomom was photographed this week at a video store splurging on games for her brood.With her warped financial priorities, Suleman fits right in with the militant moochers at the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. As I reported last week, ACORN launched a lawless "civil disobedience" campaign across the country to demand their housing entitlement rights. With this well-oiled propaganda campaign buoying his efforts, President Obama used his State of the Nation address last night to advance his push for a massive government home foreclosure plan that will help "responsible homeowners avoid foreclosure."
But a closer look at ACORN's sob stories shows that the prototypical foreclosure "victims" don't deserve an ounce of sympathy -- or a cent of our money.
Earlier this week, ACORN activists broke into a foreclosed home in Baltimore. With a mob cheering and camera crew taping, Baltimore ACORN leader Louis Beverly busted a padlock and jimmied the door open at 315 South Ellwood Ave. The home once belonged to restaurant worker Donna Hanks, who assailed her evil bank for raising her mortgage by $300 and leaving her on the street. "This is our house now," Beverly declared with Hanks by his side at the break-in.
What ACORN didn't tell you: Hanks' house was sold in June 2008 for $192,000. She bought the two-story home in the summer of 2001 for $87,000. At some point during the next five years, she refinanced the original home loan for $270,000. Where did all that money go? (Hint: Think house-sized ATM.)
The property initially went into foreclosure proceedings in the spring of 2006. Hanks soon filed for bankruptcy and agreed to a Chapter 13 plan to pay back her bank and other creditors. In September 2006, the bankruptcy court ordered Hanks' employer to deduct $340/month from her salary to pay down the debt. Hanks did not comply with the legally binding plan. In December 2007, the loan servicer issued a notice of default on nearly $7,000 past due.
While she was reneging on her mortgage IOUs, she somehow managed to collect rent on her basement (for which she was taken to court) and rack up a criminal record on charges of theft and second-degree assault. The house was sold seven months ago after two years of court-negotiated attempts to allow Hanks to dig herself out of her debt hole.
Beverly, who claims to be a foreclosure victim himself, was charged with burglary for the break-in and released. He is literally a housing thug -- having been separately charged with second-degree assault and property destruction earlier this year; battery, assault, handgun possession and possession of a deadly weapon with intent to injure in 1992; and slapped with a peace order issued against him in 2006.
The Washington Post spotlighted Beverly's and Hanks' activism without following up on their criminal records and financial negligence. The paper also shilled for ubiquitous ACORN foreclosure "victim" Veronica Peterson of Columbia, Md., recycling uncritically her accusation that she had been tricked into buying a $545,000 home by a broker who inflated her income and misrepresented her assets. "These loans were weapons of mass destruction," the single mom of three and home day care provider who couldn't keep up with her mortgage bills told the Post reporter. "They destroyed our credit, our lives, and they blew up in our face."
But a look at court and real estate records exposed the truth. Edward Ericson Jr., a reporter for the independent Baltimore City Paper, discovered that the "victim" -- who took out a full mortgage with no down payment on a house she couldn't afford -- looks more like a predatory borrower. And amazingly, Peterson lived in the home more than year without paying rent or mortgage.
"The online court and land records show that Peterson closed on the house on Nov. 3, 2006, with two loans from Washington Mutual. The main mortgage, for $436,000, had a starting interest rate of 8.5 percent, adjusting in December. … The second loan, often called a 'piggyback,' totaled $109,000 with an interest rate of 11.25 percent. … Those two payments together would have totaled $3,386.17 per month. That's before property taxes, upkeep, utilities, etc. Peterson would have to earn at least $50,000 per year just to make her house payments."
The foreclosure was filed in July 2007. "The balance on the main note then was $435,735.86," Ericson reported, plus unpaid interest and late fees -- suggesting she made at most one payment on the house. "Had she made all of her payments, Peterson would have spent about $64,335 so far. Had she rented a similar place, she would have been charged around $2,500 per month -- a total of $47,500 -- since January 2007. Instead, she apparently paid nothing."
Who are the real suckers? Who are the true victims? If only the reporters swallowing their stories were half as diligent about background checks of ACORN thugs as they were with Joe the Plumber.
Stay tuned Pilgrims, it can only get worse ------- before it gets better!!
What is the state of racism in these United States?
The question has been raised a lot lately, I reckon 'cause 'Obamation' got elected, if this election puts racism in our collective rear view mirrors in this great country. Eric Holder, our less than sterling Attorney General, who spent his first week in that illustrious office calling us all 'cowards' because we don't have enough open discussions about race (at least in his racist little mind) on weekends. Or something like that. Apparently, we all socialize with our friends and families on weekends instead of driving down the road to find some strangers to mingle with and discuss racial topics.
As to the heart of the question -- You show me a citizen of any nationality, race, religion, or ethnic origin who states unequivocally "There is no racism or prejudice in me or my community", and I'll show you somebody who belongs in a strait jacket. Or at least under the loving care of Nurse Ratchett in the 'Cuckoo's Nest'!
Tell you what Pilgrims -- forgetting the other other nuances of prejudice, I'll agree that racism, white on black or black on white has been left behind when I see ads in the newspapers and on TV advertising mattress sales on MLK Day and using his image. When I drive down the street and see someone dressed like Reverend King holding up a Sale Sign and waving at traffic going by.
Whoa there dudes, before you get all red faced, I see them dressed like Ole Abe, or George on Presidents Day all the time, I see Lady Liberty holding up her torch in front of every strip center I pass, so why not MLK Day sales.
You know the answer of course, the companies are afraid to run such advertisements because of the backlash they might suffer. They would be accused of demeaning the sacred image of this great man. They would be threatened with boycotts, vandalism and worse.
But, ...... in a truly non-racist environment --- would such things occur? I think not!!
So, the next time you hear one of these Sunday morning talk show guest race baiters, and we all know who they are -- Attorney General Holder is just the latest -- as you listen to them, ask yourself, 'Would this guy give a thumbs-up to a January White Sale on the 3rd Monday of each January?"
If your answer is 'Hell No', change the channel and watch something worth while or at least - honest !!!
"My name is Pecozbill and I approved this message!"
As to the heart of the question -- You show me a citizen of any nationality, race, religion, or ethnic origin who states unequivocally "There is no racism or prejudice in me or my community", and I'll show you somebody who belongs in a strait jacket. Or at least under the loving care of Nurse Ratchett in the 'Cuckoo's Nest'!
Tell you what Pilgrims -- forgetting the other other nuances of prejudice, I'll agree that racism, white on black or black on white has been left behind when I see ads in the newspapers and on TV advertising mattress sales on MLK Day and using his image. When I drive down the street and see someone dressed like Reverend King holding up a Sale Sign and waving at traffic going by.
Whoa there dudes, before you get all red faced, I see them dressed like Ole Abe, or George on Presidents Day all the time, I see Lady Liberty holding up her torch in front of every strip center I pass, so why not MLK Day sales.
You know the answer of course, the companies are afraid to run such advertisements because of the backlash they might suffer. They would be accused of demeaning the sacred image of this great man. They would be threatened with boycotts, vandalism and worse.
But, ...... in a truly non-racist environment --- would such things occur? I think not!!
So, the next time you hear one of these Sunday morning talk show guest race baiters, and we all know who they are -- Attorney General Holder is just the latest -- as you listen to them, ask yourself, 'Would this guy give a thumbs-up to a January White Sale on the 3rd Monday of each January?"
If your answer is 'Hell No', change the channel and watch something worth while or at least - honest !!!
"My name is Pecozbill and I approved this message!"
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Monday, February 23, 2009
I don't live in New York anymore but......
.... I reckon New York City's problem with early retirements is gonna be one we are all sharing shortly! Read on and then think about your city and it's retirement rules.... (from the NY Post)
TIME BOMB OF YOUNG COPS
By CHUCK BENNETT
February 23, 2009 --
The city's pension system is collapsing under the weight of payments it makes to more than 10,000 retired cops - all under the age of 50.
They represent a staggering 25 percent of the city's police-pension liability - which is expected to help push the total bill for retirees to $7.8 billion in four years, almost six times the amount paid in 1997.
"Right now, we are paying full retirement benefits to people in their 40s," Mayor Bloomberg cautioned. "As people are living longer, we simply can't afford to do it forever.
"Our pension system is one of those areas where spending has grown to an unaffordable rate. And we simply have to find a way to rein it in."
City figures show cops and firefighters actually live longer than other municipal workers.
Uniformed city workers can start collecting after 20 years, while others have to wait until their normal retirement age.
The pension time bomb is starkly illustrated by the fact that 10,381 retired cops between 40 and 49 are now collecting.
In 1998, the city contributed $1.4 billion - about 4 percent of its total budget - to cover obligations to the five pension funds for municipal workers. In 2000, pension contributions actually dropped, to $700 million.
But now, the city's budget is taking a much bigger hit because of policies that pay thousands of retired uniformed service members half or three-quarters salary for life.
Last year, the city spent $5.6 billion for all of its pensions - 9 percent of the total city budget.
By 2013, the city is projected to be on the hook for as much as $7.8 billion - 11 percent of the entire projected $70 billion budget - if the stock market does not recover by then.
Fueling those numbers is the increasing projected life span of the Finest and Bravest.
An average 42-year-old male firefighter has a life expectancy of 81, according to mortality tables from the New York City Office of the Actuary. A 42-year-old cop can expect to live to 80.
Because many cops and firefighters retire in their 40s, that means they might collect 40 years of pension checks - topping $2 million apiece.
In comparison, an average paper-pushing city clerk or traffic officer who is now 42 has a life expectancy of only 77.
"That's the good news - we're gonna live longer," said state Sen. Martin Golden (R-Brooklyn), a former NYPD officer who retired with a line-of-duty injury after he was struck by a car during a drug bust.
"The bad news is, they're going to have to take a look at this. The city's in trouble."
In the 2010 budget, police officers alone will need $2 billion in pension contributions, while firefighters will require $910 million.
While saying that he did not relish the idea of relying on "50-year-old cops chasing bad guys up the stairs," Golden also said that when it came to addressing skyrocketing pension costs, changes might have to be made for future recruits.
"The bottom line is everything is on the table," he said. "Everything's got to be explored."
To address spiraling pension costs, Bloomberg and Gov. Paterson want to eliminate the long-cherished "20-and-out" retirement plan for cops, firefighters, sanitation workers and correction officers.
They want to require a minimum of 25 years of service and a minimum retirement age of 50. They also want uniformed employees to pay 5 percent of their salaries into their pension funds until retirement, and to pay more for health benefits.
There is precedent for retooling the pension system to control costs.
"There have been three times in the past when they have done this," said Charles Brecher, a researcher with the Citizens Budget Commission. "Those were related to times of fiscal pressure, including the '70s."
Supporting the argument for pension change is the fact that approximately 2,000 New York City police officers retire each year, compared with about 1,000 who are removed from the rolls though death, according to the New York City Police Pension Fund's 2008 annual report.
And nearly 75 percent of firefighters retire with disability - which entitles them to three-quarters salary for life.
Any change will be vociferously opposed by Patrolmen's Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch.
"It defies logic to suggest that police officers have a longer actuarial life expectancy than the city's civilian employees in far less stressful jobs," he said. "Clearly, it is in the city's interest to show a longer life expectancy for police," Lynch said, calling the city's analysis an "attempt to cheapen pension benefits for future police officers."
TIME BOMB OF YOUNG COPS
By CHUCK BENNETT
February 23, 2009 --
The city's pension system is collapsing under the weight of payments it makes to more than 10,000 retired cops - all under the age of 50.
They represent a staggering 25 percent of the city's police-pension liability - which is expected to help push the total bill for retirees to $7.8 billion in four years, almost six times the amount paid in 1997.
"Right now, we are paying full retirement benefits to people in their 40s," Mayor Bloomberg cautioned. "As people are living longer, we simply can't afford to do it forever.
"Our pension system is one of those areas where spending has grown to an unaffordable rate. And we simply have to find a way to rein it in."
City figures show cops and firefighters actually live longer than other municipal workers.
Uniformed city workers can start collecting after 20 years, while others have to wait until their normal retirement age.
The pension time bomb is starkly illustrated by the fact that 10,381 retired cops between 40 and 49 are now collecting.
In 1998, the city contributed $1.4 billion - about 4 percent of its total budget - to cover obligations to the five pension funds for municipal workers. In 2000, pension contributions actually dropped, to $700 million.
But now, the city's budget is taking a much bigger hit because of policies that pay thousands of retired uniformed service members half or three-quarters salary for life.
Last year, the city spent $5.6 billion for all of its pensions - 9 percent of the total city budget.
By 2013, the city is projected to be on the hook for as much as $7.8 billion - 11 percent of the entire projected $70 billion budget - if the stock market does not recover by then.
Fueling those numbers is the increasing projected life span of the Finest and Bravest.
An average 42-year-old male firefighter has a life expectancy of 81, according to mortality tables from the New York City Office of the Actuary. A 42-year-old cop can expect to live to 80.
Because many cops and firefighters retire in their 40s, that means they might collect 40 years of pension checks - topping $2 million apiece.
In comparison, an average paper-pushing city clerk or traffic officer who is now 42 has a life expectancy of only 77.
"That's the good news - we're gonna live longer," said state Sen. Martin Golden (R-Brooklyn), a former NYPD officer who retired with a line-of-duty injury after he was struck by a car during a drug bust.
"The bad news is, they're going to have to take a look at this. The city's in trouble."
In the 2010 budget, police officers alone will need $2 billion in pension contributions, while firefighters will require $910 million.
While saying that he did not relish the idea of relying on "50-year-old cops chasing bad guys up the stairs," Golden also said that when it came to addressing skyrocketing pension costs, changes might have to be made for future recruits.
"The bottom line is everything is on the table," he said. "Everything's got to be explored."
To address spiraling pension costs, Bloomberg and Gov. Paterson want to eliminate the long-cherished "20-and-out" retirement plan for cops, firefighters, sanitation workers and correction officers.
They want to require a minimum of 25 years of service and a minimum retirement age of 50. They also want uniformed employees to pay 5 percent of their salaries into their pension funds until retirement, and to pay more for health benefits.
There is precedent for retooling the pension system to control costs.
"There have been three times in the past when they have done this," said Charles Brecher, a researcher with the Citizens Budget Commission. "Those were related to times of fiscal pressure, including the '70s."
Supporting the argument for pension change is the fact that approximately 2,000 New York City police officers retire each year, compared with about 1,000 who are removed from the rolls though death, according to the New York City Police Pension Fund's 2008 annual report.
And nearly 75 percent of firefighters retire with disability - which entitles them to three-quarters salary for life.
Any change will be vociferously opposed by Patrolmen's Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch.
"It defies logic to suggest that police officers have a longer actuarial life expectancy than the city's civilian employees in far less stressful jobs," he said. "Clearly, it is in the city's interest to show a longer life expectancy for police," Lynch said, calling the city's analysis an "attempt to cheapen pension benefits for future police officers."
Sunday, February 22, 2009
This came in over the transom from a fellow retired Military vet ....
EMERGENCY ROOM....The other day, I needed to go to the emergency room. Not wanting to sit there for four hours, I put on my old ARMY fatigues and my T-shirt and hat with the patch below on them.When I went into the E. R., I noticed that 3/4 of the people got up and left. I guess they decided that they weren't that sick after all. Cut at least three hours off my waiting time.Here's the patch. Feel free to use it the next time you're in need of quicker emergency service.
He added----
It also works well if you ever have to use a Laundromat. Works great at Sam's Club too.
IF YOU THINK THIS IS A JOKE.... I HAVE A BORDER PATROL T-SHIRT AND HAT AND GET ASKED, "IS THIS TRUE?" I REPLY IT SURE IS AS I PROTECTED OUR BORDERS FOR 24 YEARS.
He added----It also works well if you ever have to use a Laundromat. Works great at Sam's Club too.
IF YOU THINK THIS IS A JOKE.... I HAVE A BORDER PATROL T-SHIRT AND HAT AND GET ASKED, "IS THIS TRUE?" I REPLY IT SURE IS AS I PROTECTED OUR BORDERS FOR 24 YEARS.
(Thanx and a tip o' the stetson to Spanky!)
Who's the biggest fool of all?
February Fool
Rich Tucker
Friday, February 20, 2009
Looks as if April Fool’s Day came early this year.
In a puzzling move, the nation’s first black attorney general decided Wednesday to tackle the pressing issue of … race relations. “We, as average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race,” Eric Holder announced. “Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.”
Is that so?
Well, by all means, let’s open this “conversation.” So what did you think of the political cartoon in the New York Post recently? The drawing shows two cops who’ve just shot a chimp. “They’ll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill,” the officers say.
The art plays off the story of a chimp that recently went crazy in Connecticut (where many Post readers live). It attacked a woman and was shot dead by police. But some, of course, see the cartoon as a racist attack on Holder’s boss.
“Being that the stimulus bill has been the first legislative victory of President Barack Obama (the first African American president) and has become synonymous with him it is not a reach to wonder are they inferring that a monkey wrote the last bill?” serial race-baiter Al Sharpton complained in a statement.
That comment is absurd. Everyone knows Obama didn’t actually write the “stimulus” bill; he outsourced that task to Congress. Besides, the newspaper’s editor-in-chief explained, the cartoon “broadly mocks Washington’s efforts to revive the economy. Again, Al Sharpton reveals himself as nothing more than a publicity opportunist.”
So: there was a brief conversation on race. Was that what the country needed?
Sure, sociology professor Michael Eric Dyson told CNN. “We still lack a great deal of integrity and background and honesty about race and perhaps if we had more forthright conversations about race, we wouldn’t have to have these subterranean discourses that really are more malevolent.”
But, the anchor asked, what if a white person insisted the Post’s cartoon wasn’t racist? “They might be ignorant,” the Georgetown professor responded. “Openness doesn’t mean that you’re going to be right. Just because you’re willing to be honest doesn’t mean that we have to say that you’re right. It means that we’re willing to expose our ignorance and give that on the altar of conversation so that all of us can be better by it.”
In other words, in this context a “conversation” on race means listening to blacks telling whites what would be acceptable to say or even think, lest we be “ignorant.” Great.
Back to Holder, who’s supposed to be the country’s “top cop.” Instead he’s concerned with just whom Americans are hanging around with. “Saturdays and Sundays, America in the year 2009 does not in some ways differ significantly from the country that existed almost 50 years ago,” Holder claimed. But that’s incorrect.
The untold story of race relations in the United States is how much things have improved, not how bad things are. Let’s look at Holder’s window of 50 years. In 1959, (within living memory for many Americans) there were segregated restaurants in many states. Blacks had only been allowed to play major league baseball for 12 years and NBA basketball for nine. The idea of blacks and whites playing golf together on courses in the south seemed absurd. Today it’s routine.
In fact, today when the issue of race comes up, it’s often because someone is nakedly trying to use it to advance a political position. A few weeks back Roland Burris and some fellow Illinois Democrats held a news conference to explain why Burris deserved a seat in Congress. “There are no African-Americans in the U.S. Senate,” warned Illinois Rep. Bobby Rush ominously.
Indeed there weren’t -- simply because our supposedly racist country had just elected a black man out of the Senate and made him president.
Perhaps Holder was simply following in the satirical footsteps of The Onion. “African-American man Barack Obama, 47, was given the least-desirable job in the entire country Tuesday when he was elected president of the United States of America,” the mock newspaper wrote immediately after the election. “The job comes with such intense scrutiny and so certain a guarantee of failure that only one other person even bothered applying for it.”
So, April Fool. Unless he was kidding, Eric Holder is the real joke here.
Rich Tucker
Friday, February 20, 2009
Looks as if April Fool’s Day came early this year.
In a puzzling move, the nation’s first black attorney general decided Wednesday to tackle the pressing issue of … race relations. “We, as average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race,” Eric Holder announced. “Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.”
Is that so?
Well, by all means, let’s open this “conversation.” So what did you think of the political cartoon in the New York Post recently? The drawing shows two cops who’ve just shot a chimp. “They’ll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill,” the officers say.
The art plays off the story of a chimp that recently went crazy in Connecticut (where many Post readers live). It attacked a woman and was shot dead by police. But some, of course, see the cartoon as a racist attack on Holder’s boss.
“Being that the stimulus bill has been the first legislative victory of President Barack Obama (the first African American president) and has become synonymous with him it is not a reach to wonder are they inferring that a monkey wrote the last bill?” serial race-baiter Al Sharpton complained in a statement.
That comment is absurd. Everyone knows Obama didn’t actually write the “stimulus” bill; he outsourced that task to Congress. Besides, the newspaper’s editor-in-chief explained, the cartoon “broadly mocks Washington’s efforts to revive the economy. Again, Al Sharpton reveals himself as nothing more than a publicity opportunist.”
So: there was a brief conversation on race. Was that what the country needed?
Sure, sociology professor Michael Eric Dyson told CNN. “We still lack a great deal of integrity and background and honesty about race and perhaps if we had more forthright conversations about race, we wouldn’t have to have these subterranean discourses that really are more malevolent.”
But, the anchor asked, what if a white person insisted the Post’s cartoon wasn’t racist? “They might be ignorant,” the Georgetown professor responded. “Openness doesn’t mean that you’re going to be right. Just because you’re willing to be honest doesn’t mean that we have to say that you’re right. It means that we’re willing to expose our ignorance and give that on the altar of conversation so that all of us can be better by it.”
In other words, in this context a “conversation” on race means listening to blacks telling whites what would be acceptable to say or even think, lest we be “ignorant.” Great.
Back to Holder, who’s supposed to be the country’s “top cop.” Instead he’s concerned with just whom Americans are hanging around with. “Saturdays and Sundays, America in the year 2009 does not in some ways differ significantly from the country that existed almost 50 years ago,” Holder claimed. But that’s incorrect.
The untold story of race relations in the United States is how much things have improved, not how bad things are. Let’s look at Holder’s window of 50 years. In 1959, (within living memory for many Americans) there were segregated restaurants in many states. Blacks had only been allowed to play major league baseball for 12 years and NBA basketball for nine. The idea of blacks and whites playing golf together on courses in the south seemed absurd. Today it’s routine.
In fact, today when the issue of race comes up, it’s often because someone is nakedly trying to use it to advance a political position. A few weeks back Roland Burris and some fellow Illinois Democrats held a news conference to explain why Burris deserved a seat in Congress. “There are no African-Americans in the U.S. Senate,” warned Illinois Rep. Bobby Rush ominously.
Indeed there weren’t -- simply because our supposedly racist country had just elected a black man out of the Senate and made him president.
Perhaps Holder was simply following in the satirical footsteps of The Onion. “African-American man Barack Obama, 47, was given the least-desirable job in the entire country Tuesday when he was elected president of the United States of America,” the mock newspaper wrote immediately after the election. “The job comes with such intense scrutiny and so certain a guarantee of failure that only one other person even bothered applying for it.”
So, April Fool. Unless he was kidding, Eric Holder is the real joke here.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Annie - on academic 'historians'..........
Why We Don't Celebrate 'Historians Day'
Ann Coulter
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Being gracious winners, this week, liberals howled with delight at George Bush for coming in seventh-to-last in a historians' ranking of the presidents from best to worst.
This was pretty shocking. Most liberals can't even name seven U.S. presidents.
Being ranked one of the worst presidents by "historians" is like being called "anti-
American" by the Nation magazine. And by "historian," I mean a former member of the Weather Underground, who is subsidized by the taxpayer to engage in left-wing political activism in a cushy university job.
So congratulations, George Bush! Whenever history professors rank you as one of the "worst" presidents, it's a good bet you were one of America's greatest.
Six months after America's all-time greatest president left office in 1989, historians ranked him as only a middling president. (I would rank George Washington as America's greatest president, but he only had to defeat what was then the world's greatest military power with a ragtag group of irregulars and some squirrel guns, whereas Ronald Reagan had to defeat liberals.)
At the time, historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. dismissed Reagan as "a nice, old uncle, who comes in and all the kids are glad to see him. He sits around telling stories, and they're all fond of him, but they don't take him too seriously" -- and then Schlesinger fell asleep in his soup.
Even liberal historian Richard Reeves blanched at Reagan's low ranking in 1989, saying, "I was no fan of Reagan, but I think I know a leader when I see one."
Reagan changed the country, Reeves said, and some would say "he changed the world, making communism irrelevant and the globe safe for the new imperialism of free-market capitalism." In Reeves' most inspiring line, he says Reagan "was a man of conservative principle and he damned near destroyed American liberalism."
By 1996 things hadn't gotten much better for Reagan in the historians' view. A poll of historians placed Reagan 26th of 42 presidents -- below George H.W. Bush, his boob of a vice president who raised taxes and ended Republican hegemony under Reagan. Four of the 32 historians called Reagan a "failure."
I guess it depends on your definition of "failure." To me a failure is someone who aspired to be a legitimate scholar but ends up as an obscure lecturer at Colorado College.
Speaking of which, Colorado College political scientist Thomas Cronin explained Reagan's low ranking, saying Reagan "was insensitive to women's rights, civil rights, oblivious to what was going on in his own Administration -- the procurement scandal, HUD, Iran-Contra."
Soon after he took office, President Reagan famously hung a portrait of President Calvin Coolidge in the Cabinet Room -- another (Republican) president considered a failure by historians.
Coolidge cut taxes, didn't get the country in any wars, cut the national debt almost in half, and presided over a calm, scandal-free administration, a period of peace, 17.5 percent growth in the gross national product, low inflation (.4 percent) and low unemployment (3.6 percent).
Unlike some recent presidents with Islamic middle names, he didn't run around comparing himself to Lincoln constantly.
Arthur Schlesinger Jr. ridiculed President Calvin Coolidge as a hayseed who slept too much and took decisive action only once in his life. Schlesinger never tired of pointing out that Coolidge slept 11 hours a day, as if hours of sleep is the true measure of presidential greatness.
Perhaps Schlesinger's venom toward Coolidge was meant as penance for his once mistakenly admitting that Eisenhower was a good president -- another hated (Republican) president among historians.
Under President Dwight Eisenhower, the gross national product grew by over 25 percent and inflation averaged 1.4 percent. George Meany, then AFL-CIO president, said that the American worker had "never had it so good." Like Coolidge and Reagan, Eisenhower was enormously popular with the American people.
In a poll of "leading scholars" taken soon after Eisenhower left office, he was named one of the 10 worst presidents. The distinguished scholars -- none of whose names anyone remembers today -- called him dumb, dismissing the five-star general who smashed the Nazi war machine as "Old Bubble Head." As Patton said, these "bilious bastards ... don't know anything more about real battle than they do about fornicating."
It's as if geologists took a poll and announced their opinion that gold was heavier than lead.
Reagan and Eisenhower have recently started to move up in the presidential rankings -- for the same reason George Washington is always ranked one of the best. Historians ought to detest Washington, but his exclusion from the top ranks of these pompous historian polls would expose the absurdity of their rankings.
Putting preposterously overrated presidents like John F. Kennedy or FDR in the same category as Reagan or Washington is like a teenage girl ranking the Jonas Brothers with the Rolling Stones and the Beatles as the three greatest bands of all time.
Liberals may call him a "war criminal," but historians have inadvertently paid Bush a great tribute this week by ranking him as a "below average" president. I can only dream that, someday, no-name, left-wing historians will rank me as one of the all-time worst columnists.
Ann Coulter
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Being gracious winners, this week, liberals howled with delight at George Bush for coming in seventh-to-last in a historians' ranking of the presidents from best to worst.
This was pretty shocking. Most liberals can't even name seven U.S. presidents.
Being ranked one of the worst presidents by "historians" is like being called "anti-
American" by the Nation magazine. And by "historian," I mean a former member of the Weather Underground, who is subsidized by the taxpayer to engage in left-wing political activism in a cushy university job.So congratulations, George Bush! Whenever history professors rank you as one of the "worst" presidents, it's a good bet you were one of America's greatest.
Six months after America's all-time greatest president left office in 1989, historians ranked him as only a middling president. (I would rank George Washington as America's greatest president, but he only had to defeat what was then the world's greatest military power with a ragtag group of irregulars and some squirrel guns, whereas Ronald Reagan had to defeat liberals.)
At the time, historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. dismissed Reagan as "a nice, old uncle, who comes in and all the kids are glad to see him. He sits around telling stories, and they're all fond of him, but they don't take him too seriously" -- and then Schlesinger fell asleep in his soup.
Even liberal historian Richard Reeves blanched at Reagan's low ranking in 1989, saying, "I was no fan of Reagan, but I think I know a leader when I see one."
Reagan changed the country, Reeves said, and some would say "he changed the world, making communism irrelevant and the globe safe for the new imperialism of free-market capitalism." In Reeves' most inspiring line, he says Reagan "was a man of conservative principle and he damned near destroyed American liberalism."
By 1996 things hadn't gotten much better for Reagan in the historians' view. A poll of historians placed Reagan 26th of 42 presidents -- below George H.W. Bush, his boob of a vice president who raised taxes and ended Republican hegemony under Reagan. Four of the 32 historians called Reagan a "failure."
I guess it depends on your definition of "failure." To me a failure is someone who aspired to be a legitimate scholar but ends up as an obscure lecturer at Colorado College.
Speaking of which, Colorado College political scientist Thomas Cronin explained Reagan's low ranking, saying Reagan "was insensitive to women's rights, civil rights, oblivious to what was going on in his own Administration -- the procurement scandal, HUD, Iran-Contra."
Soon after he took office, President Reagan famously hung a portrait of President Calvin Coolidge in the Cabinet Room -- another (Republican) president considered a failure by historians.
Coolidge cut taxes, didn't get the country in any wars, cut the national debt almost in half, and presided over a calm, scandal-free administration, a period of peace, 17.5 percent growth in the gross national product, low inflation (.4 percent) and low unemployment (3.6 percent).
Unlike some recent presidents with Islamic middle names, he didn't run around comparing himself to Lincoln constantly.
Arthur Schlesinger Jr. ridiculed President Calvin Coolidge as a hayseed who slept too much and took decisive action only once in his life. Schlesinger never tired of pointing out that Coolidge slept 11 hours a day, as if hours of sleep is the true measure of presidential greatness.
Perhaps Schlesinger's venom toward Coolidge was meant as penance for his once mistakenly admitting that Eisenhower was a good president -- another hated (Republican) president among historians.
Under President Dwight Eisenhower, the gross national product grew by over 25 percent and inflation averaged 1.4 percent. George Meany, then AFL-CIO president, said that the American worker had "never had it so good." Like Coolidge and Reagan, Eisenhower was enormously popular with the American people.
In a poll of "leading scholars" taken soon after Eisenhower left office, he was named one of the 10 worst presidents. The distinguished scholars -- none of whose names anyone remembers today -- called him dumb, dismissing the five-star general who smashed the Nazi war machine as "Old Bubble Head." As Patton said, these "bilious bastards ... don't know anything more about real battle than they do about fornicating."
It's as if geologists took a poll and announced their opinion that gold was heavier than lead.
Reagan and Eisenhower have recently started to move up in the presidential rankings -- for the same reason George Washington is always ranked one of the best. Historians ought to detest Washington, but his exclusion from the top ranks of these pompous historian polls would expose the absurdity of their rankings.
Putting preposterously overrated presidents like John F. Kennedy or FDR in the same category as Reagan or Washington is like a teenage girl ranking the Jonas Brothers with the Rolling Stones and the Beatles as the three greatest bands of all time.
Liberals may call him a "war criminal," but historians have inadvertently paid Bush a great tribute this week by ranking him as a "below average" president. I can only dream that, someday, no-name, left-wing historians will rank me as one of the all-time worst columnists.
Charles Krauthammer -- on target!!
The Biden Prophecy
Charles Krauthammer
Friday, February 20, 2009
WASHINGTON -- The Biden prophecy has come to pass. Our wacky veep, momentarily inspired, had predicted last October that "it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama." Biden probably had in mind an eve-of-the-apocalypse drama like the Cuban Missile Crisis. Instead, Obama's challenges have come in smaller bites. Some are deliberate threats to U.S. interests, others mere probes to ascertain whether the new president has any spine.
Preliminary X-rays are not very encouraging.
Consider the long list of brazen Russian provocations:
(a) Pressuring Kyrgyzstan to shut down the U.S. air base in Manas, an absolutely crucial NATO conduit into Afghanistan.
(b) Announcing the formation of a "rapid reaction force" with six former Soviet republics, a regional Russian-led strike force meant to reassert Russian hegemony in the Muslim belt north of Afghanistan.
(c) Planning to establish a Black Sea naval base in Georgia's breakaway province of Abkhazia, conquered by Moscow last summer.
(d) Declaring Russia's intention to deploy offensive Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad if Poland and the Czech Republic go ahead with plans to station an American (anti-Iranian) missile defense system.
President Bush's response to the Kaliningrad deployment -- the threat was issued the day after Obama's election -- was firm. He refused to back down because giving in to Russian threats would leave Poles and Czechs exposed and show the world that, contrary to post-Cold War assumptions, the U.S. could not be trusted to protect Eastern Europe from Russian bullying.
The Obama response? "Biden Signals U.S. Is Open to Russia Missile Deal," as The New York Times headlined Biden's Feb. 7 Munich speech to a major international gathering. This followed strong messages from the Obama transition team even before the inauguration that Obama was not committed to the missile shield. And just to make sure everyone understood that the Bush policy no longer held, Biden in Munich said the U.S. wanted to "press the reset button" on NATO-Russian relations.
Not surprisingly, the Obama wobble elicited a favorable reaction from Russia. (There are conflicting reports that Russia might suspend the Kaliningrad blackmail deployment.) The Kremlin must have been equally impressed that the other provocations -- Abkhazia, Kyrgyzstan, the rapid reaction force -- elicited barely a peep from Washington.
Iran has been similarly charmed by Obama's overtures. A week after the new president went about sending sweet peace signals via al-Arabiya, Iran launched its first homemade Earth satellite. The message is clear. If you can put a satellite into orbit, you can hit any continent with a missile, North America included.
And for emphasis, after the roundhouse hook, came the poke in the eye. A U.S. women's badminton team had been invited to Iran. Here was a chance for "ping-pong diplomacy" with the accommodating new president, a sporting venture meant to suggest the possibility of warmer relations.
On Feb. 4, Tehran denied the team entry into Iran.
Then, just in case Obama failed to get the message, Iran's parliament speaker rose in Munich to offer his response to Obama's olive branch. Executive summary: Thank you very much. After you acknowledge 60 years of crimes against us, change not just your tone but your policies, and abandon the Zionist criminal entity, we might deign to talk to you.
With a grinning Goliath staggering about sporting a "kick me" sign on his back, even reputed allies joined the fun. Pakistan freed from house arrest A.Q. Khan, the notorious proliferator who sold nuclear technology to North Korea, Libya and Iran. Ten days later, Islamabad capitulated to the Taliban, turning over to its tender mercies the Swat Valley, 100 miles from the capital. Not only will sharia law now reign there, but the democratically elected secular party will be hunted down as the Pakistani army stands down.
These Pakistani capitulations may account for Obama's hastily announced 17,000 troop increase in Afghanistan even before his various heralded reviews of the mission have been completed. Hasty, unexplained, but at least something. Other than that, a month of pummeling has been met with utter passivity.
I would like to think the supine posture is attributable to a rookie leader otherwise preoccupied (i.e. domestically), leading a foreign policy team as yet unorganized if not disoriented. But when the State Department says that Hugo Chavez's president-for-life referendum, which was preceded by a sham government-controlled campaign featuring the tear-gassing of the opposition, was "for the most part ... a process that was fully consistent with democratic process," you have to wonder if Month One is not a harbinger of things to come.
Other than being one of the longest sentences in history, that last sentence gives serious pause for thought.....
Charles Krauthammer
Friday, February 20, 2009
WASHINGTON -- The Biden prophecy has come to pass. Our wacky veep, momentarily inspired, had predicted last October that "it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama." Biden probably had in mind an eve-of-the-apocalypse drama like the Cuban Missile Crisis. Instead, Obama's challenges have come in smaller bites. Some are deliberate threats to U.S. interests, others mere probes to ascertain whether the new president has any spine.
Preliminary X-rays are not very encouraging.
Consider the long list of brazen Russian provocations:
(a) Pressuring Kyrgyzstan to shut down the U.S. air base in Manas, an absolutely crucial NATO conduit into Afghanistan.
(b) Announcing the formation of a "rapid reaction force" with six former Soviet republics, a regional Russian-led strike force meant to reassert Russian hegemony in the Muslim belt north of Afghanistan.
(c) Planning to establish a Black Sea naval base in Georgia's breakaway province of Abkhazia, conquered by Moscow last summer.
(d) Declaring Russia's intention to deploy offensive Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad if Poland and the Czech Republic go ahead with plans to station an American (anti-Iranian) missile defense system.
President Bush's response to the Kaliningrad deployment -- the threat was issued the day after Obama's election -- was firm. He refused to back down because giving in to Russian threats would leave Poles and Czechs exposed and show the world that, contrary to post-Cold War assumptions, the U.S. could not be trusted to protect Eastern Europe from Russian bullying.
The Obama response? "Biden Signals U.S. Is Open to Russia Missile Deal," as The New York Times headlined Biden's Feb. 7 Munich speech to a major international gathering. This followed strong messages from the Obama transition team even before the inauguration that Obama was not committed to the missile shield. And just to make sure everyone understood that the Bush policy no longer held, Biden in Munich said the U.S. wanted to "press the reset button" on NATO-Russian relations.
Not surprisingly, the Obama wobble elicited a favorable reaction from Russia. (There are conflicting reports that Russia might suspend the Kaliningrad blackmail deployment.) The Kremlin must have been equally impressed that the other provocations -- Abkhazia, Kyrgyzstan, the rapid reaction force -- elicited barely a peep from Washington.
Iran has been similarly charmed by Obama's overtures. A week after the new president went about sending sweet peace signals via al-Arabiya, Iran launched its first homemade Earth satellite. The message is clear. If you can put a satellite into orbit, you can hit any continent with a missile, North America included.
And for emphasis, after the roundhouse hook, came the poke in the eye. A U.S. women's badminton team had been invited to Iran. Here was a chance for "ping-pong diplomacy" with the accommodating new president, a sporting venture meant to suggest the possibility of warmer relations.
On Feb. 4, Tehran denied the team entry into Iran.
Then, just in case Obama failed to get the message, Iran's parliament speaker rose in Munich to offer his response to Obama's olive branch. Executive summary: Thank you very much. After you acknowledge 60 years of crimes against us, change not just your tone but your policies, and abandon the Zionist criminal entity, we might deign to talk to you.
With a grinning Goliath staggering about sporting a "kick me" sign on his back, even reputed allies joined the fun. Pakistan freed from house arrest A.Q. Khan, the notorious proliferator who sold nuclear technology to North Korea, Libya and Iran. Ten days later, Islamabad capitulated to the Taliban, turning over to its tender mercies the Swat Valley, 100 miles from the capital. Not only will sharia law now reign there, but the democratically elected secular party will be hunted down as the Pakistani army stands down.
These Pakistani capitulations may account for Obama's hastily announced 17,000 troop increase in Afghanistan even before his various heralded reviews of the mission have been completed. Hasty, unexplained, but at least something. Other than that, a month of pummeling has been met with utter passivity.
I would like to think the supine posture is attributable to a rookie leader otherwise preoccupied (i.e. domestically), leading a foreign policy team as yet unorganized if not disoriented. But when the State Department says that Hugo Chavez's president-for-life referendum, which was preceded by a sham government-controlled campaign featuring the tear-gassing of the opposition, was "for the most part ... a process that was fully consistent with democratic process," you have to wonder if Month One is not a harbinger of things to come.
Other than being one of the longest sentences in history, that last sentence gives serious pause for thought.....
Friday, February 20, 2009
They wanted to ban the right of citizens to own firearms, the courts said NO!
So then they decided if they couldn't ban guns, they'd start taxing ammo and making ammo manufacturers serial code each bullet. Starts next year!. Now along comes Illinois, Land of Lincoln (& Obamanation) with this new little zinger.......
Illinois Bill Would Require Gun Owners to Buy $1M in Liability Insurance
February 18, 2009
An Illinois state lawmaker is proposing that gun owners be required to carry personal liability insurance of at least $1 million.
Rep. Kenneth Dunkin's bill seeks to amend the state's Firearm Owners Identification Card Act to provides that any person who owns a firearm in the state maintain a $1 million or higher policy of liability insurance "specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person."
A gun owner would be responsible after a firearm is lost or stolen until the loss or theft is reported to the police department or sheriff of the jurisdiction in which the owner resides.
Police would be empowered to pull the gun license of anyone who does not submit evidence of having the required insurance.
The measure is now in the House Rules Committee.
Anybody want to make any wild guesses what the insurance companies will do with this.... or what the government will do with the registrations at the insurance offices? Be alert Pilgrims, be very very alert!!!
Illinois Bill Would Require Gun Owners to Buy $1M in Liability Insurance
February 18, 2009
An Illinois state lawmaker is proposing that gun owners be required to carry personal liability insurance of at least $1 million.
Rep. Kenneth Dunkin's bill seeks to amend the state's Firearm Owners Identification Card Act to provides that any person who owns a firearm in the state maintain a $1 million or higher policy of liability insurance "specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person."
A gun owner would be responsible after a firearm is lost or stolen until the loss or theft is reported to the police department or sheriff of the jurisdiction in which the owner resides.
Police would be empowered to pull the gun license of anyone who does not submit evidence of having the required insurance.
The measure is now in the House Rules Committee.
Anybody want to make any wild guesses what the insurance companies will do with this.... or what the government will do with the registrations at the insurance offices? Be alert Pilgrims, be very very alert!!!
2009 Version of "Out of the mouths of babes"
These bright young folks are from the school in Arizona where 'O' gave his Stimulus speech the other day! Hopefully - they represent tomorrows leaders of this country who will have salvage what's left of it after 'O's path of fiscal destruction.
STUDENTS QUESTION OBAMA'S PLAN
Thu Feb 19 2009
EAST VALLEY TRIBUNE
Tim Hacker
A Dobson High School Advanced Placement government class with strong opinions about Barack Obama watched the president's speech Wednesday on a small, grainy TV in the corner of their classroom.
Some of the students attentively watched the speech, giving questioning looks and comments, shaking their heads and laughing at some of Obama's words. Other students listened, occasion ally glancing up to watch, while texting on their cell phones, reading a book or finishing school work.
The gymnasium's events were shown simultaneously in rooms throughout the Mesa school, and teachers were given discretion on whether to show the speech, the students said. The students in the class were hopeful things will work out but questioned whether Obama's plan would actually work to dig the country out of its economic woes. They also expected a longer speech.
Senior Syna Daudfar took some notes during the speech and was among the most vocally opposed to Obama's words.
At one point, when he talked about the costs of his stimulus plan, senior Maaike Albach and Daudfar looked at each other and said, "uh-oh."
"Overall I think it's a good idea, but he's not addressing the issues of the economic crisis," said Daudfar, a John McCain supporter who added he leans more toward being a moderate conservative. "The spending bill he just passed is just progressing the Democratic agenda rather than addressing the economic issues in the country."
Daudfar thinks Obama's plan is backward and deals with the "less important stuff" first. "Bailing out businesses" and "providing better regulatory systems for giving out money to businesses" should have been first, he said.
"If businesses can't afford to hire people, then people won't be able to work and pay off their mortgages," he said. "It's kind of like putting money into20a funnel." Albach, who is also a Republican, said Obama's plan sounds good but questioned how Obama can want to rely on "people's responsibility" when that is "what got us in this economic crisis in the first place."
"This puts us more into debt," said Albach, 18. "It's a horrible situation we're in."
Senior Brandon Miller wore a shirt with the words, "Hitler gave great speeches, too" above a picture of Obama.
Miller said he had been an Obama supporter "because of his speeches," but after debating the issues in this class and looking more into Obama's policies, his vote was swayed toward McCain.
He showed a video on his camera he had just taken of the president's minutelong motorcade and talked about what a "great experience" it was to watch it. Miller had also spent a couple of hours in front of the school, hanging out and watching the protesters.
"Even though I don't support him, I think it's cool he's here," said Miller, 18. "I just don't believe all the things he's telling us. His goal is just too big and broad."
Miller wanted to hear more about the costs and guidelines the stimulus bill entails.
Senior Katelyn Meyer, who also leans more toward being a Republican, said Obama's plan sounds good, "but it's easier said than done."
"I like the refinancing part, and I like the part about mortgages, but I'm afraid we're going to put the money in but won't s ee any effect," said Meyer, 18, who still thought it was "cool" to say the president was at her school, even though she didn't get to see him live.
The students also questioned why Obama chose their school for his speech since he wasn't talking about education and wondered how much money the district spent on beautifying the campus while district positions and services are being cut.
District officials noted this week that the landscaping project completed over the weekend at Dobson was already in the works and was just expedited by the president's visit. Funding came from voter-approved bonds.
New sod was laid in front of the school Tuesday, and Daudfar said, "The joke at the school is they're going to take it away when he (Obama) leaves."
AP government teacher Jeff Sherrer said his students "feel very strongly about the issues, maybe more than the general population." He thought at least one of his students was outside protesting, and he had planned to take his students outside as a class project to show them what was going on but didn't get the chance.
"These kinds of kids really get into it," Sherrer said. "During the election we had lots of debates on the issues."
STUDENTS QUESTION OBAMA'S PLAN
Thu Feb 19 2009
EAST VALLEY TRIBUNE
Tim Hacker
A Dobson High School Advanced Placement government class with strong opinions about Barack Obama watched the president's speech Wednesday on a small, grainy TV in the corner of their classroom.
Some of the students attentively watched the speech, giving questioning looks and comments, shaking their heads and laughing at some of Obama's words. Other students listened, occasion ally glancing up to watch, while texting on their cell phones, reading a book or finishing school work.
The gymnasium's events were shown simultaneously in rooms throughout the Mesa school, and teachers were given discretion on whether to show the speech, the students said. The students in the class were hopeful things will work out but questioned whether Obama's plan would actually work to dig the country out of its economic woes. They also expected a longer speech.
Senior Syna Daudfar took some notes during the speech and was among the most vocally opposed to Obama's words.
At one point, when he talked about the costs of his stimulus plan, senior Maaike Albach and Daudfar looked at each other and said, "uh-oh."
"Overall I think it's a good idea, but he's not addressing the issues of the economic crisis," said Daudfar, a John McCain supporter who added he leans more toward being a moderate conservative. "The spending bill he just passed is just progressing the Democratic agenda rather than addressing the economic issues in the country."
Daudfar thinks Obama's plan is backward and deals with the "less important stuff" first. "Bailing out businesses" and "providing better regulatory systems for giving out money to businesses" should have been first, he said.
"If businesses can't afford to hire people, then people won't be able to work and pay off their mortgages," he said. "It's kind of like putting money into20a funnel." Albach, who is also a Republican, said Obama's plan sounds good but questioned how Obama can want to rely on "people's responsibility" when that is "what got us in this economic crisis in the first place."
"This puts us more into debt," said Albach, 18. "It's a horrible situation we're in."
Senior Brandon Miller wore a shirt with the words, "Hitler gave great speeches, too" above a picture of Obama.
Miller said he had been an Obama supporter "because of his speeches," but after debating the issues in this class and looking more into Obama's policies, his vote was swayed toward McCain.
He showed a video on his camera he had just taken of the president's minutelong motorcade and talked about what a "great experience" it was to watch it. Miller had also spent a couple of hours in front of the school, hanging out and watching the protesters.
"Even though I don't support him, I think it's cool he's here," said Miller, 18. "I just don't believe all the things he's telling us. His goal is just too big and broad."
Miller wanted to hear more about the costs and guidelines the stimulus bill entails.
Senior Katelyn Meyer, who also leans more toward being a Republican, said Obama's plan sounds good, "but it's easier said than done."
"I like the refinancing part, and I like the part about mortgages, but I'm afraid we're going to put the money in but won't s ee any effect," said Meyer, 18, who still thought it was "cool" to say the president was at her school, even though she didn't get to see him live.
The students also questioned why Obama chose their school for his speech since he wasn't talking about education and wondered how much money the district spent on beautifying the campus while district positions and services are being cut.
District officials noted this week that the landscaping project completed over the weekend at Dobson was already in the works and was just expedited by the president's visit. Funding came from voter-approved bonds.
New sod was laid in front of the school Tuesday, and Daudfar said, "The joke at the school is they're going to take it away when he (Obama) leaves."
AP government teacher Jeff Sherrer said his students "feel very strongly about the issues, maybe more than the general population." He thought at least one of his students was outside protesting, and he had planned to take his students outside as a class project to show them what was going on but didn't get the chance.
"These kinds of kids really get into it," Sherrer said. "During the election we had lots of debates on the issues."
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Those Chicago boys have their own rules..... and to hell with us!
RAHM'S 'RENT' IS JUST THE TIP OF ETHICS ICEBERG
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
February 17, 2009 --
NEWS broke last week that Rahm Emanuel, now White House chief of staff, lived rent- free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) - and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate. But this is only the tip of Emanuel's previously undislosed ethics problems.
One issue is the work Emanuel tossed the way of De Lauro's husband. But the bigger one goes back to Emanuel's days on the board of now-bankrupt mortgage giant Freddie Mac.
Emanuel is a multimillionaire, but lived for the last five years for free in the tony Capitol Hill townhouse owned by De Lauro and her husband, Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg.
During that time, he also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts. It paid Greenberg's firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008. (Emanuel's own campaign committee has also paid Greenberg more than $50,000 since 2004.)
To be fair, Greenberg had polling contracts with the DCCC before - but each new election cycle brings its own set of consultants. And Emanuel was certainly generous with his roommate.
Emanuel never declared the substantial gift of free rent on any of his financial-disclosure forms. He and De Lauro claim that it was just allowable "hospitality" between colleagues. Hospitality - for five years?
Some experts suggest that it was also taxable income: Over five years, the free rent could easily add up to more than $100,000.
Nor is this all that seems to have been missed in the Obama team's vetting process. Consider: Emanuel served on the Freddie Mac board of directors during the time that the government-backed lender lied about its earnings, a leading contributor to the current economic meltdown.
The Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Agency later singled out the Freddie Mac board as contributing to the fraud in 2000 and 2001 for "failing in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention." In other words, board members ignored the red flags waving in their faces.
The SEC later fined Freddie $50 million for its deliberate fraud in 2000, 2001 and 2002.
Meanwhile, Emanuel was paid more than $260,000 for his Freddie "service." Plus, after he resigned from the board to run for Congress in 2002, the troubled agency's PAC gave his campaign $25,000 - its largest single gift to a House candidate.
That's what friends are for, isn't it?
Now Rahm Emanuel is in the White House helping President Obama dig out of the mess that Freddie Mac helped start.
The president's chief of staff isn't subject to Senate confirmation, but his ethics still matter. Is this the change that we can depend on?
Here's an answer to our Budget Deficit...... audit all the Democrats!! This adds to that explanation why Dems don't mind raising taxes --- they don't pay 'em!!!
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
February 17, 2009 --
NEWS broke last week that Rahm Emanuel, now White House chief of staff, lived rent- free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) - and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate. But this is only the tip of Emanuel's previously undislosed ethics problems.
One issue is the work Emanuel tossed the way of De Lauro's husband. But the bigger one goes back to Emanuel's days on the board of now-bankrupt mortgage giant Freddie Mac.
Emanuel is a multimillionaire, but lived for the last five years for free in the tony Capitol Hill townhouse owned by De Lauro and her husband, Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg.
During that time, he also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts. It paid Greenberg's firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008. (Emanuel's own campaign committee has also paid Greenberg more than $50,000 since 2004.)
To be fair, Greenberg had polling contracts with the DCCC before - but each new election cycle brings its own set of consultants. And Emanuel was certainly generous with his roommate.
Emanuel never declared the substantial gift of free rent on any of his financial-disclosure forms. He and De Lauro claim that it was just allowable "hospitality" between colleagues. Hospitality - for five years?
Some experts suggest that it was also taxable income: Over five years, the free rent could easily add up to more than $100,000.
Nor is this all that seems to have been missed in the Obama team's vetting process. Consider: Emanuel served on the Freddie Mac board of directors during the time that the government-backed lender lied about its earnings, a leading contributor to the current economic meltdown.
The Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Agency later singled out the Freddie Mac board as contributing to the fraud in 2000 and 2001 for "failing in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention." In other words, board members ignored the red flags waving in their faces.
The SEC later fined Freddie $50 million for its deliberate fraud in 2000, 2001 and 2002.
Meanwhile, Emanuel was paid more than $260,000 for his Freddie "service." Plus, after he resigned from the board to run for Congress in 2002, the troubled agency's PAC gave his campaign $25,000 - its largest single gift to a House candidate.
That's what friends are for, isn't it?
Now Rahm Emanuel is in the White House helping President Obama dig out of the mess that Freddie Mac helped start.
The president's chief of staff isn't subject to Senate confirmation, but his ethics still matter. Is this the change that we can depend on?
Here's an answer to our Budget Deficit...... audit all the Democrats!! This adds to that explanation why Dems don't mind raising taxes --- they don't pay 'em!!!
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Y'all will be please to hear....
.....that there is at least one State Governor out there who is 'telling it like it is' instead of just standing there, holding his bowl out and asking, "Please sir, is there any more"?
As many state and local officials clamor for their share of the billions of dollars in federal aid in the stimulus bill under consideration in Washington, South Carolina’s Republican governor is sounding a note of dissent about federal efforts to help the economy.
“A problem that was created by building up of too much debt will not be solved with yet more debt,” Gov. Mark Sanford said Sunday, making a reference to the federal deficit spending that will likely finance the federal stimulus package.
“We’re moving precipitously close to what I would call a savior-based economy,” Sanford also said Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union.
The South Carolina Republican said such an economy is “what you see in Russia or Venezuela or Zimbabwe or places like that where it matters not how good your product is to the consumer but what your political connection is to those in power.”
“That is quite different than a market-based economy where some rise and some fall but there’s a consequence to making a stupid decision,” Sanford said after pointing to the powers granted to the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve to help deal with the current economic crisis.
“A lot of people who’ve made some very stupid decisions are being bailed out by the population at large,” he added.
As many state and local officials clamor for their share of the billions of dollars in federal aid in the stimulus bill under consideration in Washington, South Carolina’s Republican governor is sounding a note of dissent about federal efforts to help the economy.
“A problem that was created by building up of too much debt will not be solved with yet more debt,” Gov. Mark Sanford said Sunday, making a reference to the federal deficit spending that will likely finance the federal stimulus package.
“We’re moving precipitously close to what I would call a savior-based economy,” Sanford also said Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union.
The South Carolina Republican said such an economy is “what you see in Russia or Venezuela or Zimbabwe or places like that where it matters not how good your product is to the consumer but what your political connection is to those in power.”
“That is quite different than a market-based economy where some rise and some fall but there’s a consequence to making a stupid decision,” Sanford said after pointing to the powers granted to the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve to help deal with the current economic crisis.
“A lot of people who’ve made some very stupid decisions are being bailed out by the population at large,” he added.
Guest Morning News Column...........
A an old Vet friend from Florida pretty well summarized this morning's news today and threw it over my transom:
Coffee & News To Start a Stimulating Day
- Feb 17, 2009
Let's see. My automatic mouse has run amok on the mouse pad and selected at random some of the most uplifting interesting headlines of the day.
1. Japan: Finance Minister Shoichi Nakagawa steps down due to health problems or the possibility he was drunk at the G7 summit meeting while Sec. of State invites Prime Minister Taro Aso to the White house for a meeting with the POTUS. Aso, of course accepts cause he's embarrassed about his drunk Finance Minister and told Sec. of State Clinton that while he is making travel plans to show the wonderful alliance with the U.S. to get your stinking 8,000 Marines out of Okinawa.
2. Japan: Not to be outdone by Prime Minister Aso, Clinton fires off yet another warning shot for the U.S. against North Korea's leader Kim Jong Il. [paraphrase] "Stop this silly missile crap or the U.S. government will not normalize relations with you. We mean it this time. You will not receive any energy, financial and humanitarian assistance from us." I think she meant that we don't have any energy to spare until our windmills are up and running and certainly Kim ain't receiving financial help until our own citizens get their $13-$15 dollar a week Stimuli.
3. Chicago: Sen. Burris says he "won't resign." And the beat goes on in Chicago politics.
4. Stamford, Conn: Most likely the PETA group will be P.O.'d at the killing of a chimpanzee that nearly ripped the face off a woman.
5. SEATTLE, Washington: A 16-year-old girl was found dead and another girl was found unconscious in an Army barracks at Fort Lewis. The Fort Lewis Criminal Investigation Division is trying to determine why the two girls were in the barracks where soldiers live, and what led to their conditions when they were found. Damn, it's going to take Sherlock Holmes to figure this one out.
6. NEW YORK: -- The founder of an Islamic television station in upstate New York aimed at countering Muslim stereotypes has confessed to beheading his wife. Of course we should never stereotype some Muslim actions.
7. Somewhere in U.S.: Trump Entertainment Resorts Inc., real estate tycoon Donald Trump's casino group, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Tuesday morning, court documents show. Looks like things are a changing for good ole boy Donald, except the hairdo.
8. NEW YORK -- Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, whose pro-gun stance has attracted criticism from fellow New York Democrats, has moved two rifles she kept under her bed for protection because of news reports about the weapons. Damn politicians that keep guns around under beds. That's down right dangerous, especially when the bullets are someplace else.
9. Washington: 'Game-Changing' U.S. Strategy Urgently Needed in Afghanistan. It seems that drug money is winning the war with payoffs to local tribe politicians. U.S. thinks more troops might be the answer, but not sure how many or when they could arrive. In the meantime, why doesn't our government take over the poppy fields, sell the drugs at a discount and bank some extra loot? [well, it was a thought anyway]
10. France: Salma to reveal in the future what her first legitimate night in bed was like.
Mouse is now going to wander over to local news while I get the extra cup of joe. Maybe there is uplifting news on the home front. Nah! Just wishful thinking.
Thanks, and a Tip O' the Stetson to Vet Mike of Flagler Beach FL !!!!! Leave a comment if you'd like to see Mike do a follow up next week......
Coffee & News To Start a Stimulating Day
- Feb 17, 2009
Let's see. My automatic mouse has run amok on the mouse pad and selected at random some of the most uplifting interesting headlines of the day.
1. Japan: Finance Minister Shoichi Nakagawa steps down due to health problems or the possibility he was drunk at the G7 summit meeting while Sec. of State invites Prime Minister Taro Aso to the White house for a meeting with the POTUS. Aso, of course accepts cause he's embarrassed about his drunk Finance Minister and told Sec. of State Clinton that while he is making travel plans to show the wonderful alliance with the U.S. to get your stinking 8,000 Marines out of Okinawa.
2. Japan: Not to be outdone by Prime Minister Aso, Clinton fires off yet another warning shot for the U.S. against North Korea's leader Kim Jong Il. [paraphrase] "Stop this silly missile crap or the U.S. government will not normalize relations with you. We mean it this time. You will not receive any energy, financial and humanitarian assistance from us." I think she meant that we don't have any energy to spare until our windmills are up and running and certainly Kim ain't receiving financial help until our own citizens get their $13-$15 dollar a week Stimuli.
3. Chicago: Sen. Burris says he "won't resign." And the beat goes on in Chicago politics.
4. Stamford, Conn: Most likely the PETA group will be P.O.'d at the killing of a chimpanzee that nearly ripped the face off a woman.
5. SEATTLE, Washington: A 16-year-old girl was found dead and another girl was found unconscious in an Army barracks at Fort Lewis. The Fort Lewis Criminal Investigation Division is trying to determine why the two girls were in the barracks where soldiers live, and what led to their conditions when they were found. Damn, it's going to take Sherlock Holmes to figure this one out.
6. NEW YORK: -- The founder of an Islamic television station in upstate New York aimed at countering Muslim stereotypes has confessed to beheading his wife. Of course we should never stereotype some Muslim actions.
7. Somewhere in U.S.: Trump Entertainment Resorts Inc., real estate tycoon Donald Trump's casino group, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Tuesday morning, court documents show. Looks like things are a changing for good ole boy Donald, except the hairdo.
8. NEW YORK -- Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, whose pro-gun stance has attracted criticism from fellow New York Democrats, has moved two rifles she kept under her bed for protection because of news reports about the weapons. Damn politicians that keep guns around under beds. That's down right dangerous, especially when the bullets are someplace else.
9. Washington: 'Game-Changing' U.S. Strategy Urgently Needed in Afghanistan. It seems that drug money is winning the war with payoffs to local tribe politicians. U.S. thinks more troops might be the answer, but not sure how many or when they could arrive. In the meantime, why doesn't our government take over the poppy fields, sell the drugs at a discount and bank some extra loot? [well, it was a thought anyway]
10. France: Salma to reveal in the future what her first legitimate night in bed was like.
Mouse is now going to wander over to local news while I get the extra cup of joe. Maybe there is uplifting news on the home front. Nah! Just wishful thinking.
Thanks, and a Tip O' the Stetson to Vet Mike of Flagler Beach FL !!!!! Leave a comment if you'd like to see Mike do a follow up next week......
Time to start picking up those phones or keyboards soon..... again!!
A Chicago-Style Census
Ken Blackwell
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
The census is one of the most important functions performed by the federal government because the integrity our representative democracy depends on it. Because both parties understand its importance, the census has always been insulated from political corruption.
That is why news of the Obama Administration’s plan to take the 2010 census away from the Commerce Department and run it out of the White House is disturbing. This action will have enormous implications on the balance of political power in the country.
When I was co-chairman of the U.S. Census Monitoring Board, the left fought unsuccessfully to introduce “statistical sampling” into the census count. Had they gotten their way, it would have adjusted the numbers.
Statistical sampling is inherently unreliable and carries the potential for corruption and fraud. There are competing theories on which model or formula to use to adjust the numbers. If you pick the wrong formula, everyone would be deprived of having an equal vote and equal representation.
Some say that statistical sampling cannot be used in congressional districting. That is only half-true. First, the Supreme Court ruled in 1999 that sampling cannot be used to reapportion seats from one state to another. However, the Court did not address whether sampling could be used to redraw district lines within each state. Look at how Texas’s redistricting plan last decade flipped several Democrat seats to Republican seats, and it is clear how much of an impact redrawing lines can have.
Second, there are ways clever lawyers can figure out how to push the envelope with sampling to manipulate reapportionment without blatantly violating the Court’s order. The Obama Administration is overflowing with clever lawyers.
Beyond that, sampling can be used to “adjust” the numbers for receiving federal money. With the trillion-dollar spending monstrosity that just squeaked through Congress, allocating those funds could easily target districts to help vulnerable Democrats, and pick off vulnerable Republicans.
Finally, some say not to be overly concerned because it’s too late to impact the 2010 census. Don’t believe that for a moment. While it is true that some aspects have been in the planning for years, there are tremendous changes that could be done at the last minute. This is a partisan power grab, and Republicans need to stand up against it.
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel would most likely be supervising the census. This is the man who, for the past few years, was chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). As such, his mission was to elect as many Democrats as possible to Congress. No person in America is better-versed than Mr.
Emanuel on exactly what redistricting and reapportionment plan would give Democrats a super-majority in Congress for the next decade.
Further, the White House can keep its census deliberations secret. This adds a dangerous dimension to the process. The Commerce Department is subject to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), which requires public hearings and input for making rules and regulations, and requires agencies to explain how they account for all the evidence presented. But the White House is not an agency, and is exempt for the APA. If the White House takes over the census, they could incorporate suggestions from organizations such as ACORN and MoveOn.org on how to conduct the census, and all such meetings and consultations would be secret. So much for President Obama’s promise of transparency.
It is exactly this sort of Chicago-style politics that must be kept out of the census. The administration’s power grabbing scheme will allow for the worst sort of political dealing in smoke-filled backrooms.
Republicans should immediately introduce legislation to keep the census out of the White House. Nothing should be more independent of rank partisan politics than the process that determines the integrity of our representative democracy.
President Obama got elected talking about the audacity of hope. It is truly audacious for his administration to hope that Chicago-style politics could carry the day on this important issue.
Ken Blackwell
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
The census is one of the most important functions performed by the federal government because the integrity our representative democracy depends on it. Because both parties understand its importance, the census has always been insulated from political corruption.
That is why news of the Obama Administration’s plan to take the 2010 census away from the Commerce Department and run it out of the White House is disturbing. This action will have enormous implications on the balance of political power in the country.
When I was co-chairman of the U.S. Census Monitoring Board, the left fought unsuccessfully to introduce “statistical sampling” into the census count. Had they gotten their way, it would have adjusted the numbers.
Statistical sampling is inherently unreliable and carries the potential for corruption and fraud. There are competing theories on which model or formula to use to adjust the numbers. If you pick the wrong formula, everyone would be deprived of having an equal vote and equal representation.
Some say that statistical sampling cannot be used in congressional districting. That is only half-true. First, the Supreme Court ruled in 1999 that sampling cannot be used to reapportion seats from one state to another. However, the Court did not address whether sampling could be used to redraw district lines within each state. Look at how Texas’s redistricting plan last decade flipped several Democrat seats to Republican seats, and it is clear how much of an impact redrawing lines can have.
Second, there are ways clever lawyers can figure out how to push the envelope with sampling to manipulate reapportionment without blatantly violating the Court’s order. The Obama Administration is overflowing with clever lawyers.
Beyond that, sampling can be used to “adjust” the numbers for receiving federal money. With the trillion-dollar spending monstrosity that just squeaked through Congress, allocating those funds could easily target districts to help vulnerable Democrats, and pick off vulnerable Republicans.
Finally, some say not to be overly concerned because it’s too late to impact the 2010 census. Don’t believe that for a moment. While it is true that some aspects have been in the planning for years, there are tremendous changes that could be done at the last minute. This is a partisan power grab, and Republicans need to stand up against it.
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel would most likely be supervising the census. This is the man who, for the past few years, was chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). As such, his mission was to elect as many Democrats as possible to Congress. No person in America is better-versed than Mr.
Emanuel on exactly what redistricting and reapportionment plan would give Democrats a super-majority in Congress for the next decade.
Further, the White House can keep its census deliberations secret. This adds a dangerous dimension to the process. The Commerce Department is subject to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), which requires public hearings and input for making rules and regulations, and requires agencies to explain how they account for all the evidence presented. But the White House is not an agency, and is exempt for the APA. If the White House takes over the census, they could incorporate suggestions from organizations such as ACORN and MoveOn.org on how to conduct the census, and all such meetings and consultations would be secret. So much for President Obama’s promise of transparency.
It is exactly this sort of Chicago-style politics that must be kept out of the census. The administration’s power grabbing scheme will allow for the worst sort of political dealing in smoke-filled backrooms.
Republicans should immediately introduce legislation to keep the census out of the White House. Nothing should be more independent of rank partisan politics than the process that determines the integrity of our representative democracy.
President Obama got elected talking about the audacity of hope. It is truly audacious for his administration to hope that Chicago-style politics could carry the day on this important issue.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Pilgrims, I am sorry to keep beating you to death with this Porkulus thing....
but if I watch it and say nothing ---- Ain't I as guilty as Obamanation? Folks, our nation needs your prayers!
Last week, Obama wrote in an op-Ed piece in the Washington Post that if Congress does not pass his "stimulus" package, and do so right away, "Our nation will slip deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse." "Wow," I thought when I read this, "The stimulus bill must contain some really important stuff if it's critical to the survival of our country! I better take a closer look. Maybe the guy is really onto something." So, I did some Internet research and here is just some of the massive spending proposed in the bill:
-- $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts (partial payback to Hollywood liberals?)
-- $380 million for the Women, Infants & Children welfare program
-- $300 million in grants to combat violence against women
-- $1.2 billion to provide "youth" with summer jobs (because their parents will be unemployed)
-- $2.4 billion for "neighborhood stabilization" activities (Barbed wire for LA, So. Chicago, Miami and Detroit?)
-- $650 million for digital TV coupons (more made in China items/computers)
-- $150 million for the Smithsonian (new storage area for Obama signs)
-- $34 million to renovate the Dept. Of Commerce headquarters (more made in China items/computers)
-- $500 million for improvements to the National Institute of Health facility (more made in China items/computers)
-- $44 million for repairs to the Dept. Of Agriculture's headquarters (more made in China items/computers)
-- $350 million for agriculture department computers(more made in China items/computers)
-- $88 million to move (that's right, move) the Public Health Service into a new building.
-- $1 billion for the Census Bureau (more made in China items/computers)
-- $89 billion for Medicaid (not Medicare)
-- $30 billion for COBRA extensions (insurance for the increasing number of unemployed)
-- $36 billion for expanded unemployment (many more coming up)
-- $20 billion for food stamps (many more coming up)
-- $850 million for Amtrak (Already subsidised every year..2008 was 1.3 billion)
-- $87 million for a "polar ice breaking ship" (What about the ice caps melting because of global warming?)
-- $1.7 million for the National Park Service
-- $55 million for the Historic Preservation Fund
-- $7.6 million for the Rural Advancement Program
-- $150 million for "agricultural commodity purchases" (For more unemployed)
-- $150 million for producers of livestock, farm-raised fish and honey bees ( Yes, bees)
-- $160 million for paid volunteers (what is a "paid volunteer"?) at the Corporation for National and Community Service
Are we really to believe Obama that we may not be able to reverse our country's slide if he and Congress are prevented from ramming all this pork down our throats? And, by the way, what happened to Obama's pledge to end pork barrel spending?
Another interesting tidbit: Obama said that one of the reasons Congress must pass the stimulus bill, and must pass it NOW, is to end our dependence on foreign oil. What is astonishing is that he made this proclamation about energy independence less than 24 hours after his new interior secretary canceled the oil and gas leases on 77 parcels of federal land.
Oh, and by the way, Congress did pass the Bill but Obama has been away on vacation in Chicago(not even in office for a month) and has delayed signing this "critically urgent" legislation until he can set up the appropriate photo op in Denver. He was busy last weekend -- up in Camp David 'just to get away from it all after a tough week in office" as well...
Last week, Obama wrote in an op-Ed piece in the Washington Post that if Congress does not pass his "stimulus" package, and do so right away, "Our nation will slip deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse." "Wow," I thought when I read this, "The stimulus bill must contain some really important stuff if it's critical to the survival of our country! I better take a closer look. Maybe the guy is really onto something." So, I did some Internet research and here is just some of the massive spending proposed in the bill:
-- $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts (partial payback to Hollywood liberals?)
-- $380 million for the Women, Infants & Children welfare program
-- $300 million in grants to combat violence against women
-- $1.2 billion to provide "youth" with summer jobs (because their parents will be unemployed)
-- $2.4 billion for "neighborhood stabilization" activities (Barbed wire for LA, So. Chicago, Miami and Detroit?)
-- $650 million for digital TV coupons (more made in China items/computers)
-- $150 million for the Smithsonian (new storage area for Obama signs)
-- $34 million to renovate the Dept. Of Commerce headquarters (more made in China items/computers)
-- $500 million for improvements to the National Institute of Health facility (more made in China items/computers)
-- $44 million for repairs to the Dept. Of Agriculture's headquarters (more made in China items/computers)
-- $350 million for agriculture department computers(more made in China items/computers)
-- $88 million to move (that's right, move) the Public Health Service into a new building.
-- $1 billion for the Census Bureau (more made in China items/computers)
-- $89 billion for Medicaid (not Medicare)
-- $30 billion for COBRA extensions (insurance for the increasing number of unemployed)
-- $36 billion for expanded unemployment (many more coming up)
-- $20 billion for food stamps (many more coming up)
-- $850 million for Amtrak (Already subsidised every year..2008 was 1.3 billion)
-- $87 million for a "polar ice breaking ship" (What about the ice caps melting because of global warming?)
-- $1.7 million for the National Park Service
-- $55 million for the Historic Preservation Fund
-- $7.6 million for the Rural Advancement Program
-- $150 million for "agricultural commodity purchases" (For more unemployed)
-- $150 million for producers of livestock, farm-raised fish and honey bees ( Yes, bees)
-- $160 million for paid volunteers (what is a "paid volunteer"?) at the Corporation for National and Community Service
Are we really to believe Obama that we may not be able to reverse our country's slide if he and Congress are prevented from ramming all this pork down our throats? And, by the way, what happened to Obama's pledge to end pork barrel spending?
Another interesting tidbit: Obama said that one of the reasons Congress must pass the stimulus bill, and must pass it NOW, is to end our dependence on foreign oil. What is astonishing is that he made this proclamation about energy independence less than 24 hours after his new interior secretary canceled the oil and gas leases on 77 parcels of federal land.
Oh, and by the way, Congress did pass the Bill but Obama has been away on vacation in Chicago(not even in office for a month) and has delayed signing this "critically urgent" legislation until he can set up the appropriate photo op in Denver. He was busy last weekend -- up in Camp David 'just to get away from it all after a tough week in office" as well...
I read somewhere once, "You can steal a whole lot more with a briefcase than with a gun!"
And that would certainly seem to be the case in Washington last week. You probably thought that Porkulus Bill passed by your representatives was a miserly $789 Billion Dollars that your kids and grand kids would be paying for ..... right? Wrong ---!
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked the Congressional Budget Office to estimate the impact of permanently extending the 20 most popular provisions of the stimulus bill. What did the CBO find? As you can see from the table below, the true 10 year cost of the stimulus bill $2.527 trillion in in spending with another $744 billion cost in debt servicing. Total bill for the Generational Theft Act: $3.27 trillion. That would be, $3,270,000,000,000 of your grandkids tax money!!!!!
A tip o' the stetson to the Heritage Foundation for publishing this quietly held fact!!
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked the Congressional Budget Office to estimate the impact of permanently extending the 20 most popular provisions of the stimulus bill. What did the CBO find? As you can see from the table below, the true 10 year cost of the stimulus bill $2.527 trillion in in spending with another $744 billion cost in debt servicing. Total bill for the Generational Theft Act: $3.27 trillion. That would be, $3,270,000,000,000 of your grandkids tax money!!!!!
A tip o' the stetson to the Heritage Foundation for publishing this quietly held fact!!
Sunday, February 15, 2009
'Hanoi Jane' finds her past catching up with her!!!
February 12, 2009 --AN old skeleton has emerged from Jane Fonda's closet to remind us of her traitorous embrace of the North Vietnamese, which got her dubbed "Hanoi Jane." Docudrama Films is re leasing on DVD a long-suppressed documentary called "FTA," aka "[Bleep] the Army," which chron
icles the anti-war shows Fonda staged in front of GIs. The flick opened in theaters in 1972 the same week she flew to Hanoi and encouraged the Vietnamese com munists to fight "American impe rialists." It was yanked days later and withdrawn from circulation, and the late director Francine Par ker blamed pressure from the Nixon White House.Gee willikers, wonder why I have a problem trying to feel sorry for her? Don't reckon it's 'cause of the friends and military buddies I lost over there ..... Now she's just a rich bitch, with only ex-husbands who are even stranger than her ---
What goes around, comes around doesn't even apply here --- or she'd be in some tepee somewhere chewing on a piece of buffalo hide for her buck!
In the Military, it was called "Hurry up and Wait"...
in Obamanation's world --- it's called "Rush it thru before anybody reads it" and I'll get around to it when I can.......
WHAT'S THE RUSH?
By BRENDAN SCOTT IN ALBANY and ANA MARIA ALAYA IN NY, AP
February 15, 2009 --
After pushing Congress for weeks to hurry up and pass the massive $787 billion stimulus bill, President Obama promptly took off for a three-day holiday getaway.
Obama arrived at his home in Chicago on Friday, and treated wife Michelle to a Valentine's Day dinner downtown last night. The couple was spotted leaving upscale Table Fifty-Two, which specializes in Southern cuisine, with the first lady toting what appeared to be a doggie bag.
The president plans to spend the Presidents' Day weekend in the Windy City, and is not expected to sign the bill until Tuesday, when he travels to Denver to discuss his economic plan.
Both the House and Senate passed the bill Friday night.
The push to get the bill through before the holiday weekend was so frantic, members of Congress didn't have a chance to read all 1,071 pages of the document before they could vote.
"In a perfect world it would have been nice to have had more time to process it," said Ilan Kayatsky, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).
WHAT'S THE RUSH?
By BRENDAN SCOTT IN ALBANY and ANA MARIA ALAYA IN NY, AP
February 15, 2009 --
After pushing Congress for weeks to hurry up and pass the massive $787 billion stimulus bill, President Obama promptly took off for a three-day holiday getaway.
Obama arrived at his home in Chicago on Friday, and treated wife Michelle to a Valentine's Day dinner downtown last night. The couple was spotted leaving upscale Table Fifty-Two, which specializes in Southern cuisine, with the first lady toting what appeared to be a doggie bag.
The president plans to spend the Presidents' Day weekend in the Windy City, and is not expected to sign the bill until Tuesday, when he travels to Denver to discuss his economic plan.
Both the House and Senate passed the bill Friday night.
The push to get the bill through before the holiday weekend was so frantic, members of Congress didn't have a chance to read all 1,071 pages of the document before they could vote.
"In a perfect world it would have been nice to have had more time to process it," said Ilan Kayatsky, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).
My old memory must be failing.... I'd swear I heard this sorry dude using words like emergency, catastrophe, crisis last week. Now one week in office and he's off on three day weekends. Hell, a new hire at your local Dairy Queen don't get three day weekends until they've learned the job and earned the holiday!
Quote of the week---
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
~ ~~Margaret Thatcher~~
~ ~~Margaret Thatcher~~
Saturday, February 14, 2009
The Right Honorable Congress Folks said what??
An interesting resolution came from the House as they officially sent their representatives into conference with the Senate to resolve the differences in the two passed bill versions of the Porkulus Bill:
From yesterday's Congressional Record, Page H1096:
Mr. LEWIS of California moves to instruct the managers on the part of the House that they shall not record their approval of the final conference agreement (as such term is used in clause 12(a)(4) of rule XXII of the Rules of the House of Representatives) unless the text of such agreement has been available to the managers in an electronic, searchable, and downloadable form for at least 48 hours prior to the time described in such clause.
This instruction passed unanimously in a recorded vote. So in theory, talk of votes on Thursday or Friday this week are nonsense, unless the House decides to completely ignore this vote. There is some wiggle room to be had as the instructions specify that the text must be available to managers in the House, not the general public, but that still can't be strictly true at least until final bill text is ready.
It would seem legitimate to expect the House to abide by this vote --- and if it doesn't, to ask why not....
From yesterday's Congressional Record, Page H1096:
Mr. LEWIS of California moves to instruct the managers on the part of the House that they shall not record their approval of the final conference agreement (as such term is used in clause 12(a)(4) of rule XXII of the Rules of the House of Representatives) unless the text of such agreement has been available to the managers in an electronic, searchable, and downloadable form for at least 48 hours prior to the time described in such clause.
This instruction passed unanimously in a recorded vote. So in theory, talk of votes on Thursday or Friday this week are nonsense, unless the House decides to completely ignore this vote. There is some wiggle room to be had as the instructions specify that the text must be available to managers in the House, not the general public, but that still can't be strictly true at least until final bill text is ready.
It would seem legitimate to expect the House to abide by this vote --- and if it doesn't, to ask why not....
As usual - Krauthammer get's right to the point......
Iraq: Good News Is No News
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, February 13, 2009; A17
Preoccupied as it was poring over Tom Daschle's tax returns, Washington hardly noticed a near-miracle abroad. Iraq held provincial elections. There was no Election Day violence. Security was handled by Iraqi forces with little U.S. involvement. A fabulous bazaar of 14,400 candidates representing 400 parties participated, yielding results highly favorable to both Iraq and the United States.
Iraq moved away from religious sectarianism toward more secular nationalism. "All the parties that had the words 'Islamic' or 'Arab' in their names lost," noted Middle East expert Amir Taheri. "By contrast, all those that had the words 'Iraq' or 'Iraqi' gained."
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki went from leader of a small Islamic party to leader of the "State of Law Party," campaigning on security and secular nationalism. He won a smashing victory. His chief rival, a more sectarian and pro-Iranian Shiite religious party, was devastated. Another major Islamic party, the pro-Iranian Sadr faction, went from 11 percent of the vote to 3 percent, losing badly in its stronghold of Baghdad. The Islamic Fadhila party that had dominated Basra was almost wiped out.
The once-dominant Sunni party affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood and the erstwhile insurgency was badly set back. New grass-roots tribal ("Awakening") and secular Sunni leaders emerged.
All this barely pierced the consciousness of official Washington. After all, it fundamentally contradicts the general establishment/media narrative of Iraq as "fiasco."
[.........]
The big strategic winner here is the United States. The big loser is Iran. The parties Tehran backed are in retreat. The prime minister who staked his career on a strategic cooperation agreement with the United States emerged victorious. Moreover, this realignment from enemy state to emerging democratic ally, unlike Egypt's flip from Soviet to U.S. ally in the 1970s, is not the work of a single autocrat (like Anwar Sadat), but a reflection of national opinion expressed in a democratic election.
This is not to say that these astonishing gains are irreversible. There loom three possible threats: (a) a coup from a rising and relatively clean military disgusted with the corruption of civilian politicians -- the familiar post-colonial pattern of the past half-century; (b) a strongman emerging from a democratic system (Maliki?) and then subverting it, following the Russian and Venezuelan models; or (c) the collapse of the current system because of a premature U.S. withdrawal that leads to a collapse of security.
Averting the first two is the job of Iraqis. Averting the third is the job of the United States. Which is why President Obama's reaction to these remarkable elections, a perfunctory statement noting that they "should continue the process of Iraqis taking responsibility for their future," was shockingly detached and ungenerous.
When you become president of the United States you inherit its history, even the parts you would have done differently. Obama might argue that American sacrifices in Iraq were not worth what we achieved. But for the purposes of current and future policy, that is entirely moot. Despite Obama's opposition, America went on to create a small miracle in the heart of the Arab Middle East. President Obama is now the custodian of that miracle. It is his duty as leader of the nation that gave birth to this fledgling democracy to ensure that he does nothing to undermine it.
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, February 13, 2009; A17
Preoccupied as it was poring over Tom Daschle's tax returns, Washington hardly noticed a near-miracle abroad. Iraq held provincial elections. There was no Election Day violence. Security was handled by Iraqi forces with little U.S. involvement. A fabulous bazaar of 14,400 candidates representing 400 parties participated, yielding results highly favorable to both Iraq and the United States.
Iraq moved away from religious sectarianism toward more secular nationalism. "All the parties that had the words 'Islamic' or 'Arab' in their names lost," noted Middle East expert Amir Taheri. "By contrast, all those that had the words 'Iraq' or 'Iraqi' gained."
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki went from leader of a small Islamic party to leader of the "State of Law Party," campaigning on security and secular nationalism. He won a smashing victory. His chief rival, a more sectarian and pro-Iranian Shiite religious party, was devastated. Another major Islamic party, the pro-Iranian Sadr faction, went from 11 percent of the vote to 3 percent, losing badly in its stronghold of Baghdad. The Islamic Fadhila party that had dominated Basra was almost wiped out.
The once-dominant Sunni party affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood and the erstwhile insurgency was badly set back. New grass-roots tribal ("Awakening") and secular Sunni leaders emerged.
All this barely pierced the consciousness of official Washington. After all, it fundamentally contradicts the general establishment/media narrative of Iraq as "fiasco."
[.........]
The big strategic winner here is the United States. The big loser is Iran. The parties Tehran backed are in retreat. The prime minister who staked his career on a strategic cooperation agreement with the United States emerged victorious. Moreover, this realignment from enemy state to emerging democratic ally, unlike Egypt's flip from Soviet to U.S. ally in the 1970s, is not the work of a single autocrat (like Anwar Sadat), but a reflection of national opinion expressed in a democratic election.
This is not to say that these astonishing gains are irreversible. There loom three possible threats: (a) a coup from a rising and relatively clean military disgusted with the corruption of civilian politicians -- the familiar post-colonial pattern of the past half-century; (b) a strongman emerging from a democratic system (Maliki?) and then subverting it, following the Russian and Venezuelan models; or (c) the collapse of the current system because of a premature U.S. withdrawal that leads to a collapse of security.
Averting the first two is the job of Iraqis. Averting the third is the job of the United States. Which is why President Obama's reaction to these remarkable elections, a perfunctory statement noting that they "should continue the process of Iraqis taking responsibility for their future," was shockingly detached and ungenerous.
When you become president of the United States you inherit its history, even the parts you would have done differently. Obama might argue that American sacrifices in Iraq were not worth what we achieved. But for the purposes of current and future policy, that is entirely moot. Despite Obama's opposition, America went on to create a small miracle in the heart of the Arab Middle East. President Obama is now the custodian of that miracle. It is his duty as leader of the nation that gave birth to this fledgling democracy to ensure that he does nothing to undermine it.
Some call it a 'not so secret' love affair........
But... based on Michelle's recent coverage - - - including the new Vague magazine cover, I reckon it should more accurately be called ..... a menage de trois!!!Friday, February 13, 2009
How do you spell arrogance? With a capital SCHUMER!!!!
The "Tiny" Trillion-Dollar Turbaconducken You Don't Care About
Michelle Malkin
Friday, February 13, 2009
N.Y. De
mocratic Sen. Chuck Schumer took to the floor on Tuesday to sneer at public outrage over the trillion-dollar porkulus. "The American people really don't care," he said, about those "little tiny, yes, porky amendments." He punctuated his derision by pinching his pointer finger and thumb together. Only the "chattering classes" worry about such trivial matters, Schumer scoffed.
Well, we are all "chattering classes" now. Congressional phones and fax lines have been ringing off the hooks all week with complaints from angry constituents across the country. And just two days after Schumer declared that no one cares, the taxpayer group Americans for Prosperity delivered 400,000 petitions to the Senate protesting the behemoth bill. Those petitions were signed before the latest details of the House-Senate conference report negotiations had been disclosed -- and before any final legislative text had been made available to the general public.
If the stimulus plan were a Thanksgiving dinner entree, it would be a Turbaconducken -- the heart attack-inducing dish of roasted chicken stuffed inside a duck stuffed inside a turkey, all wrapped in endless slabs of bacon. But according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's fantasyland "fact sheet" released early Thursday afternoon, "there are no earmarks or pet projects" in the final package.
Trust her no further than you could throw a pot-bellied pig. Despite the self-delusional declarations of Pelosi and President Obama that no pet projects exist, Hill staffers spilled the beans on several new set-asides tacked onto the bill.
Thanks to Michigan's Democratic Sens. Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin, General Motors will receive a special tax break worth an estimated $7 billion to cover liabilities incurred when it accepted its $13.4 billion bailout from the Bush administration. The failing automaker has lined up for an addition $4 billion in bailout funds -- at which time they'll no doubt ask for another mega-tax liability waiver. The moochers' cycle never ends.
Then there's Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's Railway to Sin City. Appointing yourself a Senate conferee has its perks. Roughly $8 billion in perks.
Reid, you see, needs to stimulate his re-election bid, so he haggled with President Obama to tuck in a teeny, tiny, yes, porky amendment for high-speed rail lines. Reid has his eyes -- and paws -- on a proposed Los Angeles-to-Las Vegas magnetic levitation train. He has already sunk $45 million in previous earmarks into his, yes, pet project. Wasn't it earlier this week that Obama was lecturing companies not to travel to Las Vegas on the taxpayers' dime?
But I digress. Along with these not-earmarks, not-pet projects, there's $2 billion for impeached Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's pet FutureGen near-zero emissions power plant project, $300 million for souped-up "green" golf carts for government workers, $30 million for "smart appliances" and $65 million for digital TV coupons. According to Hill Republicans, money for basic highways and bridges was cut by $1 billion from the House-passed level, but:
-- $9 billion for school construction was added back in (originally cut by the Nelson-Collins "compromise");
-- $5 billion was added to the state fiscal stabilization fund (originally cut by Nelson-Collins), making it a grand total of $53.6 billion;
-- $1 billion was added back for Prevention & Wellness Programs, including STD education; and
-- $2 billion for neighborhood stabilization programs.
As I've reported previously, that "neighborhood stabilization" slush fund money will end up in the pockets of left-wing shakedown artists such as ACORN and the Massachusetts-based Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA), led by self-proclaimed "bank terrorist" Bruce Marks. There's an additional $3.25 billion in HUD grants and Community Development Block Grants in the bill that will also inevitably find its way into the coffers of these housing-entitlement lobbying groups.
Another egregious not-earmark earmark that survived untouched: $2 billion for the National Parks Service championed by House Democratic conferee and Appropriations Chairman Rep. David Obey. A report by the GOP minority on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee revealed that Obey's son, Craig, lobbied the panel and advocated for the stimulus plan on behalf of the National Parks Conservation Association.
All told -- and safely assuming the major spending provisions become permanently enshrined -- the final price tag of this government hogzilla of all hogzillas over the next 10 years will be a whopping $3.27 trillion with a capital "T."
Michelle Malkin
Friday, February 13, 2009
N.Y. De
mocratic Sen. Chuck Schumer took to the floor on Tuesday to sneer at public outrage over the trillion-dollar porkulus. "The American people really don't care," he said, about those "little tiny, yes, porky amendments." He punctuated his derision by pinching his pointer finger and thumb together. Only the "chattering classes" worry about such trivial matters, Schumer scoffed.Well, we are all "chattering classes" now. Congressional phones and fax lines have been ringing off the hooks all week with complaints from angry constituents across the country. And just two days after Schumer declared that no one cares, the taxpayer group Americans for Prosperity delivered 400,000 petitions to the Senate protesting the behemoth bill. Those petitions were signed before the latest details of the House-Senate conference report negotiations had been disclosed -- and before any final legislative text had been made available to the general public.
If the stimulus plan were a Thanksgiving dinner entree, it would be a Turbaconducken -- the heart attack-inducing dish of roasted chicken stuffed inside a duck stuffed inside a turkey, all wrapped in endless slabs of bacon. But according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's fantasyland "fact sheet" released early Thursday afternoon, "there are no earmarks or pet projects" in the final package.
Trust her no further than you could throw a pot-bellied pig. Despite the self-delusional declarations of Pelosi and President Obama that no pet projects exist, Hill staffers spilled the beans on several new set-asides tacked onto the bill.
Thanks to Michigan's Democratic Sens. Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin, General Motors will receive a special tax break worth an estimated $7 billion to cover liabilities incurred when it accepted its $13.4 billion bailout from the Bush administration. The failing automaker has lined up for an addition $4 billion in bailout funds -- at which time they'll no doubt ask for another mega-tax liability waiver. The moochers' cycle never ends.
Then there's Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's Railway to Sin City. Appointing yourself a Senate conferee has its perks. Roughly $8 billion in perks.
Reid, you see, needs to stimulate his re-election bid, so he haggled with President Obama to tuck in a teeny, tiny, yes, porky amendment for high-speed rail lines. Reid has his eyes -- and paws -- on a proposed Los Angeles-to-Las Vegas magnetic levitation train. He has already sunk $45 million in previous earmarks into his, yes, pet project. Wasn't it earlier this week that Obama was lecturing companies not to travel to Las Vegas on the taxpayers' dime?
But I digress. Along with these not-earmarks, not-pet projects, there's $2 billion for impeached Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's pet FutureGen near-zero emissions power plant project, $300 million for souped-up "green" golf carts for government workers, $30 million for "smart appliances" and $65 million for digital TV coupons. According to Hill Republicans, money for basic highways and bridges was cut by $1 billion from the House-passed level, but:
-- $9 billion for school construction was added back in (originally cut by the Nelson-Collins "compromise");
-- $5 billion was added to the state fiscal stabilization fund (originally cut by Nelson-Collins), making it a grand total of $53.6 billion;
-- $1 billion was added back for Prevention & Wellness Programs, including STD education; and
-- $2 billion for neighborhood stabilization programs.
As I've reported previously, that "neighborhood stabilization" slush fund money will end up in the pockets of left-wing shakedown artists such as ACORN and the Massachusetts-based Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA), led by self-proclaimed "bank terrorist" Bruce Marks. There's an additional $3.25 billion in HUD grants and Community Development Block Grants in the bill that will also inevitably find its way into the coffers of these housing-entitlement lobbying groups.
Another egregious not-earmark earmark that survived untouched: $2 billion for the National Parks Service championed by House Democratic conferee and Appropriations Chairman Rep. David Obey. A report by the GOP minority on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee revealed that Obey's son, Craig, lobbied the panel and advocated for the stimulus plan on behalf of the National Parks Conservation Association.
All told -- and safely assuming the major spending provisions become permanently enshrined -- the final price tag of this government hogzilla of all hogzillas over the next 10 years will be a whopping $3.27 trillion with a capital "T."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)