Sunday, May 31, 2009

How about you answer this one ...

CASE DISMISSED! Perhaps you remember seeing the video from November?

The civil suit filed Jan. 7 identified the three men as members of the Panthers and said they wore military-style uniforms, black berets, combat boots, battle-dress pants, black jackets with military-style insignias and were armed with "a dangerous weapon"and used racial slurs and insults to scare would-be voters and those there to assist them at the Philadelphia polling location on Nov. 4.

The complaint said the three men engaged in "coercion, threats and intimidation, ... racial threats and insults, ... menacing and intimidating gestures, ... and movements directed at individuals who were present to vote." It said that unless prohibited by court sanctions, they would "continued to violate ... the Voting Rights Act by continuing to direct intimidation, threats and coercion at voters and potential voters, by again deploying uniformed and armed members at the entrance to polling locations in future elections, both in Philadelphia and throughout the country."

Now, you'd THINK that this would clearly be an issue of concern. But, in our post racial-Amerikkka? Not so much.

Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.

You're not saying POLITICS were involved, are you? The department was poised to secure sanctions against these men, when their superiors entered a default judgment.

I'm so relieved that Mr. Shabazz will no longer be able to brandish a weapon as he stands outside of a polling location and intimidates voters. Well, let me fix that, he can't stand within a hundred feet of an open polling location, on election day, with a weapon. Until 2012.

Can I hear just the tiniest bit of outrage from the left?

Friday, May 29, 2009


This from Doug Ross:

ITheir issue? They're trying to figure how to justify the closings of GOP-owned dealerships while ignoring the Democrat bigwigs who have just captured major new territories.

"Hey, it's all statisticulus," they say, "and you wingnuts can't possibly figure out our vector arithmetic and such!"

Perhaps Frank at could consider the following:

Item 1: Using the list of all 789 dealerships to be closed, WND found that owners contributed $450,000 to GOP presidential candidates; $7,970 to Sen. Hillary Clinton; $2,200 to John Edwards and $450 to Barack Obama. For the "progressives" out there, that's a 1000-to-1 ratio of GOP-to-Obama donations for closed dealerships.

Second, OC can STFU about me being a Rush drone. If you will note, I started commenting on this story days ago (Tuesday, I believe). To MY KNOWLEDGE, I'm not sure when or if Rush even brought this up.

Honestly, get a new schtick or you're outta here. Consider this a warning.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

"Dealergate" update

List of Chrysler dealers who gave to the GOP, and then lost their dealership.

Of course, perhaps all dealers are Republican donors?

Well, then there's this big Dem donor group that not only have kept all SIX of their dealerships, but have had all their competition eliminated.

Comprehensive post here.

What say you Bob?

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Oh , Frak no

Mr. Hope and Change is talking-up the "Value Added Tax." The funny thing, is that there is actually no "value added" to the "VAT" - it's just one of those funny word things with no meaning.

A 10% tax (that's a national tax on everything) would bring the tax on goods up to 16% in Michigan.

On top of Property Taxes.

On top of Federal income taxes.

On top of State income taxes.

On top of local income taxes.

Had enough yet?

Update, from WSJ:

A big VAT backer is Ezekiel Emanuel, who is a doctor, the brother of White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and a health-care adviser to White House Budget Director Peter Orszag. In a 2008 book titled “Health Care, Guaranteed,” Zeke Emanuel argues that a 10% VAT would pay for every American not entitled to Medicare or Medicaid to enroll in a health plan with no deductibles and minimal co-payments, the WaPo says. (For more, see our post and this blog.)

Oh goody. 10% of everything we buy .... why, that's practically FREE.

M'chelle Obama:Gardener

This is EXACTLY what I wear when I'm out planting my garden. Nothing screams "I've been an organic gardener ALL my life" more than those boots.

First they came for the Auto Dealers ....

Noises started yesterday about this, and it's really too early to start calling Obama "Mugabe". But, this is definitely something that needs to be investigated (something newspapers USED to do ... back when people read 'em). Gateway Pundit:

Earlier it was reported that the Obama Administration may have targeted GOP donors in deciding which Chrysler dealerships would have to close their doors.

Now there's this...
RLJ-McLarty-Landers is owned by three men.
One was the former Chief of Staff for President Clinton.
One is the founder of Black Entertainment Television and a huge Obama supporter.
All 6 of their Chrysler dealerships will remain open.
And, get this... Their local competitors have been eliminated!

So, the million-dollar-question (or should we talk in trillions now?) is who was "the decider" regarding which dealerships would be stolen?

A lawyer for Chrysler dealers
facing closure as part of the automaker's bankruptcy
reorganization said on Tuesday he believes Chrysler executives
do not support a plan to eliminate a quarter of its retail
Lawyer Leonard Bellavia, of Bellavia Gentile & Associates,
who represents some of the terminated dealers, said he deposed
Chrysler President Jim Press on Tuesday and came away with the
impression that Press did not support the plan.
"It became clear to us that Chrysler does not see the wisdom
of terminating 25 percent of its dealers," Bellavia said. "It
really wasn't Chrysler's decision. They are under enormous
pressure from the President's automotive task force."

Oh, but there is more.

I'm skeptical. Simply because it would be such a completely bonehead move. It would require near complete complicity of the media. Oh ... right.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

While you were roasting weinies

The madman in pajamas tested a nuke. PTL that didn't interfere with Obama's golf game.

Oh, and here's a bit of fun. This is what Obama's saying at Democratc fundraising events now-a-days:

And finally, we need these four leaders to help us restore fiscal discipline in Washington so we don't leave our children and grandchildren with a mountain of debt. These are some of the leaders in trying to get Washington to take those responsibilities seriously. Already, my administration has identified more than 100 government programs that we can reduce or eliminate, save $17 billion next year alone. We're going line by line through the budget, page by page, looking for even more cuts.

I've personally asked the leadership in Congress to reinstate the pay-as-you-go rule that we followed during the 1990s, a rule that will help start -- (applause) -- a rule that helped us start this new century with a $236 billion surplus. You remember that? The idea is very simple: You don't spend what you don't have. If you want to spend, you need to find someplace else to cut. That's the rule that families across this country follow every single day -- and there's no reason why their government shouldn't do the same.

I know, it's a riot!

Today he's in Vegas (yes, the same place corporate fat cats aren't supposed to go) to appear at a fundraiser for Harry Reid.

Random thought

Do you think M'chelle wore her $500 tennis shoes to work in her Victory Garden?

Honestly, the day a person spend that much on a pair of tennis shoes, they have officially lost all perspective.

Dear Jenny,

Now that you're not going to get that Supreme Court nomination (which you claimed you didn't want anyway), it looks like you're going to have to finish out your disastrous second term. And, by that I don't mean to imply that your first term was any better. But, let's not quibble, k? You may want to advise Mr. Cherry to start looking for a new line of work because I really don't see how he's going to springboard being your Lt Governor into ... well, anything.

So, I understand you folks are toying around with the idea of implementing a graduated income tax here in Michigan. Get those richies to pay their fair share during these trying times, right? Michigan's current 4.25% income tax just isn't enough for you vultures. But, you may want to look and see what happened in Maryland when they raised the income tax on the wealthy to 6.25%.

One year later, nobody's grinning. One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls. In 2008 roughly 3,000 million-dollar income tax returns were filed by the end of April. This year there were 2,000, which the state comptroller's office concedes is a "substantial decline." On those missing returns, the government collects 6.25% of nothing. Instead of the state coffers gaining the extra $106 million the politicians predicted, millionaires paid $100 million less in taxes than they did last year -- even at higher rates.

How much is due to the recession, and how much from relocation? Who knows. Regardless, soak the rich tax schemes in an effort to support government bloat is simply a very bad idea.

Perhaps it's time to let your husband's assistants go?


Friday, May 22, 2009

Highlight and Lowlight

Highlight from the Cheney Speech. About "enhanced interrogation."

This might explain why President Obama has reserved unto himself the right to order the use of enhanced interrogation should he deem it appropriate. What value remains to that authority is debatable, given that the enemy now knows exactly what interrogation methods to train against, and which ones not to worry about. Yet having reserved for himself the authority to order enhanced interrogation after an emergency, you would think that President Obama would be less disdainful of what his predecessor authorized after 9/11. It’s almost gone unnoticed that the president has retained the power to order the same methods in the same circumstances. When they talk about interrogations, he and his administration speak as if they have resolved some great moral dilemma in how to extract critical information from terrorists. Instead they have put the decision off, while assigning a presumption of moral superiority to any decision they make in the future.

Lowlight. Obama on the previous administration:

Unfortunately, faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions. I believe that many of these decisions were motivated by a sincere desire to protect the American people. But I also believe that all too often our government made decisions based on fear rather than foresight; that all too often our government trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions. Instead of strategically applying our power and our principles, too often we set those principles aside as luxuries that we could no longer afford. And during this season of fear, too many of us — Democrats and Republicans, politicians, journalists, and citizens — fell silent.

The irony. It burns.

For reasons that I will explain, the decisions that were made over the last eight years established an ad hoc legal approach for fighting terrorism that was neither effective nor sustainable — a framework that failed to rely on our legal traditions and time-tested institutions, and that failed to use our values as a compass. And that's why I took several steps upon taking office to better protect the American people.

First, I banned the use of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques by the United States of America.

No he didn't.

The second decision that I made was to order the closing of the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay.

When, how, and where? No clue. Get back to us on that one, k? Per Maquire, we can call this "The Fierce Urgency of Someday."

Now, over the last several weeks, we've seen a return of the politicization of these issues that have characterized the last several years. I'm an elected official; I understand these problems arouse passions and concerns. They should. We're confronting some of the most complicated questions that a democracy can face. But I have no interest in spending all of our time re-litigating the policies of the last eight years. I'll leave that to others. I want to solve these problems, and I want to solve them together as Americans.

Oh, just STFU. He has the every bit of power at his disposal, and he'd simply like the opposition to stop opposing him. It's not politics, Obama. We HONESTLY disagree with you.

I could go on, but honestly I've read enough. Let's all agree that Obama speaks very nice. He's got a purty mouth. He just doesn't mean very much of what he says.

Allah summarizes it for us:

In a nutshell: We must look forward while also remembering that everything is Bush’s fault, and we must not abandon our core ideals unless doing so would make things too difficult for The One.

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Gay Marriage

The thing that gets me MOST about the whole gay marriage kerfuffle, is that its proponents are LYING. The lie I'm going to focus on, here, is that they are not interested in forcing religious groups to "accept" them.

Then we have this.

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (Reuters) - A bill that would have made New Hampshire the sixth state in the United States to authorize gay marriage stalled unexpectedly Wednesday over concessions to religious groups opposed to such unions.

The state's House of Representatives objected to language in the bill that would have allowed religious groups to decline to participate in same-sex marriage ceremonies or to offer gay couples other services.

Read that a couple of times. And, then read this:

State Representative Steve Vaillancourt, an openly gay Republican, was a leading voice against the amendment securing religious liberties, saying the House should not be "bullied" by the governor.

He said an earlier bill that passed both chambers and was on the governor's desk should have been made law, calling the amendment a step backward that would allow discrimination to be written into New Hampshire law.

So, protecting the rights of religious folks is discrimination. Got it.


And, just like I'm not a racist because I voted for McCain, I'm not homophobic either because I voted for Chris*.

*hypothetical, since I didn't vote.


Sorry, if I'm repeating news/stories from yesterday, but THEY'RE NEW TO ME.

Victor David Hanson, yesterday in the Corner:

All of which leaves us a final musing: If so, what was the hysteria of 2001-2008 about other than simple politics?

I doubt we get any more movies about ongoing renditions, redactions, any more Checkpoint-like novels, any more waterboarding skits and reenactments, any more late-night comedians doing their Bush tapped, intercepted, tortured, renditioned, tribunaled poor suspect X routines.

And I guess as well that the good old days of supposedly flushed Korans in Guantánamo and Omar the poor liberationist renditioned to Cairo are over. We are now in the age of a sober and judicious President Obama who circumspectly, if reluctantly and in anguish at the high cost, does what is necessary to keep us safe.

And we won't see a brave young liberal senator, Obama-like, barnstorming the Iowa precincts blasting a presidency for trampling our values with the shame of Guantánamo, wiretaps, intercepts, renditions, military tribunals, Predators, Iraq, etc. That motif just dissolved — or rather, it never really existed.

It short, all the fury, the vicious slander, the self-righteous outbursts, the impassioned speeches from the floor, the "I accuse" op-eds by the usual moralistic pundits — all that turned out to be solely about politics, nothing more.

H/t, again, Dan Collins.

Now that all the artistic energy in the United States is focused on fellating the One, we can thankfully say good-bye to all the moralizing movies and commentary from our Hollywood betters.

But, for those of you who who voted because you were against the War? Sorry. Obama wasn't really serious about that stuff. The guys aren't coming home any earlier. Gitmo? He'll get back to you. Wiretaps and the Patriot Act? BTW, those are legal and necessary.

No, the change is that Obama is a statist. He's working on taking all the power away from the little people (who keep fucking it up, apparently) and giving it those super-smart people in the Federal Government. Banks. Auto Industry. Cap and Trade. Health Insurance. Giving control of these things, to the Federal Government (for our own good, you know) is one step closer to Fascism. You can refuse to see it, but that just makes you dense.

We tried to follow the founding father's ideas about limiting the power of the Federal Government long enough, apparently. Now it's time for a "Constitutional Lawyer" President to throw that all away, in the biggest power grab since FDR.


From Frank J.

Anyone else freaked out by the thought of there once being half-monkey/half-lemurs? I’m glad they’re dead.

By the way, I’ve gotten tired of atheist who think any evidence of evolution helps disprove God, so I’ve decide to declare by fiat that evolution is property of Christianity and proof of God. Thus any evolution evidence helps disprove atheism. Evolution is way too complicated for Athor, god of atheism, to figure out, but its child’s play for my god, God. So every time some half-monkey/half-lemur thingee is found that is further disproof of atheism. So, if you’re an atheist, you have to give up believing in evolution or become a Christian

h/t :Dan Collins.

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Food for thought

From Monica Conyers. Paraphrased- as I just heard it on the radio. Audio should be available later.

How come whenever they go after corrupt politicians in Detroit, they always go after black politicians? Going back to Coleman Young, it's always the black folks. Never the white Anglo-Americans.

Fine question, Monica. Let's ponder that.


On that crapstrom that happened yesterday, from The Wall Street Journal:

One thing seems certain by 2016: Taxpayers will be paying Detroit to make the cars Americans don't want, and then they will pay again either through (trust us) a gas tax or with a purchase subsidy. Even the French must think we're nuts.

I can't WAIT!

Don't forget. Buzz word is that we are "working together." But, how that's going to work out isn't so clear:

So far, the Obama administration has yet to lay out its magical thinking on how the homegrown auto makers are to become "viable" when required to subordinate every auto attribute that consumers find desirable in favor of achieving a passenger-car average of 39 miles per gallon by 2016. Nonetheless the answer has quietly seeped out: Taxpayers will write $5,000 or $7,000 rebate checks to other taxpayers to bribe them to buy hybrids and plug-ins at a price that lets Detroit claim it's earning a "profit" on its Obamamobiles.

Mr. Obama was supposed to be smart. His administration was supposed to be a smart administration. But the policy coming out has not been smart. It has been a brute shifting of power to the president's political allies, justified by the shibboleths of copybook liberalism (though Mr. Obama is clever enough to know that nothing he's done will have a meaningful effect on atmospheric carbon or climate change or the country's need for oil imports).

The only power 'bama and his friends have left us, the American people, is our ability to refuse to buy what they're selling. By making this a political issue, the only choice we have is to hope Obamamotors fails.

Monday, May 18, 2009

Thank GOD we dodged that bullet

Palin was clearly too stupid to be vice-President. But Bidog? Genius.

Biden reveals location of secret bunker.

Add it to the list.

But, remember. As the comics have told us, there is simply nothing funny about Obama or his administration.

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Renamed! Leftist or Liberal? [was:Advice to my leftist readers]

This is a really, REALLY good article.

From the late 1960s forward it has been acceptable among too many students and faculty to ridicule or attack ideas with which they disagreed. Worse yet, the ridicule and attack often became a substitute for substantively addressing the disagreeable ideas.

Seem familiar to the debating style used by liberals at this very site? And, before you accuse me of quoting some right-wing nutter, go read what he has to say. This guy is definitely a liberal, but not a "leftist".

Bits and pieces:

But despite the healthy, productive, and necessary debate concerning global economic history and contemporary policy measures, often the loudest and most aggressive voices in academia do not represent healthy, positive or informed debate. The anti-globalization movement, anti-Americanism, and lingering communism that are common in some academic departments do not offer a useful, positive, or well-considered means of making the world a better place. Hatred and bitterness are no substitute for intellectual coherence. The social and intellectual atmosphere at most universities (and, significantly, the two cannot be distinguished) continues to support views that are better described as “Leftist” than as Liberal. It is not socially acceptable in the humanities departments of most universities to suggest that Hong Kong and Singapore are economically successful today in large part because they had the good fortune to have inherited classical liberal principles as a legacy of British colonialism, or that free trade is the best means available of alleviating global poverty today, or to debate whether FDR or LBJ was the most destructive U.S. president in the 20th century.

This guy is a freakin OUTLAW.

Another Link, because you REALLY must read this.

h/t: Protein Wisdom.

Friday, May 15, 2009

Baha haha ha

Germany says nein! to taking any of the Gitmo gang. 'Bama wants Germany to take in 9 of the little terrorists.

Bavaria’s Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann — of the Christian Social Union, Bavaria’s sister party to Merkel’s Christian Democrats — called the request an “imposition” by the US. “We don’t need people like this in Germany,” he told the mass circulation tabloid Bild. “It would be extremely naive (of German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier) to let these people into the country.” Steinmeier himself, though, has kept relatively quiet on the subject — though he has been consistent in his support of the Obama administration.

Isn't it WONDERFUL that the world loves us now? And, isn't it satisfying that the world powers want us to do things they wouldn't do??

The coming shitstorm

Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act is to be unveiled.

The largest scientific and economic questions are being addressed by others, so I will confine myself to reporting about how all this looks from the receiving end of the taxes, restrictions and mandates Congress is now proposing.

Quite simply, it looks like imperialism. This bill would impose enormous taxes and restrictions on free commerce by wealthy but faltering powers -- California, Massachusetts and New York -- seeking to exploit politically weaker colonies in order to prop up their own decaying economies. Because proceeds from their new taxes, levied mostly on us, will be spent on their social programs while negatively impacting our economy, we Hoosiers decline to submit meekly.

The Waxman-Markey legislation would more than double electricity bills in Indiana. Years of reform in taxation, regulation and infrastructure-building would be largely erased at a stroke. In recent years, Indiana has led the nation in capturing international investment, repatriating dollars spent on foreign goods or oil and employing Americans with them. Waxman-Markey seems designed to reverse that flow. "Closed: Gone to China" signs would cover Indiana's stores and factories.

Michigan unemployement is over 13%. Next year, they're predicting 17%. And, that's the conservative estimate. This cap and trade scheme could do WONDERS for our economy. Imagine all those unemployed folks having to deal with higher energy bills? It's almost as if ... Obama doesn't care about the little guy. NO! That couldn't be it!

And for what? No honest estimate pretends to suggest that a U.S. cap-and-trade regime will move the world's thermometer by so much as a tenth of a degree a half century from now. My fellow citizens are being ordered to accept impoverishment for a policy that won't save a single polar bear.

We are told that although China, India and others show no signs of joining in this dismal process, we will eventually induce their participation by "setting an example." Watching the impending indigence of the Midwest, and the flow of jobs from our shores to theirs, our friends in Asia and the Third World are far more likely to choose any other path but ours.

Politicians in Washington speak of a reawakened appreciation for manufacturing and American competitiveness. But under their policy, those who make real products will suffer. Already we observe the piranha swarm of green lobbyists wangling special exemptions, subsidies and side deals. The ordinary Hoosier was not invited to this party, and can expect at most only table scraps at the service entrance.

Pass this, and Obama is certain to go down as the Worst. President. Ever. I hope Obama fails. As much as I relish being proven right that he was a horrible choice as president, I do not want to have this as my vindication. Cap and trade is a horrible taxing scheme that will have very little effect on our climate.

The Congressional Budget Office -- Mr. Orszag's former roost -- estimates that the price hikes from a 15% cut in emissions would cost the average household in the bottom-income quintile about 3.3% of its after-tax income every year. That's about $680, not including the costs of reduced employment and output. The three middle quintiles would see their paychecks cut between $880 and $1,500, or 2.9% to 2.7% of income. The rich would pay 1.7%. Cap and trade is the ideal policy for every Beltway analyst who thinks the tax code is too progressive (all five of them).

But the greatest inequities are geographic and would be imposed on the parts of the U.S. that rely most on manufacturing or fossil fuels -- particularly coal, which generates most power in the Midwest, Southern and Plains states. It's no coincidence that the liberals most invested in cap and trade -- Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Ed Markey -- come from California or the Northeast.

Imagine that?

And of course Congress is its own "stakeholder." An economy-wide tax under the cover of saving the environment is the best political moneymaker since the income tax. Obama officials are already telling the press, sotto voce, that climate revenues might fund universal health care and other new social spending. No doubt they would, and when they did Mr. Obama's cap-and-trade rebates would become even smaller.

Cap and trade, in other words, is a scheme to redistribute income and wealth -- but in a very curious way. It takes from the working class and gives to the affluent; takes from Miami, Ohio, and gives to Miami, Florida; and takes from an industrial America that is already struggling and gives to rich Silicon Valley and Wall Street "green tech" investors who know how to leverage the political class.

Cap and trade is a big, fat scam.

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Rule Five blogging debut

I'm not much of a Rule Five blogger, but this is really just too funny to pass up.

Michelle Obama is #93 on Maxim's Hot 100 for 2009. Really?
No, really?

From "PrivatePIgg" at PFB Blog:

Is it just me, or does it feel like we are living in North Korea? Kim Jong-Il invented the light bulb, and Michelle Obama is the hottest woman on Earth. Yes, Master.

Here are some of the women who are just not as hot as M'chelle. Number 95, Padma Lakshmi:

And, this poor girls falls in at #96, Olivia Munn:

Now, I have to admit, I'm not Maxim's target audience, so I may be WAY off base here, but Michelle just doesn't seem, TO ME, to be among the 100 hottest women. I suppose that's 'cause I'm a right-wing nutter.

That must be it.

Darth Cheney

I'm not wincing.

He's perfectly entitled to make his case, and given that Dick Cheney is as popular as Britney Spears at a Sunday school teacher convention, we hope he continues to be the face of the Republican Party," said Hari Sevugan, national press secretary for the Democratic National Committee. "His continued presence reminds people that the GOP is unwilling to put forward new ideas or leadership, and so long as he continues to be the voice of the Republican cause, he ensures that the Republican Party will remain the party of the past."

Heh. I never grow tired of that meme. Dumbest political statement ever.

Since leaving the White House in January, Cheney has accused Obama of making the country less safe, disagreed with orders to close the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, defended the Bush administration's harsh interrogation techniques and called for a public airing of classified information on the controversial program. On Sunday, he said he would pick Rush Limbaugh over former secretary of state Colin L. Powell as a model for the Republican Party and virtually wrote his onetime colleague out of the GOP.

Cheney has made clear that part of his motivation is to defend against possible legal action against Bush officials who authorized or carried out the controversial interrogation policies. He recently told Stephen F. Hayes of the Weekly Standard that he remembers how, during the Iran-contra scandal in the Reagan administration, senior officials often ran for cover, leaving "the little guys out to dry." He said he is determined to defend those people now. "I don't know whether anybody else will, but I sure as hell will," he told Hayes.

I hope Cheney keeps at it, and I hope Obama fails in many of his plans for America. OUTLAW.

OH- and Paul Begala is one stupid motherfucker.

Health Care CRISES!

Today's feature presentation comes to us via Laura from over at the Green Room:

Please watch before you comment.

Obama says “the stars are aligned” to implement the changes he wants. What he really means is Congress is aligned, and that he wants to ram this through the way they did the stimulus package - unread, undebated, and unworkable.

Of course, bama and friends have no idea how to fund this behemoth, that we don't need, and the educated citizen shouldn't want. Chances are, should it come to pass, it will NOT be funded in an clear or honest way.

What we need to get away from is the idea that healthcare can be provided for by the government. Government doesn't provide anything, but it's (often crappy) organizational abilities. Everything comes from the people. Government takes, and transfers.

So, let's be honest. When someone says that the government should provide healthcare, what they really should be saying is that other people should be paying their healthcare bills.

Should we be paying for the healthcare of young folks who would rather live large than drop a few bills a month for their own healthcare? Should we, as a society, be paying for the healthcare of 12 million non-Americans? Should we be providing the healthcare for folks making $75,000 a year, who would rather have a new care that pay for their own doctor's visits?

I await the outrage from the left


The Obama administration is weighing plans to detain some terror suspects on U.S. soil -- indefinitely and without trial -- as part of a plan to retool military commission trials that were conducted for prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The proposal being floated with members of Congress is another indication of President Barack Obama's struggles to establish his counter-terrorism policies, balancing security concerns against attempts to alter Bush-administration practices he has harshly criticized.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Left's Response to Republican Criticism

Shut Up is on the march.

h/t to Serr8d who I would have just linked, but I know how some folks are non-clickers.

Honesty and Transparency

What did Obama know, and when did he know it? A day after the government announced that Chrysler was entering a short, government-assisted Chapter 11 bankrupcy, and Obmama declared that this will not disrupt the lives of the people who work at Chrysler or the communities that depend on it, Chrysler announced it was closing five plants. Two in Michigan.

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Democrat, is an especially interesting case. According to other participants, Granholm played a prominent role in a call between public officials and Chrysler executives at 1 p.m. on April 30, just after Obama made his announcement. In that call, she pressed Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli after he spoke of maintaining 30,000 jobs at Chrysler's domestic plants.

Granholm, a Harvard law graduate and former federal prosecutor, quickly noted that Chrysler actually employs thousands more, and she wanted to discern if Nardelli was playing games with those numbers, according to call participants.

But Nardelli glossed over the numbers and left the impression that his was a ballpark figure and that no cuts were planned. Granholm appeared to believe it. Visibly pleased, she told a news conference that afternoon that all Chrysler jobs would be saved, adding that there was even "the opportunity for more" jobs through the Fiat deal and restructuring.

Soon enough, this would prove to be incorrect. Yet Granholm, a Democratic star, apparently has not complained publicly about being misled. Her office did not return The Plain Dealer's calls to discuss the matter.

For the Obama White House, the Chrysler episode raises a question about one of its favorite buzz words: transparency. Administration officials, including those close to the negotiations involving Chrysler, have refused to talk for attribution. One official told The Plain Dealer that he is still working with struggling auto companies, including General Motors, and doesn't wish to trade accusations with lawmakers.

So, why hasn't Jenny said anything about this since?


The word of the day is Statism.

statism |ˈstātˌizəm|
a political system in which the state has substantial centralized control over social and economic affairs : the rise of authoritarian statism.
statist |ˈsteɪd1st| noun & adjective

Here, let me use it in a sentence for you:

Obama is a statist.


Catching up ....

News from yesterday ....

Sugar tax:

Proponents of the tax cite research showing that consuming sugar-sweetened drinks can lead to obesity, diabetes and other ailments. They say the tax would lower consumption, reduce health problems and save medical costs. At least a dozen states already have some type of taxes on sugary beverages, said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

"Soda is clearly one of the most harmful products in the food supply, and it's something government should discourage the consumption of," Mr. Jacobson said.

Mr. Jacobson can go fuck himself. And, I don't even drink soda. What has HAPPENED to our country? It isn't the job of the Federal government to either provide medical care OR encourage healthy habits.

Monday, May 11, 2009

What he said/What he meant

What he said:

"We can no longer afford to spend as if deficits do not matter and waste is not our problem," Mr. Obama said.

What he meant:

"We can no longer afford to spend on defense as if deficits do not matter and waste is not our problem. Because, for social programs, and funds targeted at my voting base - deficits have a worth-while payoff !"

Defense Department to absorb 80% of the cuts 'bama has proposed in next year's discretionary funds.

This $17 billion represents less than 1% of this year's budget deficit. Congrats!

Hot Air:

Barack Obama has submitted a budget plan that spends over $400 billion dollars more than the previous administration’s last full budget, an increase of 12%. That comes on top of an off-budget additional $787 billion in the “stimulus” bill, hundreds of billions in extra TARP funding, and an estimated $635 billion “down-payment” on health-care reform, also off-budget. How does Obama plan to pay for all of that? As we noted in last week’s Obamateurisms, Obama offset this with a whopping $17 billion in proposed cuts, half of which comes at the expense of national defense.

It's the deficit, stupid! I thought that was the mantra of the election. Line-by-line, 'bama was gonna go. Apparently, he only intended to do that with that icky Defense Department. I feel safer already. Because the World loves us now, right?

Friday, May 08, 2009

This is what I meant, last night at dinner

I've been trying to wrap my head around this idea, and how to best express it, and then someone at Protein Wisdom linked this. What idea, you ask? Well, the idea that the GOP, or conservatives, have allowed their message to go astray. To focus all the attention on loser arguments so that our Prime Directive gets lost in the weeds. "Our" arguments are being framed and presented by liberals and their media cohorts, and they have, for all intent and purpose, set our agenda. We've been reduced to merely responding to whatever is thrown at us, constantly on the defense.

I grow a bit tired of the in-fighting on all the conservative blogs and news shows between the “social conservatives”: and the Libertarian wing of the party. Ditch abortion. Don’t ditch abortion. Move to the center. Don’t abandon principles. It’s a defeatist argument and one that really doesn’t need to be fought. The David Frums and Meghan McCains have it half right. Where they lose me is in their obvious attempts to gain approval from our enemies.
But they do have one thing right. In the current climate, many of the social issues are big losers amongst certain voter groups. The biggest bloc, and the one we have the greatest potential to turn, is women. Women tend to poll liberal on issues like gay marriage and abortion.
Now, before this turns into a two-hundred comment post with people yelling about not giving up their core principles, let me be clear. I do not advocate that the party pull left or advertise itself as “Democrat-light.” But I do advocate prioritizing the issues that form the foundation of our marketing campaign.

Yes, exactly. That last part.

But there's more!

Did the Democrats put nationalizing the banks, firing corporate CEOs, and practically making out with Hugo Chavez in their trailer? Did their poster include Obama’s embarrassing world apology tour? I think not.
Yet, we allow the media to frame the discussions and the debates. Why, for example, did most of our pundits take the bait on the Perez Hilton thing and let the media frame the arguments as an example of the gay marriage issue being debated in the public forum? That incident was about how the left stifles free speech. It was about how women are second-class citizens in the Democratic party. Every discussion of Ms. California should have been an opportunity to bring up the media’s treatment of Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton. But it wasn’t. Instead, we allowed the Democrats to cut our trailer and replace the robot on the key art with a photo of Shia LaBeouf.
The core values of the movement can be different from the marketing campaign. That’s the smart way to do it. It’s how the Democrats took over the government and it’s our only hope at taking it back.

So, what is the "Prime Directive" for conservatives?

Conservatism is all about freedom. That’s the sales pitch. Conservatives endorse freedom. We are the modern day rebels. We are the punk rockers of politics. We like to work hard and party harder. The government is “The Man.” “The Man” tries to hold you down. Anybody who wants the “safety net” of cradle to the grave government support should be ridiculed. And rightfully so.

Yep. That's it. That is the CORE value of conservatives. OUTLAW! FIGHT THE POWER.

Thursday, May 07, 2009

Hater warns against gay marriage

More Carrie news? Nope. From JammieWearingFool:

D.C. Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), the only council member to vote against the bill today to legalize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, predicted today there could be a "civil war" in the District if the Council decides to take up a broader gay marriage bill later this year.

"All hell is going to break lose," Barry said while speaking to reporters. "We may have a civil war. The black community is just adamant against this."

"What you've got to understand is 98 percent of my constituents are black and we don't have but a handful of openly gay residents," Barry said. "Secondly, at least 70 percent of those who express themselves to me about this are opposed to anything dealing with this issue. The ministers think it is a sin, and I have to be sensitive to that."

So, what bad names will Perez Hilton call Marion Barry? Or, we could use adjust Bob's smear, and call Barry a "Soldier of God and Gay Hating City Council Member."

I mean, let's put this in perspective. Carrie merely voiced her opinion on national tv. Marion Barry VOTED against it.

Wednesday, May 06, 2009

I thought "Hope" and "Change" would be different/ with more!

That incident with Steve Rattner that the White House said "never happened":

Who the fuck do you think you're dealing with? We'll have the IRS audit your fund. Every one of your employees. Your investors. Then we will have the Securities and Exchange Commission rip through your books looking for anything and everything and nothing we find to destroy you with.

Bet you wished you'd read "Liberal Fascims" when it came out.

h/t: Serr8d

Michael Barone weighs in:

Left-wing bloggers have been saying that the White House’s denial of making threats should be taken at face value and that Lauria’s statement* is not evidence to the contrary. But that’s ridiculous. Lauria is a reputable lawyer and a contributor to Democratic candidates. He has no motive to lie. The White House does.

Think carefully about what’s happening here. The White House, presumably car czar Steven Rattner and deputy Ron Bloom, is seeking to transfer the property of one group of people to another group that is politically favored. In the process, it is setting aside basic property rights in favor of rewarding the United Auto Workers for the support the union has given the Democratic Party. The only possible limit on the White House’s power is the bankruptcy judge, who might not go along.

Michigan politicians of both parties joined Obama in denouncing the holdout bondholders. They point to the sad plight of UAW retirees not getting full payment of the health care benefits the union negotiated with Chrysler. But the plight of the beneficiaries of the pension funds represented by the bondholders is sad too. Ordinarily you would expect these claims to be weighed and determined by the rule of law. But not apparently in this administration.

[*One of my clients,” Lauria told host Frank Beckmann, “was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight.”]

Monday, May 04, 2009

Justice, liberal Style as per Bob

Ted Stevens conceals $250,000 worth of gifts. RETHUGLICAN CORRUPTION!!

Chris Todd gets sweetheart land deal from a man he helped pardon? Nothing to see here. Move along folks.

In his Senate financial disclosure documents from 2002-2007, Mr. Dodd reported that the Galway home was worth between $100,001 and $250,000. However, Mr. Rennie reports that in 2006 and 2007 the Senator added a footnote that reads: "value based on appraisal at time of purchase."

Mr. Dodd had good reason to add the qualifier. Senate rules call for valuations to be current and anyone who looked into the estimate would immediately spot Mr. Dodd's lowballing. A June 17, 2007 feature in Britain's Sunday Times did just that. "Diary" observed that in Roundstone "a two-bed recently made E680,000 ($918,000) and a cottage is currently on offer for E800,000." Noting Mr. Dodd's estimate of his property -- between E75,000 and E185,000 -- the diarist quipped, "to hell with the stamp duty, and form an orderly queue."

Don't care about this either, do you?

Mr. Dodd is already under a cloud for receiving what a former loan officer claims was preferential treatment from Countrywide Financial on two mortgage refinancings -- in Connecticut and Washington -- in 2003. Countrywide was an aggressive lender to shaky borrowers and relied heavily on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to buy those mortgages in bulk. As a senior Member of the Senate Banking Committee, Mr. Dodd was one of Fannie's greatest promoters. Mr. Dodd promised last year to disclose mortgage documents to prove he got no special treatment, but so far all he's done is let a few hand-picked journalists take a quick peek before he put the papers back in storage.

Friday, May 01, 2009

Note to self

Next time, link to MY BLOG when I find something good. Good stuff like this, which I linked in a comment at Protein Wisdom which then found its way to thePuppy blender. Did it come from my comment? I don't know for sure, but I'm thinking it probably did.

If you haven't listened, you need to. Second link up there.