Saturday, December 08, 2007

Pay day loans II

Luke at Smoke if You Got 'Em has some good points on the pay day loan operations.

However, I'd like to ask some question on his points.... let's go through them.

While I don't doubt that the lottery is merely a method for the state to get the money back that it has paid to the poor, I do think that payday loans are more destructive. Moreover, even though I'm not one for government intervention in the free markets, I would support more regulation of these operations.

So it's OK for the state to rip off the poor via the lottery so they "can get their money back" but not OK for a private company who gave the state their money to begin with?

The reason I support more regulation of these businesses is because of the lack of regulation compared against other "banking" style operations like banks, credit unions, and mortgage companies. All states, and even the feds, regulate banks, credit unions and mortgage companies to some degree. In fact, one might even consider them to be highly regulated entities. But payday lenders are not regulated as uniformly. It's true that more states are beginning to pay more attention to payday lenders, but as it stands they are largely unregulated. Now, I'm not saying that I would support really stringent regulations that require all kinds of reporting and record keeping. My main focus would be on the interest rates charged. A loooong time ago, states used to have "usury" laws that prevented lenders of any kind from charging exorbitant interest rates on money loaned. However, I believe only Utah has usury laws still on the books. All other states, including Ohio, have done away with them.

Consider that the reason these payday loan operation sprang up in the first place is because of the regulation of banks, S&L's and mortgage companies. The companies setting these businesses up are simply filling a banking need that the traditional banks cannot do because of regulation. One of the largest of the payday operations in Ohio was created by the ex President of then Cincinnati based Provident Bank. Don't you think he would have loved to get Provident in on those deals if regulation hadn't tied their hands to do so?

Second, if you take the profit motivation out of these payday loan operations they will go away. Now the poor have no place to do "banking" business except loan sharks and pawn brokers; hardly a better alternative.

I wonder how Luke feels about grocery stores like Krogers that charge more in inner city stores than they do in the suburbs. Are they gouging the poor? Why shouldn't we regulate them?

What about operations like Jackson Hewitt, HR Block, 7/11, JB Byrider, et al. who have made dealing with the poor a cottage industry. Should we regulate them since they charge poor customers demonstrably more money than suburban operations?

Once again, the conventional wisdom is that "the poor" are some kind of brainless group of disenfranchised citizens. In fact, most of "the poor" are that way for a reason. If most of them would give up their cigarettes, booze and lottery tickets, they wouldn't need to use pay day loan operations to begin with.

Please read my earlier post on a rapid refund conversation I had with a "poor" person. I guarantee that's more the norm than the exception.

I challenge anybody who believes in regulating these operations to go into any convenience store on the beginning of the month. You'd think it was Christmas. You would no longer wonder why pay day loan operations exist.

Look, I hate defending the people who run these businesses. I feel the same way about defending sex offenders against these ridiculous sex crimes laws. But I'm going to call out the total hypocrisy on these issues.

I also like the debate on this issue but I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why it's OK for the state to "rip off the poor" rather than private business. The state after all, is a reflection on it's citizenry, so in essence we're saying is "it's OK for all of us to rip off the poor as long as we get to share in the profits equally".

First Citiwide Change Bank

Maybe these guys should do payday loans

Why the Bengals will always be losers


Palmer: Winning cures all that ails.

Carson, the clue phone is ringing.... Will you pick it up?

Consider this Carson.... when you cure your ails, you'll start winning.

Winning doesn't happen magically. Although for the Bengals, they think it must.


Mark Steyn in his Steynian way bangs on the sub prime loan market.


So now the government has stepped in and said that, if you fall into a particular category of adjustable-rate mortgage (ARMs, in the biz) and you're worried that it's getting way too adjustable, don't worry: The Nanny State is about to readjust it well inside your comfort zone. By fiat of the Treasury secretary, your adjustable-rate mortgage is henceforth an unadjustable adjustable-rate mortgage. These new UNARMs will spread their healing balm across the land until it's safe enough for the housing "market" to once again be exposed to market forces.

The government has, in effect, nullified the terms of legal contracts mutually agreed by both parties – borrower and lender, Mr. and Mrs. Joe Schmoe and the First National Bank of Pleasantville.

This is a pretty remarkable act by a "conservative" administration. The government's general absolution for imprudence by both borrower and lender doesn't seem a smart move – for the U.S. credit markets, for real estate, for responsible borrowers for future homeowners, or for state and municipal taxpayers whose governments are being encouraged by Washington to bail out home "owners" by issuing tax-free debt.

I would like to know how the Bush administration plans on taking care of those families who acted responsibly and "locked in" to 30 year fixed rate even though that rate was higher than a variable rate. Shouldn't they get some kind of a rebate?

Or how about the family who could have used a four bedroom home but instead squeezed into a three bedroom because it was more affordable. When are the feds going to give them some money so they can move into the home they really wanted?

Maybe the feds can come up with a program for people who racked a bunch of credit card debt and instead of rolling it into a mortgage, actually knuckled down and paid off the debt at 28% interest.

I have a client who is an appraiser. He used to do work for some of these sub prime lenders until they started to tell him they needed a certain appraisal to come in at "x" dollars. So he quit doing appraisals for them.

It would be easy to beat on the mortgage brokers in these instances. In fact, they should go to jail for perpetrating frauds. Regardless, many of these brokers are under pressure by the borrower to do the deal. Many of them have racked up credit cards and are trying to refinance that debt into a mortgage without giving up the credit cards.

When will individuals be responsible for their choices in life? When will the government start rewarding those that act responsibly instead of penalizing them with taxes so that they can bail out someone who's a totally irresponsible? When will the feds either do away with the mortgage interest deduction or allow all consumer interest to be deductible so people will be less inclined to roll consumer debt into their homes?

The fact is, many of these subprime loans are a direct result of the mortgage interest deduction which encouraged people to roll all of their consumer debt into mortgages. As people rolled this debt over, many of them never altered their credit spending. Now that the Merry go Round has stopped, the government is trying to clean up a mess which was their creation to begin with.

The federal government, creating problems then solving them since the 16th. amendment

Do you believe in Miracles

Jason Lee Steorts comments on Christians (specifically Catholics) who want to beat on Mitt Romney.


Everything was created by an all-powerful and all-knowing being who exists outside of space and time. This being impregnated a human woman through non-physical means and was born as her offspring. Within space and time, the being was executed as a criminal and spent three days in a tomb. But then it came back to life and went up to a place called Heaven, which we cannot detect or observe. We eat this being’s body once a week. By doing this — and sundry other things, such as getting sprinkled with water by a man in a robe who utters an incantation, or telling the man in the robe all the bad things we do — by doing this, we too can go to Heaven after our own bodies come up out of their graves.

His point is how do mainstream Christians pass judgment on Mormonism when their own faith is based on something that totally runs against logic.

I don't know why Romney rubs me the wrong way. It may be his Mormonism or maybe it's his background in Massachusetts. Regardless, this article does give me time to pause and think about my own prejudices.

Pay Day Loans

I've always been surprised at how many of my fellow sensible conservative bloggers ( Dave at NixGuy and Tom at Bizzyblog) support regulation of pay loan operations when there are so many other places that rip off the poor.

It's always been my opinion the Ohio Lottery is 3000 times more destructive to poor people's lives than check cashing operations; yet everyone wants to look the other way at that.

Well here's another incident where legalized gambling has ruined another family.


A former Lockland account clerk is accused of bilking the village out of $60,000 and then using the cash to buy lottery tickets and feed a gambling addiction at the Argosy casino, Hamilton County prosecutors said.

Tell me again how many families pay day loan operations have destroyed in this manner.

Why give shooter boy what he wants

All those a-holes that like to call themselves "journalists", somehow lack the intelligence to recognized that they are pawns being duped by so many derelicts in the world.

So this week we have a murderer who tells all his acquaintances that he's going to be famous. So how do all those "journalists" handle this information? They proceed to post his picture, name and biography all over every newspaper, web site and newscast in the country.

Mona Charon at National Review Online addresses the issue.


I still remember where I was when I heard that the student who committed the Virginia Tech massacre had released a press packet including a video, a manifesto, and photos of himself holding various weapons. I was just leaving a TV studio (having spoken about something else). Bursting with anger, I asked one of the producers if I could use his computer and posted on the web an urgent plea to NBC News (the organization that had first received the packet): “Don’t publish it!”

They did, of course. And so did every other news outlet. The killer’s picture, his disordered thoughts, and his resentments were aired for days and weeks.

The same dangerous pattern has been repeated again and again. The disturbed man who took hostages at Sen. Clinton’s headquarters in New Hampshire told loved ones to “watch the news tonight.” The shooter who terrorized an Omaha shopping mall by mowing down total strangers has achieved his goal (and I will not add to the problem by publishing his name). He left a suicide note in which he predicted “at least now I’ll be famous.” His picture is featured in every newspaper and is flashed on television hourly. His miseries are being dissected and analyzed. An unhappy and rejected young man is finally getting, posthumously, the attention he clearly sought but could not secure in life. And other disturbed people are watching and taking note.

Apparently, the only way a "journalist" will ever get the hint is when one of these idiots raids one of their offices and shoots up a bunch of their comrades.

Global Warming follow up

A reader named Mark sent in a follow up to my earlier post about global warming causing every thing.

It's by the American Thinker.


Dr. John Brignell, a British engineering professor, runs a website called numberwatch. He has compiled what has to be the most complete collection of links to media stories ascribing the cause of everything under the sun to global warming. He has already posted more than six-hundred links.

The site's stated mission is to expose all the "scares, scams, junk, panics and flummery cooked up by the media, politicians, bureaucrats and so-called scientists and others that try to confuse the public with wrong numbers" Professor Brignell's motto is "Working to Combat Math Hysteria."

Thanks Mark

Friday, December 07, 2007

Frank Caliendo on Letterman as Bush

The Fairness doctrine in play


I want to apologize for the foul language on the title of the Jimmy Kimmel video.

I was trying to find a humorous Hillary video and I did not see the title which transfered directly from youtube.

It's my attempt to keep the blog PG-13 and I don't think that language qualifies on this blog.

Again, my apologies.

Hillary Clinton shows off her cleavage - Jimmy Kimmel Live

A Friday Funny

Journalist snubs bloggers.... again

Here's an interesting exchange with Helen Thomas regarding whether bloggers are journalists.

Dear Helen, for the record, I'm more of a "journalist than you are and I'm an accountant.

Again, someone needs to remind me of what makes a "journalist"?

According to Wikipedia (the devil per Ms. Thomas), here are her credentials

Thomas was born in Winchester, Kentucky, to Lebanese immigrants.[1] She was reared in Detroit, Michigan and attended Wayne University, graduating with a bachelor's degree in 1942. Thomas' first job in journalism was as a copygirl for the now-defunct Washington Daily News, but shortly after she was promoted to cub reporter she was laid off as part of massive cutbacks at the paper.

So maybe it's a college degree? Except Peter Jennings was a high school drop out.

I know... you have to pass an exam like the bar, the CPA exam, or medical boards. Nope.

Apparently, what makes you a journalist is to hang out with other people who call themselves "journalists".

Maybe we can hang an MA on the end of all "journalist" names. Think of it, Helen Thomas MA (Masters in Arrogance).

Now global warming reduces hurricanes

I realize the average American has no memory past his last six pack purchase, but for cryin' out loud....

As I predicted, a couple of months ago.... remember how we were going to have all these Katrina type hurricanes because of global warming?

Well now we're not going to have all these hurricanes because of global warming.....

In June, as the 2007 hurricane season began, the predictions were dire. There were to be 16 named storms. Nine hurricanes. Five “intense hurricanes.” A 74 percent-chance of a storm hitting the U.S. coastline — all above the historical average. And numerous news stories cited Global Warming as the culprit for what was about to happen.

Hurricane season just ended over the weekend. The results? There have been six hurricanes (the historic average), two of them “intense hurricanes” (below average). Not one hit the United States (below average). Floridian business owners are so upset over the inaccurate forecasts that they are considering a lawsuit. Not only has “hurricane hype” cut back on their tourism industry, it has also sent their insurance rates skyrocketing.

But now

We know the possible consequences of tinkering with our environment, causing unprecedented changes. This is how we approach the subject of man-made global warming. Wherever there is change, we turn immediately to global warming to explain it. Heat and cold, drought and downpour, famine and plenty — all can be caused by global warming. It can cause more foliage and less foliage; a slower-spinning earth and a faster one; more snow and less snow; a sun-scarred desert world, or a new ice age. Climate change makes mountains grow and it makes mountains shrink.

Isn't that the whole point behind the "science" of global warming...... make the past match with the "theory" instead of predicting the future based on the theory?

The libs close in

Ever since Tim Russert drew blood with the "driver's licenses for illegals" question, it looks like liberals have sniffed the smelling salts and are starting to hit the Hill pretty hard.

You've got all the big papers coming out with their "Why we can't nominate Hillary" pieces.

Here's one from the uber liberal LA Times


On paper, they look an awful lot like Hillary Rodham Clinton. They are professional women of a certain age -- politically active Democrats, liberals, unabashed feminists who remember what it was like to be told they could not become firefighters or university department heads, let alone president of the United States of America.

They are women of accomplishment who have bumped up against glass ceilings, sometimes breaking them, while managing marriages, raising children and trying to make the world their version of a better place.

They have waited a long, long time for a plausible female presidential candidate. You'd think they'd be rushing to support Clinton. But they can't stand her.

I love it when they eat their own.


Thursday, December 06, 2007

The Weasel

Investor's Business Daily with commentary on the honorable senator Harry Reid.


Reid, who didn't let President Ford's funeral interrupt his junket to Peru's Machu Picchu ruins in January, managed to lead only a tiny percentage of the Senate against free trade for our Andean ally on Tuesday, as the pact won 77-18. His stance not only showed how bad his judgment is, but how out of touch he is even with his own party.

Peru was supposed to be the easiest of all trade pacts for Congress to approve. The AFL-CIO didn't oppose it, and Peru accepted changes without complaint to ensure its passage. There was no good reason not to support it. But Reid voted "no" anyway, and justified it in an 883-word diatribe blaming Bush.

"I support engagement with Latin America; I strongly support being a better neighbor, but I do not support this narrow policy tool that the Bush administration has fixated on," Reid said.


More global warming hypocrisy

NEVER have so many people converged to save the planet from the catastrophic effects of global warming, with more than 10,000 flying in to Indonesia's resort island of Bali.

Delegates include ministers, Nobel laureates and drought-stricken farmers, but critics say they are contributing to the very problem they aim to solve.


Bitter partisanship

Walter Williams once again hit one out with this column.


Some people complain about bitter partisan politics. I welcome it. The greater the number of decisions made in the political arena the greater the conflict. Let's look at it by way of a few examples:

I like the Lexus LS 460. I also like Dell computers. Many other people have different preferences. Some might prefer a Cadillac and an HP computer while others prefer a Chrysler and IBM computer. With these strong preferences for particular cars and computers, we never see people arguing or fighting in an effort to impose their preferences for cars and computers on other people. There's car and computer peace. Why? You buy the car and computer you want; I do likewise and we remain friends.

There's absolutely no reason for car and computer choices to remain peaceful. Suppose our car and computer choices were made in the political arena through representative democracy or through a plebiscite where majority ruled. We would decide collectively whether our cars would be Lexuses or Cadillacs or Chryslers. We also would decide collectively whether our computer would be a Dell or HP or IBM computer.

I guarantee there would be nasty, bitter conflict between otherwise peaceful car and computer buyers. Each person would have reason to enter into conflict with those having different car and computer tastes because one person's win would necessarily be another's loss. It would be what game theorists call a zero-sum game.

How would you broker a peace with these parties in conflict? If you're not a tyrant, I'm betting you would say, “Take the decision out of the political arena and let people buy whatever car and computer they wish.”

To add to Williams piece, the more partisan and bitter, the less that "gets" done. Why is that when the government "gets things done", my rectum gets a little bit tighter?

Where's my global warming

I usually don't wear a coat this time of year. Usually I can get by with a sleeveless, fleece vest.

This morning I come rollin' out of the palatial abode and froze my ass off. What gives? I get in the car and the temperature reads 8 degrees!

I guess I should look on the bright side. If we didn't have global warming, the temperature would have been 6.8 degrees.

Wednesday, December 05, 2007

Another liberal conundrum

Divorce means global warming.


Divorce can be bad for the environment. In countries around the world divorce rates have been rising, and each time a family dissolves the result is two new households.

"A married household actually uses resources more efficiently than a divorced household," said Jianguo Liu, an ecologist at Michigan State University whose analysis of the environmental impact of divorce appears in this week's online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.


Genetically engineered food

Here's an interesting article about "Frankenstein" engineered food.


AS we eat our chips, hamburgers and milkshakes for lunch today, let's put the debate about genetically modified food into perspective. We eat food laden in fats and preservatives largely without debate or complaint. Yet the prospect of producing GM foods that could be drought resistant, grown without being heavily treated with pesticide and made more nutritious has caused a huge outcry.

I've never quite understood the public outcry over GEF. Even before this technology the tomato's, corn, and wheat we ate was no where near the food produced 100 years ago.

Plants and seed have been routinely bred to ward off the ill effects of climate and pest; there just has never been an ability to make the dramatic changes in the plant DNA we have today.


Sexual Choice

A letter to the editor today talks about the downside of sexual choice in today's society.


As a "consumer" who was sold "sexual choice," I would like to let you know that premarital sex today is not the "product" it's been advertised to be.

My generation would better benefit from being taught the cost versus benefit of these life-affecting choices, rather than be subject to a political agenda that assumes that all young people will choose to have sex and all they need is contraceptive information. Knowledge of contraceptives is important, but it's more important to know that the sexual choices made today can affect young people their entire lives.

In all honesty, can anyone truly say that their lives were better off because they engaged in sex early and often? I just wonder how many people who have led active, promiscuous sex lives regret that choice as compared to the people who lived chaste lifestyles? How many people who have decided to live monogamous lifestyles have had to deal with issues like HPV, HIV, abortions, STD's? And I haven't even mentioned the emotional trauma of being used sexually.

Yet we still have this group of people who insist on instructing kids to "do what they're going to do anyway".

As I've always contended, it's like telling a kid that it's OK to smoke as long as the cigarettes have filters. Or It's OK to do drugs as long as they are made safely by pharmaceutical companies.

I'll never get it.


John Stossel, has a good follow up piece on how capitalism and private ownership of real estate save the Pilgrims.


I practice charity regularly. I believe in sharing. But when government takes our money by force and gives it to others, that's not sharing.

And sharing can't be a basis for production -- you can't share what hasn't been produced. My point is that production and prosperity require property rights. Property rights associate effort with benefits. Where benefits are unrelated to effort, people do the least amount necessary to get by while taking the most they can get. Economists have a pithy way of summing up this truth: No one washes a rental car.

You'd think a congress person might have some knowledge of this.


Jimmy V's ESPY Speech

This week is the ESPN Jimmy V classic and they showed this video last night on the broadcast. If you've never seen it, you need to.

Bank Robbers had options

Last night, someone must have complained about the article I referenced on my post below because the Enquirer changed the title, byline and added an author to the link.

Now the headline reads

Bank robbers had options

and the by line

Two young black men – who told a judge they robbed a Reading bank because they needed college tuition – had other options but didn’t use them, said the mother of one man and minority advocates.

Did either of these clowns think about something like..... getting a job. And yes I know tuition is a lot higher than it was when I went to school but $130,000. It's still not that high at Toledo or UC.

The whole reporting of this thing is a disgrace. Lot's of kids are faced with lots of challenges and somehow manage to not put a shotgun in the chest of a bank teller. I don't care if these thugs were up for Nobel Peace Prizes, they should be getting lots of time and the media shouldn't be trying to generate pity for these fools.

Next for the Enquirer..... They'll come out with a pity piece about the thugs who robbed some boy scouts selling Christmas trees because they needed a new car.

Tuesday, December 04, 2007


I went online to the Enquirer's site and I saw this photo. If you can't make it out, it is a picture of a man pointing a shotgun at a bank teller.

Right below that, I see this headline

Deters defends prosecution

For those who don't know, Joe Deters is the Hamilton County Prosecutor. His job is to prosecute people who commit crime. In the photo above, doesn't it look like this a crime worth prosecuting? Why should Deters defend anything related to the prosecution of this crime?

Well, the criminal happens to be a nice, young, black, male who also happens to be a "good" college student.

So I guess the writer believes that if you are a black student trying hard to pay for tuition, you need to get a pass on something like an ARMED BANK ROBBERY.

Excerpt from the article

Responding to criticism that his office unfairly treated two young black men who face 20 years in prison for armed robbery, Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters said skin color played no role in his office’s conduct.

Are you kidding me? This is from The Onion. Right?

At least Deters responded appropriately.

“I think it’s very unfair to say the system is rigged against a certain demographic,” Deters said today. “The system is rigged against people who take guns into banks.”

The true racists here are the writer and editor who seem to believe that a "Prosecutor" needs to justify prosecuting a person who put a shotgun in the chest of a bank teller because he's a black college student. The photo is not the best but you can make out the fear on the teller. To think this guy shouldn't be prosecuted is flat out racist and is the epitome of the Pygmalion Effect.

Wanted - a liberal to debate

When I started this blog a year ago, one of the goals was to influence people's thinking about the issues of the day. I didn't want to spend time doing another blog that simply regurgitated the Drudge Report headlines.

At least once every couple of days, I've tried to do a post that questions the conventional wisdom on an issue and I would love to have a liberal "stalk" the site to debate us on the post at hand.

But Ive started to learn that much of blogging is "preaching to the choir". People just aren't inclined to read opposing opinions.

So a couple of weeks ago I figured I'd take the "fight" to the enemy and debate issues on their sights. I began with my question to Progress Ohio on how much I should pay my employees. They've refused to answer my question.

So I've been surfing lots of liberal blogs Buckeye State, Plunderbund, Psychobilly Democrat, Dispassionate Liberal, etc. etc. and I can't find one liberal blog that actually posts on the issues. Most just post about the election and how republicans hate the poor, blacks, women, homosexuals, etc. For the past three days, I haven't been able to find one liberal blog that seeks to convert a reader to their thinking.

I'll throw this out there. If there is a liberal blog that would like to debate this blog on an issue, please email me at and we'll work out the details.

Clinton character assasination

When I first read this nonsense about when Obama decided to run for president, I ignored it.

After all, it's my impression that all these dorks have been meandering their lives for quite some time..... all geared to be president some day. Well, except for Rudy. If he really wanted to be president 10 years ago, you think he would have used the Bill Clinton playbook to hide his extramarital activity.

These are the people who note that they were high school class president on their resumes. Total geeks.

With that said, you really have to question the Hillary Clinton attack on Obama's claim that he's never positioned his career with the intent to be president. Given that it's really such a non issue, why would your campaign put such an effort in a press release refuting all this menusha?

I'm copying this verbatim from the web site for fear that they'll ultimately take it down.

Sen. Obama Rewrites History, Claims He Hasn't Been Planning White House Run

Today in Iowa, Senator Barack Obama said: "I have not been planning to run for President for however number of years some of the other candidates have been planning for."

Oh really?

"Senator Obama's comment today is fundamentally at odds with what his teachers, family, classmates and staff have said about his plans to run for President," Clinton spokesperson Phil Singer said. "Senator Obama's campaign rhetoric is getting in the way of his reality."

Immediately after joining the Senate, Senator Obama started planning run for President. "'The first order of business for Senator Obama's team was charting a course for his first two years in the Senate. The game plan was to send Senator Obama into the 2007-2008 election cycle in the strongest form possible'...The final act of the plan was turning up the talk about a potential Presidential bid, which was greatly aided by his positive press and suggestions by pundits that he run for President." [U.S. News and World Report, 6/19/07 ]

His law school classmates say that Senator Obama has been planning Presidential run for 'more than a decade.' [A]ccording to those who know him, he has been talking about the presidency for more than a decade. "It was clear to me from the day I met him that he was thinking about politics," says Harvard Law School classmate Christine Spurell. [Washington Post, 8/12/07 ]

15 years ago, Senator Obama told his brother-in-law he was planning to run for President. Craig [Robinson] pulled him aside [in 1992] and asked about his plans. "He said, 'I think I'd like to teach at some point in time, and maybe run for public office,' recalls Robinson, who assumed Senator Obama meant he'd like to run for city alderman. "He said no -- at some point he'd like to run for the U.S. Senate. And then he said, 'Possibly even run for President at some point.' And I was like, 'Okay, but don't say that to my Aunt Gracie.' I was protecting him from saying something that might embarrass him." [Washington Post, 8/12/07 ]

In third grade, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want To Be a President.' His third grade teacher: Fermina Katarina Sinaga "asked her class to write an essay titled 'My dream: What I want to be in the future.' Senator Obama wrote 'I want to be a President,' she said." [The Los Angeles Times, 3/15/07]

In kindergarten, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want to Become President.' "Iis Darmawan, 63, Senator Obama's kindergarten teacher, remembers him as an exceptionally tall and curly haired child who quickly picked up the local language and had sharp math skills. He wrote an essay titled, 'I Want To Become President,' the teacher said." [AP, 1/25/07 ]

Are you serious? They've resorted to quoting a Obama's kindergarten teacher to discredit him! To what lengths will the Clinton campaign go to discredit a candidate.

Thank God I'm not running for president against the Clinton's. They'd pull out some quote from old friend saying how I wanted to be president so I could have a housekeeper clean up my spilled bong water. Or maybe when I told my first grade teacher how I wanted to be Elvis Presley when I grew up. Or that time I was 17, drunk, & wearing a toga referring to myself as Senator Blutarsky.

While the whole issue appears to be ridiculous, it's another example of what the Clinton Mafia will do to discredit an opponent for something so patently petty. Imagine what they'll do for something serious? Richard Nixon wishes he had their stones.

Kern inducted

Congratulations again to Rex Kern for being inducted tonight into the College Football Hall of Fame.

I grew up about a block from the Kern family right between his father's barber shop and uncle's shop down the street.

Here's an excerpt from Buckeye extra
"I recalled that from pee-wee football," Kern said. "One time at practice the coach told me, 'Rex, this time don't give the ball to the halfback.' I faked it and the whole team tackled (the back), and I ran around the corner and there was nobody there. I thought that was pretty cool."

And it all started for Kern on the playground of Lancaster's West Elementary.

"He lived right next to the school, and he would go over there and play all the time," said Earl Jones, Kern's football coach at Lancaster High. "He would play with kids two years older than him, and I think that's where he learned to be such a competitor."

Jones said he thought Kern got some fighting spunk from his mother, Jean, a former high school athlete. Kern's father, Trenton, ran a barber shop on West Sixth Avenue and was a disciplinarian who "didn't baby his kids," Jones said.

Rex was legendary in my neighborhood and I can still remember games where we would try faking handoffs and pitchouts just like Kern did over a decade earlier.

If you go to the playground at West Elementary you learn something else about Kern's upbringing. You learned not to be tackled unless you wanted to pull gravel out of your arms & legs.... Part of that hard life.

Growing up on the west side of Lancaster was never easy. The one good thing was your friends were too scared to come into the neighborhood to toilet paper your house at night.

As I've said in the past, for years I tried to "run away" from my hometown because it was "small". But as I've matured, I'm clear the only one who was small was me. Everything that I am today, I owe to people like the Kerns and the workers from the Anchor Hocking plant who coached our little league and pee wee teams.

For me, Kern's induction to the Hall is a vindication of every thing that is good about life on the west side of Lancaster.

Congratulations Rex.

Our apologies

Dennis Prager, with an apology from baby boomers to their children.


The other slogan whose awful consequences we baby boomers bequeathed to you was, "Make love, not war." Our parents had liberated the world from immeasurably cruel and murderous regimes in Germany and Japan -- solely thanks to waging war. But instead of concluding that war could do great moral good, we sang ourselves silly with such inane lyrics as "Give peace a chance," as if that deals in any way with the world's most monstrous evils. So we taught you to make love and not war. And we succeeded.

We made you anti-war and almost completely sexualized your lives. We told you that having sex was terrific or at least to be expected, even in early teens, and that your only concerns should be avoiding sexually transmitted diseases and getting pregnant. And if you did get pregnant, we made sure that you could extinguish the life you were carrying as effortlessly and guiltlessly as possible.


Clinton Loyalty

One of the most fascinating aspects of liberal politics is the unwavering liberal love of the Clintons.


What have the Clintons ever done for liberals or the democratic party. Remember, the Clinton's were the first to employ "triangulation" knowing the public's distrust of liberal policies. The Clinton's coattails have always extended to just below their backsides. Effectively, just enough to cover their own rear ends but certainly not enough to carry others.

They've sold out liberal causes with things like the war, welfare reform, the death penalty and "don't ask don't tell".

In the 1990's, the Clinton's effectively took over the DNC to do their dirty work at the risk of long term party growth.

Yet, given all that, I see this headline

Vulnerable Democrats See Fates Tied to Clinton

Let's put this in a metaphor. If you were on a lifeboat with a Clinton, I guarantee they would kill and eat you, before you got a chance to use any of the supplies on the raft. I think I'd tie my fate to something else.

Liberal Journalism again

From an AP piece in this morning's paper (not online)

.... the court left in place a federal appeals court ruling that Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash, acted improperly in giving reporters access to a recording of a 1996 call of republican leaders discussing the House ethics case against Newt Gingrich, R -GA

McDermott did not act "improperly" he acted illegally. Do you doubt that if this were a republican it would read differently?

Here's the same event covered by conservative columnist Wesley Pruden.

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner yesterday achieved a definitive victory in his decadelong fight with a leading liberal Democrat who leaked an illegally taped 1996 telephone conversation among House Republican leaders

See a difference?

Monday, December 03, 2007

Why not shoot yourself

After catching up on my reading from last week, I ran across this diddy from Kathleen Parker. Apparently, people are committing abortions so they can lessen their carbon footprints.


Hey, did you hear the one about the woman who aborted her kid so she could save the planet?

That's no joke, but Darwin must be chuckling somewhere.

Toni Vernelli was one of two women recently featured in a London Daily Mail story about environmentalists who take their carbon footprint very, very seriously.

So seriously, in fact, that Vernelli aborted a pregnancy and, by age 27, had herself sterilized. Baby-making, she says, is "selfish" and "all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet."

Once again, my training as a recovering liberal is kicking in. I used to have Toni's beliefs entirely. "Kids are the ultimate display of selfishness" was a phrase I recited like a mantra.

Here's a quiz for Toni. What could be more selfish than killing a baby because of it's potential carbon footprint and not killing yourself? If only your mother was so "selfless" when she was conceived.

This has always amused me about liberals. If you believe that humans are nothing more than a random conglomeration of cells & protoplasm; Why are you still here? All you are doing is wasting valuable resources this earth could use for other plants & animals that are just as deserving of them as you are.

It's not like you have a god or anything that you have to answer to. So really.... why are you still here consuming all the earth's resources?

This whole thing still makes me wonder about how liberals derive any moral code for humans. If we are just random cells, what difference would it make if I just went up to Toni and stole her purse? What if I wanted to cannibalize her? Who's to say it's wrong if she has no real purpose on this earth and is no different than the juicy cow I just had for lunch.

As we enter the Christmas season, I have to own that it takes a leap of faith to believe in the virgin birth. But it takes a hell of a lot more blind faith to believe that we're just a pack of cells lumped together with no real purpose.

If you believe that then tell me why you're still here.

First Dance

The photos and videos are starting to roll in from the wedding.

Here's a clip of Gordon and Mrs. Gekko's first dance. You've got to watch the whole thing to appreciate it.

College football update

I didn't get a chance to post on college football games since I watched so many.

Now that the BCS selections are over, let me make these comment. If you ever wondered about leagues fixing games, you need only watch the WVU - Pitt game.

There were three absolutely horrible calls against Pitt, a personal foul and two holding calls. It was truly a travesty. It was patently clear the officials were out to game it so WVU could get into the title game.

We'll finally see how OSU performs against a non conference team not from NE Ohio. What, couldn't the BCS choose John Carroll as OSU's opponent?

I'm still trying to figure out how a team that was fourth last week (Georgia) went to fifth when they didn't play and two teams in front of them lost.

How do you choose LSU over Oklahoma or USC? For that matter, how about Hawaii who didn't lose to a D-1 team all year.

The BCS is the worst thing in college sports. While college presidents like to hide behind "we think that the possibility of a playoff adds too many games to the schedule", the fact is, they had no problem adding a twelfth game for all teams and conference championship games and the like.

They also conveniently forget that all the other divisions in college football play playoff games and that most of the games will be played during campus shutdowns.

If you ever wondered how the current system exists, just answer money.... the same reason the Big East tried to screw Pitt Saturday night.

It's the bloggers fault

A couple of weeks ago, I noted a piece by Ron Brownstein where he accused "bloggers" for coarsening the political debate.

This week, Brownstein is back. This time, he accuses republicans of being "scorpions". Once again, a liberal's form of psychological projection.

More at the American Thinker.

Sunday, December 02, 2007

Don't hit the Breck Girl

I saw this headline and I started to worry.

Battered by Poll, Clinton Hits Back

I hope she didn't hit the Hair Bear, he might start crying.

Chris Jordan

Above is a Chris Jordan photograph. If you've never been on this site, you should check it out.

Chris Jordan is a photographer who does lots of social commentary shots. The above is a shot made up out of cigarette packs.

He has a number of pieces that are truly incredible. I'd love to see how he sets these up.

Check out the shots here.

Limosine liberals

The LA Times, of all places, has an excellent piece about the "gentry liberals".


After decades on the political sidelines, liberalism is making a comeback. Polls show plunging support for Republicans and their brand of conservatism among young, independent voters and Latinos. But what kind of liberalism is emerging as the dominant voice in the Democratic Party?

Well, it isn't your father's liberalism, the ideology that defended the interests and values of the middle and working classes. The old liberalism had its flaws, but it also inspired increased social and economic mobility, strong protections for unions, the funding of a national highway system and a network of public parks, and the development of viable public schools. It also invented Social Security and favored a strong foreign policy.

Today's ascendant liberalism has a much different agenda. Call it "gentry liberalism." It's not driven by the lunch-pail concerns of those workers struggling to make it in an increasingly high-tech, information-based, outsourcing U.S. economy -- though it does pay lip service to them.

Rather, gentry liberalism reflects the interests and values of the affluent winners in the era of globalization and the beneficiaries of the "financialization" of the economy. Its strongholds are the tony neighborhoods and luxurious suburbs in and around New York, Washington, Boston, San Francisco and West Los Angeles.