Saturday, April 19, 2008

Those bitter Chicagoans

The weekend has gotten off to an especially violent start, with no fewer than 19 people shot on the streets of Chicago, four of them fatally, from Friday afternoon through Saturday morning.

I never knew that Chicago was a small town filled with all those gun clinging hicks.

Hat Tip to Mark.

Another awesome Ohio ranking

Ohio shows up large on another ranking....
That's the good news. The report, scheduled to be released Wednesday by investment researcher Morningstar Inc., also found that the worst plans, such as broker-sold offerings from Nebraska and Ohio, still feature high costs or funds with lackluster performance.

Even our 529 plans suck

Friday Funny

Sorry I forgot the Friday Funny... A must watch for Marc Dann's office.

Defending elitism

A column defending Obamania's "intellectualism".

......Yes, Obama's richer than most ordinary people, but in that pantheon, he's the guy most likely to know how much a can of tuna costs.

Actually Meghan, it's not the cost of a can tuna, it's the price of arugula at Whole Foods.

For the record, my spell checker can't even identify the word arugula. How's that for snobism.

Just call him frat president

The Enquirer with a comprehensive, albeit two weeks late, article on the Marc Dann scandal.
During his 2007 inauguration, Dann pledged, "My staff and I will adopt and adhere to the highest possible ethical standards."

Then came text messages like this from one woman to another: " in a weird situation...iem w marc dan....drunnnnk."

The text message, others like it, and a string of allegations of sexual advances, threats and graphic talk by Anthony Gutierrez, Dann's general services chief, to two office employees have been part of the case that put Dann in a political bind. One of Gutierrez's accusers filed a criminal complaint against him Friday.

Another is that e-mails written by at least one of the women suggest that someone in the office of Dann, an advocate for open government, sought to keep the complaints hush-hush.

Dann's office also rejected a number of records requests about the case, a reversal of his position when he was a hard-charging Democratic state senator exposing corruption in the state's Republican power structure.

I need to party with these guys.

If this guy does anymore women, he'll be a democratic candidate for president.


Friday, April 18, 2008

Obama vetting

Nothing is more hilarious than the whine of liberal media and blogger types for the treatment Obama is getting to date.

Eleanor Clift at Newsweek crying about The Billary knocking around Obamania.
Unless Hillary can surprise us once again, repeating the triumph she had in Ohio when Pennsylvanians go to the polls, Rove is likely to have Obama to kick around. The Philadelphia debate didn't do anything to help either candidate, and quite possibly hurt them both, but we are slowly evolving toward a result that seems increasingly inevitable: Obama as a Democratic nominee whose vulnerabilities boost chances of a Republican victory in the fall.

You know Eleanor, if you and your brethren actually did your job instead of performing sexual acts on your candidates, you wouldn't be in this position.

Flash back to the Kerry campaign. The MSM was struck by the traction the Swift Boat guys got on Kerry. Why? John O'Neill had been only calling out Kerry for the past 30 years or so. Didn't anyone catch the Cavett interviews or Kerry's assertion that US troop acted in a manner "reminiscent of Ghengis Khan".

The reason it had traction was because most of it was true and Kerry was trying to run a campaign counter to his former treasonous activity.

Obamania's no different. This guy has been hanging out for years with various anti American people, one of which he married. Now he's going to run as some kind of uniter.... Puuhhleeeeze.

The Billary is actually doing the DNC a service. Now that the mud is coming out, they won't have to wait until the convention their choice, they can do it today.

He should have been a senator

Jerry Rose, sentenced today for running a modern day Ponzi scheme, got the max, 20 years.

Jerry should have run the social security program he could have received a government pension out of the deal.

More Obamanomics

From the WSJ

Time and again, the rookie Senator has said he would not raise taxes on middle-class earners, whom he describes as people with annual income lower than between $200,000 and $250,000. On Wednesday night, he repeated the vow. "I not only have pledged not to raise their taxes," said the Senator, "I've been the first candidate in this race to specifically say I would cut their taxes."

But Mr. Obama has also said he's open to raising – indeed, nearly doubling to 28% – the current top capital gains tax rate of 15%, which would in fact be a tax hike on some 100 million Americans who own stock, including millions of people who fit Mr. Obama's definition of middle class.

Mr. Gibson dared to point out this inconsistency, which regularly goes unmentioned in Mr. Obama's fawning press coverage. But Mr. Gibson also probed a little deeper, asking the candidate why he wants to increase the capital gains tax when history shows that a higher rate brings in less revenue.

"Bill Clinton in 1997 signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20%," said Mr. Gibson. "And George Bush has taken it down to 15%. And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased. The government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28%, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?"

Mr. Obama answered by citing rich hedge fund managers. Raising the capital gains tax is necessary, he said, "to make sure . . . that our tax system is fair and that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools. And you can't do that for free."


The American Thinker with a incredible comment by Obamania's regarding the capital gains tax

Charlie Gibson reminded Obama of a March 27th statement he made to Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's Closing Bell that he'd return the rate to the 28 percent it was under Bill Clinton. Said Gibson: [emphasis added throughout]

"It's now 15 percent. That's almost a doubling if you went to 28 percent. But actually Bill Clinton in 1997 signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent .... And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.

"And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased. The government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected? "

And Obama's remarkable response:

"Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness. We saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year -- $29 billion for 50 individuals. And part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That's not fair."

Wow. Democrats have typically ignored or outright denied the supply-side benefits of lower taxes -- particularly capital gains.

But with that statement, Obama betrayed first his intellectual dishonesty, then his economic idiocy. The candidate is well aware that his hypothetical hedge fund manager pays a much higher rate on wages than does his supposed secretary. And that they both pay the same rate on capital gains - yes Senator, millions of Americans of varying income, including secretaries, own stock.

My take on Obamanomics is he doesn't care... He doesn't care if the reduced capital gains rates generates more economic activity or that it results in more tax revenues for the Treasury. His only concern is that it's "fair".

So as long as everybody is poor I guess that's fair. Sound like marxism to you?

Exactly, who is served by making rich people poor? How are poor people served?

Thursday, April 17, 2008

Time goes green

So Time Magazine is going green.

What are some the efforts Time is undertaking.

We're following our own advice. Time Inc. is the industry leader in sustainable development, and we are the first U.S. publisher to measure the carbon footprint of our entire supply-and-disposal chain, from logging operations to landfill. We have increased the percentage of our paper that comes from sustainably managed forests, from 25% to 69%. We have asked our paper companies to reduce CO2 emissions at least 20% by the year 2012. And we're co-sponsoring a campaign called Remix to promote the recycling of our magazines. These efforts have been led by Time Inc. CEO Ann Moore and engineered by David Refkin, our director of sustainable development. We are also pleased to work with CNN's award-winning Planet in Peril series and Anderson Cooper 360° in our reporting on the environment.

You know, if Time wanted to truly go green, they'd get rid of those annoying subscription cards that fall out of the magazine every time you pick one up. That's an entire Brazilian rain forest there.

What's wrong with being poor?

Let's say you'd love to live in a nice condo on a river but you can't afford the $500,000 plus asking price that it will cost to buy a place down there.

Well, if you live in Cincinnati, you can start with quitting your job, getting knocked up and you could qualify for public housing unit right on the river front.

Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory angrily swatted down demands for public housing at The Banks on Wednesday, saying it was ill-timed and counterproductive to affordable housing efforts in the region.

"How dare they? How dare CMHA," Mallory said testily, the day after the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority voted to insist that the $1 billion riverfront development set aside a portion of the project for subsidized housing.

At least this time, the Mayor "swatted it down.

I've got a clue to the "progressives" out there. Being poor should suck! There's a reason people rise out of poverty.... it's because it sucks and they'll do what they have to so they don't have to be poor anymore.

But let's face it... if you can set up a nice place along the river with a scenic view why would you not want to stay poor? After all,if you actually become non-poor, you'll have to move out.

Once again, this is one of the after effects of "progressive" governance. It's why people with common sense would rather cling to their guns and get the hell out of the city where this type of lunacy is practiced.

Coming up next for the poor in Cincinnati; filet mignon, hybrid cars, and Cristal.

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

The feds created gangsta rap.

Alicia Keys on genocide in the black community.
According to an interview in the magazine’s May issue, the 27-year-old singer says: “‘Gangsta rap’ was a ploy to convince black people to kill each other. ‘Gangsta rap’ didn’t exist.” She also is quoted as saying that she wears a gold AK-47 pendant around her neck “to symbolize strength, power and killing ’em dead.”

Alicia, the public may be outraged by your statement but I got your back girl.

Each and every large city in this country maintains an Office of Black Genocide; it's called City Hall and it's run by democrats. Look at the genocide in each and every city in the US and what is the common denominator, democratic governance.

I mean for cryin' out loud, look at all the gun clinging, bitter hicks around the country. How is it that they've been able to keep the genocide from occurring in their small towns? With all those guns and all that bitterness? They vote for republicans.

Seem like a good cause and effect to me.


Lefties for global warming

Another lefty publication, The Guardian, pointing out the idiocy of policies to confront global warming will do nothing but starve the poor.

Farewell the age of reason, welcome the idiocracy. Only George Orwell could have invented - and named - the government's Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) that came into operation yesterday. It is the latest in a long line of measures intended to ease the conscience of the rich while keeping the poor miserable, in this case spectacularly so.

The consequences of the RTFO have been much trumpeted on these pages. It says enough that one car tank of bio petrol needs as much grain as it takes to feed an African for a year, or that a reported one-third of American grain production is now subsidised for conversion into biofuel. Jeremy Paxman pleaded the cause of this latest green wheeze on Monday's Newsnight, while the United Nations food expert, Jean Ziegler, screamed for it to stop: "Children are dying ... It is a crime."

The transport secretary, Ruth Kelly, said this week: "The government has consistently stressed that biofuels are only worth supporting if they deliver genuine environmental benefits." Yet she must know that, at present, the opposite is the case. Kelly pleaded that rescinding her policy might impede investment and "weaken our influence over the direction of EU policy". She did not mention biofuels' threat to rainforests, food self-sufficiency and global warming generally, through needing costly fertiliser and road transport. Nor did she mention the role in her decision of such lobbies as the British Association for Biofuels and Oils, and the National Farmers' Union.

Once again, the "progressives" are keeping their streak of being wrong on the side of history a perfect 100%.

But you don't need to be a bitter, gun and god clinging, hillbilly to know that.... you just need some common sense; something "progressives" appear to lack.

The Billary slides

New poll numbers are out and apparently The Billary continues it's slide south.

That's not newsworthy. What's newsworthy is that 41% of the public finds The Billary trustworthy.

Are you kidding me? Are we a nation of retards? Call me a skeptic but I think a perjury charge precludes a characterization as "trustworthy".

Keep in mind this is after the whole "Snipers in Bosnia" production.

Exactly, what does The Billary need to do for these 41% to be "non trustworthy"?

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Monday, April 14, 2008


It's April 14th and I'm ready for a pack of smokes and a cold beer.

If you want to join me, show up at Willie's in Kenwood tomorrow from about 6:00 - 8:00.

If you are a small town, angry, hick, don't cling to your guns and religion. Come to Willie's and cling to a cold beer on me. When you get home, you can go back to clinging to your guns.

If you are on welfare or don't pay taxes, don't show up. I already paid for your beer and smokes a long time ago.

Politicians lie?

Right up there with the rhetorical questions of our day

1) Is the Pope Catholic?

2) Does a bear dump in the woods?

3) Is water wet?

4) Do politicians lie?

Apparently, Ohio's deal with the tobacco companies to use their tobacco settlement on an anti smoking campaign is not happening as originally intended.
Ten years ago, Ohio won the tobacco lottery.

It was among 46 states to join a lawsuit accusing tobacco producers of using unfair advertising to get smokers addicted to nicotine. Smelling bankruptcy, 11 tobacco companies and industry trade groups agreed to a settlement, promising the states $260 billion in payments spread out over 25 years.

Bob Taft, as the newly elected governor, convinced the state legislature to budget nearly half of Ohio's $10 billion share of the settlement for school construction projects - the state was entangled in a major lawsuit over school funding at the time - and the other half for anti-smoking programs sponsored by the new Ohio Tobacco Prevention Foundation.

But years of successive raids on the tobacco foundation - mostly to balance the state budget - have depleted its original $330 million endowment.

Now the fund - meant to last a lifetime and with a record of slashing smoking rates - will be snuffed out within two years, its caretakers say.

Brought to you by the same liars that brought you, "the lottery will fix our public school funding" and "this tax increase will only be temporary".

OOP's...... What's that sound? That's the sound of another resident crossing the Brent Spence bridge for a red state. Before the toll of course.

Obamania's upset

Apparently, Obamania is upset that The Billary is twisting his comments from last week and using them to her advantage.

Funny, I don't see where he compares it to his twisting of McCain's "100 years in Iraq" comments.

Who will she vote for? #15

Meet Jennifer Wheeler. What gives Ms. Wheeler her 15 minutes of fame?

A bridesmaid on her way to her sister’s wedding got sidetracked Sunday to the Clermont County jail after she was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs while her two young children were in the backseat, jail officials said.

Jennifer Wheeler, 28, is held this morning at the jail without bond until she appears at 10 a.m. before Clermont County Municipal Court Judge Gregory Chapman, court records show.

Come November, does Ms. Wheeler push the button for the candidate who stands against bitterness so she won't have to cling for her guns and religion, in Obamannia?

Does she push the button against politics as usual and vote for Ralph Nader?

Or does she settle for John McCain?


Sunday, April 13, 2008

Let's starve people so we can save the planet

A liberal rag sister to the NY Times, The Boston Globe, has an editorial on the effects of ethanol.


CORN should be used for food, not motor fuel, and yet the United States is committed to a policy that encourages farmers to turn an increasing amount of their crop into ethanol. This may save the nation a bit of the cost of imported oil, but it increases global-warming gases and contributes to higher food prices.

Candidates for president need to tell Americans the truth about ethanol, but they are falling over themselves in pursuit of the farm belt vote. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton want more ethanol factories built than even President Bush envisaged when he called for 15 percent of US gasoline consumption to be replaced by alternative fuels by 2017. John McCain, who correctly called the ethanol push a boondoggle in 2000, now says that it is "a very important way to achieve energy independence."

Ethanol consumes almost a quarter of US corn production. The energy self-sufficiency that all the candidates seek should not come at the expense of the environment or the food supply.

How does Al Gore look at himself in the mirror knowing that based on this phony global warming mythology, innocent people may starve because they can't purchase grain?

Probably the same way he curls up into his bed nestled in the middle of his 10,000 square foot home.