Minimum wage

Once again, let me state that I'm not a conservative for me but for the working class types who need low skilled jobs.

With that said, let's look at what the hike in the minimum wage has done to unemployment, specifically, teen unemployment.

Earlier this year, economist David Neumark of the University of California, Irvine, wrote on these pages that the 70-cent-an-hour increase in the minimum wage would cost some 300,000 jobs. Sure enough, the mandated increase to $7.25 took effect in July, and right on cue the August and September jobless numbers confirm the rapid disappearance of jobs for teenagers.

The September teen unemployment rate hit 25.9%, the highest rate since World War II and up from 23.8% in July. Some 330,000 teen jobs have vanished in two months. Hardest hit of all: black male teens, whose unemployment rate shot up to a catastrophic 50.4%. It was merely a terrible 39.2% in July.

The biggest explanation is of course the bad economy. But it's precisely when the economy is down and businesses are slashing costs that raising the minimum wage is so destructive to job creation. Congress began raising the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour in July 2007, and there are now 691,000 fewer teens working.

As the minimum wage has risen, the gap between the overall unemployment rate and the teen rate has widened, as it did again last month. (See nearby chart.) The current Congress has spent billions of dollars—including $1.5 billion in the stimulus bill—on summer youth employment programs and job training. Yet the jobless numbers suggest that the minimum wage destroyed far more jobs than the government programs helped to create.

Once again, let me ask my liberal brethren out there. If the minimum wage is such a good idea, why don't we make it $20/hr.?

More........

Tucker Carlson, racist

I didn't know Tucker Carlton was a racist until I read this note criticizing our first black president......

But here's the most interesting question about today's Olympic vote: Why didn't Obama see this coming? He spends all this time, gets all this press, uses all this political capital to promote Chicago, and then loses? What an amateur. Prosecutors don't ask witnesses questions in court unless they're sure of the answers. Presidents don't stake their personal reputations on contests whose outcomes are uncertain. Very foolish move. No wonder he can't get health care passed.

More.....

Thank God (Obama) for the Stimulus

It s good thing we kicked that stimulus in otherwise we'd end up with 8.5% unemployment.

Let me ask this of my liberal brethren out there.

If it took a 1 trillion stimulus to keep our unemployment "down" to 9.8% what would a couple of trillion more get us?

What the Olympic fiasco says about the Obamunists

From The Campaign Spot.......

There's actually something worrisome about this whole Chicago fiasco, and it goes back to President Obama's inexperience. Diplomacy 101 tells us that your head of state only shows up on the high-profile stage when a deal is complete. The lesson that most politicians learn well before they gain positions of power is that diplomacy is done by diplomats, professionals who work through all the negotiations and the hardball tactics and the carrot/stick combinations. The principals in the matter gather to discuss high-level topics and to smile for the cameras as the agreement is being signed. Heads of state do not conduct diplomacy, they ratify it, and surprises are entirely unwelcome at those summits and signing events (hence Reagan's anger in Iceland.)

Why were you and Ramesh surprised? Because you thought that President Obama at least knew this very basic lesson. Today's announcement suggests that he does not, and it just got advertised big-time to countries who already were pretty sure we had a rookie at the helm who didn't know how to use international power. President Obama just got upstaged by an organization against whom no retaliation is acceptable, and he wants to meet with the Iranians next month? We are in deep, deep trouble.

Their inexperience mirrors their lack of econ 101 knowledge.

But they were supposed to love us

Remember the good old days when boys wore those canvas Chuck Taylor Converse to hoop in and the world hated us because George Bush was president?

Someone need to send a freakin' memo to the IOC who bounced the US on the first ballot........

"The shock of Chicago's elimination was greater for the fact that it came in the first round. And greater for the fact that President Obama had taken valuable hours from his packed and tense political schedule to travel to Copenhagen. His legendary powers of persuasion will be said to have failed him, though in reality it will be Chicago's bid that failed him. Nonetheless, this is a moment which allows the president's detractors to allege waning prestige on the part of his presidency. And it will raise questions about the political advice that he is receiving."

Yep.

Don't worry, it's probably the same advice he's getting when he names a NAMBLA (the North American Man/Boy Love Association) fan to head safe schools for children.

More........

Jack Webb Schools Roman Polanski on Sex with Children

The libertarian dilemma, Issue 3

Last June, I posted my distaste for the horrible casino issues we keep getting in this state.

I don't go to casinos and I don't care if you go. In my opinion, casinos are a monumental waste of money, time and energy. But I like my beer and for some that would be a monumental waste of money, time and energy.

So I don't care if we have a casino in every square mile of Ohio, I won't be there and it doesn't bother me if you go there.

None the less, I'm going to ring the clue phone to the jack asses who keep putting these casino votes on the ballot and explain to them why I keep voting them down and why Ohioans in general keep voting them down.

When you vote for a gambling issue, you are not voting for legalized gaming in Ohio, you are voting for a legal real estate/gaming cartel.

In this particular vote, we get to vote for a casino in one of four predetermined locations around the state. Wouldn't you just know that the guys who put the ballot up for vote just happen to own that particular real estate.

So what incentive does someone in Marietta, Lima, Portsmouth, Warren, Sidney, Springfield, et al. have to vote for a casino? They get no benefit from any development that occurs from casino activity. In fact, you could argue that money gets sapped from their communities just like Indiana and Michigan sucks money out of Ohio.

Here's a take from MVRed in Youngstown

Supporters of Issue 3 can go on and on about how
this area will receive $11 million annually in casino revenues, but these supporters fail to realize this Amendment will make it nearly impossible for a casino to ever be built right here in the Mahoning Valley! I don’t know about you, but I’d love to see a casino built in downtown Youngstown sometime in my lifetime.

If the casino supporters truly want to pass a piece of legislation that a MAJORITY of Ohioans will pass, then they need to make casino gambling legal in the ENTIRE state, not just the four largest cities. The reason these ballot measures continue to fail is because they are granting a handful of locations the ability to build casinos, NOT the entire State, which is wrong.

He is 100% correct.

If the dipsticks in this state want legalized casino's they'd set up a commission to issue gamimg licenses. In order to get a license you'd have to go through capitalization and legal guidelines with a healthy application fee.

Then you can leave it up to each individual community to establish zoning guidelines just like you have with bars, strip joints and race tracks.

By doing that, an Ohioan in Nelsonville or Cambridge or Sandusky can feel like they have a vested interest in Ohio gaming.

As it is now, unless you live in one of the "chosen" cities, Ohioans get to vote to make sure they'll never get a casino.

Vote No on 3.

Congratulations Chicago

As we know from history, America presidents don't travel to lobby. They travel to take credit. So Obama's trip wasn't to lobby for Chicago's bid for the Olympics as much as it was a opportunity to takle credit.

My prediction, the Olympics will be in Chicago in 2016, if we all don't die from global warming before hand.

Maybe by 2016, the city's population will be wiped out from homicides.

Death in "Progress" City

From the motor city of Detroit, who hasn't had a conservative run the city since Henry Ford rolled the first Model T off the assembly line.........

At 1300 E. Warren St., you can smell the plight of Detroit.

Inside the Wayne County morgue in midtown Detroit, 67 bodies are piled up, unclaimed, in the freezing temperatures. Neither the families nor the county can afford to bury the corpses. So they stack up inside the freezer.

Albert Samuels, chief investigator for the morgue, said he has never seen anything like it during his 13 years on the job. "Some people don't come forward even though they know the people are here," said the former Detroit cop. "They don't have the money."

Lifelong Detroit residents Darrell and Cheryl Vickers understand this firsthand. On a chilly September morning they had to visit the freezer to identify the body of Darrell's aunt, Nancy Graham -- and say their goodbyes.

You know what Detroit need? A tax increase. Just ask Gov. Granholm.

What's so "progressive" about piling up dead bodies?

More......

But hey, it's not rape rape

The stuff that comes out on this Kevin Jennings guy just gets more and more disgusting.

We're expecting this guy to make our schools safer? From who, him?

Kevin Jennings, President Obama's Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug FreeSchools at the U.S. Department of Education, is in hot water this week for having failed to report that a 15-year-old sophomore student in his school had told him of having sex with an older man.

But failure to report what appeared to be a case of statuatory rape of a child may be the least of Jennings' worries. Lori Roman of Regular Folks United points to statements by Jennings a decade or more ago when he praised Harry Hay of the North American Association for Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), which promotes the legalization of sexual abuse of young boys by older men.

Roman provides damning details and links here. She also notes that Jennings wrote the forward "to a book called Queering Elementary Education. And another fellow you may have heard of wrote one of the endorsements on the book jacket—Bill Ayers." Ayers, of course, is the Weather Underground bomber from the 1960s who is just an "acquaintance" of Obama.

Every presidential administration ends up with scandals inspired by controversial appointees, but typically those tend to revolve around financial improprieties, conflicts of interest, or some other form of white-collar misconduct. For Obama, the scandals seem to be develping in a pattern of disclosures revolving around radical left ideology that raises questions about their fitness for any job in government.

In all seriousness, it's truly amateur hour for this collection of dolts.

Article here.

Baby games

Carla Bruni - Nobody knows you when you're down and out

If you ever needed a sign that Armageddon was upon us this is it.

We've got an American running France, a Frenchman running the US and French First Lady hotter than our Miss America.

Thursday humor

Life in "Progress" city

From the Olympic city of Chicago, who hasn't had a conservative run the city since Mrs. O'Leary's cow started a fire.......

A 14-year-old boy was chased down a street in the Edgewater neighborhood this morning and hit with a pipe, fracturing his skull, according to police and witnesses.

Another teenage boy in Chicago attacked in the streets? If you are a parent in Chicago, you may want your thirteen year old shipped off to Iraq where it's safer.

When the sprinters come in during the Olympics I hope they can run faster than a speeding bullet.

More....

How good is the US health care system?

Good enough for this............

Baker began by offering a blunt disclosure. “I make my living sending patients to the U.S.,” he said. “This is medical tourism, but instead of sending someone to Thailand, we’re sending them to Delaware.”

Through an innovative partnership with 22 independent American surgery centers and doctors in 13 states, Baker and his American counterparts transport Canadians to the U.S. for timely care at cost savings up to 80 percent. The partnership operates largely outside the traditional health insurance system. And this isn’t just about helping Canadians. Baker now also provides a similar state-to-state service for Americans seeking more affordable or timely care.

Under Canada’s controversial federal health legislation, surgeons are prohibited from charging patients to provide “medically necessary” treatment. In addition, they are limited to performing surgeries to six hours a week. Gilbert recalled one surgeon telling her, “I spend six hours in surgery each week, less time than I spend explaining to sick patients why I can’t perform theirs.”

More..........

Is this a good thing?

When you read, this you wonder......

Michelle Obama working IOC like a politician

I know whenever I get worked over "like a politician", I always have rectal bleeding.

More........

But they love us now III

Remember the good old days when milk was sold in glass bottles and the world hated us because of George W. Bush.

Someone needs to tell Israel they're supposed to love us now............

The president's approval rating has fallen to an astonishingly low 4 percent in the Holy Land

Read the rest........

David Corn, racist

I didn't know David Corn was a racist until I read this piece critical of our first black president...........

Is President Obama serious about Afghanistan?

Of course, he's serious when it comes to his goal of disrupting and destroying al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies. No doubt, he and his aides are thinking long and hard about what to do there and how to respond to the recent assessment submitted by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of the U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. (In that review, McChrystal notes that the "overall situation is deteriorating" and that the Afghan government is a major problem, but he implicitly makes the case for more troops.) On Wednesday afternoon, Obama's scheduled to hold a big powwow on Afghanistan with his entire national security squad, including Vice President Joseph Biden, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, Adm. Mike Mullen, Gen. David Petraeus, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair, CIA chief Leon Panetta, McChrystal and others.

Yet Obama is caught in a rhetorical trap regarding his devotion to the war in Afghanistan, as I've noted before. And on Tuesday, the White House fell into it again.

More.........

The ACORN protection racket

Don't you love to go to game in some cities where, not only do you have to pay to park, you also have to pay for someone to watch your car and keep from being ripped off, usually by the same people hitting you up.

Or where you have to pay some guy named Carmine for protection of your store from some group of Soprano like gangsters.

ACORN was playing the same game for years on large banks. Because banks were so sensitive to their CRA evaluations (those evaluations was a determinate factor in merger approval by the justice department), they basically paid off ACORN and Rainbow coalition types just so they wouldn't protest.

As a former small business bank lender, I got to see this first hand. Whenever my boss would hand me an application and say "this is a CRA deal", I knew it was a piece of shit and needed a lackey to sign off on it. Usually they were small deals to help out a friend in "the community" or loans the more specialized areas of the bank wanted no part of because it meant bending so many loan policies.

None the less, the ACORN scandal is now exposing this extortion...........

On Sep 29, the article “Bank of America Pulls ACORN funding” appeared on the CNN political ticker. While the short piece thankfully does list some of ACORN’s recent scandals, such as the Breitbart video investigation and the voter registration fraud, it didn’t answer the question that was surely on every reader’s mind: What exactly was Bank of America paying ACORN for?

Let’s not fault writer/editor Amy Sabha for not addressing the topic, as she was clearly very busy working on this video in which she goes up and down the UN escalator.

Instead we can just go to the Bank of America community website, which notes that the firm works with ACORN in more than 20 cities to provide “special mortgage products.” Or we can go to the ACORN Housing website, which describes a program that produced $246 million in mortgages from Bank of America with “flexible underwriting and discounted pricing.” Or this page, which describes a program with low down payments, no private mortgage insurance, no cash reserve necessary, and flexibility on income requirements, such as being able to include public assistance.

Yes, ACORN and Bank of America joined forces to become the ultimate subprime lender. So much for the organization’s lofty social justice rhetoric.

More.........

Global Warming Challenge Update

The updated score for the global warming challenge.

The average high temperature for the month of September was 76.6 degrees v a historical average high of 78.0 degrees.

The average low temperature for the month was 59.1 degrees v a historical average low of 56.8 degrees.

So the month of September is a kiss your sister tie and brings the total score through September.

Warm -9
Cool - 9


By the way, it's been three months since that dolt Eric from plunderbong called me out for not "putting my money where my mouth is".

So, once again, Eric I'm willing to lay $100.00 on this. Where are you?

Grayson says Republicans want you to die (full length)

Rep. Alan Grayson's apology

The Day ObamaCare Died - Sung by Barack Obama

PSA - Listen to Overpaid Celebrities

Leslie Gelb, racist

I didn't realize Leslie Gelb was a racist until I read his criticism of our first black president.......

I'm lost on President Barack Obama's Afghanistan policy—along with most of Congress and the U.S. military. Not quite eight months ago, Mr. Obama pledged to "defeat" al Qaeda in Afghanistan by transforming that country's political and economic infrastructure, training Afghan forces and adding 21,000 U.S. forces for starters. He proclaimed Afghanistan's strategic centrality to prevent Muslim extremism from taking over Pakistan—an even more vital nation because of its nuclear weapons. And a mere three weeks ago, he punctuated his commitments by proclaiming that Afghanistan is a "war of necessity," not one of choice. White House spokesmen reinforced this by promising that the president would "fully resource" the war.

Yet less than one week ago, Mr. Obama said the following about troop increases: "I'm going to take a very deliberate process in making those decisions. There is no immediate decision pending on resources, because one of the things that I'm absolutely clear about is you have to get the strategy right and then make a determination about resources." He repeated that on Sunday's talk shows.

Are we now to understand that he made all those previous declarations and decisions without a strategy he was committed to? Prior to his recent statements, it seemed clear that the president and his advisers had adopted a strategy already—the counterinsurgency one—and that Gen. Stanley McChrystal was tapped precisely because he would implement that plan. The idea, to repeat, was to deploy forces sufficient to clear territory of Taliban threats, hold that territory, and build up the sinews of the country behind that.

More.........

The Fighting Gekko's

Have you ever heard the old college joke about the NCAA being so upset with Alabama they gave Florida International an extra year of probation.

So is the life with the NCAA, who manage to make mountains out of mole hills by banishing the nickname of the University of North Dakota, The Fighting Sioux.

Nevermind that Illinois gets to keep Fighting Illini or Florida State gets to keep Seminoles, somehow the NCAA is deeply offended by The Fighting Sioux. By the way, have you ever seen the tremendously stereotypical Seminole pregame ceremony with the Indian on a horse driving a spear into the ground?

Here's some points to keep in mind.

1) Let's say that you were ethnically cleansing an area, what is the first thing you do? You eliminate all references to the ethnic groups you are oppressing. By eliminating reference to tribes, I believe the NCAA is practicing a form of ethnic cleansing.

2) By my count, at least 15 states' names are references to Indian tribes and/or have origins to Indian culture. Should we wipe those out?

3) In my home town we have a neighborhood with a series of Indian tribe names; Wyandot, Cherokee, Shawnee, Miami, etc. are those offensive? I mean, afterall, we don't name streets after the 12 tribes of Israel or African tribes like Somali, Hutu, or Zulu. So it should be taken as a slight? Does it matter that those streets back into streets named after American presidents Roosevelt, McKinley, Garfield, Washington, Harrison, Pierce, etc.? I'm sure that was done to offend everyone.

Here's a solution to the problem. UND can use the nickname The Fighting Valentine's (my real name) and they do stuff like throw candy hearts into the crowd, change the school colors to Scarlett and Pink, or have a giant cupid come onto the field and drop and arrow into the 50 yard line and I promise I won't be offended.

In fact, I'd be honored. But I think they're looking for something a little more proud than that.

Eugene Robinson, racist

I didn't know Eugene Robinson was a racist until I read his piece critical of our first black president.............

I doubt President Obama’s trip to Copenhagen to argue for Chicago to get the Olympics matters much, but, on balance, I think I’d have skipped it.

I understand why the president would want to support his hometown in its grab for glory. And it’s pretty much expected that heads of government will make a personal appearance before the lords of the International Olympics Committee -- most heads of government, that is. Our presidents usually send emissaries. The break with tradition doesn’t bother me. But I do wonder what will be accomplished.

More.......

An article that didn't need to be written

Yesterday, the WSJ printed this article titled

Why Medical Malpractice is off Limits

Are you kidding me?

I love the WSJ, but this one was a waste of paper. A true master of the obvious expose.

Next week

Why Bears Poop in the Woods.

You can read it here.

Who did she vote for? #889

Here's a great example of the types of derelicts our current welfare state breeds in our society.....

Suzie Avila-Villa is 25. The prosecution says the boy she slept with is only 14, but old enough to get her pregnant. Their baby lived for five weeks, and they weren't happy days, according to the Butler County Coroner. An autopsy showed the baby was malnurished, had broken bones, scrapes and bruises, and eventually died from a crushed skull.

Avila-Villa is accused of killing her child, abusing his corpse, tampering with evidence, and unlawful sexual conduct with a minor. If convicted she is elligible for the death penalty.
According to prosecutors, Avila-Villa had an meeting with Job and Family Services coming up, and she was afraid that if she didn't reveal the name of her baby's father, she'd lose her benefits. But, if she did identify him, she'd also be in trouble.

So, she allegedly killed the baby by crushing his skull, and hid his body in a trash can. The details came out in a prosecution filing yesterday, ahead of a court appearance by Avila-Villa this afternoon.

Via WLW

Too bad for her she didn't have some hip hop hits or an academy award. She might have gotten off on this.

So last November, did she pull the chain for The Messiah or The Maverick?

Is mandatory health insurance constitutional?

A while back, I posted that one of the "reforms" that could be enacted on health care is to require health insurance to be purchased by everyone; much like we require car insurance.

I was quickly and correctly called out on the notion that was against the basic civil liberties.

As a libertarian that is true. But if you think about it, you already are forcibly required to pay for your health care at retirement in the form of Medicare. What's the difference?

Frankly, I think lot's of things are unconstitutional and a mockery of civil liberties such as DUI check points, McCain Feingold, hate crime legislation, etc. but that hasn't stopped our Supreme Court to tell us otherwise (remember they brought us "separate but equal").

Here's a piece discussing the constitutionality of mandatory health care.......

In the last few days, a new argument has emerged in the debate over Democratic health care proposals: Are they constitutional? More precisely, can the federal government force Americans to buy health insurance?

"Mandatory Insurance Is Unconstitutional" is the unapologetic title of an op-ed last week in the Wall Street Journal by David Rivkin and Lee Casey, Justice Department attorneys during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations. Investor's Business Daily wonders: "Where in the U.S. Constitution does it say the government can force people to buy health insurance?" So does an opinion article in the Christian Science Monitor, a discussion on the O'Reilly Factor, and commentary by Fox News' Andrew Napolitano.

For their part, defenders of mandatory insurance haven't engaged very much, in part because courts tend to be so reluctant to strike down federal laws in the first place. Precious few laws are ever erased from the books by the stroke of a judge's pen; lawyers use terms like the "presumption of constitutionality" and "judicial deference to the legislature" to explain this reticence. (See our CBS Evening News coverage of mandated health insurance, and a FAQ on the topic.)

Timothy Jost, a professor of Washington and Lee University School of Law who says he prefers a national public plan, has argued the constitutional principles -- saying in a Politico.com essay that the question was a Republican "talking point" that shouldn't be taken terribly seriously. "A basic principle of our constitutional system for the last two centuries has been that the Supreme Court is the ultimate authority on the Constitution, and the Constitution the court now recognizes would permit Congress to adopt health care reform," Jost wrote.

Read the rest

Cash for clunkers; the results are in

In what anyone who's ever passed an econ 101 course could have told you. The Cash for Clunkers program really didn't do anything but bastardize the normal flow of auto inventories.......

1. According to this report from Edmunds, sales of new vehicles in September 2009 fell off a cliff, dropping 41% from August 2009 and down 23% from September 2008. This shows that the primary sales effect of the “Cash for Clunkers” program was to harvest sales that would otherwise have occurred later in the year and compress them into an earlier time period. Gosh, what a boon to car dealers. I hope their glorious August was worth the September hangover.

2. An economic analysis by Citigroup concluded that buyers received little or no financial benefit from the Cash for Clunkers programs because the $4500 government credit essentially replaced discounts and incentives that buyers would have received from the dealers themselves.

3. Foreign car companies did better than GM, Ford or Chrysler in sales of new cars under the clunkers program. Brilliant. The taxpayers own most of GM but our government feeds the competition.

4. The dramatic drop in sales in September also supports an argument that many economists have about Cash for Clunkers: The buyers were wealthier folks who would have purchased new cars anyway. We the taxpayers just helped them out. The less wealthy are still driving their clunkers because they couldn’t qualify for a car loan. That’s probably a good thing.

Don't forget that the clunkers turned in would have filtered down replacing even bigger junkers on the auto food chain. Unfortunately, with the lack of used car inventory people with those huge gas hogs will get to keep them for a little while longer.


Read the whole thing here.....

The "Progressive" morality matrix

A few weeks back, Gordon and the Lovely Mrs. Gekko (my no drama mama), watched a series on VH1 called Lords of the Revolution. It was about some of the major societal icons of the 1970's; Timothy Leary, Andy Warhol, Muhammad Ali, The Black Panthers, and Cheech & Chong.

If you ever want to watch a series on the most self indulgent, self absorbed, sociopathic, narcissistic, assholes in history, you need to watch the series.

The series makes heroes and idols out of a group of people who had all the empathy of a can of root beer. Only one of which (Ali) I believed to be true to a belief and a cause.

I really never had a clue about the life of Andy Warhol but apparently, he filmed members of his cast ( a collection of drug abusers and general derelicts ) interacting in a place he called The Factory. During one of these "filmings", one of the male cast members beat the crap out of a female cast member eliciting all kinds of accolades from the "artistic" types. (watch these outtakes)

In addition, one of the "cast" members committed suicide by jumping off of a balcony. Warhol's response? "I wish I would have been able to film that."

I don't think I was ever more disgusted with a group of people as I was with those who not only watched these displays but actually believed them to be "artistic". All I could think about was loving the opportunity to kick all of there collective asses; call it artistic irony.

This is all a long winded back drop to the response on Polanski's arrest. See, apparently in the mind of a "progressive" there's a matrix in the liberal circle of what you do/create v. forgiveness of sin.

If you are a great artist or cause leader, you get a free pass to rape a child (Polanski, Jackson), kill a cop (Mumia Abu Jamal), murder a girlfriend (Phil Specter) or sexually harass (BJ Clinton) mass murder (Che Gueverra).

It makes you wonder if Susan Sarandon and/or Sean Penn would show up at a Charles Manson parole hearing if he would have had a few top 40 hits.

So let's be creative with the morality matrix. If one gets on the NY Times best seller list, do they get to fondle your neighbor's son?

If you protect abortion rights, do you get to drown a young woman and not report it?

If you win an Emmy, do you get a free domestic violence pass?

Take a Grammy, no time for heroin distribution?.

Play along at home and come up with your own Morality Matrix.

Sand Hill - Venable Elementary Indoctrination Camp

NY Times has to watch others for "all the news fit to print"

IBD on the NY Times fumble............

Fox's judgment now seems to play the role the Times' once did, and the Times is no doubt left wondering how it could have lost out on yet another one.

It's not the first: It missed the John Edwards mistress and baby scandal in campaign 2008; it missed the National Endowment for the Arts press conference shilling for Obama; it also missed the debacle over the seamy background of "green jobs" czar Van Jones.

Now it's missed the Acorn scandals — all because of its "insufficient tuned-in-ness to the issues dominating Fox News and talk radio," according to managing editor Jill Abramson, who will now "assign an (unnamed) editor to monitor opinion media."

Baloney. Those Fox stories had impact because they were fact-, not opinion-based. The public agreed, and the politicians were forced to act. The Times' "monitor" idea smears Fox as an opinion outfit whose product must be handled with tongs.

In fact, it's ideological bias that keeps Times journalists from covering the news with impact. The newspaper of record should be reporting the news "without fear or favor," as its motto says — not simply by accepting the liberal line.

If they happen to hit their favorite politicians, too bad. Because if they don't do this, they aren't newsmen. By taking a cheap shot at Fox and then bitterly following it instead of leading, the Times blows its credibility even more than its missed scoops do.

Read the whole thing..........

Life in "Progress" State

From the wolverine state of Michigan, who hasn't had a conservative run the state since Plato was blogging on stone tablets..........

A West Michigan woman says the state is threatening her with fines and possibly jail time for babysitting her neighbors' children.

Lisa Snyder of Middleville says her neighborhood school bus stop is right in front of her home. It arrives after her neighbors need to be at work, so she watches three of their children for 15-40 minutes until the bus comes.

The Department of Human Services received a complaint that Snyder was operating an illegal child care home. DHS contacted Snyder and told her to get licensed, stop watching her neighbors' kids, or face the consequences.

"It's ridiculous." says Snyder. "We are friends helping friends!" She added that she accepts no money for babysitting.

Mindy Rose, who leaves her 5-year-old with Snyder, agrees. "She's a friend... I trust her."

Read the rest here.

If that weren't bad enough, Massachusetts is doing the same thing here.

Ask yourself the question, was it conservatives or "progressives" who wrote and enforced these ridiculous laws?

For sure, these laws were intended to protect the children but ask yourself this question, who gets hurt from these laws, the working poor or the rich?

See, the rich can already afford quality daycare and probably build flex time into their work schedules so they don't have to worry about time/costs. But if your poor and you have to rely on the generosity of neighbors, you get screwed.

Once again, I posit that I'm not a conservative for my own selfish reasons. I'm a conservative for the least of us. In this case parents who are willing to help a neighbor in need.

What's so "progressive" about sticking it to the little guy?

Quote of the day

From reader Bernie...

The only positive thing about the 'Cash for Clunkers' program is

that it took thousands of Obama bumper stickers off the road

.

Marty Peretz, racist

I didn't know Marty Peretz was a racist until I read this piece on the TNR site critical of our first black president.....

The secretary of defense, Robert Gates, revealed two hush-hush secrets on television this morning.

1. that Iran intended to develop nuclear weapons. No shit!

2. that the matter of closing Guantanamo was "more complicated than we thought." Surprise, surprise.

The first of these revelations is especially significant. What does it say about the president's adventures in sympatico diplomacy? This is hard to say: but I believe it's an utter failure.

I think it's time that we out all these columnists for being the racists they are.

Thank you Costco

Gordon and the Lovely Mrs. Gekko (my no drama mama) went out Saturday to look for patio furniture thinking there might be some nice out of season sales/close outs.

I guess we were about six months too late for a seasonal close out sale.

None the less, Costco did remind me that we only have 94 days until Christmas with their seasonal area loaded with Christmas gear; complete with decorated Christmas trees.

Thanks Costco. I almost forgot.

Hey NY Times

The NY Times did a nice job of collectively dislocating their shoulders patting themselves on the back for naming an unnamed editor to monitor blogs for potential "news" stories so they don't get scooped again. (By the way, it's a sad state when the public editor has to post a correction on his story.)

So here's a hand off to the Times for what should be a whack out of the park; the Obamaunists naming a "Safe School" Czar who had intimate knowledge of statutory rape and failed to report it.

Mr. Jennings brings all the sleaze of Mr. Foley. Sex and the underaged? Check. An older man? Check. Potential misbehavior by a government official? Check.

And the Jennings case brings a lot more: A "safe schools czar" who failed to report a statutory rape? An education leader who encouraged a 15-year-old student to be comfortable with sexual abuse? A federal official who ignored a law requiring him to report even the possibility of a crime?

And it is not just sex, there's a political angle, too. Since taking office, the Obama administration has been hammered by repeated breakdowns in its vetting process. Appointees who don't pay taxes. An appointee who signed on to accusations that the previous administration was complicit in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. And now an appointee who thinks sex between an adult and a 15-year-old is no big deal.

All those facts aside, from the media's perspective, the stories aren't even remotely similar. Mr. Jennings hasn't been hit with 1,400 stories or 140 or even 14. With the exception of Fox News, which discovered new audio-taped evidence in the case, Mr. Jennings' story has been ignored.

Maybe the Times thinks this guy is a Polanski relative........

More..........

Quote of the day

From John Nolte on the Roman Polanski arrest...........

Pleading guilty to unlawful sex with an underage girl — the drugging, raping and sodomizing of a 13 year-old — isn’t stopping Hollywood from ginning up an indignation campaign over the possibility of fugitive director Roman Polanski being held accountable for his crimes. Yes, these are the values of those who control the most powerful propaganda device ever created. Which begs a question: If his unspeakable deed doesn’t meet the standard, what exactly would Roman Polanski have to do in order to become a pariah in this town … I mean, besides vote for Sarah Palin?

Read the rest.......

Richard Cohen, racist

Wow, I didn't know Richard Cohen was a racist until I read this column criticizing our first black president.......

Sooner or later it is going to occur to Barack Obama that he is the president of the United States. As of yet, though, he does not act that way, appearing promiscuously on television and granting interviews like the presidential candidate he no longer is. The election has been held, but the campaign goes on and on. The candidate has yet to become commander in chief.

Take last week's G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh. There, the candidate-in-full commandeered the television networks and the leaders of Britain and France to give the Iranians a dramatic warning. Yet another of their secret nuclear facilities had been revealed and Obama, as anyone could see, was determined to do something about it -- just don't ask what.

snip

Obama lost credibility with his deadline-that-never-was and now he threatens to lose some more with his posturing toward Iran. He has gotten into a demeaning dialogue with Ahmadinejad, an accomplished liar. (The next day, the Iranian used a news conference to counter Obama and, days later, Iran tested some intermediate-range missiles.) Obama is our version of a Supreme Leader, not given to making idle threats, setting idle deadlines, reversing course on momentous issues, creating a TV crisis where none existed or, unbelievably, pitching Chicago for the 2016 Olympics. Obama's the president. Time he understood that.

We need more cowbell!!!!!!!!!!

Who did they vote for? #4109

Meet various gang member beating a student to death.

This past November, do you think the candidate of choice for these thugs was John McCain or Barack Obama?


See the video here.......

Feminists give Polanski a pass

When I read of Roman Polanski's arrest in Switzerland, my reaction was similar to my reaction to the latest Paula Abdul drama.

What I find most curious is the reaction of various feminists who, once again, are willing to give a leach a pass.

For instance, here's Anne Applebaum.......

Of all nations, why was it Switzerland -- the country that traditionally guarded the secret bank accounts of international criminals and corrupt dictators -- that finally decided to arrest Roman Polanski? There must be some deeper story here, because by any reckoning the decision was bizarre -- though not nearly as bizarre as the fact that a U.S. judge wants to keep pursuing this case after so many decades.

Here's piece by Kate Harding reminding people of the crime Polanski committed..............

Roman Polanski raped a child. Let's just start right there, because that's the detail that tends to get neglected when we start discussing whether it was fair for the bail-jumping director to be arrested at age 76, after 32 years in "exile" (which in this case means owning multiple homes in Europe, continuing to work as a director, marrying and fathering two children, even winning an Oscar, but never -- poor baby -- being able to return to the U.S.). Let's keep in mind that Roman Polanski gave a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude and champagne, then raped her, before we start discussing whether the victim looked older than her 13 years, or that she now says she'd rather not see him prosecuted because she can't stand the media attention. Before we discuss how awesome his movies are or what the now-deceased judge did wrong at his trial, let's take a moment to recall that according to the victim's grand jury testimony, Roman Polanski instructed her to get into a jacuzzi naked, refused to take her home when she begged to go, began kissing her even though she said no and asked him to stop; performed cunnilingus on her as she said no and asked him to stop; put his penis in her vagina as she said no and asked him to stop; asked if he could penetrate her anally, to which she replied, "No," then went ahead and did it anyway, until he had an orgasm.

Can we do that? Can we take a moment to think about all that, and about the fact that Polanski pled guilty to unlawful sex with a minor, before we start talking about what a victim he is? Because that would be great, and not nearly enough people seem to be doing it.

The French press, for instance (at least according to the British press) is describing Polanski "as the victim of a money-grabbing American mother and a publicity-hungry Californian judge." Joan Z. Shore at the Huffington Post, who once met Polanski and "was utterly charmed by [his] sobriety and intelligence," also seems to believe that a child with an unpleasant stage mother could not possibly have been raped: "The 13-year old model 'seduced' by Polanski had been thrust onto him by her mother, who wanted her in the movies." Oh, well, then! If her mom put her into that situation, that makes it much better! Shore continues: "The girl was just a few weeks short of her 14th birthday, which was the age of consent in California. (It's probably 13 by now!) Polanski was demonized by the press, convicted, and managed to flee, fearing a heavy sentence."

Wow, OK, let's break that down. First, as blogger Jeff Fecke says, "Fun fact: the age of consent in 1977 in California was 16. It's now 18. But of course, the age of consent isn't like horseshoes or global thermonuclear war; close doesn't count. Even if the age of consent had been 14, the girl wasn't 14." Also, even if the girl had been old enough to consent, she testified that she did not consent. There's that. Though of course everyone makes a bigger deal of her age than her testimony that she did not consent, because if she'd been 18 and kept saying no while he kissed her, licked her, screwed her and sodomized her, this would almost certainly be a whole different story -- most likely one about her past sexual experiences and drug and alcohol use, about her desire to be famous, about what she was wearing, about how easy it would be for Roman Polanski to get consensual sex, so hey, why would he need to rape anyone? It would quite possibly be a story about a wealthy and famous director who pled not guilty to sexual assault, was acquitted on "she wanted it" grounds, and continued to live and work happily in the U.S. Which is to say that 30 years on, it would not be a story at all. So it's much safer to focus on the victim's age removing any legal question of consent than to get tied up in that thorny "he said, she said" stuff about her begging Polanski to stop and being terrified of him.

I guess it's OK to rape someone as long as you are a crusader of all things liberal.

Read the rest on the Polanski apologists.....

As an aside, reader Jeremy sent me an email asking the question; Who would Polanski have voted for this past November?

But they love us now II

Remember the good old days when we had returnable pop bottles and the world hated us because George Bush was president?

Someone needs to tell Great Britain...........

The juxtaposition on our front page this morning is striking. We carry a photograph of Acting Sgt Michael Lockett - who was killed in Helmand on Monday - receiving the Military Cross from the Queen in June, 2008. He was the 217th British soldier to die in the Afghan conflict. Alongside the picture, we read that the Prime Minister was forced to dash through the kitchens of the UN in New York to secure a few minutes “face time” with President Obama after five requests for a sit-down meeting were rejected by the White House.

What are we to make of this? This country has proved, through the bravery of men like Acting Sgt Lockett, America’s staunchest ally in Afghanistan. In return, the American President treats the British Prime Minister with casual contempt. The President’s graceless behaviour is unforgivable. As most members of the Cabinet would confirm, it’s not a barrel of laughs having to sit down for a chat with Gordon Brown. But that’s not the point. Mr Obama owes this country a great deal for its unflinching commitment to the American-led war in Afghanistan but seems incapable of acknowledging the fact. You might have thought that after the shambles of Mr Brown’s first visit to the Obama White House - when there was no joint press conference and the President’s “gift” to the Prime Minister was a boxed DVD set - lessons would have been learned. Apparently not. Admittedly, part of the problem was Downing Street’s over-anxiety to secure a face-to-face meeting for domestic political purposes but the White House should still have been more obliging. Mr Obama’s churlishness is fresh evidence that the US/UK special relationship is a one-way street.

More.......

I've got a fever for more cowbell

Interest in socialized medicine hits a new low...........

Just 41% of voters nationwide now favor the health care reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s down two points from a week ago and the lowest level of support yet measured.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% are opposed to the plan.

I think the problem with the health care debate is that we need the president to be out front on this and talk about the issue. He's been too passive the past couple of weeks. In fact, has he even been seen on TV at all?

I think we need more cowbell.

More.......

Deep Thoughts

Deep Thoughts by Gordon Gekko.....

Out of curiosity, I have to wonder if the ACORN workers who were fired, were fired because they didn't give the pimp and hooker voter registration cards.....

.

But they love us now

Remember the good old days when you had to walk ten miles up hill to school (up hill and in the snow) and when the world would love us again once we rid ourselves of George Bush.

Apparently, someone forgot to send India the memo.........

He may not relish the comparison but it is now becoming increasingly obvious that Mr Barack Obama is the most hostile American President for India since Richard Nixon. In the eight months he has been in office, Mr Obama has snubbed India more than once. He has sent repeated signals that New Delhi is not integral to his Asian security architecture. Partly as a result of his country’s economic crisis, he has bent over backwards to accommodate China. His open advocacy of protectionism has been most visibly targeted at outsourcing of technology jobs to India. He headlined anti-trade legislation by saying it would punish those who created jobs in Bangalore rather than Buffalo, a special mention that was extraordinarily impolitic and did not go unnoticed in India. In contrast, the tariff war against Chinese tyres has not been posited in such stark bilateral terms. This past week, the Obama team reversed a decade of American nuclear pragmatism and went back to an outdated non-proliferation agenda that should have died, really, in the 1990s. Once more, India has been asked to give up its nuclear weapons and sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a second-tier power. Most alarmingly, Mr Obama has swung wildly on Afghanistan-Pakistan (AfPak). At various points his diplomats and Generals have said different things. Yet, in all this the overarching political message has been missing.

There has been a remarkable absence of clarity on Mr Obama’s strategic goals. In the early months, it was easy to pretend he was making up his mind. Now, it would seem he has no mind. His confusion on AfPak and constant shifting of tactical milestones would suggest he has little understanding of the nature of the challenge there and, behind those engaging phrases, is thoroughly confused. If the Obama Administration’s most recent thoughts on AfPak are taken as final, the American President is looking to cut and run. He would want to begin bringing troops home by early 2012, in time for his re-election. This would mean delegating Afghanistan to the Pakistani Army, and asking it to control the Taliban. It would also activate a lethal Saudi-Pakistani-Taliban alliance. This formidable combination of wealth, geography, religious appeal, unending foot-soldiers and nuclear weapons would create a monster power straddling south and west Asia. To some degree, it could be offset by a strong India and a stable Iran, which would flank AfPak. However, Mr Obama is determined that Teheran must not pursue its Bomb and India should be pressured to sign the NPT. Strangely, he has not considered asking Pakistan to give up its nukes in return for billions of dollars of “sustained and expanded commitment”.

But hey, when your PM comes over he'll be sure to gift you those classic DVD's he gave Gordon Brown.

More....

Bearcats in Top Ten

Congratulations to Brian Kelly and the UC Bearcats for the Top Ten ranking in this week's AP poll.

The University of Cincinnati football program reached another milestone Sunday when it was ranked in the Associated Press Top 10 for the first time in the school’s history.

The Bearcats (4-0) are No.10 in the AP media poll this week, No.11 in the USA Today coaches’ poll.

“We’re excited about being a Top 10 team,” UC coach Brian Kelly said, “but again I think I’ve been pretty consistent in my feeling that it’s not where you start, it’s where you finish.

“We’ve gotten off to a good start and we’ve gained some national recognition for our program, but we’ve got a long way to go.”

A lot of football to be played but I can't help but think of a BCS game between the Buckeyes and Bearcats.

By the way, if you didn't already know, Marvin Lewis went to give a pep talk to the Fresno State team Saturday. What an a-hole.