Saturday, November 28, 2009

What is a "Republican"?

Kathleen Parker has a problem with a litmus test for republican nominees....

The so-called purity test is a 10-point checklist -- a suicide pact, really -- of alleged Republican positions. Anyone hoping to play on Team GOP would have to sign off on eight of the 10 -- through their voting records, public statements or a questionnaire. The test will be put up for consideration before the Republican National Committee when it meets early next year in Hawaii.

The list apparently evolved in response to the Republican loss in the recent congressional race in Upstate New York, when liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava withdrew from the race under pressure from conservatives and endorsed Democrat Bill Owens, who won. Republicans had held that seat for more than a century.

What Kathleen doesn't mention is what exactly is a "republican" and how do you distinguish from someone who calls themselves a democrat and vice versa.

Look, as far as I'm concerned the party label doesn't mean anything to me to begin with because of the fact that party labels are a distinction without a difference. But at some point the labels need to mean something.

I guess for Parker, it's better to have a republican like Dede win this past election ( she was going to get her ass kicked by the way) yet conservatives had absolutely no voice in this past election had it not been for Doug Hoffman. Isn't that inherently unamerican?


The Terminator angling for a White House job

Ahnauld most be looking for an appointment with The obamunists.......

The Internal Revenue Service has filed a federal tax lien against Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for nearly $80,000, public records show.

The lien was filed May 11 at the Los Angeles County recorder's office for $79,064, according to a record in an electronic database that includes lien filings. The record does not indicate what property the lien was placed on, but it lists the debtor as Arnold Schwarzenegger with the governor's home address in Brentwood.


When will mainstream media actually break a story

Can you name the biggest journalistic stories this year; you know the investigative stories media outlets claim to investigate and/or fact check. The first that comes to mind are the John Edwards love child scandal, the ACORN, pimps and whores story and now the Chinks in the Branch Gorevidian armor story.

But you wouldn't know of any of these things if your news sources were The NY Times and CBS news.

Mark Steyn with the call...............

Michael Gerson has lousy timing. In The Washington Post, in one of those now familiar elegies for old media, he writes:

And the whole system is based on a kind of intellectual theft. Internet aggregators (who link to news they don't produce) and bloggers would have little to collect or comment upon without the costly enterprise of newsgathering and investigative reporting. The old-media dinosaurs remain the basis for the entire media food chain.

That's laughably untrue in the Warmergate story. If you rely on the lavishly remunerated "climate correspondents" of the big newspapers and networks, you'll know nothing about the Climate Research Unit scandals - just the business-as-usual drivel about Boston being underwater by 2011. Indeed, even when a prominent media warm-monger addresses the issue, the newspaper prefers to reprint a month-old column predating the scandal. If you follow online analysis from obscure websites on the fringes of the map, you'll know what's going on. If you go to the convenience store and buy today's newspaper, you won't. That's the problem.

If anyone needs newspapers, it ought to be for stories like this. If there were no impending epocalypse, then "climate science" would be a relatively obscure field, as it was up to a generation ago. Now it produces celebrity scientists living high off the hog of billions in grants. They thus have a vested interest in maintaining the planet's-gonna-fry line. So what do the media do? Instead of exposing the thesis to rigorous journalistic examination, they stage fluffy green stunts, run soft-focus "living green" features with Hollywood "activists", and at a time of massive staff cutbacks in every other department create the positions of specialist "climate correspondent" and "environmental reporter" and fill them with sycophantic promoters of the Big Scare to the point that, as Dr Mann coos approvingly to The New York Times, "you've taken the words out of my mouth".

What Gerson writes ought to be true. Warmergate demonstrates why it isn't.

Article here...

Understanding competition

Ruben Navarrette gets it........

Competition. A simple concept and a beneficial one. It makes us better by forcing us to work harder. Sadly, it's also an idea that is going out of style in a society where students expect to get good grades just for showing up, where everyone gets a ribbon no matter where they finish, and where parents scheme to get their kids into college by lobbying state legislatures to create set-asides for in-state residents at public universities.

When we're not hiding from domestic competition, we're trying to shield ourselves from the foreign variety. High-skilled workers don't want to compete with those from China, India or Pakistan. Low-skilled workers are just as afraid of those from Mexico, Guatemala or El Salvador.

Politicians only make matters worse. While Republicans exploit the immigration issue, Democrats do the same thing with trade. In last year's Democratic presidential primary, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton tried to give displaced workers in Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania a convenient villain to blame -- the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Both parties use lies and demagoguery to exploit fears and convince frightened Americans that we can fence ourselves off from competition. Build a wall. Impose a tariff. All so we don't have to put up with the annoyance of being forced to out-work, out-produce and out-hustle someone else to make a living.

Imagine that. What people in other countries accept as the natural order, we continue to resist. What our own parents and grandparents came to expect decades ago when they went after a job, we think we're above. We've come to think that competition is cruel because there are winners and losers; so we spend all our time devising new ways to minimize the losing.

In short, if you don't prepare yourself against competition, you'll be consumed by it.


Thursday, November 26, 2009


Now at $1192

Happy Thanksgiving

There is much to thank our creator for? Being born as an American might be the most important.

I hope all of you have a great day with your families and God Bless.


A great article detailing the differences between red v. blue


Graph of the day

Wednesday, November 25, 2009


Continues to climb....

now $1190.00

I'm in love with myself!

The Big O with some heavy reading this weekend. A GQ with his likeness on the cover.

After he gets through that, he plans to read Dreams of my Father.

Oh, by the way "O", check out some of those fashion tips like leaving the mom jeans at home.

Williams on generosity

One of the most influential pieces I ever read that led to my conversion to a thinking conservative instead of a feeling liberal was a column by Walter Williams regarding the selling of body parts for organ transplants.

He's back with this piece on bone marrow transplants.......

How many things in our lives would we like to depend upon the generosity and selflessness of our fellow man, and do you think we would like the outcome? You say, "Williams, are you now putting down generosity and selflessness?" No, I'm not. Let me ask the question in a more direct way. Say you want a nice three-bedroom house. Which human motivation do you think would get you the house sooner: the generosity of builders or the builders' desire to earn some money? What about a nice car? Which motivation of auto companies and their workers do you trust will get you a car sooner: the generosity of owners and workers, or owner desire for profits and worker desire for wages? As for me, I put my faith in people's self-interest as the most reliable way to get them to do what I want and believe most other people share my faith. What would your prediction be about the supply of housing, cars and most other things if Congress enacted a law mandating that a house or car could only be donated, not sold? If you said there would be a shortage of houses and cars, go to the head of the class.

Bone marrow transplantation is a relatively new medical procedure that is used to treat diseases once thought incurable such as leukemia, aplastic anemia, Hodgkin's disease, immune deficiency disorders and some solid tumors such as breast and ovarian cancer. Every year, at least 1,000 Americans die and others suffer because they cannot find a matching bone marrow donor. The reason why there is a shortage of donors is the National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA), enacted by Congress in 1984. NOTA makes it illegal to give anything of value in exchange for bone marrow and that includes, for example, giving a college student a scholarship or a new homeowner a mortgage payment. Everyone involved in such a transaction -- doctors, nurses, donors and patients -- risks up to five years in a federal penitentiary.

There might be light at the end of the tunnel because the Washington-based Institute for Justice (, one of my very favorite liberty-oriented organizations, has brought suit against this inhumane practice of the U.S. Congress. The suit, Flynn v. Holder, was filed in the Los Angeles Division of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Oct. 26, 2009. Doreen Flynn, the plaintiff, is the mother of five children, three of whom have Fanconi anemia, a serious genetic disorder affecting the blood whose sufferers often need a bone marrow transplant during their teen years.

The Institute for Justice is not challenging Congress' ban on compensation for solid organs such as hearts, kidneys and livers. Instead, the lawsuit challenges only the provision of National Organ Transplant Act that bans compensation for bone marrow. The premise of the Institute for Justice's legal challenge is that there is a fundamental biological distinction between renewable marrow cells and nonrenewable solid organs. In the case of bone marrow, the donor's bone marrow is completely replenished in a few weeks. That's less time than it takes for the human body to fully replenish a pint of donated blood that is often sold to blood banks.

Just about everyone would agree that there would be massive shortages and discontent if there were a congressional mandate that we must depend on our fellow man's generosity for our home, our car, our food and thousands of other items that we use. Why then must a person depend on his fellow man's generosity for an item like bone marrow that might mean the difference between life and death? There is no rhyme or reason for the congressional prohibition of bone marrow other than arbitrary unconstitutional abuse of power that far too many Americans tolerate and would like to see extended to other areas of our lives.


Just put it on the card

The Obamunists are treating the national debt like a unlimited credit card. The bad news? The bill cometh......

The United States government is financing its more than trillion-dollar-a-year borrowing with i.o.u.’s on terms that seem too good to be true.

But that happy situation, aided by ultralow interest rates, may not last much longer.

Treasury officials now face a trifecta of headaches: a mountain of new debt, a balloon of short-term borrowings that come due in the months ahead, and interest rates that are sure to climb back to normal as soon as the Federal Reserve decides that the emergency has passed.

Even as Treasury officials are racing to lock in today’s low rates by exchanging short-term borrowings for long-term bonds, the government faces a payment shock similar to those that sent legions of overstretched homeowners into default on their mortgages.

With the national debt now topping $12 trillion, the White House estimates that the government’s tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year, even if annual budget deficits shrink drastically. Other forecasters say the figure could be much higher.

In concrete terms, an additional $500 billion a year in interest expense would total more than the combined federal budgets this year for education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But hey, I'm totally comfortable with Turbo Tim Geitner at the helm..........


Ed Begley.... going down with the ship

Bearcats still undefeated

And it's not just the football team.

The Bearcats followed up a beating of #23 Vanderbilt with a 69-57 beating of #21 Maryland in the Maui invitational.

They play in the championship game tonight against Gonzaga.

Nice job Mick. Keep it going.

Life in "Progress" City

From the golden gate city of San Francisco, who hasn't had a conservative in their city government since the gold rush days.........
Police arrested 18 members of the Service Employees International Union on Monday night after they blocked rush hour traffic on Market Street about a block from Civic Center Plaza to protest job cuts in the face of San Francisco's budget deficit.

Protesters, trying to prevent 500 city workers from being laid off, reassigned or given smaller paychecks, had notified police ahead of time of their plans. Nobody was injured in the demonstration, police said. The demonstrators were cited and released with an order to appear later in court.

Officers moved in after the group blocked traffic at the intersection of Market and Hayes streets for about 30 minutes, police said. It then took officers more than an hour to clear the roadway.

"I'm sure people were inconvenienced," Officer Boaz Mariles said. "We do our best to facilitate the flow of traffic, but we're challenged with these events."

Hide The Decline - Climategate

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

But they were supposed to love us

Remember the good old days when fast food joints had car hops and the world hated us because George Bush was president.

Apparently, the British aren't taking a liking to King Obama's lack of decision on Afghanistan.......

Mr Ainsworth took the unprecedented step of publicly criticising the US President and his delays in sending more troops to bolster the mission against the Taliban.

A “period of hiatus” in Washington - and a lack of clear direction - had made it harder for ministers to persuade the British public to go on backing the Afghan mission in the face of a rising death toll, he said.

Senior British Government sources have become increasingly frustrated with Mr Obama’s “dithering” on Afghanistan, the Daily Telegraph disclosed earlier this month, with several former British defence chiefs echoing the concerns.

But Mr Ainsworth is the first Government minister to express in public what amounts to personal criticism of the US president’s leadership over the conflict which has so far cost 235 British lives.

Polls show most voters now want an early withdrawal, following the death of 98 British service personnel this year alone.

Ministers say the mission is vital to stop international terrorists using Afghanistan as a base, but Gordon Brown has promised an “exit strategy” that could start next year.


Kenneth Gladney Gets Stomped By SEIU Thugs in Hate Crime-- St. Louis County Officials Blow Him Off


now at $1,169 an ounce

Nate Robinson shoots on wrong basket, D'Antoni snaps

You've never seen bad basketball until you've seen a Knicks/Nets game

Democrats Befuddled On $300M "Bribe" For Sen. Mary Landrieu

Democrat Congressman OK with Jail Time for No Insurance

Why I hate vaccinations #441003

GlaxoSmithKline has advised doctors in Canada to stop using a batch of its swine flu vaccine, amid reports of severe side-effects in some patients.

The batch of some 170,000 doses was put on hold because of the reported higher than usual number of patients having anaphylactic reactions.

This may include breathing problems, raised heart rate and skin rashes.

The pharmaceutical company said it was investigating the reports, which could lead to the withdrawal of the batch.



Monday, November 23, 2009


Now at $1160.

Life in "Progress" City

From the city of Camden NJ, who hasn't had a republican in the city since, well, er, EVER.......

A national study ranks the New Jersey city of Camden as the nation's most dangerous city in 2008.

The annual rankings from CQ Press are based on FBI-compiled crime data and population figures. Some criminologists say the methodology is unfair.

Camden is no stranger to the top of the list. It was the most dangerous city for 2003 and 2004 and is consistently in the top 10. The bad ranking comes during a year when the number of murders has dropped amid major changes to the police department.

The study found Camden had more than 2,300 violent crimes for every 10,000 residents last year.

St. Louis, Oakland, Calif., Detroit and Flint, Mich., round out the top five.

Nice to see the follow up cities have so few republicans you couldn't find one with a pack of bloodhounds using free Sarah Palin biographies as bait.

Just out of curiosity, why hasn't a study ever been done linking crime to the number of registered democrats in a particular area?

Don't you think we might see a correlation?

What's so "progressive" about crime ridden cesspools?


Another global warming malady

The Branch Gorevidians are, for sure, hypochondriacs.

How else to explain all of societies maladies on the bogus religion of global warming.

Now we get to add prostitution to the list.......

The effects of climate change have driven women in communities in coastal areas in poor countries like the Philippines into dangerous work, and sometimes even the flesh trade, a United Nations official said.

Suneeta Mukherjee, country representative of the United Nations Food Population Fund (UNFPA), said women in the Philippines are the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change in the country.

“Climate change could reduce income from farming and fishing, possibly driving some women into sex work and thereby increase HIV infection," Mukherjee said during the Wednesday launch of the UNFPA annual State of World Population Report in Pasay City.


See the entire list of the issues caused by global warming here....

Bob Dylan "Here Comes Santa Claus"

Taking a cue from Right Runner

Increase your carbon footprint

and your waistline.

thanks reader Bernie

What the smart people doing

Unlike Obama, I'll never profess to be the smartest person in the world and, also unlike, Obama I watch what the smart people are doing and emulate them.

What you are not seeing from the smart people in the world right now; investments in dollars.

What you are seeing; investments in gold.....
At the intersection of yellow dog and greenback, it's worth noting that the tiny island of Mauritius became the third central bank to buy gold in the past month -- specifically, 2 metric tons worth $71.7 million from the International Monetary Fund (following in the footsteps of India and Sri Lanka).

I don't know what the fourth central bank will be, but I'm pretty sure there will be one.

Meanwhile, the Buttonwood column in last week's Economist, "Paper promises, golden hordes," cited the small quantity of gold that actually exists: "Two hundred metric tonnes of gold" -- that's what India bought -- "would occupy a cube of a little more than two metres on a side; it would fit into a small bedroom."

(For folks who might not know, all the gold that's ever been found would fit into two Olympic-size swimming pools!)

The column noted the psychological sea change that appears to be taking place at the central-bank level: "For bullion bulls, the implication is clear: central banks no longer trust the creditworthiness of other governments. And if they have lost confidence, private investors should do the same."

I think that pretty much sums up how the groupthink process gets started. Of course, that idea will have cut a wide swath through all levels of asset managers (witness my scenario above) before gold finally becomes too crowded and tops out.

The corollary of folks wanting to buy gold -- i.e., having no faith in dollars and other colored paper -- also has implications for the bond market. It's what I have alluded to with my shorthand nickname "the funding crisis."

That the Buttonwood column took this up for discussion is potentially an early sign that the concept of a funding crisis may now be going mainstream (at least sophisticatedly so):

"Developed-country governments have attempted to control bond yields through quantitative easing and to support stock markets through ultra-low interest rates. But they cannot support their currencies as well without risking problems in the bond and equity markets. Gold's surge may indicate that investors fear the next stage of the crisis will occur in the foreign-exchange markets."

That is a succinct warning of what I believe will likely be next year's serious problem for the xera, where weakness is no longer described as just excess volatility but a genuine cause for concern.

Read the rest and remember to invest in the three "G's" Gold, Guns and Generators.

A panel of racists

I'm amazed at the overt racism being displayed by Chris Matthews panel here. How else do you explain the criticism of our first black president by David St. Ignatius and Anne Kornblut?

Even Chris Matthews is figuring out that the tingle down his leg is warm urine.

A White House cover up

This should have congressional investigation written all over it.
Just hours after Sen. Charles Grassley and Rep. Darrell Issa released a report Friday on their investigation into the abrupt firing of AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin, the Obama White House gave the lawmakers a trove of new, previously-withheld documents on the affair. It was a twist on the now-familiar White House late-Friday release of bad news; this time, the new evidence was put out not only at the start of a weekend but also hours too late for inclusion in the report.

The new documents support the Republican investigators' conclusion that the White House's explanation for Walpin's dismissal -- that it came after the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees AmeriCorps, unanimously decided that Walpin must go -- was in fact a public story cobbled together after Walpin was fired, not before.

Walpin was axed on the evening of June 10, when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, who told Walpin he had one hour either to resign or be fired. The next day, congressional Republicans, led by Grassley, objected, charging that Walpin's dismissal violated a recently-passed law requiring the president to giveCongress 30 days' notice before dismissing an inspector general.

Pressed for the reason Walpin was fired, Eisen told House and Senate aides that the White House conducted an "extensive review" of complaints about Walpin’s performance before deciding to dismiss him. According to the new report, Eisen told Congress that "his investigation into the merits of removing Gerald Walpin involved contacting members of the Corporation for National and Community Service [CNCS] board to confirm the existence of a 'consensus' in favor of removal." But Republican investigators later discovered that during that "extensive review," the White House did not even seek the views of the corporation's board -- the very people whose "consensus" purportedly led to Walpin's firing.

Other than board chairman Alan Solomont, the Democratic mega-donor and Obama supporter who originally told the White House of his dissatisfaction with Walpin, "no member of the CNCS board had any substantive input about whether the removal of Gerald Walpin was appropriate," according to the report. Only one other board member, vice-chairman Stephen Goldsmith, was even called by the White House, and that was on June 10, a few hours before Walpin was fired. According to the report, Goldsmith told investigators that "the White House had already decided to remove Walpin and wanted to confirm [Goldsmith's] support for the action."

This is an excellent investigative report, read the rest.

Who did she vote for? #80

Meet Natalie Blanchard. Why is Natalie in the news?

A Quebec woman on long-term sick leave is fighting to have her benefits reinstated after her employer's insurance company cut them, she says, because of photos posted on Facebook.

Nathalie Blanchard, 29, has been on leave from her job at IBM in Bromont, Que., for the last year and a half after she was diagnosed with major depression.

The Eastern Townships woman was receiving monthly sick-leave benefits from Manulife, her insurance company, but the payments dried up this fall.

When Blanchard called Manulife, the company said that "I'm available to work, because of Facebook," she told CBC News this week.

She said her insurance agent described several pictures Blanchard posted on the popular social networking site, including ones showing her having a good time at a Chippendales bar show, at her birthday party and on a sun holiday — evidence that she is no longer depressed, Manulife said.

Blanchard said she notified Manulife that she was taking a trip, and she's shocked the company would investigate her in such a manner and interpret her photos that way.

Now granted, Natalie here is Canadian. But let's pretend that on one of her vacations to Key West, she hooked up with an ACORN employee who registered her to vote.

Would she have voted for The Maverick or the Messiah?


Sunday, November 22, 2009

The destruction of ordinary people

If you ever wanted to understand the popularity of TEA parties and/or Sarah Palin, read this post at Wizbang.......

There's a trend emerging in American politics. I don't think it's a new one, but it's growth is disturbing to me. And it's the amazing hostility to the common people.

With the explosion of the internet, Andy Warhol's "15 minutes" theory seems to have developed a variant: under the right circumstances, anyone can become a superstar overnight, over the most trivial of reasons -- and fall just as quickly. Even in politics.

But in politics, there is a growing trend to take that nobody, that average person, and treat them just like we do hardened political professionals -- and attempt to destroy them in the process.

Take, for example, this guy named Joe. He's playing with his kids in his front yard one fine fall day a bit over a year ago when this horde descends on his neighborhood. He recognizes the guy at the head of the mob -- it's the Democratic nominee for president, and Joe doesn't particularly like the guy. So he figures he'll ask him a rather pointed question, take what will likely be his only shot in life to make a big shot squirm a little. It's not the greatest of questions, but the big shot bobbles it a little -- and suddenly Joe finds that he's the talk of water coolers across the nation.

Or, if you prefer, this gal named Carrie. She thinks she has this shot at fame and success, trading off her looks. So she enters a beauty pageant, and is doing pretty well. Then a worthless sack of shit masquerading as a human being that -- for some insane reason -- had been tapped as a judge decides to bring politics into the equation. Carrie ain't the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree, so she gives a vaguely-coherent answer that she hopes will please everyone (that's what pageant contestants are supposed to do, after all), saying that she personally opposes gay marriage, but is glad that it's something that we can freely discuss and decide as a society.

For Joe's impertinence of helping Mr. Big Shot make himself look like a fool, he must be punished. No, he must be destroyed. Every aspect of his life must be ripped apart and laid bare for public consumption. Why, did you hear that he's behind on his taxes? That he's not even a fully licensed plumber? Hell, his legal first name isn't even Joe!

And for Carrie, why she must be punished as well for not whole-heartedly endorsing the position of the judge. She, too, must be denounced and exposed and shamed and degraded. The judge (a flamingly-homosexual, plagiarizing, crass beyond belief online gossip columnist whose queenly traits dwarf those of real queens like Elizabeth II) promptly labels her a "cunt" among other things (gee, what a surprise: misogyny from someone like Perez Hilton) and calls her a hate-monger and a homophobe and anything else his diseased little brain can think of.

Maybe if the political elite douche bags the likes of David Brooks and David Frum read this, they might have an understanding of what's actually going on in the country beyond DC.

Please read the rest here......

Barack's Big Asian Adventure

So what exactly has all of Obama's jet setting gotten him; or the US?

Gazing serenely from the Great Wall of China last week, President Barack Obama appeared to be making the most of one of the supreme perks of White House occupancy — a private guided tour of Asia’s most spectacular tourist destination.

White House aides exulted that perfectly choreographed pictures of this moment would make front pages around the world. Yet an experience Obama declared to be “magical” turned sour as he returned home to a spreading domestic revolt that is fanning Democratic unease.

It was not just that the US media have suddenly turned a lot more sceptical about a president with grand ambitions to reshape politics at home and abroad — even one previously friendly newspaper noted dismissively: “Obama goes to China, brings home a T-shirt.”

Nor was the steady decline in the president’s approval ratings — which fell below 50% for the first time in a Gallup poll last week — the main cause of White House angst. Obama remains more popular than either Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton a year after their elections, and both presidents eventually cruised to second terms.

The real problem may be Obama’s friends — or rather, those among his formerly most enthusiastic supporters who are now having second thoughts.

The doubters are suddenly stretching across a broad section of the Democratic party’s natural constituency. They include black congressional leaders upset by the sluggish economy; women and Hispanics appalled by concessions made to Republicans on healthcare; anti-war liberals depressed by the debate over troops for Afghanistan; and growing numbers of blue-collar workers who are continuing to lose their jobs and homes.


Life in "Progress" State

From the gopher state of Minnesota, who hasn't had a conservative in state office since there were only 9000 lakes.......

Do you believe in the American dream -- the idea that in this country, hardworking people of every race, color and creed can get ahead on their own merits? If so, that belief may soon bar you from getting a license to teach in Minnesota public schools -- at least if you plan to get your teaching degree at the University of Minnesota's Twin Cities campus.

In a report compiled last summer, the Race, Culture, Class and Gender Task Group at the U's College of Education and Human Development recommended that aspiring teachers there must repudiate the notion of "the American Dream" in order to obtain the recommendation for licensure required by the Minnesota Board of Teaching. Instead, teacher candidates must embrace -- and be prepared to teach our state's kids -- the task force's own vision of America as an oppressive hellhole: racist, sexist and homophobic.

The task group is part of the Teacher Education Redesign Initiative, a multiyear project to change the way future teachers are trained at the U's flagship campus. The initiative is premised, in part, on the conviction that Minnesota teachers' lack of "cultural competence" contributes to the poor academic performance of the state's minority students. Last spring, it charged the task group with coming up with recommendations to change this. In January, planners will review the recommendations and decide how to proceed.

The report advocates making race, class and gender politics the "overarching framework" for all teaching courses at the U. It calls for evaluating future teachers in both coursework and practice teaching based on their willingness to fall into ideological lockstep.

The first step toward "cultural competence," says the task group, is for future teachers to recognize -- and confess -- their own bigotry. Anyone familiar with the reeducation camps of China's Cultural Revolution will recognize the modus operandi.


Kalifornistan Trailer

A funny

Click here for an SNL wrap up of the China summit.

Don't believe me

So what does David Broder, not exactly your garden variety red meat conservative, have to say about Obamacare............

I have been writing for months that the acid test for this effort lies less in the publicized fight over the public option or the issue of abortion coverage than in the plausibility of its claim to be fiscally responsible.

This is obviously turning out to be the case. While the CBO said that both the House-passed bill and the one Reid has drafted meet Obama's test by being budget-neutral, every expert I have talked to says that the public has it right. These bills, as they stand, are budget-busters.

Here, for example, is what Robert Bixby, the executive director of the Concord Coalition, a bipartisan group of budget watchdogs, told me: "The Senate bill is better than the House version, but there's not much reform in this bill. As of now, it's basically a big entitlement expansion, plus tax increases."

Here's another expert, Maya MacGuineas, the president of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget: "While this bill does a better job than the House version at reducing the deficit and controlling costs, it still doesn't do enough. Given the political system's aversion to tax increases and spending cuts, I worry about what the final bill will look like."

These are nonpartisan sources, but Republican budget experts such as former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin amplify the point with specific examples and biting language. Holtz-Eakin cites a long list of Democratic-sponsored "budget gimmicks" that made it possible for the CBO to estimate that Reid's bill would reduce federal deficits by $130 billion by 2019.

Perhaps the biggest of those maneuvers was Reid's decision to postpone the start of subsidies to help the uninsured buy policies from mid-2013 to January 2014 -- long after taxes and fees levied by the bill would have begun.