Saturday, January 30, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
The real scandal surrounding the failed Christmas Day airline bombing was not the fact that a terrorist got on a plane -- that can happen to any administration, as it surely did to the Bush administration -- but what happened afterward when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was captured and came under the full control of the U.S. government.Seriously, Is the Obama Administration just a collection of intellectual dim wits who simply sit around and theorize about the role of government?
After 50 minutes of questioning him, the Obama administration chose, reflexively and mindlessly, to give the chatty terrorist the right to remain silent. Which he immediately did, undoubtedly denying us crucial information about al-Qaeda in Yemen, which had trained, armed and dispatched him.
We have since learned that the decision to Mirandize Abdulmutallab had been made without the knowledge of or consultation with (1) the secretary of defense, (2) the secretary of homeland security, (3) the director of the FBI, (4) the director of the National Counterterrorism Center or (5) the director of national intelligence (DNI).The Justice Department acted not just unilaterally but unaccountably. Obama's own DNI said that Abdulmutallab should have been interrogated by the HIG, the administration's new High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group.
Perhaps you hadn't heard the term. Well, in the very first week of his presidency, Obama abolished by executive order the Bush-Cheney interrogation procedures and pledged to study a substitute mechanism. In August, the administration announced the establishment of the HIG, housed in the FBI but overseen by the National Security Council.
Where was it during the Abdulmutallab case? Not available, admitted National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, because it had been conceived for use only abroad. Had not one person in this vast administration of highly nuanced sophisticates considered the possibility of a terror attack on American soil?
Gordon, are you crazy?
Well, consider that if he would win, he'd have six more months of experience than our current president.
That's worked out real well hasn't it?
Kind of put things in prospective doesn't it?
Former John Edwards' aide Andrew Young, who covered up the Democratic presidential candidate's affair, said when he cleaned up his house after his role in the cover-up ended he found one more shocker.Yeah Hairman, there are two Americas. One where guys marry their girlfriend when they knock her up and one where the guy is chivalrous enough to pay for the abortion.
"There was one tape that was marked 'special,'" Young told ABC News' Bob Woodruff in an exclusive interview. "It's a sex tape of Rielle and John Edwards made just a couple of months before the Iowa caucuses."
Though Young never saw the woman's face in the tape, he said she was "visibly pregnant" and was "wearing a bracelet" and a "thumb ring" typically worn by Rielle Hunter.
"It's her jewelry," Andrew Young's wife, Cheri, told ABC News. "It could be on another woman with the same jewelry."
Young gives his account of the sex scandal and the elaborate cover-up for the Democratic presidential candidate in a new tell-all book titled, "The Politician," which will be released Jan. 30.
California's plans to build a 220-mph train system between the Bay Area and Southern California will get a big boost today when President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden award the state more than a quarter of the $8 billion in federal stimulus money devoted to creating high-speed rail networks.
California will receive $2.25 billion - more than any other corridor - to help build the 800-mile high-speed rail project, which has an estimated construction cost of $42 billion. State voters in 2008 approved the sale of $10 billion in bonds to help build the system.
"This award is fantastic news for California and for our state's high-speed rail project," said Curt Pringle, chairman of the California High Speed Rail Authority and mayor of Anaheim. "This award will go toward specific projects, but it will benefit every single section of our planned high-speed rail system by moving this entire vision closer ... to being the first true high-speed rail system in the United States."
Originally, I believed the tone deafness of the Obamunists was attributable to the arronagance of The One. Now it's clear there's a true delusional quality to being a liberal in general.
Thanks reader Jeremy.
BARACK OBAMA'S new plan for the banks is unlikely to achieve his stated
aim that "Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by a
bank that is too big to fail." But whether or not the proposed measures
fall short of that ambitious goal, one thing is sure. If the plan is
implemented, it will have unintended consequences. That has been the
history of previous financial reforms.
Take , a rule established by the American authorities in
the 1930s to restrict the interest rate that banks could pay on
deposits. It had several motives, including a desire to boost banks'
profits (and thereby help pay for ) and a belief that
competition to pay high deposit rates would encourage banks to take too
many risks. The rule was extended to thrifts (savings-and-loans
institutions) in the 1960s.
With rates held below their natural level, American savers eventually
turned elsewhere. The biggest institutions looked abroad. As dollars
accumulated outside America, the Euromarket, where lenders and
borrowers were free to set rates between them, developed in London.
Small investors moved their savings out of banks and thrifts and into
money-market funds, which did not face a limit on the rates they could
pay. The devisers of Regulation Q did not intend to boost the
money-market fund industry or to prop up London as a global financial
centre but that is the effect they had.
Thanks reader Tim.
The place to be
They watched the hazy sun
Sinking in the sea
From the Golden State of California, where you can't find a conservative with a Predator drone hovering over the state...........
The California Senate approved creating a government-run health care system for the nation's most populous state on Thursday, ignoring a veto threat from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.Are these people INSANE!
Supporters said it is time for state legislatures to take up the debate as the Obama Administration's national health care proposal falters in Congress.
"If it's not to be done at the national level, let us take the lead," said state Sen. Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego.
The move in California comes after Massachusetts voters changed the calculus in Congress by electing a Republican to the Senate who opposes the pending plan.
Democrats are the majority in both houses of the California Legislature. The 40-member state Senate passed the single-payer plan on a 22-14 vote, sending it to the Assembly. One Democrat voted against the measure.
Their budget is already in the red billions of dollars. So much their bond rating has been downgraded. Yet they trudge forward with yet another entitlement that can't be paid for as productive residents pack up U-Hauls as soon as they return from other states.
California is the perfect case study of why liberalism doesn't work at any level. Yet these guys keep sucking down the Kool Aid.
Goes to VA to campaign for Deeds..... Fail
Goes to MA to campaign for Coakley..... Fail
Calls John Calipari, coach of the Kentucky Wildcats to thank him for their Haiti relief. Kentucky goes out that night and loses to South Carolina ending their undefeated season.
Maybe Charlie Crist should have learned about The Curse before he met with him yesterday.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Liberals must have the mentality of your average five year old based on their obsession with Thomas the Tank Engine (that might explain why Alec Baldwin narrates the show).
So we're looking at throwing $500 million in a shovel ready stimulus project rail system that will haul our butts from Cincinnati to Cleveland in a speedy 6 and 1/2 hours.
Wow! That's kicking ass given that it only takes 4 1/2 to drive there today.
I can see the citizens clamoring for such an efficient mode of transportation. Well, not exactly........
Results of a recent Ohio Newspaper Poll show a majority of Ohio voters, 52%, are not on-board Ohio's costly $564 million plan to re-start a passenger train connecting Cincinnati with Cleveland via Dayton and Columbus that only averages 39-mph, takes six and one-half hours to travel the 255-mile route and will need $18 million each year in public subsidy.
The poll, part of a continuing collaboration between Ohio's eight largest newspapers, shows the growing schism between proponents of the 3-C Transportation Corridor, who say returning passenger trains to a route over which they have not run in over 40 years will give 60 percent of Ohio’s population increased travel options as early as 2011 that will be safe, efficient and cost effective, and opponents, who argue it's slow speed, long trip times and on-going need for massive public subsidy will not shift drivers from their cars to the rails and for those who do, will leave them stranded at their destination because ground support transportation systems are woefully inadequate.
But that's not the kicker here. Not only is this albatross not fast, it's not going to be cheap either........
State Rep. Louis Blessing, R-Colerain Township, an attorney and long-time state legislator, said he opposes the state investing in the rail line. Blessing, now in the House again after eight years in the Senate, told Wilkinson he is not surprised by the poll's results, citing as his primary concern the fact that the state can design and build the system on existing rail tracks with federal money, but couldn't maintain and operate it without pouring millions of dollars into the system for the foreseeable future.
The Ohio Department of Transportation estimates revenues for the 255-mile rail line while operating costs of $29 million would leave a 18 million-per-year gap for public subsidy.
I'm starting to truly believe that liberals intentionally start these white elephants knowing that they don't pay for themselves so they have more reason to increase taxes.
Where do I sign up?
Read the rest of this and shake your head
Then why is it that this administration did almost nothing in 2009 but focus on health care for it's domestic agenda?
By the way, if you really want to help small businesses in this country, help big businesses. That's the fuel for small companies in this country. Here's why
Nice to hear we're going to have a nuclear plant soon. Anyone want to take wagers on Iran having one before we build another?
Jonathan Chait of the New Republic
President Obama’s speeches have always been notable for both their exquisite prose and their unusually high intellectual level. Tonight’s speech, while probably as effective as such speeches can be, was neither.
The dropoff between rhetoric penned by Obama and that by his staff, always noticeable, was especially so tonight. When he declared, “health care experts who know our system best consider this approach a vast improvement over the status quo,” I wondered if his budget freeze had already claimed the entire White House speechwriting staff.
Obama suggested that we should embrace alternative energy sources even if you doubt climate science. (I’m pretty sure that, if carbon dioxide were harmless, we’d be better off sticking with the cheap energy.) He embraced some hoary populist tropes, in which “Washington” and “us” are homogenous, mutually exclusive categories, and he belongs to the second. (“Washington has been telling us to wait for decades.”) And his rationale for a budget freeze made no sense whatsoever. “I am absolutely convinced that [the stimulus] was the right thing to do,” he said, “But families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions. The federal government should do the same.” Um, why?
And when Obama announced “I do not accept second place for the United States of America,” I thought I was listening to Otter:
I can't tell if Chait forgot that Obama was a black man for a moment. (see previous post)
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Why? Because they end up being a litany of "what you want - I can give you" promises. Never once actually telling the public the truth about our government and our national identity.
If you want a balanced budget - We're putting together a task force to get that done.
If you want increased government spending - We putting together more programs we can't pay for.
If you want a government program funding pony's for kids - we're going to do that with a tax against Secretariat.
If you want light blue M&M's - we're putting a special tax against "big candy" until M&M/Mars releases them.
Big Bird painted orange.... - We're commissioning PBS to review the program
You want McDonald's to serve curly fries - We'll get that done.... without transfat.
Of course, the oppostition party who will do the response will be opposed to everything the president's going to do or make it bigger.
The only thing neither party will ever address is my "Free Beer for Midgets program". What these people have against midgets is beyond me. I'm thinking that the little people lobby in congress must be pretty lame.
None the less, it's why I've taken up the program to fund free beer for the shortest of us. If you'd like to contribute please email me at email@example.com for details.
Regardless, I'll let the pundits watch tonight's laundry list of freebies and I'll read them tomorrow.
An 18-year-old man was rushed into surgery Tuesday night with serious injuries after being shot a few blocks from his home as he walked back from work, according to a Cincinnati police captain.What's so "progressive" about being shot?
The teenager has not been identified, but Capt. Mike Neville said he is in serious condition at University Hospital. The teen remained in serious condition Wednesday morning, police say.
The shooting occurred near the corner of Hewitt and Evanston avenues in Evanston.
The teen called police around 10 p.m., Neville said, but at least 30 minutes elapsed between the shooting and the phone call because the teen walked about three blocks home on Crane Avenue before calling police.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Teenagers have found it significantly harder to get a job since the recession began in late 2007, with black youths and young people from low-income families faring the worst, wrote Andrew Sum of Northeastern University in Boston, a employment researcher commissioned by the Chicago Urban League and the Alternative Schools Network.
"Low-income and minority youth, who depended on part-time jobs as a significant stepping stone to future employment, have been forced out of the job market and economically marginalized," Herman Brewer of the Chicago Urban League said in a statement.
Overall, 26 percent of American teenagers aged 16 to 19 had jobs in late 2009, said the report, which was based on U.S. Census Bureau data. That figure is a record low since statistics began to be kept in 1948, the researchers said.
I posted last week on a business who decided not to hire two teenagers because the minimum wage was to high for the skill required to do the work.
The Gekko's have a combined 14 siblings (nine her, four me). Together, with in laws, we have one person among all of us who have lost a job (subsequently re-employed). I note this because the people in our family probably have as more marketable skills than the average person. We'll ultimately do OK during this downturn.
It's the folks who don't have skills who will suffer and things like minimum wage hike will only put pressure on employers to farm out their labor demands to third world countries when the economy does turn around.
Once again, I'm not a conservative for me. The Gekko's will always find a way to make money. It's the least of us I truly care about.
Unfortunately, democrats sell self destructing snake oil to these people like a group of carnies.
Maybe they'll get it before it's too late.
Monday, January 25, 2010
The Weekly Standard points out that teleprompters were used in remarks to the press; not the students.
Regardless, are you telling me this guy can't do a five minute introduction of Arne Duncan without the crutch of a teleprompter?
If you ever wondered why people are criticizing the one for his disconnection with the people, watch the video. It's apparent that he's addressing everyone but no one simultaneously.
It would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetic.
Berry recounted meetings with White House officials, reminiscent of some during the Clinton days, where he and others urged them not to force Blue Dogs “off into that swamp” of supporting bills that would be unpopular with voters back home.
“I’ve been doing that with this White House, and they just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.” [snip]
“I began to preach last January that we had already seen this movie and we didn’t want to see it again because we know how it comes out,” said Arkansas’ 1st District congressman, who worked in the Clinton administration before being elected to the House in 1996... "I just began to have flashbacks to 1993 and ’94. No one that was here in ’94, or at the day after the election felt like. It certainly wasn’t a good feeling.”
What does a smart politician do?
More of the same........
Nearly three out of four Americans think that at least half of the money spent in the federal stimulus plan has been wasted, according to a new national poll.
A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday morning also indicates that 63 percent of the public thinks that projects in the plan were included for purely political reasons and will have no economic benefit, with 36 percent saying those projects will benefit the economy.
Twenty-one percent of people questioned in the poll say nearly all the money in the stimulus has been wasted, with 24 percent feeling that most money has been wasted and an additional 29 percent saying that about half has been wasted. Twenty-one percent say only a little has been wasted and 4 percent think that no stimulus dollars have been wasted.
Thanks reader Jeremy
The cold hard numbers in the Massachusetts special Senate election this week tell you something important about the appeal of Barack Obama and his policies on his 365th day in office. Democrat Martha Coakley did fine among the voters that would be impressed by your knowledge of Edmund Burke. But she got a thumbs down and Republican Scott Brown got a thumbs up from the children and grandchildren of the people Jimmy Burke represented 40 or 50 years ago.
What Brooks has described as "the educated class" -- shorthand for the elite, university-educated, often secular professionals who probably make up a larger share of the electorate in Massachusetts than in any other state -- turned out in standard numbers and cast unenthusiastic votes for the Democrat.
You can see them on the map: the gentrified wards of Boston through Cambridge and Newton and northwest out Route 2 to Lexington and Concord all voted Democratic. You can also find them in the mountains of western Massachusetts, where trust funders and the college dropouts who wait on them in kicky restaurants form an even more left-wing constituency than neighboring Vermont.
Members of "the educated class" are pleased by Obama's decision to close Guantanamo and congressional Democrats' bills addressing supposed global warming. They are puzzled by his reticence to advance gay rights but assume that in his heart he is on their side.
They support more tepidly the Democrats' big government spending, higher taxes and health care bills as necessary to attract the votes of the less enlightened and well-off. For "the educated class," such programs are, in the words of the late Sen. Pat Moynihan, "boob bait for the bubbas."
Here's the case that ended McCain- Feingold
Obama has decided that bankers will be the scapegoat he blames for all the county's woes.
Using the Howard Fineman school of inference, I guess we can extrapolate that the word "bankers" is code for Jews.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Of course, we may never know the truth since the Obamunist response was to read the terrorist his rights like a drunken college student being charged with drunk driving.
So what went wrong? According to Barack Obama, the problem is that he overestimated you dumb rubes' ability to appreciate what he's been doing for you. "That I do think is a mistake of mine," the president told ABC's George Stephanopoulos. "I think the assumption was if I just focus on policy, if I just focus on this provision or that law or if we're making a good rational decision here, then people will get it."
But you schlubs aren't that smart. You didn't get it. And Barack Obama is determined to see that you do. So the president has decided that he needs to start "speaking directly to the American people."
Wait, wait! Come back! Don't all stampede for the hills! He gave only (according to CBS News' Mark Knoller) 158 interviews and 411 speeches in his first year. That's more than any previous president – and maybe more than all of them put together. But there may still be some show out there that didn't get its exclusive Obama interview – I believe the top-rated "Grain & Livestock Prices Report – 4 a.m. Update with Herb Torpormeister" on WZZZ-AM Dead Buzzard Gulch Junction's Newstalk Leader is still waiting to hear back from the White House.
But what will the president be saying in all these extra interviews? In that interview about how he hadn't given enough interviews, he also explained to George Stephanopoulos what that wacky Massachusetts election was all about:
"The same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office," said Obama. "People are angry, and they're frustrated, not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years but what's happened over the last eight years."Got it. People are so angry and frustrated at George W. Bush that they're voting for Republicans. In Massachusetts. Boy, I can't wait for that 159th interview.
The president is right. He needed to sell health care more.
Meet Robert Jenkins. Why is Mr. Jenkins in the news...........
A Canton man remains in jail after being arrested for urinating on a meat counter at a Wal-Mart store.
According to Lt. Linda Brown of the Canton Police Department, Robert T. Jenkins, 21, of Canton, was arrested at 1:30 a.m. Friday morning and charges with felony vandalism and disorderly conduct.
Police say Jenkins was arrested after they responded to a call from an employee at the Wal-Mart store on Atlantic Blvd. NE, claiming a man walked up to the meat counter and began urinating on the steaks, destroying more than $600 dollars in meat.
According to Lt. Brown, it is not yet known if alcohol or drugs played a role in Brown's actions.
He is currently being held in the Stark County jail in lieu of $25,000 bond.
Now in November, 2008, did Mr. Jenkins here vote for hope and change or four more years of Bush?
As a result, I'm putting together a task force to help me not spend so much. You say ridiculous, just cut up your credit cards and instill some fiscal discipline into your life?
Well, you might be a candidate to help Obama not spend so much...........
In a dramatic concession to senior Democratic and Republican lawmakers, President Obama abruptly shifted his position Saturday and declared his public support for creating a fiscal commission that could propose sweeping tax increases and spending cuts to try to slash the soaring federal debt.
The White House released an unexpected written statement from Obama saying he now backs putting together a powerful commission created through a federal statute, a reversal from earlier this week when Vice President Joe Biden signaled in a private meeting with Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.Dakota, and other key lawmakers that the administration would only support a weaker version of the commission by forming it through an executive order.
First, I hate these commissions. Part of being in a government office is having the balls to make the tough calls.
The Indian head of the UN climate change panel defended his position yesterday even as further errors were identified in the panel's assessment of Himalayan glaciers.
Dr Rajendra Pachauri dismissed calls for him to resign over the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change’s retraction of a prediction that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.
But he admitted that there may have been other errors in the same section of the report, and said that he was considering whether to take action against those responsible.
“I know a lot of climate sceptics are after my blood, but I’m in no mood to oblige them,” he told The Times in an interview. “It was a collective failure by a number of people,” he said. “I need to consider what action to take, but that will take several weeks. It’s best to think with a cool head, rather than shoot from the hip.”
The year 2010 is already a nightmare for progressives, and it's only January. In one week alone, the health-care bill derailed, the liberal radio network Air America went silent, and the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment allows corporations to pump as much money as they want into political campaigns. I've got no answers on the first two, but a few suggestions for avoiding despair on the third, the most serious threat to American democracy in a generation.
In a devastating decision, the high court cleared the way for one of those corporate takeovers you read about, only much bigger. If Exxon wants to spend $1 million (a bar tab for Big Oil) defeating an environmentalist running for city council, it can now do so. If Goldman Sachs wants to pay the entire cost of every congressional campaign in the U.S., the law of the land now allows it. The decision frees unions, too, but they already spend about as much as they can on politics. Fortune 100 firms currently spend only a fraction of 1 percent of their $605 billion in annual profits on buying politicians.
Here's a question for Alter.
How is it that the corporation you work for (Washington Post Corp) is allowed to espouse it's opinion and free speech on the public, thus campaigning for candidates and issues but Exxon/Mobil is not allowed to political pursue what's in it's corporate interests?
Maybe if Exxon/Mobil bought a TV station like GE owns MSNBC you'll be OK with that.
Go back some decades, and it looked as if liberals were going to be the death of America. They wanted to take it really easy on criminals. They favored welfare programs that destroyed families. They backed foreign aid that buttressed tyrannies. Their way of dealing with enemies was unilateral disarmament. Still other proposals could have spent, taxed and regulated us into oblivion.
The voters didn't like all of this, the L-word became a curse, and so liberals went into something akin to a witness protection program. They changed their name to "progressives" and if they did not quite hide out, they became less obtrusive with some of their views. Yes, they griped, fumed, engaged in numerous sneak attacks and thumbed their noses at the opposition, but they did turn the lights dimmer than before on their grand vision of free-enterprise destruction and runaway statism.