Friday, May 28, 2010

Areas to examine of this graph, from the government showing the deficit, spending, and health care.

The deficit decreases as spending decreases, starting in about 1994, when the Conservatives took over Congress.  Spending hyper accelerated, as did the deficit, in about 2006 when the Democrats regained power.

Health care is not breaking the bank, total spending is.

We’re too broke to be this stupid

STEYN: Beleaguered taxpayers may finally put a stop to the sheer waste of government spending

Must read!

Liberal Fuzzy Math on Employment

I have seen Democrats several times now bragging about how we added 200 some thousand jobs recently. Why doesn't anyone in the media call them out on this? How can we be adding all of these jobs and the rate of unemployment increase up to 9.9% at the same time? Doesn't an increase in the unemployment rate mean more people not having jobs?

Correct me if I am wrong here.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

The Idiot In Chief

As some of you may know my eldest daughter has been attending the University of Michigan. Well what did I get in return for all of the out of state tuition I paid? You guessed it, being able to see the Idiot In Chief speak to his adoring followers in the BIG House at graduation. His speech could more or less be summed up as: Why can't we be more civil to each other?

This President is definitely the biggest hypocrite who as ever lived in the White House. He gives a speech which is basically do as I say not do as I do. He is the most partison President in modern history. Not one time has he tried to be reasonable in trying to reach across to the minority party and we are seeing the results of his radical left wing agenda.

Actually seeing the masses chanting Obama! Obama! at the graduation made me really see how loony the radical left really is. It truly reminded me of some of the old newsreels where the NAZI's are chanting Zeig Heil whenever Hitler would speak. It is truly scary how so many people can swallow the Kool Aid without even questioning the direction this country is going.

Thank goodness that the majority of Americans are waking up to what is happening. According to Rasmussen the Obama Approval Index is now at the all time low of -22 strongy disapprove ove strongly approve of his performance. Overall, Obama's approval/disapproval among likely voters stands at 43/56. Other numbers are equally troubling for the President. Among men, 20 percent strongly approve of his job performance, but a stunning 50 percent strongly disapprove. And only 35 percent now say his handling of the economy is excellent or good.

Rich and Terry are you paying attention to the fact that this idiot is trying to turn us into Greece? If you have ever needed proof that Keynsian Economics are a joke all you need to do is look at Greece. The good thing is Greece is small enough to bail out rather easily. Who is going to bail out the US after this idiot is done?

I also told you that Holder is the worst AG ever. He just keeps making that comment look more and more true every day. Flip flopping on terror and then testifying before Congress that he has not even read the AZ law, which is only 10 pages long, yet is able to publicly criticize it. What kind of lawyer would ever make substantive comments about a statute without reading it? This administration just keeps on giving new meaning to the word "idiot".

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Obama Knows No Bounds of Self Pity; His life is So Hard!!!

Here is a quote from Obama at the recent fundraiser in San Francisco for Barbara Boxer:

"Let's face it this has been the toughest year and a half since any year and a half since the 1930s."

Here's the link:

That is a quote from a guy who is so smart and who has such a masterful historical view that he can put World War II in perspective for all you dopes who thought that was really hard.

I'm not going off on a total rant here, but my point is this: when you are a narcissist of the first order you only see events in terms of you. This might be his hardest 18 months ever. In fact, I suspect that is true because the worthless SOB has never in his whole life been responsible for an outcome before now, I mean except for all the burdens of being a community organizer.

Real life is hard. Harry Truman, if he were still with us, would have the right advice for Barry: "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."

Let's all help Barry get out of the kitchen. Get involved, contribute, and vote the bastard out. Barry and his boys are bad for the country.

All the best,


Obama Deception

Well for those of you who are interested there are several documentaries on You Tube in regards to the Obama Deception...this is also related to several other Presidents. I watched a couple of them...each about 1-2 hours long. The ones I watched were...Fall of the Republic HQ Full Length Version and The Obama Deception...both very informative on what goes on in this and make up your own minds

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Gosh, Even Liberals Are Decrying Obama's Ineptitude Regarding Iran

Baxter recently described Krauthammer as being over the top in his criticism of Obama's foreign policy strategy regarding Iran and the resultant willingness of Turkey and Brazil to side with Iran. Here's what it looks like when one of Bax's team wrings their hands over Obama's naivety and ineptitude.

I admit it is a lot softer language, but the bottom line is the same: our side is losing.

Obama believes in a different US than I do. His focus is on apologies and seeking forgiveness for all our misdeeds. My focus is to continue what our country has done for over 100 years: spread freedom and keep America and its allies safe.

Get involved, contribute and vote Obams and his team out. He and they are bad for America.

All the best,


Big. Bigger than yellow cake?

Not a concept, not a...misstatement, pretty much bribery.

Joe Sestak There was a time when the White House and Rep. Joe Sestak were enemies. Now they're in the bunker together: Neither wants to talk about whether a White House official tried to get Sestak to drop his campaign for senator by offering him a job. With its reticence, the Obama White House raises some eerie (and, from its perspective) unwelcome parallels with the Bush White House.

President Obama endorsed Sestak's opponent, incumbent and recent Democratic convert Arlen Specter, in Pennsylvania's Democratic primary. Included in the standard package of services that accompanies such support is "field-clearing"—encouraging challengers to look for employment opportunities elsewhere. Sestak says that an administration official offered him a job if he'd drop out of the race. He declined and went on to win the party's nomination. Now he and White House officials are allies in trying to keep the seat in the Democratic Party.

This situation provides a corollary to Kinsley's law about Washington scandals, which is that the scandal isn't what's illegal, it's what's legal: Offering a job in exchange for dropping out of a political race actually is illegal. But it's not that scandalous. In previous administrations and in both parties, this kind of pressure has been applied. And both parties are smart enough to never make any offers explicit. It works like religion (or the mafia, if you want a secular example): The understanding is that, if you do the right thing, your reward will come later.

That may have happened in the Sestak case. We don't know. And that's the problem: White House officials won't talk about what happened, going mum almost exactly as their predecessors did during the inquiry into who in the Bush White House leaked the name of a CIA agent.

The questions about what Sestak was offered have been nagging for months. They were renewed after he defeated Specter. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs has responded as he did months ago. "Lawyers in the White House and others have looked into conversations that were had with Congressman Sestak and nothing inappropriate happened," he said multiple times last week.

Match this response with the one Scott McClellan gave in October 2003 when asked about what White House officials may have said about CIA official Valerie Plame. Reporters wanted to know who said what to whom. McClellan responded: "I spoke with those individuals … and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this."

The problem with both responses, of course, is that we can't just take the word of White House officials. Sestak says the offer was made, and the White House admits there were conversations. At least three laws might have been broken, according to Darrell Issa, the Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. With that many, it shouldn't be up to one of the interested parties to decide whether any laws were broken.

Gibbs sounded even more like McClellan at a press briefing last Friday, when he successfully ducked 13 questions on the matter. After a while, McClellan learned to duck such inquiries by saying he couldn't answer questions because a special prosecutor was looking into the matter. That won't happen in this case. The Department of Justice blew off the request to name a special prosecutor to look into the Sestak matter. That's better for the White House, because no White House wants an investigation into its internal workings. But it leaves this fish flopping on the deck.
"Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration has been minding my own business," President Calvin Coolidge told journalists in March 1929.  If Coolidge suddenly sprang to life today, he would look around and drop dead.

Washington Democrats are minding their own business . . . and everyone else's. In this Era of Unlimited Government, the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats stick their snouts anywhere they will fit, without the guidance of common sense, frugality or any sense of priorities. For today's federal government, it's everything, all the time.

We don't need to reform the law, we need to enforce the law.

Sunday, May 23, 2010


The problem is someone stole democracy right out from under under our noses. The tea baggers think it's about spending, about lower taxes, about less government, yes it's about all that, but that is the result not the root cause. You can't fix the problem unless you discover the root cause.
The Republican's think the tea party will get them back in power. WRONG They won't they are just steeering the party to more extreme positions, which will destroy the Republicans for years.
The Democrats think the tea party is an enemy we need to destroy! WRONG!

The tea party is wrong also!
The answer is not small government, small taxes, the problem is the people we send, and how they get there and what they do when they get there. Congress is nothing more than legalized bribery. The answer is TRUE DEMOCRACY!
We have a system today that is not able to govern because you can't move to the middle unless you are willing to lose your next election. Gerrymandering, No Term Limits, Nutty Cable TV, Internet Falsehoods, all keep pushing people to the extreme postions where nothing good is being accomplished.
The middle is where everyone's ideas are respected! The good of the country is FIRST not Party. Let's accomplish Term Limits, Draw a grid across this country and elect from some square mile formula, not some party lines.
Any way the smarter heads on this blog will comment and I am sure see where I am wrong, but at least I am trying!

"Have you read the Arizona law?"

It's a question that, with growing frequency, is cutting through the passions and politics surrounding the "Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act," or Senate Bill 1070.

Everybody seems to have an opinion about the immigration law signed by Gov. Jan Brewer on April 24. But not everybody has actually read it.

It turns out U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, whose Justice Department is considering legal action against Arizona over the law, had only "glanced" at it, at least as of his May 13 appearance before the House Judiciary Committee. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, a former Arizona governor who has said she would not have signed the bill, last week told Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., during a hearing: "I have not reviewed it in detail. I certainly know of it, Senator."

The question about reading the bill has even been aimed at President Barack Obama, who also has not been sparing in his criticism of Arizona's law. On Thursday, the White House confirmed Obama has indeed read the legislation, which, as amended, runs fewer than 20 pages.

Saturday, May 22, 2010

Are You Ready For Global Cooling?

Climate Science: Noted scientists at a Chicago climate conference declare that global warming is not only dead, but that the planet faces a big chill for decades to come. What about those frozen wind turbines?  It's not exactly Copenhagen or Kyoto, but the 700 scientists attending the fourth International Conference on Climate Change, sponsored by the Heartland Institute, had some chilling news of their own in the most liberal sense.

"Global warming is over — at least for a few decades," Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, told the gathering. "However, the bad news is that global cooling is even more harmful to humans than global warming, and a cause for greater concern."

Easterbrook and 74 other presenters at the conference said what everyone already knows, having shoveled record amounts of global warming off our sidewalks and driveways last winter.  We don't need computer models to tell us, baby, it's getting cold outside. Of course, the doomsayers will claim that global warming causes global warming. Right.

"Rather than global warming at a rate of about 1 (degree) Fahrenheit per decade, records of past natural cycles indicate there may be global cooling for the first few decades of the 21st century to about 2030," Easterbrook said.

He spoke of natural cycles that have been occurring since the discovery of fire and mankind's first carbon emissions, long before the invention of the wheel and the SUV.

Easterbrook and the other scientists reported on sudden and natural climate fluctuations documented in the geologic record, all before 1945. Two big climate changes occurred in the past 15,000 years, and another 60 smaller changes in the last 5,000 years.

Immigration: They DON'T ask the immigration status of people they are arresting?

 An Arizona official asks a good question: If California wants to boycott Arizona over the way it enforces federal law, what about the electricity California gets from there?

The problem with righteous indignation is that when others call you on it and tell you to put your money where your mouth is, it can cause an embarrassing leak in your hot air balloon.

Gary Pierce, a commissioner on the five-member Arizona Corporation Commission, has done just that, calling the bluff of the Los Angeles City Council and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Pierce wrote Villaraigosa a letter saying in essence that if L.A. didn't need Arizona's business, maybe it didn't need Arizona's power either. Pierce noted Villaraigosa had pledged L.A. would "send a message" by cutting the "resources and ties" they share.

He wanted to know if the mayor also wants to give back the 24% of the electricity it gets from Arizona power plants.

"If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation," Pierce wrote, suggesting the mayor and the council were all hat and no cattle.
SHANGHAI — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned North Korea on Friday that it would face “consequences” for sinking a South Korean warship in March, as she set off on an intense round of shuttle diplomacy in Asia to muster an international response.

“It is important to send a clear message to North Korea that provocative actions have consequences,” Mrs. Clinton said after meeting in Tokyo with the Japanese foreign minister, Katsuya Okada. “We cannot allow this attack on South Korea to go unanswered by the international community.”
The comments were the first from Mrs. Clinton on what South Korea has called a deliberate North Korean torpedo attack, which killed 46 sailors. Mrs. Clinton declined to lay out the options for a response, saying that would be “premature.”



Millions of American workers could discover that they no longer have employer-provided health insurance as ObamaCare is phased in. That's because employers are quickly discovering that it may be cheaper to pay fines to the government than to insure workers.
AT&T, Caterpillar, John Deere and Verizon have all made internal calculations, according the House Energy and Commerce Committee, to determine how much could be saved by a) dropping their employer-provided insurance, b) paying a fine of $2,000 per employee, and c) leaving their employees with the option of buying highly-subsidized insurance in the newly created health-insurance exchange.
AT&T, for example, paid $2.4 billion last year to cover medical costs for its 283,000 active employees. If the company dropped its health plan and paid an annual penalty for each uninsured worker, the fines would total almost $600 million. But that would leave AT&T with a tidy profit of $1.8 billion.
Economists say employee benefits ultimately substitute for cash wages, which means that AT&T employees would get higher take-home pay. But considering that they will be required by federal law to buy their own insurance in an exchange, will they be net winners or losers? That depends on their incomes.
A Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analysis of the House version of ObamaCare, which is close to what actually passed in March, assumed a $15,000 premium for family coverage in 2016. Yet the only subsidy available for employer-provided coverage is the same one as under current law: the ability to pay with pretax dollars. For a $30,000-a-year worker paying no federal income tax, the only tax subsidy is the payroll tax avoided on the employer's premiums. That subsidy is only worth about $2,811 a year.
If this same worker goes to the health-insurance exchange, however, the federal government will pay almost all the premiums, plus reimburse the employee for most out-of-pocket costs. All told, the CBO estimates the total subsidy would be about $19,400—almost $17,000 more than the subsidy for employer-provided insurance.

Friday, May 21, 2010

Obama's Naivety Injures the US

Charles Krauthammer is unapologetically conservative, no doubt. What is also true is that he is often correct. Iran is brazen in its march towards atomic weapons and this administration has demonstrated such weakness on the world stage that no one fears the consequences of supporting Iran. You can read Mr. Krauthammer's analysis here:

All the best,


Thursday, May 20, 2010

Here Comes Da Judge

Gallup would certainly not be considered a polling organization with a conservative bias. Today they published Satisfaction Ratings for this time of mid-term election cycles dating back to 1982. May I offer my congratulations to all incumbents for setting a new record low rating of 23%. Here is the link:

I forecast that those running will not succeed in excusing themselves by blaming the former president, although I have no doubt that Obama will continue his tired rhetoric in that regard. Chickens eventually do come home to roost, and Barry and the Boys will soon bear the brunt of voter dissatisfaction.

It couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch. I encourage all who are dissatisfied with the current direction to contribute, engage, and vote when the time comes.

All the best,


Wednesday, May 19, 2010

The Prop 100 Bellwether

It was said on this board that Prop 100 would be a bellwether. Perhaps it was. If so, it means that the electorate will choose to pay higher taxes rather than cut spending when popular programs are threatened. My (moderate) Republican wife supported Prop 100 and "thought everybody did." She was surprised to hear that Dr J opposed the eminently sensible proposition.

When taxes are discussed in a vacuum, we may all feel "taxed enough already." When said taxes are weighed against popular programs, once the electorate understands the budget realities, the Republican complaints ring rather hollow.

Newt Gingrich and John Boehner have recently predicted an avalanche; a 70+/- seat GOP pickup in November. After reviewing last night's returns, Joe Scarborough opined that the GOP will not be taking back the House or the Senate this year if they can't even win PA CD12 in this environment. "That is exactly the kind of district that is supposed to change hands in a wave election."

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Sunday, May 16, 2010

A Prime Example of Style over Substance

Eric Cantor, the Republican whip has a new website, "YouCut", where citizens can vote on the best of five programs to cut. He wants to show just how serious Republicans are about cutting spending. Please note that if all five programs - rather than one - were cut, we'd save a whopping $3.4B per year. If you cut five similar programs every week of the year, your savings would be $176B. The deficit is $1.4 trillion dollars. That's quite a gap.

Please cut and paste:
Our arguments, in concept, are over entitlements.  Framed, time and time again as reductions in spending vs. tax increases.  The tax increase argument requires the belief that people will not do without.

Proposition 100 is going to be a bell weather.

Friday, May 14, 2010

Health Care Costs...OOPS

Well apparently they guy at the CBO broke out of the closet the Administration had him locked in and came out with some new numbers yesterday I understand...remember that 940 Billion it was going to cost (still have not figured out why you would spend 940 billion to save 115 billion)...seems that we need to sprinkle the infield with another 115 Billion that has now been the revised number. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that we add another 500-700Billion before it is over with...the scary part is that we are just getting started and already are over budget...OMG is that a shocker, government projects over budget...who would have thought

Thursday, May 13, 2010

This man is stupid beyond belief.

We’re Not Greece

It’s an ill wind that blows nobody good, and the crisis in Greece is making some people — people who opposed health care reform and are itching for an excuse to dismantle Social Security — very, very happy. Everywhere you look there are editorials and commentaries, some posing as objective reporting, asserting that Greece today will be America tomorrow unless we abandon all that nonsense about taking care of those in need.  The truth, however, is that America isn’t Greece — and, in any case, the message from Greece isn’t what these people would have you believe.

So, how do America and Greece compare?  Both nations have lately been running large budget deficits, roughly comparable as a percentage of G.D.P. Markets, however, treat them very differently: The interest rate on Greek government bonds is more than twice the rate on U.S. bonds, because investors see a high risk that Greece will eventually default on its debt, while seeing virtually no risk that America will do the same. Why?
One answer is that we have a much lower level of debt — the amount we already owe, as opposed to new borrowing — relative to G.D.P. True, our debt should have been even lower. We’d be better positioned to deal with the current emergency if so much money hadn’t been squandered on tax cuts for the rich and an unfunded war. But we still entered the crisis in much better shape than the Greeks.  Even more important, however, is the fact that we have a clear path to economic recovery, while Greece doesn’t.
The U.S. economy has been growing since last summer, thanks to fiscal stimulus and expansionary policies by the Federal Reserve. I wish that growth were faster; still, it’s finally producing job gains — and it’s also showing up in revenues. Right now we’re on track to match Congressional Budget Office projections of a substantial rise in tax receipts. Put those projections together with the Obama administration’s policies, and they imply a sharp fall in the budget deficit over the next few years.

Gosh Paul, don't you think it is just a little concerning how we managed to set the largest monthly April budget deficit ever in an economy that has been "recovering" since last summer? Perhaps the rebound is...false, mostly in government and the true achievers and job creators are sitting on their hands? Wonder why Paul? Let's read on.

Greece, on the other hand, is caught in a trap. During the good years, when capital was flooding in, Greek costs and prices got far out of line with the rest of Europe. If Greece still had its own currency, it could restore competitiveness through devaluation. But since it doesn’t, and since leaving the euro is still considered unthinkable, Greece faces years of grinding deflation and low or zero economic growth. So the only way to reduce deficits is through savage budget cuts  (Savage Paul? a country where 40% of the work force are government employees and pensions are too generous, so any budget cuts are "Savage"? Just wondering Paul, does this remind you of any other countries, perhaps in the not too distant future? To be clear, what budget cuts have you ever described as not "savage"?) and investors are skeptical about whether those cuts will actually happen.  No S--t, just like here in the good old USA of Obama.

It’s worth noting, by the way, that Britain — which is in worse fiscal shape than we are, but which, unlike Greece, hasn’t adopted the euro — remains able to borrow at fairly low interest rates. Having your own currency, it seems, makes a big difference.  In short, we’re not Greece. We may currently be running deficits of comparable size, but our economic position — and, as a result, our fiscal outlook — is vastly better.

That said, we do have a long-run budget problem. But what’s the root of that problem? “We demand more than we’re willing to pay for,” is the usual line. Yet that line is deeply misleading. Paul, you are so funny. Misleading? We? We means the elderly, the unemployed, and mostly, those with too generous pensions, who are demanding huge resources from a small portion of the current population and resources from ALL of future generations. That's the we..Paul. You knew that and you were just kidding, right?

First of all, who is this “we” of whom people speak? Bear in mind that the drive to cut taxes largely benefited a small minority of Americans: 39 percent of the benefits of making the Bush tax cuts permanent would go to the richest 1 percent of the population. When you say stupid thing like this Paul, do you not sleep well? Now Paul, let's be honest, the top one percent pay more than 39% of income taxes, right? And if there is a tax cut, who is going to get the benefit, those paying taxes right? What? Oh, so when taxes are cut you want them to go to folks not paying taxes. I get it, I don't understand it and think it is unjust, counterproductive and well...kind of Communism, but I get how you could think it, since you are stupid beyond belief. And Paul remember when we discussed above about how the deficit remains huge because tax receipts are low and spending remains high, remember? Think any of that conundrum might be from the successful sitting on their hands as they wait for a huge increase in taxes and watch this administration attack industry after industry? What do ya think?

And bear in mind, also, that taxes have lagged behind spending partly thanks to a deliberate political strategy, that of “starve the beast”: conservatives have deliberately deprived the government of revenue in an attempt to force the spending cuts they now insist are necessary.  So no spending cuts are necessary? Think the folks in Utah, W. VA, MA and all these states having elections where spend-a-holics are getting their asses kicked would agree with you Paul? Think the governor of New Jersey would agree with you?

Meanwhile, when you look under the hood of those troubling long-run budget projections, you discover that they’re not driven by some generalized problem of overspending. Instead, they largely reflect just one thing: the assumption that health care costs will rise in the future as they have in the past. This tells us that the key to our fiscal future is improving the efficiency of our health care system — which is, you may recall, something the Obama administration has been trying to do, even as many of the same people now warning about the evils of deficits cried “Death panels!”  Paul, isn't it kind of embarrassing to publish such drivel on the day when the CBO redid the health care numbers finding them off by $100B+ ? And that is before it is implemented, unless God help us it is repealed, and spending goes from hyper into warp drive. And Paul, there will be death panels, has to be, when the consumer of a service is no longer responsible for the service, someone else will need to limit access and ergo, death panels.

So here’s the reality: America’s fiscal outlook over the next few years isn’t bad. We do have a serious long-run budget problem, which will have to be resolved with a combination of health care reform and other measures, probably including a moderate rise in taxes.  But no spending cuts, right?  None?  Not ear marks, the remainder of TARP, left over stimulus, nothing?  Buddy, lots of other folks, sane folks, think you are wrong and in fact stupid beyond belief and soon we are going to have an election to sort out this little issue, wanna bet how it goes?  And used moderate, now you won the Nobel Prize and everything, but does that give you the right to just out and out lie? Moderate? There is this guy, Baxter, who makes the same argument, says that there are not enough budget cuts to to make a difference, but-and you know this-there are not enough tax increases to cover planned spending unless it is!  But we should ignore those who pretend to be concerned with fiscal responsibility, but whose real goal is to dismantle the welfare state — and are trying to use crises elsewhere to frighten us into giving them what they want. So, for example, when in the past the Republicans proposed lowering the yearly increases (now...don't lie Paul, that is what they said) you and your kind called them Draconian cuts, lowering the growth, not shrinking, not, not growing, but just not growing as much, that is what you called dismantling the welfare state? Paul, you are not only stupid beyond belief, but you are a liar, a big fat liar who is hell bent on destroying our country. Any fool with open eyes would see where we are heading. Folks have had enough with you and your doublespeak.  Not to worry, the NYT is going out of business. 

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

2004 State of the Union

And we should limit the burden of government on this economy by acting as good stewards of taxpayer dollars. In two weeks, I will send you a budget that funds the war, protects the homeland, and meets important domestic needs, while limiting the growth in discretionary spending to less than 4 percent. This will require that Congress focus on priorities, cut wasteful spending, and be wise with the people's money. By doing so, we can cut the deficit in half over the next five years.

Tax Bills at their Lowest Level Since 1950...

and still people complain! We all know they do not have a plan to balance the budget. If only they had a clue...

Please cut and paste:

Don't worry Rich(ie), there will be a response

Saturday, May 8, 2010

Let's see if Rich will answer a question.

He has challenged the Conservatives to answer how they will balance the budget with cuts alone.
Repealing the stimulus, cancelling health care, raising the retirment age, reducing colas will not completely do the job; he states, and ignorning the incentives of broad based tax cuts and a pro growth agenda he seems to pretty much just want to raise taxes to cover the whole thing.

Now he states that "o" and his team are so good they should go on the road and cure Europe. He also has a lot, a lot, of vitriol for the TEA party movement.

OK, so let's see if you can address this little one.

What have "o" or the Democrats cut? Don't talk about the commission, its recommendations are in the future and we may be Greece by then. The "adults" are in charge you say? It seems that what those in charge have done is taken their parents credit card and spent more, planning on their children picking up the bill.

The TEA party wants smaller government which spends less money. Granted cuts alone might not balance the budget, but what is wrong with budget!

So are you just for tax increases? What have the Democrats cut? And, even giving your party of adults the benefit of the doubt, that tax increases are inevitable, why no spending cuts?

Hard to defend.


Republican Senator Robert Bennett of Utah on Saturday became the first incumbent U.S. senator to drop a re-election bid this year after losing a vote for his party's nomination.
Unlike most states, Utah has a nominating system in which delegates winnow down their party's field of candidates before a primary election. Mr. Bennett was eliminated from the Senate race in the second of three rounds of delegate voting. He finished third in the vote; only the top two advance to the final round.

The remaining candidates, businessman Tim Bridgewater and lawyer Mike Lee, will compete in a June 22 primary. Running on populist platforms, they both have backing from tea-party supporters and have pledged to reduce the federal government's size if elected.

The winner of the GOP nomination will be favored to win the general election in this heavily Republican state. Mr. Bennett can't run as an independent Senate candidate because the filing deadline to do so has passed. He told the Associated Press on Saturday that he hasn't ruled out running as a write-in candidate in November.
A Derivative even Ol' Sara can understand:

Heidi is the proprietor of a bar in Detroit. She realizes
that virtually all of her customers are unemployed alcoholics and, as such,
can no longer afford to patronize her bar. To solve this problem, she comes
up with a new marketing plan that allows her customers to drink now, but pay

Heidi keeps track of the drinks consumed on a ledger
(thereby granting the customers loans). Word gets around about Heidi's
"drink now, pay later" marketing strategy and, as a result, increasing
numbers of customers flood into Heidi's bar. Soon she has the largest sales
volume for any bar in Detroit .

By providing her customers freedom from immediate payment
demands, Heidi gets no resistance when, at regular intervals, she
substantially increases her prices for wine and beer, the most consumed
beverages. Consequently, Heidi's gross sales volume increases massively.

A young and dynamic vice-president at the local bank
recognizes that these customer debts constitute valuable future assets and
increases Heidi's borrowing limit. He sees no reason for any undue concern,
since he has the debts of the unemployed alcoholics as collateral.

At the bank's corporate headquarters, expert traders figure
a way to make huge commissions, and transform these customer loans into
DRINKBONDS, ALKIBONDS and PUKEBONDS. These securities are then bundled and
traded on international security markets.

Naive investors don't really understand that the securities
being sold to them as AAA secured bonds are really the debts of unemployed
alcoholics. Nevertheless, the bond prices continuously climb, and the
securities soon become the hottest-selling items for some of the nation's
leading brokerage houses.

One day, even though the bond prices are still climbing, a
risk manager at the original local bank decides that the time has come to
demand payment on the debts incurred by the drinkers at Heidi's bar. He so
informs Heidi.

Heidi then demands payment from her alcoholic patrons, but
being unemployed alcoholics they cannot pay back their drinking debts. Since
Heidi cannot fulfill her loan obligations she is forced into bankruptcy. The
bar closes and the eleven employees lose their jobs.

Overnight, DRINKBONDS, ALKIBONDS and PUKEBONDS drop in price
by 90%. The collapsed bond asset value destroys the banks liquidity and
prevents it from issuing new loans, thus freezing credit and economic
activity in the community.

The suppliers of Heidi's bar had granted her generous
payment extensions and had invested their firms' pension funds in the
various BOND securities. They find they are now faced with having to write
off her bad debt and with losing over 90% of the presumed value of the
bonds. Her wine supplier also claims bankruptcy, closing the doors on a
family business that had endured for three generations, her beer supplier is
taken over by a competitor, who immediately closes the local plant and lays
off 150 workers.

Fortunately though, the bank, the brokerage houses and their
respective executives are saved and bailed out by a multi-billion dollar
no-strings attached cash infusion from their cronies in Government.

The funds required for this bailout are obtained by new
taxes levied on employed, middle-class, non-drinkers who have never been in
Heidi's bar.

Any questions?

Let's set record straight on new law

John Kavanagh - May. 8, 2010 12:00 AM

Arizona's new anti-illegal immigration law, Senate Bill 1070, has generated a large amount of controversy, much of it due to a misunderstanding of its provisions. As a co-sponsor, I would like to set the record straight.
SB 1070 is a comprehensive anti-illegal immigration law designed to "crack down" on illegal immigration and all the harm it causes Arizona in crime and backbreaking public expenses to incarcerate, educate, medically treat and provide other services to illegal immigrants and their children.
The most frequent criticism of SB 1070 is it will empower police to challenge the legal presence of all Hispanics, legal and illegal, based solely upon their appearance. This is untrue.
SB 1070 only directs police officers to question someone when they have "reasonable suspicion" to believe that the person is in the U.S. illegally and even then only after being stopped for breaking another law. This provision merely extends a half-century-old U.S. Supreme Court-created tool called "stop and question" to immigration offenses. To prevent racial profiling, the law states that in constructing "reasonable suspicion," police officers "may not consider race, color or national origin."
Based upon input from police chiefs and detectives, changes were made to SB 1070 to correct other potential problems.
Police officers are only required to make "reasonable" legal presence inquiries "when practicable," so that officers will be free to prioritize their time. No officer will have to question an immigration suspect while a bank is being robbed.
Likewise, no questioning is required when it would "hinder or obstruct an investigation." Crime victims and witnesses would never be questioned because questioning is limited only to those who have violated some law.
Another argument made against SB 1070 is that it illegally pre-empts federal immigration law. We are not preempting federal law - we are incorporating and enforcing it. If anybody is preempting federal law, it's the municipalities that have instituted "sanctuary city" policies that prohibit their police officers from even reporting illegal immigrants to federal authorities. SB 1070 prohibits sanctuary city policies within Arizona.
Nor does the new law require residents to carry identification papers. This mistaken belief stems from a provision in the law that creates a presumption of legal presence if a person presents specified forms of government-issued identification. As with all law, the burden of proof rests upon the police officer. If the officer's questioning does not elevate the information level from reasonable suspicion to probable cause, the suspect walks.
Failing to present identification papers is not grounds to arrest, unless the suspect admits to non-citizen status, because federal law requires the carrying of such documents by non-citizens.
The bottom line is that the Bush administration dropped the ball on border security and internal immigration enforcement, whereas the Obama administration cannot even find it.
The primary responsibility of government is to protect its citizens, and illegal immigration poses a growing threat to safety. Until such time as the federal government secures the border and adequately enforces immigration laws internally, Arizona will have no choice but to protect its citizens.

Friday, May 7, 2010

The Obama Fiscal Responsibility Farce Continues

Today President Barack Obama's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform will convene for the first time at the White House. Tasked with making recommendations to Congress that would put the budget in primary balance by 2015 and "meaningfully improve" our nation's long-term fiscal outlook, the commission meets a little over a month after Congress approved a new $2.5 trillion health care entitlement that the Obama administration now confirms will increase our nation's total health care spending.
This is a now familiar pattern for the White House: first enact record breaking levels of deficit spending, then turn right around and promise austerity sometime in the future. This February, after signing the largest single-year increase in domestic federal spending since World War II, President Obama held a “fiscal responsibility” summit designed to “send a signal that we are serious” about putting the nation on sounder financial footing. The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank quipped at the time: “Holding a ‘fiscal responsibility summit’ at the White House in the middle of a government spending spree is a bit like having an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting at a frat house on homecoming weekend.”
Why were $400 Billion deficits so terrible but $1,400 Billion deficits are OK?

Why is health care suddenly a right?

How can a government which cannot run Welfare/Medicare/Social Security run health care?

Illegal immigration continues, should we enforce our laws?

Terrorism continues, are we at war?

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

This English teacher has phrased it the best I've seen yet


Tomatoes and Cheap Labor Cheap Tomatoes  This should make everyone think, whether you are Democrat, Republican or Independent From a California school teacher -

"As you listen to the news about the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things that you should be aware of:

I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a large Southern California high school which is designated a Title 1 school, meaning that its students average lower socioeconomic and income levels.

Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell Gardens, Huntington Park, etc., where these students are protesting, are also Title 1 schools.


I love NBA basketball and the Suns but the Suns decision to wear Los Suns jerseys to protest the recent immigration law is just stupid. Umm...your customers don't support you!

Now, TNT, broadcaster of the NBA playoff have waded into the controversy with the noted social scientist Charles Barkley.

The law, intended to deal with the problem of illegal immigration and the inability of law enforcement to question those arrested on other issues may or may not be legally sound, but is not a sign of "prejudice". Then to add insult to injury, Chris Weber, who probably knows less about Arizona then he does "math", (sorry Chris, insult intended Mr college athlete), equates the recent law to our reluctance to enact a MLK holiday, which in truth was a reluctance to given ANOTHER paid holiday.

Then, Charles, Mr. I'm in your corner until I am not, blasts McCain and JD, who HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BILL. Charles, the bill has 80% support, go figure. Ask your gardener.

Monday, May 3, 2010

Sunday, May 2, 2010

Something New, and Jimmy likes it.

Marco Rubio appeared on a Sunday talk show this month to say something remarkable. The Republican running for Florida's Senate seat suggested we reform Social Security by raising the retirement age for younger workers. Florida is home to 2.4 million senior citizens who like to vote. The blogs declared Mr. Rubio politically suicidal.
The response from Mr. Rubio's primary competitor, Gov. Charlie Crist, was not remarkable. His campaign slammed Mr. Rubio's idea as "cruel, unusual and unfair to seniors living on a fixed income." Mr. Crist's plan for $17.5 trillion in unfunded Social Security liabilities? Easy! He'll root out "fraud" and "waste."
Let's talk Republican "civil war." Not the one the media is hawking, that pits supposed tea party fanatics like Mr. Rubio against supposed "moderates" like Mr. Crist. The Republican Party is split. But the real divide is between reformers like Mr. Rubio and Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, who are running on principles and tough issues, and a GOP old guard that still finds it politically expedient to duck or demagogue issues. As Republicans look for a way out of the wilderness, this is the rift that matters.

And it's the divide playing out in Florida, even if that's not the press's preferred narrative. In conventional-wisdom world, Mr. Rubio is the darling of an angry grass roots, surging at the expense of the postpartisan Mr. Crist.

And woe betide the GOP, goes the storyline. It is courting disaster, repeating its mistake in New York 23, nominating radicals who can't win elections. Never mind the grass roots never did drum Mark Kirk (running for Illinois's Senate seat) out of the party. Or that Florida doesn't even fit this mold. Mr. Rubio, a Jeb Bush protégé, is hardly too conservative for his state. A recent Rasmussen poll has him beating Mr. Crist and Democrat Kendrick Meek statewide. Mr. Crist doesn't solve his Rubio problem by bolting the party.

What has attracted independents and even Democrats to Mr. Rubio is his reformist agenda, which taps into this week's Pew poll finding a historically low 22% of Americans trust government. It hasn't hurt that Mr. Crist has provided a sharp contrast with a campaign that channels the mindset that lost the GOP its majority.

On Social Security, Mr. Rubio is a supporter of Mr. Ryan's roadmap, which tackles entitlement and budget reform. Mr. Crist took the typical Washington path of refusing to acknowledge reality and then accusing his opponent of robbing granny. This is reminiscent of the GOP reluctance to embrace hard issues like health-care reform when it controlled Washington. One result is ObamaCare.

Saturday, May 1, 2010

Epistemic Closure is Real

And "Morning Coffee" is a prime example.