30 December 2009


Apparently I have been naughty this year, but I STILL got presents! I had the opportunity to meet up with Bub this past weekend and talk a little bit on the state of the union and the state of the children (mostly the state of the children of course since that is a highlight of our lives at this point). He noted that he’d had a chance to look at some of my postings (yes, some really about sums up all of the postings I’ve written over the past few months) and his basic conclusion was that “wow, he sucks.” In my defense I would only point out that recently my wife and I brought our first son into this dark and dreary world and unfortunately my work doesn’t allow me to post as often as I’d like. But excuses, excuses, right?

Just to show Bub and our stalwart 3 (is that a stretch?) readers I wanted to comment on something that has been lurking in the back of my mind now for the past few weeks: I cannot stand the Republican Party. Don’t get me wrong. I agree with a majority of what they profess and believe but I fail to understand their methods of application of these beliefs. In the face of an overpowering Democratic majority the Republican Party has basically become a group of seven year olds whose only defense in the face of such great opposition is to point out every little thing that the Democrats are doing wrong and by so doing, come off as, well, whiny bitches.

I am not an eloquent man. Sorry.

Realize that I am not saying that they don’t have reason or cause for such criticism of what the current administration and crooks in congress are implementing at the very moment I type these hollow words. There is much to be said in criticism of the policies and “legislation” (I put it in quotes only because ramming inefficient bills through Congress is little more than your basic schoolyard bullying… “Give me some tots Napoleon…”) but I think that Republicans fail to realize that the country is tired of hearing the same mantra that the Democrats have completely missed such and such point or that they are evil crooks (even though it’s true it doesn’t hold water coming from a group with so many members involved in so many well-publicized infidelity scandals).

I am not advocating disengagement or surrendering the fight. I just think they could play it a little smarter.

Take, for example, the recent news of the attempted bombing of NWA flight 253. In this case security measures meant to keep men like Umar Farouk AbdulMutallab from getting as far as he did on his bombing mission completely failed. Yes, someone should be held responsible. Yes, airline security needs to be updated with better machines, training and policies. Yes, there needs to be more interagency communication. Yes, Napolitano is a complete tool bag. But you can’t lay every incident at the feet of an administration (especially one that has only been in office for a year and has been dealing with two wars and an economic collapse. I mean really, do they have time to revamp airline security while they are singlehandedly trying to destroy America, the American way of life and all freedoms associated with those rights and privileges as we know them? ...I digress…).

I guess I just expect more from leaders. Leadership isn’t about mere criticism of your opponent (I think it has something to do with leading or something) and it would be nice to see some leadership come out of the Republican Party that isn’t so consistently contrarian to the Obama administration. Yes, Obama is a liar and shows real, tangible disdain for America and its differences in relation to the rest of the word. But guess what? He’s still an American. He’s still POTUS. As much as I hate to say it, his election was historic.

America’s first black president. That is something to truly be excited about (politics and ideologies aside of course).

Sometimes I think leading means you have to embrace certain aspects of situations. Again, I am not advocating an attitude of humping Obama’s leg like every MSM outlet has done for the past two years. I just think that when something like this happens and America is attacked we, as Americans, should come together and act as one. Perhaps stop for five minutes and say “Mr. President, we got your back this time.”

Is that too much to ask?

Even the Democrats found it within themselves to support President Bush early in his presidency after the heinous attacks of 9-11.

I can commend them for that (even though they eventually broke down and acted like the French later on).

Scott Ott is a conservative editor for Scrappleface.com and recently ran for Lehigh County Executive (PA) against a Democrat incumbent. He wrote that one day, prior to the election, he went to a certain part of town, parked his car and sought out citizens with whom he could speak about politics and his goals and ideas for the county. He soon stopped at a small store where the owner sat outside talking with another man. Upon introducing himself and handing the owner his campaign bookmarker the owner asked him a number of questions leading up to the real question of the day.

What did he think of the president?

The spirit of his response, I think, should be present in the minds of our Conservative leaders as they seek to regain seats and power in Congress in the next election.
I told him I oppose almost every policy of the president's that I can think of. However, I said that I literally wept with joy the night he won at the thought that a black man had reached such a position in our nation. I said that I admire the fact that our president had worked hard, learned much, translated his skills into wealth through writing books, married a woman and remained faithful to her, and by all accounts is a great Daddy to his girls. I noted that his hard work, persistence, vision, focus and sense of personal responsibility had brought him to his current place. I only wish, I said, that he himself would understand the elements of his success story and recommend them to others, and that he would stop talking about Americans as if we were victims, and stop telling people that government would solve their problems. His message should be, "I grabbed the opportunity that America offers to every citizen, and my diligence has been rewarded beyond my wildest dreams. It's hard work, but it's worth the effort, and you can do it
I will never agree with even a small number of Obama’s methods for “improving” our great nation. There are just too many ideological differences between approaches. But I do think we need to learn a new way to engage him. He is, and always will be, respected by millions of Americans. Attacking every teeny tiny event that occurs during his administration makes Republicans look petty. It makes them look just like the liberals during the latter half of the Bush Administration.

Is that really what we want to be?

22 December 2009

If this doesn't drive you up the wall I don't know what will.

Your hope and change for a brave new world. Sebelius says everyone will pay into funding for abortion and claims that if allowances aren't made for women to get abortions through these public/private funds then somehow we will be "discriminating against, or invading the privacy rights of women." Yes, that makes total sense. Somehow prohibiting the rest of the country from paying for an abortion for a woman who doesn't want to take responsibility for her actions with an idiot dude would be "invading the privacy rights of women." Makes TOTAL sense! With public support hovering somewhere between 38% and 41% it's no wonder that congress is in such a hurry to get it passed. (I can tell you that I, for one, am really hoping for better "government controlled" insurance coverage because after my wife had a C section to deliver our first son our insurance made us pay an out of control, disgusting, highway robbery price of....wait for it...$250!!!!! Can you believe it? Oh the humanity! How will we live?! How will we get by?! Help us Obi-One-Obama! You're our only hope!...ahem...sorry...just had to get that out)

In the same vein of nonsensical remarks, Obama's rating has improved markedly to a -21%. The lowest thus far.

h/t: Hot Air

05 December 2009

Thank you Mr. Stossel

Watch it through to the end. It's got the "OOOO, BURN!" moment for your viewing/ hair-pulling-out pleasure.

h/t: Jawa

25 November 2009

Check out this 'unprecedented' article

But but but...It's OBAMA! It MUST be unprecedented!

12 October 2009

This just in: Pigs are flying!

SNL made fun of His Holiness. Make sure your food storage is ready.

07 October 2009

We wish him well.

As many of you know, Bub is currently unreachable. As such he has asked that a few of his hardcore followers continue posting in his absence. Hopefully I won't estrange too many of his readers with my random thoughts and writing. We shall see...

18 September 2009

The Audacity of Hos

Courtesy of Jon Stewart. Really. Freaking. Hilarious.

17 September 2009

Terrell Davis is A Man

For no particular reason, I was reminiscing with a friend about one of my all-time favorite athletes...period. Terrell Davis, RB for the Denver Broncos from 1995-2001 (his career was cut short by a wicked knee injury, thanks to an interception by Brian freaking Griese). I remembered seeing this hit as a highlight back in 1995, and I hope you'll enjoy it as much as I do.

Muse - The Uprising (Part Deux)

I know I've posted this song before, but Jer-Bear just sent me a link to this video of Muse performing The Uprising live in concert in Teignmouth, UK. So enjoy it. Again. I know I did.

The paranoia is in bloom, the PR
The transmissions will resume
They'll try to push drugs
Keep us all dumbed down and hope that
We will never see the truth around

Another promise, another scene, another
A package not to keep us trapped in greed
With all the green belts wrapped around our minds
And endless red tape to keep the truth confined

They will not force us
They will stop degrading us
They will not control us
We will be victorious

Interchanging mind control
Come let the revolution take its toll if you could
Flick the switch and open your third eye, you'd see that
We should never be afraid to die

Rise up and take the power back, it's time that
The fat cats had a heart attack, you know that
Their time is coming to an end
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend

15 September 2009

Health Care Not a "Right"

So I was hanging out with a good friend of mine (who looks fabulous in navy pants, btw) the night of Obama's obligatory health care plug. Our conversation inevitably turned to Obamacare, specifically whether health care was a right or not. I feel the need to articulate my thoughts a little more on this.

The Declaration of Independence declares that all human beings posses "certain unalienable rights" that have been "endowed by their Creator." These God-given rights include life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Health care isn’t on that list. The question is, should it be?

This question is far more significant than it may first seem, and the justification for a government takeover of health care depends on the answer. The very next sentence in the Declaration affirms that the purpose of government is to "secure" those rights against infringement. If access to health care is deemed a fundamental right, as many on the left have claimed, then the government must be obliged to guarantee that access to every citizen. Medical treatment would have to be available on an equal basis to anyone seeking it, regardless of age, physical condition, or ability to pay. Essentially, it could be equated to our religious freedom. Our freedom to worship how, where, and what we choose does not depend on private markets. We do not have to purchase it, it is ours by right, regardless of our economic or social condition. But can this value really be assigned to health care?

Ted Kennedy certainly thought so, as do Barack Obama, the progressives, and some well-meaning citizens. And it is not hard to understand why. As human beings, and as Americans in particular, we are especially concerned about the well-being of others (this is one of the luxuries afforded to citizens of a developed and wealthy nation). Few of us are indifferent to the desperation felt by those who need medical care, but cannot afford it. But basic human rights are not founded upon passion, or even upon need. Wanting something, no matter how justifiably or altruistically, does not entitle you to possess it, especially if someone else will be forced to provide it for you.

This is where our comparison of the right to health care to the freedom of religion (and the rest of the unalienable rights) fails. The rights laid out in the Declaration of Independence are strictly negative rights (meaning they cannot be taken away). Our right to free speech, to own property, or to worship does not infringe on any other person's right to the same. We can all simultaneously express ourselves, own property (ownership of my home does not inhibit in any way your ownership of your home), and assemble for worship without inhibiting anyone else from doing the same. But if I claim health care as a right, then someone else must be compelled to provide or pay for that care. This compulsion can be in the form of higher taxes, insurance mandates, health care rationing, etc., but the bottom line is that a right to health care would leave society less free.

Imagine if we used this same line of reasoning with regards to food or clothing. Both are essential to human welfare, but few would suggest that Washington national the food and clothing industries. You cannot simultaneously guarantee either without again compelling someone to provide them. In fact, it is precisely because food and clothing are seen as commodities whose availability is dependent on the market that they can be had in such abundance and diversity. This is exactly why we need to allow health insurance companies to compete across state lines. As Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe recently said,
Some people will always need help. No decent person ignores the cries of the sick or hungry or poor. Happily, there is no better system for achieving the widest possible access to health care - or any other good or service - than the one that requires the least degree of political interference: the normal interplay of supply, demand, and competition. Health care is too important to be left to the market? No, it is too important not to be.

ACORN Continues to Hang Itself

That's right...let out a little more rope. First MD, NY, and DC. Now...California. James O'Keefe and Hanah Giles are at it again, this time in San Bernardino. Enjoy.

How anyone could still defend these slimeballs is beyond me...maybe you could ask Charlie Gibson.

Storm Trooper Truthers

In honor of Van Jones' dismissal as the green jobs czar after his Truther association came to light, I thought I'd share this video with y'all. I find it is helpful to compare current events with things I'm more familiar or comfortable with in order to really understand and appreciate them. Things like sports. Or Star Wars.

h/t: Jawa

14 September 2009

ACORN Busted, De-funded

I'm sure you're all familiar with the recent undercover video exposé of ACORN carried out by James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles in Baltimore, DC, and New York. If you're not, don't feel bad, because for some inexplicable reason the MSM has yet to catch on to this story (actually, it's very much explicable, sadly enough). I've posted video from the Baltimore setup below for your viewing pleasure, and you can view the videos from the DC and NY ops by following the above links to Andrew Breitbart's new website, Big Government. This is what O'Keefe had to say regarding his motivation for carrying these investigations (which, I would like to point out, were effectuated by a private citizen, and not by any news or government agency...I guess we are our own watchdogs, now).
A famous community organizer once said, “The only way to upset the power structure in your communities is to goad them, confuse them, irritate them and, most of all, make them live by their own rules. If you make them live by their own rules, you destroy them.” Impossible demands can irritate modern leftists in ways nothing else can, whether it’s by banning Lucky Charms cereal because it’s racist against Irish people, calling Planned Parenthood saying you want to donate money for black abortions in the name of Margaret Sanger, or making Sen. Snowe sign an oversized bailout check for a billion dollars to Amtrak, in her own office.

The scenario we posed the ACORN Housing employees in Baltimore is due to the application of similar power tactics. We gave ACORN a taste of its own medicine. ACORN was alleged to be thug-like, criminal, and nefarious. This criminal behavior was evidenced by a video of Baltimore ACORN community organizers breaking the locks on foreclosed homes. Instead of railing against their radicalism, it is best to bring out this type of radicalism. Hannah Giles and I took advantage of ACORN’s regard for thug criminality by posing the most ridiculous criminal scenario we could think of and seeing if they would comply–which they did without hesitation.

Additionally, instead of focusing on foreclosure itself, which has become seemingly as politicized as abortion, we focused on crimes more difficult for the left to defend: trafficking of young helpless girls and tax evasion. The first group represents the severely disadvantaged, the second a threat to the distribution of wealth.

While manipulation or entrapment occurs when people are encouraged to do things they otherwise wouldn’t, the pre-set trap is their own. These tactics allow the viewer to see ACORN’s soul; their playing field and their morality, out in the open. Their system is based on conflict and change for its own sake. This system is based on totalitarian principles and class war techniques. These people understand pressure, power and self-interest. When the Baltimore employees saw we were shady dealers, their instincts clicked in, as we were prime recruits.

ACORN has ascended. They elect our politicians and receive billions in tax money. Their world is a revolutionary, socialistic, atheistic world, where all means are justifiable. And they create chaos, again, for it’s own sake. It is time for us to be studying and applying their tactics, many of which are ideologically neutral. It is time, as Hannah said as we walked out of the ACORN facility, for conservative activists to “create chaos for glory.”

NOTE: In light of these latest controversies the House has voted overwhelmingly (83-7) to strip ACORN of all federal funding (they have already been banned from participating in the census). The amendment still has to pass the Senate, though, but even Pelosi may be forced to allow it to come to the floor.

12 September 2009

Government IS the Problem

In honor of all those who are participating in rallies and marches across the country on this memorable occasion, I'd like you to watch this brief excerpt from Ronald Reagan's first inaugural address. You can view the entire address here.

We Surround Them

This is what a republic looks like. Astroturf? Hardly.

DC Metro estimated crowds at 1.2 million. ABC News estimated them at 2 million. You can see more streaming camera shots here.

09 September 2009

Obamacare End-of-Life Counseling

Here's a preview of what you can expect with Obamacare's mandatory government end-of-life counseling.

h/t: MM

05 September 2009

UN names Castro 'World Hero of Solidarity'

Yes, that Castro. Fidel was presented the award for 'World Hero of Solidarity' by UN General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann (Brockmann is also a socialist, and is a recipient of the Lenin Peace Prize, an award given primarily to prominent Communists and supporters of the former Soviet Union). Solidarity is really just progressive code for socialism. I guess the award makes sense, though. The term solidarity can be defined as "a union of interests or purposes or sympathies among members of a group." I'm pretty sure that most Cubans are unified in their misery and terror under Castro's regime.

In addition to the award presented to Fidel, Bolivian president Evo Morales was presented the award for 'World Hero of Mother Earth', whatever the crap that means. I wonder if it's because of his affinity for the coca plant. Although he publicly condemns the production and use of cocaine (he only grows the plant, after all, he doesn't refine it), Bolivia is the fasting growing cocaine producer in Latin America. In fact, a UN report (go ahead, laugh at the irony) showed that while cocaine production declined by 28% last year in Columbia, Bolivia's cocaine production grew 10%. The abuse of the drug is so prolific that there are semi-legalized cocaine bars in La Paz. They have to move locations from time to time, but only because of complaints of neighboring businesses, not because of any legal crackdown. And oh, by the way, Morales is the leader of the radical left-wing political party, Movement for Socialism, and an ideological ally of Hugo Chavez.

The late African socialist and former Tanzanian president Julius Nyerere was also posthumously named the 'World Hero of Social Justice'. I guess it's only proper for a an award for social justice to go to a socialist. Nyerere established a single-party system that effectively eliminated all political competition, and he supported revolutionaries in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Angola, and Congo. He also welcomed Black revolutionaries from around the world to gather and discuss various forms of Marxism, and he was praised by the US based Black Radical Congress. Nyerere instituted ujamaa, a policy under which all land belonged to the state (this was a tribal practice and was the basis for his African socialism), and he used the 1962 Preventive Detention Act to suppress trade unions and brutally incarcerate thousands of civilians and political opponents (if you don't look at any of the other links, look at that one...it's the actual act as enacted by the Tanzanian (then called Tanganyika) National Assembly, and is pretty interesting). The government forcibly relocated thousands to collective farms, which greatly disrupted agricultural efficiency and output (crop yields on collective farms were, on average, 60% less than on individually owned fields). The Tanzanian economy effectively collapsed, and its starving people had to rely almost wholly on foreign aid for survival.

So, did we notice a pattern developing? Castro: socialist. Morales: socialist. Nyerere: socialist. Brockmann: socialist. Conclusion? The UN is an engine for the global spread of socialist ideologies. Don't believe me? Listen to their praise of these three award recipients. “What we want to do is present these three people to the world and say that they embody virtues and values worth emulation by all of us." Their words, not mine.

As an aside, what I find truly remarkable is the traction that socialism/communism seems to be gaining among the more liberal and progressive circles. Not so much that they are espousing socialist ideas, but that they are more actively and openly promoting the socialist agenda. The argument used to be, "You're a socialist," followed by "No I'm not." Now it is "You're a socialist," followed by "So what?" There was a time when socialism was recognized as the corrupt, oligarchic political system that trampled individual progress and self-worth that it actually is. Now, every brainless, self-absorbed, incompetent, self-aggrandizing progressive liberal wants to show how "enlightened" they are by espousing a political system that has proven time and again how corrupt and detrimental to individual liberty it is. Please, someone explain to me how I'm the irrational one.

So why is socialism/communism dangerous to freedom? Listen to the following excerpts from two addresses given by Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture under Eisenhower, and President and Prophet of the LDS Church. They were given in 1966 and 1965 respectively. The second clip is well worth the time to view it in its entirety, despite its length. You can view it here. Remember, these messages were given over 40 years ago, and are perhaps more ominous and vital now than ever before.

02 September 2009

The Government Can...

I saw this video on the 912 Project the other day. I've been meaning to post it here but I've been...well...lazy. Oh, well. Here you go. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

24 August 2009

Trust Him, He's Doing God's Work!

I've been converted. We should all support ObamaCare. Why? Because God says so. Just ask these people.

21 August 2009

Death Panels? What Death Panels? Oh, You Mean THOSE Death Panels

Want a glimpse into the wonderful, candy-coated world of Obamacare? Look no further than Oregon's health care priorities. Maybe Sarah Palin wasn't so far off, after all.

That's right, folks. The state of Oregon decides who is worth keeping around, and who should just be put down. I mean, the lady in the video really has outlived her usefulness. Kind of like when a race horse breaks her leg. Think Oregon is callous? Wait until it's the federal government that runs things.

11 August 2009

What Ever Happened to Public Health Care Negotiations?

Naked Emperor News has done yet another fantastic job of demonstrating Big O's hypocrisy. Enjoy...if you can stomach it.

07 August 2009

Muse - The Uprising

Muse has been one of my favorite bands for quite some time now. I just listened to their new hit singe, The Uprising (thanks, GB). Take a listen below, and pay special attention to the lyrics (I've posted them below the clip in case you can't make them out). Fantastic.

The paranoia is in bloom, the PR
The transmissions will resume
They'll try to push drugs
Keep us all dumbed down and hope that
We will never see the truth around

Another promise, another scene, another
A package not to keep us trapped in greed
With all the green belts wrapped around our minds
And endless red tape to keep the truth confined

They will not force us
They will stop degrading us
They will not control us
We will be victorious

Interchanging mind control
Come let the revolution take its toll if you could
Flick the switch and open your third eye, you'd see that
We should never be afraid to die

Rise up and take the power back, it's time that
The fat cats had a heart attack, you know that
Their time is coming to an end
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend

04 August 2009

Faça Xixi no Banho!

This one's for you, Lak. Now we can all be a little greener by...peeing in the shower. That's right. In the shower. I mean, the water is already running, right? And besides, one flush of the toilet can use 12 liters of water, which equates to about 4380 liters of water a year. So by relieving yourself while lathering up, you're cleansing both your inner and outer bad-self at the same time. Let's call this "eco-hygene." Wait, didn't the hippies already try that?

h/t: Jawa

We are NOT a Democracy!

I was talking with a friend the other day about the differences between the various forms of government, particularly the distinction between a democracy and a republic. Later that day I saw this video, which does a good job of explaining the basic components of each form of government and their benefits and failures. It's pretty simplistic in it's explanation, but hey, sometimes we just need to keep it simple, right?

Issa to Emanuel: Back Off!

Last month I blogged about the Obamanation's scare tactics against Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) because he questioned the efficacy of the stimulus package. Now Darrell Issa (R-CA) strikes back. Via the Committe on Oversight and Government Reform:
Following reports that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has been orchestrating an effort to intimidate members of Congress and Governors who raise legitimate concerns regarding the effectiveness of the stimulus, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA) sent a letter to Emanuel saying "While this type of scare tactic may work In Chicago, it will not work to intimidate me or other Members of the United States Congress."

"I and others have dared to bring these facts to the attention of President Obama, the Congress and the American people," Issa wrote. "You’ve unfortunately reacted by once again resorting to the playbook of the Chicago political machine."

Last month, Politico reported that Emanuel had "launched a coordinated effort to jam" Senator Kyl and other Administration critics… "[A]fter seeing Kyl and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) again paint the legislation as a failure on Sunday talk shows, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel directed that the letters from the Cabinet secretaries be sent to [Governor] Brewer, according to two administration officials."

Issa noted, "The fact that the letters were coordinated by you to maximize the level of intimidation is supported by the timing, structure, and content of each letter. Not only were the four letters all sent the day following Senator Kyl’s remarks, but they were also remarkably similar in tone and sentence structure."
It is admirable that Issa is willing to stand up to the Chicago/DC political thuggery, but we need more representatives willing to resist these kinds of tactics and stand up for what is right, even when popularity polls are not in their favor.

Specter's and Sebelius' Call to Arms

Courtesy of IowaHawk
Guest Opinion
By Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA)
and Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services

Over two hundred years ago, America's founding fathers established a constitutional republic based on the audacious notion that the interests of its citizens would be best served by a wise body of their democratically-elected representatives. In the two centuries that have since transpired, that bold experiment has largely been a success. But we should also realize our system only works when the interests of voters and their government are in harmony. Unfortunately, recent evidence suggests that America's hard-working hometown legislators are feeling the pinch from a fickle and increasingly out-of-touch voter class who no longer serves our needs.

Nowhere has this disturbing trend been more evident than in the recent debate over health care reform. Like hundreds of our fellow legislators and government officials, we recently traveled to a town hall meeting to distribute a grassroots press release explaining why this critical legislation is a done deal. Our advance staffs said that should anticipate a respectful, positive hearing from local media and bused-in union members. Instead we were greeted by a rude howling mob of idiot "voters" who refused to listen to reason, and ruined what should have been a killer photo op for our re-election ad campaign.

Have these arrogant ivory tower armchair quarterbacks ever had to live with the pressures of being a working stiff Senator or Cabinet Secretary in Washington DC? Have they ever had to juggle markup language on a supplemental appropriations bill, or deal with an incompetent Chief of Staff who constantly double-books fund raising dinners? Apparently not, if their whiny obnoxious chants are any indication. "Read the Bill! Read the Bill!" blah, blah, blah, as if we weren't already exhausted from writing and voting for the damned thing...

Sadly, that brief shining Camelot in Washington has suddenly been replaced by a new Dark Ages, with hordes of placard- and plague-carrying voter vermin pouring up from the sewers of our home districts, threatening us and our very re-elections. Across Washington, hundreds of everyday legislators and consultants are paralyzed by fear, wondering where these these intrusive bubonic boobs will strike next.

The reasons for this are difficult to understand, but the results are clear: we have come face-to-face with a national crisis of confidence, as America's struggling government increasingly loses faith with its electing class. A recent Rasmussen tracking poll showed American Voters getting a paltry 23% approval rating from members of Congress and the Executive branch, and only 17% from members of the media...

Enough is enough. It's time for us to get out our pitchforks and tell the Outside-the-Beltway gang that we're mad as hell, and we're not going to take it any more. We are the little guy, the junior senator from some godforsaken Nebraskansaw, just looking to make that subcommittee with the big contributor action. That fresh young regulatory agency head who only wants to test that bank nationalization idea from her Harvard term paper. We are the people who get up every day, work hard, and play inside the rules. Most of the time. And if one of us accidentally plays outside one of those rules, then, by golly, the rest of us will make sure to modify that rule so he's still playing inside the rules. And we're tired of getting pushed around the town hall by the likes of you, Big Voter.

Will our call-to-arms spark a grassroots movement among Government-Americans to take our town halls back? Call us irrepressible optimists, but we have high hopes. Because we still believe in the American ideal that one man, with a staff of 83, and a chair on an $800 billion subcommittee, and an iPhone full of contact numbers, can still make a difference.

In the end, democracy means that voters get the government they deserve. In fairness, shouldn't we get the voters we deserve?

03 August 2009

Obama vs Obama on Health Care

Just in case you need any more evidence that Obama is trying to orchestrate a government takeover of health care and introduce a single payer system, here you go.

You know, I'm so sick of arguing this point, that I can't even find the stomach to comment on the video. Not that it needs any commentating...it should be pretty straight forward.

h/t: Breitbart

24 July 2009


Check out the posts by Lak over at Passing Time (here, here, and here) for an echo of my sentiments about the whole Crowley/Gates incident in Cambridge. And then watch this press conference by Sgt. Dennis O'Connor of the Cambridge Police Department. (BTW, maybe if I had that sweet Boston accent more people would respect me and take me seriously. Or maybe not, but it's still wicked good). I absolutely think that Obama and Patrick should apologize, but they won't. Gibbs has already explained it away by saying, in response to the question of whether Obama regretted saying what he did during his press conference, "I think he would regret if he realized how much of a [sic] overall distraction and obsession it would be, I think he probably would regret distracting you guys with obsessions." Don't you love how the Obamanation deflects any criticism by saying it was someone else's fault? And don't you love how the MSM lets them get away with it?

UPDATE: CNN's Tony Harris (hack) called the press conference you just watched "incendiary." Really? Did we watch the same thing? You can watch his comments here if you are so inclined, but I can sum them up for you. "Wah wah wah racism wah wah wah."

UPDATE 2: The One himself graced reporters with his presence at the WH briefing today, and said, "In my choice of words, I unfortunately gave the impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sergeant Crowley specifically." Gee, it's hard to imagine where that "wrong" impression came from. I mean, "acting stupidly" has so many positive connotations, how could one possibly assume he actually meant that the PD "acted stupidly." Obama then said, "Race is still a troubling aspect of our society. Because of our history, African Americans are sensitive to these issues." Enough with the race card! What an enabler! This guy would sell every non-black person in America into slavery as part of reparations if he could! Race obviously had nothing to do with this issue, but they just can't waste a good opportunity to trash law enforcement or whites.

22 July 2009

More Military Budget Cuts

First, the Senate killed the F22 as a result of pressure from Obama. Now this. Tell me, dear reader, where does it end?

Who Says Politicians Don't Have a Sense of Humor?

Rep. Russ Carnahan held a townhall-like meeting the other day to "explain" Obamacare. Part of his "explanation" included the usual party regurgitation that Obamacare would not only save Americans money, it would give them more options and better coverage, etc. He also claimed that Obamacare would create "efficiencies", and then he had the nerve to flat out lie and claim that the CBO issued a report stating that the proposed health care plan would actually produce a $600 billion surplus over ten years. Pretty sure that the CBO said that Obamacare was unsustainable. But I really shouldn't be such a hatemonger. Anyway, enjoy the video, especially Kevin Jackson's question, "If it's so good, why doesn't Congress have to be on it?"

h/t: MM

21 July 2009

Science Czar Holdren's Population Control Proposals

I've been meaning to blog about this for awhile, but I've been too lazy. :) John Holdren was recently appointed as Obama's Science Czar (I'm sure I'm the only one that finds it disturbing that all these czars answer directly and exclusively to the White House). As if everything that the One has done hasn't warned you about what's coming, this should help clarify it.

In 1977, Holdren co-authored a book titled Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment. In the book, Holdren sets forth his plans to help save the environment, and humanity in general. Here are some of his proposals, complete with page references and translations, just so you don't think I'm making this stuff up, and that you understand exactly what he's saying.
Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society. [p. 837]
TRANSLATION: I have determined that there's nothing unconstitutional about laws which would force women to abort their babies.
One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society. [p. 786]
TRANSLATION: Single mothers should have their babies taken away by the government, or they could be forced to have abortions.

Are we having fun yet? Well, the ride's just starting, kids.
Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock. [p. 787-8]
TRANSLATION: Mass sterilization of humans though drugs in the water supply is ok as long as it doesn't harm pets or livestock.
A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.

The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births. [p. 786-7]
TRANSLATION: The government could control women's reproduction by either sterilizing them or implanting mandatory long-term birth control. (NOTE: This is under the section titled, "Involuntary Fertility Control").
If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility—just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns—providing they are not denied equal protection. [p. 838]
TRANSLATION: Anyone whom we deem causes "social deterioration" can be compelled to not have children. (I'll admit, this one's tempting).
In today's world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern. The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children? [p. 838]
TRANSLATION: Nothing is wrong or illegal about the government dictating family size.
Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime—sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.

The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries' shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits. [p. 942-3]
TRANSLATION: A "Planetary Regime" should control the global economy and dictate by force the number of children allowed to be born. (NOTE: This is found under the section titled, "Toward a Planetary Regime").
If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization. [p. 917]
TRANSLATION: We will need to surrender national sovereignty to an armed international police force.

Well, that all sounds lovely, doesn't it? Oh, and by the way, we need to do all of this by 2000, or we will face a global population "catastrophe." Nice foresight, John. And this is the man who will help the determine the direction of technology and science research. I know I'll sleep better at night knowing he's on the job. Trust me, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but how does someone this radical even get a legitimate job, let alone a powerful government position (and no, I'm not claiming that the czars are legitimate jobs...they don't even have to be approved by Congress!). If the above snippets aren't enough for you, check out the in-depth analysis of Ecoscience performed by Zombie.

20 July 2009

Conservative Bob Dylan

Even Bob Dylan says it's time we start changin'. Yeah, the video is kind of creepy, but the song and voice are great.

h/t: 912

19 July 2009

17 July 2009

CNN Hack "Journalist" Out

Apparently Susan Roesgen was too blatantly biased during her coverage of the Tax Day Tea Parties, even for CNN (and that's saying something). Now it looks like her contract won't be renewed. How tragic. It's amazing how these hacks even get jobs as "journalists." Most "journalists" these days are nothing more than the media equivalent of ambulance chasers, or are simply lapdogs for big government.
TVNewser has learned CNN correspondent Susan Roesgen's contract will not be renewed and she will be leaving the network.

Roesgen, you'll recall, was criticized for her coverage at the tax day tea parties in April, when she said the event she was covering in Chicago was, "anti-CNN since this is highly promoted by the right-wing, conservative network Fox."

Roesgen took a break for a few weeks after that reporting...

When TVNewser asked whether Roesgen's comments at the Chicago tea party rally had anything to do with her not being renewed, a CNN spokesperson said, "I can't comment on personnel matters."

Obama's Wreckovery Plan

The GOP produced this ad highlighting the inconsistencies in O's statements regarding the wreckovery package. It's a pretty good ad. Check out Hot Air for more on this.

Goldman-Sachs Web of Deceit

Just in case the whole ObamaCare thing isn't enough to make your blood boil, watch this breakdown of the controversy surrounding the bailouts and AIG/Goldman-Sachs, courtesy of Glenn Beck. One thing Glenn doesn't mention is that Goldman-Sachs is also widely believed to own the Fed. Is it just me, or is it insane that we entrust a private business to control the supply of money in our country, and that we don't even know who actually runs the Fed??? Are you kidding me? Anyway, enjoy this video. DISCLAIMER: You may want to wrap your head in duct tape before watching it, just in case.

Government is sooooo...Efficient!

This is a chart developed by the House Republicans on the Joint Economic Committee, and illustrates the monstrous bureaucracy that will be created with ObamaCare. I mean, with a government that bloated and complex, what could possibly go wrong?

The CBO has issued an analysis of the reform bill, and has put the price tag at $1.5 trillion. TRILLION. 1,500,000,000,000.00. That's a lot of zeroes. And when was the last time the CBO's budget estimate was more than the actual cost of the program? Not only that, but the CBO acknowledged that the $1.5 trillion mark did not include all likely costs.
We have not yet estimated the administrative costs to the federal government of implementing the specified policies, nor have we accounted for all of the proposal’s likely effects on spending for other federal programs.
Basically, they're saying that health care will cost $1.5 trillion only if there are no costs associated with it's management and implementation. Right. But even without factoring in administrative costs, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf called the trajectory of the federal budget "unsustainable." That's right. Unsustainable.
Under current law, the federal budget is on an unsustainable path, because federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run. Although great uncertainty surrounds long-term fiscal projections, rising costs for health care and the aging of the population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly under any plausible scenario for current law. Unless revenues increase just as rapidly, the rise in spending will produce growing budget deficits. Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress economic growth in the United States. Over time, accumulating debt would cause substantial harm to the economy. The following chart shows our projection of federal debt relative to GDP under the two scenarios we modeled.

Keeping deficits and debt from reaching these levels would require increasing revenues significantly as a share of GDP, decreasing projected spending sharply, or some combination of the two.

Measured relative to GDP, almost all of the projected growth in federal spending other than interest payments on the debt stems from the three largest entitlement programs—Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. For decades, spending on Medicare and Medicaid has been growing faster than the economy. CBO projects that if current laws do not change, federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid combined will grow from roughly 5 percent of GDP today to almost 10 percent by 2035. By 2080, the government would be spending almost as much, as a share of the economy, on just its two major health care programs as it has spent on all of its programs and services in recent years.
Here's what else you get from this bill:

- 31 new federal programs, agencies, and commissions to oversee the government-run health insurance regime (meaning 31 new czars).

- A "Health Choices Commissioner" would head the new "Health Choices Administration" (don't get that confused with the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Veterans Health Administration, and the Indian Health Service, all of which have done a bang-up job administering health care.

- A government-run "Public Health Investment Fund" and a "Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund." Social Security and Medicare should show us how competent government is at managing these trust funds.

- A "Bureau of Health Information" (not to be confused with the already existing National Center for Health Statistics). Michelle Malkin had this to say about the BHI:
New bureaucracies always have old special interests to appease. The Bureau of Health Information will house its own “Office of Civil Rights” and “Office of Minority Health.” The information czar will be required to collect health statistics in the “primary language” of ethnic minorities – and thus, the need for a new “language demonstration program” to showcase their efforts. Obamacare will also ensure “cultural and linguistics competence training” and establish “a youth public health program to expose and recruit high school students into public health careers.” The government health care juggernaut must be fed and staffed, after all.
Had enough yet? You haven't heard anything, yet. Investors Business Daily reviewed the bill, and it didn't take long for the red flags to go up. Page 16 of the proposed bill contained some language that seemed to provide a provision that would outlaw individual private medical insurance. IBD even sought the help of the House Ways and Means Committee to ensure that their interpretation of the provision was correct. Sadly, it was.
The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:

"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.
Scared yet? Read 1984 by George Orwell, and you really will be.

16 July 2009

Barbara Boxer Plays the Race Card Against....Wait for it...the CEO of the National Black Chamber of Congress

Holy crap, this is priceless. Barbara "Please Call me Senator" Boxer gets positively, utterly, and unquestionably destroyed. What kind of self-absorbed, condescending WHITE person tries to play the race card against a BLACK man??? Especially someone as educated as Mr. Alford obviously is. All I have to say is, "California, you got exactly who you deserved." God love you, but this one's on you.

h/t: Jawa

Hondurans Resist Communism....and Obama!

As you may or may not know, Honduras is a country very dear to me. I lived there for a couple of years, and by lived there, I mean lived amongst the people, not with the rich expats. I have lived in poor, rural areas like Nacaome and Orocuina, in middle-class areas like Danli, and both poor and wealthy areas in urban Tegucigalpa. Hondurans are passionate about two things: fútbol (especially Olimpia and Motagua), and Honduras itself. They value their independence, and in spite of their obvious economic struggles, pride themselves on their heritage. Now they are showing their commitment to uphold and support their constitution, in spite of efforts of the socialist/communist regimes (Chavez, Castro, Obama), by ousting would-be-dictator-for-life "Mel" Zelaya. The MSM has attempted to portray the uprising as unconstitutional and unpopluar, and largely a movement by the power-hungry military. But as you can see from the video below, this political move is not only constitutional, it is widely supported by the public in all parts of Honduras.

NOTE: The first few scenes showing violent protests are accompanied by captions stating that "These are not Hondurans." The peaceful protests are then promoted as the demonstrations of true Hondurans.

Gratuitous War Porn

Take a break from the depressing news surrounding ObamaCare, and enjoy this minute and a half of gratuitous war porn. I won't even tell your spouse. Brought to you by the good folks at dvids.

h/t: Jawa

Job Vacancy for Paid "Grassroots" Health Care Reform Activists

This is just hilarious. And Congress wants to call the Tea Party movements "astroturf." At the very least conservatives haven't had to pay people to promote their cause. Check out this job posting on the San Francisco area craigslist. (NOTE: It's now been removed, but is available at Free Republic). I believe this represents the desperation that the progressives are feeling to pass the health care reform bill. Can we say, "power grab"? I knew you could!
Why is now the time to work for change? Because we have a new president and new hope for a better America.

Because we need change like never before, on everything from the economy to climate change and more.

And because we know that the challenges we face, from ending our dependence on oil to winning the battle for equal rights, are huge—and the politicians and powerful interests who stupidly and stubbornly resist change aren’t calling it quits anytime soon.

America’s leading advocacy groups are gearing up to meet these challenges this summer. In order to win, they need citizen support and grassroots action. That’s where we come in.

At the Fund for the Public Interest, we’ve been organizing campaigns to protect the environment, stand up for the public interest, and defend human rights for more than 25 years. We've helped cut global warming pollution with Environment America. And working with the Human Rights Campaign, we helped organize the grassroots opposition needed to defeat the discriminatory Federal Marriage Amendment.

Your chance to make change happen. We need people like you—lots of people like you—to go out in communities around the country this summer and help make change happen. And you can earn money doing it. Earn $4,000-$6,000 this summer.

To apply for a job this summer, visit our website—www.JobsThatMatter.org—or call Chris at 415-622-0064

Compensation: $11-16 an hour This is at a non-profit organization. Principals only. Recruiters, please don't contact this job poster. Phone calls about this job are ok. Please do not contact job poster about other services, products or commercial interests.
Let's all call Chris (415.622.0064) and find out why a "grassroots" movement has to pay people to participate.

h/t: Drudge

15 July 2009

O-Goons Threaten AZ Gov

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) was interviewed on Sunday by George Stephanopoulos. Referring to the stimulus package, he said, "the reality is it hasn't helped yet. Only about 6.8 percent of the money has actually been spent. What I proposed is, after you complete the contracts that are already committed, the things that are in the pipeline, stop it."

Sounds pretty reasonable, right? Ask any successful business executive, and they'll tell you that if something isn't working, you either change it, or scrap it all together and cut your losses. What you don't do is continue to do the same thing over and over again, and expect to get a different result (isn't that the definition of insanity?).

Of course, Obama has neither been an executive of anything, or successful at anything other than rhetoric, so it should come as no surprise that the Obamanation is going to ride the pork train to their graves. And if they're going down, they're going to take the rest of the civilized world down with them. So a day after Sen. Kyl made that statement, AZ Gov. Jan Brewer received 4 letters from Washington, one each from Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. Each of them pointed out the money that AZ is slated to receive as part of the porkulus bill, including $73 million in HUD funds, $230 million in funding for Recovery Act projects, $520.9 million for AZ highway projects, and $320 million in interior funds. LaHood even added this:
[Kyl] publicly questioned whether the stimulus is working and stated that he wants to cancel projects that aren't presently underway. I believe the stimulus has been very effective in creating job opportunities throughout the country. However, if you prefer to forfeit the money we are making available to your state, as Senator Kyl suggests, please let me know.
Did you catch that? Sen. Kyl had the audacity (is anyone outside the Obamanation authorized to used that word, btw?) to question the success of the stimulus package. So what will come of all this? Probably nothing. Gov. Brewer will kowtow all the way to Washington if she has to in order to keep the pork flowing. Her response gives you a glimpse of spineless jellyfish that allegedly "represent" us.
The governor is hopeful that these federal Cabinet officials are not threatening to deny Arizona citizens the portion of federal stimulus funds to which they are entitled. She believes that would be a tremendous mistake by the administration. And the governor is grateful for the strong leadership and representation that Arizonans enjoy in the United States Senate.
I would love to see someone of consequence stand up to the thugs in Washington. Just once. That's all. Is that too much to ask? Apparently...

h/t: jpt

Obama Snubbed

Porkulus: $850 billion. Universal health care: $1.5 trillion. Seeing Obama snubbed by the very Russians whose boots he was licking: priceless.

h/t: HA

14 July 2009

CanadaCare is the Best!

That's right, folks. This is what we're aspiring to. On the count of 3, everyone grab their ankles. 1...2...

10 July 2009

Bill Whittle Issues Cali Beatdown

I just love this guy. Watch the following beatdown of politicians in California...and America, courtesy of Bill Whittle and PJTV.

09 July 2009

Now There's Transparency for You

Just sickening.
Carol Browner, former Clinton administration EPA head and current Obama White House climate czar, instructed auto industry execs “to put nothing in writing, ever” regarding secret negotiations she orchestrated regarding a deal to increase federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.

Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-WI, is demanding a congressional investigation of Browner’s conduct in the CAFE talks, saying in a letter to Rep. Henry Waxman, D-CA, that Browner “intended to leave little or no documentation of the deliberations that lead to stringent new CAFE standards.”

Federal law requires officials to preserve documents concerning significant policy decisions, so instructing participants in a policy negotation concerning a major federal policy change could be viewed as a criminal act.

Waxman is chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. Sensenbrenner is the ranking Republican member of the panel.

Browner’s informal directive was previously reported by The New York Times. Sensebrenner’s letter is being made public tomorrow. A copy was made available to The Examiner by an official with knowledge of the controversy.
Yessiree. Most transparent government. Ever.

Big Brother is Looming

I've spent most of my waking moments since 26 June thinking about that monstrosity of a bill known fondly as Cap-&-Tax that recently passed the House. What is especially frustrating about the passage of the bill (we'll get to the atrocities that are actually in the bill in a moment) is that not a single representative read the entire, completed bill. How could they, with the final 300 page amendment not being submitted until around 3a the morning it was voted on? Apparently those of us that think our representatives and senators should be held 100% accountable for what they vote on (meaning they should actually, oh I don't know, read the bill) are insane. Just ask House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.
“If every member pledged to not vote for it if they hadn’t read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes,” Hoyer told CNSNews.com at his regular weekly news conference.

Hoyer was responding to a question from CNSNews.com on whether he supported a pledge that asks members of the Congress to read the entire bill before voting on it and also make the full text of the bill available to the public for 72 hours before a vote.

In fact, Hoyer found the idea of the pledge humorous, laughing as he responded to the question. “I’m laughing because a) I don’t know how long this bill is going to be, but it’s going to be a very long bill,” he said.
Anyone with any shred of self-respect should be fuming right now. Our "representatives" mock us "common folk" at every turn. If it's not getting a speed-reader to read part of the porkulus bill, that it's claiming that Americans don't care about pork. There aren't words to explain how incensed I am.

Then there's the whole premise of the bill being based on "scientific" data that is still very questionable. The Obamanation would have you belief that the science is settled, but that is far from true. This bill attempts to regulate every aspect of our private lives (we'll cover that in a moment, too, just in case you think I'm blowing this out of proportion) based on the assumption that global warming and climate change are real and man-made. It strips us of our individual liberties, and the fact that the EPA suppressed a 98 page report by EPA senior research analyst Alan Carlin draws serious questions about climate change.
Carlin's report found "that global temperatures have declined for 11 years; that new research predicts Atlantic hurricanes will be unaffected; that there’s 'little evidence' that Greenland is shedding ice at expected levels; and that solar radiation has the largest single effect on the earth’s temperature." These findings are not what the administration wanted to get out right before the vote on climate change legislation.

The EPA justified suppressing this report by saying that Carlin is not a scientist. In her weekly column Michelle Malkin points out that "neither is Al Gore. Nor is environmental czar Carol Browner. Nor is cap-and-trade shepherd Nancy Pelosi." Carlin does, however, hold a B.S. in physics and has been with the EPA for 35 years.
So with regards to the bill itself, I've read bits and pieces of it (probably more than any single representative has). AIP has a great article on one particular section (304) that should make you tremble with rage. Let me just highlight a couple of other mildly interesting sections of the bill.

- This bill will creates a new energy tax (remember, Obama himself claimed that energy prices would necessarily skyrocket under Cap-&-Tax) at a time when America is facing one of the worst recessions (bordering on depressions) in history.

- This bill will force jobs overseas. The Obamanation claims it create all these wonderful "green jobs," windmill farms, solar panels and so on (ask Spain how that's working out for them). Meanwhile, coal plants will be pushed out of business as will refineries and many small businesses. We will lose many jobs overseas, and if we try to impose some kind of import tariff to prevent that from happening, we will successfully start a trade war at a time when we manufacture absolutely nothing, and consume everything. The Heritage Foundation predicts that this bill will "destroy 1,145,000 jobs on average, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by over 2,479,000 jobs."

- There are light bulb restrictions (no more than 60 watts in your candelabra); in fact there's a whole section that deals with lamps.

- If you decide to build a new home, it must meet new and specific energy requirements. If you decide to sell your existing home, a federal inspector must inspect your home, determine it's energy rating, and if your home is found to be unacceptable then you must retrofit and make changes before you will be able to sell, or have your home official labeled and registered as non-compliant and non-energy efficient (this is the infamous section 304 that you absolutely must read).

- There are "scientific based measurements outlining the species and minimum distance required between trees planted...in addition to the minimum required distance to be maintained between such trees and building foundations, air conditioning units, driveways and walkways...". Yes, you read that right. The government is going to tell you what kind of trees you can plant, and where you are going to plant them.

- There's a section dealing with outdoor lighting that determines the kind of landscape lights, lights in your swimming pool, lights on artwork and other architectural lighting that you are allowed to install. The federal government is going to tell you what wattage that light can be and how many you can have.

- The government will regulate water dispensers, hot tubs and other appliances. They'll regulate water usage and wood stoves (in fact, any wood stove that does not meet regulation must be "destroyed and recycled").

- The bill dictates where plugs for your hybrid cars must be, and deals extensively with transportation.

There is precious little time to stop this. The democrats already possess that crucial 60th vote in the senate, are now filibuster-proof. That means that we must get democratic senators to defect to prevent this egregious trampling of our individual liberties to pass. Contact your senators, and make sure they know you strongly and vehemently oppose this bill. Unless you like paying higher taxes and doing exactly what you're told. Then you don't have to do anything.

08 July 2009


Remember Wimpy, the loveable character from Popeye? Well, California (and soon the rest of America) is taking a page straight out of the Wimpy's Guide to Economic Insovlency. I call it "Wimpynomics." Here's how it works:

California is mired in a budget deficit of more than $24 billion, and is now planning on issuing $3.3 billion in IOU's in July alone. Sucks for Californians. So what's the larger implication? With Cap-&-Tax having passed the House, and Obamacare looming, then we could very well end up paying for it with IOU's worth less than California's.
Obama has bet everything on passing health care this year. The publicity surrounding the California debt fiasco almost assures his resounding defeat.

It takes years and years to make a mess as terrible as the California debacle, but the recipe is simple. All that you need is two political parties that are always willing to offer easy government solutions for every need of the voters, but never willing to make the tough decisions necessary to finance the government largess that results. Voters will occasionally change their allegiance from one party to the other, but the bacchanal will continue regardless of the names on the office doors.

California has engaged in an orgy of spending, but, compared with our federal government, its legislators should feel chaste. The California deficit this year is now north of $26 billion. The U.S. federal deficit will be, according to the latest numbers, almost 70 times larger.

The federal picture is so bleak because the Obama administration is the most fiscally irresponsible in the history of the U.S. I would imagine that he would be the intergalactic champion as well, if we could gather the data on deficits on other worlds. Obama has taken George W. Bush’s inattention to deficits and elevated it to an art form.

The Obama administration has no shame, and is willing to abandon reason altogether to achieve its short-term political goals. Ronald Reagan ran up big deficits in part because he believed that his tax cuts would produce economic growth, and ultimately pay for themselves. He may well have been excessively optimistic about the merits of tax cuts, but at least he had a story.

Obama has no story. Nobody believes that his unprecedented expansion of the welfare state will lead to enough economic growth. Nobody believes that it will pay for itself. Everyone understands that higher spending today begets higher spending tomorrow. That means that his economic strategy simply doesn’t add up.
But there may be some signs that there is still some semblance of sanity in Washington. Obamacare will cost more than $1 trillion (yes, trillion with a T). Opposition to the plan is now spreading to moderate Democrats (and should spread to any politician gives one iota about keeping their job). The only foreseeable way to pay for this thing is to increase/implement new taxes of some kind, and any option involving taxes is going to be widely unpopular (we won't mention Obama's commitment to not increase taxes for those making under $250,000/yr). So that leaves basically two options. Either health care reform fails completely, or Congress passes some weak bill that carries the name "health care", but doesn't actually do anything. With the Democrats now gaining the 60th vote in the Senate, the latter option is the most likely.

h/t: Bloomberg