Shocking Update: Nancy Pelosi Lied!

Remember this statement from Pelosi regarding her alleged knowledge about waterboarding and enhanced interrogation techniques?

Just in case you're hard of hearing, she said "We were not...let me repeat, not told that waterboarding, or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods, were used." That sounds almost as convincing as Rafael Palmeiro's vehement denial of steroids use. "I have never used steroids. Period. I do not know how to say it any more clearly than that. Never." We know how that story ended.

So it should come as no surprise now that the evidence is mounting against Pelosi's version of the truth. Porter Goss, the ranking Republican on the House committee at the time, distinctly remembers being briefed, along with Pelosi, on not only the existence of waterboarding, but that it was being used in interrogation sessions. "We were briefed, and we certainly understood what CIA was doing. Not only was there no objection, there was actually concern about whether the agency was doing enough."

The Washington Post ran a story in 2007 that described a virtual tour that Pelosi and 3 others were given of the detention center, including the harsh interrogation techniques being used.

In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.

Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.

“The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough,” said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.

And then ABC, of all people, broke this story yesterday.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” on terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah in September 2002, according to a report prepared by the Director of National Intelligence’s office and obtained by ABC News.

The report, submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee and other Capitol Hill officials Wednesday, appears to contradict Pelosi’s statement last month that she was never told about the use of waterboarding or other special interrogation tactics. Instead, she has said, she was told only that the Bush administration had legal opinions that would have supported the use of such techniques.

The report details a Sept. 4, 2002 meeting between intelligence officials and Pelosi, then-House intelligence committee chairman Porter Goss, and two aides. At the time, Pelosi was the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee.

The meeting is described as a “Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of particular EITs that had been employed.”

Brendan Daly, a Pelosi spokesman, said Pelosi’s recollection of the meeting is different than the way it is described in the report from the DNI’s office.

I'm sure it is, Mr. Daly. How convenient for you and Ol' Nancy that she "misremembered." To anyone with half a brain, this is complete horbgorble (yes, that's the family friendly version of the word that I want to say). Even if such crap were true, she never even bothered to register an objection about the techniques, which shows that if she was a concerned about them, she obviously didn't care enough to make it known. The article goes on to describe several other meetings that CIA had with members of both parties in Congress.

It will be interesting to see how this one plays out. My guess is that Pelosi will defend her recollection of the occasion in the face of the facts, and that the MSM will sweep it all under the rug as conservative, hate-mongering propaganda (although the fact that ABC reported this is a promising sign). And as for why she never lodged a complaint? My guess is that the big bad Bush administration threatened her into silence, so she had no choice.

UPDATE: Fox News just ran this story. Let's see if the rest of the MSM pick it up, or if it will die a slow, ignominious death as Obama proclaims some other emergency to get our attention away from the issues that matter.

Andrea Mitchell Strikes Again

Just in case you need any more evidence that Andrea Mitchell should be fired, check out this in-depth reporting of breaking news. The whole broadcast actually takes over 5 min. I guess it's right up Andrea's alley, though. Grab your airsickness bag and enjoy.

Americans Deputized to Bail Out Incapable Government

Remember way back when President Obama promised that Americans would be able to track "every dime" of the $787 billion stimulus bill? Well, rest assured, he has every intention of keeping his promise. It just won't happen in the near future. And by "every dime", he means "every dime that we on Capitol Hill decide you need to see." Earl Devaney, chairman of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, which manages www.recovery.gov, said the government's website currently shows the programs being funded by the stimulus money, but won't actually show where exactly the money is going until at least October. And that projected date is optimistic at best. Devaney told a House subcommittee on Tuesday that it will be a challenge to have the information available and online in just 5 months (he actually said that they don't have enough storage capacity to track all the information).

But even if the White House can manage to find a server powerful enough to track the equivalent of a 689 mile high stack of $100 bills, you and I won't be able to see exactly who gets the money. As it stands, the administration is only requiring the first 2 recipients of funding to report the usage of stimulus money. So if a state gets funding, and then gives it to a city, that's all you get to see. You won't be able to find out which contractors or agencies will actually be getting the money. Nice, huh?

So who's going to fill in the gaps in tracking government spending? Why, you and I are, of course!

"We are, in essence, deputizing the entire American citizenry to help with the oversight of this program," said Rep. Brad Miller, chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology's subcommittee on investigations and oversight.

I'm going to have millions of citizens to help me," he said, comparing run-of-the-mill Americans to inspectors general, the high-ranking officials charged with ferreting out waste and abuse in federal agencies.

"I'm going to have a million little IGs running around," the chairman said Tuesday after his testimony before the subcommittee.

And perhaps that's just as well, given the turnout of the panel tasked with keeping track of thousands of millions of dollars. Just three of the 10 members bothered to show up for the subcommittee's second meeting.

Wow. It's great to know that the Obamanation is taking its job so seriously. And since we're all a bunch of "little IGs running around," does that mean we're going to get subpoena power? Be able to execute search warrants? Make arrests? Just call me Deputy Dawg.

On a side note, when asked at the hearing how the board would be able to verify Obama's claim that the stimulus money will create of save 4 million jobs, Devaney responded, "Sir, we haven't really received any information about that on the Web site." What? The government is clueless? Simply shocking.

Celebrating 100 Days of Ineptitude

So the Great One hosted his 3rd prime-time press conference in as many months last night to commemorate his 100th day in office. I find it mildly amusing (read: hysterical) that Obama is so concerned about people knowing what a great job he's doing in office that he needs a press conference to remind us. If he were such a successful and effective president, would he really need to tie up prime-time television slots to tell us about it? Shouldn't we all just inherently know what a great president he is? Shouldn't his works speak for themselves? The obvious answer is yes, his body of work does speak for itself, which explains why Obama was so desperate to ram his twisted perception of reality down our throats.

Now I have to admit that I think I've developed an allergic reaction to the sound of Obama's voice, because I can only listen for so long before I get nauseated and break out in hives. Subsequently, I was unable to force myself to listen to his whole press conference. The parts that I did catch, however, were filled with hope and change.

For example, take Jeff Zeleny's (NY Times) question to the president. Now take a moment to think what kind of question you might ask if you were Mr. Zeleny. You represent a major "news" source (for the sake of debate we're not going to argue the veracity of that statement). You're on national television during prime-time. What kind of question do you ask? Do you ask a question about the economy? The growing size of government? Swine flu? How about the idiotic decision to buzz lady liberty with Air Force One without telling New Yorkers? There are a plethora of great, hard-nosed questions that you could ask. So which of these to Zeleny choose to direct to our Commander-in-Thief? The answer is D: none of the above. Instead, he chose to go with this tough, hard-nosed question: What has surprised, troubled, enchanted, and humbled you the most about being president? Seriously? Enchanted? WTF!? This guy writes for the NY Times? His question was so bad that he actually got laughed at by his fellow reporters! No wonder the NY Times stock price is less than the cost of the Sunday paper!

With in-depth, probing questions like this one, it should be obvious to my one reader that Obama would have to omit some reporters' questions in the interest of time. So who would you skip over if you were in his swanky, italian leather shoes? BET? Maybe Telemundo? Wrong again. Try Fox News. Wednesday's press conference marked the second of 3 pressies were Obama has snubbed Fox News. I'm sure he was more than a little peeved at the Fox Network for refusing to air the press conference because it conflicted with their prime-time network sweeps (they did show it on their news and business channels). But Obama's actions shouldn't surprise anyone, as his vitriolic hatred of Fox is a matter of common knowledge. In fact, he said this leading up to the press conference:

Those of you who are watching certain news channels on which I'm not very popular, and you see folks waving tea bags around, let me just remind them that I am happy to have a serious conversation about how we are going to cut our health care costs down over the long term, how we are going to stabilize Social Security...but let's not play games and pretend that the reason is because of the Recovery Act.

One thing that the press conference did do was assuage all my fears that Obama wants to convert our country to a European-style social welfare state.

You know, I don't want to run auto companies. I don't want to run banks. I've got two wars I've got to run already. I've got more than enough to do. So the sooner we can get out of that business, the better off we're going to be...

I don't think that we should micromanage, but I think that, like any investor, the American taxpayer has the right to scrutinize what's being proposed and make sure that their money is not just being thrown down the drain....

So I just want to help them get there. But I want to disabuse people of this notion that somehow we enjoy, you know, meddling in the private sector, if -- if you could tell me right now that, when I walked into this office that the banks were humming, that autos were selling, and that all you had to worry about was Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, getting health care passed, figuring out how to deal with energy independence, deal with Iran, and a pandemic flu, I would take that deal.

And -- and that's why I'm always amused when I hear these, you know, criticisms of, "Oh, you know, Obama wants to grow government." No. I would love a nice, lean portfolio to deal with, but that's not the hand that's been dealt us.

So you see? Obama doesn't want to socialize this country...he has no choice. It's all Bush's fault, and Obama is just trying to pick up the pieces. But isn't it great to know that he doesn't want to nationalize the auto and banking industries? That he doesn't want to socialize the country? I know I'll sleep better tonight.

Oh, btw, Fox says suck it. Their ratings on 29 April 2009 killed NBC, ABC, and CBS.

And I'm sure that I'm the only one that finds it ironic Fox showed it's drama "Lie to Me", and the rest of the networks showed Obama opening his mouth. Maybe all the networks are on the same page, afterall.

Your Transparent Government...

You've probably heard about about the scandal involving Jane Harman and a couple of individuals accused of espionage. The case can get kind of messy, so here to clear things up is Jon Stewart.

Happy 100th Day-iversary, Mr. Obama!

Congratulations, Mr. Obama! You made it! Your first 100 days in office are finally complete! And what a busy 100 days they have been! You have done more to jeopardize our national security, destroy our international reputation, and annihilate the economy than all 43 previous presidents combined. And you've done it all in less than 100 days, and all while saving the environment! Hooray! Now that's something to really hang your hat on!

The NY Post ran a fitting tribute to our Dearly Beloved today commemorating this momentous occasion. It's entitled "100 Days, 100 Mistakes," and is worth the read of you have the time. But don't fret, Mr. President. At least Chavez and Castro still love you.

Fat People Cause Global Warming

The Sun is reporting that fat people contribute more to global warming than those of us who have chiseled bodies, rock-hard abs, and extraordinary physiques. The report says that fat people may eat more than non-fatties. The increased food production required to feed these overweight monstrosities is literally destroying the planet, since food production accounts for about 1/5 of all greenhouse gases. And since fat people obviously loathe exercise the way that vampires loathe the sun, they drive more than the rest of us more athletic types. Not to mention all that extra methane gas they must be omitting. So you see? Al Gore is right! Humans are destroying the planet! And not just any humans, but fat humans! I think the solution is obvious. Government-sponsored food rationing for fat people. Or maybe we should implement our own "fat tax."

Happy Earth Day!

In honor of Earth Day, I wanted to share with you the following thought, courtesy of Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park. It is read by the one and only Charlton Heston.

Iran Trains Crack Team of Military Commandos

The US military has been put on high alert today after footage of an elite team of Iranian soldiers was leaked. These soldiers possess skills and abilities that far surpass our own. It is obvious that they are a select few chosen for their unique talents. The US military better start playing catch up!

This skill set will be particularly handy when the soldiers get caught stealing food because they're starving, and have their hands cut off under Iranian law. Go Team!

h/t: The Jawa Report

Tea Party Smear

Hundreds of thousands of people turned out at tax day tea parties in 800 cities across America yesterday to protest anything from the increased taxes to big federal government. So how much coverage to the rallies get from the mainstream media? (That was a rhetorical question, and you don't actually have to answer it). It is truly inspiring to see such a grass roots (no, Pelosi, not astroturf...that would your man Axelrod) movement, all propelled by Americans who are concerned about the direction this country is going. So it is especially revolting to see how the MSM is covering it...when they decide to cover it at all (that's for you, NY Times). Michelle Malkin levels Pelosi in this video, as well as Susan Roesgen for her openly contemptuous coverage of the tea parties. WARNING: You may want to grab your air sickness bag before viewing this.

GASP! Green Jobs Bad for the Economy?!

The word is starting to leak out that Obama's drive to create more green jobs might just actually end up costing the economy more than it helps it. I know, I know. That's crazy. I mean, the Messiah himself said it would help the country, so it has to be true, right?

The Big O has often used Spain as an example of how a nation can use federal funds to stimulate the economy through green initiatives.

Think of what’s happening in countries like Spain, Germany and Japan, where they’re making real investments in renewable energy. They’re surging ahead of us, poised to take the lead in these new industries.

Their governments have harnessed their people’s hard work and ingenuity with bold investments — investments that are paying off in good, high-wage jobs — jobs they won’t lose to other countries. There is no reason we can’t do the same thing right here in America...In the process, we’ll put nearly half a million people to work building wind turbines and solar panels; constructing fuel-efficient cars and buildings; and developing the new energy technologies that will lead to new jobs, more savings, and a cleaner, safer planet in the bargain.

Don't see anything wrong with that plan? Maybe the Great One should have actually looked at the result of these projects before committing to them. Gabriel Calzada Alvarez, PhD, a researcher from the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, has issued a report entitled, "Study of the Effects on Employment of Public Aid to Renewable Energy sources," that identifies the green projects that Spain has undertaken, and their economic consequences. Even if you only read the table of contents, you get a great idea of how successful their green initiatives have been. My favorite quote? Here you go (emphasis mine).

Thus, on average, the subsidized green job destroys the resources required to have created 2.2 jobs in the economy.

Consequently, through the use of both methods [two different calculations] we have reached a similar conclusion: for every green job, we can be highly confident that 2.2 jobs are destroyed elsewhere in the economy [or about 9 jobs destroyed for every 4 created], to which we have to add those jobs that the non-subsidized investment would have created.

Yup. Sounds like a great model. I'll bet the Obamanation was as thorough in researching this hair-brained ideas as they were in vetting so many cabinet-level candidates. Calzada goes on to say,

The study’s results show how such ‘green jobs’ policy clearly hinders Spain’s way out of the current economic crisis, even while U.S. politicians insist that rushing into such a scheme will ease their own emergence from the turmoil.

But what does a Spaniard know about the environment and economic progress? We should ask American who specializes in these things, like Pat Michaels, professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia and senior fellow in environmental studies at the CATO Institute. What's that? We already did? He said that he was not surprised with the findings, and that we should expect similar results here.

But for the Obamanation, it has never actually been about benefiting Americans. Instead, it has always been about ramming the progressive, liberal, left-wing agenda down our throats while assuring us that this is really what we want (remember, you should never waste a good crisis!). Besides, those kooks over at the CATO Institute are just a bunch of Right-Wing Extremists, anyway. Off with their heads!

Terrorism Update

Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air has written a scathing critique of the DHS report that I wrote about yesterday. Well worth the read.

More Proof that I'm a Terrorist

After hearing that Missouri retracted its report linking militias and conservatives, I was questioning my status as an extremist/domestic terrorist. Well, never fear! DHS is here! DHS has issued a report (h/t: The Liberty Papers) entitled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment." The report essentially amounts to a hit list on conservatives, and is the most disgusting, federally-issued document that I have read in recent memory. Here are a few nuggets from the report:

Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, orrejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups, as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement.

Rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors, and home foreclosures.

Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use.

Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990s with the perception that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to work at significantly lower wages. They also opposed free trade agreements, arguing that these arrangements resulted in Americans losing jobs to countries such as Mexico.

Many rightwing extremist groups perceive recent gun control legislation as a threat to their right to bear arms and in response have increased weapons and ammunition stockpiling, as well as renewed participation in paramilitary training exercises.

Rightwing extremist paranoia of foreign regimes could escalate or be magnified in the event of an economic crisis or military confrontation, harkening back to the “New World Order” conspiracy theories of the 1990s. The dissolution of Communist countries in Eastern Europe and the end of the Soviet Union in the 1990s led some rightwing extremists to believe that a “New World Order” would bring about a world government that would usurp the sovereignty of the United States and its Constitution, thus infringing upon their liberty.

No, these are not legitimate concerns. These are the irrational fears of a paranoid, extremist, fringe group. Congratulations, you're probably a domestic terrorist.

The Fallacy of Equality

The term "equality" has been bothering me lately, especially as it has been slung around by the liberal media with regards to minorities, special interest groups, etc.

The founders wrote in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal, and yet it is obvious that no two human beings are identical in any respect. We come from different places, look different, act different, have varying degrees of strength (super-human, in my case), intelligence (yes, I am omniscient, too), and other abilities. So how, exactly, are we all equal?

According to Dr. W. Cleon Skousen, we are treated as equals in 3 ways: in the sight of God, in the sight of the law, and in the protection of our rights. Constitutional writer Clarence Carson described it this way:

First, there is equality before the law. This means that every man's case is tried by the same law governing any particular case. Practically, it means that there are no different laws for different classes and orders of men. The definition of premeditated murder is the same for the millionaire as for the tramp. A corollary of this is that no classes are created or recognized by law.

Second, the Declaration refers to an equality of rights...Each man is equally entitled to his life with every other man; each man has an equal title to God-given liberties along with every other.

But it seems that we've lost the original meaning of the term "equality." No longer is it about equal opportunity, but it is about equal things. As an example, I was reminded of a billboard that I saw a while ago here in Memphis that proudly proclaimed that if you couldn't afford to pay for a cell phone, the government would help you get one. Really? Is the right to a cell phone one of those unalienable rights that I slept through in my civics classes? If you can't afford a cell phone, guess what? TOUGH! If it is that important to you, go out and get a second job, or cut some of those trips to Mickey D's out (although we ARE very proud of our official status here in MS as the most obese state in the country). The argument here is that you need a cell phone in case of emergencies. Really? Where were the cell phones for the first 18+ years of my life? I seemed to manage just fine! We've become so accustomed to certain luxuries and amenities that we view them as "essential" to our survival. Of course, we are certainly not the first generation to confuse this definition, and we will undoubtedly not be the last. John Adams was in France when Jean Jacques Rousseau was teaching that all men were designed to be equal in every way. In response, Adams wrote:

That all men are born to equal rights is true. Every being has a right to his own, as clear, as moral, as sacred, as any other being has...But to teach that all men are born with equal powers and faculties, to equal influence in society, to equal property and advantages through life, is as gross a fraud, as glaring an imposition on the credulity of the people, as ever was practiced...

It should be obvious, then, to anyone who can objectively analyze a subject, that we are, in fact, created equal by God, and that we all have equal opportunities to succeed in this country based on our own merits. This also means that we are all subject to the same consequences as a result of our actions. Granted, the implication of this law (equality) has not always been executed justly. But an unjust application of the law does not make the law itself unjust. It just means we need to support those will more appropriately carry out the law as it is established.

Move over Jack Bauer: Meet Marcus Luttrell

If you haven't seen this video, or heard his interviews on the Glenn Beck radio program, you really need to. THIS is the epitome of what a hero should be. Marcus Luttrell is one of the baddest people on the planet. Glenn Beck said on his radio program said that Marcus makes Jack Bauer look like Screech from Saved by the Bell. This is the Navy SEAL that was the lone survivor (also authored the book Lone Survivor) of Operation Red Wing (for which he was awarded the Navy Cross and Purple Heart).

Last week 4 low-life teenagers in TX were going around joyriding and shooting people's dogs (they had Michael Vick jerseys on, btw). First of all, you don't shoot people's dogs just for the hell of it. Second of all, you don't shoot the Lone Survivor's dog. Marcus chased them through 4 counties before the drivers were finally forced to pull over after hitting police rollers. Here's the thing. At one point he was able to ram them off the road into a ditch about 3 miles from his home. He had a gun leveled at the driver. No one was around. They just shot his dog (who, incidentally, was given to him as a coping mechanism after he retired from the SEALs, and is named DASY, with each letter representing him and his SEAL team). You know what he did? Nothing. He exhibited perhaps the greatest amount of self-control I have ever heard of. He was as a member of the most elite division of the most powerful military on earth. Every instinct he had must have been screaming at him to take them out. But he didn't. He trusted the justice system of the country to which he dedicated his life.

Just so there's no misunderstanding, I very seriously doubt I would have been able to do the same. Those of you who know me and know how much we love our dogs and consider them part of our family will understand. And DASY meant so much more to Marcus than I can imagine. If it were me, I think I would have walked up to them and happily have shot them between the eyes. I don't even know that I would have been conflicted about it. I'm sure I would have had that moment of general human conscience where I asked myself if I really wanted to do this. But I believe that in my mind it would seem (at the moment) incredibly justifiable. (Especially in TX, and given that the criminal had discharged a gun on my property).

And here's where I see Marcus as miles above me. Marcus not only had to overcome the knee-jerk, reactionary, revenge-driven response that all of us average Joes would have faced. He's been trained to eliminate a threat at the first opportunity. Threat identified. Threat eliminated. Simple as that.

Please keep Marcus in your prayers. He has by no means forgiven these punks, and he may not be able to restrain himself the next time he runs into one of them. (In fact, he found out where to find one of the kids during the day, so he left town so that he wouldn't be tempted to take him out). He's trying to cope with losses and horrors that neither you nor I can ever imagine.

UPDATE: Just in case you need more evidence of what kind of man Marcus is, check out the video below. 'Nuf said.

Barackmobile

It's nice to see that the new Government Motors is actively seeking to overhaul its company in an attempt to make it more profitable. (I guess that to be "more profitable" would imply some previous level of profitability. So I suppose they're just trying to become profitable, period).

As part of that endeavor, GM is investing heavily in more fuel efficient and greener vehicles (you know, since there is such an enormous market for that in the US). Their latest project involves a partnership with NH based Segway to produce the Personal Urban Mobility & Accessibility (charmingly called PUMA) vehicle. Are you ready for these wicked specs? It will weigh 300 lbs and travel up to, *gasp*35 mph! Holy freaking crap! Where do I sign up?

Never mind that it looks like someone took a couple wheels off my old big wheel and threw them on a garbage can. Or that I've seen bar stools that can go faster. This is the wave of the future! We will all soon be trading our cars in for these babies! Especially when the government mandates that the banks cease to provide loans for evil polluting combustion vehicles, and can only provide loans for these glorious, eco-friendly, mobile chick-repellers. But who really needs to date, anyway? Certainly no one driving one of these bad boys. But I'm sure the crew of the Starship Enterprise would be impressed.

Unfortunately, the PUMA isn't scheduled to be available until Q1 2010. But this just-released photo show you the design planned for the final model:


All hail the Glorious Leader! Just one question, though. Where do you fit the teleprompter? ZING!

Even Microsoft Needs a Little Stimulus Love

The Microsoft Corporation is, by nearly any measure, the poster child for an efficient and effective business model. Whether or not you like the company or its products, it's tough to argue with the numbers. While the US economy grew just over 1% in 2008 (although it lost over 6% in Q4 alone), and many companies saw net losses last year, Microsoft still posted moderate gains. In 2008, Microsoft posted $60 bn in revenue, an operating income of $22 bn, and a net income of $17 bn. At the end of last year, Microsoft also reported $72 bn in total assets, and $36 bn in total equity. Granted, their earnings may have not been what they have in the past, but the company still netted a significant amount of money last year.

So it's no wonder that some residents of Redmond, WA are very upset about a plan for Microsoft to use $11 million of stimulus money to build a bridge that will connect 2 campuses at Microsoft's headquarters.

Here's the thing. Microsoft is spending $17.5 million of its own money to build the public access bridge, and studies have estimated that Microsoft would account for around 42% of the bridge's traffic. (For those of you mathematically challenged, they're paying about 49% of the bill). So that kind of seems fair, right? Opponents are arguing that while Microsoft's contribution is certainly significant, the public money that will be diverted could be better spent elsewhere.

I understand both sides of this debate. But here's the thing. The porkulus bill that was passed was one big pet project/earmark cesspool, so if you're going to get upset at anyone, be upset at your legislators and senators for voting for the thing (without reading it, I might add). Microsoft is simply doing what it does best; making decisions that are in the best interest of Microsoft and it's employees and investors. In fact, if you're a Microsoft investor, you should be grateful that the company has the common sense to take advantage of savings opportunities when presented to them (including laying off 5000 employees). Maybe the auto industry wouldn't be such a mess if they had the cajones to make tough decisions (curse you, UAW). At least this pet project is being partially funded (almost 50%) with private money and will benefit the community, and is only a drop in the $11 Trillion (that's Trillion with a capital T) bucket. Unlike a certain senator's maglev project.

Barackian Economic Theory 101

Class, today's lesson is going to cover the Barackian Theory of Economics, so please try to stay awake. The major cause of the economic problem facing our nation right now is that we (consumers) spent too much money. So consumers are no longer spending as much money because we've over-extended our finances. Because consumers are not spending as much money, businesses aren't spending as much money. There is no incentive for businesses to continue to spend money and produce for a market that is not purchasing, right? Therefore, because neither consumers nor businesses are spending money, the economy is slowing down.

Seems pretty straight forward, right? Now here's where the Barackian Economic Theory kicks in. Please try to keep up, and be sure to wrap your head in duct tape if you feel it starting to explode. In order to "jump-start" (don't you love that term?) the economy, the government needs to tax the consumers (who are over-extended already) and the businesses (who aren't profitable or producing because consumers aren't spending). The government then needs to take that money and give it to the banks in the form of a bailout so that...are you ready for this? Wait for it...wait for it...the banks can then give loans back to people who are over-extended and the businesses who aren't profitable, who will then be charged interest on the money that was theirs to begin with!!!

I'm no economist, but wouldn't it just be easier to let everybody keep their own money?

#@$$!!!@%(*!$^%U(

Please see previous post.

In the Immortal Words of Chevy Chase

So I have been overwhelmed trying to figure out how to express my frustrations the last couple of days. I mean, where do I begin? We have GIVE and SERVE, DREAM (BTW, have you noticed how un-menacing things sound when we give them cute acronyms?), ICE being called un-American (again), etc. My dear friend Lak over at Passing Time has brilliantly found the perfect way to express all that pent-up frustration and anger, a la Chevy Chase. I'm sorry to rip this off of him, but it made me laugh and momentarily made me forget about our $11 Trillion (yes, Trillion with a "T") toilet being used to flush our country and its Constitution down the drain. So that's worth something, right?

WARNING: Parents, you may want to cover your children's ears.

Washington Says Obama's Insane

Thomas Jefferson recounted a conversation he had with President George Washington in August 1793. Jefferson expressed concerns over some elements in government that were pushing for more monarchical-type powers. Washington responded, saying that "the Constitution we have is an excellent one, if we can keep it where it is." Jefferson responded by saying,

There does not pass a week, in which we cannot prove declarations dropping from the monarchical party [the branch of the administration pushing for a central government with massive powers and saying] that our government is good for nothing, is a milk and water thing which cannot support itself, we must knock it down, and set up something of more energy.

President Washington replied that if any were guilty of such nonsense, it would be "proof of their insanity."

Obama's Ulterior Motives

One of the methods used by statists to destroy capitalism consists of establishing controls that tie a given industry hand and foot, making it unable to solve its problems, then declaring that freedom has failed and stronger controls are necessary.

- Ayn Rand, 1975

h/t: The Jawa Report

Daniel Hannan Throws Down the Gauntlet

Hat tip to Lak for posting the video regarding UK MEP Daniel Hannan's verbal beatdown of UK PM Gordon Brown as shown on the Glenn Beck television program last night. You can watch Mr. Hannan's full lambast of el Gordo below. Seriously, we need this guy to emigrate.

UPDATE: If I would have paid attention, I would have seen that Lak already posted that video. Oh, well. The more viral it gets, the better, right?

Kabuki Theater of AIG Outrage

Remember all the fist-pounding hellfire and damnation Congress has been calling upon all those evil AIG employees that received bonuses? Very reminiscent of the Japanese-style Kabuki theater, known for it's dramatic and extravagant style. And just in case there is any doubt over the complete and utter ineptitude of those who call themselves our leaders, this should serve as the proverbial nail in the coffin. The NY Times Op-Ed section ran this story today, and, contrary to most NY Times articles, is exceptionally well presented (probably because the NY Times contributor made no comments about it, other than to give context for the article). The article is a letter from Jake DeSantis, an Executive VP of AIG's Financial Products divisions to AIG Chief Executive Edward Liddy. It is a little lengthy, but well worth the read.

It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of my decision, I want to offer some context:

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

You and I have never met or spoken to each other, so I’d like to tell you about myself. I was raised by schoolteachers working multiple jobs in a world of closing steel mills. My hard work earned me acceptance to M.I.T., and the institute’s generous financial aid enabled me to attend. I had fulfilled my American dream.

I started at this company in 1998 as an equity trader, became the head of equity and commodity trading and, a couple of years before A.I.G.’s meltdown last September, was named the head of business development for commodities. Over this period the equity and commodity units were consistently profitable — in most years generating net profits of well over $100 million. Most recently, during the dismantling of A.I.G.-F.P., I was an integral player in the pending sale of its well-regarded commodity index business to UBS. As you know, business unit sales like this are crucial to A.I.G.’s effort to repay the American taxpayer.

The profitability of the businesses with which I was associated clearly supported my compensation. I never received any pay resulting from the credit default swaps that are now losing so much money. I did, however, like many others here, lose a significant portion of my life savings in the form of deferred compensation invested in the capital of A.I.G.-F.P. because of those losses. In this way I have personally suffered from this controversial activity — directly as well as indirectly with the rest of the taxpayers.

I have the utmost respect for the civic duty that you are now performing at A.I.G. You are as blameless for these credit default swap losses as I am. You answered your country’s call and you are taking a tremendous beating for it.

But you also are aware that most of the employees of your financial products unit had nothing to do with the large losses. And I am disappointed and frustrated over your lack of support for us. I and many others in the unit feel betrayed that you failed to stand up for us in the face of untrue and unfair accusations from certain members of Congress last Wednesday and from the press over our retention payments, and that you didn’t defend us against the baseless and reckless comments made by the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut.

My guess is that in October, when you learned of these retention contracts, you realized that the employees of the financial products unit needed some incentive to stay and that the contracts, being both ethical and useful, should be left to stand. That’s probably why A.I.G. management assured us on three occasions during that month that the company would “live up to its commitment” to honor the contract guarantees.

That may be why you decided to accelerate by three months more than a quarter of the amounts due under the contracts. That action signified to us your support, and was hardly something that one would do if he truly found the contracts “distasteful.”

That may also be why you authorized the balance of the payments on March 13.

At no time during the past six months that you have been leading A.I.G. did you ask us to revise, renegotiate or break these contracts — until several hours before your appearance last week before Congress.

I think your initial decision to honor the contracts was both ethical and financially astute, but it seems to have been politically unwise. It’s now apparent that you either misunderstood the agreements that you had made — tacit or otherwise — with the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, various members of Congress and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo of New York, or were not strong enough to withstand the shifting political winds.

You’ve now asked the current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. to repay these earnings. As you can imagine, there has been a tremendous amount of serious thought and heated discussion about how we should respond to this breach of trust.

As most of us have done nothing wrong, guilt is not a motivation to surrender our earnings. We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house.

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.’s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you.

The only real motivation that anyone at A.I.G.-F.P. now has is fear. Mr. Cuomo has threatened to “name and shame,” and his counterpart in Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal, has made similar threats — even though attorneys general are supposed to stand for due process, to conduct trials in courts and not the press.

So what am I to do? There’s no easy answer. I know that because of hard work I have benefited more than most during the economic boom and have saved enough that my family is unlikely to suffer devastating losses during the current bust. Some might argue that members of my profession have been overpaid, and I wouldn’t disagree.

That is why I have decided to donate 100 percent of the effective after-tax proceeds of my retention payment directly to organizations that are helping people who are suffering from the global downturn. This is not a tax-deduction gimmick; I simply believe that I at least deserve to dictate how my earnings are spent, and do not want to see them disappear back into the obscurity of A.I.G.’s or the federal government’s budget. Our earnings have caused such a distraction for so many from the more pressing issues our country faces, and I would like to see my share of it benefit those truly in need.

On March 16 I received a payment from A.I.G. amounting to $742,006.40, after taxes. In light of the uncertainty over the ultimate taxation and legal status of this payment, the actual amount I donate may be less — in fact, it may end up being far less if the recent House bill raising the tax on the retention payments to 90 percent stands. Once all the money is donated, you will immediately receive a list of all recipients.

This choice is right for me. I wish others at A.I.G.-F.P. luck finding peace with their difficult decision, and only hope their judgment is not clouded by fear.

Mr. Liddy, I wish you success in your commitment to return the money extended by the American government, and luck with the continued unwinding of the company’s diverse businesses — especially those remaining credit default swaps. I’ll continue over the short term to help make sure no balls are dropped, but after what’s happened this past week I can’t remain much longer — there is too much bad blood. I’m not sure how you will greet my resignation, but at least Attorney General Blumenthal should be relieved that I’ll leave under my own power and will not need to be “shoved out the door.”

Sincerely,

Jake DeSantis

You Might be a Militia Member if...

Glenn Beck had this on his radio program the other morning, and I've been meaning to post it here. Apparently I'm well on my way to becoming a militia member, according to a Missouri Information Analysis Center strategic report on the modern militia movement.

Want to know if you're a militia member? Just answer the questions below...you might be surprised!

Do you, or have you ever expressed concern over the Ammunition Accountability Act?

Are you concerned about the possible economic collapse of the US Government?

Are you opposed to the possibility of a new Constitutional Convention in light of the current socio-political climate?

Are you concerned about the possibility of a North American Union (NAU)?

Are you concerned about the creation of the Civilian National Security Force?

Are you concerned about Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)?

Do you believe that the government has gotten away from the intent of the Constitution?

Do you believe in strong state rights?

Are you, or have you ever been opposed to the collection of federal income taxes based on constitutional principles?

Do you currently, or have you ever displayed the Gadsden flag?

Do you currently, or have you ever supported Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, or Bob Barr?

Do you support gun rights and/or believe that the 2nd amendment is under assault?

There you go! If you answered yes or maybe to 2 or more of these questions, you just might be a militia member! I guess I better start stockpiling weapons and ammunition...

Mmm...Obama-Fingers!

With a long history of racial justice and equality in Germany, I'm surprised that German frozen food company Sprehe's choice of product branding is even being questioned.


In an effort to move more product, Sprehe has branded it's new line of frozen chicken tenders as "Obama-Fingers" in an effort to capitalize on the Hopey/Changey's optimistic message for our future.

"We noticed that American products and the American way of eating are trendy at the moment," Judith Witting, sales manager for Sprehe, told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "Americans are more relaxed. Not like us stiff Germans, like (Chancellor Angela) Merkel."

The idea, she claimed, was to get in on the Obama-mania which is continuing to grip Germany. The word "fingers" in the name refers to the fact that it is a finger food. "It's like hotdogs," Witting said. "No one would ever think they are actually from dogs."

Nope. No possible racial objections about blacks and fried chicken here.

Toxic Assets No More!

HOORAY! The government's done it! They've cleared the books of all toxic assets! We don't need to worry any more! The economy will bounce back! Taxes will decline! Wages will increase! Universal health care will work and we'll all live in that creepy paradise displayed in the Watchtower pamphlets!

UPDATE: It has been brought to my attention that toxic assets no longer exist because we are now calling them legacy assets. The PC pixies strike again.

Bailed Out Companies Owe Back Taxes

I've been behind for the last couple of days. I changed the template of the blog (and believe me, I'm DEFINITELY a newbie at this), and I screwed some of the editing features up. But I'm back up and running. And in case you're wondering, I'm still flabbergasted by our federal government.

This was released over the weekend, but I've been meaning to post it here. It turns out that 13 firms that are receiving bailout funds from the porkulus packages actually OWE back taxes to the federal government to the tune of over $220 million (which admittedly seems minuscule when compared to the billions and trillions we're spending now).

At least 13 companies receiving billions of dollars in bailout money owe a total of more than $220 million in unpaid federal taxes, a key lawmaker said Thursday.

Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., chairman of a House subcommittee overseeing the federal bailout, said two companies owe more than $100 million apiece.

The House Ways and Means subcommittee on oversight discovered the unpaid taxes in a review of tax records from 23 companies receiving the most money, Lewis said as he opened a hearing on the issue.

The absolute hilarity of it all would be sidesplitting if it weren't so nauseating. But never fear. Democrats are on the case! '"This is shameful. It is a disgrace," said Lewis. "We are going to get to the bottom of what is going on here."'

Of course you are. So you're going to review all 470 institutions that received money, right? "Lewis said the panel plans to review tax records from other firms receiving federal money, but he was unsure if it would look at every one of them."

But why, Mr. Lewis? Shouldn't we review all the bailout recipients to make sure that there isn't money owed elsewhere? No, apparently we operate on the honor system. "Banks and other companies receiving federal money were required to sign contracts stating they had no unpaid taxes, Lewis said. But he said the Treasury Department did not ask them to turn over their tax records." How's that working out for ya'?

Well, we should at least get the Treasury Department involved, since this kinda sorta concerns them, right?

No one from the Treasury Department appeared at Thursday’s hearing. Lewis said he asked Treasury officials for a private briefing on their efforts to uncover unpaid taxes, as well as someone to testify at Thursday’s hearing.

“They said no one was available,” Lewis said in an interview.

They're probably just too busy.

But don't worry, dear readers. The IRS is aware of the situation and will handle it.

The Internal Revenue Service “has every expectation that these amounts will be paid and is committed to collect every dollar of taxes that are owed,” IRS spokesman Frank Keith said in a statement. “The IRS recognizes that those entities that receive taxpayer support have a special obligation to pay their taxes, and these taxpayer accounts will remain closely monitored by the IRS to ensure that the full amount of taxes due are paid.”

Border Protection is Un-American

Someone needs to punch Nancy Pelosi in her smug, little face. Did you know that enforcing our immigration laws to protect our borders is un-American, and that in doing so we are terrorizing families? And it's not just Pelosi. Obama has stated the same thing. Here's a video that will make you want to scream. You only really need to see the first 45 seconds of the video. Her arrogance and self-righteousness simply oozes from our alien-sized eyeballs.

And this certainly isn't the first time she's called protection of our borders and enforcement of our laws un-American.

Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) issued this verbal beat-down:

The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Speaker Pelosi called worksite arrests and deportation of illegal workers 'un-American.' That’s quite a powerful word – 'un-American.' And it’s quite a spectacle to have the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives call the actions of our law enforcement men and women 'un-American.'

We should praise them, not insult them, for enforcing our immigration laws.

Twelve million Americans are out of work. Seven million illegal workers hold jobs that should go to citizens and legal immigrant workers. Let's let the American people decide what is 'un-American.' We should not criticize law enforcement personnel; instead, we should be grateful for the job they do.

Obama to Veterans: Thanks for your service. Could you please bend over?

The merry-go-round of insanity and stupidity over in O-land continues to accelerate at alarming speed. In fact, it's spinning so fast and out of control that it feels a little like those guys that undergo high-g training in the centrifuge.

The latest debacle? The Obamanation is considering a bill that will force veterans to use private insurance to cover the cost of treating injuries sustained in combat. Yeah, that makes sense. You know it's really bad when even Jon Stewart calls out the liberal agenda.

Census + White House + ACORN = Recipe for Success!

I really wanted to title this post WTF!?!?, but that expression has kind of lost it's meaning due to my continuous usage of the word regarding anything that comes out of the Obamanation.

So Der Fuhrer has been working to transfer control and reporting of the U.S. Census to the White House on the grounds of improving "efficiency." When I first heard that, I thought it reeked vaguely of a power grab. Now it just downright smells like a landfill. So who is responsible for collecting the data in the census? The government hires temporary workers to scour the countryside, diligently recording the vital information that will help determine congressional districts, representatives, and electoral votes. The astute reader would understandably raise the question, "Aren't our Dear Leader and his administration too busy miring our economy in a depression, revoking our individual rights, and destroying our Constitution to find qualified, intelligent individuals to take the census?" Never fear, ACORN is here!

That's right, folks! ACORN is going to help recruit workers to take the 2010 census!

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now signed on as a national partner with the U.S. Census Bureau in February 2009 to assist with the recruitment of the 1.4 million temporary workers needed to go door-to-door to count every person in the United States -- currently believed to be more than 306 million people.

A U.S. Census "sell sheet," an advertisement used to recruit national partners, says partnerships with groups like ACORN "play an important role in making the 2010 Census successful," including by "help[ing] recruit census workers."

Wow. Does anyone else find this positively terrifying? Does anyone remember the voter fraud questions during Obama's presidential campaign? ANYONE!?!? ACORN has been implicated in voter-fraud schemes in 15 states!!!

But maybe I'm just being irrational. After all, an ACORN representative has stated that "fears that the organization will unfairly influence the census are unfounded. It will be the Census Bureau that determines the role and scope of its 300 national partners. ACORN is committed to a fair and accurate count." Well, if ACORN says it is committed to fairness, that's good enough for me.


This is gerrymandering on steroids. *sigh* Does anyone have some duct tape? My head's about to explode.

The Scorpion and the Frog

Anyone remember this fable? How very appropriate...

A scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream and the scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on its back. The frog asks, "How do I know you won't sting me?" The scorpion says, "Because if I do, I will die too."

The frog is satisfied, and they set out, but in midstream, the scorpion stings the frog. The frog feels the onset of paralysis and starts to sink, knowing they both will drown, but has just enough time to gasp "Why?"

Replies the scorpion: "Its my nature..."

Want more evidence of hypocrisy? Click here...

Torture at Club Gitmo

Thanks to our friends at the Jawa Report for posting this hilarious video. I figured we could all use some levity since the Obamanation is dragging our country to Hell in a handbasket.

WTF, Part Deux!?!?

I have no words to express my anger/confusion/hatred over Der Fuehrer's policies and actions. Now this. Remember John Walker Lindh? For those of you with short-term memories (read: Democrats), he was our own home-grown terrorist who was actually CAUGHT in Afghanistan. Fighting with the Taliban. Against Americans. Call me crazy, but that sounds borderline TREASONOUS!!! Don't believe me? Article III of the Constitution (note to Democrats: That's the document with which you're wiping your asses) states, "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." Let's see...levying war against the US...Check. Adhering to her Enemies...Check. Aiding and abetting her enemies...Check. You can see the charges levied against him here.

Sounds fairly cut and dried, right? Not so fast, dear reader (all 1 of you out there). In swoops defence attorney Tony West. He throws around the notion of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, being too scared to quit, he never MEANT to fight the US, etc. Typical litigious BS. You've got to wonder about the moral aptitude of a guy who's conscience can allow him to defend someone like that. Yeah, I know his firm was contracted by the State Department. But it kind of makes you wonder, right? Want to know the best part? He's now O's nominee for the head of the Justice Department's Civil Division. You know, because there aren't enough people in this administration or in Congress with no moral compass.

So how did he get nominated? This might shed some light on the subject.

He also, conveniently enough, helped raise $65 million for Obama in California as a state finance co-chair during the campaign.

Not a bad down payment.

Indeed. Plutocracy, anyone?

Fascism, Segunda Parte

This follow-up to my previous post on fascism is a little overdue, but deal with it. :) I want to talk a little about traditional fascist policies and compare them to the Obamanation's.

As a rule, fascist movements promote social interventionism with the intent of manipulating society to promote the interests of the state. Social interventionism occurs when a government or organization interferes with social affairs. Social interventionist policies can include mandatory charitable contributions or welfare as a means to alleviate social and economic problems of people facing financial difficulties. It can also include provisions for, or nationalization of health care and reformation of education systems.

Some social interventionist policies have been labeled by critics as social authoritarianism due to views that the policies violate individual freedom or human rights.

Fascist movements speak of the need to create a "new man" and a "new civilization" as part of their intention to transform society to fit the ideology and agenda of the movement. (Compare Mussolini's promise of a “social revolution” for “remaking” the Italian people to Obama's promise to "remake America").

Fascist states pursue policies of societal indoctrination to their policies and movements through propaganda. This is deliberately spread through education and media by way of regulation of the production of education and media material. (I'm not even going to link the media one...there are too many good examples. See Michelle Malkin for some great articles).

Fascism staunchly opposes many capitalist tenets, such as minimal government intervention, support of free trade, free international movement of capital, and individualism.

Fascists offer "protection" to the petite bourgeoisie (lower middle-class) and to small businesses and the proletariat from the evil upper-class bourgeoisie and big business. Fascism blames capitalist liberal democracies for creating class conflict and social inequalities.

Unlike laissez-faire capitalist systems, fascist economies rely on significant government intervention such as regulations, objectives, and nationalization of certain enterprises. Fascist governments nationalize key industries, manage their currencies and make massive state investments. Fascist governments introduce price controls, wage controls and other types of economic interventionist measures.

The people who benefited from Mussolini's Italian fascist social policies were members of the middle and lower-middle classes, who filled jobs in the vastly expanding government workforce, which grew from about 500,000 to a million jobs in 1930. Health and welfare spending grew dramatically under Italian fascism, with welfare rising from 7% of the budget in 1930 to 20% in 1940.

Is this really what we want? Do we really want to increase our dependency on government for our very survival? This is where we are heading! Everything that is being enacted in Washington right now is being done to keep Americans under the boot-heel of big government. They WANT us to become so dependent that we will have no choice but to keep them in power!

I know it is easy to become enamored by talk of equality and social equity, but as John Adams said regarding Jean Jacques Rousseau's declaration that all men were designed to be equal in every way,

That all men are born to equal rights is true. Every being has a right to his own, as clear, as moral, as sacred, as any other being has...But to teach that all men are born with equal powers and faculties, to equal influence in society, to equal property and advantages through life, is as gross a fraud, as glaring an imposition on the credulity of the people, as ever was practiced by monks, by Druids, by Brahmins, by priests of the immortal Lama, or by the self-styled philosophers of the French Revolution.

WTF?!?!

Seriously? WTF?! Moderate Taliban? Isn't that like moderate Nazi, moderate Al Qaeda, or moderate terrorist in general? Aren't Talibs, by definition of belonging to the Taliban, RADICAL EXTREMISTS??? AM I THE ONLY ONE WHO DOESN'T GET THIS??? It's pathetic when the Taliban themselves make more sense than our fearless leader.

"This does not require any response or reaction for this is illogical," Qari Mohammad Yousuf, a purported spokesman for the insurgent group, told Reuters when asked if its top leader Mullah Mohammad Omar would make any comment about Obama's proposal.

"The Taliban are united, have one leader, one aim, one policy...I do not know why they are talking about moderate Taliban and what it means?"

"If it means those who are not fighting and are sitting in their homes, then talking to them is meaningless. This really is surprising the Taliban."

And then there's this. Chalk another great national security decision up to the D'Ohbama Administration while they "consider new strategies for prosecuting terrorists." Really? Because having them admit and glorify their participation isn't good enough, right?

Five men charged in the Sept. 11 attacks mock U.S. authorities and proclaim themselves "terrorists to the bone" in a war crimes court filing released Tuesday.

The five Guantanamo prisoners use the six-page document to try to justify the killing of nearly 3,000 people.

The five had previously said they wanted to plead guilty to the charges against them, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-proclaimed Sept. 11 mastermind, had expressed pride in the attacks.

The charges, which carry a potential death sentence, "are badges of honor, which we carry with pride," they write.

The charge of conspiracy is "laughable," they write, because the planning was intended to be secret.

*sigh* I need a hug.

Obama = The new Mohammad

I know that some thin-skinned Muslims got all testy when that Danish cartoonist published the 12 cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammad a couple of years ago. But only a radical, fringe group would be so enamored by an individual that they would prop him up on a pedestal in some twisted form of deification, positively prohibiting any critical or analytical discussion about his character or behavior, right? Right? So what do we call the Detroit city council?

Nowhere is Michigan's brain drain on greater display than in the Detroit City Council chambers.

My hopes for Detroit's future faded as I watched the tape of last Tuesday's council meeting, the one that considered the Cobo Center expansion deal.

It was a tragic circus, a festival of ignorance that confirmed the No. 1 obstacle to Detroit's progress is the bargain basement leaders that city voters elect. The black nationalism that is now the dominant ideology of the council was on proud display, both at the table and in the audience.

Speakers advocating for the deal were taunted by the crowd and cut short by Council President Monica Conyers, who presided over the hearing like an angry bulldog; whites were advised by the citizens to, "Go home."

Opponents were allowed to rant and ramble on uninterrupted about "those people" who want to steal Detroit's assets and profit from the city's labors.

A pitiful Teamster official who practically crawled to the table on his knees expressing profuse respect for this disrespectful body was battered by both the crowd and the council.

When he dared suggest that an improved Cobo Center would create more good-paying jobs for union workers, Conyers reminded him, "Those workers look like you; they don't look like me."

Desperate, he invoked President Barack Obama's message of unity and was angrily warned, "Don't you say his name here."

How about we call them RACISTS. Where's Al Sharpton when you really need him?

The most honest, ethical, and open Congress in history...

Really?
Cadillac DeVille: $774/mo (taxpayer money, btw). "It’s one of the bigger Cadillacs. I’ve got a desk in it. It’s like an airplane."
4 Upper Manhattan apartments: less than 50% of the regular cost.
Catching Charlie Rangel with this pants around his ankles: priceless.

Very Reaganesque, Mr. Obama

I wonder if the Messiah and the MSM are talking about the same Reagan...This is a little lengthy, but please take the time to watch it all. It is clear that Reagan considered his presidency more as a stewardship over the nation, whereas Obama considers it as an opportunity to consolidate power.

Bread and Circuses

Long ago, from the time that we [sold] our suffrages to no man, the populace hath rid itself of cares; for it, which formerly bestowed power, the rods of office, legions and all things, now refraineth itself, and wisheth with anxiety for only two things; bread and [circuses]. [Juvenal, Satire X]