"All signs point to a new flood of real estate foreclosures that no amount of government sandbagging will prevent. Sources of trouble:
• A record 7.58 percent of U.S. homeowners with mortgages were at least 30 days late on payments in August, says Equifax, up from 7.32 percent in July. Delinquencies are not only rising from month to month, but rising at a faster pace. More than 41 percent of subprime mortgages are delinquent. (That's quite an increase from 2007, when I took heart from the fact that only 10 percent of subprime mortgages were in default. But, well, at least the glass is still more than half full, right?)
• About 1.2 million loans out there are in limbo: The borrower is in serious default yet the bank has not started the foreclosure process. Another 1.5 million are in early stages of the foreclosure process but the bank hasn't yet taken possession of the home. Counting these and loans that are highly likely to end up in default, one analyst estimates three million to four million foreclosed homes will come on the market over the next few years. And don't believe the freshwater economists when they tell you there's no such thing as a free lunch: Some 217,000 Americans have not made a mortgage payment in one full calendar year, but their lenders have yet to begin the foreclosure process.
(snip)
Put it all together, and throw in mainstream media outlets that as recently as June were calling for mortgage haircuts specifically to allow people to keep borrowing against their houses, and you've got the mother of all perfect storms mixed with the crack cocaine of third rails on steroids. The foreclosure wave may seem all tired and 2008, but it's hotter than ever."
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Where's the milk? The question of animal rights, revisited
"If animals could talk, a few cows in Burlington County might ask state legislators to hurry up and outlaw bestiality.
During a bizarre hearing there yesterday, a Superior Court judge dismissed animal-cruelty charges against a Moorestown police officer accused of sticking his penis into the mouths of five calves in rural Southampton in 2006, claiming a grand jury couldn't infer whether the cows had been "tormented" or "puzzled" by the situation or even irritated that they'd been duped out of a meal.
"If the cow had the cognitive ability to form thought and speak, would it say, 'Where's the milk? I'm not getting any milk,' " Judge James J. Morley asked.
Children, Morley said, seemed "comforted" when given pacifiers, but there's no way to know what bovine minds thought of Robert Melia Jr. substituting his member for a cow's teat.
"They [children] enjoy the act of suckling," the judge said. "Cows may be of a different disposition."
Burlington County Assistant County Prosecutor Kevin Morgan was certainly irritated by the ruling, claiming the grand jury didn't see the videos of the alleged incident, including one in which one hungry calf allegedly head-butts Melia in the stomach.
"I think any reasonable juror could infer that a man's penis in the mouth of a calf is torment," Morgan argued. "It's a crime against nature."
During a bizarre hearing there yesterday, a Superior Court judge dismissed animal-cruelty charges against a Moorestown police officer accused of sticking his penis into the mouths of five calves in rural Southampton in 2006, claiming a grand jury couldn't infer whether the cows had been "tormented" or "puzzled" by the situation or even irritated that they'd been duped out of a meal.
"If the cow had the cognitive ability to form thought and speak, would it say, 'Where's the milk? I'm not getting any milk,' " Judge James J. Morley asked.
Children, Morley said, seemed "comforted" when given pacifiers, but there's no way to know what bovine minds thought of Robert Melia Jr. substituting his member for a cow's teat.
"They [children] enjoy the act of suckling," the judge said. "Cows may be of a different disposition."
Burlington County Assistant County Prosecutor Kevin Morgan was certainly irritated by the ruling, claiming the grand jury didn't see the videos of the alleged incident, including one in which one hungry calf allegedly head-butts Melia in the stomach.
"I think any reasonable juror could infer that a man's penis in the mouth of a calf is torment," Morgan argued. "It's a crime against nature."
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
A call for a diagnosis of Sen. Robert Byrd, 91 and in poor health, by Dr. Death - Ezekiel Emanuel
"Senator Byrd's been in very poor health the past year and has only been able to make the Senate floor a few times the past session. He's back in the hospital now, and at 91 is surely having a tough time fighting old age maladies.
I can't help but wonder what the current health care proposals of the Dems would do if applied to Sen. Byrd's health problems the past few years. If he were an ordinary citizen, would his care be rationed or declared unnecessary because of age or life expectancy? What would the death panels say? At 91, how many "quality" years would they forecast he has left? Spend the money or thumbs down? It's a legitimate question."
I can't help but wonder what the current health care proposals of the Dems would do if applied to Sen. Byrd's health problems the past few years. If he were an ordinary citizen, would his care be rationed or declared unnecessary because of age or life expectancy? What would the death panels say? At 91, how many "quality" years would they forecast he has left? Spend the money or thumbs down? It's a legitimate question."
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Playing defense against feds, dozens of states pursue sovereignty
"There is a growing movement on the part of states to override federal laws and regulations under the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states. So far, the battle lines have been drawn at Real ID, medical marijuana and firearms, but federally mandated health insurance may not be far behind.
State sovereignty resolutions were introduced in 37 states this year; seven passed. Although the resolutions are not legally binding, Tenth Amendment Center founder Michael Boldin says they "serve notice" that states will no longer automatically enforce federal mandates in areas they believe the central government has no constitutional authority.
Montana's first-in-the-nation law reasserting state authority over the regulation of firearms manufactured and sold within state boundaries was soon followed by a similar law in Tennessee. Officials from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives have already sent letters to gun dealers and federal permit holders in both states, telling them to ignore the state law. A court battle is next.
Nearly 20 other states have similar legislation in the works, including directives to their governors to order National Guard troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. Next year, Arizona will have a state constitutional amendment on the ballot that allows state citizens to opt out of any national health care program."
State sovereignty resolutions were introduced in 37 states this year; seven passed. Although the resolutions are not legally binding, Tenth Amendment Center founder Michael Boldin says they "serve notice" that states will no longer automatically enforce federal mandates in areas they believe the central government has no constitutional authority.
Montana's first-in-the-nation law reasserting state authority over the regulation of firearms manufactured and sold within state boundaries was soon followed by a similar law in Tennessee. Officials from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives have already sent letters to gun dealers and federal permit holders in both states, telling them to ignore the state law. A court battle is next.
Nearly 20 other states have similar legislation in the works, including directives to their governors to order National Guard troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. Next year, Arizona will have a state constitutional amendment on the ballot that allows state citizens to opt out of any national health care program."
Did you unwittingly give to Obama's campaign through bailouts of defrauded banks
Are you one of those who think President Obama poses a threat to the future of the United States?
Are you one of those who attended Tea Party protests against reckless government spending?
Here's more bad news: you may have unwittingly financed Obama's presidential campaign.
News broke Tuesday morning that Hassan Nemazee had been indicted for defrauding Bank of America, Citibank and HSBC of at least $290 million. He is accused of falsifying documents and signatures to purportedly show he had hundreds of millions worth of collateral.
The U.S. Attorney in Manhattan and the FBI said he used the proceeds of the loans to make donations to the election campaigns of federal, state and local candidates, donations to political action committees and charities.
Nemazee, 59, typically donates more than $100,000 annually to Democratic political candidates. He is listed as one of the top "bundlers" of contributions to Obama's 2008 presidential campaign, according to OpenSecrets.org, a website run by the Center for Responsive Politics research group.
This is where you come in. The U.S. government bailed out Bank of America to the tune of $15 billion, and Citibank to the tune of $25 billion. HSBC also received a bailout, but the amount couldnot be immediately determined.
"For more than 10 years, Hassan Nemazee projected the illusion of wealth, stealing more than $290 million so that he could lead a lavish lifestyle and play the part of heavyweight political fundraiser," U. S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan said in a statement.
Nemazee was arrested at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey on August 23 as he was checking in for a flight to Italy, according to court papers. He was released on bail.
Are you one of those who attended Tea Party protests against reckless government spending?
Here's more bad news: you may have unwittingly financed Obama's presidential campaign.
News broke Tuesday morning that Hassan Nemazee had been indicted for defrauding Bank of America, Citibank and HSBC of at least $290 million. He is accused of falsifying documents and signatures to purportedly show he had hundreds of millions worth of collateral.
The U.S. Attorney in Manhattan and the FBI said he used the proceeds of the loans to make donations to the election campaigns of federal, state and local candidates, donations to political action committees and charities.
Nemazee, 59, typically donates more than $100,000 annually to Democratic political candidates. He is listed as one of the top "bundlers" of contributions to Obama's 2008 presidential campaign, according to OpenSecrets.org, a website run by the Center for Responsive Politics research group.
This is where you come in. The U.S. government bailed out Bank of America to the tune of $15 billion, and Citibank to the tune of $25 billion. HSBC also received a bailout, but the amount couldnot be immediately determined.
"For more than 10 years, Hassan Nemazee projected the illusion of wealth, stealing more than $290 million so that he could lead a lavish lifestyle and play the part of heavyweight political fundraiser," U. S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan said in a statement.
Nemazee was arrested at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey on August 23 as he was checking in for a flight to Italy, according to court papers. He was released on bail.
Big Dem contributor indicted in $290 million fraud
Hassan Nemazee, a fund-raiser for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and other Democrats, has been indicted for defrauding Bank of America, HSBC and Citigroup Inc out of more than $290 million in loan proceeds, U.S. prosecutors said on Monday.
The announcement follows last month's indictment of Nemazee, head of a private equity firm and an Iranian American Political Action Committee board member, on one count of defrauding Citigroup's Citibank.
The new indictment adds allegations that he defrauded two other banks, Bank of America and HSBC Bank USA, in a similar fashion by falsifying documents and signatures to purportedly show he had hundreds of millions worth of collateral.
The office of the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan and the FBI said he used the proceeds of his scheme to make donations to election campaigns of federal, state and local candidates, donations to political action committees and charities.
The announcement follows last month's indictment of Nemazee, head of a private equity firm and an Iranian American Political Action Committee board member, on one count of defrauding Citigroup's Citibank.
The new indictment adds allegations that he defrauded two other banks, Bank of America and HSBC Bank USA, in a similar fashion by falsifying documents and signatures to purportedly show he had hundreds of millions worth of collateral.
The office of the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan and the FBI said he used the proceeds of his scheme to make donations to election campaigns of federal, state and local candidates, donations to political action committees and charities.
Obama's energy secretary insults Americans
When it comes to greenhouse-gas emissions, Energy Secretary Steven Chu sees Americans as unruly teenagers and the Administration as the parent that will have to teach them a few lessons.
Speaking on the sidelines of a smart grid conference in Washington, Dr. Chu said he didn’t think average folks had the know-how or will to to change their behavior enough to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
“The American public…just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act,” Dr. Chu said. “The American public has to really understand in their core how important this issue is.” (In that case, the Energy Department has a few renegade teens of its own.)
(snip)
An update: Energy Department spokesman Dan Leistikow added: “Secretary Chu was not comparing the public to teenagers. He was saying that we need to educate teenagers about ways to save energy. He also recognized the need to educate the broader public about how important clean energy industries are to our competitive position in the global economy. He believes public officials do have an obligation to make their case to the American people on major legislation, and that’s what he’s doing.”
Speaking on the sidelines of a smart grid conference in Washington, Dr. Chu said he didn’t think average folks had the know-how or will to to change their behavior enough to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
“The American public…just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act,” Dr. Chu said. “The American public has to really understand in their core how important this issue is.” (In that case, the Energy Department has a few renegade teens of its own.)
(snip)
An update: Energy Department spokesman Dan Leistikow added: “Secretary Chu was not comparing the public to teenagers. He was saying that we need to educate teenagers about ways to save energy. He also recognized the need to educate the broader public about how important clean energy industries are to our competitive position in the global economy. He believes public officials do have an obligation to make their case to the American people on major legislation, and that’s what he’s doing.”
Monday, September 21, 2009
Killing granny: the self-styled elite reach the abyss
"A virulent moral blindness has seized hold of a substantial slice of America's educated elite. Convinced they know better, they argue for a shallow, illogical, and horrifying vision of people as disposable.
I was wrong last week when I declared that Newsweek's cover showing a baby next to a headline declaring that we're all born racist was evidence that the mainstream media had hit bottom and destroyed itself. It was intellectual arrogance on my part that led me to underestimate the determination of Newsweek's editors to find new deeper bottoms to hit.
This week's Newsweek cover exceeds the sheer breathtaking ugliness of last week's cover: "The Case for Killing Granny." Alongside a photo of an electrical plug. The cover story is penned by Evan Thomas, (Andover, Harvard, Virginia Law), currently teaching at Princeton, alongside Peter Singer, who believes newborn infants can be killed because they lack "rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness" and thus don't qualify for personhood."
I was wrong last week when I declared that Newsweek's cover showing a baby next to a headline declaring that we're all born racist was evidence that the mainstream media had hit bottom and destroyed itself. It was intellectual arrogance on my part that led me to underestimate the determination of Newsweek's editors to find new deeper bottoms to hit.
This week's Newsweek cover exceeds the sheer breathtaking ugliness of last week's cover: "The Case for Killing Granny." Alongside a photo of an electrical plug. The cover story is penned by Evan Thomas, (Andover, Harvard, Virginia Law), currently teaching at Princeton, alongside Peter Singer, who believes newborn infants can be killed because they lack "rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness" and thus don't qualify for personhood."
Announcing the Generational Theft Calculator
Just starting your career?
The bad news is that you will pay $150,000 during your working life just to pay off that ugly stimulus bill, a thinly disguised payoff to Democrat interest groups.
This is one of the first findings of the Generational Theft Calculator devised for Pajamas TV. For a look, click on the headline link of this blog post.
The bad news is that you will pay $150,000 during your working life just to pay off that ugly stimulus bill, a thinly disguised payoff to Democrat interest groups.
This is one of the first findings of the Generational Theft Calculator devised for Pajamas TV. For a look, click on the headline link of this blog post.
Just in time: A 12-step program for racists
1. We are powerless over racism. We are white. It's in our DNA, and it's on display from infancy. Unpublished scientific studies show that when presented with a white ball and a black ball, the white infant will choose the white ball 99% of the time. In contrast, the black infant will choose the black ball exactly 50% of the time. To the black infant no race is preferable over another. It's in his DNA. The only known exception is the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. When presented with a black ball and a white ball the infant Jeremiah chose the black ball 100% of the time. Indeed, when he was strong enough, he picked up the black ball with both hands and used it to smash the white ball into pieces.
Michelle Malkin on Citibank-ACORN mortgage scam
"GOP California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger now wants an investigation. But neither the Terminator nor any other California public official raised a peep when the very same San Diego ACORN office publicly announced a partnership with Citibank to secure home loans for illegal aliens.
In 2005, Citibank and ACORN Housing Corporation — which received tens of millions of tax dollars under the Bush administration alone — began recruiting Mexican illegal aliens for a lucrative program offering loans with below-market interest rates, down-payment assistance and no mortgage insurance requirements. Instead of the Social Security numbers required of law-abiding citizens, the program allows illegal alien applicants to supply loosely monitored tax identification numbers issued by the IRS.
The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that "undocumented residents" comprise a vast market representing a potential sum of "$44 billion in mortgages." Citibank enlarged its portfolio of subprime and other risky loans. ACORN enlarged its membership rolls. The program now operates in Miami; New York City; Jersey City, N.J.; Baltimore; Washington, D.C.; Chicago; Bridgeport, Conn.; and at all of ACORN Housing's 12 California offices.
San Diego ACORN officials advised illegal alien recruits that their bank partners would take applicants who had little or no credit, or even "nontraditional records of credit, such as utility payments and documentation of private loan payments."
The risk the banks bear is the price they pay to keep ACORN protesters and Hispanic lobbyists from the National Council of La Raza screaming about "predatory lending" off their backs. These professional grievance-mongers have turned the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act — which forced lenders to sacrifice underwriting standards for "diversity" — into lucrative "business" opportunities. Or rather, politically correct blackmail."
In 2005, Citibank and ACORN Housing Corporation — which received tens of millions of tax dollars under the Bush administration alone — began recruiting Mexican illegal aliens for a lucrative program offering loans with below-market interest rates, down-payment assistance and no mortgage insurance requirements. Instead of the Social Security numbers required of law-abiding citizens, the program allows illegal alien applicants to supply loosely monitored tax identification numbers issued by the IRS.
The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that "undocumented residents" comprise a vast market representing a potential sum of "$44 billion in mortgages." Citibank enlarged its portfolio of subprime and other risky loans. ACORN enlarged its membership rolls. The program now operates in Miami; New York City; Jersey City, N.J.; Baltimore; Washington, D.C.; Chicago; Bridgeport, Conn.; and at all of ACORN Housing's 12 California offices.
San Diego ACORN officials advised illegal alien recruits that their bank partners would take applicants who had little or no credit, or even "nontraditional records of credit, such as utility payments and documentation of private loan payments."
The risk the banks bear is the price they pay to keep ACORN protesters and Hispanic lobbyists from the National Council of La Raza screaming about "predatory lending" off their backs. These professional grievance-mongers have turned the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act — which forced lenders to sacrifice underwriting standards for "diversity" — into lucrative "business" opportunities. Or rather, politically correct blackmail."
Obamacare is a tax disguised as insurance reform
"This bill is designed to force healthy people who don't have health insurance -- and may neither need nor want it -- to buy it anyway, in order to raise the money to subsidize those who do need it.
Obama has pledged only to increase taxes on the rich. But his program essentially taxes the core of the middle class (those making $30,000 to $80,000). It will make them overpay in order to pick up the slack for others who need the extra coverage.
In other words, health-care "reform" is a health-care tax dressed up as a program to cover the uninsured.
No matter how Democrats get the money to cover those who need insurance, they offend supporters that they need to pass the bill: "
Obama has pledged only to increase taxes on the rich. But his program essentially taxes the core of the middle class (those making $30,000 to $80,000). It will make them overpay in order to pick up the slack for others who need the extra coverage.
In other words, health-care "reform" is a health-care tax dressed up as a program to cover the uninsured.
No matter how Democrats get the money to cover those who need insurance, they offend supporters that they need to pass the bill: "
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Frank Luntz: Barack Obama, the new face of Washington, is disliked because of that fact
"As the former leader of the free world, Jimmy Carter deserves our respect. As a political analyst - attributing racism to the anger at President Obama - he is irresponsibly inaccurate.
Obama's popularity hasn't tumbled because he's black. It's tumbled because he has come to represent Washington instead of those who sent him there.
I know this because of a 6,400-person interview survey I conducted for my new book "What Americans Really Want ... Really." I sat down to write this book, conduct the poll and insisted that the second "really" be included in the title because I was fed up with opinion elites who ascribe opinions to Americans that simply do not exist.
The latest flareup over supposed racism is only the most recent example. America certainly isn't perfect, but as a society, we are intolerant of intolerance, and we'll immediately demonize anyone, anywhere who tries to play the race card. Just ask Bill Clinton.
The real reason why 72% of the people I interviewed say that they're "mad as hell and they're not going to take it anymore" has nothing to do with racism. No, their rage is about a lack of accountability, a lack of respect, and a lack of progress in the nation's capital."
Obama's popularity hasn't tumbled because he's black. It's tumbled because he has come to represent Washington instead of those who sent him there.
I know this because of a 6,400-person interview survey I conducted for my new book "What Americans Really Want ... Really." I sat down to write this book, conduct the poll and insisted that the second "really" be included in the title because I was fed up with opinion elites who ascribe opinions to Americans that simply do not exist.
The latest flareup over supposed racism is only the most recent example. America certainly isn't perfect, but as a society, we are intolerant of intolerance, and we'll immediately demonize anyone, anywhere who tries to play the race card. Just ask Bill Clinton.
The real reason why 72% of the people I interviewed say that they're "mad as hell and they're not going to take it anymore" has nothing to do with racism. No, their rage is about a lack of accountability, a lack of respect, and a lack of progress in the nation's capital."
If Jimmy Carter is the "national hemmorrhoid," what malfunction does Barack Obama represent?
"Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney reflects conservatives' growing confidence when he taunts Democrats, saying "I'll bet you never dreamed you'd look back at Jimmy Carter as the good old days."
Republicans at the Values Voter Summit Saturday talked of a growing political rebellion in the country, even as they acknowledged Democrats currently have the upper hand.
Romney recalled the euphoria among Democrats at the time President Barack Obama was elected.
'A year ago, there were quite a few people who were ready to write off this movement. They were enthralled by Barack Obama's promise of near-Biblical transformations,' Romney said in comments prepared for Saturday's meeting. 'Well, he can still spin a speech, but he can't spin his record.'"
My take: I think ridicule should play a prominent role in the effort to take down Barack Obama and the Democrats. After all, when have we seen such madcap power grabbing? Such outlandish overreaching,? Such relentless lying? Such buffoons pretending to restore order to a country that actually was going pretty well before dim-witted polticians like themselves screwed things up.
Rush Limbaugh showed the way with his takedown of Jimmy Carter, referring to the hapless former president as "the national hemmorrhoid," an insult befitting Carter's multi-layered incompetence.
There have been a few stabs at mockery of Obama - the "half-black prince" was one I liked - but nothing has stuck so far.
This is a great and noble cause. It deserves memorable mockery. Not to mention that mockery has a long and storied history as a tactic in American politics. Let the arrows fly.
Republicans at the Values Voter Summit Saturday talked of a growing political rebellion in the country, even as they acknowledged Democrats currently have the upper hand.
Romney recalled the euphoria among Democrats at the time President Barack Obama was elected.
'A year ago, there were quite a few people who were ready to write off this movement. They were enthralled by Barack Obama's promise of near-Biblical transformations,' Romney said in comments prepared for Saturday's meeting. 'Well, he can still spin a speech, but he can't spin his record.'"
My take: I think ridicule should play a prominent role in the effort to take down Barack Obama and the Democrats. After all, when have we seen such madcap power grabbing? Such outlandish overreaching,? Such relentless lying? Such buffoons pretending to restore order to a country that actually was going pretty well before dim-witted polticians like themselves screwed things up.
Rush Limbaugh showed the way with his takedown of Jimmy Carter, referring to the hapless former president as "the national hemmorrhoid," an insult befitting Carter's multi-layered incompetence.
There have been a few stabs at mockery of Obama - the "half-black prince" was one I liked - but nothing has stuck so far.
This is a great and noble cause. It deserves memorable mockery. Not to mention that mockery has a long and storied history as a tactic in American politics. Let the arrows fly.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Education - a bottomless pit for taxpayers
From American Thinker
"Every major education law passed since the 1960s has borne Kennedy's imprint, from Head Start to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. He has proven himself, time and again, to be a fighter for children and educators."
Reg Weaver, the immediate past President of the National Education Association President, as reported by Air America in listing the accomplishments of Senator Ted Kennedy.
"Every major education law passed since the 1960s has borne Kennedy's imprint, from Head Start to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. He has proven himself, time and again, to be a fighter for children and educators."
Reg Weaver, the immediate past President of the National Education Association President, as reported by Air America in listing the accomplishments of Senator Ted Kennedy.
Where's the love for the ACORN stingers?
"So when two scrappy DC journalists bring down a President, it’s turned into “All the President’s Men,” winning accolades and Oscars. When an unemployed single mother of three takes the fight to an energy giant, it becomes a blockbuster vehicle for Julia Robert’s cleavage. And when a former Vice President exposes man’s inhumanity toward Mother Earth – “An Inconvenient Truth” crowns him the most majestic whistle blower ever.
But when two amateur journalists (in their early twenties, poorly dressed as sex workers, with under two grand in their budget) casually take down a sleazy behomoth that leeches off American taxpayers, you’d think Hollywood and the media would be all over this. I mean, what Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe did to Acorn – leading to the House approving to cut off all their funding – is the whistle blowing film to end ALL whistle blowing films. These two kids did what Michael Moore could never come close to accomplishing: uncovering lurid incompetence, affecting policy, and saving Americans millions of dollars.
So where is Clooney? Soderberg? Moore? Shouldn’t Megan Fox be playing Hannah – with Daniel Radcliffe as O’Keefe? When Red Eye makes an appearance, will I be played by Verne Troyer?"
But when two amateur journalists (in their early twenties, poorly dressed as sex workers, with under two grand in their budget) casually take down a sleazy behomoth that leeches off American taxpayers, you’d think Hollywood and the media would be all over this. I mean, what Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe did to Acorn – leading to the House approving to cut off all their funding – is the whistle blowing film to end ALL whistle blowing films. These two kids did what Michael Moore could never come close to accomplishing: uncovering lurid incompetence, affecting policy, and saving Americans millions of dollars.
So where is Clooney? Soderberg? Moore? Shouldn’t Megan Fox be playing Hannah – with Daniel Radcliffe as O’Keefe? When Red Eye makes an appearance, will I be played by Verne Troyer?"
Friday, September 18, 2009
ACORN has received $12.5 million tax dollars
After checking a few federal spending reports, economist Chris Edwards has revealed exactly how much money ACORN received over the past few years from taxpayers.
According to the database, taxpayers supported ACORN to the tune of more than $12.5 million from 2003 to 2007.
Edwards says cutting off ACORN is only the beginning:
ACORN’s share of overall federal subsidies is tiny, but as thousands of similar organizations have become hooked on 1,800 different federal subsidy programs, a powerful lobbying force has been created that propels the $3.6 trillion spending juggernaut. ACORN’s own website touts its lobbying success in helping to pass various big government programs. So cutting off ACORN is a start, but just a small start at the daunting task of cutting back the giant federal spending empire.
According to the database, taxpayers supported ACORN to the tune of more than $12.5 million from 2003 to 2007.
Edwards says cutting off ACORN is only the beginning:
ACORN’s share of overall federal subsidies is tiny, but as thousands of similar organizations have become hooked on 1,800 different federal subsidy programs, a powerful lobbying force has been created that propels the $3.6 trillion spending juggernaut. ACORN’s own website touts its lobbying success in helping to pass various big government programs. So cutting off ACORN is a start, but just a small start at the daunting task of cutting back the giant federal spending empire.
ACORN helped illegals get billions in mortgages
"In 2005, Citibank and ACORN Housing Corporation -- which received tens of millions of tax dollars under the Bush administration alone -- began recruiting Mexican illegal aliens for a lucrative program offering loans with below-market interest rates, down-payment assistance and no mortgage insurance requirements. Instead of the Social Security numbers required of law-abiding citizens, the program allows illegal alien applicants to supply loosely monitored tax identification numbers issued by the IRS.
The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that "undocumented residents" comprise a vast market representing a potential sum of "$44 billion in mortgages." Citibank enlarged its portfolio of subprime and other risky loans. ACORN enlarged its membership rolls. The program now operates in Miami; New York City; Jersey City, N.J.; Baltimore; Washington, D.C.; Chicago; Bridgeport, Conn.; and at all of ACORN Housing's 12 California offices. San Diego ACORN officials advised illegal alien recruits that their bank partners would take applicants who had little or no credit, or even "nontraditional records of credit, such as utility payments and documentation of private loan payments."
The risk the banks bear is the price they pay to keep ACORN protesters and Hispanic lobbyists from the National Council of La Raza screaming about "predatory lending" off their backs. These professional grievance-mongers have turned the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act -- which forced lenders to sacrifice underwriting standards for "diversity" -- into lucrative "business" opportunities. Or rather, politically correct blackmail. "
The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that "undocumented residents" comprise a vast market representing a potential sum of "$44 billion in mortgages." Citibank enlarged its portfolio of subprime and other risky loans. ACORN enlarged its membership rolls. The program now operates in Miami; New York City; Jersey City, N.J.; Baltimore; Washington, D.C.; Chicago; Bridgeport, Conn.; and at all of ACORN Housing's 12 California offices. San Diego ACORN officials advised illegal alien recruits that their bank partners would take applicants who had little or no credit, or even "nontraditional records of credit, such as utility payments and documentation of private loan payments."
The risk the banks bear is the price they pay to keep ACORN protesters and Hispanic lobbyists from the National Council of La Raza screaming about "predatory lending" off their backs. These professional grievance-mongers have turned the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act -- which forced lenders to sacrifice underwriting standards for "diversity" -- into lucrative "business" opportunities. Or rather, politically correct blackmail. "
Good for us: John Stossel moves from ABC to Fox
"It's time for a change. Next month, I leave ABC News to start a weekly one-hour prime time show with Fox News.
When I announced that on my blog, plenty of viewers said they were happy to have me leave.
"Goodbye. You suck. You have found a much better home for your garbage reporting and backwards politics."
"Congratulations on the move to the network intellectually suited to your quasi-libertarian corporate-apologist hackery!"
Oh well, you can't please everyone. I don't expect that my libertarian beliefs will please everyone at Fox, either."
When I announced that on my blog, plenty of viewers said they were happy to have me leave.
"Goodbye. You suck. You have found a much better home for your garbage reporting and backwards politics."
"Congratulations on the move to the network intellectually suited to your quasi-libertarian corporate-apologist hackery!"
Oh well, you can't please everyone. I don't expect that my libertarian beliefs will please everyone at Fox, either."
Economy will recover despite government efforts
"Recessions don't peter out in 10 days, of course. But they do eventually end, with or without central bankers' help. According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the US went through 32 recessions between 1854 and 2001, the average duration of which was about 17 months - or a few months shorter than the current recession, so far.
"Even a severe downturn can be followed by rapid recovery without aggressive central bank intervention. In the 1921 recession, wholesale prices, industrial production, and manufacturing employment all fell by 30 percent or more within a year. Yet by early 1922, the US economy had recovered fully from its mid-1921 low. What's more, it did so with no help from the Fed, which was determined to let the recession take its course, so as to hasten the restoration of the prewar gold standard.
Bernanke, in contrast, has been praised for taking bold, innovative measures to tame a supposedly unprecedented economic collapse. But his innovations included errors of both commission and omission that almost certainly deepened the recent downturn, making it last that much longer."
My take: As I have argued earlier, politicians rush to take ameliorative action early in recessions not to end the recessions but to position themselves to take credit for ending the recessions. They hurry because they don't know when the recessions will end through the normal workings of a free economy. Just as they are loathe to waste an economic calamity, so are they loathe to waste the return of better times.
The only departure from the pattern by the Obama administration lay in its resort to fascist policies, such as the takeover of General Motors and Chrysler and its unparalleled spending. If the past is prologue, the administration's self-congratulation will be unusually loud and especially offensive.
Chances are that economic historians will find that the frantic anti-recession efforts worsened the recession, as President Franklin Roosevelt's policies did in the early 1930s.
Markets work, but liberal politicians don't want to acknowledge that fact.
"Even a severe downturn can be followed by rapid recovery without aggressive central bank intervention. In the 1921 recession, wholesale prices, industrial production, and manufacturing employment all fell by 30 percent or more within a year. Yet by early 1922, the US economy had recovered fully from its mid-1921 low. What's more, it did so with no help from the Fed, which was determined to let the recession take its course, so as to hasten the restoration of the prewar gold standard.
Bernanke, in contrast, has been praised for taking bold, innovative measures to tame a supposedly unprecedented economic collapse. But his innovations included errors of both commission and omission that almost certainly deepened the recent downturn, making it last that much longer."
My take: As I have argued earlier, politicians rush to take ameliorative action early in recessions not to end the recessions but to position themselves to take credit for ending the recessions. They hurry because they don't know when the recessions will end through the normal workings of a free economy. Just as they are loathe to waste an economic calamity, so are they loathe to waste the return of better times.
The only departure from the pattern by the Obama administration lay in its resort to fascist policies, such as the takeover of General Motors and Chrysler and its unparalleled spending. If the past is prologue, the administration's self-congratulation will be unusually loud and especially offensive.
Chances are that economic historians will find that the frantic anti-recession efforts worsened the recession, as President Franklin Roosevelt's policies did in the early 1930s.
Markets work, but liberal politicians don't want to acknowledge that fact.
National Post: Death of markets exaggerated
While all around us are hailing the death of free markets and the end of capitalism, nobody seems to have noticed how ugly capitalists are now rekindling the global economy. For people who don't know how markets work and how self-interest drives business activity, two good examples of capitalist-like greed in action include the mini-boom in the North American auto market and the emerging bubblet in Canadian housing. More broadly, the U. S. financial sector, responding to market signals, is also back in the business of cranking out fancy investment instruments and paying bonuses to people who do. Business investment is picking up. Stock prices are rising, and gold is setting price records.
Capitalism is dead, eh? Well, long live capitalism--or at least as much capitalism as we are allowed to enjoy. It may be news to many, but the very market forces that allegedly triggered the financial crisis are now triggering recovery. As French President Nicolas Sarkozy ( "the markets are mad") and other leaders of the G20 gear up for their market-bashing Pittsburgh Summit next week, they do so surrounded by millions of people who are now chasing the new market signals offered up by changing market conditions and despite new government policy. Rather than bash free markets, the G20 should hold a one-minute prayer to give thanks that markets still work and that people respond in their own self-interested way to whatever economic signals they get.
Capitalism is dead, eh? Well, long live capitalism--or at least as much capitalism as we are allowed to enjoy. It may be news to many, but the very market forces that allegedly triggered the financial crisis are now triggering recovery. As French President Nicolas Sarkozy ( "the markets are mad") and other leaders of the G20 gear up for their market-bashing Pittsburgh Summit next week, they do so surrounded by millions of people who are now chasing the new market signals offered up by changing market conditions and despite new government policy. Rather than bash free markets, the G20 should hold a one-minute prayer to give thanks that markets still work and that people respond in their own self-interested way to whatever economic signals they get.
Krauthammer: Lies are for the unslick; Obama misleads and lmisdirects
"Obama doesn't lie. He merely elides, gliding from one dubious assertion to another. This has been the story throughout his whole health care crusade. Its original premise was that our current financial crisis was rooted in neglect of three things -- energy, education and health care. That transparent attempt to exploit Emanuel's Law -- a crisis is a terrible thing to waste -- failed for health care because no one is stupid enough to believe that the 2008 financial collapse was caused by a lack of universal health care.
So on to the next gambit: selling health care reform as a cure for the deficit. When that was exploded by the Congressional Budget Office's demonstration of staggering Obamacare deficits, Obama tried a new tack: selling his plan as revenue-neutral insurance reform -- until the revenue neutrality is exposed as phony future cuts and chimerical waste and fraud.
Obama doesn't lie. He implies, he misdirects, he misleads -- so fluidly and incessantly that he risks transmuting eloquence into mere slickness."
So on to the next gambit: selling health care reform as a cure for the deficit. When that was exploded by the Congressional Budget Office's demonstration of staggering Obamacare deficits, Obama tried a new tack: selling his plan as revenue-neutral insurance reform -- until the revenue neutrality is exposed as phony future cuts and chimerical waste and fraud.
Obama doesn't lie. He implies, he misdirects, he misleads -- so fluidly and incessantly that he risks transmuting eloquence into mere slickness."
Thursday, September 17, 2009
H.L Mencken's time has come - again
From National' Review's Corner
Feast of Gloom [John Derbyshire]
Paleocons, malcontents, and curmudgeons please note: the annual meeting of the H. L. Mencken Club on Halloween weekend is shaping up to be a magnificent feast of gloom, despair, cynicism, and rancor! Why would you not want to attend? I shall of course be giving an address, in the schedule there somewhere between the burning in effigy of Irving Kristol and the handing-out of suicide capsules
In our present straits … it is Mencken's loathing and contempt for our political classes that should most appeal. Mencken loved liberty and perceived that any politician more active than Coolidge — which is to say, wellnigh any politician at all — seeks to take liberty away from us, either in pursuit of some mad ideology, or, more often, just from the desire to be seen always busy at something. Public adoration of wonder-worker politicians like FDR excited Mencken's fiercest diatribes. He called FDR "the Führer," "the greatest president since Hoover," etc.
Feast of Gloom [John Derbyshire]
Paleocons, malcontents, and curmudgeons please note: the annual meeting of the H. L. Mencken Club on Halloween weekend is shaping up to be a magnificent feast of gloom, despair, cynicism, and rancor! Why would you not want to attend? I shall of course be giving an address, in the schedule there somewhere between the burning in effigy of Irving Kristol and the handing-out of suicide capsules
In our present straits … it is Mencken's loathing and contempt for our political classes that should most appeal. Mencken loved liberty and perceived that any politician more active than Coolidge — which is to say, wellnigh any politician at all — seeks to take liberty away from us, either in pursuit of some mad ideology, or, more often, just from the desire to be seen always busy at something. Public adoration of wonder-worker politicians like FDR excited Mencken's fiercest diatribes. He called FDR "the Führer," "the greatest president since Hoover," etc.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Monday, September 14, 2009
Obamacare would invite new tides of illegal immigration
From Vdare.com
"Like virtually every issue that faces the nation, our healthcare problem is greatly exacerbated by mass immigration—both legal and illegal. A total of 43% of non-citizens lack health insurance, compared to just 12.7% of native born Americans. These uninsured immigrants impose huge strains on our healthcare system that helped create the crisis we currently face.
Plenty of analysts and commentators have exposed how illegal aliens will receive healthcare under Obamacare. They point out that while the bill claims to prohibit illegal aliens from receiving benefits, the Democrats repeatedly blocked amendments that would screen for the illegals. Steve Camarota of the non-partisan Center for Immigration Studies recently estimated that 6.6 million illegal aliens will be eligible for public healthcare."
(snip)
"But the obvious intent, as well as the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" clause, is ignored by federal policy that gives children of illegal aliens born in the United States automatic citizenship.
What does this have to do with the healthcare debate? Under the plan right now, only one family member needs to be eligible for government healthcare, then the whole family can get free healthcare.
The Congressional Research Service acknowledged,
"There could be instances where some family members would meet the definition of an eligible individual for purposes of the credit, while other family members would not… H.R. 3200 does not expressly address how such a situation would be treated. Therefore, it appears that the Health Choices Commissioner would be responsible for determining how the credits would be administered in the case of mixed-status families."
My take: As things stand, Obamacare would invite new tides of illegal immigration, with health care as the lure. Say, a Mexican wife is eight months pregnant. With her husband, she enters the United States illegally, hides out for a month, then gives birth in a hospital. The child is a citizen by birthright. Because the child is a citizen, the parents also are eligible for Obamacare.
"Like virtually every issue that faces the nation, our healthcare problem is greatly exacerbated by mass immigration—both legal and illegal. A total of 43% of non-citizens lack health insurance, compared to just 12.7% of native born Americans. These uninsured immigrants impose huge strains on our healthcare system that helped create the crisis we currently face.
Plenty of analysts and commentators have exposed how illegal aliens will receive healthcare under Obamacare. They point out that while the bill claims to prohibit illegal aliens from receiving benefits, the Democrats repeatedly blocked amendments that would screen for the illegals. Steve Camarota of the non-partisan Center for Immigration Studies recently estimated that 6.6 million illegal aliens will be eligible for public healthcare."
(snip)
"But the obvious intent, as well as the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" clause, is ignored by federal policy that gives children of illegal aliens born in the United States automatic citizenship.
What does this have to do with the healthcare debate? Under the plan right now, only one family member needs to be eligible for government healthcare, then the whole family can get free healthcare.
The Congressional Research Service acknowledged,
"There could be instances where some family members would meet the definition of an eligible individual for purposes of the credit, while other family members would not… H.R. 3200 does not expressly address how such a situation would be treated. Therefore, it appears that the Health Choices Commissioner would be responsible for determining how the credits would be administered in the case of mixed-status families."
My take: As things stand, Obamacare would invite new tides of illegal immigration, with health care as the lure. Say, a Mexican wife is eight months pregnant. With her husband, she enters the United States illegally, hides out for a month, then gives birth in a hospital. The child is a citizen by birthright. Because the child is a citizen, the parents also are eligible for Obamacare.
Onward and upward in Sharialand
Indonesia’s province of Aceh has passed a new law making adultery punishable by stoning to death, a member of the province’s parliament has said. The law also imposes severe sentences for rape, homosexuality, alcohol consumption and gambling.
Opponents had tried to delay the law, saying more debate was needed because it imposes capital punishment.
Sharia law was partially introduced in Aceh in 2001, as part of a government offer to pacify separatist rebels. A peace deal in 2005 ended the 30-year insurgency, and many of the former rebels have now entered Aceh’s government, which enjoys a degree of autonomy from the central government in Jakarta.
The legislation was passed unanimously by Aceh’s regional legislature, said assembly member Bahrom Rasjid.
"This law will be effective in 30 days with or without the approval of Aceh’s governor," he said…
Married people convicted of adultery can be sentenced to death by stoning. Unmarried people can be sentenced to 100 lashes with a cane.
Opponents had tried to delay the law, saying more debate was needed because it imposes capital punishment.
Sharia law was partially introduced in Aceh in 2001, as part of a government offer to pacify separatist rebels. A peace deal in 2005 ended the 30-year insurgency, and many of the former rebels have now entered Aceh’s government, which enjoys a degree of autonomy from the central government in Jakarta.
The legislation was passed unanimously by Aceh’s regional legislature, said assembly member Bahrom Rasjid.
"This law will be effective in 30 days with or without the approval of Aceh’s governor," he said…
Married people convicted of adultery can be sentenced to death by stoning. Unmarried people can be sentenced to 100 lashes with a cane.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Mark Steyn: Obama skips small, easy health care fixes in favor of a sweeping leftist fix
Well, says the president, not so fast. Lots of people with insurance run into problems when they change jobs or move to another state. OK, In that case, why not ease the obstacles to health care portability?
Well, says the president, shuffling his cups and moving the pea under another shell, we're spending too much on health care. By "we're," he means you and you and you and you and millions of other Americans making individual choices over which he casually claims collective jurisdiction.
And that, ultimately, gets closer than anything else he says to giving the game away. For most of the previous presidency, the Left accused George W. Bush of using 9/11 as a pretext to attack Iraq. Since January, his successor has used the economic slump as a pretext to "reform" health care. Most voters don't buy it: They see it as Obama's "war of choice," and the more frantically he talks about it as a matter of urgency the weirder it seems. If he's having difficulty selling it, that's because it's not about "health." As I've written before, the appeal of this issue to him and to Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank et al is that governmentalization of health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture – one in which elections are always fought on the Left's issues and on the Left's terms, and in which "conservative" parties no longer talk about small government and individual liberty but find themselves retreating to one last pitiful rationale: that they can run the left-wing state more effectively than the Left can. Listen to your average British Tory or French Gaullist on the campaign trail, pledging to "deliver" government services more "efficiently."
Well, says the president, shuffling his cups and moving the pea under another shell, we're spending too much on health care. By "we're," he means you and you and you and you and millions of other Americans making individual choices over which he casually claims collective jurisdiction.
And that, ultimately, gets closer than anything else he says to giving the game away. For most of the previous presidency, the Left accused George W. Bush of using 9/11 as a pretext to attack Iraq. Since January, his successor has used the economic slump as a pretext to "reform" health care. Most voters don't buy it: They see it as Obama's "war of choice," and the more frantically he talks about it as a matter of urgency the weirder it seems. If he's having difficulty selling it, that's because it's not about "health." As I've written before, the appeal of this issue to him and to Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank et al is that governmentalization of health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture – one in which elections are always fought on the Left's issues and on the Left's terms, and in which "conservative" parties no longer talk about small government and individual liberty but find themselves retreating to one last pitiful rationale: that they can run the left-wing state more effectively than the Left can. Listen to your average British Tory or French Gaullist on the campaign trail, pledging to "deliver" government services more "efficiently."
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Navigating the brave new world of animal rights - a primer and preview of things to come
In its relentless effort to harness every individual and creature in America to its own designs, the Obama administration now threatens, perhaps unwittingly, to light up a dark corner that many don't even know exists.
The lonely farmhand is about to have his unwanted moment in the sunshine.
Until now, the lonely farmhand has been glimpsed only rarely, usually in a buried item in a rural weekly or small daily newspaper. Reporters don't like to write the stories, and editors don't like to publish them, so the notices tend to be short and well buried:
"The sherifff's office has charged a 45-year old farm hand with lewd and laschivious conduct after another farmer complained that his goat had been abused."
Sometimes the victim is a sheep, or even a cow. Whatever the case, the victim has never had a highly trained support group so the indelicate occurrence has quickly disappeared from public view.
Now, that is likely to change.
A collegue of President Obama, Cass Sunstein, is the new head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), and has been confirmed by the Senate.
What is at issue here is Sunstein's forceful advocacy of animal rights, especially his recommendation that people should be enabled to file suit on behalf of animals that have been mistreated. His objective is to ameliorate some of the worst cruelties inflicted on amimals that are bred and processed for food.
In 2002, Sunstein traced the idea of animal rights to 18th Century economist and social reformer Jeremy Bentham, who likeneed animals to slaves and argued that an adult dog or a horse is more rational than a human infant and should therefore be granted similar rights.
In 1789, a time when France had freed its slaves but England still held its slaves captive, Bentham wrote a primer in which he stated, "The day may come, when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of the skin is no reason why a human being should be abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor."
While I am not philosophically opposed to limited animal rights, I do foresee some difficulties.
Until now, odd matings between man and beast have been rare and little noted. That's as it should be. What would happen if bestiality became a frequent subject of courtroom proceedings? If the past is prologue, books will be written and movies made about the practice? Would bestiality then work its way into the American mainstream and become commonplace? Does anyone think that would be a good thing?
The mere thought of the first bestiality reality show on television makes me shudder.
Not to mention the fainting goats, which add another dimension to the problem. The ordinary goat is a tough, sturdy, stubborn creature. A farmer who wants to move a goat ordinarily carries a two-by-four in his hand.
Would the two-by-fours have to be coated with a soft material so as not to offend the faint-hearted?
Unlike ordinary goats, fainting goats are sensitive creatures who are known for only one thing - fainting. If you surprise the goat in any way, it faints. If you startle the goat it faints. If you look cross-eyed at the goat, it might faint.
Can you imagine the hay a trial lawyer could make if he had a fainting goat as a client? You give the goat an angry glance, the goat faints, and you spend the next two years in court defending yourself. The judge, having just navigated animal sensitivity training, fines you the entire wad you were planning to spend to set up a new meat processing plant.
In desperation, you borrow enough money to buy two fainting goats, then hire a trial lawyer. Within a year, you're a millionaire.
The lonely farmhand is about to have his unwanted moment in the sunshine.
Until now, the lonely farmhand has been glimpsed only rarely, usually in a buried item in a rural weekly or small daily newspaper. Reporters don't like to write the stories, and editors don't like to publish them, so the notices tend to be short and well buried:
"The sherifff's office has charged a 45-year old farm hand with lewd and laschivious conduct after another farmer complained that his goat had been abused."
Sometimes the victim is a sheep, or even a cow. Whatever the case, the victim has never had a highly trained support group so the indelicate occurrence has quickly disappeared from public view.
Now, that is likely to change.
A collegue of President Obama, Cass Sunstein, is the new head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), and has been confirmed by the Senate.
What is at issue here is Sunstein's forceful advocacy of animal rights, especially his recommendation that people should be enabled to file suit on behalf of animals that have been mistreated. His objective is to ameliorate some of the worst cruelties inflicted on amimals that are bred and processed for food.
In 2002, Sunstein traced the idea of animal rights to 18th Century economist and social reformer Jeremy Bentham, who likeneed animals to slaves and argued that an adult dog or a horse is more rational than a human infant and should therefore be granted similar rights.
In 1789, a time when France had freed its slaves but England still held its slaves captive, Bentham wrote a primer in which he stated, "The day may come, when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of the skin is no reason why a human being should be abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor."
While I am not philosophically opposed to limited animal rights, I do foresee some difficulties.
Until now, odd matings between man and beast have been rare and little noted. That's as it should be. What would happen if bestiality became a frequent subject of courtroom proceedings? If the past is prologue, books will be written and movies made about the practice? Would bestiality then work its way into the American mainstream and become commonplace? Does anyone think that would be a good thing?
The mere thought of the first bestiality reality show on television makes me shudder.
Not to mention the fainting goats, which add another dimension to the problem. The ordinary goat is a tough, sturdy, stubborn creature. A farmer who wants to move a goat ordinarily carries a two-by-four in his hand.
Would the two-by-fours have to be coated with a soft material so as not to offend the faint-hearted?
Unlike ordinary goats, fainting goats are sensitive creatures who are known for only one thing - fainting. If you surprise the goat in any way, it faints. If you startle the goat it faints. If you look cross-eyed at the goat, it might faint.
Can you imagine the hay a trial lawyer could make if he had a fainting goat as a client? You give the goat an angry glance, the goat faints, and you spend the next two years in court defending yourself. The judge, having just navigated animal sensitivity training, fines you the entire wad you were planning to spend to set up a new meat processing plant.
In desperation, you borrow enough money to buy two fainting goats, then hire a trial lawyer. Within a year, you're a millionaire.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Trial lawyers profit from jackpot justice; protect their domain with campaign contributions
From Wall Street Journal
"Tort reform is a policy no-brainer. Experts on left and right agree that defensive medicine—ordering tests and procedures solely to protect against Joe Lawyer—adds enormously to health costs. The estimated dollar benefits of reform range from a conservative $65 billion a year to perhaps $200 billion. In context, Mr. Obama's plan would cost about $100 billion annually. That the president won't embrace even modest change that would do so much, so quickly, to lower costs, has left Americans suspicious of his real ambitions.
It's also a political no-brainer. Americans are on board. Polls routinely show that between 70% and 80% of Americans believe the country suffers from excess litigation. The entire health community is on board. Republicans and swing-state Democrats are on board. State and local governments, which have struggled to clean up their own civil-justice systems, are on board. In a debate defined by flash points, this is a rare area of agreement.
The only folks not on board are a handful of powerful trial lawyers, and a handful of politicians who receive a generous cut of those lawyers' contingency fees. The legal industry was the top contributor to the Democratic Party in the 2008 cycle, stumping up $47 million. The bill is now due, and Democrats are dutifully making a health-care down payment."
(snip)
"Over in the House the discussion isn't about tort reform, but about tort opportunities. During the House Ways & Means markup of a health bill, Texas Democrat Lloyd Doggett ($1.5 million from lawyers) introduced language to allow freelance lawyers to sue any outfit (say, McDonald's) that might contribute to Medicare costs. Only after Blue Dogs freaked out did the idea get dropped, though the trial bar has standing orders that Democrats make another run at it in any House-Senate conference. "
"Tort reform is a policy no-brainer. Experts on left and right agree that defensive medicine—ordering tests and procedures solely to protect against Joe Lawyer—adds enormously to health costs. The estimated dollar benefits of reform range from a conservative $65 billion a year to perhaps $200 billion. In context, Mr. Obama's plan would cost about $100 billion annually. That the president won't embrace even modest change that would do so much, so quickly, to lower costs, has left Americans suspicious of his real ambitions.
It's also a political no-brainer. Americans are on board. Polls routinely show that between 70% and 80% of Americans believe the country suffers from excess litigation. The entire health community is on board. Republicans and swing-state Democrats are on board. State and local governments, which have struggled to clean up their own civil-justice systems, are on board. In a debate defined by flash points, this is a rare area of agreement.
The only folks not on board are a handful of powerful trial lawyers, and a handful of politicians who receive a generous cut of those lawyers' contingency fees. The legal industry was the top contributor to the Democratic Party in the 2008 cycle, stumping up $47 million. The bill is now due, and Democrats are dutifully making a health-care down payment."
(snip)
"Over in the House the discussion isn't about tort reform, but about tort opportunities. During the House Ways & Means markup of a health bill, Texas Democrat Lloyd Doggett ($1.5 million from lawyers) introduced language to allow freelance lawyers to sue any outfit (say, McDonald's) that might contribute to Medicare costs. Only after Blue Dogs freaked out did the idea get dropped, though the trial bar has standing orders that Democrats make another run at it in any House-Senate conference. "
Ralph Peters: "We've learned nothing."
From New York Post
"We resolved that we, the People, would never forget. Then we forgot.
We've learned nothing.
Instead of cracking down on Islamist extremism, we've excused it.
Instead of killing terrorists, we free them.
Instead of relentlessly hunting Islamist madmen, we seek to appease them.
Instead of acknowledging that radical Islam is the problem, we elected a president who blames America, whose idea of freedom is the right for women to suffer in silence behind a veil -- and who counts among his mentors and friends those who damn our country or believe that our own government staged the tragedy of September 11, 2001.
Instead of insisting that freedom will not be infringed by terrorist threats, we censor works that might offend mass murderers. Radical Muslims around the world can indulge in viral lies about us, but we dare not even publish cartoons mocking them."
"We resolved that we, the People, would never forget. Then we forgot.
We've learned nothing.
Instead of cracking down on Islamist extremism, we've excused it.
Instead of killing terrorists, we free them.
Instead of relentlessly hunting Islamist madmen, we seek to appease them.
Instead of acknowledging that radical Islam is the problem, we elected a president who blames America, whose idea of freedom is the right for women to suffer in silence behind a veil -- and who counts among his mentors and friends those who damn our country or believe that our own government staged the tragedy of September 11, 2001.
Instead of insisting that freedom will not be infringed by terrorist threats, we censor works that might offend mass murderers. Radical Muslims around the world can indulge in viral lies about us, but we dare not even publish cartoons mocking them."
No more underwater mortgages; Obama would let you buy insurance after your house is on fire
From New York Post
"In his Wednesday speech, President Obama fired up the troops on the urgency of reducing the number of uninsured in this country and achieving universal coverage via insurance regulations and forcing all Americans to buy insurance.
Under his plan, insurers would be faced with "guaranteed issue" and "community rating." In other words, they wouldn't be allowed to deny insurance based on a pre-existing condition, take coverage away in the middle of a treatment, set a premium based on one's medical history or set lifetime caps on coverage.
If there were a "guaranteed issue" law for fire insurance, no one would buy coverage unless his or her home was actually on fire. We'd see the same "negative selection" under the Obama plan: Lots of people would simply avoid buying insurance until they got sick. After all, if you can't be turned down when you are sick, why bother wasting money on insurance when you don't need it?
Sick patients cost more, of course. Insurance premiums would gradually get more and more expensive, because the only people in the insurance pool would be ill.
Community rating would have a similar impact, because insurers would be forced to charge the same prices to the sick and the healthy, to smokers and non-smokers, and to the obese and those who are fit.
Such measures guarantee that all customers will end up paying higher prices. The average state-level mandate for community rating hikes premiums by over 10 percent. The average guaranteed-issue ordinance drives up premiums a whopping 227 percent.
This has proved to be the case in the states of New York and New Jersey -- which have the highest insurance rates in the nation. As a result, the young and healthy forgo purchasing insurance because it is a bad deal for them as they have few assets and are not likely to face a catastrophic illness."
"In his Wednesday speech, President Obama fired up the troops on the urgency of reducing the number of uninsured in this country and achieving universal coverage via insurance regulations and forcing all Americans to buy insurance.
Under his plan, insurers would be faced with "guaranteed issue" and "community rating." In other words, they wouldn't be allowed to deny insurance based on a pre-existing condition, take coverage away in the middle of a treatment, set a premium based on one's medical history or set lifetime caps on coverage.
If there were a "guaranteed issue" law for fire insurance, no one would buy coverage unless his or her home was actually on fire. We'd see the same "negative selection" under the Obama plan: Lots of people would simply avoid buying insurance until they got sick. After all, if you can't be turned down when you are sick, why bother wasting money on insurance when you don't need it?
Sick patients cost more, of course. Insurance premiums would gradually get more and more expensive, because the only people in the insurance pool would be ill.
Community rating would have a similar impact, because insurers would be forced to charge the same prices to the sick and the healthy, to smokers and non-smokers, and to the obese and those who are fit.
Such measures guarantee that all customers will end up paying higher prices. The average state-level mandate for community rating hikes premiums by over 10 percent. The average guaranteed-issue ordinance drives up premiums a whopping 227 percent.
This has proved to be the case in the states of New York and New Jersey -- which have the highest insurance rates in the nation. As a result, the young and healthy forgo purchasing insurance because it is a bad deal for them as they have few assets and are not likely to face a catastrophic illness."
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Science czar Holdren prescribed a less prosperous future for the U.S.
In 2007, John Holdren, the Obama administration's science czar, said in an interview that the United States will have to be less prosperous in the future so the available wealth can be spread more evenly.
HOLDREN: There has been a strain of what many people call “US exceptionalism” in the United States, the notion that the United States is so big, so important, so powerful, so technologically advanced that it can and should do what it wants. I think this strain is misguided.
Q: Will Americans need to reduce their living standards? Is that politically viable, or will technology [unintelligible] do it?
H: I think ultimately that the rate of growth of material consumption is going to have to come down, and there’s going to have to be a degree of redistribution of how much we consume, in terms of energy and material resources, in order to leave room for people who are poor to become more prosperous.
HOLDREN: There has been a strain of what many people call “US exceptionalism” in the United States, the notion that the United States is so big, so important, so powerful, so technologically advanced that it can and should do what it wants. I think this strain is misguided.
Q: Will Americans need to reduce their living standards? Is that politically viable, or will technology [unintelligible] do it?
H: I think ultimately that the rate of growth of material consumption is going to have to come down, and there’s going to have to be a degree of redistribution of how much we consume, in terms of energy and material resources, in order to leave room for people who are poor to become more prosperous.
Ignorance is a big reason the media and political elites can’t think straight about medical care
"Sheer ignorance is a big reason the media and political elites can’t think straight about medical care. They just don’t understand even the basics. There are no scientists, no engineers, and few physicians in Congress.
We live in an amazingly arrogant age, at least in politics and the more self-indulgent fields of academia.
Obama is a product of the non-scientific academic world, where Marxist pseudo-philosophy is popular, as long as the colleges themselves can live off the fat of the (capitalist) land. Our academics are revolutionaries who never take a personal risk, just like our Democrats. That’s why the philosophy behind Obama’s Marxoid takeover of our health care seems to be:
Who cares if we do harm? We’ll fix it later! If it’s politically convenient! Whatever we do cannot hurt the apparatchiks, the ruling elite, who will have their own medical system.
Congress and federal bureaucrats will keep their current insurance plans. Academics will keep their tenure and their soft lifestyle at the expense of taxpayers. It’ll be a two-layered system straight out of Soviet Moscow: the nomenklatura versus the workers.
ObamaCare is really, really cheap compared to that one billion dollars for testing a single drug. The cost of testing and developing HR 3200, the current and ever-changing plan for ObamaCare, is zero dollars — because no testing and development has ever been done on more than 1,000 complicated pages. The bill has been thrown together in back-room deals between lobbyists and staffers in Congress. It’s like a hugely complex computer program that’s never been tested to see if it will run."
We live in an amazingly arrogant age, at least in politics and the more self-indulgent fields of academia.
Obama is a product of the non-scientific academic world, where Marxist pseudo-philosophy is popular, as long as the colleges themselves can live off the fat of the (capitalist) land. Our academics are revolutionaries who never take a personal risk, just like our Democrats. That’s why the philosophy behind Obama’s Marxoid takeover of our health care seems to be:
Who cares if we do harm? We’ll fix it later! If it’s politically convenient! Whatever we do cannot hurt the apparatchiks, the ruling elite, who will have their own medical system.
Congress and federal bureaucrats will keep their current insurance plans. Academics will keep their tenure and their soft lifestyle at the expense of taxpayers. It’ll be a two-layered system straight out of Soviet Moscow: the nomenklatura versus the workers.
ObamaCare is really, really cheap compared to that one billion dollars for testing a single drug. The cost of testing and developing HR 3200, the current and ever-changing plan for ObamaCare, is zero dollars — because no testing and development has ever been done on more than 1,000 complicated pages. The bill has been thrown together in back-room deals between lobbyists and staffers in Congress. It’s like a hugely complex computer program that’s never been tested to see if it will run."
Scheme to import underage girls for sex gets advice from ACORN
"Andrew Breitbart has established a new website, Big Government.com, a companion to his Big Hollywood.com, and on it you can see this video of Obama's buddies, ACORN, prepping two people posing as a pimp and a prostitute how to lie to the IRS to obtain public housing within which to carry out their trade:
Officials with the controversial community organizing group ACORN were secretly videotaped offering to assist two individuals posing as a pimp and a prostitute, encouraging them to lie to the Internal Revenue Service and providing guidance on how to claim underage girls from South America as dependents."
[snip]
"In the videotape, made on July 24, James O'Keefe, a 25-year-old independent filmmaker, posed as a pimp with a 20-year-old woman named "Kenya" who posed as a prostitute while visiting ACORN's office in Baltimore. The couple told ACORN staffers they wanted to secure housing where the woman could continue to maintain a prostitution business.
I still can't figure out why Attorney General Holder hasn't managed to institute a RICO investigation against this mult-state criminal enterprise."
(see two previous videos)
Officials with the controversial community organizing group ACORN were secretly videotaped offering to assist two individuals posing as a pimp and a prostitute, encouraging them to lie to the Internal Revenue Service and providing guidance on how to claim underage girls from South America as dependents."
[snip]
"In the videotape, made on July 24, James O'Keefe, a 25-year-old independent filmmaker, posed as a pimp with a 20-year-old woman named "Kenya" who posed as a prostitute while visiting ACORN's office in Baltimore. The couple told ACORN staffers they wanted to secure housing where the woman could continue to maintain a prostitution business.
I still can't figure out why Attorney General Holder hasn't managed to institute a RICO investigation against this mult-state criminal enterprise."
(see two previous videos)
Obama was right in his defense of Obamacare; so was the guy who called him a liar
In his appearance before Congress, President Barack Obama said this: "The reforms I am proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally."
To which, I reply, "So what? You answered a question, but you ducked the issue."
Illegal aliens have been getting health care, often at no cost, for years by merely showing up at hospital emergency rooms and complaining of illness or injury. National policy requires that those who show up at emergency rooms of American hospitals can not be turned away.
There is no reason to believe that that policy will be changed any time soon.
This means that Obama was technically correct in his argument.
Sow was the congressman who called Obama a "liar."
This means that, whether Obamacare is enacted or defeated, illegal aliens will continue to receive health care.
To which, I reply, "So what? You answered a question, but you ducked the issue."
Illegal aliens have been getting health care, often at no cost, for years by merely showing up at hospital emergency rooms and complaining of illness or injury. National policy requires that those who show up at emergency rooms of American hospitals can not be turned away.
There is no reason to believe that that policy will be changed any time soon.
This means that Obama was technically correct in his argument.
Sow was the congressman who called Obama a "liar."
This means that, whether Obamacare is enacted or defeated, illegal aliens will continue to receive health care.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
U.S. likely to lose most of $23 billion bailout of GM and Chrysler
"Taxpayers face losses on a significant portion of the $81 billion in government aid provided to the auto industry, an oversight panel said in a report to be released Wednesday.
The Congressional Oversight Panel did not provide an estimate of the projected loss in its latest monthly report on the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. But it said most of the $23 billion initially provided to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC late last year is unlikely to be repaid.
"I think they drove a very hard bargain," said Elizabeth Warren, the panel's chairwoman and a law professor at Harvard University, referring to the Obama administration's Treasury Department. "But it may not be enough."
The prospect of recovering the government's assistance to GM and Chrysler is heavily dependent on shares of the two companies rising to unprecedented levels, the report said. The government owns 10 percent of Chrysler and 61 percent of GM. The two companies are currently private but are expected to issue stock, in GM's case by next year."
The Congressional Oversight Panel did not provide an estimate of the projected loss in its latest monthly report on the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. But it said most of the $23 billion initially provided to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC late last year is unlikely to be repaid.
"I think they drove a very hard bargain," said Elizabeth Warren, the panel's chairwoman and a law professor at Harvard University, referring to the Obama administration's Treasury Department. "But it may not be enough."
The prospect of recovering the government's assistance to GM and Chrysler is heavily dependent on shares of the two companies rising to unprecedented levels, the report said. The government owns 10 percent of Chrysler and 61 percent of GM. The two companies are currently private but are expected to issue stock, in GM's case by next year."
Dems don't have votes to pass health care in House
From Drudge Report
"At least 44 more moderate Members of the Democrat Caucus have gone on the record in opposition to the current health care bill in the House, Hill source claims. Likewise, at least 57 liberal Members of the Democrat Caucus have gone on the record saying they will vote against a health care bill without a strong public option.
In other words, unless multiple Democrats flip on their stated position on health care, Speaker Pelosi lacks the votes to pass a bill through the House on the strength of Democrat votes alone."
"At least 44 more moderate Members of the Democrat Caucus have gone on the record in opposition to the current health care bill in the House, Hill source claims. Likewise, at least 57 liberal Members of the Democrat Caucus have gone on the record saying they will vote against a health care bill without a strong public option.
In other words, unless multiple Democrats flip on their stated position on health care, Speaker Pelosi lacks the votes to pass a bill through the House on the strength of Democrat votes alone."
Camille Paglia: Dems are "elegantly detatched from ordinary Americans"
"An example of the provincial amateurism of current White House operations was the way the president's innocuous back-to-school pep talk got sandbagged by imbecilic support materials soliciting students to write fantasy letters to "help" the president (a coercive directive quickly withdrawn under pressure). Even worse, the entire project was stupidly scheduled to conflict with the busy opening days of class this week, when harried teachers already have their hands full. Comically, some major school districts, including New York City, were not even open yet. And this is the gang who wants to revamp national healthcare?"
(snip)
"Why has the Democratic Party become so arrogantly detached from ordinary Americans? Though they claim to speak for the poor and dispossessed, Democrats have increasingly become the party of an upper-middle-class professional elite, top-heavy with journalists, academics and lawyers (one reason for the hypocritical absence of tort reform in the healthcare bills). Weirdly, given their worship of highly individualistic, secularized self-actualization, such professionals are as a whole amazingly credulous these days about big-government solutions to every social problem. They see no danger in expanding government authority and intrusive, wasteful bureaucracy. This is, I submit, a stunning turn away from the anti-authority and anti-establishment principles of authentic 1960s leftism."
(snip)
"Why has the Democratic Party become so arrogantly detached from ordinary Americans? Though they claim to speak for the poor and dispossessed, Democrats have increasingly become the party of an upper-middle-class professional elite, top-heavy with journalists, academics and lawyers (one reason for the hypocritical absence of tort reform in the healthcare bills). Weirdly, given their worship of highly individualistic, secularized self-actualization, such professionals are as a whole amazingly credulous these days about big-government solutions to every social problem. They see no danger in expanding government authority and intrusive, wasteful bureaucracy. This is, I submit, a stunning turn away from the anti-authority and anti-establishment principles of authentic 1960s leftism."
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Yes, but who, or what, is being satirized? You be the judge
From American Thinker
dear presadint obama,
how r u? i hope ur ok. thx 4 speaking 2 us in schl 2day. ms smith sed u wanted 2 no how u enspire us. well its alot!
1 thing u enspird me is 2 get better grades. i told ms smith it ain fair some kids get better grades then others. ms smith is cool she just outta collaj so she sed ok whacha gonna do. i sed we need a grade zar. i dont even no what a zar is but i lernt it from u. ms smith sed thats a grate idea an it correc injustis and so on so she axd me who shud be the grade zar an i was like my buddy brian cuz he smart an stuff.
so we got brian 4 grade zar an then we all got bs cuz the smart kids had 2 give the rest of us there xtra points an my mom was proud of me in schl an its all cuz of u mr presadint.
an whats so funny is some smart kids got jellis an all mad an stuff an there parents took em outta schl an we started making cs. ms smith sed there wasnt enuf points 4 bs an thats when u enspird me agin.
i sed ms smith cain we get grade points from someone els an she sed hmmm ok who u mean an i sed i dont no. but me an brian thot an then we was like we need stimulas 4 grades. so we axd ms smith an she sed thats a good idea 2.
so we got this kid owen 4 stimulas zar an he an ms smith talked an they sed we can get grade points from nex month. so then we all got bs agin but ms smith sed we gonna need 2 work harder nex month cuz we gonna all loose points remember but this wud stimalate us 2 do it cuz we ain gonna get discurraj. an this was good cuz my mom was proud agin.
dear presadint obama,
how r u? i hope ur ok. thx 4 speaking 2 us in schl 2day. ms smith sed u wanted 2 no how u enspire us. well its alot!
1 thing u enspird me is 2 get better grades. i told ms smith it ain fair some kids get better grades then others. ms smith is cool she just outta collaj so she sed ok whacha gonna do. i sed we need a grade zar. i dont even no what a zar is but i lernt it from u. ms smith sed thats a grate idea an it correc injustis and so on so she axd me who shud be the grade zar an i was like my buddy brian cuz he smart an stuff.
so we got brian 4 grade zar an then we all got bs cuz the smart kids had 2 give the rest of us there xtra points an my mom was proud of me in schl an its all cuz of u mr presadint.
an whats so funny is some smart kids got jellis an all mad an stuff an there parents took em outta schl an we started making cs. ms smith sed there wasnt enuf points 4 bs an thats when u enspird me agin.
i sed ms smith cain we get grade points from someone els an she sed hmmm ok who u mean an i sed i dont no. but me an brian thot an then we was like we need stimulas 4 grades. so we axd ms smith an she sed thats a good idea 2.
so we got this kid owen 4 stimulas zar an he an ms smith talked an they sed we can get grade points from nex month. so then we all got bs agin but ms smith sed we gonna need 2 work harder nex month cuz we gonna all loose points remember but this wud stimalate us 2 do it cuz we ain gonna get discurraj. an this was good cuz my mom was proud agin.
Thomas Sowell looks at the extreme urgency of Barack Obama
"He tried to rush Congress into passing a massive government takeover of the nation's medical care before the August recess-- for a program that would not take effect until 2013!"
(snip)
"...he wanted to get this massive government takeover of medical care passed into law before the public understood what was in it.
Moreover, he wanted to get re-elected in 2012 before the public experienced what its actual consequences would be."
(snip)
"...he wanted to get this massive government takeover of medical care passed into law before the public understood what was in it.
Moreover, he wanted to get re-elected in 2012 before the public experienced what its actual consequences would be."
(snip)
"...he wanted to get this massive government takeover of medical care passed into law before the public understood what was in it.
Moreover, he wanted to get re-elected in 2012 before the public experienced what its actual consequences would be."
(snip)
"...he wanted to get this massive government takeover of medical care passed into law before the public understood what was in it.
Moreover, he wanted to get re-elected in 2012 before the public experienced what its actual consequences would be."
Monday, September 7, 2009
Is China more capitalist than the United States?
From American Thinker
"Why is GM, a capitalist firm, so successful in Communist China and a failure in Capitalist USA? Apparently, the Chinese learned from the economic failures of socialism while the US Congress learned nothing and actively intervenes in the decision-making of American capitalist firms, imposing environmental restrictions few of which would pass the economic test that benefits should be equal to or greater than cost. It subsidizes energy-saving activities like insulating buildings, buying energy-saving autos and even light bulbs, none of which would survive the light of day as producers of net benefits. It orders banks to make bad loans, e.g., the Community Reinvestment Act. Through the EPA, it regulates factory emissions. It proposes a socialist solution to health care. It has declared its policy to replace fossil fuels with renewable alternative fuels. It pays a large portion of the costs of wind turbines and solar panels."
(snip)
"We have urged China to join us in our quixotic attempt to prevent global warming. She has refused, arguing that her per capita consumption of energy is the lowest of any industrial country. Except for the leftist economists, economics tells us that we should let the prices of different energy sources determine when a new source is ready for development. No subsidy would be required if we let the market make the decision. Totalitarian China accepts this approach; free market U.S. takes the Soviet prescription."
(snip)
"Then, to top it off, we invite foreign governments to socialize our economic system in order to serve their purposes. We let the Chinese government fix the price at which the dollar is exchanged for the yuan at a rate that allows their producers to steal market share from ours. And we give foreign governments a tax break (no tax on interest or dividends earned) when they buy ownership in American businesses and thus turn our businesses into socialist enterprises serving foreign governments.
China learned the lessons of socialism's failure in Russia and is prospering. Congress did not."
"Why is GM, a capitalist firm, so successful in Communist China and a failure in Capitalist USA? Apparently, the Chinese learned from the economic failures of socialism while the US Congress learned nothing and actively intervenes in the decision-making of American capitalist firms, imposing environmental restrictions few of which would pass the economic test that benefits should be equal to or greater than cost. It subsidizes energy-saving activities like insulating buildings, buying energy-saving autos and even light bulbs, none of which would survive the light of day as producers of net benefits. It orders banks to make bad loans, e.g., the Community Reinvestment Act. Through the EPA, it regulates factory emissions. It proposes a socialist solution to health care. It has declared its policy to replace fossil fuels with renewable alternative fuels. It pays a large portion of the costs of wind turbines and solar panels."
(snip)
"We have urged China to join us in our quixotic attempt to prevent global warming. She has refused, arguing that her per capita consumption of energy is the lowest of any industrial country. Except for the leftist economists, economics tells us that we should let the prices of different energy sources determine when a new source is ready for development. No subsidy would be required if we let the market make the decision. Totalitarian China accepts this approach; free market U.S. takes the Soviet prescription."
(snip)
"Then, to top it off, we invite foreign governments to socialize our economic system in order to serve their purposes. We let the Chinese government fix the price at which the dollar is exchanged for the yuan at a rate that allows their producers to steal market share from ours. And we give foreign governments a tax break (no tax on interest or dividends earned) when they buy ownership in American businesses and thus turn our businesses into socialist enterprises serving foreign governments.
China learned the lessons of socialism's failure in Russia and is prospering. Congress did not."
Waging war against Afghanistan's poppy plants
From Reason
"If the goal is to establish a stable government to fill the vacuum created by our ousting of the Taliban and al-Qaida, we've done quite a job. Most Americans can accept a Marine's risking life and limb to safeguard our freedoms. But when that Marine is protector of a corrupt and depraved foreign parliament—one that recently legalized marital rape and demands women ask permission from male relatives to leave their homes—it is not a victory worth celebrating.
You know, idealism regarding Afghanistan's future begins to dissipate the first time we read the words "why don't we negotiate with the moderate Taliban?"
But while strict Shariah law is acceptable, illicit drugs are not. If most of us agree that America has no business foisting its notions of wrong and right on other cultures, why, then, did we spend hundreds of millions of dollars eradicating poppy crops (one of the only productive crops of the Afghan farmers)? Was it because our own war on drugs has gone so splendidly?"
(snip)
"...if every military engagement includes an open-ended plan for nation building that pins our fortunes on the predilections of a backward nation, we are, indeed, setting ourselves up for failure."
"If the goal is to establish a stable government to fill the vacuum created by our ousting of the Taliban and al-Qaida, we've done quite a job. Most Americans can accept a Marine's risking life and limb to safeguard our freedoms. But when that Marine is protector of a corrupt and depraved foreign parliament—one that recently legalized marital rape and demands women ask permission from male relatives to leave their homes—it is not a victory worth celebrating.
You know, idealism regarding Afghanistan's future begins to dissipate the first time we read the words "why don't we negotiate with the moderate Taliban?"
But while strict Shariah law is acceptable, illicit drugs are not. If most of us agree that America has no business foisting its notions of wrong and right on other cultures, why, then, did we spend hundreds of millions of dollars eradicating poppy crops (one of the only productive crops of the Afghan farmers)? Was it because our own war on drugs has gone so splendidly?"
(snip)
"...if every military engagement includes an open-ended plan for nation building that pins our fortunes on the predilections of a backward nation, we are, indeed, setting ourselves up for failure."
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Valerie Jarrett on Jones: "We were watching him...for as long as he's been active..."
From Power Line
"The key point about the Van Jones affair is what it tells us about Barack Obama. Jones isn't someone who slipped through the cracks of the vetting process. We know this because, as Scott pointed out earlier today, top Obama aide Valerie Jarrett has said, "So, Van Jones, we were so delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House; we were watching him. . .for as long as he's been active out in Oakland."
Having watched the rise of Van Jones, why did Team Obama nonetheless "recruit" him into the White house? Because what Jones says and believes is well within the range of what Obama believes, and thus not jarrring to him and his crew.
If Jones is now beyond the pale, it is only because the Obama crowd finally hears him through the filter of a controversy. When Obama and company heard him only through the filter of what they believe, there was no controversy because his statements -- e.g., his attack on Israeli "occupation" dating back to 1948 and his claim that "U.S. tax dollars are funding violence against people of color inside the U.S. borders and outside the US borders" -- are not particularly controversial to Team Obama.
This, of course, is the Rev. Jeremiah Wright phenomenon all over again."
"The key point about the Van Jones affair is what it tells us about Barack Obama. Jones isn't someone who slipped through the cracks of the vetting process. We know this because, as Scott pointed out earlier today, top Obama aide Valerie Jarrett has said, "So, Van Jones, we were so delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House; we were watching him. . .for as long as he's been active out in Oakland."
Having watched the rise of Van Jones, why did Team Obama nonetheless "recruit" him into the White house? Because what Jones says and believes is well within the range of what Obama believes, and thus not jarrring to him and his crew.
If Jones is now beyond the pale, it is only because the Obama crowd finally hears him through the filter of a controversy. When Obama and company heard him only through the filter of what they believe, there was no controversy because his statements -- e.g., his attack on Israeli "occupation" dating back to 1948 and his claim that "U.S. tax dollars are funding violence against people of color inside the U.S. borders and outside the US borders" -- are not particularly controversial to Team Obama.
This, of course, is the Rev. Jeremiah Wright phenomenon all over again."
After ignoring attacks against Van Jones' racism et al, what does the NYT report when he resigns?
If you're the New York Times, smug and liberal, you take pleasure in ignoring news that would embarrass liberals, Democrats, trisexuals or anyone who hates America or longs for the approaching socialist paradise.
The Times and its staff undoubtedly have found it almost erotic to close their eyes to conservative media's relentless pursuit of Van Jones, which have gone to the extreme of publishing Jones's own anti-American and anti-white rants.
The trouble starts when the right wing media attacks result in the sudden resignation of Van Jones.
How would you like to write the Times's lead about the sudden resignation of a sterling public servant, with an unblemished record, who suddenly quits a well-paid, highly visible job in the administration of a president who has masqueraded as a national savior?
It can't be easy, I tell you.
This is how the Times handled the challenge:
"Van Jones resigned as the White House’s environmental jobs 'czar' on Saturday, after weeks of controversy over his past comments and affiliations had slowly escalated.
Appointed as a special adviser for “green jobs” by President Obama, Mr. Jones did not go through the traditional vetting process for administration officials who must be confirmed by the Senate. So it was not until recently that some of Mr. Jones’s past actions received broad airing, including his derogatory statements about Republicans in February and his signature on a 2004 letter suggesting that former President George W. Bush might have knowingly allowed the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to occur in order to use them as a “pre-text to war.”
Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said on Sunday that Jones had resigned because “the agenda of the president is bigger than any one individual” and he did not want the dispute to get in the way of creating green jobs in this economy.
After George Stephanoupoulos, the host of ABC’s “This Week,” asked several questions about Mr. Jones’s past controversial statements, Mr. Gibbs said that the president “doesn’t endorse what he said.”
Not bad, but certainly far short of inspiring. The Times exonerates Obama by blaming poor vetting for Jones's hiring. But why wasn't Jones vetted properly?
Because Obama already knew that Jones met his basic requirement: he was a hard leftist who was hostile toward white people and the American system.
The Times and its staff undoubtedly have found it almost erotic to close their eyes to conservative media's relentless pursuit of Van Jones, which have gone to the extreme of publishing Jones's own anti-American and anti-white rants.
The trouble starts when the right wing media attacks result in the sudden resignation of Van Jones.
How would you like to write the Times's lead about the sudden resignation of a sterling public servant, with an unblemished record, who suddenly quits a well-paid, highly visible job in the administration of a president who has masqueraded as a national savior?
It can't be easy, I tell you.
This is how the Times handled the challenge:
"Van Jones resigned as the White House’s environmental jobs 'czar' on Saturday, after weeks of controversy over his past comments and affiliations had slowly escalated.
Appointed as a special adviser for “green jobs” by President Obama, Mr. Jones did not go through the traditional vetting process for administration officials who must be confirmed by the Senate. So it was not until recently that some of Mr. Jones’s past actions received broad airing, including his derogatory statements about Republicans in February and his signature on a 2004 letter suggesting that former President George W. Bush might have knowingly allowed the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to occur in order to use them as a “pre-text to war.”
Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said on Sunday that Jones had resigned because “the agenda of the president is bigger than any one individual” and he did not want the dispute to get in the way of creating green jobs in this economy.
After George Stephanoupoulos, the host of ABC’s “This Week,” asked several questions about Mr. Jones’s past controversial statements, Mr. Gibbs said that the president “doesn’t endorse what he said.”
Not bad, but certainly far short of inspiring. The Times exonerates Obama by blaming poor vetting for Jones's hiring. But why wasn't Jones vetted properly?
Because Obama already knew that Jones met his basic requirement: he was a hard leftist who was hostile toward white people and the American system.
Obama doles out $200 billion to climate alarmists
"Obama just rewarded his academic buds by doubling the budget of the National Science Foundation, and sending a couple of hundred billion to the climate alarmists. Science magazine has been outright supporting the Democrats for years in its editorial pages. Academic Pell Grants have increased by 25% in just one year. It all goes to the Big U Lobby. Academia is a powerful political lobby, and they lean Hard Left. What we are reading in Science magazine today is not exactly free from that Party Line."
The radical roots of Obama's outreach to children
From American Thinker
"I have previously reported that this idea of inculcating revolutionary goals in our children's minds stems from the philosophy of Bill Ayers, Obama's friend, collaborator, and campaign supporter. But Obama's ideological mentors appear to reach farther back to an influential radical Italian communist, Antonio Gramsci.
Barack Obama ties to Ayers are personal as well as professional. Obama chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an educational effort that blew through tens of millions of dollars of foundation money with little to show for its efforts. Ayers headed up a key operating body of the Challenge. Stanley Kurtz writes that Obama "clearly aligned himself with Ayers's radical views on education issues".
What might those views be?
Bill Ayers, former Weatherman bomber and now professor of education, sees teachers as the vanguard of the revolutionary proletariat. He propounds that view though his teaching, textbooks, and speeches.
Ayers is not merely a professor of education: he exercises far greater power as president of the American Educational Research Association and as someone who works to publish a line of textbooks to be used in graduate schools of education. His methods and beliefs have been used to "teach the teachers", who will then promote and propagate his views in classrooms across our nation. He is, as Sol Stern, wrote a "radical educator with real influence" -- and that was written before his friend Barack Obama became President.
Ayers looks at teachers as part of a pyramid scheme, whereby he can geometrically increase the ranks of radicals by exposing young children to radical principles (even so far as using math classes to teach about the evils of capitalism). This might go down better than bombing people into obedience."
"I have previously reported that this idea of inculcating revolutionary goals in our children's minds stems from the philosophy of Bill Ayers, Obama's friend, collaborator, and campaign supporter. But Obama's ideological mentors appear to reach farther back to an influential radical Italian communist, Antonio Gramsci.
Barack Obama ties to Ayers are personal as well as professional. Obama chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an educational effort that blew through tens of millions of dollars of foundation money with little to show for its efforts. Ayers headed up a key operating body of the Challenge. Stanley Kurtz writes that Obama "clearly aligned himself with Ayers's radical views on education issues".
What might those views be?
Bill Ayers, former Weatherman bomber and now professor of education, sees teachers as the vanguard of the revolutionary proletariat. He propounds that view though his teaching, textbooks, and speeches.
Ayers is not merely a professor of education: he exercises far greater power as president of the American Educational Research Association and as someone who works to publish a line of textbooks to be used in graduate schools of education. His methods and beliefs have been used to "teach the teachers", who will then promote and propagate his views in classrooms across our nation. He is, as Sol Stern, wrote a "radical educator with real influence" -- and that was written before his friend Barack Obama became President.
Ayers looks at teachers as part of a pyramid scheme, whereby he can geometrically increase the ranks of radicals by exposing young children to radical principles (even so far as using math classes to teach about the evils of capitalism). This might go down better than bombing people into obedience."
For Van Jones, green jobs meant redistribution
"Van Jones, a special adviser to the president, revealed his Trojan-horse strategy during a 2008 interview on leftist Uprising Radio in Los Angeles.
"The green economy will start off as a small subset" of a "complete revolution" away from "gray capitalism" and toward "redistribution of all the wealth," he said. "And we are going to push it and push it and push it until it becomes the engine for transforming the whole society."
"The green economy will start off as a small subset" of a "complete revolution" away from "gray capitalism" and toward "redistribution of all the wealth," he said. "And we are going to push it and push it and push it until it becomes the engine for transforming the whole society."
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Obama, sinking in polls, finds another soap box
From National Review
"Looking for a quick and easy boost in the polls, President Obama has decided to go to the one place where merit bears no relationship to adulation: the United Nations. On September 24, the president will take the unprecedented step of presiding over a meeting of the UN Security Council.
No American president has ever attempted to acquire the image of King of the Universe by officiating at a meeting of the UN’s highest body. But Obama apparently believes that being flanked by council-member heads of state like Col. Moammar Qaddafi — who is expected to be seated five seats to Obama’s right — will cast a sufficiently blinding spell on the American taxpayer that the perilous state of the nation’s economy, the health-care fiasco, and a summer of “post-racial” scapegoating will pale by comparison."
"Looking for a quick and easy boost in the polls, President Obama has decided to go to the one place where merit bears no relationship to adulation: the United Nations. On September 24, the president will take the unprecedented step of presiding over a meeting of the UN Security Council.
No American president has ever attempted to acquire the image of King of the Universe by officiating at a meeting of the UN’s highest body. But Obama apparently believes that being flanked by council-member heads of state like Col. Moammar Qaddafi — who is expected to be seated five seats to Obama’s right — will cast a sufficiently blinding spell on the American taxpayer that the perilous state of the nation’s economy, the health-care fiasco, and a summer of “post-racial” scapegoating will pale by comparison."
David Walker: "We suffer from a fiscal cancer"
"Mr. Walker identifies the disease as having a basic cause: "Washington is totally out of touch and out of control," he sighs. "There is political courage there, but there is far more political careerism and people dodging real solutions." He identifies entrenched incumbency as a real obstacle to change. "Members of Congress ensure they have gerrymandered seats where they pick the voters rather than the voters picking them and then they pass out money to special interests who then make sure they have so much money that no one can easily challenge them," he laments. He believes gerrymandering should be curbed and term limits imposed if for no other reason than to inject some new blood into the system."
Krauthammer charts Obama's stumbles
"He's become ordinary. The spell is broken. The charismatic conjurer of 2008 has shed his magic. He's regressed to the mean, tellingly expressed in poll numbers hovering at 50 percent.
For a man who only recently bred a cult, ordinariness is a great burden, and for his acolytes, a crushing disappointment. Obama has become a politician like others. And like other flailing presidents, he will try to salvage a cherished reform -- and his own standing -- with yet another prime-time speech.
But for the first time since election night in Grant Park, he will appear in the most unfamiliar of guises -- mere mortal, a treacherous transformation to which a man of Obama's supreme self-regard may never adapt."
For a man who only recently bred a cult, ordinariness is a great burden, and for his acolytes, a crushing disappointment. Obama has become a politician like others. And like other flailing presidents, he will try to salvage a cherished reform -- and his own standing -- with yet another prime-time speech.
But for the first time since election night in Grant Park, he will appear in the most unfamiliar of guises -- mere mortal, a treacherous transformation to which a man of Obama's supreme self-regard may never adapt."
Federal bureaucrats are paid 59 % more
From Cato
"The Bureau of Economic Analysis has released its annual data on compensation levels by industry (Tables 6.2D, 6.3D, and 6.6D here). The data show that the pay advantage enjoyed by federal civilian workers over private-sector workers continues to expand.
The George W. Bush years were very lucrative for federal workers. In 2000, the average compensation (wages and benefits) of federal workers was 66 percent higher than the average compensation in the U.S. private sector. The new data show that average federal compensation is now more than double the average in the private sector."
In 2008, the average wage for 1.9 million federal civilian workers was $79,197, which compared to an average $49,935 for the nation’s 108 million private sector workers (measured in full-time equivalents). The figure shows that the federal pay advantage (the gap between the lines) is steadily increasing."
"The Bureau of Economic Analysis has released its annual data on compensation levels by industry (Tables 6.2D, 6.3D, and 6.6D here). The data show that the pay advantage enjoyed by federal civilian workers over private-sector workers continues to expand.
The George W. Bush years were very lucrative for federal workers. In 2000, the average compensation (wages and benefits) of federal workers was 66 percent higher than the average compensation in the U.S. private sector. The new data show that average federal compensation is now more than double the average in the private sector."
In 2008, the average wage for 1.9 million federal civilian workers was $79,197, which compared to an average $49,935 for the nation’s 108 million private sector workers (measured in full-time equivalents). The figure shows that the federal pay advantage (the gap between the lines) is steadily increasing."
"The soft-spoken arrogance and vanity of this administration is somtimes stunning"
From American Thinker
"Now that Obama is in full charge of things this is what we can look forward to. On April 14 he told us.
"...the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80% of the total health care bill out there....It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. That's why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance." (Italics ours.)
Who? Someone like Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, health advisor to Obama, and Zeke's brother Rahm, who loves to hurl thunderbolts from Mount Olympus and bully freshman congressmen. They and their ilk will give us "guidance" about who is worthwhile, who is ready to die, who shall live a week or two longer. Zeke is a Harvard academic who is arrogant enough to believe that he can change human nature and decide the most intimate and complex of human issues -- those of life and death. The man, a bona fide MD, clearly prefers writing bushels of words about what's good or bad for society to caring for people and being responsible for suffering patients. The soft-spoken arrogance and vanity of this administration is sometimes stunning."
Dr. Emanuel thinks health care must be distributed according to the group to which an individual belongs. Valued groups include young and healthy persons, and favored racial and gender groups. Those of less value, of course, are those with medical problems and the elderly."
(snip)
"Benjamin Franklin -- At the age of 70 he helped to draft and signed the Declaration of Independence. For the next 14 years, until his death in 1790, he at one time or another served as the Ambassador to France, negotiated a peace treaty with England, had a romantic affair with a Mme Brillon, invented bifocals, signed the U.S. Constitution, and became the president of the Society for promoting the abolition of Slavery.
Casey Stengel -- Stengel's genius contributed to that great run of 10 Yankee pennants in 12 years from 1949-1960. After losing to the Pittsburgh Pirates in the 1960 World Series Stengel was involuntarily retired from the Yankees, because he was believed to be too old to manage. Stengel's view was that he had been fired for turning 70, and that he would "never make that mistake again." Stengel was talked out of retirement after one season to manage the New York Mets, which he did for four more years. And though they ended up last in their league those years Stengel never stopped adding to the poetry and lore of baseball, "Can't anybody play this here game?"
Ronald Reagan -- Ran for and was elected President of the United States at the age of 69 and again at 73.
(the list goes on)
"Now that Obama is in full charge of things this is what we can look forward to. On April 14 he told us.
"...the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80% of the total health care bill out there....It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. That's why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance." (Italics ours.)
Who? Someone like Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, health advisor to Obama, and Zeke's brother Rahm, who loves to hurl thunderbolts from Mount Olympus and bully freshman congressmen. They and their ilk will give us "guidance" about who is worthwhile, who is ready to die, who shall live a week or two longer. Zeke is a Harvard academic who is arrogant enough to believe that he can change human nature and decide the most intimate and complex of human issues -- those of life and death. The man, a bona fide MD, clearly prefers writing bushels of words about what's good or bad for society to caring for people and being responsible for suffering patients. The soft-spoken arrogance and vanity of this administration is sometimes stunning."
Dr. Emanuel thinks health care must be distributed according to the group to which an individual belongs. Valued groups include young and healthy persons, and favored racial and gender groups. Those of less value, of course, are those with medical problems and the elderly."
(snip)
"Benjamin Franklin -- At the age of 70 he helped to draft and signed the Declaration of Independence. For the next 14 years, until his death in 1790, he at one time or another served as the Ambassador to France, negotiated a peace treaty with England, had a romantic affair with a Mme Brillon, invented bifocals, signed the U.S. Constitution, and became the president of the Society for promoting the abolition of Slavery.
Casey Stengel -- Stengel's genius contributed to that great run of 10 Yankee pennants in 12 years from 1949-1960. After losing to the Pittsburgh Pirates in the 1960 World Series Stengel was involuntarily retired from the Yankees, because he was believed to be too old to manage. Stengel's view was that he had been fired for turning 70, and that he would "never make that mistake again." Stengel was talked out of retirement after one season to manage the New York Mets, which he did for four more years. And though they ended up last in their league those years Stengel never stopped adding to the poetry and lore of baseball, "Can't anybody play this here game?"
Ronald Reagan -- Ran for and was elected President of the United States at the age of 69 and again at 73.
(the list goes on)
Friday, September 4, 2009
Audi honcho slams GM Volt: "for the intellectual elite who want to show how enlightened they are"
"He (Audi of America President Johan de Nysschen) dismissed GM’s upcoming plug-in hybrid as “a car for idiots,” saying that few consumers will be willing to pay $40,000 -- the Volt’s estimated base price -- for a car that competes against $25,000 sedans and conventional hybrids. Nor, he noted, is the Volt a luxury car whose green-technology costs will be excused because it also delivers prestige or performance.
“No one is going to pay a $15,000 premium for a car that competes with a (Toyota) Corolla,” he said. “So there are not enough idiots who will buy it.”
He did add that plug-in hybrids are good in concept and hold advantages over diesels in stop-and-go driving. But for the moment, de Nysschen noted, electric vehicles (EVs) are more about making a statement.
“They’re for the intellectual elite who want to show what enlightened souls they are,” he said."
“No one is going to pay a $15,000 premium for a car that competes with a (Toyota) Corolla,” he said. “So there are not enough idiots who will buy it.”
He did add that plug-in hybrids are good in concept and hold advantages over diesels in stop-and-go driving. But for the moment, de Nysschen noted, electric vehicles (EVs) are more about making a statement.
“They’re for the intellectual elite who want to show what enlightened souls they are,” he said."
Public turns against labor unions in Obama era
"Gallup finds organized labor taking a significant image hit in the past year. While 66% of Americans continue to believe unions are beneficial to their own members, a slight majority now say unions hurt the nation's economy. More broadly, fewer than half of Americans -- 48%, an all-time low -- approve of labor unions, down from 59% a year ago."
A satirical look at high times in Kabul, Afghanistan
Executives of a private contractor hired to protect the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, marveled Friday at the glut of applications it has received since unleashing a bold recruitment strategy the day before.
Unable to replace guards who have fled Afghanistan to avoid injury or death in terrorist attacks, the contractor leaked a bogus story to American news outlets.
The story maintained that the contractor not only tolerated, but required, that guards drink heavily, smoke pot, emgage in sex acts. and use drugs while on duty at the embassy. The purpose was to end a long drought in applications. Not one person had applied for duty in Kabul for two years.
Shortly after the story hit the streets, the contractor's telephone started ringing. Faxes streamed in nonstop. Soldiers waiting for outbound flights to the U.S., where they were scheduled for discharge, changed their minds and lined up at the contractor's door in Kabul.
What do they think they have to look foreward to? Naked pool parties. Performance of sex acts while on duty as evidence they are ready for promotion. Bear in mind that these activities came to light because previous guards had complained about them. That should have been a tipoff.
One of the new applicants, asked why he had applied, said, "Listen, a few days ago I was pumping gas in East Skokie, and I hadn't had a date in six weeks. Sex. drugs and videotape didn't look so bad."
One of those who blew the whistle told ABC News that supervisors not only were aware of the "deviant sexual acts" but helped to organize them.
"It was mostly the young guys fresh from the military who were told they had to participate," said the guard. "They were not gay but they knew what it took to get promoted."
The State Department said it was investigating the allegations and the circumstances surrounding the photographs, which show naked and barely clothed men fondling one another. The guard said the drunken parties had been held regularly for at least a year and a half.
A year and a half in Kabul can seem like a long time.
Unable to replace guards who have fled Afghanistan to avoid injury or death in terrorist attacks, the contractor leaked a bogus story to American news outlets.
The story maintained that the contractor not only tolerated, but required, that guards drink heavily, smoke pot, emgage in sex acts. and use drugs while on duty at the embassy. The purpose was to end a long drought in applications. Not one person had applied for duty in Kabul for two years.
Shortly after the story hit the streets, the contractor's telephone started ringing. Faxes streamed in nonstop. Soldiers waiting for outbound flights to the U.S., where they were scheduled for discharge, changed their minds and lined up at the contractor's door in Kabul.
What do they think they have to look foreward to? Naked pool parties. Performance of sex acts while on duty as evidence they are ready for promotion. Bear in mind that these activities came to light because previous guards had complained about them. That should have been a tipoff.
One of the new applicants, asked why he had applied, said, "Listen, a few days ago I was pumping gas in East Skokie, and I hadn't had a date in six weeks. Sex. drugs and videotape didn't look so bad."
One of those who blew the whistle told ABC News that supervisors not only were aware of the "deviant sexual acts" but helped to organize them.
"It was mostly the young guys fresh from the military who were told they had to participate," said the guard. "They were not gay but they knew what it took to get promoted."
The State Department said it was investigating the allegations and the circumstances surrounding the photographs, which show naked and barely clothed men fondling one another. The guard said the drunken parties had been held regularly for at least a year and a half.
A year and a half in Kabul can seem like a long time.
Michigan's drive for clean tech jobs mostly hot air
"A central belief in Washington and most state capitals nowadays is that government should "invest" in certain businesses—"clean tech," say, or manufacturing—to drive job creation. We hope it all turns out better than it has in Michigan.
For the past 14 years, Lansing politicians have offered $3.3 billion in tax credits through the Michigan Economic Development Corporation and spent another $1.6 billion in outlays to create and retain jobs. The subsidies have ranged from tax breaks for Hollywood, to money for new industrial plants, to millions for TV ads starring Jeff Daniels and Tim Allen talking about business and tourism in the state.
It's one of the largest experiments in smokestack chasing in American history, but one thing it hasn't done is create jobs. An exhaustive new 100-page study by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a Michigan think tank, has reviewed where all the money has gone and what came of it. The study finds that for every 100 jobs that were promised with these tax credits over 14 years, only 29 arrived. Dare we call this cash for clunkers?"
For the past 14 years, Lansing politicians have offered $3.3 billion in tax credits through the Michigan Economic Development Corporation and spent another $1.6 billion in outlays to create and retain jobs. The subsidies have ranged from tax breaks for Hollywood, to money for new industrial plants, to millions for TV ads starring Jeff Daniels and Tim Allen talking about business and tourism in the state.
It's one of the largest experiments in smokestack chasing in American history, but one thing it hasn't done is create jobs. An exhaustive new 100-page study by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a Michigan think tank, has reviewed where all the money has gone and what came of it. The study finds that for every 100 jobs that were promised with these tax credits over 14 years, only 29 arrived. Dare we call this cash for clunkers?"
George Will: U.S. should get out of Iraq
"Recently, Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of U.S. troops there, "blanched" when asked if the war is "functionally over." According to The Washington Post's Greg Jaffe, Odierno said:
"There are still civilians being killed in Iraq. We still have people that are attempting to attack the new Iraqi order and the move towards democracy and a more open economy. So we still have some work to do."
No, we don't, even if, as Jaffe reports, the presence of 130,000 U.S. troops "serves as a check on Iraqi military and political leaders' baser and more sectarian instincts." After almost six and a half years, and 4,327 American dead and 31,483 wounded, with a war spiraling downward in Afghanistan, it would be indefensible for the U.S. military -- overextended and in need of materiel repair and mental recuperation -- to loiter in Iraq to improve the instincts of corrupt elites. If there is worse use of the U.S. military than "nation-building," it is adult supervision and behavior modification of other peoples' politicians."
"There are still civilians being killed in Iraq. We still have people that are attempting to attack the new Iraqi order and the move towards democracy and a more open economy. So we still have some work to do."
No, we don't, even if, as Jaffe reports, the presence of 130,000 U.S. troops "serves as a check on Iraqi military and political leaders' baser and more sectarian instincts." After almost six and a half years, and 4,327 American dead and 31,483 wounded, with a war spiraling downward in Afghanistan, it would be indefensible for the U.S. military -- overextended and in need of materiel repair and mental recuperation -- to loiter in Iraq to improve the instincts of corrupt elites. If there is worse use of the U.S. military than "nation-building," it is adult supervision and behavior modification of other peoples' politicians."
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Hitler and Lenin together, before Hitler was Hitler and Lenin was Lenin; but is it true, or a get-rich-quick scheme?
From the Corner at National Review:
"Apparently there may be a drawing of Adolf Hitler playing chess with Lenin! Really. Skepticism is still probably called for. But jeepers. If true, if ever there were a better moment when God should have lobbed a lightning bolt or a meteor earthward, I can't think of it. From the Telegraph:
Pictured: Hitler playing chess with Lenin
A picture of a young Adolf Hitler apparently playing chess against Vladimir Lenin 100 years ago has come to light.
The image is said to have been created in Vienna by Hitler's art teacher, Emma Lowenstramm, and is signed on the reverse by the two dictators.
Hitler was a jobbing artist in the city in 1909 and Lenin was in exile and the house where they allegedly played the game belonged to a prominent Jewish family."
"Apparently there may be a drawing of Adolf Hitler playing chess with Lenin! Really. Skepticism is still probably called for. But jeepers. If true, if ever there were a better moment when God should have lobbed a lightning bolt or a meteor earthward, I can't think of it. From the Telegraph:
Pictured: Hitler playing chess with Lenin
A picture of a young Adolf Hitler apparently playing chess against Vladimir Lenin 100 years ago has come to light.
The image is said to have been created in Vienna by Hitler's art teacher, Emma Lowenstramm, and is signed on the reverse by the two dictators.
Hitler was a jobbing artist in the city in 1909 and Lenin was in exile and the house where they allegedly played the game belonged to a prominent Jewish family."
Supremes to hear appeal of FEC ban on Clinton film
From Reason
"'When the government of the United States of America claims the authority to ban books because of their political speech," says Citizens United, " something has gone terribly wrong.' A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court seems to agree.
Next week, for the second time, the Court will hear oral arguments in Citizens United v. FEC, a case that poses the question of whether the Federal Election Commission violated the First Amendment when it prevented the conservative group from showing a highly critical documentary about Hillary Clinton on cable TV during the 2008 primary season. The Court scheduled the unusual second round of arguments after it heard the lengths to which the federal government had been driven in defending its suppression of Hillary: The Movie."
"'When the government of the United States of America claims the authority to ban books because of their political speech," says Citizens United, " something has gone terribly wrong.' A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court seems to agree.
Next week, for the second time, the Court will hear oral arguments in Citizens United v. FEC, a case that poses the question of whether the Federal Election Commission violated the First Amendment when it prevented the conservative group from showing a highly critical documentary about Hillary Clinton on cable TV during the 2008 primary season. The Court scheduled the unusual second round of arguments after it heard the lengths to which the federal government had been driven in defending its suppression of Hillary: The Movie."
U.S. has little to show for last 8 years in Afghan
From Reason
"On Oct. 7, 2001, the United States launched one of the most stunningly successful military operations in its history. Just four weeks after terrorists directed from Afghanistan killed nearly 3,000 people on American soil, we struck al-Qaida and Taliban government targets with aircraft, missiles, and Special Forces soldiers. By early December, the Taliban was out of power, al-Qaida had fled into the mountains, and victory was ours.
But that was eight years ago. Did anyone expect back then that we would still be in Afghanistan today, with more troops than ever? The war we thought we had won is not only dragging on but getting worse.
Already, 2009 has been the deadliest year of the war for American forces, and August was the deadliest month yet. Concludes Anthony Cordesman, an expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, "The U.S. is now losing the war against the Taliban."
Beyond toppling the Taliban regime, it's hard to see what we have accomplished."
"On Oct. 7, 2001, the United States launched one of the most stunningly successful military operations in its history. Just four weeks after terrorists directed from Afghanistan killed nearly 3,000 people on American soil, we struck al-Qaida and Taliban government targets with aircraft, missiles, and Special Forces soldiers. By early December, the Taliban was out of power, al-Qaida had fled into the mountains, and victory was ours.
But that was eight years ago. Did anyone expect back then that we would still be in Afghanistan today, with more troops than ever? The war we thought we had won is not only dragging on but getting worse.
Already, 2009 has been the deadliest year of the war for American forces, and August was the deadliest month yet. Concludes Anthony Cordesman, an expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, "The U.S. is now losing the war against the Taliban."
Beyond toppling the Taliban regime, it's hard to see what we have accomplished."
Ted Kennedy tried to make secret deal with Soviets to defeat Reagan in 1984 election
From Forbes
"Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.
"On 9-10 May of this year," the May 14 memorandum explained, "Sen. Edward Kennedy's close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow." (Tunney was Kennedy's law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) "The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov."
Kennedy's message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. "The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations," the memorandum stated. "These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign."
"Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.
"On 9-10 May of this year," the May 14 memorandum explained, "Sen. Edward Kennedy's close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow." (Tunney was Kennedy's law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) "The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov."
Kennedy's message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. "The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations," the memorandum stated. "These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign."
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Some claim doctors in UK are too enthusiastic in diagnosing terminal illnesses in patients
"In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.
Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.
But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.
As a result the scheme is causing a “national crisis” in patient care, the letter states. It has been signed palliative care experts including Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics, University of London, Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke’s cancer centre in Guildford, and four others.
“Forecasting death is an inexact science,”they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death “without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong.
“As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients."
The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS."
Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.
But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.
As a result the scheme is causing a “national crisis” in patient care, the letter states. It has been signed palliative care experts including Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics, University of London, Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke’s cancer centre in Guildford, and four others.
“Forecasting death is an inexact science,”they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death “without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong.
“As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients."
The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS."
Kennedy legacy: sanctuary city for alien rapists
From vdare.com
"On August 18th, just a week before Kennedy died, a young woman exited a taxi just a short stroll from the former Kennedy home. As she walked along, two men crept up from behind and struck her on the back of the head. They grabbed her by the throat, choked her, then dragged her to a waiting pickup truck. Next, they tossed her into the truck and drove to a secluded parking lot.
Once there, the men took turns raping her, then kicked her to the curb, and drove away.
These two thugs were illegal aliens from Mexico and Guatemala.
Luckily, the police could make a quick arrest because they had recently cited the men for a traffic violation. However, because of the local sanctuary policies that Kennedy had long championed, the police had been unable to inquire into their immigration status.
This devastated young woman is another one of Ted Kennedy’s victims.'
"On August 18th, just a week before Kennedy died, a young woman exited a taxi just a short stroll from the former Kennedy home. As she walked along, two men crept up from behind and struck her on the back of the head. They grabbed her by the throat, choked her, then dragged her to a waiting pickup truck. Next, they tossed her into the truck and drove to a secluded parking lot.
Once there, the men took turns raping her, then kicked her to the curb, and drove away.
These two thugs were illegal aliens from Mexico and Guatemala.
Luckily, the police could make a quick arrest because they had recently cited the men for a traffic violation. However, because of the local sanctuary policies that Kennedy had long championed, the police had been unable to inquire into their immigration status.
This devastated young woman is another one of Ted Kennedy’s victims.'
Only 37 % view Democrat congress favorably
"Slightly more than one-third of Americans have a favorable opinion of the Democratic-led Congress, a new poll said Wednesday in a clear warning to the majority party.
The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press said the 37 percent expressing a positive opinion represents a decline of 13 points since April.
The favorable percentage is one of the lowest in more than two decades of Pew surveys—if not the lowest, the poll said. The previous low was 40 percent in January, but the difference is not statistically significant because of the margin of error.
The overall percentage wasn't the only warning for Democrats.
The poll found a major drop in intentions to vote Democratic in next year's midterm elections. Forty-five percent of respondents said they would vote for a Democratic candidate in their district or lean Democratic, while 44 percent said they would vote or lean Republican. Four years ago the numbers favored Democrats 52 percent to 40 percent, as the party went on to gain control of Congress.
The bad news for Democrats isn't a bonanza for Republicans. The survey found that favorable ratings for the GOP remain low at 40 percent."
The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press said the 37 percent expressing a positive opinion represents a decline of 13 points since April.
The favorable percentage is one of the lowest in more than two decades of Pew surveys—if not the lowest, the poll said. The previous low was 40 percent in January, but the difference is not statistically significant because of the margin of error.
The overall percentage wasn't the only warning for Democrats.
The poll found a major drop in intentions to vote Democratic in next year's midterm elections. Forty-five percent of respondents said they would vote for a Democratic candidate in their district or lean Democratic, while 44 percent said they would vote or lean Republican. Four years ago the numbers favored Democrats 52 percent to 40 percent, as the party went on to gain control of Congress.
The bad news for Democrats isn't a bonanza for Republicans. The survey found that favorable ratings for the GOP remain low at 40 percent."
Voters: Forget elections, use random selection
A new finding by Rasmussen Reports opens up the possibility of huge savings in time and money, with no loss in quality, through cancellation of future congressional elections:
"Forty-two percent (42%) say people randomly selected from the phone book could do a better job than the current Congress."
This brings back fond memories of Wiliam F. Buckley, founder of National Review, who famaously said, "I'd rather be governed by the first fifty names in the Boston telephone book than by the faculty of Harvard."
"Forty-two percent (42%) say people randomly selected from the phone book could do a better job than the current Congress."
This brings back fond memories of Wiliam F. Buckley, founder of National Review, who famaously said, "I'd rather be governed by the first fifty names in the Boston telephone book than by the faculty of Harvard."
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
"Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent"
From Townhall
"Britain's release of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi-- the Libyan terrorist whose bomb blew up a plane over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 270 people-- is galling enough in itself. But it is even more profoundly troubling as a sign of a larger mood that has been growing in the Western democracies in our time.
In ways large and small, domestically and internationally, the West is surrendering on the installment plan to Islamic extremists.
The late Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn put his finger on the problem when he said: "The timid civilized world has found nothing with which to oppose the onslaught of a sudden revival of barefaced barbarity, other than concessions and smiles."
(snip)
"The ostensible reason for releasing al-Megrahi was compassion for a man terminally ill. It is ironic that this was said in Scotland, for exactly 250 years ago another Scotsman-- Adam Smith-- said, "Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent."
(snip)
"...bending over backward to be nice to our enemies is one of the many self-indulgences of those who engage in moral preening.
But getting other people killed so that you can feel puffed up about yourself is profoundly immoral. So is betraying the country you took an oath to protect."
"Britain's release of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi-- the Libyan terrorist whose bomb blew up a plane over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 270 people-- is galling enough in itself. But it is even more profoundly troubling as a sign of a larger mood that has been growing in the Western democracies in our time.
In ways large and small, domestically and internationally, the West is surrendering on the installment plan to Islamic extremists.
The late Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn put his finger on the problem when he said: "The timid civilized world has found nothing with which to oppose the onslaught of a sudden revival of barefaced barbarity, other than concessions and smiles."
(snip)
"The ostensible reason for releasing al-Megrahi was compassion for a man terminally ill. It is ironic that this was said in Scotland, for exactly 250 years ago another Scotsman-- Adam Smith-- said, "Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent."
(snip)
"...bending over backward to be nice to our enemies is one of the many self-indulgences of those who engage in moral preening.
But getting other people killed so that you can feel puffed up about yourself is profoundly immoral. So is betraying the country you took an oath to protect."
Nation building requires a nation; Afghanistan isn't
"I'm sorry about the drama," writes Allen, an enthusiastic infantryman willing to die "so that each of you may grow old." He says: "I put everything in God's hands." And: "Semper Fi!"
Allen and others of America's finest are also in Washington's hands. This city should keep faith with them by rapidly reversing the trajectory of America's involvement in Afghanistan, where, says the Dutch commander of coalition forces in a southern province, walking through the region is "like walking through the Old Testament."
U.S. strategy -- protecting the population -- is increasingly troop-intensive while Americans are increasingly impatient about "deteriorating" (says Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) conditions. The war already is nearly 50 percent longer than the combined U.S. involvements in two world wars, and NATO assistance is reluctant and often risible."
(snip)
"...forces should be substantially reduced to serve a comprehensively revised policy: America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, airstrikes and small, potent special forces units, concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters.
Genius, said de Gaulle, recalling Bismarck's decision to halt German forces short of Paris in 1870, sometimes consists of knowing when to stop. Genius is not required to recognize that in Afghanistan, when means now, before more American valor, such as Allen's, is squandered."
Allen and others of America's finest are also in Washington's hands. This city should keep faith with them by rapidly reversing the trajectory of America's involvement in Afghanistan, where, says the Dutch commander of coalition forces in a southern province, walking through the region is "like walking through the Old Testament."
U.S. strategy -- protecting the population -- is increasingly troop-intensive while Americans are increasingly impatient about "deteriorating" (says Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) conditions. The war already is nearly 50 percent longer than the combined U.S. involvements in two world wars, and NATO assistance is reluctant and often risible."
(snip)
"...forces should be substantially reduced to serve a comprehensively revised policy: America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, airstrikes and small, potent special forces units, concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters.
Genius, said de Gaulle, recalling Bismarck's decision to halt German forces short of Paris in 1870, sometimes consists of knowing when to stop. Genius is not required to recognize that in Afghanistan, when means now, before more American valor, such as Allen's, is squandered."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
