Too good to pass up.
Whenever Republicans lose an election, there are pundits at the ready, prepared to explain that the GOP must downplay issues like abortion in order to concentrate on those sexy populist themes like cutting the capital-gains tax. The script is written before the campaign begins. If Republicans win, it is because of the appeal of capital-gains cuts and despite their opposition to abortion. If they lose, it is because of their opposition to abortion and despite the appeal of capital-gains cuts. The facts don't matter; the analysis comes before the data
Got that?
It's all Palin's fault.
As you might guess, the commentary was written in response to an "Expert" on the staff of the Wall Street Journal.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Humbert H Humphrey, Cuba, and Doyle-Style Politics
There's nothing like a story from Roeser to illuminate the dark (and I MEAN 'dark') corners of Democrat politics.
Humphrey and his Democrat (DFL) allies had a lock on the Mesabi Range voters, all of whom were convinced that the mining companies had screwed them silly. In fact, the DFL's increasingly extortionate taxation of mining had brought the enterprise to its financial knees. Unemployment on the Range would not go away.
Then, the discovery that taconite (the waste product of mining) could be processsed--manufactured---into viable iron ore. Millions could be spent on the necessary machinery and technology, and thousands could be employed. Were jobs to be had, the DFL resentment-vote would slowly disappear, endangering Hubert H Humphrey's empire.
But in order to make that happen, the Minnesota Constitution had to be amended.
Of course, the (R) Governor of Minnesota made it a priority to amend the Constitution. This item would be on the 1962 ballot, as would the Governor.
Minnesota was always to be a Democratic state but as the fall of 1962 loomed, it looked like we were ahead and the taconite amendment might be accepted by the voters for consideration later. Humphrey saw this as a great threat. We were on the way to reelection in mid-October, 1962 when the Cuban Missile Crisis hit the Kennedy administration
Suddenly the whole complexion of the campaign changed. We were shut out of the news for more than a week because the national and Minnesota media concentrated on the heroic figure of John F. Kennedy facing yet another test in national security policy
...The nation thrilled to see the Russians supposedly…supposedly… back down. Kennedy was adjudged the winner and with it came a gigantic surge of pro-JFK admiration across the land
...Unknown at the time was that Bobby Kennedy had cut a secret deal with the Kremlin that we would remove missiles from Turkey if they would recompense in Cuba…and keep it quiet so his brother could savor the favorable press. We dismantled our missiles in Turkey which gravely weakened the defenses of the West but the media portrayed it as a glorious victory for this young photogenic president
The Gubernatorial/Amendment campaign continued apace, and it appeared that the (R) Governor would prevail, as well as the Amendment.
...Hubert Humphrey took care of that. In the last few hours of October he unveiled a so-called “scandal” involving 13 feet of concrete poured at unacceptably cold temperatures for a stretch of Interstate 35 near Hinckley…poured, he charged, in cold weather at the insistence of my governor so he could dedicate the portion of the highway for his own political aggrandizement. Then to make it official, Humphrey got the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads (then in the Commerce Department) to cancel the portion of the interstate that was to be paid by the feds-90%. I discovered that the highway worker responsible for orchestrating the “scandal” was a brother of a high DFL operative. Did the media care? Nope
(That's for those of you who think that media antipathy for Pubbies is of recent vintage...it ain't so, folks...)
With that supposed contract cancellation in his pocket, Humphrey announced that the taxpayers of Minnesota would have to pay the entire cost of the Interstate at a cost of tens of millions of dollars due to the Republican governor’s piggish, loutish insistence on pouring the concrete. Of course the pouring of the concrete wasn’t done at our behest. Dedicating a portion of the Interstate was of minimal significance and we never bothered thinking about it. But between the Kennedy aura and the Humphrey charge of evil collusion, we lost reelection by…get this…91 votes out of 1,250,000 cast
Think that "the national interests," or even "the PEOPLE'S interests" ever get between a Dem politician and the power-goal?
Think again.
Humphrey and his Democrat (DFL) allies had a lock on the Mesabi Range voters, all of whom were convinced that the mining companies had screwed them silly. In fact, the DFL's increasingly extortionate taxation of mining had brought the enterprise to its financial knees. Unemployment on the Range would not go away.
Then, the discovery that taconite (the waste product of mining) could be processsed--manufactured---into viable iron ore. Millions could be spent on the necessary machinery and technology, and thousands could be employed. Were jobs to be had, the DFL resentment-vote would slowly disappear, endangering Hubert H Humphrey's empire.
But in order to make that happen, the Minnesota Constitution had to be amended.
Of course, the (R) Governor of Minnesota made it a priority to amend the Constitution. This item would be on the 1962 ballot, as would the Governor.
Minnesota was always to be a Democratic state but as the fall of 1962 loomed, it looked like we were ahead and the taconite amendment might be accepted by the voters for consideration later. Humphrey saw this as a great threat. We were on the way to reelection in mid-October, 1962 when the Cuban Missile Crisis hit the Kennedy administration
Suddenly the whole complexion of the campaign changed. We were shut out of the news for more than a week because the national and Minnesota media concentrated on the heroic figure of John F. Kennedy facing yet another test in national security policy
...The nation thrilled to see the Russians supposedly…supposedly… back down. Kennedy was adjudged the winner and with it came a gigantic surge of pro-JFK admiration across the land
...Unknown at the time was that Bobby Kennedy had cut a secret deal with the Kremlin that we would remove missiles from Turkey if they would recompense in Cuba…and keep it quiet so his brother could savor the favorable press. We dismantled our missiles in Turkey which gravely weakened the defenses of the West but the media portrayed it as a glorious victory for this young photogenic president
The Gubernatorial/Amendment campaign continued apace, and it appeared that the (R) Governor would prevail, as well as the Amendment.
...Hubert Humphrey took care of that. In the last few hours of October he unveiled a so-called “scandal” involving 13 feet of concrete poured at unacceptably cold temperatures for a stretch of Interstate 35 near Hinckley…poured, he charged, in cold weather at the insistence of my governor so he could dedicate the portion of the highway for his own political aggrandizement. Then to make it official, Humphrey got the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads (then in the Commerce Department) to cancel the portion of the interstate that was to be paid by the feds-90%. I discovered that the highway worker responsible for orchestrating the “scandal” was a brother of a high DFL operative. Did the media care? Nope
(That's for those of you who think that media antipathy for Pubbies is of recent vintage...it ain't so, folks...)
With that supposed contract cancellation in his pocket, Humphrey announced that the taxpayers of Minnesota would have to pay the entire cost of the Interstate at a cost of tens of millions of dollars due to the Republican governor’s piggish, loutish insistence on pouring the concrete. Of course the pouring of the concrete wasn’t done at our behest. Dedicating a portion of the Interstate was of minimal significance and we never bothered thinking about it. But between the Kennedy aura and the Humphrey charge of evil collusion, we lost reelection by…get this…91 votes out of 1,250,000 cast
Think that "the national interests," or even "the PEOPLE'S interests" ever get between a Dem politician and the power-goal?
Think again.
"Experts" on Palin
The other McCain swings his mace.
None of her critics in the commentariat could ever draw such a crowd or generate such enthusiasm, and yet they do not hesitate to proclaim that she is "not close to being acceptable in high office" ([Ken] Adelman), that her selection as John McCain's running mate is "irresponsible" ([Francis] Fukuyama) and even that she "represents a fatal cancer to the Republican Party" ([David] Brooks).
Popularity as a pathology? What Brooks and the others are saying is that these people who spend hours in the cold October wind for a chance to see Sarah Palin are too stupid to know what's good for them. "Listen to us," say the political experts.
One of those (R) "experts" happens to comment on this blog, and runs his own blogs, too...
After briefly mentioning the "Nuke Iraq/Iran" proclivities of the above-named "experts," McCain opines with accuracy:
...And at nothing are they more expert than evading responsibility, a task that requires scapegoats. So the unpopularity of the Republican Party has nothing to do with the policies the experts urged and the politicians the experts supported. Rather, it's the provincial hockey mom who is to blame."Cakewalk Ken" and Fukuyama have now declared their support for Obama, citing Palin prominently among their reasons. Brooks and Will have not (yet) declared themselves acolytes of Hope, but have made clear that they view Palin as an unalloyed dead weight on the GOP.
...AMONG THE FACTS the experts ignore is that the Republican Party was in deep political trouble long before John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. The total popular vote in the Democratic primaries (36 million) was 70 percent larger than in the GOP primaries (21 million), and McCain's 9.9 million primary votes represented just 47 percent of the Republican total
At least the local 'expert' didn't advocate turning the Middle East into glass, and DOES have constructive criticism of the (R) campaign--admittedly, a barn-sized target.
But "experts" who see Palin as the problem are wrong. McCain and the (R) label are the problem--and it will be precisely the same with Romney, or Jeb Bush.
None of her critics in the commentariat could ever draw such a crowd or generate such enthusiasm, and yet they do not hesitate to proclaim that she is "not close to being acceptable in high office" ([Ken] Adelman), that her selection as John McCain's running mate is "irresponsible" ([Francis] Fukuyama) and even that she "represents a fatal cancer to the Republican Party" ([David] Brooks).
Popularity as a pathology? What Brooks and the others are saying is that these people who spend hours in the cold October wind for a chance to see Sarah Palin are too stupid to know what's good for them. "Listen to us," say the political experts.
One of those (R) "experts" happens to comment on this blog, and runs his own blogs, too...
After briefly mentioning the "Nuke Iraq/Iran" proclivities of the above-named "experts," McCain opines with accuracy:
...And at nothing are they more expert than evading responsibility, a task that requires scapegoats. So the unpopularity of the Republican Party has nothing to do with the policies the experts urged and the politicians the experts supported. Rather, it's the provincial hockey mom who is to blame."Cakewalk Ken" and Fukuyama have now declared their support for Obama, citing Palin prominently among their reasons. Brooks and Will have not (yet) declared themselves acolytes of Hope, but have made clear that they view Palin as an unalloyed dead weight on the GOP.
...AMONG THE FACTS the experts ignore is that the Republican Party was in deep political trouble long before John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. The total popular vote in the Democratic primaries (36 million) was 70 percent larger than in the GOP primaries (21 million), and McCain's 9.9 million primary votes represented just 47 percent of the Republican total
At least the local 'expert' didn't advocate turning the Middle East into glass, and DOES have constructive criticism of the (R) campaign--admittedly, a barn-sized target.
But "experts" who see Palin as the problem are wrong. McCain and the (R) label are the problem--and it will be precisely the same with Romney, or Jeb Bush.
Romney? Is He Serious?
Mitt Romney now sees himself as the savior of the (R) brand.
This is the guy who instituted "Romney-Care" in Massachusetts--which even his (D) successor (Patrick) can't afford to keep running? The guy who illegally "blessed" same-sex marriages in Massachusetts?
THAT Romney?
The Romney gang is dirt-i-fying Palin--mostly to head her off at the pass.
But Romney will have a larger problem than merely burying Palin.
It will be finding Conservatives who have any interest in him, whatsoever.
HT: Peter
This is the guy who instituted "Romney-Care" in Massachusetts--which even his (D) successor (Patrick) can't afford to keep running? The guy who illegally "blessed" same-sex marriages in Massachusetts?
THAT Romney?
The Romney gang is dirt-i-fying Palin--mostly to head her off at the pass.
But Romney will have a larger problem than merely burying Palin.
It will be finding Conservatives who have any interest in him, whatsoever.
HT: Peter
Underwater In Wisconsin
The WSJ publishes a map.
In Wisconsin, according to the WSJ item, about 14% of Wisconsin homeowners are "upside down" on their mortgages (they owe more than the home is worth,) and 20%+ are "near underwater."
It's not quite as bad as the national average of 18%.
In Wisconsin, according to the WSJ item, about 14% of Wisconsin homeowners are "upside down" on their mortgages (they owe more than the home is worth,) and 20%+ are "near underwater."
It's not quite as bad as the national average of 18%.
Principal Removes Obama Sign
JSOnline reports that Dr Mark Schmitt, Principal of Catholic Memorial High School in Waukesha has removed the Obama sign from his front yard.
Well.
'Responsibilities' finally showed up and arm-wrestled 'rights' to the ground, where (in this instance) they belong.
Fr. Hartmann and the Board are to be thanked for their courage.
Well.
'Responsibilities' finally showed up and arm-wrestled 'rights' to the ground, where (in this instance) they belong.
Fr. Hartmann and the Board are to be thanked for their courage.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Obama, Dr. Schmitt?
The principal of Catholic Memorial High School in Waukesha, WI., insists on maintaining his "OBAMA" sign in his front yard, across the street from the school. Most people familiar with the school and with Dr. Schmitt KNOW that it's his yard, and his sign.
This despite the following:
Obama is undecided on whether life begins at conception -
Obama has pledged to Planned Parenthood to sign The Freedom of Choice Act, a law which would cancel every state, federal, and local regulation of abortion, no matter how modest or reasonable. It would even abolish all state restrictions on government funding for abortions. Catholics that pay income tax will be paying an abortionist to perform an abortion
Obama would repeal the Mexico City policy, which bars federal funding for international nongovernmental organizations involved in abortion-related services and would pit the US against the Vatican on the international fight against abortion
He strongly supports the 1973 Supreme Court decision on abortion rights and says he will oppose any constitutional measure to overturn it.
Obama has pledged to choose Justices with a Pro Abortion agenda and he voted against Roberts and Alito
Obama voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions and prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion
Obama supports the destruction of embryos for experimentation and voted to expand research to more embryonic stem cell lines
He voted yes on $100M to fund contraceptives for teens and sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women
Voted no on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP a program that gives funds to states in order to provide health insurance to families with children
He opposed the federal marriage amendment in 2006 and also favors repealing the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which gives a state the right not to recognize same-sex marriages performed in another state
These are not "values of the Kansas heartland." These are the values of Moloch--the Culture of Death.
HT: Pro Ecclesia
This despite the following:
Obama is undecided on whether life begins at conception -
Obama has pledged to Planned Parenthood to sign The Freedom of Choice Act, a law which would cancel every state, federal, and local regulation of abortion, no matter how modest or reasonable. It would even abolish all state restrictions on government funding for abortions. Catholics that pay income tax will be paying an abortionist to perform an abortion
Obama would repeal the Mexico City policy, which bars federal funding for international nongovernmental organizations involved in abortion-related services and would pit the US against the Vatican on the international fight against abortion
He strongly supports the 1973 Supreme Court decision on abortion rights and says he will oppose any constitutional measure to overturn it.
Obama has pledged to choose Justices with a Pro Abortion agenda and he voted against Roberts and Alito
Obama voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions and prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion
Obama supports the destruction of embryos for experimentation and voted to expand research to more embryonic stem cell lines
He voted yes on $100M to fund contraceptives for teens and sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women
Voted no on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP a program that gives funds to states in order to provide health insurance to families with children
He opposed the federal marriage amendment in 2006 and also favors repealing the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which gives a state the right not to recognize same-sex marriages performed in another state
These are not "values of the Kansas heartland." These are the values of Moloch--the Culture of Death.
HT: Pro Ecclesia
McCain/Obama Tax Plans
They actually do have some proposals.
Both plans, on balance, reduce federal taxes, demonstrating a clear and encouraging understanding by the candidates that income taxes are too high. McCain proposes $300 million more in tax cuts over 10 years. Unfortunately, Obama proposes additional tax increases -- but conveniently delays their implementation until at least two years after a hypothetical second term...
Oh, really? That's not taking into account the Magical-Disappearing-Tax-Credit "reduction" of the O-and-Con-Man...
Regardless,
Among the major differences, the most important is that McCain's proposals emphasize creating jobs and raising wages.
This distinction is most apparent in the Republican nominee’s proposal to extend all the 2001 and 2003 reductions in tax rates and his proposals to cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent -- second highest in the industrialized world -- to 25 percent. The distinction is also apparent in McCain’s proposal to allow immediate expensing of business investment necessary for job growth and international competitiveness.
McCain finesses the "fair trade" issue by addressing one of the causes: tax rates. Business in PRChina do not pay taxes; matter of fact, they are heavily subsidized for exporting products. It's mercantilism pure. McCain's answer: a little-bitty teeny-tiny counter-fire exercise.
Beats the hell out of Obama's plan:
Obama's preference for punitive redistributionism is also seen in his proposal to raise tax rates on capital gains and dividends. Capital formation is essential for increasing workers’ productivity and wages. Taxes on capital gains and dividends are direct and certain impediments to business investment.
Given the problems with capital in the last few months (it disappears from Banks pretty quickly, no?) this "capital formation" thing is extremely significant. Running a business on borrowed money doesn't work for long, particularly in thin-margin industries--that is, in competitive businesses.
Like jobs? Like having an income?
Think carefully about long-term prospects.
Both plans, on balance, reduce federal taxes, demonstrating a clear and encouraging understanding by the candidates that income taxes are too high. McCain proposes $300 million more in tax cuts over 10 years. Unfortunately, Obama proposes additional tax increases -- but conveniently delays their implementation until at least two years after a hypothetical second term...
Oh, really? That's not taking into account the Magical-Disappearing-Tax-Credit "reduction" of the O-and-Con-Man...
Regardless,
Among the major differences, the most important is that McCain's proposals emphasize creating jobs and raising wages.
This distinction is most apparent in the Republican nominee’s proposal to extend all the 2001 and 2003 reductions in tax rates and his proposals to cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent -- second highest in the industrialized world -- to 25 percent. The distinction is also apparent in McCain’s proposal to allow immediate expensing of business investment necessary for job growth and international competitiveness.
McCain finesses the "fair trade" issue by addressing one of the causes: tax rates. Business in PRChina do not pay taxes; matter of fact, they are heavily subsidized for exporting products. It's mercantilism pure. McCain's answer: a little-bitty teeny-tiny counter-fire exercise.
Beats the hell out of Obama's plan:
Obama's preference for punitive redistributionism is also seen in his proposal to raise tax rates on capital gains and dividends. Capital formation is essential for increasing workers’ productivity and wages. Taxes on capital gains and dividends are direct and certain impediments to business investment.
Given the problems with capital in the last few months (it disappears from Banks pretty quickly, no?) this "capital formation" thing is extremely significant. Running a business on borrowed money doesn't work for long, particularly in thin-margin industries--that is, in competitive businesses.
Like jobs? Like having an income?
Think carefully about long-term prospects.
IBD/TIPP Tracking Poll, Day 17
Umnnnnhhhh, that's yesterday, 10/17...
Three points, with 9/2% undecided.
I looked at the "Catholic" section. And the "Catholic" section is moving towards McCain. A few days ago it was a dead heat--now it's 44/42 McCain, with 13% undecided.
Think 59 Bishops may have had something to do with it?
Three points, with 9/2% undecided.
I looked at the "Catholic" section. And the "Catholic" section is moving towards McCain. A few days ago it was a dead heat--now it's 44/42 McCain, with 13% undecided.
Think 59 Bishops may have had something to do with it?
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Catholic Memorial HS Principal: OBAMA Supporter
Belling has a hot one.
Seems the Principal of Catholic Memorial HS in Waukesha, WI., has a large "Obama" sign in his front yard--which is across the street from the school.
Interesting.
Here's a guy, Dr. Mark Schmitt, who makes his living on NON-ABORTED children, working for a Church whose Bishops have made clear that only a "grave reason" should allow support for the most viciously pro-abortion Presidential candidate in US history.
Further, Belling reports that 'several members of the CMH Board' have asked the principal to take down his sign--and he has refused.
The President of the school, Fr. Paul Hartmann (who is unable to articulate the USCC position on the matter, by the way) acknowledges that Board members are "upset," like many teachers and students.
But Hartmann cannot convince the Principal to take down his sign, either.
I'm sure that the Principal, Mr. Schmidt, has a morals clause in his contract, Father.
Exercise it, Father. Grow a pair.
Seems the Principal of Catholic Memorial HS in Waukesha, WI., has a large "Obama" sign in his front yard--which is across the street from the school.
Interesting.
Here's a guy, Dr. Mark Schmitt, who makes his living on NON-ABORTED children, working for a Church whose Bishops have made clear that only a "grave reason" should allow support for the most viciously pro-abortion Presidential candidate in US history.
Further, Belling reports that 'several members of the CMH Board' have asked the principal to take down his sign--and he has refused.
The President of the school, Fr. Paul Hartmann (who is unable to articulate the USCC position on the matter, by the way) acknowledges that Board members are "upset," like many teachers and students.
But Hartmann cannot convince the Principal to take down his sign, either.
I'm sure that the Principal, Mr. Schmidt, has a morals clause in his contract, Father.
Exercise it, Father. Grow a pair.
Palin and McPain
Couldn't-a said it better myself.
The only reason that John McCain even has a chance in this election is because of Sarah Palin. No one cares about the “maverick.” Before he selected her to be his running mate the only reason people were thinking of voting him was because they were deathly afraid of having a progressive loon like Obama in the White House. Much of the support for McCain is still largely anti-Obama sentiment, but now there are people genuinely excited about the Republican ticket because it contains the most truly conservative candidate on the ticket since Reagan left the scene. While McCain can barely fill small auditoriums at his rallies, Palin has people lined up for nearly a mile to catch a glimpse of her.
Those who despise Sarah Palin are the very same people who gave us the turd sandwich called John McCain. They thought that the Republican Party could once again return to its Rockefeller (non) glory days. The fact that Palin conservatism is vastly more appealing than McCain conservatism has got to be a tremendous disappointment to those operating under the delusion that they could recapture control of the Republican Party. Sorry guy, but no dice. If McCain loses next Tuesday - and I am going out on the limb of limbs in predicting that he WILL NOT - then that paves the way for traditional conservatives to solidy control within the party for the 2010 and 2012 elections. Even if McCain wins, the strong possibility that he will step down after one term means that Sarah Palin will be the next GOP nominee
Look, folks. McCain's campaign has been horrible; it began as a cult-of-personality thing and is ending sounding as though he's channeling Reagan. But in reality, that's because there's no there there in McPain. To call him 'erratic' is accurate, but does not capture him.
In the end, McCain's political philosophy is non-existent. Period. It's day-to-day; it's ad-hoc.
It's reported that the Pubbie Poohbahs are retreating to the Bat-Cave after the election to 'figure it all out' again.
They would do better to ask Palin her thoughts and unanimously agree to adopt them as the next Party platform.
The only reason that John McCain even has a chance in this election is because of Sarah Palin. No one cares about the “maverick.” Before he selected her to be his running mate the only reason people were thinking of voting him was because they were deathly afraid of having a progressive loon like Obama in the White House. Much of the support for McCain is still largely anti-Obama sentiment, but now there are people genuinely excited about the Republican ticket because it contains the most truly conservative candidate on the ticket since Reagan left the scene. While McCain can barely fill small auditoriums at his rallies, Palin has people lined up for nearly a mile to catch a glimpse of her.
Those who despise Sarah Palin are the very same people who gave us the turd sandwich called John McCain. They thought that the Republican Party could once again return to its Rockefeller (non) glory days. The fact that Palin conservatism is vastly more appealing than McCain conservatism has got to be a tremendous disappointment to those operating under the delusion that they could recapture control of the Republican Party. Sorry guy, but no dice. If McCain loses next Tuesday - and I am going out on the limb of limbs in predicting that he WILL NOT - then that paves the way for traditional conservatives to solidy control within the party for the 2010 and 2012 elections. Even if McCain wins, the strong possibility that he will step down after one term means that Sarah Palin will be the next GOP nominee
Look, folks. McCain's campaign has been horrible; it began as a cult-of-personality thing and is ending sounding as though he's channeling Reagan. But in reality, that's because there's no there there in McPain. To call him 'erratic' is accurate, but does not capture him.
In the end, McCain's political philosophy is non-existent. Period. It's day-to-day; it's ad-hoc.
It's reported that the Pubbie Poohbahs are retreating to the Bat-Cave after the election to 'figure it all out' again.
They would do better to ask Palin her thoughts and unanimously agree to adopt them as the next Party platform.
Damn Hard Work, That Foreign Relations Stuff
Obama will get a crash course, I guess.
Here's a short vid demonstrating his assiduous study of foreign affairs.
He's on the Senate For/Relat's Committee. But don't confuse letterhead-presence with actual application.
HT: Regular Guy
Here's a short vid demonstrating his assiduous study of foreign affairs.
He's on the Senate For/Relat's Committee. But don't confuse letterhead-presence with actual application.
HT: Regular Guy
Fifty-Nine Bishops and Waiting
A comprehensive list compiled by InsideCatholic.com reveals that more than 80 U.S. bishops have proclaimed abortion and the life issues to be the defining issues in the upcoming election, including 22 bishops who signed on to a joint statement by the New York bishops, and another 10 bishops who signed on to a Pennsylvania joint statement (Free Republic)
At this time, the Archbishop of Milwakee has not issued a statement, nor has the Bishop of Green Bay.
However, Bps. Listecki (LaCrosse) and Morlino (Madistan) have done so.
Abp. Timothy Dolan may yet essay on the issue. The closest he's come is this:
...abortion is a complex issue; ...people of good will need to work creatively to create a just society where the poor have options to care for their babies, born and pre-born - a point powerfully made in many documents of the American bishops, including "Faithful Citizenship," the U.S. bishops' pastoral statement on political responsibility
...printed in the Milwaukee JS in September.
At this time, the Archbishop of Milwakee has not issued a statement, nor has the Bishop of Green Bay.
However, Bps. Listecki (LaCrosse) and Morlino (Madistan) have done so.
Abp. Timothy Dolan may yet essay on the issue. The closest he's come is this:
...abortion is a complex issue; ...people of good will need to work creatively to create a just society where the poor have options to care for their babies, born and pre-born - a point powerfully made in many documents of the American bishops, including "Faithful Citizenship," the U.S. bishops' pastoral statement on political responsibility
...printed in the Milwaukee JS in September.
"I Lost My Home"
Here's a long essay from an ex-Obama speechwriter.
There are a couple of lines which are significant:
Perhaps this is why I found the initial mocking of Joe so offensive and I realized an old line applied: “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party; the Democratic Party left me.”
The party I believed in wouldn’t look down on working people under any circumstance. And Joe the Plumber is right. This is the absolutely worst time to raise taxes on anyone: the rich, the middle class, the poor, small businesses and corporations.
That's the clincher, although her take-away isn't bad, either:
When people say how excited they are about this election, I can now say, “Maybe for you. But I lost my home.”
According to Charlie, Obama has now told us that tax-increases will hit those earning $75K.
She won't be the ONLY one to lose her home.
There are a couple of lines which are significant:
Perhaps this is why I found the initial mocking of Joe so offensive and I realized an old line applied: “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party; the Democratic Party left me.”
The party I believed in wouldn’t look down on working people under any circumstance. And Joe the Plumber is right. This is the absolutely worst time to raise taxes on anyone: the rich, the middle class, the poor, small businesses and corporations.
That's the clincher, although her take-away isn't bad, either:
When people say how excited they are about this election, I can now say, “Maybe for you. But I lost my home.”
According to Charlie, Obama has now told us that tax-increases will hit those earning $75K.
She won't be the ONLY one to lose her home.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
"A Collective Salvation"?
Interesting video here.
This is the vid in which Obama compares Bosnia to the USA. I don't recall any recent episodes of ethnic cleansing here in the US, nor Hutu/Tutsi mutual bloodbaths, (except, of course, Planned Parenthood's campaign,) but that wasn't the part that interested me.
Earlier on, Obama gets into his reparations-race-fixation--castigating the suburbanites who 'don't want to pay for city children to go to school...' Well, there are some who feel that way. It's a leap, though, to imply that ALL suburbanites have that attitude, and in Wisconsin, it's irrelevant. The entire State contributes to MPS.
Most striking is his comment that 'my individual salvation....[requires]....collective salvation for the country...[requiring] sacrifices for the new day and the new age.' (Right around 1:00 in the vid.)
That language is odd, wouldn't you say? He's invoking religion here--but what religion? Is this what Rev. Wright teaches? Or does this "collective salvation" notion come from some other place?
It's language for a crusade--but in whose name?
HT: No Quarter
This is the vid in which Obama compares Bosnia to the USA. I don't recall any recent episodes of ethnic cleansing here in the US, nor Hutu/Tutsi mutual bloodbaths, (except, of course, Planned Parenthood's campaign,) but that wasn't the part that interested me.
Earlier on, Obama gets into his reparations-race-fixation--castigating the suburbanites who 'don't want to pay for city children to go to school...' Well, there are some who feel that way. It's a leap, though, to imply that ALL suburbanites have that attitude, and in Wisconsin, it's irrelevant. The entire State contributes to MPS.
Most striking is his comment that 'my individual salvation....[requires]....collective salvation for the country...[requiring] sacrifices for the new day and the new age.' (Right around 1:00 in the vid.)
That language is odd, wouldn't you say? He's invoking religion here--but what religion? Is this what Rev. Wright teaches? Or does this "collective salvation" notion come from some other place?
It's language for a crusade--but in whose name?
HT: No Quarter
Ayers and Dohrn Visited Mecca
Well, THEIR version of Mecca.
If the MSM had any difficulty, or even cared about, finding unrepentant domestic terrorist and Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers, or his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, during a week this past September, it was perhaps because they didn’t know where to look — or, most likely, weren’t looking.
The radical couple had made a little offshore visit to that four-letter island off Florida’s coast...
That would be Cuba, folks.
Documentation here.
If the MSM had any difficulty, or even cared about, finding unrepentant domestic terrorist and Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers, or his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, during a week this past September, it was perhaps because they didn’t know where to look — or, most likely, weren’t looking.
The radical couple had made a little offshore visit to that four-letter island off Florida’s coast...
That would be Cuba, folks.
Documentation here.
Toledo Cop-Clerk Searched Joe's Records
Well, here's the fish that will get fried.
The Toledo Police Department confirms that one of its records clerks has been charged with performing an unlawful search of Joe The Plumber’s records.
(Nothing said as to whether the perp was DIRECTED to do so by a superior... and I'll bet a bit that she was just following orders.)
One who will NOT get fried:
Obama donor Helen Jones-Kelly, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, approved a separate search. More are being investigated.
But word has it that Joe the Plumber's thinking about a lawsuit...
The Toledo Police Department confirms that one of its records clerks has been charged with performing an unlawful search of Joe The Plumber’s records.
(Nothing said as to whether the perp was DIRECTED to do so by a superior... and I'll bet a bit that she was just following orders.)
One who will NOT get fried:
Obama donor Helen Jones-Kelly, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, approved a separate search. More are being investigated.
But word has it that Joe the Plumber's thinking about a lawsuit...
"Hush Rush" Hits McIlheran
Clearly, the JS editorial board is working towards fairness.
McIlheran's blog has been dead since the Great Makeover (except for about 1 day with the new graphix).
Perhaps he'll send messages by pigeon?
McIlheran's blog has been dead since the Great Makeover (except for about 1 day with the new graphix).
Perhaps he'll send messages by pigeon?
$250K, $200K, $150K.....and Counting Down to YOU!
Sykes has it...at least for the time being:
7/8/08: "If You Make $250,000 A Year Or Less, We Will Not Raise Your Taxes. We Will Cut Your Taxes." (Barack Obama)
10/25/08: "If you have a job, pay taxes, and make less than $200,000 a year, you’ll get a tax cut." (Barack Obama)
10/27/08: "What we're saying is that $87 billion tax break doesn't need to go to people making an average of 1.4 million, it should go like it used to. It should go to middle class people -- people making under $150,000 a year." (Joe Biden)
At that rate, it will be $52K by January 1st, and $30K on Inauguration Day.
Maybe WEAC members should be paying attention.
7/8/08: "If You Make $250,000 A Year Or Less, We Will Not Raise Your Taxes. We Will Cut Your Taxes." (Barack Obama)
10/25/08: "If you have a job, pay taxes, and make less than $200,000 a year, you’ll get a tax cut." (Barack Obama)
10/27/08: "What we're saying is that $87 billion tax break doesn't need to go to people making an average of 1.4 million, it should go like it used to. It should go to middle class people -- people making under $150,000 a year." (Joe Biden)
At that rate, it will be $52K by January 1st, and $30K on Inauguration Day.
Maybe WEAC members should be paying attention.
ACORN Needs a BIG Tax Credit, Obama!!
Wow.
This outfit knows how it would like you to spend YOUR money. Not-so-good on spending their own, particularly for Federal taxes, fair wages, ....you know, silly stuff like that.
...more than 200 federal, state, and local tax liens adding up to more than $3 million have been filed against the ACORN network since 1989. All of these liens, which are only issued by creditor tax agencies after a tax debt has become seriously delinquent, are associated with ACORN's 1024 Elysian Fields Avenue address in New Orleans, Louisiana. That address is the official headquarters for nearly 300 ACORN-affiliated groups.
The most recent lien ($23,383) was filed by the IRS against an ACORN affiliate, American Workers Associates Inc., on Sept. 9. The largest lien ($547,312) was filed against ACORN itself by the IRS on March 10.
...Even though it's unclear what kinds of taxes ACORN and its affiliates failed to pay, because almost all ACORN affiliates are nonprofits that are exempted from paying most or all taxes, it seems likely that the liens were issued for non-payment of employees' payroll taxes, which are not covered under the tax-exemption.
Several accountants confirmed this view, saying the tax debts are probably related to delinquent payroll taxes. If so, this would be the ultimate irony because payroll taxes fund the social programs and wealth redistribution schemes that ACORN so ardently supports. (See Foundation Watch, November 2008.)
Makes sense. After all, when the O-and-Savior steals YOUR 401(k) money, then all that cash can go toward the delinquent Social Security taxes which ACORN didn't pay.
Ironies abound:
ACORN stoutly defends the right of workers to organize unions, but the group doesn't like it when its own workers try to organize. It has tried to stop its own employees from signing up with unions, and in 2003 the National Labor Relations Board determined it had unlawfully blocked its workers from organizing...
This while occupying the very same building as the SEIU headquarters, no less...
And all that "living wage" stuff? Piffle!!
ACORN supports raising the minimum wage and enacting so-called living wage policies, and claims it organized community and labor coalitions that succeeded in enacting living wage laws in 41 cities by the end of the 1990s.
Yet a 2003 study of ACORN by the Employment Policies Institute found the group paid a wage of $5.67 per hour, which was "less than half the level demanded by many proposed 'living wage' ordinances that ACORN supports."
As to Equal Opportunity--screw THAT stuff, too:
Even though it supports the continued imposition of equal employment opportunity laws on the rest of America, it argued in a separate lawsuit that same year that it shouldn't have to comply with those laws. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had to sue ACORN to force it comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the crown jewel of the civil rights movement's legislative accomplishments. (See Labor Watch, November 2008.)
If the O-and-Savior loses, there's a tax-counsel/ER attorney slot available.
This outfit knows how it would like you to spend YOUR money. Not-so-good on spending their own, particularly for Federal taxes, fair wages, ....you know, silly stuff like that.
...more than 200 federal, state, and local tax liens adding up to more than $3 million have been filed against the ACORN network since 1989. All of these liens, which are only issued by creditor tax agencies after a tax debt has become seriously delinquent, are associated with ACORN's 1024 Elysian Fields Avenue address in New Orleans, Louisiana. That address is the official headquarters for nearly 300 ACORN-affiliated groups.
The most recent lien ($23,383) was filed by the IRS against an ACORN affiliate, American Workers Associates Inc., on Sept. 9. The largest lien ($547,312) was filed against ACORN itself by the IRS on March 10.
...Even though it's unclear what kinds of taxes ACORN and its affiliates failed to pay, because almost all ACORN affiliates are nonprofits that are exempted from paying most or all taxes, it seems likely that the liens were issued for non-payment of employees' payroll taxes, which are not covered under the tax-exemption.
Several accountants confirmed this view, saying the tax debts are probably related to delinquent payroll taxes. If so, this would be the ultimate irony because payroll taxes fund the social programs and wealth redistribution schemes that ACORN so ardently supports. (See Foundation Watch, November 2008.)
Makes sense. After all, when the O-and-Savior steals YOUR 401(k) money, then all that cash can go toward the delinquent Social Security taxes which ACORN didn't pay.
Ironies abound:
ACORN stoutly defends the right of workers to organize unions, but the group doesn't like it when its own workers try to organize. It has tried to stop its own employees from signing up with unions, and in 2003 the National Labor Relations Board determined it had unlawfully blocked its workers from organizing...
This while occupying the very same building as the SEIU headquarters, no less...
And all that "living wage" stuff? Piffle!!
ACORN supports raising the minimum wage and enacting so-called living wage policies, and claims it organized community and labor coalitions that succeeded in enacting living wage laws in 41 cities by the end of the 1990s.
Yet a 2003 study of ACORN by the Employment Policies Institute found the group paid a wage of $5.67 per hour, which was "less than half the level demanded by many proposed 'living wage' ordinances that ACORN supports."
As to Equal Opportunity--screw THAT stuff, too:
Even though it supports the continued imposition of equal employment opportunity laws on the rest of America, it argued in a separate lawsuit that same year that it shouldn't have to comply with those laws. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had to sue ACORN to force it comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the crown jewel of the civil rights movement's legislative accomplishments. (See Labor Watch, November 2008.)
If the O-and-Savior loses, there's a tax-counsel/ER attorney slot available.
Early Natural Law Affirmations v. "Redistribution"
Some would imagine that Natural Law was invented in the Dark Ages.
Not really. It's been around for a long time, and acknowledged as such...
...this reasoning was phrased by Aquinas but not invented by him but by ancient non-Christian philosophers: Aristotle who wrote of “natural justice”; Cicero who wrote “law is the distinction between things just and unjust, made in agreement with that primal and most ancient of all things, nature.” Cicero was the first one to write, “if the principles of justice were founded on the decrees of peoples, the edicts of princes or the decisions of judges, then justice would sanction robbery and adultery and forgery of wills, in case these acts were approved by the votes or decrees of the populace.”
What else than 'edicts of princes or ....judges' can Obama refer to when he suggests remedying the 'defects' of the Constitution?
It was not accidental that the Framers used the phrase "....Laws of Nature and Nature's God..." in the Declaration, folks. Jefferson & Co. had read Aristotle and Cicero--in the original Greek and Latin--and knew exactly what they were talking about.
The Natural Law insists that the fruits of one's labors are one's own. The disposition of those fruits are subject to moral imperatives incumbent on individuals, not States (although States are naturally allowed to provide for defense, highways, and some minimal social safety-net for the unfortunate or disabled.)
We argued that "In the FDR/Obama worldview, "rights" begin with positive law--that law made by the sovereign, or the Legislature. In the view of the Founders, "rights" originate from God, thus are "natural." BIG difference."
Obama's view corresponds precisely with that of the Princes--that all comes from the State, its Princes, and its judges.
Too bad it's not true.
HT: Roeser
Not really. It's been around for a long time, and acknowledged as such...
...this reasoning was phrased by Aquinas but not invented by him but by ancient non-Christian philosophers: Aristotle who wrote of “natural justice”; Cicero who wrote “law is the distinction between things just and unjust, made in agreement with that primal and most ancient of all things, nature.” Cicero was the first one to write, “if the principles of justice were founded on the decrees of peoples, the edicts of princes or the decisions of judges, then justice would sanction robbery and adultery and forgery of wills, in case these acts were approved by the votes or decrees of the populace.”
What else than 'edicts of princes or ....judges' can Obama refer to when he suggests remedying the 'defects' of the Constitution?
It was not accidental that the Framers used the phrase "....Laws of Nature and Nature's God..." in the Declaration, folks. Jefferson & Co. had read Aristotle and Cicero--in the original Greek and Latin--and knew exactly what they were talking about.
The Natural Law insists that the fruits of one's labors are one's own. The disposition of those fruits are subject to moral imperatives incumbent on individuals, not States (although States are naturally allowed to provide for defense, highways, and some minimal social safety-net for the unfortunate or disabled.)
We argued that "In the FDR/Obama worldview, "rights" begin with positive law--that law made by the sovereign, or the Legislature. In the view of the Founders, "rights" originate from God, thus are "natural." BIG difference."
Obama's view corresponds precisely with that of the Princes--that all comes from the State, its Princes, and its judges.
Too bad it's not true.
HT: Roeser
What's Your House Worth?
Sorry, I can't answer that.
But there IS a measure, once-removed, provided by Case-Shiller. It's not perfect. And I call it "once-removed" because the closest measured Midwestern city is Chicago.
And in Chicago, August 07/August 08 prices are down 9.8%. (Highest value-to-current value is off by 11.3%).
Minneapolis, also close by, is even worse: August o7/August 08 is down 13.5%, with peak-to-current down by 17.1%.
Overall USA: down 16.6% August 07/August 08.
HT: Ritholtz
But there IS a measure, once-removed, provided by Case-Shiller. It's not perfect. And I call it "once-removed" because the closest measured Midwestern city is Chicago.
And in Chicago, August 07/August 08 prices are down 9.8%. (Highest value-to-current value is off by 11.3%).
Minneapolis, also close by, is even worse: August o7/August 08 is down 13.5%, with peak-to-current down by 17.1%.
Overall USA: down 16.6% August 07/August 08.
HT: Ritholtz
Whose Platform Is This One?
P-Mac did the research, and it's telling.
...suppose there were a candidate who promised things you think good. He felt the government should alleviate poverty among the old, providing an adequate income when necessary. He wants the government to act to maintain a sound middle class, if necessary providing opportunities for work for those left unemployed. He believes large corporations should share their prosperity with their workers via profit-sharing plans. He supports universal access to higher education. The government should provide universal health care, especially for children, and it ought to provide them better opportunities for exercise, since they’re woefully unfit these days. It is time, he says, for the nation to unite, leave no citizen behind, to work as one and grant every member equal rights and duties.
I'll leave out the "tell-line" from McIlheran's piece--but I'll connect it to another sterling local blogger (who has overcome his legal training), who mentioned that the candidate with that platform was NOT a social conservative.
Just as a matter of contrast to the Governor of Alaska...
...suppose there were a candidate who promised things you think good. He felt the government should alleviate poverty among the old, providing an adequate income when necessary. He wants the government to act to maintain a sound middle class, if necessary providing opportunities for work for those left unemployed. He believes large corporations should share their prosperity with their workers via profit-sharing plans. He supports universal access to higher education. The government should provide universal health care, especially for children, and it ought to provide them better opportunities for exercise, since they’re woefully unfit these days. It is time, he says, for the nation to unite, leave no citizen behind, to work as one and grant every member equal rights and duties.
I'll leave out the "tell-line" from McIlheran's piece--but I'll connect it to another sterling local blogger (who has overcome his legal training), who mentioned that the candidate with that platform was NOT a social conservative.
Just as a matter of contrast to the Governor of Alaska...
FDR Fulfilled: Re-Distribution & Regency vs. the Founders
As Grim noted, the "negative-/positive- rights" debate about the Constitution has been ongoing for a while. Today, PowerLine provides more historical notes.
...Professor Sunstein was actually the right man to call on to explain Obama's remarks. They derive directly from Sunstein's advocacy of Roosevelt's so-called second Bill of Rights.
Roosevelt set forth his "second Bill of Rights" in his January 1944 State of the Union Address:
"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all--regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
--The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
--The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
--The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
--The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
--The right of every family to a decent home;
--The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
--The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
--The right to a good education."
Well, that's a lot of "rights."
PowerLine then quotes Tom Palmer's analysis of FDR's manifesto:
You owe your life -- and everything else -- to the sovereign. The rights of subjects are not natural rights, but merely grants from the sovereign. There is no right even to complain about the actions of the sovereign, except insofar as the sovereign allows the subject to complain. These are the principles of unlimited, arbitrary, and absolute power, the principles of such rulers as Louis XIV. Intellectuals have assiduously promoted them; think of Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes
In the FDR/Obama worldview, "rights" begin with positive law--that law made by the sovereign, or the Legislature.
In the view of the Founders, "rights" originate from God, thus are "natural." BIG difference.
Several millennia of experience with Sovereign Law have demonstrated that it doesn't work out exactly as its proponents would have you believe. Recent applications were instituted by Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Hugo Chavez, and Fidel Castro.
I don't think we need another example to emerge on this land.
...Professor Sunstein was actually the right man to call on to explain Obama's remarks. They derive directly from Sunstein's advocacy of Roosevelt's so-called second Bill of Rights.
Roosevelt set forth his "second Bill of Rights" in his January 1944 State of the Union Address:
"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all--regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
--The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
--The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
--The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
--The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
--The right of every family to a decent home;
--The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
--The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
--The right to a good education."
Well, that's a lot of "rights."
PowerLine then quotes Tom Palmer's analysis of FDR's manifesto:
You owe your life -- and everything else -- to the sovereign. The rights of subjects are not natural rights, but merely grants from the sovereign. There is no right even to complain about the actions of the sovereign, except insofar as the sovereign allows the subject to complain. These are the principles of unlimited, arbitrary, and absolute power, the principles of such rulers as Louis XIV. Intellectuals have assiduously promoted them; think of Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes
In the FDR/Obama worldview, "rights" begin with positive law--that law made by the sovereign, or the Legislature.
In the view of the Founders, "rights" originate from God, thus are "natural." BIG difference.
Several millennia of experience with Sovereign Law have demonstrated that it doesn't work out exactly as its proponents would have you believe. Recent applications were instituted by Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Hugo Chavez, and Fidel Castro.
I don't think we need another example to emerge on this land.
"Trust Your Government?" Kiss My Ass!
Oh, yah.
My next-door neighbor is retired. When he was working, he was an employee of a local government. His political thinking is like mine--and he is more than a little disturbed about this sort of crap.
Helen Jones-Kelly, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, confirmed today that she OK'd the check on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher following the Oct. 15 presidential debate.
She said there were no political reasons for the check on the sudden presidential campaign fixture though the Support Enforcement Tracking System.
Amid questions from the media and others about "Joe the Plumber," Jones-Kelley said she approved a check to determine if he was current on any ordered child-support payments.
That's the sort of stuff that the Milorganite plant processes every day, folks.
More pertinent:
Helen Jones-Kelley (two e's in Kelley) just happens to be a maximum $2300 contributor to Barack Obama.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Next up: which slimebag in the Toledo cop-shop was pulling Joe's records.
Wanna make any bets about campaign contributions from THAT turdball?
"Trust your Government."
Kiss my ass.
HT: Malkin
My next-door neighbor is retired. When he was working, he was an employee of a local government. His political thinking is like mine--and he is more than a little disturbed about this sort of crap.
Helen Jones-Kelly, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, confirmed today that she OK'd the check on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher following the Oct. 15 presidential debate.
She said there were no political reasons for the check on the sudden presidential campaign fixture though the Support Enforcement Tracking System.
Amid questions from the media and others about "Joe the Plumber," Jones-Kelley said she approved a check to determine if he was current on any ordered child-support payments.
That's the sort of stuff that the Milorganite plant processes every day, folks.
More pertinent:
Helen Jones-Kelley (two e's in Kelley) just happens to be a maximum $2300 contributor to Barack Obama.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Next up: which slimebag in the Toledo cop-shop was pulling Joe's records.
Wanna make any bets about campaign contributions from THAT turdball?
"Trust your Government."
Kiss my ass.
HT: Malkin
What's Behind the Curtain in Obama's Health Plan?
There are a LOT of details missing from the Obama health plan--and when the NYTimes expresses that, you know....
Though Mr. Obama has not released details, economists believe he might require large and medium companies to contribute as much as 6 percent of their payrolls
...Writ large, that is one of the significant concerns about Mr. Obama’s health plan, which like this state’s landmark 2006 law would subsidize coverage for the uninsured by taxing employers who do not cover their workers. And it is a primary reason that so-called play-or-pay proposals have had an unsteady history for nearly two decades.
With Mr. Obama’s plan, business leaders say, the devil will be in the unknown details.
...Left undefined has been what size firms would be exempted, what constitutes a “meaningful contribution,” and how much noncompliant businesses would be required to pay.
Gee. "Meaningful contribution." Does that sorta, kinda, vaguely sound like "all workers whose employers don't offer a sufficiently generous pension..."
The Obama campaign is unapologetic. In fact, near defiant on the question.
Senator John McCain, the Republican nominee, badgered Mr. Obama in two of their debates to define the penalty, but Mr. Obama did not rise to the bait.
“We made a decision even before the plan was rolled out not to decide,” said David M. Cutler, a Harvard economist who speaks for the campaign on health care. “It’s not that there’s a decision out there that we’re not telling. It’s literally that we’ve decided not to decide.”
Now THAT's reassuring.
For those of you who recall the Wisconsin proposal, these numbers will resonate:
Several econometric models have assumed that Mr. Obama would have to set his penalty near 6 percent of payroll (Mercer, a benefits consulting firm says that large employers typically pay 15 percent).
Vote Obama! There's a surprise inside!!
HT: JustOneMinute
Though Mr. Obama has not released details, economists believe he might require large and medium companies to contribute as much as 6 percent of their payrolls
...Writ large, that is one of the significant concerns about Mr. Obama’s health plan, which like this state’s landmark 2006 law would subsidize coverage for the uninsured by taxing employers who do not cover their workers. And it is a primary reason that so-called play-or-pay proposals have had an unsteady history for nearly two decades.
With Mr. Obama’s plan, business leaders say, the devil will be in the unknown details.
...Left undefined has been what size firms would be exempted, what constitutes a “meaningful contribution,” and how much noncompliant businesses would be required to pay.
Gee. "Meaningful contribution." Does that sorta, kinda, vaguely sound like "all workers whose employers don't offer a sufficiently generous pension..."
The Obama campaign is unapologetic. In fact, near defiant on the question.
Senator John McCain, the Republican nominee, badgered Mr. Obama in two of their debates to define the penalty, but Mr. Obama did not rise to the bait.
“We made a decision even before the plan was rolled out not to decide,” said David M. Cutler, a Harvard economist who speaks for the campaign on health care. “It’s not that there’s a decision out there that we’re not telling. It’s literally that we’ve decided not to decide.”
Now THAT's reassuring.
For those of you who recall the Wisconsin proposal, these numbers will resonate:
Several econometric models have assumed that Mr. Obama would have to set his penalty near 6 percent of payroll (Mercer, a benefits consulting firm says that large employers typically pay 15 percent).
Vote Obama! There's a surprise inside!!
HT: JustOneMinute
Gun-Idiot
Reported by Clay Cramer:
An 8-year-old boy died after accidentally shooting himself in the head while firing an Uzi submachine gun under adult supervision at a gun fair.
The boy lost control of the weapon while firing it Sunday at the Machine Gun Shoot and Firearms Expo at the Westfield Sportsman's Club, police Lt. Lawrence Vallierpratte said.
Police said the boy, Christopher Bizilj of Ashford, Conn., was with a certified instructor and called the death a "self-inflicted accidental shooting."
Cramer observes, and I concur, that there are some things one should NEVER do. Having an 8-year-old 'try out' a full-auto is one of them.
This father will have a long time to regret the decision. His son did not.
An 8-year-old boy died after accidentally shooting himself in the head while firing an Uzi submachine gun under adult supervision at a gun fair.
The boy lost control of the weapon while firing it Sunday at the Machine Gun Shoot and Firearms Expo at the Westfield Sportsman's Club, police Lt. Lawrence Vallierpratte said.
Police said the boy, Christopher Bizilj of Ashford, Conn., was with a certified instructor and called the death a "self-inflicted accidental shooting."
Cramer observes, and I concur, that there are some things one should NEVER do. Having an 8-year-old 'try out' a full-auto is one of them.
This father will have a long time to regret the decision. His son did not.
"Redistribution" Spin from Obama, Refuted
Oh, yah, the O-and-Savior gang is spinning the radio-interview "redistribution" quote.
Problem is, they're re-distributing the actualities--which is polite for Lying.
Chicago Public Radio's Ben Calhoun had done a report on the clip:
"...when heard in the context of the whole show, Obama’s position is distinctly misrepresented by the You Tube posting. Taken in context, Obama is evaluating the historical successes and failures of the Civil Rights movement—and, ironically, he says the Supreme Court was a failure in cases that it took on a role of redistributing resources."
This is itself a misrepresentation, and a severe one. Obama does indeed thoughtfully describe the historical success and failures of the Civil Rights movement, but he most certainly does NOT repudiate redistribution
...He only notes that redistribution was unwieldy to achieve in the courts and is a bad idea there because of structural problems (47:00). Aside from that he feels redistribution is fine
That's precisely the sense of the edited version easily available on the 'net.
Obama's line of thinking was that 'we should do redistribution'--and that the Constitution, as written, doesn't allow for that too easily, nor should the Courts direct such an effort.
That's largely up to the President and Congress, in his view.
HT: SpectatorBlog
Problem is, they're re-distributing the actualities--which is polite for Lying.
Chicago Public Radio's Ben Calhoun had done a report on the clip:
"...when heard in the context of the whole show, Obama’s position is distinctly misrepresented by the You Tube posting. Taken in context, Obama is evaluating the historical successes and failures of the Civil Rights movement—and, ironically, he says the Supreme Court was a failure in cases that it took on a role of redistributing resources."
This is itself a misrepresentation, and a severe one. Obama does indeed thoughtfully describe the historical success and failures of the Civil Rights movement, but he most certainly does NOT repudiate redistribution
...He only notes that redistribution was unwieldy to achieve in the courts and is a bad idea there because of structural problems (47:00). Aside from that he feels redistribution is fine
That's precisely the sense of the edited version easily available on the 'net.
Obama's line of thinking was that 'we should do redistribution'--and that the Constitution, as written, doesn't allow for that too easily, nor should the Courts direct such an effort.
That's largely up to the President and Congress, in his view.
HT: SpectatorBlog
Monday, October 27, 2008
MADD Lies: Statistics Version
Nick nails it.
When a state doesn't have sobriety check points, we need them to catch drunk drivers. When drunk drivers aren't caught at sobriety checkpoints, then that is a show of their effectiveness. Under what conditions then would they not be found useful? It's totally bogus.
His research also shows that checkpoints are VERY expensive in DUI's/hour and Payroll/issued ticket, compared to your basic regular patrol activity.
But checkpoints ARE good for rummaging around in people's cars!
..The concern is that police are not only using the checkpoints as a way to enforce other laws but also as a way to make money — especially since cities such as Sacramento make $70 every time they impound a car at a DUI checkpoint, even if that car’s driver was not suspected of drinking and driving.
This is what Sheriffs like to show off: increased fine revenues. That's one reason David Clarke, self-alleged Republican, thinks this is a fine and dandy idea. Doesn't hurt the Deficit-Laden James Doyle regime, either, by the way.
One other thing: they may be drunks, but they aren't stupid. When you KNOW that the County Mounties are hanging around 35th St. at I-94, you get onto I-94 at Hawley Road.
Doh.
When a state doesn't have sobriety check points, we need them to catch drunk drivers. When drunk drivers aren't caught at sobriety checkpoints, then that is a show of their effectiveness. Under what conditions then would they not be found useful? It's totally bogus.
His research also shows that checkpoints are VERY expensive in DUI's/hour and Payroll/issued ticket, compared to your basic regular patrol activity.
But checkpoints ARE good for rummaging around in people's cars!
..The concern is that police are not only using the checkpoints as a way to enforce other laws but also as a way to make money — especially since cities such as Sacramento make $70 every time they impound a car at a DUI checkpoint, even if that car’s driver was not suspected of drinking and driving.
This is what Sheriffs like to show off: increased fine revenues. That's one reason David Clarke, self-alleged Republican, thinks this is a fine and dandy idea. Doesn't hurt the Deficit-Laden James Doyle regime, either, by the way.
One other thing: they may be drunks, but they aren't stupid. When you KNOW that the County Mounties are hanging around 35th St. at I-94, you get onto I-94 at Hawley Road.
Doh.
The Boom in Sales
Pun intended, folks.
Americans have cut back on buying cars, furniture and clothes in a tough economy, but there's one consumer item that's still enjoying healthy sales: guns. Purchases of firearms and ammunition have risen 8 to 10 percent this year, according to state and federal data.
...Several variables drive sales, but many dealers, buyers and experts attribute the increase in part to concerns about the economy and fears that if Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois wins the presidency, he will join with fellow Democrats in Congress to enact new gun controls. Obama has said that he believes in an individual right to bear arms but that he also supports "common-sense safety measures."
Yah--like protecting my 401(k).
More than three dozen interviews with gun dealers and buyers in Virginia and Maryland and with experts nationwide indicated that the increase in gun sales appears to be driven predominantly by concerns about the presidential election and the economy.
Gun buyers were more likely to say they were responding to the political situation than to the economy, and all but three people said they feared that Obama would restrict gun rights. Two who indicated that they would support Obama anyway said their concerns about the economy and health care outweighed those about gun rights.
Yah, but they bought the guns...
And it's an intermediate-term trend.
The increase is also notable because it follows a heavy year for gun purchases, which industry officials and experts link to the Virginia Tech shootings in April 2007 and a burgeoning housing market crisis. NICS checks show a 20 percent increase in April 2007, compared with the previous year.
This year's jump is a continuation of a trend that began in 2006, about the time the housing bubble popped in parts of the nation, and remained steady last year as the political season began to take shape and the housing crisis grew. It is also a bigger jump than the average annual increases of about 5 percent or less typical since instant background checks began in 1998
That's a good thing. As we say, "An armed society is a polite society." And that bulge in the pocket--nope, it's not an AlGoreAlpha sign.
Americans have cut back on buying cars, furniture and clothes in a tough economy, but there's one consumer item that's still enjoying healthy sales: guns. Purchases of firearms and ammunition have risen 8 to 10 percent this year, according to state and federal data.
...Several variables drive sales, but many dealers, buyers and experts attribute the increase in part to concerns about the economy and fears that if Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois wins the presidency, he will join with fellow Democrats in Congress to enact new gun controls. Obama has said that he believes in an individual right to bear arms but that he also supports "common-sense safety measures."
Yah--like protecting my 401(k).
More than three dozen interviews with gun dealers and buyers in Virginia and Maryland and with experts nationwide indicated that the increase in gun sales appears to be driven predominantly by concerns about the presidential election and the economy.
Gun buyers were more likely to say they were responding to the political situation than to the economy, and all but three people said they feared that Obama would restrict gun rights. Two who indicated that they would support Obama anyway said their concerns about the economy and health care outweighed those about gun rights.
Yah, but they bought the guns...
And it's an intermediate-term trend.
The increase is also notable because it follows a heavy year for gun purchases, which industry officials and experts link to the Virginia Tech shootings in April 2007 and a burgeoning housing market crisis. NICS checks show a 20 percent increase in April 2007, compared with the previous year.
This year's jump is a continuation of a trend that began in 2006, about the time the housing bubble popped in parts of the nation, and remained steady last year as the political season began to take shape and the housing crisis grew. It is also a bigger jump than the average annual increases of about 5 percent or less typical since instant background checks began in 1998
That's a good thing. As we say, "An armed society is a polite society." And that bulge in the pocket--nope, it's not an AlGoreAlpha sign.
Think Your Union Takes Care of You?
Well, think again, suckas.
An employer and union violated ERISA when they entered into an agreement to deduct 100 percent of retirees' health insurance premiums from their accrued sick-leave accounts, the Seventh Circuit ruled. The bargaining agreement provided that if, upon retirement, an employee had unused sick leave, the monetary value of that leave would be used to pay the retirees' healthcare premiums "on the same basis as the benefit is currently paid for employees." (At the time of the agreement, the employer was paying 90 percent of the premium cost while employees paid 10 percent.) Despite this provision, the employer used up the entire $42,000 in a retiree's accrued sick leave by deducting 100 percent of the cost of his insurance premium from the sick-leave account. The appeals court rejected the employer's justification that the retiree health plan agreement had been modified by later dealings with the union,
...This "secret side deal" between the union and employer to alter the terms of the retiree health plan agreement was a breach of fiduciary duty by the plan managers nonetheless. "So it is doubly unlawful—as unwritten and as secret," the appeals court concluded. Moreover, the Seventh Circuit ruled attorney fees were properly granted to the plaintiff retirees. "For the defendants to use their deceptive conduct toward the retired employees as a basis for trying to duck liability was shabby," the appeals court wrote
Oh, by the way: the Wisconsin State Employees Union Council 24 LOST the decision.
They screwed Orth (and a number of others....)
An employer and union violated ERISA when they entered into an agreement to deduct 100 percent of retirees' health insurance premiums from their accrued sick-leave accounts, the Seventh Circuit ruled. The bargaining agreement provided that if, upon retirement, an employee had unused sick leave, the monetary value of that leave would be used to pay the retirees' healthcare premiums "on the same basis as the benefit is currently paid for employees." (At the time of the agreement, the employer was paying 90 percent of the premium cost while employees paid 10 percent.) Despite this provision, the employer used up the entire $42,000 in a retiree's accrued sick leave by deducting 100 percent of the cost of his insurance premium from the sick-leave account. The appeals court rejected the employer's justification that the retiree health plan agreement had been modified by later dealings with the union,
...This "secret side deal" between the union and employer to alter the terms of the retiree health plan agreement was a breach of fiduciary duty by the plan managers nonetheless. "So it is doubly unlawful—as unwritten and as secret," the appeals court concluded. Moreover, the Seventh Circuit ruled attorney fees were properly granted to the plaintiff retirees. "For the defendants to use their deceptive conduct toward the retired employees as a basis for trying to duck liability was shabby," the appeals court wrote
Oh, by the way: the Wisconsin State Employees Union Council 24 LOST the decision.
They screwed Orth (and a number of others....)
THIS Cardinal Intends to Teach
From Creative Minority:
...Cardinal Egan today criticized Fordham University for giving an award to Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, a supporter of abortion rights. The Jesuit university wasn't just giving him any award though. Breyer is scheduled to receive the Fordham-Stein Ethics Prize Wednesday at a dinner in New York
...A spokesman for the New York Archdiocese said Cardinal Edward Egan was surprised to learn Breyer would receive an award from Fordham's law school and has spoken to the Catholic university's leaders to ensure "that a mistake of this sort will not happen again," says the Associated Press.
Leaving no room for misunderstanding, spokesman Joseph Zwilling said Monday that Egan was talking specifically about Breyer's votes on the court in favor of abortion rights
We await Abp Timothy Dolan's pre-election editorial in the local Catholic newspaper.
...Cardinal Egan today criticized Fordham University for giving an award to Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, a supporter of abortion rights. The Jesuit university wasn't just giving him any award though. Breyer is scheduled to receive the Fordham-Stein Ethics Prize Wednesday at a dinner in New York
...A spokesman for the New York Archdiocese said Cardinal Edward Egan was surprised to learn Breyer would receive an award from Fordham's law school and has spoken to the Catholic university's leaders to ensure "that a mistake of this sort will not happen again," says the Associated Press.
Leaving no room for misunderstanding, spokesman Joseph Zwilling said Monday that Egan was talking specifically about Breyer's votes on the court in favor of abortion rights
We await Abp Timothy Dolan's pre-election editorial in the local Catholic newspaper.
Wanna Trade in Your Car?
Not so fast, sucka.
In the last 30 days, used-car values have dropped by $2,000.00 across the board.
Now you're upside-down!!
In the last 30 days, used-car values have dropped by $2,000.00 across the board.
Now you're upside-down!!
Obama's Education at Columbia U.
Another piece of the Obama mindset clicks into place.
[Obama]... is a follower of Jeremy Bentham who said the purpose of law is to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number. Good is defined as pleasure. In law that view has been inculcated by Hans Kelsen [1881-1973] who exerted a tremendous influence on American law in the same way that John Dewey (who lived at the same time) gave us relativism in philosophy and education. Kelsen, born in Austria, author of his country’s constitution between the two world wars, rejected the possibility of natural law and as a renowned professor at Columbia denied the “metaphysical view that there is an absolute reality, i.e. a reality that exists independently of human knowledge.” He adopted philosophical relativism which he described as the “empirical doctrine that really exists only within human knowledge and that, as the object of knowledge, reality is relative to the knowing subject.” The Nazi rule of law came from Kelsen despite his best intentions. When we remove absolutes, remove natural law, you substitute human convenience for law
Denial of nature has its consequences, eh?
Philosophical relativism, taught Kelsen, which has become an accepted part of contemporary legal studies (so accepted that it is granted without attribution), teaches that “what is right today may be wrong tomorrow.” He stated, “the minority must have full opportunity of becoming the majority. Only if it is not possible to decide in an absolute way what is right and what is wrong is it advisable to discuss the issue and after discussion submit to a compromise.” The problem, of course, is that when the majority is in control of the political process decide to oppress the minority there is neither moral nor legal recourse. We are seeing this now even before the campaign is over...
So what is yours today (like that 401(k)) might NOT be yours tomorrow, you repressive ass.
...under this nihilistic Kensen legal philosophy the legislator decides what law will be useful and in accord with the basic norm as determined by himself. There is no higher law of nature or of God and the ultimate criterion is force
That 'nihilistic legal philosophy' has also been called "legal postivisim" on this blog. You can look it up--it's the single worst fault of attorneys who become legislators and judges.
Jeremy Bentham [said] man’s “only object is to seek pleasure and to shun pain…Evil is pain or the cause of pain. Good is pleasure or the cause of pleasure.”
And the O-and-Savior intends to eliminate pain, legally.
For some folks, anyway.
HT: "Cass" Roeser
[Obama]... is a follower of Jeremy Bentham who said the purpose of law is to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number. Good is defined as pleasure. In law that view has been inculcated by Hans Kelsen [1881-1973] who exerted a tremendous influence on American law in the same way that John Dewey (who lived at the same time) gave us relativism in philosophy and education. Kelsen, born in Austria, author of his country’s constitution between the two world wars, rejected the possibility of natural law and as a renowned professor at Columbia denied the “metaphysical view that there is an absolute reality, i.e. a reality that exists independently of human knowledge.” He adopted philosophical relativism which he described as the “empirical doctrine that really exists only within human knowledge and that, as the object of knowledge, reality is relative to the knowing subject.” The Nazi rule of law came from Kelsen despite his best intentions. When we remove absolutes, remove natural law, you substitute human convenience for law
Denial of nature has its consequences, eh?
Philosophical relativism, taught Kelsen, which has become an accepted part of contemporary legal studies (so accepted that it is granted without attribution), teaches that “what is right today may be wrong tomorrow.” He stated, “the minority must have full opportunity of becoming the majority. Only if it is not possible to decide in an absolute way what is right and what is wrong is it advisable to discuss the issue and after discussion submit to a compromise.” The problem, of course, is that when the majority is in control of the political process decide to oppress the minority there is neither moral nor legal recourse. We are seeing this now even before the campaign is over...
So what is yours today (like that 401(k)) might NOT be yours tomorrow, you repressive ass.
...under this nihilistic Kensen legal philosophy the legislator decides what law will be useful and in accord with the basic norm as determined by himself. There is no higher law of nature or of God and the ultimate criterion is force
That 'nihilistic legal philosophy' has also been called "legal postivisim" on this blog. You can look it up--it's the single worst fault of attorneys who become legislators and judges.
Jeremy Bentham [said] man’s “only object is to seek pleasure and to shun pain…Evil is pain or the cause of pain. Good is pleasure or the cause of pleasure.”
And the O-and-Savior intends to eliminate pain, legally.
For some folks, anyway.
HT: "Cass" Roeser
"Trust the Polls"?
Well, maybe--and maybe not.
...her shop was retained to do a few Presidential polls for targetted states on behalf of a union so the union could decide where to spend their ad dollars for the last week. They did Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Missouri. After mocking the hell out of the voter id spreads used by Rassmussen, Zogby, etc. (and this is coming from a committed Dem who will be voting for Barry O) she said the results of their polling lead her to believe that McCain will definitely win FL, OH, NC, MO and NV. She says Obama definitely wins New Mexico. She said that Colorado and New Hampshire were absolute dead heats. She said she thinks there is a 55% chance Obama holds on in Pennsylvania and a 75% chance McCain wins Virginia...
Comes down to how the pollsters select their field:
all of those polls rely on Dem turnout being +4 and as much as +7, when in 2006, Republicans actually had the advantage by +3.
The quoted guru-ette favors IBD/TIPP as a credible source. Today's numbers: 46.5/43.3/10.1 Obama, McCain, Undecided (respectively.)
HT: The Hatted One
...her shop was retained to do a few Presidential polls for targetted states on behalf of a union so the union could decide where to spend their ad dollars for the last week. They did Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Missouri. After mocking the hell out of the voter id spreads used by Rassmussen, Zogby, etc. (and this is coming from a committed Dem who will be voting for Barry O) she said the results of their polling lead her to believe that McCain will definitely win FL, OH, NC, MO and NV. She says Obama definitely wins New Mexico. She said that Colorado and New Hampshire were absolute dead heats. She said she thinks there is a 55% chance Obama holds on in Pennsylvania and a 75% chance McCain wins Virginia...
Comes down to how the pollsters select their field:
all of those polls rely on Dem turnout being +4 and as much as +7, when in 2006, Republicans actually had the advantage by +3.
The quoted guru-ette favors IBD/TIPP as a credible source. Today's numbers: 46.5/43.3/10.1 Obama, McCain, Undecided (respectively.)
HT: The Hatted One
"Change"? Oh, Yah! It's Called "Leviathan"
This YouTube is all over the 'net, for good reason. (Alternative link from Ace--just in case YouTube "disappears" the original.)
It's a 2001 radio interview of then-State Senator Obama.
In it he talks about the "change" he wants to effect. The discussion he had with Joe the Plumber was NOT an accident--"wealth" re-distribution is precisely what Obama intends to achieve.
Grim has the historical context on Obama's "negative liberty/positive liberty" comment:
The terms "negative liberty" and "positive liberty" come from Sir Isaiah Berlin.
(Quoting Wiki):
Berlin contended that under the influence of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant and G. W. F. Hegel (all committed to the positive concept of liberty), European political thinkers often equated liberty with forms of political discipline or constraint. This became politically dangerous when notions of positive liberty were, in the nineteenth century, used to defend nationalism, self-determination and the Communist idea of collective rational control over human destiny. Berlin argued that, following this line of thought, demands for freedom paradoxically become demands for forms of collective control and discipline – those deemed necessary for the "self-mastery" or self-determination of nations, classes, democratic communities, and even humanity as a whole. There is thus an elective affinity, for Berlin, between positive liberty and political totalitarianism.
(In contrast, the Catholic Church defines "liberty" as "the freedom to do what is right," an entirely different ground of understanding.)
Back to Grim:
"Negative liberty" is actual liberty. It's freedom from constraint, freedom to do what you can do, to be what you can be. Positive liberty is not the assurance that you'll have the chance to try for something, but assurance that you'll have that thing. The government will give it to you -- which means, the government will force other citizens to provide you with the means
That is a fundamental alteration of our concept of the relationship between government and citizen. It is a radical mode, and one that Berlin rightly warned has often led to totalitarian modes
...I think that now-Senator Obama intends a vision that isn't race-based. Below I described his tax plan as "putting a third of America on welfare," as it would give people "tax cuts" beyond what they pay in taxes -- money for nothing. I think that really is the plan here: not to make payments to minorities, but to make payments to everyone below a certain threshhold
It's grand-scale welfare.
Now there is nothing wrong, per se, with welfare--if one begins with the Christian/Catholic concept of liberty as the freedom to do what is right, which means assisting the less-fortunate. But that is a moral imperative applying to individuals, not necessarily to States.
Elevating the moral imperative to a State-administered system is necessarily messy. Obama conceded that in his discussion of the Courts' civil-rights rulings.
So his default position is that the "messiness" of re-distribution should be legislative instead.
Which means that you have to trust Congress to get it right, if that's the direction you're going.
Side note: If Obama spent all that time in a Christian church, how come izzit he buys this entirely atheistic/secularist line on "freedom"?
Hmmmmm?
It's a 2001 radio interview of then-State Senator Obama.
In it he talks about the "change" he wants to effect. The discussion he had with Joe the Plumber was NOT an accident--"wealth" re-distribution is precisely what Obama intends to achieve.
Grim has the historical context on Obama's "negative liberty/positive liberty" comment:
The terms "negative liberty" and "positive liberty" come from Sir Isaiah Berlin.
(Quoting Wiki):
Berlin contended that under the influence of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant and G. W. F. Hegel (all committed to the positive concept of liberty), European political thinkers often equated liberty with forms of political discipline or constraint. This became politically dangerous when notions of positive liberty were, in the nineteenth century, used to defend nationalism, self-determination and the Communist idea of collective rational control over human destiny. Berlin argued that, following this line of thought, demands for freedom paradoxically become demands for forms of collective control and discipline – those deemed necessary for the "self-mastery" or self-determination of nations, classes, democratic communities, and even humanity as a whole. There is thus an elective affinity, for Berlin, between positive liberty and political totalitarianism.
(In contrast, the Catholic Church defines "liberty" as "the freedom to do what is right," an entirely different ground of understanding.)
Back to Grim:
"Negative liberty" is actual liberty. It's freedom from constraint, freedom to do what you can do, to be what you can be. Positive liberty is not the assurance that you'll have the chance to try for something, but assurance that you'll have that thing. The government will give it to you -- which means, the government will force other citizens to provide you with the means
That is a fundamental alteration of our concept of the relationship between government and citizen. It is a radical mode, and one that Berlin rightly warned has often led to totalitarian modes
...I think that now-Senator Obama intends a vision that isn't race-based. Below I described his tax plan as "putting a third of America on welfare," as it would give people "tax cuts" beyond what they pay in taxes -- money for nothing. I think that really is the plan here: not to make payments to minorities, but to make payments to everyone below a certain threshhold
It's grand-scale welfare.
Now there is nothing wrong, per se, with welfare--if one begins with the Christian/Catholic concept of liberty as the freedom to do what is right, which means assisting the less-fortunate. But that is a moral imperative applying to individuals, not necessarily to States.
Elevating the moral imperative to a State-administered system is necessarily messy. Obama conceded that in his discussion of the Courts' civil-rights rulings.
So his default position is that the "messiness" of re-distribution should be legislative instead.
Which means that you have to trust Congress to get it right, if that's the direction you're going.
Side note: If Obama spent all that time in a Christian church, how come izzit he buys this entirely atheistic/secularist line on "freedom"?
Hmmmmm?
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Palin-Stabbing: Cui Bono?
Well, here's an interesting tidbit.
Noam Schreiber of TNR infers that complaints from supporters of Sarah Palin about McCain campaign aide Nicolle Wallace are somehow related to Wallace's ties to CBS news.
In fact, Wallace is a Bush loyalist, and if you think Wallace's old boss Jeb Bush isn't looking ahead to 2012 -- if you think the Bush clan doesn't views Palin as a potential threat to their dynastic succession -- you're crazy.
We know the NeoCon/Lefty Pubbies are doing their best to sink Palin the day the election is over (assuming Obama wins.) We know that Romney operatives are doing it, too.
And I don't think we need another Bush in the White House. Ever. Again.
HT: McCain
Noam Schreiber of TNR infers that complaints from supporters of Sarah Palin about McCain campaign aide Nicolle Wallace are somehow related to Wallace's ties to CBS news.
In fact, Wallace is a Bush loyalist, and if you think Wallace's old boss Jeb Bush isn't looking ahead to 2012 -- if you think the Bush clan doesn't views Palin as a potential threat to their dynastic succession -- you're crazy.
We know the NeoCon/Lefty Pubbies are doing their best to sink Palin the day the election is over (assuming Obama wins.) We know that Romney operatives are doing it, too.
And I don't think we need another Bush in the White House. Ever. Again.
HT: McCain
Bailout: Already There Are Secrets!!
Shoebox flagged a Minneapolis Fed Reserve paper which contradicted the Party Line about the imminent death of credit.
So at best, the "imminent death of credit" is in play.
Maybe it's there; maybe it's not.
But there's no death of Government contracts!
And certainly no death of Government SECRET contracts!!
So you know, the recipient of the contract is Bank of New York/Mellon.
By the way:
When the Treasury Department's bailout czar provided an update this week on the government's $700 billion plan to rescue troubled financial institutions, he vowed that it would be an "open and transparent program with appropriate oversight.''
HT: The Agitator
NOT Just a "Farm Raid" in Iran
Oh, yah, SOCOM took out a way-station in Iran.
But PowerLine's source says it was a little more than just KO'ing 8 'farmers' who were accomplices for AlQuaeda.
The announced goal was to shut down a family who were facilitating jihadi entry into Iraq. The intel was obviously good . . . so good we did a very risky and un-necessary thing, if the "goal" is as advertised: we endangered American helos and troops by inserting them conspicuously into hostile territory, needlessly endangering both and our prestige (imagine if something had gone wrong and the helos had tangled like in Iran after the Shah's overthrow).
This was not a subtle operation. We could easily have sent exactly the same message -- if a message we were sending -- by using a drone and some smart munitions.
Something else was going on there -- kidnapping, the appearance of kidnapping (to remove a friendly operative), computer theft, setting up sensors, or something else.
Maybe building a McDonald's?
But PowerLine's source says it was a little more than just KO'ing 8 'farmers' who were accomplices for AlQuaeda.
The announced goal was to shut down a family who were facilitating jihadi entry into Iraq. The intel was obviously good . . . so good we did a very risky and un-necessary thing, if the "goal" is as advertised: we endangered American helos and troops by inserting them conspicuously into hostile territory, needlessly endangering both and our prestige (imagine if something had gone wrong and the helos had tangled like in Iran after the Shah's overthrow).
This was not a subtle operation. We could easily have sent exactly the same message -- if a message we were sending -- by using a drone and some smart munitions.
Something else was going on there -- kidnapping, the appearance of kidnapping (to remove a friendly operative), computer theft, setting up sensors, or something else.
Maybe building a McDonald's?
Following the Coronation in January...
Because you had nothing important to worry about, here's a short list of The Hive's next few objectives on the international front. The (very brief) synopsis is written by Austin Ruse, who is extremely knowledgeable of the United Nations, having been the leader of a pro-life NGO there for well over 20 years.
Enter Barack Obama. If he is the next president of the United States, the international social radicals will have free rein to do whatever they wish. And here is what they wish.
First, they need the United States to sign a bunch of treaties. It embarrasses the left that we – almost alone in the world – have not ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the International Criminal Court (ICC) There are other treaties they want the US to ratify, like the Land Mines Treaty, but here let’s concern ourselves only deal with social policy.
(Somewhere in the stack of treaties is one which seriously restricts small-arms dealing. I'm sure that the NRA is tracking that one; they're reasonable certain that it will damn near obviate 2A freedoms in this country.)
Here is a snapshot of the problems with each treaty. CEDAW is used to promote abortion. CRC undercuts the rights of parents. ICESCR introduces things like a right to health and certain economic rights that Americans have found off-putting and that come with hefty price tags
...Lack of merits aside, the United States views its treaty obligations seriously. Many other countries ratify these things simply to get the United Nations off their backs. Those governments sign these treaties and promptly ignore them. We incorporate treaty obligations into our domestic laws, which can then be litigated in the federal courts
In other words, international treaties become "the law of the land" in the USA.
Obama has endorsed CEDAW as has his vice presidential running mate Joe Biden. Both are in favor of the ICC, too. It is likely that, with a larger and more left-leaning Senate, a whole slew of left-leaning treaties will be ratified
Oh, that's hardly the worst part.
But there are even larger issues than these particular treaties or new UN conferences. There is larger mischief afoot. It is called global governance.
...global governance holds that international relations and international law should have more to do with regulating the behavior of individual citizens within each state and that these decisions should not be left to sovereign states, but to international bodies like the United Nations and its various commissions and committees.
You always wanted to meet a UN bureaucrat? Here's your chance!! Imagine one of Idi Amin's stooges inquiring about your possession of a handgun...in your living room.
A name to watch: Douglas Koh, a Clinton Admin guy who is a serious and dedicated "internationalist." The O-and-Savior may put him on SCOTUS--after the Hildebeeste, of course.
Enter Barack Obama. If he is the next president of the United States, the international social radicals will have free rein to do whatever they wish. And here is what they wish.
First, they need the United States to sign a bunch of treaties. It embarrasses the left that we – almost alone in the world – have not ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the International Criminal Court (ICC) There are other treaties they want the US to ratify, like the Land Mines Treaty, but here let’s concern ourselves only deal with social policy.
(Somewhere in the stack of treaties is one which seriously restricts small-arms dealing. I'm sure that the NRA is tracking that one; they're reasonable certain that it will damn near obviate 2A freedoms in this country.)
Here is a snapshot of the problems with each treaty. CEDAW is used to promote abortion. CRC undercuts the rights of parents. ICESCR introduces things like a right to health and certain economic rights that Americans have found off-putting and that come with hefty price tags
...Lack of merits aside, the United States views its treaty obligations seriously. Many other countries ratify these things simply to get the United Nations off their backs. Those governments sign these treaties and promptly ignore them. We incorporate treaty obligations into our domestic laws, which can then be litigated in the federal courts
In other words, international treaties become "the law of the land" in the USA.
Obama has endorsed CEDAW as has his vice presidential running mate Joe Biden. Both are in favor of the ICC, too. It is likely that, with a larger and more left-leaning Senate, a whole slew of left-leaning treaties will be ratified
Oh, that's hardly the worst part.
But there are even larger issues than these particular treaties or new UN conferences. There is larger mischief afoot. It is called global governance.
...global governance holds that international relations and international law should have more to do with regulating the behavior of individual citizens within each state and that these decisions should not be left to sovereign states, but to international bodies like the United Nations and its various commissions and committees.
You always wanted to meet a UN bureaucrat? Here's your chance!! Imagine one of Idi Amin's stooges inquiring about your possession of a handgun...in your living room.
A name to watch: Douglas Koh, a Clinton Admin guy who is a serious and dedicated "internationalist." The O-and-Savior may put him on SCOTUS--after the Hildebeeste, of course.
Columbo Has a Few Questions
From a successful Hollywood TV scriptwriter.
Set/scene: Large, well-appointed home in Chicago, mid-afternoon. Obama answers the door, enter Columbo, extinguishing cigar in porch ashtray....
Excuse me Mr. Obama, I mean Senator Obama, sir. Um . . Know you are busy and important and stuff. I mean running for president is very important and . . Ah . . . I hate to bother you. I will only take a minute ok, sir?
...So if you could just help me out a minute and give me some details, I will get right out of your way. I want to close this case and maybe take the wife to Coney Island or something. Ever been to Coney Island ? No, I didn't think so. .
Well, listen, anyways, I can't seem to get some information I need to wrap this up. These things seem to either be "locked" or "not available'. I'm sure it's just some oversight or glitch or something, so if you could you tell me where these things are . . . I . . . I . . . Have them written down here somewhere . . Oh wait. Sorry about the smears. It was raining out. I'll just read it to you.
Could you help me please find these things, sir?
1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- "not available"
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- "not available"
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate -- Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not released
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
13. Your Record of baptism-- Not released or "not available"
14. Your Illinois State Senate records--"not available"
Oh hey . Listen! I know you are busy! Is this too much for you now? I mean tell you what. I will come back tomorrow. Give you some time to get these things together, you know?
Stuff you'd love to see...
Set/scene: Large, well-appointed home in Chicago, mid-afternoon. Obama answers the door, enter Columbo, extinguishing cigar in porch ashtray....
Excuse me Mr. Obama, I mean Senator Obama, sir. Um . . Know you are busy and important and stuff. I mean running for president is very important and . . Ah . . . I hate to bother you. I will only take a minute ok, sir?
...So if you could just help me out a minute and give me some details, I will get right out of your way. I want to close this case and maybe take the wife to Coney Island or something. Ever been to Coney Island ? No, I didn't think so. .
Well, listen, anyways, I can't seem to get some information I need to wrap this up. These things seem to either be "locked" or "not available'. I'm sure it's just some oversight or glitch or something, so if you could you tell me where these things are . . . I . . . I . . . Have them written down here somewhere . . Oh wait. Sorry about the smears. It was raining out. I'll just read it to you.
Could you help me please find these things, sir?
1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- "not available"
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- "not available"
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate -- Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not released
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
13. Your Record of baptism-- Not released or "not available"
14. Your Illinois State Senate records--"not available"
Oh hey . Listen! I know you are busy! Is this too much for you now? I mean tell you what. I will come back tomorrow. Give you some time to get these things together, you know?
Stuff you'd love to see...
Postmoderinst Marxists
Take it from one who knows.
"Because I used to be a Marxist-feminist-postmodernist ideologue, and I understand the party-line of the movement:
-- destroy the notion of objective truth with appeals to diversity, difference, and multi-cult(ural)ism;
-- eliminate the possibility of rational discourse by elevating the affective above the rational;
-- convert all public political discourse into emotive appeals to race, gender, class, and sexuality;
-- define "freedom" as "freedom from constraint" and never as "freedom to do what is right;"
-- attack all secular opposition as "oppressive, self-centered, and fearful;"
-- attack all religious opposition as "superstitious, fundamentalist, and ignorant;"
-- use "white liberal guilt" to attack economic growth and prosperity;
-- feed over-educated narcissism with the prospect of ruling, finally, and ruling more than the meager resources of an English/women's studies department at a state university."
It OUGHT to seem familiar. It's The Project, the Project of the Hive, and has been since roughly the French Revolution, albeit the roots go back to a tree in Eden.
The platform of "Hope and Change."
Really??
"Because I used to be a Marxist-feminist-postmodernist ideologue, and I understand the party-line of the movement:
-- destroy the notion of objective truth with appeals to diversity, difference, and multi-cult(ural)ism;
-- eliminate the possibility of rational discourse by elevating the affective above the rational;
-- convert all public political discourse into emotive appeals to race, gender, class, and sexuality;
-- define "freedom" as "freedom from constraint" and never as "freedom to do what is right;"
-- attack all secular opposition as "oppressive, self-centered, and fearful;"
-- attack all religious opposition as "superstitious, fundamentalist, and ignorant;"
-- use "white liberal guilt" to attack economic growth and prosperity;
-- feed over-educated narcissism with the prospect of ruling, finally, and ruling more than the meager resources of an English/women's studies department at a state university."
It OUGHT to seem familiar. It's The Project, the Project of the Hive, and has been since roughly the French Revolution, albeit the roots go back to a tree in Eden.
The platform of "Hope and Change."
Really??
Old Enough to Hope
G K Chesterton:
IT is currently said that hope goes with youth and lends to youth its wings of a butterfly; but I fancy that hope is the last gift given to man, and the only gift not given to youth. Youth is pre-eminently the period in which a man can be lyric, fanatical, poetic; but youth is the period in which a man can be hopeless. The end of every episode is the end of the world. But the power of hoping through everything, the knowledge that the soul survives its adventures, that great inspiration comes to the middle-aged. God has kept that good wine until now
--Charles Dickens
IT is currently said that hope goes with youth and lends to youth its wings of a butterfly; but I fancy that hope is the last gift given to man, and the only gift not given to youth. Youth is pre-eminently the period in which a man can be lyric, fanatical, poetic; but youth is the period in which a man can be hopeless. The end of every episode is the end of the world. But the power of hoping through everything, the knowledge that the soul survives its adventures, that great inspiration comes to the middle-aged. God has kept that good wine until now
--Charles Dickens
The Takedown of Barack
I thought Penn and Teller were magicians or something, in Vegas.
But whatever they are, they put together a VERY well-edited clip which does a very good job demonstrating the Follies of Obama.
HT: Peter
But whatever they are, they put together a VERY well-edited clip which does a very good job demonstrating the Follies of Obama.
HT: Peter
MPS' Woes: Union Benefits!
So long as we're on the topic of 'union benefits,' and how they will be used to destroy 401(k) plans and "less-than-sufficient" health plans...
....it will be instructive to see what "union benefits" have done to Milwaukee Public Schools.
To appreciate the impact of fringe benefi t costs, consider that in 2004-05 the overall MPS budget grew $27.3 million while fringe benefi t costs grew $45.8 million. In other words, every new dollar of spending plus an additional $18 million were needed to pay for higher fringe benefit costs
The independent WTA report issued last year found that fringe benefit costs rose 83 per cent between 1995 and 2004, faster than any other MPS spending category. Looking to the future, the WTA concluded: “[I]n the coming years, the expenditure demands MPS faces, particularly in the fringe benefit area, will grow faster than available revenues. As a result, annual rounds of budget retrenchment are inevitable."
Think that's a problem? Get a load of this:
In just one category — health care for retirees — MPS has a $2.2 billion unfunded liability. This is nearly twice the size of the MPS annual budget. MPS uses a “pay-as-you-go” system that
annually provides only a quarter of the cost needed to address its unfunded liability. As a result, that liability will grow to $4.9 billion in less than a decade.
The summary:
A new report from an independent consultant confirms the basic conclusion that MPS reached years ago, namely, the district’s fringe benefits are “considerably more generous” than in
the private sector and among other units of government. As a consequence, cuts in
classroom programs have occurred despite a substantial increase in per pupil spending,
something verified more than a year ago in an independent report from the Wisconsin
Taxpayers Alliance (WTA).
Well, now. "Union benefits," seemingly the new gold-standard for retirement and health-plans under the (anticipated) Democrat hegemony, may be detrimental to your health.
You'll DIE trying to pay for them...
HT: The Warrior
....it will be instructive to see what "union benefits" have done to Milwaukee Public Schools.
To appreciate the impact of fringe benefi t costs, consider that in 2004-05 the overall MPS budget grew $27.3 million while fringe benefi t costs grew $45.8 million. In other words, every new dollar of spending plus an additional $18 million were needed to pay for higher fringe benefit costs
The independent WTA report issued last year found that fringe benefit costs rose 83 per cent between 1995 and 2004, faster than any other MPS spending category. Looking to the future, the WTA concluded: “[I]n the coming years, the expenditure demands MPS faces, particularly in the fringe benefit area, will grow faster than available revenues. As a result, annual rounds of budget retrenchment are inevitable."
Think that's a problem? Get a load of this:
In just one category — health care for retirees — MPS has a $2.2 billion unfunded liability. This is nearly twice the size of the MPS annual budget. MPS uses a “pay-as-you-go” system that
annually provides only a quarter of the cost needed to address its unfunded liability. As a result, that liability will grow to $4.9 billion in less than a decade.
The summary:
A new report from an independent consultant confirms the basic conclusion that MPS reached years ago, namely, the district’s fringe benefits are “considerably more generous” than in
the private sector and among other units of government. As a consequence, cuts in
classroom programs have occurred despite a substantial increase in per pupil spending,
something verified more than a year ago in an independent report from the Wisconsin
Taxpayers Alliance (WTA).
Well, now. "Union benefits," seemingly the new gold-standard for retirement and health-plans under the (anticipated) Democrat hegemony, may be detrimental to your health.
You'll DIE trying to pay for them...
HT: The Warrior
The Obama Health Plan and 401(k)s
By the way...
Reports have it that the Obama health plan does not 'force' national health-care onto the country. Instead, his plan will set 'minimum standards' for coverage similar to coverage provided to Federal workers.
Hmmmmmm......
Does that "minimum standards" thing ring a bell?
Let us quote the invaluable McIlheran:
...all workers whose employers don't offer a sufficiently generous pension would be required to divert 5% of their pay into an account ...
Kinda looks like the same-o, same-o, right?
The pattern:
Government sets a standard which must be met; that standard can only be met by a minority of businesses (and Government-as-employer); people employed by other businesses, or self-employed with minimal benefits, will pay, dearly, for their jobs.
Reports have it that the Obama health plan does not 'force' national health-care onto the country. Instead, his plan will set 'minimum standards' for coverage similar to coverage provided to Federal workers.
Hmmmmmm......
Does that "minimum standards" thing ring a bell?
Let us quote the invaluable McIlheran:
...all workers whose employers don't offer a sufficiently generous pension would be required to divert 5% of their pay into an account ...
Kinda looks like the same-o, same-o, right?
The pattern:
Government sets a standard which must be met; that standard can only be met by a minority of businesses (and Government-as-employer); people employed by other businesses, or self-employed with minimal benefits, will pay, dearly, for their jobs.
Think YOUR Sales Are Down?
For a lot of businesses, sales are ....meh.
Not Volvo Trucks. Their sales are.....well....you decide:
...truckmaker Volvo admitted demand across the Continent has crashed by 99.7% as it took orders for just 115 new lorries in the last three months.
That compares to orders totalling 41,970 in the third quarter of 2007.
They certainly had the time to "focus on quality" while building those trucks. That's only about 1 per DAY.
HT: CalcRisk
Not Volvo Trucks. Their sales are.....well....you decide:
...truckmaker Volvo admitted demand across the Continent has crashed by 99.7% as it took orders for just 115 new lorries in the last three months.
That compares to orders totalling 41,970 in the third quarter of 2007.
They certainly had the time to "focus on quality" while building those trucks. That's only about 1 per DAY.
HT: CalcRisk
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Two New Blogroll Adders
Two-fer!
Janeabelle and Berry Laker. The first one's a little racy. The second likes Rush.
Both are listed as "followers" on my blogspot.
I cannot imagine why, (what's to follow? Old? Nasty?) but at least I can mention and 'roll 'em.
Janeabelle and Berry Laker. The first one's a little racy. The second likes Rush.
Both are listed as "followers" on my blogspot.
I cannot imagine why, (what's to follow? Old? Nasty?) but at least I can mention and 'roll 'em.
"Show Me Just One, Charlie"--Well, How About 30%?
Tom Barrett's office could be crowded if ACORN's own numbers are accurate.
The folks over at ACORN - Barack Obama's favorite "community organizers" - now admit that more than 30 percent of the 1.3 million voter-registration forms they submitted this year were rejected by election officials nationwide
ACORN says no more than "1 to 1.5 percent" involved actual fraud - which was committed, according to their friends at The New York Times, by "low-income field workers trying to please their supervisors." They were only following orders, you see ...
...a long [NYTimes] story a couple of pages later cites a report by ACORN's own lawyer that says the relationships between the group's 174 affiliates may have violated multiple federal laws.
The report raises problems, the article adds, about possible illegal use of charitable dollars for political purposes, improper money transfers and conflicts created by employees working for ACORN affiliates.
Oh, 'what's a few votes here and there,' in the words of a local Democrat...
The folks over at ACORN - Barack Obama's favorite "community organizers" - now admit that more than 30 percent of the 1.3 million voter-registration forms they submitted this year were rejected by election officials nationwide
ACORN says no more than "1 to 1.5 percent" involved actual fraud - which was committed, according to their friends at The New York Times, by "low-income field workers trying to please their supervisors." They were only following orders, you see ...
...a long [NYTimes] story a couple of pages later cites a report by ACORN's own lawyer that says the relationships between the group's 174 affiliates may have violated multiple federal laws.
The report raises problems, the article adds, about possible illegal use of charitable dollars for political purposes, improper money transfers and conflicts created by employees working for ACORN affiliates.
Oh, 'what's a few votes here and there,' in the words of a local Democrat...
MSM Tanking for Obama--Part 1,078,432, Illegal Campaign Contributions
Obama's campaign finance scandal gets bigger every day, but you won't notice it if you live on MSM coverage.
At least National Journal made an attempt.
...The Obama campaign’s Web site accepted the $25 donation, but the McCain campaign’s Web site rejected it.
Rebecca Donatelli, president of Campaigns Solutions of Alexandria, Va., which processes donations for John McCain, said her system rejected the donation because American Express could not verify that the donor lived at the address given with the online contribution...
(Quoted by Morrissey)
As Ace points out, Obama's campaign has deliberately and knowingly DISABLED the credit-card verification routines. That's why they can get contributions from A. Hitler, O. BinLaden, Mickey Mouse, Kermit the Frog, (etc.).
Disabling verification allows that.
MORE:
"It’s fairly clear that the Obama campaign has allowed certain donations to stand for certain periods of time that are dubious,” said Stephen Weissman, policy director at the nonpartisan D.C.-based Campaign Finance Institute
(Morrissey, again)
Here's the damning part:
The wider disconnect here, if I’m reading the piece correctly, is that the FEC uses donors’ names to police campaign contribution limits when in fact it’s the names that are the most easily faked aspect of donating online.
The FEC will not be able to police the illegal activity, now or ever. Obama's campaign says that "they will catch up" with fake-name contributions--but the Obama campaign is DELETING CREDIT-CARD NUMBERS--which is the only method FEC might have to run audits.
Look: if you register as Mickey Mouse and use Amex 1234-5678-9012, giving a fake address, then as Minnie Mouse using Amex 1234-5678-9012, giving another fake address, the only audit-trail is the credit-card number.
So Obama's campaign deletes the credit card number from its records!
"The campaign does not store credit card information for verification purposes because it can subject individual accounts to being compromised," Shapiro said in an e-mail. "We track contribution history by an individual's name, address, and other information provided," he said. The McCain campaign did not say whether it stores credit card numbers.
Yes, the laws were written by Congress, which would rather not have a strong FEC. And yes, there are 'gray areas.'
But a credible and painstakingly thorough reporter--Ken Timmerman--speculates that the O campaign could have taken as much as $63 million from non-citizens. Even if it's only HALF that, it's a lot of illegal money.
But who cares? The Messiah is near! The Selected One, favored by NBCCBSCNNABCAP.
And they wonder why nobody buys their "product."
HT: Ace
At least National Journal made an attempt.
...The Obama campaign’s Web site accepted the $25 donation, but the McCain campaign’s Web site rejected it.
Rebecca Donatelli, president of Campaigns Solutions of Alexandria, Va., which processes donations for John McCain, said her system rejected the donation because American Express could not verify that the donor lived at the address given with the online contribution...
(Quoted by Morrissey)
As Ace points out, Obama's campaign has deliberately and knowingly DISABLED the credit-card verification routines. That's why they can get contributions from A. Hitler, O. BinLaden, Mickey Mouse, Kermit the Frog, (etc.).
Disabling verification allows that.
MORE:
"It’s fairly clear that the Obama campaign has allowed certain donations to stand for certain periods of time that are dubious,” said Stephen Weissman, policy director at the nonpartisan D.C.-based Campaign Finance Institute
(Morrissey, again)
Here's the damning part:
The wider disconnect here, if I’m reading the piece correctly, is that the FEC uses donors’ names to police campaign contribution limits when in fact it’s the names that are the most easily faked aspect of donating online.
The FEC will not be able to police the illegal activity, now or ever. Obama's campaign says that "they will catch up" with fake-name contributions--but the Obama campaign is DELETING CREDIT-CARD NUMBERS--which is the only method FEC might have to run audits.
Look: if you register as Mickey Mouse and use Amex 1234-5678-9012, giving a fake address, then as Minnie Mouse using Amex 1234-5678-9012, giving another fake address, the only audit-trail is the credit-card number.
So Obama's campaign deletes the credit card number from its records!
"The campaign does not store credit card information for verification purposes because it can subject individual accounts to being compromised," Shapiro said in an e-mail. "We track contribution history by an individual's name, address, and other information provided," he said. The McCain campaign did not say whether it stores credit card numbers.
Yes, the laws were written by Congress, which would rather not have a strong FEC. And yes, there are 'gray areas.'
But a credible and painstakingly thorough reporter--Ken Timmerman--speculates that the O campaign could have taken as much as $63 million from non-citizens. Even if it's only HALF that, it's a lot of illegal money.
But who cares? The Messiah is near! The Selected One, favored by NBCCBSCNNABCAP.
And they wonder why nobody buys their "product."
HT: Ace
Kiss Your 401(k) Bye-Bye? P-I-G Delight!
P-Mac doesn't like what he hears from the DC Establishment Lefties.
...Reps. George Miller of California and Jim McDermott of Washington, both Democrats, head a couple of committees that make law about retirement accounts. They've been listening to critics of 401(k) plans, including an economics professor who's got a notion to force people into a government-run replacement.
...The plan that Miller and McDermott liked, by economist Teresa Ghilarducci, has been peddled for at least a year by the influential left-leaning Economic Policy Institute. It would repeal the law by which you don't pay taxes on money you put into your 401(k) or earn in it. The accounts would be taxed as any investment. [Note well: the Economic Policy Institute is Union-funded.]
Meanwhile, all workers whose employers don't offer a sufficiently generous pension would be required to divert 5% of their pay into an account handled by the Social Security Administration. It would be invested in government bonds and would supposedly provide a return of 3%, no more, no less.
Let's break for perspective.
There are three common forms of retirement benefits for most folks; this will be a VERY brief and not-too-technical overview. There is nuance in each of these, and there are a number of twists and turns which may be applicable only to your workplace and your personal situation. I ain't not a Retirement Specialist, CLU, or other kinda guru, folks. Do NOT take this to the bank.
1) Fixed-Benefit Plans require the employer to pay retired workers $XXX/month, the number being decided by some formula usually including years of service and average pay in the last few years of employment. This is the plan commonly held by powerful unions (UAW, Machinists, Steelworkers, Teamsters, AFSCME, Trades) and (surprise!!!) by public salaried employees such as Milwaukee County Supervisors, Congresscritters, Governors, and Leggies. They are generally the most-expensive plans; that is, they cost the employer a lot of money because if the plan's assets do not bring in the expected return, the employer must contribute extra money to make up the difference.
Ask Scott Walker about these plans...
2) Fixed-Contribution Plans require the employer to deposit a percentage of your annual pay to a retirement fund (say 5%.) After you retire, you withdraw from the accumulated assets in the fund. Generally, an actuary figures out how much you get every month based on your life-expectancy and that's the amount you get. If the assets diminish or increase significantly, the withdrawals are re-figured. Some Wisconsin public employees have this sort of plan. Note that the employer's pension contributions stop when you stop working, making it a less-burdensome plan to your employer.
3) 401(k) Plans are similar to Fixed-Contribution plans--your employer usually (not always) "matches" a certain portion of what YOU contribute. The assets are invested, usually at the discretion of the employee, and at retirement, withdrawals are made as in Fixed-Contribution plans, except the Government has rules about how much you must take every year. Again, the employer's obligation stops when you stop working.
Generally speaking, employers which provide 401(k) plans are in highly-competitive industries and may be thinly-capitalized--that is, their stock is not publicly traded. There's not a lot of fat to spread around.
Why do this, when nearly any prudent 401(k) can double that return long-term with a middling mutual fund? Because 401(k)s are unfair, Ghilarducci says - lots of people don't save into them, so the break goes to a "lucky few."
P-Mac goes back to the infamous Joe the Plumber exchange with the O-and-Savior. Pay attention to the red-highlighted word:
The Ohio man asked Obama a good question: Where do you get off jacking up taxes on me when I strike it rich via hard work and enterprise? Obama's rambling, unguarded answer was telling. He said that plumbers do better when "folks from the bottom up" have money to get their plumbing fixed. Obama concluded, "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
"Wealth" is different from "Earnings." To economists, "wealth" is assets--what you own--like your house, your cars, your Elvis recordings and collector Smurf dolls, diamonds, stocks, bonds, and cash-in-the-bank. "Earnings" is exactly that: what you get paid in salary, wage, and/or dividends and interest. Taxing "earnings" is commonplace.
On the other hand, the only "wealth" tax we have is the estate tax, and while that is a burden to some people who have accumulated wealth, like farmers who own several thousand acres or plumbers who built a successful business, it doesn't usually hit a lot of middle-class-salary-man/wage-man type folks.
If we take Obama's "wealth" comment seriously, it is extremely significant.
Taxing a 401(k) under the terms vaguely outlined by Ghilarducci would be a new 'wealth' tax--you'd pay cap-gains taxes when the gains were taken, not post-retirement when rates are lower. More significant, employers would NOT have a tax-incentive to contribute to your 401(k) retirement any more. Worst of all, you would be required to finance the Government's debt at 3%--a helluva deal for Congressional spenders, but not necessarily for you.
In brief, it's the death-warrant for the 401(k) plan.
Thus, the Ghilarducci plan has two very powerful built-in constituencies:
1) The Party-In-Government (PIGs), who will be able to spend a bunch of money (and purchase a lot of votes) at VERY low interest-cost; and
2) Unions, who have extracted a "sufficiently generous" retirement plan such as fixed-benefit or fixed-contribution. In other words, it will benefit the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, Teamsters, Machinists, Steelworkers, and UAW. Fuggedabout thinly-capitalized or highly-competitive businesses. Work for them and you're screwed.
This plan will hit anyone with a 401(k), which includes a lot of people who drive 10-year-old Fords and whose 'exorbitant nights-out' consist of once-a-month movies w/a fish-fry and a late chocolate malt from Gilles', (which is most of the 4.5 readers of this blog.) In other words, regular people who are not likely paying Union Bosses or taking a Government pension.
And it will force them to accept a VERY meager dole from the Government--3%, forever--meaning that Government spending will go up to purchase more votes.
Reduced to its simplest terms, the attack on the 401(k) will benefit only two interest-groups: the Party-In-Government and the Unions. If you don't work in a union shop or for the Government, go to the back of the bus.
The PIGS and their Union Co-conspirators. What a great group of folks. "Spreading the wealth," indeed.
...Reps. George Miller of California and Jim McDermott of Washington, both Democrats, head a couple of committees that make law about retirement accounts. They've been listening to critics of 401(k) plans, including an economics professor who's got a notion to force people into a government-run replacement.
...The plan that Miller and McDermott liked, by economist Teresa Ghilarducci, has been peddled for at least a year by the influential left-leaning Economic Policy Institute. It would repeal the law by which you don't pay taxes on money you put into your 401(k) or earn in it. The accounts would be taxed as any investment. [Note well: the Economic Policy Institute is Union-funded.]
Meanwhile, all workers whose employers don't offer a sufficiently generous pension would be required to divert 5% of their pay into an account handled by the Social Security Administration. It would be invested in government bonds and would supposedly provide a return of 3%, no more, no less.
Let's break for perspective.
There are three common forms of retirement benefits for most folks; this will be a VERY brief and not-too-technical overview. There is nuance in each of these, and there are a number of twists and turns which may be applicable only to your workplace and your personal situation. I ain't not a Retirement Specialist, CLU, or other kinda guru, folks. Do NOT take this to the bank.
1) Fixed-Benefit Plans require the employer to pay retired workers $XXX/month, the number being decided by some formula usually including years of service and average pay in the last few years of employment. This is the plan commonly held by powerful unions (UAW, Machinists, Steelworkers, Teamsters, AFSCME, Trades) and (surprise!!!) by public salaried employees such as Milwaukee County Supervisors, Congresscritters, Governors, and Leggies. They are generally the most-expensive plans; that is, they cost the employer a lot of money because if the plan's assets do not bring in the expected return, the employer must contribute extra money to make up the difference.
Ask Scott Walker about these plans...
2) Fixed-Contribution Plans require the employer to deposit a percentage of your annual pay to a retirement fund (say 5%.) After you retire, you withdraw from the accumulated assets in the fund. Generally, an actuary figures out how much you get every month based on your life-expectancy and that's the amount you get. If the assets diminish or increase significantly, the withdrawals are re-figured. Some Wisconsin public employees have this sort of plan. Note that the employer's pension contributions stop when you stop working, making it a less-burdensome plan to your employer.
3) 401(k) Plans are similar to Fixed-Contribution plans--your employer usually (not always) "matches" a certain portion of what YOU contribute. The assets are invested, usually at the discretion of the employee, and at retirement, withdrawals are made as in Fixed-Contribution plans, except the Government has rules about how much you must take every year. Again, the employer's obligation stops when you stop working.
Generally speaking, employers which provide 401(k) plans are in highly-competitive industries and may be thinly-capitalized--that is, their stock is not publicly traded. There's not a lot of fat to spread around.
Why do this, when nearly any prudent 401(k) can double that return long-term with a middling mutual fund? Because 401(k)s are unfair, Ghilarducci says - lots of people don't save into them, so the break goes to a "lucky few."
P-Mac goes back to the infamous Joe the Plumber exchange with the O-and-Savior. Pay attention to the red-highlighted word:
The Ohio man asked Obama a good question: Where do you get off jacking up taxes on me when I strike it rich via hard work and enterprise? Obama's rambling, unguarded answer was telling. He said that plumbers do better when "folks from the bottom up" have money to get their plumbing fixed. Obama concluded, "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
"Wealth" is different from "Earnings." To economists, "wealth" is assets--what you own--like your house, your cars, your Elvis recordings and collector Smurf dolls, diamonds, stocks, bonds, and cash-in-the-bank. "Earnings" is exactly that: what you get paid in salary, wage, and/or dividends and interest. Taxing "earnings" is commonplace.
On the other hand, the only "wealth" tax we have is the estate tax, and while that is a burden to some people who have accumulated wealth, like farmers who own several thousand acres or plumbers who built a successful business, it doesn't usually hit a lot of middle-class-salary-man/wage-man type folks.
If we take Obama's "wealth" comment seriously, it is extremely significant.
Taxing a 401(k) under the terms vaguely outlined by Ghilarducci would be a new 'wealth' tax--you'd pay cap-gains taxes when the gains were taken, not post-retirement when rates are lower. More significant, employers would NOT have a tax-incentive to contribute to your 401(k) retirement any more. Worst of all, you would be required to finance the Government's debt at 3%--a helluva deal for Congressional spenders, but not necessarily for you.
In brief, it's the death-warrant for the 401(k) plan.
Thus, the Ghilarducci plan has two very powerful built-in constituencies:
1) The Party-In-Government (PIGs), who will be able to spend a bunch of money (and purchase a lot of votes) at VERY low interest-cost; and
2) Unions, who have extracted a "sufficiently generous" retirement plan such as fixed-benefit or fixed-contribution. In other words, it will benefit the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, Teamsters, Machinists, Steelworkers, and UAW. Fuggedabout thinly-capitalized or highly-competitive businesses. Work for them and you're screwed.
This plan will hit anyone with a 401(k), which includes a lot of people who drive 10-year-old Fords and whose 'exorbitant nights-out' consist of once-a-month movies w/a fish-fry and a late chocolate malt from Gilles', (which is most of the 4.5 readers of this blog.) In other words, regular people who are not likely paying Union Bosses or taking a Government pension.
And it will force them to accept a VERY meager dole from the Government--3%, forever--meaning that Government spending will go up to purchase more votes.
Reduced to its simplest terms, the attack on the 401(k) will benefit only two interest-groups: the Party-In-Government and the Unions. If you don't work in a union shop or for the Government, go to the back of the bus.
The PIGS and their Union Co-conspirators. What a great group of folks. "Spreading the wealth," indeed.
Peanut Butter Side to the Floor!! MARCH!!
In the Murphy's Law book...
We mailed a package to a student offshore; the scheduled arrival date was 10/18.
But in the particular country, things with the post office are a bit....lackadaisacal.
So, of course, the damn thing arrived ONE DAY AFTER the recipient left for a 10-day trip. We have no friggin' idea whether they will actually attempt a second delivery.
We mailed a package to a student offshore; the scheduled arrival date was 10/18.
But in the particular country, things with the post office are a bit....lackadaisacal.
So, of course, the damn thing arrived ONE DAY AFTER the recipient left for a 10-day trip. We have no friggin' idea whether they will actually attempt a second delivery.
What To Do AFTER the Election
Another Rat Deserts the Ship
Noonan, Parker (whoever SHE is), Buckley, and Adelman.
Our subject will be Adelman.
Granted, McCain's views are closer to mine than Obama's. But I've learned over this Bush era to value competence along with ideology. Otherwise, our ideology gets discredited, as it has so disastrously over the past eight years.McCain's temperament -- leading him to bizarre behavior during the week the economic crisis broke -- and his judgment -- leading him to Wasilla -- depressed me into thinking that "our guy" would be a(nother) lousy conservative president. Been there, done that.
Quoted by Stacy McCain, who observes:
Keep in mind that this is coming from a supporter of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), Bill Kristol's "National Greatness" outfit that pushed for the invasion of Iraq.
Then McCain quotes Matt Lewis:
In 2000, the thing to value was character and integrity, because it was perceived that Clinton lacked that. In 2008, the thing to value is competence, because it is perceived that Bush lacked that
What we are seeing, folks, is the Urge to Survive; how to keep the money rolling in given what may be an Obama victory.
Our subject will be Adelman.
Granted, McCain's views are closer to mine than Obama's. But I've learned over this Bush era to value competence along with ideology. Otherwise, our ideology gets discredited, as it has so disastrously over the past eight years.McCain's temperament -- leading him to bizarre behavior during the week the economic crisis broke -- and his judgment -- leading him to Wasilla -- depressed me into thinking that "our guy" would be a(nother) lousy conservative president. Been there, done that.
Quoted by Stacy McCain, who observes:
Keep in mind that this is coming from a supporter of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), Bill Kristol's "National Greatness" outfit that pushed for the invasion of Iraq.
Then McCain quotes Matt Lewis:
In 2000, the thing to value was character and integrity, because it was perceived that Clinton lacked that. In 2008, the thing to value is competence, because it is perceived that Bush lacked that
What we are seeing, folks, is the Urge to Survive; how to keep the money rolling in given what may be an Obama victory.
THIS Is What McCain Should Be Saying
Exactly what I suggested a few weeks ago.
Video here.
McCain should have showed Fan/Fred and Obama in ....ahhhh.....'compromising positions,' which is exactly the truth.
Oh, well.
Video here.
McCain should have showed Fan/Fred and Obama in ....ahhhh.....'compromising positions,' which is exactly the truth.
Oh, well.
Ex-Jesuit Makes Not-So-Good News
Here's the story.
[NY State] Gov. Paterson's chief of staff now says he owed nearly $300,000 in back taxes, $100,000 more than was previously known — and his lawyer blamed the problem on "non-filer syndrome."
Charles O'Byrne's attorney, Richard Kestenbaum, mentioned the virtually unheard-of ailment at a briefing for reporters intended to quell the firestorm surrounding O'Byrne's failure to file income-tax returns from 2001 to 2005.
O'Byrne, 49, a former Jesuit priest with close ties to the Kennedy family, has already blamed his neglect to file — first reported by The Post — on clinical depression
Well, it's a defense, I suppose.
Think YOU could run that past the IRS?
HT: Moonbattery
[NY State] Gov. Paterson's chief of staff now says he owed nearly $300,000 in back taxes, $100,000 more than was previously known — and his lawyer blamed the problem on "non-filer syndrome."
Charles O'Byrne's attorney, Richard Kestenbaum, mentioned the virtually unheard-of ailment at a briefing for reporters intended to quell the firestorm surrounding O'Byrne's failure to file income-tax returns from 2001 to 2005.
O'Byrne, 49, a former Jesuit priest with close ties to the Kennedy family, has already blamed his neglect to file — first reported by The Post — on clinical depression
Well, it's a defense, I suppose.
Think YOU could run that past the IRS?
HT: Moonbattery
McCain/Obama: What's the Difference?
Maybe too much coffee this AM. Overstimulated?
1) Shoebox noted (and we picked up) a story from the Minneapolis Federal Reserve, whose economists simply could not find evidence of a "bank meltdown" through October '08. Commercial lending was fine, consumer lending was fine, deposits were growing, and commercial paper was dandy. The only hitch was the TED spread, which had increased sharply--but the economists laid that off to a 'flight to quality' following the Chicken-Little Doom and Gloom stories put out by Paulson and the Administration.
I admit that I bought the story at the time. I relied on information from a few local financial-industry-connected pals. They had been told (sold?) the same bill of goods.
2) The Bush Administration, led by Hank Paulson (not GWB) importunes Congress to appropriate $700Bn to "rescue" the Banks, despite the findings above. This now includes a "rescue" of GM, FoMoCo, and Cerberus/Chrysler, as well as a "forced" Federal stock-purchase in a number of Banks. We need not remind you that Paulson is ex-CEO of Goldman, Sachs--
3) Paulson, now morphing into Napoleon, will soon use some of the $700Bn to recapitalize insurance companies--Met, Pru, NYL, and Hartford have been mentioned.
4) Malkin reports that ETHANOL producers (!!!!????) are also screaming for Bailout Dollars--and we have no good reason to expect the Administration to deny them, given its near-corrupt obeisance to Archer-Daniels-Midland (although the Democrat Party is just as corrupt--see, e.g., James Doyle, Esq., Governor of Wisconsin.)
5) The AIG $85Bn has turned into $120+Bn, with $90+Bn already burned; there's discussion of more "lending" into that sewer-drain going on as we burn bandwidth.
McCain has yet to distance himself from ANY of this crap (except the Ethanol Mob's corrupt practices.)
SO WHAT?
Well, here's the "what:"
So long as the GWB Boyzzzz are in the process of socializing the Banks and insurers, all of which McCain has implicitly or explicitly endorsed....
....and are working their way towards doing same with the Big Three and the ethanol mob...
...why not go full-bore with Obama?
We can have a McCain Sec/Treas who is calling the shots at the country's banks, insurers, and other places yet-to-be-named, or we can have an Obama Sec/Treas (Jamie Dimon, anyone?) who will do the same.
What's the difference?
Here's the humorist's take. But maybe it's not humor.
1) Shoebox noted (and we picked up) a story from the Minneapolis Federal Reserve, whose economists simply could not find evidence of a "bank meltdown" through October '08. Commercial lending was fine, consumer lending was fine, deposits were growing, and commercial paper was dandy. The only hitch was the TED spread, which had increased sharply--but the economists laid that off to a 'flight to quality' following the Chicken-Little Doom and Gloom stories put out by Paulson and the Administration.
I admit that I bought the story at the time. I relied on information from a few local financial-industry-connected pals. They had been told (sold?) the same bill of goods.
2) The Bush Administration, led by Hank Paulson (not GWB) importunes Congress to appropriate $700Bn to "rescue" the Banks, despite the findings above. This now includes a "rescue" of GM, FoMoCo, and Cerberus/Chrysler, as well as a "forced" Federal stock-purchase in a number of Banks. We need not remind you that Paulson is ex-CEO of Goldman, Sachs--
3) Paulson, now morphing into Napoleon, will soon use some of the $700Bn to recapitalize insurance companies--Met, Pru, NYL, and Hartford have been mentioned.
4) Malkin reports that ETHANOL producers (!!!!????) are also screaming for Bailout Dollars--and we have no good reason to expect the Administration to deny them, given its near-corrupt obeisance to Archer-Daniels-Midland (although the Democrat Party is just as corrupt--see, e.g., James Doyle, Esq., Governor of Wisconsin.)
5) The AIG $85Bn has turned into $120+Bn, with $90+Bn already burned; there's discussion of more "lending" into that sewer-drain going on as we burn bandwidth.
McCain has yet to distance himself from ANY of this crap (except the Ethanol Mob's corrupt practices.)
SO WHAT?
Well, here's the "what:"
So long as the GWB Boyzzzz are in the process of socializing the Banks and insurers, all of which McCain has implicitly or explicitly endorsed....
....and are working their way towards doing same with the Big Three and the ethanol mob...
...why not go full-bore with Obama?
We can have a McCain Sec/Treas who is calling the shots at the country's banks, insurers, and other places yet-to-be-named, or we can have an Obama Sec/Treas (Jamie Dimon, anyone?) who will do the same.
What's the difference?
Here's the humorist's take. But maybe it's not humor.
Gas-Tax WILL Go Up; Ethanol Subsidies Next?
From US DOT:
Travel on all roads and streets changed by -5.6% (-15.0 billion vehicle miles) for August 2008 as compared with August 2007. Travel for the month is estimated to be 253.7 billion vehicle miles
Frankie (da Enforcer) Busalacchi is having kittens right now.
The pressure to increase the Wisconsin gas tax will be enormous. Further, the corn-grower/ethanol people will be screaming for MORE MORE MORE MORE money.
Yes, an Obama regime will increase ethanol subsidies, but you can expect handout-demands to materialize in Wisconsin as well.
Further documentation at Headless showing corn prices in lockstep with petroleum--which only adds to the "need" of ethanol producers who may otherwise go banko. (Boo Hoo.)
HT: Calculated Risk
Illegal Records Searches on "Joe the Plumber"
Can't say this is surprising.
"State and local officials are investigating if state and law-enforcement computer systems were illegally accessed when they were tapped for personal information about "Joe the Plumber."
Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher became part of the national political lexicon Oct. 15 when Republican presidential candidate John McCain mentioned him frequently during his final debate with Democrat Barack Obama.
...[Within days of the famous incident] Information on Wurzelbacher was accessed by accounts assigned to the office of Ohio Attorney General Nancy H. Rogers, the Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency and the Toledo Police Department.
(Memo to Capper: are ALL Child Support people political plants?)
Slimebuckets and lowlifes.
"Trust your Government"??
Kiss my ass.
"State and local officials are investigating if state and law-enforcement computer systems were illegally accessed when they were tapped for personal information about "Joe the Plumber."
Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher became part of the national political lexicon Oct. 15 when Republican presidential candidate John McCain mentioned him frequently during his final debate with Democrat Barack Obama.
...[Within days of the famous incident] Information on Wurzelbacher was accessed by accounts assigned to the office of Ohio Attorney General Nancy H. Rogers, the Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency and the Toledo Police Department.
(Memo to Capper: are ALL Child Support people political plants?)
Slimebuckets and lowlifes.
"Trust your Government"??
Kiss my ass.
Friday, October 24, 2008
"Voter Suppression": Projection, Part 35,675
All you PUMA/HRC Dems have probably seen this letter--but others haven't.
I write on behalf of Hillary Clinton for President (”the Committee”) in regard to the January 19, 2008 Nevada Democratic Caucus. The Committee is aware of a letter addressed to you today from the Obama for America campaign requesting an inquiry into the conduct of the caucuses. The Committee shares the Obama campaign’s concern that full participation in the democratic process may have been compromised by the substantial number of irregularities occurring at the caucuses, and we fully support a complete inquiry by the Nevada State Democratic Party (the ”Party”) into all caucus improprieties.
My, my. Problems?
Here are a few excerpts from the complaint.
The Committee received substantially similar reports of improprieties of such a number as to leave no conclusion but that the Obama campaign and its allies and supporters engaged in a planned effort to subvert the Party’s caucus procedures to its advantage.
For example:
þ Preference cards were premarked for Obama.
þ Clinton supporters were denied preference cards on the basis that none were left, while Obama supporters at the same caucus sites were given preference cards.
þ Caucus chairs obviously supporting Obama:
o Deliberately miscounted votes to favor Senator Obama.
o Deliberately counted unregistered persons as Obama votes.
o Deliberately counted young children as Obama votes.
Numerous reports received by the Committee demonstrate a concerted effort on the part of the Obama campaign and its supporters to prevent eligible voters supporting a candidate other than Senator Obama from caucusing...
The Committee received a substantial number of disturbing reports from voters that they had been subject to harassment, intimidation or efforts to prevent them from voting.
Uh-huh. That's "suppression," textbook 101. Democrat stuff.
If only the Republicans could learn these techniques.
HT: Ace
I write on behalf of Hillary Clinton for President (”the Committee”) in regard to the January 19, 2008 Nevada Democratic Caucus. The Committee is aware of a letter addressed to you today from the Obama for America campaign requesting an inquiry into the conduct of the caucuses. The Committee shares the Obama campaign’s concern that full participation in the democratic process may have been compromised by the substantial number of irregularities occurring at the caucuses, and we fully support a complete inquiry by the Nevada State Democratic Party (the ”Party”) into all caucus improprieties.
My, my. Problems?
Here are a few excerpts from the complaint.
The Committee received substantially similar reports of improprieties of such a number as to leave no conclusion but that the Obama campaign and its allies and supporters engaged in a planned effort to subvert the Party’s caucus procedures to its advantage.
For example:
þ Preference cards were premarked for Obama.
þ Clinton supporters were denied preference cards on the basis that none were left, while Obama supporters at the same caucus sites were given preference cards.
þ Caucus chairs obviously supporting Obama:
o Deliberately miscounted votes to favor Senator Obama.
o Deliberately counted unregistered persons as Obama votes.
o Deliberately counted young children as Obama votes.
Numerous reports received by the Committee demonstrate a concerted effort on the part of the Obama campaign and its supporters to prevent eligible voters supporting a candidate other than Senator Obama from caucusing...
The Committee received a substantial number of disturbing reports from voters that they had been subject to harassment, intimidation or efforts to prevent them from voting.
Uh-huh. That's "suppression," textbook 101. Democrat stuff.
If only the Republicans could learn these techniques.
HT: Ace
Bank Dividends: History
Noted by Ritholtz:
"Read the fine print -- The $250 billion bank recapitalization effectively ends divdiends. If they took the cash -- and they all needed it -- there are no divvies paid until the money is paid back. No common dividends, no preferred either (though they will accumulate)."
So M&I is going to take the bailout money?
And stop paying DIVIDENDS???
"Read the fine print -- The $250 billion bank recapitalization effectively ends divdiends. If they took the cash -- and they all needed it -- there are no divvies paid until the money is paid back. No common dividends, no preferred either (though they will accumulate)."
So M&I is going to take the bailout money?
And stop paying DIVIDENDS???
I'm a Member of the "Resistance"!!
Evidently, Obama has already determined that there is a "resistance" movement.
One of the "issues" [Harry] Smith [CBS] asked about near the end of the interview was: "Whoever gets elected president, somehow, has to put their arm around the whole country and say, 'we're in this together.' Can do you that?" That gave Obama the opportunity to call for unity and attack conservatives at the same time: "I can. And I think that's the tone that we've set from the beginning of this campaign. I mean, look. Is Sean Hannity suddenly going to get on the air waves and say 'You know, I was wrong about this Obama guy, he's my man.' No, that's not going to happen. I mean's there's going to be a certain wing of the Republican Party that is, you know, dug in and resistant to the notion that we need to change direction."
Umnnnnhhhhh....I make it a point to avoid listening to Hannity for a variety of reasons...and I'm not a registered Republican (I'm a conservative...)
Having said that, I will be a Member of the Resistance should Obama be elected.
And we know what Obama's crowd thinks about "the Resistance:"
It's in this video. Hint: 25 million will be dead.
Let's not forget Obama pal Mike Klonsky, either.
HT: TrenchLady
One of the "issues" [Harry] Smith [CBS] asked about near the end of the interview was: "Whoever gets elected president, somehow, has to put their arm around the whole country and say, 'we're in this together.' Can do you that?" That gave Obama the opportunity to call for unity and attack conservatives at the same time: "I can. And I think that's the tone that we've set from the beginning of this campaign. I mean, look. Is Sean Hannity suddenly going to get on the air waves and say 'You know, I was wrong about this Obama guy, he's my man.' No, that's not going to happen. I mean's there's going to be a certain wing of the Republican Party that is, you know, dug in and resistant to the notion that we need to change direction."
Umnnnnhhhhh....I make it a point to avoid listening to Hannity for a variety of reasons...and I'm not a registered Republican (I'm a conservative...)
Having said that, I will be a Member of the Resistance should Obama be elected.
And we know what Obama's crowd thinks about "the Resistance:"
It's in this video. Hint: 25 million will be dead.
Let's not forget Obama pal Mike Klonsky, either.
HT: TrenchLady
Dames Attacking Palin: Psychography
Krauthammer is a shrink and makes a point which resonates on why the FemiNazis (and their crumpet/oenophile/camembert "conservative" By-Otch comrades) absolutely despise Sarah Palin.
"In Palin’s case, I think what it adds up to is her decision, at her age, with four other children, to have a Down Syndrome child. This, too, as Joseph Epstein wrote, in feminist circles: if abortion is not about this, what is it about? And they look at her as sort of a back room-a backwater hick-who for religious reasons went ahead and had a child that they would never have. Underneath it, I think, deep underneath it, I think it’s a self-loathing on the part of these feminists, knowing that she did a virtuous thing and a generous act that they would never have undertaken. And her having undertaken it is an affront to them: a silent rebuke.”
Not quite complete, Charles. (I'm no shrink, but I understand people, too.)
In addition, she's perfectly content and happy with her choice; remains married to a man's man, and equanamably handles her daughter's pregnancy.
In other words, Charles, she's at peace with her circumstances; she understands that there is God, Who is Good, Who has numbered the hairs on her head, and Who loves her.
It's the practical atheists--the ones who disregard Commandment Number Two (no false gods)--who spit and screech into the night.
HT: Roeser
"In Palin’s case, I think what it adds up to is her decision, at her age, with four other children, to have a Down Syndrome child. This, too, as Joseph Epstein wrote, in feminist circles: if abortion is not about this, what is it about? And they look at her as sort of a back room-a backwater hick-who for religious reasons went ahead and had a child that they would never have. Underneath it, I think, deep underneath it, I think it’s a self-loathing on the part of these feminists, knowing that she did a virtuous thing and a generous act that they would never have undertaken. And her having undertaken it is an affront to them: a silent rebuke.”
Not quite complete, Charles. (I'm no shrink, but I understand people, too.)
In addition, she's perfectly content and happy with her choice; remains married to a man's man, and equanamably handles her daughter's pregnancy.
In other words, Charles, she's at peace with her circumstances; she understands that there is God, Who is Good, Who has numbered the hairs on her head, and Who loves her.
It's the practical atheists--the ones who disregard Commandment Number Two (no false gods)--who spit and screech into the night.
HT: Roeser
Who's Attacking Sarah Palin?
Interesting theory here.
What needs to happen for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential aspirations to remain viable?
Primarily, at least 2 things:
(1) McCain needs to lose, and
(2) Sarah Palin has to be seen as a political liability and therefore unelectable.
OK. "Healthcare" Romney, the Lefto-Wacky ex-Gov Massachusetts. Hmmmmm.
Given that, I wonder if it's only a coincidence that many (but certainly not all) of the elitist "conservatives" who have abandoned McCain in favor of "The One" - and who have thoroughly trashed Sarah Palin in the process in an order to paint her as responsible for a McCain loss (should that occur) - just so happen to be Romney supporters?
Specific mention is given to the By-Otch Queen Kathleen Parker and Bill Weld, another massive Mass. failure.
Dunno, and don't care, what Noonan thought of Romney, by the way.
What needs to happen for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential aspirations to remain viable?
Primarily, at least 2 things:
(1) McCain needs to lose, and
(2) Sarah Palin has to be seen as a political liability and therefore unelectable.
OK. "Healthcare" Romney, the Lefto-Wacky ex-Gov Massachusetts. Hmmmmm.
Given that, I wonder if it's only a coincidence that many (but certainly not all) of the elitist "conservatives" who have abandoned McCain in favor of "The One" - and who have thoroughly trashed Sarah Palin in the process in an order to paint her as responsible for a McCain loss (should that occur) - just so happen to be Romney supporters?
Specific mention is given to the By-Otch Queen Kathleen Parker and Bill Weld, another massive Mass. failure.
Dunno, and don't care, what Noonan thought of Romney, by the way.
On "Liturgy Committees"
Delivered with delightful prose, an indictment of "liturgy committees" in your typical Catholic parish.
Except for the renovation of a traditional-style church building (that rare opportunity to do permanent damage with serious money, that everybody else will be stuck with for years), the typical Catholic parish will provide no greater opportunity for the dabbling of dilettantes, than it will for people who haven't cracked open a mildly serious book on the topic of Catholic worship since the day they were born. Saying this may seem unkind or judgmental, except to the extent that it is true. I cannot for the life of me understand what goes through most pastors' minds when they convene such a group. But in my experience as a chorister, musician, lay reader, and acolyte, there is nothing more irritating than the arbitrary decrees of a group of people who don't know what the hell they're talking about, beyond the bag of gimmicks they picked up at a liturgy workshop the previous weekend. Some of the stupidest ideas I have ever heard on behalf of a parish priest, emanated from groups charged with "planning the liturgy."
The author then raises an excellent question.
"Liturgy planning" is another dumb idea. The Church has already "planned" the liturgy. They print it in books with nicely bound covers that are really hard to miss when you walk into a sacristy. Our job, at most, is to prepare the liturgy, most of which becomes routine a few weeks after a priest is ordained. When you have to reinvent it, when you have to constantly explain what is going on with it, it is no longer a ritual. You see, a ritual is SUPPOSED to be done the same way over and over again, with minimum variation, and no explanation. That's why they call it a RITUAL, you dummy!
..but that's sort of the same complaint that people have about Legislators. After all, why do we send those critters off to nicely-appointed domed buildings, if they don't DO SOMETHING??
In conclusion,
Most parishes can do without them, save for the gathering of people with genuine responsibilities associated with worship; the music director, the sacristan, the persons in charge of altar servers, readers, ushers -- yes, even the nice ladies who have arranged the flowers in the sanctuary since time immemorial.
Think of all the trees which could be saved! The gasoline! The rectory heat/light bills!!
MWBH.
Except for the renovation of a traditional-style church building (that rare opportunity to do permanent damage with serious money, that everybody else will be stuck with for years), the typical Catholic parish will provide no greater opportunity for the dabbling of dilettantes, than it will for people who haven't cracked open a mildly serious book on the topic of Catholic worship since the day they were born. Saying this may seem unkind or judgmental, except to the extent that it is true. I cannot for the life of me understand what goes through most pastors' minds when they convene such a group. But in my experience as a chorister, musician, lay reader, and acolyte, there is nothing more irritating than the arbitrary decrees of a group of people who don't know what the hell they're talking about, beyond the bag of gimmicks they picked up at a liturgy workshop the previous weekend. Some of the stupidest ideas I have ever heard on behalf of a parish priest, emanated from groups charged with "planning the liturgy."
The author then raises an excellent question.
"Liturgy planning" is another dumb idea. The Church has already "planned" the liturgy. They print it in books with nicely bound covers that are really hard to miss when you walk into a sacristy. Our job, at most, is to prepare the liturgy, most of which becomes routine a few weeks after a priest is ordained. When you have to reinvent it, when you have to constantly explain what is going on with it, it is no longer a ritual. You see, a ritual is SUPPOSED to be done the same way over and over again, with minimum variation, and no explanation. That's why they call it a RITUAL, you dummy!
..but that's sort of the same complaint that people have about Legislators. After all, why do we send those critters off to nicely-appointed domed buildings, if they don't DO SOMETHING??
In conclusion,
Most parishes can do without them, save for the gathering of people with genuine responsibilities associated with worship; the music director, the sacristan, the persons in charge of altar servers, readers, ushers -- yes, even the nice ladies who have arranged the flowers in the sanctuary since time immemorial.
Think of all the trees which could be saved! The gasoline! The rectory heat/light bills!!
MWBH.
Another One Bites the Dust
National City is no more.
PNC Financial Services Group will buy National City Corp. of Cleveland in a $5.6 billion deal that will bring PNC Bank to Milwaukee.
PNC is the old Pittsburgh National, which is a potentate in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Ky.
National City is based in Cleveland and was "in trouble" about one day after their acquisition of St. Francis Bank/Milwaukee--not due to the St Francis buy, but because NatCit was heavily into subprimes. Nuclear Waste.
Those St Francis folks are going to have so damn many year-end payroll slips they'll need a new vault to keep them...
PNC Financial Services Group will buy National City Corp. of Cleveland in a $5.6 billion deal that will bring PNC Bank to Milwaukee.
PNC is the old Pittsburgh National, which is a potentate in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Ky.
National City is based in Cleveland and was "in trouble" about one day after their acquisition of St. Francis Bank/Milwaukee--not due to the St Francis buy, but because NatCit was heavily into subprimes. Nuclear Waste.
Those St Francis folks are going to have so damn many year-end payroll slips they'll need a new vault to keep them...
More on "Easy Al" Greenspan
From a newsletter:
According to Greenspan's tortured explanations, the unregulated finance companies (that he repeatedly refused to regulate), combined with the unbridled issuance of adjustable-rate mortgages (that he publicly extolled), combined with the astronomical growth of complex derivatives (that he enthusiastically encouraged), combined with the lack of governmental oversight and control (that he actively thwarted), had NOTHING to do with the resulting financial disaster.
No, these influences did not cause the problem. And neither - we are led to infer - did the former Fed Chairman's career-long penchant for nurturing asset bubbles, cause the problem. The real culprits, Greenspan argued, were all those bond investors who were demanding high-yield securities...
Uh-huh. But there's an anwer for that, too:
...the inquiring mind would want to inquire, "Why were bond investors seeking high yields?" Hmmm...could part of the reason have been that Greenspan was continuously suppressing short-term interest rates, even when economic conditions did not seem to require them. "Greenspan is maintaining emergency interest rates without an emergency," James Grant explained at the time.
Grant is, arguably, THE authority on rates.
Now, of course, it wasn't just "Easy Al." But $Umpty-Zillions in infused cash over the years has to go somewhere, folks.
We might mention Congress and two lousy Presidents, not to mention the biggest problem: the "gimme" population which demanded bigger houses, granite countertops, and two Caddies in the drive...
According to Greenspan's tortured explanations, the unregulated finance companies (that he repeatedly refused to regulate), combined with the unbridled issuance of adjustable-rate mortgages (that he publicly extolled), combined with the astronomical growth of complex derivatives (that he enthusiastically encouraged), combined with the lack of governmental oversight and control (that he actively thwarted), had NOTHING to do with the resulting financial disaster.
No, these influences did not cause the problem. And neither - we are led to infer - did the former Fed Chairman's career-long penchant for nurturing asset bubbles, cause the problem. The real culprits, Greenspan argued, were all those bond investors who were demanding high-yield securities...
Uh-huh. But there's an anwer for that, too:
...the inquiring mind would want to inquire, "Why were bond investors seeking high yields?" Hmmm...could part of the reason have been that Greenspan was continuously suppressing short-term interest rates, even when economic conditions did not seem to require them. "Greenspan is maintaining emergency interest rates without an emergency," James Grant explained at the time.
Grant is, arguably, THE authority on rates.
Now, of course, it wasn't just "Easy Al." But $Umpty-Zillions in infused cash over the years has to go somewhere, folks.
We might mention Congress and two lousy Presidents, not to mention the biggest problem: the "gimme" population which demanded bigger houses, granite countertops, and two Caddies in the drive...
OPEC: Live by the Sword, Die by the Sword
Boo hoo.
OPEC said at an emergency meeting Friday that it will slash oil production by 1.5 million barrels to stem the "dramatic collapse" of oil prices, but crude prices plunged 7 percent anyway as financial markets spiraled downward across the globe
And they'll cut further, they say.
OPEC officials, however, signaled they were prepared to slice deeper quickly if crude continues its freefall
Who's crying loudest?
Iran and Venezuela pushed for a cut of 2 million barrels a day
Regardless,
Oil futures slid $4.46 to $63.38 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange
Best guess? Around $60.00/bbl for the intermediate term.
Pretty soon, you'll hear noises about Bank problems--for those Banks which wrote $Zillion loans to Venezuela and Iran.
OPEC said at an emergency meeting Friday that it will slash oil production by 1.5 million barrels to stem the "dramatic collapse" of oil prices, but crude prices plunged 7 percent anyway as financial markets spiraled downward across the globe
And they'll cut further, they say.
OPEC officials, however, signaled they were prepared to slice deeper quickly if crude continues its freefall
Who's crying loudest?
Iran and Venezuela pushed for a cut of 2 million barrels a day
Regardless,
Oil futures slid $4.46 to $63.38 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange
Best guess? Around $60.00/bbl for the intermediate term.
Pretty soon, you'll hear noises about Bank problems--for those Banks which wrote $Zillion loans to Venezuela and Iran.
Vote Suppression: the Democrat Version
I have long contended that generally speaking, "projection" is the modus operandi of most political name-callers.
Here's another proof.
Fairfax general registrar Rokey Suleman [a Democrat] said Thursday that he has had to reject some of the ballots because of a Virginia law passed in 2002. That law — then called Senate Bill 113, sponsored by then state Sen. Bill Bolling — requires that when an overseas citizen wants to request an absentee ballot and cast a vote with the same paperwork, it requires not only a witness signature but also the current address of the witness.
The McCain campaign said there’s not even a space for the witness to list an address. Suleman agreed; he said the federal document was changed in recent years and the space for the witness address was removed. But the Virginia law hasn’t changed.
The rejected ballots were from servicemen deployed overseas (surprise!!!)
This, my friends, is "Vote Suppression" writ large.
At the same time, Virginia Democrats are bending every single corner to "assist" college students to vote...
HT: SouthernAppeal
Here's another proof.
Fairfax general registrar Rokey Suleman [a Democrat] said Thursday that he has had to reject some of the ballots because of a Virginia law passed in 2002. That law — then called Senate Bill 113, sponsored by then state Sen. Bill Bolling — requires that when an overseas citizen wants to request an absentee ballot and cast a vote with the same paperwork, it requires not only a witness signature but also the current address of the witness.
The McCain campaign said there’s not even a space for the witness to list an address. Suleman agreed; he said the federal document was changed in recent years and the space for the witness address was removed. But the Virginia law hasn’t changed.
The rejected ballots were from servicemen deployed overseas (surprise!!!)
This, my friends, is "Vote Suppression" writ large.
At the same time, Virginia Democrats are bending every single corner to "assist" college students to vote...
HT: SouthernAppeal
Second Capper's Emotion--Partially
Hey--the stopped clock thing strikes again!
Cindy is a Milwaukee county employee that works in the Economic Support Division. She is a Quality Assurance Tech, which is a fancy way of saying she is one of the people that investigate and recoup overpayments or incorrect payments
...Cindy is damn good at her job. In 2006, in just nine months, she caught $1.6 million dollars in overpayments. In 2007, that number jumped to an amazing $2,126,623.95 that she recovered.So far this year, as of October 15th, she has reclaimed more than $1.4 million. In less than three years, she has saved taxpayers over $5 million dollars
Capper's complaint?
What is disturbing is that even though Cindy is the best in the nation in her line of work, and has won a state award for her production, Milwaukee County refuses to even acknowledge her accomplishments with so much as a commendation
...or maybe at least a nice pretty letter, hey.
Memo to Scott Walker: GET ON THIS RIGHT NOW!!
But Capper hasn't actually become sane or anything. Here's his last graf:
For my conservative friends that are most probably having a knee jerk reaction, and want to point out that these large numbers of overpayments are an example of why benefits should be stopped, I would like to kindly, but firmly, point out that the Bush administration has allowed companies like Halliburton and Blackwater, to name just a couple, get away with a helluva lot more in overpayments. And there was never any attempts to get recoupement on those billions of dollars
Sure 'nuff. Capper's still running against Bush. Maybe Scott Walker should send out new calendars to County employees, too.
Cindy is a Milwaukee county employee that works in the Economic Support Division. She is a Quality Assurance Tech, which is a fancy way of saying she is one of the people that investigate and recoup overpayments or incorrect payments
...Cindy is damn good at her job. In 2006, in just nine months, she caught $1.6 million dollars in overpayments. In 2007, that number jumped to an amazing $2,126,623.95 that she recovered.So far this year, as of October 15th, she has reclaimed more than $1.4 million. In less than three years, she has saved taxpayers over $5 million dollars
Capper's complaint?
What is disturbing is that even though Cindy is the best in the nation in her line of work, and has won a state award for her production, Milwaukee County refuses to even acknowledge her accomplishments with so much as a commendation
...or maybe at least a nice pretty letter, hey.
Memo to Scott Walker: GET ON THIS RIGHT NOW!!
But Capper hasn't actually become sane or anything. Here's his last graf:
For my conservative friends that are most probably having a knee jerk reaction, and want to point out that these large numbers of overpayments are an example of why benefits should be stopped, I would like to kindly, but firmly, point out that the Bush administration has allowed companies like Halliburton and Blackwater, to name just a couple, get away with a helluva lot more in overpayments. And there was never any attempts to get recoupement on those billions of dollars
Sure 'nuff. Capper's still running against Bush. Maybe Scott Walker should send out new calendars to County employees, too.
Campaign Finance, Reformed: Democrat ScumFrauds
Below we mentioned the "reform" of campaign finance, whereby Obamamamama's campaign disabled all verification software and accepts donations from ....
Who knows?
Well, that game is apparently a Democrat trademark.
Then I thought, just for the hell of it, I'd try the same thing with our Texas Senate race matching Cornyn (R) and Noriega (D).
Cornyn's site wouldn't let me because the address and zip code didn't match. Guess what? With the same info, donating five to surrender-monger Rick Noriega was peachy.
Not to be outdone, Slander Murtha, fat jackass, does the same:
I just donated $5 to John Murtha. Actually, Mr. Fuck You, of 1 Scumbag Backstabber Lane, Haditha PA donated $5 to Murtha. Went right through, gave me my confirmation number and everything.
Nothing like a little reform, eh?
HT: Ace (both stories)
Who knows?
Well, that game is apparently a Democrat trademark.
Then I thought, just for the hell of it, I'd try the same thing with our Texas Senate race matching Cornyn (R) and Noriega (D).
Cornyn's site wouldn't let me because the address and zip code didn't match. Guess what? With the same info, donating five to surrender-monger Rick Noriega was peachy.
Not to be outdone, Slander Murtha, fat jackass, does the same:
I just donated $5 to John Murtha. Actually, Mr. Fuck You, of 1 Scumbag Backstabber Lane, Haditha PA donated $5 to Murtha. Went right through, gave me my confirmation number and everything.
Nothing like a little reform, eh?
HT: Ace (both stories)
McCain/Feingold, Jim Doyle, Lawyers, and Fraud
Yah, ol' John McCain sure fixed it up good, hey.
Just like his co-conspirator Russ Feingold.
...the Obama campaign has chosen to reject, and the McCain campaign has chosen to adopt, the Address Verification System, or AVS. It is a simple tool that prevents credit card fraud.
As Steyn observed, "the AVS security checks most merchant processors use to screen out fraudulent transactions (and, incidentally, overseas customers) were intentionally disabled by the Obama campaign -- and thus their web donation page enables fraudulent (and/or foreign) donations."
Campaign contributions under false names are illegal, as are contributions by noncitizens. Federal campaign law also limits the amount any one citizen can contribute to the presidential campaign to $2,300. The acceptance of campaign contributions via credit card without AVS protection facilitates illegal contributions. This is what the Obama campaign has chosen to do, and what the McCain campaign has chosen to avoid
Which is, mutatis mutandis, exactly what Machiavelli-Jim Doyle and his Democrat co-conspirators have done to the elections here in Wisconsin.
No ID, no worries.
Doyle, Barrett, and Obama sing from the Bart Simpson songbook, "I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything."
I need not remind you that Obama, Doyle, Feingold, and Barrett are lawyers.
F&^% them.
HT: PowerLIne
Just like his co-conspirator Russ Feingold.
...the Obama campaign has chosen to reject, and the McCain campaign has chosen to adopt, the Address Verification System, or AVS. It is a simple tool that prevents credit card fraud.
As Steyn observed, "the AVS security checks most merchant processors use to screen out fraudulent transactions (and, incidentally, overseas customers) were intentionally disabled by the Obama campaign -- and thus their web donation page enables fraudulent (and/or foreign) donations."
Campaign contributions under false names are illegal, as are contributions by noncitizens. Federal campaign law also limits the amount any one citizen can contribute to the presidential campaign to $2,300. The acceptance of campaign contributions via credit card without AVS protection facilitates illegal contributions. This is what the Obama campaign has chosen to do, and what the McCain campaign has chosen to avoid
Which is, mutatis mutandis, exactly what Machiavelli-Jim Doyle and his Democrat co-conspirators have done to the elections here in Wisconsin.
No ID, no worries.
Doyle, Barrett, and Obama sing from the Bart Simpson songbook, "I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything."
I need not remind you that Obama, Doyle, Feingold, and Barrett are lawyers.
F&^% them.
HT: PowerLIne
Paulson: Where'd You Get Your Numbers?
The Minnesota Fed folks cannot figure out why "Napoleon" Paulson and his boyzzz need all that money.
Shoebox summarizes the leadup to the Big Bailout.
The four claims were:
1. Bank lending to nonfinancial corporations and individuals has declined sharply.
2. Interbank lending is essentially nonexistent.
3. Commercial paper issuance by nonfinancial corporations has declined sharply, and rates have risen to unprecedented levels.
4. Banks play a large role in channeling funds from savers to borrowers.
And then the Minnesota folks debunk every single one of those claims.
As is clear from these figures, bank credit has not declined during the financial crisis. Indeed, bank credit appears to have risen relative to trend in the month of September. Figures 2A and 2B display analogous data for loans and leases made by U.S. commercial banks. Again, we see no evidence of any decline during the financial crisis. Figures 3A and 3B display data for commercial and industrial loans. Again, we see no evidence that the financial crisis has affected lending to non financial businesses. Figures 4A and 4B display data for consumer loans and show no evidence that the financial crisis has affected consumer lending.
The report goes on to address the "TED Spread," inter-bank lending, and commercial paper--with similar results in all cases (given the "TED spread" anomaly created by a 'flight-to-quality' immediately following revelations of problems.)
This leads us to wonder, along with Shoebox, if certain large players (i.e., Citi, Chase, Goldman Sachs, and others) might have played Congress and the President for fools--not to mention a large number of other people--myself included--who swallowed the "CRISIS!!! CRISIS!!!" line.
Hmmmmm.
Shoebox summarizes the leadup to the Big Bailout.
The four claims were:
1. Bank lending to nonfinancial corporations and individuals has declined sharply.
2. Interbank lending is essentially nonexistent.
3. Commercial paper issuance by nonfinancial corporations has declined sharply, and rates have risen to unprecedented levels.
4. Banks play a large role in channeling funds from savers to borrowers.
And then the Minnesota folks debunk every single one of those claims.
As is clear from these figures, bank credit has not declined during the financial crisis. Indeed, bank credit appears to have risen relative to trend in the month of September. Figures 2A and 2B display analogous data for loans and leases made by U.S. commercial banks. Again, we see no evidence of any decline during the financial crisis. Figures 3A and 3B display data for commercial and industrial loans. Again, we see no evidence that the financial crisis has affected lending to non financial businesses. Figures 4A and 4B display data for consumer loans and show no evidence that the financial crisis has affected consumer lending.
The report goes on to address the "TED Spread," inter-bank lending, and commercial paper--with similar results in all cases (given the "TED spread" anomaly created by a 'flight-to-quality' immediately following revelations of problems.)
This leads us to wonder, along with Shoebox, if certain large players (i.e., Citi, Chase, Goldman Sachs, and others) might have played Congress and the President for fools--not to mention a large number of other people--myself included--who swallowed the "CRISIS!!! CRISIS!!!" line.
Hmmmmm.
Naturally, Doyle and Dave Clarke Like Statism
This comes as no surprise.
Dog eats own vomit; Doyle endorses Statism. Clarke joins.
The real headline should be "Legislature Evades Responsibility."
Gov. Jim Doyle called Thursday for tougher laws to fight drunken driving — including legalizing roadside sobriety checkpoints in Wisconsin.
Milwaukee County Sheriff Dave Clarke also likes checkpoints--but Clarke is not a Machiavellian; he's just plain erratic--but he kinda likes wearing a Big Guy Uniform in a Statist sorta way.
Milwaukee County sheriff’s deputies have been hampered by the checkpoint ban, said Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. Politicians should “stop dancing around the issue” and rescind the ban, he said.
“Are they going to side with special interests, or are they going to side with the people on this one?” he asked
WHAT "people," Dave?
Responsible people have been calling for increased jail-time for DUI's for years--and the Legislature has ignored those calls repeatedly. Talk about "repeat" problems...
Nothing wrong with 5 years for 2nd offense, and 10 years for 3rd. If someone gets past that, then LIFE for the 4th.
Staskunas plays tough:
Staskunas said he also may push for another controversial change: requiring mandatory prison time for those convicted of five or more drunken driving offenses
Ooooh. That's really scary, Tony. Five-time loser--THEN prison? Wow. That's the sort of BS that got us to where we are now, Tony. Go find a pair, Tony, then open your mouth.
Instead, we'll have roundups. What's the probable cause? "You're driving, asshole! Outta the car!"
Yo mama can't dance, and you can't drive.
Dog eats own vomit; Doyle endorses Statism. Clarke joins.
The real headline should be "Legislature Evades Responsibility."
Gov. Jim Doyle called Thursday for tougher laws to fight drunken driving — including legalizing roadside sobriety checkpoints in Wisconsin.
Milwaukee County Sheriff Dave Clarke also likes checkpoints--but Clarke is not a Machiavellian; he's just plain erratic--but he kinda likes wearing a Big Guy Uniform in a Statist sorta way.
Milwaukee County sheriff’s deputies have been hampered by the checkpoint ban, said Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. Politicians should “stop dancing around the issue” and rescind the ban, he said.
“Are they going to side with special interests, or are they going to side with the people on this one?” he asked
WHAT "people," Dave?
Responsible people have been calling for increased jail-time for DUI's for years--and the Legislature has ignored those calls repeatedly. Talk about "repeat" problems...
Nothing wrong with 5 years for 2nd offense, and 10 years for 3rd. If someone gets past that, then LIFE for the 4th.
Staskunas plays tough:
Staskunas said he also may push for another controversial change: requiring mandatory prison time for those convicted of five or more drunken driving offenses
Ooooh. That's really scary, Tony. Five-time loser--THEN prison? Wow. That's the sort of BS that got us to where we are now, Tony. Go find a pair, Tony, then open your mouth.
Instead, we'll have roundups. What's the probable cause? "You're driving, asshole! Outta the car!"
Yo mama can't dance, and you can't drive.
FDIC: $40Bn More Down the Drain Beyond Fan/Fred
A little lobbying goes a long way.
In another attempt to artificially prop up the value of housing, the FDIC announces that it will assume 'some risk' of re-negotiated mortgages.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corp Chairman Sheila Bair told the Senate Banking Committee that regulators were working with the Bush administration to create a loan guarantee program under which the government would bear some of the risk of future losses.
"We're having very good discussions with Treasury," Bair said, suggesting loan guarantees would be an incentive for lenders to modify loans and possibly slow defaults. "We're sharing some ideas, and I know they're looking at some other things as well."
Treasury's official appointed to run a financial bailout for financial firms, Neel Kashkari, said "it's something we're very seriously considering."
It's not too hard to figure out who's behind this scam.
Think Realtors and Local Gummints--both of which rely on housing values to make (or take) money.
The bailout package that Congress approved early this month gives the Treasury Department the power to offer loan guarantees as an inducement for lenders to modify loans, Bair said.
"Specifically, the government could establish standards for loan modifications and provide guarantees for loans meeting those standards," Bair said. "By doing so, unaffordable loans could be converted into loans that are sustainable over the long term."
Bair did not mention any dollar figure for such a program but the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday that officials were considering something on the order of $40 billion.
That's on top of the $200Bn absorbed by the taxpayers when they bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
You may have forgotten about that $200Bn, because the MSM only talks about "Bank" bailouts. But before "Bank" bailouts, there was the Fan/Fred bailout.
In another attempt to artificially prop up the value of housing, the FDIC announces that it will assume 'some risk' of re-negotiated mortgages.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corp Chairman Sheila Bair told the Senate Banking Committee that regulators were working with the Bush administration to create a loan guarantee program under which the government would bear some of the risk of future losses.
"We're having very good discussions with Treasury," Bair said, suggesting loan guarantees would be an incentive for lenders to modify loans and possibly slow defaults. "We're sharing some ideas, and I know they're looking at some other things as well."
Treasury's official appointed to run a financial bailout for financial firms, Neel Kashkari, said "it's something we're very seriously considering."
It's not too hard to figure out who's behind this scam.
Think Realtors and Local Gummints--both of which rely on housing values to make (or take) money.
The bailout package that Congress approved early this month gives the Treasury Department the power to offer loan guarantees as an inducement for lenders to modify loans, Bair said.
"Specifically, the government could establish standards for loan modifications and provide guarantees for loans meeting those standards," Bair said. "By doing so, unaffordable loans could be converted into loans that are sustainable over the long term."
Bair did not mention any dollar figure for such a program but the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday that officials were considering something on the order of $40 billion.
That's on top of the $200Bn absorbed by the taxpayers when they bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
You may have forgotten about that $200Bn, because the MSM only talks about "Bank" bailouts. But before "Bank" bailouts, there was the Fan/Fred bailout.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
What ELSE---if Obama Wins?
From Deneen:
The great temptation of the Democrats will be to become Santa Claus to every oppressed and alienated group that comes asking. Their great task - should they accept the mission - is to creatively and thoughtfully address the great middle class anxieties of the nation, contemplate ways to provide some degree of economic and social stability to the Joe the Plumbers of the world, and thus resist every worst instinct they have to disdain and re-educate the parochial views of our unprogressed middle class whose anxieties and support will make Obama president, but will not necessarily keep him there. If they can do that, the Republicans will wander in the wilderness for a very long time. I'm just not sure the Democrats will be that smart, and able to resist their worst instincts. If not, we will witness one of the greatest Pyhrric victories ever seen in just under two weeks' time.
That's true. If Pelosi, Reed, Schumer, et al, legislate every silly idea that's been advanced by their pals in the last 2 years, there will be Hell to pay for the Democrat Party.
And it will start the day they begin screwing with 401(k)s. It will not be prudent for Senators Kohl and Feingold to mingle in large crowds if they vote to eviscerate those instruments.
The great temptation of the Democrats will be to become Santa Claus to every oppressed and alienated group that comes asking. Their great task - should they accept the mission - is to creatively and thoughtfully address the great middle class anxieties of the nation, contemplate ways to provide some degree of economic and social stability to the Joe the Plumbers of the world, and thus resist every worst instinct they have to disdain and re-educate the parochial views of our unprogressed middle class whose anxieties and support will make Obama president, but will not necessarily keep him there. If they can do that, the Republicans will wander in the wilderness for a very long time. I'm just not sure the Democrats will be that smart, and able to resist their worst instincts. If not, we will witness one of the greatest Pyhrric victories ever seen in just under two weeks' time.
That's true. If Pelosi, Reed, Schumer, et al, legislate every silly idea that's been advanced by their pals in the last 2 years, there will be Hell to pay for the Democrat Party.
And it will start the day they begin screwing with 401(k)s. It will not be prudent for Senators Kohl and Feingold to mingle in large crowds if they vote to eviscerate those instruments.
Surprise! Madistan "Judge" Ignores Law
From the JSOnline site:
A Dane County judge dismissed Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen's lawsuit against the state's elections board, saying Van Hollen had not shown that any state or federal laws had been violated.
It would be silly to bother posting the briefs filed by Van Hollen.
The judge didn't read them--why would you?
Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi ruled this morning that Van Hollen had not shown any laws had been violated.
She said mismatched data in government databases are not enough to affect one's ability to vote. The board has said the mismatches are often attributable to typographical mistakes or other harmless errors."
On Nov. 4, each qualified voter in Wisconsin will go to the polls," Sumi noted. "It doesn't matter if the (Department of Transportation) has misspelled his name or if his middle initial is missing on voter rolls
But, of course, HAVA specifically requires that these errors are rectified.
Sumi went further and also ruled that Van Hollen didn't have the power to bring the lawsuit even if he'd identified violations of the law
That's an interesting assertion, given that HAVA was specifically incorporated into Wisconsin Statutes, thereby empowering the State AG to make such a filing.
What we have here is no surprise whatsoever--a Lefty judge living within a stone's throw of the most Lefty Machiavellian governor Wisconsin ever had.
She likes her career--what's the law in comparison to that?
A Dane County judge dismissed Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen's lawsuit against the state's elections board, saying Van Hollen had not shown that any state or federal laws had been violated.
It would be silly to bother posting the briefs filed by Van Hollen.
The judge didn't read them--why would you?
Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi ruled this morning that Van Hollen had not shown any laws had been violated.
She said mismatched data in government databases are not enough to affect one's ability to vote. The board has said the mismatches are often attributable to typographical mistakes or other harmless errors."
On Nov. 4, each qualified voter in Wisconsin will go to the polls," Sumi noted. "It doesn't matter if the (Department of Transportation) has misspelled his name or if his middle initial is missing on voter rolls
But, of course, HAVA specifically requires that these errors are rectified.
Sumi went further and also ruled that Van Hollen didn't have the power to bring the lawsuit even if he'd identified violations of the law
That's an interesting assertion, given that HAVA was specifically incorporated into Wisconsin Statutes, thereby empowering the State AG to make such a filing.
What we have here is no surprise whatsoever--a Lefty judge living within a stone's throw of the most Lefty Machiavellian governor Wisconsin ever had.
She likes her career--what's the law in comparison to that?
Post-Election Rioting
Not entirely incredible, this future-news report....
Shortly after Fox News, ABC, and CBS all declare John McCain the President-elect, the sound of martini glasses and champagne bottles being dropped all over the East coast signals the beginnings of a long and dangerous night. The riots come from unsuspected areas, not from urban areas at all but urbane settings like Manhattan, Lose Angeles, and Ann Arbor Michigan [and Madistan, WI].
Dozens of rioters in loafers and tweed coats stumble off their college campuses in Ann Arbor, Michigan and begin heaving granola bars at passing SUV's. This "mob" will angrily attempt to turn over a parked SUV but their little flabby arms will hardly hardly budge the behemoth automobile so they turn over a Segway locked to a tree nearby until one of the rioters says, "Hey that's mine" and threatens a lawsuit causing the rioters to scatter.
...The celebrities soon decide to pull drivers out of any passing pick-up-truck to beat them but their hybrids are sadly unable catch up to any trucks before their car runs out of its electric charge and they're forced to pull over and call Ed Begley Jr. for a charge.
National Guard troops are called out to protect Starbucks which have been especially hard hit by thirsty looters
Dozens of UW-Mad profs, enraged, begin throwing Whole Foods-purchased Fair Trade arugula stalks at police. One cop drops his riot-shield and glowers. The entire group of professors raise their skirts and screech, then flounce in the other direction....
Shortly after Fox News, ABC, and CBS all declare John McCain the President-elect, the sound of martini glasses and champagne bottles being dropped all over the East coast signals the beginnings of a long and dangerous night. The riots come from unsuspected areas, not from urban areas at all but urbane settings like Manhattan, Lose Angeles, and Ann Arbor Michigan [and Madistan, WI].
Dozens of rioters in loafers and tweed coats stumble off their college campuses in Ann Arbor, Michigan and begin heaving granola bars at passing SUV's. This "mob" will angrily attempt to turn over a parked SUV but their little flabby arms will hardly hardly budge the behemoth automobile so they turn over a Segway locked to a tree nearby until one of the rioters says, "Hey that's mine" and threatens a lawsuit causing the rioters to scatter.
...The celebrities soon decide to pull drivers out of any passing pick-up-truck to beat them but their hybrids are sadly unable catch up to any trucks before their car runs out of its electric charge and they're forced to pull over and call Ed Begley Jr. for a charge.
National Guard troops are called out to protect Starbucks which have been especially hard hit by thirsty looters
Dozens of UW-Mad profs, enraged, begin throwing Whole Foods-purchased Fair Trade arugula stalks at police. One cop drops his riot-shield and glowers. The entire group of professors raise their skirts and screech, then flounce in the other direction....
The Professoriate Supports Terrorist Ayers
Well, you'd expect that the Professoriate--the Elite, the Educated, the Better Ones--would sign a petition supporting Unrepentant "Bomber" Ayers.
And you'd expect that UW would be represented on that list.
You're right. The very FIRST name:
(they'll all be in red....for the reason you already know...)
Gloria Ladson-Billings
Then the rest.
Rene Antrop-Gonzalez, Ph.D
Ken Zeichner
Taina R. Collazo-Quiles
Brian W. Lagotte
Katy Swalwell
Jen Scott Curwood
Mary Thompson-Shriver
Katherina A. Payne
Ross Colin
Andrew Clement
Vonzell Agosto
Quentin Wheeler-Bell
Matthew Knoester
Donna L. Vukelich
Kerry Kretchmar
Corrin Pitluck
One from Alverno: Desiree Pointer Mace
One from a local grade school, "Escuela Fratney": Dale Weiss
And that's only from the first 850 or so of over 3,200 names.
And you'd expect that UW would be represented on that list.
You're right. The very FIRST name:
(they'll all be in red....for the reason you already know...)
Gloria Ladson-Billings
Then the rest.
Rene Antrop-Gonzalez, Ph.D
Ken Zeichner
Taina R. Collazo-Quiles
Brian W. Lagotte
Katy Swalwell
Jen Scott Curwood
Mary Thompson-Shriver
Katherina A. Payne
Ross Colin
Andrew Clement
Vonzell Agosto
Quentin Wheeler-Bell
Matthew Knoester
Donna L. Vukelich
Kerry Kretchmar
Corrin Pitluck
One from Alverno: Desiree Pointer Mace
One from a local grade school, "Escuela Fratney": Dale Weiss
And that's only from the first 850 or so of over 3,200 names.
Your 401(k) to Disappear?
Oh, yah.
Powerful House Democrats are eyeing proposals to overhaul the nation’s $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive.
House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-California, and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee’s Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, are looking at redirecting those tax breaks to a new system of guaranteed retirement accounts to which all workers would be obliged to contribute
Quoted in Hot Air. Their analysis?
That means your employer can no longer write off their contributions to your 401(k), and your capital gains would be taxable year-on-year. In other words, it becomes just another investment or savings account, with no tax benefit at all, and no employer contribution. Instead, Uncle Sam would give you your “matching” funds — up to a whopping $600 per year! Whoopee!
And what do you get as "securities"?
They give you government bonds as your only investment option.
Think that's all? Maybe not. There's the Argentine option, too.
Argentina's leftist government has seemingly found a novel way to find the money to stay afloat: cracking open the piggybank of the nation's private pension system.
The government proposed to nationalize the private pensions, which would provide it with much of the cash it needs to meet debt payments and avoid a second default this decade.
--Powerline, quoting the WSJournal
So at about the time that your "Gummint Bonds" become payable to you, they may become "junk bonds," and then you'll be .....(unprintable word here.)
Powerful House Democrats are eyeing proposals to overhaul the nation’s $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive.
House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-California, and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee’s Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, are looking at redirecting those tax breaks to a new system of guaranteed retirement accounts to which all workers would be obliged to contribute
Quoted in Hot Air. Their analysis?
That means your employer can no longer write off their contributions to your 401(k), and your capital gains would be taxable year-on-year. In other words, it becomes just another investment or savings account, with no tax benefit at all, and no employer contribution. Instead, Uncle Sam would give you your “matching” funds — up to a whopping $600 per year! Whoopee!
And what do you get as "securities"?
They give you government bonds as your only investment option.
Think that's all? Maybe not. There's the Argentine option, too.
Argentina's leftist government has seemingly found a novel way to find the money to stay afloat: cracking open the piggybank of the nation's private pension system.
The government proposed to nationalize the private pensions, which would provide it with much of the cash it needs to meet debt payments and avoid a second default this decade.
--Powerline, quoting the WSJournal
So at about the time that your "Gummint Bonds" become payable to you, they may become "junk bonds," and then you'll be .....(unprintable word here.)
Brookfield/Elm Grove Obamunists
You'll notice that a striking number of residences in Elm Grove have Obama signs in the yard.
Same-o with a number of Brookfield residences--especially in a new high-end southwestern subdivision near Brookfield Road at Greenfield Ave.
What do THEY know that we don't?
Same-o with a number of Brookfield residences--especially in a new high-end southwestern subdivision near Brookfield Road at Greenfield Ave.
What do THEY know that we don't?
Sykes---Beautiful?
Charlie opines that 'he'd be beautiful if they spent $150K on him'
Umnnnnhhhh.....Charlie......
Let's put it this way, Charlie. I don't think the world is ready for an improved Sykes.
PC enough?
Umnnnnhhhh.....Charlie......
Let's put it this way, Charlie. I don't think the world is ready for an improved Sykes.
PC enough?
Vote Fraud? How About the MONEY, Honey?
Another "error" in the Obama fund-raising scandal.
There have been a smattering of incidents reported in which people have seen credit card charges surface suggesting they donated to Barack Obama when they did not.
Now comes the story of Mary T. Biskup, of Manchester, Missouri. Biskup got a call recently from the Obama campaign, which was trying to figure out why she donated $174,800 to the campaign -- well over the contribution limit of $2,300.
...No charges ever showed up on her credit card statement.
"We're not out a penny," Biskup said
So the O-and-Savior folks took action:
"We refunded all of the contributions and contacted authorities when we determined Ms. Biskup had not made them
OK.
But exactly who got the refunds?
HT: Clay Cramer
There have been a smattering of incidents reported in which people have seen credit card charges surface suggesting they donated to Barack Obama when they did not.
Now comes the story of Mary T. Biskup, of Manchester, Missouri. Biskup got a call recently from the Obama campaign, which was trying to figure out why she donated $174,800 to the campaign -- well over the contribution limit of $2,300.
...No charges ever showed up on her credit card statement.
"We're not out a penny," Biskup said
So the O-and-Savior folks took action:
"We refunded all of the contributions and contacted authorities when we determined Ms. Biskup had not made them
OK.
But exactly who got the refunds?
HT: Clay Cramer
Scholarly Remarks
Somebody named Janet Boles teaches polysci at Marquette U.
She managed to get into the newspaper.
Janet Boles, a political science professor at Marquette University, said the fraud vs. intimidation battle intensified after the 2000 election, in which a Florida recount gave the White House to Republican George W. Bush.
...“Those who dropped out and were not participating are disproportionately the poor,” said Boles. “Suddenly, we get blatant attempts at voter suppression just as those who were dropping out are dropping back in.”
Nothing like a rational quote, well-supported by documentation, "professor."
She managed to get into the newspaper.
Janet Boles, a political science professor at Marquette University, said the fraud vs. intimidation battle intensified after the 2000 election, in which a Florida recount gave the White House to Republican George W. Bush.
...“Those who dropped out and were not participating are disproportionately the poor,” said Boles. “Suddenly, we get blatant attempts at voter suppression just as those who were dropping out are dropping back in.”
Nothing like a rational quote, well-supported by documentation, "professor."
Milwaukee County Employee Assists Fraud
Looks like a couple of women scammed taxpayers for $360K--maybe $800K--and had a little help from a friend.
According to the complaint, Watson is also a former employee of the county Department of Health and Human Services, and obtained help from an employee in getting the children authorized and placed with Tender Moments [the daycare center in question.]
Worse:
It’s not the first time Watson has been under investigation. She previously operated a child care center but had her license revoked after the state learned she was billing for children who weren’t in her care. Feiss said he reviewed that case but didn’t have enough evidence to prosecute Watson.
So this dame has a history of scamming the system, and Milwaukee County DHHS employees are still helping her to defraud the State taxpayers?
According to the complaint, Watson is also a former employee of the county Department of Health and Human Services, and obtained help from an employee in getting the children authorized and placed with Tender Moments [the daycare center in question.]
Worse:
It’s not the first time Watson has been under investigation. She previously operated a child care center but had her license revoked after the state learned she was billing for children who weren’t in her care. Feiss said he reviewed that case but didn’t have enough evidence to prosecute Watson.
So this dame has a history of scamming the system, and Milwaukee County DHHS employees are still helping her to defraud the State taxpayers?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
US Bishops: Ignore 'Fake Catholic' Aborto-Proponents
This is shaping up to be very significant.
—"Our faith requires us to oppose abortion on demand and to provide help to mothers facing challenging pregnancies," Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia and Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y., said in an October 21 statement. The bishops urged Catholics to study the teaching of the Church, rather than rely on statements and materials from outside groups and individuals
What does that actually mean? Happy to make it clear for you:
The argument that "the Church should accept the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision on abortion as a 'permanent fixture of constitutional law' and should concede that the only way to reduce abortions is to provide more government support for pregnant women is wrong.
Equally wrong:
"The Church's efforts against abortion should focus solely on restoring recognition for unborn children's human rights and that proposals to provide social and economic support for pregnant women distract from that effort."
That first one, advocating acceptance of Roe as "settled", is used by such twits as Kmiec, Cafardi, and Cahill, who have lots of Elite, Sophisticated, Knowledge and Friends In High Places, not yo mention Prestigious Law-School Faculty Appointments.
We, along with the Bishops, are not impressed.
American Papist also enlightens us about Bp. Martino and clears up a mystery.
An election forum at a Pennsylvania parish that took place last Sunday was organized to allow Catholics the opportunity to defend their support for McCain and Obama. However, the forum took a surprising turn when an unexpected guest showed up to guide his flock, the Bishop of Scranton, Joseph F. Martino.
... After Sr. Gannon spoke, the bishop took the floor. Bill Genello, a spokesman for the Diocese of Scranton told the Wayne Independent that when Bishop Martino arrived, his intention was to listen “to the presenters and how they might discuss Catholic teaching.”
However, he continued, “Certain groups and individuals have used their own erroneous interpretations of Church documents, particularly the U.S. Bishops’ statement on Faithful Citizenship, to justify their political positions and to contradict the Church’s actual teaching on the centrality of abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research.”
When the bishop heard the speakers using the bishops’ statement to justify their choice for president, he reminded the audience that those “groups and individuals who make statements about Catholic teaching do not speak with the same authority or authenticity as their bishop.”
The USCC is, after all, just a bunch of bureaucrats in a very expensive building. The USCC actually does NOT have authority to teach, rule, or sanctify--only individual Bishops have that.
What "mystery" here?
We noted that a bunch of Lefty Agitators have screeched loudly about Bp. Martino--seems that he, operating within Canon Law, de-certified a "teachers' union" which had taken over the Diocesan schools.
They screeched so loudly that even a LeftyWacko in Milwaukee heard it.
There are a lot of Catholics who don't know what it's like to have a Bishop act like a man. Some are finding out, to their dismay.
Too bad.
—"Our faith requires us to oppose abortion on demand and to provide help to mothers facing challenging pregnancies," Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia and Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y., said in an October 21 statement. The bishops urged Catholics to study the teaching of the Church, rather than rely on statements and materials from outside groups and individuals
What does that actually mean? Happy to make it clear for you:
The argument that "the Church should accept the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision on abortion as a 'permanent fixture of constitutional law' and should concede that the only way to reduce abortions is to provide more government support for pregnant women is wrong.
Equally wrong:
"The Church's efforts against abortion should focus solely on restoring recognition for unborn children's human rights and that proposals to provide social and economic support for pregnant women distract from that effort."
That first one, advocating acceptance of Roe as "settled", is used by such twits as Kmiec, Cafardi, and Cahill, who have lots of Elite, Sophisticated, Knowledge and Friends In High Places, not yo mention Prestigious Law-School Faculty Appointments.
We, along with the Bishops, are not impressed.
American Papist also enlightens us about Bp. Martino and clears up a mystery.
An election forum at a Pennsylvania parish that took place last Sunday was organized to allow Catholics the opportunity to defend their support for McCain and Obama. However, the forum took a surprising turn when an unexpected guest showed up to guide his flock, the Bishop of Scranton, Joseph F. Martino.
... After Sr. Gannon spoke, the bishop took the floor. Bill Genello, a spokesman for the Diocese of Scranton told the Wayne Independent that when Bishop Martino arrived, his intention was to listen “to the presenters and how they might discuss Catholic teaching.”
However, he continued, “Certain groups and individuals have used their own erroneous interpretations of Church documents, particularly the U.S. Bishops’ statement on Faithful Citizenship, to justify their political positions and to contradict the Church’s actual teaching on the centrality of abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research.”
When the bishop heard the speakers using the bishops’ statement to justify their choice for president, he reminded the audience that those “groups and individuals who make statements about Catholic teaching do not speak with the same authority or authenticity as their bishop.”
The USCC is, after all, just a bunch of bureaucrats in a very expensive building. The USCC actually does NOT have authority to teach, rule, or sanctify--only individual Bishops have that.
What "mystery" here?
We noted that a bunch of Lefty Agitators have screeched loudly about Bp. Martino--seems that he, operating within Canon Law, de-certified a "teachers' union" which had taken over the Diocesan schools.
They screeched so loudly that even a LeftyWacko in Milwaukee heard it.
There are a lot of Catholics who don't know what it's like to have a Bishop act like a man. Some are finding out, to their dismay.
Too bad.
Obama Future? Patrick's Current
As usual, Roeser has the goods.
Deval Laurdine Patrick lived as a child in a two-bedroom apartment in the Robert Taylor Homes housing project. He was tapped, molded and marketed by David Axelrod for the Massachusetts governorship contest in 2006. Axelrod, born fairly upper and radical in New York city, is a shrewd merchandiser of unusual African American candidates who can catch the favor of white liberals and money people
So far, so good. But then:
As far as getting by an electorate, the propping up of attractive black candidates worked. Only one hitch: after election nothing worked. . And that’s the way it has been with the shining paragon of Hope, Deval Patrick who is now the failed and continuing-to-fail governor of Massachusetts. With Barack Obama supposed to usher in a new era of idealism and “hope,”-indeed often the very same words that Axelrod candidate Patrick did-it’s instructive to see why Axelrod’s black candidates often fail to live up to promise and often inculcate widespread cynicism and in some cases virulent media rage when they govern
Hoo! Media RAGE?? of the Virulent sort?
The Axelrod campaign methodology in very few words follows.
Now the Axelrod campaign running on high octane idealism-brimming with slogans including “Yes We Can!” Can do what? Who knows? Another: “a time for hope!” Hope for what? Answer: it’s up to you. He didn’t stress issues but his own biography and he will fight entrenched back-room politics. The only entrenched backroom politics in solidly one-party Massachusetts is in his own party but nobody cares-the idea resonates. . Massachusetts liberals thrilled as he becomes only the second elected black governor in U.S. history. Unstated. Never mind. His victory in 2006 hiked the Democratic margin-already a supermajority-in both Houses of the state’s legislature.
The knickers-thrill of the MSM is exactly the same one, yes...
After all the pretty photo ops were taken and filmy rhetoric delivered, it became time to govern. The poetic words dissing old-time politicians rankled Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, veteran Democrat...
...new curtains in the office....Caddy instead of a Ford...wife gets a $70K chief-of-staff....a little "phone call" to Bob Rubin asking for some help for a company (Patrick was on the Board of the company)--not good,.
Normally a Democratic governor should be expected to get along with a Democratic Speaker but it was not the case with Salvatore DiMasi whom Patrick had vilified along the campaign trail as one of the old fashioned baronial types. DiMasi picked Hillary Clinton as his candidate in the Massachusetts primary; Patrick endorsed Obama. In the primary the Dem pols went with Clinton overwhelmingly, repudiating the new governor. Then came Patrick’s bid to allow three gambling casinos into the state which he proclaimed would generate thousands of new jobs and mega-millions in revenue. But Patrick neglected to consult legislative leaders, the first rule in Politics 101.
Not only did DiMasi administer a sharp defeat to his governor when the media went to the governor’s office to get a comment, they found he was-guess where?-in New York city signing a $1.1 million book deal extolling his new way of governing generating excitement which pleased Axelrod. But not the Boston media
Well--if nothing else, an Obamamamamama Imperialcy could be a lot of fun to watch, eh?
Roeser provides three other examples of Axelrod-made "campaign success/govern lose" candidates.
It's possible that the O-and-Savior will be a one-termer.
Deval Laurdine Patrick lived as a child in a two-bedroom apartment in the Robert Taylor Homes housing project. He was tapped, molded and marketed by David Axelrod for the Massachusetts governorship contest in 2006. Axelrod, born fairly upper and radical in New York city, is a shrewd merchandiser of unusual African American candidates who can catch the favor of white liberals and money people
So far, so good. But then:
As far as getting by an electorate, the propping up of attractive black candidates worked. Only one hitch: after election nothing worked. . And that’s the way it has been with the shining paragon of Hope, Deval Patrick who is now the failed and continuing-to-fail governor of Massachusetts. With Barack Obama supposed to usher in a new era of idealism and “hope,”-indeed often the very same words that Axelrod candidate Patrick did-it’s instructive to see why Axelrod’s black candidates often fail to live up to promise and often inculcate widespread cynicism and in some cases virulent media rage when they govern
Hoo! Media RAGE?? of the Virulent sort?
The Axelrod campaign methodology in very few words follows.
Now the Axelrod campaign running on high octane idealism-brimming with slogans including “Yes We Can!” Can do what? Who knows? Another: “a time for hope!” Hope for what? Answer: it’s up to you. He didn’t stress issues but his own biography and he will fight entrenched back-room politics. The only entrenched backroom politics in solidly one-party Massachusetts is in his own party but nobody cares-the idea resonates. . Massachusetts liberals thrilled as he becomes only the second elected black governor in U.S. history. Unstated. Never mind. His victory in 2006 hiked the Democratic margin-already a supermajority-in both Houses of the state’s legislature.
The knickers-thrill of the MSM is exactly the same one, yes...
After all the pretty photo ops were taken and filmy rhetoric delivered, it became time to govern. The poetic words dissing old-time politicians rankled Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, veteran Democrat...
...new curtains in the office....Caddy instead of a Ford...wife gets a $70K chief-of-staff....a little "phone call" to Bob Rubin asking for some help for a company (Patrick was on the Board of the company)--not good,.
Normally a Democratic governor should be expected to get along with a Democratic Speaker but it was not the case with Salvatore DiMasi whom Patrick had vilified along the campaign trail as one of the old fashioned baronial types. DiMasi picked Hillary Clinton as his candidate in the Massachusetts primary; Patrick endorsed Obama. In the primary the Dem pols went with Clinton overwhelmingly, repudiating the new governor. Then came Patrick’s bid to allow three gambling casinos into the state which he proclaimed would generate thousands of new jobs and mega-millions in revenue. But Patrick neglected to consult legislative leaders, the first rule in Politics 101.
Not only did DiMasi administer a sharp defeat to his governor when the media went to the governor’s office to get a comment, they found he was-guess where?-in New York city signing a $1.1 million book deal extolling his new way of governing generating excitement which pleased Axelrod. But not the Boston media
Well--if nothing else, an Obamamamamama Imperialcy could be a lot of fun to watch, eh?
Roeser provides three other examples of Axelrod-made "campaign success/govern lose" candidates.
It's possible that the O-and-Savior will be a one-termer.
Photo ID Required
Oh, yah.....photo ID.
Minor pharmaceuticals, booze, beer, checks....
and taking the ACT test, too.
But not for something as minor as voting on the direction of the USA for 4 years or so.
After all, "what's a couple of votes here and there?" in the words of an old Democrat pal...
Minor pharmaceuticals, booze, beer, checks....
and taking the ACT test, too.
But not for something as minor as voting on the direction of the USA for 4 years or so.
After all, "what's a couple of votes here and there?" in the words of an old Democrat pal...
And If Obama Loses?
This is not very encouraging.
Police departments in cities across the country are beefing up their ranks for Election Day, preparing for possible civil unrest and riots after the historic presidential contest.
...Some worry that if Barack Obama loses and there is suspicion of foul play in the election, violence could ensue in cities with large black populations. Others based the need for enhanced patrols on past riots in urban areas (following professional sports events) and also on Internet rumors.
There WILL be 'a suspicion of foul play' in the election if Obama loses--but we can lay it to the pollsters who have been pushing very large Obamama-tilting numbers recently.
HT: ConfedYankee
Police departments in cities across the country are beefing up their ranks for Election Day, preparing for possible civil unrest and riots after the historic presidential contest.
...Some worry that if Barack Obama loses and there is suspicion of foul play in the election, violence could ensue in cities with large black populations. Others based the need for enhanced patrols on past riots in urban areas (following professional sports events) and also on Internet rumors.
There WILL be 'a suspicion of foul play' in the election if Obama loses--but we can lay it to the pollsters who have been pushing very large Obamama-tilting numbers recently.
HT: ConfedYankee
Financial Market Improvements? Yup. Some.
Since the Fed (and Congress) have jammed several bazillion dollars into the markets, things have improved slightly.
Key indicators:
The TED spread: 2.74 down from 3.04 yesterday (and over 4.00 only 10 days ago)
The yield on 3 month treasuries: 1.09% up from 0.93% (which tells us that investors are moving away from T-bills to other securities--like commercial paper, or short-term bank/commercial notes.)
The A2P2 spread is 4.18 for Monday, down from 4.36 on Friday This is the difference in interest yield between high-quality and mid-quality non-financial commercial paper.
HT: CR
Key indicators:
The TED spread: 2.74 down from 3.04 yesterday (and over 4.00 only 10 days ago)
The yield on 3 month treasuries: 1.09% up from 0.93% (which tells us that investors are moving away from T-bills to other securities--like commercial paper, or short-term bank/commercial notes.)
The A2P2 spread is 4.18 for Monday, down from 4.36 on Friday This is the difference in interest yield between high-quality and mid-quality non-financial commercial paper.
HT: CR
Was There a Money-Back Guarantee??
Wachovia eats.....ahhhh....dirt.
Wachovia on Wednesday posted a $23.9 billion third-quarter loss, a record for any United States lender in the global credit crisis ... The loss totaled $11.18 per share, and stemmed mostly from an $18.7 billion write-down of good will
Much of Wachovia’s troubles stem from a fast-deteriorating $118.7 billion portfolio of “Pick-a-Pay” option adjustable-rate mortgages it largely took on when it bought the California lender Golden West Financial for $24.2 billion in 2006.
Wachovia said it now expects cumulative losses on that 438,000-loan portfolio of $26.1 billion, or 22 percent, up from the 12 percent it had forecast in July.
Suppose Herbie and Marion Sandler will refund 22% of their proceeds from selling Golden (??) West to Wachovia?
They got $2.4Bn from the Suckers of Wach. Surely, $500 million or so wouldn't bother them--nor the LeftoWackies they are funding: Center for American Progress, MoveOn.Org, Human Rights Watch, Media Matters.
After all, they should WANT to "spread the wealth."
HT: CalculatedRisk
Wachovia on Wednesday posted a $23.9 billion third-quarter loss, a record for any United States lender in the global credit crisis ... The loss totaled $11.18 per share, and stemmed mostly from an $18.7 billion write-down of good will
Much of Wachovia’s troubles stem from a fast-deteriorating $118.7 billion portfolio of “Pick-a-Pay” option adjustable-rate mortgages it largely took on when it bought the California lender Golden West Financial for $24.2 billion in 2006.
Wachovia said it now expects cumulative losses on that 438,000-loan portfolio of $26.1 billion, or 22 percent, up from the 12 percent it had forecast in July.
Suppose Herbie and Marion Sandler will refund 22% of their proceeds from selling Golden (??) West to Wachovia?
They got $2.4Bn from the Suckers of Wach. Surely, $500 million or so wouldn't bother them--nor the LeftoWackies they are funding: Center for American Progress, MoveOn.Org, Human Rights Watch, Media Matters.
After all, they should WANT to "spread the wealth."
HT: CalculatedRisk
MPS: The Textbook Way to Reduce Property Values
Insofar as we're not residents of Milwaukee, I don't have a dog in the fight--but as a State taxpayer, I have at least a squirrel or a chipmunk in there someplace. After all, State taxpayers send lots of money---LOTS of money--to MPS.
Anyhoo, the MPS Board has now virtually assured Milwaukee homeowners that their housing values will decrease.
...rather than increase taxes by 13.6% as Andrekopoulos proposed, board members Terry Falk, Michael Bonds, Jennifer Morales, Tim Peterson and Peter Blewett voted to tax to the revenue limit, an increase of 14.6% over last year, and to use the additional $2.5 million in tax revenue for plans including expanding staffing in early childhood classrooms, expanding drivers education and paying for all juniors to take the ACT
(Nice of them to pick up the $35.00 fee for ACT tests, eh? But if those kiddies go to college and actually learn real economics, those kids will never return to Milwaukee...)
MPS taxpayers were going to get hit no matter what. At 13.6%, the increase would have been $130/year; at 14.6%, it's $143.00.
David Riemer, who is damn good at 'running numbers' (in the corporate sense, not street-gambling) said what is pertinent:
“Most of the people who live in Milwaukee are poor, near poor or middle class,” Riemer said. “This is the worst possible time to impose a substantial increase in their already high school-property tax.”
Riemer trends Lefty, but he's not a doctrinaire wacko. And what he said is portentous. But his implicit prophesy is not good news for Milwaukee residents, nor for the City itself.
Most folks who are 'poor, near-poor, or middle-class' purchase a house based on cash-flow. In other words, the value of the property they purchase is directly related to the amount of money they can pay towards the mortgage. Property taxes are part of the mortgage payment.
As a result of this calculus, ANY increase in the monthly payment tends to result in a decrease in the value of the property. When prop-taxes rise, the $150K house becomes a $145K house.
Given the sub-prime situation, this move is not very smart. While the 20%++ decreases in property-values have not hit Milwaukee, there's no reason to think that they cannot do so; the recession is just beginning here, and employment is already headed down, rapidly.
That was "Cassandra" Riemer's un-stated message. But 5 MPS Board members couldn't read between the lines.
I'm old enough to recall that the Common Council of Milwaukee also tried to defy the laws of economics vis-a-vis Jos. Schlitz Brewing--attempting to force the Company to continue its operations here.
That worked out well, didn't it?
Anyhoo, the MPS Board has now virtually assured Milwaukee homeowners that their housing values will decrease.
...rather than increase taxes by 13.6% as Andrekopoulos proposed, board members Terry Falk, Michael Bonds, Jennifer Morales, Tim Peterson and Peter Blewett voted to tax to the revenue limit, an increase of 14.6% over last year, and to use the additional $2.5 million in tax revenue for plans including expanding staffing in early childhood classrooms, expanding drivers education and paying for all juniors to take the ACT
(Nice of them to pick up the $35.00 fee for ACT tests, eh? But if those kiddies go to college and actually learn real economics, those kids will never return to Milwaukee...)
MPS taxpayers were going to get hit no matter what. At 13.6%, the increase would have been $130/year; at 14.6%, it's $143.00.
David Riemer, who is damn good at 'running numbers' (in the corporate sense, not street-gambling) said what is pertinent:
“Most of the people who live in Milwaukee are poor, near poor or middle class,” Riemer said. “This is the worst possible time to impose a substantial increase in their already high school-property tax.”
Riemer trends Lefty, but he's not a doctrinaire wacko. And what he said is portentous. But his implicit prophesy is not good news for Milwaukee residents, nor for the City itself.
Most folks who are 'poor, near-poor, or middle-class' purchase a house based on cash-flow. In other words, the value of the property they purchase is directly related to the amount of money they can pay towards the mortgage. Property taxes are part of the mortgage payment.
As a result of this calculus, ANY increase in the monthly payment tends to result in a decrease in the value of the property. When prop-taxes rise, the $150K house becomes a $145K house.
Given the sub-prime situation, this move is not very smart. While the 20%++ decreases in property-values have not hit Milwaukee, there's no reason to think that they cannot do so; the recession is just beginning here, and employment is already headed down, rapidly.
That was "Cassandra" Riemer's un-stated message. But 5 MPS Board members couldn't read between the lines.
I'm old enough to recall that the Common Council of Milwaukee also tried to defy the laws of economics vis-a-vis Jos. Schlitz Brewing--attempting to force the Company to continue its operations here.
That worked out well, didn't it?
Obama's Promise to Moloch: FOCA
Moloch (also 'molek', from Hebrew m'l'k) was the god who demanded child sacrifice in Punic culture, and one monument to him was found in Carthage. It's entirely possible that the Minotaur was another representation. There were other names including, but not limited to, Ba'al, Apis Bull, Golden Calf, Chemosh. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moloch
Moloch's modern American descendants (NARAL and Planned Parenthood) are doing quite well, thank you. And Barack Obama would like them to do even better.
In a speech before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund last year, he made the promise that the first thing he would do as President would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act.
What would be the effects of FOCA?
...FOCA goes far beyond guaranteeing the right to an abortion throughout the nine months of pregnancy. It arrogantly prohibits any law or policy interfering with that right. While advocates trumpet this law as the triumph of the freedom of choice, they hide the dark reality that the law would actually inhibit choice.
Laws protecting the rights of nurses, doctors and hospitals with moral objections to abortion would no longer stand. Health and safety regulations for abortion clinics would also vanish. ...the law would force taxpayers to fund abortions
"Waiting periods," and parental notification and consent laws would also be eradicated.
And the gruesome literal re-creation of Moloch is included:
Advocates of FOCA redefine a woman’s “health” so as to expressly permit post-viability abortions. Thus, a child who survives an abortion can be left to die for the health of the mother.
---something Obama failed to ensure when he was an Illinois Senator, because (unlike him) the majority of those Senators were repulsed by the prospect.
The Bishop of Paterson, NJ does not like Moloch.
We shouldn't, either.
Moloch's modern American descendants (NARAL and Planned Parenthood) are doing quite well, thank you. And Barack Obama would like them to do even better.
In a speech before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund last year, he made the promise that the first thing he would do as President would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act.
What would be the effects of FOCA?
...FOCA goes far beyond guaranteeing the right to an abortion throughout the nine months of pregnancy. It arrogantly prohibits any law or policy interfering with that right. While advocates trumpet this law as the triumph of the freedom of choice, they hide the dark reality that the law would actually inhibit choice.
Laws protecting the rights of nurses, doctors and hospitals with moral objections to abortion would no longer stand. Health and safety regulations for abortion clinics would also vanish. ...the law would force taxpayers to fund abortions
"Waiting periods," and parental notification and consent laws would also be eradicated.
And the gruesome literal re-creation of Moloch is included:
Advocates of FOCA redefine a woman’s “health” so as to expressly permit post-viability abortions. Thus, a child who survives an abortion can be left to die for the health of the mother.
---something Obama failed to ensure when he was an Illinois Senator, because (unlike him) the majority of those Senators were repulsed by the prospect.
The Bishop of Paterson, NJ does not like Moloch.
We shouldn't, either.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Favre vs. the Favre-o-Maniacs
There are two 'righty' bloggers that I know of who think that Brett Favre actually was carrying Jesus when He 'walked on water'. I won't name names, but one lives in Franklin and one lives even further south.
Full disclosure: I think Favre is one of the great athletes of the era, certainly one of the 5 best NFL quarterbacks ever to rip turf.
But as to being a mensch?
No longer.
Fox NFL Sunday reporter Jay Glazer was on the Jim Rome radio show today and strongly defended his story from Sunday that former Green Bay Packers quarterback Brett Favre briefed Detroit Lions coaches for over an hour on the phone about the Packers' offense prior to their Week 2 game
"The way it happened is that he called Matt Millen, Matt's been trying to get in touch with him to go hunting...Brett said, 'By the way, who are playing this week?-type of thing.' (Favre said) 'Oh, you are? You guys want any tips?' And then Matt hooked him up with the coaching staff and Brett...When Brett talks, he doesn't do anything in snippets. Brett talks...
"I do find it disappointing some of the denials...Peter King gets that text message from Brett saying, 'Total BS.' And I've gone at it a little bit with Peter, let me...This is the same guy (Favre) who when reports originally came out saying he was going to come back, called one of his best friends in Biloxi (Al Jones) and said, 'It's all rumor. It's all rumor.' I will say this, Jim, I stand by my story 1,000%. 1,000%....These are strong accusations (against Favre), damn right you have to be 100%, are you kidding me?...You have to get it straight from the horse's mouth on this, you have to get it from people who know the situation and who've been involved with the situation. That's why I stand so strongly behind my source. My sources I should actually say because it was from more than one person
What a jackass Brett really is.
Full disclosure: I think Favre is one of the great athletes of the era, certainly one of the 5 best NFL quarterbacks ever to rip turf.
But as to being a mensch?
No longer.
Fox NFL Sunday reporter Jay Glazer was on the Jim Rome radio show today and strongly defended his story from Sunday that former Green Bay Packers quarterback Brett Favre briefed Detroit Lions coaches for over an hour on the phone about the Packers' offense prior to their Week 2 game
"The way it happened is that he called Matt Millen, Matt's been trying to get in touch with him to go hunting...Brett said, 'By the way, who are playing this week?-type of thing.' (Favre said) 'Oh, you are? You guys want any tips?' And then Matt hooked him up with the coaching staff and Brett...When Brett talks, he doesn't do anything in snippets. Brett talks...
"I do find it disappointing some of the denials...Peter King gets that text message from Brett saying, 'Total BS.' And I've gone at it a little bit with Peter, let me...This is the same guy (Favre) who when reports originally came out saying he was going to come back, called one of his best friends in Biloxi (Al Jones) and said, 'It's all rumor. It's all rumor.' I will say this, Jim, I stand by my story 1,000%. 1,000%....These are strong accusations (against Favre), damn right you have to be 100%, are you kidding me?...You have to get it straight from the horse's mouth on this, you have to get it from people who know the situation and who've been involved with the situation. That's why I stand so strongly behind my source. My sources I should actually say because it was from more than one person
What a jackass Brett really is.
FDR, Obama, and Sykes
Charlie mentions an article which tells us that Obama will not have to work too hard to transmogrify the Federal Gummint into a Super-Leviathan, as FDR did a bunch of the heavy-lifting a long time ago.
By co-incidence, Patrick Deneen had something to say about that.
Taking a longer view, we can find some instructive thoughts on the current financial crisis from a number of the original opponents to the Constitution. Many will recall we last heard from these so-called "Anti-federalists" nearly 220 years ago, when they expressed what were then thought to be overheated concerns about "consolidation" that would be effected gradually under the proposed Constitution. "Consolidation pervades the whole constitution" wrote Pennsylvania's opposition in the ratification debates. Over and over, its opponents saw the grant of powers that promised eventual consolidation of power to the center, and the evisceration of the place of the States and robust local diversity. "The convention appears to have proposed the partial consolidation evidently with a view to collect all powers ultimately, in the United States into one entire government," warned "The Federal Farmer." The lever by which power would ultimately be accrued was the use of powers not necessarily then required, but granted for future possible use as would be "necessary and proper." Wrote the Pennsylvania minority, "the legislature of the United States are vested with great and uncontroulable powers, of laying and collecting taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; of regulating trade, raising and supporting armies, organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, instituting courts and other general powers.... And if they may do it , it is pretty certain that they will; for it will be found that the power retained by the original states, small as it is, will be a clog upon the wheels of government of the United States; the latter, therefore, will be naturally inclined to remove it out of its way."
Umnnnhhhh...yah.
They saw that the particular way that this consolidation was being effected was by the hurried response to a crisis, and the willingness of a populace to acquiesce to a grant of power to the center in an effort to contain not just such a crisis, but the uncertainty it aroused - especially financial anxieties
Umnnnnhhhhhh...yah, yah, yah....
...as financial and political systems expand, crises cannot be contained, and enlargement and consolidation of powers is deemed to be the only solution. A system inaugurated theoretically with the aim to shrink government to small and legitimate size has been the driver of the most massive expansion of public, financial, police and military power in the history of humanity
And (believe it or not) it gets worse:
...one likely outcome of our decades-long investment in the creation of a global financial system will be a concerted effort to set into motion the creation of new international institutions and organizations that will almost as surely have a propensity to accumulate power to the center as that same propensity was perceived by the Anti-federalists. Just as surely, we are likely to see calls for a new global system that can respond to what are now de facto global crises
And the lever-operators will be the antitheses of Palins and plumbers:
...just as surely, the people who will guide us through these crises - people who have the acumen and savvy, the education and credentials to navigate from the center - will bring to bear the particular values they have learned from the culture and its institutions of higher learning, above all, ethics of extraction, mobility, abstraction, meritocracy, and economic materialism. Views that are deemed backwards or insufficiently progressed - even if popularly supported - will be summarily excluded, although it will be claimed that such exclusion will be done in the name of "democracy." Excluded still - following the concerns of over 200 years ago - will be "every order of men in the community ... - professional men, merchants, traders, mechanics, etc.," who will enlarge the sorts of concerns and commitments that are undertaken in the name of the common good.
Hooboy.
By co-incidence, Patrick Deneen had something to say about that.
Taking a longer view, we can find some instructive thoughts on the current financial crisis from a number of the original opponents to the Constitution. Many will recall we last heard from these so-called "Anti-federalists" nearly 220 years ago, when they expressed what were then thought to be overheated concerns about "consolidation" that would be effected gradually under the proposed Constitution. "Consolidation pervades the whole constitution" wrote Pennsylvania's opposition in the ratification debates. Over and over, its opponents saw the grant of powers that promised eventual consolidation of power to the center, and the evisceration of the place of the States and robust local diversity. "The convention appears to have proposed the partial consolidation evidently with a view to collect all powers ultimately, in the United States into one entire government," warned "The Federal Farmer." The lever by which power would ultimately be accrued was the use of powers not necessarily then required, but granted for future possible use as would be "necessary and proper." Wrote the Pennsylvania minority, "the legislature of the United States are vested with great and uncontroulable powers, of laying and collecting taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; of regulating trade, raising and supporting armies, organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, instituting courts and other general powers.... And if they may do it , it is pretty certain that they will; for it will be found that the power retained by the original states, small as it is, will be a clog upon the wheels of government of the United States; the latter, therefore, will be naturally inclined to remove it out of its way."
Umnnnhhhh...yah.
They saw that the particular way that this consolidation was being effected was by the hurried response to a crisis, and the willingness of a populace to acquiesce to a grant of power to the center in an effort to contain not just such a crisis, but the uncertainty it aroused - especially financial anxieties
Umnnnnhhhhhh...yah, yah, yah....
...as financial and political systems expand, crises cannot be contained, and enlargement and consolidation of powers is deemed to be the only solution. A system inaugurated theoretically with the aim to shrink government to small and legitimate size has been the driver of the most massive expansion of public, financial, police and military power in the history of humanity
And (believe it or not) it gets worse:
...one likely outcome of our decades-long investment in the creation of a global financial system will be a concerted effort to set into motion the creation of new international institutions and organizations that will almost as surely have a propensity to accumulate power to the center as that same propensity was perceived by the Anti-federalists. Just as surely, we are likely to see calls for a new global system that can respond to what are now de facto global crises
And the lever-operators will be the antitheses of Palins and plumbers:
...just as surely, the people who will guide us through these crises - people who have the acumen and savvy, the education and credentials to navigate from the center - will bring to bear the particular values they have learned from the culture and its institutions of higher learning, above all, ethics of extraction, mobility, abstraction, meritocracy, and economic materialism. Views that are deemed backwards or insufficiently progressed - even if popularly supported - will be summarily excluded, although it will be claimed that such exclusion will be done in the name of "democracy." Excluded still - following the concerns of over 200 years ago - will be "every order of men in the community ... - professional men, merchants, traders, mechanics, etc.," who will enlarge the sorts of concerns and commitments that are undertaken in the name of the common good.
Hooboy.
Obamamamama's Right: It Ain't Over Yet
You know, there's no tunes from the fat lady...
Frankly, I'm not nearly as optimistic as Slublog, but he makes an interesting case (and he does know from statistics, lying therewith, etc., etc.)
...Polling is, at best, an extremely inexact science and even the best polls are based on numerous assumptions about the population at large. And it's safe to say the polls we've seen this election season are not the best.
You would also have to believe that only 27% of those who show up to vote on election day will be Republicans.**
...Some of the pollsters have justified their out-of-whack party distribution numbers by assuming that Obama will bring in huge numbers of new voters. How well did that work out for him in the primary? He lost the big rural states and his massive army of new voters was only good enough to give him a bare win over Hillary Clinton in pledged delegates.
That "yout' vote" stuff has been around for a long time, by the way--and it's been mostly a pipe-dream. They simply don't show up to vote.
**By the way: "independent" does not mean mushy-middle in all cases. I'm an "independent" because I haven't been a member of either Party for several years. But, as Charlie likes to say, "I'm not a Republican; I'm a Conservative." That may be anecdotal, but it's probably a lot more significant than the pollsters think it is.
Very next post on Ace quotes Geraghty, who speaks with "Obi-Wan"--who said this:
"Believe me, there is someone in the Obama campaign who is deathly afraid of the 'McCain pulls even or goes ahead' poll." (And in Gallup, it was within 2 percent.) "That Obama strategist knows how much depends on the whole Chuck Schumer and Rahm Emanuel approach —work with the media to demoralize conservatives, and keep the perception of a juggernaut going. But a day or two of a few bad polls, and that strategy backfires. The conservatives know they've still got a shot at this."
Emanuel is (deservedly) reviled as a scumbag pol of the Daley Machine School...
Frankly, I'm not nearly as optimistic as Slublog, but he makes an interesting case (and he does know from statistics, lying therewith, etc., etc.)
...Polling is, at best, an extremely inexact science and even the best polls are based on numerous assumptions about the population at large. And it's safe to say the polls we've seen this election season are not the best.
You would also have to believe that only 27% of those who show up to vote on election day will be Republicans.**
...Some of the pollsters have justified their out-of-whack party distribution numbers by assuming that Obama will bring in huge numbers of new voters. How well did that work out for him in the primary? He lost the big rural states and his massive army of new voters was only good enough to give him a bare win over Hillary Clinton in pledged delegates.
That "yout' vote" stuff has been around for a long time, by the way--and it's been mostly a pipe-dream. They simply don't show up to vote.
**By the way: "independent" does not mean mushy-middle in all cases. I'm an "independent" because I haven't been a member of either Party for several years. But, as Charlie likes to say, "I'm not a Republican; I'm a Conservative." That may be anecdotal, but it's probably a lot more significant than the pollsters think it is.
Very next post on Ace quotes Geraghty, who speaks with "Obi-Wan"--who said this:
"Believe me, there is someone in the Obama campaign who is deathly afraid of the 'McCain pulls even or goes ahead' poll." (And in Gallup, it was within 2 percent.) "That Obama strategist knows how much depends on the whole Chuck Schumer and Rahm Emanuel approach —work with the media to demoralize conservatives, and keep the perception of a juggernaut going. But a day or two of a few bad polls, and that strategy backfires. The conservatives know they've still got a shot at this."
Emanuel is (deservedly) reviled as a scumbag pol of the Daley Machine School...
On 'Legislating Morality'
Patrick Deneen:
...Seeking to "legislate morality" is to acknowledge that the base presuppositions of a culture have made it resistant to any such imposition. A culture that has robust forms of learned or habituated restraint as a matter of cultural transmission does not need to "legislate" such morality, or - if it does - it serves as a punctuating norm, not an external imposition. We don't experience the law forbidding murder as a form of "legislated morality," largely because the norm of not murdering is widely accepted. Law is only experienced as such an imposition when the prevailing norm has been eviscerated or does not exist. Morality can be legally sanctioned, but not created whole cloth out of law. For this reason, efforts to "legislate morality" either in the cultural or economic realms are currently doomed to failure. What is needed is a change in culture, not our legal code.
There is a great deal more worth reading at the link. Deneen shows that the Left and the Right are both erroneous in their presuppositions about the phrase 'legislating morality,' by making the "AHA!" observation that generally, the phrase is used in media res.
For the Left, quibbles about 'morality' are all about sex; for the Right, they are all about money.
It's the culture, stupid!
Can it be changed?
...It is not likely. So long as our operating paradigm is the belief that law and morality are externally generated impositions, there will be no stopping the dissolution of any forms of social and cultural constraint. Our cultural wasteland has the same sources as our economic catastrophe: both are the result of a culture that has proven incapable of withstanding the corrosive solvent of liberal assumptions about human nature. Begin with a belief in human beings as naturally autonomous and free, and after a time - not immediately, but eventually - that belief will act as a corrosive agent that will destroy all forms of culturally transmitted and embedded restraints. Any such restraints will be experienced not as "natural" features of our human landscape - as constitutive parts of what is is to be a person living in this culture - but as arbitrary impositions on my natural freedom.
Think about it. Does ANYONE take seriously the maxim of Franklin that 'a penny saved is a penny earned'?
Anyone?
Bueller?
...Seeking to "legislate morality" is to acknowledge that the base presuppositions of a culture have made it resistant to any such imposition. A culture that has robust forms of learned or habituated restraint as a matter of cultural transmission does not need to "legislate" such morality, or - if it does - it serves as a punctuating norm, not an external imposition. We don't experience the law forbidding murder as a form of "legislated morality," largely because the norm of not murdering is widely accepted. Law is only experienced as such an imposition when the prevailing norm has been eviscerated or does not exist. Morality can be legally sanctioned, but not created whole cloth out of law. For this reason, efforts to "legislate morality" either in the cultural or economic realms are currently doomed to failure. What is needed is a change in culture, not our legal code.
There is a great deal more worth reading at the link. Deneen shows that the Left and the Right are both erroneous in their presuppositions about the phrase 'legislating morality,' by making the "AHA!" observation that generally, the phrase is used in media res.
For the Left, quibbles about 'morality' are all about sex; for the Right, they are all about money.
It's the culture, stupid!
Can it be changed?
...It is not likely. So long as our operating paradigm is the belief that law and morality are externally generated impositions, there will be no stopping the dissolution of any forms of social and cultural constraint. Our cultural wasteland has the same sources as our economic catastrophe: both are the result of a culture that has proven incapable of withstanding the corrosive solvent of liberal assumptions about human nature. Begin with a belief in human beings as naturally autonomous and free, and after a time - not immediately, but eventually - that belief will act as a corrosive agent that will destroy all forms of culturally transmitted and embedded restraints. Any such restraints will be experienced not as "natural" features of our human landscape - as constitutive parts of what is is to be a person living in this culture - but as arbitrary impositions on my natural freedom.
Think about it. Does ANYONE take seriously the maxim of Franklin that 'a penny saved is a penny earned'?
Anyone?
Bueller?
The Consequences of Obamunism
Observed by Planet Moron:
According to Senator Obama’s energy advisor, Jason Grumet, upon taking office, Barack Obama will classify carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant. Given that the exhalation of carbon dioxide is a normal byproduct of such common human activities as talking this could have wide-ranging ramifications, not the least of which is that longtime Consensus supporter Joe Biden would in all likelihood be declared a Superfund Site.
....an accolade fitting his IQ to a "T".
According to Senator Obama’s energy advisor, Jason Grumet, upon taking office, Barack Obama will classify carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant. Given that the exhalation of carbon dioxide is a normal byproduct of such common human activities as talking this could have wide-ranging ramifications, not the least of which is that longtime Consensus supporter Joe Biden would in all likelihood be declared a Superfund Site.
....an accolade fitting his IQ to a "T".
"Friends of Angelo"--Are They Crooks?
Angelo Mozilo was the President of Countrywide Mortgage, which specialized in sub-prime and Alt-A loans. Those loans were sold to Fannie and Freddie, and sometimes re-sold to predators like Bear Stearns, Lehman, Goldman Sachs, (etc.) who re-sold them to ....ah.....rubes.
The U S Taxpayer will pick up the pieces, which will run between $200Bn and $1Trillion.
Angelo Mozilo also arranged for "sweetheart" loans to his Extra-Special-Government Pals.
Franklin Raines, ex-CEO of Fannie
James Johnson, also an ex-CEO of Fannie
Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn (the sweetheart mortgage was IN ADDITION to the campaign contributions from Countrywide)
Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Alphonso Jackson (a BushBoyyzzzz)--now you know why he suddenly "resigned."
Donna Shalala
Richard Holbrooke (Clinton hanger-on)
The U S Taxpayer will pick up the pieces, which will run between $200Bn and $1Trillion.
Angelo Mozilo also arranged for "sweetheart" loans to his Extra-Special-Government Pals.
Franklin Raines, ex-CEO of Fannie
James Johnson, also an ex-CEO of Fannie
Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn (the sweetheart mortgage was IN ADDITION to the campaign contributions from Countrywide)
Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Alphonso Jackson (a BushBoyyzzzz)--now you know why he suddenly "resigned."
Donna Shalala
Richard Holbrooke (Clinton hanger-on)
Monday, October 20, 2008
Dark Election Humor
Here's another somewhat humorous take--no matter who wins.
But it's a dark take, folks.
When presented with the "glass half full/half empty" question, I'm likely to reply "Who cares if it's full or empty? What you don't understand is that the glass contains urine!"
--Russ from Winterset at Ace
But it's a dark take, folks.
When presented with the "glass half full/half empty" question, I'm likely to reply "Who cares if it's full or empty? What you don't understand is that the glass contains urine!"
--Russ from Winterset at Ace
Co-Incidence? Or Corruption?
P-Mac finds another nugget.
He quotes the Wall Street Journal:
"New York Sen. Charles Schumer's public criticism of IndyMac Bancorp last summer, which critics say helped spark a run on deposits that took under the troubled thrift, came while IndyMac's assets were being eyed by investors who are major donors to the Democratic Senate campaign committee the senator chairs."
Seems that there was a measly $700K in DemSenate contributions over four years, yadayadayada, and Schumer chairs Banking subcommittee, yadayadayada.
You could believe Jack Ryan: "There is NO SUCH THING as co-incidence."
Or you could believe the study which came out about 10 years ago demonstrating that US Senators' net worth climbed at astronomical rates---AFTER they were elected---through fortuitous purchases of equities and various parcels of land....
Or you could believe in the Tooth Fairy, of course.
Note to John McCain: if you show, simply, that Obama was MARRIED to Fannie/Freddie, and that Fannie/Freddie have cost the taxpayers well over $200 Bn., you could win.
I'm wasting my bandwidth, of course...
By the way, the linked Mises article includes the name Thomas H. Lee Partners, a firm which has earned a reputation as successor-to-Blackbeard here in the Milwaukee area.
He quotes the Wall Street Journal:
"New York Sen. Charles Schumer's public criticism of IndyMac Bancorp last summer, which critics say helped spark a run on deposits that took under the troubled thrift, came while IndyMac's assets were being eyed by investors who are major donors to the Democratic Senate campaign committee the senator chairs."
Seems that there was a measly $700K in DemSenate contributions over four years, yadayadayada, and Schumer chairs Banking subcommittee, yadayadayada.
You could believe Jack Ryan: "There is NO SUCH THING as co-incidence."
Or you could believe the study which came out about 10 years ago demonstrating that US Senators' net worth climbed at astronomical rates---AFTER they were elected---through fortuitous purchases of equities and various parcels of land....
Or you could believe in the Tooth Fairy, of course.
Note to John McCain: if you show, simply, that Obama was MARRIED to Fannie/Freddie, and that Fannie/Freddie have cost the taxpayers well over $200 Bn., you could win.
I'm wasting my bandwidth, of course...
By the way, the linked Mises article includes the name Thomas H. Lee Partners, a firm which has earned a reputation as successor-to-Blackbeard here in the Milwaukee area.
The Biden Inoculation: What's Going On?
So now that Joe Biden said it, the question is "Why the Hell Did He SAY THIS?"
"Mark my words," the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking.
..."And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."
This technique is called "the inoculation." It's a well-worn cliche; you set up the circumstances under which your guy may do a Full Reverse On Promises, and (later) point to the statement as a 'fair warning.'
So what does Biden anticipate?
"I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate," Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities
"...the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It's like cleaning the Augean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets. This is a systemic problem we have with this economy."
OK--so it could be something requiring the use of military force (anathema to the CodePinkos) or it could be something requiring a Gummint takeover of everything financial (anathema to almost everyone else except the True Believer Socialists.)
*******************
We're assuming that this IS an inoculation, of course. Biden's been known to run his flap without much aforethought.
*******************
But if he's basing his statement on something that he knows about which is not commonly-known, then there's another question: Why Give John McCain an Advantage? For the "candidate of change" is certainly NOT the person who is perceived as the 'steady old hand, practiced in the arts of governance and leadership.'
Given Joe Biden's proclivities to run his mouth before engaging his brain, this is either just another gaffe (but of larger import than most), or.....or.....or.....it's a slip which is extremely significant.
"Mark my words," the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking.
..."And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you - not financially to help him - we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."
This technique is called "the inoculation." It's a well-worn cliche; you set up the circumstances under which your guy may do a Full Reverse On Promises, and (later) point to the statement as a 'fair warning.'
So what does Biden anticipate?
"I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate," Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities
"...the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It's like cleaning the Augean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than – think about it, literally, think about it – this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets. This is a systemic problem we have with this economy."
OK--so it could be something requiring the use of military force (anathema to the CodePinkos) or it could be something requiring a Gummint takeover of everything financial (anathema to almost everyone else except the True Believer Socialists.)
*******************
We're assuming that this IS an inoculation, of course. Biden's been known to run his flap without much aforethought.
*******************
But if he's basing his statement on something that he knows about which is not commonly-known, then there's another question: Why Give John McCain an Advantage? For the "candidate of change" is certainly NOT the person who is perceived as the 'steady old hand, practiced in the arts of governance and leadership.'
Given Joe Biden's proclivities to run his mouth before engaging his brain, this is either just another gaffe (but of larger import than most), or.....or.....or.....it's a slip which is extremely significant.
G K Chesterton on Hypocrisy
The Devil's own handbook--Rules for Radicals,--with its rules slavishly obeyed by the Left-o-Wackies such as Obama, Axelrod, and far lesser darklings such as One Wisconsin Now leaders like Xoff, would have us believe the following dictum:
"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."
Uh-huh.
Long before Alinsky wrote his rules, G K Chesterton was hearing the whining from Englishmen opposed to WWI.
His retort will, of course, confuse the un-thinking, but it is eminently sensible. (It's found in the Introduction to The Everlasting Man.)
"As for the general view that the Church was discredited by the war--they might as well say that the Ark was discredited by the Flood. When the world goes wrong, it proves rather that the Church is right. The Church is justified, not because her children do not sin, but because they do."
And following the logic, Chesterton un-masks the knaves:
"But that marks their mood about the whole religious tradition; they are in a state of reaction against it."
I don't have to remind you that those 'in a state of reaction against the religious tradition' were foreshadowed by precisely that creature to whom Alinsky dedicated his book, and who remains actively reacting to this very day...
Q. E. D.
"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."
Uh-huh.
Long before Alinsky wrote his rules, G K Chesterton was hearing the whining from Englishmen opposed to WWI.
His retort will, of course, confuse the un-thinking, but it is eminently sensible. (It's found in the Introduction to The Everlasting Man.)
"As for the general view that the Church was discredited by the war--they might as well say that the Ark was discredited by the Flood. When the world goes wrong, it proves rather that the Church is right. The Church is justified, not because her children do not sin, but because they do."
And following the logic, Chesterton un-masks the knaves:
"But that marks their mood about the whole religious tradition; they are in a state of reaction against it."
I don't have to remind you that those 'in a state of reaction against the religious tradition' were foreshadowed by precisely that creature to whom Alinsky dedicated his book, and who remains actively reacting to this very day...
Q. E. D.
Time Out for a Joke!
Stolen, with no shame, from Apostasy. It's an oldie-but-goodie.
The Pope took a couple of days off to visit the mountains of Alaska for some sightseeing. He was cruising along the campground in the Pope-mobile when there was a frantic commotion just at the edge of the woods.
A helpless Democrat, wearing sandals, shorts, a 'Save the Whales' hat, and a 'To Hell with Bush' T-shirt, was screaming while struggling frantically, thrashing around trying to free himself from the grasp of a 10-foot grizzly bear.
As the Pope watched horrified, a group of Republican loggers came racing up. One quickly fired a .44 magnum into the bear's chest. The other two reached up and pulled the bleeding, semi-conscious Democrat from the bear's grasp. Then, using long clubs, the three loggers finished off the bear and two of them threw it into the bed of their truck while the third tenderly placed the injured Democrat in the back seat.
As they prepared to leave, the Pope summoned them to come over. "I give you my blessing for your brave actions!" he told them. "I heard there was a bitter hatred between Republican loggers and Democratic environmental activists, but now I've seen with my own eyes that this is not true."
As the Pope drove off, one of the loggers asked his buddies, "Who was that guy?"
"It was the Pope," another replied. "He's in direct contact with heaven and has access to all wisdom."
"Well," the logger said, "he may have access to all wisdom, but he sure don't know anything about bear hunting!
"Is the bait holding up, or do we need to go back to Massachusetts and get another one?"
The Pope took a couple of days off to visit the mountains of Alaska for some sightseeing. He was cruising along the campground in the Pope-mobile when there was a frantic commotion just at the edge of the woods.
A helpless Democrat, wearing sandals, shorts, a 'Save the Whales' hat, and a 'To Hell with Bush' T-shirt, was screaming while struggling frantically, thrashing around trying to free himself from the grasp of a 10-foot grizzly bear.
As the Pope watched horrified, a group of Republican loggers came racing up. One quickly fired a .44 magnum into the bear's chest. The other two reached up and pulled the bleeding, semi-conscious Democrat from the bear's grasp. Then, using long clubs, the three loggers finished off the bear and two of them threw it into the bed of their truck while the third tenderly placed the injured Democrat in the back seat.
As they prepared to leave, the Pope summoned them to come over. "I give you my blessing for your brave actions!" he told them. "I heard there was a bitter hatred between Republican loggers and Democratic environmental activists, but now I've seen with my own eyes that this is not true."
As the Pope drove off, one of the loggers asked his buddies, "Who was that guy?"
"It was the Pope," another replied. "He's in direct contact with heaven and has access to all wisdom."
"Well," the logger said, "he may have access to all wisdom, but he sure don't know anything about bear hunting!
"Is the bait holding up, or do we need to go back to Massachusetts and get another one?"
Best part: you don't have to go to MA to find them. You can get them locally, fresh!
Fr Nate Reesman: Straight Talk on the Election
Fr. Nate Reesman is the associate pastor at St Mary's Parish of Elm Grove, WI. He preached on "render unto Caesar" this last Sunday--and it's worth reading excerpts.
It is NOT consistent with Christian belief to conclude that religion and faith have no place in politics or the shaping of public discourse and policy. ... “Who would Jesus vote for?” Well, that’s not really a helpful question either- Jesus does not have a candidate or a political party. The Catholic Church does not endorse party platforms. And it’s not because we’re concerned about our tax exempt status- it’s because we want to be careful not to identify one way of governing or one means of social reform exclusively as THE way to implement the message of the gospel. I think that is part of why Jesus responded as he did in this gospel passage for today.
...A related point and a crucial one: just because the Church takes a position on an issue, it does not mean the issue is a religious issue. Faith must inform our positions on the major topics in this election, but, that does not mean that non-believers should not hold the same position. What our faith does (through the tools I already mentioned) is help us to see each of the major issues more clearly as human issues. Abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cells, so-called same-sex unions are NOT religious issues. They are HUMAN issues. They are about the truth of the human person which means that everyone should be able to come to agreement about them- believers and non-believers alike.
That's worth repeating: human issues actually have a truth-component which is NOT "religious."
It follows from this, that Catholic voters and politicians are not imposing their religious beliefs on anyone when we say, for example, that embryonic stem cell research is always evil and must be opposed at all costs. We are advancing the truth, and others are free to reject it; it is not an imposition to explain what is true to a society that is frequently confused about truth.
That means that there is no merit to the notion that an office holder, or even a voter for that matter, can claim to hold to one view privately while legislatively supporting another, as though what is true is a matter of personal preference and should not be forced on the public at large. Really, all legislation is about truth and morality- it’s simply a question of whose version of it. The truth is not an imposition, and we should not fear it.
Umnnnnhhhh....yes. Decidedly so.
...when it comes to our duty to promote policies that alleviate poverty or provide health care to all, those are general aims, that employ broad systematic means, and good people of faith can disagree about what those means are. There are lots of ways to alleviate poverty. Either candidate could be correct on that question depending upon the circumstances.
[BUT]
...there are certain issues that involve more concrete and specific actions that are, quite frankly,
never permissible under any circumstances, not only because they are the direct result of a personal decision (in a way that something like creating poverty could never be), but more importantly because they attack human dignity at the most basic of levels. And such issues should never have the moral force of law behind them, either permitting them or endorsing them
These are called intrinsic evils- there is no circumstance or situation where they can ever be allowed or promoted or protected... Abortion is perhaps the most obvious of these types of acts. It is never a good thing, much less a right, under any circumstance- it only brings pain and misery. There is no exception. Ever. Also: embryonic stem cell research. Euthanasia. And, so-called same-sex relationships
So?
A Catholic can never vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion, IF the reason they are supporting him is precisely because they agree with them on this issue. That is called formal cooperation in the advancement of a grave evil and is grounds for a mortal sin
No surprise there.
...a person can support a candidate whose position on an issue involving intrinsic evils is wrong, for example, a candidate who supports legalized abortion, but, only if the voter has a truly serious or proportionate reason to do so.
Such as? Fr. Reesman uses the example provided by Abp. Chaput of Denver:
“What would such a “proportionate” reason look like? It would be a reason we could, with an honest heart, expect the unborn victims of abortion to accept when we meet them and need to explain our actions- as we someday will.” (page 230). If you support a pro-choice candidate, be prepared to explain your decision to those people who lost their lives because of legalized abortion
And here's a very pertinent observation about "poverty causes abortion...."
...it is a poor argument to suggest that the authentic pro-life position is to support a candidate who seems to propose a better formula for eliminating poverty while still pledging to keep abortion legal, on the grounds that poverty causes abortions. Certainly the alleviation of a variety of social conditions, chief among them economic hardship, would help reduce the number of abortions. But we did not abort millions of children during the Great Depression- the decision to have an abortion comes down to a disposition of the heart.
(The claim that "poverty causes abortions" is inaccurate from the get-go, as a large number of abortions are procured by college-aged white females--and college-graduate, employed, white females...)
Fr. Reesman spent a lot of time thinking, clearly, about the issues--and this will cause more than a little controversy at St. Mary's, which has a lot more (D) members than the casual observer might think.
Pray for him, and for our Country.
It is NOT consistent with Christian belief to conclude that religion and faith have no place in politics or the shaping of public discourse and policy. ... “Who would Jesus vote for?” Well, that’s not really a helpful question either- Jesus does not have a candidate or a political party. The Catholic Church does not endorse party platforms. And it’s not because we’re concerned about our tax exempt status- it’s because we want to be careful not to identify one way of governing or one means of social reform exclusively as THE way to implement the message of the gospel. I think that is part of why Jesus responded as he did in this gospel passage for today.
...A related point and a crucial one: just because the Church takes a position on an issue, it does not mean the issue is a religious issue. Faith must inform our positions on the major topics in this election, but, that does not mean that non-believers should not hold the same position. What our faith does (through the tools I already mentioned) is help us to see each of the major issues more clearly as human issues. Abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cells, so-called same-sex unions are NOT religious issues. They are HUMAN issues. They are about the truth of the human person which means that everyone should be able to come to agreement about them- believers and non-believers alike.
That's worth repeating: human issues actually have a truth-component which is NOT "religious."
It follows from this, that Catholic voters and politicians are not imposing their religious beliefs on anyone when we say, for example, that embryonic stem cell research is always evil and must be opposed at all costs. We are advancing the truth, and others are free to reject it; it is not an imposition to explain what is true to a society that is frequently confused about truth.
That means that there is no merit to the notion that an office holder, or even a voter for that matter, can claim to hold to one view privately while legislatively supporting another, as though what is true is a matter of personal preference and should not be forced on the public at large. Really, all legislation is about truth and morality- it’s simply a question of whose version of it. The truth is not an imposition, and we should not fear it.
Umnnnnhhhh....yes. Decidedly so.
...when it comes to our duty to promote policies that alleviate poverty or provide health care to all, those are general aims, that employ broad systematic means, and good people of faith can disagree about what those means are. There are lots of ways to alleviate poverty. Either candidate could be correct on that question depending upon the circumstances.
[BUT]
...there are certain issues that involve more concrete and specific actions that are, quite frankly,
never permissible under any circumstances, not only because they are the direct result of a personal decision (in a way that something like creating poverty could never be), but more importantly because they attack human dignity at the most basic of levels. And such issues should never have the moral force of law behind them, either permitting them or endorsing them
These are called intrinsic evils- there is no circumstance or situation where they can ever be allowed or promoted or protected... Abortion is perhaps the most obvious of these types of acts. It is never a good thing, much less a right, under any circumstance- it only brings pain and misery. There is no exception. Ever. Also: embryonic stem cell research. Euthanasia. And, so-called same-sex relationships
So?
A Catholic can never vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion, IF the reason they are supporting him is precisely because they agree with them on this issue. That is called formal cooperation in the advancement of a grave evil and is grounds for a mortal sin
No surprise there.
...a person can support a candidate whose position on an issue involving intrinsic evils is wrong, for example, a candidate who supports legalized abortion, but, only if the voter has a truly serious or proportionate reason to do so.
Such as? Fr. Reesman uses the example provided by Abp. Chaput of Denver:
“What would such a “proportionate” reason look like? It would be a reason we could, with an honest heart, expect the unborn victims of abortion to accept when we meet them and need to explain our actions- as we someday will.” (page 230). If you support a pro-choice candidate, be prepared to explain your decision to those people who lost their lives because of legalized abortion
And here's a very pertinent observation about "poverty causes abortion...."
...it is a poor argument to suggest that the authentic pro-life position is to support a candidate who seems to propose a better formula for eliminating poverty while still pledging to keep abortion legal, on the grounds that poverty causes abortions. Certainly the alleviation of a variety of social conditions, chief among them economic hardship, would help reduce the number of abortions. But we did not abort millions of children during the Great Depression- the decision to have an abortion comes down to a disposition of the heart.
(The claim that "poverty causes abortions" is inaccurate from the get-go, as a large number of abortions are procured by college-aged white females--and college-graduate, employed, white females...)
Fr. Reesman spent a lot of time thinking, clearly, about the issues--and this will cause more than a little controversy at St. Mary's, which has a lot more (D) members than the casual observer might think.
Pray for him, and for our Country.
"No Hate" Obamunistas
Well, looky here:
CLEARWATER (Bay News 9) — A Clearwater man’s vehicle that displayed a bumper sticker supporting John McCain has been defaced in what appears to be a hate crime, authorities say.
According to authorities, 41-year-old Frank Armstrong’s 2006 Lexus LS 430 was parked on the 1400 block of Gulf Boulevard when someone or a group of people scratched the letters “KKK” into the paint and burned a U.S. Flag on the vehicle.
Authorities say those involved also used cigarettes to burn several areas of the car and apparently urinated on the car.
So happens I've been in Clearwater. It's part of Polk County, and not a place where one wants to cause trouble like that...
But then there's New York City:
Defendant grabbed the sign [informant] was holding, broke the wood stick that was attached to it, and then struck informant in informant's face thereby causing informant to sustain redness, swelling, and bruising to informant's face and further causing informant to sustain substantial pain.
The complainant/informant is a 58-year-old woman of 'slight build,' now with a number of bruises and band-aids...
And New Mexico:
(Sunday, October 19 - Filed by Mark Williams in Raton, New Mexico with the Stop Obama Tour) We learned at this morning’s Stop Obama Rally here that the McCain/Palin Straight Talk Express came through town yesterday. It arrived with a window shattered by a .22 caliber weapon. It had also been hit by an unknown number of paint balls from a paint ball gun or guns. There were reportedly no injuries and neither candidate was on board.
Most likely, the shooter thought the bus was actually a rabbit.
Frankly, I'd prefer it if the violence was restricted to the floors of the House and Senate, where it is at least justifiable. Let the "honorable" Members slug it out.
CLEARWATER (Bay News 9) — A Clearwater man’s vehicle that displayed a bumper sticker supporting John McCain has been defaced in what appears to be a hate crime, authorities say.
According to authorities, 41-year-old Frank Armstrong’s 2006 Lexus LS 430 was parked on the 1400 block of Gulf Boulevard when someone or a group of people scratched the letters “KKK” into the paint and burned a U.S. Flag on the vehicle.
Authorities say those involved also used cigarettes to burn several areas of the car and apparently urinated on the car.
So happens I've been in Clearwater. It's part of Polk County, and not a place where one wants to cause trouble like that...
But then there's New York City:
Defendant grabbed the sign [informant] was holding, broke the wood stick that was attached to it, and then struck informant in informant's face thereby causing informant to sustain redness, swelling, and bruising to informant's face and further causing informant to sustain substantial pain.
The complainant/informant is a 58-year-old woman of 'slight build,' now with a number of bruises and band-aids...
And New Mexico:
(Sunday, October 19 - Filed by Mark Williams in Raton, New Mexico with the Stop Obama Tour) We learned at this morning’s Stop Obama Rally here that the McCain/Palin Straight Talk Express came through town yesterday. It arrived with a window shattered by a .22 caliber weapon. It had also been hit by an unknown number of paint balls from a paint ball gun or guns. There were reportedly no injuries and neither candidate was on board.
Most likely, the shooter thought the bus was actually a rabbit.
Frankly, I'd prefer it if the violence was restricted to the floors of the House and Senate, where it is at least justifiable. Let the "honorable" Members slug it out.
Pubbie "Geniuses": No Excuse for Stupidity
There's simply no excuse for the stupidity of the Pubbie "whizkids" handling the press.
At least, that's McCain's take.
Let me try to explain this briefly. The daily deadline reporters who are out there covering the McCain campaign every day should never be treated as the Big Media Enemy, except in those cases where an individual reporter commits some specific act of unfairness. Nor should the local and regional reporters who show up to cover specific events be confused with The Big Media Enemy.
The workaday journalist whose job it is to go out and cover campaigns deserves to be treated with respect. That reporter is supposed to be getting the news, and when campaigns don't allow reporters access to candidates -- when there's never a press conference, never any unscripted availability -- you can't blame the inevitable deterioration of the campaign's press relations on the press.
...The liberal leanings of the press corps can't be helped (at least, not in the short term), but how Republicans deal with that problem is within their own control. "I do not believe in a fate that will fall on us no matter what we do. I do believe in a fate that will fall on us if we do nothing," Reagan said, and today's GOP stands guilty of doing nothing about media bias -- except constantly whining and lashing out in paranoid rage, which is Nixonesque, not Reaganesque.
Republican campaign operatives have to get over their sadistic, punitive attitude toward the press. The Tucker Bounds School of GOP media relations -- where every interview is treated as an opportunity to show contempt for the interviewer -- is only making a bad situation worse.
All this because of what has become obvious: Sarah Palin actually IS bright, principled, and able to engage in intelligent discourse---when she's not being micro-managed by micro-brained Pubbie "whizkids."
At least, that's McCain's take.
Let me try to explain this briefly. The daily deadline reporters who are out there covering the McCain campaign every day should never be treated as the Big Media Enemy, except in those cases where an individual reporter commits some specific act of unfairness. Nor should the local and regional reporters who show up to cover specific events be confused with The Big Media Enemy.
The workaday journalist whose job it is to go out and cover campaigns deserves to be treated with respect. That reporter is supposed to be getting the news, and when campaigns don't allow reporters access to candidates -- when there's never a press conference, never any unscripted availability -- you can't blame the inevitable deterioration of the campaign's press relations on the press.
...The liberal leanings of the press corps can't be helped (at least, not in the short term), but how Republicans deal with that problem is within their own control. "I do not believe in a fate that will fall on us no matter what we do. I do believe in a fate that will fall on us if we do nothing," Reagan said, and today's GOP stands guilty of doing nothing about media bias -- except constantly whining and lashing out in paranoid rage, which is Nixonesque, not Reaganesque.
Republican campaign operatives have to get over their sadistic, punitive attitude toward the press. The Tucker Bounds School of GOP media relations -- where every interview is treated as an opportunity to show contempt for the interviewer -- is only making a bad situation worse.
All this because of what has become obvious: Sarah Palin actually IS bright, principled, and able to engage in intelligent discourse---when she's not being micro-managed by micro-brained Pubbie "whizkids."
$120 Grand on J-School for THIS?
I feel sorry for this b-yotch Kantor.
Jodi Kantor apparently got so desperate for dirt on Cindy McCain for the tiresome rehash the New York Times published today that she tried suckering teenagers on Facebook into cooperating with her.
"I’m a reporter at the New York Times, writing a profile of Cindy McCain, and we are trying to get a sense of what she is like as a mother. So I’m reaching out to fellow parents at her kids’ schools. My understanding is that some of her older kids went to Brophy/Xavier, but I’m trying to figure out what school her 16 year old daughter Bridget attends– and a few people said it was PCDS. Do you know if that’s right? Again, we’re not really reporting on the kids, just seeking some fellow parents who can talk about what Mrs. McCain is like.
"Also, if you know anyone else who I should talk to– basically anyone who has encountered Mrs. McCain and might be able to share impressions– that would be great."
Maybe Kantor took the job at the NYT thinking that the NYT was not, actually, the National Enquirer.
Of course, it's possible that Kantor wanted a job at the Enquirer but had to settle for the NYT.
HT: Hot Air
Jodi Kantor apparently got so desperate for dirt on Cindy McCain for the tiresome rehash the New York Times published today that she tried suckering teenagers on Facebook into cooperating with her.
"I’m a reporter at the New York Times, writing a profile of Cindy McCain, and we are trying to get a sense of what she is like as a mother. So I’m reaching out to fellow parents at her kids’ schools. My understanding is that some of her older kids went to Brophy/Xavier, but I’m trying to figure out what school her 16 year old daughter Bridget attends– and a few people said it was PCDS. Do you know if that’s right? Again, we’re not really reporting on the kids, just seeking some fellow parents who can talk about what Mrs. McCain is like.
"Also, if you know anyone else who I should talk to– basically anyone who has encountered Mrs. McCain and might be able to share impressions– that would be great."
Maybe Kantor took the job at the NYT thinking that the NYT was not, actually, the National Enquirer.
Of course, it's possible that Kantor wanted a job at the Enquirer but had to settle for the NYT.
HT: Hot Air
Colin Powell and Obama
I think Malkin has it nailed.
The media’s in a tizzy over Colin Powell’s Meet the Press endorsement of Barack Obama this morning.
It’s not a surprise to anyone who’s paid attention to his pro-Obama murmurings over the last four months.
How will people outside the Beltway bubble respond?
Yawn.
Powell's a helluva military commander and may have been (underline may) a good SecState.
Yawn.
By the way, it's not race. It's Leftism--and Powell IS a Lefty.
The media’s in a tizzy over Colin Powell’s Meet the Press endorsement of Barack Obama this morning.
It’s not a surprise to anyone who’s paid attention to his pro-Obama murmurings over the last four months.
How will people outside the Beltway bubble respond?
Yawn.
Powell's a helluva military commander and may have been (underline may) a good SecState.
Yawn.
By the way, it's not race. It's Leftism--and Powell IS a Lefty.
Irrelevant Comparisons
The lefties like taxes--and they make a case which is irrelevant. Maybe they think you're stupid.
A sales tax actually has very little to do with where a business chooses to operate. Case in point: Miller Brewing recently moved most of it's [sic] management operations to Chicago, a city with a 10.25% sales tax
So what?
Nobody is making the case that businesses such as Miller Brewing will not locate in high-sales-tax areas.
However, a high sales tax will have a negative impact on retail sales establishments--like restaurants and furniture/appliance stores.
HT: Sykes
A sales tax actually has very little to do with where a business chooses to operate. Case in point: Miller Brewing recently moved most of it's [sic] management operations to Chicago, a city with a 10.25% sales tax
So what?
Nobody is making the case that businesses such as Miller Brewing will not locate in high-sales-tax areas.
However, a high sales tax will have a negative impact on retail sales establishments--like restaurants and furniture/appliance stores.
HT: Sykes
DNR's Vacuous Nannyism
Your mother had nothing on Wisconsin's Damn Near Russia.
The state Department of Natural Resources says shooting deer with lead ammunition can leave tiny lead particles or fragments in the deer’s body far from the wound channel.
No evidence links human consumption of venison to lead poisoning. But the DNR says the risk shouldn’t be ignored.
Hunters should consider using copper or other high-weight retention bullets and practice their marksmanship so they can make cleaner, deadlier shots away from major muscle areas...
Good thing these guys don't work at Department of Transportation, or they'd be warning people about smoking while driving.
HT: Owen
The state Department of Natural Resources says shooting deer with lead ammunition can leave tiny lead particles or fragments in the deer’s body far from the wound channel.
No evidence links human consumption of venison to lead poisoning. But the DNR says the risk shouldn’t be ignored.
Hunters should consider using copper or other high-weight retention bullets and practice their marksmanship so they can make cleaner, deadlier shots away from major muscle areas...
Good thing these guys don't work at Department of Transportation, or they'd be warning people about smoking while driving.
HT: Owen
Obama's Campaign Money: How Much is Illegal?
The guy's done well for campaign contributions.
Exceptionally well.
Amazingly, extraordinarily, well.
But there are telltale signs that the money's not necessarily legal. One big sign is "un-rounded amounts."
Newsmax found an astonishing 37,265 unique donors to the Obama campaign whose contributions were not rounded up to dollar amounts. That amounts to more than 10 percent of the total number of unique donors whose names have been disclosed by the Obama campaign to the public.
Of those, 44,410 contributions came in unrounded amounts of less than $100. FEC regulations only require that campaigns disclose the names of donors who have given a total of $200 or more, so that means that all these contributors were repeat donors.
So what?
One expert in campaign finance irregularities offers a possible explanation.
“Of course this is odd. They are obviously converting from local currency to U.S. dollars,” said Ken Boehm, the chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center
There are other tells in the campaign records.
The Obama camp claims to have 2.5 million donors in all. But until now, they have kept secret the names of the overwhelming majority of these money-givers. According to a Newsmax analysis, the Obama campaign finance records contain just 370,448 unique names.
Even accounting for common names such as Robert Taylor or Michael Brown, which can signify multiple donors, Obama’s publicly known donor base is less than 20 percent of the total number of donors the campaign claims to have attracted. But the identity of the other 2 million donors is being kept secret.
As of the end of August, those secret donors have given an incredible $222.7 million to Obama, according to the FEC -- money whose origin remains unknown to anyone other than Obama’s finance team, who won’t take calls from the press
---that is to say, the press which actually has an interest--
Hillary shoulda stuck around Chicago for a longer time. She coulda learned how to do this.
Exceptionally well.
Amazingly, extraordinarily, well.
But there are telltale signs that the money's not necessarily legal. One big sign is "un-rounded amounts."
Newsmax found an astonishing 37,265 unique donors to the Obama campaign whose contributions were not rounded up to dollar amounts. That amounts to more than 10 percent of the total number of unique donors whose names have been disclosed by the Obama campaign to the public.
Of those, 44,410 contributions came in unrounded amounts of less than $100. FEC regulations only require that campaigns disclose the names of donors who have given a total of $200 or more, so that means that all these contributors were repeat donors.
So what?
One expert in campaign finance irregularities offers a possible explanation.
“Of course this is odd. They are obviously converting from local currency to U.S. dollars,” said Ken Boehm, the chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center
There are other tells in the campaign records.
The Obama camp claims to have 2.5 million donors in all. But until now, they have kept secret the names of the overwhelming majority of these money-givers. According to a Newsmax analysis, the Obama campaign finance records contain just 370,448 unique names.
Even accounting for common names such as Robert Taylor or Michael Brown, which can signify multiple donors, Obama’s publicly known donor base is less than 20 percent of the total number of donors the campaign claims to have attracted. But the identity of the other 2 million donors is being kept secret.
As of the end of August, those secret donors have given an incredible $222.7 million to Obama, according to the FEC -- money whose origin remains unknown to anyone other than Obama’s finance team, who won’t take calls from the press
---that is to say, the press which actually has an interest--
Hillary shoulda stuck around Chicago for a longer time. She coulda learned how to do this.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Frist: Dirty? or Just Stupid? AP: Misleading, of Course
AP kinda highlights this little story.
Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million to kill legislation that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae, three years before the government took control to prevent their collapse.
In the cross hairs of the campaign carried out by DCI...[were Republican Senators.]
Here's the line the AP would like you NOT to read:
Freddie Mac's payments to DCI began shortly after the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee sent Hagel's bill to the then GOP-run Senate on July 28, 2005. All GOP members of the committee supported it; all Democrats opposed it.
Curious:
In the midst of DCI's yearlong effort, Hagel and 25 other Republican senators pleaded unsuccessfully with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., to allow a vote.
"If effective regulatory reform legislation ... is not enacted this year, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system and the economy as a whole," the senators wrote in a letter that proved prescient
So was Frist a scumbag, or just one of the stupidest Senators in DC? (Yes, I know, the guy had an MD degree...)
MORE that the AP doesn't really want you to read:
In the end, there was not enough Republican support for Hagel's bill to warrant bringing it up for a vote because Democrats also opposed it and the votes of some would be needed for passage. The measure died at the end of the 109th Congress
Freddie Mac executive Hollis McLoughlin oversaw DCI's drive, according to the three people.
"Hollis's goal was not to have any Freddie Mac fingerprints on this project and DCI became the hidden hand behind the effort," one of the three people told the AP.
The guilty:
Nine of the 17 targeted Republican senators did not sign Hagel's letter: Sens. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Christopher "Kit" Bond and Jim Talent of Missouri, Conrad Burns of Montana, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and George Allen of Virginia
The courageous and ethical:
Eight of the targeted senators did sign it: Sens. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Mike Crapo of Idaho, Jim Bunning of Kentucky, Larry Craig of Idaho, John Ensign of Nevada, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, George Voinovich of Ohio and David Vitter of Louisiana
No wonder the Pubbies shafted Santorum!
Among other things, one wonders who the f&^% authorized Fan/Fred to spend lobbying money, and whether the taxpayers should....ahhhh.....forcibly remove $2 million from DCI officers, not to mention the 12 or so Freddie insiders who spent the money.
I rather like the option of forcible removal, myself.
Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million to kill legislation that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae, three years before the government took control to prevent their collapse.
In the cross hairs of the campaign carried out by DCI...[were Republican Senators.]
Here's the line the AP would like you NOT to read:
Freddie Mac's payments to DCI began shortly after the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee sent Hagel's bill to the then GOP-run Senate on July 28, 2005. All GOP members of the committee supported it; all Democrats opposed it.
Curious:
In the midst of DCI's yearlong effort, Hagel and 25 other Republican senators pleaded unsuccessfully with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., to allow a vote.
"If effective regulatory reform legislation ... is not enacted this year, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system and the economy as a whole," the senators wrote in a letter that proved prescient
So was Frist a scumbag, or just one of the stupidest Senators in DC? (Yes, I know, the guy had an MD degree...)
MORE that the AP doesn't really want you to read:
In the end, there was not enough Republican support for Hagel's bill to warrant bringing it up for a vote because Democrats also opposed it and the votes of some would be needed for passage. The measure died at the end of the 109th Congress
Freddie Mac executive Hollis McLoughlin oversaw DCI's drive, according to the three people.
"Hollis's goal was not to have any Freddie Mac fingerprints on this project and DCI became the hidden hand behind the effort," one of the three people told the AP.
The guilty:
Nine of the 17 targeted Republican senators did not sign Hagel's letter: Sens. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Christopher "Kit" Bond and Jim Talent of Missouri, Conrad Burns of Montana, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and George Allen of Virginia
The courageous and ethical:
Eight of the targeted senators did sign it: Sens. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Mike Crapo of Idaho, Jim Bunning of Kentucky, Larry Craig of Idaho, John Ensign of Nevada, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, George Voinovich of Ohio and David Vitter of Louisiana
No wonder the Pubbies shafted Santorum!
Among other things, one wonders who the f&^% authorized Fan/Fred to spend lobbying money, and whether the taxpayers should....ahhhh.....forcibly remove $2 million from DCI officers, not to mention the 12 or so Freddie insiders who spent the money.
I rather like the option of forcible removal, myself.
If He Wins, The O Has a Headache Coming
Astute analysis and prognostication from PJBuchanan.
No Democrat has ever come out of the far left of his party to win the presidency. McGovern, the furthest left, stayed true to his convictions and lost 49 states.
Obama has chosen another course. Though he comes out of the McGovern-Jesse Jackson left, he has shed past positions like support for partial birth abortion as fast as he has shed past associations, from William Ayers to ACORN, from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to his fellow parishioners at Trinity United.
One question remains: Will a President Obama, with his party in absolute control of both Houses, revert to the politics and policies of the Left that brought him the nomination, or resist his ex-comrades’ demands that he seize the hour and impose the agenda ACORN, Ayers, Jesse, and Wright have long dreamed of?
Whichever way he decides, he will be at war with them, or at war with us. If Barack wins, a backlash is coming.
A delightful thought, indeed; the conundrum will affect Congressional 'rats like Obey, Kohl, and Kagen the same way. They cannot go too far to the Left without repercussions in 2 years.
No Democrat has ever come out of the far left of his party to win the presidency. McGovern, the furthest left, stayed true to his convictions and lost 49 states.
Obama has chosen another course. Though he comes out of the McGovern-Jesse Jackson left, he has shed past positions like support for partial birth abortion as fast as he has shed past associations, from William Ayers to ACORN, from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to his fellow parishioners at Trinity United.
One question remains: Will a President Obama, with his party in absolute control of both Houses, revert to the politics and policies of the Left that brought him the nomination, or resist his ex-comrades’ demands that he seize the hour and impose the agenda ACORN, Ayers, Jesse, and Wright have long dreamed of?
Whichever way he decides, he will be at war with them, or at war with us. If Barack wins, a backlash is coming.
A delightful thought, indeed; the conundrum will affect Congressional 'rats like Obey, Kohl, and Kagen the same way. They cannot go too far to the Left without repercussions in 2 years.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Tax Liens: Big and Small
Lemmeeseeheah.
Joe the plumber has a tax lien for $1200.00 or so.
ACORN, on the other hand:
INITIAL AMOUNT: $547,312
INITIAL DOCKET #: 424212708
AMOUNT: $547,312
FILING DATE: 03/10/2008
INITIAL DATE: 03/10/2008
UPDATE DATE: 05/07/2008
Name SSN/EIN Address
IRS PLAINTIFF
ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS FOR REFORM NOW DEBTOR
1024 ELYSIAN FIELDS AVE
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70117
HT: No Quarter
Joe the plumber has a tax lien for $1200.00 or so.
ACORN, on the other hand:
INITIAL AMOUNT: $547,312
INITIAL DOCKET #: 424212708
AMOUNT: $547,312
FILING DATE: 03/10/2008
INITIAL DATE: 03/10/2008
UPDATE DATE: 05/07/2008
Name SSN/EIN Address
IRS PLAINTIFF
ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS FOR REFORM NOW DEBTOR
1024 ELYSIAN FIELDS AVE
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70117
HT: No Quarter
ACORN in Alabama
Maybe Alabama's so sweet a home that people just appear out of nowhere...?
Six Alabama counties have more people on their voting rolls than they do people of voting age, according to voter registration numbers and U.S. Census Bureau estimates.
The curious statistic could be the result of a surge in new registrations added to voter rolls that have not been purged of people who moved, said local election officials. But the state's top elections chief said Thursday she's concerned that bloated rolls could leave opportunity for Election Day fraud. . .
HT: John Lott
Six Alabama counties have more people on their voting rolls than they do people of voting age, according to voter registration numbers and U.S. Census Bureau estimates.
The curious statistic could be the result of a surge in new registrations added to voter rolls that have not been purged of people who moved, said local election officials. But the state's top elections chief said Thursday she's concerned that bloated rolls could leave opportunity for Election Day fraud. . .
HT: John Lott
More Bank Humor
Heh.
Went to Best Buy to get a toaster and they gave me a free bank with purchase.
Q: What the difference between today's investment bankers and pigeons?
A: Pigeons can still make a deposit on a BMW.
HT: Calculated Risk
Went to Best Buy to get a toaster and they gave me a free bank with purchase.
Q: What the difference between today's investment bankers and pigeons?
A: Pigeons can still make a deposit on a BMW.
HT: Calculated Risk
CPR to BeeGees, Verdi, or Orff
If you're going to do CPR, think BeeGees.
The Bee Gees hit Stayin' Alive has lived up to its name after researchers in the US discovered that it has almost the perfect rhythm to help jump-start a stopped heart
The Seventies disco anthem contains 103 beats per minute, just three beats more than the 100 chest compressions per minute recommdended by the American Heart Association.
Do not, however, actually SING the song while doing compressions, as it will be counter-productive to the patient and may lead to a lawsuit, notwithstanding the Good Samaritan laws.
Dr. Matthew Gilbert, a 28-year-old medical resident, was among participants in the University of Illinois study..."I heard a rumour that 'Another One Bites the Dust' works also, but it didn't seem quite as appropriate," Mr Gilbert said.
For the classically-oriented CPR administrator, try the Anvil Chorus from Verdi's Aida.
Or the In Taberna drinking-song from Carmina Burana by Orff. Come to think of it, the drinking song might be the best alternative...
The Bee Gees hit Stayin' Alive has lived up to its name after researchers in the US discovered that it has almost the perfect rhythm to help jump-start a stopped heart
The Seventies disco anthem contains 103 beats per minute, just three beats more than the 100 chest compressions per minute recommdended by the American Heart Association.
Do not, however, actually SING the song while doing compressions, as it will be counter-productive to the patient and may lead to a lawsuit, notwithstanding the Good Samaritan laws.
Dr. Matthew Gilbert, a 28-year-old medical resident, was among participants in the University of Illinois study..."I heard a rumour that 'Another One Bites the Dust' works also, but it didn't seem quite as appropriate," Mr Gilbert said.
For the classically-oriented CPR administrator, try the Anvil Chorus from Verdi's Aida.
Or the In Taberna drinking-song from Carmina Burana by Orff. Come to think of it, the drinking song might be the best alternative...
Friday, October 17, 2008
Bishops' Charities to Cut Off ACORN
Well, they cut off funding ACORN.
But you have to read the story. It's an elliptical excuse.
Funding was suspended for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, popularly known as ACORN, because of the financial irregularities, said Ralph McCloud, executive director of CCHD, the U.S. bishops' domestic anti-poverty and social justice program.
"We're not funding them at any level," McCloud told Catholic News Service Oct. 15.
The suspension covers all 40 ACORN affiliates nationwide that had been approved for $1.13 million in grants for the funding cycle that started July 1, 2008.
The "irregularities" is the $1 million embezzlement.
Not to worry. Joe the Plumber will be paying plenty towards ACORN when his taxes go up.
But you have to read the story. It's an elliptical excuse.
Funding was suspended for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, popularly known as ACORN, because of the financial irregularities, said Ralph McCloud, executive director of CCHD, the U.S. bishops' domestic anti-poverty and social justice program.
"We're not funding them at any level," McCloud told Catholic News Service Oct. 15.
The suspension covers all 40 ACORN affiliates nationwide that had been approved for $1.13 million in grants for the funding cycle that started July 1, 2008.
The "irregularities" is the $1 million embezzlement.
Not to worry. Joe the Plumber will be paying plenty towards ACORN when his taxes go up.
Miscellaneous Palin Factology
Peg Noonan and the LoonyTune Left may not like it, but here are some facts.
Question: What is America's first line of missile interceptor defense that protects the entire United States ?
Answer: 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard.
Question: What is the ONLY National Guard unit on permanent active duty?
Answer: 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard
Question: Who is the Commander in Chief of the 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard?
Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, of Alaska
Question: What U.S. governor is routinely briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counter terrorism?
Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska
Question: What U.S. governor has a higher classified security rating than either candidate of the Democrat Party?
Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska
According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain in February, but nobody ever found out. This is a woman used to keeping secrets. She can be entrusted with our national security, because she already is.
However, Joe Biden has patrolled the aisles of his local Home Depot, and Obamamamamama is keeping his eyes on Hyde Park security issues--like Bill Ayers.
Question: What is America's first line of missile interceptor defense that protects the entire United States ?
Answer: 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard.
Question: What is the ONLY National Guard unit on permanent active duty?
Answer: 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard
Question: Who is the Commander in Chief of the 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard?
Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, of Alaska
Question: What U.S. governor is routinely briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counter terrorism?
Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska
Question: What U.S. governor has a higher classified security rating than either candidate of the Democrat Party?
Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska
According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain in February, but nobody ever found out. This is a woman used to keeping secrets. She can be entrusted with our national security, because she already is.
However, Joe Biden has patrolled the aisles of his local Home Depot, and Obamamamamama is keeping his eyes on Hyde Park security issues--like Bill Ayers.
The Culture War Today: Civil War Next?
PJBuchanan immortalized the phrase back in '88--and it's only gotten more evident, as Fr. Neuhaus makes clear.
We are two nations: one concentrated on rights and laws, the other on rights and wrongs; one radically individualistic and dedicated to the actualized self, the other communal and invoking the common good; one viewing law as the instrument of the will to power and license, the other affirming an objective moral order reflected in a Constitution to which we are obliged; one given to private satisfaction, the other to familial responsibility; one typically secular, the other typically religious; one elitist, the other populist. These strokes are admittedly broad, but the reality is all too evident in the increasingly ugly rancor that dominates and debases our public life. And, of course, for many Americans the conflicts in the culture wars run through their own hearts.
No other question cuts so close to the heart of the culture wars as the question of abortion. The abortion debate is about more than abortion. It is about the nature of human life and community. It is about whether rights are the product of human assertion or the gift of “Nature and Nature’s God.” It is about euthanasia, eugenic engineering, and the protection of the radically handicapped. But the abortion debate is most inescapably about abortion. In that debate, the Supreme Court has again and again, beginning with the Roe and Doe decisions of 1973, gambled its authority, and with it our constitutional order, by coming down on one side.
Neuhaus' phrase "...gambled its authority,..." is a very strong statement, indeed.
But accurate, as Scalia pointed out by analogy to Dred Scott.
In that case, the nation did not roll over to the 'authority' of SCOTUS, for good reason. It may come to another showdown. God help us all.
HT: Cosmos
We are two nations: one concentrated on rights and laws, the other on rights and wrongs; one radically individualistic and dedicated to the actualized self, the other communal and invoking the common good; one viewing law as the instrument of the will to power and license, the other affirming an objective moral order reflected in a Constitution to which we are obliged; one given to private satisfaction, the other to familial responsibility; one typically secular, the other typically religious; one elitist, the other populist. These strokes are admittedly broad, but the reality is all too evident in the increasingly ugly rancor that dominates and debases our public life. And, of course, for many Americans the conflicts in the culture wars run through their own hearts.
No other question cuts so close to the heart of the culture wars as the question of abortion. The abortion debate is about more than abortion. It is about the nature of human life and community. It is about whether rights are the product of human assertion or the gift of “Nature and Nature’s God.” It is about euthanasia, eugenic engineering, and the protection of the radically handicapped. But the abortion debate is most inescapably about abortion. In that debate, the Supreme Court has again and again, beginning with the Roe and Doe decisions of 1973, gambled its authority, and with it our constitutional order, by coming down on one side.
Neuhaus' phrase "...gambled its authority,..." is a very strong statement, indeed.
But accurate, as Scalia pointed out by analogy to Dred Scott.
In that case, the nation did not roll over to the 'authority' of SCOTUS, for good reason. It may come to another showdown. God help us all.
HT: Cosmos
New Bish for Cincy
From Bonfire:
I am happy to inform you that the Holy Father has appointed Bishop Dennis Schnurr, till now Bishop of Duluth, to be Coadjutor Archbishop of Cincinnati
(email from Bp Pilarczyk)
I am happy to inform you that the Holy Father has appointed Bishop Dennis Schnurr, till now Bishop of Duluth, to be Coadjutor Archbishop of Cincinnati
(email from Bp Pilarczyk)
Another Doubt About the O's Electability
Interesting stuff from an MS/Mathematics Democrat (but McCain voter this time).
The primary process consisted of fourteen caucuses and thirty-nine primaries. Obama only lost one out of fourteen caucuses yet he lost twenty-one out of thirty-nine primaries. You don’t have to be a mathematician to realize something is not right. I first noticed something was wrong when I watched the returns from Texas come in.
Texas is unique in the Primary world because it has both a primary and a caucus. It’s called the Texas Two-Step. Hillary Clinton won the Primary by four points, yet she lost the caucus which was held on the same day by twelve points. That’s a sixteen point swing
...I decided to analyze the rest of the caucus results. Washington State, Nebraska, and Idaho also held a primary and a caucus and the results were even more divergent than Texas results. The divergent results were partially the result of the disenfranchisement that is inherent in the caucus process since the elderly, mother of young children and shift workers are less likely to attend. But they are also the result of voter fraud intentionally perpetrated by the Obama campaign and voter intimidation by Obama supporters. The result is that the primary was stolen from Senator Clinton.
One could speculate that the lady is also a PUMA, no? Well, the answer is yes, and the rest of the piece deals with matters rhetorical.
But the numbers-analysis is very interesting. And it may well preview the election-night results.
The primary process consisted of fourteen caucuses and thirty-nine primaries. Obama only lost one out of fourteen caucuses yet he lost twenty-one out of thirty-nine primaries. You don’t have to be a mathematician to realize something is not right. I first noticed something was wrong when I watched the returns from Texas come in.
Texas is unique in the Primary world because it has both a primary and a caucus. It’s called the Texas Two-Step. Hillary Clinton won the Primary by four points, yet she lost the caucus which was held on the same day by twelve points. That’s a sixteen point swing
...I decided to analyze the rest of the caucus results. Washington State, Nebraska, and Idaho also held a primary and a caucus and the results were even more divergent than Texas results. The divergent results were partially the result of the disenfranchisement that is inherent in the caucus process since the elderly, mother of young children and shift workers are less likely to attend. But they are also the result of voter fraud intentionally perpetrated by the Obama campaign and voter intimidation by Obama supporters. The result is that the primary was stolen from Senator Clinton.
One could speculate that the lady is also a PUMA, no? Well, the answer is yes, and the rest of the piece deals with matters rhetorical.
But the numbers-analysis is very interesting. And it may well preview the election-night results.
Peggy Noonan: In the Tank
Sad.
Peg Noonan's great moment occurred when she stole some lines of poetry from a Canadian RAF pilot ("Slipped the surly bonds of Earth....Touched the face of God
") and put them into a speech delivered (very well, indeed) by Ronald Reagan.
Since then, she's authored a few interesting pieces--one recalls her essay on GWB's Second Inaugural which, rightly, questioned the NeoCon Project that Bush embraced.
Now, she's working desperately towards ...what? Book-sales?
Today, on Gov. Palin:
This is not a leader, this is a follower, and she follows what she imagines is the base, which is in fact a vast and broken-hearted thing whose pain she cannot, actually, imagine. She could reinspire and reinspirit; she chooses merely to excite. She doesn't seem to understand the implications of her own thoughts.
Obiter dicta in the same column:
Her supporters accuse her critics of snobbery: Maybe she's not a big "egghead" but she has brilliant instincts and inner toughness. But what instincts? "I'm Joe Six-Pack"? She does not speak seriously but attempts to excite sensation—"palling around with terrorists." If the Ayers case is a serious issue, treat it seriously. She is not as thoughtful or persuasive as Joe the Plumber, who in an extended cable interview Thursday made a better case for the Republican ticket than the Republican ticket has made. In the past two weeks she has spent her time throwing out tinny lines to crowds she doesn't, really, understand
Ms. Noonan doesn't get it, at all.
The Governor did not get where she got (nor maintain her popularity ratings at 80+% in Alaska) by 'exciting sensations,' or 'thinking deeply' about Ayers.
The Governor lives her convictions, Peggy. And her convictions need not be articulated for Flyover-Country Americans, who share a natural, instinctive, and deep revulsion for unapologetic domestic terrorists like Ayers. Nor does she have to yap about her convictions about the value of every single human life. (That's the Trig-thing, Ms. Noonan)
She doesn't have to issue a 15-page, footnoted paper on her convictions.
She personalizes them for us, Ms. Noonan. She lives them.
That's what we call "by example." It's a leadership form which is sorely lacking midst the Intellectualoids and Elite Political Classes.
Perhaps that's why you don't recognize its value--or its appeal.
HT: Jack at Ace
Peg Noonan's great moment occurred when she stole some lines of poetry from a Canadian RAF pilot ("Slipped the surly bonds of Earth....Touched the face of God
") and put them into a speech delivered (very well, indeed) by Ronald Reagan.
Since then, she's authored a few interesting pieces--one recalls her essay on GWB's Second Inaugural which, rightly, questioned the NeoCon Project that Bush embraced.
Now, she's working desperately towards ...what? Book-sales?
Today, on Gov. Palin:
This is not a leader, this is a follower, and she follows what she imagines is the base, which is in fact a vast and broken-hearted thing whose pain she cannot, actually, imagine. She could reinspire and reinspirit; she chooses merely to excite. She doesn't seem to understand the implications of her own thoughts.
Obiter dicta in the same column:
Her supporters accuse her critics of snobbery: Maybe she's not a big "egghead" but she has brilliant instincts and inner toughness. But what instincts? "I'm Joe Six-Pack"? She does not speak seriously but attempts to excite sensation—"palling around with terrorists." If the Ayers case is a serious issue, treat it seriously. She is not as thoughtful or persuasive as Joe the Plumber, who in an extended cable interview Thursday made a better case for the Republican ticket than the Republican ticket has made. In the past two weeks she has spent her time throwing out tinny lines to crowds she doesn't, really, understand
Ms. Noonan doesn't get it, at all.
The Governor did not get where she got (nor maintain her popularity ratings at 80+% in Alaska) by 'exciting sensations,' or 'thinking deeply' about Ayers.
The Governor lives her convictions, Peggy. And her convictions need not be articulated for Flyover-Country Americans, who share a natural, instinctive, and deep revulsion for unapologetic domestic terrorists like Ayers. Nor does she have to yap about her convictions about the value of every single human life. (That's the Trig-thing, Ms. Noonan)
She doesn't have to issue a 15-page, footnoted paper on her convictions.
She personalizes them for us, Ms. Noonan. She lives them.
That's what we call "by example." It's a leadership form which is sorely lacking midst the Intellectualoids and Elite Political Classes.
Perhaps that's why you don't recognize its value--or its appeal.
HT: Jack at Ace
Van Hollen, SCOTUS, Ohio, and the GAB
Okay.
Yesterday we asked why JB Van Hollen filed his action against the mal/non-feasance (pick one, or both) GAB in a State of Wisconsin Circuit Court.
We asked because:
1) HAVA is a Federal law, meaning that a Federal Court may have some interest; and
2) A Madison-area Wisconsin judge will do everything possible to avoid taking an action which may harm Democrat vote-fraud in Wisconsin.
Both are true, of course.
The definitive answer, from SCOTUS, regarding the Ohio case:
The [US] Attorney General may bring a civil action against any State or jurisdiction in an appropriate United States District Court for such declaratory and injunctive relief (including a temporary restraining order, a permanent or temporary injunction, or other order) as may be necessary to carry out the uniform and nondiscriminatory election technology and administration requirements under sections 301, 302, and 303.
This means that Van Hollen does not have "standing" to file the case in Federal Court.
OTOH, VanHollen DOES have "standing" under Wisconsin law, which incorporates HAVA--and likely that's the only place he does have "standing."
Not to worry. #2 (above) will be operative.
HT: Ace
(Note: a commenter also left a URL to all the filings and actions in the Wisconsin case, if you're an insomniac...)
Yesterday we asked why JB Van Hollen filed his action against the mal/non-feasance (pick one, or both) GAB in a State of Wisconsin Circuit Court.
We asked because:
1) HAVA is a Federal law, meaning that a Federal Court may have some interest; and
2) A Madison-area Wisconsin judge will do everything possible to avoid taking an action which may harm Democrat vote-fraud in Wisconsin.
Both are true, of course.
The definitive answer, from SCOTUS, regarding the Ohio case:
The [US] Attorney General may bring a civil action against any State or jurisdiction in an appropriate United States District Court for such declaratory and injunctive relief (including a temporary restraining order, a permanent or temporary injunction, or other order) as may be necessary to carry out the uniform and nondiscriminatory election technology and administration requirements under sections 301, 302, and 303.
This means that Van Hollen does not have "standing" to file the case in Federal Court.
OTOH, VanHollen DOES have "standing" under Wisconsin law, which incorporates HAVA--and likely that's the only place he does have "standing."
Not to worry. #2 (above) will be operative.
HT: Ace
(Note: a commenter also left a URL to all the filings and actions in the Wisconsin case, if you're an insomniac...)
Connections Galore!!
The Other McCain observes:
Greta van Susteren notes that Wade Rathke, the guy who founded ACORN and also founded Local 100 of the left-wing labor union SEIU, got his start as a college draft-resistance activist with Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the organization from which Bill Ayers created the Weather Underground.
Hmmmmmm.
To quote Jack Ryan, Clancy's creation: "There is no such thing as co-incidence."
Greta van Susteren notes that Wade Rathke, the guy who founded ACORN and also founded Local 100 of the left-wing labor union SEIU, got his start as a college draft-resistance activist with Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the organization from which Bill Ayers created the Weather Underground.
Hmmmmmm.
To quote Jack Ryan, Clancy's creation: "There is no such thing as co-incidence."
Another Way to Phrase It
So for you Obamamamamama-unists, here's the correct version of things:
Jesus was an unlicensed carpenter, and Brutus was a senator
HT: WWWTW
Making Bad Into Worse
Stupid remark from The One-and-Savior, recorded yesterday:
"How many plumbers you know making a quarter of a million dollars per year?"
I'm sure that Obamamamamama thinks plumbers are just a bunch of butt-crack display machines, too...
This to follow up on his "spread the wealth around" remark (which was economically illiterate AND signal of a redistributive mindset...)
"How many plumbers you know making a quarter of a million dollars per year?"
I'm sure that Obamamamamama thinks plumbers are just a bunch of butt-crack display machines, too...
This to follow up on his "spread the wealth around" remark (which was economically illiterate AND signal of a redistributive mindset...)
"Events, my boy. Events."