You're Not Helping

Michelle Malkin's junior blogging buddy, Doug Powers, isn't helping the conservative cause any by using a bogus Time Magazine cover in a post.

I can't for the life of me figure out how to get access to comment on the site to correct it. (oh, I see...you can't)

The lame post is here: The ‘We’re Gonna Freeze to Death Because of Global Warming’ Headline of the Day

Someone else got caught here but actually checked their work: In 1977 Time Magazine Warns Us Prepare For An Ice Age

You can find the un-Photoshopped original as well as see that there was no April 8, 1977 Time by searching their archives here: Time cover archives

And the unadulterated cover is here: April 9, 2007

Sheesh...yer makin' us look bad, pal.

--

UPDATE:

Sadly, Newsbusters has also picked up on this retread photoshop and, once again, the commenters buy in, many going so far as to claim they remember reading it...yes, a magazine that never existed. Sigh. At least in this case there are a few people toward the end that bop the others on the nose and point out that they've been suckered.

--

UPDATE:

Posts finally being pulled. Hopefully some 'I will better research my work' resolutions being made.

Grinch

Maybe by remembering the bad that the Democrats have done in the name of 'progress' we can put it behind us and look towards a brighter 2011.

Larry Elder reminds:

For the past 50 years, the Democrats -- and many Republicans who should know better -- have been wrong about virtually every major domestic policy issue. Let's review some of them...

Welfare for the "underclass."

When President Lyndon Johnson launched his "War on Poverty," the poverty rate was trending down. When he offered money and benefits to unmarried women, the rate started flat-lining. Women married the government, allowing men to abandon their moral and financial responsibilities.

The percentage of children born outside of marriage -- to young, disproportionately uneducated and disproportionately brown and black women -- exploded. In 1996, over the objections of many on the left, welfare was reformed. Time limits were imposed, and women no longer received additional benefits if they had more children. The welfare rolls declined. Ten years later, The New York Times wrote: "When the 1996 law was passed ... liberal advocacy groups ... predicted that it would increase child poverty, hunger and homelessness. The predictions were not fulfilled."

Education.

The federal government's increasing involvement with education -- what is properly a state and local function -- has been costly and ineffective at best, and counterproductive at worst. Title I, a program begun 45 years ago to close the performance gap between urban and suburban schools, burns through more than $15 billion a year, and the performance gap has widened. The feds spend $80 billion a year on K-12 education, as if money is the answer. States like Utah and Iowa spend much less money per student compared with districts like those in New York City and Washington, D.C., with much better results...

"Affirmative action."

Race-based preferences have been a disaster for college admissions. Students admitted with lesser credentials are more likely to drop out. Had their credentials matched their schools, they would have been far more likely to graduate and thus enter the job market at a more productive level...

Ann Coulter reminds:

Liberals are always indignantly accusing conservatives of claiming God is on our side. What we actually say is: We're on God's side, particularly when liberals are demanding God's banishment from the public schools, abortion on demand, and taxpayer money being spent on Jesus submerged in a jar of urine and pictures of the Virgin Mary covered with pornographic photos...

What the Bible says about giving to the poor is: "Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." (2 Corinthians (9:7)

Being forced to pay taxes under penalty of prison is not voluntary and rarely done cheerfully. Nor do our taxes go to "the poor." They mostly go to government employees who make more money than you do.

Happy Holy Days to you and yours.

Leavin' On A Jet Plane

Here's something to think about...

If an airline announced that it was implementing some new security measures that, under certain circumstances, could be considered intrusive, but were reasonable in light of historical successes at preventing hijackings and bombings and they were upfront and open about it as a means to prevent terrorism - I think it would soon become one of the most popular airlines. I think people would flock to a 'secure' airline.

But when the government forces private industries and citizens to submit to ineffective, overly intrusive, abusive, worthless "security" measures by undertrained staffers who aren't allowed to differentiate between 80 year old nuns and nervous, sweaty guys named Muhammad - everybody justifiably freaks out.

Another argument for privatization, if you ask me.

Remember When

Remember when we had professionals running the country, including national security and foreign relations?

President Obama’s counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan, speaking to reporters in the White House briefing room on Tuesday, defended James Clapper, the nation’s intelligence chief, for not knowing about the arrests of 12 suspected terrorists in London on Monday.

Clapper, in an interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer hours after the arrests took place, was unable to answer her question about the situation, which the Associated Press described as the largest counterterrorism raid in nearly two years.

The arrests of the 12 men, ranging in age from 17 to 28, drew major media coverage on Monday, hours before Sawyer interviewed Clapper and Brennan.

“First of all, London," Sawyer said to Clapper in Monday’s interview. "How serious is it? Any implication that it was coming here?"

When Clapper didn’t have anything to say, Brennan jumped in: “You mean the arrests of the 12 individuals by the British early this morning,” Brennan responded to Sawyer. “This is something that the British told us about early this morning when it was taking place.”

Sawyer later told Clapper she was surprised he didn’t know about the events in London.

"Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't," Clapper responded...

Brennan said there was nothing the director of national intelligence was required to do about the raids in London, and consequently he was giving his full attention where DNI action was required.

Yeah, those were the days. No one's asking him to do anything, but it would be nice if he at least had a clue that one of the biggest anti-terror operations had just gone down in the nation of our best allies.

Amazing

I don't know that I ever read all of Bill Cosby's 'pound cake' speech before.

Damn, Bill. Too bad they weren't listening to you...still aren't.

Sigh

AP:

President Barack Obama signed into law a huge, holiday-season tax bill extending cuts for all Americans on Friday, saluting a new spirit of political compromise as Republicans applauded and liberals seethed.

Because they're angry that they couldn't spike taxes on the rich, even if it meant the working poor and middle class suffer, too.

The benefits range from tax cuts for millionaires and the middle class

No they don't, nobody's getting a tax cut.

to longer-term help for the jobless...

The package retains Bush-era tax rates for all taxpayers, including the wealthiest Americans,

Pay no attention to the fact that we just said something completely different.

a provision Obama and congressional liberals opposed. It also offers 13 months of extended benefits to the unemployed and attempts to stimulate the economy with a Social Security payroll tax cut for all workers.

At a cost of $858 billion over two years,

If you pretend that all the money anyone earns belongs to the government and you only get what they "give" you.

the deal contains provisions dear to both Democrats and Republicans. It represents the most money that Obama was likely to have been able to dedicate over the next year to the slowly recovering economy. Yet it also increases the federal deficit

If you ignore the history that lower tax rates lead to increased revenues.

at a time when the country is growing increasingly anxious about the red ink...

He conceded that the White House and Congress face a difficult challenge when it comes to controlling the deficit and tackling the nation's debt...

But not that the behavior of him and the Democrats for the past 4 years had anything to do with it.

To complete the deal, Obama set aside his vow to extend tax cuts only for the middle class and lower wage earners. The measure also enacts an estate tax that is more generous to the wealthy

In this case "more generous" means "much more confiscatory than they are now"...and who else would be paying taxes meant to confiscate the wealth of the wealthy other than the wealthy?

than Obama had sought.

Since his campaign for president in 2008, Obama has said income tax rates should rise for single taxpayers with gross incomes over $200,000 and married couples with incomes over $250,000...

Really? That's a new interpretation of saying he wouldn't hike taxes on people making under $250,000...they're using the 'new math' $200,000 figure and only said who wouldn't have their taxes hiked (he's already broken that promise several times, of course), not that he was saying taxes "should rise" for everyone else.

The extended tax cuts in the negotiated package include rates lower than those that would have gone into effect Jan. 1,

I think Amnesty International and the Red Cross might want to investigate the AP, that's some seriously tortured language to say that taxes won't be jacked up...you mean not raising taxes means that tax rates would be lower than if they were raised?? Wow, Mr. Wizard!

a $1,000-per-child tax credit, tax breaks for college students and lower taxes on capital gains and dividends. The bill also extends through 2011, a series of business tax breaks designed to encourage investment that expired at the end of 2009.

Social Security taxes would be cut by nearly a third, from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent, for this coming year. A worker making $50,000 would save $1,000; one making $100,000 would save $2,000.

But the payroll tax cut also means that workers will face an increase in 2012 if the full 6.2 percent rate is restored. And by scheduling President George W. Bush's

Not that the Constitution requires The House of Representatives to write all tax legislation or anything.

2001 and 2003 tax rates to expire in two years, the law ensures that taxes will be a top issue in the 2012 presidential election.

The tax code is filled with dozens of cuts that expire each year, and not all of them made it into the package. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., tried to include a property tax deduction for people who don't itemize, but it was left out. The provision would have saved taxpayers about $1.5 billion a year...

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! When a Democrat introduces a provision it "would have saved taxpayers", but when Republicans introduce something it "costs" the government.

What's more, Obama's praise for Republicans, and his heralding of an overdue bipartisan moment in Washington, came after he himself spent the better part of 2010 bashing the GOP leadership as an obstructionist party of no.

But somehow we never got around to mentioning this before the elections.

I Love This Scene

Remember that great Christmas special, Twas The Night Before Christmas? There's a scene near the beginning where the mayor and councilmen are meeting at town hall, trying to figure out why Santa's blowing them off.

Guy: A citizen to see you, Mr. Mayor.

Mayor: Citizen? They're not allowed in here. This is public property!

If You Don't Run Our Blasphemous Homoerotic Art Show We Won't Fund Any More Blasphemous Homoerotic Art Shows

I'm having trouble finding the downside here...

The people that funded the blasphemous homoerotic art show being shown this Christmas season at the Smithsonian have said that unless the Smithsonian displays the most especially blasphemous part of their blasphemous homoerotic art show then they won't fund any more blasphemous homoerotic art shows at the Smithsonian.

Umm....oh no?

But Who's Counting?

Tea Party Inspired Violence:

(crickets)

Obama/Pelosi/Reid Party Inspired Violence:

1.

At 3:30 a.m. on Nov. 24, flames engulfed an unoccupied home still under construction at 16 Boulder Brook Road in Sandwich. Only the exterior of the house had been completed. The home, which was valued at $500,000, had a three-car garage and three bedrooms, but no plumbing or electric service, Sandwich Fire Chief George Russell said...

The following week, on Dec. 2, incendiary devices were found at 43 Trotters Lane in Marstons Mills, law enforcement officials said.

At Trotters Lane, the message "(expletive) the rich," was clearly spray painted on a fence on the property, Barnstable police Det. John York said.

---

2.

Clay Duke, the man who opened fire on a Florida school board Tuesday, posted a “last testament” on Facebook decrying the wealthy and linking to a slew of progressive sites including theprogressivemind.info and MediaMatters.org.

The chilling Facebook statement, posted under the “About Clay” section, talks about being born poor and how the rich “take turns fleecing us"

Gillbrand Votes For Higher Middle Class Taxes And Ending Unemployment Benefits 10 Days Before Christmas

Yes, here we are 10 days before Christmas and the warm and fuzzy (let's not forget all those cozy stories about lovable mommy Kirsten in the local papers!) Gillibrand just voted to let taxes go up on the middle class and working poor as of January 1 and to end unemployment benefits for the long-term out-of-work.

Brings a tear to your eye, doesn't it? Maybe she can knit a hanky for us while Rex explains how she's like a mother to us all. Why it's a Christmas anti-miracle! I'm sure the New Yorkers that just voted for her are thrilled about this, that she voted to hold the middle class and the working poor and the unemployed hostage unless everyone agrees to punish "the rich" with higher taxes.

Let them eat fruit cake! Right, Kirsten? If you can't punish "the rich" then everybody's gonna suffer!

(Schumer, for the record, voted the other way.)

Gift Giving Ideas

In the spirit of the season I feel compelled to offer up some well thought out gift giving advice to anyone that still has some last minute shopping to do.

Specifically, if you have any leftists on your list. Here's what I want you to do:

1. Think hard about that person. You want this to be a personal gift. Think about that person's cherished possessions. Specifically, think about something they bought for themselves - a nice big HDTV, a fancy cell phone, nice shoes, a piece of extravagant jewelry, etc.

2. Get a nice little box, some paper, a pencil, and some ribbon.

3. Write a note explaining that for Christmas you are giving them that item*. For example:

Dear Martha,

For Christmas this year I am giving you that lovely pearl necklace of yours instead of taking it from you and giving it to someone else.

All my best.

4. Put the note in the box and tie it up nice with a ribbon. Hand it over with a smile.

*I probably shouldn't need to explain this, but I will, just in case...

In case you haven't noticed, the left likes to call 'not taking something from someone and giving it to someone else' a 'handout' or 'giveaway'. Lowering someone's tax rate or even just not raising it is now known as a 'giveaway'. Not raising taxes on a small business owner is a 'handout to the rich'. Therefore, by not taking something they earned on their own to give to someone else, you are, in their parlance, giving it to them.

So, go ahead, give it to them this Christmas.

This Pretty Well Sums Up Leftist Statism

Via Mrs. "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.":

“We can’t just leave it up to the parents."

God forbid. Next thing you know they'll be eating a cupcake on their friend's birthday and becoming a conservative!

Real History - I'm With Stupid

Larry Elder:

Barbara Walters gushed over John F. Kennedy Jr. and foresaw a political future for him. Never mind that the young man had flunked the New York bar exam -- twice.

"Dumb" former President George W. Bush, caricatured as a slacker in an Oliver Stone movie, made better grades in college than did Al Gore, his opponent in 2000. Gore dropped out of divinity school after earning five F's. Then he entered law school and dropped out. He won a Nobel Peace Prize for his anti-global warming crusade, and his documentary won an Academy Award, but Gore got a D in science at Harvard. Bush also scored higher on his verbal SAT than did Rhodes scholar and "brainy" presidential candidate Bill Bradley.

"Dumb" former President Ronald Reagan majored in economics. But the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, who ran for the presidency, got expelled from Harvard for hiring someone to take a Spanish test.

"Dumb" Republican former President Gerald Ford was ridiculed as a bumbling doofus by Chevy Chase on "Saturday Night Live." Democratic former President Lyndon Baines Johnson famously quipped that Ford, who played football for the University of Michigan, "spent too much time playing football without a helmet." But Ford graduated from Yale Law School, the same school that produced Bill and Hillary Clinton.

The worldly and literate Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who ran for president in 2004, didn't exactly kill on his military aptitude test. He got half the questions right and half the questions wrong -- dead average. He explained his poor showing by insisting, "I must have been drinking the night before."

Vice President Joe Biden's 1988 quest for the presidency evaporated when he plagiarized a speech by a British politician. When someone questioned his academic credentials at a campaign stop, the offended Biden claimed that he had a full academic scholarship at law school and graduated in the top half of his class. In fact, he had a need-based half-scholarship and graduated near the bottom -- 76th out of 85...

Real History - Colorblind

Larry Elder:

"White America does not like having a black president."

Thus pronounced Michael Moore in an appearance on "Real Time with Bill Maher." And Maher agreed, "That is the truth."

"The statistics don't lie," Moore plowed ahead. "I'm not talking about polls. I'm talking about that the young people in '08 was the only -- do you know this? -- it's the only demographic -- white demographic -- that Obama won, 18- to 29-year-olds. Every other demographic, over 29, Obama lost the white vote. Every single one."

Crime solved. Case closed. Book 'em, Danno. Except for one minor detail: No Democratic presidential candidate has won the "white vote" since 1964.

Add Obama's name to a long list of white Democrats who lost that demographic: Humphrey in 1968; McGovern in 1972; Carter in 1976 and 1980; Mondale in 1984; Dukakis in 1988; Clinton in 1992 and 1996; Gore in 2000.

In fact, white voters preferred Obama to Sen. John Kerry -- who lost the white vote by 17 points in 2004, while Obama lost it in 2008 by "only" 12 points. Obama improved on Kerry's share of the white vote in every age demographic, including the 18- to 29-year-olds (which Kerry lost).

Bonus:

But NAACP CEO Ben Jealous encountered unexpected skepticism when he appeared on Anderson Cooper's CNN show.

Cooper asked why the NAACP selected a "clearly left-wing group -- which is opposed to the tea party" -- to conduct the study. He said the report "does seem to use a lot of innuendo and a lot of guilt by association." Cooper played a montage of video clips showing prominent Democrats -- from the President on down -- campaigning with the mantra that it's time to "take our country back!" "Why is it when Democrats say 'take our country back,'" said Cooper, "no one says that's extreme nationalism, but when tea party supporters say it, it's ominous and racism in disguise?" Jealous stammered, stumbled and fumbled. Painful to watch.

Real History

The Audacity Of Economic Ignorance

Why do we seem so helpless in solving our current mess? A big reason is the shocking lack of basic economic literacy among many of our political leaders. Case in point: Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown.

Brown ripped into GOP Rep. Eric Cantor, saying he "either failed English class or failed logic class or failed history class because these tax cuts for the rich that Bush did twice ... resulted in very little economic growth. We saw only 1 million jobs created in the Bush years, 22 million created in the Clinton years, when we reached a balanced budget with a fairer tax system."

This is false. From 2002, the last year before the cuts, to 2007, the last year before the financial meltdown, the real economy expanded by $1.77 trillion, or 15.2%. "Very little" growth? Jobs increased by 7.77 million, business investment surged 38%, and personal net worth soared 56%. Brown is wrong on every point...

Laughably, Brown talks about how "we" reached a balanced budget during the Clinton years. What do you mean "we," senator? Since budgets are written and passed by Congress, and only approved by the president, Brown must know that it was Republicans who balanced the budget — not Democrats.

That's right, a GOP-led Congress controlled the spending that led to the surpluses of the late 1990s. It also proposed welfare reform and pushed through cap-gains tax cuts that helped the economy boom. To his credit, President Clinton signed these initiatives into law — but only after much political arm-twisting...

He went on to say: "There is no real history illustrating that these tax cuts for the rich result in jobs. It's extending unemployment benefits that creates economic activity that creates jobs, not giving a millionaire an extra ... $30,000 in tax cuts they likely won't spend."

"No real history"? Taxes were cut on high-income earners in the 1920s (Coolidge), 1960s (Kennedy), 1980s (Reagan) and again in the 2000s (Bush). These cuts benefited the rich and everyone else. In all these cases, jobs boomed after tax cuts. In fact, history shows that the best way to boost jobs is to cut taxes on the rich...

Awesome

cool

Holiday Cheer

This ought to put a smile on your face:

The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’

Indeed.

"(expletive) The Rich"

Did Liberal hate speech spur arsonist on Cape Cod

At 3:30 a.m. on Nov. 24, flames engulfed an unoccupied home still under construction at 16 Boulder Brook Road in Sandwich. Only the exterior of the house had been completed. The home, which was valued at $500,000, had a three-car garage and three bedrooms, but no plumbing or electric service, Sandwich Fire Chief George Russell said...

The following week, on Dec. 2, incendiary devices were found at 43 Trotters Lane in Marstons Mills, law enforcement officials said.

At Trotters Lane, the message "(expletive) the rich," was clearly spray painted on a fence on the property, Barnstable police Det. John York said.

Must be the angry rhetoric of the Tea Party inciting people to this violence, right?

Probably Good News

There's been a lot of talk lately about Obama facing a primary challenge from a Democrat in a year or so (let's face it, that's when the campaigning will be in full swing).

First thought: Hmmm...bad news - we'd much rather face unpopular, incompetent Obama than a more moderate, experienced challenger.

Second thought: More likely scenario? Obama being challenged from the left by a more extreme candidate (sorry, that's not possible, the guy's an out and out socialist - I mean a candidate perceived as more extreme) - all abortion all the time on taxpayer dimes, gay marriage for everyone whether they're gay or straight, 95% tax rates on the "rich" to move towards 65% off the tax rolls, etc...(incidentally, all things Obama supports, but pretends he doesn't).

Probably not a bad thing because it would then drive Obama left in the primary (again, out loud to where he already is), which would do wonders for him with independents.

This could be a good thing.

Gee, When You Put It Like That

Michelle Malkin with a wake up call to go along with Hawkins':

Just two short years ago, Obama campaigned as the transcendent unifier. "Young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled, Americans have sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of red states and blue states," he proclaimed. "We have been and always will be the United States of America." It's been an Us vs. Them freefall ever since.

"We don't mind the Republicans joining us," Obama taunted a few weeks ago. "They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."

"They're counting on young people staying home and union members staying home and black folks staying home," the fear-mongering agent of hope and change jeered on the campaign trail last month.

"You would think they'd be saying thank you," he sneered last April, when millions turned out for the nationwide Tax Day tea party protests.

"I want them just to get out of the way" and "don't do a lot of talking," he scoffed in response to prescient critics of the federal trillion-dollar stimulus boondoggle.

In addition to labeling GOP opponents of his open-borders policies "enemies" who needed to be "punished" by Latino voters, Obama accused them -- that is, us -- of lacking patriotism. "Those aren't the kinds of folks who represent our core American values," he told viewers of the Spanish-language network Univision...

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer called vocal citizens who protested the federal health care takeover bill during the town hall revolts of 2009 "un-American," too. Remember? "These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views -- but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American," Pelosi and Hoyer blasted in an op-ed piece for USA Today last summer. "Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades."

This from the woman who called for a vengeful government investigation of grassroots opponents of the Ground Zero mosque.

Obama's pal Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida, whom the president hailed as an "outstanding" member of Congress, accused Republicans of wanting elderly people to "die quickly" and of presiding over a "holocaust in America." Vice President Joe Biden hailed Grayson as a "guy who doesn't back away from a fight, and doesn't back down from what he believes in" and told him at a fundraiser: "We owe you one, buddy." No mention of Grayson's smear of a female Federal Reserve adviser as a "K Street whore."

In California, entrenched incumbent jerk Pete Stark derided immigration enforcement activists at a town hall by asking: "Who are you going to kill today?" To an elderly constituent who opposed the health care bill, Stark retorted: "I wouldn't dignify you by peeing on your leg. It wouldn't be worth wasting the urine."

Open Mouth. Clutch Stomach. Scrunch Eyes. Commence Hysterical Laughter.

Here's you gut busting laugh of the day courtesy of a lefty with Palin Derangement Syndrome (with minors in 'general cluelessnes's and 'great authors of the 20th century ignorance')

Richard Wolffe makes fun of Palin for reading famous author of Christian works for ‘divine inspiration’

MSNBC commentator Richard Wolffe made fun of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for reading author C.S. Lewis for “divine inspiration,” despite the fact that the acclaimed British academic and creator of childrens’ books was also a noted writer of works on Christianity.

Appearing on MSNBC’s “Hardball” with Chris Matthews, Wolffe expressed incredulity, noting that Lewis wrote “a series of kids’ books.”

Matthews interrupted Wolffe: “I wouldn’t put down C.S. Lewis.”

“I’m not putting him down,” Wollfe responded. “But you know divine inspiration? There are things she could’ve said to divine inspiration. Choosing C.S. Lewis is an interesting one.”

Aside from authoring popular children’s books like the “Chronicles of Narnia,” Lewis was known as a Christian apologist who authored a number of books on religion, like “Mere Christianity.”

Quite a feat to out-ignorant Chris Matthews. Somebody get this guy his own 4-hour block of daily airtime on MSNBC, quick!

(for a few words more the author here should have noted that even the "series of kids' books" noted here are deeply, deeply Christian)

Why They Lost

The Democrats sure are doing their best to punish America for kicking them out of the House, aren't they? Good time to remember why that happened to begin with and John Hawkins has a good bunch of it:

3) "If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2." -- Barack Obama

Speaking of the mask slipping, Barack Obama has gone from pretending to be a post-racial healer to an ugly demagogue who tells Latinos that Republicans are their "enemies." One of the things that made Barack Obama appealing to so many Americans was the belief that he’d help Americans get beyond race-based grievances. Instead, we now have a President who fans the flames of race-based hatred...

6) "What good is reading the (health care) bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?" -- John Conyers

It has not escaped the American people that never before has there been so much momentous legislation passed by people who not only didn't know what was in it, but also didn't care that they didn't know what was in it.

7) "There’s going to be a tendency on the part of our people to be in denial about (Scott Brown's win), but if you lose Massachusetts and that’s not a wake-up call, there’s no hope of waking up." -- Evan Bayh

When angry Americans showed up at townhall meetings, Democrats claimed they were "astroturf." When the Tea Partiers gathered, Democrats wrote them off as extremists. When Scott Brown won "Ted Kennedy's seat" in a race that revolved around stopping health care reform, Democrats just shrugged it off. When the polls showed staunch and growing opposition to health care reform, Democrats said the American people would learn to love it...

Let's Guess

My guess is "spending a trillion dollars of borrowed money".

Oh wait, it says he's not proud of it.

Hmmm...

Having a discussion with a Republican?

Gluing his ears back?

No, wait! Maybe it's just an editing error! Maybe it's about kicking Biden!

No, he couldn't go that long...

One BAZILLION Dollars!

The two-year cost of the plan, estimated at about $850 billion, would further swell record federal deficits.

I'm confused. Why don't the Democrats just propose increasing taxes to 100% at all income levels? Then when anyone votes against it they can get the press to claim that the "cost of" not doing it is a hundred bazillion gazillion frillion dollars.

How is that any different than a "plan" that is simply not hiking taxes - therefore, not hiking taxes even more, costs even more.

Right?

It's Getting Harder To Deny The Effects Of Limitless Unemployment

As more and more time passes the data set for comparing the extension of unemployment benefits for, well, ever is starting to show starker and starker contrast to post-recession employment in the past - and the news isn't good if we want to get this economy moving again with people employed and paying taxes. I've posted a few times about how people are admitting that they're not taking jobs and staying on unemployment, instead. So the stories in yesterday's paper about how it's an "encouraging sign" that job openings are up...well isn't as you'll see.

Are We Subsidizing Unemployment?

The same day the White House cut a deal for 13 additional months of unemployment aid, the Labor Department released data showing that more than 3 million jobs are going unfilled. These are jobs employers are actively trying to fill, not just slots they're leaving open until business improves.

Why are so many jobs going begging when so many Americans are begging for jobs? Because many don't have to take them — thanks in part to 99 weeks and counting of unemployment benefits.

Add to that record food stamp payments and other welfare, and the unemployed have been perversely incentivized to keep holding out for better jobs, rather than take less-than-desirable or lower-paying ones. Until their benefits start running out, many long-term unemployed are in no rush to take another job. They can pass on offers requiring long commutes or relocation.

The latest job vacancy numbers bear this out.

At the end of October, there were 3.4 million job openings — a 12% increase from September and a 32% jump from a year earlier.

Since the recession's end in July 2009, openings have soared 44%. This defies previous post-recession trends. Normally the job vacancy rate goes down after a recession, as the job market stabilizes. But millions of jobs are going unfilled now — especially in heavily unionized industries, such as manufacturing, education and health care.

Since President Obama's stimulus extended federal jobless benefits, and bribed states to do the same, the median duration of unemployment has nearly tripled, hitting 26 weeks this summer.

Fully a third of full-time workers have been unemployed for 52 weeks or more, while 47% of jobless Americans have been out of work for at least 27 weeks — the highest since the government began keeping records in the 1940s.

Studies show extending jobless benefits — which now pay people 50% to 60% of their previous wage to stay home for two years — just ends up subsidizing more unemployment...

If the administration gets its way, the so-called "99ers" will become 155ers and keep the nation's high jobless rate artificially elevated. Studies show longer unemployment translates to higher unemployment. University of Chicago economist Robert Shimer estimates that generous jobless benefits alone account for as much as 1.5 points of our 9.8% jobless rate...

Washington ought to learn from Sweden, one of the few European nations to lower unemployment. After suffering chronically high joblessness in the 1990s, it cut the duration for its generous jobless benefits — and watched as the jobless rate plunged.

How's That Song Go? We're On A Train To Nowhere?

If only we had high speed rail from, say, Newburgh to Kingston, boy, that'd be fantastic!

The first leg of the Golden State's bullet train will run from nowhere to nowhere. What keeps us from laughing is the cost — more than $4 billion — before cars, locomotives or electric power.

Not to insult the roughly 25,000 residents of Corcoran and Borden, but these towns in California's San Joaquin Valley don't really fit anyone's idea of a major destination...

Enough with the jokes. Nothing wrong with small towns, or the people in them. But there's something out of whack about last week's decision, by the California High Speed Rail Authority, to start building the state's bullet-train system where it's least likely to be used.

The 65-mile line would pass through one bona fide city, Fresno, but it wouldn't take Fresno's half-million or so residents anywhere they'd likely want to go. About $3 billion of its $4.15 billion price tag would come out of federal funds. And all this is before the cost of locomotives, cars, heavy maintenance facilities or the electric power supply.

The obvious question is, "Why?" The answer is politics. The new route makes no economic sense, but it does fit the conditions placed on federal stimulus funds...

---

Lyle Lanley: Well, sir, there's nothing on earth
Like a genuine,
Bona fide,
Electrified,
Six-car
Monorail!
What'd I say?

Ned Flanders: Monorail!

Lyle Lanley: What's it called?

Patty+Selma: Monorail!

Lyle Lanley: That's right! Monorail!

...

I swear it's Springfield's only choice...
Throw up your hands and raise your voice!

All: Monorail!

Lyle Lanley: What's it called?

All: Monorail!

Lyle Lanley: Once again...

All: Monorail!

Marge: But Main Street's still all cracked and broken...

Bart: Sorry, Mom, the mob has spoken!

Government by, for, and of the Simpsons. Whaddaworld.

Hippo Sighting

Jesus and Muhammad: NYT Hypocrisy on 'Challenging, Disturbing' Images

The Times explained:

...One of those images, 11 seconds of ants crawling on a crucifix, drew an outraged denunciation from the Catholic League, a lay civil rights organization that receives no church financing. It called the video “hate speech” and said it was designed to “assault the sensibilities of Christians.”...

The exhibition is supposed to deal with culturally challenging images. Indeed, some of the most important roles of art and of museums are to challenge, disturb and enlighten.

Fine words. Too bad the Times didn’t follow them when the religion of Islam was being mocked.

As you may remember, several cartoons mocking the prophet Muhammad ran in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in September 2005 and were used months later as a pretext for riots by radical Muslims in several European cities.

Did the Times “challenge, disturb and enlighten” its readers by reprinting the cartoons in the name of free speech and an open society? Hardly. Instead, the Times unloaded its impressive store of self-righteousness in the other direction, blaming the Danish newspaper and the cartoonists for incitement while refusing to reprint the cartoons to show support for free speech, calling it a “gratuitous assault[s] on religious symbols.”

Yet the Times didn't have trouble running a photo the very next day of a painting by Chris Ofili offensive to Catholics -- the Virgin Mary clotted with elephant dung.

Democrats Reject Plan To Stop Middle Class Tax Hikes, Extend Unemployment

House Democrats continued their death throes temper tantrum today, angrily voting to kill a Republican plan that Obama had agreed to that would extend unemployment benefits, temporarily reduce Social Security taxes, and put off tax hikes on the working poor and middle class for two years.

Democrats are vowing to kill the plan, thereby radically hiking taxes on the working poor and middle class and throwing people off of unemployment unless they are allowed to impose a huge tax hike on "the rich".

Told You So

See? What'd I tell you? Today the Gazette has a screaming, top of the fold headline: "GOP blocks $250 checks for seniors"

How about: 'GOP blocks Democrat handout to rich seniors'? After all, I'm sure some of the payments would go to seniors that are rich, why not single them out the way they single out 'rich' people that aren't having their taxes raised?

How about: 'Dems oppose middle class tax cuts'? That's a pretty accurate headline (using leftist logic that not raising taxes, keeping taxes the same, is a tax cut). But we don't see anything like that blaring across the paper above the fold.

Still, the large story is dwarfed by more important news. What with all the things going on in the world we shouldn't expect the biggest story of the day to be that the GOP wants to block yet another Democrat spending plan that they don't intend to pay for (have the Democrats proposed any spending bills that are paid for since they passed PAYGO?). War. Iran. Recession. Unemployment near 10%. Holidays. Government corruption. Paterson handing out goodies left and right before he flees office. Yup, there's more important thing to be found on the front page.

Like a gigantic story about Kirk Douglas' birthday.

I kid you not. Just ONE of the three photos on the front page is larger than the text of the phony baloney $250 story, which somehow manages to not mention that it was the Democrats that have controlled Congress for the past two years and haven't done anything about the lack of a COLA. And it also fails to make clear that the Democrats could EASILY pass this handout, but, like many other things, they've tried to do it 'fast track', which requires 2/3 support* which they don't have, so they and the papers can decry the GOP "block"ing things which the Democrats could easily pass if they simply brought them up for a normal vote. Which all means, if you're paying attention, that the GOP, still far in the minority until January, blocked NOTHING, that the Democrats, the majority, are the ones that failed to pass the handout because they refused to bring it up for a simple vote.

Pathetic. Just pathetic.

--
*In reality, on many of these issues, they have a lot of support - things like unemployment benefit exemptions. For those that don't follow politics that closely, the reason they 'fast track' all these things is because when you do that you don't have to let anybody offer amendments - so the GOP can't try to tack on something that would, you know, pay for it. Instead they just try to get 2/3 to vote for something that is pure deficit spending (“After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,” Pelosi said in her speech from the speaker’s podium. “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.” - remember that?) and then they get to refuse to let the GOP introduce the exact same bill except with a way to pay for it and can then whine to the willing media about how the GOP stopped them from doing something that the GOP actually wants them to do - basically trying to fool America (which worked up until this year) into thinking that it was the guy saying 'pay with cash' that was the problem, not the woman screaming 'charge it!'.

Democrats Blast Obama For Opposing Tax Hikes On Working Poor, Middle Class

Did I pretty much capture the right tone of the mainstream media with that 'headline'? I think I got it just about right, to be honest. Let's not kid ourselves, that is exactly how they would frame it if it wasn't the Democrats. The GOP, acting to follow the wishes of a majority of Americans, have begun implementing the HOPEd for CHANGE that put them back in control of the House by getting Obama and some Democrats to agree to not raise taxes in the midst of a severe economic downturn, cut Social Security taxes, and extend unemployment benefits.

And the Democrats? They're furious. We already know that their leftwing idea men at MorOn.org think refusing to hike taxes, cutting Social Security taxes, and extending unemployment benefits is "an absolute disaster". Well, let's be honest, it is an absolute disaster to their socialist agenda. They're furious that they couldn't get the public to agree to another two years of class warfare, "fundamental transformation", and "spreading the wealth around" (which always means from those that produce to those that consume, funny, they never seem to think it should spread in the other direction at all). Instead poll after poll (until this got on the table and the leftwing press starting doing their own 'polls' that showed otherwise) showed that Americans wanted to prevent tax hikes on everyone, from the poor guy down the block to the rich guy down the street.

The Democrats, it seems, are so keen to hike taxes on 'the rich' that they'll do so even at the expense of the middle class, the working poor, and the unemployed.

While Republicans such as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell welcomed the compromise, Democrats said they haven’t committed to the plan and party activists mounted campaigns to kill it. Vice President Joe Biden is being dispatched to the Senate Democratic Caucus lunch this afternoon to lobby lawmakers.

“House Democrats have not signed off on this deal,” Maryland Representative Chris Van Hollen, a member of the House Democratic leadership, said today on Bloomberg Television. “I have some serious reservations.”

Right there in black and white, Democrat activists are 'mounting campaigns' to hike taxes on the middle class, the working poor, and kill an unemployment benefit extension.

Odd that the press never seems to portray things that way, isn't it? Kinda sorta makes you think they might kinda sorta have certain, you know, biases?

And, oh yeah, what do they do in retaliation to show that they're the ones we should listen to about fiscal responsibility?

House Democrats push through massive budget bill

Cuz nothing says, 'those damned Republicans are going to bankrupt the middle class to give handouts to the rich!' like ramming through "massive" spending bills.

MorOns Get MorOnyer

So, as I noted the other day, here's what the deal Obama agreed to includes: "a plan to extend expiring income tax cuts for all Americans, renew jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed and grant a one-year reduction in Social Security taxes.

The emerging agreement also includes tax breaks for businesses..."

So how do the MorOn.orgers portray this? What do they want to you flip out about? What do they call it?

"An absolute disaster"

extend expiring income tax cuts for all Americans? "An absolute disaster!"

renew jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed? "An absolute disaster!"

grant a one-year reduction in Social Security taxes? "An absolute disaster!"

tax breaks for businesses? "An absolute disaster!"

Nice.

Credit Where No Credit Is Due

Anybody else notice the furious media and Democrat (sorry for the repetition) spin trying to make the plan to freeze tax hikes (they're incorrectly calling them "tax cuts") Obama's plan - when in reality (like welfare reform in the '90s) it's all the doing of pressure from the GOP in Congress (given majorities to do just what they're doing via elections) and Obama is simply trying to jump out in front of the parade and pretend he's leading it? The Gazette's front page trumpets the "tax cut" plan of Obama as if he came up with it and has forced the GOP to go along with him.

Why?

Because there are enough Democrats that aren't total idiots. They understand the following:

1) Freezing tax rates (better yet lowering them) WILL stimulate the economy. History proves this. The economy is going to come back a bit in the next two years. They won't admit it, ever, but they know it's true, you can only see so many charts that prove that unemployment goes down, wealth goes up, GDP goes up, and tax revenues go up before you know, deep down, that it's true.

2) Keynesian flailing of borrowed money around is an abject failure. It failed FDR, it failed Japan, it failed Obama - it fails whenever it is tried. Unemployment stuck near 10% and nose-diving tax receipts for two years, along with sluggish-to-nonexistent real GDP growth make a poor argument for the porktacular spending spree being a "success" in "getting the economy turned around".

3) The left does not want lower taxes, they wanted, badly, the tax hikes that were coming. Tax hikes on producers is how the left plans to destroy (they claim 'improve') America by "spreading the wealth around". (Note that this plan now being called "Obama's" directly contradicts his own 'theory' that "everybody is better off if you spread the wealth around".) But they know that continuing to do so is, in fact, disastrous for economies - just look at Europe - don't think that the soft socialist slide into bankruptcy by their European role models didn't shake them up.

4) The last thing that they want is for Obama to be seen opposing what they know is going to work, setting them up for utter failure and political destruction in 2012. There is simply no way they can see Obama fighting to keep doing what he's been doing and not see the historical thumping the GOP gave them in 2010 repeated and multiplied in 2012, leaving them as weak as they thought the GOP was after 2008. They need to make it look like this is all his idea so he can take credit for it in 2012. The fact that "his" plan is only being taken up, against the wailing and gnashing of Democrat Congressional teeth, after the American people spanked the daylights out of the leftwing-dominated Democrat party nationally, statewide, and locally across the nation, will be painted as merely a coincidence.

(The TU ran a story inside with a headline that was more honest, saying that Obama was the one that agreed to the deal)

Times Unions' Glaring Hypocrisy

*Times Union editorial, Nov. 9, 2010:

Remember, too, that the Republicans are as determined to extend tax cuts for the richest 2 percent of Americans as they are to blocking the health care law.

That adds another $700 billion to the deficit over 10 years, and brings the cost of making the Bush-era tax cuts permanent for everyone to more than $3 trillion.

This is the party of fiscal restraint? Political confrontation -- reminiscent of then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich and President Clinton -- seems more like it. That led to the government shutdown in 1995, for which the Republicans paid dearly.

(Of course it also lead to those 'surpluses' the editors are always trumpeting as somehow being an accomplishment only of Clinton)

*Times Union editorial, Dec. 5, 2010:

Just consider the cost of more tax cuts for the richest 2 percent of the country. The people, that is, who don't need them and won't necessarily spend that money right away.

===

*Times Union editorial, Mar. 16, 2009:

But anytime we get to keep some of our money, it's a good day.

Excuse Me?

See this?Look down in the lower right hand corner. What's it say? Do I see the word "NEWS"? I do! Funny, you'd think someone that associates with "NEWS", even if they're a "NEWS BLOG", would not print such debatable items as this as fact:

They point to two high-profile Texas cases in which evidence has recently emerged that the state had put innocent men to death. Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in 2004 after being convicted of killing his daughters in a 1991 house fire. But numerous arson experts have identified serious flaws in the original investigation and concluded that the blaze likely originated accidentally. And Claude Jones was executed in 2000 for killing a liquor store owner, but DNA testing recently showed that a strand of hair that prosecutors said proved his guilt in fact came from the victim.

Ummmm....no.

Not even close.

Despite anti-death penalty activists' claims, neither case is even vaguely settled as stated by this "NEWS" outlet.

Willingham

Doug Fogg, a Corsicana firefighter for 31 years, was the first responder to arrive at 1213 W. 11th Ave. in Corsicana that Monday morning. He conducted the local arson investigation.

Fogg calls Beyler an “armchair quarterback” and riles at the accusation that Corsicana and state detectives used nothing more than folklore to come to their conclusions.

“A lot of this stuff (in Beyler’s report) is misspoken or misinterpreted,” Fogg said.

The report accuses state arson investigator Manuel Vasquez, now deceased, of not securing the scene, of missing or mishandling crucial evidence that might have exonerated Willingham, and not using scientific fire analysis.

Willingham had a lot of excuses for the fire, Fogg recalled, including that a stranger entered the house and set the fire, that the 2-year-old started it, that a ceiling fan or squirrels in the attic caused an electrical short, or the gas space heaters in the children’s bedroom sparked it.

The investigators searched for electrical shorts, but found none; the gas-powered space heaters were off because the family’s gas supply had been cut off at the meter; and “we didn’t find a ceiling fan. Willingham said there was one, but we didn’t find any signs of one,” Fogg said.

The other explanations just didn’t add up, Fogg said, adding: “We eliminated all accidental causes.”

Evidence of accelerants was found, but Willingham had an excuse for that, too. Willingham told investigators he poured cologne on the children’s floor “because the babies liked the smell,” he blamed a kerosene lamp for any accelerant in the hallway, and said spilled charcoal-lighter fluid happened while he was grilling, Fogg recalled.

Fogg agreed that there was a damaged bottle of charcoal lighter fluid on the other end of the porch away from the door, but the grill was in the side yard not on the porch when firefighters arrived. Fogg remembered four empty bottles of charcoal lighter were found just outside the front door.

Beyler acknowledges that one sample did have accelerant in it, but said it was unidentified, a claim Fogg disputes.

Local investigators didn’t leave the house until midnight, spending over 12 hours sifting through the debris by hand, taking videotape and more than 80 photographs of the scene, cutting up flooring for the lab, bagging and dating each sample and recording where it came from in the house, Fogg said. Samples were contaminated by melted plastic toys, fire-damaged carpet and floor tiles, but it wasn’t because of investigator’s incompetence, Fogg said.

Beyler theorized it was a flashover, and said investigators didn’t see the difference between the intense heat of a flashover and an accelerant-driven fire. Fogg laughed at the notion.

If it had been a flashover, it would have taken out the thin layer of sheetrock on the walls, he argued.

“That house was box construction,” Fogg said. “The only sheetrock that came down was what was hit with water. The paper backing wasn’t even scorched.”

As well, the fire damage was worse at the floor level than at the ceilings, which is the opposite of typical fire, Fogg said...

For Hensley, the most damning evidence came from Willingham, who told officers that 2-year-old Amber woke him up. Firefighters later found her in his bed, with burns on the soles of her feet. Yet, Willingham didn’t take the girl with him when he fled, nor did he receive burns walking down that same hallway, Hensley pointed out.

Willingham was taken to the hospital where doctors did a blood-gas analysis on him, a standard test for someone who’s been inside a burning house.

“He had no more (carbon monoxide) than somebody who had just smoked a cigarette,” Hensley said...

Willingham’s behavior afterwards did not help his case. Todd Morris was the first police officer on the scene and he found Willingham trying to push his car away from the house to save it from the fire, while his children were inside burning up, Hensley said...

Bristol said the science for investigating fires may have changed over the last two decades, but the accelerant was there, and that evidence remains valid.

“I don’t have any doubt he did it, or was guilty,” Bristol said. “I think he would have been convicted whether we had the arson evidence or not.”...

The article in the New Yorker quoted Willingham’s protest of innocence as his final words, but Loyd Cook of the Daily Sun was one of three media witnesses at the execution. Willingham’s actual final words were a venom-filled curse at his ex-wife as he attempted an obscene gesture, Cook reported.

“I hope you rot in hell, b—,” Willingham said before dying...

From his seat at the defense table, attorney David Martin’s job was to fight tooth and nail for Willingham. Once it was over, though, Martin became convinced his client was guilty. He dismisses the Beyler report as propaganda from anti-death penalty supporters...

The defense team couldn’t locate an arson expert back then willing to say the house fire was accidental.

“We never could find anybody that contradicted Vasquez,” Martin said.

As for Jones, the case is perhaps even more muddled, but the supposed 'proof' that he was "innocent" proves nothing more than that a single piece of evidence in the case was not what it was originally thought that it was - it was not the hair of some unknown killer (that would indeed have been troubling evidence, VERY troubling), but instead it was found to simply belong to the victim of the crime, it does nothing to disprove other elements of the case, which need to stand (if they can) on their own merits. In any event, those responsible for putting him to death remain convinced that the weight of the evidence shows they got the right guy and, if anything, not finding that another was present deflates arguments to the contrary, albeit in a minor way. The supposed 'smoking guy' hair proves neither that Jones was guilty nor innocent.

(personally, I am 100% on the side of 'getting it right'. I support the death penalty and am 100% convinced that it is "Constitutional". Frankly, I think anyone that disagrees needs to start over in school at the first grade and relearn reading, because the Constitution itself calls for the death penalty. I'm pretty sure they were smart enough to not put stuff in there that directly contradicted other parts. If they did, this is the only instance. However, that said, I do think that the use of the death penalty should be more limited. As much as I dislike the thought of paying room and board for vicious criminals for their entire life, I think that's the correct choice, morally, when what should be a very high crossbar for use of the death penalty is not crossed with the evidence available. I also do not believe that modern crossbar jumping devices should be used to pretend to go back in time and retry cases from the past. You use the best techniques available to you at the time. We now have many such techniques available to us and we should use them. When there is any reasonable doubt, we should abstain. When there is no question, when there are multiple independent, credible witnesses, a murder weapon, and motive (that sort of thing)...then, yes, I believe that the rule of law and a reasonable moral code calls for that person to be removed from society and not made a guest of that society for the remainder of their days - or, worse yet, for merely a while.

And that's all I have to say on that. Strong defense. No muddied waters. Very high crossbar. Death penalty on the other side.)

WaPo Destroys Mythical Plame Movie

The editors at the Washington Post seem to be on a tear of printing the truth about every 6 months or so. The nut they find this time is the mostly-fabricated, detached-from-reality, left-wing myth that became the 'Plame saga':

...the recently released film "Fair Game"..."It's accurate," Ms. Plame told The Post. Said Mr. Wilson: "For people who have short memories or don't read, this is the only way they will remember that period."

...In fact, "Fair Game," based on books by Mr. Wilson and his wife, is full of distortions - not to mention outright inventions...The movie portrays Ms. Plame as having cultivated a group of Iraqi scientists and arranged for them to leave the country, and it suggests that once her cover was blown, the operation was aborted and the scientists were abandoned. This is simply false. In reality...Ms. Plame did not work directly on the program, and it was not shut down because of her identification.

The movie portrays Mr. Wilson as a whistle-blower who debunked a Bush administration claim that Iraq had tried to purchase uranium from the African country of Niger. In fact, an investigation by the Senate intelligence committee found that Mr. Wilson's reporting did not affect the intelligence community's view on the matter, and an official British investigation found that President George W. Bush's statement in a State of the Union address that Britain believed that Iraq had sought uranium in Niger was well-founded.

"Fair Game" also resells the couple's story that Ms. Plame's exposure was the result of a White House conspiracy. A lengthy and wasteful investigation by a special prosecutor found no such conspiracy - but it did confirm that the prime source of a newspaper column identifying Ms. Plame was a State Department official, not a White House political operative.

Hollywood has a habit of making movies about historical events without regard for the truth; "Fair Game" is just one more example. But the film's reception illustrates a more troubling trend of political debates in Washington in which established facts are willfully ignored...Though it was long ago established that Mr. Wilson himself was not telling the truth - not about his mission to Niger and not about his wife - the myth endures...

(Actually, the "investigation" found no such thing - Armitage admitted to Fitzgerald at the very beginning of the investigation - before it went on for two years - that he was the source of the "leak" of information that everybody already knew.)

When What 'Everybody Knows' Is Wrong

Church v. State, a battle royale that supposedly we all know the facts behind...

if only the facts we all know didn't weren't simply pulled from someone's behind...

A recent New York Times piece said that it was "a flub of the first order" when Christine O'Donnell, Republican candidate for senator in Delaware, asked a law school audience "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" According to the New York Times, ?The question draw gasps and laughter" from this audience of professors and law students who are elites-in-waiting.

The New York Times writer joined in the mocking response to Ms. O'Donnell's question, though admitting in passing that "in the strictest sense" the "actual words 'separation of church and state' do not appear in the text of the Constitution." Either the separation of church and state is there or it is not there. It is not a question of some "strictest" technicality...

There was no mystery about what "an establishment of religion" meant when that phrase was put into the Constitution. It was not an open ended invitation to judges to decide what role religion should play in American society or in American government.

The Church of England was an "established church." That is, it was not only financed by the government, its members had privileges denied to members of other religions.

The people who wrote the Constitution of the United States had been British subjects most of their lives, and knew exactly what an "established church." meant. They wanted no such thing in the United States of America. End of story-- or so it should have been.

For more than a century, no one thought that the First Amendment meant that religious symbols were forbidden on government property. Prayers were offered in Congress and in the Supreme Court. Chaplains served in the military and presidents took their oath of office on the Bible...

I've said it before and I've said it again - how on earth do liberals think that we are "headed towards a theocracy!" because the President says 'God Bless America' or we have "God" on our money when we did not become a theocracy in the past when there was so much more religion in our politics in the past vs. now? It's like if there were a million candles burning in a room full of drafts and billowy curtains, then after all but a dozen are extinguished you jump out and start screaming about how we're drawing nearer and nearer to burning the place down any minute now.

Republicans Embarrass The Left And The Press

Obama, GOP reach deal to extend tax cuts

Brushing past Democratic opposition, President Barack Obama announced agreement with Republicans Monday night on a plan to extend expiring income tax cuts for all Americans, renew jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed and grant a one-year reduction in Social Security taxes.

The emerging agreement also includes tax breaks for businesses...

Gee, look at that, I guess the GOP cares about:

the unemployed
seniors
businesses
the middle class
the working poor
AND
the "rich"

all at the same time.

Too bad the left and their press mouthpieces can't say they care as much as them.

Battle For NY-1 Is Still Being Fought

Upstate residents like to claim that NYC and Long Island residents think that everything north of Westchester is some uncharted "upstate" that's a different state. So it's perhaps a bit of a rebuke that around here we get little news of the only unresolved House race in the nation - more than a month after election day - which happens to be right here in NY. Of course, it would be a seat representing "downstate" - NY-1 - so we hear little to nothing about it "upstate". It's still far from over: NY-1 UPDATE: Judge Reviewing Ballots, GOP Suspects Illegal Voting by Dems

It's not a new accusation, but it might be the first time the Dems could get caught with their hands in the cookie jar voting machine. The gist is that Democrats are known to have encouraged wealthy city residents to vote not (or 'not just') in the city where their vote is 'wasted' on sure-to-be-elected Democrat candidates, but to vote in more suburban areas where they have second or vacation homes (as opposed to primary residences that are where you are legally bound to vote) - in this case Long Island, but we've also heard of this re: Saratoga.

The voters in question include people who own homes in New York City, have a New York City address on their drivers' licences and, in numerous instances, voted in New York City multiple - even dozens of - times over the past decade or so. Some of them have gotten STAR tax relief - available only on one's principal dwelling - on homes outside the 1st CD. Ryan said the Altschuler team has also turned up recorded mortgage documents in which some of the voters affirmed their NYC residences were their primary residences - and then voted in Suffolk County.

"That's either voter fraud or bank fraud," Ryan said.

Ryan accuses New York City Democrats of scheming to influence elections outside of the city. "They have taken proactive measures to encourage people to vote from their vacation homes," Ryan said. He pointed to CountryVote.org, a website he said was established by a group of Democratic lawyers to encourage wealthy New York City Democrats who have second homes in the country to register at their country address - where their vote in an election will have more influence.

Rangel Accused Of MORE Violations

Can you imagine if they have to have ANOTHER ethics hearing on this guy?

The Federal Election Commission is investigating a complaint that Rep. Charles Rangel improperly used his National Leadership PAC to fund his legal defense on ethics charges for which he was censured Thursday, The Post has learned.

The FEC is acting on a complaint by the National Legal and Policy Center filed after The Post reported last month that Rangel paid nearly $400,000 from his PAC...

The center expects to file a second complaint this week contending that Rangel's PAC money included at least $195,000 in donations from lobbyists with business before the House Ways & Means Committee, of which he is a member...

Pelosi and team had four years to "drain the swamp" and "clean up"...I think they missed a few spots.

Soares Sued - How Will Local Media React?

NY prosecutor in steroid raid faces federal suit

Albany County prosecutor David Soares, who made national headlines and dominated TV sports networks by charging a Florida pharmacy with selling anabolic steroids to pro athletes and entertainers, is being sued in federal court for $27 million.

Albany County District Attorney P. David Soares and his deputy face trial on accusations of false arrest and defamation in the case.

Meanwhile, Soares' charges against operators of the Orlando pharmacy shut down in a 2007 raid have been dismissed twice by courts.

Given the breathless, wall-to-wall coverage of Soares' big make-a-name-for-himself 'bust' that marked the beginning of this saga, it will be interesting to see how the networks and papers that provided that coverage will cover the continuing unraveling of the case and now Soares' own potential undoing. Stay tuned...

Democrats, In Case You Were Wondering...

why the American people just rejected you (now that you finally exposed your true selves) in November, it's probably for things like this: Robert Menendez compares tax fight with GOP to talks with terrorists

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) on Friday compared the tax-cut fight with Republicans to negotiating with terrorists...

“Do you allow yourself to be held hostage and get something done for the sake of getting something done, when in fact it might be perverse in its ultimate results?” Menendez said, when asked whether he and other Democrats would compromise with Republicans. “It’s almost like the question of do you negotiate with terrorists.”

Could that be taken as questioning their patriotism? ;)

The Wheels On The Bus Have Fallen Off, Fallen Off...

The wheels on the bus have fallen off, fallen off, fallen off...

Remember yesterday's headlines? "Jobless claims rise, but trend shows improvement / Two-year low for layoffs hints at hiring pickup"

Yeah...

"Jobless rate rises to 9.8 pct. as job growth slows
Jobless rate rises to 9.8 pct in Nov., highest since April; economy adds only 39,000 jobs"

Employers added only 39,000 jobs last month, a sharp decline from the 172,000 created in October, the Labor Department reported Friday. The weakness was widespread. Retailers, factories, construction companies, financial firms and the government all cut jobs last month...

In fact, private companies -- the backbone of the economy -- created 50,000 jobs. That was down significantly from the 160,000 private-sector jobs created in October and was the smallest gain since January.

With hiring so weak, the unemployment rate rose from 9.6 percent to 9.8 percent. The jobless rate has now topped 9 percent for 19 straight months, the longest stretch on record...

...17 percent of the labor force is "underemployed." That was the same as October. Still, the figure remains close to a record high set last year.

Another grim figure: There was a record 1.3 million "discouraged" workers in November. Those are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available to them.

Hey, ya know what? Now's the PERFECT time to raise taxes on people that create jobs and spend time on gays in the military!

The wheels on the bus will not come back, not come back, not come back
The wheels on the bus will not come back for twooo mooore yeeeeears

Look, Ma! A Hippo!

(source)

The Wheels

The wheels on the spin go 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round

Jobless claims rise, but trend shows improvement

The wheels on the spin go 'round and 'round, all through the media

You Look, You Find

Funny, whenever the press goes looking for people collecting unemployment instead of looking for work because Congress keeps on giving out benefits longer and longer...they find them.

Despite all the wailing about the 'heartless' and 'cruel' GOP that wants to somehow take away money from poor people to give to rich people (I'm not sure what the bill number that would be for that one) who portray all unemployed as lazy layabouts smothering the rest of the newscasts and newspapers, they keep finding these people whenever they actually do their jobs and look.

The Detroit News did.

The Wall Street Journal did.

And now the Boston Herald has:

I’d started out the day reaching out to a dozen unemployed workers to ask whether they’d urge Brown to change his mind and extend benefits even if that adds to the national deficit.

I actually spoke with eight of them. Only two said yes unequivocally...

But the rest of the dozen who e-mailed my 96.9 FM morning radio show? In a startling indication of distrust, they spoke of their fellow unemployed workers “gaming the system” —collecting unemployment while working under the table.

Unlike rule-following Greg Vasale, who paid the price for honesty, some admitted turning down low-paying jobs. They suspected others of lying about even trying to find work. “You used to have to go down and prove your were looking,” said one. “Now you just send in a form.”

Said another: “People should have to do some kind of public service or volunteer (to get unemployment) to weed out the lazy ones.”...

“It’s scary to be unemployed,” Barry said. “There are people who’ll suffer if they don’t extend benefits. I will be shut off on Christmas Day, too. But there are so many people just collecting and not looking for jobs. There’s good, and there’s bad.”

Schumer Finds A Nut

Blind squirrel and all that...seems Chucky is one of those pushing to stop coddling and rewarding muslim groups that have now been proven to have terrorist ties, including CAIR that doesn't want muslims looked at when they board planes:

Now that a federal judge has unsealed evidence showing the three most prominent Muslim groups in America support terror, Washington must cut all ties with them.

U.S. District Judge Jorge Solis has ruled there is "ample evidence" to support the Justice Department's decision to blacklist the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as unindicted co-conspirators in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terror trial.

He refused requests to strike their names from the list.

At the trial, which ended in guilty verdicts on all 108 counts, FBI agents testified that ISNA, NAIT and CAIR are fronts for the federally designated terrorist group Hamas, which has murdered countless Israelis and at least 17 Americans.

Indianapolis-based ISNA controls most of the Islamic centers and schools in the country through its NAIT subsidiary — a Saudi-funded trust that holds title to radical mosques, including the notorious 9/11 mosque in D.C. CAIR, headquartered within three blocks of the U.S. Capitol, is the nation's largest Muslim-rights group. The trio for years have maintained they are "moderate" nonprofits that condemn terrorism.

However, "The government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA and NAIT with Hamas," Solis said in his 20-page ruling, written in July 2009 and unsealed just last Friday.

Solis noted that investigators have traced "hundreds of thousands of dollars" from ISNA and NAIT bank accounts to Hamas suicide bombers and their families in Gaza and the West Bank.

He said CAIR also took part "in a conspiracy to support Hamas." Phone lists and other documents introduced by the government reveal CAIR and its founding chairman Omar Ahmad have operated as key members of Hamas' U.S. wing, known as the "Palestine Committee," according to the ruling.

FBI wiretaps and agent testimony also placed both Ahmad and CAIR's acting executive director — Nihad Awad — at a secret meeting held last decade with Hamas leaders in Philadelphia.

In a hotel room, participants hatched a scheme to disguise payments to Hamas suicide bombers and their families as charity. ISNA also was mentioned at the meeting...

Although the FBI has severed ties with CAIR, other government agencies have not. For instance, CAIR continues to select Muslim guests to speak and pray in Congress. CAIR chief Awad even prayed alongside Anwar Awlaki, now a fugitive al-Qaida cleric.

The FBI, meanwhile, still does outreach with ISNA. And the White House has solicited the group for resumes. Many Muslims tied to ISNA have been hired for sensitive positions within the government.

A handful of senators — including Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. — have called for a governmentwide ban on these groups, a move that seems long overdue, given the new court evidence.

Hippos Running Wild At The New York Times

As if it wasn't obvious that wallowing hippos are running that particular asylum, note the the New York Times has been joyously running classified diplomatic briefs on its pages...while one of their editors had this to say about why they wouldn't touch the emails blowing the climate changers agenda out of the water:

The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won't be posted here.

Unlike, of course, private diplomatic communiques or anti-terror programs that were "acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye".

New York Should Be More Like Those Europeans!

You know, all alternative-fueled and eco-awesome!

Controversial gas 'fracking' extraction headed to Europe

...European energy companies are scrambling to secure licenses to roll out extraction projects this side of the Atlantic...

In August, US energy corporation Halliburton carried out the first hydraulic fracturing of a well in Poland on behalf of the state-owned Polish Oil and Gas Company (PGNiG). Energy consultancy Wood MacKenzie estimates the country's reserves could stand at 1.4 trillion cubic meters. The high numbers have got US companies Exxon and Chevron scrambling to drill test wells alongside smaller companies such as Three Leg Resources from the Isle of Man...

Across the North Sea, Shell has drilled three exploratory wells in the southern Swedish region of Skaane, and in September Gripen Gas AS was awarded five exploration licences in the Cambro-Ordivian Basin. Caudrilla Resources has secured licences to test for gas in the Netherlands and Spain, while US company Devon is exploring Denmark's shale potential.

ExxonMobil has concessions for Lower Saxony and North Rhine Westphalia in Germany, conducting five drillings, with two more test wells planned by the end of 2010, and owns 750,000 acres of leaseholdings in the Lower Saxony basin alone...

What we need to take care of these budget shortfalls is get some of that green industry up and running in our depressed areas.

Glow From Solar Factories Fails to Match Town's Hopes

Many cities and the Obama administration are relying on green industries to pull them out of the recession. But many businesses in green industries are startups that close quickly or are not large enough to create significant job gains....

See tail. Chase tail. Repeat.