The Cost of Selling Your Soul

Kathleen Sebelius has sold her soul to obtain political power. I can't see that there is really any other way to come to any other conclusion. She's a practicing Catholic who not only believes in abortion, but supports late-term and partial birth abortion. Watch the video to see how very much she cares about those getting abortions, as well. The question might be, other than herself, what DOES she care about? At what price glory, only I'm not speaking about eternal glory. If you live your life as if there is no God, you had better be right.

The Manchurian Candidate

March 9 (Bloomberg) -- Back in the 1960s, Lyndon Johnson gave us the War on Poverty. In the 1970s, Richard Nixon launched the War on Drugs. Now that we have seen President Barack Obama’s first-year legislative agenda, we know what kind of a war he intends to wage.

It is no wonder that markets are imploding around us. Obama is giving us the War on Business.

Imagine that some hypothetical enemy state spent years preparing a “Manchurian Candidate” to destroy the U.S. economy once elected. What policies might that leader pursue?

He might discourage private capital from entering the financial sector by instructing his Treasury secretary to repeatedly promise a brilliant rescue plan, but never actually have one. Private firms, spooked by the thought of what government might do, would shy away from transactions altogether. If the secretary were smooth and played rope-a-dope long enough, the whole financial sector would be gone before voters could demand action.

Another diabolical idea would be to significantly increase taxes on whatever firms are still standing. That would require subterfuge, since increasing tax rates would be too obvious. Our Manchurian Candidate would have plenty of sophisticated ideas on changing the rules to get more revenue without increasing rates, such as auctioning off “permits.”


Thanks to Kimmie for the picture. It was animated but I can't get that to come through here, darn it. Please read rest of article here

Movie Recommendation - La Vie en Rose

I am not a movie critic and I am also not a fan of foreign movies with subtitles. Especially French movies. My oldest daughter sung its praises and I felt compelled to watch. She has very good taste in these things and she knows I am not fond of the French or subtitles. I'm glad I watched. I do very much like Edith Piaf. I was an older teenager when she died so I only have a passing familiarity with her music. I read she had been on Ed Sullivan many times and I was an ardent fan of that show, but I don't remember her. I know I would have remembered her. She was only 47 when she died, ravaged by the effects of drugs and alcohol and a terribly sad life. But she was defiant to the end and the movie is a masterpiece. Here's a You Tube Clip of her singing a song written for her, Non, je ne regrette rien (1961) (No I regret Nothing). Two years later, she would be dead. I have provided the English translation of the song. I certainly fits her life.



No, nothing at all, I regret nothing at all
Not the good, nor the bad. It is all the same.
No, nothing at all, I have no regrets about anything.
It is paid, wiped away, forgotten.
I am not concerned with the past, with my memories.
I set fire to my pains and pleasures,
I don?t need them anymore.
I have wiped away my loves, and my troubles.
Swept them all away.
I am starting again from zero.

No, nothing at all, I have no regrets
Because from today, my life, my happiness, everything,
Starts with you!

Contradictions of Socialism (I Saw The Future & Ran Away!}

Courtesy of Red Square from The People's Cube

There was a time in recent American history when certain Soviet jokes didn't work in translation - not so much because of the language differences, but because of the lack of common sociopolitical context. But that is changing. As President Obama is preparing us for a great leap towards collectivism, I find myself recollecting forgotten political jokes I shared with comrades while living in the old country under Brezhnev, Andropov, and Gorbachev. (I was too young to remember the Khrushchev times, but I remember the Khrushchev jokes.) I also noticed that the further America "advances" back to the Soviet model, the more translatable the old Soviet jokes become.

Not all Soviet advancements have metastasized here yet, but we have four more glorious years to make it happen.

One of my favorite political jokes is this:

The six dialectical contradictions of socialism in the USSR:

1. There is full employment - yet no one is working.
2. No one is working - yet the factory quotas are fulfilled.
3. The factory quotas are fulfilled - yet the stores have nothing to sell.
4. The stores have nothing to sell - yet people got all the stuff at home.
5. People got all the stuff at home - yet everyone is complaining.
6. Everyone is complaining - yet the voting is always unanimous.

It reads like a poem - only instead of the rhythm of syllables and rhyming sounds, it's the rhythm of logic and rhyming meanings. If I could replicate it, I might start a whole new genre of "contradictory six-liners." It would be extremely difficult to keep it real and funny at the same time, but I'll try anyway.

Dialectical contradictions are one of the pillars in Marxist philosophy, which states that contradictions eventually lead to a unity of opposites as the result of a struggle. This gave a convenient "scientific" excuse for the existence of contradictions in a socialist society, where opposites were nice and agreeable - unlike the wild and crazy opposites of capitalism that could never be reconciled. Hence the joke.

Then I moved to America, where wild and crazy opposites of capitalism were supposedly at their worst. Until recently, however, the only contradictions that struck me as irreconcilable were these:

Economic justice:

1. America is capitalist and greedy - yet half of the population is subsidized.
2. Half of the population is subsidized - yet they think they are victims.
3. They think they are victims - yet their representatives run the government.
4. Their representatives run the government - yet the poor keep getting poorer.
5. The poor keep getting poorer - yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.
6. They have things that people in other countries only dream about - yet they want America to be more like those other countries.

Hollywood cliches:

1. Without capitalism there'd be no Hollywood - yet filmmakers hate capitalism.
2. Filmmakers hate capitalism - yet they sue for unauthorized copying of their movies.
3. They sue for unauthorized copying - yet on screen they teach us to share.
4. On screen they teach us to share - yet they keep their millions to themselves.
5. They keep their millions to themselves - yet they revel in stories of American misery and depravity.
6. They revel in stories of American misery and depravity - yet they blame the resulting anti-American sentiment on conservatism.
7. They blame the anti-American sentiment on conservatism - yet conservatism ensures the continuation of a system that makes Hollywood possible.

I never thought I would see socialist contradictions in America, let alone write about them. But somehow all attempts to organize life according to "progressive" principles always result in such contradictions. And in the areas where "progressives" have assumed positions of leadership - education, news media, or the entertainment industry - contradictions become "historically inevitable."

If one were accidentally to open his eyes and compare the "progressive" narrative with facts on the ground, one might start asking questions. Why, for instance, if the war on terror breeds more terrorists, haven't there been attacks on the U.S. soil since 2001? Why, if George W. Bush had removed our freedom of speech, was nobody ever arrested for saying anything? And if Obama has returned us our freedoms, why was a man harassed by police in Oklahoma for having an anti-Obama sign in his car? Why would anyone who supports free speech want to silence talk radio? And why is silencing the opposition called the "Fairness Doctrine"?

After the number of "caring," bleeding-heart politicians in Washington reached a critical mass, it was only a matter of time before the government started ordering banks to help the poor by giving them risky home loans through community organizers. Which resulted in a bigger demand, which resulted in rising prices, which resulted in slimmer chances of repaying the loans, which resulted in more pressure on the banks, which resulted in repackaging of bad loans, which resulted in a collapse of the banks, which resulted in a recession, which resulted in many borrowers losing their jobs, which resulted in no further mortgage payments, which resulted in a financial disaster, which resulted in a worldwide crisis, with billions of poor people overseas - who had never seen a community organizer, nor applied for a bad loan - becoming even poorer than they had been before the "progressives" in the U.S. government decided to help the poor.

As if that were not enough, the same bleeding hearts are now trying to fix this by nationalizing the banks so that they can keep issuing risky loans through community organizers. In other words, to prevent the toast from landing buttered side down, they're planning to butter the toast on both sides and hope that it will hover in mid-air. Which also seems like a sensible alternative energy initiative.

If that doesn't fix the problem, there's always the last resort of a liberal: blame capitalism. It's always a win-win. Today government regulators may be blaming capitalism for the crisis caused by their dilettantish tampering with the economy, but who do you think they will credit after market forces resuscitate the economy?

Years ago, living in America made me feel as though I had traveled in a time machine from the past. But after the recent "revolutionary" changes have turned reality on its head - which is what "revolution" literally means - I'm getting an uneasy feeling I had come from your future.

As your comrade from the future, I also feel a social obligation to help my less advanced comrades in the American community, and prepare them for the transition to the glorious world of underground literature, half-whispered jokes, and the useful habit of looking over your shoulder. Don't become a nation of cowards - but watch who might be listening.

Let's start with these few.

People's power:

1. Liberals believe they're advancing people's power - yet they don't believe people can do anything right without their guidance.
2 People can't do anything right - yet the government bureaucracy can do everything.
3. The government bureaucracy can do everything - yet liberals don't like it when the government takes control of their lives.
4. Liberals don't like it when the government takes control of their lives - yet they vote for programs that increase people's dependency on the government.
5. They vote for programs that increase people's dependency on the government - yet they believe they're advancing people's power.

Bush and the media:

1. The media said Bush was dumb - yet he won over two intelligent Democrats.
2. He won over two intelligent Democrats - yet the media said his ratings were hopeless.
3. The media said his ratings were hopeless - yet the 2004 electoral map was red.
4. The 2004 electoral map was red - yet the media said his policies failed.
5. The media said his policies failed - yet the economy grew and the war was won.
6. The economy grew and the war was won - yet the media said we needed "change."

Public education:

1. Liberals have been in charge of education for 50 years - yet education is out of control.
2. Education is out of control - yet liberal teaching methods prevail.
3. Liberal teaching methods prevail - yet public schools are failing.
4. Public schools are failing - yet their funding keeps growing.
5. Their funding keeps growing - yet public schools are always underfunded.
6. Public schools are always underfunded - yet private schools yield better results for less.
7. Private schools yield better results for less - yet public education is the only way out of the crisis.

Foreign radicals*:

1. Foreign radicals hate America - yet they're all wearing American blue jeans.
2. They're all wearing American blue jeans - yet they disdain American culture.
3. They disdain American culture - yet they play American music, movies, and video games.
4. They play American music, movies, and video games - yet they call Americans uncivilized.
5. They call Americans uncivilized - yet they expect Americans to defend their civilization.
6. They expect Americans to defend their civilization - yet they think American capitalism is outdated.
7. They think American capitalism is outdated - yet most of their countries require American handouts.
(* Some US politicians have similar opinions about their redneck constituents - yet they won't shut up about how proud they are to have their mandate.)

Liberals and taxes:

1. Liberals want to help the poor - yet they won't give money to charities.
2. They won't give money to charities - yet they'd like the government to become a gigantic charity.
3. They'd like the government to become a gigantic charity - yet the money has to be taken from people by force.
4. The money has to be taken from people by force - yet they call it welfare.
5. They call it welfare - yet higher taxes make everyone poorer.
6. Higher taxes make everyone poorer - yet liberals find ways not to pay taxes.
7. Liberals find ways not to pay taxes - yet they get to be chosen to run the government.

Liberals and the CIA:

1. The CIA is a reactionary institution - yet its agents always leak information that helps liberals politically.
2. CIA agents always leak information that helps liberals politically - yet liberals say the CIA is clueless.
3. Liberals say the CIA is clueless - yet in their movies the CIA is running the world.
4. In their movies the CIA is running the world - yet they tell us that better intelligence could have prevented the war.
5. Better intelligence could have prevented the war - yet "enhanced interrogations" of captured terrorists must not be allowed.

Love and marriage:

1. Sex differences are the result of social conditioning - yet homosexuality is biological.
2. Homosexuality is biological - yet everybody is encouraged to experiment with it.
3. Everybody is encouraged to experiment with it - yet venereal diseases are treated at the taxpayers' expense.
4. Venereal diseases are treated at the taxpayers' expense - yet taxpayers have no right to impose standards since there are no moral absolutes.
5. There are no moral absolutes - yet gay marriage is an absolute must.
6. Gay marriage is an absolute must - yet family is an antiquated tool of bourgeois oppression.

Oleg Atbashian, a writer and graphic artist from Ukraine, currently lives in New York. He is the creator of ThePeoplesCube.com, a satirical website where he writes under the name of Red Square. Please click on the link above to visit the site. It's absolutely brilliant and spot on politically, ethically and morally.

Obama to Reverse U.S. Government Ban on Funding Stem Cell Research Today

President Barack Obama will reverse the U.S. government’s ban on funding stem-cell research today and pledge to “use sound, scientific practice and evidence, instead of dogma” to guide federal policy, an adviser said.

Harold Varmus, co-chair of a science advisory group to the President, said Obama will ask the White House Office of Science and Technology to create guidelines to incorporate ‘scientific integrity’ into decision-making by U.S. agencies. The action on stem cells, which can grow into any kind of tissue, may help speed research into cures for major illness.

Academic laboratories, led by Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and companies already using stem-cell technology, led by Geron Corp., of Menlo Park, California, could gain tens of millions of dollars in funding because of the decision. A “significant amount” of $10 billion given the National Institutes of Health in Obama’s stimulus plan will go to this area of research, Varmus said.
“We view what happened with stem-cell research in the last administration as one manifestation of the failure to think carefully about how government use of scientific advice occurs,” said Varmus, a Nobel prize winner who is president of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, in a conference call with reporters yesterday. “Public policy must be guided by sound, scientific advice.”

Ed Morrissey from Hot Air writes:

The advocates of this policy cheer the supposed triumph of science over politics, but in truth, it’s the reverse. Over a year ago, researchers found a way to unlock adult stem cells to have the same flexibility as hEsc lines, ie, the ability to transform into any kind of tissue. Bush’s policy in effect pushed the government-funded research in that direction, which prompted the breakthrough. With that process available, we have no need to grind up our offspring to cure diseases, especially since grinding up our offspring has yet to result in even one therapeutic result, despite billions of dollars of research into hEsc. A scientific approach would dictate that we follow success instead of failure.

In fact, the market has done just that. While some states (California being one) have provided public funds for hEsc research, most of the private money goes towards adult stem-cell research. Why? It’s a proven technology. That’s one of the reasons hEsc researchers are so desperate to overturn Bush’s ban on federal funding —they can’t compete for any other funding any longer.

This decision places politics ahead of science. People demand government funding for hEsc not because it works, but because it’s popular. Pro-abortion activists want it as an endorsement of abortion as some sort of mechanism for scientific advance, and they’ve managed to sucker the rest into thinking that we’ll all die unless we start destroying embryos to keep us alive. No one has offered a single scientific reason to have the federal government fund hEsc research.

Back Then We Thought It Was Cool

This article is from American Thinker.

Back then we thought it was cool
By Randy Fardal

Recent recantations by avid Obama supporters, including financial celebrity Jim Cramer, are reminiscent of the late actor, Yul Brynner. Brynner was an avid smoker who, on learning that he was dying of lung cancer, recorded the following message to be played after his death: Don't Smoke

Listening to Cramer essentially link Obama to America's economic cancer, you might notice some parallels between supporting Obama and smoking cigarettes.

To young people, supporting Obama and smoking cigarettes both look cool and both make them feel good. And despite dire warnings from responsible adults, lots of their friends also do both and, so far, nothing bad has happened to them.

Older and wiser smokers gradually realize that cigarettes cost them a huge portion of their earnings, increase their health care costs, and make them feel helpless because cigarette makers control their lives. Older and wiser Democrats must be saying the same about Obama -- just four months after they voted for him.


According to MSN Money, "A 40-year-old who quits smoking and puts the savings into a 401(k) earning 9% a year would have nearly $250,000 by age 70." --Probably about the same amount lost by the average 401(k) owner since Obama was elected.

Cigarette companies now acknowledge that their products are potentially addictive and harmful, but they once implied that smoking was healthy. They might not have run "Hope" ads, but they did run ads in the 1940s with this headline:

More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette.

Likewise, Obama's economy doctors claim that transferring wealth from working Americans to his supporters is not addictive to the recipients and will improve our economic health. And if those 1940s smoking doctors were still alive, they also could be part of Obama's bogus scientific consensus excuse for imposing crippling taxes to combat his manmade global warming hoax.


Now that financial surgeon generals like Cramer have begun to establish a link between Obama's policies and America's economic cancer, why not follow the lead of the anti-smoking activists that demanded warning labels on cigarette packages? Something like this could be posted prominently on Obama's forehead:

And since anti-smoking activists demand astronomical taxes to "cover the costs of smoking to society", why not institute similar tax rates on Obama voters to cover the societal costs of his leftist programs? In states that have high concentrations of Obama voters, such as New York, most of the price of a pack of cigarettes goes to taxes. Likewise, a 90 percent income tax on New York Obama voters seems fair.

Furthermore, perhaps a multi-trillion-dollar class action lawsuit could be filed against Obama. After all, he knowingly pushed highly addictive wealth transfers and deliberately withheld evidence from numerous global trials that extreme government spending causes major economic health risks. The uncaring egomaniac also denies that "second hand deficits" harm the economic health of our children.

Finally, he must have violated some FTC rule against predatory pricing by advertising his product with the promise of "tax cuts for 95 percent of Americans". Then, once he had driven his only remaining competitor out of the market, he jacked up the price by trillions. If not predatory pricing, it must be false advertising.

Last month, Russian prime minister and former Soviet KGB leader Vladimir Putin also warned against following Obama's leftist policies. That's akin to the Soviet Union giving us a warning from its grave, just as Russian-born Yul Brynner did from his.

You can read the entire article and check out the links here

In case you are not aware of Putin's warning, this is what he had to say.

Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin has said the US should take a lesson from the pages of Russian history and not exercise excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state's omnipotence.

In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the statet's role absolute, Putin said during a speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.

Sounding more like Barry Goldwater than the former head of the KGB, Putin said, Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors, and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state.

Putin also cautioned the US against using military Keynesianism to lift its economy out of recession, saying, in the longer run, militarization won't solve the problem but will rather quell it temporarily. What it will do is squeeze huge financial and other resources from the economy instead of finding better and wiser uses for them. Putin's comments come in sharp contrast to Russia's own military buildup and expansion.

Putin also echoed the words of conservative maverick Ron Paul when he said, we must assess the real situation and write off all hopeless debts and assets. True, this will be an extremely painful and unpleasant process. Far from everyone can accept such measures, fearing for their capitalization, bonuses, or reputation. However, we would conserve and prolong the crisis, unless we clean up our balance sheets.

Hell has indeed frozen over when the Ruskies get it but Obama doesn't.

“The time for enlightenment has come. We must calmly, and without gloating, assess the root causes of this situation and try to peek into the future

Obama and the Never Ending Spending Parade

It seems even politically liberal venues of the media are starting to become alarmed at the massive spending, wealth destruction and generational theft of the Obama Administration.

Obama the Spender Goes to Washington
No One Spends Other People's Money as Carefully as He Spends His Own
Opinion by JOHN STOSSEL
March 5, 2009 —


How lucky we are to have Barack Obama as president. He's already come up with a revolutionary idea that escaped his predecessors: He's going to scour the budget for ... "waste and inefficiency" "... go line by line through the federal budget in order to eliminate wasteful and ineffective programs."

It's astonishing that no one has thought of this before. Who knew programs could actually be eliminated just because they don't work and waste taxpayers' money?

And he's making progress.

"[W]e have already identified $2 trillion in savings over the next decade."

How will he do it? Here's an example: "Agriculture Secretary [Tom] Vilsack is saving nearly $20 million with reforms to modernize programs and streamline bureaucracy."

Amazing! "Modernize and streamline." It is indeed a new day.

Though he says he wants better not bigger government, Obama plans to spend a lot more money -- on medical reform, education, energy, etc. He also promises to halve the deficit by the end of his term. (Presumptuously he says, "first term.")

This is dangerous nonsense. Obama's budget numbers are laden with politically driven assumptions about a rosy future in which robust economic growth pays for record-breaking government.

Unfortunately, Obama is simultaneously working hard to delay recovery by imposing new taxes on the rich, toadying up to unions and trial lawyers, being ambiguous about trade and threatening all sorts of "activist" government that makes the future even more unpredictable. The new taxes are not just the direct assault on wealthy taxpayers, but indirect punishments, like his cap-and-trade plan for carbon emissions. His gifts to unions go beyond the outrageous "card-check" rule to the requirement that stimulus spending go to union workers who must be paid artificially high Davis-Bacon wages. All this will frighten off private capital and suffocate economic recovery.

Obama's budget also creates a $634 billion "reserve fund" for medical reform -- but only $318 billion is to come from higher taxes. Where will the rest come from? Where else? Savings squeezed out of Medicare, Medicaid and other medical programs.

Give me a break.

It is hard to take seriously his claim that he will cut old spending to make way for new spending and a lower deficit. As The Wall Street Journal points out, "[T]he 2009 budget deficit is estimated to be an eye-popping 12.7 percent of GDP, which once again dwarfs anything we've seen in the postwar era. The White House blueprint predicts that this will fall back down to 3.5 percent as soon as 2012, but this is based on assumptions about Washington that aren't going to happen."

One of the most absurd assumptions is that the new stimulus spending will be temporary.

Higher stimulus spending in the current budget becomes the new baseline for future budgets. Any cuts below that line will be condemned as heartless.

Every president promises to save money by eliminating waste and fraud. But the savings never materialize.

In Washington, one person's waste is another person's pork. Every dime spent by the federal government has well-connected advocates who swear the money is vital to the national interest. They line up to testify. Even if they didn't grease the palms of lobbyists and congressmen, their cries would be hard to resist. "This program will keep this poor woman, your constituent, alive! Would you be so cold as to deny her that?"

Read the rest of the article here

Olbermann is a Cry Baby

I mean really, can this so-called man be any more pathetic. A sportscaster who thinks he is William F. Buckley, poor Keithy is just pathetic. You almost kind of feel sorry for him.

The Great Destabalization by Mark Steyn

There hasn't been much in the news about Obama's snub to the British Prime Minister. But people noticed...important people and they won't forget. This says something not only about the neophyte president but about his underlings, those who should have guided him in picking appropriate gifts for the Prime Minister. Frankly, I am surprised they didn't give him a packet of Burger King and Pizza Hut coupons. Maybe Michelle could have handed them to him in her sleeveness dress with her bulging biceps. How pathetic.

The Great Destabilization
Can America, the engine of the global economy, pull the rest of the world out of the quicksand?

By Mark Steyn


British prime minister Gordon Brown thought long and hard about what gift to bring on his visit to the White House last week. Barack Obama is the first African-American president, so the prime minister gave him an ornamental desk-pen holder hewn from the timbers of one of the Royal Navy’s anti-slaving ships of the 19th century, HMS Gannet. Even more appropriate, in 1909 the Gannet was renamed HMS President.

The president’s guest also presented him with the framed commission for HMS Resolute, the lost British ship retrieved from the Arctic and returned by America to London, and whose timbers were used for a thank-you gift Queen Victoria sent to Rutherford Hayes: the handsome desk that now sits in the Oval Office.

And, just to round things out, as a little stocking stuffer, Gordon Brown gave President Obama a first edition of Sir Martin Gilbert’s seven-volume biography of Winston Churchill.

In return, America’s head of state gave the prime minister 25 DVDs of “classic American movies.”

Evidently, the White House gift shop was all out of “MY GOVERNMENT DELEGATION WENT TO WASHINGTON AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS LOUSY T-SHIRT” T-shirts. Still, the “classic American movies” set is a pretty good substitute, and it can set you back as much as $38.99 at Wal-Mart: Lot of classics in there, I’m sure — Casablanca, Citizen Kane, The Sound of Music — though this sort of collection always slips in a couple of Dude, Where’s My Car? 3 and Police Academy 12 just to make up the numbers. I’ll be interested to know if Mr. Brown has anything to play the films on back home, since U.S.-format DVDs don’t work in United Kingdom DVD players.

It could be worse. The president might have given him the DVD of He’s Just Not That Into You. Gordon Brown landed back in London a sadder but wiser man. The Fleet Street correspondents reported sneeringly that he (and they) had been denied the usual twin-podia alternating-flags press conference. The Obama administration had supposedly penciled one in for the Rose Garden, but then there was that catastrophic snowfall (a light dusting). This must be the first world leaders’ press conference to be devastated by climate change. No doubt President Obama could have relocated it to a prestigious indoor venue, like the windowless room round the back of the White House furnace in Sub-Basement Level 5. But why bother? Some freak flood would have swept through and washed the prime minister and his DVD set into the Potomac and out to the Atlantic. And by the time the Coast Guard fished him out, the sodden classic movies wouldn’t work in any American DVD player any better than in the Brit one.

snip here....

I would make a modest prediction that in 2012, after four years of the man who was supposed to heal America’s relations with a world sick of all that swaggering cowboy unilateralism, those relations will be much worse. From Canada to India, the implications of the Obama ascendancy are becoming painfully clear. The other week Der Spiegel ran a piece called “Why Obamania Isn’t the Answer,” which might more usefully have been published before the Obamessiah held his big Berlin rally. Written by some bigshot with the German Council on Foreign Relations and illustrated by the old four-color hopey-changey posters all scratched up and worn out, the essay conceded that Europe had embraced Obama as a “European American.” Very true. The president is the most European American ever to sit in the Oval Office. And, because of that, he doesn’t need any actual European Europeans getting in the way — just as, at his big victory-night rally in Chicago, the first megastar president didn’t need any megastar megastars from Hollywood clogging up the joint: Movie stars who wanted to fly in were told by his minders that he didn’t want any other celebrities deflecting attention from him. Same with world leaders. If it’s any consolation to Gordon Brown, he’s just not that into any of you.

snip here....

And that was before Obama made clear that for him the economy takes a very distant back seat to the massive expansion of government for which it provides cover. That’s why he’s indifferent to the plummeting Dow. The president has made a strategic calculation that, to advance his plans for socialized health care, “green energy,” and a big-government state, it’s to his advantage for things to get worse. And, if things go from bad to worse in America, overseas they’ll go from worse to total societal collapse. We’ve already seen changes of government in Iceland and Latvia, rioting in Greece and Bulgaria. The great destabilization is starting on the fringes of Europe and working its way to the Continent’s center.

We’re seeing not just the first contraction in the global economy since 1945, but also the first crisis of globalization. This was the system America and the other leading economies encouraged everybody else to grab a piece of. But whatever piece you grabbed — exports in Taiwan, services in Ireland, construction in Spain, oligarchic industrial-scale kleptomania in Russia — it’s all crumbling. Ireland and Italy are nation-state versions of Bank of America and General Motors. In Eastern Europe, the countries way out on the end of the globalization chain can’t take a lot of heat without widespread unrest. And the fellows who’ll be picking up the tab are the Western European banks who loaned them all the money. Gordon Brown was hoping for a little more than: “I feel your pain. And have you ever seen The Wizard of Oz? It’s about this sweet little nobody who gets to pay a brief visit to the glittering Emerald City before being swept back to the reassuring familiarity of the poor thing’s broken-down windswept economically devastated monochrome dustbowl. You’ll love it!”

“Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn”? Oh, perish the thought. The prime minister flew 8,000 miles for dinner and a movie. But the president says he’ll call. Next week. Next month. Whatever.

For entire article, please go here
Also, I highly recommend Mark Steyn's Book America Alone, which you can buy here

And A Small Child Shall Lead Them

The New York Slimes actually ran an article about Jonathan, which really surprised me. I am not fan of that news rag, nor is any conservative. I posted his CPAC speech on my blog at the time. He is really something else, this little powerhouse. Here's part of the article:

The Little Mr. Conservative
By JAN HOFFMAN
Duluth, Ga.

SITTING in the back seat of his mother’s van as she drives through Atlanta suburbs, Jonathan Krohn is about to sign off with a conservative radio talk show host in Florida. In the 40 minutes he’s been on the air, with the help of his mother’s cellphone, this hyper-articulate Georgia eighth grader has attacked the stimulus bill, identified leaders he thinks will salvage the Republican Party’s image, and assessed the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s birth certificate.

The show’s host chuckles and asks whether President Obama has called Jonathan “a little fascist.”

“The president hasn’t come after me yet,” Jonathan says chummily, “but we’ve had other people come after me!”

“Jonathan!” his mother hisses from the driver’s seat.

The interview concluded, Jonathan wistfully handed his mother her cellphone. His parents still won’t let him have one, even though he turned 14 last Sunday, right after he became an instant news media darling and the conservative movement’s underage graybeard at last weekend’s Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington.

The annual convention brings in the movement’s grand old lions, like Rush Limbaugh, as well as cubs to rally 8,500 of the faithful, who were shaken by the election of Barack Obama. Jonathan, a slight, home-schooled only child whose teeth are in braces, is so passionate about his beliefs that he spent his summer writing “Define Conservatism,” an 86-page book outlining what he says are its core values. In January, he contacted CPAC organizers, asking to speak there.

With some skepticism, they gave him a spot on a Friday panel of grassroots activists. But Jonathan, an experienced child actor, rocked the house with a three-minute speech, which was remarkable not so much for what he said, but his electrifying delivery. The speech was part pep talk, part book promotion. By Saturday morning, an archdeacon of the movement was saying, “I’m Bill Bennett: I used to work for Ronald Reagan and now I’m a colleague of Jonathan Krohn’s!”

As video of the speech coursed through the Internet, radio talk show hosts and television reporters at the conference sought him eagerly.

In less than a week, Jonathan appeared on “Fox and Friends” and CNN, and broadcast network anchors requested interviews. He has lost count of the number of radio shows he has spoken on. Though his family has received hate mail, accusing them of brainwashing their son, a Jonathan Krohn fan club has sprung up on Facebook. High honors: Jon Stewart has already poked fun at him.

And the invitations have only snowballed since the family returned to their modest house in a subdivision here.

Why just that morning, his mother, Marla Krohn, marveled, a staff member for a potential candidate for Georgia governor asked for a meeting with Jonathan. In her gentle drawl, Mrs. Krohn said cautiously, “I’m not sure I’m a supporter of his.”

“Neither am I,” Jonathan piped in.

“But I’m a voter,” Mrs. Krohn reminded him firmly.

Jonathan retorted, “Now that I’m a political pundit, I have the ability to influence people. I have to think about it!”

But first, his mother reminded him, he had some homework to finish.

He’s an unusual kid with an unusual background. Jonathan’s parents, Doug, a computer systems integrator, and Marla, a sales representative and former actress who teaches drama and speech to middle-school students, have been home-schooling their bright, curious son since the sixth grade. On Fridays, Jonathan joins 10 middle-school students at the Classical School in Woodstock, where classes are taught from a Christian perspective, for five hours of study, including Latin. They have two 10-minute recesses for tag, said Jonathan’s teacher, Stephen P. Gilchrist. Lunch is eaten at their desks while they work.

“Other children his age are not quite sure how to take him,” Mr. Gilchrist said. “Jonathan is so intense, so verbal and a strong personality. But as they get to know him, they respect him for what he is. And he is tons of fun.”

Jonathan’s father oversees his math; he studies Arabic with a tutor.

“Before I got into politics,” Jonathan said as he sat with his parents in the study of their home, “I wanted to be a missionary to people in the Middle East. I thought it would be better to speak with them in their own language.” The family are active members of Peachtree Corners Baptist Church in Norcross, Ga.

That was several careers ago. But he is sticking with Arabic, because, “it’s important to talk with our allies in their language.”

Although the Krohns are conservative, they say Jonathan’s passion for politics is largely his. “Politics bore me,” his mother said flatly. “I’ve learned a lot from Jonathan about the candidates I’ve voted for.” Doug Krohn said he listened to talk radio, but with his Iowa-born soft-sell manner, he’s hardly the pontificating firebrand his son is.

Jonathan said he became a political enthusiast at 8, after hearing about a Democratic filibuster on judicial nominations. “I thought, ‘Who goes to work saying, ‘I’m going to filibuster today?’ ” he said.

Mr. Krohn, looking bleary-eyed by recent events, muttered, “And now he can filibuster with the best of them.”

Jonathan would wake up at 6 a.m. to listen to Bill Bennett’s “Morning in America” show and became riveted by politics and American history. Soon, Mr. Bennett, whom Jonathan now describes as, “my mentor and very good friend,” was taking Jonathan’s calls.

“Jonathan was an extraordinary boy, very special,” Mr. Bennett said, in a phone interview. “He wowed my audience, he wowed me. He’s very engaging and learned. He’s got staying power.”

Last spring, as the presidential campaign was in full roar, Jonathan decided the term conservatism was so misused that he needed to write a book explaining it. He received a computer from his maternal grandfather for his 13th birthday. “In the Jewish culture in which my mom was raised, 13 is a big deal,” he said. “But since I’m a Jewish Christian, I don’t do a bar mitzvah.” (Decades ago, his mother became a Baptist.)

Although the family said they hired an editor to go over grammar, Jonathan, they said, wrote the book himself. “My mom would get tough,” Jonathan said. “She’d say, ‘If you don’t stop writing now and go outside and get some exercise, I won’t let you finish this book!’ ”

See the rest of the article here

Lou Dobbs on the Shamnesty Bill

DISCLAIMER: NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR BRAIN ANEURYSMS, HEART ATTACKS, STROKES, OR OTHER LETHAL ILLNESSES WHILE WATCHING THIS VIDEO. I'M JUST SAYIN'.

Obama and the Teleprompter

Your Mortage is Not My Problem and Whoopi Goes on Rant About Taxes

Get over it, Whoopie. You voted for him and sung his praises. SHOCKER! You are going to get hit with higher taxes, after all you did for him! Call the WAHHHHHBULANCE!

A New Low in Diplomacy

I don't know about most of my friends and family. Well, actually I do. Other than one or two, none of them seem at all bothered by anything that is going on right now. We all have our own personal crises to deal with, after all. It's too darn bad because something very wicked this way comes, to coin a phrase from Ray Bradbury. And it's moving faster all the time. I don't feel I am at all simplifying by saying it will be the end of life as some of us know it. I was reading an article today on a website chastising Obama for insulting the British Prime Minister and his family when they were here with cheap gifts and no fanfare. I wasn't surprised that it happened, but I was surprised at the responses. Among the well thought out gifts the British Prime Minister gave the Obamas were dresses from Top Shop, a British line of clothing opening in the U.S. They are not cheap clothing. I went on line and saw that their average frocks run starting at about $50.00 plus and go up into the hundreds of dollars. This is how people respond to criticism of the Obamas in "any way."

If you don’t like it, you can always return to the U.K. and blog from there…

Sandra, Top shop is like Target (I love top shop cotton panties) and how many books did they get that cost “hundred” of pounds?

Uh, no, it is not like Target but nice try dimbulb.

Sorry Sandra, I am laughing at this. I can only think this is a humor post because we are allowed to comment on it.

When people give you a gift, you don’t have to ‘match” what they give you, do you? Gifts are gifts. Maybe Michelle felt like the book and a helicopter was appropriate for the too boys that probably have every everything they want.

Obama is president now, and just like any other president, he can like who he want, and do what he want in “his” white house.

Can you send a link to the other british blogs. Maybe I need to read them to understand the sincerity of this, because it just seem funny to me. I am like picturing it in my head.

Good day, Everybody! It’s going to be 70 degrees in Greensboro, and I’m barbecuing!!!

March 5th, 2009 at 2:18

You can't make this up folks. You just can't.

This post was hilarious. Thanks to all the posters who revealed how inexpensive the dresses probably were.

Who cares how much the items cost? The gifts were given as a gesture. Surely, you and your Brit friends can find something else to be up in arms about.

The gift that keeps on giving...stupidity.

And my favorite:

President Obama and his wife, don’t have to kiss the Brit’s behind. I wouldn’t want nothing from your country. I have been there and it was no big deal. Look at you, you can’t keep your nose out of the Obama’s business, that says it all. You Brit’s are just to dull!

One thing for sure, you will never see any black PM’s in your{England} country, and who wants to meet the slumball who dump his wife to marry a bimbo?

The UK Telegraph reports this:

Barack Obama 'too tired' to give proper welcome to Gordon Brown
Barack Obama's offhand approach to Gordon Brown's Washington visit last week came about because the president was facing exhaustion over America's economic crisis and is unable to focus on foreign affairs, the Sunday Telegraph has been told.

By Tim Shipman in Washington
Last Updated: 10:03PM GMT 07 Mar 2009

President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown walk down the Colonnade of the White House in Washington, Photo: AP
Sources close to the White House say Mr Obama and his staff have been "overwhelmed" by the economic meltdown and have voiced concerns that the new president is not getting enough rest.

British officials, meanwhile, admit that the White House and US State Department staff were utterly bemused by complaints that the Prime Minister should have been granted full-blown press conference and a formal dinner, as has been customary. They concede that Obama aides seemed unfamiliar with the expectations that surround a major visit by a British prime minister.

But Washington figures with access to Mr Obama's inner circle explained the slight by saying that those high up in the administration have had little time to deal with international matters, let alone the diplomatic niceties of the special relationship.

Allies of Mr Obama say his weary appearance in the Oval Office with Mr Brown illustrates the strain he is now under, and the president's surprise at the sheer volume of business that crosses his desk.

A well-connected Washington figure, who is close to members of Mr Obama's inner circle, expressed concern that Mr Obama had failed so far to "even fake an interest in foreign policy".
A British official conceded that the furore surrounding the apparent snub to Mr Brown had come as a shock to the White House. "I think it's right to say that their focus is elsewhere, on domestic affairs. A number of our US interlocutors said they couldn't quite understand the British concerns and didn't get what that was all about."

The American source said: "Obama is overwhelmed. There is a zero sum tension between his ability to attend to the economic issues and his ability to be a proactive sculptor of the national security agenda.

"That was the gamble these guys made at the front end of this presidency and I think they're finding it a hard thing to do everything."

British diplomats insist the visit was a success, with officials getting the chance to develop closer links with Mr Obama's aides. They point out that the president has agreed to meet the prime minister for further one-to-one talks in London later this month, ahead of the G20 summit on April 2.

But they concede that the mood music of the event was at times strained. Mr Brown handed over carefully selected gifts, including a pen holder made from the wood of a warship that helped stamp out the slave trade - a sister ship of the vessel from which timbers were taken to build Mr Obama's Oval Office desk. Mr Obama's gift in return, a collection of Hollywood film DVDs that could have been bought from any high street store, looked like the kind of thing the White House might hand out to the visiting head of a minor African state.

Mr Obama rang Mr Brown as he flew home, in what many suspected was an attempt to make amends.

The real views of many in Obama administration were laid bare by a State Department official involved in planning the Brown visit, who reacted with fury when questioned by The Sunday Telegraph about why the event was so low-key.

The official dismissed any notion of the special relationship, saying: "There's nothing special about Britain. You're just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn't expect special treatment." The apparent lack of attention to detail by the Obama administration is indicative of what many believe to be Mr Obama's determination to do too much too quickly.

In addition to passing the largest stimulus package and the largest budget in US history, Mr Obama is battling a plummeting stock market, the possible bankruptcy of General Motors, and rising unemployment. He has also begun historic efforts to achieve universal healthcare, overhaul education and begin a green energy revolution all in his first 50 days in office.

The Sunday Telegraph understands that one of Mr Obama's most prominent African American backers, whose endorsement he spent two years cultivating, has told friends that he detects a weakness in Mr Obama's character.

"The one real serious flaw I see in Barack Obama is that he thinks he can manage all this," the well-known figure told a Washington official, who spoke to this newspaper. "He's underestimating the flood of things that will hit his desk." A Democratic strategist, who is friends with several senior White House aides, revealed that the president has regularly appeared worn out and drawn during evening work sessions with senior staff in the West Wing and has been forced to make decisions more quickly than he is comfortable.

He said that on several occasions the president has had to hurry back from eating dinner with his family in the residence and then tucking his daughters in to bed, to conduct urgent government business. Matters are not helped by the pledge to give up smoking.

Read the rest of the article here

Rick Santelli on Mortgage Crisis

He needs his own show!

Health Care at a Sickening Cost

From the Patriot Post

Health care at a sickening cost
Back in the Great Society era, Social Security was expanded to include Medicare. When the program was introduced, Americans were assured that it would not become a costly drain on the federal budget. But almost every year for the past 40, the cost of Medicare has increased at a faster rate than the cost of private insurance. The federal government now is responsible for 47 percent of all health care costs.

Despite Barack Obama's protestations to the contrary, the $634 billion promised to pay for his ambitious health care plan won't cover its estimated $1 trillion cost over the next decade. And as we have seen before with both Medicare and Medicaid, projected revenues and cost savings are viewed by federal bean counters with the rosiest-tinted glasses available.

Most troubling are the looming tax increases on the owners of small businesses. They will soon bear the brunt of Obama's plan to reduce charitable deductions for wealthier taxpayers. In theory, these increases will cover about half the planned cost, but because taxpayers tend to do their best to avoid paying full freight, it's assured that either the deduction rules will need to be tightened still further or (more likely) the income thresholds for qualification lowered. It seems the private-sector health care condition in this nation may soon be downgraded to critical and unstable.

In related news, Obama selected Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius to head the Department of Health and Human Services after his first choice, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, was forced to withdraw when he was found to be a tax cheat. In 2007, Sebelius called on Kansas lawmakers to "commit themselves to universal [health] coverage." She is also vociferously pro-abortion and vetoed several bills that would have imposed modest restrictions on the practice. HHS boasts a $700 billion budget and Sebelius would have significant influence on abortion policy.

One policy up for review is George W. Bush's conscience-based protections for physicians who refuse to perform certain procedures, including abortion, for moral reasons. Unfortunately, "review" could mean "revocation."

"Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed ... or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment." --Ronald Reagan

"Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor's fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last." --Ronald Reagan

Pay Your Own Damn Mortgage

I want this bumper sticker.

I'M TIRED

I have a letter written by someone else to share, but first let me add to his thoughts. I'm tired, too, you see. I am nearly 61 and I have worked since I was 14 years old. My social security statement shows my first earnings in 1962. During my junior and senior year in high school, I held down a full-time job in a nursing home from 11 at night to 7 in the morning, when I would rush home, take a quick shower, and go to school from 8 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. Then there was basketball practice and drama practice and chores at home. I would be lucky each night to get 2 hours of sleep. But I did it. For 50 cents an hour I did it. I paid for my clothes, my junior class ring, and my senior pictures. My entire life work ethic never changed. I never got anything for nothing and never expected to. After my divorce, I supported my two girls by myself, no child support, sometimes working two and three jobs. When I decided to go to nursing school, I was in school all day, came home and fed my kids, put them to bed, did my homework and once again worked 11 at night to 7 in the morning in a nursing home. I had no car and had to walk or take a cab wherever I went. I did, as Blanche said in Streetcar Named Desire, rely occasionally on the kindness of strangers for a ride, but I paid my bills and fed my kids and I never took any help. Now they tell me they are going to cut Medicare benefits. Here I am not too far from retirement. They have already changed the age for retirement several times. I hope I make it but mostly I hope I really CAN retire and take a much needed break after over 50 years of working. I sure am tired.

This article came to me via Atlas Shrugged who got it from Old Jarhead. I am sure lots of people can relate to this.

I’ll be 63 soon. Except for one semester in college when jobs were scarce, and a six-month period when I was between jobs, but job-hunting every day, I’ve worked, hard, since I was 18. Despite some health challenges, I still put in 50-hour weeks, and haven’t called in sick in seven or eight years. I make a good salary, but I didn’t inherit my job or my income, and I worked to get where I am. Given the economy, there’s no retirement in sight, and I’m tired. Very tired.

I’m tired of being told that I have to “spread the wealth around” to people who don’t have my work ethic. I’m tired of being told the government will take the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy or stupid to earn it.

I’m tired of being told that I have to pay more taxes to “keep people in their homes.” Sure, if they lost their jobs or got sick, I’m willing to help. But if they bought McMansions at three times the price of our paid-off, $250,000 condo, on one-third of my salary, then let the leftwing Congresscritters who passed Fannie and Freddie and the Community Reinvestment Act that created the bubble help them—with their own money.

I’m tired of being told how bad America is by leftwing millionaires like Michael Moore, George Soros and Hollywood entertainers who live in luxury because of the opportunities America offers. In thirty years, if they get their way, the United States will have the religious freedom and women’s rights of Saudi Arabia, the economy of Zimbabwe, the freedom of the press of China, the crime and violence of Mexico, the tolerance for Gay people of Iran, and the freedom of speech of Venezuela. Won’t multiculturalism be beautiful?

I’m tired of being told that Islam is a “Religion of Peace,” when every day I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men killing their sisters, wives and daughters for their family “honor;” of Muslims rioting over some slight offense; of Muslims murdering Christian and Jews because they aren’t “believers;” of Muslims burning schools for girls; of Muslims stoning teenage rape victims to death for “adultery;” of Muslims mutilating the genitals of little girls; all in the name of Allah, because the Qur’an and Shari’a law tells them to.

I believe “a man should be judged by the content of his character, not by the color of his skin.” I’m tired of being told that “race doesn’t matter” in the post-racial world of President Obama, when it’s all that matters in affirmative action jobs, lower college admission and graduation standards for minorities (harming them the most), government contract set-asides, tolerance for the ghetto culture of violence and fatherless children that hurts minorities more than anyone, and in the appointment of US Senators from Illinois. I think it’s very cool that we have a black president and that a black child is doing her homework at the desk where Lincoln wrote the emancipation proclamation. I just wish the black president was Condi Rice, or someone who believes more in freedom and the individual and less in an all-knowing government.

I’m tired of a news media that thinks Bush’s fundraising and inaugural expenses were obscene, but that think Obama’s, at triple the cost, were wonderful. That thinks Bush exercising daily was a waste of presidential time, but Obama exercising is a great example for the public to control weight and stress, that picked over every line of Bush’s military records, but never demanded that Kerry release his, that slammed Palin with two years as governor for being too inexperienced for VP, but touted Obama with three years as senator as potentially the best president ever.

Wonder why people are dropping their subscriptions or switching to Fox News? Get a clue. I didn’t vote for Bush in 2000, but the media and Kerry drove me to his camp in 2004.

I’m tired of being told that out of “tolerance for other cultures” we must let Saudi Arabia use our oil money to fund mosques and madrassa Islamic schools to preach hate in America, while no American group is allowed to fund a church, synagogue or religious school in Saudi Arabia to teach love and tolerance.

I’m tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight global warming, which no one is allowed to debate. My wife and I live in a two-bedroom apartment and carpool together five miles to our jobs. We also own a three-bedroom condo where our daughter and granddaughter live. Our carbon footprint is about 5% of Al Gore’s, and if you’re greener than Gore, you’re green enough.

I’m tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do. Did a giant germ rush out of a dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up their noses while they tried to fight it off? I don’t think Gay people choose to be Gay, but I damn sure think druggies chose to take drugs. And I’m tired of harassment from cool people treating me like a freak when I tell them I never tried marijuana.

I’m tired of illegal aliens being called “undocumented workers,” especially the ones who aren’t working, but are living on welfare or crime. What’s next? Calling drug dealers, “Undocumented Pharmacists”? And, no, I’m not against Hispanics. Most of them are Catholic and it’s been a few hundred years since Catholics wanted to kill me for my religion. I’m willing to fast track for citizenship any Hispanic person who can speak English, doesn’t have a criminal record and who is self-supporting without family on welfare, or who serves honorably for three years in our military. Those are the citizens we need.

I’m tired of latte liberals and journalists, who would never wear the uniform of the Republic themselves, or let their entitlement-handicapped kids near a recruiting station, trashing our military. They and their kids can sit at home, never having to make split-second decisions under life and death circumstances, and bad mouth better people then themselves. Do bad things happen in war? You bet. Do our troops sometimes misbehave? Sure. Does this compare with the atrocities that were the policy of our enemies for the last fifty years—and still are? Not even close. So here’s the deal. I’ll let myself be subjected to all the humiliation and abuse that was heaped on terrorists at Abu Ghraib or Gitmo, and the critics can let themselves be subject to captivity by the Muslims who tortured and beheaded Daniel Pearl in Pakistan, or the Muslims who tortured and murdered Marine Lt. Col. William Higgins in Lebanon, or the Muslims who ran the blood-spattered Al Qaeda torture rooms our troops found in Iraq, or the Muslims who cut off the heads of schoolgirls in Indonesia, because the girls were Christian. Then we’ll compare notes. British and American soldiers are the only troops in history that civilians came to for help and handouts, instead of hiding from in fear.

I’m tired of people telling me that their party has a corner on virtue and the other party has a corner on corruption. Read the papers—bums are bi-partisan. And I’m tired of people telling me we need bi-partisanship. I live in Illinois, where the “Illinois Combine” of Democrats and Republicans has worked together harmoniously to loot the public for years. And I notice that the tax cheats in Obama’s cabinet are bi-partisan as well.

I’m tired of hearing wealthy athletes, entertainers and politicians of both parties talking about innocent mistakes, stupid mistakes or youthful mistakes, when we all know they think their only mistake was getting caught. I’m tired of people with a sense of entitlement, rich or poor.

Speaking of poor, I’m tired of hearing people with air-conditioned homes, color TVs and two cars called poor. The majority of Americans didn’t have that in 1970, but we didn’t know we were “poor.” The poverty pimps have to keep changing the definition of poor to keep the dollars flowing.

I’m real tired of people who don’t take responsibility for their lives and actions. I’m tired of hearing them blame the government, or discrimination, or big-whatever for their problems.

Yes, I’m damn tired. But I’m also glad to be 63. Because, mostly, I’m not going to get to see the world these people are making. I’m just sorry for my granddaughter.

Robert A. Hall is a Marine Vietnam veteran who served five terms in the Massachusetts state senate. He blogs at www.tartanmarine.blogspot.com

FRIDAY NIGHT RUSH

GOD BLESS RUSH!

What 9000 plus earmarks look like

QUOTE OF THE WEEK (H/T MICHAEL SOLOMON)

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." He went on to say: "I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democrat Party has adopted our platform."
- Norman Thomas,

Socialist Party candidate for President of the US, during a speech in 1944

Trickle Down Povery - Michael Solomon

Michael Solomon's Op-Ed this week is great. He writes:

It's all Former President George W. Bush's fault that there are close to 9000 "Earmarks" in the new Omnibus bill passed last week by the Democratically controlled 111th Congress.

That is pretty much how it was spelled out last Sunday (March 1, 2009) on "This Week", with George Stephanopoulos by OMB Director Peter Orszag. "This is last year's business. We want to just move on. Let's get this bill done, get it into law and move forward," Orszag said. This should have been Last year's business?

Who controlled congress last year? If it was last year's business then the Democratic Congress didn't do its job last year. Only Congress can spend money. With the Congressional approval rating at an all time low of nine-percent (9%), is it a wonder that they didn't want to put all those earmarks in place. How low can you go? However, being in re-election mode, why antagonize the voters.

Are they saying that they didn't want to purpose spending legislation because they knew that President Bush would not sign it after all the criticism he was receiving for the runaway spending of the previous Congress?

In my belief, here is what the Pelosi Congress and Reid Senate did, they waited for a friendly signature to ink the pork and earmarks, and, they got it in President Obama. Now that he is giving them what they want, he has to spin it anyway he can. So Orszag is making the talk show circuit and blaming George W. Bush. If they could find a way, they would probably blame him for the Stock Market Crash of 1929. "Last year's business," wasn't Obama in the Senate last year? Why didn't he do last year's business then? It appears last year's business is fast becoming this year's fiasco.

Let us examine some of what earmarks are in this bill; earmarks that the President promised would never leave his office signed. "I will go over every bill line by line and eliminate any earmarks and pork that comes across my desk." Do those words sound familiar? He only repeated them over ten times during his campaign. I imagine that if no one in Congress read the bill why should the president.

One of the provisions in the new bill will eliminate school vouchers in the D.C. area. Disadvantaged families who are trying pull themselves up by the bootstraps and give their children a better education now have to re-enroll them in public schools that have shown to be a failure.

Is the money the government is saving on school vouchers part of the $20 million to study the swamp mouse in California? Maybe it is part of the $200,000 to remove tattoos from gang members in Los Angeles? How about the millions to study pig manure?

My question is simple, how many jobs are being created by the "Porkalucious" bill?

I have a plan to help eliminate some of the earmarks. For example there was $4.5 million to renovate a habitat for two Polar Bears in the Philadelphia Zoo. My suggestion is, put them in a refrigerator truck and ship them back to the arctic. How many children who go to bed hungry every night can we feed with $4.5 million?

But, the President wants to push through as much spending as he can. He wants the top two-percent of the wage earners to pay for it all by increasing their taxes. We have all heard of "Trickle Down Economics." This will become "Trickle Down Poverty." When the top wage earners, who for the most part are small business owners, are taxed out of existence, who will create the new jobs.

In comparing the Johnson administration to the current administration, Dick Morris stated it this way, "President Lyndon Johnson's administration was known for his War on Poverty. President Obama's will become notable for his War on Prosperity."

Actually there may be one job that has been created. There is a few million dollars in the bill to study and classify human foot odor. The Obama administration may be looking for a foot-sniffer. Anyone interested?

Please visit his blog here

Be sure and read Michael's Book WHERE DID MY AMERICA GO

OBAMA ABORTS AMERICA'S CONSCIENCE

FROM THE CHRISTIAN NEWSWIRE

WASHINGTON, Mar. 6 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Obama administration published its official request to rescind the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services regulation that clarifies that healthcare professionals have a right to conscience and should not be forced to participate in aborting a baby, or other medical services, that offend their moral convictions.

"President Obama is working to deprive the country of medical professionals who use their consciences when treating their patients," said Heartbeat International President Peggy Hartshorn, Ph.D. "Women, babies, and families deserve conscientious healthcare by doctors who believe in the sanctity of human life. It is wrong for the U.S. government to condemn doctors who follow the Hippocratic principle of 'do no harm'. This is un- American."

"The reversal of this regulation could cause conscientious doctors to stop practicing medicine leaving a significant void in the availability of healthcare providers. And the problem will be compounded if the government attempts to force Catholic hospitals to offer abortion." said Hartshorn. "Please email HHS to stop Obama's first attempt to purge healthcare of all people with religious or moral objections to taking human life."

The official publication in the Federal Register indicates: "The [HHS] Department is proposing to rescind in its entirety the final rule entitled 'Ensuring That Department of Health and Human Services Funds Do Not Support Coercive or Discriminatory Policies or Practices in Violation of Federal Law,' published in the Federal Register on December 19, 2008."

Go to Heartbeat International for more information.

I would like to add, when I was in nursing school in 1976, we were told that we did not have to participate in any procedure that was against our ethical or moral standards. I never thought I would see the day that would change. This is an abomination and I cannot see how prolife healthcare givers and hospitals can continue under these guidelines. Monstrous.

RAMIREZ ON THE STIMULUS PACKAGE AND EARMARKS

O'Reilly on George Tiller

In this video, one of Tiller's patients discusses her abortion process.



TWO YEARS AGO O'Reilly is discussing George Tiller and his connection to Kathleen Seblieus, including her support of him despite legislation which was attempted to be passed. Monsters.



In this last clip, Sebelius seems reluctant to discuss Tiller, except to say he is a health care provider....yes, and one who has contributed a lot of money to her. But relax folks, she's going to be running, if Obama has his way, our nationwide healthcare. I know that makes me feel just fine. In a creepy, sadistic, horrible kind of way. Of course, most of America is sleeping through this. Those who are not in the throes of Obamagasm might know, but it's hard to believe there are that many Americans who believe in abortion at all, let alone late term abortion and what about the born alive debate, those babies born alive from abortion. Obama says to put them in a dirty linen closet and let them die. I am not making this up. From what I have seen of Sebelius, it appears that would be fine with her, too.