People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Friday, January 30, 2009

Another One Bites The Dust

Don't expect the Fred Whitaker Company to help pay for that middle class health care/welfare program your United States Senators passed yesterday (see below). The company is folding:
Textile dyeing company is closing
By Sarah Bruyn Jones, Roanoke Times

Fred Whitaker Co. will shut its doors on March 31, laying off all of its 136 employees.

Executives of the Roanoke industrial textile dye company made the announcement Wednesday, telling employees that the business was no longer viable.

"We've struggled really hard the last two years with losing money and trying to recover," said Becky Reynolds, director of human resources. "Everybody is looking for a cheaper source. We've had such a decline in orders that we just hit that point."

The fierce local, national and international competition facing the textile industry coupled with the recession ultimately led to dwindling orders and the decision to close, Reynolds said. [link]
Another 136 people go onto the government unemployment line. Expect Webb and Warner to shed the expected tears. And to continue their efforts to worsen the problem.

May God have mercy.

Lies, Damn Lies and ...

... Washington Post editorials.

Here's how a blindly liberal newspaper explains the need to "close" that mythical "gun show loophole" (in "Guns in Virginia"):
The Virginia Senate has an unprecedented opportunity today to begin to reverse the state's abysmal record on gun regulation.

Licensed gun dealers in Virginia are required to conduct background checks on buyers, including those to whom they sell at gun shows. Yet, according to the Virginia State Police, up to 35 percent of vendors at the scores of gun shows throughout the state are unlicensed and thus are under no obligation to perform the checks.
Are they naive, stupid, or just plain wicked? You decide.

FACT: Vendors who sell guns at gun shows ARE required to be licensed and ARE required to go through the background check process when selling their wares.

FACT: As the Richmond Times-Dispatch pointed out recently, that "35% of vendors" who don't submit background check information to the authorities involves people and businesses who don't sell guns. A quote is instructive:

"Gun-control advocates often muddy the issue by referring to “unlicensed dealers” at gun shows, of which there are indeed many. They sell holsters, flashlights, hunting knives, T-shirts, books, gun safes — even jewelry. But an unlicensed dealer who sold guns as a business would invite felony charges under federal law."

This alone should shame these snakes.

FACT: The only gun transactions that take place at gun shows in which there are no background checks conducted involve the transfer of one or more weapons from one private citizen - not a vendor - to another.

Anyone who's ever actually been to a gun show will tell you - it is common for individuals to bring their firearms to a gun show and try to sell them on the side. It's true that there is no background check involved. But it's also true that those individuals could market their guns through the local newspaper, or at a flea market, or through a yard sale. No background check is required there either. Yet.

FACT: As the Times-Dispatch points out:
Individuals selling guns from their own private collection do not have to fill out background check forms. (And if they did, they'd simply turn to newspaper advertising or their front yard.)

FACT: The goons at the Washington Post know all this and yet they continue to foist their lies on a gullible reading public. They know no shame.

FACT: We will continue to demand and defend our Constitutional rights in spite of the efforts of elitists to deny us. To subjugate us.

Want my guns? Quit this silly "gun show loophole" idiocy and come and get 'em, big boy.

Hear. Hear.

Charles Krauthammer is on a tear this morning. A snippet from "Outreach, Yes. Apology, No.":

"My job," says Obama, "is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives." That's his job? Do the American people think otherwise? Does he think he is bravely breaking new ground? George Bush, Condoleezza Rice and countless other leaders offered myriad expressions of that same universalist sentiment.

Every president has the right to portray himself as ushering in a new era of this or that. Obama wants to pursue new ties with Muslim nations, drawing on his own identity and associations. Good. But when his self-inflation as redeemer of U.S.-Muslim relations leads him to suggest that pre-Obama America was disrespectful or insensitive or uncaring of Muslims, he is engaging not just in fiction but in gratuitous disparagement of the country he is now privileged to lead.

We're going back to the days when our foreign policy consisted of little more than Clinton extending apologies to terrorist countries after their henchmen slaughtered American men, women, and children in cold blood.

Swell. Just swell.

A Troubling Horizon

Remember who it is that has been buying up all that U.S. debt in recent years. When they - the Chinese, Japanese, and Saudis - lose faith in their investments, well, we ain't seen problems like we'll see problems.

As one might imagine, that faith is being shaken by our new president and his gang of suicide merchants in Congress:
Global Worries Over U.S. Stimulus Spending
By Nelson D. Schwartz, The New York Times

Davos, Switzerland — Even as Congress looks for ways to expand President Obama’s $819 billion stimulus package, the rest of the world is wondering how Washington will pay for it all.

Few people attending the World Economic Forum question the need to kick-start America’s economy, the world’s largest, with a package that could reach $1 trillion over two years. [jf: because they don't care]. But the long-term fallout from increased borrowing by the United Stated government, and its potential to drive up inflation and interest rates around the world, seems to getting more attention here than in Washington.

While the dollar’s status as refuge in a time of turmoil should prevent that kind of sell-off for now, a number of financial specialists warned that if fundamental factors like the lack of American savings and bloated budget deficits did not change, the dollar could eventually fall sharply. [link]
And if that isn't enough to scare your socks off, there's the fact that Obama's stimulus plan - if adopted - will accelerate our doom:

“Even before Obama walked through the White House door, there were plans for $1 trillion of new debt,” said Niall Ferguson, a Harvard historian who has studied borrowing and its impact on national power. He now estimates that some $2.2 trillion in new government debt will be issued this year, assuming the stimulus plan is approved.

“You either crowd out other borrowers or you print money,” Mr. Ferguson added. “There is no way you can have $2.2 trillion in borrowing without influencing interest rates or inflation in the long-term.”

Mr. Ferguson was particularly struck by the new borrowing because the roots of the current crisis lay in an excess of American debt at all levels, from homeowners to Wall Street banks.

“This is a crisis of excessive debt, which reached 355 percent of American gross domestic product,” he said. “It cannot be solved with more debt.”
Foreign investors bailing on us. Our economy worsening because of massive federal debt and the inevitable tax increases that will be required to offset (some of) it.

May God help us.

A Sinking Ship

As the American people learn the details of Obama's monstrous "stimulus" plan ...

... their euphoria for the man becomes aversion to the plan:
Public Support for Economic Recovery Plan Slips to 42%
Rasmussen Reports

Public support for the economic recovery plan crafted by President Obama and congressional Democrats has slipped a bit over the past week.

Forty-two percent (42%) of the nation’s likely voters now support the president’s plan, roughly one-third of which is tax cuts with the rest new government spending. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 39% are opposed to it and 19% are undecided. Liberal voters overwhelmingly support the plan while conservatives are strongly opposed. [link]
That's 42% and falling. As the details continue to come out, expect that percentage to dwindle a whole lot further.

Congress Marches Toward Oblivion ...

... spending money we don't have on people who can easily pay their own way.

Remember that health care program that George Bush vetoed because it extended benefits (at your expense) to middle class and upper middle class families? It passed the Senate yesterday. On the day after the House passed that stimulus plan that spends a mountain of cash as well.

Cash we don't have:
Senators Approve Health Bill for Children
By Robert Pear, New York Times

Washington — The Senate passed a bill on Thursday to provide health insurance to more than four million uninsured children, as a newly empowered Democratic majority brushed aside Republican objections.

The vote was 66 to 32, with nine Republicans joining Democrats to support the bill.

One of the most significant sections of the child health bill would allow states to use federal money to cover children and pregnant women who are legal immigrants. Under existing law, legal immigrants are generally barred from Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program for five years after they enter the United States. [link]
So how did that friend of the working schmuck (the schmuck who'll have to scrape together the money to pay for this) James Webb and his partner in crime, Mark Warner vote? Need you ask?

Barack Obama (and John McCain) promised the American people free shit during the campaign. The American people voted in favor. So who am I to argue that a person living in Southwest Virginia making $42,000 a year paying for health coverage of a family in New Jersey with an annual income of $82,000 a year is madness?

Oh, and it won't just be Ernie the Canoe Livery Man paying for it. It'll be Volvo. And the Roanoke Times. And Goodyear. And Corning.

So I'll not make the argument. You wanted this. Prepare to reap the rewards.

Say It, Brutha


The article appears to be intended to bash Rush, but to me, it makes him out to be the hero in the fight for the soul of the Republican Party. Here's the lede to "House GOP member to Rush: Back off":
Rush Limbaugh may command a large following, but his caustic comments Monday about the GOP’s congressional leadership have at least one Republican House member defending his colleagues and offering an unusually candid critique of the talk radio powerhouse and his fellow commentators.

“I think that our leadership, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, are taking the right approach,” [Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga] said. “I mean, it’s easy if you’re Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks. You don’t have to try to do what’s best for your people and your party. You know you’re just on these talk shows and you’re living well and plus you stir up a bit of controversy and gin the base and that sort of that thing. But when it comes to true leadership, not that these people couldn’t be or wouldn’t be good leaders, they’re not in that position of John Boehner or Mitch McConnell."
But it's Rush's response to this jab that wins the day:
Asked to respond to Gingrey, Limbaugh, in an email to Politico, wrote: “I'm sure he is doing his best but it does not appear to be good enough. He may not have noticed that the number of Republican colleagues he has in the House has dwindled. And they will dwindle more if he and his friends don't show more leadership and effectiveness in battling the most left-wing agenda in modern history. And they won't continue to lose because of me, but because of their relationship with the grassroots, which is hurting. Conservatives want leadership from those who claim to represent them. And we'll know it when we see it.”
As Rush has pointed out before, he's not the one who led the Party to its current state of collapse. After all, he fought tooth and nail to keep John McCain from being nominated - and lost. Only to see the man he opposed get crushed in November. Beyond the "moderate" McCain though, it was Rush who, over the years, fought against the profligate spending of his fellow Republicans that ultimately demoralized and muted the base of the Party, and sent swing voters flocking to the Democrats.

And now, with the Democrat Congress poised to spend this country into oblivion, Rush pleads for someone from the opposition party - his Party - to stand up and oppose that which will do grievous harm.

I agree with Rush. As much as I admire Mitch McConnell, his near-silence over the last few weeks has been a great disappointment. This Gingrey character prefers a leader who is politic (i.e., marked by artful prudence, expedience, and shrewdness). And Congress, it can be argued, is the place for politics. But there comes a time when one's convictions, one's principles, should bring a leader of the opposition to say, "We're not going to take this lying down. We're not going to watch our country being destroyed."

The Republican Party has "gone along" with the Democrats when it came to spending initiatives ever since George W. Bush came to office. Anyone remember "No Child Left Behind"? The education bill that Ted Kennedy and President Bush put together? The House sponsor? John Boehner. It was all downhill from there.

Rush has found himself on the outside looking in for all these eight years. While trying his best to remain a loyal Republican, he's watched as his party has turned itself into the Democrat-lite party. And he's watched as it lost its majorities in 2006. He watched, as well, as it became a shell of its former self in 2008.

There are those who argue - including our new president - that the GOP would be foolish to listen to Rush Limbaugh. The reality of it is that the leadership thereof quit listening to him long ago. The results speak for themselves.

You go, Rush. You still speak for many, many of us. Perhaps someday we'll once again have a two-party system in this country.

- - -

Maybe the current leadership needs to move out of the way and allow new blood to take charge.

On Presidential Hypocrisy

Andrew Stuttaford:
'Climate change' moralists are always talking about the need to take responsibility/set an example in the face of the imminent planetary apocalypse. Imagine my surprise, therefore, when I read this:

"Washington — The capital flew into a bit of a tizzy when, on his first full day in the White House, President Obama was photographed in the Oval Office without his suit jacket. There was, however, a logical explanation: Mr. Obama, who hates the cold, had cranked up the thermostat. 'He’s from Hawaii, O.K.?' said Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, who occupies the small but strategically located office next door to his boss. 'He likes it warm. You could grow orchids in there.'"

Thermostat down, coat on, Mr. President: the planet's in peril (or so you tell us).
So what's hypocritical about that?

Mark Hemingway reminds us of an Obama quote from the recent campaign:

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times . . . and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK."

"We" meaning "everyone but me" apparently.



Nancy Pelosi explaining how hundreds of millions of dollars in our tax money being spent on sexually transmitted disease prevention will stimulate the economy:

"There is a, uh, uh, uh, I'm a big believer in prevention and we have a, uh, there is a part of the bill on the House side of it that is about prevention. It's about, uh, it being less expensive to the states to do these prevention measures."

Feel stimulated?

As Obama Prepares To Combat Global Warming ...

... the Earth cools.

The founder of the cable TV "Weather Channel", John Coleman, provides us with this:
The Amazing Story Behind the Global Warming Scam

The key players are now all in place in Washington and in state governments across America to officially label carbon dioxide as a pollutant and enact laws that tax we citizens for our carbon footprints. Only two details stand in the way, the faltering economic times and a dramatic turn toward a colder climate. The last two bitter winters have lead to a rise in public awareness that CO2 is not a pollutant and is not a significant greenhouse gas that is triggering runaway global warming.

Al Gore ... said the science behind global warming is settled and there will be no more debate, From 1992 until today, he and his cohorts have refused to debate global warming and when ask about we skeptics they simply insult us and call us names.

So today we have the acceptance of carbon dioxide as the culprit of global warming. It is concluded that when we burn fossil fuels we are leaving a dastardly carbon footprint which we must pay Al Gore or the environmentalists to offset. Our governments on all levels are considering taxing the use of fossil fuels. The Federal Environmental Protection Agency is on the verge of naming CO2 as a pollutant and strictly regulating its use to protect our climate. The new President and the US congress are on board. Many state governments are moving on the same course.

We are already suffering from this CO2 silliness in many ways. Our energy policy has been strictly hobbled by no drilling and no new refineries for decades. We pay for the shortage this has created every time we buy gas. On top of that the whole thing about corn based ethanol costs us millions of tax dollars in subsidies. That also has driven up food prices. And, all of this is a long way from over.

And, I am totally convinced there is no scientific basis for any of it.

Global Warming. It is the hoax. It is bad science. It is a hijacking of public policy. It is no joke. It is the greatest scam in history. [link]
The greatest scam in planetary history. And it's a long way from having run its course.

That All May Have The Chance ...

... to be president.

This clip is getting a lot of buzz:

Powerful stuff.