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

Monday, January 31, 2011

How Little They Know About Republicans

Read this, from this morning's Washington Post, and tell me which Republicans come to mind:
So this year Mr. Obama has endorsed two concepts more modest than cap-and-trade and built to appeal to Democrats and Republicans. The first is establishing a clean-energy standard expected to require that American utilities derive a certain amount of the electricity they provide from clean sources - the president mentioned 80 percent by 2035. Last year, Democrats opposed including nuclear energy or natural gas in that mix; Tuesday night, Mr. Obama included both.

If America is to have such a standard, this is the right call. It widens the appeal of the policy to Republicans, but it's also sensible, since nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases and natural gas produces about half the carbon emissions of coal. [emphasis mine]
Let's try to ignore the assumptions built into that statement that greenhouse gases are bad (they aren't) and "carbon emissions" (meaning CO2) are bad (they aren't), and focus on that "it widens the appeal of the policy to Republicans" ditty.

Does the Washington Post truly believe there is a Republican out there who would support a government mandate that 80% of our electricity must come from (mythical) "clean" sources?

Arlen Specter might have.  But he left.  For good. 

And that short, pudgy senator from South Carolina might.  But he's a nitwit.  And he'll be gone next time around as well.


There is not a Republican alive today who thinks it a good idea to foist another government obligation onto an already overburdened America.  None.

You folks at the Post really need to get out more.

While They Prove Themselves Incapable ...

... of protecting their own citizenry, from snow,

So much easier than getting overpaid union workers to get off their fat asses and plow the streets.  So they instead "investigate" private transactions between private individuals all the way across the country.

For the love of God.

Go Easy On Robert Redford

He hasn't been in a decent movie this entire century.  So if Mr. Environment has become a filthy money-grubbing land developer, so as to make a few bucks and pay off some bills, so be it.

I knew his environmentalist schtick was an ... act ... all along anyway.

It's OUR Big Tent Now

A helpful suggestion: You Nelson Rockefeller/George H.W. Bush acolytes in the Republican Party may find surroundings more to your liking over in the Democratic Party.  The times they are a'changin':

It's coming time to decide.  Hop on board the train that will take this country into a prosperous future, or nominate some "electable" fossil in 2012 and witness four more years of Obamanation.

- - -

* Me? I can see myself voting for certain Republicans in 2012. I can also see myself going third-party if others - in the mold of Bob Dole - are nominated.

Don't forget: I'm the guy who voted for Alan Keyes over George W. Bush in 2000.

Remember too: That short-term win - or loss - isn't everything. Moving the nation in the right direction is everything. We're in it for the long haul.

As Mao Tse-Tung once said, "We shall heal our wounds, collect our dead, and continue fighting." 

And there is much fighting yet to be done.

Those Who Can Do; Those Who Can't ...

... teach.

I was reminded of that idiom when I read this:
Low-key W&L law professor Judy Clarke takes on Tucson shooting suspect Jared Loughner's case
By Laurence Hammack, Roanoke Times

Most law students who sign up for Judy Clarke's classes at Washington and Lee University know she has defended some of America's most indefensible criminals:

Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber. Eric Rudolph, the Olympic Park bomber. Susan Smith, who drowned her two young sons in a South Carolina lake.

And now, Jared Loughner, 22, charged in the Tucson, Ariz., shooting that left six people dead and a congresswoman critically wounded.

But any aspiring lawyer expecting to hear war stories from the professor is quickly disappointed. [link]
Why might Ms. Clarke be reluctant to talk about those cases?

Ted Kaczynski, with her help, is now serving life with no possibility of parole.

Eric Rudolph, with her help, is now serving five consecutive life terms in prison.

And Susan Smith, with her help, is serving a life sentence in prison in South Carolina.

I'm not all that sure I'd be talking about my ... successful ... efforts on their behalf either.

So Judy Clarke teaches law at Washington & Lee.

Seems right.

But I wonder what prospects her track record foretell for one Jared Loughner?

Maybe the fourth attempt at the "crazy" defense will be a charm.

Charming & Witty

Sarah Palin, the most influential woman on the planet, maintains her sense of humor through it all:
She admits that she "threw a little politics" into her recent TLC reality show by dragging the crew to the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge on the pretense of hunting caribou. Her real purpose? Showing viewers that ANWR is a "barren, desolate, less-than-pristine place"--perfect, in other words, for lots of new oil drilling. "If a caribou needs to be sacrificed for the sake of energy independence," she adds, "I say, 'Mr. Caribou, maybe you need to take one for the team.'" She mentions how some media figures have pledged not cover her at all in February, and says the boycott "sounds good" to her: "because there's a lot of chaos in Cairo, and I can't wait to not get blamed for it--at least for a month." [link]
Oh, did I also mention that she's really hot?

- - -

* Some will try to argue that Hillary Clinton is the most influential woman on the planet. But, as her feckless response to the Egyptian crisis proves, she should have stayed home and baked cookies. Her "influence" would be just as profound.

** A nifty quote:

"Detractors are more obsessed with her than supporters are. And they can’t even explain why they hate her. Ask them about it, and they mumble something about her being stupid. But I’d hook her up to an intelligence test against Joe Biden any day.”

Question of the Day

Dr. Milton R. Wolf:

"The question remains: If Obamacare is such a great law, why does the White House keep protecting its best friends from it?"

Maybe someone in the mainstream press will ask that question of their savior in the White House some day.

Some day before I die of old age, maybe.

Leader of the Free World?

How about Spectator-in-Chief?

Nancy Morgan:
One of the issues raised in the run-up to our last presidential election was the question "Which candidate is best qualified to handle a '3 AM moment'?" America now has a partial answer. It isn't President Obama.

Last Friday was Day 4 of the ongoing protests in Egypt, where tens of thousands Egyptians took to the streets to demand the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak. As the situation reached a flash point, with a mounting death toll and Egyptian tanks in the streets of Cairo, President Obama maintained his silence. Well, not quite. He did Twitter, by proxy.

The world is left wondering what position America, the world's former superpower, will take. The only stance our administration has taken to date is a generic plea for an end to the violence and the oft-repeated call for human rights. Meanwhile, the world teeters on the brink as a global  crisis with profound geopolitical implications for the U.S. continues to unfold.

Obama's 3 am moment has come. And gone. Obama was noticeably AWOL.
Looks like that "community organizer" experience on his résumé wasn't enough, after all, to make this guy qualified to be president.

Who knew?

- - -

Barack Obama on the violence that is rampaging through the streets of Cairo:

"My main hope right now is ... is that violence is not the answer ..."

Return with me to the days of Jimmy Carter.

Good grief.

Quote of the Day

From Betsy M. Galliher:
[The National Organization for Women] is really no different than any other Leftist organization that inevitably descends into cannibalism. Again and again, Leftists prove their goal is no longer liberation, but victimization. There's simply no other way to perpetuate the narrative.

So naturally, there's no worse affront to women -- no greater path to subjugation according to WINO's [jf: Women In Name Only] -- than Sarah Palin. When in reality, the enemy is - the Left's favorite tour de force - Statism.

I can confirm with all the gratitude of a happy, liberated, free, American woman -- Sputnik is launched. Catch up if you can.
"NOW Goes Shark Jumping," American Thinker, January 31, 2011

Say It Ain't So!

Newt Gingrich supports ethanol?  Is that possible?  Does that, then, make him one of them?

There can be no doubt.
Professor Cornpone
Wall Street Journal editorial

The former Speaker blew through Des Moines last Tuesday for the Renewable Fuels Association summit, and his keynote speech to the ethanol lobby was as pious a tribute to the fuel made from corn and tax dollars as we've ever heard. Mr. Gingrich explained that "the big-city attacks" on ethanol subsidies are really attempts to deny prosperity to rural America, adding that "Obviously big urban newspapers want to kill it because it's working, and you wonder, 'What are their values?'"

The real fight is between the House Republicans now trying to rationalize the federal fisc and the kind of corporate welfare that President Obama advanced in his State of the Union.

[T]he ethanol boom ... is the result of decades of deliberate industrial policy, as Mr. Gingrich well knows. In 1998, then Ways and Means Chairman Bill Archer tried to kill ethanol's subsidies for good, only to land in the wet cement that Speaker Gingrich had poured.

Yet today this now-mature industry enjoys far more than cash handouts, including tariffs on foreign competitors and a mandate to buy its product. Supporters are always inventing new reasons for these dispensations, like carbon benefits (nonexistent, according to the greens and most scientific evidence) and replacing foreign oil (imports are up). An historian of Mr. Gingrich's distinction surely knows all that. [link]
I know Mr. Gingrich didn't get to where he got without being darn good at political calculation.  And that the road to the White House starts in Iowa.

But with the nation teetering on the brink of collapse, would it be too much to ask for ol' Newt to put the plotting and scheming away and get real about America's problems?  Two of which involve out-of-control government spending and mandates?  Parts of which include the (epic) ethanol boondoggle?

Keep this up and find yourself on the trash heap of history, sir.

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Oh, How Times Have Changed

The most unwaveringly leftist columnist in America, Frank Rich, who was gleeful not long ago when Barack Obama and his ilk in Congress were rolling over the Republicans in Washington, is big on compromise now that his kind have been sent, en masse, into retirement by We the People.

This is too much: "The Tea Party Wags the Dog."

A laugh line:

"Having sold itself in 2010 as the uncompromising champion of Tea Party-fueled fiscal austerity, the enhanced G.O.P. caucus arrived in Washington in 2011 to discover that most Americans prefer compromise to confrontation and favor..."

Frank Rich cares about what most Americans think.  Stop the presses.

Most Americans disfavored ObamaCare too.  But Rich didn't care about them then.  Oh, no.

But now he does.

What's changed, I wonder.

Time To Decide

The Big Question(s):

Why am I going and what the heck am I supposed to do when I get up there?

The space shuttle program. A mission without ... a mission.

* In truth, the article has to do with a manufactured dilemma relating to whether this government employee should do what we're paying him to do or continue to collect a paycheck but sit at home waiting for his wife to return from the hospital.  I see a prime-time Oprah special in the offing.

Moving Beyond Race

Historians a hundred years from now will puzzle over the fact that Barack Obama refers (referred) to himself as being "black" when, in fact, he's as white as he is African-American.  A strange contortion indicative of our mixed-up time.

But those same historians will mark this time as the end of an era.  A time when we were all categorized by our skin color.


Because it's getting harder and harder to tell who's what.

This is great:
Black? White? Asian? More Young Americans Choose All of the Above
By Susan Saulny, New York Times

Many young adults of mixed backgrounds are rejecting the color lines that have defined Americans for generations in favor of a much more fluid sense of identity.

They are also using the strength in their growing numbers to affirm roots that were once portrayed as tragic or pitiable.

One in seven new marriages is between spouses of different races or ethnicities, according to data from 2008 and 2009 that was analyzed by the Pew Research Center. Multiracial and multiethnic Americans (usually grouped together as “mixed race”) are one of the country’s fastest-growing demographic groups. And experts expect the racial results of the 2010 census, which will start to be released next month, to show the trend continuing or accelerating.

No one knows quite how the growth of the multiracial population will change the country. [link]
Actually I do know.  It will spell the end of the lucrative careers of the likes of Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan, both of whom trade on race and bigotry.

And we'll get beyond this now-silly notion that we humans are somehow different from one another because our skin tones have variation.

It's a bizarre world we live in.  But we make it a little saner as each day goes by.

Here's to miscegenation!

Gone. But Not Forgotten.

We have long memories.  And every intention of keeping fresh in our minds the names of those who came near to socializing the world with their sinister push for global warming wealth redistribution.*

They'll hope the fiasco of their purposeful creation disappears.  It won't.  Leading the pack?

Barack Obama:
Browner Resignation, Obama Omission Could Spell the End of Global Warming Policy, Say Climate Change Analysts
By Matt Cover, CNS News

(CNSNews.com) – The abrupt resignation of Carol Browner, President Barack Obama’s global warming czar, and the omission by Obama of global warming from his State of the Union speech on Tuesday could mean that the White House has given up on global warming, according to climate change analysts.

Browner, who announced her resignation Tuesday, led the White House effort to enact global warming legislation and policy. A former director of the Environmental Protection Agency during the Clinton administration, Browner was well regarded in the environmentalist community and served officially as director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy.

In his State of the Union address on Tuesday, Obama left out any reference to global warming or the more ambiguously named climate change, seemingly abandoning what had been one of the most prominent policy areas of the past two years.

Browner’s signature legislative goal – cap and trade legislation – failed in Congress last year when it was not brought up for a vote in the Senate after narrowly passing in the House.

“The new political expediency is skepticism,” he said. “Man-made global warming is the new butt of jokes in Washington.” [link]
All joking aside, these people nearly succeeded at destroying our way of life.  Browner, Obama, and their ilk deserve to have their own chapter in the Book of Infamy.  Let's put them there.  And keep them there.

Never forget the lesson learned here.

* "Global warming wealth redistribution."  Someone will read that a hundred years from now and say, "Huh?"

Where Egypt Is Headed

The truth is ...

... nobody knows.

Even the CIA, which is supposed to have a clue, seems to not have a clue.



Climategate, Chapter 2

The world's scientists really aren't making their profession any more trustworthy. The latest:

The power that the environmental movement has over climate "scientists" is disclosed to the world.

And it ain't pretty.

Saturday, January 29, 2011

On Obama's State of the Union

Charles Krauthammer:
And of course, once again, there is the magic lure of a green economy created by the brilliance of Washington experts and politicians. This is to be our "Sputnik moment," when the fear of the foreigner spurs us to innovation and greatness of the kind that yielded NASA and the moon landing.

Apart from the irony of this appeal being made by the very president who has just killed NASA's manned space program, there is the fact that for three decades, since Jimmy Carter's synfuel fantasy, Washington has poured billions of taxpayer dollars down a rat hole in vain pursuit of economically competitive renewable energy.

This is nothing but a retread of what used to be called industrial policy - government picking winners and losers. Except that in a field that is not nearly technologically ready to match fossil fuels, we pick one loser after another - from ethanol, a $6 billion boondoggle that even Al Gore admits was a mistake, to the $41,000 Chevy Volt that only the rich can afford (with their extended Bush tax cuts, of course).

Perhaps this is all to be expected from Democrats ...
"The old Obama in new clothing," Washington Post, January 28, 2011

- - -

I'm reminded of recent efforts by members of the mainstream press to prop up this empty suit by declaring his speech to be "Reaganesque."


You tell me, does this - Obama's response to the violence that is taking place in the streets of Cairo - sound Reaganesque?
"You can see these pent-up frustrations that are being displayed on the streets.

"My main hope right now is ... is that violence is not the answer in solving these problems in Egypt, so the government has to be careful about not resorting to violence, and the people on the streets have to be careful about not resorting to violence."
"My main hope is that violence is not the answer"?


How about Suzy Fifth Grader?

- - -

You want Reaganesque?

There's this from my choice for president, 2012:

That, folks, is Reaganesque.

- - -

And don't even get me started on that court jester - Joe Biden.

- - -

One last thing, I read Obama's attempt at channeling his inner Mahatma Ghandi - "violence is not the answer" - at the same time that violence is already engulfing Egypt, and wonder: Where's George W. Bush when we need him?

Isn't it time for some leadership in the White House?

While The Left Ridicules Sarah Palin ...

... the really smart people who make up what's left of the left in this country give this moron a complete pass.

He really is a fool.

But they don't seem to care.

And We Think It's Bad Here

This is beyond bad:

Oh, my.

Everything Is On The Table

Nothing is sacred.

We're broke, folks. Busted.

Friday, January 28, 2011

As It Should Be

Let the people decide.

He's not a crook.  He's just a sphincter.  And a Democrat.

And it's Chicago.

Obama Will Destroy The Coalfields

We got rid of Rick Boucher.  And dozens of other radicals like him.  But oviously Obama didn't get the message.  Either that or he's on a suicide mission and doesn't care what happens to his party.


Our work is just begun:
Cap and Trade Returns From the Grave
By Kimberley Strassel, Wall Street Journal

Cap and trade is dead. Long live cap and trade.

The president presented his new, conciliatory face to the nation this week, and his State of the Union was as notable for what it didn't include as what it did. He uttered not one word about global warming, a comprehensive climate bill, or his regulatory attempts to reduce carbon. Combined with his decision to give the axe to controversial climate czar Carol Browner, political analysts took all this as further proof that Barack Obama was moving to the middle, making nice with Republicans.

Snort. Guffaw. Chortle.

Listen carefully to Mr. Obama's speech and you realize he spent plenty of it on carbon controls. He just used a different vocabulary. If the president can't get carbon restrictions via cap and trade, he'll get them instead with his new proposal for a "clean energy" standard. Clean energy, after all, sounds better to the public ear, and he might just be able to lure, or snooker, some Republicans into going along.

The official end of cap and trade, and Mrs. Browner, wasn't conciliation—it was necessity. The public now understands that cap and trade is an economy killer, and no small number of Democrats lost their seats in midterms for supporting it. Few in the party want to take it up again, and House Republicans won't let it pass. Mr. Obama would be crazy to continue calling for it.

Mrs. Browner, for her part, had become a political liability. As czar, she's had sweeping control over administration policy—all of it unaccountable. This worked under a Democratic Congress, but House Republicans had made clear they intended to call her to testify. This had the makings of an ugly fight over executive privilege and would have forced the White House to defend a lack of transparency. Better to let the lightning rod go.

But Mr. Obama has no intention of letting go of his carbon-free world. He instead went to plan B. Specifically, he called in his speech for the nation to "join" him in a "new goal: by 2035, 80% of America's electricity will come from clean energy sources." What the president was in essence calling for—in happier, fuzzier, broader language—is what policy wonks refer to as a "renewable portfolio standard." This is a government mandate requiring that utilities produce annually a specific amount of their electricity from renewable sources—wind, solar, biofuels.

It's also cap and trade by another name. [link]
Those of us who have been following this saga closely also have come to know it by another name - bullshit.

This whole "clean energy" initiative has proven to be a miserable - and costly - failure.  From wind to solar to ethanol.  America has come to grips with that fact.

Maybe someday it will dawn on our president.

It Figures


Hypocrisy on Display: NY Times Defends, Runs Photo of Ants-on-Crucifix Art; Proudly Refused to Run Muhammad Cartoons


One Big Happy Family

Another example - one of many - of the ... cozy ... relationship that exists between the mainstream press and Big Government:
Claire Shipman's Husband Named New Obama Press Secretary; Conflict of Interest for ABC?
By Scott Whitlock, NewsBusters

The White House on Thursday named Jay Carney, the husband of ABC News reporter Claire Shipman, to be the new White House Press secretary. Carney is also an ex-journalist, formally of Time magazine.

Will this appointment prove to be a conflict of interest for Shipman? Will she continue to report on the Obama administration? Shipman whose title is senior national correspondent, often covers political stories and has a reputation as an activist liberal. In 2008, she hailed Barack Obama, the now-boss of her husband, as "brave" for a speech disassociating himself with radical preacher Jeremiah Wright. In 2007, she fawned over Obama's "fluid poetry."

In 2000, she lauded Al Gore as a "pretty conservative Democrat." In 2004, discussing former Communist leader Mikhail Gorbachev, she ltouted him as "generally regarded" for being "the man who broke down the ‘Iron Curtain.'" [link]
Don't be surprised if we see the little woman interviewing the hubby with mutual admiration devoted to the man who pays half the family paycheck.

And if we're really lucky, we'll get to see the interview conducted in bed!

A metaphor if there ever was one.

Just file this away in the memory banks for the next time someone says something about the press being unbiased..

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Civil War Historians Win Their Fight

Though I'm not sure exactly what their victory entails.

You know that site over near Spotsylvania that had all the Civil War buffs up in arms?  The one on which Wal-Mart had planned to build a "super center"?  The one that you could see from the old Wilderness battlefield site way off in the distance?  Well, you couldn't actually see it.  There are too many other retailers in between, obstructing view.

What was it they were trying to "preserve" anyway?

As it turns out, Wal-Mart won't be building there.  It doesn't need the hassle.

Folks there will probably go three blocks up and two blocks over and everyone will be happy.  And Wal-Mart will still make a pile of cash.

As for that site that the preservationists want so desperately to preserve?

It's in there somewhere ...

Moran's a Moron

It's not the first time I wrote that.  And it won't be the last.  As long as his fellow morons up in northern Virginia continue to give this dick a job:
Some still fighting the late unpleasantness. Like Jim Moran
By Mark Tapscott, Washington Examiner

Whenever I find myself tempted to say nothing would surprise me in politics, I am reminded of Rep. Jim Moran, the unusally mean-spirited New Yorker who somehow managed to become Alexandria's congressman. The guy has a real talent for verbal mendacity, particularly toward conservatives, which he exercises regularly.

Moran's latest outburts is typical. Speaking last night following President Obama's State of the Onion address, Moran was interviewed on an Arab network. Listen carefully and you will hear these words:

“It [the Republican successes in the 2010 elections] happened for the same reason the Civil War happened in the United States. It happened because the Southern states, the slaveholding states, didn’t want to see a president who was opposed to slavery.

"In this case, I believe, a lot of people in the United States don’t want to be governed by an African-Amerian, particularly one who is liberal, who wants to spend money and who wants to reach out to include everyone in our society….”

Yes, he really said it. How do such morally superior beings as Moran manage to remain among the unenlightened, racist rabble that is "a lot of people in the United States." [link]
It's been said many times but it's worth repeating: The "lot of people" to whom Moran refers - to the tune of 70% - supported Obama's presidency in the early months of 2009.  Then they all became racists?

In Moran's Wolkenkuckucksheim, it is so.

You folks in Arlington wanted this twit. By God, you're going to have to live with him.

You Were Warned

When I read lines like this:

.. and this:

As of today, a total of 733 [ObamaCare] waivers have been granted for 2011 ...

I wonder why Obama doesn't offer to grant everyone a waiver and start all over again.

This has gone from mistake to embarrassment.

Quote of the Day

From the Wall Street Journal:
When in his State of the Union speech Mr. Obama said, "This is our generation's Sputnik moment," citing the emergence of global competition from the likes of China and India, he was right.

Minutes later he proposed to cover the country with high-speed rail and companies making solar shingles.

High-speed rail and solar shingles? If that's the president's idea of meeting our Sputnik moment, then Houston, we have a problem.
"A Presidency to Nowhere," January 27, 2011

Had Cooler Heads Prevailed

Few people today are aware of it but when Virginia politicians met in Richmond on April 4, 1861 the delegates to the "secession convention" there convened actually voted against secession.

That's right. Virginia voted not to secede and to remain loyal to the Union.

If only subsequent events hadn't changed all that and drawn the Commonwealth into a protracted conflict that later saw its countryside devastated, forty of its western counties secede from the state, and countless thousands of its sons dead and dying on dozens of battlefields across the North and South.

If only ...

The New York Times presciently wrote on April 17, 1861:
Everybody here sees that now war has commenced, the question which the Virginia Convention has to decide is simply whether Virginia will declare war against the United States or stand by the Government; whether she will invite the battle upon her soil, to her utter ruin, or aid in bringing the fratricidal strife to a speedy termination by sustaining the Government and Union.
One of those subsequent events?  Abraham Lincoln announcing the call-up of 75,000 troops to put down the rebellion that began in Charleston Harbor on April 12 of the same year.

On April 17 the Virginia Secession Convention drew up an ordinance of secession and on May 23 its citizens, by a vote of 132,201 to 37,451, ratified it.

And the war was on.

If only ...

- - -

You might wonder why I write about this.  It's in today's news, sorta:

"Three West Virginia counties seek vote to secede, join Virginia."

It's not over.

Nothing's Changed

Obama still plans on shutting down the coalfields.

This comes from Congressman Griffith's office:
Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) issued the following statement today in response to the Obama Administration’s new coal mining regulatory ban that would eliminate thousands of coal-related jobs:

“Amazingly, just one day after President Obama’s call for job creation and economic growth, new federal regulations are threatening the very future of the coal industry in America. Even the President’s own experts agree. These new regulations would eliminate 7,000 coal mining jobs and dramatically cut production. Regulations of this magnitude will devastate many Southwest Virginian families and communities who depend on coal for their livelihoods.

“With unemployment above 9 percent and thousands of good paying jobs on the line, we cannot afford more roadblocks from the White House. Slashing coal production reduces our ability to tap into valuable domestic resources and realize future energy goals. Reducing coal production will ultimately increase the cost of electricity. More regulations will only harm the economy. It’s time for the Obama Administration to stop creating uncertainty with their mixed messages. Their message is one day they want jobs, the next day they don’t.”

According to the Associated Press, the job and production losses are outlined in a document produced by the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. [received via email]
That report, entitled "New rules would cut thousands of coal jobs," was indeed released one day after Obama went to great lengths in his State of the Union speech to talk about how his one big priority is to create jobs.

He was lying before. He lies still.

- - -

From the AP account:
"U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said that if thousands of mining jobs could be lost, "then I will do everything in my power to block this wrong-headed proposal.

"'Let me be crystal clear: I will fight any proposal from our federal government that poses a threat to our country's energy supply, West Virginia's coal industry, our jobs and our way of life,''" he said."
Not a word from Webb or Warner.

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Your Property Rights In Jeopardy?

There are certain terms in our 2011 lexicon that send up red flags when some politician brings them up. "Eminent Domain" is one of them.  "Smart growth" being another.  Both terms have to do with someone in government - who's always wiser than you and me and has better intentions than you and me - knowing what should be done with your property.  Whether you like it or not.  "Property rights"?  That's so 19th century.  They care about the greater good.  And they're always smarter.

Where once they were called "bureaucratic collectivists," an offshoot of Marxism, today we know them as Democrats.  Democrats to be feared.  Democrats who know what should be done with your property.  Whether you like it or not.

Here's another term you should get your arms around: Urban Development Areas.  Daniel Nairn gives us a (glowing) look into their creation and evolution:
Over the last couple of years the state government of Virginia has been rolling out a land use planning category for localities known as Urban Development Areas (UDAs), where higher density development can be concentrated. 

The concept started off slowly in 2007 with HB 3202 as an advisory element to be placed in the Comprehensive Plans of "high growth" localities, but UDAs have gradually been weaved into everything from stormwater regulations to street design requirements over the last year.

The Development and Land Use Tools Subcommittee, known as the Athey-Vogel group, last week released a proposal for stronger UDAs and a loan fund to sweeten the pot. Considering the media has pretty much ignored this process (I can't find any story, actually), it seems like a worthwhile endeavor to pay attention to where this initiative may be going.

The purpose of UDAs is not only to allow the concentration of growth in certain areas (thus relieving the pressure on others) but also to guide the design of such areas to ensure they are livable and attractive environments. The legislation explicitly calls for "new urbanism and traditional-neighborhood design," and the essential criteria are spelled out clearly: pedestrian-friendly road design, interconnection of streets, preservation of natural areas, mixed-use neighborhoods, reduction of front and side setbacks, among other things. Minimum densities are set by floor-to-area ratio for commercial and dwelling-units-per-acre for residential development.

Last week's proposed changes double the density requirements for all localities with populations greater than...
A few things to mention.   That ditty about "the purpose of UDAs is not only to allow the concentration of growth in certain areas ..."  Allow?  Hell, we've always allowed growth.  No.  In this instance make that requireMandate.  (More on that in a second.) And how about that "minimum densities are set by floor-to-area ratio for commercial and dwelling-units-per-acre for residential development"?  "Minimum densities are set"?  Hello?  What happened to "allow"?  Are we talking about the United States of America?  Did Leon Trotsky come back to life and settle in in Richmond, Virginia?

This brings us to Virginia House Bill 1721.

Before your eyes glaze over, understand this: It's opposed by the Sierra Club and by the Southern Environmental Law Center.

Got your attention?

Why would those two anti-American organizations be opposed?

Take a wild guess.

See HB 1721 Urban development areas; makes incorporation of areas optional rather than mandatory.

From the Richmond Tea Party:
HB 1721

The following is information that Donna Holt of Campaign for Liberty provided about HB1721.


The General Assembly convened on January 12th and we are following many pieces of legislation. HB 1721 is one that has dire consequences for us. Currently, 67 localities in Virginia are mandated to build Urban Development Areas.

HB1721, introduced by Delegate Bob Marshall, would make Urban Development Areas optional rather than mandatory.

The bill was recommended to report (passed by a majority of yea votes) by the House Counties, Cities and Towns Sub-committee #2 by a vote of 7-4 on January 20th, but was stalled on January 21st by the full committee at the request of Speaker Howell. It must pass this full committee and then go to the House Floor for a full vote. If it passes there, it then goes to the Senate on February 8th, Cross-Over Day, to begin the process there. This is going to be a long battle.


This bill is being attacked by heavyweights like the Home Builders Association, Southern Environmental Law Center, and the Sierra Club, and the League of Conservation Voters.

Members of the Home Builders Association stand to gain a great benefit from the construction of UDAs. Not only can they build up to twelve homes on a single acre of land that they can purchase very inexpensively, but they get tax breaks for the new urbanism, green building, and green energy efficiency practices used in the construction of these high-density communities.

Organizations like the Southern Environmental Law Center and the Sierra Club are heavily funded by other international organizations like ICLEI and benefit greatly by defeating the bill.

The reality, folks, is if we don’t get this bill passed, 67 local governments in Virginia will have no choice but to approve the comprehensive plans in EVERY locality in Virginia because UDAs are MANDATED.


WE NEED ALL HANDS ON DECK NOW if we are to be successful! We must show them who the real heavy weights are.

We strongly urge you to:

* Contact every member of the House Counties, Cities and Towns Committee to urge them to vote in support of the bill.
* Contact Speaker Bill Howell (R) Phone: (804) 698-1028 Email: delwhowell@house.virginia.gov and ask him to support this bill.
* Contact YOUR representatives to let them know you support this bill.
* We urge citizens from EVERY locality of the Commonwealth to be representatives of their community at the next committee meeting on HB1721.

We are in the fight of our lives to defend private property rights. It is up to each and every one of us to do all we can to get HB1721 passed out of this committee and on to the floor for a vote.
Yes, there's another term that should frighten the socks off of you - "Comprehensive plan." See "bureaucratic collectivism" again.

Did you know there are 67 localities in Virginia that are mandated to build Urban Development Areas?

Neither did I.

But now that we do, what say we put a stop to it. NOW.

Support HB 1721.  Stop the Sierra Club.  Stop the Southern Environmental Law Center.  Before they come after you.

And let's all take the time to learn more about this ICLEI.  Our future depends on it.

- - -

* "Smart growth is an urban planning and transportation theory that concentrates growth in compact walkable urban centers to avoid sprawl and advocates compact, transit-oriented, walkable, bicycle-friendly land use, including neighborhood schools, complete streets, and mixed-use development with a range of housing choices."

- - -

** Some will look at this and say, "You live in Bland County, population 6,900. What do you care?" For those I have another term: Creeping Socialism. Today they came for the citizens of Fairfax County.  Tomorrow they come after me.  I choose to not let that happen.

- - -

*** You're thinking it can't happen here?  Look at ICLEI's membership roster. On the list of its participating "urban" localities?

Abingdon, Virginia.

Blacksburg, Virginia.

Roanoke, Virginia.

No, it can't happen to you.

How much do you value your property rights?

- - -

**** I received this from the Southwest Virginia Tea Party:
We're going before the [Abingdon Board of Supervisors] tonight [last night] with the intention of getting them to rescind their unanimous decision to join in the VA Go Green Govt Initiative. If you haven't heard of ICLEI or Agenda 21, good place to start is here: http://jayforde.com/agenda-21/ 
The Town of Abingdon has been partnered with ICLEI since 2008 and we're currently going thru 1000+ pages, uncovering the details of their illegitimate, UN-rubber-stamped affair, courtesy of our tax dollars.

They're just about to get their clinches into the county, but we're hell bent to stop this madness. They are the end of property rights (social injustice in their book) and they're getting their claws into zoning laws and comprehensive plans with the intention of herding us all into Urban Development Areas. Think I'm crazy yet? HB3202 mandates 67 counties create them and become "sustainable". We lost our sponsor for its repeal and are now lobbying to get 1727 (Bob Marshall's bill) to make UDA"S optional rather than mandatory. This crap is everywhere.

They always said our doom would come from the inside. THEY are HERE. ICLEI is in 18 VA locales & 600+ nationally. The Agenda is tied to federal HUD$$ and DOT$$ and has been snowballing since 1974.
I fear for my country.

I Think We All Know The Answer To That

Congressman Morgan Griffith on President Obama's speech last night:

“Regarding the federal budget, the President wants to freeze and spend? He proposes to freeze annual domestic spending, but continue to spend on new programs? How will he do this without adding to the deficit? This ‘Houdini accounting’ defies logic.”

Obama defies logic. Breaking news.

Even I'm Surprised

I would have thought he'd have at least sent his pals an insincere, meaningless suggestion of an intention of a proposition.  But no:

Too bad.  So many handgun magazines; so little time.

You Knew This Was Coming

What to do about Gabrielle Giffords?

That "empty chair" symbolism only works for a time.

Then reality sets in.

But not quite yet, apparently:

Rep. Loretta Sanchez sparks outrage from fellow Democrats with proposal to boot Giffords from Armed Services Committee

Her fellow Democrats apparently prefer that there be one less Democrat vote on the committee. At least until Giffords is able to return.

I say: Whatever the Democrats want.

- - -

Not meaning to associate this story in any way with Ms. Giffords' plight, I remember the day that they hauled my then-congressman on a stretcher to the House floor in 1994 to vote.  He was 84 and in failing health.  Not a pretty sight.  But, by God, he voted.

Admirable.  If a little weird.

Time To Put Up Or Shut Up

This is humorous.  If only because it's going to get everyone in the mainstream press all worked up.  After all, when it comes to certain items that may be newsworthy, they don't want to know absolutely refuse to know.  Hilarious:
Game-changer! Arizona to pass 2012 eligibility law
By Bob Unruh, WorldNetDaily

It could be a game-changer.

A plan in Arizona to require presidential candidates to prove their eligibility to occupy the Oval Office is approaching critical mass, even though it has just been introduced.

The proposal from state Rep. Judy Burges, who carried a similar plan that fell short last year only because of political maneuvering, was introduced yesterday with 16 members of the state Senate as co-sponsors.

It needs only 16 votes in the Senate to pass.

In the House, there are 25 co-sponsors, with the need for only 31 votes for passage, and Burges told WND that there were several chamber members who confirmed they support the plan and will vote for it, but simply didn't wish to be listed as co-sponsors. [link]
Expect the courts to strike this law down, should it pass.

Judges, like ... investigative ... journalists ..., refuse to know for sure what the truth is.  They prefer to take the cocaine snorter's word for it.


On That Annual Gov't Love Fest ...

... that's known as the State of the Union speech, I didn't stay up to watch it (darn!), but if this is any indication, maybe I chose appropriately.

William A. Jacobson calls it: A million points of trite.

Our side has all the creative geniuses.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Point. Counterpoint.

The Washington Post this morning on George Allen's announcement that he is running for office again:
American history and politics have a rich tradition of second acts; Mr. Allen is no less plausible a candidate than others who have risen from defeat. Virginians will be justified in hoping for a candidacy from Mr. Allen that offers substance and serious policy discussion.
From on High:
Like anyone at the Washington Post gives a shit about "substance and serious policy discussion."  Last time around?  Stephen Spreuill on the Washington Post's "race to the bottom," October 24, 2006:

"Even by the usual standards, the Washington Post’s coverage of the Virginia Senate race between incumbent George Allen and former Secretary of the Navy Jim Webb has been remarkably one-sided. Since mid-August, the Post has published approximately 100 newspaper articles and editorials about allegations that Allen is racist.

"On August 15, the Post ran a story on page A01 titled, 'Allen Quip Provokes Outrage, Apology; Name Insults Webb Volunteer.'

"The incident certainly merited coverage, but nothing like what was to follow. The Post followed up Tuesday’s story (and accompanying editorial) with another front-page story on Wednesday. On Thursday, three stories in the Post were about the “macaca” incident, including one purporting to debunk Allen’s excuse that 'macaca' was a nickname referring to the volunteer’s mohawk-style haircut. Style-section reporter Libby Copeland reported that the hairstyle in question was not a mohawk at all, but rather 'a hybrid of the mullet and the ‘faux-hawk,’ a hipster look that peaks at the top of the head, reminiscent of the cartoon character Tintin.'

"As the campaign got dirtier, the Post exhausted every conceivable angle in order to keep the 'macaca' story in the paper. First, it sought out the professional grievance groups ('For One Group, ‘Macaca’ Recalls Slurs After 9/11'). Then, it compared Allen’s woes to those of other (Republican) politicians ('Comments Haunt Another Senator; Montana’s Burns Joked About Latinos'). Finally — two weeks after the incident — the Post profiled Macaca himself ('Fairfax Native Says Allen’s Words Stung').

What came next made all that preceded it look like high-minded debate. On September 24, the liberal web magazine Salon.com reported that, according to several of Allen’s college football teammates, he used the 'N-word' in college. The Post picked up the story two days later, and two days after that it covered allegations that Webb had also used the 'N-word' in college. Allen’s accusers were admitted Democratic partisans, and Webb’s accuser a Republican, but none of this stopped the Post or other mainstream media outlets from following them down into a gutter of unsubstantiated rumors.

After the 'N-word' debacle, the Post took an even weirder swipe at Allen. After weeks of portraying him as a racist redneck, it published a 1,302-word article about how his 'cowboy' image was nothing more than a 'shtick' ('Will Sen. Allen’s Cowboy Boots Fit Virginia Voters? Detractors Call Cowboy Image a Shtick'). As National Review’s Byron York noted at the time, 'Webb’s senior advisor is the only detractor quoted in Shear’s article, which features positive quotes from two present and former Allen staffers, plus one Allen fan.'

At first, the race between Allen and Webb looked like the kind of race policy wonks dream about.

Instead, it has degenerated into a disgraceful mud-slinging contest — a race to the bottom aided in no small part by the Washington Post.
I don't expect the gutter-dwellers at the Post to go on the attack in 2012 with the macaca ploy (although they did bring it up just this morning),  but you can bet there'll be a whole lot more about "radical agendas" and tea party affiliations, maybe even a little bit of the old standby - RACIST! - than there will be any ""substance and serious policy discussion."  These people hate George Allen and everything he stands for.

Expect that hatred to be reflected in that which appears on the pages of that rag they call a newspaper. Again.

The Tea Party & Obama

Worlds apart.

Where Stalin Would Thrive

In Virginia's most liberal county, of course.

This speaks volumes about them.

As They Desperately Try To Hold The Narrative Together ...

... the climate mongers among us continue to see their scheme crumble:

This involves the official British inquiry into the scandal that doomed the global warming movement.

Expect the Penn State inquiries to be denounced as shams soon as well.

Global warming was always a scam.

We slowly get to the truth.

The Universe has Been Shaken To Its Core

So does that beef burrito include beef or not?

Just when you thought the world made sense.

What's next?  Soylent Green?

An American Dichotomy

Ever wonder how it is that America's corporations are doing so well while the average American is doing so poorly?

In microcosm:

They are all doing great!


The World Has Turned Upside Down

I don't know.  Maybe it's just me.  But doesn't it seem proper that when you seek knowledge on a particular subject that you'd refer to someone who has knowledge on that subject?

I ask you: What do Jennifer Granholm and Jeffrey Immelt know about creating jobs?

A step into bizarroworld:

From "Former Michigan Gov. Granholm to Teach Job Creation at UC Berkeley" we learn that Jennifer Granholm, who presided over a state that, "in the years since she took office through October, the latest month for which final employment data was available, Michigan lost some 632,400 payroll jobs, a 14.1 percent decline, and within that, 281,800 manufacturing jobs, a 37.6 percent decline," is going to teach others how to ... create jobs.

Or not?

And what of GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt, Mr. Obama's new "jobs" guy?

See "Obama names GE chief Jeffrey Immelt to head economic recovery advisory panel."

What's that all about, you ask?

"President Obama's decision to tap General Electric Co. Chief Executive Jeffrey Immelt to lead an initiative on jobs and ..."

An initiative on jobs.

At least it can be said that Immelt, unlike Granholm, has at least created jobs.


While killing jobs.


That's right.  Nobody in America has done more to destroy American jobs than Jeffrey Immelt.  Except for maybe Jennifer Granholm.  And Obama.

And he and she - they - are now in position to teach us how to grow American jobs?

Please.  Stop.  You're killing me.

Keith Olbermann. 'Unemployed Uberdork.'

I love the effective use of words.

Look, The Guy's a Worm, But ...

... the courts should give wide latitude to the voters.  Especially in an instance where the circumstances are murky.  Try to put aside your distaste for Rahm Emanuel, Obama's close adviser, and decide if he truly deserved to be kicked off the ballot in Chicago:
Who's a Carpetbagger?
Wall Street Journal editorial

Conservatives like to gripe that too many politicians go native in Washington and never return home. So why are so many people rejoicing that an Illinois appeals court ruled yesterday that former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is ineligible to run for mayor of Chicago on February 22 because he hasn't lived in the city for the past year?

According to the 2-1 court decision, although Mr. Emanuel was a "qualified elector" in the state, his return from Washington in October fell short of the one-year residency standard required for municipal office in Illinois. No returns, no exceptions. The ruling overturns rulings by the Chicago Board of Elections Commission and a Cook County judge that had allowed him to stay on the ballot.

As carpetbaggers go, however, Mr. Emanuel isn't even a venial sinner. He has lifelong ties to the Windy City, and for six years he represented the Fifth Congressional district that includes part of Chicago before President Obama offered him the White House job in late 2008. While in Washington, he maintained his Illinois driver's license, paid income taxes in both locations, and continued to pay property taxes on his Chicago home, which he rented out during his absence.

The Illinois court argues that Mr. Emanuel's intention to return to Chicago does not meet the legal definition of residence as a "permanent abode." But Mr. Emanuel's absence was done in the course of service to the country. (We have our issues with the quality of that service, but that's a separate issue.) Under Illinois law, voters who are away "on business of the United States" may have their residence requirement waived—an exception that should logically extend to candidates.

It's tempting to enjoy Mr. Emanuel's ballot troubles because he's a darling of rich Chicago liberals and it's a rare misstep for the Daley machine, which is backing him. But we don't think Mr. Emanuel should be penalized, or Chicago voters denied the chance to vote for him, because he chose to serve his country. [link]
In short, the courts should butt out.  If Emanuel is undeserving of the office, the people will make the right decision.  That's what elections are all about.

Rahm Emanuel should be on the ballot. 

And the people of Chicago should then vote him into retirement.

Monday, January 24, 2011

Nothing Hateful About That

Here's today's lesson on civility.  Offered up by a contributor to the Bristol Herald Courier:
Talk radio proves hate breeds hate

As I listened to the airways repeating the news about the shooting of the Arizona congresswoman and others, I noticed how the reporters tiptoed around one of the major contributors of this tragedy: talk radio.

One of our local radio stations allows these hate spewers, from 9:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. five days a week. Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and others spew this hate toward our president. Calling him names like Hitler, and saying he wasn’t born in the USA and hate toward Democrats in general. And the sweetheart of the conservatives speaking about bullets and ballots, and bull’s-eyes over Democrats.

Hate breeds hate. I believe in free speech, but common sense should rule. Unless this type of broadcasting is stopped we’ll continue to hear of these tragedies.
I hate these haters. They need to be banned.

May God have mercy.

The Difference Between Them & Me

Make of this what you will.  I never watch politicians' speeches on TV.  Except for snippets replayed at a later point in time anyway.  While others take them seriously, I prefer to withhold judgment until I find out exactly what they've done, and are doing, rather than listen dreamily and say, after ... promises ... are made, "oh, that would be nice."

Promises that are never - NEVER - kept, of course.

That may explain why some people bought into the Obama hope & change schtick.  They listened and said, "Oh, that would be nice."  I didn't listen and paid close attention to that which he'd actually done in his past.  That probably explains, too, why the "listeners" are so disappointed with him these days and I yawn and say, "I told you so."

Anyway, prepare yourself.  Obama's giving a speech tomorrow night.  And millions will listen.

Me?  I'll be watching reruns of Fantasy Island.  At least the producers had the good sense to improve its entertainment value by including a midget.

I wonder when Obama will think of doing the same ...

* Someone will suggest that I am afflicted by A.D.D.  I prefer to think that my time is of value.

James Webb Is Next To Go

Virginia flirted with liberalism.  For a time.  And we got saddled with Weird James Webb as a result.

That day is gone.

Let's send him back to wherever he came from.

And get back on track.
George Allen to announce Senate bid Monday
By David Catanese, Politico

Former Sen. George Allen will end weeks of speculation and formally declare his candidacy for U.S. Senate in Virginia on Monday, two Republican advisers tell POLITICO.

Allen, who has been making all the moves of a candidate in recent weeks, is expected to blast an e-mail to supporters with a video message before alerting the media.

The announcement comes as no surprise. The former governor and senator has been touring the state to champion a repeal of the health care law, quietly reaching out to state lawmakers and seeking advice from those who guided his earliest campaigns.

Allen’s Monday announcement comes before Democratic Sen. Jim Webb’s own decision about running for a second term. Webb, who bested Allen by fewer than 10,000 votes in 2006, has been silent about a reelection campaign, leaving even some of his closest supporters wondering what he’ll do. [link]
I put chances at "better than even" that Webb won't seek reelection.  His one and only driving impetus in 2006 was to see the war in Iraq ended.  It has.  He has no other reason to be in Congress.  So don't be surprised when he decides to depart.

As for Allen, he doesn't have an unpopular war to defend anymore.  His only enemy in a 2012 contest will be the Washington Post.  He can expect that rag to pull out all the stops in its effort to defeat him.  As it did - to its eternal discredit - last time around.

Here's to George Allen in 2012.  Take it to 'em, big guy.

- - -

The slime mongers begin their assault.  In today's Washington Post:

For the love of God.

Spending Cuts? Start Here.

I'm quickly becoming an Ileana fan:
U.N. funding an early target for House Republicans
By Bridget Johnson, The Hill

A key House Republican is quickly pressing forward with her goals to scale back U.S. funding for the United Nations.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told The Hill that oversight would be a key function of the panel, particularly funding to the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC) that is "a waste of taxpayer dollars."

"I'd like to make sure that we once and for all kill all U.S. funding for that beast," she said last month. "Because I don't think that it advances U.S. interests, I don't think that that's a pro-democracy group, it's a rogue's gallery, pariah states, they belong there because they don't want to be sanctioned." [link
Ileana has picked the right target.  What sane person could support a Human Rights Council that sees, of all the human rights abuses being committed around the planet, only those coming from an evil Zionist Israel (I qualify the use of the word "sane" intentionally; that leaves out all the Muslims on the planet). 

But really the entire United Nations is a fat, wasteful, anti-America collection of socialists and thugs.

We should defund the U.N. completely.

But Ileana'a effort will be a good first step.

We Can Cut Here Too

George W. Bush did a lot of things right.  But he, like his father, was a big-government guy.  Thus, his response to the 9/11 attacks amounted to creating a massive new bureaucracy in Washington called Homeland Security and bringing in a federal employee union to take control of airport baggage handling (?).*   Neither response was necessary or justifiable.

Yet here we are.

Anybody remember why we have a DHS?

Answer: So that the FBI would communicate with the CIA.

An executive order wouldn't do.  We needed 10,000 new federal employees to make it happen.

And here we are.

Well, let's get away from where we are.  And kill the damn thing:
Do We Need a Department of Homeland Security or a TSA?
By Art Carden, Forbes

The new Republican House of Representatives took office amidst much fanfare about the US Constitution and respecting Constitutional limits on government. I have suggested that if they are really serious about it, they will start by abolishing the Transportation Security Administration. Not much has changed in the last few weeks. Indeed, we can do without the whole “Homeland Security” charade.

Defenders of the Department of Homeland Security and TSA ask whether we are willing to sacrifice safety and security to avoid being inconvenienced. There is no evidence that this works. I have said it before and I will say it again: the data suggest that if anything, the TSA actually costs lives.

No doubt, there are plenty of people who heartily endorse increasingly-invasive measures employed by the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration because it makes them feel safe. That feeling of safety is an illusion. As Bruce Schneier and others have pointed out, the entire operation is “security theater” that costs us time and money while leaving us no safer. As Wikileaks is showing us, an opaque government saying “just trust us” is not to be trusted. [link]
Make that "grossly expensive security theater."  And we don't have the cash for that kind of entertainment anymore.

TSA is a joke.  And always has been.  As for Homeland Security, truth be known, there's nothing that is being done within its (many) walls that the FBI and CIA can't do on their own.  And if the members thereof occasionally do lunch, efforts will be coordinated and we'll remain safe.  Or at least as safe as we are today.

So, as I've said from Day One, we need to kill the Department of Homeland Security because it's an egregious waste of our hard-earned income.  And TSA can be snuffed along with it.

We're broke, folks.  We can't afford foolishness like that anymore.

* Well, okay, he did go to war against global Islamist aggression as well. I should mention that.

String Him Up!

Wow.  Chicago Bears fans are a surly bunch:
Jay Cutler under attack for leaving Bears' loss with knee injury
By Sean Leahy, USA TODAY

The Chicago Bears defended QB Jay Cutler on Sunday after he came under withering criticism from fans, analysts and even fellow players for having left an NFC title game loss to the Green Bay Packers with a knee injury.

Cutler exited the game, with the Bears trailing 14-0, early in the third quarter. He remained on the sidelines, spending some of the remainder of the game looking sullen in a seat on the bench and some of it standing on the sideline.

Fellow NFL players questioned Cutler's toughness on Twitter during the game, and ESPN analyst and former Super Bowl-winning QB Trent Dilfer called him out after the game.

"You can play this position (QB) hurt," Dilfer said on ESPN. "Some of us have." [link]
Get the impression nobody in Chicago - including his teammates - like the guy?  (I've seen interviews with him on ESPN; I can see why).

But to criticize Cutler for not playing injured?  Wow.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

This Is Just Silly

Civil War preservationists have their thongs stuck in their cracks over the fact that Wal-Mart is going to build one of its superstores near a battlefield site here in Virginia.

NEAR a battlefield site.

The outrage.

I ask you, though, which of Wal-Mart's other 95 locations here in the Commonwealth aren't near a Civil War battlefield site?  The whole freaking state is one big Civil War battlefield site.

Abortion Supporters Are Dangerous To Public Health

And I'm not talking only about their being dangerous with regard to all the little babies whose deaths they encourage.

The irony: The feminist ideal is killing women.

This is criminal.

Where Is The Outrage?

Where's Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) when we need her?
Left wing climate of hate and assassination
Jack Cashill, American Thinker

In September 2010 Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon was scheduled to speak at Penn Valley Community College in Kansas City.

At some point, wearing black clothes and a bullet-proof vest, 22 year-old Casey Brezik bolted out of a classroom, knife in hand, and slashed the throat of a dean. As he would later admit, he confused the dean with Nixon.

The story never left Kansas City. It is not hard to understand why. Knives lack the political sex appeal of guns, and even Keith Olbermann would have had a hard time turning Brezik into a Tea Partier.

Indeed, Brezik seems to have inhaled just about every noxious vapor in the left-wing miasma: environmental extremism, radical Islam, anti-capitalism, anti-Zionism and Christophobia, among others.

In his "About Me" box on Facebook, Brezik listed as his favorite quotation one from progressive poster boy, Che Guevara. The quote begins "Our every action is a battle cry against imperialism" and gets more belligerent from there.

On his wall postings, Brezik ranted, "How are we the radical(s) (left) to confront the NEW RIGHT, if we avoid confrontation all together?" [link]
Why didn't we hear about this incident before?  Why weren't we told about this radical leftist's hate-driven assassination attempt?

Oh, wait.

Radical.  Leftist.

I think I've figured out why the media - and the nitwit from New York - have remained conspicuously silent.

He's Not Serious

This is Obama's idea of making American products competitive?

"If we're serious about fighting for American jobs and American businesses, one of the most important things we can do is open up more markets to American goods around the world."

Earth to guy who never took Business 101 or read Economics for Dummies: That's stupid.

If "we" are serious about "fighting" for American businesses, we'd do whatever is necessary to allow those businesses to be competitive with the Chinese.  That fight would start by our government lowering the confiscatory corporate tax rates that are currently in place in this country.

Does anyone think this Democrat is prepared to even consider that?


So his idea of "fighting" is to ask other people in other countries do something for him that is not in their best interests.  That's "fighting"?

That's not even "trying."

We can be competitive.  But we need to fight to make it happen.

Wishing upon a star is not fighting.

Take it from someone who's taken Business 101: Not only is opening up foreign markets something we shouldn't be "fighting" to accomplish, we don't even need to play at it.  As the Chinese have proven here - to our detriment - make a decent product at a great price and the markets will open up without any effort on our part whatsoever.

Interesting Thought

But it's not going anywhere.

Idaho GOP gets ready to nullify health care reform
By John Miller, Associated Press

BOISE, Idaho – After leading the nation last year in passing a law to sue the federal government over the health care overhaul, Idaho's Republican-dominated Legislature now plans to use an obscure 18th century doctrine to declare President Barack Obama's signature bill null and void.

Lawmakers in six other states — Maine, Montana, Oregon, Nebraska, Texas and Wyoming — are also mulling "nullification" bills, which contend states, not the U.S. Supreme Court, are the ultimate arbiter of when Congress and the president run amok.

It's a concept that's won favor among many tea party adherents who believe Washington, D.C., is out of control.

Though a 1958 U.S. Supreme Court decision reaffirmed that federal laws "shall be the supreme law of the land," Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter is promoting the idea, too. In his January 10 State of the State speech, he told Idaho residents "we are actively exploring all our options — including nullification." [link]
There are in existence today two ways to "nullify" Obama's draconian laws.  One is to "vote the bums out" who went along with his nefarious schemes in the first place (you guys did a pretty darn good job of that in November) and have the laws "nullified" by new members of Congress.  Hello, Obamacare.  The other is for states to band together and declare - through their state legislators - that they believe Obama's individual efforts at socialism should be nullified.  If enough states agree, an amendment to the Constitution is then sent to We the People and we nullify. (It would be messy, but there is that mechanism.  Hello, Prohibition).

Except for Anthony Kennedy (who, on any given day, is prepared to believe just about anything), no other member of the United States Supreme Court is prepared to go along with the nullification movement.

So save your breath.

And devote your energies to throwing more of the bums out.

By the way, James Webb comes up for reelection in less than two years.

Please. No.

Obama is being urged to keep working on "energy" as he goes forward.

Gas prices will soon have doubled since the day he came into office, oil drilling in the gulf is at a standstill, oil exploration has dried up, nothing's been done about getting back on track with nuclear power, coal operations are being shut down by his EPA, and poor Americans are going without heat because utility rates - thank you again, EPA - are now breathtakingly high.

I don't think more talk about windmills and "green" shit is going to sway too many Americans these days.

We think Obama has done quite enough already.  He can stop now.


I guess they've exhausted all their criticisms of Sarah Palin for everything she's ever done. Now they're criticizing her for that which she hasn't done.

What kind of mindset brings an argument like this out?
First in nation, last with Sarah Palin
By Alexander Burns, Politico

If Sarah Palin decides to run for president, she could quickly find that it’s not Arizona, but New Hampshire that poses the bigger threat to her candidacy.

That’s because in all of her travels since the 2008 election – during the midterm campaign and across two expansive book tours – the former Alaska governor has not once set foot in the first-in-the-nation primary state. And residents have noticed.

For all the attention to Palin’s large-scale image problems, ... her seeming disconnect with the Granite State could represent an equally serious hole in any path to the GOP presidential nomination. [link]
So I should hold a grudge because she hasn't been to Bland, Virginia?

For the love of God.  You people need to seek counseling.

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Quote of the Day

From Michelle Malkin:

"Deadly indifference to protecting life isn't tangential to the abortion industry's existence -- it's at the core of it. The Philadelphia Horror is no anomaly. It's the logical, bloodcurdling consequence of an evil, eugenics-rooted enterprise wrapped in feminist clothing."

Future generations will damn ours.

Sign of the Times

Watching Chinese Premier Hu Jintao patiently smirk as our president drooled all over him at that White House press conference reminded me of a day long ago when a U.S. president would travel to Lower Slobberyovia, don a native shirt, and talk glowingly about "the close bonds that have historically linked our two nations in friendship and determination to ... " blah ... blah ... blah.

The whole time wanting to get the hell out of Lower Slobberyovia and find some civilized domain where he could get a glass of water without having to worry about some infectious disease.

How the tables have turned.

This is humiliating.

It's what we've come to.

Remember What Your Daddy Taught You

Never make a promise you can't keep.

Just three days ago: "Newly-elected Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie is on a mission to end the Birther controversy once and for all."

Today: "Abercrombie has utterly failed in his mission to prove that Obama was born in the United States."


Blood in the water.

Boiling mass of frenzy.

Abercrombie, so you know, is a Democrat.  And a "friend" of Obama.

The first is very believable (see above).  You'd have to prove to me, though, what with this moron's efforts, that the latter applies.

With friends like Abercrombie ...

- - -

Caption of the day, from Hot Air:

How proud the people of Hawaii must be.

No Time For Weiners

I just can't get excited about Mitt Romney.  Every time I look at him, I see George H.W. Bush.  A guy who perceives a problem and looks to government to fix it.  And talk about how it was the only way to ... blah ... blah ... blah.  Another John McCain.

In my mind, government IS the problem.  IT needs to be fixed.  And I don't see Romney being up to the task.

So who might be?

Who might be that take-no-prisoners kind of conservative who'll draw the scimitar and plunge into the fray?

Maybe ...
Conservatives urge Mike Pence to fill GOP 'void'
By Jonathan Martin and Kasie Hunt, Politico

To understand the dissatisfaction on the right with the current crop of Republican presidential hopefuls, look no further than Mike Pence.

An Indiana congressman with just five terms in public office, Pence is currently the subject of a draft movement — but he may well pick a gubernatorial run over a White House bid.

Nevertheless, a group of longtime Republicans — including former House Majority Leader Dick Armey and former Rep. Jim Ryun — are working with a well-connected conservative public relations firm to urge the congressman to head to Des Moines and Manchester instead of Indianapolis and Muncie. [link]
I'm not sure what that crack about Pence having "just five terms in public office" under his belt is all about.  After all, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton had a whopping total of one each.   But skip that.

Mike Pence is a conservative.  And has never wavered.

Unlike so many other "read my lips" Republicans.

My guess is he'll not run for president.  For his own reasons.

Too bad.

How Long Will This Continue?

There's a lot of talk these days about the global food shortage.

Meanwhile, here in the world's breadbasket:

An expensive, inefficient fuel at that.

For the love of God.

We'll Miss Keith Olbermann

Unlike all those "open-minded" liberals in this country who work tirelessly to have opposition voices (think Limbaugh) banned from the public arena of ideas, I've always enjoyed ultra-leftist Keith Olbermann's participation.  He's entertaining.  Buffoonish.  And entertaining.  I would never think of calling for his proscription from the national discussion.

That's the difference between them and us.

Looks like someone has banished him though.  Either that or he's going to work for Obama (isn't the White House press secretary position still vacant?).

The news: Olbermann Signs Off from MSNBC’s Countdown for Last Time

No reason given.

Maybe he's joined a convent?

- - -

Instapundit provides a comment from a reader.  A Keith Olbermann epitaph:

"His viewer is going to be bummed."


- - -

Then again, we'll always have a Kennedy to kick around.

And Speaking of Buffoonishly Entertaining

Olbermann may be gone.

That idiot down in Florida - a Democrat - may have been turned out of office by the voters.

But, by God, we'll always have that idiot down in Tennessee.

A Democrat.

* Ban him for his hate speech?  Hell, give him a megaphone and a slot on MSNBC.

Point. Counterpoint.

A Shit-for-Brains Democrat from New York on those "high-capacity" magazines that she wants to ban:

"The only reason for the existence of these devices is to be able to shoot as many people as quickly as possible."

From on High:

"I can think of another.  To be able to put as many rounds as possible through an intruder who's breaking into my home at 2 in the morning.  And if he's shooting back, and I don't have time to hunt up my box of 9mm when I've emptied the magazine in his direction, I'll sure be thankful that the thing held more than 10 rounds."

Politifact Virginia

I think I like this thing.  At least the Virginia version.

* About Politifact Virginia:

"PolitiFact Virginia is a partnership of the Richmond Times-Dispatch and PolitiFact.com, a Pulitzer Prize-winning Web site of the St. Petersburg Times, to help you find the truth in politics.

"Every day, reporters and researchers from the Times-Dispatch examine statements by Virginia elected officials and candidates and anyone else who speaks up on matters of public importance. We research their statements and then rate the accuracy on our Truth-O-Meter – True, Mostly True, Half True, Barely True and False. The most ridiculous falsehoods get our lowest rating, Pants on Fire."