Quote

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

Saturday, June 30, 2012

Obama Can't Leave Well Enough Alone

Chief Justice John Roberts tried his best to bail our President's skinny ass out. But our President just can't let it be. Roberts came up with the perfect excuse for his voting in favor of the ObamaCare mandate. It's a tax. And Congress has the power to tax.

But no.

Obama refuses to accept the fact that it's a tax. He says its "a penalty" of some sort.

Does all this mean we get a do-over?

Friday, June 29, 2012

Justice Roberts Is Right

Regarding his deciding vote in the case before the Supreme Court involving Obama's health care act, Chief Justice Roberts, in his majority opinion, writes the following:

"It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices."

And he's right.

It serves no purpose now to debate the legality of ObamaCare.  It has been forever affirmed as the law of the land.  Nor to dwell on Roberts's slimy reinterpretation-of-convenience that brought the stunning ruling to our doorsteps.

It is the law.

Until it is no longer the law.

As Roberts says - in so many words - you voted for the sonsabitchas who did this to you.  It's up to you - and me - to correct that mistake.

Every one of those mother's sons must go.

Come November ...

- - -

I've moved beyond feelings bordering on the seditious.  And am now overwhelmed with a sense of foreboding.  And disgust.  And dejection.  We are now subjects of the state.  Nothing more.


I'm tired.  


I'm busting my ass every day for this ...

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Appeals Court To The Coalfields: Drop Dead

As if it weren't bad enough that the federal EPA's war on coal is moving forward so rapidly, and so brazenly.  And if it weren't bad enough that the excuse being foisted upon the working families of Southwest Virginia, West Virginia, Tennessee, Georgia, and beyond who will soon be on Obama's ever-growing food stamp program because the EPA is using the now-discredited "global warming" excuse to do it, our court system has given its sanction:
Court Gives A Green Light To The Imperial EPA
Investor's Business Daily editorial

For those who have tracked the efforts of the Environmental Protection Agency to clamp down on carbon dioxide emissions, this week's news from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia will come as no surprise.

Back in 2007, the Supreme Court told the EPA to regulate CO2 as a pollutant. A three-judge panel at the appeals court reaffirmed those marching orders when it gave the EPA the go-ahead to limit new coal-fired power plants.

The only real difference between then and now is in the EPA's attitude. Five years ago, under the Bush administration, it was a reluctant warrior and had to be prodded by the court. Now it's gung-ho.

It is using all the power it can squeeze out of the 1970 Clean Air Act to phase out the burning of coal. The panel's unanimous decision gave it the green light it wanted. The prospects of a successful appeal — which would require the Supreme Court to reverse itself — look dim.

Under the law, the EPA has to find that CO2 — not by itself but as a cause of climate change — is a threat to public health, safety and welfare. It does this by citing predictions from computer models.

The debates over these are legion, and there's nothing laypeople can add to them at this point. But the agency also needs to address the broader impact of what it proposes, and here the discussion seems to have been cut off before its time.

In its Regulatory Impact Analysis for the power plant rule, the EPA says the regulation is not an "economically significant rule." That might come as news to the coal mining industry, since the rule would probably bar the building of new coal-fired plants for the next eight years at least. [link]
A scorched earth policy intended to destroy the economies of coal producing states has no "economic significance." Come tell it to the children of the coalfields, you swine.

Thousands of families are to be thrown out of work because a bogus environmental theory is more important to do-gooders in Washington than is the well-being of the citizenry of this country.

My God.

Oh, How They Don't Want That

13.1 million Americans out of work.

46.2 million Americans now living in poverty.

46 million on food stamps.

50% of black males out of work.

25% of graduating college students can't find a job.

U.S. real wages are falling at an unprecedented rate.

And the Democratic media has this in response:

Time Magazine: Romney Is 'Too Focused' on the Economy

Yeah, let's talk about gay people some more.

For the love of God.

Wishful Thinking

From the Democratic Party's smartest strategist:

James Carville: ‘The Tea Party Is Over’

Oh, how he wants to believe it to be true ...

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Obama Lectures The Wrong European

Folks (or volke in this case) in Europe must get a big chuckle out of Barack Obama lecturing them on fiscal responsibility.  Often.

Some may chuckle anyway.

Others are not amused.

Including German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble.

In response to another admonition coming from Washington about European spending and debt, Schäuble had this to say:

"Mr. Obama should first of all take care of reducing the American deficit, which is harder than in the eurozone. People are always very quick at giving others advice."

Obama giving advice on fiscal restraint is like Rosie O'Donnell conducting weight-loss classes.

If either were part of a circus act, fine.

But really?


ObamaCare Rats Leaving The Ship

First to go?  Joe Biden and Rahm Emanuel.  From yesterday's New York Times:

From "Ignorance, GOP Falsehoods on Obama-Care Doomed the Measure, NYTimes Reporters Claim":
Reporter Jodi Kantor took off her journalist hat to bluntly accuse the GOP of "falsely raising the specter of death panels in Sunday's "Putting On a Brave Face, but Preparing for Heartbreak on Health Care." The online headline left off the pro-Obama personalization: "Wearing Brave Face, Obama Braces for Health Care Ruling."

In the White House, many of his top advisers, including Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his first chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, counseled Mr. Obama against a sweeping health care overhaul. By summer 2009, with the country still stunned by economic crisis and Republicans falsely raising the specter of death panels, some aides practically begged the president to scale back, take interim steps and move on to other issues.
So Biden and that other guy were opposed to fighting for what became known as ObamaCare. News that incidentally finds its way onto the pages of the New York Times the day before it gets publically nuked by the Supreme Court.

Sure they did.

And I've got a bridge in Arizona ...

What Would We Do Without Lefties?

Their entertainment value is darn near priceless.

Today's offering:

Chris Matthews Foams: Voter ID Law Is a GOP Plot to 'Kill Off the Older Voters'

And then they're coming to get you, Chris ...

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Romney's Coming To Town

If you're anywhere around Salem today, stop by Carter Machinery on Lynchburg Pike.  The next President of the United States is going to be there.

Might even be some of those maggot-infested protesters show up.

Should be a hoot.

Better Think That Through, Sweetheart

What's wrong with this nitwit's musing?

Cher Cites 'Revolution' As Solution Against Racist Republicans...

Only one problem, babe.  Those "racist Republicans" have all the guns, remember?  Your kind decided you were better off unarmed and unaware.  So you're going to launch this revolution with what?  Your breast implants?  You gonna beat those racist Republicans to death with them?

Cher on the front lines of the revolution.


Now that's revolting.

Hey, We're Here To Protect You From The Russkies!

I've mentioned, on too many occasions, my opinion that NATO, in 2012, serves absolutely no purpose (other than to funnel millions of American taxpayer dollars into eager - and bare - European coffers each year).  You're about to find out just how fossilized it has become.

Turkey - a member state in good standing - has called upon NATO to come to its assistance in its dispute with Syria.  A dispute that could erupt into all-out conflict.

Expect NATO to respond with alacrity.  With a letter.  Of full-fledged backing.

But nary a bullet for Turkey's defense.  That ain't gonna happen.

NATO exists and is prepared to act, you see, should World War II break out.

Meanwhile, meetings will be held, press conferences will be established, tea will be served, photos ...

We Need More Gun Control!

News from the most gun-controlled city this side of Pyongyang:

Rate of Killings Rises 38 Percent in Chicago in 2012

Maybe there's something going on beyond the fact that bad guys have guns.

Maybe there's something going on in Chicago that has to do with it having too many bad guys wandering the streets with impunity.

Nah.  It's those shiny metal objects with minds of their own.

Just ask those Democratic politicians in the Big Windy who are tasked with the job of ending all the carnage.  They'll tell ya.


To Liberals Skin Color Is Everything

"Cathy Areu, a contributing editor for the Washington Post Magazine, said Monday, 'It’s a tough time to be a white man in America where the minorities are really taking over.'"

She was, of course, being serious.

These people are so consumed with racial animosity ...

With All Due Respect To Justice Scalia

How Barack Obama chooses to - or not to - enforce the laws of the land is not Scalia's concern.  Except when he goes into the voting booth, like every other American citizen.  But speaking from the bench?  Stick to interpreting the Constitutionality of the law for us, man, and leave the politics to others.

In the news:
Supreme Court splits its verdict on Arizona immigration law
By James Vicini and Jonathan Stempel, Reuters

The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the main provision of Arizona's crackdown on illegal immigrants but threw out three other parts, handing partial victories to President Barack Obama in his challenge to the law and to the measure's conservative supporters.

In an important test of whether federal or state governments have the power to enforce immigration laws, the top U.S. court unanimously upheld the statute's most controversial aspect, a requirement that police officers check the immigration status of people they stop, even for minor offenses such as jay-walking.

But in a split ruling, the court also struck down other provisions of the southwestern U.S. state's 2010 law, the first of its kind in the country, that the Obama administration had challenged in court. The votes on those provisions were 5-3 or 6-2, with the more conservative justices in dissent.

Justice Antonin Scalia read an angry dissent from the bench, saying he would have upheld the entire Arizona law.

It "boggles the mind" that the president might decline to enforce federal immigration law, Scalia said, referring to Obama's June 15 executive order stopping deportation for certain young people in the United States illegally. [link] [emphasis mine]
Yes, it's a travesty that Obama is abandoning the state of Arizona to illegals. And yes, his replacement is going to have to confront the growing lawlessness that prevails there.

But that is not within Antonin Scalia's purview as a Supreme Court Justice. He crossed the line.

Let us deal with Obama and the illegals, big guy. You stick to the Constitution.

Joe Arpaio For President

At least he's willing to enforce the law.  Unlike the man most responsible for law enforcement in the land.

In response to Obama's decision to ignore federal law and the Supreme Court's decision forbidding the state of Arizona from enforcing federal law, Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio has this message:

"I'm not stopping anything. I'm going to continue to enforce those state laws regardless of what the federal government is trying to put pressure on me to satisfy all these activists, which by the way are in front of my building right now. Three and half years they've been in front of my building. So, I'm not going to bend to the federal government, especially when we still have state laws to enforce."

My hero.


And Speaking Of Obama's Decision To Abandon Arizona

Investor's Business Daily:

"What does it say about the Obama administration's priorities that it effectively scraps its sworn pledge to uphold the law, usurps the legislative function by ignoring federal laws, punishes those who comply and puts its own re-election first?"

"White House A Sore Winner On Arizona Ruling," editorial, June 25, 2012

When Do WE Get Reimbursed?

This story continues to be big news in the news world:

N.Y. attorney general: Madoff victim payouts within 3 years

As everyone knows - and is repeatedly reminded by the press - Bernie Madoff is the investor who swindled $1.2 billion from his innocent victims.

Question:

When do the American people get the $862 billion back that Obama swindled through his failed "stimulus" scheme?

Well, We Know Where The Daughter Gets It

Look no further than the mother:
Utah mom upset over judge's hair-cut punishment
By the Associated Press

Price, Utah (AP) — A Utah mother says she felt intimidated in court when a judge told her that he would reduce her 13-year-old daughter's sentence if she chopped off the girl's ponytail in court — an offer the mother says she now wishes she hadn't taken.

Valerie Bruno, of Price, said she has filed a formal complaint against 7th District Juvenile Judge Scott Johansen with the Utah Judicial Conduct Commission. The teenager and an 11-year-old friend were referred to juvenile court for cutting off the hair of a 3-year-old girl with scissors in March and for harassing another girl in Colorado by telephone.

When the 13-year-old faced Johansen for a hearing in May, he ordered she serve 30 days in detention and to perform 276 hours of community service, but he also offered to take 150 hours of community service off the sentence if her mother cut her ponytail in his courtroom.

Bruno is now expressing regret for not consulting an attorney before taking her daughter into the courtroom.

Mindy Moss, mother of the 3-year-old whose hair was cut off, said she approved of the sentence and even spoke up during the hearing when she felt Bruno had not cut off enough of her daughter's hair. Johansen then directed Bruno to cut the ponytail all the way "to the rubber band." [link]
Looks to me like the mother needs some discipline. Maybe she'll then start being a mother.

A three-year-old?  Come on, lady.  You have a responsibility here.

It Comes Down To This

Prediction: Global Warming Will Cause Everything

Monday, June 25, 2012

Donna Quixote Draws Her Sword

An amusing challenge comes from the lips of the most intelligence-challenged member of America's Democratic Party, Maxine Waters:

"'After a good night sleep, I wake up the next day, and I say: Come on, Tea Party, let’s get it on.’

By "get it on," she ain't talking sex.  (Or is she...  Hard to tell sometimes ...)  She's challenging those of us who espouse the Tea Party ideal to enter with her into the arena of political debate and "get it on."

Maxine Waters.

Clown.

Her words were apparently cheered by those Democrats in attendance at something called a "Unity Dinner."

Which makes them about as bright.

"Get it on."  No reporting on whether the California congresswoman could spell those words ...


Earth To Liberal Media

They never could understand why the really ... moderate ... Jon Huntsman was completely ignored in the Republican primaries and why he ultimately received a whopping two delegates to the upcoming Republican National Convention.

Here's why, geniuses:

Jon Huntsman Update: He Lands a Job at a Liberal Think Tank

I know.  I know.  The Brookings Institution isn't a liberal think tank.  It's a moderate think tank.  Made up of commies, collectivists, and other centrists.

In truth, Huntsman is where he ought to be.  And out of our hair.

Good riddance.

As Obama's Principle Achievement Is About To Be Aborted ...

... blame for ObamaCare's demise now starts to bubble to the surface - directed at the famed former Constitutional law instructor himself -  and it has a wonderful fragrance of WE TOLD YOU SO.

You were told long ago that the man who was going to make the rise of the oceans begin to slow and our planet begin to heal didn't have the first clue as to what he was talking about.

Turns out?  Obama - the Constitutional Law instructor - didn't know the first thing about Constitutional Law either.

See "Obama’s legal tactics seen as possibly hurting chances to save health-care law."

See "Perhaps if Obama had ever written any scholarly articles on the Commerce Clause, he’d have had a better understanding. But then, he never wrote any scholarly articles on anything."

As ObamaCare slowly sinks beneath the waves ...

Wikipedia Pulls a Liberal Stunt

There are few people in this country who would disagree with the proposition that Scientologists are - for the most part - nuts.

But even nuts have the right to speak in this country of ours.

So when Wikipedia opens its doors to the public, and allows anyone and everyone to fashion its content, but then singles out Scientologists for banishment, something, in my humble opinion, has gone off the rails.

See "Wikipedia Bans Church of Scientology."

Reason?  Too often members of the "church" (founded by a man many consider to have been hopelessly nuts himself) make things up when they edit the "Church of Scientology" entry in its "free encyclopedia."

Henceforth the "church" and its principle adherents are prohibited from doing any more editing.

Oddly, the same Wikipedia continues to allow Democrats to edit the "Barack Obama" submission to its pages.

Making its steadfast policy on lies and deception seem highly capricious.

I would respectfully suggest that those who referee for Wikipedia reconsider their decision.  Don't start down that road.

Or, as an alternative, let me submit my list - a lengthy and ever growing list - of other people and organizations that should be banned for the same reason.

No, you really don't want to go there.  

This Is Why McDonnell Should Have Stayed Out ...

... of the roiling University of Virginia mess.

First, see where our Governor felt the need to insert himself in the controversy.  And see where I admonished him for it.

And look at what it is that's about to transpire.  The University of Virginia is about to be taken over by the inmates:

"The board of visitors is reconvening Tuesday ... If the board capitulates to this top-down ultimatum, it ought to disband, drop the pretense of outside supervision, and turn the whole place over to the faculty that really runs it."

One tends to forget - this being the exalted university that Thomas Jefferson built - that it is owned in large measure by We the People.  And not owned by any measure by a grossly self-absorbed and detached-from-the-outside-world faculty.

University spending is out of control.  The Board of Visitors - recognizing the fact that the now-deposed president Teresa Sullivan either didn't have the wherewithal or the inclination to stop it - canned her ass.  Her employment was properly and justly terminated.

An action that the school's employees cannot accept.

My suggestion?  Fire them too.  The country is now awash in unemployed (and equally self-absorbed)  academics.  Those at UVa can be replaced overnight.

Suggestions aside, I ask again: Is this a controversy that Governor Bob McDonnell really wants to stick his nose in?

Don't Ever Doubt Glenn Beck ...

... like the New York Times's David Brooks did. You'll end up looking like a fool.

Said Brooks last February about Beck and the "Arab Spring" uprising in Egypt:

"What are you raving about? It is not the taking over of the Muslim fundamentalists."

In Brook's New York Times yesterday:

"Named Egypt’s Winner, Islamist Makes History."

That's right.  The Muslim fundamentalists have taken over.

As Glenn Beck predicted.

A prediction that Brooks mocked.

See Glenn Beck rub Brooks's nose in it.

Our Commander In Chief

What does a Politician-In-Chief do when the CIA submits an analysis of his plan in 2009 for fighting the war in Afghanistan that flatly states that it won't work?

He pretends he never got it.

"'We didn't want it," the official said."

Good grief.

Food For Thought

Something that makes you go hmmmm:

The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers Party.

Barack Obama was a lawyer.
Michelle Obama was a lawyer.
Hillary Clinton is a lawyer.
Bill Clinton is a lawyer.
John Edwards is a lawyer.
Elizabeth Edwards was a lawyer.
Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate).
Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.
Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress:
Harry Reid is a lawyer.
Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different.
President Bush is a businessman.
Vice President Cheney is a businessman.
The leaders of the Republican Revolution:
Newt Gingrich was a history professor.
Tom Delay was an exterminator.
Dick Armey was an economist.
House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer.
The former Senate Majority Leader Bill First is a heart surgeon.
Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer?  Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely, won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976. The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work, who are often the targets of lawyers.

The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers.
 Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who  heal the sick, like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich. The Lawyers Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America . And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers Party, grow. Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation. This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people.

Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side. Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming. Some Americans become adverse parties of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the Lawyers Party to provide real change, real reform or real hope in America Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.

The United States has 5% of the world’s population and 66% of the world’s lawyers!
Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in ridiculous lawsuits such as spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you and also to limit punitive damages in huge medical malpractice lawsuits. This legislation has continually been blocked from even being voted on by the Democrat Party. When you see that 97% of the political contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association goes to the Democrat Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!

Received via email.

Sunday, June 24, 2012

Are We Paying For This?

Look, I like to party my brains out on occasion too.  So I don't begrudge anyone wanting to cut loose and get crazy.  But when I'm asked to pay for other people's Bacchanalia?  Can we talk about that first?

Here's the latest from that debauchery that just ended down in Brazil that the one-world government types named - affectionately - the Rio de Janeiro summit on sustainable development:
Dubbed the Rio+20 conference to mark the 20th anniversary of the Earth summit that set out a global path to protect the environment, the Brazilian meeting was everything that summits have become in recent years: a colourful event with demonstrations, celebrities, cultural celebrations, business round tables, intense social media and riot police.

As far as content goes, however, the meeting produced a vision statement that contained plenty of good intentions but very few solid commitments.

Generally, countries committed to pay more attention to climate change, and increase aid for development. They also agreed to eventually develop long-term goals for sustainable development — global targets for both the environment and for eradicating global poverty.

Timelines and amounts were absent. [source]
No mention of the cost of putting 10,000 people in a room over a period of several days to come up with that mission statement. But you can bet it was in the tens of millions.

"Countries committed to pay more attention to climate change."  You gotta be kidding.

But hey.  The margaritas were mighty fine.  And the hookers!  Who'll forget Mama Conchita and those buxom Brazilian strumpets ...

Quote of the Day

From Mark Steyn:

"Indeed, the aforementioned Rigoberta Menchú ran as a candidate in the 2007 and 2011 presidential elections in Guatemala, although she got knocked out in the first round — Guatemalans evidently being disinclined to elect someone to the highest office in the land with no accomplishment whatsoever apart from a lousy fake memoir. Which just goes to show what a bunch of unsophisticated rubes they are."

"Obama’s Great American Novel," National Review, June 23, 2012

A Stirring Message

This goes out to those of you who want to save our country from Obama and the leaches among us:




You own this country. Take ownership.  Before it's too late.

When Skin Color Matters Above All Else

Fact 1: Barack Obama received upwards of 98% of the African-American vote in New York City in 2008.

Fact 2: More than half of all of African-Americans in New York City who were old enough to work had no job at all this year.

Fact 3: Barack Obama will receive upwards of 98% of the African-American vote in New York City in 2012.

I Thought We Weren't Supposed To Get Involved ...

... in social issues:

Poll: Obama tops Mitt Romney on social issues

If there are people out there who vote in national elections based on issues relating to sexuality, I think Obama should have them.

And if these are the kind of people who support our President because of their fixation on social issues, he deserves them.

He Has The Authority ...

... but is it the smart thing to do?
UVa: Gov. Bob McDonnell may oust entire board
By Tim Mak, Politico

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell demanded on Friday that board members of the University of Virginia settle the issue of the university’s presidency by Tuesday or he will ask all members to resign.

“Let me be absolutely clear: I want final action by the Board on Tuesday,” he wrote in a letter to the board. “If you fail to do so, I will ask for the resignation of the entire Board on Wednesday. Regardless of your decision, I expect you to make a clear, detailed and unified statement on the future leadership of the University.”

Controversy has dogged the university over President Teresa Sullivan being forced out by the school’s Board of Visitors, a move that has forced passionate protests by students, faculty and donors. [link]
I'm sure Governor Bob is getting a lot of pressure from UVa alumnae around the state who want the controversy to disappear, one way or another. But is it really at crisis point? Does McDonnell really need to intrude in the process so early on?

Patience and counseling, it seems to me, are called for. Not the heavy hand of government stepping in and applying even more pressure to an already volatile situation.

Back off, Bob.  And let those with skin in the game work toward their own solutions.  The Commonwealth will survive.

Why The EPA Must Be Abolished

EPA fines oil refiners for failing to use nonexistent biofuel

Saturday, June 23, 2012

What The GOP Establishment Doesn't Understand

When a Republican politician in Washington goes into a negotiation with a Democrat on Democrat terms - no matter the negotiated outcome - the Republican loses.

This they don't get.

But voters around the country - looking at the colossal mess that such deliberations have brought us - do.

That's why liberals are on the run and "moderate" Republicans - like Utah's Senator Orrin Hatch - are facing the wrath of their party's base.

To illustrate, here's an interesting exchange in Steven Moore's "Orrin Hatch Battles Ted Kennedy's Ghost in Utah":
What many conservatives view as Mr. Hatch's worst fiscal sin was co-sponsoring the 1997 children's health-care plan (S-Chip) with the late Ted Kennedy. I remember a few days after that bill passed, when an exuberant Mr. Hatch boasted to a conservative gathering that "I rolled Ted Kennedy" because "it's not an entitlement" and the bill didn't have the panoply of health benefits liberals wanted.

One skeptic asked Mr. Hatch, "Don't you think that's what Mr. Kennedy is telling his liberal allies right now about you?" As feared, the law has ballooned in cost and the episode has reinforced the view among conservatives that Orrin Hatch is an unreliable deal-cutter.
Kennedy celebrated the fact that he got what he wanted. Hatch celebrated the fact that Kennedy got only half of what he wanted.

In either case, Kennedy - and Hatch - grew the government and added another entitlement (Hatch's denial aside) to the burgeoning list of federal entitlements that this country can't afford.

Hatch doesn't see it that way.

And that - that alone - is why he needs to go.

- - -

To further illustrate the fact that we make progress, get a load of this:  If a retiring Democrat lament is any indication, perhaps the days of Republicans going along to get along (a more apt phrase there never was) are soon to be over.  From "Retiring Rep. blames ‘dumber’ public for atmosphere in Congress":

“'It used to be you had real friends on the other side of the aisle. It’s not like that anymore,' Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.) told Business Week’s Josh Tyrangiel. 'Society has changed. The public is to blame as well. I think the people have gotten dumber.'"

Don't look now, Gary, but your snooty ultra-liberalism is showing.

Does he really believe that the American people - along with the Republican Party - have (gotten "dumber" and ...) abandoned him? Well, yeah.

But could it be the case that Ackerman has simply gone off the reservation and left America behind?

Nah.

It's everyone's else's fault.

Ackerman, ye'll not be missed.  Go.  Now.

Friday, June 22, 2012

This Is Cute

The Presidential election in 2012 was too close to call. Neither Mitt Romney nor Obama had enough votes to win. There was much talk about ballot recounting, court challenges, etc., but a week-long ice fishing competition seemed the sportsmanlike way to settle things. The candidate that caught the most fish at the end of the week would win the election.

After much of back and forth discussion, it was decided that the contest would take place on a remote frozen lake in northern Wisconsin. There were to be no observers present, and both men were to be sent out separately on this isolated lake and return at 5 p.m. with their catch for counting and verification by a team of neutral parties.

At the end of the first day, Mitt Romney returned to the starting line and he had 10 fish. Soon Obama returned and had no fish. Well, everyone assumed he was just having a bad day or something and hopefully, he would catch up the next day. At the end of the 2nd day Mitt came in with 20 fish and Obama came in again with none.

That evening, the Democrats got together secretly and said, "I think that Mitt Romney is a low-life, cheatin' son-of-a-gun. Tomorrow, don't bother fishing. Just spy on him and see just how he is cheating."

The next night (after Mitt returns with 50 fish), the Democrats got together for the report of how the Republicans were cheating. Obama said, "You are not going to believe this, he's cutting holes in the ice!"

Received via email.

Spot The Idiot

The Hot Air caption captures it perfectly (click on the image to enlarge it):


So you know, this stupid, stupid woman is the most important Democrat in the House of Representatives.

For the love of God, she is.

West Virginia, a One-Party State

This is what you people up the road in West Virginia deserve when you pull the party lever every November every year for decades.  You get a United States Senator that defies your most basic trust and throws you under the bus.

When I heard it on the radio I couldn't believe it.  Senator Jay Rockefeller stabbed the Number One industry in his state in the back.  Big time. By siding with the "carbon footprint" loons:
Rockefeller says coal industry needs to 'face reality'
By Ry Rivard, Charleston Daily Mail Capitol Reporter

Charleston, W.Va. -- West Virginia coal operators must stop shrugging off climate change and pollution-related health problems to "face reality" about the future of coal, Sen. Jay Rockefeller said in a stern and stunning speech on the Senate floor Wednesday.

Rockefeller, D-W.Va., accused the coal industry of scare tactics. He said after years of industry opposition to new environmental regulations, the "bitterness of the fight has taken on more importance than any potential solution."

"The dialogue on coal, its impact and federal government's role has reached a stunningly fevered pitch -- carefully orchestrated messages that strike fear into the hearts of West Virginians and feed uncertainty about coal's future are the subject of millions of dollars of paid television ads, billboards, break room bulletin boards, public meetings, letters and lobbying campaigns," he said.

"A daily onslaught declares that coal is under siege from harmful outside sources and that the future of the state is bleak unless we somehow turn back the clock, ignore the present and block the future."

Rockefeller's remarks came amid an attempt by the Senate to stop the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from enforcing its new Mercury and Air Toxic Standards Rule.

The maneuver failed.

Rockefeller, as he made clear in his remarks, opposed the effort to block the rule.

The new EPA rule is targeted at reducing emissions, particularly mercury, from coal-fired power plants nationwide. The regulatory agency expects the rule to avert 11,000 pollution-related premature deaths. Rockefeller said pollution-related health concerns were being "demeaned" in the whole debate over the rule, which will also increase utility costs.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said Rockefeller's remarks were historic and courageous.

Members of the business community were shocked by Rockefeller's speech, said West Virginia Chamber of Commerce President Steve Roberts said.

When a reporter called, Roberts answered his phone, "This is Capito for United States Senate headquarters."

Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., is considered a possible U.S. Senate candidate. Rockefeller is next on the ballot in 2014 - if he runs again.

West Virginia Coal Association Vice President Jason Bostic said he thought it was clear the Obama administration was not a friend to coal mining, particularly Appalachian mining. He said it didn't make sense to accuse the industry of fear mongering because the mineworkers union also opposed the EPA rule.

"How dare a U.S. senator accuse organizations as broad as the United Mine Workers and the Coal Association of fear mongering," Bostic said. "If it's real, how can it be fear mongering?"

Back in West Virginia, business and industry leaders were dismayed by Rockefeller's vote and speech, Roberts said.

Roberts said he felt Rockefeller ignored his constituents and cast a vote that "is disappointing in unbelievable terms."

"Not only a vote, but a speech that is reverberating through the coal community in ways that I really haven't seen another very senior United States senator give anti-coal speeches," Roberts said, referring to Byrd's end-of-career remarks.

Roberts said he didn't think Rockefeller's remarks would be helpful to other Democrats in an election year.

"In case I'm not direct enough: I think this potentially hurts other Democrats on the ticket because at some point somebody is going to ask the question, 'What side are you on?'" Roberts said. [link]
When I first heard of Rockefeller's betrayal, my reaction was this: He just bought himself a reelection fight in 2014. But according to this article he may not seek reelection at all. Thus the restraints holding down his liberal bent have fallen away.

The people of West Virginia deserved better than this. But then they elected the bastard. Over and over again.

Guess we can't feel too sorry when more and more of them are thrown out of work as the EPA continues its inexorable war on coal.

- - -

Speaking of the loons whose side Rockefeller has chosen to take, here's a quote from one over in Boone County, heart of the coalfields:
Rockefeller's speech seemed destined to be quoted again and again by those who agree. Both messages tell the industry to change itself and both are by senators who worked repeatedly on behalf of coal industry interests.

Maria Gunnoe, a community organizer in Boone County who works to end mountaintop removal, said she couldn't stop reading Rockefeller's speech.

"I was just reading it for the fifth time," she said in a telephone interview Wednesday evening. "I can't quit reading it, actually. I've read it and thought about it and go back to it and read it again."

Gunnoe said Rockefeller "truly cares" about people in mining communities.
Not that this nitwit will really care, but the people in her mining community in Boone - the ones Rockefeller "truly cares" about - are unemployed in record numbers all of a sudden, as the EPA's efforts to destroy their livelihoods succeed, as coal-fired power plants around the country begin to be shut down.

What idiocy.

Food For Thought

Click on the image to enlarge it:


Thursday, June 21, 2012

The Party Of Old White Guys

The advice I'm about to offer Mitt Romney is crass, contemptible, and, probably, racist/sexist.  The kind of advice that Dick Morris would have given Bill Clinton to get his ass out of the ringer in 1998.  The kind of advice that worked.

First, though, let's accept a given.  The position of Vice President of the United States is virtually purposeless (except in instances where it has its entertainment value - google the words "Joe," "clown," and "Biden").

That being the case, Romney would do well to use the opportunity to select a politician to fill the position that might provide him with a point or two in Hispanic or black or female votes (with the expectation that it won't bring anything more).

I know.  American voters are much more engaged than to allow something so shallow to influence their voting decisions.  But really?  (Google the words "Barack," President," and Obama.")

That said, here's my recommendation to ol' Mitt:  Don't do this:

Tim Pawlenty's stock soars in Romney-world

Pawlenty.  A white guy.

What will he bring to the Romney White House?

Brains.  Ability.  Formulation.  Enunciation.  Good looks.

Wow.  Big deal, right?

Yeah.  Big freaking deal.

If elected Pawlenty will join an assemblage of 45,000 really smart and articulate (and good-looking)  government employees offering advice to President Romney.

Big whoop.

No.  Romney needs to use the position to break the mold (google the words "Sarah," "McCain-was-destined-to-be-a-loser-otherwise," and "Palin").  To shake things up.  To get a discussion going in one or more minority communities. (One or more?  Google the words "Condoleezza," "black," "female," and "Rice.")

Names that come to mind:

Allen West.  (Google his name and the first response that comes up includes the words "Atilla" and "Hun.")  So maybe not.

Michelle Bachmann.  Again, she'd be great for the entertainment value.  I love to see liberals wet their pants in anger and frustration.  But she's a bit of a flake.  So no.

Marco Rubio.  Good guy.  Good politician.  Good choice.  But he doesn't seem to want it.

Sarah Palin.  Now that would be bold.  (A bit of a disclaimer: I've offered to give birth to her next child; I love and admire her that much.)  But bold Romney ain't.  So that's out.

Colin Powell.  Colin Powell.  The (non-)politician who my fellow Tea Party fanatics love to hate.  But hey, fellas, we're all going to vote for Romney regardless.  So you (and I) don't count in this deliberation.  We're after independents here.  And - dare I use the term - "open-minded" Americans.  Those who are willing to vote for a candidate because of the color of his skin.  Last I looked...

... our guy would then be blacker than theirs.

Crass, contemptible, and, probably, racist/sexist, isn't it?

I can see the bumper sticker now ...



Like I said, that'll be good for a few points.

And a few points will make all the difference in November.

Mitt: I'll be sending you a bill for the advice.  Just, please, don't do anything stupid (for more on that, google the words "Tim" and "Pawlenty").

The Virginia Tech Massacre Victims' Relatives ...

... need to let it go.

Since when did it become about money and nothing more?

But no.  The plaintiffs in the case will now take their pleadings to the Supreme Court of Virginia where they'll ask for justice ...

... more money.

Jesus.

How Open-Minded Are Liberals?

About this open-minded:

Alice Walker Doesn't Want Her Books Published in Hebrew

Ms. Walker, so you know, is the author of the highly praised novel, The Color Purple, a work whose central theme is about abuse, maturation, acceptance, and, ultimately, forgiveness.  A work of fiction.

Like liberalism itself.

Obviously.

Four More Years! Four More Years!

When will it end?

Fed: Slower Growth, Higher Unemployment in 2012

The real tragedy?  Millions of Americans are poised to go into the booth in November and vote MORE OF THE SAME.

For the love of God.

The Final Tally Is In

Obama's "green" initiative is a colossal failure:

$9 Billion in ‘Stimulus’ for Solar, Wind Projects Made 910 Final Jobs -- $9.8 Million Per Job

And, yes, he's pledging to deliver MORE OF THE SAME if reelected in November.

How Little They've Come To Expect From Him

That was then.  The Washington Post the day after Barack Obama won election to the highest office on the planet:

"The excitement that Mr. Obama generated among his supporters suggests a capacity to inspire and reassure a worried and divided nation. His efficient, disciplined and, at times, ruthless campaign suggests a capacity to manage a government beset by problems of unimaginable complexity. And his combination of intelligence and eloquence, along with his evident instincts for consensus, offers hope that he can provide the leadership the nation so badly needs."

This is now:

Washington Post: Is It Even 'Possible' for Obama or any President 'to Succeed in the Modern World?'

My, how the mighty have fallen.

Nothing Good Will Come Of This

I'd like nothing better than to see our highly political United States Attorney General resign, but history tells us that this move will only stir the muck in Washington:

House panel recommends Holder contempt citation

If he gives up his office - as he should - fine.

But a protracted fight over Executive documents is going to get us nowhere.

- - -

But there is this:

Obama's Executive Privilege Has The Stench Of Cover-Up

I don't think these questions have been properly answered: Who in the Executive branch of the United States government set up and launched the plan to embarrass gun-rights supporters through the deployment of the infamous scheme that's come to be known as "Fast and Furious"?  And who authorized it?

Executive privilege, so you know, can only be invoked if the White House chooses to protect the President and his correspondence from Legislative overreach.  But the President has told us that he never had anything to do with "Fast and Furious."  So how does his invoking executive privilege apply?  Did he have something to do with it after all?

That leaves the big question: What did Obama know and when did he know it?

As the Wall Street Journal puts it:

"How can the President invoke a privilege to protect documents he and the White House are supposed to have had nothing to do with?"

Unfortunately we will never get answers now.

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Obama Who?

Todd Jackson, Roanoke Times, reports:

"The U.S. economy has 'obviously turned the corner' and is improving, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack said this morning in Blacksburg as he kicked off a media tour to praise the Obama administration’s assustance to rural areas.

"Staffers emphasized that Vilsack was campaigning as a former governor of Iowa rather than in his current federal role."

This clown was campaigning in Blacksburg, Virginia as a former governor of ... Iowa?

Really?

No. Not really.

But if I was a member of Obama's cabinet, and I was ordered to visit (kicking and screaming) a part of the country that harbors more animosity toward my boss than was directed toward our 16th President at the height of the Civil War, I'd identify myself as something other than what I am too.

Obama who?

On This Day ...

149 years ago, Virginia's wayward western counties successfully seceded from the state that was forbidden to secede from the United States and was officially declared a state by the government that doesn't allow secession.

Don't try to make sense of it.  Your head will explode.

Regardless, here's to the great state of West Virginia.

Now will you please come back home?

Romney Does a Good Impromptu

He may not go down in history as "the best orator ever," but he's not waiting for a teleprompter to disgorge words of wisdom either.

This is actually pretty good:





Take it to 'em, big guy.

The Party Continues

Now it's moved to fun-in-the-sun Rio de Janeiro:

U.N. Global Environmental Program Gets a Boost at ‘Rio+20’ Conference

Global recession?  Euro collapse?  War?  Pestilence?  Starvation?

Hey. let's talk about organic celery.  And pass me a margarita.  When are the hookers getting here?

How Quickly Things Change

It wasn't that long ago - Bill Clinton was President - that the people of Connecticut were free of the dreaded and debilitating income tax.

Then along came a lying, two-faced, back-stabbing Republican and that blessing vanished.

Two short decades ago.

How quickly times have changed:

New York, Connecticut Top State Income Tax Per Capita

In a democracy, we get what we deserve.  The people of Connecticut deserve this.

Republicans Offer An Alternative ...

... to windmills, waste-to-energy, and wishful thinking:
Two Cheers for House Energy Bill
By Nicolas Loris, Heritage Foundation

Often when policymakers introduce legislation in Washington, the title of the bill doesn’t always correspond with what the bill actually does. This is not one of those times. U.S. House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R–CA) recently introduced the Domestic Energy and Jobs Act, which would greatly improve access to America’s resources, bringing jobs and much needed economic activity along with it.

The legislation combines seven different bills that would open areas to oil and gas exploration, streamline the permitting process for all energy sources, provide lease certainty, and provide transparency and accountability on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations. While some of the language focuses too much on federal planning of energy policy and delays implementation of regulations rather than preventing them, the legislation would increase energy supply and drive economic growth.

An important component of this legislation is that it streamlines the permitting of all energy projects. Receiving a permit for any energy project, not just fossil fuels, takes entirely too long. Duplicative and unnecessary regulations slow the process. Furthermore, environmental activists delay new energy projects by filing endless administrative appeals and lawsuits. McCarthy’s bill would create a manageable time frame for permitting for all energy sources, including renewable energy projects.

Government restrictions and regulations are significantly impeding the market’s effectiveness in responding to changes in energy prices and making it difficult for suppliers of all types of energy to produce energy and create jobs. The Domestic Energy and Jobs Act would provide America with much needed energy supply and a much needed economic stimulus. [link]
"The Domestic Energy and Jobs Act would provide America with much needed energy supply and a much needed economic stimulus." Therefore expect Obama and company to be opposed to it.

That's Just Silly

How many of you haven't had "a brush with" health issues at some point in your life?

Cold?  Sore throat?  Runny nose?  Worse?

Then you've gained the right to speak out on the issue of Obamacare.

Or so suggests this genius who writes for the Washington Post.

Some Democrat has faced a health issue in her past.  So she's "very well positioned to go on offense on health care."

That fact, genius, puts her in a select group of 100% of America.

'You wonder why the U.S. had its credit-rating downgraded?'

Our government is out of control.

"In the 1990s Bill Clinton boasted that welfare reform took Americans off the dole. The Obama Administration boasts about how many it has added."

My God.

Take Heart!

We'll always have our 99%'ers.

Survey: Asia's millionaires outnumber North America's

We've done it to ourselves.  Where once many of us looked to the day when all Americans would be millionaires, now those seeking success flee to Asia, where they are welcomed with open arms.

Sadly, many in this country will cheer this news.

Fools.

I Can't Imagine Why

See Efrafa.

See Talk of drones patrolling U.S. skies spawns anxiety

Purpose? To get an accurate count of the number of rapes, murders, assaults, robberies, and thefts that occur down below.

Hey, it's the age of Obama. What's a few million bucks when you consider the fact that the government will have quality bookkeeping records?

See V for Vendetta.

From The Gun Control Capital of America

While the police in Chicago are focused on "getting guns off the street" by paying 80-year-old white grannies a hundred bucks for the ancient .22 caliber pistols their dead husbands left them (see next post), thugs - and lawlessness - run free in the streets of their city.  And though you won't find it reported as such by the mainstream press, it's not just  random crime that terrorizes the citizenry there.  It's the worst possible:

"City officials and the media might be the only two places left where people still deny Chicago is under assault from more than 50 episodes of black mobs attacking, beating, robbing and vandalizing over the last three years in and around downtown."

Meanwhile, officials there are working diligently to disarm the victims ...


We Make Progress

Reality sets in:
The futility of gun turn-ins
By Steve Chapman, Chicago Tribune

If you've got some clothes you don't need anymore, you can give them to Goodwill or the Salvation Army. If you have an old car, you can call various organizations to take it away. And if you're in Chicago and have a gun that's burning a hole in your pocket, you can get rid of it June 23, no questions asked.

The city government has a great fondness for gun turn-in events. It's done six of them in the past six years, collecting more than 23,000 weapons. This one will be held at 23 churches, and anyone handing over a firearm will get a $100 gift card. The guns will then be destroyed.

The motive behind these efforts is not hard to understand in a place that had 433 murders last year and has seen a spike this year. Dozens of shootings take place in Chicago every week.

Two years ago, explaining the effort, then-Mayor Richard M. Daleysaid, "We have just too many guns in our society. When someone has access to a gun, they use it." The gun buyback is a way "we can reduce the number of guns on our streets," says Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

But don't put too much stock in those pronouncements. The number of privately owned guns in America keeps rising, and at last count it totaled 270 million, or about one for every adult. But nationally, the homicide rate has fallen by half over the past two decades.

Contrary to Daley, most people who own guns never use them for anything but legal purposes (hunting, target shooting, self-defense). Contrary to Emanuel, the weapons this sort of venture yields are probably not the ones carried in the streets or the ones used in crimes. The reduction also represents a minuscule share of the firearms in the city, which may number over a million.

Think about it: Who is most likely to turn in a firearm for a $100 reward? Someone with 1) a cheap gun and 2) no criminal propensity — say, Aunt Millie disposing of a rusty revolver her late husband left in the nightstand.

Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck noted in a 1996 book that when St. Louis did a gun buyback, those participating "were commonly middle-aged and 80 percent white, while those involved in gun violence in that city were mostly young and black."

Criminals will have trouble finding any appeal in this offer. In the first place, their weapons may have cost far more than $100, as handguns and long guns of good quality usually do.

In the second place, thugs practice a trade in which a weapon is essential for doing business. A pistol used in the course of armed robberies will pay for itself many times over. A $100 gift card won't.

The experience elsewhere offers little hope that the program will make a noticeable difference. After a successful 1974 buyback in Baltimore, the firearm homicide rate jumped by 50 percent. A study of a Seattle effort found it "failed to reduce significantly the frequency of firearms injuries, deaths or crimes."

This is the pattern wherever turn-ins take place. [link]
Where have you heard all this before?

Oh. Yeah. From everyone in the United States of America outside liberal enclaves scattered around the country.

Reality is setting in even there.

We make progress.

Stuck on Stupid

By the way, the city of Chicago is having another gun buyback extravaganza this weekend.  Not using that old, rusted boat anchor of a .22 anymore?  Hand it over to the local ... crime fighters ... and make a buck off of it.

And do your part to make the streets of Chicago safe.

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Quote of the Day

James Taranto, making a wonderful comparison between laments that arose from within the mainstream press in 1980, when the ineffectual Jimmy Carter was on his way to losing in a landslide (to a conservative, agggghhhh!), to similar whines today:

"Listen closely and you can hear the sounds of slogging echo across the decades. They emanate not just from the failed president but from sympathetic journalists trying to absolve him of the responsibility for his failure."

Jimmy Carter too faced crises beyond his control.  Until Ronald Reagan stepped up and took control of them.

And now poor Barack ...

The World Will Have To Make Do

I'm not sure I'd buy the argument that the world has been free of hardship and strife since America rose to the exalted position of  Superpower after World War II.  In which year exactly have we seen that Pax Americana again?

The Wall Street Journal kinda skips over that point to make this one:
A Leaderless World

Not so long ago much of the world griped about an America that was too assertive, a "hyperpower" that attempted to lead with too little deference to the desires of those attending the G-20 meeting today in Mexico. Well, congratulations. A world without U.S. leadership is arriving faster than even the French hoped. How do you like it?

• In Syria, a populist revolt ...

• Iran continues its march toward a nuclear ...

• Again President of Russia, Vladimir Putin snubbed President Obama's invitation to ...

• In Egypt ...

For the Putins of the world and many American liberals, these signs of fading U.S. influence are welcome. They have finally tied down the American Gulliver. The era of "collective security" through the U.N. has arrived, and, whatever the future difficulties, at least there will be no more Iraqs.

But note well that the substitute for U.S. leadership is not a new era of U.N.-administered peace. It is often a vacuum filled by the world's nastiest actors. That is nowhere clearer than in Syria, where Russia and Iran have a free run to fortify the Assad dictatorship. [link]
Problem with this piece is? I think I could make the opposite argument using the same examples.

Yeah, Syria, Egypt, and Iran are problems. But when haven't they been?

Syria has been ruled by the same ruthless family for 42 years - when we ruled the world and now when we don't. Nothing's changed.

Iran was a thorn in our side even when Ronald Reagan governed the planet.

Egypt has been a basket case since forever.

And Russia? It was much more the totalitarian state when we weren't pulling back our influence.

So, yeah, the world today is a violent place.

Like it's been for ... ever?

American oversight or no.

WV Democrats In Rebellion

Efforts on the part of the federal government, lead by America's leading Democrat, to destroy the state's biggest industry will have this effect:
Democratic W.Va. governor won't attend convention
Associated Press

Charleston, W.Va. (AP) -- Democratic West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin says he won't attend the party's national convention, citing serious problems with President Barack Obama.

Tomblin is an automatic superdelegate to the Democratic National Convention. He says his time is best spent working in West Virginia, not attending the four-day political rally in Charlotte, N.C.

In West Virginia's presidential primary, Tomblin refused to say whether he voted for Obama.

Tomlbin isn't alone in sitting this one out - West Virginia's Sen. Joe Manchin and congressman Nick Rahall say they don't plan to attend the convention, either.

Each of the three faces a Republican opponent in November. [link]
Nowhere in America will you find better evidence that the Democratic Party has abandoned its traditional base than in West Virginia. In other areas of the country - like the deep South - Democrats who felt disfranchised by their party switched parties. But in West Virginia, that "my granddaddy was a Democrat and my daddy was a Democrat so ..." mentality reigns. So Manchin, Rahall, and Tomblin and lots of other politicians play a game in which they love their party but refuse to associate with it on the national stage.

Strange. But it'll get all three reelected in the state that Obama has forsaken.

Monday, June 18, 2012

Meet Your Congressional Candidate


Here in Virginia's 9th Congressional district the Democratic Party has nominated a complete unknown to run against Morgan Griffith come November.  One Anthony Flaccavento.

So who is he?

Well, you read here the other day that he is a proponent of something that James Lovelock - the world's leading environmentalist whacko - calls "meaningless drivel."  That being a scheme that only a United Nations groupie could love - something called "sustainable development."

But beyond that, who is Anthony Flaccavento?

Let's let him define himself.  See "Pets, Poultry, and Plastics," Richmond Times- Dispatch, May 27, 2007.

Or I can summarize his work for you:

Food is too cheap.  You're too fat.  And he has a plan to correct both problems.

And he wants your vote in November.

Good luck with that, sweetheart.

The Product of Small Minds


You've read that old adage: "Those who can do; those who can't write editorials for the Roanoke Times."

The shoe fits.

Check out today's editorial, "Now deal with rising doublespeak."

In this ditty the editorialists there attack people like me who are convinced that the evidence that humans are causing the planet to warm is unconvincing.

First sentence: "Euphemisms usually fail in politics."

Followed by a whole lot of sentences about a euphemism once termed "global warming" but one that quickly morphed into "climate change" when the globe quit warming but the climate - thank God! - kept changing.

Persons who live by the euphemism die by the euphemism.

Nice Ploy If You Can Get Away With It

With shades of Michael Moore:

"Comedy Central host Jon Stewart regularly bashes American multimillionaires for their wealth while ignoring the awkward fact that he’s one of them."

That's where the term "biting the hand that feeds you" comes from.

For what it's worth, Stewart - now one of the richest capitalists on earth - once admitted to Roger Ailes that he - Stewart - was a socialist.

Just goes to show, you don't have to be all that smart to be filthy rich.

The NY Times Lives In an Alternative Universe


Scroll down and you'll find a reference to Mitt Romney, who says the number of unemployed and underemployed in this country is now 23 million.  And rising (Obama will try to convince you that the number of jobs extant has risen for 27 straight months, but what he doesn't say is that the number of workers seeking employment has risen even higher in each and every one of those months, what with immigrants and young people entering the marketplace by the hundreds of thousands).

Despite all that, the New York Times this morning makes a wonderful argument against Alabama's harsh law targeting illegals ... a wonderful argument IF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WERE AT FULL EMPLOYMENT.

The Times:
Alabama law drives out illegal immigrants but also has unexpected consequences

Albertville, Ala. — For years, most poultry workers here were Mexican immigrants, including some who were in the country illegally. But last fall, after a tough state law against illegal immigrants took effect, many vanished overnight, rattling the town’s large Hispanic community and leaving the poultry business scrambling to find workers willing to stand for hours in a wet, chilly room, cutting up dead chickens.

“Even someone born and raised in Albertville may not have the necessary skills or be able to pass a background check,” said Frank Singleton, a spokesman for Wayne Farms, which owns the slaughterhouse. The firm held a job fair that attracted about 250 local residents, but few were hired, and some soon quit, daunted by the demanding work. Since the law took effect, he said, “our turnover rate has gone through the roof.”

Sponsors of the law say it has done exactly what they had hoped, driving tens of thousands of illegal immigrants from the state.

[State Sen. Scott Beason, the sponsor of the law,] said he had “absolutely no doubt” that the law, and the resulting exodus of illegal workers, has started putting more Alabamians to work. Beason noted that the state’s unemployment rate has fallen sharply since last fall, from 9.8 percent to 7.2 percent, and he said the new law was “a big part” of the reason. “I get phone calls from people thanking me all the time,” he said.

Nevertheless, a variety of employers in Alabama said they have not been able to find enough legal residents to replace the seasoned Hispanic field pickers, drywall hangers, landscapers and poultry workers who fled the state. [link] [emphasis mine]
Bullshit.  If employers in Alabama can't find employees, they aren't trying.

This argument might have worked when George W. Bush came into office. But today, with a fifth of America being out of work?

Please.

That ol' dog don't hunt no mo'.

Romney Makes Sense

It has for years been bewildering how the brokest nation on the planet can send billions of dollars overseas to keep other governments from going broke.

But there's Obama ...

And there was Bush ...

Back to Truman and beyond ...

Well, Mitt Romney says (key word being "says") he'll have none of it:
US won't send checks to Europe: Romney
Associated Press

The United States will not bail out European countries if the eurozone economy falls apart under a spiraling debt crisis, Republican White House hopeful Mitt Romney said Sunday.

"We're not going to send checks to Europe. We're not going to bail out the European banks. We're going to be poised here to support our economy," Romney told CBS television's "Face the Nation" program.

He expressed hope that "regardless of what happens in Europe, that our banking sector is able to weather the storm," noting that US banks are on a "much stronger basis" than during the last crisis.

"I wish that over the last three and a half years that the president would have taken action to rebuild the basis of our economy... get it on such a strong footing that the challenges in Europe if they occur wouldn't have as significant impact as they might otherwise," he said.

"But right now, we're dealing with 23 million people out of work or stopped looking for work or underemployed, homes are still bumping along the bottom, foreclosures are (at) very high levels, median incomes are way down; the president's frankly made it harder for our economy to reboot." [link]
I hope he's faithful to his pledge.

Starting with two wars and a Marshall Plan, we've been bailing Europe out for decades.

Well, enough is enough. Let them sink or swim on their own.

We have our own problems to deal with.

Ever growing problems ...

And Speaking of Foreign Aid ...

... we give over a billion dollars a year to this bunch:

Islamist claims victory in Egypt president vote

A virulent anti-American, by the way.

Weren't we fighting a war whose goal was to kill all the Islamists a few short years ago?

Now they're receiving our foreign aid.

My God.  We are paying for the noose with which they intend to hang us.

A Second Look At Rubio

Why can't Republicans walk the walk?
A Tale of Two Conservatives
Wall Street Journal editorial

One test for economic conservatives is whether they are willing to oppose constituent business interests looking for government favoritism. On that score, two recent contrasting votes by Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Marco Rubio of Florida are instructive.

Last month the Senate easily voted to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank, 78-20, a vote that was never much in doubt given the backing from business lobbies and the White House. But it's still worth saluting the 20 votes in opposition—19 Republicans and independent socialist Bernie Sanders—and especially Mr. DeMint, a rare case of a Senator voting for principle against the biggest interests in his home state.

Boeing is the largest beneficiary of Ex-Im bank taxpayer loan guarantees and it has a new plant to turn out 787s in North Charleston. General Electric and Caterpillar have major plants in South Carolina and get Ex-Im help too. Mr. DeMint went so far as to lead the charge against Ex-Im, much to the annoyance of Chambers of Commerce in the Palmetto State.

"I gave a speech to 400 Chamber members and everyone was for Ex-Im Bank," he says. "So I asked them: 'How many of you would sign your own name to this loan?' Not a single hand went up." Mr. DeMint says he voted as he did because he's concluded that "we've created a culture in Washington that has almost every major business in the country with its nose in the trough."

That includes the sugar lobby, which last week narrowly defeated a bipartisan attempt at reforming its egregious quota program that gouges American consumers to benefit a mere 5,000 or so farmers. The Senate voted 50-46 to table Senator Pat Toomey's reform bill, but the reform would have passed if not for the votes of 16 GOP Senators.

The usual sugar beet and sugar cane state suspects dominate the list, but one name leaps out—Mr. Rubio, the freshman from Florida who won his seat in 2010 while running as a tea party favorite in opposition to the crony capitalism and government meddling of the Obama Administration.

Mr. Rubio nonetheless voted against consumers and for the big sugar-cane producers, including Florida's Fanjul family. Mr. Rubio thus voted to the left of the 16 Democrats who joined 30 Republicans in supporting sugar reform. Unlike Mr. DeMint, the Floridian was not a profile in courage on this issue, or even a profile. [link]
Expect the price of sugar to remain artificially high.

Expect manufacturing jobs in industries that use large quantities of sugar in their processes (think chocolate) to remain tragically low.

Expect Marco Rubio to babble some incoherent explanation when asked why he would vote for such a thing.

Some day. Some day ...

Then Don Lemon's Stupid Too

Don Lemon Agrees With Sam Donaldson About Conservatives Opposing Obama Simply Because He's Black

That Ring of Truth

Ah, that lovable "99%" crowd (click on the image to enlarge it):



They hate the government they want more of.

I don't know ...

Sunday, June 17, 2012

The Usual Suspects ...

... are attending a "sustainable development" conference in Rio de Janeiro this week.

Nothing is expected to come out of it.  Except more meaningless drivel.

But Hillary and her environmentalist pals should have a great time dancing the night away.

Drinks are on us, by the way.

- - -

Care for a dose of that meaningless drivel that will be coming out of the Rio conference?

Try and wrap your brain around concepts like "resource justice" and "contraction and convergence for over- and under-consumers of natural resources."

Neither I nor those who espouse such nonsense have a clue as to what it means.

But there they are, espousing it anyway ...

The Light Bulb Comes On

This article doesn't identify those in the Delaware Senate who voted sensibly as being either Democrat or Republican but because the state is Democrat Central, I have to assume a few of the YEA votes were Dems.  Which means there's hope for mankind after all.

The encouraging news:
Delaware Senate nixes extension of gun buyback
By Randall Chase, Associated Press

The Delaware state Senate has refused to reauthorize a gun buyback program set to expire July 1.

Lawmakers last year approved a pilot program that resulted in more than 2,000 weapons being exchanged for prepaid debit cards worth $100 to $200.

Legislation sponsored by Democratic Sen. Bobby Marshall (D-Wilmington) to extend the program was defeated 13-to-8 Wednesday, even though $200,000 had been set aside in the budget for the upcoming fiscal year.

Opponents questioned the effectiveness of the program in reducing gun crime in cities such as Wilmington, where three people were shot to death this week in a span of less than 24 hours. [link]
It doesn't take a genius to realize that a person could sell some hunk o' junk to the government, pocket the cash, and drive down to the local Wal-Mart and buy a nice, shiny new rifle for home protection. Or for shooting opposing gang members in Wilmington.

The gun buyback scheme is, without doubt, the most idiotic idea Democrats in this country have ever come up with. Tops on a very lengthy list of stupid ideas.

Though the practice still exists, at least the Senate in Delaware has come to its senses.

Hope springs eternal ...

Sam Donaldson's a Moron

A quote from the most well-respected member of the media elite (well-respected by that same media elite, that is) alive today:

"Many on the political right believe this president ought not to be there – they oppose him not for his polices [sic] and political view but for who he is, an African American!"

Right, Sam.  We oppose Obama because he's "black."

Which is the same reason we oppose(d) Hillary.  And, for that matter, John Kerry and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.

Because they're black.

You idiot.

Gotta Love Them Muslims

From the religion of peace:
World War Two graves in Libya desecrated again
Reuters

Benghazi, Libya (Reuters) - Headstones on World War Two military graves in Libya's eastern city of Benghazi have been desecrated again, a local official said on Saturday, in the second such attack in four months.

Earlier this year, Libya's leadership apologised after armed men in Benghazi smashed the graves of British and Italian troops killed during World War Two, in an act of vandalism that bore the hallmarks of radical Islamists.

In February, amateur video footage posted on social networking site Facebook showed men casually kicking over headstones in a war cemetery and using sledgehammers to smash a metal and stone cross.

Benghazi is near where British and Commonwealth troops fought heavy battles against German and Italian forces during the 1939-45 war.

Security experts say the area around the city is host to a number of Islamist militant groups opposed to any Western presence in Muslim countries. [link]
Meanwhile, the press in this country spends its time focusing our attention on the actions of a handful of Mormons who lived 150 years ago ...

Muslims. Ever think about how much better a world ours would be without them?