Friday, October 10, 2008

What's This?

Does this mean West Virginians are not all racist pigs? It must ...

Poll shows Obama ahead of McCain in W.Va.

For the sake of accuracy, the stats actually show that 50% of Mountaineer voters currently favor Obama's candidacy. The other 50% of West Virginians are still racist pigs.

Okay, Forget The 'Drill Here, Drill Now'

Gas Dips Below $3 Mark At Some Bristol Filling Stations

And just in time for us to turn our attention back to "American Idol" again. Good timing.

Seems Fitting

Isn't the Roanoke City Market where inspectors found rat turds in the pancakes recently? I think we've found the source:

Bill Clinton to stump for Obama at city market

Mystery solved.

Pulaski Gets Hammered Again

The temporary imbalance between tax revenue and projected government spending here in Virginia brings a permanent layoff to 62 Pulaski area residents:
Cuts will close door on Pulaski prison site
By Lerone Graham, Roanoke Times

About 60 Pulaski Correctional Center employees will lose their jobs when the prison is closed next year as a result of state budget cuts announced Thursday.

The closing of the Pulaski Correctional Center, which opened in 1955 on 52 acres off U.S. 11 near Dublin, will result in 62 layoffs.

Virginia Department of Corrections spokesman Larry Traylor said the department is trying to carry out the governor's cost-cutting plan as efficiently as possible. (link)

This news comes close on the heels of the release of Virginia Employment Commission numbers that show Pulaski's rate of unemployment stands at a staggering 9.4% and is climbing rapidly.

Is the closing of the prison (our only growth industry in Southwest Virginia, by the way, besides meth and oxycontin production) warranted? The experts apparently say it is.

This is going to hurt ...

Winning On The Merits

So Obama is going to bring change, they tell us. He's "transformative." Unlike any politician this country has ever seen before. A uniter, not a divider. Well, if this is a taste of things to come, count me out:
Enter The Race Card
New York Post editorial

It was bound to happen, and so it has: Democrats and their allies are playing the race card.

Big time.

[N]o less a luminary than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yesterday lit into a radio host who had the temerity to note that former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines has been an adviser to Barack Obama's campaign.

"The only connection that people could bring up about Raines and Barack Obama," said Reid, "is that they both are African-American. Other than that there is nothing."

Actually, The Washington Post has reported that the Obama campaign sought advice from Raines "on mortgage and housing policy matters."

That may not be the end of the world, but it's sure not "nothing."

Then there's Democratic luminary Barney Frank ... (link)
A new kind of politics? Doesn't look it to this (sigh...) white boy.

Quote of the Day

On Obama's judgment, and the media's double standard, Charles Krauthammer:

Obama's political career was launched with Ayers giving him a fundraiser in his living room. If a Republican candidate had launched his political career at the home of an abortion-clinic bomber -- even a repentant one -- he would not have been able to run for dogcatcher in Podunk. And Ayers shows no remorse. His only regret is that he "didn't do enough."

Why are these associations important?

They tell us two important things about Obama.

First, his cynicism and ruthlessness. He found these men useful, and use them he did. Would you attend a church whose pastor was spreading racial animosity from the pulpit? Would you even shake hands with -- let alone serve on two boards with -- an unrepentant terrorist, whether he bombed U.S. military installations or abortion clinics?

Second, and even more disturbing than the cynicism, is the window these associations give on Obama's core beliefs. He doesn't share the Rev. Wright's poisonous views of race nor Ayers's views, past and present, about the evil that is American society. But Obama clearly did not consider these views beyond the pale. For many years he swam easily and without protest in that fetid pond.

Until now.
If he was comfortable in the presence of these scoundrels, how are we to expect him to stand up to the likes of Osama bin Ladin?

A Tale Of Two Editorials

The Editorial team at the New York Times should read the editorials ...

... at the New York Times.

We're featured this morning to two opinion pieces from The Old Gray Lady." The first one ("Building a Better Bailout")* calls for partial government ownership of America's banks, claiming that "government is the only force that can pull us out of this crisis."

The second editorial ("Citizen Terrorists Deleted") criticizes the government (or a portion thereof) of the state of Maryland for being (a) corrupt, (b) "chilling," (c) "abusive," and (d) feckless bumblers.

Yeah, we need more of that. In the banking industry, for God's sake.

Do these people even pay attention?

- - -

* I particularly enjoyed this line: "It’s still unclear how ... the Treasury would inject capital and assume ownership." But they're all for it just the same. Brilliant.

Then Why Do It?

Want to stop "global warming?" You'd better come up with a Plan C first. The Kyoto Protocols didn't slow it down at all. And the latest proposals? Here's Bjorn Lomborg, writing in the Times of London:
Britain's efforts to reduce the speed of global warming will cost huge sums of money and have a pitifully tiny effect

Global warming is seen everywhere as one of the most important issues. From the EU to the G8, leaders trip over one another to affirm their commitment to cutting CO2 to heal the world. What they do not often acknowledge - in part because it would lose them support - is that the solutions proffered are incredibly costly and will end up doing amazingly little good, even in a century's time. This is the truly inconvenient truth of the politics of global warming.

It is a well-rehearsed point that the Kyoto Protocol was a terribly inefficient, hugely costly way to do virtually no good. Even if every industrialised country, including the United States, had accepted the protocol, and everyone had lived up to its requirements for the entire century, it would have had virtually no impact, even a hundred years from now. It would reduce the global temperature increase by an immeasurable 0.15C by the year 2100. The cost of implementing Kyoto, taking the average figure from the various top macroeconomic models, would have been almost £100 billion annually for the rest of the century.

The US declined to sign up to Kyoto and many countries, including Spain, Japan, Canada, and Greece, have had a hard time living up to their pledges. It is likely that the total reduction in carbon emissions will be less than 5 per cent of what Kyoto promised. (link)

Despite the overwhelming evidence that Kyoto I brought about little change - at great expense to those nations that got caught up in the madness - leaders of those same nations are looking to negotiate and implement Kyoto II.

What was that definition of the word stupid again?

Sabotaging American Foreign Policy

If this story proves to be true, it means Barack Obama has disqualified himself from being president:
Obama tried to sway Iraqis on Bush deal
By Barbara Slavin, The Washington Times

At the same time the Bush administration was negotiating a still elusive agreement to keep the U.S. military in Iraq, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama tried to convince Iraqi leaders in private conversations that the president shouldn't be allowed to enact the deal without congressional approval.

Mr. Obama's conversations with the Iraqi leaders, confirmed to The Washington Times by his campaign aides, began just two weeks after he clinched the Democratic presidential nomination in June and stirred controversy over the appropriateness of a White House candidate's contacts with foreign governments while the sitting president is conducting a war. (link)

I wonder how Obama is going to feel when every soldier stationed in Iraq starts conducting foreign policy. No different.

That should win over all those world leaders who the Democrats feel the need to be sucked up to.

"But Staff Sergeant Willy B. Wonka of Puoghkeepsie, New York warned us the USA would invade again if we didn't put a liquor store at the corner of Jihad and Martyrdom Streets, Barack."

A Plea To Senator McCain

It comes from a Waukesha, Wisconsin talk show host (an African-American, so he can't be accused of being a racist ...), but it is a plea we are all making, as day after day we watch him play nice so as not to offend those "moderate" voters out there:

I am begging you, sir, I am begging you. Take it to him.”

Him being Obama of course. It being the fact that Obama has in his closet a lot of skeletons that need to be exposed to the light of day.

The latest skeleton to appear? Can this be true? Hello? Can we get someone from the mainstream press to check out the story sometime before 2009?

But if the press isn't going to expose Obama, who will?

We beg you, sir. We beg you ...

And Another Thing ...

Yesterday I bitchslapped New York Times columnist Tom Friedman for his having gone after Sarah Palin for her being "a novice," a charge he'd never make about the woefully inexperienced Barack Obama. You can read it here.

But there's another point to be made, before we leave him to his narrow breadth of view. About that example that Friedman sites as being the reason for his attacking her? Sarah is right. Friedman is wrong.

In his column, he wrote:
It was when she turned to Biden and declared: “You said recently that higher taxes or asking for higher taxes or paying higher taxes is patriotic. In the middle class of America, which is where Todd and I have been all of our lives, that’s not patriotic.”

What an awful statement. Palin defended the government’s $700 billion rescue plan. She defended the surge in Iraq, where her own son is now serving. She defended sending more troops to Afghanistan. And yet, at the same time, she declared that Americans who pay their fair share of taxes to support all those government-led endeavors should not be considered patriotic.
What an awful statement? In fact, it's a statement with which I happen to agree. There's nothing patriotic about paying taxes. Nor is the act to be considered unpatriotic. Paying our taxes, like obeying speed limit laws, is simply our way of making for - and contributing to - a more orderly and prospering society. No more, no less.

I ask you: If paying taxes is patriotic, are all those millions of Americans out there who pay no taxes unpatriotic? Tom?

Admit it, man. You just hate the woman and were looking for a reason to put your venom to print. I'd suggest you find a better plan of attack.