You're not just imagining it - everything costs more today. Why? You must pay, so that they may play...
Just a few of the tax increases being proposed amongst a number of states in order to make sure public employees can still get their raises, keep their benefits, and maintain their outrageous pensions:
*Shoe repair -- The Pennsylvania state legislature is looking to add a 6 percent sales tax to the service.
*Watch repair and tailoring -- New York is considering taxing both at 4 percent.
*Bowling -- 26 states are already taxing the pseudo sport and several more, including Nevada and New Mexico, are looking to join the fray.
*Pool cleaning -- Indiana wants to join several other states in adding a 6 percent sales tax to what you pay your pool boy.
*Gym memberships -- Alabama wants your license to sweat to cost 4 percent more.
*Horseback riding -- Arizona aims to make horse owners pay 5.6 percent more to board horses on farms.
*Interior decorating -- Oregon, Colorado and New Jersey want to tack on anywhere from 2 to 6 percent in taxes on pro interior decorator services.
Change a watch battery, bowl a few frames, go to work out...even in the most mundane aspects of an individual's personal day-to-day life, the liberal welfare state feels empowered to step in, to monitor, to regulate, and to charge him or her a fee for every minor transaction, for every bit of momentary pleasure. Even the attempt to merely exercise one's body is now subject to government taxation.
And they wonder why a Tea Party rages, and why some speak openly of a Second American Revolution....
(interesting - how many of the aforementioned states have Democratic governors? Yup, just about all of them...)
Saturday, July 31, 2010
New York Comptroller Confess Ignorance On Bonds
Well, it's not like you need to know these type of things if you're a Democrat, I suppose. Just repeat "Taxes good, Business bad" enough and you are considered a Krugman-esque economic wizard:
State Controller Thomas DiNapoli flubbed a basic question yesterday about one of his office's fundamental tasks - how it sells bonds.
Asked whether they pick managers for the bond business through a competitive process or from a list of prequalified companies, DiNapoli couldn't say.
"We look at it on a case-by-case basis," DiNapoli said. "So, uh, the last one, we can check and get back to you."
In fact, a state rule requires bond managers to be picked competitively, with rare exceptions for extraordinary circumstances...
You would think the man responsible for managing and advising on the debt of a red-ink laden state like New York would at least have a basic understanding of who was selling that debt. But nope, no clue...
Is there a Democrat in this country - from Barack Obama on down - who has even a basic freshman-level understanding of how macro-economics works? Or have they all ditched troublesome things, such as facts, in favor of management by ideology?
Interesting note - the print version of the left-of-center New York Daily News, which reported this story, contains criticism of DiNapoli from his Republican opponent. Scrubbed out of the web version, though. Can't have the folks knowing there is more than one party available to rule them...
State Controller Thomas DiNapoli flubbed a basic question yesterday about one of his office's fundamental tasks - how it sells bonds.
Asked whether they pick managers for the bond business through a competitive process or from a list of prequalified companies, DiNapoli couldn't say.
"We look at it on a case-by-case basis," DiNapoli said. "So, uh, the last one, we can check and get back to you."
In fact, a state rule requires bond managers to be picked competitively, with rare exceptions for extraordinary circumstances...
You would think the man responsible for managing and advising on the debt of a red-ink laden state like New York would at least have a basic understanding of who was selling that debt. But nope, no clue...
Is there a Democrat in this country - from Barack Obama on down - who has even a basic freshman-level understanding of how macro-economics works? Or have they all ditched troublesome things, such as facts, in favor of management by ideology?
Interesting note - the print version of the left-of-center New York Daily News, which reported this story, contains criticism of DiNapoli from his Republican opponent. Scrubbed out of the web version, though. Can't have the folks knowing there is more than one party available to rule them...
Friday, July 30, 2010
Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy: Obama Busted With Oil On His Hands?
For the past few months, I have been howling - only partly tongue-in-cheek -that the Gulf oil spill was an inside job by the Obama administration made necessary by their ideologically left-wing driven agenda.
And over the past week, it certainly seems as if the truth has finally, ah, "seeped" out....
So - who caused the oil spill in the Gulf Of Mexico? Not BP, not al-Qaeda, not aliens.....our government did:
The Coast Guard has gathered evidence it failed to follow its own firefighting policy during the Deepwater Horizon disaster and is investigating whether the chaotic spraying of tons of salt water by private boats contributed to sinking the ill-fated oil rig, according to interviews and documents.
Coast Guard officials told the Center for Public Integrity that the service does not have the expertise to fight an oil rig fire and that its response to the April 20 explosion may have broken the service’s own rules by failing to ensure a firefighting expert supervised the half-dozen private boats that answered the Deepwater Horizon’s distress call to fight the blaze.
An official maritime investigation led by Coast Guard Capt. Hung M. Nguyen in New Orleans is examining whether the salt water that was sprayed across the burning platform overran the ballast system that kept the rig upright, changing its weight distribution, and causing it to list.
According to Hot Air:
The Coast Guard is not supposed to participate in firefighting, but instead assign an expert to coordinate the private firefighting efforts of the rig operator and its contractors. The Coast Guard failed to do so, and the result was an uncoordinated, “general response” effort that mainly relied on salt water to extinguish the fires. That is not the most effective way to fight rig fires; the best way is to use foam, which apparently wasn’t on hand. An expert would have known this, but as CPI’s report of the testimony shows, none was assigned...
Did Obama and Rahm Emanuel order the BP rig blown up, and follow up by issuing a specific set of directions to the Coast Guard that was counter-intuitive to what was until then standard operating procedure? In other words, did the Obama administration deliberately sink the BP Deepwater Horizon rig in order to create the crisis necessary to pass cap and trade and commit extortion upon a foreign company and the American people?
Well, why not? If Bush could kill 3,000 Americans on September 11th in order to fake a war for oil, why wouldn't Obama and Rahm kill a few million fish? Remember, these two guys likely buy into the "truther" meme anyway, why else would they hire folks like Van Jones? To leftist radicals like Barack and Rahm, this "rebel attack" was a no-brainer...
Furthermore - did Obama see as an opportunity in this crisis to nationalize BP, or at least rape and pillage them for every last cent until they died a bloody death? Again, why not? Like A Nazi raping a Jew, Obama and the Democrats see oil companies as the ultimate evil, as subhuman monsters, and any horror inflicted on them (legal or not) as justified and permissible.
So now is where the cover-up begins. Even if it was just incompetence and not conspiracy, the fact is that an arm of the United States government caused a major oil spill that has devastated the economy of the Gulf Coast. And instead of reacting to it properly - taking responsibility and taking action - the Obama administration chose inaction and coercion, letting the oil flow while flogging BP until they turned over $25 billion dollars for Obama's personal/political use. All while simultaneously trying to push through corrupt legislation that would raise taxes on every American and give control of the entire energy industry to the administration.
This may very well be the worst crime ever committed by an American president, by a factor of 10. Watergate, Lewinksy-gate? What is petty crime and a BJ from a fat chick compared to the damage wrought by Barack Obama in quest of his ideological goal, to turn America into a third-world socialist nation?
Oh, boy - folks, this is only the beginning. Expect the White House to deceive, cover-up, and lie about this story incessantly. Because if you think Barack Obama's poll numbers are a bit soft now...
And over the past week, it certainly seems as if the truth has finally, ah, "seeped" out....
So - who caused the oil spill in the Gulf Of Mexico? Not BP, not al-Qaeda, not aliens.....our government did:
The Coast Guard has gathered evidence it failed to follow its own firefighting policy during the Deepwater Horizon disaster and is investigating whether the chaotic spraying of tons of salt water by private boats contributed to sinking the ill-fated oil rig, according to interviews and documents.
Coast Guard officials told the Center for Public Integrity that the service does not have the expertise to fight an oil rig fire and that its response to the April 20 explosion may have broken the service’s own rules by failing to ensure a firefighting expert supervised the half-dozen private boats that answered the Deepwater Horizon’s distress call to fight the blaze.
An official maritime investigation led by Coast Guard Capt. Hung M. Nguyen in New Orleans is examining whether the salt water that was sprayed across the burning platform overran the ballast system that kept the rig upright, changing its weight distribution, and causing it to list.
According to Hot Air:
The Coast Guard is not supposed to participate in firefighting, but instead assign an expert to coordinate the private firefighting efforts of the rig operator and its contractors. The Coast Guard failed to do so, and the result was an uncoordinated, “general response” effort that mainly relied on salt water to extinguish the fires. That is not the most effective way to fight rig fires; the best way is to use foam, which apparently wasn’t on hand. An expert would have known this, but as CPI’s report of the testimony shows, none was assigned...
Did Obama and Rahm Emanuel order the BP rig blown up, and follow up by issuing a specific set of directions to the Coast Guard that was counter-intuitive to what was until then standard operating procedure? In other words, did the Obama administration deliberately sink the BP Deepwater Horizon rig in order to create the crisis necessary to pass cap and trade and commit extortion upon a foreign company and the American people?
Well, why not? If Bush could kill 3,000 Americans on September 11th in order to fake a war for oil, why wouldn't Obama and Rahm kill a few million fish? Remember, these two guys likely buy into the "truther" meme anyway, why else would they hire folks like Van Jones? To leftist radicals like Barack and Rahm, this "rebel attack" was a no-brainer...
Furthermore - did Obama see as an opportunity in this crisis to nationalize BP, or at least rape and pillage them for every last cent until they died a bloody death? Again, why not? Like A Nazi raping a Jew, Obama and the Democrats see oil companies as the ultimate evil, as subhuman monsters, and any horror inflicted on them (legal or not) as justified and permissible.
So now is where the cover-up begins. Even if it was just incompetence and not conspiracy, the fact is that an arm of the United States government caused a major oil spill that has devastated the economy of the Gulf Coast. And instead of reacting to it properly - taking responsibility and taking action - the Obama administration chose inaction and coercion, letting the oil flow while flogging BP until they turned over $25 billion dollars for Obama's personal/political use. All while simultaneously trying to push through corrupt legislation that would raise taxes on every American and give control of the entire energy industry to the administration.
This may very well be the worst crime ever committed by an American president, by a factor of 10. Watergate, Lewinksy-gate? What is petty crime and a BJ from a fat chick compared to the damage wrought by Barack Obama in quest of his ideological goal, to turn America into a third-world socialist nation?
Oh, boy - folks, this is only the beginning. Expect the White House to deceive, cover-up, and lie about this story incessantly. Because if you think Barack Obama's poll numbers are a bit soft now...
Chris Christie Has Already Saved More Jobs Than Barack Obama!
And in this case, the numbers are there to back it up:
Soon after taking office, Gov. Chris Christie heard Morris Township-based Honeywell International was considering fleeing the state.
So he huddled with company executives and fashioned a proposal to beef up tax credits — an incentive that led the company Thursday to promise to stay put.
“They were able to present to us the parameters of an offer that they had from another state that we needed to match to get them to stay,” Christie said at the campus, the workplace for about 10 percent of the company’s 120,000 global employees.
Honeywell proposed redeveloping the property to add new office facilities, a hotel and residential units...
12,000 New Jersey jobs saved, literally - not by stimulus, but by a tax cut. Somebody call the president! We have found a solution to our economic crisis! Oh, never mind, he's on the campaign trail, demagoging against...business.
Of course, local Democrats are throwing temper tantrums:
“I find it questionable that the governor can suddenly find money to increase handouts to a Fortune 100 business when he just vetoed the bills we labored over to provide health care to uninsured women and a homebuyers tax credit that would ultimately benefit small businesses,” Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver said in a statement.
Sigh. OK, children, let's try this lesson again: Forcing taxpayers to pay for other people's insurance doesn't grow the economy. Paying people $10,000 to buy a home doesn't grow the economy either. Neither benefits small business; there is simply no connection there whatsoever.
But should Honeywell leave and 12,000 New Jersey residents lose their jobs - how much would that cost? In unemployment payouts, in state relief, in home foreclosures, in small businesses losing their customers and then shuttering themselves, leading to even more foreclosures and layoffs?
Sheila the Democrat doesn't know. Sheila the Democrat doesn't care. Sheila the Democrat only knows one thing: that big business = bad, forcing taxpayers to cover the abortions of uninsured women = good.
Maybe that's why Sheila the Democrat is seeing her party get its collective ass kicked?
And the Fat Man rolls on, gathering no moss, only more allies and supporters....
Soon after taking office, Gov. Chris Christie heard Morris Township-based Honeywell International was considering fleeing the state.
So he huddled with company executives and fashioned a proposal to beef up tax credits — an incentive that led the company Thursday to promise to stay put.
“They were able to present to us the parameters of an offer that they had from another state that we needed to match to get them to stay,” Christie said at the campus, the workplace for about 10 percent of the company’s 120,000 global employees.
Honeywell proposed redeveloping the property to add new office facilities, a hotel and residential units...
12,000 New Jersey jobs saved, literally - not by stimulus, but by a tax cut. Somebody call the president! We have found a solution to our economic crisis! Oh, never mind, he's on the campaign trail, demagoging against...business.
Of course, local Democrats are throwing temper tantrums:
“I find it questionable that the governor can suddenly find money to increase handouts to a Fortune 100 business when he just vetoed the bills we labored over to provide health care to uninsured women and a homebuyers tax credit that would ultimately benefit small businesses,” Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver said in a statement.
Sigh. OK, children, let's try this lesson again: Forcing taxpayers to pay for other people's insurance doesn't grow the economy. Paying people $10,000 to buy a home doesn't grow the economy either. Neither benefits small business; there is simply no connection there whatsoever.
But should Honeywell leave and 12,000 New Jersey residents lose their jobs - how much would that cost? In unemployment payouts, in state relief, in home foreclosures, in small businesses losing their customers and then shuttering themselves, leading to even more foreclosures and layoffs?
Sheila the Democrat doesn't know. Sheila the Democrat doesn't care. Sheila the Democrat only knows one thing: that big business = bad, forcing taxpayers to cover the abortions of uninsured women = good.
Maybe that's why Sheila the Democrat is seeing her party get its collective ass kicked?
And the Fat Man rolls on, gathering no moss, only more allies and supporters....
Staten Island Democrat Hands Out Enemies List - Sorry, "Jew List" !
Ah, my beloved hometown of Staten Island...what did I say about it the other day? Ah, yes:
Insular? Check. Racist? Check? Anti-Semitic? Check.... I took some serious beat-downs for having the temerity to be a Jew (and somehow, I survived, without hate crime laws and the entire edifice of the PC community. Amazing, I suppose). The insular hatreds that defined Staten Island in the 70's/80's is still intact.
Oh, JerseyNut, you are quite the prophet! For what do we learn today, but that embattled Staten Island Democrat Michael McMahon, in order to prove his Republican opponent (Mike Grimm) was an "outsider", compiled and distributed a list of outside-the-district voters. A list composed entirely of Jews. A list entitled Grimm Jewish Money Q2.
Sweet Zombie Jeebus. Can somebody say the mask is falling off?
...in an effort to show that Grimm lacks support among voters in the district, which covers Staten Island and parts of Brooklyn, the McMahon campaign compiled a list of Jewish donors to Grimm and provided it to The Politicker.
The file, labeled "Grimm Jewish Money Q2," for the second quarter fundraising period, shows a list of over 80 names, a half-dozen of which in fact do hail from Staten Island, and a handful of others that list Brooklyn as home.
"Where is Grimm's money coming from," said Jennifer Nelson, McMahon's campaign spokeman. "There is a lot of Jewish money, a lot of money from people in Florida and Manhattan, retirees."
As a point of comparison, the campaign also provided in-district and out-of-district fundraising totals from McMahon and Grimm's G.O.P primary opponent, Michael Allegretti. However, they did not provide an out-of-district campaign filing from Grimm, but only a file of Jewish donors to him.
McMahon, taking his cues from Barack Hussein Obama, deflects any responsibility - it's all his staff's fault!
"I was outraged by these unfortunate remarks which were unauthorized and are in no way indicative of my beliefs or of my campaign,” said Congressman Michael E. McMahon.
Sure. But who hired these folks? Somewhere in your chain of command, there is a feeling that the anti-Semitic card can be played to win in Staten Island, and it is unlikely it begins and ends with Jennifer Nelson, who has been fired in an attempt to hide the swastikas. But even Politico comments that:
...she was not the brain trust of the campaign, and something tells me the calls for heads to roll may not end here.
Exactly. Whose idea was it to compile a Jew list in an attempt to use anti-Semitism (a latent feature of Staten Islanders, but secondary to much of their other hatreds) in an attempt to secure a Democratic victory? Was it McMahon's himself? Or did the directive come from even higher-up in the Democratic party?
Regardless, McMahon is toast, winning a traditionally Republican seat in 2008 only due to a lack of incumbent and an fearsome Obama wave. But that tide is rapidly receding, and we see clearly what has been washed ashore: Yet another anti-Semitic Democrat.
Sarah Palin has just endorsed Mike Grimm; that is good enough for me. I'll be adding to his coffers as soon as my check clears....
Insular? Check. Racist? Check? Anti-Semitic? Check.... I took some serious beat-downs for having the temerity to be a Jew (and somehow, I survived, without hate crime laws and the entire edifice of the PC community. Amazing, I suppose). The insular hatreds that defined Staten Island in the 70's/80's is still intact.
Oh, JerseyNut, you are quite the prophet! For what do we learn today, but that embattled Staten Island Democrat Michael McMahon, in order to prove his Republican opponent (Mike Grimm) was an "outsider", compiled and distributed a list of outside-the-district voters. A list composed entirely of Jews. A list entitled Grimm Jewish Money Q2.
Sweet Zombie Jeebus. Can somebody say the mask is falling off?
...in an effort to show that Grimm lacks support among voters in the district, which covers Staten Island and parts of Brooklyn, the McMahon campaign compiled a list of Jewish donors to Grimm and provided it to The Politicker.
The file, labeled "Grimm Jewish Money Q2," for the second quarter fundraising period, shows a list of over 80 names, a half-dozen of which in fact do hail from Staten Island, and a handful of others that list Brooklyn as home.
"Where is Grimm's money coming from," said Jennifer Nelson, McMahon's campaign spokeman. "There is a lot of Jewish money, a lot of money from people in Florida and Manhattan, retirees."
As a point of comparison, the campaign also provided in-district and out-of-district fundraising totals from McMahon and Grimm's G.O.P primary opponent, Michael Allegretti. However, they did not provide an out-of-district campaign filing from Grimm, but only a file of Jewish donors to him.
McMahon, taking his cues from Barack Hussein Obama, deflects any responsibility - it's all his staff's fault!
"I was outraged by these unfortunate remarks which were unauthorized and are in no way indicative of my beliefs or of my campaign,” said Congressman Michael E. McMahon.
Sure. But who hired these folks? Somewhere in your chain of command, there is a feeling that the anti-Semitic card can be played to win in Staten Island, and it is unlikely it begins and ends with Jennifer Nelson, who has been fired in an attempt to hide the swastikas. But even Politico comments that:
...she was not the brain trust of the campaign, and something tells me the calls for heads to roll may not end here.
Exactly. Whose idea was it to compile a Jew list in an attempt to use anti-Semitism (a latent feature of Staten Islanders, but secondary to much of their other hatreds) in an attempt to secure a Democratic victory? Was it McMahon's himself? Or did the directive come from even higher-up in the Democratic party?
Regardless, McMahon is toast, winning a traditionally Republican seat in 2008 only due to a lack of incumbent and an fearsome Obama wave. But that tide is rapidly receding, and we see clearly what has been washed ashore: Yet another anti-Semitic Democrat.
Sarah Palin has just endorsed Mike Grimm; that is good enough for me. I'll be adding to his coffers as soon as my check clears....
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Obama Bows To Christie, As He Should...
...having trouble uploading the video, in the meantime, check it out here and check out the deep bow at the 20 second mark.
Obama knows who his daddy is. It's conservative mastermind and Jersey's own Fat Bastard, Chris Christie. Note how obsequious Obama is to the governor; he knows the one thing that can bring him and his party down is fact-based, pointed straight-shooting from Christie, who's managing to turn Blue Jersey into a Red Rebel state....
And after all, Chris Christie has demonstrably already created or saved more jobs in New Jersey in seven months than Obama has nationwide in 18...
And thus the One fear him. That's why Obama bows so low. It's a sign of submission, and Christie will pick up on that, just as the Russians, the Saudis, and the Chinese have...
Obama knows who his daddy is. It's conservative mastermind and Jersey's own Fat Bastard, Chris Christie. Note how obsequious Obama is to the governor; he knows the one thing that can bring him and his party down is fact-based, pointed straight-shooting from Christie, who's managing to turn Blue Jersey into a Red Rebel state....
And after all, Chris Christie has demonstrably already created or saved more jobs in New Jersey in seven months than Obama has nationwide in 18...
And thus the One fear him. That's why Obama bows so low. It's a sign of submission, and Christie will pick up on that, just as the Russians, the Saudis, and the Chinese have...
Get Ready To Pay For Your Neighbor's Chevy Volt!
Ah, "Government Motors" in action. Or should I say, socialism in action, in all of its facets. The unveiling of the Chevy Volt, and it's price tag, is a textbooks study in why socialism is an economic clusterf*ck.
First, the price:
The president has bludgeoned state-owned GM to put out a plug-in hybrid vehicle that is, according to the Post, more than twice as expensive as a comparable gasoline-driven car...
Sticker price: $41,000. [Average American's] Per capita income: $39,138.
It is consumer demand and competition that brings down the price of goods and makes them affordable to everybody. When government dictates demand, you get a high-Volt sticker shock....
Who's gonna pay that? Why, you will, of course, whether you own one or not:
To entice motorists to buy these untested contraptions, the government will give each one a $7,500 subsidy, and another grand if they install their own charger at home (apartment owners of course, are out of luck, and get to subsidize homeowners with this one). President Obama wants a million electric cars on the road by 2015, and since vast cost-saving advances are unlikely to occur so quickly, it’s safe to assume the subsidy would remain, sucking only $8.5 billion dollars out of taxpayers coffers to subsidize people willing to buy a more expensive car than they actually need.
Yes, your tax dollars will pay for your neighbor's car. It's called "spreading the wealth". And since - like cash for clunkers - there will be many unwilling to resist a handout, we'll likely need more money that has been set aside. Not to mention the cost of charging them:
IBM’s vice president for energy and utilities, Allan Schurr, estimates that 80 percent of vehicles aren’t parked in the garage of the person who owns them, which means there are going to have to be a lot of public charging stations built at taxpayer expense.
Do you want to know why consumers will never buy the Volt unless either bribed to do so by your dollars or forced to do so by government compulsion? Check it out:
Lets do some math:
Chevy Volt: $41,000 (True Cost)
Honda Civic: $20,000 (Average build)
Difference: $21,000
Gas: $2.45/gal (in Oklahoma City)
The difference in price would buy 8,571.43 gallons of gas.
The Civic gets an average of 29 miles to the gallon. That’s 248,581.47 miles on the price difference.
Assuming the average driver drives 12,000 miles a year, AND you only drive the Volt on the 40 mile range of it’s battery, using no gas, you’d have to own the Volt for 20.7 years to justify the price difference in gas savings.
How long’s that warranty again?
I did a similar comparison a while back, comparing hybrid vehicles with their gasoline-only equivalent:
Ford Escape (standard) 22 MPG City/28 MPG Highway MSRP $20,435-
Ford Escape (hybrid) 34 MPG City/31 MPG Highway MSRP $29,645-
Lets go with a baseline figure of 12,000 miles a year (1K/month, like a standard lease) to figure out the "savings". And we'll will take the higher spread of City miles (12 MPG better w/hybrid) to do the math.
12000 miles at 22 MPG = 545 gallons consumed/year
12000 miles at 31 MPG = 353 gallons consumed/
Hybrid advantage - 192 gallons less/year
Great! So how much do we save? Gas in New Jersey is now $1.81 for 87 octane, let's use $2- as a figure here. How much money to we save a year using a hybrid?
192 x 2 = $384 saved
And the time it would take to recoup the extra $9,000 you spent to get a hybrid?
$384/$9,000 = 23 years
Let's assume the price of gas goes up to $3-/gallon, a 50% increase from today:
192 x 3 =$576 saved
$576/$9,000 = 15-16 years
...speaking of ideological product, there is one way you can make the initial cost of hybrids more appealing - by taxing the sh*t out of gasoline:
192 x $6 = $1,152- saved/yr
$1,152/$9000 = 7.5 years.
Another added bonus: Should gasoline usage actually decline due to extensive hybrid/electric car use, and tax revenue from per-gallon pump sales decline, you can bet your gas on getting socked with a per-mile tax...
So stand back and watch as your neighbor gets out of his previously defaulted house - mortgage covered by taxpayers - and into his brand-new Chevy Volt - paid for in part by you.
So, Hope and Changers - how's that socialism working out for you?
First, the price:
The president has bludgeoned state-owned GM to put out a plug-in hybrid vehicle that is, according to the Post, more than twice as expensive as a comparable gasoline-driven car...
Sticker price: $41,000. [Average American's] Per capita income: $39,138.
It is consumer demand and competition that brings down the price of goods and makes them affordable to everybody. When government dictates demand, you get a high-Volt sticker shock....
Who's gonna pay that? Why, you will, of course, whether you own one or not:
To entice motorists to buy these untested contraptions, the government will give each one a $7,500 subsidy, and another grand if they install their own charger at home (apartment owners of course, are out of luck, and get to subsidize homeowners with this one). President Obama wants a million electric cars on the road by 2015, and since vast cost-saving advances are unlikely to occur so quickly, it’s safe to assume the subsidy would remain, sucking only $8.5 billion dollars out of taxpayers coffers to subsidize people willing to buy a more expensive car than they actually need.
Yes, your tax dollars will pay for your neighbor's car. It's called "spreading the wealth". And since - like cash for clunkers - there will be many unwilling to resist a handout, we'll likely need more money that has been set aside. Not to mention the cost of charging them:
IBM’s vice president for energy and utilities, Allan Schurr, estimates that 80 percent of vehicles aren’t parked in the garage of the person who owns them, which means there are going to have to be a lot of public charging stations built at taxpayer expense.
Do you want to know why consumers will never buy the Volt unless either bribed to do so by your dollars or forced to do so by government compulsion? Check it out:
Lets do some math:
Chevy Volt: $41,000 (True Cost)
Honda Civic: $20,000 (Average build)
Difference: $21,000
Gas: $2.45/gal (in Oklahoma City)
The difference in price would buy 8,571.43 gallons of gas.
The Civic gets an average of 29 miles to the gallon. That’s 248,581.47 miles on the price difference.
Assuming the average driver drives 12,000 miles a year, AND you only drive the Volt on the 40 mile range of it’s battery, using no gas, you’d have to own the Volt for 20.7 years to justify the price difference in gas savings.
How long’s that warranty again?
I did a similar comparison a while back, comparing hybrid vehicles with their gasoline-only equivalent:
Ford Escape (standard) 22 MPG City/28 MPG Highway MSRP $20,435-
Ford Escape (hybrid) 34 MPG City/31 MPG Highway MSRP $29,645-
Lets go with a baseline figure of 12,000 miles a year (1K/month, like a standard lease) to figure out the "savings". And we'll will take the higher spread of City miles (12 MPG better w/hybrid) to do the math.
12000 miles at 22 MPG = 545 gallons consumed/year
12000 miles at 31 MPG = 353 gallons consumed/
Hybrid advantage - 192 gallons less/year
Great! So how much do we save? Gas in New Jersey is now $1.81 for 87 octane, let's use $2- as a figure here. How much money to we save a year using a hybrid?
192 x 2 = $384 saved
And the time it would take to recoup the extra $9,000 you spent to get a hybrid?
$384/$9,000 = 23 years
Let's assume the price of gas goes up to $3-/gallon, a 50% increase from today:
192 x 3 =$576 saved
$576/$9,000 = 15-16 years
...speaking of ideological product, there is one way you can make the initial cost of hybrids more appealing - by taxing the sh*t out of gasoline:
192 x $6 = $1,152- saved/yr
$1,152/$9000 = 7.5 years.
Another added bonus: Should gasoline usage actually decline due to extensive hybrid/electric car use, and tax revenue from per-gallon pump sales decline, you can bet your gas on getting socked with a per-mile tax...
So stand back and watch as your neighbor gets out of his previously defaulted house - mortgage covered by taxpayers - and into his brand-new Chevy Volt - paid for in part by you.
So, Hope and Changers - how's that socialism working out for you?
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Because only a UNION hand can properly reach out of a toll booth!
It's interesting to watch New Jersey's state unions crumble under the fat fist of Governor Chris Christie. A good lesson for politicians nationwide - these guys are paper tigers. Yeah, there are a fair amount of government union members, but the public hates their guts right now (perhaps unfairly, but they are the easiest targets of the anti-government fever that is going around). And when these overpaid assclowns try to make the case for their entitlements in public, they usually make fools of themselves with inane and unconvincing arguments, and wind up accelerating the guillotine instead of forestalling it.
Case in point: The New Jersey toll-takers union, currently incensed due to a privatization report (commissioned by Christie) that noted the state could save over $42 million by replacing union toll-takers with their non-union brethren. Note what follows:
So toll takers had a meeting to vent. According to coverage of the meeting, toll-takers said privatization would lead to a lesser-skilled workforce on a road where quick response is a necessity. Huh? They stick out their hands for money from those poor souls who don’t have E-ZPass. How much skill does that take?
Franceline Ehret, a toll-taker for 25 years and president of their union, the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 194, told the Star-Ledger, “It’s the major artery for the Northeast region — it’s the highest traveled road in the country, I think it’s sort of folly to put that in private hands.”
Really? Because I think it's sort of folly to pay an extra $42 million for you to stick out your hand to collect $0.50 from motorists to dim to get with the EZ Pass program. I can't imagine what difference the union label could possibly make - it's not as if you guys haven't been caught with your hands in the till, or haven't been rude beyond belief. So what am I getting for my $42 million?
Does anyone else hear a cricket chirping?
Take note, Republicans, take note of what is happening in New Jersey...
Case in point: The New Jersey toll-takers union, currently incensed due to a privatization report (commissioned by Christie) that noted the state could save over $42 million by replacing union toll-takers with their non-union brethren. Note what follows:
So toll takers had a meeting to vent. According to coverage of the meeting, toll-takers said privatization would lead to a lesser-skilled workforce on a road where quick response is a necessity. Huh? They stick out their hands for money from those poor souls who don’t have E-ZPass. How much skill does that take?
Franceline Ehret, a toll-taker for 25 years and president of their union, the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 194, told the Star-Ledger, “It’s the major artery for the Northeast region — it’s the highest traveled road in the country, I think it’s sort of folly to put that in private hands.”
Really? Because I think it's sort of folly to pay an extra $42 million for you to stick out your hand to collect $0.50 from motorists to dim to get with the EZ Pass program. I can't imagine what difference the union label could possibly make - it's not as if you guys haven't been caught with your hands in the till, or haven't been rude beyond belief. So what am I getting for my $42 million?
Does anyone else hear a cricket chirping?
Take note, Republicans, take note of what is happening in New Jersey...
Mexican Officials To "Patrol" Staten Island?
Ah, Staten Island. My hometown. The forgotten borough of New York City, in my youth is was the one place you could live a suburban lifestyle and still be a resident of the city.
A strange place. A place I was proud to call home when I grew up, since it automatically labeled me an outsider, a tag I enjoyed (and still enjoy - being a right-wing nut in New York almost guarantees social isolation). Other than feeding my teenage angst, though...
How would I describe the Island? Hmmm....
Insular? Check. Racist? Check? Anti-Semitic? Check. Bitter (at higher taxes than services, forced integration, and liberal policies being jammed down their throats)? Oh, check.
So that's why this story didn't surprise me:
Police are investigating another assault on a Hispanic man in Staten Island as a possible hate crime -- and the Mexican government is now getting involved as well.
Five men attacked the 40-year-old Mexican man Friday night as he was walking home after a soccer game at Faber Park, cop said. The attackers allegedly pummeled him while yelling anti-Mexican epithets. The man suffered head trauma, a fractured jaw and needed ten stitches above his eye, officials said.
The group of men made off with his backpack.
This is at least the sixth violent, ethnically-charged incident that has taken place in the neighborhood since April.....The latest victim is a construction worker who has called the United States his home for the last five years...
No surprise. I took some serious beat-downs for having the temerity to be a Jew (and somehow, I survived, without hate crime laws and the entire edifice of the PC community. Amazing, I suppose). The insular hatreds that defined Staten Island in the 70's/80's is still intact. But this part is the kicker:
According to the [Staten Island]Advance, this latest incident has promoted the Mexican Consulate to post personnel in Staten Island until further notice. This move is an effort to safeguard the rights of individuals and effectively assist and provide information to the Mexican residents of this area.
Whoa, Nellie! Mexican officials are now patrolling Staten Island in order to protect Mexicans who are in the United States illegally? (and yes, I am assuming the poor bastard above was an illegal, since no mention of his citizenship status amounts to a de facto declaration of its absence). It's mind-boggling, and for so many different reasons:
-shouldn't the Mexican government be worried about protecting Mexican citizens in Mexico from a drug war that has almost entirely eroded law and order and killed some 25,000 people?
-why does Mexico - including its drug lords, its citizens, and its drug gangs - feel their jurisdiction extends throughout the United States? Maybe it has something to do with a government that is refusing to enforce its own immigration laws?
-and speaking of which, in order to maintain some consistency, shouldn't Obama sue Mexico for interfering with the federal government's duties and responsibilities regarding illegal immigration - just like the way he is suing Arizona?
While the attack is horrific, both the media and the Mexicans are overstepping their bounds - the media, by deliberately hiding the man's immigration status in order to create a sympathetic story, and the Mexicans, by draining any actually sympathy Americans may have for them by trying to claim jurisdiction over their nation.
Not to mention collateral damage done to Barack Obama and the Democrats, who are seen as supporting this type of Mexico-first policy.
Why do I think this is about to be a Mexican standoff, with all liberal parties about to open fire into each other's faces? Let's see how this plays out - it should be amusing, like any slapstick comedy...
A strange place. A place I was proud to call home when I grew up, since it automatically labeled me an outsider, a tag I enjoyed (and still enjoy - being a right-wing nut in New York almost guarantees social isolation). Other than feeding my teenage angst, though...
How would I describe the Island? Hmmm....
Insular? Check. Racist? Check? Anti-Semitic? Check. Bitter (at higher taxes than services, forced integration, and liberal policies being jammed down their throats)? Oh, check.
So that's why this story didn't surprise me:
Police are investigating another assault on a Hispanic man in Staten Island as a possible hate crime -- and the Mexican government is now getting involved as well.
Five men attacked the 40-year-old Mexican man Friday night as he was walking home after a soccer game at Faber Park, cop said. The attackers allegedly pummeled him while yelling anti-Mexican epithets. The man suffered head trauma, a fractured jaw and needed ten stitches above his eye, officials said.
The group of men made off with his backpack.
This is at least the sixth violent, ethnically-charged incident that has taken place in the neighborhood since April.....The latest victim is a construction worker who has called the United States his home for the last five years...
No surprise. I took some serious beat-downs for having the temerity to be a Jew (and somehow, I survived, without hate crime laws and the entire edifice of the PC community. Amazing, I suppose). The insular hatreds that defined Staten Island in the 70's/80's is still intact. But this part is the kicker:
According to the [Staten Island]Advance, this latest incident has promoted the Mexican Consulate to post personnel in Staten Island until further notice. This move is an effort to safeguard the rights of individuals and effectively assist and provide information to the Mexican residents of this area.
Whoa, Nellie! Mexican officials are now patrolling Staten Island in order to protect Mexicans who are in the United States illegally? (and yes, I am assuming the poor bastard above was an illegal, since no mention of his citizenship status amounts to a de facto declaration of its absence). It's mind-boggling, and for so many different reasons:
-shouldn't the Mexican government be worried about protecting Mexican citizens in Mexico from a drug war that has almost entirely eroded law and order and killed some 25,000 people?
-why does Mexico - including its drug lords, its citizens, and its drug gangs - feel their jurisdiction extends throughout the United States? Maybe it has something to do with a government that is refusing to enforce its own immigration laws?
-and speaking of which, in order to maintain some consistency, shouldn't Obama sue Mexico for interfering with the federal government's duties and responsibilities regarding illegal immigration - just like the way he is suing Arizona?
While the attack is horrific, both the media and the Mexicans are overstepping their bounds - the media, by deliberately hiding the man's immigration status in order to create a sympathetic story, and the Mexicans, by draining any actually sympathy Americans may have for them by trying to claim jurisdiction over their nation.
Not to mention collateral damage done to Barack Obama and the Democrats, who are seen as supporting this type of Mexico-first policy.
Why do I think this is about to be a Mexican standoff, with all liberal parties about to open fire into each other's faces? Let's see how this plays out - it should be amusing, like any slapstick comedy...
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Obama's Cruel "Trig Palin" Tax
Used to be that liberalism was about caring for the little guy and the weakest among us, as opposed to being a platform for keeping a small group of elites in permanent power. How far contemporary liberalism has strayed from its roots can be displayed by one of the more onerous and invasive facets of the Democrat's health care reform - the hard cap on individual's flexible spending accounts (FSAs), pretax money that we have previously been "allowed" to use to alleviate excessive medical expenses, from prescriptions to eyeglasses.
Not any more. Barack Obama is wiser than we, and is limiting the amount of any FSA to $2500, so that squirrely Americans are unable to hold onto personal income that should be subjected to all the king's taxes. And of course, those who need this money the most, such as parents with disabled children, will be hurt the most. Via Americans for Tax Reform:
The “Special Needs Kids Tax” takes effect Jan. 1, 2011: This provision of Obamacare imposes a cap on flexible spending accounts (FSAs) of $2500 (Currently, there is no federal government limit). There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. (Page 1999/Sec. 9005/$14 billion)...
This is no accident, this is a party and a president who has a special hatred for special-needs children. Remember the focus put on poor Trig Palin, and the blame laid at the feet of his mother for his condition? Remember a certain president yukking it up on late night TV about his bowling being qualified for the "Special Olympics"? One can only imagine his glee - perhaps at a health care reform bull-session - at the idea of putting a special tax on folks like Sarah Palin who choose to have a special child. The "Trig Tax", indeed.
And how about a certain doctor, who happens to be the brother of the president's Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel? He has made clear the Left's feelings for where special needs children fit into our society:
"...medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia"
~Dr. Ezekial Emanuel
So if you choose to have a child with special needs, don't expect the government to help you. In fact, for choosing to birth such a child, the government will punish you by not allowing you the funding necessary to give your son or daughter the medical treatment or educational services they require. It's reserved for others, don't you see, and by keeping more of your own pre-tax dollars, you are limiting the government's ability to redistribute the money you need to help your child to other citizens who might be more...participatory.
But if you want to abort such a child, the government is fine with that. In fact, they will pay for it.
Such legislation is not just poor policy, but borders on the sociopathic.
Welcome to Change.
Not any more. Barack Obama is wiser than we, and is limiting the amount of any FSA to $2500, so that squirrely Americans are unable to hold onto personal income that should be subjected to all the king's taxes. And of course, those who need this money the most, such as parents with disabled children, will be hurt the most. Via Americans for Tax Reform:
The “Special Needs Kids Tax” takes effect Jan. 1, 2011: This provision of Obamacare imposes a cap on flexible spending accounts (FSAs) of $2500 (Currently, there is no federal government limit). There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. (Page 1999/Sec. 9005/$14 billion)...
This is no accident, this is a party and a president who has a special hatred for special-needs children. Remember the focus put on poor Trig Palin, and the blame laid at the feet of his mother for his condition? Remember a certain president yukking it up on late night TV about his bowling being qualified for the "Special Olympics"? One can only imagine his glee - perhaps at a health care reform bull-session - at the idea of putting a special tax on folks like Sarah Palin who choose to have a special child. The "Trig Tax", indeed.
And how about a certain doctor, who happens to be the brother of the president's Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel? He has made clear the Left's feelings for where special needs children fit into our society:
"...medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia"
~Dr. Ezekial Emanuel
So if you choose to have a child with special needs, don't expect the government to help you. In fact, for choosing to birth such a child, the government will punish you by not allowing you the funding necessary to give your son or daughter the medical treatment or educational services they require. It's reserved for others, don't you see, and by keeping more of your own pre-tax dollars, you are limiting the government's ability to redistribute the money you need to help your child to other citizens who might be more...participatory.
But if you want to abort such a child, the government is fine with that. In fact, they will pay for it.
Such legislation is not just poor policy, but borders on the sociopathic.
Welcome to Change.
Cracks in Obama's Hispanic Support?
Cracks, not a collapse, but cracks usually indicate some kind of hidden weakness, some type of pressure building behind the wall:
President Barack Obama's once solid support among Hispanics is showing a few cracks, a troubling sign for Democrats desperate to get this critical constituency excited about helping the party hold onto Congress this fall.
For a group that supported Obama so heavily in 2008 and in his first year in office, only 43 percent of Hispanics surveyed said Obama is adequately addressing their needs, with the economy a major concern. Another 32 percent were on the fence, while 21 percent said he'd done a poor job.
That's somewhat understandable, given that far more Hispanics have faced job losses and financial stress than the U.S. population in general.
An unfulfilled promise to overhaul the nation's patchwork immigration system, which Hispanics overwhelmingly want to see fixed, also may be to blame. That's despite the fact that Obama is challenging an Arizona law that requires police, while enforcing other laws, to question a person's immigration status if officers have a reasonable suspicion he or she is in the country illegally.
Still, 57 percent of Hispanics approve of the president's overall job performance compared with 44 percent among the general population in the latest AP national polling.
57% ain't 67%, the amount of the Hispanic vote that Obama took in 2008. The question is, will it erode even further? Hispanic economic suffering is a direct result of the Obama/Democratic financial policies - impending taxes on businesses have thwarting hiring, and hikes in the minimum wage has resulted in businesses cutting back on entry-level employees, especially during this particular recession.
The HuffPost also blames a lack of action in "comprehensive immigration reform" for the loss of Hispanic support, and notes this is "despite" Obama's challenge to Arizona's new immigration laws.
This is the standard thought process among folks who do not deal with everyday Hispanics, or only deal with the representatives of large Hispanic lobbying groups, who are of course anxious to add as many to their rolls as possible. Perhaps their is another view within the community itself?
Obama and his cadres, whose primary interaction with Hispanics is with lobbyists for ethnic identity groups, fails to see the concern within the Hispanic communities over illegal immigration.
I work with many Hispanics, we talk about it all the time. Illegals flock to their communities as to blend in; parents fear for their children as the two-bedroom apartment next door becomes host to a dozen illegals or more - are they hard workers or career criminals? Nobody knows, and with a president advocating a "don't ask, don't tell" policy towards illegals, it is the American Hispanic population that is becoming scared, victimized, and terrorized, while being politically patronized.
Think this could be a factor behind some of the cracks forming in Obama's "wall" of Hispanic support? It doesn't fit the narrative, so it won't even enter into the discussion.
And yet - Obama's poll numbers among Hispanics keeps falling, falling...
President Barack Obama's once solid support among Hispanics is showing a few cracks, a troubling sign for Democrats desperate to get this critical constituency excited about helping the party hold onto Congress this fall.
For a group that supported Obama so heavily in 2008 and in his first year in office, only 43 percent of Hispanics surveyed said Obama is adequately addressing their needs, with the economy a major concern. Another 32 percent were on the fence, while 21 percent said he'd done a poor job.
That's somewhat understandable, given that far more Hispanics have faced job losses and financial stress than the U.S. population in general.
An unfulfilled promise to overhaul the nation's patchwork immigration system, which Hispanics overwhelmingly want to see fixed, also may be to blame. That's despite the fact that Obama is challenging an Arizona law that requires police, while enforcing other laws, to question a person's immigration status if officers have a reasonable suspicion he or she is in the country illegally.
Still, 57 percent of Hispanics approve of the president's overall job performance compared with 44 percent among the general population in the latest AP national polling.
57% ain't 67%, the amount of the Hispanic vote that Obama took in 2008. The question is, will it erode even further? Hispanic economic suffering is a direct result of the Obama/Democratic financial policies - impending taxes on businesses have thwarting hiring, and hikes in the minimum wage has resulted in businesses cutting back on entry-level employees, especially during this particular recession.
The HuffPost also blames a lack of action in "comprehensive immigration reform" for the loss of Hispanic support, and notes this is "despite" Obama's challenge to Arizona's new immigration laws.
This is the standard thought process among folks who do not deal with everyday Hispanics, or only deal with the representatives of large Hispanic lobbying groups, who are of course anxious to add as many to their rolls as possible. Perhaps their is another view within the community itself?
Obama and his cadres, whose primary interaction with Hispanics is with lobbyists for ethnic identity groups, fails to see the concern within the Hispanic communities over illegal immigration.
I work with many Hispanics, we talk about it all the time. Illegals flock to their communities as to blend in; parents fear for their children as the two-bedroom apartment next door becomes host to a dozen illegals or more - are they hard workers or career criminals? Nobody knows, and with a president advocating a "don't ask, don't tell" policy towards illegals, it is the American Hispanic population that is becoming scared, victimized, and terrorized, while being politically patronized.
Think this could be a factor behind some of the cracks forming in Obama's "wall" of Hispanic support? It doesn't fit the narrative, so it won't even enter into the discussion.
And yet - Obama's poll numbers among Hispanics keeps falling, falling...
Monday, July 26, 2010
The Most Bad-Ass Marine. Ever.
You cannot kill a United States Marine. You can try, but it will only get him angry.
This story is amazing:
SOUTHERN SHORSURAK, HELMAND PROVINCE, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan — Cpl. Matt Garst should be dead.
Few people survive stepping on an improvised explosive device. Even fewer walk away the same day after directly absorbing the force of the blast, but Garst did just that....
A squad leader with 3rd Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment, Garst was leading his squad on a patrol in Southern Shorsurak, Afghanistan, June 23 to establish a vehicle checkpoint in support of Operation New Dawn...
As they swept the area with a metal detector, the IED registered no warning on the device. The bomb was buried too deep and its metallic signature too weak. Two men walked over it without it detonating.
At six feet, two inches tall and 260 pounds with all his gear on, Garst is easily the largest man in his squad by 30 or 40 pounds — just enough extra weight to trigger the IED buried deep in hard-packed soil...
Since Garst's improbable run-in with the IED, his tale has spread through the rest of the battalion, and as often happens in combat units, the story mutates, the tale becoming more and more extraordinary about what happened next: He held onto his rifle the whole time … He actually landed on his feet … He remained unmoved, absorbing the impact like he was muffling a fart in a crowded elevator …
What really happened even eludes Garst. All went black after the earth uppercut him. When he came to, he was standing on his feet holding his weapon, turning to see the remnants of the blast and wondering why his squad had a look on their faces as if they’d seen a ghost.
Garst’s squad stared at him in disbelief. The square-jawed Marine has a tendency to be short-tempered, and the realization that the blast was meant to kill him spiked his adrenaline and anger.
“It pissed me off,” he said.
He directed his men to establish a security perimeter while letting them know in his own way that he was OK.
“What the f--- are you looking at?” he said. “Get on the cordon!”
There is no other soldier in the world who could take a shot like this, and resume his demeanor and duties within three seconds.
Only a United States Marine. God bless us for having such men of strength, courage, and will fighting for our nation.
Go read it all...
Cpl. Garst does not sleep...he waits
When Cpl. Garst does a pushup, he isn't lifting himself up, he's pushing the Earth down....
Cpl. Garst once tangled with an IED...and the IED lost.
When Arnold says the line "I'll be back" in the first Terminator movie it is implied that he is going to ask Cpl. Garst for help....
This story is amazing:
SOUTHERN SHORSURAK, HELMAND PROVINCE, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan — Cpl. Matt Garst should be dead.
Few people survive stepping on an improvised explosive device. Even fewer walk away the same day after directly absorbing the force of the blast, but Garst did just that....
A squad leader with 3rd Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment, Garst was leading his squad on a patrol in Southern Shorsurak, Afghanistan, June 23 to establish a vehicle checkpoint in support of Operation New Dawn...
As they swept the area with a metal detector, the IED registered no warning on the device. The bomb was buried too deep and its metallic signature too weak. Two men walked over it without it detonating.
At six feet, two inches tall and 260 pounds with all his gear on, Garst is easily the largest man in his squad by 30 or 40 pounds — just enough extra weight to trigger the IED buried deep in hard-packed soil...
Since Garst's improbable run-in with the IED, his tale has spread through the rest of the battalion, and as often happens in combat units, the story mutates, the tale becoming more and more extraordinary about what happened next: He held onto his rifle the whole time … He actually landed on his feet … He remained unmoved, absorbing the impact like he was muffling a fart in a crowded elevator …
What really happened even eludes Garst. All went black after the earth uppercut him. When he came to, he was standing on his feet holding his weapon, turning to see the remnants of the blast and wondering why his squad had a look on their faces as if they’d seen a ghost.
Garst’s squad stared at him in disbelief. The square-jawed Marine has a tendency to be short-tempered, and the realization that the blast was meant to kill him spiked his adrenaline and anger.
“It pissed me off,” he said.
He directed his men to establish a security perimeter while letting them know in his own way that he was OK.
“What the f--- are you looking at?” he said. “Get on the cordon!”
There is no other soldier in the world who could take a shot like this, and resume his demeanor and duties within three seconds.
Only a United States Marine. God bless us for having such men of strength, courage, and will fighting for our nation.
Go read it all...
Cpl. Garst does not sleep...he waits
When Cpl. Garst does a pushup, he isn't lifting himself up, he's pushing the Earth down....
Cpl. Garst once tangled with an IED...and the IED lost.
When Arnold says the line "I'll be back" in the first Terminator movie it is implied that he is going to ask Cpl. Garst for help....
Why The Hell Is Barack Obama Coming To New Jersey?
President Barack Obama plans to visit Central Jersey on Wednesday to discuss economic issues...The White House announced Friday the president's plans to visit "the Edison area.'' It did not give specific information about the time or location of his visit.
I'm curious as to what he is here to discuss. New Jersey's unemployment rate is 9.6, consistent with the national average. More recently:
...bank economists say slow jobs recovery and a shrinking manufacturing sector mean Jersey will be one of the last to emerge from the economic slump.
It's not as if the stimulus actually stimulated any new manufacturing jobs, or business expansion in New Jersey. Actually, due to our notoriously high tax rates and regulatory environment, it seems unlikely that Jersey makes anyone's short list as a place to establish/expand a business venture.
There is this, however:
Though private companies added 5,200 jobs in New Jersey (in June), public sector rolls fell by 7,200, according to the state labor office.
Technically, that's minus 2,000 jobs, but in reality, it is 2,000 less state employees whose salaries, perks and benefits will be paid for by the overwhelmed taxpayers of New Jersey. I don't think there is much sympathy amongst the public for state employees right now...
So why would Obama come to New Jersey, a place where his policies have already been put into place, have failed spectacularly, and have been rejected? Some thoughts:
-Obama is only comfortable in Blue States, surrounded by perceived friendly crowds. This current "recovery summer" swing will tale him first to Michigan, then to New Jersey, and then to a shooting of The View. He's safe with Whoopie, but I am no longer so sure about Snookie...
-He has to appear in public somewhere, and with only a handful of competitive races in New Jersey, it's one of the few states he can actually show up in and not drag down his party's candidate.
-He plans to take credit for the 5200 private-sector jobs created in this moribound state. Why not? It's not like the president has ever used "honesty" as a barometer of what should or shouldn't come out of his mouth.
-Maybe - a long shot - he's planning on taking on the Fat Man of Trenton? Will Obama point to the job losses in the public sector, the pressure on the teacher's union for givebacks, and the closing of certain state services (motor vehicle inspection stations) as a rallying cry for additional stimulus dollars? Will he criticize Christie's austerity budget and veto of a "millionaire's (starting at $400K) tax"? Will he tell the people (or more likely, a hand-picked audience of union thugs)of New Jersey to get on the horn with their representatives and demand higher taxes, more stimulus, and more government as the solution to their woes?
Well, that would be audacity. But there would be very little hope. The residents of New Jersey already rejected this liberal program by giving the boot to Obama's pal Jon Corzine in November. Who, with the exception of state employees - who see the gravy train derailing and heading into the drink - could possibly get behind such a retro policy?
I would love to see Barack Obama take on Chris Christie. The governor's in-your-face, fact-based, no-nonsense approach to government is a stark contrast to the weaseling, whining, lying mode preferred by the president. Like an ant taking on a elephant...
Incidentally, I notice that Barack Obama is not planning (at this time) to appear with fellow African-American and Democrat Cory Booker, the well-respected Mayor of Newark. Gee, I wonder why...
I'm curious as to what he is here to discuss. New Jersey's unemployment rate is 9.6, consistent with the national average. More recently:
...bank economists say slow jobs recovery and a shrinking manufacturing sector mean Jersey will be one of the last to emerge from the economic slump.
It's not as if the stimulus actually stimulated any new manufacturing jobs, or business expansion in New Jersey. Actually, due to our notoriously high tax rates and regulatory environment, it seems unlikely that Jersey makes anyone's short list as a place to establish/expand a business venture.
There is this, however:
Though private companies added 5,200 jobs in New Jersey (in June), public sector rolls fell by 7,200, according to the state labor office.
Technically, that's minus 2,000 jobs, but in reality, it is 2,000 less state employees whose salaries, perks and benefits will be paid for by the overwhelmed taxpayers of New Jersey. I don't think there is much sympathy amongst the public for state employees right now...
So why would Obama come to New Jersey, a place where his policies have already been put into place, have failed spectacularly, and have been rejected? Some thoughts:
-Obama is only comfortable in Blue States, surrounded by perceived friendly crowds. This current "recovery summer" swing will tale him first to Michigan, then to New Jersey, and then to a shooting of The View. He's safe with Whoopie, but I am no longer so sure about Snookie...
-He has to appear in public somewhere, and with only a handful of competitive races in New Jersey, it's one of the few states he can actually show up in and not drag down his party's candidate.
-He plans to take credit for the 5200 private-sector jobs created in this moribound state. Why not? It's not like the president has ever used "honesty" as a barometer of what should or shouldn't come out of his mouth.
-Maybe - a long shot - he's planning on taking on the Fat Man of Trenton? Will Obama point to the job losses in the public sector, the pressure on the teacher's union for givebacks, and the closing of certain state services (motor vehicle inspection stations) as a rallying cry for additional stimulus dollars? Will he criticize Christie's austerity budget and veto of a "millionaire's (starting at $400K) tax"? Will he tell the people (or more likely, a hand-picked audience of union thugs)of New Jersey to get on the horn with their representatives and demand higher taxes, more stimulus, and more government as the solution to their woes?
Well, that would be audacity. But there would be very little hope. The residents of New Jersey already rejected this liberal program by giving the boot to Obama's pal Jon Corzine in November. Who, with the exception of state employees - who see the gravy train derailing and heading into the drink - could possibly get behind such a retro policy?
I would love to see Barack Obama take on Chris Christie. The governor's in-your-face, fact-based, no-nonsense approach to government is a stark contrast to the weaseling, whining, lying mode preferred by the president. Like an ant taking on a elephant...
Incidentally, I notice that Barack Obama is not planning (at this time) to appear with fellow African-American and Democrat Cory Booker, the well-respected Mayor of Newark. Gee, I wonder why...
Newark's Cory Booker Sings The Blues...
Mayor Cory Booker, is, as far as Democrats go, a smart and realistic guy who has worked hard to help the city of Newark recover from decades of Democratic decadence. Seems like he knows which way the wind is blowing before it knocks him over; he rejected an offer from Barack Obama to head some bullsh*t "urban policy" department, and has marched, in his own words, in "lockstep" with Governor Chris Christie in the battle against New Jersey's onerous teacher's unions.
So it is with no glee that I post this video of an obviously frustrated Mayor Booker discussing the ramifications of the municipal council rejecting his budget (with layoffs, service cuts, and -sigh - the inevitable tax hikes, mandatory to keep his membership in the Democratic Party). He points out, to his credit, that if the council thinks it can use tax hikes to close a $70 million dollar budget gap, they would instead wreak havoc on the city's economy, with what the mayor calls "massive foreclosure rates" as a result.
"Every single contract that does not go to the core functioning of our city...will now be cut....programs that are precious to our families and our children will now be cut...no gasoline will be provided to any city vehicle not providing for the city's safety and welfare...."
Why do I think Mayor Booker is not the last public official that we will see speaking these words?
So it is with no glee that I post this video of an obviously frustrated Mayor Booker discussing the ramifications of the municipal council rejecting his budget (with layoffs, service cuts, and -sigh - the inevitable tax hikes, mandatory to keep his membership in the Democratic Party). He points out, to his credit, that if the council thinks it can use tax hikes to close a $70 million dollar budget gap, they would instead wreak havoc on the city's economy, with what the mayor calls "massive foreclosure rates" as a result.
"Every single contract that does not go to the core functioning of our city...will now be cut....programs that are precious to our families and our children will now be cut...no gasoline will be provided to any city vehicle not providing for the city's safety and welfare...."
Why do I think Mayor Booker is not the last public official that we will see speaking these words?
Sunday, July 25, 2010
The Media's Hate Crime Against Beautiful Women...
...I could be talking about their vicious, sexually-tinged attacks on folks like Sarah Palin, Michelle Malkin, and former Miss California Carrie Prejeen, but those attacks are aimed at conservative women, and as any good-standing member of JournoList can tell you, it's OK to rape a conservative female - their political identification is the equivalent, in the liberal mind, of "asking for it".
No, I am talking about the media's bastardization of the ideal of female beauty. In the days of the great masters of the Renaissance, women of beauty were depicted as full-figured, full-bosomed and wide-bottomed, with a glass of wine in one hand and a bunch of grapes in the other, in case you didn't get the point.
Now, the only women that can be considered "hot" are size zeros or less. No hips, no curves, no bountiful bosoms allowed. More girl-ish, than woman-ish (and you wonder why the entirety of the Hollywood/MSM remains in full-throated support of Roman Polanski?). Should some young late-teen/early 20's starlet put on ten pounds as they are filling out from an adolescent (girl's) figure to an adult (woman's) figure, they are pilloried by the media as becoming "fat", complete with unflattering photos taken while said starlet shleps in sweats to grab the morning paper.
And thus, we have a generation of women who are attuned to a body style that is both unnatural, and, to many men, unattractive. Our generation of women, who are otherwise beautifu,l deem themselves to be unattractive as they engage in all sorts of obsessive-compulsive disorders in order to attain an unhealthy, undernourished "look" that the media tells them is the only one acceptable.
Neo-neocon discussed this yesterday and included a picture of Crystal Renn, who is considered "plus sized" and is involved in a controversy as to why her pictures were altered in order to make this obvious "fat chick" look thinner:
So I plead with any women reading this post today to please - please - feel free to have that extra chocolate chip cookie this morning, grab that cool ice-cream cone on this blistering hot summer day, and don't count the calories in that ice-cold beer you are thinking about guzzling to beat the heat. You are beautiful before you eat/drink it, you will still be beautiful afterwards. And remember - every extra topping is a slap in the face at the metrosexuals and spinsters in the mainstream media, who mock you because they know they can never have you - or, in the cases of the spinsters, can never look as attractive to the vast majority of men as you can.
No, I am talking about the media's bastardization of the ideal of female beauty. In the days of the great masters of the Renaissance, women of beauty were depicted as full-figured, full-bosomed and wide-bottomed, with a glass of wine in one hand and a bunch of grapes in the other, in case you didn't get the point.
Now, the only women that can be considered "hot" are size zeros or less. No hips, no curves, no bountiful bosoms allowed. More girl-ish, than woman-ish (and you wonder why the entirety of the Hollywood/MSM remains in full-throated support of Roman Polanski?). Should some young late-teen/early 20's starlet put on ten pounds as they are filling out from an adolescent (girl's) figure to an adult (woman's) figure, they are pilloried by the media as becoming "fat", complete with unflattering photos taken while said starlet shleps in sweats to grab the morning paper.
And thus, we have a generation of women who are attuned to a body style that is both unnatural, and, to many men, unattractive. Our generation of women, who are otherwise beautifu,l deem themselves to be unattractive as they engage in all sorts of obsessive-compulsive disorders in order to attain an unhealthy, undernourished "look" that the media tells them is the only one acceptable.
Neo-neocon discussed this yesterday and included a picture of Crystal Renn, who is considered "plus sized" and is involved in a controversy as to why her pictures were altered in order to make this obvious "fat chick" look thinner:
Who in their right mind would call this women anything less than stunning? My god, those curves....
So I plead with any women reading this post today to please - please - feel free to have that extra chocolate chip cookie this morning, grab that cool ice-cream cone on this blistering hot summer day, and don't count the calories in that ice-cold beer you are thinking about guzzling to beat the heat. You are beautiful before you eat/drink it, you will still be beautiful afterwards. And remember - every extra topping is a slap in the face at the metrosexuals and spinsters in the mainstream media, who mock you because they know they can never have you - or, in the cases of the spinsters, can never look as attractive to the vast majority of men as you can.
And it is in this spirit that I give you (via When Falls the Coliseum, as well as here and here), pictures of London Andrews, who has what I maintain to be the perfect female "look": That of being an aware, awake, adult woman:
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Has Mexico's "Los Zetas" Launched An Armed Incursion Into Texas?
This story is bouncing all around the Internet; let's give it some play here, OK?
In what could be deemed an act of war against the sovereign borders of the United States, Mexican drug cartels have seized control of at least two American ranches inside the U.S. territory near Laredo, Texas.
Two sources inside the Laredo Police Department confirmed the incident is unfolding and they would continue to coordinate with U.S. Border Patrol today. “We consider this an act of war,” said one police officer on the ground near the scene. There is a news blackout of this incident at this time and the sources inside Laredo PD spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Word broke late last night that Laredo police have requested help from the federal government regarding the incursion by the Los Zetas. It appears that the ranch owners have escaped without incident but their ranches remain in the hands of the blood thirsty cartels.
Laredo Border Patrol is conducting aerial surveillance over the ranches to determine the best way to regain control of the U.S. ranches, according to the Laredo Police department.
How about with swift and blinding violence? Nah, that's what George Bush would do...
Perhaps the Los Zetas are counting on Obama's fear of confrontation and his love of negotiation to save them. They can appear heroic to ordinary Mexicans, having been the first to win back land that is "rightfully theirs"...
Who are the Zetas? This report was filed over a week ago; seems prophetic:
The U.S. Justice Department is warning local police in Arizona and California a group of rogue Mexican military commandos may be headed this way. They're thought to be setting up new drug smuggling routes and it could bring new violence to the border area.
They are elite "special forces" of the Mexican military trained in the U.S. at the School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia and sent to "wipe out" one of the most powerful Mexican drug cartels.
But these soldiers deserted and became the muscle for the very cartel they were supposed to destroy....
I don't know if this is really an "invasion" as they are obviously not a government-sanctioned armed force, but if Mexican drug gangs are crossing the border and seizing American property at gunpoint in order to set up forward bases for drug smuggling and future paramilitary incursions, it certainly does require the government to repel them by force, just the way we would if an armed terrorist group was setting up base camps within American territory.
Thanks God we have a president who is strong, resolute, and knows how to fight bloodthirsty killers such as the ones currently crossing our...oh. Wait. We have no such president. Sorry. My mistake.
Somebody pull the president off the golf course. Tell him that perhaps now is not the best time to be fighting against the state of Arizona's attempts to identify illegal immigrants. And maybe this is not the best environment to push "comprehensive immigration reform", either. And could someone prepare him for the fact he might have a real, physical fight on his hands this time?
As a certain preacher used to say, seems like some Mexican chickens have come home to roost...
Updates here, with additional sources confirming the "incurions". I duno...
Update: Confederate Yankee did some legwork, says it's all a hoax. Oh, well - tell Baracky it's OK to finish the back nine...
In what could be deemed an act of war against the sovereign borders of the United States, Mexican drug cartels have seized control of at least two American ranches inside the U.S. territory near Laredo, Texas.
Two sources inside the Laredo Police Department confirmed the incident is unfolding and they would continue to coordinate with U.S. Border Patrol today. “We consider this an act of war,” said one police officer on the ground near the scene. There is a news blackout of this incident at this time and the sources inside Laredo PD spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Word broke late last night that Laredo police have requested help from the federal government regarding the incursion by the Los Zetas. It appears that the ranch owners have escaped without incident but their ranches remain in the hands of the blood thirsty cartels.
Laredo Border Patrol is conducting aerial surveillance over the ranches to determine the best way to regain control of the U.S. ranches, according to the Laredo Police department.
How about with swift and blinding violence? Nah, that's what George Bush would do...
Perhaps the Los Zetas are counting on Obama's fear of confrontation and his love of negotiation to save them. They can appear heroic to ordinary Mexicans, having been the first to win back land that is "rightfully theirs"...
Who are the Zetas? This report was filed over a week ago; seems prophetic:
The U.S. Justice Department is warning local police in Arizona and California a group of rogue Mexican military commandos may be headed this way. They're thought to be setting up new drug smuggling routes and it could bring new violence to the border area.
They are elite "special forces" of the Mexican military trained in the U.S. at the School of the Americas at Fort Benning, Georgia and sent to "wipe out" one of the most powerful Mexican drug cartels.
But these soldiers deserted and became the muscle for the very cartel they were supposed to destroy....
I don't know if this is really an "invasion" as they are obviously not a government-sanctioned armed force, but if Mexican drug gangs are crossing the border and seizing American property at gunpoint in order to set up forward bases for drug smuggling and future paramilitary incursions, it certainly does require the government to repel them by force, just the way we would if an armed terrorist group was setting up base camps within American territory.
Thanks God we have a president who is strong, resolute, and knows how to fight bloodthirsty killers such as the ones currently crossing our...oh. Wait. We have no such president. Sorry. My mistake.
Somebody pull the president off the golf course. Tell him that perhaps now is not the best time to be fighting against the state of Arizona's attempts to identify illegal immigrants. And maybe this is not the best environment to push "comprehensive immigration reform", either. And could someone prepare him for the fact he might have a real, physical fight on his hands this time?
As a certain preacher used to say, seems like some Mexican chickens have come home to roost...
Updates here, with additional sources confirming the "incurions". I duno...
Update: Confederate Yankee did some legwork, says it's all a hoax. Oh, well - tell Baracky it's OK to finish the back nine...
Design For "Ground Zero" Mosque Revealed!
It's tasteful, thoughtful, and respectful of the sensitivities of others, just like the Islamics always are...right?
Mayor Bloomberg says it's all about freedom of religion....freedom of one religion to kill all members of another, I suppose...
Stolen shamelessly from Doug Ross...
Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy: Well, Of Course The Alarm Was Deactivated!
...I mean, really - how the hell are you going to pull off a stealth bombing of an oil rig, designed to cause a spill and ignite the crisis necessary to destroy the offshore drilling industry, pass cap and trade legislation, decimate the economy of several Red states, and force energy distribution into a scarcity/rationing model, a model that assumes government control of who gets to keep their lights on - unless you first deactivate the alarm system?
Of course the rig's alarm was turned off - all Rahm Emanuel had to do was put in one freakin' call:
An alarm system was partially shut down the day the ill-fated oil rig Deepwater Horizon exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 workers and setting off the massive spill, an electronics technician who was aboard told an investigative panel on Friday.
Technician Mike Williams told the investigative panel that the alarm system was turned on to monitor for fire, explosive gas and toxic gas but that its sound and light alarms had been disabled.
Williams said that if the system had been fully active, an alarm likely would have sounded before the explosion, which happened on the night of April 20.
How easy would it for Rahm to call up his pals at BP, and tell them he needed silence on the Gulf on April 20th, no questions asked. Just enough silence to create the crisis he deemed necessary to get the cap and trade legislation passed, legislation desperately needed to fund Obama's health care reform and other social welfare programs, which any soul with a elementary school diploma knows can only bankrupt the nation, in short order...
So Rahm shuts the alarm and blasts the rig, Obama refuses crucial foreign aid and blocks the skimmers, and despite poisoning the Gulf for a decade, these assclowns still can't get their precious carbon tax passed.
These incompetent two-bit bunglers out to be mocked for evermore for their clueless attempt at treachery. After they are sentenced to long, hard prison terms, of course...
Of course the rig's alarm was turned off - all Rahm Emanuel had to do was put in one freakin' call:
An alarm system was partially shut down the day the ill-fated oil rig Deepwater Horizon exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 workers and setting off the massive spill, an electronics technician who was aboard told an investigative panel on Friday.
Technician Mike Williams told the investigative panel that the alarm system was turned on to monitor for fire, explosive gas and toxic gas but that its sound and light alarms had been disabled.
Williams said that if the system had been fully active, an alarm likely would have sounded before the explosion, which happened on the night of April 20.
How easy would it for Rahm to call up his pals at BP, and tell them he needed silence on the Gulf on April 20th, no questions asked. Just enough silence to create the crisis he deemed necessary to get the cap and trade legislation passed, legislation desperately needed to fund Obama's health care reform and other social welfare programs, which any soul with a elementary school diploma knows can only bankrupt the nation, in short order...
So Rahm shuts the alarm and blasts the rig, Obama refuses crucial foreign aid and blocks the skimmers, and despite poisoning the Gulf for a decade, these assclowns still can't get their precious carbon tax passed.
These incompetent two-bit bunglers out to be mocked for evermore for their clueless attempt at treachery. After they are sentenced to long, hard prison terms, of course...
Just How Crazy Is Van Jones?
Hmmm...my diagnosis is..."batshit crazy", unlike Alvin Greene, who is merely the victim of a government conspiracy...
Remember, this guy was a "czar" in the Obama administration, trusted with your tax dollars and our nation's future:
While the federal government sinks deeper into debt than any time since World War II, former White House “green jobs” adviser Anthony Van Jones said it was time to stop worrying about budget deficits and pressure Washington to take more money from American businesses to fund larger social and infrastructure projects.
“This is a rich country. We have plenty of money, and if you don’t believe me, ask Haliburton,” Jones told a group of progressive bloggers and activists at the Netroots Nation convention Friday. “There’s plenty of money out there; don’t fall into the trap of this whole deficit argument.”
“The only question is how to spend it,” he added.
What does it say about the mindset of the Obama administration that a man like this was put into such a high-level position, a man who thinks your money is simply there for the taking if he wants it?
How many more Van Jones clones are there in the current administration? Surely, our man Van is not a one-off accident, certainly there are numerous Jones drones in the White House, working this poisonous, criminal ideology into our legal system and public policy every minute of every day.
Vigilance. Now more than ever. For if a Grade A nutjob like Van Jones is allowed to obtain power and prestige by an administration who thinks the above views are acceptable, it is hard to imagine what they might try to spring upon us next...
Remember, this guy was a "czar" in the Obama administration, trusted with your tax dollars and our nation's future:
While the federal government sinks deeper into debt than any time since World War II, former White House “green jobs” adviser Anthony Van Jones said it was time to stop worrying about budget deficits and pressure Washington to take more money from American businesses to fund larger social and infrastructure projects.
“This is a rich country. We have plenty of money, and if you don’t believe me, ask Haliburton,” Jones told a group of progressive bloggers and activists at the Netroots Nation convention Friday. “There’s plenty of money out there; don’t fall into the trap of this whole deficit argument.”
“The only question is how to spend it,” he added.
What does it say about the mindset of the Obama administration that a man like this was put into such a high-level position, a man who thinks your money is simply there for the taking if he wants it?
How many more Van Jones clones are there in the current administration? Surely, our man Van is not a one-off accident, certainly there are numerous Jones drones in the White House, working this poisonous, criminal ideology into our legal system and public policy every minute of every day.
Vigilance. Now more than ever. For if a Grade A nutjob like Van Jones is allowed to obtain power and prestige by an administration who thinks the above views are acceptable, it is hard to imagine what they might try to spring upon us next...
Friday, July 23, 2010
JournoList: Liberal Violence & Projection, With A Taste Of Pornography
Let's give the last word on JournoList to Jennifer Rubin, who can slice and dice like few others (save Camile Paglia, perhaps):
The pose of the left punditocracy is that those on the right are angry, unreasoned, thuggish, and motivated by less than high-minded ideals. They’ve written column after column to that effect. In short, it’s not merely the intellectual corruption, indeed fraud, that [Tucker] Carlson has revealed; it is the worst sort of hypocrisy — verging on projection. The angry white men and the hate-filled political marionettes aren’t on talk radio. They’re on Journolist.
And the last video goes to this one - I am a Liberal - I Hate Violence - But Sometimes...(The JournoList Saga?)....
Via Just One Minute (who also asks the question that's on everyone's mind - does [NPR's]Sarah Spitz, or does Sarah Swallows?):
The pose of the left punditocracy is that those on the right are angry, unreasoned, thuggish, and motivated by less than high-minded ideals. They’ve written column after column to that effect. In short, it’s not merely the intellectual corruption, indeed fraud, that [Tucker] Carlson has revealed; it is the worst sort of hypocrisy — verging on projection. The angry white men and the hate-filled political marionettes aren’t on talk radio. They’re on Journolist.
And the last video goes to this one - I am a Liberal - I Hate Violence - But Sometimes...(The JournoList Saga?)....
Via Just One Minute (who also asks the question that's on everyone's mind - does [NPR's]Sarah Spitz, or does Sarah Swallows?):
Just How Crazy Is Alvin Greene?
Poor Alvin, nominated by South Carolina Democrats as their nominee for the Senate. Derided as unemployed nut job, he brings to mind the character Mel Gibson played in Conspiracy Theory, Jerry Fletcher. Poor Jerry is a mentally unstable New York City taxi driver who lectures his passengers on various conspiracy theories. But, unfortunately for Jerry, he gets one of them right...
And so it seems, in an interview with the AP, that Alvin may know more than some people want him to know. In an attempt to mock Greene, the AP quotes him thusly on his military service:
At his home in Manning on Thursday, Greene told an AP reporter who reviewed the documents with him that the evaluations show he was discriminated against by military supervisors but he did not explain what that meant.
"I'm telling you who they promote: the terrorists and the communists," said Greene, wearing a blue U.S. Air Force T-shirt. "This is why we need to overhaul the military and get these people out."
Sounds crazy? Really? Hmmm...I seem to remember a certain Major that was promoted again and again before deciding to shoot up Ft. Hood, killing 13 American soldiers and wounding more than 30 others while screaming "Allah Akbar!", the terrorist's mantra. Ah, yes - Major Nidal Malik Hasan, promoted a multitude of times despite poor evaluations and concerns about his radical Islamic rants. Would seem to validate at least part of Greene's accusation....
And how about General Stanley McCrystal? Communist is a tough charge, but....ultra-ultra liberal to the point of banning beer on bases and creating rules of engagement so restrictive that it gave a distinct advantage to our enemy? And what kind of freedom-loving American bans FOX News from the television sets in and around his headquarters? And really - who besides a communist would ban Burger King from American bases as they might be construed as a sign of "American (capitalistic?) excess"? Seems like he really might approve of a different system of government than is espoused by our Constitution...
Is Alvin Greene crazy? Or is he speaking some uncomfortable truths about our military establishment under the iron grip of political correctness? And could Obama and the Democrats be sending out the media in order to discredit Greene, to make a mockery of him, so that people don't pay any attention to his "outrageous" claims and the evidence that seems to back him up?
Is Alvin Greene the victim of....a massive government conspiracy? Somebody call Mel Gibson...
And so it seems, in an interview with the AP, that Alvin may know more than some people want him to know. In an attempt to mock Greene, the AP quotes him thusly on his military service:
At his home in Manning on Thursday, Greene told an AP reporter who reviewed the documents with him that the evaluations show he was discriminated against by military supervisors but he did not explain what that meant.
"I'm telling you who they promote: the terrorists and the communists," said Greene, wearing a blue U.S. Air Force T-shirt. "This is why we need to overhaul the military and get these people out."
Sounds crazy? Really? Hmmm...I seem to remember a certain Major that was promoted again and again before deciding to shoot up Ft. Hood, killing 13 American soldiers and wounding more than 30 others while screaming "Allah Akbar!", the terrorist's mantra. Ah, yes - Major Nidal Malik Hasan, promoted a multitude of times despite poor evaluations and concerns about his radical Islamic rants. Would seem to validate at least part of Greene's accusation....
And how about General Stanley McCrystal? Communist is a tough charge, but....ultra-ultra liberal to the point of banning beer on bases and creating rules of engagement so restrictive that it gave a distinct advantage to our enemy? And what kind of freedom-loving American bans FOX News from the television sets in and around his headquarters? And really - who besides a communist would ban Burger King from American bases as they might be construed as a sign of "American (capitalistic?) excess"? Seems like he really might approve of a different system of government than is espoused by our Constitution...
Is Alvin Greene crazy? Or is he speaking some uncomfortable truths about our military establishment under the iron grip of political correctness? And could Obama and the Democrats be sending out the media in order to discredit Greene, to make a mockery of him, so that people don't pay any attention to his "outrageous" claims and the evidence that seems to back him up?
Is Alvin Greene the victim of....a massive government conspiracy? Somebody call Mel Gibson...
Obama Allows PLO Flag to Fly High In DC
What's next for Barack Obama? Perhaps using the Israeli flag as a doormat at the entrance to the White House? Followed up by sending "pro-Israel talking points" out to a sympathetic MSM lackey, no doubt...
Anyway:
The United States State Department has announced to the Palestinian Authority/Palestinian Liberation Organization Mission representative in the United States that its status will be upgraded from a 'bureau' to that of a "general delegation' and that this change will allow the office in which the representation is situated to fly the PLO, now also the Palestine Authority, flag at its entrance.
The upgrading, besides allowing the flag to be flown, also grants certain privileges to the delegation staff, such as diplomatic immunity...
Diplomatic sources in Jerusalem ...expressed disappointment that the White House did not make ceasing the PA's anti Israel incitement a condition for the status upgrade.
Because a Jew's right to exist is a negotiable position under the Obama Administration...
Anyway:
The United States State Department has announced to the Palestinian Authority/Palestinian Liberation Organization Mission representative in the United States that its status will be upgraded from a 'bureau' to that of a "general delegation' and that this change will allow the office in which the representation is situated to fly the PLO, now also the Palestine Authority, flag at its entrance.
The upgrading, besides allowing the flag to be flown, also grants certain privileges to the delegation staff, such as diplomatic immunity...
Diplomatic sources in Jerusalem ...expressed disappointment that the White House did not make ceasing the PA's anti Israel incitement a condition for the status upgrade.
Because a Jew's right to exist is a negotiable position under the Obama Administration...
Obama Speaks on Shirley Sherrod, Manages To Say...Nothing
Barack Obama illuminated us with his shining wit, depth, and insightfulness yesterday when he spoke publicly on the Department of Agriculture's hasty firing of one-time racist Shirley Sherrod:
“If there’s a lesson to be drawn from this episode, it’s that rather than us jumping to conclusions and pointing fingers at each other, we should all look inward and try to examine what’s in our own hearts and, as a consequence, I think we will continue to make progress,” he said.
Hmmm. What is the president actually saying here? Absolutely nothing. It's just a string of liberal catch-phrases that are meaningless both as a guide to future actions and an explanations of past ones. Unless, of course, you take Obama's chiding of "finger-pointing" to be directed at his own party, whose non-stop accusations of racism against any of their detractors caused this ill-fated blowback. But since Obama has been pointing his own crooked fingers of blame in every direction since his inauguration speech, and has shown no intention of stopping himself, one can highly doubt that he intended to send any warning at all through this curiously vapid statement.
Reminds me of Jon Corzine's response to the Newark Massacre, in which three aspiring college students were executed by illegal immigrant gang members in a local schoolyard:
"It is about a failure of us to be inclusive and holistically look to bring everyone into our society".
The way Obama blames us for his racially-charged administration ("we should all look inward"), Corzine blamed all New Jerseyans for refusing to "holistically" welcome illegal immigrant gangsters into our homes. Because it is never their fault, or the result of their policies. Oh no. Couldn't be. We're too smart.
Corzine did not get re-elected, and this incident - although not a major campaign issue - and the governor's bizarre response to it lingered in the minds of many voters, which for many became the moment when it was clear that Corzine simply "did not get it".
Obama's already reach that point with the voters. His intellectually empty statement here, refusing to take responsibility for creating the environment that caused the firing of Shirley Sherrod, is simply more proof that our president "does not get it" either...
“If there’s a lesson to be drawn from this episode, it’s that rather than us jumping to conclusions and pointing fingers at each other, we should all look inward and try to examine what’s in our own hearts and, as a consequence, I think we will continue to make progress,” he said.
Hmmm. What is the president actually saying here? Absolutely nothing. It's just a string of liberal catch-phrases that are meaningless both as a guide to future actions and an explanations of past ones. Unless, of course, you take Obama's chiding of "finger-pointing" to be directed at his own party, whose non-stop accusations of racism against any of their detractors caused this ill-fated blowback. But since Obama has been pointing his own crooked fingers of blame in every direction since his inauguration speech, and has shown no intention of stopping himself, one can highly doubt that he intended to send any warning at all through this curiously vapid statement.
Reminds me of Jon Corzine's response to the Newark Massacre, in which three aspiring college students were executed by illegal immigrant gang members in a local schoolyard:
"It is about a failure of us to be inclusive and holistically look to bring everyone into our society".
The way Obama blames us for his racially-charged administration ("we should all look inward"), Corzine blamed all New Jerseyans for refusing to "holistically" welcome illegal immigrant gangsters into our homes. Because it is never their fault, or the result of their policies. Oh no. Couldn't be. We're too smart.
Corzine did not get re-elected, and this incident - although not a major campaign issue - and the governor's bizarre response to it lingered in the minds of many voters, which for many became the moment when it was clear that Corzine simply "did not get it".
Obama's already reach that point with the voters. His intellectually empty statement here, refusing to take responsibility for creating the environment that caused the firing of Shirley Sherrod, is simply more proof that our president "does not get it" either...
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Just how race-conscious is the Obama administration?
Jim Geraghty lays it out:
We have the administration that took three days to issue a presidential statement on an attempted bombing of a plane over Detroit, took ten days to publicly comment on the oil spill in the Gulf, took three months to review the policy in Afghanistan and took fourteen months to respond to governors’ request for U.S. troops on the Mexican border suddenly managing to move as fast as lightning on Sherrod. It’s surreal.
A lot that has happened in the last eighteen months can fall into that category...
We have the administration that took three days to issue a presidential statement on an attempted bombing of a plane over Detroit, took ten days to publicly comment on the oil spill in the Gulf, took three months to review the policy in Afghanistan and took fourteen months to respond to governors’ request for U.S. troops on the Mexican border suddenly managing to move as fast as lightning on Sherrod. It’s surreal.
A lot that has happened in the last eighteen months can fall into that category...
Barack Obama: America's Robert Mugabe?
Not convinced by Obama's instant support of Professor Gates of Harvard (black) over Sergeant Crowley of the Cambridge Police (white)? Not buying that spending 20 years in a racist church under spiritual mentor Jeremiah Wright had any affect on the president? A coincidence that the only health care reform related tax to go into immediate effect was a tax on white people?
Oh, gentle reader...how much longer can you go on deluding yourself? Our president, Barack Hussein Obama, is a racist, and a vindictive, vicious one at that, and will use any and all of his power as the nation's chief executive to forcibly destroy the livelihoods of white folks so that black folks can keep theirs, even if it is beyond any common/economic sense.
You don't have to believe me...listen to Troubled Asset Relief Program Special Inspector General Neal M. Barofsky, whose recent scathing report on Obama's bungling of the auto bailout that caused tens of thousands of unnecessary job losses, made the following points:
-"[D]ealerships were retained because they were ... minority- or woman-owned dealerships";
-Thousands of jobs were lost, unnecessarily, due specifically to Obama's "mandate for shared sacrifice";
-A disproportionate number of Obama-forced closings were of rural dealerships, in areas unfriendly to Obama, even though such closures could "jeopardize the return to profitability" for GM and Chrysler
So 10,000+ Americans unnecessarily lost their jobs because:
-they were white, rather than black
-they were suburban, rather than urban, or-
-they were Republican, rather than Democrat
-or they "needed" to suffer because Barack Obama's ideology insisted they must
We thought we elected a black messiah, instead, we got a slightly Americanized version of Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, who took all his nation's farmland away from white families and gave them to blacks, (which he calls "land distribution" - sound familiar?) leading his nation from health and prosperity to famine, decay, and despair.
This comparison is apt, by the way, as Obama's Democratic party acts similar to Mugabe's ZANU-Popular Front when confronted by critics of his policies. Just ask the New Hampshire man whose dealership was closed on him so that he may "participate in shared sacrifice" - he has paid for this -
Oh, gentle reader...how much longer can you go on deluding yourself? Our president, Barack Hussein Obama, is a racist, and a vindictive, vicious one at that, and will use any and all of his power as the nation's chief executive to forcibly destroy the livelihoods of white folks so that black folks can keep theirs, even if it is beyond any common/economic sense.
You don't have to believe me...listen to Troubled Asset Relief Program Special Inspector General Neal M. Barofsky, whose recent scathing report on Obama's bungling of the auto bailout that caused tens of thousands of unnecessary job losses, made the following points:
-"[D]ealerships were retained because they were ... minority- or woman-owned dealerships";
-Thousands of jobs were lost, unnecessarily, due specifically to Obama's "mandate for shared sacrifice";
-A disproportionate number of Obama-forced closings were of rural dealerships, in areas unfriendly to Obama, even though such closures could "jeopardize the return to profitability" for GM and Chrysler
So 10,000+ Americans unnecessarily lost their jobs because:
-they were white, rather than black
-they were suburban, rather than urban, or-
-they were Republican, rather than Democrat
-or they "needed" to suffer because Barack Obama's ideology insisted they must
We thought we elected a black messiah, instead, we got a slightly Americanized version of Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, who took all his nation's farmland away from white families and gave them to blacks, (which he calls "land distribution" - sound familiar?) leading his nation from health and prosperity to famine, decay, and despair.
This comparison is apt, by the way, as Obama's Democratic party acts similar to Mugabe's ZANU-Popular Front when confronted by critics of his policies. Just ask the New Hampshire man whose dealership was closed on him so that he may "participate in shared sacrifice" - he has paid for this -
- by taking personal abuse and attacks from the state's Democratic party, who apparently know more about business than...businessmen.
What's next for Barack Obama and the Democrats? Flaming tire necklaces for white Wall Street traders?
Nothing would surprise me anymore....
What's next for Barack Obama and the Democrats? Flaming tire necklaces for white Wall Street traders?
Nothing would surprise me anymore....
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Hollywood To Strip Captain America Of His Patriotism
I wonder what he will wear on his uniform, the sickly blue colors of the United Nations?
The LA Times, via Big Hollywood reports on a big, but predictable, disappointment:
The director of "Captain America: The First Avenger," the 2011 summer blockbuster that will coincide with the character's 70th anniversary, says the screen version of the hero will be true to his roots -- up to a certain point.
"We're sort of putting a slightly different spin on Steve Rogers," said Joe Johnston, whose past directing credits include "Jurassic Park III" and "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids." He's a guy that wants to serve his country, but he's not a flag-waver. We're reinterpreting, sort of, what the comic book version of Steve Rogers was."
Reinterpreting him to be exactly what Hollywood wants their heroes to be: Anti-American foreigners, or anti-American Americans ashamed of their national heritage. Need proof? Go to the end of the LA Times story:
"Yeah, and it's also the idea that this is not about America so much as it is about the spirit of doing the right thing," the director said. "It's an international cast and an international story. It's about what makes America great and what make the rest of the world great too."
So the Captain America movie is not going to to be about the American spirit, but the spirit - in Joe Johnson's eyes - of doing what he believes to be the "right thing". Since there is no such thing as "American exceptionalism", as he makes perfectly clear above. And what is that spirit, in the mind of a Hollywood producer? Fighting terrorists, or fighting Israel? Fighting for America, or fighting against it? Will Captain America show his love for his country they way the Democrats did in 2000-2008 - by calling her (and her leaders) out for every ill in the world? I don't want to imagine what this "Captain America" will look like, or sound like, having to ape Joey Johnson's warped Hollywood-based ideas of morality....
John Nolte at Big Hollywood sees it has just another part of the bigger Hollywood picture show:
Like the mainstream media, once you figure out Hollywood’s nothing more than a left-wing propaganda machine, all your confusion will lift and every seemingly counter-intuitive move they make when it comes to profits, artistic integrity,and the very basics of right and wrong, will suddenly make perfect sense. Trust me on this. Just try looking at the industry through that prism for one week and see if the clouds of confusion don’t suddenly lift.
The same industry that spent hundreds of million of dollars on a dozen-plus embarrassingly awful anti-American flops that were specifically designed to undermine morale at home so we would lose the war in Iraq is now putting the brakes on the Americanism of a character named Captain America?
Prediction: The critics will love it - it feeds right into their pre-conceived notions - but box office will invariably disappoint, as it inexplicably seems to with every anti-American "lib flick", no matter how "A list" the star may be...
I prefer to remember Captain America this way, from his rebranding in 2008 - screaming for vengeance, and packing serious frickin' heat:
The LA Times, via Big Hollywood reports on a big, but predictable, disappointment:
The director of "Captain America: The First Avenger," the 2011 summer blockbuster that will coincide with the character's 70th anniversary, says the screen version of the hero will be true to his roots -- up to a certain point.
"We're sort of putting a slightly different spin on Steve Rogers," said Joe Johnston, whose past directing credits include "Jurassic Park III" and "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids." He's a guy that wants to serve his country, but he's not a flag-waver. We're reinterpreting, sort of, what the comic book version of Steve Rogers was."
Reinterpreting him to be exactly what Hollywood wants their heroes to be: Anti-American foreigners, or anti-American Americans ashamed of their national heritage. Need proof? Go to the end of the LA Times story:
"Yeah, and it's also the idea that this is not about America so much as it is about the spirit of doing the right thing," the director said. "It's an international cast and an international story. It's about what makes America great and what make the rest of the world great too."
So the Captain America movie is not going to to be about the American spirit, but the spirit - in Joe Johnson's eyes - of doing what he believes to be the "right thing". Since there is no such thing as "American exceptionalism", as he makes perfectly clear above. And what is that spirit, in the mind of a Hollywood producer? Fighting terrorists, or fighting Israel? Fighting for America, or fighting against it? Will Captain America show his love for his country they way the Democrats did in 2000-2008 - by calling her (and her leaders) out for every ill in the world? I don't want to imagine what this "Captain America" will look like, or sound like, having to ape Joey Johnson's warped Hollywood-based ideas of morality....
John Nolte at Big Hollywood sees it has just another part of the bigger Hollywood picture show:
Like the mainstream media, once you figure out Hollywood’s nothing more than a left-wing propaganda machine, all your confusion will lift and every seemingly counter-intuitive move they make when it comes to profits, artistic integrity,and the very basics of right and wrong, will suddenly make perfect sense. Trust me on this. Just try looking at the industry through that prism for one week and see if the clouds of confusion don’t suddenly lift.
The same industry that spent hundreds of million of dollars on a dozen-plus embarrassingly awful anti-American flops that were specifically designed to undermine morale at home so we would lose the war in Iraq is now putting the brakes on the Americanism of a character named Captain America?
Prediction: The critics will love it - it feeds right into their pre-conceived notions - but box office will invariably disappoint, as it inexplicably seems to with every anti-American "lib flick", no matter how "A list" the star may be...
I prefer to remember Captain America this way, from his rebranding in 2008 - screaming for vengeance, and packing serious frickin' heat:
