So I'm Watching TV This Morning, Thinking Every Channel Had Become an Al-Jazeera Affiliate...

...and really, could you blame me? Government officials going to various state-proxy television stations to rant about Israel is usually the stuff that accompanies the hookahs with breakfast in the Middle East, not the United States. But then again, we are living in a sea of Change:

David Axelrod — a political operative who now seems at the center of foreign-policy formulation — went on the Fox, ABC, and NBC Sunday talk shows to repeat how insulted the Obami were over Israeli building in Jerusalem and what an affront this was to them.

The AFP:

"This was an affront, it was an insult but most importantly it undermined this very fragile effort to bring peace to that region," said David Axelrod, one of President Barack Obama's closest advisers.

"We have just started proximity talks, that is shuttle diplomacy, between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and for this announcement to come at that time was very destructive," he said on NBC television's Meet the Press show.

But there was no sign Washington was prepared to let go of the issue.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Netanyahu's expression of regret was "a good start" but suggested that the Israeli leader had more to do to placate his country's closest ally.

In an interview on Fox News Sunday, he said that in her conversation with Netanyahu, Clinton outlined steps that the United States thinks he should take.

"I think what would be an even better start is coming to the table with constructive ideas for constructive and trustful dialogue about moving the peace process forward," he said.

Such tone, such words. Words never used to eviscerate the folks who kill American soldiers in Afghanistan, words never used against the Iranians, who openly plot a Second Holocaust while planning to bring a reign of nuclear terror to the Middle East, words never used against the Chavezes and Kim-Jong's who incessantly plot against us.

No - Israel is The Affront, Israel is The Insulter, Israel is the Destructive Force in the fragile peace process. Because they build houses for Jews in their capital, don't you know...

And to make amends, they must bow to the clenched fist of Hillary Clinton, who dares demand this proud nation crawl on her knees to the negotiation table, to abide by terms dictated by Barack Hussein Obama, he of the twenty years worshipping at the feet of the anti-Semitic preacher from Hell, Reverend Wright.

As Jennifer Rubin says, It is disturbing indeed to hear an American administration adopt the Arab rhetorical line...but it goes even further, for while the administration betrays Israel on the world stage, we turn a blind eye to actions taken by the Palestinians at the very same time:

Although world pressure forced the Palestinian Authority to cancel the official ceremonies to name a square after the terrorist Dalal Mughrabi last week, several senior Fatah officials participated in a "popular inauguration" organized by Fatah's youth movement. According to the PA, the square is now named after Mughrabi and an official ceremony, including placing a monument, will take place at a later date. Thursday's "popular inauguration" was on the 32nd anniversary of "the Coastal Road Massacre" of 1978, in which 37 were murdered in a bus hijacking.

All civilians, 13 of whom were little children. But celebrating mass murdererswith palsm gleefully awash in Jewish blood is not a provocation on the scale of building apartment building, I suppose, nor "destructive" to an alleged "peace process"...

Seems like Barack Obama has taken up the Palestinian worldview. Smart diplomacy, I suppose, as things have worked out so well for them so far...

Joke About The IRS, Get a Visit From the FBI ?

And to remember, once, that one of the freedoms we held dear was the ability to mock our leaders, and our government.

Not any more:

IRS watchdogs are investigating more than 70 reported instances of inappropriate comments made to agency workers by taxpayers, National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen M. Kelley said Wednesday. Workers have received a mix of inappropriate verbal comments -- including jokes or statements of support for pilot A. Joseph Stack -- and more serious threats, she said.

Investigating physical threats to its employees is an obvious responsibility of the federal government, of course. But "jokes" and "inappropriate comments"? Are they serious? As we used to say when we were younger, "What is this, Russia?"

Maybe it's just an overzealous union boss trying to protect her employees. But being an IRS agent has been an unpopular job since day one, and if you can't take some jokes about it, find another line of work. Don't send federal agents out to threaten amateur comedians taking aim at one of the oldest targets in the book.

That's not just un-American, it's fascist, plain and simple. Can you imagine having to tell your kids "Shhh! Don't make a joke about that man! You can go to jail!"

You can't? Well, welcome to Barack Obama's America, where the Change is here and the Hope is gone forever...
And speaking of The King, maybe the IRS's thin-skinned peevishness here is due to the fact that Barack sees the Agency as his own personal army, a Stasi with ledgers, if you will - from last May:

At his Arizona State University commencement speech last Wednesday, Mr. Obama noted that ASU had refused to grant him an honorary degree, citing his lack of experience, and the controversy this had caused. He then demonstrated ASU's point by remarking, "I really thought this was much ado about nothing, but I do think we all learned an important lesson. I learned never again to pick another team over the Sun Devils in my NCAA brackets. . . . President [Michael] Crowe and the Board of Regents will soon learn all about being audited by the IRS."

Was that a joke? Apparently. But interesting to see how the president perceives the IRS. Unfortunately, by painting them as his own political vengeance squad, he ultimately puts the individual agents at greater risk than any wanna-be wiseguy ever could...

Runaway Prius: A Hoax!

(bumped and updated from original post on Friday 3/12)

Jeez, the mainstream media is such a bunch of suckers. If the fact that a guy could talk on his cellphone while handling an "out of control Prius" (an oxymoron if there ever was one) wasn't a big enough freakin' clue, a few minutes of research would have uncovered this:

Sleuth work at the Web sites Jalopnik.com and Gawker.com reveals that Sikes and his wife Patty in 2008 filed for bankruptcy and are over $700,000 in debt. Among their creditors is Toyota Financial Services for a lease on a 2008 Toyota Prius, with value at time of bankruptcy of $20,494. The Jalopnik Web site shows a copy of Toyota's secured claims form, though when Jalopnik questioned Sikes by e-mail he denied being behind on his Prius payments.

Sikes also has a history of filing insurance claims for allegedly stolen items that are slowly coming to light. In 2001 he filed a police report with the Merced County Sheriff's Department for $58,000 in stolen property, including jewelry, a prosumer mini-DV camera and gear, and $24,000 in cash, according to Fox40 in Sacramento. His bankruptcy documents show a 2008 payment of $7,400 for an allegedly stolen saxophone and clothes.

For what it's worth, Sikes owned and operated a Web site called AdultSwingLife.com. More salacious material on this man will continue to pour in.

Read the whole thing. It is mind-boggling that the media could remain so willfully blind. Now, if I was even the slightest bit conspiratorial, I might begin to think Gee, Toyota is (was) the world's #1 automaker, the United States government now owns General Motors & needs to see a return on their investment, and the media sure could use some financial assistance themselves, and they have been awful supportive - disproportionately so - of a government that grows more unpopular by the day, so could it be that...

Nah. Couldn't be. Not in a free country...


UPDATE 3/13: How convenient:

Jim Sikes, who claims to have had an unintended acceleration incident with his Toyota Prius on a San Diego County freeway Monday afternoon, says he has no plans to sue Toyota.

He's been saying that in multiple media interviews, but he expanded a bit with Jalopnik, which e-mailed him to ask if (as they'd been tipped), he was behind on his Prius payments. He e-mailed back, denying that he is or ever was late on the lease payment, saying "What we are waiting for is SLANDEROUS statements from the media." He also mentioned having hired an attorney.

To represent him in the made-for-TV movie, no doubt...and one more testament to Sikes' character:

William Sweet says he went into business with Sikes, together opening up a paralegal services company called "AAA California Aid" in 1997. Sweet operated the main office and Sikes ran one in Los Banos, California. Sweet alleges numerous incidents of fraud and theft involving Sikes led him to dissolve their partnership, including an incident in which Sikes sent an employee to break into the main office to steal payment records.

"As soon as i heard the words "Jim Sikes" I immediately woke up out of a dead sleep and thought "uh oh what the hell is this guy up to now?"

Meanwhile, over at the mainstream media, the AP defends its reporting by...quoting a former NHTSA administrator from the Carter administration...

UPDATE II: Seems like the AP is finally catching up to us, and reconsidering their earlier defense of Sikes:

"it does not appear to be feasibly possible, both electronically and mechanically that his gas pedal was stuck to the floor and he was slamming on the brake at the same time."

So, so hard to change the narrative, isn't it, boys? Involves actual...work.

What Color Will YOUR Avatar Be, When Health Care Reform Passes?

I'll get to that shortly...but first, I'd like to review a statement Nancy Pelosi made a few weeks back:

As I said to some friends yesterday in the press, we will go through the gate. If the gate is closed, we will go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we will pole vault in. If that doesn’t work, we will parachute in. But we are going to get health care reform passed for the American people for their own personal health and economic security and for the important role that it will play in reducing the deficit.

Abe Greenwald clarifies what I found most troublesome about this statement, coming from the Speaker of the House:

The barriers she cites are none other than the checks and balances, the procedural roadblocks, put in place centuries ago so that no lawmaker or executive could force policy upon the American people “for their own personal health and economic security.” Speaker Pelosi’s statement is not merely colorful evidence of tenacity and cunning. It is a contemptuous dismissal of democracy. Just as the plan for socialist annexation of one sixth of the economy is a dismissal of free-market capitalism.

Funny too, how comfortable Pelosi is bragging that she made this statement to the press. Their reason for being, at one time, was to protect us from people like the Speaker. Instead, she can talk openly before them of subversion and tyranny, knowing they have been completely co-opted by their ideological biases.

So getting back to the title of this post - many folks shaded their Twitter avatars, or their blog pages, green a few months back as a show of support for the short-lived uprising of the Iranian people. A nice gesture, I'm sure, but no more effective than a "Free Tibet" bumper sticker is in actually, you know...freeing Tibet. Better to hit the streets like they did, or at least hit the phones and demand support for their struggle from our legislators.

So when and if health care reform passes and is signed into law, in complete subversion (for that seems the only path left for Pelosi & Posse) of the spirit, if not the very letter, of the Constitution and the law itself, what do we do?

For we will then be operating under a government as illegitimate as any thug regime operating in the world today.

Do we take to the streets en masse - like our Iranian heroes - and throw the nation into turmoil, resisting until legitimacy is restored? Or do we pick a common shade for our avatars and blogs to register our disgust in a more urbane way, one that won't upset our routines or our digestion?

I'm just asking - asking myself as well as any who may be reading this. For the day may be upon us to choose, and the actions we take - or do not take -will, either way, mark us in the history books forever...

Democrats Demand Taxpayer-Funded Abortions!

And you thought I was just being a right wing nut when I said that liberals won't be happy until there's a "McBortions" on every corner, killing as yet-unborn children, with no need for waiting periods or, in the case of minors, parental notification. All paid for out of the new National Health, funded by you and me.

Hey, I ain't the one telling the story - it's Democratic Congressman Bart Stupak:

In an interview with Marquette, Mich., radio station WKQS' Mark & Walk morning show, Stupak described what he said was a conversation with Waxman about the Senate's version of the health care overhaul. That bill contains weaker language than the House-passed legislation, which includes a provision crafted by Stupak to ensure insurance companies that participate in a national exchange don't use federal money for abortion services.

"I gave him the language. He came back a little while later and said, 'But we want to pay for abortions.' I said, 'Mr. Chairman, that's -- we disagree. We don't do it now, we're not going to start.'

"'But we think should,'" Stupak said Waxman told him.

...Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of three panels responsible for cobbling together the House version of a health care overhaul last year, did not immediately return a request for comment.

Don't be fooled about the end result that the left, now controlling all the levers of power, is gunning for. "Health Care Reform" is just the means...

And remember - the time for talk, as they keep saying, is over....

ObamaCare: Contempt, With A Dash of Arrogance

Jennifer Rubin nails it:

Perhaps Obama and the Democrats are in denial. But I think it’s more properly seen as contempt. They simply don’t care what voters think, for they know best. That’s the entire premise of ObamaCare. Voters who may be young and healthy can’t be trusted to decide to self-insure or buy cheap, high-deductible plans. Employers can’t be trusted to balance health care, salary, and other employee benefits in deciding how to compensate their employees. Consumers can’t be trusted to shop around from state to state or select the exact sort of plan they need; the government will set “minimum” standards (which include every procedure politicians deem necessary).

So should we be surprised that Democratic politicians are intent on doing this, knowing full well voters don’t want them to?

One might also define this as arrogance; the liberal elite is convinced it can handle every aspect of your life better than you can, and is sure that it is expert enough in every single area of human endeavor to enable total control without risk of failure. That's why, besides taking complete jurisdiction over your God-given body via "health care reform", they are about to seize control of the entire student loan program (also without a vote), ban most Americans from fishing (by executive order), and regulate the air you exhale (again, by fiat).

We're just not smart enough to understand that fishing is bad for the fishies, breathing out is bad for Mother Earth, that only Democrats and bureucrats can determine whether or not you kid needs a college loan (Question #1 skin color?), and because only they can decide what medical treatments you can receive - not based on what you might need, of course, but what they deem to be "fair".

And it's because Barack Obama and the Democrats - in their arrogance and contempt for your limited proletarian intelligence - know best. So lie down, put your fishing rod aside, and stop breathing...

Stopping ObamaCare: The 75% Solution?

Whenever a blogger writes a sentence like the one to follow, I have the urge to follow through, for occasionally one can uncover a nugget of gold...

Robert Stacy McCain, in discussing the usurping of constitutional democracy that Louise Slaughter is proposing to pass health care reform, makes the following statement:

People tell me I’m mad to think that some kind of state-level Article V convention is out of the question. That may be, but the atrociousness of Pelosi and company drag that Article V cramdown just a little closer toward being within the question every single day.

So what the hell is Article V? It's a way out:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress...

So here's the question - can we get the legislatures of 34 states to agree to propose an amendment to the constitution that would kill ObamaCare, should it pass? Or perhaps, rather than specifying certain legislation, maybe bar the rules - whether the "Slaughter Rules", or reconciliation - under which a massive social upheaval was engineered?

And if we get the 34 states to meet and propose an amendment, could we get 38 to approve it? One the one hand, Ronald Reagan won 49 states in 1984, so anything's possible. But think of the legislatures in places like California, Vermont, Michigan - goose-step liberals who would throw their own bodies in front of ObamaCare.

And yet again, look at states like New York and New Jersey, who, despite having majority-liberal state legislatures, would be economically decimated by the additional burdens of a national health care takeover. Both New York Senators - Kirsten Gillibrand and the previously untouchable Schmuckie Schumer - have been pilloried by the people and the media for agreeing to a reform deal that could add billions of extra costs onto an already shaky state budget.

So is an Article V convention out of the question? Today, yes. Come November of 2010, after what looks to be a wave election for Republicans of historical magnitude, the answer could be quite different. Even should ObamaCare pass, it's lifespan, like that of the Democratic majority, may well be short-lived.

And should Barack Obama and the Democrats prove themselves to be above the law of the land? Well, there is another document that provides for that little eventuality:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness....

...Starring Barack Obama as Homer Simpson!

From the classic Simpsons episode "Moaning Lisa"...

When straight-A student Lisa Simpson gets in trouble at school (for her chronic depression), Homer is befuddled and at a loss to respond...until finally:

Homer: Bart! Vacuum this floor!
Bart: Hey Man! I didn't do anything wrong!
Homer: In times of trouble you've got to go with what you know. Now hop to it, boy!

And what does Barack Obama do, when he is unable to convince Congressional Democrats to vote for his health care (aka "Career Suicide") bill?

Obama doesn't know how to persuade Stupak Democrats, nervous Blue Dog or red district Democrats, or Kucinich-types who think the Senate version is a sellout. He knows how to deliver applause lines at rallies with lots of college students and union members in the audience. So that's what he's going to do.

Barack Obama, following the logic of Homer Simpson. My God....

The country's in the very best of hands...

Racist Pot, Calling The "Tea" Kettle Racist

When your whole career has been built upon the spelling of your last name and the ethnic identity it presupposes, it is no surprise that every action is seen through the prism of race. Thus it is no surprise that supporters of New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez (D-La Raza) are playing the race card against the New Jersey Tea Party:

New Jersey Democrats are coming out with guns blazing against a tea party-led effort to recall Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez, with the state party chairman going so far as to brand the campaign racist.
Last week, newly minted Democratic Chairman John Wisniewski blasted the recall campaign as extremist, saying that it was no accident that it was targeting Menendez, the only Hispanic in the Senate.

"These are radical people who chose Menendez off of a list of Democrats because of the sound of his last name.”...

Radical? Who's radical, and who's a racist? Let's look at Menendez's record:

...Sen. Menendez just held a recent book signing at...the National Council of La Raza...

Menendez forced a $473K earmark into the "stimulus" bill to support anti-American Hispanic hate group La Raza ("The Race") while simultaneously voting to raise our taxes?

Sen. Menendez (D-N.J.) has put a "hold" on legislation to reauthorize the E-Verify workplace verification program....When it comes to favoring foreign workers (and the greedy employers who use them to depress wages) over struggling American workers, Sen. Menendez has no shame....

And here's a story on how Menendez voted in support of the ugly "General Betray-us" ad published by MoveOn...

Senator Menendez (D-Illegal Immigrants) is sh*tting bricks right now. His approval among his Hispanic "base" is only around 30%, the state is turning more purple by the day, and the most overtaxed state in the Union is mounting a recall movement to turn his sorry ass out. What to do? Scream "racism!", and hope it reverberates.

And this might have worked, 2-4 years ago. But the reason New Jersey has revolted against the Democrats is that they have lived under socialism for the last four years, and they have seen the destruction it has wrought, for the state and for each of its residents personally. They know that Menendez (D-Liberal Idiots) is representative of what they have now forsaken, and they want him out now, before he does any more damage to the state and to the nation.

The cry of racism is seen as a desperation ploy, and it has been suitably ignored. Menendez is now further weakened, and represents another opportunity for a Republican pick-up in a state where residents are proving they are faster learners than their West Coast counterparts...

Hat Tip: Rheil World View

Obama Comes To St. Louis; Democrats Run For The Hills...

...this article asks whether the president will be seen as an asset or drawback for his party in the upcoming midterm elections...

Well, that shouldn't be too hard to figure out...where was Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, the de facto Democratic nominee for the open Senate seat, and daughter of the legendary Mel?

Let's ask her her spokesman, Mr. Linden Zakula, who claimed that Robin was "already locked in" to meetings in Washington, D.C.:

"Yes, she could have been there, but she feels very strongly about the need for financial regulatory reform," he said....

Oh, Robin...with excuses like that, it's gonna be a long eight months....

Condemn This, Joe!

We mentioned earlier how quick Joe Biden was to "condemn" Israel for building homes within its own capital, using phraseology the administration usually reserves for terrorists and fascists. One wonders what Joe will say - if anything - about this particular outrage:

On Thursday, according to Palestinian Media Watch, the Palestinian Authority is planning to go through with plans to name a public square after Dalal Mughrabi, who led a 1978 bus hijacking in which 37 Israelis, including 12 children, were killed. Thursday is the 32nd anniversary of the attack. Biden will still be in town.

Don't expect much of a response from the Obama administration. A society that glorifies the slaughter of innocent women and children is not the problem in the Middle East; it's Jews building houses in Jerusalem.

We call this "smart diplomacy", by the way...

Biden Condemns Israel...

...using the same words and phrasing that the Obama administration has used to condemn regimes such as Iran, and the Norks...is there any doubt that to Barack Obama and the Democrats, Israel is on par with them?

Biden's words, after Israel dared to build 1,600 homes in Jerusalem, the capitol of the Jewish people for some 4,000 -odd years:

“I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem,” Biden, currently in Israel, said in a statement. “The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I’ve had here in Israel.”

“We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them,” Biden continued...

And the Vice President then took his revenge om Netanyahu bu showing up an hour and a half late for dinner. Real mature, Joe....

But just for comparisons sake...when have we seen the phrase "condemn" from the administration before? Let's listen:

...in June, Gibbs said Obama “condemned the violence” in Iran.

In May, Obama released a statement on Aung San Suu Kyi, saying, “I strongly condemn her house arrest and detention, which have also been condemned around the world.”

The same month, Obama “strongly condemn[ed]” a North Korean nuclear test and missile launch.

In July, Obama said, “I strongly condemn the attacks that occurred this morning in Jakarta.”
The October bombings in Baghdad prompted Obama to say, “I strongly condemn these outrageous attacks on the Iraqi people…”

Last month, we had this: “The United States and the European Union condemn the continuing human rights violations in Iran since the June 12 election.”

And now he condemns Israel worth the same anger - for building homes, mind you - that he uses to protest against a rogue Iranian regime, North Korean nuclear missiles, and terrorist attacks on our allies...

Well, being that Israel has watched and seen exactly how much force has followed Obama's various condemnations, they probably feel they have nothing to worry about.

And they'd be right, except for the fact that whatever precious few actions Obama has taken have all been against allies - whether is be siding with fascists in Honduras, or taking Argentina's side in Falklands War II, or alienating Brazil and Columbia in favor of Hugo Chavez...

Should be interesting to see what unfolds from here....

Socialism's End-Game Is Upon Us....

...because all of the spending being done by Washington, by our state governments, by our local governments, has to be paid for by someone. And that someone is...you and me.

Item 1:

While President Obama's push to raise federal income taxes for the wealthy gets lots of attention, the continuing upward creep in the sales tax rates imposed by state and local governments has gotten less notice.
But Vertex Inc., which calculates sales tax for Internet sellers, reports that the average general sales tax rate nationwide reached 8.629% at the end of 2009, the highest since the Berwyn, Pa., company started tracking data in 1982...

See? The end result of socialism dawns early in America..."I was all for it, when they said they would force the rich to pay for it. Then I realized...it was I was whom they considered "the rich"....

First, the rich. Then, the middle class. Eventually - as in now - the poor and aged:

A little-noticed law could soon result in smaller Social Security checks for hundreds of thousands of the elderly and disabled who owe the U.S. money from defaulted loans and other debts more than a decade old.

Previously, the U.S. hasn't been able to withhold Social Security payments to recover most debts delinquent for more than ten years.
But a provision in the 2008 Farm Bill lifted the ten-year statute of limitations on the government's ability to withhold Social Security benefits in collecting debts other than student loans...and income taxes.,..

This means that a person who defaulted on a small-business loan in 1995, for example, and who is receiving Social Security could be notified that his benefits may be reduced each month until the debt, with interest, fees, and penalties, is paid. The Treasury can withhold 15% of the benefit, though it can't be reduced to below $750. Tax debts have no floor.

"Tax debts have no floor", of course, because that's money you owe to the government. So they can bleed an elderly or disabled person to bankruptcy or death (for a mistake made decades ago) in order to recoup monies needed to pay for Son of Stimulus III, or abortions under ObamaCare, or whatever spending urge the current powers that be may need to have fulfilled.

And of course, there is always the opportunity to take successful businesses and do a "break-out", Sopranos-style. Politicians thought this would take some time to destroy their economy; see how shocked they are when they learn the adverse affects are instantaneous:

Amazon.com Inc. cut ties Monday with Colorado online businesses that help it sell products because of a new state law aimed at getting out-of-state, online retailers to collect sales tax.

The move hurts businesses—many of them small, home-based operations—that earn money by using their Web sites and blogs to link customers to online retailers. Colorado has at least 4,200 such businesses, known as affiliates or associates, accounting for about 5,000 jobs, and most of them rely on Amazon to some degree, according to their trade group, the Performance Marketing Association.

Note the rage when the hold-up goes haywire:

Democratic lawmakers, including Gov. Bill Ritter, criticized Amazon for cutting off affiliates, with some calling it "corporate bullying." They said Amazon will still be on the hook to either collect the tax or tell their customers to pay it.

"They've done nothing here but spit in our face," Senate Majority Leader John Morse said.

Who's the bully? The Democrats who tried to shake down a successful business, or the business who fought back? And should Morse really be angry when, at the point of a gun, Amazon refused to turn over the money but instead hocked a lugie in his general direction? Doesn't that make them...heroes? And aren't Ritter and Morse really both simply scared sh*tless that Colorado residents will rightfully blame them for a failed heist?

What is ours will soon become theirs. All of our earnings will become their revenue; with a pittance left behind to feed and clothe ourselves, and our families, as our dollars get redistributed to the unproductive.

Just wondering: Can I get paid in gold? I'll convert what I need into cash, and bury the rest in the Pine Barrens of New Jersey.....

64% of Independents Hate ObamaCare!

...and the President yawns. He has long since moved past that whole arcane "consent of the governed" thing anyway...

The whole story:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 42% favor the plan while 53% are opposed. These figures include just 20% who Strongly Favor the plan and 41% who are Strongly Opposed.

As has been the case for months, Democrats overwhelmingly favor the plan, and Republicans are overwhelmingly opposed. As for those not affiliated with either major party, 32% favor the plan, and 64% are opposed.

One reason for the huge partisan gap is that a solid plurality of Democrats believe it would be a good for workers if they were forced off a private insurance plan and on to a government program. Republicans and unaffiliated voters strongly disagree.

A statement that butresses the belief that Democrats are more and more a party of white, upper-class elites. If they were really were the party of the blue-collar working man, well - can you see any union guy wanting to drop his collective-negotiated benefit package for some social welfare medical plan? Yeah, me neither.

Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters believe passage of the proposed health care legislation will lead to higher health care costs. Just 17% believe it will achieve the stated goal of reducing the cost of care.
Forty-nine percent (49%) also think passage of the plan will reduce the quality of care, while only 23% believe it will improve the quality of care.

Well, that just means that Americans are too stupid to understand the great generosity of our benevolent Democratic leadership. Maybe if they read more of the work of liberally-lauded economic genius Ezra Klein (who's all of...what? 26 year old?) or studied the work of Bush-bashing, Republican-hating, former Enron board member and Nobel prize-winning Paul Krugman, they would have greater understanding of how adding a trillion in debt on top of an existing trillion in debt is actually deficit reduction.

Seventy-six percent (76%) of those with insurance now rate their own coverage as good or excellent. The fact that most Americans are comfortable with their own insurance coverage has proven to be a major obstacle for advocates of reform.

Hey - if Obama says it's a crisis, then it's a crisis, OK? And if 5% of all Americans are uninsured, then the other 95% should suffer gladly, and sacrifice their hard-earned benefits to the control of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, who obviously know much more about how to run 17% of the nation's economy than the free market does!

All of which leaves this as an obvious result:

The disconnect between sustained public opposition to the plan and the belief it may pass may be one reason that just 21% of voters believe the federal government has the consent of the governed. This follows a similar disconnect on the bailouts, the takeover of General Motors and other initiatives that were approved in the past year despite strong public opposition.

But don't worry, Democrats. Obama will protect you in November! Just like he saved Martha Coakley, Jon Corzine, and the Democrats of Virginia...

The Eric Massa Affair: A Warning Shot At Reluctant Democrats?

One of my favorite movies is the Clint Eastwood classic "Unforgiven". There's a memorable scene where the local sheriff, a hard-nosed bully named Little Bill Daggett (played by Gene Hackman), beats the living shi*t out of a gunman ("English Bob") who rode into town expecting to execute a quick hit and leave with the payoff.

With the whole of the town watching the assault with horror, Hackman, while beating his adversary bloody, makes the following remarks:

I guess you think I'm kicking you, Bob. But it ain't so. What I'm doing is talking, you hear? I'm talking to all those villains down there in Kansas. I'm talking to all those villains in Missouri. And all those villains down there in Cheyenne. And what I'm saying is there ain't no whore's gold. And if there was, how they wouldn't want to come looking for it anyhow.

...cause if you did come looking for it, you'd get what English Bob was getting. Message sent.

Now listen to Eric Massa, soon to be disappeared from the House, allegedly for improper behavior. But was the improper behavior simply his voting choices, especially his continued insistence on a "no" vote on ObamaCare?

"I am showering, naked as a jaybird, and here comes Rahm Emanuel, not even with a towel wrapped around his tush, poking his finger in my chest, yelling at me."

"Steny Hoyer has never said a single word to me at all, never, not once," Massa said. "Never before in the history of the House of Representatives has a sitting leader of the Democratic Party discussed allegations of House investigations publicly, before findings of fact. Ever."
"I was set up for this from the very, very beginning," he added. "The leadership of the Democratic Party have become exactly what they said they were running against."

“That’s very kind of you, but understand what that means for me," Massa said in a response to a caller who suggested he not resign. “It means that a group of lawyers are going to try to rip me and my family limb from limb. And you’ve already seen it in the newspapers. … It’s a piranha feeding frenzy.”

In other words: "We're not giving Eric Massa the business here, and ruining his life and his family's. It ain't so. What we're doing is talking here, you know? We're talking to all those Blue Dog Democrats. We're talking to all those far-left ideologues. And we're talking to all of those red-state fence sitters. And we're saying that you got no choice but to vote for the Obama health care plan. Because you don't have any options. And if you think you do, well, you don't want to exercise them anyhow."

Message sent? We'll see if the numbers spin tomorrow....

Obama Feels The Wheels Of The Bus...

...going "round and round" right over his sorry socialist ass....

The man who promised to bridge partisan divides cannot even countenance center/left dissension in his own party. So it appears as if he is helping to orchestrate the primary opposition to Arkansas Democrat Blanche Lincoln, hoping to force out the blue dog for another liberal poodle who will vote the party line on the "progressive agenda".

Doesn't seem like Blanche is going to take it lying down; she's going rogue on Obama and her own party:



Nice ad, albeit somewhat misleading, as her vote against a "public option" was not the same as a vote against ObamaCare. Still, one would love to ask Obama how it feels to be under the spinning wheels of the very same bus he has thrown so many former allies under when they have outlives their usefulness to him. As a certain reverend might have said, the chickens are coming home to roost...

And Blanche is only the first of many Democrats who are going to realize that if they are to have a shot at re-election, they're going to have to get behind the wheel of the bus and put the pedal to the metal...

Interesting to see how hard Obama and the Democrats are going after Blanche. Disloyalty to party is always a capital offense to the Left, of course, but Obama has been especially vicious to the so-called "weaker sex" for some time:

Hillary Clinton has been humiliated and marginalized, mammograms and pap smears are soon to be eliminated, tampons are about to be taxed, and the whole Obama operation is known as "the boy's club". The marginalization of women by these misogynists continues....all, of course, with the media's blessing (and participation).

Better go easy on Blanche, Baracky...we're watching.

Gibbs: Obama "Out of the Loop" on KSM Trial

Hey, I didn't say it, Robert Gibbs did...

Michael Goodwin on Barack Obama's warped priorities:

President Obama has given some 35 speeches on health care, spent entire weekends trying to cut a deal with House and Senate leaders and wasted a full day on a summit to nowhere. All for a monstrosity America doesn't need or want.

Meanwhile, the White House says a decision on where and how to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed is still weeks away. "This hasn't gone up to the president yet," Robert Gibbs said.

There is no better illustration of Obama's warped priorities. He's determined to jam a health-care takeover through, but isn't involved in a key national-security debate. Time is finite and for Obama not to have devoted any of his to the case of the 9/11 masterminds is shocking -- but not surprising. The facts don't fit his politics.

...The president backed Holder's plan, but his reluctance to get involved now can mean only one thing: He has no clue about what to do next. There was no Plan B and there still isn't.

Incidentally, this is also why Iran goes along its merry way building nuclear weapons for the upcoming Second Holocaust, while we do nothing. Obama was so sure that his "open palm" policy would turn the mullahs into purring pussycats, he never even considered simultaneously building towards a military option or even creating a sanctions consensus. Now he sits, slack-jawed and clueless, with no preparation in place for a preemptive strike, and no hopes of getting any significant international help for meaningful economic actions against Iran, as every man fends for himself while events spin rapidly out of control...

So sure is Obama of his own righteousness, so certain is he that all barriers will fall before him, that there is no "what if?" factor in any of his overseas dealings. He is left dumbfounded upon rejection, resorting to meaningless noises and empty press releases in lieu of intelligent action.

What is it that German Generalfeldmarschall Helmuth Karl Bernhard Graf von Moltke said? "No battle plan survives contact with the enemy"? Someone ought to tell Barack Obama that his key responsibility as president is to protect the homeland. It is the #1 trust given to government, and should he fail it, no other initiative, no matter how grand or worthy, will pass muster before the people of the United States...

Cap and Trade By Any Other Name...

"If Cap and Trade is dead", the Washington Post asks today, "how can we create a climate bill that's as close to it as possible?"

Well, the panel is virtually unanimous on that one - tax carbon, and let the consumers pay. But what about the fact that the poor and middle-class (a class now defined, apparently, as someone making between $30-$45K; once you get close to $50K, you're just another selfish bastard who doesn't want to pay his/her fair share) will be "hardest hit" by the reality that everything produced in this nation will become exponentially more expensive?

Richard L. Revesz, dean of NYU's School of Law,gives us the preferred solution:

We will all see small increases in our energy bills, at the gas pump, and many day-to-day goods because manufacturers and retailers will be paying more for their energy bills too. To buffer Americans from those cost increases, a new climate bill should include a refund that takes any revenue raised from a carbon pricing measure, like a cap or a tax, and refunds it back to individuals. If done well, the refund would keep consumers whole and in some cases come out a little ahead.

The biggest concern is shielding those in the lower and middle economic classes...But beyond a question of fairness, it makes political sense to ensure that voters are not paying the price of a century of burning dirty fuels. Compensating working families for price increases has the potential to appease many voters who are not convinced climate change is a priority.

Kudos to Ravesz for admitting two truths - costs will rise ("to some extent" can be fairly translated to "astronomical") and that such a rise will be politically unpopular. His solution is music to the ears of the Obama administration and the Democratic party:

But, of course, to be able to provide Americans with a financial buffer for increased energy prices, the government must raise the funds from polluters -- otherwise there will be no revenue to refund. That means any measure Congress adopts must include payments from emitters. It can come in the form of a tax or the auction of pollution permits, but there must be a funding pool with which to compensate lower and middle income Americans... It is much more likely that a policy will remain popular if voters can know they are being compensated.

Tax big energy companies, and redistribute the monies to the lower classes, who will not use it to produce anything, but, since they are getting something for nothing, will continue to vote for you. The productive class -those who make, say $60K or better and account for most discretionary spending - will bear the brunt of these costs, but with this plan in place, will not have enough votes to stop this looting of their (minimal, and ever-shrinking) wealth.

Such is "fairness" under the rule of the left. Such is the morality of the Deans of our esteemed Universities- sure, the economy will be disrupted in ways we cannot foresee (transferring wealth from the productive to the unproductive is usually called socialism, perfesser) especially in the middle of an unprecedented financial crisis , but that's the price of "fairness", and it's nothing that can't be fixed by taxing the rich and big business. Gee, way to think out of the box, Ravesz...

And incidentally, just because the government collects these taxes from "polluters" (and when do SUV owners fall into this catagory?), there is no guarantee they will not just, you know, keep the money for themselves. Just like a number of states are doing right now, as they refuse to pay tax refunds to citizens who had too much money withheld from their paychecks. Why? Because the government needs it more than you do:

This year, more Americans and businesses may be asking: Where's my tax refund?

That's because cash-strapped states such as North Carolina, Alabama and Hawaii have been forced to slow down issuing income tax refunds to individuals and businesses because of a lack of funds in their budget.

Kansas has hinted that a delay might be possible...Another state, New York, is still considering whether they'll follow the likes of Hawaii and delay refund payments.

"States typically do this when they are tight and they don't have a budget in place," said Karla Dennis, CEO of Cohesive, a nationwide tax preparation firm...Delaying the refund, Dennis says, "gives the state funds to work with in the interim to fill a gap in their revenues."

So good luck getting anywhere near full value on your "carbon refund", suckers...

Scary thing about this proposal? It hits every emotional button in today's leadership - taxing, redistributing, economic command and control, and most importantly - staying in power. Why do I expect to see this plan coming soon in a "climate bill" produced by a Congress near you?

Abortion: Lies My President Told Me

The Jerseynut is a squishy conservative on the abortion issue - I'm in no mood to see a civil war over it, and feel the best way to discourage it is to ostracize the behavior (if it worked for smoking...). That being said, more Americans oppose abortion than support it, so one would think that a president, while trying to sell a government health-care takeover, would at least be smart enough to make sure that the Hyde Amendment is strictly adhered to.

Obama is aware of this. Obama is also a hardcore ideologue, and radical pro-abortionist. So what does he do to sell his takeover of American medicine and placate the pro-life majority?

He lies. Blatantly, and to our faces. As Jennifer Rubin explains, Obama’s claim that his favored bill (essentially the Senate bill) doesn’t subsidize abortions simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

And it doesn't:

The president’s latest proposal mirrors legislation that has passed the Senate, which doesn’t include a Hyde Amendment[prohibiting taxpayer funding of abortions], and would inevitably establish abortion as a fundamental health-care service for the following reasons:

• It would change existing law by allowing federally subsidized health-care plans to pay for abortions and could require private health-insurance plans to cover abortion.
• It would impose a first-ever abortion tax—a separate premium payment that will be used to pay for elective abortions—on enrollees in insurance plans that covers abortions through newly created government health-care exchanges.
• And it would fail to protect the rights of health-care providers to refuse to participate in abortions.

The president’s plan goes further than the Senate bill on abortion by calling for spending $11 billion over five years on “community health centers,” which include Planned Parenthood clinics that provide abortions.

Does that sound like the status quo? If you believe abortion law will be unchanged under ObamaCare, you probably think you'll get to keep your health insurance, too.

The fact that the president needs to lie about a key issue within the bill, the fact that he's back to having to bribe congressman to get the votes he needs, and the fact that he's demanding that a complete overhaul of the nation's covenant with the government be passed on a party-line vote (on Easter Sunday?), well...I think those are about all the facts you need to tell you exactly what kind of health care reform Barack Obama is trying to spring upon us....

Oh - and if the bill passes? Expect a taxpayer-funded "McBortions" to be opening on a street corner near you...

Pete Stark: Anti-Semite, Misogynist, Racist...

...and proud Democrat.

Sorry, let me be more specific: He's the Democrat Nancy Pelosi put in charge of the Ways and Means committee in Charlie Rangel's "absence". What do we know about the man who will now be in charge of determining what the government's cut of your salary is going to be?

Well, like San Fran Nan, he's a Bay Area Democrat, which makes him more liberal than 99.99% of his fellow Americans. And he's got no problem speaking his mind, which is a good thing, because we get to see some of the ugliness that resides within:

...controversies include singling out "Jew colleagues" for blame for the Persian Gulf War and referring to Congressman Stephen Solarz of New York (who co-sponsored the Gulf War Authorization Act) as "Field Marshal Solarz in the pro-Isreal forces." in 1991. In 1995, during a private meeting with Congresswoman Nancy Johnson of Connecticut, he called Johnson a "whore for the insurance industry" and suggested that her knowledge of health care came solely from "pillow talk" with her husband, a physician.

But wait! There's more!

In 1999, he said to former California State Welfare Director Eloise Anderson, herself a former welfare mother, that she would "kill children if she had her way" for her advocacy of welfare reform. In a 2001 Ways and Means Subcommittee on Health hearing on abstinence promotion, he referred to Congressman J. C. Watts of Oklahoma, an African American, as "the current Republican Conference Chairman, whose children were all born out of wedlock."

Stark seems to have issues with blacks; especially those who stray off the liberal plantation:

In August 1990, Stark drew controversy for calling Health and Human Services Secretary Louis Wade Sullivan, an African American, "a disgrace to his race" for supporting Bush Administration policies... Sullivan replied in a statement, saying in part, "I guess I should feel ashamed because Congressman Stark thinks I am not a 'good Negro.' As a Cabinet member who has spent almost four decades of my life dedicated to healing,…[I] am unable to express my own views without being subject to race-based criticism by those who are not ready to accept independent thinking by a black man."

And what respect he has for his constituents!

During a town hall meeting, a constituent who opposed Barack Obama's health care plan told Stark, "Mr. Congressman, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining." Stark responded with, "I wouldn't dignify you by peeing on your leg. It wouldn't be worth wasting the urine."

And like all good Democrats, he knows how to express the love for the American soldier:



"Republicans sure don't care about finding $200 billion to fight the illegal war in Iraq. Where are you going to get that money? Are you going to tell us lies like you're telling us today? Is that how you're going to fund the war? You don't have money to fund the war or children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement."

And this is who Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi feel is the best choice to put on one of the most powerful committees in Congress at a turning point in history. What does that say about their respect for you?

We should be thankful, I suppose, that they are dignifying us by urinating on our legs...

The Situation: Playing Politics With Snookie !

Man oh man, is Jersey hot these days!

Governor Chris Christie is being hailed as a conservative god (And why not? After accepting 375 of 378 proposed spending cuts, New Jerseyans still give him a 52% approval rating; even Dems are giving him positive territory), while Georgia Congressmen are giving shout-outs to Jersey Shore party animals Snookie and The Situation as they bash Obama's transparent health-care takeover and bullshit bi-partisanship:

U.S. Representative Paul Broun, M.D. (GA-10) released the following statement after President Barack Obama announced his intentions to incorporate only four minor Republican ideas into the 2,000-plus page health care bill:

“I don’t know if we should be insulted or humored at the President’s feeble attempts to incorporate Republican ideas into his latest health care proposal. Snookie, from the Jersey Shore, has more substance than President Obama’s offer.

“Instead of listening to the American people, the President has once again demonstrated his arrogance and ignorance about what the nation expects from its leaders. This is “The Situation,” Mr. President: the American people do not want unconstitutional mandates and job-killing tax increases. They are concerned with the costs of premiums, the quality of their health care and ensuring their children and grandchildren are not left with the bill. If you want to govern with the consent of the governed, you need to scrap this government take-over plan and embrace more of our commonsense solutions that protect the vital patient/doctor relationship and decrease the costs of premiums without adding to the national debt.”

Not sure if Snookz or "The Sitch" really belong in this conversation, but it is a testament to the awesome influence of the Garden State that the rest of the nation looks askance to us for hope, guidance, and inspiration.

Sheeeet. All we need is some oil rigs alongside the Garden State Parkway, and we'll be the East-Coast version of Texas! Just picture it - JWow on the mechanical bull, Pauli D spinning country, and Ronnie, still mad at the world but armed to the teeth....

How It Happened Here...

Just thinking on it, as I read the headlines screaming that Barack Obama will force through a huge entitlement program - the de facto socialization of the world's best health care system -defying the will of a large majority of the American people, by using arcane Senate rules designed for entirely different purposes.

And all of our lives will be changed, for the worse, permanently. And there is nothing we can do about it.

How did we, the ultimate democracy, wind up putting into power a government that rules like proto-fascists, ignoring the pleas of the people and rejiggering American society to create a welfare state, a state that empowers them but disenfranchises us?

Well, perhaps we are not so exceptional after all. We had the benefit of seeing totalitarianism rise across the world, from Nazism to Socialism to Communism, and we always watched it with unbelieving eyes, comfortable that it could never happen here.

"What rubes!", is what we all secretly thought, as we watched nations fall under the spell of charismatics from Hitler to Chavez, who promised wealth and glory but delivered nothing but impoverishment and despair to their peoples. We, the exceptional Americans, were too smart to fall for the charlatan's bag of tricks.

Only we weren't. Barack Obama came on the scene as a man unknown and unaccomplished, but with a mesmerizing speaking voice which delivered words of hope and change and new beginnings. There were precious few specifics, of course, but we decided to indulge each our own personal fantasies about what it might mean, as opposed to pressing for details. And when details came out - about his unsavory cohorts, his anti-Semitic mentors, his hard-left ideology - we ignored it, lost in our own daydreams about how our lives (and souls) would be improved by the well-spoken man who promised he could make it so, with a wave of his hand.

And the media helped, of course - using their power both to smear the enemies of Obama and to hide the ugliness that was bubbling under the surface. No discussion was held on what it might mean to the nation to live under one-party rule; a party that was becoming more and more radically leftist. They acted as a salve over the fears of the doubters, using the power of their medium to spread the words of the One, bolstered by positive reviews by what accounts for an intellectual elite in this country. This too, a slavish devotion to party and power by a media that was supposed to keep both honest, was, to this extent, new to America...

In retrospect, it was a Midtown three-card-monte game, with Obama as the dealer and the media as his partners. We were the patsies, and like the dumbfounded tourists staring blankly at the card table, we have been parted from our money.

Unfortunately, we are about to be separated from much more. Our choices over our very lives are about to be limited by, and distributed through, the government. Generations will be enslaved by its debt, and forced into lower living standards than their parents. And we the people now see that, but we are powerless, as we chose to take the route of rubes everywhere - closing our minds to rationality and reason, and putting our lives into the hands of people who swore they'd take care of us.

And maybe that's it. We've avoided the fascist trap for so long because we were a self-reliant people, never needing or wanting to exchange our freedom for temporary security. But in 2008, we took flight from our heritage, and today, we see the result.

We'll never make the same mistake again. But it will take more than my lifetime to bring ourselves back from the horrible place Obama and the Democrats are dragging us to....

....this is in some way the epitome of the modern Left: impervious to public opinion, indifferent to fiscal reality, and willing to operate through brute political force.

Shocker: Obama's Fiscal Commsion To Help Him Raise Taxes

When I wrote about Barack Obama's "debt panel", created to outsource the responsibility of the huge deficit being run up by the Democrats, I said the following:

And really, isn't this just another exercise in theatrics; in that by accepting and implementing the panel's proposals (TAX HIKES!), Obama can claim they came not from him, but were established as sound policy by an elite bi-partisan panel ! Hmmm...maybe he should re-title it the "Cover My Ass Commission"?

Steny Hoyer, Pelosi's "#2" (in every sense of the word), today:

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) warned Monday afternoon that debt crises like the one gripping Greece will inevitably hit the United States if leaders fail to cut deficits, and he urged Republicans to join President Barack Obama’s fiscal commission and develop a package of budget cuts and revenue hikes by the end of the year.

Hoyer urged Republicans to be open to revenue hikes, not just budget cuts, to reach a compromise.

“If need be, I am hopeful that both parties will agree to look at revenues as part of the solution — not as a gateway to higher spending, but as part of a compromise that cuts spending and balances the budget,” Hoyer said.

Hoyer said a higher retirement age as well as adjusting Medicare and Social Security benefits to make them more progressive could also be part of a deal.

But wouldn't cutting spending reduce the need for increased taxes? And how can we avoid the Greek Tragedy if we stifle the economy with even more smothering "revenue enhancers"?

And what does making benefits more "progressive", mean, anyway? Will folks who paid into Social Security their whole life now get a pittance in return because others (who paid little ) are deemed more "needy" then they? If so, doesn't that break the entire Social Security contract with the American people?

Hoyer is looking, as I suspected, for the commission to approve a liberal way out of our current mess - by raising taxes on, and cutting benefits for, not the rich, but the upper-middle class and upwards. You know, the folks that spend the most money, run the most companies, and in general keep the economy afloat. They are the class that must pay the price for the Democrat's gross over-indulgences, although once the middle is milked, the game will begin anew, and the "commission" will aim lower...

And Obama? He gets to implement his liberal agenda under the aegis of simply following the instructions of his bi-partisan fiscal commission. Don't blame him - he's just following orders...

President Obama, Partying Like A Rock Star!

And you know, ordinarily, I would have no problem with it - the guy's got a real stressful job. But when it's the guy who (along with his wife) are planning to control my health care, well, then his boozin' and drinkin' just smells like more of the ruling class refusing to obey the dictates they pass down to their subjects.

Anyway - I think we can infer from the doctor's comments exactly what kind of lifestyle Obama is leading:


...after his 90-minute medical at the Navy hospital outside Washington yesterday morning, his doctors confirmed he had not yet managed to conquer the habit and suggested he "continue smoking cessation efforts".

....The doctors also recommended "moderation of alcohol intake".

Again, as long as he's not staggering around the White House wasted (and there is some anecdotal evidence that this might be the case, see left and link), I really shouldn't care.

BUT - under a national health care plan, our freedom to indulge is in danger. With Michelle Obama on the warpath against obese children (which is less of a general population problem and more of a socioeconomic one) and Baracky pushing "national health", every bag of chips you munch on, every beer you quaff, every loaded slice of pizza becomes an unpatriotic act. With rising health care costs sure to be the biggest drain on our economy under Obamacare (just like it is for every nation that has socialized medicine), restrictions will have to be put on unhealthy activities, all in the name of "keeping costs down". And if they don't outlaw it, the Left will do the next best thing - tax the living sh*t out of it, so that a slice and a Bud will be relieving you of a $10- spot, at least...

So Barack - why don't you clean up your unhealthy lifestyle before you start putting the clamps on ours? You always say you're no elitist, so in the name of the "health care crisis", why don't you lead by example, and try to keep the nation's medical costs down, by living a less deadly lifestyle, one that doesn't include booze and cigarettes?

Maybe it would be easier to take your (and your wife's) admonishments about the state of the nation's health more seriously if you didn't smell like a barroom at closing time...

Washington Post Apologizes To Eric Cantor...

...for echoing Barack Obama's accusation that the presence of the health care bill - all 2,700 pages of it - on Cantor's desk during the summit was a "prop":

In a Feb. 26 editorial, we said Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) was "posturing" during the Thursday health-care summit by stacking the voluminous Senate bill before him. Mr. Cantor says that he had the bill with him, well-tabbed, not for show but so that Republicans could respond if specific provisions of the bill came up for discussion. That makes sense, and we should not have characterized his purpose as we did.

Valid retrenchment. Would be nice if the president would show as much class and thought as even the the bottom-feeding lefties at the Washington Post, and admit that his statement was unnecessarily nasty and accusatory....but that would involve admitting he was wrong.

Verboten...