Obama & The Media: A Picture Worth 1,000 Words...

Snagged this one from Instapundit:

Glenn focuses on the, ahem, "diversity" of the crowd around Obama. Sheesh, take out the President, and it looks like it could be a Tea-Party gathering in the deep South! At least, that's what they tell me...

You know what bothers me, though? First, the fact they are yukking it up with the president, a man who they are supposed to be at least on somewhat adversarial terms with. Based on the sh*t-eating grins and guffaws going 'round the room, it seems to me as if they perceive each other as "part of the same team", so to speak...

The second thing is the looks on this crowd's faces. Smug, self-satisfied, convinced of their intellectual and cultural superiority, relishing their access to power and delighting in using it in the attempt to influence others, it certainly lends credence to Brietbart's (the original source for this photo) headline the other day: Yes, But the Reporters at Pravda Weren’t Such Insufferable Assholes...

Where I less mature and insightful, like JournoList member Spencer Ackerman, I would say that the collective self-centered sneer of this entire group makes me want to grab their collective heads and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card...

Instead, I just feel sorry for them. They sold their souls and destroyed their industry in an attempt to help the Left gain power; now it appears that their moment in the sun will be shockingly brief. When the smoke clears, these folks will have seen their lifelong delusions of superiority destroyed, their jobs endangered, and what little respect they had from the public instead converted to distrust, if not outright hostility. How will they wrap their swelled heads around that reality? With plenty of Prozac, I reckon...

Mark 8:36 : For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

Ask the folks in the picture above, once time has wiped the smirks from their faces...

"JournoList" And The Blood Lust Of The Left

The latest "JournoList" ( a secret cabel of MSM members working to shape the news - no, seriously) transcripts released by the Daily Caller are all over the 'net, with this juicy tidbit being used as absolute proof that the media intentionally whitewashed out Barack Obama's past in order to get him elected - as written by Spencer Ackerman, regarding what to do about Obama's butt-buddy Jeremiah Wright:

It’s not necessary to jump to Wright-qua-Wright’s defense. What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwinger’s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear. Obviously I mean this rhetorically.

If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.

C'mon, anyone with half a brain knows that the cry of "racist!" is the last refuge of a scoundrel with no further intellectual ammunition in his mental toolbox. But what bothers me - and what bothers Jim Geraghty - is the absolute blood lust on display here by what we are told is a cultured professional journalist:

Considering Weigel’s talk of setting Matt Drudge on fire, Ezra Klein’s off-color recommendation for Tim Russert, and now Ackerman fantasizing about putting conservatives through plate-glass windows, there is a bizarre addiction to lurid, violent, threatening language — not just among the commenters of liberal blogs, but among the folks who we are told represent their best and brightest. It’s disturbing, and the fact that it doesn’t bother more people is disturbing.

To use one of the Left's favorite "intellectual" exercises, let's ask ourselves "Why do they hate us?"

Does the Right oppress the Left? No, we want them to have even more freedom and liberties than they currently enjoy.
Does the Right mock the Left? Well, gently, perhaps, but conservative journalists don't go online and threaten to disfigure, say, Keith Olberman
Does the Right take things that the Left feels are legitimately theirs? Well, political power, up until the past 18 months. Otherwise, the Right prevents the Left from taking what is not legitimately theirs, ie: people's incomes, their right to their own medical plan, their handguns...

Ah. The crux of the problem. The Left hates the Right because conservatives have thwarted for years the liberal lust for power and control - over the nation, but as a means to control the lives of every one of their citizens. In the liberal utopia, every citizen will be forced to live as they do (in city apartments), travel as they do (in mass transit or tiny cars), eat as they do (organics only!), and otherwise live in a state of complete nonthreatening equality - high taxes/low income for all, mediocre medical treatment for the masses, equally minimal advancement opportunities. So not as to upset the perks and privileges of your ruling class. Of course, the only thoughts that will be considered "acceptable" are those that are in agreement with liberal dogma. Otherwise, you will be tagged as a racist (or guilty of a "hate crime"), and boy, are there penalties for that....!

So how does the Left handle their frustration at having their attempts at power grabs turned back time and time again? With threats (yes, Spencer, that's a threat) of vicious acts of violence, coupled with a campaign of fear, terror, and blackmail.

And, as Geraghty points out, this is the attitude from the Left's "best and brightest". Is it any wonder that conservative activists are constantly under the threat of physical assault from union goons and other liberals with just a shred less self-control?

Why doesn't it bother more people? The American Left is aware that violence is the last physical tool in their belt, and that they won't hesitate to use it, now that their brief reign of democratic rule is about to end. But, like the story of Jeremiah Wright, this is apparently a situation that the mainstream media feels that we need to know as little as possible about...

So let's call Rand Paul a racist instead. Let's make fun of Sarah Palin. But whatever we do, let's turn the people's heads away from what our true intentions really are...

Video: Chris Christie & The Jersey "Miracle"

OK, so despite this 1:50 video, perhaps "miracle" is a strong term so early in his tenure. But that fact that he has managed to hold the line on taxes and spending, gain some concessions from the unions (and turn the public against those who defy him), and balance a budget that had a $11 billion dollar hole, well....in a state that was considered a fiscal basket case in a liberal headlock as recently as seven months ago, this does qualify as a miracle. If he can sustain it.

As Allahpundit notes, this video is not designed for the hardcore Christie fans - it leaves out some of his greatest, snarkiest "hits" (here, here, and here) , and showcases some issues (anti-offshore drilling) and people (Newark Mayor Cory Booker) that are certainly on the left side of the spectrum. But Jersey still has a strong Blue current, and if you want to keep the middle, you need to reach across the aisle, and it is something Christie has shown he can do (unlike a certain president). And Booker may just be the sanest Democrat on the planet (certainly in New Jersey); click the link to see a piece I wrote earlier this year...

Anyway - how do you turn a liberal welfare state into a place where people actually want to live, work, and do business? This video (infomercial?) from Chris Christie shows you how!

Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy: Seep, and Weep....

...for the worst is yet to come. Why only minimal amounts of huzzahs and political masturbation over the fact that BP "capped" the well a few short days ago? Ah, because there is something still seeping into the sea...and it's ain't coming from underneath the cap:

Late Sunday, (Retired Coast Guard Admiral) Allen said something was detected seeping near the broken oil well and demanded in a sharply worded letter that BP step up monitoring of the ocean floor. Allen didn't say what was seeping. White House energy adviser Carol Browner told the CBS "Early Show" the possible seepage was found less than two miles from the well site.

The concern all along — since pressure readings on the cap weren't as high as expected — was a leak elsewhere in the well bore, meaning the cap may have to be reopened to prevent the environmental disaster from becoming even worse and harder to fix. An underground leak could let oil and gas escape uncontrolled through bedrock and mud.

... the government is worried that the cap on the well is causing oil and gas to leak out elsewhere, which could make the sea floor unstable and cause the well to collapse.

We wrote about this possibility on June 24th in a post entitled "Apocalypse Now?". We hate to be prophetic, but it seems as if there is something really bad about to go down in the Gulf of Mexico:

What does this mean? It means they will never cap the gusher after the wellhead...They have shifted from stopping or restricting the gusher to opening it up and catching it. This only makes sense if they want to relieve pressure at the leak hidden down below the seabed.....and that sort of leak is one of the most dangerous and potentially damaging kind of leak there could be.

A ll of these things lead to only one place, a fully wide open well bore directly to the oil deposit...after that, it goes into the realm of "the worst things you can think of" . The well may come completely apart as the inner liners fail. ...all the worst things you can think of are a possibility, but the very least damaging outcome as bad as it is, is that we are stuck with a wide open gusher blowing out 150,000 barrels a day of raw oil or more. There isn't any "cap dome" or any other suck fixer device on earth that exists or could be built that will stop it from gushing out and doing more and more damage to the gulf.

It's a race now...a race to drill the relief wells and take our last chance at killing this monster before the whole weakened, wore out, blown out, leaking and failing system gives up it's last gasp in a horrific crescendo.

Seems as though the guy who wrote this a few weeks back (not us, we just paraphrase and re-publish!) was on to something. The well is "capped" right now, but there is still methane and oil seeping into the Gulf, which can only lead to one conclusion: The well bore is fatally compromised, and we are all f*cked.

Why? If we keep the cap on, we risk a massive explosion and tectonic disruption of the Gulf's sea bed, leading to a cataclysmic conclusion - can you imagine the Gulf States hit by a tsunami of oil? Buildings miles away from the sea covered with sheen? Men, women, children, choked to death by a massive wave of crude?

Imagine a Gulf where life is poisoned for a generation, where refugees from an environmental and economic crisis flood the Midwest and South, making the Katrina-inspired exodus from New Orleans look like a fun run. Pictures disruptions in fuel supplies and food creating nationwide panic amid price gouging and rationing, as a President who has already lost the faith of the nation repeats ad nasuem on TV that "everything is fine", and will get better if we just pass cap and trade....

I'd suggest imagining it right now. Because if you can picture it, and what you would do to save yourselves and your loved ones, you might be able to actually survive it. Because what's coming up the pipe is an insatiable monster, fueled with the pressure of the maelstrom of Earth's inner core, and neither Barack Obama or any team of liberal technocrats are going to be able to stop it. All this, for some political advantage...

May God have mercy on us, for what is about to come...

New Jersey’s Rich Refuse To Recycle!

It appears as if New Jersey’s lower and middle classes recycle rather dutifully, but the rich, who seem to be the ones doing the most lecturing on the subject, seem to be doing the least actual…recycling.

Let’s look at some charts, shall we?

RECYCLING RATES OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY COUNTY: 2008 Cumberland 56.5% Ocean 35.7% Gloucester 49.9% Mercer 35.2% Bergen 44.0% Union 33.7% Cape May 44.0% Passaic 33.5% Essex 39.8% Camden 32.1% Salem 39.4% Sussex 31.9% Morris 39.3% Atlantic 30.3% Monmouth 39.1% Hudson 29.5% Middlesex 38.9% Hunterdon 29.1% Burlington 38.6% Somerset 28.7% Warren 37.0% STATE 37.7%

OK, let’s look at a second table – per capita income in these counties:

Rank	National Rank	County	Per Capita Income	Median House- hold Income
1	7	Somerset County	$37,970	$76,973
2	10	Morris County	$36,964	$77,340
3	13	Hunterdon County	$36,370	$79,888
4	21	Bergen County	$33,638	$65,241
5	42	Monmouth County	$31,149	$64,231
6	79	Mercer County	$27,914	$56,612
7	91	Sussex County	$26,992	$65,266
8	91	Union County	$26,992	$55,339
9	100	Middlesex County	$26,535	$61,446
10	111	Burlington County	$26,339	$58,608
11	120	Warren County	$25,728	$56,100
12	148	Essex County	$24,943	$44,944
13	181	Cape May County	$24,172	$41,561
14	244	Ocean County	$23,054	$46,443
15	266	Gloucester County	$22,708	$54,273
16	289	Camden County	$22,354	$48,097
17	393	Passaic County	$21,370	$49,210
18	417	Hudson County	$21,154	$40,293
19	439	Atlantic County	$21,034	$43,933
20	462	Salem County	$20,874	$45,573
21	1353	Cumberland County	$17,376	$39,150

So Somerset County, the wealthiest in the state of New Jersey, recycles the least. Hunterdon, the third-richest county in the state, is right behind Hunterdon in worst recycling counties. Hudson County, just off the bottom of the Per Capita Income column, recycles just about as much as the monied Hunterdon crowd.

The highest recycling rate? Cumberland County, which just happens to be the poorest county in the state.

The article in the Asbury Park Press glosses over the class differences here – actually, they don’t mention it at all – and focuses instead on a bill that would raise deposit fees and increase government spending as (apparently) the only solution to the recycling issue. Naturally, the paper is vexed by the fact that most people are opposed to such a bill. Maybe, given the neo-revolutionary fervor in the air, this wasn’t the best time to propose punishment taxation?

Clinton resident and recycling advocate Ron Williams was dismayed by the local opposition.

"They feel it's the government telling them what to do. It's as simple as that," Williams said.

The Republicans understand, even if the APP doesn’t:

“I regard wasting assets and wasting resources as almost inexcusable," state Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll said.

Yet Carroll, a Republican from Morris County, voted against the Recycling Enhancement Act. "It's a moral issue, to me. To my way of thinking, you recycle everything you can. I don't think it should be much of a governmental issue," Carroll said.

Carroll is correct, especially given the fact that the poor are the ones complying with the law, and would almost certainly be the ones to forced to pay any additional penalties tacked on by the state. Being that the wealthiest counties are stacked with the state’s political players and the people who support them financially, how likely are they to see a summons in the mailbox from the local sheriff for not recycling dozens of champagne bottles left empty after a fundraiser for his boss?

Hey – this blog loves the rich and is a big supporter of trickle-down economics and unfettered capitalism. BUT – if the rich are going to pass “green” lifestyle laws, they’d better abide by them, and not force responsibility onto New Jersey’s poor to subsidize their wasteful ways.

And maybe the APP should recognize that fact. But given the paper’s editorial slant, I would bet that most of them live in the aforementioned “rich” counties, and are smuggling empty caviar cans into their trash can as well. And how do they want to relieve their guilt? By taxing and spending, of course. Liberal cocaine…sigh…

Obey the laws on the books, my well-off friends, before passing new ones you have no intention of enforcing anyway…except, perhaps, in Hudson, Atlantic, Salem, and Cumberland counties…

Liar, Liar: Obama admits health care mandate is a tax!

The New York Times:

While Congress was working on the health care legislation, Mr. Obama refused to accept the argument that a mandate to buy insurance, enforced by financial penalties, was equivalent to a tax.

“For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase,” the president said last September, in a spirited exchange with George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program “This Week.”

When Mr. Stephanopoulos said the penalty appeared to fit the dictionary definition of a tax, Mr. Obama replied, “I absolutely reject that notion.”

Well, Mr. President, I absolutely reject the notion that you are anything other than a lying ten-pound pile of shit in a five-pound bag:

...in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”

And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.

...In a brief defending the law, the Justice Department says the requirement for people to carry insurance or pay the penalty is “a valid exercise” of Congress’s power to impose taxes.

Funny how they never mentioned that during their push to impose socialized medicine upon the American people. Even their own side admits that Obama lied to the people he is supposed to represent:

Jack M. Balkin, a professor at Yale Law School who supports the new law, said, “The tax argument is the strongest argument for upholding” the individual-coverage requirement.

Mr. Obama “has not been honest with the American people about the nature of this bill,” Mr. Balkin said last month at a meeting of the American Constitution Society, a progressive legal organization. “This bill is a tax. Because it’s a tax, it’s completely constitutional.”

And why did Obama lie to the nation in the run-up to the nationalization of America's health care system? Because h eunderstood that the American people, if they knew the truth about what his health care reform really was and what its ultimate goal still is (a single-payer system), would reject it out of hand. By lying about it, he was able to convince enough members of his own party to push it through, as they believed they would not have to go home and defend the greatest tax increase in American history.

And the media still continues to express shock about how the American people have tuned out the president, and seem to have already made their choices for 2010, despite their (and the Democrat's) virtually non-stop demagogic attacks upon the Republican party (and to a certain extent, on the American people themselves, for being "selfish" and "stupid").

The media might have sold their souls to Barack Obama and The Party for mere pennies, but most Americans held onto theirs, no matter how they voted, leaving only the true believers to defend the indefensible, with cult-like chants:

The leader is good,
the leader is great.
We surrender our will,
as of this day...

The rest of us hold tight to our wallets , tune out the incomprehensible bullshit coming from Washington, and wait impatiently for November...

Somewhere, John Galt Is Chuckling...

...if he can get the New York Times, that is, and saw this doozy of a headline today:

Wealthy Reduce Buying in a Blow to the Recovery

“One of the reasons that the recovery has lost momentum is that high-end consumers have become more jittery and more cautious,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics.

Maybe that's because the current administration is branding them as no less than traitors to the Republic for daring to be talented and intelligent, and for refusing to willingly give away their earnings? Maybe they are being cautious because they expect to need their money to fund future tax hikes that the Democrats absolutely must impose in order to fund their social welfare programs? Or perhaps they are saving it in order to safely go into hiding after the administration sets hordes of ACORN employees upon their residences and places of business in order to make sure their wealth is "shared"?

....the Top 5 percent in income earners — those households earning $210,000 or more — account for about one-third of consumer outlays, including spending on goods and services, interest payments on consumer debt and cash gifts, according to an analysis of Federal Reserve data by Moody’s Analytics. That means the purchasing decisions of the rich have an outsize effect on economic data...

So as it turns out, we do need the rich after all. If they don't buy boats, the maritime industry goes out of business. If they don't buy bigger homes, the construction trade suffers. If they don't continually buy/flip cars, the automotive business fails.

And who gets hurt most? The average Joe who supports his family by working at these businesses. Once the rich stop spending, well...sorry, Joe. Maybe things will get better someday and we can expand again, or re-open. But in the meantime, here's two weeks pay. Best of luck to you and the family....

But the Left is so rigid in its ideological thinking that, like a carriage horse with blinders on, they cannot see what is clearly in front of them:

Sam Pizzigati, associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, a left-leaning research center, cautions against simply boosting the spending power of the rich through tax cuts or other measures. “Otherwise, we find ourselves in an ‘Alice in Wonderland’ world,” he said, “and the solution to the hard times that the economy is going through is to help the people that are not going through hard times.”

God forbid. How about tax cuts across the board, so all can spend freely and stimulate demand in a way that the politically-driven "stimulus" bill is utterly incapable of?

It just might work. But it is heresy to those who hold the reigns of power. And so it is off the table, for reasons having nothing to do with logic or intellect or economics. And we all suffer mightily and more so, day after day...while the New York Times asks, "Who is John Galt?"

I'd rather our economy be run by the aforementioned horse. At least it responds to a carrot and stick...

Bachman's Tea Party Caucus: A Clear And Present Danger?

Well, not to the American people. But to the Democratic party, its liberal apparatchiks entrenched within Congress and the bureaucracy, and to the media who nourish them all? Oh, absolutely.

Michelle Bachman wants to get this Party started:

Grassroots favorite Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota plans to form a Tea Party caucus in the House.

“The House Tea Party Caucus will serve as an informal group of members dedicated to promote Americans’ call for fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution and limited government,” Bachmann wrote in a Thursday letter to Rep. Robert Brady, chairman of the Committee on House Administration.

Bachmann said she plans to serve as the chairwoman of the caucus. Her communication director, Dave Dziok, said in an interview that the congresswoman was alone in forming the idea for the caucus, and that she will reach out to other members to join once the group is approved by House administration.

And Republicans aren’t the only ones welcome to sign up for the caucus, he said. “It’s absolutely open to every member, regardless of party,” Dziok said.

But here's my question: Can the House "administration" deny permission for the caucus to be formed? Let's put it this way - how can they not deny the petition to caucus?

After all, the NAACP (who's primary job seems to have become acting as a national whip for the Democratic party to keep the black vote in line, lest they become divested of their skin coloration and all the benefits retained therein) just declared the Tea Party to be a racist organization. How can the Democrats allow a caucus to be formed in defiance of this statement? What would be next, a Klan Kaucus? (Ooops, sorry, Robert Byrd has already left the building)...

What about the feeling of Robert Menedez (D-La Raza), who claimed the Tea Party folks in New Jersey were "right wing extremists"? And what about Nancy Pelosi, who famously claimed that the entire Tea Party is mere "AstroTurf"? Why, it would make a mockery of her intelligence! And what of Representative Andre Carson - he of the mythological attack of racist insults from the Tea Party that no one else heard or could verify, despite dozens of cameras running? He claimed the Tea Party was one of the largest threats to our internal security. How can we let the terrorists form a caucus within the House?

And finally, what of Barack Obama? Can the House Democrats legitimize a Tea Party caucus who has made Barack Obama public enemy #1, after they have worked so hard to de-legitimize (through Congress and Party affiliates such as the NAACP and the media) them?

Either way, Michelle Bachman's simple request has put the Democrats in a bind. Approve the caucus, and you legitimize a group - whose popularity, unlike yours, continues to rise - whose primary purpose is to defeat the agenda the Democrats have worked so hard to impose upon the American people. Approve the caucus, and you make fools of all the aforementioned people above, as well as the NAACP, SEIU, and other affiliated Party groups.

Deny the Tea Party the right to caucus in Congress? Then you legitimize every complaint the Tea Party, and the "extreme right", has about the Democratic party - that is is elitist, exclusionary, and socialist bordering on neo-fascist by refusing to let the most popular opposition party in the nation caucus in the halls of Congress, a right extended to almost every other liberal group who petitions to form one, regardless of their irrelevance (the Congressional Bike Caucus (CBC)? Friends of Switzerland Caucus ? The Youth Challenge Caucus?).

The Democrats are in a bind, facing their own Kobayashi Maru, the ultimate "no-win" scenario. However the House Administration chooses to jump, the Democrats lose...

Green Energy? Not In New Jersey...

....because while it sounds great in practice, everybody's got a beef. Build turbines 20 miles offshore, as one wind company suggested, and environmentalists react in the negative, saying some seabirds may get sliced. Build them on land, and, well....

The Board of Freeholders passed a resolution Thursday to oppose the construction of a 380-foot wind turbine at a wastewater treatment facility in Union Beach.

Freeholder Director Lillian G. Burry said the resolution was prompted by last month's board meeting, which was held in Keyport and attended by many Bayshore residents who blasted the Bayshore Regional Sewerage Authority's plan to build the turbine within 1,000 feet of homes.

Burry said the board is not opposed to wind power, but rather questioned the appropriateness of locating the "extremely invasive structure" near residential neighborhoods.

1,000 feet is just over three football fields, not quite in the backyard but still somewhat close. But if we are to at some point incorporate renewable energy sources into the power grid, this is what must be done. I wonder how may of these people have high-tension, high-load power lines within 1,000 feet of their homes. I'll bet most of them do, and don't think twice about it. But put in a windmill....

I don't know, I find windmills to be a perfect marriage of technology and nature, and find them eye-catching and inspiring:

Atlantic City

And useful:

Authority officials have said the turbine will allow them to reduce municipal sewerage rates by 35 percent by 2013. Towns that would benefit from the rate reduction are Union Beach, Hazlet, Holmdel, Keyport, Matawan, Aberdeen, Keansburg and parts of Marlboro.

Well, I suppose no one will benefit now. Except a few gulls, and some folks who prefer power lines to turbines...

Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy Roundup: Everything You Wanted To Know, But Were Afraid To Ask...

...because after all, you are a "perfect citizen", right?

An Obama-directed conspiracy?

President Obama announces a change in national policy on offshore drilling, and 20 days later a platform explodes, creating an environmental disaster that, we’re told, may be worse than the Exxon Valdez. That’s timing so perfect it’s usually associated with Abbott and Costello. There are a lot of folks who passionately opposed the possibility of expanded offshore drilling and who would have the motive to help “enable” an accident that discredited the policy.

New Jersey's crooked Senators get into the act, with an attempt to create some patently illegal ex post facto laws:

Democratic Sens. Bob Menendez (N.J.), Frank Lautenberg (N.J.) and Bill Nelson (Fla.) intend to introduce a bill Monday increasing the economic liability cap for offshore oil spills from $75 million to $10 billion in response the the Gulf of Mexico disaster, according to a release.

Well, that'll show that oil slick!

Look, the sum of these three guy's intelligence doesn't equal that of one bona fide village idiot,but...

Barack Obama's first epic fail - an attempt to create a bombastic photo-op:

Despite their frantic requests, no photogenic dying oil-covered birds could be found to form a backdrop for the Presidential tirade as he weighed into BP.

Of course, this was before photos and media coverage became off-limits...

And really, are we giving our dullard president too much credit here? Maybe Obama's just a pigeon, and the real man behind the conspiratorial curtain is...Rahm Emanuel:

Emanuel lived for five years rent-free in an apartment owned by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and her husband, Stanley Greenberg, whose consulting firm was a prime architect in BP's efforts to recast itself as a "green" corporation and recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars awarded through a committee chaired by Emanuel.

And incidentally, is this the worst oil spill ever? Ah...no. Remember a fellow by the name of Saddam Hussein?

As Iraqi troops retreated from Kuwait, they opened the valves of oil wells and pipelines, pouring up to 8 million barrels into the gulf...

He's been dead for a while now - you can blame George W. Bush for that. But David Axelrod is still with us, and he claimed (as per Contentions) just this past Sunday that the Gulf oil spill is the “worst ecological disaster ever” . But like most Obama officials, his grasp of history - and reality - is tenuous at best:

If Mr. Axelrod wants some really catastrophic ecological disasters, how about the Aral Sea, where the Soviets diverted for agricultural use all the water that had flowed into it, destroying what had been the fourth largest lake in the world (26,000 square miles), as well as the vast ecosystem (and fishing industry) it had nurtured?

Or how about the London killer smog of 1952 that is thought to have killed upwards of 12,000 people, more than a thousand times as many people as have died in the Gulf Oil spill?

In this country, the worst man-made ecological disaster was, by order of magnitude, the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. Drought and poor farming practices in an area that should never have been farmed at all destroyed 100,000,000 acres. One dust storm that started on the high plains on May 9, 1934, dumped an estimated 6,000 tons of dust on the city of Chicago alone — four pounds per person. New York had to turn on the streetlights in broad daylight the next day. Two and half million people fled the area over the decade. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, died of dust pneumonia. Many more, especially children, died of malnutrition. Others were blinded when dust got under their eyelids...

But the truth doesn't matter when you have an agenda to ram through. Just ask Ken Salazar, Secretary of the Interior, who changes the facts whenever it is convenient:

The seven experts who advised President Obama on how to deal with offshore drilling safety after the Deepwater Horizon explosion are accusing his administration of misrepresenting their views to make it appear that they supported a six-month drilling moratorium -- something they actually oppose.

The experts, recommended by the National Academy of Engineering, say Interior Secretary Ken Salazar modified their report last month, after they signed it, to include two paragraphs calling for the moratorium on existing drilling and new permits.

Too bad the law caught up with them this time, and overturned the moratorium:

U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan ....sided with the plaintiffs.

"If some drilling equipment parts are flawed, is it rational to say all are?" he asked. "Are all airplanes a danger because one was? All oil tankers like Exxon Valdez? All trains? All mines? That sort of thinking seems heavy-handed, and rather overbearing."

This is certainly a bummer - what was the point of blowing up BP Deepwarter Horizon, if not to choke off the supply of oil, and control what little remained?

Wanting—or creating—scarcity has always been a part of the leftist agenda, on the theory that scarcities create the need for government allocation and control. One of the greatest threats of the current situation is that environmental extremists will use it as a justification to further their misguided agenda.

Well, if nothing else, Obama can at least destroy the Red States of the Gulf region - by refusing international aid (or did he simply got a "Dutch fleet" confused with a "Dutch rudder"?), ordering the Coast Guard to use safety protocols in order to stop the skimmers from skimming, and by forcing the state of Louisiana to stop building the very sand berms that might have saved their beaches.

And he's still got his oil spill "commission" as an ace in the hole - stacked with enviorn"mental"ists of the first order:

Only one of the seven commissioners, the dean of Harvard's engineering and applied sciences school, has a prominent engineering background — but it's in optics and physics.

You can be sure he'll take their advice,though...

Need more conspiracy theories? Maybe the Brits did it themselves! Or maybe - more obviously - Obama wants to loot the oil companies before he destroys them! Like raping your victim, then killing her, I suppose:

President Barack Obama is poised to seize the handling of oil spill damage claims from BP, his chief spokesman said Tuesday, as Obama sought to reassure people he's up to the enormous challenge of helping them recover from the environmental disaster

On the matter of the disputed damage payments, Gibbs said, "We have to get an independent claims process. I think everyone agrees that we have to get BP out of the claims processes ...

But other possibilities still remain. Perhaps the culprit really was....al-Qaeda? To be shown as weak and incompetent would have been a political death sentence for The One....

Or perhaps - only slightly less realistic - the Gulf rig was destroyed by aliens, trying to fulfill the Book of Revelations:

Pagan Gnostics suggest that the Oil Spill is an expression by a regressive alien consciousness, that does not view itself as being “malevolent“. Rather, this alien consciousness views itself to be angelic, and acting “in behalf of God” to carry out the “Book of Revelation” ...

Weird. But what's really far out - like X-Files far out - is the fact that HHS has built a top-secret medical facility on one of the Gulf beaches. What the f*uck is going on there? HHS isn't saying...

That should give you plenty to think about. Now how about some photos of what's really going on down in the Gulf; photos that Barack Obama desperately does not want you to see? Click here, and be prepared to be sick...

Vacation !

I'm hitting the Jersey Shore for a few days of fun in the sun (hopefully) and surf. Leaving the laptop behind; being a burnt-out beach bum does not allow for furious mid-day blogging. That's when I pull the brim of my hat down and doze off instead...

I should have a post or two pop up regardless, unlikely to be timely but perhaps interesting nevertheless. Probably be back live late Friday, or more likely Saturday.

In the meantime, here's hoping it's...hot.

What is Barack Obama Really Up To?

If you're like me, you lie awake at night asking yourself that very question. Over at Gates of Vienna, Baron Bodissey has some possible answers, and let's just say they won't help you sleep any better:

In a speech at the University of Missouri on October 30th, 2008, just before he was elected President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama famously said, “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

His words possessed a chilling resonance with those of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known to history as Lenin. In November 1917, after the Bolsheviks occupied the Tsar’s Winter Palace, Lenin sat down with his comrades in their opulent new offices and said calmly, “We shall now proceed to construct the socialist state.”

Incidentally, was Obama intentionally channelling Lenin? One part of me says no, our president is just not that smart of a guy, and is fairly ignorant of history to boot. But on the other hand, the old community organizer's love of Marxism is fairly well known, and he has surrounded himself with many a true believer - from Van Jones to Anita Dunn- and has been known to decorate the White House Xmas tree with little pictures of Chairman Mao. So maybe he was having his own little Lenin moment. Who can say?

Anyway - what is America's own (show me the birth certificate!) Hugo Chavez think he's going to fundamentally transform the nation into? The Baron continues:

The Husseinization of America over the last year and a half has involved inconceivable amounts of new debt, increased government control over an already damaged economy, abandonment of America’s allies, outreach to its enemies, unprecedented interference in the private decisions of citizens, and proposed restrictions on our civil liberties.

From Obamacare to the Gulf oil spill, one can’t escape the feeling that all of this is going according to plan, and that the plan depends on the systematic ruin of the United States as an economic and military power.

But why? What possible end can Obama and his far-left handlers hope to achieve?

Totalitarian control of a completely devastated country?


Short answer - yes. For Obama and his cadres, it is about power and control, and to exert complete power you must have complete control, and (relatively) wealthy and free men are notoriously hard to order about. BUT - if you break them financially, erode their rights, take away their doctors, and outlaw their options, they have nowhere to turn but to you.


And that is when they will obey you, or perish.


Like the Soviets once did. Like the North Koreans do.


Welcome to your future; Change is now upon us.


Somewhere, Barack Obama is smiling a maniacal grin - almost Joker-style, one might say...


Sleep tight.

But I thought Republicans had to move towards the "center"?

Hasn't that been the narrative for almost two years now, that the Republican party was out of touch, that it needed to embrace climate change, socialized medicine, amnesty for illegals, and affirmative action in order to become a relevant party again?

But it turns out, like all narratives driven by the media, that this meme was a bit...off-base. It seems - as least according to key Democrats - that it is their party that needs to move towards the center. And in this case, moving to the center means taking a hard Right turn:

The nation is on a "disastrous fiscal track" and Democrats must deal with it more directly or risk "huge" political consequences, Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen (D) said in an interview here Friday.

"I don't think we've done particularly well in the tryout, and I think it's going to hurt us," he said. "It's certainly hurting Democrats in Tennessee. And I wish we could get back more toward the middle of the road."

...when asked where he put Obama on the ideological spectrum, he said, "I'm not sure. I know in times that I talked to him during the campaign, he came across to me as fairly centrist on things. But I have to say that on things that have happened so far, he would be certainly well to the left of any independent in the country."

"Well to the left", indeed. Not what we were promised, not what we were told. And poor Governor Bredesen is shaking in his boots, about to feel the wrath of the center-right Tennessee voters, for what Obama has wrought. As Professor Jacobson writes today in a must-read post:

Democrats will pay the price politically for kicking the nation when it was down, for using a crisis to force through what the American people did not want, and for insulting those who objected.

A final piece of advice - don't waste your breath, Phil. If Obama doesn't give a sh*t about the opinions of 300 million Americans, he ain't gonna give a rat's tail about yours.

This captain is going down with the ship, but he's tying the lifeboats to the deck, and making sure everyone goes down to Davey Jones' locker with him...

Gulf Oil Spill Conspiracy: It's All Going According To Plan

Why in the world would Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel conspire to blow up BP's Horizon Deepwater rig? Oh, we have discussed so many reasons, but here's one that's coming to pass - the desire to eliminate America's use of oil almost entirely (except in the oversized SUVs of the political elite) and switch our economy into a "green" one, an economy that's based on powering heavy machinery with hope and fairy dust. And if that doesn't work, why, I suppose we'll still need some oil - but Barack Obama will decide who gets how much:

Wanting—or creating—scarcity has always been a part of the leftist agenda, on the theory that scarcities create the need for government allocation and control. One of the greatest threats of the current situation is that environmental extremists will use it as a justification to further their misguided agenda.

Sounds crazy? Maybe, but Obama and his fellow environ"mental"ists are winning this battle before our very eyes:

Diamond Offshore announced Friday that its Ocean Endeavor drilling rig will leave the Gulf of Mexico and move to Egyptian waters immediately — making it the first to abandon the United States in the wake of the BP oil spill and a ban on deep-water drilling.

And the Ocean Endeavor's exodus probably won't be the last, according to oil industry officials and Gulf Coast leaders who warn that other companies eager to find work for the now-idled rigs are considering moving them outside the U.S.

No drilling means no oil. No oil means rationing. Rationing means the government decides who will get to work and who will die and home in the sweltering heat. Just like health care reform will.

And Obama increases his power even further, and gains additional leverage to push through cap and trade, as he points to the "effect" of "oil dependency" to his shaky liberal legislators.

So what has the government conspiracy to create the oil spill in the Gulf brought Obama? The ability to shut off the flow of oil (the single most evil substance int he world, to the Obami), force rationing, and tax Americans into despair. All while destroying the economy of the Gulf states, much of which just coincidentally are "red states".

All according to plan. Meanwhile...Oil was spewing freely into the Gulf of Mexico as BP crews claimed progress...

Maybe Obama needs the Gulf ruined for twenty years as a reminder of why his choking economic policies must remain enforced? Does he plan on pointing to an oil-soaked Gulf in 2012 and shrieking "Blame Bush!"?

Who knows. Regardless, the entire "crisis" is unfolding according to plan. Obama can't be too concerned, as he's about to take his third vacation since the spill began....

I suppose, in his mind, he's got a lot accomplished....

New Jersey Democrats Prepared To Resort To Violence...

...when folks disagree with them. But remember, folks, they're the party of the people, the working man. Just like communism was.

Now, the below story is a New Jersey story, which means take it for what it's worth, but I still believe the sentiment here is not restricted to our local Democrats - via Cubachi:

...things in the NJ State Senate got as testy as the Taiwanese parliament or as testy and stupid as an episode of ‘Jersey Shore.’ Democrat Sen. Ray Lesniak (D-Union). Republican Sen. Michael Doherty took to the Senate floor to slam the democrats school funding plan, accusing that the proposal favored urban areas over rural and suburban ones. Lesniak loudly opposed the accusation. Thus Doherty confronted Lesniak and things started to get heated.

Democrat hack, State Senator Dick Codey, stood between the two men to let them cool off. Codey likened himself to the Dalai Lama of the left, Jimmy Carter. Yes, that same peaceful, loser president that brought us Islamic terrorism and economic turmoil.

At that point, Codey rose from his desk next to Lesniak’s to cool Doherty down.

“It was a spirited debate, and it was starting to escalate, so it was time for me to jump up and play Jimmy Carter,” said Codey

At which point, Lesniak admitted openly that he would have:

“Punched (Doherty’s) nose down his throat…As somebody who grew up in Elizabeth port section, you never know.”

Gee, where did Lesniak get the idea it was OK to "get in the faces" of the opposition? What makes him think that an acceptable answer to substantive disagreement over funding is to break his opponent's nose?

Same reason, I suppose, that the aforementioned communists never "won" any free and open elections, they simply killed their opponents and terrorized the rest into submission. Their arguments are unwinnable on the merits (Obama knows that), so intimidation is the fallback position. Hey, why do you think Holder's DOJ dropped the case against the Black Panthers in Philadelphia? They may need them come 2012...

Like more and more Democrats nationwide, Lesniak's thug side is coming out. It's not entirely a bad thing, though. He has revealed himself, and if the folks in Union keep re-electing this sh*tbag, they will deserve the poor representation, the misappropriation of funds, and the economic stagnancy common to all subjects of a petty tyrant. The scales may have fallen, but only the free can choose whether or not to see...

Related: MoreMonomouth Musings has an interesting battle taking place between its readers and a Hamilton, NJ 8th grade teacher, who recently penned an op-ed for the Asbury Park Press claiming that Tea Partiers use of the "Don't Tread On Me" Gadsden Flag is "an abuse of our very sacrosanct independence as a nation." After admitting in the comments that she used Time-Life books as her resource and that she "follow polotics (sic) well enough to know the Tea Party is a phase that will only make the Republicans lose power", our local ( and loyally Democratic) school teacher responds to logical and historical arguments as "character-bashing", then signs off with a fury.

She's a blood brother to Lesniak. Make unsupportable statements, and when asked to defend them, reply with blistering hatred. She's a sadder case than Lesniak; shoot, nobody pays much attention to him, but the aforementioned teacher has impressionable students forced to imbibe her incoherent bullsh*t on a daily basis.

Democrats, all....

(with a hat-tip to Wyblog. He's got pictures of pretty girls, too...)

Obama Blames Ignorant Jews For His Own Anti-Semitism

Jews have been called many things - so many things - but our brilliant President has come up with a new insult that even the most rabid Jew-hater dared not use, for fear of being laughed out of the Bund:

Ignorant.

How else to describe his "understanding" of the Jews recent disenchantment with his presidency?

During the interview Wednesday, when confronted with the anxiety that some Israelis feel toward him, Obama said that “some of it may just be the fact that my middle name is Hussein, and that creates suspicion.”

OK, that must explain it. Because it can't be his policies - because his policies are His policies, they must be by nature brilliant, and the only problem can be people's inability to comprehend his greatness. Like the opposition to health care reform.

The New York Post takes President Douchebag to task:

Of course, there might be other reasons why Israelis and their supporters view Obama with suspicion. Such as:

* His public humiliation last March of Bejamin Netanyahu at the White House, when Obama walked out of their talks to go have dinner with his family, leaving Israel's prime minister alone for over an hour, and then refused to release even a photo of their meeting.

* His disturbing comparison, during that "outreach" speech to the Arab world in Cairo, of the Palestinians' "daily humiliations" and "intolerable" situation to the Nazi Holocaust.

* His administration's public demand that Israeli leaders "demonstrate not just through words but through specific actions that they are committed to this relationship and to the peace process" -- a demand Sen. Chuck Schumer labeled "terrible" and "counterproductive."

* His continued push for closer US ties with Syria -- an ally of Iran, state sponsor of terrorism and major backer of both Hamas and Hezbollah.

* His decision to join the farcical UN Human Rights Council -- which devotes most of its time to denouncing Israel.

The Post is going easy on Obama. See here for a more compete list of offenses against Israel and the Jews, each carried out with knowing contempt. If he were a Republican, Democrats would be waling around with pictures of Barack with Hitler's brush mustache. Oh wait - they already are...

But over at Contentions, Pete Wehner smacks down Barack Hussein Obama like the common street-variety anti-Semite that he so clearly is:

These statements combine some of Obama’s worst traits: arrogance, condescension, and detachment from reality.

Obama regards himself much like a teacher who oversees a classroom of sometimes unruly, sometimes dim-witted children. His magnificence is sometimes hidden from them. And so it is left for America’s philosopher-king to explain — in simply, easy-to-understand words — why things are the way they are.

In this instance, the anxiety Israel feels toward for Obama is not rooted in his unwise policies or his disgraceful past treatment of the Israeli prime minister. No, the cause is Obama’s middle name.

In addition, Israelis are a bit too dull to see the miracles that have resulted from Barack the Great’s outreach to the “Muslim world.”

The truth is that whatever Obama’s outreach to the Muslim community is designed to do, it has — as Jen points out — been a complete failure. Israel’s wariness toward Obama is rooted in his pursuit of an agenda that is as harmful to Israel. But all of this is beyond the realm of comprehension for Obama. For him, it all comes down to his middle name. We have rarely, if ever, seen self-delusion on a scale quite like this.

How self-delusional? Who can say? But I will say we haven't seen the worst of Barack Obama yet, and I stand by a piece of earlier analysis:

Obama's policy vis-a-vis Israel is the greatest Audacity yet. Barack Hussein Obama, a Muslim/not Muslim, is hoping to succeed where mullahs, Middle East dictators, terrorist Chairman, and Kings, Princes, and madman have failed.

He believes he can bring Israel to her knees before him.

No wonder they hate you.

They should.

Suing Arizona

Maybe the best thing about the Obama Administration's decision to sue the state of Arizona for daring to enforce the law is how clearly it is illuminating the deep divisions between the American president and the American people.

Even his "own" people, as in the blue-staters for whom Obama was The One they had been waiting for. We've seen New Jersey and Massachusetts flip; and we've seen the Democrats wave it off. But can they so easily dismiss this show of support for the state of Arizona form the state of ....New York?

New Yorkers are among the most generous donors to a legal defense fund set up to fight President Obama's challenge to Arizona's crackdown on illegal immigrants.

Nearly 300 New Yorkers have ponied up $11,956 online to the fund that this week had raised almost $700,000, according to numbers compiled by the Arizona Governor's Office.

Donors from only five other states have given more to the effort than New Yorkers. And four of the five states that gave more are on the southern border.

What's most laughable about this whole lawsuit is that it is primarily a political exercise; one that the Democrats have openly hoped will motivate Hispanic voters to come to the polls in the midterm elections to save their jobs.

But maybe not:

Steven Padin, a cop from Buffalo, donated $10 as a "symbolic" gesture.

"I feel very strongly about the security of this country," he said.

Like many of those giving to the fund, Padin is a strong proponent of legal immigration.

Ironically, he is Hispanic, with Puerto Rican roots.

But he simply cannot understand why the federal government does not secure the borders.

Every year, the 25-year veteran of the Buffalo Police Department travels to Mexico and other countries south of the border on a volunteer goodwill mission to teach police tactics.

On one of his trips, he got to know a man who wants to come to America legally.

"He was an honest person, hardworking. He wants to come here the honest route," Padin said.
But his application is stuck at the end of a very long line, while millions illegally pour over the border.

It is an injustice, and Americans hate injustice, regardless of what ethnicity the Democrats try to tag them with. 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.

Our Great Uniter is becoming a Great Divider; it's about all he has left to save his party and himself. De-Americanize all, set them at each other's throats based on race and ethnicity, and hope that enough of them vote Democratic when the smoke clears.

But based upon the reaction to the Arizona lawsuit, all Americans collectively are going after one throat. And it ain't Arizona's...

Gulf Oil Spill: A Conspiracy To Create Scarcity?

We've gone thru a lot of good reasons why Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel would conspire to blow up BP's Deepwater Horizon rig:

-to walk back prior statements about additional drilling
-to hurt red states bordering the Gulf region
-to force "cap and trade" legislation down the nation's throat in a crisis atmosphere, thus looting even more money from the private sector to pay for expanded government
-to set a precedent of controlling media access
-to eliminate oil drilling entirely, and hope that someone invents a solar powered car by next Thursday

The last reason is one that is fleshed out a bit more by... Reason, ironically, as they explain what the benefits would be to the powers that be of an "oil crisis":

Wanting—or creating—scarcity has always been a part of the leftist agenda, on the theory that scarcities create the need for government allocation and control. One of the greatest threats of the current situation is that environmental extremists will use it as a justification to further their misguided agenda.

Actually, this brings Obama's frantic push for health-care socialization into greater focus. National health care systems have always created scarcity and forced rationing (ask Obama's recent appointee, a big fan of rationing life and death); just think of the political pull Obama's apparatchiks would have once they have control over the flow of dwindling medical supplies across America. Who would not swear fealty to the powers that be in order to get a piece of that action?

And what would be different if the flow of oil - the ability to turn lights on and off, for businesses to open and close, the ability to avoid freezing to death in the winter and burring to death in the summer - was strictly controlled by Obama?

Same result. A massive increase in personal power for Obama, political power by the Democrats, and regulatory power by the bureaucracies involved.

Can you see why blowing up the BP oil rig was a no-brainer for Obama? Sure, it's a bit out of hand now, but he can still get everything he wanted, and now that's he stopped talking about it completely (10 days now?), maybe everyone will forget about that messy spill down in the Gulf...

If not, he can always send tanks into downtown Phoenix...

LeBron James To Miami: A Tax Refugee?

Any why not? Why in the world would you pay millions upon millions of dollars for the "privilege" of working in New York, New Jersey, or Cleveland? I can't speak for LeBron, but this sure as hell would have influenced my descion:

The tax savings for James in Miami over New York City would be staggering, according to the Post’s analysis.

“On a five-year contract worth $96 million -- what he'd get from the Knicks or the Heat -- LeBron would pay $12.34 million in New York taxes.” Florida has no state income tax.

New Jersey and Ohio, the other reported frontrunners to attract James, also have state income taxes, but they are not as his as in New York. Based on a $96 million contract, James would pay $5.69 million in state taxes if he re-signed with the Cleveland Cavaliers. If he signed with the New Jersey Nets, James would pay $10.32 million in state taxes.

LeBron is smart, and whether he intended to or not, he has taught a great economic lesson to liberals, who believe with the fervor of the rightous that another "millionaires tax" is all any state/federal government needs to avoid cutting spending.

Of course, a tax on millionaires (in New Jersey, where math education is not what it used to be, the recently vetoed "millionaires tax" kicked in at $400K) affects everyone, rich and poor. To wit:

Robert Schoenberger and Teresa Dixon Murray of the Cleveland Plain-Dealer estimated that downtown Cleveland businesses will lose $48 million over the course of the NBA season without James.

Apply that thinking to New York. Adding LeBron James to the Knicks would have added tens of millions in tax revenue taken off the top of every ticket and t-shirt sold - in other words, the state would have taken a cut of every "Lebron dollar" spent. But no, instead they insisted on a outsize tax - a punitive one, really - on the the man who would provide their city/state with the ability to generate additional revenue by his mere existence.

But Lebron felt he shouldn't be punished for his ability to make money, and so walked away from the Big Apple. And the greedy parliament of whores that make up the state legislature have now lost a lucrative form of revenue that would have lasted for years because of their insistence on punitive taxes on the men of ability, the men who create the wealth they see fit to confiscate.

We've seen this happen before, incidentally - here's a two minute drill on how "soak the rich" economics really works:

Maryland couldn't balance its budget last year, so the state tried to close the shortfall by fleecing the wealthy. Politicians in Annapolis created a millionaire tax bracket, raising the top marginal income-tax rate to 6.25%. And because cities such as Baltimore and Bethesda also impose income taxes, the state-local tax rate can go as high as 9.45%. Governor Martin O'Malley, a dedicated class warrior, declared that these richest 0.3% of filers were "willing and able to pay their fair share." The Baltimore Sun predicted the rich would "grin and bear it."

One year later, nobody's grinning. One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls. In 2008 roughly 3,000 million-dollar income tax returns were filed by the end of April. This year there were 2,000, which the state comptroller's office concedes is a "substantial decline." On those missing returns, the government collects 6.25% of nothing. Instead of the state coffers gaining the extra $106 million the politicians predicted, millionaires paid $100 million less in taxes than they did last year -- even at higher rates.

Is there a lesson learned here? Not by liberals and Democrats, unfortunately - they're all soccer fans...