Remodeling

At a time of record deficits, a new soccer field for detainees at Camp 6 in Guantanamo Bay is just getting the finishing touches — at a cost of $750,000 to taxpayers.

But I thought Obama promised to close it? 🙂

Members of the U.S. Supreme Court have affirmed they are not willing to listen to arguments over Justice Elena Kagan’s impartiality on the issue of Obamacare, a case that’s to be before the court in a few weeks.

Kagan was solicitor general in the Obama White House when Obamacare was developed, and emails released from that time reveal she was rooting for its passage.

There are concerns she participated in strategy sessions to defend the law before Obama gave her a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court bench, where she now has great influence in a decision about the fate of the plan to nationalize health-care decision-making.

Generally judges are to prevent even the appearance of partiality in a case on which they rule.

But this was the whole reason she was appointed!!

“That was a fundamentally flawed program, fundamentally flawed,” Holder said of Fast and Furious. “And, I think that I can agree with some of my harshest critics that there are legitimate issues that need to be explored with regard in which the way Fast and Furious was carried out.”

“But, I think one thing that also has to be understood is that once this was brought to my attention” — Holder said before slamming his hand on the committee room table he was sitting at — “I stopped it. I stopped it.”

So when was that? a couple of weeks, couple of months, right after  Brian terry was killed, before that??

During an interview with Fox News host Megyn Kelly shortly after Holder’s comments, House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa — the lead congressional investigator into the Fast and Furious scandal with Sen. Chuck Grassley — said he and others in Congress don’t think Holder is telling the full truth.

“Well, certainly one of the reasons we doubt the legitimacy of that claim is, on Feb. 4 [2011], we received what was in fact an untruthful, a lie, a false letter that has now been retracted,” Issa said. “Lanny Breuer, one of his chief aides and number three at Justice, was in Mexico lobbying for more gun-walking. Additional evidence shows that [U.S. agent] Jaime Zapata was killed with a similar program weapon. In other words, this was a policy change that happened and continued up until fairly recently. We need to get to the bottom of it.”

In addition, Issa said that if Holder wants to show he’s cooperating with the congressional investigation and is interested in really ending gun-walking, he’d fork over the rest of the lawfully-subpoenaed documents he’s still hiding from Congress. 

“The inspector general at Justice has 80,000 pages and we have 6,000 pages, but even in those 6,000 pages we find damning evidence that high-ranking people in Justice knew all along and not only didn’t stop this program, but believed in it,” Issa said. (DC)

Organ Pipe National Monument,located near Tucson along the U.S.-Mexico border, you’ll need a heavily armed escort to do so. A decade ago, a park ranger was shot and killed in the park by armed illegal smugglers touting AK-47s. Just three years ago, the park started offering van tours escorted by rangers armed with semi-automatic weapons.

Since 2009, the park has offered van tours to the springs, as long as rangers armed with assault rifles go along to protect the visitors. Now, ten years after Eggle’s murder, the park’s leadership has decided to open up a portion of the closed areas to the public in March, citing improved safety conditions and a big increase in Border Patrol agents in the area.

“There is a chance we might have to cancel the tour if there’s some sort of apprehension in progress,” Park Ranger Karl Sommerhauser, wearing a bulky dark green bulletproof vest, told the tourists last week. Sommerhauser had an ear piece curling out of his left ear. “We expect you to take direction from Ken,” he said sternly.

Ken Hires, an unflaggingly cheerful park ranger dressed in reassuringly normal-looking tan ranger clothes, bounded to the front of the room. Hires is what’s called an interpretive ranger, which means he has no law enforcement duties and does not carry a weapon. (“I spent my five years in Vietnam. Enough shooting,” he said later.) Hires explained that some law enforcement officers would be hiding in the hills and closely watching the two-hour nature hike, while another pair of armed rangers would follow the tourists closely from the ground. “They’ll have M14s at hand,” he told the group. “Don’t be worried.”

“You might see something interesting off the trail, but please don’t go wandering off,” Hires continued, explaining that it made it difficult for the rangers to track people from the hills. “Please be respectful that those people are putting themselves on the line for us.”

This is happening in America and the park isn’t the only area in Arizona under control of drug cartels and where Americans are in danger.

Outside of safety concerns, where are the environmentalists? Drug runners and illegal immigrants are destroying thousands of acres of Sonoran desert by creating new roads and foot paths wherever they choose, damaging the habit of the cacti and animals living there. Organ Pipe National Monument is a unique and special place that drug runners have no problem destroying. So called “environmentalists” don’t seem to have a problem with the destruction either. (Katie Pavlich)

“I say this again as someone who has walked that border,” she said. “I’ve ridden that border. I’ve flown it. I’ve driven it. I know that border I think as well as anyone, and I will tell you it is as secure now as it has ever been.”–DHS Secretary Janet Napalitano.

Was that before or after you sent the Arizona National Guard to the border with no ammo and strict instructions to not engage anyone??  (which she did as Governor).

Now I feel Better… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 

Cherry Picking

We’ve been hearing lots of talk of “economic recovery” and “reductions in unemployment” and “better days ahead” in the mainstream media.  It’s now about eight months until the 2012 election, and the Obama campaign is in full-on panic mode over the bad economy, so they’re releasing all kinds of misinformation, which is gobbled up by the press, who simply regurgitate it without a moment’s pause to question or analyze the “facts” and “figures” being presented.  And why should they?  Obama is their guy, and they would be thrilled to see him re-elected, so they’re happy to let the falsehoods stand when they report what they’re fed, and they have a million excuses at the ready if they’re ever called on it.  “This was a government report – we had reason to believe it”, or “those numbers were fluid – we just reported where they stood at that particular moment”.

The BS: In 2009, we were losing 750,000 jobs a month. Our biggest banks and auto companies were on the brink of pulling down the whole economy. But we righted the ship. We did not tip into a Great Depression. And over the last 22 months, businesses have created more than 3 million jobs, the most since 2005 and more manufacturing jobs than since the 1990s. We still have a long way to go but we have restored hope and possibility to the economy.

This chart from the Bureau of Labor Statistics utterly destroys that argument.  The BLS measures the percentage of working-age adults currently employed in the population — and as can easily be seen, three years of Barack Obama has not made any dent in the trough created by the recession:

That is not recovery.  It’s not even a start to a recovery.  By cherry-picking 22 months, the best Greenberg can claim is job growth of 136,370 jobs per month, which would barely exceed the needed job growth per month to keep up with population growth.

Why cherry-picking?  I explained the issue when Obama tried using this claim during his Google+ hangout at the beginning of the month:

But why 22 months?  Obama began his term in January 2009, and the recession ended in June 2009.   What’s so special about March 2010?  Well, not so surprisingly, that’s almost the nadir of employment during Obama’s presidency, which actually took place in February 2010, two years ago this month. Even if he’d picked the right month, it would still only have been 2.654 million, not 3 million.

Calculating from the end of the recession, the net job creation from those 31 months is only 1.407 million, a wan 45,390 net jobs a month, far below the pace needed to keep up with population growth.   Calculating for the entirety of his presidency, we’re actually in the hole 937,000 jobs.  Obama tried to cherry-pick the worst month in order to claim the most credit he could possible for job growth, and managed to get both the month and the math wrong anyway.

Obama and his strategists can cherry-pick all they like.  This chart tells the real story of Obamanomics and job creation during his term.

Good News: DHS Spending $11 Million Scouring Web for Criticism of Its Policies

I’d have loved to have heard the shrieks of indignation coming from The New York Times and the rest of the leftist infrastructure had John Ashcroft and other Bush administration officials engaged in this kind of egregious behavior.

No double standards here, folks.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been paying a defense contractor $11.4 million to monitor social media websites and other Internet communications to find criticisms of the department’s policies and actions.

A government watchdog organization, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), obtained hundreds of documents from DHS through the Freedom of Information Act and found details of the arrangement with General Dynamics. The company was contracted to monitor the Web for “reports that reflect adversely on DHS,” including sub-agencies like the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Citizenship and Immigration Services, Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In testimony submitted to the House Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, Ginger McCall, director of EPIC’s Open Government Project, stated that “the agency is monitoring constantly, under very broad search terms, and is not limiting that monitoring to events or activities related to natural disasters, acts of terrorism, or manmade disasters…. The DHS has no legal authority to engage in this monitoring.”

McCall added: “This has a profound effect on free speech online if you feel like a government law enforcement agency—particularly the Department of Homeland Security, which is supposed to look for terrorists—is monitoring your criticism, your dissent, of the government.”

Rest assured that our beloved, baritone DHS secretary — and her ostensible boss, Eric “Fast ‘n’ Furious” Holder — would never, ever use this kind of information to go after private citizens. They’re just doing research.

As far as you know.

Consider this reason number 43,263 to kick this administration’s ample rear out of office in November.

PENNSYLVANIA JUDGE THROWS OUT ASSAULT CASE

An atheist annoyed a Muslim by using a Halloween costume of “zombie Mohammed” and the Muslim to beat the shit out the guy.

The charge goes to try and the Judge throws it out calling the atheist a “doofus”.

From Jonathan Turley:

There is a surprising story out of Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania that seems the perfect storm of religious tensions. You begin with Ernie Perce, an atheist who marched as a zombie Mohammad in the Mechanicsburg Halloween parade. Then you add Talaag Elbayomy, a Muslim who stepped off a curb and reportedly attacked Perce for insulting the Prophet. Then you have a judge (Judge Mark Martin) who threw out the criminal charges against Elbayomy and ridiculed the victim, Perce. The Judge identifies himself as a Muslim and says that Perce conduct is not what the First Amendment is supposed to protect. [UPDATE: The judge says he is not a Muslim despite what is heard by most listeners on the tape. That being the case, the criticism of the comments remains.] [UPDATE2: Perce has responded to our blog and denied many of the factual representations made by Judge Martin].

The judge not only points to the Koran in the courtroom but his time in Muslim countries as relevant to his deliberations. Putting aside the problem of ruling in a case where you admit you have strong personal feelings, the lecture given on the first amendment is perfectly grotesque from a civil liberties perspective.

The Judge: “Well, having had the benefit of having spent over two-and-a-half years in predominantly Muslim countries, I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. In fact, I have a copy of the Quran here, and I would challenge you, Sir, to show me where it says in the Quran that Muhammad arose and walked among the dead. I think you misinterpreted a couple of things. So before you start mocking somebody else’s religion, you might want to find out a little more about it. It kind of makes you look like a doofus. …

In many other Muslim-speaking countries, err, excuse me, many Arabic-speaking countries, predominantly Muslim, something like this is definitely against the law there, in their society. In fact, it could be punished by death, and frequently is, in their society.

Here in our society, we have a Constitution that gives us many rights, specifically First Amendment rights. It’s unfortunate that some people use the First Amendment to deliberately provoke others. I don’t think that’s what our forefathers intended. I think our forefathers intended to use the First Amendment so we can speak with our mind, not to piss off other people and cultures – which is what you did.

I don’t think you’re aware, Sir, there’s a big difference between how Americans practice Christianity – I understand you’re an atheist – but see Islam is not just a religion. It’s their culture, their culture, their very essence, their very being. They pray five times a day toward Mecca. To be a good Muslim before you die, you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca, unless you’re otherwise told you cannot because you’re too ill, too elderly, whatever, but you must make the attempt. Their greeting is ‘Salam alaikum, wa-laikum as-Salam,’ uh, ‘May God be with you.’

Whenever it is very common, their language, when they’re speaking to each other, it’s very common for them to say, uh, Allah willing, this will happen. It’s, they’re so immersed in it. And what you’ve done is, you’ve completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very, very, very offensive. I’m a Muslim. I find it offensive. I find what’s on the other side of this [sign] very offensive. But you have that right, but you are way outside your bounds of First Amendment rights.

I’ve spent about seven years living in other countries. When we go to other countries, it’s not uncommon for people to refer to us as ‘ugly Americans.’ This is why we hear it referred to as ‘ugly Americans,’ because we’re so concerned about our own rights, we don’t care about other people’s rights. As long as we get our say, but we don’t care about the other people’s say.”

Burning the Flag anyone? Occupoopers pooping on the Flag anyone? Flag in a Jar of Urine anyone?

Hitler References, “racism” references by Liberals when you disagree with them.

No provocation there. It’s unfortunate that some people use the First Amendment to deliberately provoke others. –The Judge. 🙂

FREEDOM –DEMOCRAT STYLE

Democrat Kathy Hochul (via Guy Benson): I love the audible shock that ripples through the upstate New York crowd when their elected representative informs them that “the Congress” isn’t especially interested in what the Constitution has to say on certain “aspects” of its sundry decrees.  She goes on to pay lip service to religious freedom, suggesting that HHS’ extremely narrow exemptions to the mandate are sufficient.  Under this interpretation, the fact that “the decision has been made by this Congress than Americans are entitled to healthcare” renders conscience objections from religious institutions and individuals obsolete. 

From Here Campaign Website: Democrat Kathy Hochul dismissed being portrayed as a tax-and-spend liberal as “politics” and said she’s a pragmatist who is open to good ideas no matter which side of the political aisle they come from.

“You can’t label me anything,” Hochul said during a stop at The Daily News Thursday.

Sure…. 😦 Whatever….

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/25/video-dem-rep-booed-by-constituents-over-hhs-mandate/

“Well, basically, we’re not looking to the Constitution on that aspect of it.”- Rep Hochul

THE IRS & TEA PARTY

In January and February of this year, the Internal Revenue Service began sending out letters to various local Tea Parties across the country. Mailed from the same Cincinnati, Ohio IRS office, these letters have reached Tea Parties in Virginia, Hawaii, Ohio, and Texas (we are hearing of more daily). There are several common threads to these letters: all are requesting more information from these independent Tea Parties in regard to their nonprofit 501(c)(4) applications (for this type of nonprofit, donations are not deductible). While some of the requests are reasonable, much of them are strikingly onerous and, dare I say, Orwellian in nature.

The other question is the timing of these IRS letters requesting reams of copies and hundreds of hours of work and potentially thousands of dollars in accounting/legal fees (all due in two weeks). Some of these Tea Party groups have not received anything concerning their nonprofit status since 2010 prior to these letters.

In the near future, the Affordable Healthcare Act mandate and all things related to healthcare are to be policed and enforced by the IRS. This means thousands more IRS agents will be added, but the actual number is yet unknown. Considering that healthcare accounts for 1/6th of the U.S. economy, it will probably be a significant number of additional agents. According to the tax administration inspector general, Russell George, “The new Affordable Care Act provisions represents the largest set of tax law changes in 20 years.” That’s an overwhelming thought considering there are over 70,000 pages of federal tax code. (KFYI)

But I guess I’m just Cherry Picking… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Doesn’t it Make you “Feel” Good

‘African Americans for Obama’

The program urges black Americans to volunteer their time by making calls, organizing events and going door to door in their neighborhoods encouraging other African Americans to vote for Obama.

Not only is Obama playing the race card in an attempt to pressure black Americans into voting for him, he is also violating the separation between church and state. In the video promo for the campaign, Obama urges black people to pressure churches into supporting his administration by getting his message out via “the faith community”. He also calls on voters to become “congregation captains”.

Again, imagine what the reaction would be any of the Republican candidates launched a ‘Whites for Romney’, ‘Whites for Santorum’ (Christian Conservatives for Santorum) or ‘Whites for Gingrich’ campaign. There would be non-stop uproar. But Obama does the equivalent and gets a free pass.

“I thought race didn’t matter Mr. President?” asks Chad Hasty. “I don’t think MLK would be too pleased with you at all. African-Americans for Obama? Give me a break. Under this President, more blacks are unemployed. More blacks are on food stamps. If I had to bet though, Obama will still pull 93% of the black vote. Again, just a wild guess.”

As part of his efforts to lock down the black community as a voting bloc, Obama has arrived in Florida accompanied by an invasion of rappers and NBA basketball stars – all at taxpayer expense.

“The group — which organizers said includes Magic Johnson, Alonzo Mourning and NBA Commissioner David Stern — will meet with President Obama for a $30,000-a-plate fundraiser at the (actual) home court of Dallas Mavericks guard Vince Carter in his Isleworth mansion,” reports the Orlando Sentinel.

The expensive fundraising trip is timed to coincide with Sunday’s 61st NBA All-Star Game at Orlando’s Amway Center. (Prison Planet)

But it’s not about Race or the Politically Correct “religion”. Remember, no moral or ethics…It’s just politics. And it supposed to make you “feel” good.

As long as you’re non-white or Illegally in the country, then you’re just supposed to go sit in a corner and shut up your ignorant “extremist” fool.

Democrats used to say the more people knew about ObamaCare, the more they’d like it. Well, the public has had almost two full years to soak it in, and more want it repealed than ever.

A Quinnipiac University poll last week found 52% of Americans want ObamaCare scrapped. That’s up from 44% last May. Meanwhile, just 39% want to keep it, down from 45%. Even one in five Democrats now says Congress should repeal the law.

That hasn’t kept liberals from calling ObamaCare foes idiots, which is what Democratic party head Debbie Wasserman Schultz did when asked about the poll.

Americans only oppose ObamaCare because they “didn’t know” about its many benefits. “The pieces of health care reform, when you ask Americans about them, they overwhelmingly support them,” she said.

Democrats have fed a credulous media that line since they shoved the law down our throats in 2010.

Obama pollster Joel Benenson promised “once reform passes, the tangible benefits Americans will realize will trump the fear-mongering rhetoric opponents are stoking today.”

David Axelrod said that “health care, over time, is going to become more popular.”

And, of course, who can forget Nancy Pelosi’s declaration that “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”

Do anything. Say Anything. Winning is the only answer.

What Americans may not know, however, is that there is no chance ObamaCare will ever be repealed unless they vote Obama out of office in November. (IBD)

And if you disagree, shut and sit down you’re an idiot.

White House awareness of the political impact (of higher gas prices) was illustrated yesterday, when the president mentioned higher gas prices at a White House event promoting the extension of the payroll tax cut through year’s end.

Obama said the $40 increase each two-week pay period for a typical American family “helps to pay the rent, the groceries, the rising cost of gas — which is on a lot of people’s minds right now.”

So what if gas prices are higher, I got you $40 to pay for it! 😦

So it’s a Bribe?

Vote for me I got you $40!!! 🙂  (Just ignore all the other stuff like inflation)

I got you $40!!  Doesn’t that make you “feel” good!

GREEN UPDATE

It turns out, the president admitted, no one actually knows how to turn algae (or a million other things) into motor fuel. It simply cannot be done yet by anyone anywhere, although it does sound great, doesn’t it?

Then Obama added, in at least one indisputable presidential observation, “If we can figure out how to make energy out of that, we’ll be doing all right.” 

Bypassing abundant supplies of environmentally friendly and reliable natural gas, the Bay State (Massachusetts) forces its utilities to buy energy from offshore wind farms. The tilting at windmills continues.

To the 36 states that, like Massachusetts, have embraced what are called renewable portfolio standards, they will continue pursuing green energy sources despite their heavy subsidies, uneven and unreliable capacity, and the simple fact that you cannot store wind energy for when the wind is not blowing.

After decades of subsidies, wind provides only 1% of our electricity compared with 49% for coal, 22% for natural gas, 19% for nuclear power and 7% for hydroelectric.

Wind turbines generally operate at only 20% efficiency compared with 85% for coal, gas and nuclear power plants.

Cape Wind (the Massachusetts Wind Farm) has already signed an agreement with another utility, National Grid, to sell electricity for 18.7 cents per kilowatt hour (kwh), with a 3.5% increase every year over the next 15 years. This wind power therefore starts out at more than double the average Massachusetts rate of 8 cents per kwh. (and goes higher every year for 15 years until it’s is now triple what non-green energy would cost– way to save the 99% “middle class” money guys!)

It “feels” good to “go green”. The fact that it is even more expensive and inefficient and insufficient doesn’t matter.

What matters is what you “feel” good about it. How you “feel” about the issues and how you “feel” about him and his cronies. And if you don’t “feel” happy about it you are a racist, stupid doody-head and should just shut up and sit down you ignorant twit! 🙂

Vote for me because it “feels” good!!!  (and the other guy’s and “extremist” whacko!) 🙂

But it’s not about Politics

I thought this was funny…

Splinters in her crotch

A woman from Los Angeles who was a tree hugging, liberal Democrat and an anti-hunter purchased a piece of timberland near Colville , WA . There was a large tree on one of the highest points in the tract. She wanted a good view of the natural splendor of her land so she started to climb the big tree.

As she neared the top she encountered a spotted owl that attacked her. In her haste to escape, the woman slid down the tree to the ground and got many splinters in her crotch. In considerable pain, she hurried to a local ER to see a doctor .

She told him she was an environmentalist, a Democrat, and an anti-hunter and how she came to get all the splinters. The doctor listened to her story with great patience and then told her to go wait in the examining room and he would see if he could help her. She sat and waited three hours before the doctor reappeared.

The angry woman demanded, “What took you so long?” He smiled and then told her, “Well, I had to get permits from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management before I could remove old-growth timber from a ‘recreational area’ so close to a waste treatment facility. I’m sorry, but due to Obama-Care they turned you down.”

*******

“Well, our lack of a coherent energy policy is a huge issue right now” noted the famous automotive revolutionary Lee Iacocca. Gas was $1.50.

“When I was running Chrysler I tried to get Presidents Carter and Reagan to focus on this, but when foreign oil is cheap it’s just too easy to play politics and to ignore the problem of foreign oil dependency” he continued. “One of these days America is going to end up in big trouble if we don’t make some changes…”

That was twelve years ago. And today we are in trouble – have we been “playing politics” all these years? – as yet another spike in foreign oil prices threatens our economy.  And, just like in 2008, Barack Obama is once again running a campaign for the presidency in an environment of spiking fuel prices – only this time he’s the incumbent and not the outsider.

The price increases have become so burdensome that the President can no longer ignore them.  Last Thursday he stated that “some politicians, they see this as a political opportunity,” and noted a headline from “one newspaper” which supposedly indicated that “Republicans are licking their chops” over rising gas prices. “Only in politics do people root for bad news” President Obama growled to his audience.

And boy were they cheering from 2004-2008, The Democrats, that is…

As I pointed out a couple of days ago, where all these people for the last generation or so have said we need to drill our own oil and the politicos and the environmentalists to this days till say “But that’ll take ten years” so they can do nothing, and now 25 years later it’s still “ten years”.

Fascinating.

After denying a permit in January for the expansion of the TransCanada Corporation’s Keystone XL Pipeline project – a project that would have presumably expanded American oil refining and decreased America’s foreign oil dependency – the President is now stuck defending his obsession with government funded electric cars that don’t sell, and failed solar energy companies owned by his campaign donors which have “lost” hundreds of millions of our tax revenues. (Austin Hill)

White House Mouthpiece Jay Carney: “Oil and gas production in the United States has risen every year since the president’s been in office. Oil production is now higher than it’s been in eight years.”

Industry analysts say production is rising — not because of President Obama, but in spite of him.

“Today on federal land, the area where the president has control, production in the Gulf of Mexico is down 30 percent. Lease sales in Rocky Mountains on federal lands are down 70 percent,” Jack Gerard, head of the American Petroleum Institute said.

He says the president has put 85 percent of the outer continental shelf off limits and overall, is only making 3 percent of the areas under his control available for development.

So, the Obama/White House All-Purpose Strategy Numero Uno goes something like: blame the Bush administration’s policies for everything from the terrible economy to the dragging war in Afghanistan, but gloss over and take credit for the long-term effects of the Bush administration’s policies when it helps Obama to quell voters unhappy with rising gas prices. Got it. (townhall.com)

And the Border has never been more secure than under Obama! 🙂

So he has no political choice but to a) blame the Republicans and b) Lie his ass off and expect his cohorts in the Liberal Ministry of Truth Media to run with it 24/7 as a drumbeat of Doublespeak.

While campaigning for the presidency during the 2008 price spike, candidate Obama scoffed at the idea of producing more oil at home.  “If everybody in America inflated their tires to the proper level,” he sarcastically noted in August of that year, “we would actually probably save more oil, than all the oil we’d get from John McCain drillin’ right below his feet… or wherever he was gonna drill…”

President Barack Obama’s Energy Secretary Steven Chu in 2011:  wants to“figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” At the time he made the statement, gas cost $7 – $8 a gallon in Europe.

CHU: Well, the recent spike in gasoline prices following that huge spike in 2007, 2008 is a reminder to Americans that the price of gasoline over the long haul should be expected to go up just because of supply and demand issues. And so we see this in the buying habits of Americans as they make choices for the next car they buy.

So buy green or else!

http://www.breitbart.tv/prager-destroys-obamas-algae-oil-speech/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

If people have been saying it for 25 years and YOU’D listened then maybe you wouldn’t have to be saying it now! Or in another 25 years when it’s $15 a gallon or more.

But at least it’s not about politics… 😦

“I leave it up to the government to make good decisions for Americans.”–NASCAR babe Danica Patrick.

I feel better, don’t you? 🙂

New American Way

More Wisdom from Tax Cheat, Treasury Secretary Geithner:

Geithner: Tax the Rich for “the Privilege of Being an American”

“{I}f you don’t ask, you know, the most fortunate Americans to bear a slightly larger burden of the privilege of being an American…”

“And that’s the kind of balance you need. And why is that the case? Because if you don’t try to generate more revenues through tax reform (aka Tax Increases), if you don’t ask the, you know, the most fortunate Americans to bear a slightly larger burden of the privilege of being an American, then you have to — the only way to achieve fiscal sustainability — is through unacceptably deep cuts in benefits for middle class seniors, or unacceptably deep cuts in national security.”

You could STOP SPENDING LIKE AN IDIOT! 🙂

When deep in debt the solution is not to Spend Even More!

But no Liberal would ever even conceive of that idea. And the Republicans aren’t far behind them.

I would also remind the Secretary that 47% of American pay no taxes AT ALL. And the “rich” people’s money he’s so covets pay over 70% of the taxes NOW!

But the Democrats want to SPEND EVEN MORE!

So they have to feed the class envy beast.

Even Michelle “Marie Antionette” Obama got in the act at a swanky fundraiser with “rich” Democrats:

“If a family in this country is struggling, we cannot be satisfied with our own families’ good fortune.”

She also rapped the rich, as has her husband. “Who do we want to be?” Obama asked. “Will we be a country where success is limited to the few at the top? This country is strongest when we are all better off.”

Thanks, Comrade. You can sit down now.

If your own millions of dollars is a burden to you, you can always give it away, dearie. 🙂

And besides doesn’t unemployment stimulate economic growth according to Nancy Pelosi, Press Propagandist Jay Carney and Sr WH Advisor Valerie Jarrett?

Why yes, they did say that. So maybe what we really need is even more unemployment, think of the “stimulus”!!! 🙂

When the Budget Control Act of 2011 increased the debt ceiling last August, Congress, the administration, and outside analysts believed that this increase would allow federal borrowing under the limit well into 2013 (and outside of the election campaign),” the center’s analysts wrote. “Due to unexpected circumstances … that belief appears increasingly likely to have been misguided.”

Well, now it may hit in the  summer and fall, along with $6 or higher gas prices, ObamaCare at the Supreme Court, SB1070 at the Supreme Court.

Won’t that be fun. The Ministry of Truth will have to spin the planet backwards to try and cover up this mess.

But don’t worry The latest Liberal Fantasy– Algae will save us all:

Environmentalists, by and large, live in a world of their own. A very smug, ill-thought-out world in which driving your electric car, wearing your hemp clothes, staring daggers at people who don’t put their soda bottles in the recycling bin, and perhaps even accepting subsidies from the federal government to put solar panels on your roof, are somehow the recipe for a sustainable and prosperous national future. They are blithely negligent of the facts: their cellphones/computers/electric cars are powered by coal, the promise of solar and wind is relatively pathetic, the accepted wisdom of recycling is founded on myth, global warming is increasingly dubious and politicized, that Obama’s green “investments” are helping to push the country toward bankruptcy… I could go on. We have the opportunity to create innumberable jobs and help dredge ourselves out of this economic slump, if we’d only let ourselves actually compete in the global energy market, and when energy prices are high, poorer Americans are the first to suffer.

But even worse than that, environmentalists actually have the gall to want to deny certain types of energy development and technologies to less developed (a.k.a., more miserable) parts of the world, thinking that the people living the ‘simple life’ are somehow ‘better off,’ on a local level and for the welfare of the planet in general. No — wealthier societies are healthier societies.

This video is one of my all-time favorites, and though it’s of a somewhat different environmental capacity than gas prices in America, it very aptly demonstrates just how willfully ignorant and lacking in critical thinking the greenie-attitude really is. Enjoy (warning: some crass language): (From Penn & Teller’s “Bullshit”) (Townhall.com)

Now don’t you feel like going out and hugging a tree and mugging a Millionaire?

It’s the New American Way!  🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

 Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

But at least it’s not OIL!

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

“It’s the easiest thing in the world (to) make phony election-year promises about lower gas prices,” Obama said. “What’s harder is to make a serious, sustained commitment to tackle a problem that may not be solved in one year or one term or even one decade.”

It’s not my fault!! Don’t blame Me!

And Oil will never solve the problem so let’s concentrate on pie-in-sky, economically non-viable solutions instead! And when you call me on it I will use bogus statistics that “show” I’m not doing just that!!!

Unless you’re a Democrat and the President is a Republican, especially one named Bush, then it’s entirely their Fault!

So Obama trotted out yet another ANYTHING BUT OIL liberal “feel good” Enviro-whacko fantasy: The trio of proposals announced in Miami included a $30 million competition in natural gas technologies and a $14 million program to development algae-based fuel.(which is a minimum of 10 years away from even competing- see below- let alone replacing)

None of this crap is economically viable, but at least it’s not OIL! 🙂

“We’re making new investments in the development of gasoline, diesel ($4 a gallon here in Phoenix) , and jet fuel that’s actually made from a plant-like substance, algae — you’ve got a bunch of algae out here,” Obama said at the University of Miami today. “If we can figure out how to make energy out of that, we’ll be doing alright.

IF!!!!! Yeah and IF I could figure out how to win the Lottery and look like Hugh Jackman and retire as a multi-millionaire the world would be a better place! 🙂

So I think I’ll devote the rest of my life to making that happen and ignore reality. Fantasy is so much better and makes me “feel” so much better. 🙂

Believe it or not, we could replace up to 17 percent of the oil we import for transportation with this fuel that we can grow right here in America.”

IF it Works! IF it’s viable! IF it’s compatible! In 20-30 years and after trillions of dollars of Solyndras.

But at least it’s not OIL!

Obama did not say when he expected algae-based fuel to reach that level, but the federal government has a dodgy track record with respect to developing alternative vehicle fuels. Biodiesel, for example, accounted for less than 1 percent of the diesel fuel market as of 2008, according to the Energy Information Administration. And of course there’s ethanol — after four decades, tens of billions of dollars in subsidies, and draconian mandates that force it on unwilling consumers, ethanol was five percent of vehicle consumption (by volume) as of 2008. Although algae-to-gas is a very different idea, it is still in its early stages.

I did blogs about famines in other parts of the world because so much corn was being used up for the then-latest NOT OIL Liberal fantasy.

But it’s not Obama’s fault! Remember that. 🙂

Oil is what makes the world run, but Liberal hate it, so they’ll do everything they can to avoid it without appearing to do so because that’s bad politics.

Just remember, when you fill up your car and it cost $60,70,$80, $90, $100 to do it it’s The Republicans fault!! 🙂

Oil industry leaders reject Obama’s claim to have given significant support to oil production. “These have been the most difficult three years from a policy standpoint that I’ve ever seen in my career,” Bruce Vincent, president of Swift Energy, an oil and gas company in Houston, said yesterday. “They’ve done nothing but restrict access and delay permitting.”

The Ministry of Truth has a Lot of work to do! 🙂

The Washington Examiner’s Michael Barone argues that he hasn’t been consistent even on that front. “We’ve prohibited a pipeline, the safest way to transport oil, from Canada, but we’re aiding Mexico in offshore drilling, which is riskier, and by a firm that lacks the experience of the U.S. firms we have been trying to prevent drilling in the same body of water,” Barone wrote yesterday. “Does this make any sense at all?”

And we are subsidizing Brazil. It just so happens that Petrogas in Brazil is partially owned by Democrat Uber-contributor George Soros.

Nothing to see here. Except Cronyism. 🙂

Speaking of Crony Capitalism: Solyndra

Nearly two dozen employees of the solar panel maker that got a $535 million federal loan guarantee shortly before bankruptcy got $368,500 in bonuses Wednesday from a federal bankruptcy judge — in spite of the company failing to disclose it gave several of the raises of as much as 70% months earlier, after it went bankrupt.

The Washington Times noted a lawyer representing fired Solyndra workers has argued the company’s liquidation benefits few beyond Argonaut Ventures, part of a foundation run by Obama fundraiser George Kaiser.

Other Solyndras are coming to light, the latest being Sapphire Energy. Its pond-scum-based biofuel still costs over $26 a gallon, but that doesn’t matter when your executives give almost solely to Democrats.

The Washington Free Beacon reports that after $104.5 million in stimulus and other Energy and Agriculture Department funds for a New Mexico facility, it can boast just 36 new jobs. UC Berkeley’s Energy Biosciences Institute says it’ll take a decade before we know if algae-based fuel can compete with gas.

The Washington Post recently found “$3.9 billion in federal grants and financing flowed to 21 companies backed by firms with connections to five Obama administration staffers and advisers.”

Revelations of Obama’s green waste and corruption may have only just begun. (IBD)

The Great Obama Whoppers

IBD: The White House billed President Obama’s energy policy speech as a response to mounting criticism of record high gas prices. What he delivered was a grab bag of excuses and outright falsehoods.

Obama’s main message to struggling motorists was: It’s not my fault, so stop whining. The speech only got worse from there, recycling excuses and myths that Obama’s peddled for years. But there were some standout whoppers that deserve debunking. The five biggest:

“We’re focused on production.”

Fact: While production is up under Obama, this has nothing to do with his policies, but is the result of permits and private industry efforts that began long before Obama occupied the White House.

Obama has chosen almost always to limit production. He canceled leases on federal lands in Utah, suspended them in Montana, delayed them in Colorado and Utah, and canceled lease sales off the Virginia coast.

His administration also has been slow-walking permits in the Gulf of Mexico, approving far fewer while stretching out review times, according to the Greater New Orleans Gulf Permit Index. The Energy Dept. says Gulf oil output will be down 17% by the end of 2013, compared with the start of 2011. Swift Energy President Bruce Vincent is right to say Obama has “done nothing but restrict access and delay permitting.”

“The U.S. consumes more than a fifth of the world’s oil. But we only have 2% of the world’s oil reserves.”

Fact: Obama constantly refers to this statistic to buttress his claim that “we can’t drill our way to lower gas prices.” The argument goes that since the U.S. supply is limited, it won’t ever make a difference to world prices.

It’s bogus. New exploration and drilling technologies have uncovered vast amounts of recoverable oil.

In fact, the U.S. has a mind-boggling 1.4 trillion barrels of oil, enough to “fuel the present needs in the U.S. for around 250 years,” according to the Institute for Energy Research. The problem is the government has put most of this supply off limits.

“Because of the investments we’ve made, the use of clean, renewable energy in this country has nearly doubled.”

Fact: Production of renewable energy — biomass, wind, solar and the like — climbed just 12% between 2008 and 2011, according to the federal Energy Information Administration.

“We need to double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising.”

Fact: Renewable energy simply won’t play an important role in the country’s energy picture anytime soon, accounting for just 13% of U.S. energy production by 2035, according to the EIA.

“There are no short-term silver bullets when it comes to gas prices.”

Fact: Obama could drive down oil prices right now simply by announcing a more aggressive effort to boost domestic supplies. When President Bush lifted a moratorium in 2008, oil prices immediately fell $9 a barrel.

Obama said in his speech that Americans aren’t stupid. He’s right about that, which is why most are giving his energy policy a thumbs down.

So The Ministry of Truth has EVEN more work to do.

So don’t worry, Be Happy. Your grandkids will be free of OIL!

Possibly…Maybe…Probably Not…But it will make you feel good thinking it will happen.

Enjoy!

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Some Things Never Change

One of George Orwell’s most chilling images was that of a totalitarian government that succeeded in convincing people their oppressed existence was the opposite of what it was.

“War is Peace,” the ruling party insisted in Orwell’s novel 1984, “Freedom is Slavery” and “Ignorance is Strength.”

Mine: FEAR IS HOPE

On Tuesday evening, speaking in Durham, N.C., White House adviser and close Chicago friend of the Obamas Valerie Jarrett took the argument that government spending is “good for the economy” to a new level.

This evening, speaking at North Carolina Central University in Durham, North Carolina, White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett said that folks getting and spending unemployment checks is a healthy thing . . . because it stimulates the economy:

“Even though we had a terrible economic crisis three years ago, throughout our country many people were suffering before the last three years, particularly in the black community,” Jarrett said. “And so we need to make sure that we continue to support that important safety net. It not only is good for the family, but it’s good for the economy. People who receive that unemployment check go out and spend it and help stimulate the economy, so that’s healthy as well.”

Being such an insult to the millions of Americans now seeking work, Jarrett’s claim has attracted plenty of attention. But it’s nothing new for this White House.

Last summer, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney lectured Wall Street Journal reporter Laura Meckler for not knowing it “as part of the entrance exam” that jobless benefits are “one of the most direct ways to infuse money directly into the economy because people who are unemployed and obviously aren’t running a paycheck are going to spend the money that they get.”

Carney contended that “every place that that money is spent has added business, and that creates growth and income for businesses that leads them to decisions about jobs, more hiring.”

So add to the Orwell list of government-dictated absurdities, “unemployment is employment.”

July 2010: Unemployment benefits are creating jobs faster than practically any other program, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday. 

Talking to reporters, the House speaker was defending a jobless benefits extension against those who say it gives recipients little incentive to work. By her reasoning, those checks are helping give somebody a job. 

“It injects demand into the economy,” Pelosi said, arguing that when families have money to spend it keeps the economy churning. “It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name.” 

Pelosi said the aid has the “double benefit” of helping those who lost their jobs and acting as a “job creator” on the side. 

“It’s impossible to think of a situation where we would have a country that would say we’re not going to have unemployment benefits,” Pelosi said

Some things just don’t change. 🙂

Economists quoted in an Associated Press article yesterday say that gas prices have never been higher at this time of year.  Never.   In our entire history.  And how high are these gas prices?  Nearly $5 in California.  Over $5 in Washington, DC.  And it’s only February.  Ed Morrissey points out in a post at HotAir.com that in the not-so-distant-past, NBC begged President Obama to increase gas prices as part of a cynical mechanism to collect more tax revenue to fund research into “green energy”, which appears to be emerging as an ultra-expensive pipe dream more each day, and to get consumers accustomed to the notion that they will never be able to fill up their tank for $20 again.

Well, gas prices have increased considerably during President Obama’s term, specifically by 83%, as we reported recently, and according to CNS News.  And now it appears that the price of gas will rise to heretofore-unseen levels this summer.  Right in the months leading to the fall of 2012.  During which there will be a presidential election. 

According to GasBuddy.com, motorists are shelling out $5.89 for a gallon of regular gas at a Shell station in Lake Buena Vista, topping out at $5.99 a gallon for premium. It doesn’t get better at a Suncoast Energy station in Orlando, where drivers are paying $5.79 for a gallon of regular. (CW44-Tampa)

So the President and The Ministry of Truth are going to get out in front of this and Lie Massively so that you believe it wasn’t his fault (but it was Bush’s when this happened but not even at these levels).

“If drilling [in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge] were approved today, it would be ten years before oil arrived in refineries.” — Sierra Magazine, January-February issue, 2002.

“Oil extracted from the Wildlife Refuge would not reach refineries for seven to ten years and would never satisfy more than two percent of our nation’s oil demands at any one time.” — Senator Maria Cantwell (D., Wash.), April 17, 2002.

“It would take years and years of development” to generate any supply. — Vice President Al Gore, September 30, 2000. He preferred releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve instead.

The Bush plan to drill in ANWR offers “no real action to bring oil prices down now, no real prospect of freeing ourselves from dependence on big oil and foreign oil.” — Al Gore, Sept. 30, 2000. (PJM)

It’s now 10 years later. Ta da! Don’t you feel better now! 🙂

See also: http://www.mrc.org/articles/film-%E2%80%98there%E2%80%99s-no-tomorrow%E2%80%99-spreads-eco-hysteria-about-economic-collapse

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

 Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Doubletalk and Doublethink

Keystone Hilarity Update:White House press secretary Jay Carney first says Republicans “forced” President Obama to deny the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. Later in his press briefing, Carney says Obama didn’t turn down the pipeline.

“In terms of Keystone, as you all know, the history here is pretty clear. And the fact is because Republicans decided to play political with Keystone, their action essentially forced the administration to deny the permit process because they insisted on a time frame in which it was impossible to completely approve the pipeline,” Carney said when asked about the pipeline by ABC News’ Jake Tapper.

Later in the briefing, Carney says it is the Republicans’ fault.

Jake Tapper: “How can you say that you have an all the above on approach if the President turned down the Keystone pipeline? And you blame the Republicans for making it political.”

Carney: “But the President didn’t turn down the Keystone pipeline.”

“There are no magic solutions to rising oil prices,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney. “The rising gas prices clearly the effect of a variety of factors on the global price of oil,” he told reporters, citing geopolitical unrest and rapid growth in India and China.

President George W. Bush was mostly attacked for wanting to drill too much (or being “cozy” with the oil industry), while President Obama’s policies are rooted in unilaterally shutting down the domestic oil industry amidst rising prices and a struggling economy.

I guess the gas prices have forced the Democrats  to start  to squirm so they have to go to the 2 page playbook– Page 1- It’s the Republicans fault, Page 2- It’s someone else’s fault other than ours.

“It’s Bush’s Fault” Just doesn’t work anymore. Besides they are too busy with “It’s NOT Obama’s Fault” Now.

Bush drew gallons of coverage in 2008. Comparing a 20-day span of rising gas prices in 2008 to 24 days of rising prices in February 2011, the Business & Media Institute found the networks did more than 2 ½ times as many stories during the Bush years versus Obama.

Unrest in the Mideast has hit American consumers hard, driving up gas prices that had already been above $3-a-gallon since Dec. 23. The national average for gasoline hit $3.36 on Feb. 28, the highest ever for the month of February according to The Associated Press. But the amount of network news coverage of rising gas prices did not reflect it.

All three broadcast networks together averaged just one story about rising gas prices per day. In contrast, when gas prices rose similarly in 2008, the networks averaged more than one story, per network, per day.

It took 24 days, from Feb. 1, to Feb. 24 for the national average for unleaded gasoline to climb from $3.101 to 3.228. The last comparable period of “eye-popping” gas prices: the 20 days between Feb. 21, 2008, and March 11, 2008, when the national average climbed from $3.086 to $3.227.

Some 2008 reports including the March 6, 2008, “Early Show” exaggerated the already rising prices by emphasizing extremely high prices. That morning CBS showed viewers a California gas pump that was charging $5.19-a-gallon for regular unleaded before mentioning the national average for that day, which was $2.02 lower. Some 2011 reports have reversed that trend by downplaying the impact of currently high gas prices on consumers by using words like “inching” to describe rising prices, or calling U.S. prices “a bargain compared to Europe.”

The Business & Media Institute examined all the broadcast network news reports mentioning gas prices during each of those time periods and found ABC, CBS and NBC aired more than 2 ½ times more stories (63 stories to 24) in 2008 than they did in 2011. (Newsbusters)

See: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/julia-seymour/2011/03/01/networks-link-bush-skyrocketing-gas-prices-15-times-more-obama

The liberal fascination with developing expensive vehicles that run on electricity doesn’t change that: 1) Solar or wind powered vehicles don’t commercially exist; 2) The cars that do run on electricity, or even battery-powered hybrids still require gas  and 3) the high cost of the alternatively fueled vehicles makes them largely insignificant in the auto market and cost-prohibitive to the average consumer. (Heritage)

But as I said yesterday, the Ministry of Truth has a lot of work to do.

But Obama and Company figure if you’re given no choice ,by refusing to do anything about raising gas prices and actively working against oil companies, you’ll be herded into buy a hybrid or electric car. Exactly what they want you to buy and that it will work, eventually and it’s what “feels” good to them. So it must be better than something they accused Bush of being– “Pro-Oil”.

Just like if they spend even money and tax “the rich” enough it will eventually work.

Just give them more time. 🙂

Get out the Barf Bag Folks:

“We’ve got to have a return to some homespun American values of fair play, shared responsibility. That’s who we are as a people,” President Obama said during a press event on the payroll tax cut extension.

“You know, when times are tough, Americans don’t give up. They push ahead. They do whatever it takes to make their lives better, their communities better, and their countries better. With or without Congress every day I’m going to be continuing to fight with them. I do hope Congress joins me. Instead of spending the coming months in a lot of phony political debates (Like 15 months on ObamaCare Mr President?), focusing on the next election (He’s been doing nothing except that since 2009), I hope that we spend some time focusing on middle-class Americans and those are struggling to get in the middle class (and they are the ones paying $38,500 a person to kiss my ass at events). We have a lot more work to do. Let’s do it,” Obama said. (Yeah, socialism is hard work!) 🙂

And the Weirdest Moment of this year so far:

Today, an election lawyer tipped us off to a Federal Election Commission filing for a brand new super PAC: The Occupy Wall Street Political Action Committee.

The “eat the rich” and kill the Corporate people have the biggest Orwellian Doublethink in history, they are now a PAC, and will take money from “rich” people to defeat them because they are evil.

John Paul Thorton “Chief Principle Minister” of the PAC: We found it a little odd that Thornton, who decries corporate money in politics, is establishing a mechanism for raising unlimited corporate funds. “It does seem counterintuitive,” he said. “I am out to get the bloated amounts of money out of politics but to do that, we need to support candidates looking to do that.”

DOUBLETHINK: To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself — that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink.

The world has truly gone insane but you aren’t supposed to notice.

So don’t tell anyone.

As always, should you or any of your I.M. Force be caught or killed, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions.

This Blog will self-destruct in five seconds. Good luck…

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The Ministry Has Work to Do

The Ministry Of Truth (which the Daily Kos having a website with that name by the way is amusing)

The Ministry of Truth concerned itself with Lies. Party ownership of the print media made it easy to manipulate public opinion, and the film and radio carried the process further.

The primary job of the Ministry of Truth was to supply the citizens of Oceania (read: America now) with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels – with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child’s spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary.

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history and change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother (Obama) makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate (or these days cover it up, modify the conditions or invent a new term for it and just continue on- i.e. “Tax Reform” now means Tax Increases on “the Rich” on the Left). This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind  (or be wrong)(if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction)(Fast & Furious), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong.

Example: “short-term measures for jobs growth.” — Read Stimulus spending. 😦

Has the economy improved since Barack Obama became the president of the United States? Of course not. Despite what you may be hearing in the mainstream media (The Ministry of Truth), the truth is that when you compare the U.S. economy on the day that Barack Obama was inaugurated to the U.S. economy today, there is really no comparison. The unemployment crisis is worse than it was then, home values have fallen, the cost of health insurance is up, the cost of gas is way up, the number of Americans living in poverty has soared and the size of our national debt has absolutely exploded. Anyone that believes that things are better than they were when Barack Obama was elected is simply being delusional.

The following are 18 statistics that prove that the economy has not improved since Barack Obama became the president of the United States….

#1 Today there are 88 million working age Americans that are not employed and that are not looking for employment. That is an all-time record high.

1a. The Unemployment rate has been OVER 8% for 3 Years in a row!!

#2 When Barack Obama was elected, the percentage of unemployed Americans that had been out of work for more than 52 weeks was less than 15%. Today, it is above 30% .

2a. The number of workers who have been unable to find a job in 27 months or more has shot up 83%, with their ranks now at 5.5 million

#3 There are 1.2 million fewer jobs in America today than there were when Barack Obama was inaugurated.

#4 When Barack Obama first took office, the number of “long-term unemployed workers” in the United States was approximately 2.6 million. Today, that number is sitting at 5.6 million .

#5 The average duration of unemployment in the United States is hovering close to an all-time record high .

#6 During the Obama administration, worker health insurance costs have risen by 23 percent .

#7 Since Barack Obama has been president, the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the United States has increased by 90 percent .

#8 Since Barack Obama has been president, home values in the United States have declined by another 13 percent .

#9 Under Barack Obama, new home sales in the U.S. set a brand new all-time record low in 2009, they set a brand new all-time record low again in 2010, and they set a brand new all-time record low once again during 2011.

#10 Since Barack Obama took office, the number of Americans living in poverty has risen by more than 6 million .

10a. Median annual household income is about 7% below where it was in February 2009, according to the Sentier Research Household Income Index.

#11 Since Barack Obama entered the White House, the number of Americans on food stamps has increased from 32 million to 46 million .

#12 The amount of money that the federal government gives directly to Americans has increased by 32 percent since Barack Obama entered the White House.

#13 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the percentage of Americans living in “extreme poverty” is now sitting at an all-time high .

#14 When Barack Obama first took office, an ounce of gold was going for about $850. Today an ounce of gold costs more than $1700 an ounce.

#15 Since Barack Obama became president, the size of the U.S. national debt has increased by 44 percent .

#16 During Barack Obama’s first two years in office, the U.S. government added more to the U.S. national debt than the first 100 U.S. Congresses combined .

#17 During the Obama administration, the U.S. government has accumulated more debt than it did from the time that George Washington took office to the time that Bill Clinton took office .

#18 The U.S. national debt has been increasing by an average of more than 4 billion dollars per day since the beginning of the Obama administration.

More:

Standing too many months on the unemployment line is driving Americans crazy — literally — and it’s costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.

With their unemployment-insurance checks running out, some of the country’s long-term jobless are scrambling to fill the gap by filing claims for mental illness and other disabilities with Social Security — a surge that hobbles taxpayers and making the employment rate look healthier than it should as these people drop out of the job statistics.

As of January, the federal government was mailing out disability checks to more than 10.5 million individuals, including 2 million to spouses and children of disabled workers, at a cost of record $200 billion a year, recent research from JPMorgan Chase shows.

The sputtering economy has fueled those ranks. Around 5.3 percent of the population between the ages of 25 and 64 is currently collecting federal disability payments, a jump from 4.5 percent since the economy slid into a recession.

Mental-illness claims, in particular, are surging.

During the recent economic boom, only 33 percent of applicants were claiming mental illness, but that figure has jumped to 43 percent.

Research also shows a growing number of men, particularly older, former white-collar workers, instead of the typical blue-collar ones, are applying.

Even More:

But barely a month after returning from a luxury Christmas break in Hawaii Michelle Obama is on holiday again – this time at the exclusive Colorado ski resort of Aspen. It’s her 16th holiday since her husband took office.

The Obamas are staying at the home of Jim and Paula Crown, owners of the Aspen Skiing Co, the Daily News reported.

A “middle class” non-“rich” non- Crony host I’m sure. 🙂

Let them Eat Snow!

The Icing on the Cake:

In 2011, the average gallon sold for an all-time high of over $3.50, and the average household spent $4,155 gassing up their vehicles—also a record. And if you were hoping for relief at the pump in 2012, it looks like you’re out of luck.

Gasoline prices have never been higher this time of the year.

At $3.53 a gallon, prices are already up 25 cents since Jan. 1. And experts say they could reach a record $4.25 a gallon by late April. …

The national average for gasoline began the year at $3.28 a gallon. The average price for February so far is $3.49 a gallon. That’s up from $3.17 a gallon last February, a record at the time. Back in 2007, before the recession hit, the average for February was $2.25 a gallon.

A 25-cent jump in gasoline prices, if sustained over a year, would cost the economy about $35 billion. That’s only 0.2 percent of the total U.S. economy, but economists say it’s a meaningful amount, especially at a time when growth is only so-so. The economy grew 2.8 percent in the fourth quarter, a rate considered modest following a recession.

High oil and gas prices now set the stage for even sharper increases at the pump because gas typically rises in March and April.

Sunoco, an big East Coast Refiner, has closed refineries (as as ConocoPhillips) because they were “bleeding” cash costs.

Sunoco, saying Marcus Hook was bleeding cash, shut down the plant in December, not long after the nearby ConocoPhillips in Trainer called it quits. Together, the two refineries produced about 20 percent of the gasoline used in the Northeast. Their owners are trying to sell the plants, without success.

“As soon as these two refineries shut down, prices started rising,” said Denis Stephano, president of United Steelworkers Union Local 10-234, which represents workers at the idled ConocoPhillips refinery.

“When you shut refineries down, you take refined product out of the market,” he said. (Philly.com)

And think of the Jobs… 🙂

And then there’s Iran, you know the guys Obama is largely ignoring.

Add it all up, and you can see the Ministry has a lot of work to do.

Remember this when the Ministry Lies to you 24/7/365 about how great things are becoming because of the Greatness of Barack Hussein Obama!!

Trust Me. 🙂

Where We Are

Well, I’m Back from my trek to Gallifrey One. The Largest “Doctor Who” Convention there is now. There were over 3,000 people there.

Brilliant!

And now I didn’t look like a creepy middle aged fat fan boy (because there 3,000 other ones! 🙂 )

Where we are summed up:
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, speaking on behalf of the Obama White House, to Rep. Paul Ryan: “You are right to say we’re not coming before you today to say ‘we have a definitive solution to that long term problem.’  What we do know is, we don’t like yours.”
Those two sentences speak to a mentality so bereft of intellectual vigor, so stunningly and candidly shallow, so thoroughly irresponsible, so politically myopic, selfish, and cowardly, that it should disqualify this crew from a second term in office.  What a disgrace.  Remember this moment the next time Democrats accuse the GOP of being the “do nothing,” intransigent, “party of no.” (Guy Benson)
1,027 Days since the US Senate Passed a Budget.
Obama Has never presented a budget that didn’t have at least $1 Trillion in Debt spending.
And that’s Where We Are Today Folks!
Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

High Times

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

After three years with unemployment topping 8 percent, the U.S. has seen the longest period of high unemployment since the Great Depression, the Congressional Budget Office noted in a report issued today.

And, despite some recent good news on the economic front, the CBO is still predicting that unemployment will remain above 8 percent until 2014. The report also notes that, including those who haven’t sought work in the past four weeks and those who are working part-time but seeking full-time employment, the unemployment rate would be 15 percent.

FOOD POLICE UPDATE:

After determining that a preschooler’s homemade lunch was not healthy enough, a state worker required her to purchase a meal from the school cafeteria. The result was that instead of eating a turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips and apple juice, the student ate three chicken nuggets for lunch. According to the Carolina Journal, the state employee (who inspects each students lunch box) determined that the meal packed from home did not meet USDA nutrition standards.

The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day. 

The Division of Child Development and Early Education at the Department of Health and Human Services requires all lunches served in pre-kindergarten programs – including in-home day care centers – to meet USDA guidelines. That means lunches must consist of one serving of meat, one serving of milk, one serving of grain, and two servings of fruit or vegetables, even if the lunches are brought from home. 

When home-packed lunches do not include all of the required items, child care providers must supplement them with the missing ones.

The girl’s mother – who said she wishes to remain anonymous to protect her daughter from retaliation – said she received a note from the school stating that students who did not bring a “healthy lunch” would be offered the missing portions, which could result in a fee from the cafeteria, in her case $1.25. 

The story gets even stranger later. Although the HHS worker forced her to buy a school lunch because it did not meet nutrition standards, the mother later contacted the school, only to learn that the packed lunch did meet standards:

While the mother and grandmother thought the potato chips and lack of vegetable were what disqualified the lunch, a spokeswoman for the Division of Child Development said that should not have been a problem. 

“With a turkey sandwich, that covers your protein, your grain, and if it had cheese on it, that’s the dairy,” said Jani Kozlowski, the fiscal and statutory policy manager for the division. “It sounds like the lunch itself would’ve met all of the standard.” The lunch has to include a fruit or vegetable, but not both, she said. 

There are no clear restrictions about what additional items – like potato chips – can be included in preschoolers’ lunch boxes.

So what we have is a parent who packed her preschooler’s lunch based on nutrition needs, but also on what she knew her daughter would eat. Then a government employee replaces it with a school meal because it is not nutritious enough, only for the student to gain even less nutrition and waste more food than if she had eaten the home packed lunch. It’s almost like the government is trying to supplant parents duties and failing at it or something. (Townhall.com)

The Full Story from Carolina Journal.com:

RAEFORD — A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because the school told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.

The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the person who was inspecting all lunch boxes in the More at Four classroom that day.

The Division of Child Development and Early Education at the Department of Health and Human Services requires all lunches served in pre-kindergarten programs – including in-home day care centers – to meet USDA guidelines. That means lunches must consist of one serving of meat, one serving of milk, one serving of grain, and two servings of fruit or vegetables, even if the lunches are brought from home.

When home-packed lunches do not include all of the required items, child care providers must supplement them with the missing ones.

The girl’s mother – who said she wishes to remain anonymous to protect her daughter from retaliation – said she received a note from the school stating that students who did not bring a “healthy lunch” would be offered the missing portions, which could result in a fee from the cafeteria, in her case $1.25.

“I don’t feel that I should pay for a cafeteria lunch when I provide lunch for her from home,” the mother wrote in a complaint to her state representative, Republican G.L. Pridgen of Robeson County.

The girl’s grandmother, who sometimes helps pack her lunch, told Carolina Journal that she is a petite, picky 4-year-old who eats white whole wheat bread and is not big on vegetables.

“What got me so mad is, number one, don’t tell my kid I’m not packing her lunch box properly,” the girl’s mother told CJ. “I pack her lunchbox according to what she eats. It always consists of a fruit. It never consists of a vegetable. She eats vegetables at home because I have to watch her because she doesn’t really care for vegetables.”

When the girl came home with her lunch untouched, her mother wanted to know what she ate instead. Three chicken nuggets, the girl answered. Everything else on her cafeteria tray went to waste.

“She came home with her whole sandwich I had packed, because she chose to eat the nuggets on the lunch tray, because they put it in front of her,” her mother said. “You’re telling a 4-year-old. ‘oh. your lunch isn’t right,’ and she’s thinking there’s something wrong with her food.”

While the mother and grandmother thought the potato chips and lack of vegetable were what disqualified the lunch, a spokeswoman for the Division of Child Development said that should not have been a problem.

“With a turkey sandwich, that covers your protein, your grain, and if it had cheese on it, that’s the dairy,” said Jani Kozlowski, the fiscal and statutory policy manager for the division. “It sounds like the lunch itself would’ve met all of the standard.” The lunch has to include a fruit or vegetable, but not both, she said.

There are no clear restrictions about what additional items – like potato chips – can be included in preschoolers’ lunch boxes.

“If a parent sends their child with a Coke and a Twinkie, the child care provider is going to need to provide a balanced lunch for the child,” Kozlowski said.

Ultimately, the child care provider can’t take the Coke and Twinkie away from the child, but Kozlowski said she “would think the Pre-K provider would talk with the parent about that not being a healthy choice for their child.”

It is unclear whether the school was allowed to charge for the cafeteria lunches they gave to every preschooler in the class that day.

The state regulation reads:

“Sites must provide breakfast and/or snacks and lunch meeting USDA requirements during the regular school day. The partial/full cost of meals may be charged when families do not qualify for free/reduced price meals.

“When children bring their own food for meals and snacks to the center, if the food does not meet the specified nutritional requirements, the center must provide additional food necessary to meet those requirements.”

Still, Kozlowski said, the parents shouldn’t have been charged.

“The school may have interpreted [the rule] to mean they felt like the lunch wasn’t meeting the nutritional requirements and so they wanted the child to have the school lunch and then charged the parent,” she said. “It sounds like maybe a technical assistance need for that school.”

The school principal, Jackie Samuels, said he didn’t “know anything about” parents being charged for the meals that day. “I know they eat in the cafeteria. Whether they pay or not, they eat in the cafeteria.”

Pridgen’s office is looking into the issue.

Sara Burrows is an associate editor of Carolina Journal.
Editor’s note, Feb. 15: The first two paragraphs of this story were updated. Neither DHHS nor school officials would identify the person who inspected the homemade lunches and decided they did not meet USDA guidelines. CJ has made multiple requests to DHHS for clarification. In an email to CJ, department spokeswoman Lori Walston said: “As mentioned in the statement from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) issued last night, this agency is currently working to determine the specifics of this case.”

But don’t worry, the Government and it’s bureaucratic minions don’t want to run your life for you… 😦

The nanny state that tells us what cars we should drive, what energy we must use and what health insurance we must have is now telling mothers what they can put in their children’s school lunches.

We are all familiar with the Transportation Security Administration going through our stuff at the airport on the assumption all of us are potential terrorists. When a similar level of scrutiny is applied to our kids’ school lunches on the assumption we are too stupid to feed them properly, we wonder if there’s any place the nanny state will not reach to curtail our freedoms in the name of what’s good for us.

Nope.

Mind you here in Arizona the same Government Bureaucrats have 25% of the kids never finishing High School to begin with.

And they ignore the Border like the plague.

So, Don’t worry, be happy. Government Knows Best! 🙂

 

More Politics Less Principles

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

IBD-Tax Deal: Republicans are being lauded for their political savvy in agreeing to extend the payroll tax cut and jobless benefits for another year without paying for it. Well, it may be good politics, but it’s bad on principle.

If there’s one thing pundits on the left and the right agree on, it’s that Republicans in Congress were politically clever to deny President Obama two issues he wanted to use against the GOP: extending the two-percentage point payroll tax cut and extra jobless benefits through the end of this year.

No doubt, they’re right. After all, as we’ve heard repeated for decades, politics is the “art of compromise.”

Without action by Congress, the payroll tax cut would have expired at the end of February. Republicans knew they would be tarred by the Democrats and the mainstream media — is there really any difference? — for “raising taxes” on 160 million Americans when it did.

So instead of opposing it, as they did last year, the GOP went along with Democrats to extend it.

“The payroll tax cut is political candy,” Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C. correctly observed Wednesday. “Once you hand it out, it’s hard to take it back.”

The big problem with this is that it adds $100 billion to the deficit and won’t be offset by cuts elsewhere. It moves up the bankruptcy of the Social Security system, while adding another $100 billion to our debt — all for a benefit worth less than $20 a week to average workers.

This is political pandering at its worst. And as we noted earlier this month, a new study of industrial nations finds that payroll tax cuts don’t boost the economy. Personal income tax cuts and business tax cuts do, but Obama and the Democrats want to raise those.

So we’re spending $100 billion for what? Politics.

To their credit, Republicans tried to behave like responsible adults on this. In both last summer’s debt ceiling debate and in December’s battle over the payroll tax, they insisted that the payroll tax cuts be paid for.

They were pilloried for it, portrayed as mean-spirited advocates for the rich. That’s a lie. So not to be outmaneuvered again, the GOP lowered itself to the cynical level of President Obama and the Democrats by keeping the economically useless payroll tax cut in place.

“It’s the perfect example of what all the fights are about,” Charles Krauthammer told Fox News’ Bret Baier. “This is a free-lunch presidency. But he now wants to add dinner and breakfast to the menu.”

GOP voters need to know their party is a party of principle — and not just about getting elected. What today looks like a smart political move may in the long-run come back to bite the Republicans if Democrats use this as a precedent for spending more without making cuts.

For the record, we think this is the most important election since at least World War II. A party that makes a case for less spending, lower taxes, smaller government, fewer regulations and a strong defense can win it.

Only Republicans can make that case. This latest move, however politically astute it was, doesn’t do it. More principle, less politics, please.

Not going to happen. It’s all Politics all the time. And the wimpy Republicans are desperate to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and do like children beating each other up in a sandbox during recess.

And Obama is in full-on campaign mode and won’t do or say anything that isn’t about his re-election.

Ann Coulter: If liberals like it, it’s subsidized; if they don’t, it’s prohibited. And now they can impose their left-wing authoritarianism on the entire country by calling their mandates and prohibitions “insurance.”

Liberal fundamentalists say: I don’t see why anyone needs to hunt; I don’t know why anyone needs to eat meat; I don’t see why anyone needs to bathe every day; I don’t know why anyone minds looking at urine in a low-flow toilet; I don’t know why anyone needs an incandescent light bulb …

Screw you, liberals. I don’t know why anyone needs an abortion, free contraception, crap-ass “art” with photos of vaginas on the Virgin Mary, non-farming farmers or a $1 million pension for Anthony Weiner.

But I’m forced to subsidize all of that.

And now we’re all going to be forced to subsidize the entire wish list of the Berkeley City Council, recast as “health insurance.”

Insurance is not supposed to be for normal expenses in the ordinary course of events, such as multivitamins, house painting or oil changes. Insurance is for unexpected catastrophes: fires, accidents, cancer.

The basic idea is to spread the risk of unforeseen disasters. Filling up your gas tank, for example, is not an unforeseen disaster (though it’s getting to be under Obama).

So why is birth control covered by insurance? Birth control pills aren’t that expensive — generics are about $20 a month — nor is the need for them a bolt out of the blue. Why not have health insurance cover manicures, back massages, carrot cake and nannies?

Liberals huffily ask why it’s so important to the Catholic Church not to pay for insurance plans that cover birth control, but the better question is: Why is it so important to liberals to force them to? (Wait until they have to buy coverage for vibrating butt-plugs!)

The answer is: They want the government giving official sanction to birth control and, later, abortion. That comes next. They want it for same reason gays want gay marriage — it’s purely symbolic.

Following Betty Friedan, gender feminists believe the pill is so central to what we are as a nation that it must be paid for by all, i.e. by insurance. The argument for fully subsidized abortions will be: We don’t vote on a basic human right!

Whether or not it’s a “right,” it’s not an area for “insurance.” Abortion is an elective procedure. No families are going bankrupt because they had to pay for an abortion — which costs about as much as a haircut for John Edwards or Bill Clinton. Can’t we limit the health insurance we are all required by federal law to purchase to financially ruinous, actual medical problems?

No, that is not in the cards. Just as liberals have turned the Constitution into a vehicle for achieving all the left-wing policies they could never get Americans to vote for, now they are going to use “insurance” for the same purpose. Their new method doesn’t even require them to get votes from five justices on the Supreme Court.

The secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, will do it all on her own.

Anything close to the beating heart of feminism is about to become a mandatory part of insurance coverage: fertility treatments, chemical sensitivities, a year’s leave of absence for fathers after the birth of a child, attention deficit disorder, massages, aromatherapy, watching MSNBC, sex change operations, gender reassignment surgery, gender re-reassignment surgery.

And then, once every single insurance plan in the country is required by federal law to cover one million liberal causes having nothing to do with medical problems, Democrats will be happy to let us purchase health insurance across state lines. Sure, buy your insurance from Utah or Kentucky. Every insurance plan in the country, by federal law, will be identical.

The contraception diktat is only the beginning of the government controlling your life under ObamaCare. There are approximately 100,000 more decisions the HHS Secretary will have to make under ObamaCare that you will not be able to appeal.

The bill should have been called “Kathleen Sebelius’ Dream Journal.”

As we have seen, Sebelius is not a go-with-the-flow kind of secretary. She is a doctrinaire feminist who thinks it’s important to make a statement by ordering something that has only a tangential connection to health care but will have the effect of costing everyone more money.

Are you getting why this isn’t a Catholic issue? So what if some “compromise” is reached that makes the Catholic bishops happy? They supported ObamaCare to begin with! They ought to be forced to live with the consequences of the totalitarian regime they helped foist on the rest of us.

Maybe they’ll get a waiver from the contraception mandate on religious grounds — just like unions and Obama-friendly corporations got waivers on the grounds that they realized ObamaCare would suck and they didn’t want to be a part of it.

What about the rest of us? You know, the ones who didn’t support ObamaCare? We still have to live under the thumb of a nutcase gender-feminist with unlimited authority to ban whatever she doesn’t like, subsidize whatever she does like and call it “insurance.”

If Obama is re-elected this November and ObamaCare is not repealed, Republicans’ only option will be to make Rick Santorum the head of HHS under the next Republican president (if we ever have one).

He can prohibit insurance companies from covering anything related to contraception, AIDS and substance abuse, and mandate that insurance plans pay subsidies to stay-at-home mothers, tuition for home-schooled kids and cover the purchase of his book, “It Takes a Family.”

Those particular lifestyle choices have as much to do with “insurance” as contraceptives do.

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Going Global

“We’ve got a choice. We can settle for a country where a few people do really, really well and everybody else struggles to get by”, Obama said.

“Or we can restore an economy where everybody gets a fair shot, everybody does their fair share, everybody plays by the same set of rules, from Washington to Wall Street to Main Street.” (but the 38,500 a person campaign donations from these people doesn’t hurt!)
“We need to get the deficit under control (we need to overspend less!)in a way that builds the economy. We do it in a way that’s consistent with American values so that everyone pays a fair share.”

The Obama budget is being seen on all sides as a partisan document that has little chance of being voted into law.

All out Campaign Mode…

Democrats in the Senate say that they will not bring it up for a vote.

So it’s all for show. And for Liberal Media Consumption and Talking Points.

And the Republicans are rolling over and kissing Liberal ass on the payroll tax because they don’t want “unfavorable” media coverage. 😦

Now, here’s the latest:

 

On Monday, White House National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling called for a “global minimum tax” to ensure that “nobody is escaping doing their fair share.”
Mr. Sperling added: “we will say more, perhaps not in gory detail, but in more detail, before the end of the month. And in terms of the revenues, the president is looking for shared sacrifice.”

“If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”  –Ronald Reagan

Americans make up half of the world’s richest 1%

It only takes $34,000 per person to be amid the richest 1% of people in the world.It only takes $34,000 per person to be amid the richest 1% of people in the world.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — The United States holds a disproportionate amount of the world’s rich people.

It only takes $34,000 a year, after taxes, to be among the richest 1% in the world. That’s for each person living under the same roof, including children. (So a family of four, for example, needs to make $136,000.)

So where do these lucky rich people live? As of 2005 — the most recent data available — about half of them, or 29 million lived in the United States, according to calculations by World Bank economist Branko Milanovic in his book The Haves and the Have-Nots.

Another four million live in Germany. The rest are mainly scattered throughout Europe, Latin America and a few Asian countries. Statistically speaking, none live in Africa, China or India despite those being some of the most populous areas of the world.

The numbers put into perspective the idea of a rapidly growing global middle class.

Sure, China and India are seeing their economies grow quickly, and along with that growth, large portions of their populations are also becoming richer. But remember, the emerging world is starting from a very low base to begin with, so its middle class is just that — still emerging, says Milanovic.

“It doesn’t seem right to define as middle class, people who would be on food stamps in the United States,” Milanovic said.

The true global middle class, falls far short of owning a home, having a car in a driveway, saving for retirement and sending their kids to college. In fact, people at the world’s true middle — as defined by median income — live on just $1,225 a year. (And, yes, Milanovic’s numbers are adjusted to account for different costs of living across the globe.)

In the grand scheme of things, even the poorest 5% of Americans are better off financially than two thirds of the entire world.(CNN)

So with this news our Taxes must crush us to death for the benefit of the rest of the world. We are EVIL INCARNATE! 🙂

The government safety net was created to keep Americans from abject  poverty, but the poorest households no longer receive a majority of  government benefits. A secondary mission has gradually become primary:  maintaining the middle class from childhood through retirement. The  share of benefits flowing to the least affluent households, the bottom  fifth, has declined from 54 percent in 1979 to 36 percent in 2007,  according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis published last year.

The problem by now is familiar to most. Politicians have expanded the  safety net without a commensurate increase in revenues, a primary  reason for the governments annual deficits and mushrooming debt. In  2000, federal and state governments spent about 37 cents on the safety  net from every dollar they collected in revenue, according to a New York  Times analysis. A decade later, after one Medicare expansion, two  recessions and three rounds of tax cuts, spending on the safety net  consumed nearly 66 cents of every dollar of revenue.

The recent recession increased  dependence on government, and stronger economic growth would reduce  demand for programs like unemployment benefits. But the long-term trend  is clear. Over the next 25 years, as the population ages and medical  costs climb, the budget office projects that benefits programs will grow  faster than any other part of government, driving the federal debt to  dangerous heights.

Americans are divided about the way forward. Seventy percent of  respondents to a recent New York Times poll said the government should  raise taxes. Fifty-six percent supported cuts in Medicare and Social  Security. Forty-four percent favored both.

The American public’s dependence on the federal government shot up  23% in just two years under President Obama, with 67 million now relying  on some federal program, according to a newly released study by the  Heritage Foundation.

Now that’s why you want to vote for Obama, right? 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino
 Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 Political Cartoons by Chip Bok


 

Centennial

HAPPY BIRTHDAY ARIZONA!

FEBRUARY 14, 2012

I wrote this two days ago but WordPress said that it was published, then didn’t do it, so sue me. Oh wait, the State already has been…

On February 14, 1912, after nearly 49 years as a U.S. territory and thousands of years as a sacred home to indigenous peoples, Arizona became the 48th and last of the contiguous states to enter the Union of the United States of America.

At the time of its statehood, Arizona epitomized the economic promise of the American West. Rich in natural resources, the state was earning its reputation as the home of the Five C’s – copper, cattle, cotton, citrus, and climate. Its people reflected the rich history and heritage of the Southwest, from the influences of its Native American and Hispanic cultures to the adventurous spirit of its early prospectors, ranchers, and farmers. All embraced Arizona’s rugged and rich environment to create a unique and prosperous lifestyle.

Arizona continues to be recognized for its natural beauty, a high quality of life, and its ongoing innovation in all fields, from agriculture to technology.

Arizona was founded on rugged individualism matched with hard work and vision. It was this indomitable spirit that shaped and molded our state into the place we now call home. From our school children to centenarians, from urban centers to rural communities—we all have the opportunity to come together and commemorate this indomitable spirit and the 100 years of growth, challenge and success it engendered. (az100years.org)

Now the state, which is the home to the 5th Largest Metropolitan City in the US, Phoenix, has many new challenges.

One of the hardest hit areas for the housing crash.

Illegal Aliens.

The US Government:  Under Obama (can you say being sued by them for wanting to enforce Federal Laws on Immigration; The gunwalking of Fast & Furious; The undermanned and under-armed Border)

Drug Cartels that freely operate across the border.

The Ministry of Truth Media always wanting to call us Racists at the drop of any hat.

La Raza (“The Race”) the anti-white Racists who are endemic in schools, especially in Southern Arizona.

Medical Marijuana Liberals from California. California Liberals in general are a pain in our backside.

But I love it here. July 30th will be 25 years since I left Michigan.

The “Five C’s” of Arizona’s economy are: Cattle, Copper, Citrus, Cotton, and Climate.

But, of course, mining is politically incorrect for Liberals, even though we produce more copper than anyone.

When England’s famous London Bridge was replaced in the 1960s, the original was purchased, dismantled, shipped stone by stone and reconstructed in Lake Havasu City, Arizona, where it still stands today.

And I was on a Tour bus in Central London when we went across the current London Bridge there they mentioned it and I had stifle myself from cheering.

We have one of the 7 Great Wonders of the World– The Grand Canyon.

And yes, every man, woman, and child should see the grandeur that is Mother Nature.

In 25 years I have only been once because at 245 miles it’s not that easy to get to.

Which is also a fair point that many people don’t quite understand out here. It takes a while, some times a long while to get anywhere because of the vast distances.

Tucson is 140 miles from Phoenix and Flagstaff is about the same. The grand Canyon is over 90 miles North of Flagstaff.

Because of the lack of roads to go from the South Rim to the North Rim is around 200 miles driving distance even though if you stand at the South rim you can see the North Rim 13 miles away.

Many tourists don’t get that.

The Legendary Lost Dutchman Mine is purported to be in The Superstition Mountains east of Phoenix. But no one has ever found it, but not for lack of trying.

Tucson is the oldest city. Having been founded by the Spanish in 1775. But the Navajos are the indigenous people and have been here since the time before Christ.

I am proud to live here, even if the US Government currently is trying to destroy us.

Sign Posted by The US Government INSIDE (facing south) the US in Southern Arizona: 80 miles North of the border on the South side of I-8 between Casa Grande and Gila Bend urging U.S. citizens not to camp or hike in the “Active Drug and Human Smuggling Area” because “Visitors May Encounter Armed Criminals.”

U.S. Fish and Wildlife staffers report that the 3,500 acre Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge in this area is closed to U.S. citizens as well and is “adversely affected” by cartel operations.

But if you want the US Government to do anything about it: YOU’RE A RACIST!!

In an effort to quell accusations by the open borders lobby that the Administration has not gone far enough with its administrative amnesty program, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced last week the creation of a new “public advocate” position for illegal aliens. Senior ICE Advisor Andrew Lorenzen-Strait, who was appointed as the new advocate, will serve as a point of contact for aliens in removal proceedings, community and advocacy groups, and others who have concerns, questions, recommendations or other issues they would like to raise about the Administration’s executive amnesty efforts.

Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), called the Administration’s creation of the new position outrageous. “It’s outrageous that the Obama administration has appointed a taxpayer-funded activist for illegal and criminal immigrants who are detained or ordered deported.  The administration all too often acts more like a lobbying firm for illegal immigrants than as an advocate for the American people.”

“This is just further proof that the Obama administration puts illegal immigrants ahead of the interests of Americans,” he further added in a press release. “The Obama administration’s lack of immigration enforcement allows illegal immigrants to steal jobs away from American workers and now their in-house lobbyist for illegal immigrants costs U.S. taxpayers more money.”

But don’t worry, the Border is more secure now than it has ever been, according to Big Sis Janet Napalitano, former Governor of Arizona, who did her very best when she was here to ignore the problem and bailed on the state just before the crash to take ignoring the problem National. You go Girl!

https://indyfromaz.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/arizonaobamademocrats.jpg

Hmmm…

In light of new information emerging about the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) Operation Fast and Furious (read here about ATF targeting FBI informants), we thought revisiting this video ain’t a bad idea.

Back in April of 2009, President Obama alluded in a question and answer session to the notion of “gun tracing” in Mexico . . . leading many to conclude that he may have known more than he’s ever admitted about Operation Fast & Furious and long before he says he knew anything.  You be the judge . . .

Hmmmm….

The Wisdom of Samuel L Jackson (He ain’t no Jedi…)

Barack Obama‘s politics meant nothing to Samuel L. Jackson because the “Pulp Fiction” star only voted for the president for one reason and one reason only … because he’s black. 

In an interview with Ebony magazine, Jackson explained, “I voted for Barack because he was black. ‘Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them … That’s American politics, pure and simple. [Obama’s] message didn’t mean [bleep] to me.”

Jackson then went on to drop the N-word several times when discussing Obama, telling the mag, “When it comes down to it, they wouldn’t have elected a [bleep]. Because, what’s a [bleep]? A [bleep] is scary. Obama ain’t scary at all. [Bleeps] don’t have beers at the White House. [Bleeps] don’t let some white dude, while you in the middle of a speech, call [him] a liar. A [bleep] would have stopped the meeting right there and said, ‘Who the [bleep] said that?’ I hope Obama gets scary in the next four years, ‘cuz he ain’t gotta worry about getting re-elected.” (TMZ)

But if you disagree with a Liberal you’re a racist. 🙂

Hmmm….

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Late last week, the White House tried claimed to “compromise” on the new ObamaCare requirement that all employers provide insurance with free birth control coverage, including religious employers. The compromise actually wasn’t a compromise at all, yet the White House is shutting down debate on the issue and saying it’s a done deal.

President Barack Obama and his deputies are using the demeaning language of disease and green-eyeshade accounting to establish free birth control as a government-backed right, and also to downgrade the value of human lives, say social conservatives.

“They’re claiming that children are like a disease and increase health costs,” said former Concerned Women for America president Wendy Wright.

Unborn children, however, “are humans beings and that’s what Obama and the abortion crowd refuse to recognize,” she told The Daily Caller.

The Catholic Church’s opposition to the new Obama administration regulations is heavily influenced by its ideological and religious support for human life, and its twinned opposition to birth control, including contraception, and abortion.

That ideological point was prominently displayed in the Feb. 10 response to Obama’s announcement from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

“First, we objected to the rule forcing private health plans — nationwide, by the stroke of a bureaucrat’s pen — to cover sterilization and contraception … [but] pregnancy is not a disease,” said the response.

Obama’s unsympathetic language was showcased in his Feb. 10 announcement that he would require health insurance companies to offer free birth-control services to the employees of religious groups, despite the congregations’ constitutional protection from state regulation.

“It’s a lot cheaper to prevent an illness than to treat one … [and] preventive care should include coverage of contraceptive services such as birth control,” the president said in brief remarks in the White House press room.

Even when Obama championed the claim that women have a moral right to use birth control, he talked about biological health, not of moral freedom. “Every woman should be in control of the decisions that affect her own health,” he said.

Except that he passed a law MANDATING their “pro-choice”  “pro-Control”–it was called ObamaCare.

MANDATING Freedom of Choice…Hmmm….

White House officials also justified the far-reaching policy by saying it would cost nothing, and therefore would impose no real burden on religious organizations.

Cost Nothing? Boy he really has no idea how capitalism works does he…Hmmm…

“Covering contraception saves money for insurance companies by keeping women healthy and preventing spending on other health services,” said a White House statement released Feb. 10.

But if you’re oppose to birth control to begin with, Like the Catholic Church…well, screw you… Hmmm…

Making Insurance Companies pay for something without any recourse is “free”.
Hmmm…

The Catholic Church’s advocates have reserved their strongest condemnation, however, for the White House’s description of pregnancy as a disease.

The administration believes “pregnancy is some sort of health care anomaly… [and] to be pregnant is some sort of illness,” said Cardinal Donald Wuerl, the Catholic archbishop of Washington, D.C. They believe, he said, that they “must prevent that illness. … A pregnancy becomes the problem.”

“Kids aren’t commodities — they’re humans beings and that’s what Obama and the abortion crowd refuse to recognize,” added Wright, who is now advocating for socially conservative policies at the United Nations.

But they are political footballs…Hmm…

Now, after the many genuine concerns that have been raised over the last few weeks, as well as, frankly, the more cynical desire on the part of some to make this into a political football, it became clear that spending months hammering out a solution was not going to be an option, that we needed to move this faster.  So last week, I directed the Department of Health and Human Services to speed up the process that had already been envisioned.  We weren’t going to spend a year doing this; we’re going to spend a week or two doing this.

Not to be too cynical about this, but Obama last spoke with those Catholic officials months ago regarding his mandate.  And no one at the White House bothered to contact them when it came time to offer this “accommodation,” as the bishops made clear on Friday after the Obama administration announced it.  That sounds a lot like a cynical desire to punt a political football rather than figuring out exactly why the church objected to it in the first place.  And that failure looks like the product of a cynical desire to impose the same mandate while making it look like a compromise.

Following the announced “accommodations” from the White House for religious organizations whose beliefs preclude them from offering birth control, Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, had some tough words for President Obama.

According to Land, the adjustment in the mandate requiring all employers — including religious organizations — to provide birth control is “a distinction without a difference.”

“My initial reaction is: How dumb does he think we are?” Land wondered in an interview with The Daily Caller. “Does he think when he puts lip stick on a pig, that we don’t understand that it is still a pig?”

Yes, he does. Because that’s they way the Liberal mind works. Someone objects to your idea so you just change the wording or the word and suddenly a totally new idea and if object to that it’s just because you’re “obstructionist”.

Perfect Example: Global Cooling/Warming/Climate Change etc.

Next up: Deficit Reduction (aka spending more than we have but spending less of the more than before) is good. And if you’re against it you’re just an “obstructionist”

The government safety net was created to keep Americans from abject poverty, but the poorest households no longer receive a majority of government benefits. A secondary mission has gradually become primary: maintaining the middle class from childhood through retirement. The share of benefits flowing to the least affluent households, the bottom fifth, has declined from 54 percent in 1979 to 36 percent in 2007, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis published last year.

The problem by now is familiar to most. Politicians have expanded the safety net without a commensurate increase in revenues, a primary reason for the government’s annual deficits and mushrooming debt. In 2000, federal and state governments spent about 37 cents on the safety net from every dollar they collected in revenue, according to a New York Times analysis. A decade later, after one Medicare expansion, two recessions and three rounds of tax cuts, spending on the safety net consumed nearly 66 cents of every dollar of revenue.

The recent recession increased dependence on government, and stronger economic growth would reduce demand for programs like unemployment benefits. But the long-term trend is clear. Over the next 25 years, as the population ages and medical costs climb, the budget office projects that benefits programs will grow faster than any other part of government, driving the federal debt to dangerous heights.

Americans are divided about the way forward. Seventy percent of respondents to a recent New York Times poll said the government should raise taxes. Fifty-six percent supported cuts in Medicare and Social Security. Forty-four percent favored both.

But now Obama wants to cut the Deficit (not the debt) so that he’ll promise to have less and less deficits (money we don’t have) every year for the next 4 years.

He’ll have it down to 1/2 trillion in deficits by the time he leaves.

Making it 7 years in a row!

And this is an improvement, and if you don’t want to go for it you’re an “obstructionist” who just wants to protect the “rich” (the same people giving him $38,500 a person).

Hmmm…

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

The Shell Game

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

President Obama’s proposed 2013 budget will forecast a $901 billion deficit for next year, falling far short of his goal to halve the deficit in four years.

The budget, an outline of which was released by the White House Friday night, will show a higher deficit this year than in 2011, up from $1.3 trillion to $1.33 trillion.

So that’s 3 strikes and hopefully he’s out! What a Turkey!

Wonder if this one will go down 96-0 like last years.

Mind you the US Senate that hasn’t passed a Budget in 1, 018 days has already telegraphed that it has no intention of passing a budget this year anyhow.

So this is largely an exercise in campaign BS. Which is all we’ve gotten since January 20th, 2009 anyhow.

The full blown still-born cow of a budget comes out Monday. I’m sure it will bloated, class envious, have lots of flashy fake or useless “cuts”, and totally political. What else would you expect.

“We will talk more before the end of the month on what corporate tax reform would look like,” the official said on Friday, confirming that it would include a call for “lower rates.”

Facing a potentially tough presidential re-election challenge this November, Obama will propose cutting the rate following the release of his 2013 budget plan on Monday, February 13, according to the sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record.

While he spent a big part of his January speech to Congress criticizing businesses for moving jobs overseas, Obama said that “companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world.”

So what do you wanna bet it’s going to be very selective and very “democratic”. 🙂

You do it my way or else. Or he’ll propose all new taxes to make up for it, disguised as something else or some other Orwellian turn of phrase.

Typically with this White House “tax reform” means bend over you’re about to get a massive enema!

Gene Sperling, director of Obama’s National Economic Council, has told reporters that the president will be laying out “principles” for corporate tax reform close to the budget release.

Obama’s corporate plan will also include a new minimum tax on foreign profits earned in low tax countries – an unpopular idea in the corporate community. (yahoo)

“principles” eh…This should be good… 😦

Ann Coulter:Having given up on pillorying Mitt Romney for plundering his way to vast wealth — because, unfortunately, it isn’t true — the Non-Fox Media seem to have settled on denouncing him as a rich jerk.

Liberals are disgusted by people who made their own money, as Romney did at Bain Capital. But they admire ill-gotten gains, which is how John Kerry, John Edwards, Jon Corzine, John F. Kennedy, Franklin D. Roosevelt and innumerable other spokesmen for the downtrodden amassed their fortunes.

Democrats are very proud of the rich, patrician FDR — who inherited all of his money and then launched a series of federal entitlements designed to bankrupt America 60 years later.

JFK also inherited his wealth, from a father who made his money as a bootlegger and stock manipulator. (In their defense, both went on to create jobs for bartenders and prostitutes.)

Kerry is in a special category of the gigolo. He acquired his fortune by marrying someone, who married someone, who inherited the money — leading Kerry’s children to refer to Teresa Heinz Kerry as their “step-money.” In what can only be described as luck, Kerry’s first wife was also an heiress.

I’ve been diligently searching for the shrieks of horror from the media over John Kerry’s tax returns when he ran for president eight years ago, but I can’t find anything. (Although I did find a reference to Kerry’s having served in Vietnam. Anybody else hear about that?)

Even when Kerry refused to release his wife’s tax returns in order to avoid the humiliation of revealing his allowance, the press was demurely silent.

John Edwards made well over $50 million by shaking down hardworking doctors with junk science lawsuits — as the New York Times has since admitted. The highlight of his sideshows was when he channeled unborn children in front of illiterate jurors.

(In the Democrats’ moral universe, the unborn have no right to life, but they’re perfectly acceptable as witnesses for the plaintiff in a malpractice suit.)

Democrats were overjoyed with Wall Street financier-turned Democratic politician Jon Corzine. It was just three years ago, in 2009, when President Obama was hailing Corzine as one of the “best partners I have in the White House.” Today, prosecutors are trying to find out what Corzine did with hundreds of millions of his customers’ money.

The media do everything they can to avoid looking into these mountebanks when they are active politicians. Then, when they’re out of office, the NFM summarily announce that they always knew the Democrats were sleazeballs, and why are we still talking about them?
It’s never a good time to talk about Democrat plutocrats until it’s way too late to talk about them. With Corzine, we’ll have a window of three seconds to talk about his financial shenanigans. He’s innocent until proved gui — Convicted! — What? You’re still burbling about that guy?

Liberals will be carrying on about Richard Nixon until we’re all long dead. Why has the time passed for them to really examine the man who was their vice presidential candidate only eight years ago and was desperately seeking the presidential slot four years ago?

Until we hear ferocious denunciations of FDR, JFK, Kerry, Edwards and Corzine, liberals have no business criticizing Bain Capital.

Maybe some people are irrationally offended by the rich, but Democrats aren’t. It’s the party of George Soros, Goldman Sachs and Nancy Pelosi!

The six wealthiest senators are all Democrats, half of whom married or inherited their money. Some other multimillionaire Democrats are:

• Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the second-richest senator after Kerry, who inherited his money.

• Dianne Feinstein of California, the sixth-richest senator, who married her money.

• Maria Cantwell of Washington, a bogus dot-com multimillionaire who cashed out before the stock crashed.

• Claire McCaskill of Missouri, the ninth-richest senator, who failed to pay taxes on her private plane until she was caught last year, and who married her money.

Meanwhile, with few exceptions, Republicans either made money on their own or they don’t have it. It’s no accident Democrats oppose a tax on wealth, of which they have boatloads, but strongly support taxes on income, which they typically do not have.

Democrats don’t hate the rich; they are the rich, luxuriating in fortunes acquired by inheritance or marriage, fleecing the taxpayer, trial lawyer hucksterism or disreputable money manipulation. Their contempt is reserved for those who engage in honest work for a living, whom they accuse of “greed” for wanting to pay the government a little less.

As I have said many times before, I believe the greediest people in this country are Liberals. Period.

See: https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2010/10/18/greed/

So get out your Salt Mine, because here comes another Budget from Dear Leader! Can you take it?

Political Cartoon by Mike Lester
Political Cartoon by Eric Allie
Political Cartoon by Lisa Benson

 

The Audacity of Dishonesty

1. Announcing a massive $26 billion mortgage deal with “abusive” banks, the president blamed everybody for record foreclosures except the party most culpable: government.

Speaking Thursday from the White House, Obama scolded “irresponsible” and “reckless” lenders, who “sold homes to people who couldn’t afford them.”

Yeah, they dragged people into it, held them down and forced them to do it!

And the people came in and demanded it first!

Back in 2003, as the Examiner’s Philip Klein points out, <Barney> Frank said that the government-sponsored entities were not in any sort of crisis. “The more people exaggerate these problems,” Frank told the New York Times, “the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

For the most part, private firms such as Countrywide Financial were issuing “nontraditional” mortgages in order to package them off to Wall Street and make money, not to please Barney Frank. Like most policymakers, Frank didn’t appear to see the housing bubble or looming subprime crisis before it was too late. (WP)

He <Obama> also cited buyers who bought homes bigger than their budgets, and Wall Street bankers who packaged the shaky mortgages and traded them for “profit.”

“It was wrong,” he asserted. And now the nation’s “biggest banks will be required to right these wrongs.”

Obama acts as if the private sector bears all the responsibility for the mortgage mess. But he and his attorney general know it’s merely a scapegoat for the reckless government housing policies they and their ilk drafted and enforced in the run-up to the crisis.

Starting in the mid-1990s — in a historic first — it became federal regulatory policy to force all U.S. lenders to scrap traditional lending standards for home loans on the grounds they were “racially discriminatory.”

President Clinton fretted that blacks and other minorities could not qualify for mortgages at nearly the same rates as whites and Asians. So Clinton codified more “flexible” underwriting standards in a “Policy Statement on Discrimination in Lending,” and entered it into the Federal Register.

At the same time, he set up a little-known federal body made up of 10 regulatory agencies — the Interagency Task Force on Fair Lending — to enforce the looser standards. It threatened lenders to either ease credit for low-income borrowers or face investigations for lending discrimination and suffer the related bad publicity. It also threatened to deny them expansion plans and access to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

“The agencies will not tolerate lending discrimination in any form,” the 20-page document warned financial institutions. The task force enforced these policies throughout the Bush administration.

According to Peter Ferrara, senior fellow at the Carleson Center for Public Policy:

“This overregulation reached the point of forcing lenders to discount bad credit history, no credit history, no savings, lack of steady employment, a high ratio of mortgage obligations to income, undocumented income, and inability to finance down payment and closing costs, while counting unemployment benefits and even welfare as income in qualifying for a mortgage.

“This” he said, “turned into government-sanctioned looting of the banks.”

The Justice Department — along with HUD, which regulated Fannie and Freddie — proved the most aggressive members of the fair-lending task force. Eric Holder, then acting as deputy AG, ordered lenders to actually “target” African-Americans for home mortgages they couldn’t otherwise afford. Obama cheered Holder on as an inner-city community organizer who also pressured banks to ease credit for home borrowers.

In other words, the same two officials now leading the charge to punish “abusive” lenders had egged them on before the crisis.(IBD)

2. The Obama administration is now telling liberals that it is not backing down on its new health-care mandate, even as it coos of compromise to religious groups appalled by it. These messages may seem to be contradictory, but actually the administration has been quite consistent: Nothing it has ever said on this issue has been trustworthy.

Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services, has been the leading misleader. The administration, recall, has decided that almost all employers must cover contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients in their employees’ insurance plans — even if those employers are religious universities, hospitals, and charities that reject those practices.

So she has tried to make the mandate seem more moderate than it is. In USA Today, she writes that “in the rule we put forward, we specifically carved out from the policy religious organizations that primarily employ people of their own faith.” Taken at face value, this statement would seem to imply that Notre Dame could escape the mandate if it fired its non-Catholic employees. That policy would be outrageous: What gives the federal government the legitimate authority to tell a religious institution how it should structure its mission? But in fact the administration would make the university jump through several more hoops. It would also have to expel its non-Catholic students. And even these changes would not be enough, since the university would continue to do much more than attempt to inculcate religious beliefs in its students — which is another test the administration requires for the exemption to apply.

Sebelius says that three states have religious exemptions as narrow as the one the federal government has adopted. The notion that the federal government is imposing the model of three very liberal states — New York, Oregon, and Vermont — on the entire country is not comforting. But even in those states, some employers have been able to sidestep the mandates by, for example, organizing their insurance under federal regulation, which until now has not overridden conscience. The new mandate eliminates that escape route.

Joel Hunter, one of Obama’s pet pastors, says “this policy can be nuanced.” (“I have come to bring nuance,” as Matthew 10:34 does not say.) He is wrong. Either the administration will back off, and allow religious organizations to follow their consciences, or it will not. If it chooses the former course, it may still find a way to increase access to contraception — which is not especially scarce, by the way — but it will have to replace its current policy, not just “nuance” it. (NR)

“Nuance” is the new Orwellian phrase for LYING. 🙂

It’s “complicated” 🙂

But the assurances were greeted Tuesday with skepticism from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which has been leading the opposition to the new requirement.

“So far, ‘work this thing through’ is just the sugar-coated version of ‘force you to comply,’ ” Anthony R. Picarello Jr., general counsel for the conference, said in an e-mail.

Remember, compromise with a Liberal means that you compromise your principles to do what THEY want you to do.

3. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was asked to respond to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s comment that the lack of a budget creates “uncertainty” which is “negative for growth.”

Carney responded: “I have no opinion; the White House has no opinion on Chairman Bernanke’s assessment of how the Senate ought to do its business.”

1,017 Days and Counting!

4. EPIC <The Electronic Privacy Information Center >director Ginger McCall notes that monitoring what people are saying about government policies goes too far and has a chilling effect on free speech.

“The Department of Homeland Security’s monitoring of political dissent has no legal basis and is contrary to core First Amendment principles,” she said.

“The language in the documents makes it quite clear that they are looking for media reports that are critical of the agency and the U.S. government more broadly,” said McCall. “This is entirely outside of the bounds of the agency’s statutory duties.”

DHS officials have admitted that monitoring of social networks for negative opinion was undertaken by the agency, but claim that the operation was a one off test and was quickly dropped as it did not meet “operational requirements or privacy standards,” which “expressly prohibit reporting on individuals’ First Amendment activities.”

EPIC argues otherwise and has presented evidence that suggests the practice is being held up by the DHS an an example that should be emulated.

“They are completely out of bounds here,” McCall said. “The idea that the government is constantly peering over your shoulder and listening to what you are saying creates a very chilling effect to legitimate dissent.(Info Wars)

5. Mexican cartel suspects targeted in the troubled gun-trafficking probe known as Operation Fast and Furious were actually working as FBI informants at the time, according to a congressional memo that describes the case’s mission as a “failure.”

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has acknowledged that guns were allowed into the hands of Mexican criminals for more than a year in the hope of catching “big fish.”

The memorandum from staffers with the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform says the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration were investigating a drug-trafficking organization and had identified cartel associates a year before the ATF even learned who they were. At some point before the ATF’s Fast and Furious investigation progressed — congressional investigators don’t know when — the cartel members became FBI informants.

“These were the ‘big fish,’ ” says the memo, written on behalf of Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa. “DEA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had jointly opened a separate investigation targeting these two cartel associates. … Yet, ATF spent the next year engaging in the reckless tactics of Fast and Furious in attempting to identify them.”

According to Issa and Grassley, the cartel suspects, whose names were not released, were regarded by FBI as “national-security assets.” One pleaded guilty to a minor offense. The other was not charged. “Both became FBI informants and are now considered unindictable,” the memo says. “This means that the entire goal of Fast and Furious — to target these two individuals and bring them to justice — was a failure.”

Representatives with the Justice Department and its subagencies declined to comment.

6. Deputy Attorney General James Cole had informed the committee in a letter last week that it would be “impossible” to comply with the document request by Issa’s deadline.

At issue are thousands of pages of internal Justice Department and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) documents from last year which the Justice Department has provided to the investigating Justice Inspector General, but which the Justice Department initially indicated are not subject to congressional review because of the constitutional separation of powers.

7. Last Thursday, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appeared before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to answer questions about his role in the deadly “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal. However, instead of answers, Congress got more defiance, more arrogance, and more wasted time with an attorney general who clearly feels no sense of obligation to the American people or our rule of law. …

In a rash attempt to deflect attention away from himself and his own irresponsibility, Holder let Congress know that the Obama administration is still working toward the day when it can reinstate former President Bill Clinton’s so-called “assault weapons” ban. According to Holder:

“This administration has consistently favored the reinstitution of the assault weapons ban. It is something that we think was useful in the past with regard to the reduction that we’ve seen in crime, and certainly would have a positive impact on our relationship and the crime situation in Mexico.”

It’s difficult to follow Holder’s logic here, but it goes something like this …

The Obama administration — particularly Eric Holder’s Justice Department — oversaw an epic scandal whereby our own federal government illegally funneled thousands of firearms into the hands of Mexican drug lords. This contributed to the death of one U.S. Border Patrol agent and hundreds of Mexicans.

Despite being head of the Justice Department and our nation’s chief law enforcement officer, Eric Holder claims he doesn’t know how or why this scandal occurred, or even who under his charge may have authorized it. He also refuses to turn over critical documents to congressional investigators that could help prevent something this tragic and corrupt from ever happening again.

Therefore, Obama and Holder are confident that if they can ban a large number of the legal firearms that law-abiding Americans use every day for self-defense, hunting, and recreational and competitive target shooting, it will help solve Mexico’s crime problem.

Now don’t you feel better… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Dependency

The American public’s dependence on the federal government shot up 23% in just two years under President Obama, with 67 million now relying on some federal program, according to a newly released study by the Heritage Foundation.

The conservative think tank’s annual Index of Dependence on Government tracks money spent on housing, health, welfare, education subsidies and other federal programs that were “traditionally provided to needy people by local organizations and families.”

The two-year increase under Obama is the biggest two-year jump since Jimmy Carter was president, the data show.

The rise was driven mainly by increases in housing subsidies, an expansion in Medicaid and changes to the welfare system, along with a sharp rise in food stamps, the study found.

“You can’t get around the fact that policy decisions made over the past two years, on top of those made over the past several decades, are having a large effect on the pace of growth of the index,” said William Beach, who authored the Heritage study.

Government dependence has climbed steadily since 1962, when the index stood at 19. By 1980, the index had risen to 100. It stood at 294 in 2010, the last year for which the data are available. D.C.-based Heritage has produced the index for nine years.

The report also found that spending on “dependence programs” accounts for more than 70% of the federal budget. That, too, is up dramatically. In 1990, for example, the figure stood at 48.5%, and in 1962 just over a quarter of federal spending went to dependence programs.

At the same time, fewer Americans pay income taxes, the report notes. Almost half (49.5%) didn’t pay income taxes in 2009, the latest year for which the researchers have data. Back in the late 1960s, only 12% of Americans escaped the income tax burden.

Other findings:

The number of people dependent on the federal government shot up 7.5% in the past two years.

In 2010, for the first time ever, average spending on dependence programs per recipient exceeded the country’s per-capita disposable income.

The dependency index has dipped only seven times in the past 49 years, three of which were under President Reagan and two under President Clinton.

Some observers say the rise in dependence under Obama is merely a reflection of the deep and long recession.

But Beach says his team’s research shows that economic effects account for only one-fifth of the change in the index.

In addition, the index shot up 8% in 2010, a year when the economy grew by 3%.

Also, in the wake of the 1981-82 recession the dependence index climbed only 6%, then fell the very next year. That early-’80s slump was nearly as long as the so-called Great Recession (16 months vs. 18 months) and saw unemployment rise higher (peaking at 10.8% vs. 10%).

The lingering high jobless rate during the slow economic recovery under Obama could also explain dependency’s rise. It’s also possible that the growth in federal dependency programs is partly to blame for the ongoing jobs recession, not just the result of it.

As the chart above shows, the time it’s taken for employment to reach its pre-recession peak has climbed the past four decades, right along with the growth in federal dependency. The current jobs recession hit a post-World War II record of 48 months in January, with payrolls still 5.6 million below their January 2008 high.

Research seems to validate this connection. Various studies have shown that extending unemployment benefits can keep unemployment rates higher than they would otherwise have been.

Obama’s own former economic adviser, Larry Summers, noted in the 1999 Concise Encyclopedia of Economics that “government assistance programs contribute to long-term unemployment … by providing an incentive, and the means, not to work.” (IBD)

ILLEGAL ALIENS

Law: If anything shows how ever-expanding government works at cross-purposes, it’s the Obama administration’s newly named post of “public advocate” for illegal aliens. What part of “illegal” don’t they understand?

It seems those who’ve broken the law by entering the U.S. illegally are now entitled to special U.S. government protection from — the U.S. government. At least, that’s the logic of the phony new “public advocate” post created for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In naming Andrew Lorenzen-Strait to the job, ICE announced he would work “directly for ICE’s Executive Assistant Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations” to help build “constructive relationships with the community and … resolve problems or concerns.”

And for whom would he do this? “(S)takeholders that include individuals, public, nongovernmental organizations, faith-based organizations and advocacy groups.”

“Stakeholders”? Based on that cast of pressure groups, it’s plain he’ll be an illegal alien advocate.

This new position reflects the Obama administration’s open-borders policy on immigration. It just won’t say so out loud. Rather than dismantling ICE or offering a blanket amnesty, Obama’s creating an illegal alien advocate inside ICE, undercutting its very mission.

Why not have a bank robber’s advocate at the FBI?

Four faulty premises lay at the root of the absurdity.

• That ICE’s mission is at odds with the public. For all President Obama’s syrupy talk about public service, ICE has been turned into a public enemy. Why not just dismantle it if it doesn’t serve the public interest?

• That enforcing the law is not the government’s job. The advocate twists ICE’s mission to customer service, as if lawbreakers needed that.

• That illegals are “stakeholders” in the U.S., a place they have no business being in. And now as “stakeholders” — the U.S. somehow owes them something.

• That some illegals are more entitled to stay than others. Lorenzen-Strait has already advised ICE about whom to deport, regardless of law. Now his job will be to sort out who is most politically useful to Obama to keep.

In reality, illegals already have advocates. They’re called embassies. And none of them are shy about making a stink on behalf of their own citizens.

Now they’ve got another advocate inside the U.S. government, paid for by you. With that kind of coddling, it’s just another reason to keep crossing our border.(IBD)

America, what a country!

And of course, these people will vote for what’s best for the country over what kisses their asses… 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

How to Stop the Elites…

 

congress-fe08-intro-tease

 

The STOCK Act would do little to address the problem of insider trading on Capitol Hill, says Hoover Institute fellow Peter Schweizer.

“My biggest concern is enforcement,” Schweizer told The Daily Caller.

He cited the example of former Louisiana Democratic Rep. William Jefferson, who famously stored $90,000 in cash bribes in his freezer.

“He had been taking bribes,” Schweizer explained. “The FBI heard about this, so they did everything they were supposed to do. They got a search warrant from a federal judge and they went in and searched his congressional office. … Congress went absolutely ballistic and said this was an infringement of constitutional rights and authority and there were actually threats to cut the FBI budget as a result of doing this.”

“I just don’t see the SEC wanting to have a fight like that,” said Schweizer. ”And that is why I think law is only as good as its likely or willing to be enforced.”

Remember, this is the SEC that was too busy taking bribes and watching porn at work to see the Mortgage/Banking Meltdown coming!!

Schweizer says the STOCK Act might do some good, but he prefers a bill called the RESTRICT Act, sponsored by Wisconsin Republican Rep. Sean Duffy.

“The RESTRICT Act basically says to members of Congress, number one, you need to put all of you assets into blind trust,” Schweizer explained. ”You know blind trusts aren’t perfect, but I think they are a help. And if you don’t want to do that then you have to disclose, I think on your website within three business days any financial transactions that you engage in.”

Schweizer says that transparency, above all else, is of paramount importance in wringing out lawmakers’ bad habits.

During congressional hearings on the STOCK Act, Schweizer noted, the Securities and Exchange Commission said that it has never charged a member of Congress with insider trading.

“If there was a health care bill going through Congress and people found out in real time that their congressman was trading stocks in the health care sector, I think they would be outraged and vote them out of office or take some sort of recourse,” he said. “The biggest issue is empowering individual voters in terms of disclosure, so I think the STOCK Act is important to pass because it makes clear that the same rules apply to members of Congress.”

The STOCK Act is insufficient because it doesn’t cover investments made in private companies, something he says has been a problem in the past.

In his book ”Throw Them All Out,” Schweizer discusses Colorado Democratic Rep. Jared Polis, who during the health care debate of 2009 bought millions of dollars’ worth of equity in BridgeHealth International, a private medical tourism company. Polis suspected, as did many, that health care reform would cause medical expenses to increase and that more people would seek medical procedures outside of the United States.

BridgeHealth is a private company, and therefore would not fall under the jurisdiction of the STOCK Act.

“He could go ahead and make that kind of trade and potentially use inside information, and he would not be prevented from doing that based on the way that this law currently exists,” Schweizer explained.

The STOCK Act also makes no attempt at guarding against conflict of interest in earmarks proposed by members.

“Bar is so low that basically so long as they can demonstrate at least one other person will benefit from the earmark, it is OK for them or their family members or whoever to profit from the use of taxpayer monies in this way,” Schweizer said. “That is an abysmally low standard.”

Several leaders in Congress have repeatedly sought earmarks that benefit their personal investments. Nancy Pelosi pushed for a $20 million earmark in 2005 “for waterfront redevelopment only two blocks away from the Belden Street property. The earmark was killed in July of that year. The Pelosis increased their financial stake in the property, and the next year Pelosi asked for the earmark again and this time she succeeded,” Schweizer noted in his book.

Earmarks like the Pelosi redevelopment example would not be considered an abuse of insider information under the STOCK Act.

While examining trades made around the time of the 2003 Medicare overhaul, Schweizer experienced what he calls his “Holy crap!” moment. The legislation, which created a new prescription-drug entitlement, promised to be a huge boon to the pharmaceutical industry—and to savvy investors in the Capitol. Among those with special insight on the issue was Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, chairman of the health subcommittee of the Senate’s powerful Finance Committee. Kerry is one of the wealthiest members of the Senate and heavily invested in the stock market. As the final version of the drug program neared approval—one that didn’t include limits on the price of drugs—brokers for Kerry and his wife were busy trading in Big Pharma. Schweizer found that they completed 111 stock transactions of pharmaceutical companies in 2003, 103 of which were buys.

“They were all great picks,” Schweizer notes. The Kerrys’ capital gains on the transactions were at least $500,000, and as high as $2 million (such information is necessarily imprecise, as the disclosure rules allow members to report their gains in wide ranges). It was instructive to Schweizer that Kerry didn’t try to shape legislation to benefit his portfolio; the apparent key to success was the shaping of trades that anticipated the effect of government policy.

Remember, currently, Insider Trading will get YOU thrown in jail. It just makes Congressman richer. 🙂

Now that’s “fair” 🙂

Throw Them All Out

Fast & Furious

Former Tucson Drug Enforcement Administration chief Tony Coulson told The Daily Caller that Attorney General Eric Holder either knew guns were walking during Operation Fast and Furious, or should have known about the deadly practice.

“[Fast and Furious] was driven locally and it was driven from Arizona, from the ground up, I mean it was not much oversight,” Coulson said in a phone interview. “And, I mean, I can only speak to the reporting, but people all the way up to the attorney general knew what was going on.”

Coulson, who ran the DEA’s Tucson office during Fast and Furious’ implementation, told TheDC he learned that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was letting guns walk back in 2009 or 2010. He said he learned this from people who were working in the Phoenix Immigration and Customs Enforcement office. He didn’t know it was called “Fast and Furious,” but said it was widely known guns were walking.

“Nothing that [ATF] was doing was running into what we were doing at DEA from the Tucson level,” Coulson said. “Now, Phoenix was a little bit different. They were, their targets kept running into DEA cases and I think that was reported out of the House letter last week. But in Tucson, we weren’t running into them. How I became aware of it was through Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”

“At the time, [ATF’s] boss here, Bill Newell, was the face and the voice of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms,” Coulson added. “If you go back during this time, he’s the one who’s on every major national news station. He’s talking about weapons in Mexico. You know, he was the voice of ATF. I mean, he was driving ATF’s policy. There was very little oversight at the time from anyone on what was going on. I became aware of it because ICE interceded on more than one occasion to seize weapons at the port of entry that ATF was trying to walk into Mexico.”

ICE falls under the Department of Homeland Security, and with the news that Holder hasn’t discussed Fast and Furious with its Secretary Janet Napolitano or Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, there are likely to be new questions into what, if anything, those cabinet officials were told of Fast and Furious.

And, contrary to the picture Holder has tried to paint during his congressional hearing appearances, Coulson said that “yeah, absolutely” law enforcement officials were widely aware the ATF was using gun-walking tactics in Arizona. Coulson went so far as to say he suspects Holder himself was aware of the tactic, or was willfully unaware — meaning he didn’t want to know and made sure he wasn’t informed of gun-walking.

“If someone brings something to your attention and not really all the facts are brought to your attention, yeah we’re sending guns into Mexico, if he [Holder] chooses not to ask the next question, and then makes a statement ‘I didn’t know about that then’ but did find out about it when it became a hot topic issue when he decided well, ‘I should ask that next question now: Are you really walking guns into Mexico?’” Coulson said. “That leads to the next question, which is: ‘Are the Mexicans seizing, recovering those weapons before they’re used in a crime?’ The answer is no.”

And with the widespread knowledge of gun-walking among federal officials in Arizona, Coulson said there’s “no way” people in Washington, D.C., at ATF headquarters and in the Department of Justice didn’t know what was going on.

“I don’t have any firsthand knowledge, but there’s no way people [in Washington, D.C., at ATF headquarters and Main Justice] can say they didn’t know,” Coulson said. “Whether they paid attention to it, whether they thought it was important, how much information exactly did they have? But, you know, at the time, ATF was really laying the story on about these weapons and how this is how they were following investigations to the next level, and how this was leading to ‘big arrests’ and Mexicans tracking guns, which was all kind of smoke and mirrors.”

Coulson also said most other law enforcement officials in Arizona knew Newell had a gun control agenda behind his actions with Fast and Furious and other operations. “Whenever Bill would make those [anti-gun rights] statements [with inflated gun trafficking statistics], everyone would roll their eyes and say, ‘when is someone going to call him on this?’” Coulson said. “That’s because it was only weapons which the Mexican government seized which they chose to trace back to the United States.”

“[Newell] is trying to make this political statement that there is this river of guns, which then the Mexican government picked up on, and said ‘it’s your guns, that’s why we’re having all this violence here,’” Coulson added. “And there’s never any accounting for the fact that probably a majority of the guns, in terms of what law enforcement generally knows, are coming up through Central America and they’re coming from other countries. The 90 percent figure has been debunked as you go along the way. It’s actually something considerably less. … They’re just picking a figure and saying 90 percent of the weapons they seized come from the U.S. Well, really, it’s 90 percent of the weapons that they choose to do a search on results in it originating from the U.S.” (Daily Caller)

So is Holder lying or incompetent or Both!

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Manipulation

“What’s frustrated people is that I’ve not been able to implement every aspect of what I said in 2008. Well, it turns out our Founders designed a system that makes it more difficult to bring about change than I would like sometimes. But what we have been able to do is move in the right direction.”–President Obama

Damn those founding fathers, they made it harder for a Dictator-King-Wanna Be to whatever he wanted whenever he wanted because he wanted!!

A month ago, we joked when we said that for Obama to get the unemployment rate to negative by election time, all he has to do is to crush the labor force participation rate to about 55%. Looks like the good folks at the BLS heard us: it appears that the people not in the labor force exploded by an unprecedented record 1.2 million. No, that’s not a typo: 1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force in one month! So as the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million, the non institutional population increased by 242.3 million meaning, those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation.
The Heritage Foundation confirms the plunge in labor force participation in this chart, followed by another graph demonstrating that by the Obama administration’s own projections (which were used to sell the stimulus to anxious Americans in 2009), the unemployment rate should be more than two percentage points lower than today’s 8.3 percent:                 

And the failed-on-its-own-terms “stimulus” data:

Nevertheless, saccharine headlines and “I get better with age!” happy talk from President Obama — matched with a lackluster and increasingly bitter GOP primary — will give the incumbent an approval boost.  Right on cue, the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll purports to show Obama hitting the magic 50 percent mark and leading Mitt Romney in head-to-head general election contest.  Celebrate good times, Democrats!  Except…the poll is “worthless,” according to Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey.  Why?

First, this is a poll of general population adults rather than registered or likely voters, so it’s not even a proper polling type for the predictive outcome they claim. More importantly, though, the poll series has dropped its reporting of partisan identification within their samples.  It’s the second time that the poll has not included the D/R/I split in its sample report, and now it looks as though this will be policy from this point forward.  Since this is a poll series that has handed double-digit partisan advantages to Democrats in the past (for instance, this poll from April 2011 where the sample only had 22% Republicans), it’s not enough to just hear “trust us” on sample integrity from the Washington Post or ABC. One cannot determine whether Obama’s improvement in this series is a result of the State of the Union speech, as Dan Balz and Jon Cohen suggest, or whether it’s due to shifting the sample to favor Democrats more so than in previous samples.
Indeed, WaPo/ABC’s numbers have been raked over the coals by conservatives in the past for their ludicrously unbalanced party ID samples.  This pollster has displayed an interesting habit of surveying far more Democrats than Republicans, which — surprise! — produces favorable data for Democrats.  Rather than be held to account for their questionable methods,  WaPo/ABC has simply decided to hide their methodology from the public altogether.  Which reminds me: I’d like to announce the release of a new nationwide poll of likely voters that shows Barack Obama’s approval rating falling to 36 percent.  This IGB* survey reveals that Obama would lose to every possible Republican opponent by at least seven points.  Whom did this pollster question, you ask?  It’s IGB’s policy to adhere to the Washington Post/ABC News precedent and not release that data.  But by all means, please talk about these important findings ad nauseam on television and radio.

All sarcasm aside, this election cycle will have peaks and valleys.  This latest poll will get breathless attention from liberals, while conservatives will point to Gallup’s recent swing-state data and other numbers.  Polls are addictive to horse-race watchers (guilty as charged), but they won’t become truly meaningful until late September.  Recall that McCain-Palin raced out to a ten point lead among likely voters in Gallup on the heels of the 2008 RNC.  The rollercoaster ride continues…
UPDATE – A Democratic pollster is questioning another element of the WaPo/ABC numbers. (Townhall.com)

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez