Nobama

Archive for January, 2009

Thank You, House Republicans

In LIBERALISM, Socialism, democrat playbook, obama on January 29, 2009 at 11:23 pm

Final passage of the nearly $820 billion package came on a 244-188 vote with no Republicans supporting the bill. This was a far cry from the bipartisan showing Obama had hoped for, but he remains  in command and Senate Republicans now concede that the president is likely to prevail there as well, with no reason to fear a protracted filibuster fight.

The reason Obama wants Republican support for his gigantic pork bill is that he has his doubts that it will do anything other  than plunge the country deeper into debt, not to show bi-partisan unity. True bi-partisan unity would be giving the Republicans their tax cuts in the bill.

Tangent: Where are all of these people who relentlessly criticized Sarah Palin for taking federal money to improve Alaska’s highways? Remember the whole “pork barrel spending” argument against her ? Why are they not outraged by this bill, the mother of all pork bills ?

If the plan fails, which it will most likely do, Obama would be able to at least split the blame. If he truly knows and believes the plan will work, then he does not have to give the evil Republicans any credit for anything, which has been democrat SOP (standard operating procedure). He never needed their support for any of this garbage. As it is now, this is Obama’s and the Democrats’ baby. Hopefully Senate Republicans will show party unity and put this whole damn thing on the Democrat’s shoulders.

Maybe in a few years, when people are still unemployed and have more debt, when tax rates are higher, when the economy is even worse, when someone figures out that printing all of this money didn’t actually work, just maybe we can get rid of these hypocrites.

Obama’s Letter to Iran

In democrat playbook, obama on January 29, 2009 at 12:07 am

Officials in Obama’s administration have drafted a letter to Iran from the president aimed at unfreezing US-Iranian relations and opening the way for face-to-face talks.

The US state department has been working on drafts of the letter since Obama was elected on 4 November last year. It is in reply to a lengthy letter of congratulations sent by the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on 6 November.

Diplomats said Obama’s letter would be a symbolic gesture to mark a change in tone from the hostile one adopted by the Bush administration, which portrayed Iran as part of an “axis of evil”.

It would be intended to allay the ­suspicions of Iran’s leaders and pave the way for Obama to engage them directly, a break with past policy.

read the entire disturbing development here

The Obama 2012 presidential re-election campaign continues

Final score :

Obama – 1

the terrorists – 1

the American people – 0 (again)

Total Running Score:

Obama – 6

the terrorists – 5

the American people – 0

Obama Continues Assault on American Auto Industry

In democrat playbook, obama on January 28, 2009 at 11:57 pm

President Obama signed an executive order Monday requiring the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider an application by California to set more stringent auto emissions and fuel-efficiency standards than required by federal law. If the EPA grants a waiver allowing California to set its own emissions standards, the nation’s largest state will be allowed to require automakers to produce trucks and cars that get better mileage than what is required under the current national standard. Thirteen other states could take similar action.

What does this mean? It means that the environmentalist wackos won out over unionized labor. Obama has  just put more nails in Detroit’s and the Big Three Automaker’s coffins.

With the automakers struggling to build cars that they’re having trouble selling now, to stay in business they will be forced to upgrade and retool manufacturing facilities. The price of American cars is going to skyrocket, fewer will sell, and the industry will flounder and die.

What about all of those employees, union members no doubt, who voted For Obama and the democrats? For it was he, Obama, who was destined to save their livlihood. What is going to happen to the blue city of  Detroit, where they aspire to name streets and parks after their president?

Well Detroit and union workers, it appears that after getting into bed with both you and the environmentalists, Obama has decided to kick you out of bed and keep the other girl. I hope that you find the money that you ponied up during the campaign to be very well spent. I’ll bet you guys wish you had Bush back now.

The Obama 2012 presidential re-election campaign continues

Final score :

Obama – 1

the terrorists – 0

the American people – 0 (again)

Total Running Score:

Obama – 5

the terrorists – 4

the American people – 0

Karl Rove Subpoenaed

In corruption, democrat playbook on January 27, 2009 at 12:51 am

WASHINGTON – The House Judiciary Committee chairman subpoenaed former White House adviser Karl Rove on Monday to testify about the Bush administration’s firing of nine U.S. attorneys and its prosecution of a former Democrat governor.

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said the ongoing legal battle to get Rove and other former Bush administration aides to testify may have success with a new president in the White House.

Former President George W. Bush upheld Rove and two other senior aides who asserted they did not have to testify before Congress about their actions in the White House.

The legal dispute between the executive and legislative branches of government is before a federal appeals court.

Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, did not return phone messages seeking comment.

The subpoena commanded Rove to appear on Feb. 2 for a deposition on the U.S. attorney firings and the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, a Democrat.

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey named a special prosecutor in September to investigate whether former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, other Bush administration officials or Republicans in Congress should face criminal charges in the firings of the U.S. attorneys.

The inquiry followed the recommendation of internal Justice Department investigators who concluded that, despite administration denials, political considerations played a part in the firings of as many as four of the federal prosecutors. Conyers wants to know what role Rove played in the dismissals.

Siegelman has alleged his prosecution was pushed by Republicans, including Rove. The former governor was convicted on bribery and other charges and was sentenced to more than seven years in prison. He was released early, when a federal appeals court ruled his appeal raised “substantial questions.”

Conyers said in a statement that times have changed.

He said Bush’s position of “absolute immunity” was “rejected by U.S. District Judge John Bates and President Obama has previously dismissed the claim as ‘completely misguided,’” Conyers said.

“I have said many times that I will carry this investigation forward to its conclusion, whether in Congress or in court, and today’s action is an important step along the way.

“Change has come to Washington, and I hope Karl Rove is ready for it. After two years of stonewalling, it’s time for him to talk.”

Last July, Bates rejected Bush’s contention that senior White House advisers are immune from subpoenas, siding with Congress’ power to investigate the executive branch.

Conyers also has sought testimony from former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, and ex-White House chief of staff Josh Bolten — although only Rove was named in the new subpoena.

TITLE 28 > PART II > CHAPTER 35 > § 541

§ 541. United States attorneys

(a) The President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, a United States attorney for each judicial district.
(b) Each United States attorney shall be appointed for a term of four years. On the expiration of his term, a United States attorney shall continue to perform the duties of his office until his successor is appointed and qualifies.
(c) Each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President.

It’s amazing that we have people like Democrat Charles Rangel, and Democrat Timothy Geitner Committing crimes against the American taxpayer in broad daylight and nothing at all is being done. Then we have a President who exercises his authority under Title 28 of the US Code and Democrat John Conyers vows to investigate until he can create evidence of illegal activity. Even worse, Democrat Conyers is not squeaky clean, dismissing his own violations as a “lack of clarity of communication”. He’s not fooling anyone.  Conyers is just as dirty as the rest of them.  Just another one.

In letters sent separately to the House Ethics Committee, the FBI, and the US Attorney’s office by two former aides of Conyers, they alleged that Conyers used his staff to work on several local and state campaigns and forced them to baby-sit and chauffeur his children.[8] In late December 2006, Conyers “accepted responsibility” for possibly violating House rules. A statement issued December 29, 2006 by the House Ethics Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) and Ranking Minority Member Howard Berman (D-Calif.), said that Conyers acknowledged what he characterized as a “lack of clarity” in his communications with staff members regarding their official duties and responsibilities, and accepted responsibility for his actions. In deciding to drop the matter, Hastings and Berman state: After reviewing the information gathered during the inquiry, and in light of Representative Conyers’ cooperation with the inquiry, we have concluded that this matter should be resolved through the issuance of this public statement and the agreement by Representative Conyers to take a number of additional, significant steps to ensure that his office complies with all rules and standards regarding campaign and personal work by congressional staff.

Obama v Limbaugh

In democrat playbook, obama on January 25, 2009 at 12:57 am

Limbaugh Responds to Obama   [Byron York]

According to an account in the New York Post, President Barack Obama yesterday told Republican leaders, “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.”  With George W. Bush now off the stage, it may be that Obama and some of his fellow Democrats view Limbaugh, and not John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, or any other elected official, as the true leader of the Republican opposition.  This morning I asked Rush for his thoughts on all this, and here is his response:

There are two things going on here. One prong of the Great Unifier’s plan is to isolate elected Republicans from their voters and supporters by making the argument about me and not about his plan. He is hoping that these Republicans will also publicly denounce me and thus marginalize me. And who knows? Are ideological and philosophical ties enough to keep the GOP loyal to their voters? Meanwhile, the effort to foist all blame for this mess on the private sector continues unabated when most of the blame for this current debacle can be laid at the feet of the Congress and a couple of former presidents. And there is a strategic reason for this.

Secondly, here is a combo quote from the meeting:

“If we don’t get this done we (the Democrats) could lose seats and I could lose re-election. But we can’t let people like Rush Limbaugh stall this. That’s how things don’t get done in this town.”

To make the argument about me instead of his plan makes sense from his perspective.  Obama’s plan would buy votes for the Democrat Party, in the same way FDR’s New Deal established majority power for 50 years of Democrat rule, and it would also simultaneously seriously damage any hope of future tax cuts.  It would allow a majority of American voters to guarantee no taxes for themselves going forward.  It would burden the private sector and put the public sector in permanent and firm control of the economy. Put simply, I believe his stimulus is aimed at re-establishing “eternal” power for the Democrat Party rather than stimulating the economy because anyone with a brain knows this is NOT how you stimulate the economy. If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of this TRILLION dollar debacle.

Obama was angry that Merrill Lynch used $1.2 million of TARP money to remodel an executive suite. Excuse me, but didn’t Merrill have to hire a decorator and contractor? Didn’t they have to buy the new furnishings? What’s the difference in that and Merrill loaning that money to a decorator, contractor and goods supplier to remodel Warren Buffet’s office? Either way, stimulus in the private sector occurs. Are we really at the point where the bad PR of Merrill getting a redecorated office in the process is reason to smear them? How much money will the Obamas spend redecorating the White House residence? Whose money will be spent? I have no problem with the Obamas redoing the place. It is tradition. 600 private jets flown by rich Democrats flew into the Inauguration. That’s fine but the auto execs using theirs is a crime? In both instances, the people on those jets arrived in Washington wanting something from Washington, not just good will.

If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of the trillion dollar debacle.

One more thing, Byron. Your publication and website have documented Obama’s ties to the teachings of Saul Alinksy while he was community organizing in Chicago. Here is Rule 13 of Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals:

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

Obama’s Executive Orders Day3

In democrat playbook, obama on January 23, 2009 at 10:10 pm

2012 Obama presidential re-election campaign day 3. Obama reverses abortion-funds policy and funds Embryonic Stem Cell Research with American Tax dollars.

Obama has signed an executive order ending the ban on federal funds for international groups that perform abortions or provide information on the option.

Liberal groups welcomed the decision while abortion rights foes criticized the president. Known as the “Mexico City policy,” the ban has been reinstated and then reversed by Republican and Democratic presidents since GOP President Ronald Reagan established it in 1984. Democrat Bill Clinton ended the ban in 1993, but Republican George W. Bush re-instituted it in 2001 as one of his first acts in office.

Obama signed it quietly, without coverage by the media, late on Friday afternoon, a contrast to the midday signings with fanfare of executive orders on other subjects earlier in the week.
Conservatives had concerns about Obama’s views on Abortion and Embryonic Stem Cell Research but thought that any change would have to be approved by Congress.  Not the case as Obama has stated that one of his first acts as President will by by executive order.  He will fund Abortion and Embryonic Stem Cell Research with American Tax dollars.  Americans who have moral issues will be forced to fund these programs.

The Authority of the President to issue executive orders is wholly based on Article II of the U.S. Constitution.  The President’s power is limited by Article II.  The President’s authority to issue an executive order cannot interfere with any other branch of Governments authority.  Funding the government and it’s programs through taxation are left for Congress and Congress only.  Obama may meet his first Constitutional law issue.

I have no intention of getting an abortion debate started.  That’s one that will never be won by any side. The issue at hand here is Obama’s willingness to throw more revenue away only to promote his agenda and to blatantly pander to the left. It’s no secret that he and his team plan to reverse approximately 200 Bush executive orders. That’s fine, he won the election, and conservatives have to suffer the consequences, but pretty soon even the left has to start wondering when he’s going to save everyone.

Final score day 3:

Obama – 2

the terrorists – 0

the American people – 0 (again)

Total Running Score:

Obama – 4

the terrorists – 4

the American people – 0

Obama Administration Kills 10 People

In obama on January 23, 2009 at 1:25 pm

There are reports from Pakistan that missiles, presumably from a U.S. unmanned aerial vehicle or UAV, have killed 10 people in that nation’s tribal region across the border from Afghanistan.
If these missiles were indeed fired from a U.S. aircraft, they would represent the first such strikes (that we know about) of President Barack Obama’s new administration.

Some Pakistanis had hoped the new U.S. president would halt those attacks started during the Bush Administration in which the CIA targets suspected al Qaeda and Taliban leaders. The strikes have reportedly sometimes killed innocent civilians, outraging many Pakistanis and prompting continual protests from the government.

The Obama Administration has clearly decided the UAV-launched missile attacks are one aspect of Bush’s war on terror that it wants to continue.

So – we can’t keep terrorists in prison, or interrogate them, but we can kill them?

OK

The Obama presidency: Here comes socialism

In Socialism, obama on January 22, 2009 at 11:56 pm

By Dick Morris
Posted: 01/20/09 06:12 PM [ET]

2009-2010 will rank with 1913-14, 1933-36, 1964-65 and 1981-82 as years that will permanently change our government, politics and lives. Just as the stars were aligned for Wilson, Roosevelt, Johnson and Reagan, they are aligned for Obama. Simply put, we enter his administration as free-enterprise, market-dominated, laissez-faire America. We will shortly become like Germany, France, the United Kingdom, or Sweden — a socialist democracy in which the government dominates the economy, determines private-sector priorities and offers a vastly expanded range of services to many more people at much higher taxes.

Obama will accomplish his agenda of “reform” under the rubric of “recovery.” Using the electoral mandate bestowed on a Democratic Congress by restless voters and the economic power given his administration by terrified Americans, he will change our country fundamentally in the name of lifting the depression. His stimulus packages won’t do much to shorten the downturn — although they will make it less painful — but they will do a great deal to change our nation.

In implementing his agenda, Barack Obama will emulate the example of Franklin D. Roosevelt. (Not the liberal mythology of the New Deal, but the actuality of what it accomplished.) When FDR took office, he was enormously successful in averting a total collapse of the banking system and the economy. But his New Deal measures only succeeded in lowering the unemployment rate from 23 percent in 1933, when he took office, to 13 percent in the summer of 1937. It never went lower. And his policies of over-regulation generated such business uncertainty that they triggered a second-term recession. Unemployment in 1938 rose to 17 percent and, in 1940, on the verge of the war-driven recovery, stood at 15 percent. (These data and the real story of Hoover’s and Roosevelt’s missteps, uncolored by ideology, are available in The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes, copyright 2007.)

But in the name of a largely unsuccessful effort to end the Depression, Roosevelt passed crucial and permanent reforms that have dominated our lives ever since, including Social Security, the creation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, unionization under the Wagner Act, the federal minimum wage and a host of other fundamental changes.

Obama’s record will be similar, although less wise and more destructive. He will begin by passing every program for which liberals have lusted for decades, from alternative-energy sources to school renovations, infrastructure repairs and technology enhancements. These are all good programs, but they normally would be stretched out for years. But freed of any constraint on the deficit — indeed, empowered by a mandate to raise it as high as possible — Obama will do them all rather quickly.

But it is not his spending that will transform our political system, it is his tax and welfare policies. In the name of short-term stimulus, he will give every American family (who makes less than $200,000) a welfare check of $1,000 euphemistically called a refundable tax credit. And he will so sharply cut taxes on the middle class and the poor that the number of Americans who pay no federal income tax will rise from the current one-third of all households to more than half. In the process, he will create a permanent electoral majority that does not pay taxes, but counts on ever-expanding welfare checks from the government. The dependency on the dole, formerly limited in pre-Clinton days to 14 million women and children on Aid to Families with Dependent Children, will now grow to a clear majority of the American population.

Will he raise taxes? Why should he? With a congressional mandate to run the deficit up as high as need be, there is no reason to raise taxes now and risk aggravating the depression. Instead, Obama will follow the opposite of the Reagan strategy. Reagan cut taxes and increased the deficit so that liberals could not increase spending. Obama will raise spending and increase the deficit so that conservatives cannot cut taxes. And, when the economy is restored, he will raise taxes with impunity, since the only people who will have to pay them would be rich Republicans.

In the name of stabilizing the banking system, Obama will nationalize it. Using Troubled Asset Relief Program funds to write generous checks to needy financial institutions, his administration will demand preferred stock in exchange. Preferred stock gets dividends before common stockholders do. With the massive debt these companies will owe to the government, they will only be able to afford dividends for preferred stockholders — the government, not private investors. So who will buy common stock? And the government will demand that its bills be paid before any profits that might materialize are reinvested in the financial institution, so how will the value of the stocks ever grow? Devoid of private investors, these institutions will fall ever more under government control.

Obama will begin the process by limiting executive compensation. Then he will urge restructuring and lowering of home mortgages in danger of default (as the feds have already done with Citibank).

Then will come guidance on the loans to make and government instructions on the types of enterprises to favor. God grant that some Blagojevich type is not in charge of the program, using his power to line his pockets. The United States will find itself with an economic system comparable to that of Japan, where the all-powerful bureaucracy at MITI (Ministry of International Trade and Industry) manages the economy, often making mistakes like giving mainframe computers priority over the development of laptops.

But it is the healthcare system that will experience the most dramatic and traumatic of changes. The current debate between erecting a Medicare-like governmental single payer or channeling coverage through private insurance misses the essential point. Without a lot more doctors, nurses, clinics, equipment and hospital beds, health resources will be strained to the breaking point. The people and equipment that now serve 250 million Americans and largely neglect all but the emergency needs of the other 50 million will now have to serve everyone. And, as government imposes ever more Draconian price controls and income limits on doctors, the supply of practitioners and equipment will decline as the demand escalates. Price increases will be out of the question, so the government will impose healthcare rationing, denying the older and sicker among us the care they need and even barring them from paying for it themselves. (Rationing based on income and price will be seen as immoral.)

And Obama will move to change permanently the partisan balance in America. He will move quickly to legalize all those who have been in America for five years, albeit illegally, and to smooth their paths to citizenship and voting. He will weaken border controls in an attempt to hike the Latino vote as high as he can in order to make red states like Texas into blue states like California. By the time he is finished, Latinos and African-Americans will cast a combined 30 percent of the vote. If they go by top-heavy margins for the Democrats, as they did in 2008, it will assure Democratic domination (until they move up the economic ladder and become good Republicans).

And he will enact the check-off card system for determining labor union representation, repealing the secret ballot in union elections. The result will be to raise the proportion of the labor force in unions up to the high teens from the current level of about 12 percent.

Finally, he will use the expansive powers of the Federal Communications Commission to impose “local” control and ownership of radio stations and to impose the “fairness doctrine” on talk radio. The effect will be to drive talk radio to the Internet, fundamentally change its economics, and retard its growth for years hence.

But none of these changes will cure the depression. It will end when the private sector works through the high debt levels that triggered the collapse in the first place. And, then, the large stimulus package deficits will likely lead to rapid inflation, probably necessitating a second recession to cure it.

So Obama’s name will be mud by 2012 and probably by 2010 as well. And the Republican Party will make big gains and regain much of its lost power.

But it will be too late to reverse the socialism of much of the economy, the demographic change in the electorate, the rationing of healthcare by the government, the surge of unionization and the crippling of talk radio.

A Win For The Obama Worshippers

In Fascism, LIBERALISM, obama on January 22, 2009 at 11:39 pm

by Dan Gifford

When John F. Kennedy was elected president, I did not believe it was possible to top the Kennedy cult fantasy craziness summed up by violinist Isaac Stern when he visited the White House:

I felt as though I were inside a golden coach drawn by four pure-bred white horses into the glitter of mythic Camelot.

I was wrong. Obama-mania has it all beat.

Now, while I acknowledge that Obama’s ascendancy (he is “The One,” after all) to the White House shows Americans have rejected racism, his demigod anointment by the masses indicates way too many Americans have not eschewed the allures of the personality cult. Here is LA LA Land, some of our most highly educated and creative have seen fit to use their children to praise “The One:” Sing for Change: Barack Kids Serenade Dear Leader Obama. Somewhere else, children have been put in military uniforms and made to give special solutes in pledge to Obama: Obama Youth – Junior Fraternity Regiment. If “Obama Youth” and massed cherubic child voices of praise for “The One” remind you of Kim Jun Il worship or Mao worship or others that came to a bad end, you probably have not overcome your racism and are in need of reeducation.

So while we get ready to view the grand 150 million dollar historical revision of Abraham Lincoln as a Democrat (that’s change, right?) by Obama on Abe’s Bible during the inaugural spectacle about to unfold, I believe it may be a good idea to review who really won when the votes were counted. The best summation of that I’ve seen was allegedly an editorial by London’s Daily Mail. I cannot find it on the Mail site and The Canada Free Press could find no source to accurately attribute it either. So I offer it with the admission that I would love to plagiarize it as my own ala a number of Obama’s speech lines, but I’m really not a Michael Moore kinda guy:

Obama’s Victory

A victory for the hysterical Oprah Winfrey, the mad racist preacher Jeremiah Wright, the mainstream media who abandoned any sense of objectivity long ago, Europeans who despise America largely because they depend on her, comics who claim to be dangerous and fearless but would not dare attack genuinely powerful special interest groups.

A victory for Obama-worshippers everywhere. A victory for the cult of the cult. A man who has done little with his life but has written about his achievements as if he had found the cure for cancer in between winning a marathon and building a nuclear reactor with his teeth.

Victory for style over substance, hyperbole over history, rabble-raising over reality.

A victory for Hollywood, the most dysfunctional community in the world. Victory for Streisand, Spielberg, Soros and Sarandon.

Victory for those who prefer welfare to will and interference to independence. For those who settle for group think and herd mentality rather than those who fight for individual initiative and the right to be out of step with meager political fashion.

Victory for a man who is no friend of freedom. He and his people have already stated that media has to be controlled so as to be balanced, without realizing the extraordinary irony within that statement. Like most liberal zealots, the Obama worshippers constantly speak of Fox and Limbaugh, when the vast bulk of television stations and newspapers are drastically liberal and anti-conservative. Senior Democrat Chuck Schumer said that just as pornography should be censored, so should talk radio. In other words, one of the few free and open means of popular expression may well be cornered and beaten by bullies who even in triumph cannot tolerate any criticism and opposition.

A victory for those who believe the state is better qualified to raise children than the family, for those who prefer teachers’ unions to teaching and for those who are naively convinced that if the West is sufficiently weak towards its enemies, war and terror will dissolve as quickly as the tears on the face of a leftist celebrity.

A victory for social democracy even after most of Europe has come to the painful conclusion that social democracy leads to mediocrity, failure, unemployment, inflation, higher taxes and economic stagnation. A victory for intrusive lawyers, banal sentimentalists, social extremists and urban snobs

Congratulations, America!

By the way, your education camp invitation will be mailed sometime during the next four years and attendance is mandatory

Obama’s Executive Orders Day Two – America Still Losing

In Fascism, democrat playbook, obama on January 22, 2009 at 5:45 pm

On his second full day in office, Obama took a series of steps overturning some of his predecessor’s most contentious war-on-terrorism policies.

By ordering shut the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, closing any remaining CIA secret prisons overseas and banning harsh interrogation practices, Obama said he hoped to signal that the U.S. would wage its struggle against terrorism and violence in a manner “consistent with our values and our ideals.”

It’s amazing that with all that’s wrong with the country, all of the people who need to be saved, and all of the business and industry that need bailing out, Obama has spent his first two days in office doing things to benefit terrorists. Who else is seeing this?

This concludes day 2 of the 2012 Obama presidential re-election campaign.

Final score day 2:

Obama – 1

the terrorists – 3

the American people – 0 (zero, zip, zilch, nada)

Total Running Score:

Obama – 2

the terrorists – 4

the American people – 0

 

Thank You Senators DeMint and Vitter

In America on January 22, 2009 at 5:11 pm

The Senate confirmed Hillary Clinton as secretary of state Wednesday as President Barack Obama moved to make his imprint on U.S. foreign policy, mobilizing a fresh team of veteran advisers and reaching out to world leaders. The Senate voted 94-2, with Republican Sens. David Vitter of Louisiana and Jim DeMint of South Carolina opposing.

Sen. Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, proposed that  Bill Clinton’s foundation reject foreign contributions. But Hillary Clinton rejected Lugar’s proposal, contending that the foundation’s plan to disclose annually its list of donors and a range of its contributions already exceeds legal requirements.

Lugar said he hoped Clinton would re-examine her position but supported her appointment.

Vitter and DeMint, both members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said they were unsatisfied. Last week, Vitter cast the sole opposing vote in the committee’s 16-1 endorsement of Clinton. DeMint voted in favor of Clinton on the committee because he said he didn’t want to obstruct a full Senate vote on her appointment, but ultimately did not support her nomination.

In addition to concerns surrounding the foundation, DeMint said he opposes Clinton’s positions on such matters as providing aid to foreign groups that offer abortions.

“I do not plan to slow up this nomination, but I do find it difficult to support a nominee who I know will pursue policies so contrary to American sovereignty and the dignity of the human person,” he said.

Caroline Kennedy Ends Senate Seat Bid

In America, democrat playbook on January 21, 2009 at 10:45 pm

Caroline Kennedy tonight withdrew her name from consideration to replace Hillary Clinton in the U.S. Senate after learning that Gov. David Paterson wasn’t going to choose her.

Kennedy’s decision removes the highest-profile name in the ring to step into Clinton’s now-vacant seat, as she departs after getting confirmed today as  Secretary of State.

Sources said the reason Paterson had decided not to tap the daughter of John F. Kennedy was her poor performances in media interviews and in private sessions with various officials.

Aides to Kennedy couldn’t be reached for comment.

Paterson has said he is not yet sure who he will select, but plans to announce his pick by this weekend – and an announcement is expected either Friday or Saturday.

For the first time on Tuesday, shortly after Obama was inaugurated, Paterson acknowledged publicly that he is considering state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo for the slot.

Cuomo, who has soared in public polls over Kennedy in the past two weeks in popularity for the seat, has not said whether he’s interested in the job, but has not tamped down speculation that he’s making a play for it.

Kennedy’s entrance into the bidding for Clinton’s seat was intended to have the effect of clearing the field, and forcing other contenders to see her as the inevitable choice for the post once held Robert F. Kennedy.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg privately backed her and publicly praised her abilities, and his top deputy, Kevin Sheekey, worked the phones aggressively on Kennedy’s behalf, and set her up with powerhouse consulting firm Knickerbocker SKD.

But her rollout received stiff criticism, as she ducked press questions during her first trip upstate, fared poorly in her initial round of media interviews – and several critics said she had a lack of a clear rationale for her candidacy.

The decision to appoint Clinton’s successor is solely Paterson’s, and he has offered conflicting comments about where he is in the process over the past few days – suggesting almost simultaneously that he’d made up his mind, and then that he hadn’t.

The surprise decision leaves a crowded field of about 15 people, mostly elected officials, to replace Clinton – including Long Island Rep. Steve Israel, Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi, upstate Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand, Rep. Carolyn Maloney and teachers union head Randi Weingarten.

Kennedy’s brief foray into politics lasted just under a month, from the time she roiled New York politics shortly before Christmas to say she was interested in being picked for the seat to today.

So it looks like Paterson is trading Kennedy’s fundraising ability for Cuomo’s popularity. The timing of this news is interesting indeed, the day after Ted Kennedy has an episode. This move will put Caroline Kennedy in a prime position for Ted Kennedy’s seat.

Obama’s First Executive Orders – the American People Lose Again

In Fascism, democrat playbook, obama on January 21, 2009 at 8:33 pm

In the first hours of his presidency, Obama directed an immediate halt to the Bush administration’s military commissions system for prosecuting detainees at the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Notice of the decision came in a legal filing in Guantánamo by military prosecutors just before midnight Tuesday. The decision, which had been expected as part of Obama’s pledge to close the detention camp, was described as a pause in all war-crimes proceedings there so that the new administration can evaluate how to proceed with prosecutions.

Among other cases, the decision will temporarily stop the prosecution of five detainees charged as the coordinators of the Sept. 11 attacks, including the case against the self-described mastermind, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

Later this week, the new administration is expected to issue an executive order that is to start what could be a long process of closing the detention camp, where about 245 detainees remain.

That’s right, put the well-being of these murdering, oppressive, fascist, dirtbags before that of the the American people…

Also…

Obama is bringing some belt-tightening to the White House. In one of his first official acts, Obama announced an immediate pay freeze at current levels for senior White House officials. According to the A.P., the freeze would apply to about 100 aides earning over $100,000 a year.

“This will enable the White House to stretch its budget to get more done for the country. The Obama and his staff recognize that in these austere times, everyone must do more with less, and the White House is no exception,” the White House press office announced in a statement.

Seeking to make good on his campaign pledge to limit the influence of lobbyists on his administration, Obama also signed an executive order banning executive branch employees from accepting gifts from lobbyists, as well as tightening restrictions for lobbyists seeking jobs in his administration, and for administration officials who may leave to lobby.

So, the 2012 presidential campaign has begun. Right off, this sounds good until you think about what he says. Who cares what these people make? I do not know anyone whose financial condition will improve because these folks are not paid – besides there’s nothing mentioned about per-diem

Day One Final score:

Obama – 1

the terrorists – 1

the American people – 0 (zero baby!)

Pelosi draws her lines with Obama

In What Change?, democrat playbook, obama on January 21, 2009 at 2:15 am

Two days before Obama’s Inauguration, the speaker showed off a new move — using the media to keep even a Democrat president from wandering onto her turf.

Pelosi used a Fox News appearance Sunday to break with Obama on two key issues: the fate of President George W. Bush’s tax cuts for families earning $250,000 or more and the possibility of congressional investigations into the actions of Bush administration officials.

While Pelosi’s words showed that she and Obama don’t always agree on matters of policy, the signal they sent was more important: Yes, you can use the media to speak straight to the public.

But so can I — and I will when you’re invading my turf.

“She trusts him greatly because they share the same agenda and vision, but she always keeps the interests of the caucus in mind,” said a top House Democratic aide. “She has to move the process forward and is extremely strategic.”

The speaker, Democratic aides say, is committed to pushing Obama’s broad agenda and isn’t looking to pick a fight. Nonetheless, she needs to retain leverage in upcoming negotiations with Obama, and she wants to defend her members’ interests in upcoming battles over the details of the massive stimulus package — and how to disengage the U.S. from Iraq.

This is starting sooner than I thought it would, the thing with Pelosi and Obama, that is. Don’t you know Obama’s already looking forward to 4 years of Pelosi and her garbage?

Heh, heh, heh.

read more here @ The Politico

U.S. Stocks Slide in Dow Average’s Worst Inauguration Day Drop

In obama on January 21, 2009 at 1:47 am

(Bloomberg) — U.S. stocks sank, sending the Dow Jones Industrial Average to its worst Inauguration Day decline, as speculation banks must raise more capital sent financial shares to an almost 14-year low.

State Street Corp., the largest money manager for institutions, tumbled 59 percent after unrealized bond losses almost doubled. Wells Fargo & Co. and Bank of America Corp. slumped more than 23 percent on an analyst’s prediction that they’ll need to take steps to shore up their balance sheets. The Dow’s 4 percent slide was the most on an Inauguration Day in the measure’s 112-year history, according to data compiled by Bloomberg and the Stock Trader’s Almanac.

This is not funny. Really.

Inauguration Day

In America on January 20, 2009 at 7:06 pm

There will be no posts on the inauguration today, other than this one stating that there will be no posts on the inauguration today. I’m just tired of the whole thing. I intentionally abstained from news coverage of the ceremony, and I do have one question: Did Obama really wear a top hat like the one made famous by Lincoln?

Tomorrow will be The Day After, again. The honeymoon will soon be over, power struggles will be underway, the scandals will unfold, the democrats and die-hard liberals will continue to blame Bush and the Republicans for everything wrong in the country, those who now have hope and look to the messiah will soon learn that they’ve been played for fools, the new and young voters will have moved on to a new cause and hopefully realize the error of their ways, and people like me will continue to attempt to bring people to their senses. Here’s to four years of fun, posting the facts.

New York Senate Seat Vacancy Drama

In corruption, democrat playbook on January 20, 2009 at 12:10 am

DESPITE claims that he’s still undecided, Gov. Paterson is “certain” to pick Caroline Kennedy to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton in the US Senate, several unhappy contenders for the job have told friends and associates in recent days.

The contenders based their conclusion on the view that Paterson, after nearly two months of indecision, would “greatly embarrass” and “entirely humiliate” Kennedy, anger her prominent political family and even offend President-elect Barack Obama by picking someone other than President John F. Kennedy’s daughter.

As for the governor’s claim to be weighing a last-minute finalist, the contenders agree with a close Paterson friend who said, “It’s clear David is just trying to play mind games with the press.”

Some of the contenders warned, however, that the unelected Paterson, who must face the voters next year, could face a serious backlash from Democratic activists by choosing Kennedy, whose standing with the public, and with Democrats in particular, has been sliding in recent weeks.

US Rep. Carolyn Maloney of Manhattan, a would-be Clinton replacement who is backed by several women’s organizations, was the most publicly adamant in saying the fix was in, citing a scenario – first outlined in last week’s Village Voice – under which Paterson, in a deal with Mayor Bloomberg, a Kennedy friend, selects Kennedy in exchange for help for his own election bid next year.

Another potential candidate told The Post that he was convinced that Kennedy would get the job because Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, – who polls show is the public’s favorite to succeed Clinton – failed to line up the right replacement at the AG’s office.

“Andrew just couldn’t assure the governor that he could arrange for [Assembly Speaker Sheldon] Silver to provide an acceptable successor,” said the contender.

A third potential candidate claimed that Paterson’s repeated contention – told to the media in private – that there is no front-runner is “baloney.”

“It’s been a done deal from the start,” said the would-be candidate.

David goes with Caroline with the understanding that Caroline, and her family and its resources, go with David next year. This stuff with Paterson saying he’s looking at other people is a crock,” the source continued.

Meanwhile, several Democrats pointed to Paterson’s already-declining public-opinion poll numbers to warn that selecting Kennedy could worsen his chances to be elected next year.

“The polls show Kennedy is not who the public wants, and every upstate newspaper has come out against her,” noted a longtime Democratic operative.

“Picking Caroline could turn into a disaster for Paterson,” he continued.

A little-noticed Marist College poll last week showed Paterson, who became governor last March after Eliot Spitzer resigned amid a hooker scandal, with a rapidly declining job-approval rating.

Superintendent warns against ‘inappropriate comments’

In Fascism, Liberal Conditioning, obama on January 19, 2009 at 11:43 pm

Mason school officials said they are taking a proactive educational approach in advance of this week’s planned Inauguration Day activities.

“Inappropriate comments that may make other students, staff or families feel unwelcome or uncomfortable in school or on the bus will not be tolerated,” Superintendent Kevin Bright said in an e-mail sent to parents Monday, Jan. 12.

The district, he said, expects students and staff to show respect for President-elect Obama and the incoming administration, as well as President Bush and the outgoing administration, and recognize that “while the election is a competitive process, our nation’s greatness is displayed when all sides come together for a united country.”

Jeff Schlaeger, Mason High School’s psychologist, said “inappropriate comments” occurred around election week when doctored pictures of Obama appeared at the school, including “derogatory caricatures” of him dressed like a terrorist and signs that read “Obama ‘08/Biden ‘09.”

“There were groups of students that were worked up over the results of the election,” said Schlaeger, who is a member of the district’s racial equity committee and curriculum organizer for MHS Freshman Diversity Week.

The school is offering a variety of events for students at every grade level, ranging from letter-writing and books, to videos, reflection and watching the inauguration itself, Bright said in the e-mail.

“We’re attempting to take a more proactive approach now and, first of all, celebrate the passing of power in our country and at the same time also celebrate this historic inauguration and the election of our first African-American president,” Bright said during an interview Tuesday.

Warren County Commissioner Dave Young, who has three children in the school district, said he questions an “inappropriate comments” policy based on what makes someone feel “unwelcome or uncomfortable.”

“It’s not ‘We’re discouraging you from saying those (comments)’ it’s ‘It won’t be tolerated,’ ” Young said. “That’s a very dangerous precedent.”

Of course, we all know that this means “inappropriate to Obama”. This is just another example of liberal conditioning, which is what got us here in the first place.

American Legion Reveals Strategy to Secure our Borders

In America on January 19, 2009 at 9:30 pm

By Drew Zahn © 2009 WorldNetDaily

The nation’s largest veterans organization released this week a policy bulletin that takes a firm stand against illegal immigration and calls on its members to hold elected officials accountable for implementing and enforcing U.S. immigration law.

The 30-page bulletin is officially titled, “The American Legion Policy on Immigration: A Strategy to Address Illegal Immigration in the United States.”

“The American Legion members have served in the U.S. Armed Forces throughout the world so that Americans can be safe at home,” the organization’s website explains. “This gives them a unique perspective to the threat that open borders present to their homeland.”

“America is a nation built by immigrants and the American Legion recognizes and celebrates that,” said National Commander David K. Rehbein in a press release. “We do take strong issue, however, with illegal immigration. It’s a matter of national security. The 9/11 hijackers and three of the men who plotted to kill innocent Americans at Ft. Dix were perfect examples of terrorists exploiting our weak immigration laws and our lack of enforcement. This booklet is a good reminder that America has a serious problem that needs to be addressed.”

The booklet itself makes the Legion’s position clear in a statement that stands alone on the first page.

“The American Legion is opposed to any person or persons being in this country illegally, regardless of race, sex, creed, color or national origin,” the bulletin states. “We believe the current laws governing immigration should be enforced impartially and equally.”

Originally founded in 1919 on an idea proposed by Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. (the president of the same name’s eldest son), the Legion has now grown to a membership of more than 2.6 million wartime veterans organized in more than 14,000 posts nationwide.

The policy bulletin explains, “Legionnaires subscribe to a creed, ‘To uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America; to maintain law and order and to foster and perpetuate a 100 percent Americanism.’ These words are recited in unison at Legion meetings and represent a continuing contract of service to benefit America and it is this commitment by Legionnaires that is the fuel for action on illegal immigration and other national security concerns facing this country.”

The Legion hopes the policy booklet will educate the American public on how “the security, economy and social fabric of the United States of America is seriously threatened by individuals who are illegally in this country.”

“Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime,” the booklet states. “The poor, minorities, children and individuals with little education are particularly vulnerable. It causes an enormous drain on public services, depresses wages of American workers, and contributes to population growth that, in turn, contributes to school overcrowding and housing shortages. Directly and indirectly, U.S. taxpayers are paying for illegal immigration.”

In financial terms, the booklet cites a report by the Center for Immigration Studies that claims the average illegal alien household in 2003 paid approximately $4,200 in federal taxes while, on average, created $7,000 in costs at the federal level.

In response to what it sees as a contributing factor to crime, terrorism, unemployment and depressed wages, the Legion proposes the following five-point strategy urging the federal government to enact the following steps:

1. Secure the borders and other points of entry in the United States, including construction of a physical barrier and sufficient Border Patrol presence.

2. Eliminate the jobs magnet and social services benefits that draw illegal immigrants to the U.S. by enforcing laws sanctioning employers who hire illegal aliens, implementing employment eligibility verification and eliminating government benefits for illegal aliens.

3. Eliminate amnesty laws that permit illegal aliens to break the law and remain in the U.S.

4. Reduce the U.S. illegal alien population by attrition through workplace enforcement, interagency and interstate cooperation, rejection of driver’s license plans, mandating English as national language and establishing parameters for noncriminal deportations.

5. Screen and track foreign visitors legally entering the United States. The plan further calls for reforms to current legal immigration policy, including alteration of the non-immigrant visa program that allows some nations’ citizens entrance to the U.S. without a visa application, elimination of the visa lottery that randomly approves visas from countries with low immigration rates and expanding visa allowances for seasonal and temporary workers. John Raughter, a spokesperson for the Legion, told WND that many people think only of the economic issues surrounding illegal immigration, but for Legion members who have fought to protect America, the issue is a matter of continuing the fight for our country’s freedom.

“We want to raise public awareness that illegal immigration is a national security issue,” Raughter said. “The American Legion wants to remind people that included in the Fort Dix Six conspirators and 9-11 attackers were men in the country illegally.”

George Washington’s Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation

In America on January 19, 2009 at 9:17 pm

By age sixteen, Washington had copied out by hand, 110 Rules of Civility & Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation. They are based on a set of rules composed by French Jesuits in 1595. Presumably they were copied out as part of an exercise in penmanship assigned by young Washington’s schoolmaster. The first English translation of the French rules appeared in 1640, and are ascribed to Francis Hawkins the twelve-year-old son of a doctor.
Today many, if not all of these rules, sound a little fussy if not downright silly. It would be easy to dismiss them as outdated and appropriate to a time of powdered wigs and quills, but they reflect a focus that is increasingly difficult to find. They all have in common a focus on other people rather than the narrow focus of our own self-interests that we find so prevalent today. Fussy or not, they represent more than just manners. They are the small sacrifices that we should all be willing to make for the good of all and the sake of living together.

These rules proclaim our respect for others and in turn give us the gift of self-respect and heightened self-esteem.

Richard Brookhiser, in his book on Washington wrote that “all modern manners in the western world were originally aristocratic. Courtesy meant behavior appropriate to a court; chivalry comes from chevalier – a knight. Yet Washington was to dedicate himself to freeing America from a court’s control. Could manners survive the operation? Without realizing it, the Jesuits who wrote them, and the young man who copied them, were outlining and absorbing a system of courtesy appropriate to equals and near-equals. When the company for whom the decent behavior was to be performed expanded to the nation, Washington was ready. Parson Weems got this right, when he wrote that it was ‘no wonder every body honoured him who honoured every body.’”

The Rules numbers 1 thru 110

Bush commutes border patrol agents’ sentences

In America, Bush on January 19, 2009 at 8:04 pm

President George W. Bush, in one of his last official acts in office, commuted the prison sentences of two U.S. Border Patrol agents who were imprisoned for shooting an unarmed Mexican drug smuggler in the buttocks in a case that drew widespread attention.

Ignacio Ramos had been sentenced to 11 years and a day in prison and Jose Alonso Compean received 12 years.

Their conviction in 2006 drew an outcry from supporters who said the agents were just doing their job.

Sad that it took so long.

Stop It!!

In obama on January 19, 2009 at 5:55 pm

Enough already!

with the Obama inauguration – jeez

We get it!

no network TV for the next week it looks like….

Stimulus Package Unveiled

In LIBERALISM, Socialism on January 19, 2009 at 1:15 pm

WASHINGTON — House Democrats Thursday rolled out the details of an $825 billion economic stimulus package to combat what they called “a crisis not seen since the Great Depression,” but its immediate economic impact is unclear and the plan faces hurdles before becoming law.
Details of the two-year package, which calls for $550 billion in new spending and $275 billion in tax relief, will likely change as the bill works its way through Congress. But the document provides the first blueprint of how President-elect Barack Obama and congressional Democrats plan to fight the historic economic downturn, which has already wiped out 2.6 million jobs.
Businesses would get “bonus” depreciation for investing in new plants and equipment. The proposal also allows companies that have losses this year to get refunds for taxes paid as far back as 2003; current tax rules allow losses to be carried back only two years. But companies receiving money from the financial-system bailout program are ineligible for the tax provision, a blow for some of the nation’s big banks and troubled auto makers General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC.
The stimulus plan was released hours before the Senate backed Mr. Obama on another key measure by approving the Treasury’s call for the release of the second half of the $700 billion financial-system rescue package. That program is being replenished as Bank of America Corp. was near an agreement with U.S. officials that would provide it with $15 billion to $20 billion of fresh capital.
The plan would be one of the largest single government expenditures in U.S. history, and would be equivalent to about 3% of gross domestic product over two years. The proposal is $125 billion bigger than the controversial bailout for the financial-services industry. It outweighs in dollar terms all other nations’ stimulus plans, though China’s $600 billion stimulus is a larger share of its economy.
Democrats said they emphasized government spending over tax relief because that was the best and fastest way to create jobs. Rep. David Obey (D., Wis.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, warned that the package may be insufficient — and said another spending bill may be needed later this year.
Some of the biggest expenditures will go directly to the states, with $90 billion going to increase the federal share of Medicaid payments and an additional $79 billion to help states avoid cutbacks in education and other services. Separately, $43 billion will go for transportation improvements — less than many expected, to the frustration of some Democrats.
The plan also includes Mr. Obama’s “Making Work Pay” tax credit of $500 per worker and $1,000 for couples.
Economists say the stimulus may be more effective at supporting an ultimate recovery than arresting the current decline. That’s because few elements of the package would hit the economy before the second half of the year, with the largest boost coming in late 2009 and into 2010.
A key element identified by President-elect Obama has been to spend money improving the efficiency of the federal government.
By then the U.S. is expected to show slow growth, as a result of other stimulus from the Federal Reserve and Treasury. The unemployment rate, which hit 7.2% in December, is widely expected to hit 8% by the end of the year — but without any stimulus, some economists fear it could rise into double digits.
Macroeconomic Advisers, a forecasting firm, estimated Thursday that a plan of $775 billion stimulus over two years would boost GDP by 3.2%, reduce the unemployment rate by 1.7 percentage points and raise employment by 3.3 million jobs.
The Democrats’ plan provides incentives for businesses to make capital expenditures. The “bonus” depreciation provision, for example, would provide immediate relief for businesses that invest in new plants and equipment by speeding up depreciation deductions. The package doubles the amount small businesses can immediately write off for capital investments and for purchasing new equipment and includes incentives for businesses to invest in renewable energy.
The transportation and energy projects in the package could have among the slowest impact on the economy, economists said. Even “shovel-ready” projects could be delayed as local and state governments allocate funds, receive bids and award contracts.
The quickest effect, in contrast, could come from tax cuts, particularly if the government reduces payroll taxes immediately to get funds to taxpayers. That could raise spending and get money flowing through the economy quickly, even if some of the funds are likely to be saved rather than spent.

Highlights of Economic Recovery Plan
Spending:
Science and Technology
$10 billion Science facilities
$6 billion High-speed Internet access for rural and underserved areas
 Infrastructure
$32 billion Transportation projects
$31 billion Construction and repair of federal buildings and other public infrastructure
$19 billion Water projects
$10 billion Rail and mass transit projects
 Education
$41 billion Grants to local school districts
$79 billion State fiscal relief to prevent cuts in state aid
$21 billion School modernization
 Health Care
$39 billion Subsidies to health insurance for unemployed; providing coverage through Medicaid
$90 billion Help to states with Medicaid
$20 billion Modernization of health-information technology systems
$4 billion Preventative care

Taxes

Individuals:

$500 per worker, $1,000 per couple tax cut for two years, costing about $140 billion

Greater access to the $1,000-per-child tax credit for the working poor

Expansion of the earned-income tax credit to include families with three children

A $2,500 college tuition tax credit

Repeal of a requirement that a $7,500 first-time homebuyer tax credit be paid back over time

Businesses:

An infusion of cash into money-losing companies by allowing them to claim tax credits on past profits dating back five years instead of two

Bonus depreciation for businesses investing in new plants and equipment

Doubling of the amount small businesses can write off for capital investments and new equipment purchases

Allowing businesses to claim a tax credit for hiring disconnected youth and veterans

“Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself”: FDR’s First Inaugural Address

In America on January 19, 2009 at 12:04 pm

Franklin D. Roosevelt had campaigned against Herbert Hoover in the 1932 presidential election by saying as little as possible about what he might do if elected. Through even the closest working relationships, none of the president-elect’s most intimate associates felt they knew him well, with the exception perhaps of his wife, Eleanor. The affable, witty Roosevelt used his great personal charm to keep most people at a distance. In campaign speeches, he favored a buoyant, optimistic, gently paternal tone spiced with humor. But his first inaugural address took on an unusually solemn, religious quality. And for good reason—by 1933 the depression had reached its depth. Roosevelt’s first inaugural address outlined in broad terms how he hoped to govern and reminded Americans that the nation’s “common difficulties” concerned “only material things.”

“I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our people impel. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.

In such a spirit on my part and on yours we face our common difficulties. They concern, thank God, only material things. Values have shrunken to fantastic levels; taxes have risen; our ability to pay has fallen; government of all kinds is faced by serious curtailment of income; the means of exchange are frozen in the currents of trade; the withered leaves of industrial enterprise lie on every side; farmers find no markets for their produce; the savings of many years in thousands of families are gone.

More important, a host of unemployed citizens face the grim problem of existence, and an equally great number toil with little return. Only a foolish optimist can deny the dark realities of the moment.

Yet our distress comes from no failure of substance. We are stricken by no plague of locusts. Compared with the perils which our forefathers conquered because they believed and were not afraid, we have still much to be thankful for. Nature still offers her bounty and human efforts have multiplied it. Plenty is at our doorstep, but a generous use of it languishes in the very sight of the supply. Primarily this is because the rulers of the exchange of mankind’s goods have failed, through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men.”

READ IT ALL AT HISTORY MATTERS…


Dems’ idea of sharing sacrifice

In Socialism, democrat playbook on January 19, 2009 at 1:15 am

By Michelle Malkin
Monday, January 19, 2009

“Everybody’s going to have to give,” President-elect Barack Obama has warned. And some people will have to give more than others — starting with low-income smokers.

Democrats are rushing to impose massive tax hikes of at least 61 cents on every cigarette pack sold in America, in addition to new increases on other tobacco products. The money will fund a long-plotted federal expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

Yes, this is Dr. Big Nanny’s prescription for recession: punitive tax increases on the poor to feed a universal health-care Trojan horse.

Obama and his liberal Democrat colleagues sure have a funny way of demonstrating “progressive” values, don’t they? Health surveys show that smokers are more likely to be blue-collar workers, minorities and have less than a high-school education. The National Taxpayers Union noted that tobacco taxes take a 50 times larger share of income from those earning less than $20,000 than from those earning more than $200,000.

And what will that money buy? SCHIP, you’ll recall, is the joint federal-state program that covers health insurance for children and families at or near the poverty line. During the last two years, President Bush and the Republicans took a rare fiscally conservative stand against widening eligibility criteria far beyond the working poor. Democrats wanted to be able to enroll families with incomes at 300 or 400 percent of the poverty level — adding an estimated $35 billion over five years to the existing SCHIP funding costs.

Opponents of this push were lambasted as cruel child-haters for arguing that the program should not be extended to include well-off families, illegal aliens and single adults. They were attacked as heartless penny-pinchers for questioning the wisdom of subsidizing the SCHIP expansion with a dwindling and unstable funding source (smoking is on the decline and cigarette tax revenues are shrinking).

But if these do-gooders truly cared about children, they’d be cursing mightily over the squandering of current SCHIP funds and the cheating of the very children the program was intended to help. State data analyzed by the Department of Health and Human Services reveal that 13 states spent more than 44 percent of their SCHIP funds in 2008 on people who are neither children nor pregnant women.

In New Jersey, people earning as much as $295,000 were enrolled in its SCHIP program, dubbed “NJ FamilyCare.” Like many states, New Jersey failed to check eligibility for all program enrollees and refuses to conduct stringent assets tests.

As I’ve noted before, the refusal to do assets tests on federal health insurance programs is why federal entitlements are exploding and government keeps expanding. After an audit found that the New Jersey program had paid $43.1 million to participants without knowing whether they were eligible, Republican Assemblyman Richard Merkt observed that it “called into serious question the state’s competence to run health insurance programs.” Multiply that by 50 states.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Democrats plan to lift decade-old restrictions to allow legal immigrant children to tap into SCHIP. But there’s no word on whether citizenship eligibility requirements will be strengthened.

What I can tell you for sure is that the SCHIP expansion is a rest stop on the road to a universal health insurance entitlement built on the backs of overtaxed low-income workers. Welcome to the era of “shared sacrifice.”

Michelle Malkin is author of “Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild.”

The First Socialist Act of 2009

In Socialism, democrat playbook on January 19, 2009 at 1:09 am

New SCHIP Bill—Federal Cigar Tax to Be Capped at 40 Cents

Posted: Tuesday, January 13, 2009

By David Savona

The House Ways and Means Committee introduced the newest incarnation of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) today. The International Premium Cigar & Pipe Retailers Association (IPCPR) reported in an email that the legislation would impose a revised federal excise tax on large cigars—52.4 percent, with a maximum tax cap of 40 cents per cigar.

It was feared throughout the cigar industry that the cap would be much higher. The original version called for a $10 cap, and earlier versions had a cap of $3 per cigar. The tax is currently capped at five cents.

The bill, which seeks to fund an expansion of SCHIP with higher tobacco taxes, is expected to pass given the new Democratic leadership in Washington. Last year, Congress attempted to pass the expansion, but President Bush vetoed the legislation two times, most recently in December.

“Our industry came together to aggressively challenge the disastrous, proposed $3 tax cap,” wrote Chris McCalla, legislative director of the IPCPR, in the email.
The new legislation also does not have a floor tax on cigars, although certain other tobacco products would be subject to the floor tax.

Obama the Arrogant

In obama on January 18, 2009 at 3:52 pm

Somebody should really tell Obama that he is not Abraham Lincoln. He’s riding the train, he’s using Lincoln’s Bible for the oath of office – talk about arrogance. By the time Lincoln won the presidency, he was well accomplished with numerous achievements on the national and local scene. What are Obama’s accomplishments? One term in the senate and he did nothing. Community agitator. That’s about it. I keep hearing that he’s a great orator, but not “uh” without a ” uh” teleprompter. I hear that he’s a man of vision, so was Hitler and a bunch of other thug dictators. One other thing – somebody please tell Obama that Lincoln was a REPUBLICAN.

Thanks.

Obama Hosting Pricey Party in Hard Times

In LIBERALISM, broken promises, obama on January 18, 2009 at 3:32 pm

WASHINGTON – Unemployment is up. The stock market is down. Let’s party.

The price tag for  Obama’s inauguration gala is expected to break records, with some estimates reaching as high as $150 million. Despite the bleak economy, however, Democrats who called on President George W. Bush to be frugal four years ago are issuing no such demands now that an inaugural weekend of rock concerts and star-studded parties has begun.

Obama’s inaugural committee has raised more than $41 million to cover events ranging from a Philadelphia-to-Washington train ride to a megastar concert with Beyonce, U2 and Bruce Springsteen to 10 official inaugural balls. Add to that the massive costs of security and transportation — costs absorbed by U.S. taxpayers — and the historic inauguration will produce an equally historic bill.

In 2005, Reps. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., and Jim McDermott, D-Wash., asked Bush to show a little less pomp and be a little more circumspect at his party.

“President Roosevelt held his 1945 inaugural at the White House, making a short speech and serving guests cold chicken salad and plain pound cake,” the two lawmakers wrote in a letter. “During World War I, President Wilson did not have any parties at his 1917 inaugural, saying that such festivities would be undignified.”

The thinking was that, with the nation at war, excessive celebration was inappropriate. Four years later, the nation is still at war. Unemployment has risen sharply. And Obama pressed Congress to release the second half of a $700 billion bailout package in hopes of rescuing a faltering banking industry.

Obama’s inauguration committee says it is mindful of the times and is not worried people will see the four days of festivities as excessive.

“That is probably not the way the country is going to be looking at it,” said committee spokeswoman Linda Douglass. “It is not a celebration of an election. It is a celebration of our common values.”

Douglass said the campaign sought to keep costs down by having the same decorations at each of the 10 balls, eliminating floral arrangements and negotiating prices on food.

“Those at the Obama administration are trying to be reflective of the climate,” McDermott’s spokesman, Mike DeCeasar, said Saturday.

The festivities began Saturday with a speech at Philadelphia’s historic 30th Street train as Obama’s trip began.

Sunday’s concert at the Lincoln Memorial includes performances by Sheryl Crow, Stevie Wonder, Garth Brooks and others. Denzel Washington and Queen Latifah will read historic passages. HBO paid $2.5 million for the exclusive rights to broadcast the concert.

Monday, the inaugural committee is hosting a national day of service, followed by three “bipartisan dinners” and a concert at the Verizon Center honoring military families. The Disney Channel will broadcast the concert, which includes performances by teen stars Miley Cyrus and the Jonas Brothers, as part of a $2 million deal that also gave ABC the exclusive rights to broadcast one inaugural ball.

The television deals allowed the committee to recoup about $5 million of the $15 million production costs for the televised events, Douglass said.

Security and transportation costs are being paid by taxpayers. And with millions of tourists expected to descend on Washington for Tuesday’s inauguration ceremony, Bush declared a state of emergency, allowing the district to recover some costs for the event.

The inauguration committee is paying for 10 stadium-style screens to broadcast the inauguration ceremony on the National Mall. It is also hiring garbage and recycling services and renting thousands of portable toilets for what one supplier called “the largest temporary restroom event in the history of the United States.”

Obama has pledged transparency in his inauguration fundraising. He has disclosed inaugural donors as the fundraising continued, though he is not required to do so until after the ceremony.

Many of the fundraisers are well-known moneymen and women in Democratic circles. Those leading the list raised at least $300,000. They include two of Obama’s top campaign fundraisers: Louis Susman, who retired this month as vice chairman of banking giant and government bailout recipient Citigroup, and billionaire Hyatt hotel heiress Penny Pritzker.

Pelosi Open to Prosecution of Bush Administration Officials

In LIBERALISM, democrat playbook on January 18, 2009 at 3:24 pm

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is receptive to the idea of prosecuting some Bush administration officials, while letting others who are accused of misdeeds leave office without prosecution, she told Chris Wallace in an interview on “FOX News Sunday.”

“I think you look at each item and see what is a violation of the law and do we even have a right to ignore it,” the California Democrat said. “And other things that are maybe time that is spent better looking to the future rather than to the past.”

Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, announced Friday he wants to set up a commission to look into whether the Bush administration broke the law by taking the nation to war against Iraq and instituting aggressive anti-terror initiatives. The Michigan Democrat called for an “independent criminal probe into whether any laws were broken in connection with these activities.”
Obama has not closed off the possibility of prosecutions, but hinted he does not favor them.

“I don’t believe that anybody is above the law,” he told ABC News a week ago. “On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.”

Pelosi, during the interview in her ceremonial office, said there is merit in both arguments.

“I don’t think that Mr. Obama and Mr. Conyers are that far apart,” she said. “There are different subjects and you treat them differently.”

She hinted that the law might compel Democrats to press forth on some prosecutions, even if they are politically unpopular, adding: “That’s not up to us to say that doesn’t matter anymore.”

“We cannot let the politicizing of, for example, the Justice Department to go unreviewed,” she added. “I want to see the truth come forth.”

It’s funny how they want the truth, unless it is that the democrats are guilty. What Pelosi wants is four years of costly, wasteful, hearings and testimony to distract the nation from the real criminals, the liberals. Why hasn’t any of them called for hearings on Frank, Dodd, and the others? I think that more Americans have suffered because of them than The Bush Administration.

Sex sting to keep Wisconsin mayor(D) from inauguration

In America, corruption on January 17, 2009 at 9:23 pm

RACINE, Wis. — Racine Mayor Gary Becker’s plans to attend Tuesday’s inauguration have been canceled after he was charged in an Internet sex sting.

Becker had planned to attend a U.S. Conference of Mayors event in Washington over the weekend and then stay for the inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama.

But that was before he was arrested Tuesday night at a suburban Milwaukee shopping mall. Authorities said he went there to meet who he thought was a 14-year-old girl but actually was a state agent.

A criminal complaint filed against him Thursday included sexually explicit chats he had with the other person. He faces six felony charges and has been freed on $165,000 cash bond.

Becker’s defense attorney did not return a message left Thursday seeking comment on the charges.

City Administrator Ben Hughes said canceling Becker’s airline ticket and a four-night stay in an expensive D.C. hotel will cost the city hundreds of dollars. He said city officials learned this week that Becker chose the most expensive of three options – at $550 a night – when booking hotel accommodations.

The money for three nights will be refunded, and Midwest Airlines agreed to allow the city to use Becker’s $400 ticket for another official’s travel in the next 12 months, Hughes said.

The city also has removed Becker’s picture that had greeted visitors to the Racine Web site.

“With everything going on I felt it was not appropriate for his picture and his welcome to remain on the Web site,” said City Council President David Maack on Friday. Maack is serving as acting mayor.

Top city officials are planning to discuss Tuesday removing Becker from office if he does not resign.

Let’s play name that Party affiliation! While some other news outlets finally get to Becker being a Democrat, usually deep within the story, MSNBC or in this story, the AP, fails to mention the D word

The man who has taken over for Racine Mayor Gary Becker after his arrest on probable charges of pornography and solicitation of a minor say he needs to resign.

“I think it would be in the best interest of the city of Racine,” said City Council President David Maack in an exclusive interview on Newsradio 620 WTMJ. “We need to put this behind us.

Ever notice that when it is a Democrat involved, they always need to move on? If it is a Republican, they always say there needs to be more investigation, preferably back to 1st grade.

Charges are expected against Becker today, two days after his arrest on tentative charges of attempted second-degree sexual assault of a child, child enticement and possession of child pornography.

Authorities said Becker also was being held on tentative charges of exposing a child to harmful materials, using a computer to facilitate a child sex crime and misconduct in public office.

We need to put this behind us, though.

The Journal Sentinel says state officials had begun investigating Becker after he brought a personal computer to work and had City Workers try to fix it.

So, he is a complete moron, to boot.

Let’s see: if it is a Republican, such as Jack Ryan (solicited his wife for sex), Mark Foley (inappropriate emails with no sex involved), or Larry Craig (foot tapping, no sex), it is a national disgrace. But, a Democrat with actual child p0rn on his PC? Move on.

And let’s not forget a president credibly accused of sexual improprieties, sexual harassment…..you know this story.

Back to the story, it is interesting that MSNBC forgets to mention that it is 5 felony counts and a misdemeanor. The Journal Sentinel has good detail of how it all went down, including how Becker went off to meet with who he thought was a 14 year old girl.

Court Affirms Wiretapping Without Warrants

In America on January 16, 2009 at 2:31 am

In a rare public ruling, a secret federal appeals court has said telecommunications companies must cooperate with the government to intercept international phone calls and e-mail of American citizens suspected of being spies or terrorists.

The ruling came in a case involving an unidentified company’s challenge to 2007 legislation that expanded the president’s legal power to conduct wiretapping without warrants for intelligence purposes.

Read the New York Times story here

“So we have yet another example of how George W. Bush was treated and portrayed for the last three or four years as a war criminal who deserved to have charges brought, perhaps even impeachment hearings, all because he was “spying on Americans;” all because he was violating the Constitution, trashing it, ripping it to shreds.  He was making a mockery of US civil liberties.  The left kooks were so bugged by this they often broke out in tears.  ” – Rush Limbaugh

Clinton vs Bush – Convictions

In What Change?, corruption, obama on January 16, 2009 at 2:18 am

I recently ran across the following post from 2006 while doing research  on a different subject. Read along and ask yourself, ” do we really want these people back?” This is exactly why I along with other like-minded people rail against Obama and his policy of “change”.

I always tell liberals I will only discuss politics on a fact basis, not braindead tabloid trash accusations. Then I ask them “when I provide you with the easily obtained facts, will you have the courage to face the truth?” Then send him this list.

Number of Clinton administration individuals and business associates convicted of crimes during his Presidency – - 33

Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61

Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122

STARR-RAY INVESTIGATION
Number of convictions 14

9 went to jail, a sitting Dem Governor was removed from office, a sitting President was impeached and disbarred.

SMALTZ INVESTIGATION
Guilty pleas and convictions in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses: 15

During his presidency, Clinton associates were convicted of the following crimes:

Drug trafficking (3), racketeering, extortion, bribery (4), tax evasion, kickbacks, embezzlement (2), fraud (12), conspiracy (5), fraudulent loans, illegal gifts (1), illegal campaign contributions (5), money laundering (6), perjury, obstruction of justice.

Number of people associated with the Bush administration convicted of crimes. ZERO

The Clinton Legacy

GOP seats gained in House since Clinton became president: 48

GOP seats gained in Senate since Clinton became president: 8

GOP governorships gained since Clinton became president: 11

GOP state legislative seats gained since Clinton became president: 1,254

State legislatures taken over by GOP since Clinton became president: 9

Democrat officeholders who have become Republicans since Clinton became president: 439 as of 1998

Republican officeholders who have become Democrats since Clinton became president: 3

Since this time, Scooter libbey was convicted in 2007 of obstruction of justice, perjury,and making false statements.

Amazing.

Geithner – Just Another One

In corruption, obama on January 15, 2009 at 12:53 am

Obama picked Tim Geithner to be Secretary of the Treasury—talk about a bad vetting process.  has a slight tax problem. Namely, he’s not paying them – $42,702. Of all things for the new Secretary of Treasury to have problems with—taxes? Amazing. Could it have been an honest mistake? If so, then at worst he’s an idiot (who is about to handle $1 trillion of our money)

Geithner explained he was unaware he was technically considered self-employed while working at the IMF, an international organization that does not pay an employer share of Social Security and Medicare taxes.

He repaid about $43,000 in taxes and interest – some of it after an IRS audit, the rest after Obama transition vetters brought the arrears to his attention.

“All of his taxes have now been paid in full, and at no time was there any intention on Mr. Geithner’s part to avoid taxes,” a transition source said.

Oh it was all just a mistake, what’s the harm? I’m already accustomed to Obama putting these dirtbags to work, so I’m not even going down that path again. No, this time I just want to know where are all of those people who crucified Joe The Plumber about his $1,182.98 of outstanding personal income tax? Oh yeah, that’s right, Joe Wurzelbacher’s not a liberal, a democrat, nor a socialist – so he’s bad. I just hope that if I make a mistake on my taxes, somebody lets me know so I can just pay them off and laugh about it – no wait, I’m not a liberal, a democrat, nor a socialist either. Oh well.

The Truth Behind Job Cuts

In America, LIBERALISM, obama on January 12, 2009 at 5:14 pm

You have to admit that the people who own or operate businesses and have done so for any length of time are smart. Some like to think that those same business owners, to a certain extent, just got lucky. One definition of luck is the convergence of preparation and opportunity.  The bottom line is that a company does not stay in business, nor employ people by accident. Everything about any business is being watched by somebody.

Recent unemployment numbers show that nationwide, we are at 7.2%. All of those job cuts are not due to loss of business, or an economic downturn. Businesses, small businesses in particular, are paying attention to what’s being proposed, from stimulus packages to tax increases. It’s no secret that any new spending has to be subsidized by somebody, and according to Obama and the democrats, it’s going to be the small businesses and and the people who are already paying more than their fair share. More than likely the victims of these tax increases will not even be able to benefit from the programs that their money went to.

These businessmen and women, knowing that added expenses are imminent, have simply chosen to preempt them. The results are fewer raises, lower pay, layoffs or job cuts, and closings. After all, the priority for any business is to stay in business and show a profit, not to provide retirement, healthcare, prescription drugs, or any other benefit that people think they’re entitled to.

The architects of these new stimulus plans and tax increases will simply ignore what is happening. Since votes seem to be more important than the economy,  they will see that the benefits go to the people who voted them in,  most of whom probably have no desire to ever own or operate a business or for that matter do anything other than collect benefits.

Why a Tiny Alabama Town Wants a $375 Million Chunk of the Stimulus

In LIBERALISM, obama on January 9, 2009 at 4:15 pm

The tiny town, located near the Georgia border and 26 miles from the nearest “big city” of Anniston (population: 24,276), added 33 proposals—about two thirds of them related to “green” energy—to the list of “ready- to- go” projects assembled by the U.S. Conference of Mayors. Total sum: $375,076,200.

That comes out to nearly $2 million per Edwardsville resident, although E. D. Phillips, the town’s representative to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, says the projects would affect a wider region that comprises about 80,000 people. That number includes residents of nearby rural areas that aren’t already incorporated into towns, along with the residents of Talladega Springs (population: 124), which partnered with Edwardsville and local municipal utilities on the projects.

There’s certainly no denying that Edwardsville has big ambitions. Through the various proposals, which include a renewable energy museum, scenic railroad, and vineyards, these small Alabama communities envision themselves becoming a cutting-edge demonstration project for energy sustainability and a hub for tourism.

Here we go. Get the entire story here.

The Wave

In America on January 9, 2009 at 3:41 pm

This doesn’t have anything to do with the President-Select Obama, the dems, the libs, the terrorists, the war, the other war, the bailouts, the corruption, or any other bad thing in the news. I ran across it yesterday and thought it would be nice to post something different, something positive. This story can be found on Ken’s VTX1300.com website.

The Wave
By Tom Ruttan
CYCLE CANADA – APRIL 2002

The bike’s passenger seat swept up just enough that I could see over my father’s shoulders. That seat was my throne. My dad and I traveled many back roads, searching for the ones we had never found before. Traveling these roads just to see where they went. Never in a rush. Just be home for supper.

I remember wandering down a back road with my father, sitting on my throne watching the trees whiz by, feeling the rumble of our bike beneath us like a contented giant cat. A motorcycle came over a hill toward us and as it went by, my father threw up his gloved clutch hand and gave a little wave. The other biker waved back with the same friendly swing of his left wrist.
I tapped my father on his shoulder, which was our signal that I wanted to say something. He cocked his helmeted ear back slightly while keeping his eyes ahead.

I yelled, “Do we know him?”

‘What?” he shouted.

“You waved to him. Who was it?”

“I don’t know. Just another guy on a bike. So I waved.”

“How come?”

“You just do. It’s important.”

Later, when we had stopped for chocolate ice cream, I asked why it was important to wave to other bikers. My father tried to explain how the wave demonstrated comradeship and a mutual understanding of what it was to enjoy riding a motorcycle. He looked for the words to describe how almost all bikers struggled with the same things like cold, rain, heat, car drivers who did not see them, but how riding remained an almost pure pleasure.

I was young then and I am not sure that I really understood what he was trying to get across, but .
It was a beginning. Afterward, I always waved along with my father when we passed other bikers.

I remember one cold October morning when the clouds were heavy and dark, giving us another clue that winter was niding in from just over the horizon. My father and I were warm inside our car as we headed to a friend’s home. Rounding a comer, we saw a motorcycle parked on the shoulder of the road. Past the bike, we saw the rider walking through the ditch, scouring the long grasses crowned with a touch of frost. We pulled over and backed up to where the bike stood.

I asked Dad, “Who’s that?”

“Don’t know,” he replied. “But he see to have lost something. Maybe we can give him a hand.”

We left the car and wandered through the tall grass of the ditch to the biker. He said that he had been pulling on his gloves as he rode and he had lost one. The three of us spent some time combing the ditch, but all we found were two empty cans and a plastic water bottle.

My father turned and headed back to our car and I followed him. He opened the trunk and threw the cans and the water bottle into a small cardboard box that we kept for garbage. He rummaged through various tools, oil containers and windshield washer fluid until he found an old crumpled pair of brown leather gloves. Dad straightened them out and handed them to me to hold. He continued looking until he located an old catalogue. I understood why my dad had grabbed the gloves. I had no idea what he was going to do with the catalogue. We headed back to the biker who was still walking the ditch.

My dad said, “Here’s some gloves for you. And I brought you a catalogue as well.”

“Thanks,” he replied. I really appreciate it.” He reached into his hip pocket and withdrew a worn black wallet.

“Let me give you some money for the gloves,” he said as he slid some bills out.

“No thanks,” my dad replied as I handed the rider the gloves. “They’re old and not worth anything anyway.”

The biker smiled. “Thanks a lot.” He pulled on the old gloves and then he unzipped his jacket. I watched as my father handed him the catalogue and the biker slipped it inside his coat. He jostled his jacket around to get the catalogue sitting high and centered under his coat and zipped it up. I remember nodding my head at the time, finally making sense of why my dad had given him the catalogue. It would keep him bit warmer. After wishing the biker well, my father and I left him warming up his bike.

Two weeks later, the biker came to our home and returned my father’s gloves. He had found our address on the catalogue. Neither my father nor the biker seemed to think that my father stopping at the side of the road for a stranger and giving him a pair of gloves, and that stranger making sure that the gloves were returned, were events at all out of the ordinary for people who rode motorcycles. For me, it was another subtle lesson.

It was spring the next year when I was sitting high on my throne, watching the farm fields slip by when I saw two bikes coming towards us. As they rumbled past, both my father and I waved, but the other bikers kept their sunglasses locked straight ahead and did not acknowledge us. I remember thinking that they must have seen us because our waves were too obvious to miss. Why hadn’t they waved back? I thought all bikers waved to one another.

I patted my father on his shoulder and yelled, “How come they didn’t wave to us?”

“Don’t know. Sometimes they don’t.”

I remember feeling very puzzled. Why wouldn’t someone wave back?

Later that summer, I turned 12 and learned how to ride a bike with a clutch.

I spent many afternoons on a country laneway beside our home, kicking and kicking to start my father’s ‘55 BSA. When it would finally sputter to a start, my concentration would grow to a sharp focus as I tried to let out the clutch slowly while marrying it with just enough throttle to bring me to a smooth takeoff. More often, I lurched and stumbled forward while trying to keep the front wheel straight and remember to pick my feet up. A few feet farther down the lane, I would sigh and begin kicking again.

A couple of years later, my older brother began road racing, and I became a racetrack rat. We spent many weekends wandering to several tracks in Ontario-Harewood, Mosport and eventually Shannonville. These were the early years of two-stroke domination, of Kawasaki green and 750 two-stroke triples, of Yvon Duhamel’s cat-and-mouse games and the artistry of Steve Baker.

Eventually, I started to pursue interests other than the race track. I got my motorcycle license and began wandering the back roads on my own. I found myself stopping along side roads if I saw a rider sitting alone, just checking to see if I could be of help. And I continued to wave to each biker I saw.

But I remained confused as to why some riders never waved back. It left me with almost a feeling of rejection, as if I were reaching to shake someone’s hand but they kept their arm hanging by their side.

I began to canvass my friends about waving. I talked with people I met at bike events, asking what they thought. Most of the riders told me they waved to other motorcyclists and often initiated the friendly air handshake as they passed one another.

I did meet some riders, though, who told me that they did not wave to other riders because they felt that they were different from other bikers. They felt that they were “a breed apart.” One guy told me in colorful language that he did not “wave to no wusses.” He went on to say that his kind of bikers were tough, independent, and they did not require or want the help of anyone, whether they rode a bike or not.

I suspected that there were some people who bought a bike because they wanted to purchase an image of being tougher, more independent, a not-putting-up-with-anyone’s-crap kind of person, but I did not think that this was typical of most riders.

People buy bikes for different reasons. Some will be quick to tell you what make it is, how much they paid for it, or how fast it will go. Brand loyalty is going to be strong for some people whether they have a Harley, Ford, Sony, Nike or whatever. Some people want to buy an image and try to purchase another person’s perception of them. But it can’t be done. They hope that it can, but it can’t.

Still, there is a group of people who ride bikes who truly are a “breed apart.” They appreciate both the engineering and the artistry in the machines they ride. Their bikes become part of who they are and how they define themselves to themselves alone.

They don’t care what other people think. They don’t care if anyone knows how much they paid for their bike or how fast it will go. The bike means something to them that nothing else does. They ride for themselves and not for anyone else. They don’t care whether anyone knows they have a bike. They may not be able to find words to describe what it means to ride, but they still know.
They might not be able to explain what it means to feel the smooth acceleration and the strength beneath them. But they understand.

These are the riders who park their bikes, begin to walk away and then stop. They turn and took back. They see something when they look at their bikes that you might not. Something more complex, something that is almost secret, sensed rather than known. They see their passion. They see a part of themselves.

These are the riders who understand why they wave to other motorcyclists. They savor the wave.
It symbolizes the connection between riders, and if they saw you and your bike on the side of the road, they would stop to help and might not ask your name. They understand what you are up against every time you take your bike on the road-the drivers that do not see you, the ones that cut you off or tailgate you, the potholes that hide in wait. The rain. The cold.

I have been shivering and sweating on a bike for more than 40 years. Most of the riders that pass give me a supportive wave. I love it when I see a younger rider on a “crotch rocket” scream past me and wave. New riders carrying on traditions.

And I will continue in my attempts to get every biker just a little closer to one another with a simple wave of my gloved clutch hand. And if they do not wave back when I extend my hand into the breeze as I pass them, I will smile a little more. They may be a little mistaken about just who is a “breed apart.”

Visit Ken’s VTX1300.com

Obama camp ‘prepared to talk to Hamas’

In Fascism, obama on January 9, 2009 at 12:55 am

The incoming Obama administration is prepared to abandon George Bush’s ­doctrine of isolating Hamas by establishing a channel to the Islamist organization, sources close to the transition team say.

The move to open contacts with Hamas, which could be initiated through the US intelligence services, would represent a definitive break with the Bush ­presidency’s ostracising of the group. The state department has designated Hamas a terrorist organisation, and in 2006 ­Congress passed a law banning US financial aid to the group.

The Guardian has spoken to three ­people with knowledge of the discussions in the Obama camp. There is no talk of Obama approving direct diplomatic negotiations with Hamas early on, but he is being urged by advisers to initiate low-level or clandestine approaches, and there is growing recognition in Washington that the policy of ostracising Hamas is counter-productive. A tested course would be to start ­contacts through Hamas and the US intelligence services, similar to the secret process through which the US engaged with the PLO in the 1970s. Israel did not become aware of the contacts until much later.

A UN resolution was agreed last night at the UN, calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire between Hamas and Israeli forces in Gaza. The resolution was passed, though the US, represented by secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, abstained.

Richard Haass, a diplomat under both Bush presidents who was named by a number of news organisations this week as Obama’s choice for Middle East envoy, supports low-level contacts with Hamas provided there is a ceasefire in place and a Hamas-Fatah reconciliation emerges.

Another potential contender for a ­foreign policy role in the Obama administration suggested that the president-elect would not be bound by the Bush doctrine of isolating Hamas.

Read the rest here.

Well, he said all along he was going to do it. The people who voted for him either didn’t listen or didn’t care or both. The main thing is that Bush is out. Right? People had better wake up.

God help us.

Sarah Palin Interview Addresses Couric, Fey, and Others

In LIBERALISM, democrat playbook on January 9, 2009 at 12:33 am

John Zeigler interview with Governor Palin addresses the liberal media’s attacks on her and her family during the 2008 campaign. I think it’s funny that liberals, who incidentally consider themselves to be compassionate and caring, still demonstrtate hatred toward the Governor. The campaign is over, their guy was selected, so why all the hate? What are they so scared of? (other than losing in 2010 and 2012) .

See the video here. Be sure to read the comment s following the video.

Desirée Rogers for Commerce Secretary, Why Not?

In clinton, obama on January 8, 2009 at 11:02 am

 

Desirée Rogers, a Chicago corporate executive and civic leader, streaked to the top of Washington’s A-list in November 2008 when Obama announced that she would take on the role of social secretary in his White House.

As the country’s first black presidential social secretary, Ms. Rogers, an Obama fund-raiser and an executive at Allstate Financial, will oversee every White House social event, from Easter egg hunts to lavish state dinners (along with those oh-so-important guest lists). An invitation to make her acquaintance quickly became one of the most coveted accouterments among the political elite.

Originally from New Orleans, Ms. Rogers has an M.B.A. from Harvard, a philanthropic bent, a penchant for designer fashions, a diverse and powerful group of friends and a reputation for stylish entertaining in her Gold Coast condominium. In Chicago, she has been a regular on the society pages and a fixture at fund-raising galas. She has been on a first-name basis with the city’s politicians, corporate executives and cultural leaders.

She is a registered Democrat who has often reached across the political aisle, working as the Illinois lottery chief for the Republican Gov. Jim Edgar in the 1990s and contributing $2,000 to President’s Bush re-election campaign and $1,000 to his Democratic rival, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, federal election records show. (In the most recent election, she focused on the Democrats, raising $100,000 to $200,000 for Mr. Obama and personally contributing thousands to other candidates, the records show.)

She is a well-known businesswoman who ran Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas, a $1.1 billion utility in Chicago, from 2004 until June of 2008, when she became president of a unit of Allstate Financial. 

When we hear the word “change”, this is what we expect. Ms. Rogers is the only Obama appointee so far that demonstrates any change in Washington. It’s only too bad that she couldn’t have been appointed as commerce secretary, a post for which she seems to be aptly qualified.

A commerce secretary appointment for Ms. Rogers would have spared Obama the embarrassment of selecting another corrupt official for a cabinet post. Also it would demonstrate that Obama does have the ability to occasionally make a good decison. The fact that Ms. Rogers is not a Clintonista even adds to the sensibility of such an appointment. With Richardson out, here’s Obama’s chance to make things right.

Another positive for Ms. Rogers, neither Peoples Gas /North Shore Gas nor Allstate Financial are asking for bailouts.

Feinstein slams Obama CIA head pick

In What Change?, obama on January 6, 2009 at 5:00 pm

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the Senate’s incoming Intelligence committee chair, slammed Obama’s choice of Leon Panetta as director of the CIA Monday.

“I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA Director. I know nothing about this, other than what I’ve read,” Feinstein said in a statement. “My position has consistently been that I believe the Agency is best-served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time.”

A Feinstein spokesman said that the California senator found out about Obama’s pick after her staff showed her a New York Times report.

“Obama will now have a chance to make his arguments,” the spokesman said. “Her next move is to listen.”

Feinstein is the new chairwoman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. While Panetta’s political career — as a congressman, and as Bill Clinton’s chief of staff — spans three decades, he has little hands-on intelligence experience.

I can see where this is going. As long  as Obama falls in step with all of the dems who think they’re running the show, he’s golden and everybody is fine. When he crosses one of them or makes his own decision, it’s a bad day. I can’t wait until Reid, Pelosi, Clinton, Biden, and the others get into a battle royale.

hehehe…

Ann Coulter Banned !

In America, Fascism, obama on January 6, 2009 at 3:51 pm

Ann Coulter has been banned from appearing on NBC, insiders say. “We are just not going to have her on any more, it’s over,” a top network source explains.
But a second top suit strongly denies there is any “Coulter ban”.
“Look for a re-invite, as soon as Wednesday,” said the news executive, who asked not to be named.
NBC’s TODAY show abruptly cut Ann Coulter from its planned Tuesday broadcast, claiming the schedule was overbooked.
Coulter was set to unveil her new book, GUILTY.

One network insider claims it was the book’s theme — a brutal examination of liberal bias in the new era — that got executives to dis-invite the controversialist.

“We are just not interested in anyone so highly critical of President-elect Obama, right now,” a TODAY insider reveals. “It’s such a downer. It’s just not the time, and it’s not what our audience wants, either.”

Others inside the peacock network strongly deny the book’s theme is at issue.

For the book, Coulter reportedly received the most-lucrative advance ever paid to a conservative author.

The TODAY show eagerly invited the author months ago, for her first network interview on GUILTY.

The exclusive was to air during the show’s 7 AM hour. The cut came Monday afternoon.

Coulter was also to appear on the TODAY’s fourth hour. A host even teased the segment saying the ‘conservative pit bull and bestselling author’ would be a guest.

NBC’s cable outlet, MSNBC, will also become a Coulter-free zone, insiders explain. Morning host Joe Scarborough is said to be concerned with the new ban. “He’s working to overrule it,” tips a source.
*NOTE* The ban has been lifted. Expect to see Ann on NBC soon!

 

Pay to Play in NY?

In corruption on January 5, 2009 at 2:50 am

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — The corruption scandal engulfing Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich puts a spotlight on the nation’s only other vacant Senate seat — that of Hillary Rodham Clinton in New York.

New York Gov. David Paterson, who will choose Clinton’s replacement, can expect more intense scrutiny after Blagojevich’s arrest on charges that he tried to sell the seat vacated by  Obama.

The day Blagojevich was arrested, Paterson spokesman Errol Cockfield said the New York governor would “take any necessary steps to ensure that the selection of a new senator is not compromised in any way.”

But Cockfield did not identify any specific additional safeguards. A day later, Paterson said his process was unchanged: He’s looking for someone with integrity, with ideas to move the state, and a hard worker.

But in addition to a candidate’s qualifications, Paterson’s choice also needs to serve his own political and fundraising needs — both now and when he seeks election on the same 2010 ticket as the next senator.

Paterson needs a strong candidate who can raise plenty of money and attract important voting blocs in his quest to be elected to the job he fell into in March, when Eliot Spitzer resigned after it was revealed that he patronized a high-priced prostitution ring.

“This is a country with a two-party system, and politics will play a significant role” in Paterson’s decision, said Karl Sleight, former prosecutor and head of the New York Ethics Commission under Republican and Democratic governors. “Unlike any other job, you have to take that into consideration.”

So what should potential senators do to seek the job? Not a thing, Paterson said, other than demonstrating their qualifications.

AP Story

Obama Fundraising Scandal

In corruption, obama on January 5, 2009 at 2:28 am

1abarsmoke

Since it is apparently too much effort for the mainstream media (National Journal excepted) to be bothered to investigate what is potentially one of the largest campaign finance fraud scandals ever, we thought we’d set the table for them.  Here’s a “Cheat Sheet” if you will on how the story broke and what the important issues are:

1. In early 2007, Obama tells Silicon Valley mogul, Marc Andreeson, to “watch how I run my campaign – you’ll see my leadership skills in action”.   Which makes the following account all the more concerning.  Can we expect more of the same should Obama assume the seat in the White House?
2. Rumors begin to circulate that the Obama campaign is accepting foreign and other illegal contributions.  Atlas Shrugs blog breaks the story on July 23 and confirms the rumors.
3. On October 22, a citizen does his own investigative work and gives an online donation to the Obama campaign with a the fake name of John Galt along with a fake address.  Several bloggers quickly follow up on this story with their own investigative work and find that they too can donate to the Obama campaign with fake names and addresses.  Most disturbingly, foreign citizens were also able to donate using their foreign issued credit cards with fake foreign addresses.
4. By now, it has become common knowledge that the Obama campaign is the ONLY campaign to NOT disclose their “under $200″ campaign donor list.  No substantive reasons are given by the Obama campaign.
5. On October 24, it is confirmed by the National Journal that the Obama campaign has turned off address verification on their website.  This is highly irregular – in fact, it’s quite unheard of.  Essentially, turning off address verification (known as AVS) enables donors to fake addresses and circumvent donor limits.   This means foreigners can give illegal donations and motivated Obama supporters can exceed the $2300 campaign limit! As Internet and e-commerce professionals, we launch this blog to raise the issue of how highly irregular and potentially unethical it is to turn off online credit card address verification.
6. In light of the aforementioned and in light of the record $150 million haul Obama brought in during the month of September from over 600 thousand new, mostly unidentified, donors, this blog attempts to size the problem.  We calculated that over $181 million of Obama’s donations fall into the “potentially fraudulent” category.
7. On October 29, the Obama campaign is quoted favorably in the Washington Post as checking for fraud on the “back-end”. The Obama campaign did not elaborate on what this means and the Washington Post didn’t bother to ask.
8. Since the Obama campaign turned off the easiest and most obvious way to stop campaign finance fraud, this blog and the National Journal proceeded to explore other ways in which the Obama campaign could prevent campaign finance fraud.   We determined that the Obama camp could use IP addresses (unique identifiers for computers with geographic information) and BIN numbers (unique identifiers of credit cards with geographic information) to prevent fraudulent and foreign donations on the “back-end”. Unfortunately, all records indicate that the Obama campaign does NOT use these simple and cheap methods to prevent illegal donations.
9. With public pressure mounting on the Obama campaign to disclose his donor list (despite the apathy from the New York Times and Washington Post), Charlie Gibson of ABC News asks Obama why he won’t disclose his donor list.  Obama said it would be too difficult to process. RED FLAG!  Isn’t this the internet generation candidate?  Shouldn’t it be easy for computers to process these records?
10. It turns out that the answer is “Yes!”.  The liberal online publication, Slate, proves how easy it is to process the donor list.  The National Journal also proves how easy it is by talking to the bank that houses the Obama campaign records.

In summary, the Obama campaign is the FIRST and ONLY presidential campaign to turn off online address verification when raising money online.

The Obama campaign also chooses to not to use free or cheap tools that allow them to screen foreign IP address and foreign credit cards.

Finally, unlike the Clinton and McCain campaigns, the Obama campaign refuses to disclose their donor list.

It’s up to the reader to decide whether or not there is something unethical going on here.

Obama Shrugged – Shining a light on the Obama fundraising machine

Dodd Interview Censored

In What Change?, corruption on January 5, 2009 at 2:16 am

Tom Scott conducted the interview. WELI killed it. Now you can hear it.

Scott, one of Connecticut’s leading conservative voices of the past three decades, was the last local on-air voice at WELI-AM, once a fully-staffed Greater New Haven news station turned into a right-wing talk radio syndication outlet by owner Clear Channel Communications.

Scott hosted a weekday 5 to 7 p.m. drive-time talk show until Oct. 29. That was the day he taped a combative interview with U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut (pictured with Mutual Housing chief Seila Mosquera during a recent tour of New Haven’s Fair Haven neighborhood).

The interview focused on two controversies that have dogged Dodd recently: He received personal “VIP” loans from Countrywide Financial, a predatory lender he was supposed to be regulating as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. And he helped craft a $700 billion Wall Street bailout bill designed to spur new small-business and homeowner lending — but which turns out to be designed instead to enable banks to buy other banks.

Watching the TV news monitors in the WELI newsroom, Tom Scott, a former state senator and Congressional and gubernatorial candidate, had grown frustrated that reporters seemed to be going easy on Dodd. So he savored the chance to push Dodd on why, for instance, he won’t release the documents connected to his personal Countrywide loans.

The result was riveting radio. But WELI’s listeners never got to hear it.

Asked why the interview never ran, Todd Thomas, Clear Channel’s regional operations manager, said, “That’s something that happened behind closed doors.” He declined to comment further.

click here listen to the interview

Richardson Out

In What Change?, corruption, obama on January 5, 2009 at 2:01 am

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson on Sunday announced that he was withdrawing his nomination to be Obama’s commerce secretary amid a grand jury investigation into how some of his political donors won a lucrative state contract.

Richardson’s withdrawal was the first disruption of Obama’s Cabinet process and the second “pay-to-play” investigation that has touched Obama’s transition to the presidency. The president-elect has remained above the fray in both the case of arrested Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and the New Mexico case.

A federal grand jury is investigating how a California company that contributed to Richardson’s political activities won a New Mexico transportation contract worth more than $1 million. Richardson said in a statement issued by the Obama transition office that the investigation could take weeks or months but expressed confidence it will show he and his administration acted properly.

“I have concluded that the ongoing investigation also would have forced an untenable delay in the confirmation process,” Richardson said. “Given the gravity of the economic situation the nation is facing, I could not in good conscience ask the president-elect and his administration to delay for one day the important work that needs to be done.”

A person familiar with the proceedings has told The Associated Press that the grand jury is looking into possible “pay-to-play” dealings between CDR Financial Products and someone in a position to push the contract through with the state of New Mexico.

State documents show CDR was paid a total of $1.48 million in 2004 and 2005 for its work on a transportation program.

Richardson ran against Obama in the Democratic presidential primary, but withdrew after a poor showing in the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary.

He is one of the most prominent Hispanics in the Democratic Party, having served in Congress and as President Clinton’s ambassador to the United Nations and energy secretary. As governor, he has kept up an international profile with a specialty in dealing with rogue nations. Obama also considered him to be secretary of state.

CDR and its CEO, David Rubin, have contributed at least $110,000 to three political committees formed by Richardson, according to an AP review of campaign finance records.

The largest donation, $75,000, was made by CDR in June 2004—a couple of months after the transportation financing arrangement won state approval—to a political committee that Richardson established before the Democratic National Convention that year.

In the Illinois case, Blagojevich is accused of trying to sell the Senate seat that Obama gave up to become president. Obama and two of his top aides have been interviewed by the U.S. attorney’s office pursuing the case but have denied any knowledge of such a scheme and have not been accused by prosecutors of any wrongdoing.

10 Cent per Gallon Gas Hike Presented to Congress

In America, taking Congress back on January 3, 2009 at 3:10 pm

 

The National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission wants to raise the gas tax by 10 cents a gallon.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Drivers need to pay more gas taxes and new user fees to fix crumbling roads and bridges and ease congested highways, a transportation commission is set to recommend to Congress later this month.
U.S. gasoline taxes should be raised 10 cents a gallon to help fund improvements, at least until new systems are created to charge drivers for how much they use roads, according to a draft copy of recommendations from the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission.

“We’ve basically had a 30-year experiment in this country in under-investing in surface transportation infrastructure,” said Robert Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation and chairman of the commission.

Atkinson said the gasoline tax hike combined with more aggressive use of tolls and “congestion pricing” would help cover those costs.

Some estimates say federal, state and local governments would need to spend about $80 billion per year more than current levels to begin to reduce congestion, improve roads, and expand transit, Atkinson said.

The commission will recommend that Congress implement the gas tax hike, a 15-cent increase in the federal diesel tax, as well as tax increases for other fuels as short-term measures to raise nearly $20 billion more each year than is currently collected, the draft report said.

The Highway Trust Fund, the federal government’s primary source for transportation infrastructure, is mostly funded through federal gasoline taxes.

The Surface Transportation Act, which includes the fund, is due for reauthorization by Congress this year.

Record high fuel prices and an economic slowdown caused sharp declines in driving by Americans in fiscal 2008, lowering the revenue collected for the fund, but federal highway spending rose $2 billion. The Highway Trust Fund took in $31 billion between October 2007 and September 2008, $3 billion less than the prior year.

As vehicles become more fuel-efficient, Americans will be able to drive more miles as they pay less in fuel taxes, making a highway maintenance system that depends on gasoline taxes unsustainable, said Adrian Moore, vice president at the Reason Foundation and a member of the commission.

Moore does not support raising fuel taxes, but said it is the only tool Congress can immediately implement.

“The gas tax is broken, so any increase in gas tax is just a Band-Aid. It gets you through a very short term. It doesn’t even remotely solve the problem,” Moore said.

Moore and Atkinson said America must shift to a system whereby Americans pay for the number of miles they drive instead of being taxed per gallon of gasoline. Under such a system people would pay more for driving in some areas such as heavily congested freeways and less in areas such as rural highways.

Americans pay an 18.4 cent federal tax on each gallon of gasoline they buy, plus an extra 29 cents on average in combined state and local taxes.

WE SIMPLY CANNOT ALLOW THIS! Contact your U.S. Senator and U.S. Representative now!

Senate GOP to Block Attempt to Seat Franken Early

In America, taking Congress back, trickery and strategery on January 3, 2009 at 12:14 pm

The top Senate Republican said his caucus would block any attempt to seat Democrat Al Franken until an anticipated court case over Minnesota’s close election is finished and an official election certificate is conferred.

Texas Sen. John Cornyn said Friday that Republicans would object to seating the race leader Franken sooner. A filibuster would require 60 votes to break — a few more than Democrats currently hold in Washington.

Franken holds a 49-vote lead over incumbant Republican Sen. Norm Coleman, pending the resolution of the absentee ballots. Franken’s campaign has declined to say whether he would try to take his seat immediately if the canvassing board certifies him the winner.

Senate Democrats have not indicated what they would do if Franken’s lead over Coleman holds up after the recount ends.

The loser can appeal the recount result in court.

Cornyn’s threat means it is probable that Minnesota will have only one senator when the new Congress convenes on Tuesday. A court challenge and possible appeals could keep it that way for several months.

Coleman’s term expires at noon EST on Saturday.

Obama Stirs Fears In Israel

In obama on January 3, 2009 at 10:28 am

AS WORLD leaders and international organizations rush to rescue Hamas, Israel faces complex bat tlefield challenges – while fearing a stab in the back from the incoming Obama administration.

Israel’s leaders are asking themselves two questions: Is the cost of sending sufficient ground forces into Gaza just too high? And, upon his inauguration on Jan. 20, will Obama undercut Israel’s counterterror offensive before its goals have been reached?

read the full article

and then there’s this article on obamawho

 

Third Clinton Term Draws Near

In clinton, obama on January 3, 2009 at 10:08 am

Early morning preparations continue for Obama’s Inaugural Reviewing Stand on Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2008