GraniteGrok

...in an exceedingly small way. But still....

Posted by Tim at 6:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the lesser known speakers (at least to me) at RightOnline was Guy Benson who will be the next political editor at Townhall.com.  He brings up the fact that Harry Reid's son, running for Nevada Gov., isn't using his last name.  He talks about DC, his upcoming projects at Townhall - especially going after Obamacare.  He ALSO talks about the importance of holding elected Republicans to a higher standard.

Posted by Skip at 10:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Still out on biz travel and putting in long hours at the office so blogging has been REAL light.  Saw this though, and thought you might like it.  Pretty much says it all - ostensibly offering help but knowing what the offer will really be doing...

(H/T: NetRightDaily)

Posted by Skip at 9:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Continue reading "True or False: Did Obama's "Car Czar" favor Chrysler car dealerships who donated money to Democrats?" »

Posted by Tim at 8:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I picked this up from RedState who got it recently from the Chicago Tribune where it was apparently published back in 1934.  We are invited to read the list on the sign in the bottom left hand corner but there are plenty of interesting things to catch the eye.

"It worked in Russia."  And there's Uncle Joe telling us about "How Red the sunrise is getting."

We've got intellectual elites drunk on power leading the cart while money is shoveled out the back.

Just add Obama and you can re-run this as is, just swap out Stalin for Soro's and "it worked in Europe" (where it did not work either) for Russia.

History repeats itself.

Posted by Steve MacDonald at 2:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Obama's approval numbers have been on a continuous slide as he and the Democrats attempt to remake America into a socialist country (like the dying welfare states of western Europe). He last saw a 50% approval rating on January 7, 2010. The numbers have been below that ever since.

Now we have a state breakdown by the Gallup polling organization, and it's fascinating. Note that the South, including Texas, is not strongly "solid" in its higher-than-average disapproval of Obama (although the "average" of the average ratings is below 50%). Nor is the Midwest "solid."

But most fascinating of all is the Northeast, the base of Obama's support. Little New Hampshire is one of the top 10 states that give Obama his lowest approval ratings. Look at the map below: See that little lighthouse of liberty, shining away up there in New England? Yep, it's the Free State of New Hampshire.

Bodes well for us and our future as a sovereign---and solvent---state.

Posted by Tim at 4:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

(H/T: Hot Air)

Posted by Skip at 4:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Hmm...

Posted by Skip at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

President Obama visited Missouri today, to raise funds for Senate candidate, and current Attorney General, Robin Carnahan.

Yesterday, with one day left until the event, an announcement went out that the front-row seats, originally $250, were reduced to $99.  What a deal.

What price will Paul Hodes' stump-event tickets command?  I'm guessing less...if it even happens.

In his speech, Obama boo-hooed, again, the $1.3 trillion deficit he "inherited".  He's really starting to look, and sound, desperate.

Obama also pined, "These folks drove the economy into a ditch, and they want the keys back and you gotta say the same thing to them you say to a teenager, 'you can't have the keys back because you don't know how to drive'."

FUBAR

Posted by Tom Flaherty at 9:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Over at Powerline:

On Facebook, Fred Thompson writes:

President Obama said that the US and Israel share an "unbreakable" bond.

Obama should know. He's been trying to break it for months.

 ========

Indeed.  GraniteGrok stands with Israel.

Posted by Skip at 7:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Here in NH, he's not as boffo as once was, either:

Rasmussen says voters are evenly divided at 50 percent each on whether they approve of the job Obama is doing or not, although 41 percent are in the "strongly" disapprove camp while 32 percent are in the "strongly" approve. Fifty-three percent favor repealing the health care reform measure Obama backed (with 41 percent "strongly" favoring such a move) while 44 percent are in opposition.

PPP says 48 percent disapprove of Obama's performance while 47 percent approve, with 5 percent undecided. Independents disapprove by a margin of 51 percent to 43 percent, with 6 percent undecided. Fifty percent oppose the health care reform plan he signed into law while 42 percent support it, with 8 percent undecided.

(H/T: Politics Daily)

Posted by Skip at 11:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."

            - President Barack Obama, Inauguration, 1/20/09 

This is considered to be ....working? 

Oil Spill Timeline from RightChange on Vimeo.

(H/T: The Campaign Spot)

The Progressive ideology posits that Big Government is THE answer to our problems, that simply by getting the brightest and smartest people into Government, they can "guide" us to a social utopia.  That a competent Government can smooth over the ills of everyday life.  Really?  Not if you read this:

Continue reading "Competence, Mr. President" »

Posted by Skip at 12:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Continue reading "INCREASING LAWLESSNESS IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION" »

Posted by Tim at 1:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"...from Day One..."

(H/T: Instapundit)

Posted by Skip at 8:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, it's not the worst polling for President Obama - that would be a -22 - but it is still a far cry from where he started at +30 just after his inauguration!

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 25% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-six percent (46%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21 (see trends).

Not toast yet, but the bread may well be heading towards said kitchen appliance as for the first time during his presidency, a majority of the population wouldn't vote for re-election.

That news will be ancient news by 2012, but if it keeps up through the summer and fall (and teh trend ain't looking good for Barry), it will be really bad news for Progressives.  You'll see Democrats all running to the right, a la Clinton triangulation policy, trying to out run Obama's visage.

Posted by Skip at 11:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I just don't know where to start or what to segment out!  Normally, the CNBC crew are as avid lapdogs as those over at MSNBC, but this guy, Dennis Kneale who is the CNBC Media & Technology Editor, seems scared of what he is seeing - and instead of defending, is calling out an alarm for the industry he knows has been a bright spot for America - and now is at risk from the Obama Administration:

Imagine the idiotic: Anti-capitalist regulators in Paris mount an assault on the world’s tech titans.  They target Intel for granting big discounts to PC makers, Apple for dissing Adobe, Facebook for privacy practices, AT&T and Verizon  for Internet pricing, and Google for just about everything.

That kind of government onslaught would spark a trade war with the United States, home to most of the tech giants that really matter. But this sweeping assault on American innovation isn’t being waged by the French—it is the work of the U.S. government.

The Obama Administration is waging a silent, unwise war on high-tech, hell-bent on taming a few targets to bolster a get-tough image. The feds’ enmity toward what we’re best at—technology and making money on it—threatens our long-term economic recovery.

It will curb job growth in an industry the employs well over two million people in the U.S. It will penalize investors. And it could hurt even consumers, who, far as I can tell, aren’t injured by the practices now under review.

Once again, is Determined Weakness, the overarching policy of the Obama Administration of hamstringing almost every private sector, at play here too?  Determined Weakness - my term for the process of deliberatively lowering America to "even with all other countries" by regulation and legislation to determine that losers will be winners and winners are to be demonized before emptying their wallets Chicago style.  This is not a process of idiots doing a random walk of implementing Murphy's Laws into every nook and cranny of our lives.  It is putting into place a longstanding philosophy of "everyone will be equal - and we have no problem in forcing inequality on the many to equalize the few:.

All in the name of "social justice" that demands that the Collective have primacy over the Individual.  A Progressive idea - not that of the Framers.

These government forces are more interested in meddling in markets to shield weaker companies—the laggards—from the strong ones: the lethal. The feds now try to intervene before anything bad happens, rather than respond after a problem pops up. The effect is to penalize success and criminalize bigness.

This is the offshoot of the notion that Government has to protect everyone against everything - not only at the Individual basis but at the corporate.  This is "every elementary kid on the sports team gets a medal" at the corporate level - even when it is not deserved.

I have covered high-tech since the 1980s, and I never have seen the feds involve themselves so fiercely and frequently as they have since President Obama took office. I talked about it on Friday on "Closing Bell" with Maria Bartiromo.

Look at this lamentable litany of government-gone-wild:

Continue reading "I cannot believe that a CNBC dude wrote this about the Obama Administration!" »

Posted by Skip at 9:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Priorities count.  And as President, they matter a lot. 

So, how's your handicap, Mr. President?  That'll matter when you get retired....

Posted by Skip at 12:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

OK, it looks like Obama is all but ready to try to make himself blameless as he refuses to let another man made disaster to go waste

Yup, I'll be tweeting it out here at the GraniteGrok Twitter page. I'll drag them all back to the 'Grok later on...

• here we go
• He's done everything EXCEPT working on the economy....and has promised to pull out of Afghanistan....great start
• HE assembled a group WHEN? Chu is NOT an oil guy - and it sounds like he's in charge?
• Obama will certainly be fighting this man made disaster for ever...
• Will he mention the Jones Act - and that he didn't sign it?
• Yeah, you've acted like you're in charge from day one - hey, how's that handicap going from your last 4 hour golf round?
• Make no mistake - oh gosh, I forgot to check the over / under line for the times he'll say it.
• provide assistance to the states? Has he answered Jindal yet - who was PLEADING for help????
• Oops - he's winding up for the BIG BUCKS help! Rolling out the sob stories.....
• I wanna see the legal authority by which obama gets to take BP's money to go into that special fund!
• I also want to know what "nationwide search" is going to be done to see who / how it gets to be spent.
• Yet another BIG Govt plan to rescue the Gulf....
• Serious question - "absolutely safe" Does Obama believe that he can eliminate ALL risk from regular living (re: deep water drilling)?
• Impartial - is anything in the Obama Administration impartial? I think not....
• MMS - here starts the Bush blame game! fails to mention that the focus of MMS was moved to green tech and away from oil
• 20% of oil, 2% of reserves? Running out of places to drill? Puhlease - blame the environwackos.
• So, in the land of Liberty and Freedom, for which millions have died, Obama believes he can FORCE us to carry out his desire on energy
• Great - a new national vision - hey buddy, this ain't a moon shot and when in the Constitution does it say you can direct industry
• Notice he's not bringing up Spain's experience: for every 1 green job, they lost 2 regular ones.
• Entrepreneurs - yeah, like THEY are going to work independently.....he'll have to bribe them too.
• Obama - take him at his word - he IS going to make it VERY expensive for all of us little people.
• His examples, WW II and moon shot - were done for US Defense purposes (utter survival & control of the high ground). Specific targets
• ever get the connection between CA and the Gulf - both the farming/water & oil disasters are being continued by obama's administration
• As opposed to his last press conference, he actually had an American Flag behind him - thank the Lord for small miracles
• His plan, govt run - once again, he shows VERY little faith in individuals and the free market to take of things properly
• RT @Sami_Shamieh: Obama: "I'm not Jimmy Carter, I just play him on TV." #oilspill #tcot #p2 - HEH!
  

Yeah, pretty much what I expected the emphasis to be - the first set up for more Government, more taxes, and more spending.  Sure, for once he lambasted the MMS - the folks that were to be the watchdogs (but failed to mention that his Secretary had change that focus from traditional energy sources to green tech).

Posted by Skip at 7:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This pretty much sums it up:

(H/T: Michelle and  Powerline/Michael Ramirez)

Before this latest outgushing from our Blowhard-In-Chief happened, I had put this up on my white board last last week and just never got around to doing anything with it:

The only tool Obama seems to have is a hammer & people are getting tired of him seeing everything and everybody as nails.  What kind of President can only function successfully when he is demonizing / ridiculing everything that he doesn't like?

My question is: for a person who presented himself during the campaign as "being above partisan politics" and "business as usual in Washington"; he acted Presidential - and now?

It is a serious question - how effective can a President be, long term, when he has taken the Clinton aspect of the politics of personal destruction and brought it to a higher level on bigger targets? Not only that, has done so almost on a non-stop basis - every week a new target to not just complain about, but to bully it into the ground?  In the case of BP, there certainly is fault to be handed out and it is fair to skewer them for ignoring some of the warning signs of the blowout, ignoring some of standard safety rules, and cutting corners.  But it isn't fair to level criticism merely at BP - there are a whole host of characters - the sub-contractors running the show, the vendors of the equipment - and the laxness of the Government regulation that, during Obama's watch, signed off on this.  And I, too, will add the environmentalists into the mix - for why else would deep drilling exist but for the protestations of more shallow or land based drilling but for them?  They certainly have a part to play in making it more difficult and expensive to obtain the oil that powers our economy, pushing the boundaries of what is possible.

Yet, other than in mere passing, Obama once again fails to flog Government for screwing up its oversight - where were the plans for mitigation?  I often point out his Inaugural words:

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."

            - President Barack Obama, Inauguration, 1/20/09

In this case, bupkis - it didn't work.  No, it was not responsible for an accident.  And no, it cannot solve the deep engineering difficulties faced at 5,000 ft down - as has been shown it has neither the equipment nor the capability to do so.  But, it was supposed to have plans in plans and was supposed to be able to rally what it could (e.g., fire booms, skimmers, outside help where such help WAS able to be brought in at less technically challenging depths and areas of expertise - but failed to do so.  Obama dithered and did nothing.   But I digress.

Sure, everyone expects, upon taking office, for a new President to rail against certain things - but only for a time.  He just doesn't stop.

The Presidency is a bully-pulpit office; much can be achieved by speaking about things directly to the public (or your friends and enemies) in what is the largest megaphone in the world.  One of the problems that...

Continue reading ""Ass to Kick"" »

Posted by Skip at 10:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Viewers may better understand this clip if you knew the original poem upon which this is based - "Casey at the Bat" by Ernest Thayer - often considered one of baseball's greatest writings.

(H/T: Sue)

Posted by Skip at 7:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Recieved the following by email:

If you don't read anything else today please read the essay below by Robert Weissberg, Professor of Political Science - Emeritus at the University of Illinois, Urbana.  It offers by far the most accurate description of what most Americans are feeling but haven't been able to put their finger on it. Part of the problem is the fact that it's far easier to stir up a mob with a platform of lies if the audience is both under informed and filled with a sense of entitled. Combined with the participation of the media and you have a prescription for what we have witnessed over the last two years. We must not allow any of our fellow patriots to remain in the dark. I hope you will forward this to everyone you know. It is critical ammunition in the fight to retain our individual freedom.

From American Thinker:

A Stranger in Our Midst

As the Obama administration enters its second year, I -- and undoubtedly millions of others -- have struggled to develop a shorthand term that captures our emotional unease. Defining this discomfort is tricky. I reject nearly the entire Obama agenda, but the term "being opposed" lacks an emotional punch. Nor do terms like "worried" or "anxious" apply. I was more worried about America's future during the Johnson or Carter years, so it's not that dictionary, either. Nor, for that matter, is this about backroom odious deal-making and pork, which are endemic in American politics.

After auditioning countless political terms, I finally realized that the Obama administration and its congressional collaborators almost resemble a foreign occupying force, a coterie of politically and culturally non-indigenous leaders whose rule contravenes local values rooted in our national tradition. It is as if the United States has been occupied by a foreign power, and this transcends policy objections. It is not about Obama's birthplace. It is not about race, either; millions of white Americans have had black mayors and black governors, and this unease about out-of-synch values never surfaced.

The term I settled on is "alien rule" -- based on outsider values, regardless of policy benefits -- that generates agitation...

Continue reading ""A Stranger in Our Midst"" »

Posted by Tom Flaherty at 7:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Check out this short video, which aired on CNBC, May 28th.
 

Steve Wynn, the "King" of Las Vegas, rebuilt much of the strip and built many new resorts, such as Bellagio, Wynn, Mirage, and Treasure Island.  Wynn has been "credited with spearheading the dramatic resurgence and expansion of the Las Vegas Strip in the 1990s."
 
Not good...

Posted by Tom Flaherty at 6:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Rassmussen has the WORST daily polling results for Obama yet:

Sure, he got a bump up for a bit of time after Obamacare was passed, but it's gone.  The BP oil leak is now being perceived as his Katrina.  The annual deficits are now getting BIG attention, and now that Obamacare has been passed, the "nasty bits" are starting to look real nasty too.  It doesn't help him with the majority of the American population when he stands with a foreign leader and helps to condemn a part of the US, Arizona, that is trying to defend itself:

It was a gala affair on the White House Lawn. The POTUS and The President of Mexico stood behind the podium and delivered addresses of mutual friendship and good will. It seems the two men and their governing apparatuses had something in common to strengthen their bond. They each detested the fact that Arizona had passed legislation requiring that their state law enforcement officials assist in enforcing federal statutes on illegal immigration...

...The Democrats have been revealed for exactly the hate-America-first scum they truly are. This needs to be run in campaign adds in every state, every city, in every county across America. The People need to now which of our two parties stands up and celebrates the shaming of an America state.

People expect that the President is going to be one of the leading (albeit, serious) cheerleaders for the US.  And frankly, he isn't.  For every "decent" statement he has made, he turns right around and gives some aspect of the US another kick in the pants (front side, that is). No rebuke for Calderon?  Disrespectful - to the US.

One of the most serious tasks that a President MUST do (and yes, I put it into the category of MUST rather than optional) is the laying of the wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington National Ceremony.  Obama, ostensibly Commander-in-Chief, is sloughing off that duty to the gaffe-matic Joe Biden. 

Sorry, but THIS Blue Star Dad (twice over) is not pleased over this; this should NEVER be outsourced to an underling.  Already perceived as Jimmy Carteresque, this slight to the troops he commands will not be forgotten.

Then the Gaffe-Master underling, VP Joe Biden decides that America is no longer the capital of the free world - Brussels, the capital of the EU, has a claim to that title:

Do ANY of these chuckleheads like America? And what the blood and treasure that we have spent on behalf of others with no request for "response in kind"?

Posted by Skip at 6:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The anti-terrorism strategy so far has been to bow and scrape, and admit faults, and hope nothing bad happens.  The product of that failed policy has been for our enemies to take advantage of us while continuing to hate us more than ever, with a jihadi gunman successfully killing at fort Hood while two Bombs that were meant to kill hundreds (fortunately) failed.

This hands off approach (coincidentally?) appears to be the same strategywhen dealing with BP.  After a week long silence we were barraged with speeches about how they'd all been responding "from day one."  Well its been thirty days or more since "day one,"  and the Obama administration has done nothing except blame BP, ask BP what they were going to do about it, and wait for them to do it. 

Now we have oil on the Louisiana Coastline.

What happened to the 'From Day one' people?  Where'd they go?  They went into the situation room to plot the media strategy on how to use the crisis of oil washing up on coastal beeches to advance their left wing energy policy.

You doubt me?

A bank gets a bonus and we've got union activists on the doorsteps of bank employees and legislation already written coming out of committee. 

The supreme court overturns federal speech restrictions and there's a massive outcry, constitutional amendments, and bills in both houses of congress the next morning.

The race pimps are on standby 24/7 to promulgate a massive media blitz against anyone and anything that demonstrates any behavior that could be construed as racism--to the point of making it up when it fails to happen when they'd like it to.

If Obama wanted SEIU guys on the coast building barriers and spying for oil slicks, you don't think he could make it happen overnight?  Damn right he could, but he didn't and you know why.  He needs big oil to look bad and if he has to give up some coastline (the way he gives up democrat legislators, for examle) then that's the price we'll have to pay to advance his agenda. 

That's just the kind of guy he is, from day one.

Cross Posted from NH Insider

Posted by Steve MacDonald at 3:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

(Michael Ramirez)

Gee, from what I remember from school back in the day, the Executive Branch was supposed to enforce the laws and defend the country (do they even teach that nowadays?). 

I don't think that the Constitution calls for the President to use a foreign head of state

Sidebar: whose country depends on exporting its oil and its poverty to the United States for its own well being as it denies the same "rights" to illegals entering its border that it is claiming for theirs in crossing ours

to bash his own country for his own failure to enforce the law, does it?  And he seems to so easily (too easily?) to take to that task of lecturing one of OUR States for passing a law which is pretty much just like the Federal one (but with more safeguards for the illegal immigrants than the Federal one).

(H/T: Powerline)

Posted by Skip at 9:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Obama DID say something about a ditch....didn't he?

(Michael Ramirez)

Hmm, this seems more like "airborne to nowhere but down" to me.

(H/T: Hot Air)

Posted by Skip at 2:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Author of "Manchurian President", Aaron Klein, will be on the Fox Business Network tonite at 7:10pm, according to an email I just received his co-author (and NH Blogger at RBO, Brenda Elliot).  Wish I was going to be around to watch it.

Speaking of which, I'm still working on finish my reading of the book - am almost finished with Chap 4 - last week threw me for a loop because of this and am just now getting back on track - thus, am TWO chapters behind on putting up chapter reviews....

So much to do, negligible amount of "VAST TIME PERIODS" in which to do it....sigh.....

Posted by Skip at 4:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From Slate (not exactly a conservative news source):

President Obama was feeling loose at a Democratic campaign fundraiser Thursday as he talked about the Republican Party. "We got our mops and our brooms out, we're cleaning stuff out, and they're sitting there saying, 'Hold the broom better.' 'That's not how you mop.' " He then went from the utility closet to the garage. "After [Republicans] drove the car into the ditch, made it as difficult as possible for us to pull it back, now they want the keys back. No! You can't drive! We don't want to have to go back into the ditch! We just got the car out! We just got the car out!"

Claiming to have gotten out of a ditch is one thing. Then immediately rushing full bore, headlong into a steel reinforced concrete block wall (e.g., that they use to test jet aircraft into) does not mean you're about to succeed.

Bush's deficits were ditches - a tow truck can get you out of a ditch.  Running into a steel/concrete wall results in "smithereens" - you only need a bucket and broom for the little itty pieces left over.

In my State of NH, our Democrat John "Do Nuttin'" Lynch is about to find out the hard way as well.  Except of course, Obama explicitly made the decision; Lynch merely decided to make no decisions....but same result, proportionally.

Posted by Skip at 1:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I generally don't just put up whole posts from other sites without some kind of commentary, but I think this speaks for itself:

Not Juxtaposed Enough

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar characterizes the United States Federal Government approach to BP:

“Our job basically is to keep the boot on the neck of British Petroleum to carry out the responsibilities they have both under the law and contractually to move forward and stop this spill,” Salazar told CNN’s “State of the Union” program.

George Orwell characterizes totalitarian government:

But always— do not forget this, Winston— always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever.

Frightening, isn’t it, how the Department of Interior, that is the Parks Department, for crying out loud, sounds like Big Brother?

During a time of war, I have no problem at all with our leaders showing such an attitude towards those that would enslave and defeat us - I am in favor of fighting back when our security is imperiled and in those cases, there is no such thing as a fair fight (and would love to bring back the spirit of General Patton to do so).

But to use the same rhetoric against an ordinary (albeit, huge) corporation?  Sure, a huge problem has been incurred, and BP will pay for quite a long time and quite a bit for it.  But to use language normally reserved for war against for something that rightly belongs in the world of commerce?  To essentially call them out as an enemy of the State?

Oh yeah, this is the Obama Administration speaking - the "fierce advocate of free markets".

We're in the best of hands....

Posted by Skip at 7:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Already, the defenders of the Obamessiah are getting their gear in gear, but this isn't going to cheer the cockles of their Progressive / Socialist beating hearts:

WASHINGTON – Aaron Klein's exposé of Barack Obama's notorious connections with extremists and America-haters has skyrocketed to No. 1 on the non-fiction list at Amazon.com and is now No. 4 on the overall best-seller's list.

I'm reading it now - need to do Chapter 2 tonite.  It's a good read thus far.  And oh, btw, go give fellow NH conservative blogger, Brenda (the co-author), a bit of traffic love over at RBO. And yes, I did get a free copy - and no other compensation.  Just trying to help a fellow NH blogger - sometimes it is hard enough to write posts, but a whole book?

Posted by Skip at 7:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Don't think that I'm going to be able to read this all in one sitting; nor do I wish to given much away.  That said, I think I'm going to try to go for the overall theme and then a specific think that "hits" with me.

Thus far, this is a "chock-a-block" if Chapter 1 is a good indication.  Certainly during the campaign, Obama and crew downplayed ANY involvement with the terrorist known as Bill Ayers.  Formerly of the SDS, then a leader in the Weatherman terrorist group (responsible for 30 bombings during those turbulent 60s and 70s), the Brenda Elliot and Aaron Klein bring out a lot of the historical details that establishes one thing cold-stone-clear:  Obama and Ayers knew each other for along time, often worked closely with each other, and funded each other's organizations through multiple and highly linked leftist, radical organizations.  And all of them were radical, socialist / communist philosophically based and Alinsky styled.

This journalist and this blogger were able to figure this all out.  Yet, the Left leaning media could not?  Or were all too willing to believe the Obama logic "head fakes" like this (page 2):

"And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn't make much sense..."

The impression?  "You must be nuts to believe I'm all but in bed with this terrorist and his ideology - I was only 8!" - yet, the actual history says this head fake, while technically defensible, says nothing about how Ayers philosophically continued to continue to destroy America from the inside by merely changing from tactics to physically hurt America to destroying a critical foundation - its educational system (er, that's my addition - not in the book).

The part that "hit" me?  Part of the chapter outlines the importance of Obama's childhood church - the First Unitarian Church of Honolulu.  Upon returning to Hawa'ii upon the death of his grandmother in November, 2008, the Pastor reminded him he had attended the church as a child (page 5).

"Obama's eyes lit up, and he turned to his wife, Michelle, and said, "Hey, that's right.  This is where I went to Sunday School."

Which caused me to daydream of the church I grew up in (and where I met TMEW as a grad student), Trinity Baptist in Brockton, MA.  It was a "different" kind of church to look at from both the inside and out as part of it used to be a mansion of a wealthy family and then had a traditional sanctuary, chapel, Sunday School rooms, and a Fellowship Hall added on (and very oriented in the Evangelical tradition theologically).  I remember the places that I used to "hide" in the older parts of the old building (up in the attic, the cellar, parts of the multi-car garage (turned into a youth area).  Yes, I pretty much knew all of the quick ways to "there there from here" and generally not be noticed in doing so.

And then it hit me - most kids' memories of such are rock solid - Obama had to be told that this was his church?   While the Pastor said that the upper parts of the church had been remodeled, that leaves me to believe that the general outline / architecture had not.  And Obama didn't recognize it?

I find that, well, hard to believe.  Is his memory that bad?  Or is it part of the continual Obama metamorphasis - change to fit the time and need and like a snake or lobster after molting, leave the old behind?  Or does it match up with what we saw with his 20 years with Rev. Wright - there but not "really there"?  

Even as this church is known for being a radical church then, and still?

And so it unfolds...I have events the next couple of nights, but the reading will continue.

Posted by Skip at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Skip at 12:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Got an email late last week from Brenda Elliot who is another NH based Conservative blogger (hails from over at RBO).  Seems like she has co-authored a book on our President:

The Manchurian President

Well, given the obeisance that Lame Stream Press has given to Obama, many folks (including me) have cynically concluded that they have failed in being "watchdogs of government", so she piqued my interest!  I called her, we chatted, and she agreed to send  a copy - and autographed it!  It arrived late on Saturday (er, actually, it came on time but *I* arrived home late from being here).

So, what's it about?  Introduction says it all: since the mainstream press failed to do their job well, Brenda and Aaron simply asked themselves four simple questions about Obama: 

• "What were his background and personal history?"
• "What were his politics, and who and what had shaped his views?"
• "What was his record as a politician?"
• "And what was he promising to do as president?"

The conclusion?  Given the burning cavalier attitude of the MSM towards these basic journalism ethics, this summarized the "why" of this project:

"And yet, astonishingly, none of our 'watchdogs' in the news media seemed to care."

Indeed - once again, bloggers doing the job that the MSM won't do?  Am going to try to read ASAP - and Brenda, even being a rather shy person, has agreed to an interview.  So, I get to schlep over to the Seacoast sometime soon and will report back.

In the meantime, she asks but one thing:

I'm interesting in knowing what you think

SUCH a question for a blogger - trust me, I will!  In fact, I'll post some of this as I go along... 

Posted by Skip at 8:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Skip at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Promises, promises - and each one has an expiration date as he reneges on one after another:

From the authors of the video (emphasis mine):

TheFischers (uploader) @sperk44 It doesn't say re-nay-ger it says re-ne-ger. There are two pronunciations of the word: re nig and re neg. There was a lot of effort put in to using the second pronunciation to avoid being accused by racist people like yourself of racism. You and those of you ilk hear in your little racist minds what you want to. Renege and reneger have nothing to do with racism. It's racists like yourself that hear racism in the perfect and only word we have in English to describe Obama. Screw you!

(H/T: Jean)

Posted by Skip at 10:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Frankly, this can be both a good thing and a bad thing at the same time.  I do believe that a lot of things governmental can and should be privatized.  In the 1950's and 60's, the Race to Space between the US and the Soviet Union was not just planting a man on the moon - it was all about a crash project to develop new technologies so as to not fall behind in the Cold War (that could have turned hot; both sides understood the significance of cutting edge "stuff" as a deterrent).  A Governmental thing?  Given the times - yes.  Now however?  Hmmmm...

Obama?  Is this a true "time to let corporate America do this stuff", AND for the right reasons (and I would agree on this basis)?  Or:

• Shucking the expense of stuff he believes not to be worth it (why is NASA being tasked with Climate Change observations)?
• Pushing in private so as to blame the private sector later as the Chinese and Indians (and who knows what other small country) so as to REALLY governmentalize it all?
• Another way to progress "Determined Weakness (tm)" forward by emasculating yet another historical US strength?
  

(H/T: Bill)

Posted by Skip at 6:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Freedom means being able to move where and when you want and to be able to take your money with you.  Don't like the State taxes that you have to pay, like many in California, New Jersey, and New York have to?  Do like a lot of their former residents - move.  Move to a lower tax state or one with a more business friendly atmosphere.

Ditto at the national level.  While the 'Grok has reported on such stories in the past, they have been more of the professional with a small company that is on the cusp of getting gored by the higher taxes and regulations that are coming soon.  This one, however, is a big'un:

Wynn's remarks rattle Las Vegas gaming
Says he might move his headquarters to enclave of Macau

Steve Wynn's announcements usually draw lots of raves and praise from Las Vegans, but not this time.

Local gaming and government officials instead were expressing skepticism and concern after the Wynn Resorts chairman said on a cable business network Wednesday that he was considering moving his company's corporate headquarters from Las Vegas to Macau.

...Wynn also criticized the policies of President Barack Obama, continuing a dialogue he began in October when he appeared on several Fox News television talk shows to lambaste the administration's handling of the economy.

It was his announcement that he is considering moving his headquarters and some 100 corporate staff to Macau that attracted most of the attention locally, though.

...Wynn didn't provide any details on the possible headquarters shift, saying only that he is considering the idea and would bring the matter up with the company's board of directors.

"It is not improbable or unrealistic considering so much of our revenue is from China that it makes sense that I spend most of my time here," Wynn said in an interview with CNBC. "I'm seriously considering that and I am weighing the implications of how I engineer that."

In a subsequent interview with Bloomberg News, Wynn said much of his desire to leave Las Vegas was because of the country's economic direction set by Obama.

"The governmental policies in the United States of America are a damper, a wet blanket," Wynn said. "They retard investment; they retard job formation; they retard the creation of a better life for the citizens in spite of the rhetoric of the president."

...Wynn said Wednesday he was concentrating his efforts on Macau and would skip potential opportunities in Las Vegas.

"I don't think the Las Vegas market at the moment beckons a large investment," Wynn told Bloomberg "The economic outlook in the United States, the policies of this administration, which do not favor job formation, do not encourage investment at all."

Color me unsurprised - just look at the healthcare mandate that Obamacare is making: turning companies into social service benefit organizations by fining them if they don't provide what used to be a voluntary decision, fining them if they get the status of their employees wrong with respect to healthcare status / coverage, additional regulations concerning operations and accounting - the list goes on and on.

Given that Obama has already dissed Las Vegas twice, why would any sane operator like Wynn want to stay?

All the credit for this goes to Obama - his policies, his seeming disdain for the private sector, and his inability to stop demonizing his pet peeves du jour will drive lots of folks offshore - if for no other reason than to know that they'll face far less irritation by their new host countries than their native land.

Sad....

Posted by Skip at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Editor, The Citizen:

I met a man today who I'd seen over the years, had stopped to say hello and moved along. He had cut down a tree and was splitting it into fire wood. I'd thought to stop to help if he'd want, old as he is. I felt he wouldn't mind the company at least.

And so it was, he put aside his splitting axe, sat on the length of tree cut but not yet split and without a word of declining assistance or accepting asked straight out. "What has happened that today a man 26 years old can be a child on his parents insurance; I was 16 when I joined the Army just before the Normandy Invasion?"

I replied, "That's Obamacare, we are all children of our government now or soon will be after 2014 when they've collect enough in taxes".

"They're taking money from Medicare!" he said.

I asked of his health, and talked of other things then. I'll go see him again to talk, though he is only 16 years older than I, he has looked on this world longer, lived longer as a New Hampshirite.

Thinking of this man who at an age of what today is a child to be coddled by parents, diagnosed by physiologist and protected by a socialist government, stepped forward knowing enough of the days events and what they meant, put on the uniform of this nation to bear arms to protect it. To talk to him again if but to listen if he will or wants to tell what is on his mind.

I already know that he feels that this nation has somehow lost the knowing of what it was all about, and certainly not understanding how it has come to be that at 26 a person is yet a child, at least by government standards. I wonder how many children will be capable of splitting their winters supply of firewood at 82, not that they may need to; but then again they may not be allowed to as it is dangerous and stressing work.

GW Brooks

Posted by Skip at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Normally, I am not a "movie person".  For the most part, if I go to a movie theater, it is because TMEW is excited to go watch something (although my interest level does go up if it is at an IMAX theater even as the drain on my wallet goes up as well).

That said, ever since it came out, "Patton" is one of my all time favorite movies - a guy dedicated to one thing, focused on one thing - and that was in defeating America's enemies (although he personalized whomever it was as "his" enemy).  The quote is:

Rommel... you magnificent bastard, *I read your book*! 

Why did that catch my eye?  This story.  Yes Progressives, we knuckledragging, gun loving, God fearing, and now TEA Party sympathizers know how to read as well...

Posted by Skip at 8:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

...what's good for the goose should be good for the gander, eh?

Neal Boortz, a highly rated talk show host that classifies himself as a Libertarian has no love lost for Obama and his policies.  However, following on the good doctor that asked a similar question, Boortz has ticked off the Left:

Obama and his minions have effectively politicized and are ever inserting government everything else so why SHOULDN'T push back to that process be everywhere as well? And here is his rational, based on what and how Obama's healthcare is mandating that small business owners now find themselves, by law, to be arm-locked with the Government in now being social service organization (and not just a biz) (emphasis mine) :

The Democrats have passed ObamaCare. You have 50 employees. You're going to have to cut back to 49 employees to avoid the mandate that you provide health insurance for your employees. You have this strange idea that you hire people to work for you and you pay them well for that work. It is not your responsibility to take care of their health insurance. So .. you whittle down your choices to one of two employees. Both have been with your company for the same amount of time, both have similar work histories, and they are both very similar in their work habits and productivity. The only difference is that one is an unrepentant Obama voter, and the other is not. If it were not for Obama you would not be having to let an employee go ... so doesn't it make sense that the employee who contributed to this situation be the one to go on a job hunt? That employee was a part of your problem ... so he gets to realize the consequences of his actions.

Entitlement mentality on steroids.  What Government policy SHOULD be is to de-hook the tax credits that are given ONLY to companies for the health care premium sponsorship they give to their employees - give it to individuals instead.

But with this Administration?  Letting citizens make their own decisions?  Hah!

(H/T: Boortz)

Posted by Skip at 8:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Topsy tervy all upside down:

Posted by Tim at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Amusing!

(H/T: Jean)

Posted by Skip at 12:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Last year, Obama was the rock start newly ensconced onto his royal throne in the White House.  While his personal numbers still are OK, they have fallen from the vaunted heights of before.  However, the mud from his Alinsky powered Chicago way are certainly hurting Democrats with voters overall.  Rasmussen has the details:

Current scuttlebutt has the Repubs picking up 20-25 seats in the US House, perhaps 3-6 in the Senate.  Here in NH, I'm sure that the Dems are going to take a lickin' as well - Republicans may well take back the State.  People ARE uneasy about deficits which have shot up like a shooting stars; economic affairs have also played THE major role in elections.

If this trend, of Republicans polling better and better than Dems, we may see (instead of shooting stars), an direct application of the Political Law of Gravity (pretty much, same as Newton's) what goes up must come down.

The question is, will the Political Pendulum start swinging back from the Progressive / incremental socialism that the Democrats to a much more enhanced of traditional American values of self-reliance (vs the Democrat entitlement mentality) and self-Government (vs rule by an Administration State)?

There are Progressives within the Republican Party as well as the Dems - it will make no difference if those Progressives maintain control - they will simply move just much more slower.

Posted by Skip at 1:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This canNOT be seen as favorable news in the White House - there can be no "spin" that CBS is now the new FOX News:

It will remain to be see if the crowning achievement (thus far, and if it can be seen as such) of passing Obamacare will lead to better numbers in the future.  I think, however, that ALL of the Progressive policies (ALL which pretty much take gobs of money) are in serious problems.  Why do I say this?

I generally don't put up a chart in contiguous posts - but of ALL of the issues of the day, this summarizes the problem with Progressives:

And that problem is that idea that:

• Money solves all problems
• Government can solve all problems

The major benefits of Obamacare are not scheduled to start for a couple of years - just about the time that the cost of the debt is going to really start to hit.  Thus, it will be interesting to see if Obama's (and all the other Democrats) claims that people will like Obamacare may be undone once the real costs of this MASSIVE new entitlement starts demanding money.

(H/T: NRO)

Posted by Skip at 11:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."

                - President Barack Obama, Inauguration, 1/20/09

I think that the answer, in this case, is no, it isn't working - at least, one hopes this is not a harbinger of worse things to come.

One of the things that many still do not know is that Obama nationalized the higher education financing industry when Obamacare was made the law of the land.  Why?  I believe mere accounting trickery - it was doubtful that, on its own merits, the Education Takeover would have happened even though the Obama Administration was pitching billions of dollars of savings.  So, Pelosi and Reid attached to Obamacare - and got a twofer for nationalization of two industries at once as it "seemingly" made the numbers for Obamacare look better when the two programs were combined - in essence, it was used to "game", in part, the CBO scoring.

So, what happened today, the first day that Government runs this program?  Well, for starters, it would help if the Government owned website that is now THE portal for this program would, you know, be operational?  Helpful, you think?

Studentloans.gov, the web site that handles government direct lending to students, was broken most of the day Tuesday, when President Obama signed a massive expansion of the federal role in student loans into law.

Wait - it gets better!  From the Washington Times:

The government's Web site for handling student loans was broken most of Tuesday — the very day President Obama signed a law putting the government in charge of all subsidized student lending.

Visitors to the site www.studentloans.gov early Tuesday afternoon saw an error message, while users Monday saw either an error message or, in the evening, were simply unable to connect to the site at all.

..."This is a case study in what happens when the federal government takes over a function of the private sector. On its first day of operation, the federal student loan program has collapsed into a black hole from which no information can escape," said John Hart, a spokesman for Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican.

Multiple messages for comment were left with the Education Department on Monday and Tuesday. On Tuesday afternoon, a spokesman e-mailed that officials were "checking" on the matter.   

Yessiree Bob!  They are "checking" on it - certainly gives me a warm, cuddly feeling - you?  "Mission critical" mean anything?

Well, given that Obama a while ago said that jobs were to be (stealing from the only American car company that Obama DIDN'T nationalize here) Job 1, we also got this news: Sallie Mae (a quasi-private company /government sponsored enterprise) that does student loans,  is laying off 2,500 of their workers (out of a workforce of 8,600) due to this nationalization by Obama

Gives new meaning to Obama's phrase "whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage" doesn't it?  More Obama funemployment for these families!

Oh yeah, almost forgot.  Those "billions of savings" from nationalizing this industry?  CBO has some more bad news:

The student loan overhaul legislation signed into law by President Barack Obama on Tuesday could add $52 billion to the deficit between 2010 and 2020 when the cost of the market risks and administrative expenses of the loans are taken into consideration, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported.

Can we start reviewing the "too big" part of his statement, please?

Posted by Skip at 4:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There are a lot of folks on the Right that take Obama seriously and listen to his every proclamation.  And they notice a very serious deficiency: every single one seems to come with an expiration date.  For the dunderheads on the Left that may be holding their noses as they read through the 'Grok, let me 'splain it to you: he lies.  He lies quite often.  And easily to boot.

How else can you explain all of these proclamations of Obama's - and the subsequent denial of such by stating the opposite is now true?  Orwellian, in my thoughts - does he really think that "playing politics in the moment to that particular crowd" isn't going to come back on him at some point?  Is he that full of himself?

In 22 issue areas, I counted 44 statements that he later repudiated.  No, not said that he was wrong, not that he had changed his mind.  Nay, it was now he said something new without ever noticing that he had said the opposite.

Change?  Even his truth changes.After all, Alinsky's Rules say that the end always justifies the means....

BTW, if you feel overwhelmed by all the "Change"?  Yeah, it's by design:

RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

Don't give up and don't the bastards an inch.

And DON'T give them a reason to smile...

Posted by Skip at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Now,embracing our enemies and shunning our friends?  Somehow, I think this new "Soft Power" foreign policy of Obama and Clinton is not going entice those enemies OR endear us to our friends....

(by Ramirez)

In fact, we may well find ourselves, not as the lone superpower, but just plain alone.  How many people DOES Obama want to tick off?  According to the polls, most of US don't like his policies...he has to go and export that???

Determined Weakness.

(H/T: Powerline)

Posted by Skip at 7:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Another take on our new healthcare system: the REAL reason why the Entitlement Mindset, pushed by the Democrats, is bad for us

By the way - am I the only one that has noticed that Obama and his Liberal / Democrat / Socialist / Progressive posse has just done something:

It turned companies in social services organizations?

Is this the proper role of Government?  Now, remember, it was because of Government had put involuntary wage and price controls in place that companies decided to voluntarily to offer "bennies" to attract better workers (capitalists generally being smarter and more nimble than Big Government people - maybe that's why the current BG folk hate capitalists so much), one of which was health insurance.

Obama and his cohorts have just made the insurance companies, at best, public utilities, and at worst, government-departments-by-another-name.  Obama has already, according to some accounts with this move, now effectively nationalized 50% of our economy.

Socialist?  Well, he certainly is no advocate of the free market by turning companies into involuntary social services....

Posted by Skip at 4:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Is Congress actually relevant?

Normally, Congress has been very jealous of its power - remember just a short time ago how the Congressional and Senatorial Democrats were decrying the fact that Bush was an "Imperial Presidency"?

Will the Legislative branch defend itself, get a pair, or will it just conclude "hey, he's only doing what we want him to anyways"?

After all, the Constitution DOES give them certain enumerated powers - I wish that they'd start using them (and not the ones that they think they have)....

(H/T: Washington Times)

Posted by Skip at 9:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Skip at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Continue reading "Obamacare - built on lies" »

Posted by Don at 5:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Nice article by the brainiac philosopher and historian, Victor Davis Hanson.  His latest missive on the nature of Obama is up at NRO - stroll over and take a read (emphasis mine):

But after 14 months of them, the Obama particulars add up to a remaking of America that is now clear and consistent: Grow government; redistribute income; establish permanent political constituencies of dependents; increase entitlements; hike taxes; demonize “them” while deifying their supposed victims; seek global neutrality abroad; and always play fast and loose with the truth.

What do we end up with?

You might call it: Chicago does socialism.

He only forgot one thing:  ALL of his campaign promises and subsequent statements as President have expiration dates.  I did not know that a mark of socialism was being a flip-flop....oh,  never mind - this is an Alinskyite - the end ALWAYS means that that means don't matter.

Posted by Skip at 7:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

President Obama, always the sore winner, is rather petulant and unpresidential sounding in his latest campaign stops.  He is still upset that even with his historic win with Obamacare (and make no mistake, now putting over now 1/2 the economy under government control, stomping on the original intention of the Founders vision of being a voluntary group of Individuals to that of a single coerced collective, it is historic) that people are still acting in defiance of his will.  And make no mistake, with his thin skin, he believes that in a society that is now ruled by the Progressives, we are merely defiant children.

So he lays down a challenge to the Republicans who believe that his historic Obamacare needs to be repealed: "Go for it".

My, such a backhanded slap at over 50% of the country that now believes that it should be repealed.  Is he only the President of the Progressives?  No, he does not have to agree, but even as the public polling went against President Bush over Iraq, he, as President, never became disrespectful to those holding the opposite view.

Obama, with his Alinsky roots, shows nothing but disdain and scorn in implementing "The Rules" - always the community organizer.  At some point, however, his strongest skill will turn into his weakest, as he is, I believe, is starting to think that he is the Hammer to his opposition's Nails.  And as we all know, when one is limited to a single tool, the project is doomed.

I often say that we need to take the words of those that oppose us at face value.  So, reading this at NRO, we need to take President Obama at his word:

The Anti-'Yes We Can'?: 'Go for It'

A reader e-mails:

Perhaps others have picked up on this — I haven't had the opportunity to look very closely, but immediately upon hearing Obama's response to the idea of repealing health care — "Go for it" — I thought that "Go for it" would be a great rallying cry for 1) congressional elections in 2010 2) the overall effort to repeal it, AND 3) the Republicans' presidential bid in 2012. It could be our "Yes we can." 

It's both positive and ironic, and you have to love that. GO FOR IT!

Get the signs made.

Well, Recess time is here and the CongressCritters are coming home - many to do Town Halls.

Get your signs ready:  

Obama: "Repeal?"

Just doing what Obama said - WE'RE GOING FOR IT!!!

Posted by Skip at 5:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From last week, the New England Journal of Medicine reported some really bad news if Obamacare passes (via Hot Air):

The New England Journal of Medicine, hardly a bastion of conservative thought, polled health-care providers to determine their reaction to ObamaCare, and discovered that it has many doctors looking for the exits.  Almost half of all general-practice doctors would feel compelled to leave medicine altogether if it passes:

• 46.3% of primary care physicians (family medicine and internal medicine) feel that the passing of health reform will either force them out of medicine or make them want to leave medicine.

• 36% of physicians would not recommend medicine as a career, regardless of health reform.  27% would recommend medicine as a career but not if health reform passes.

• 62.7% of physicians feel that health reform is needed but should be implemented in a more targeted, gradual way, as opposed to the sweeping overhaul that is in legislation.

Why not?  They are going to get absolutely NAILED by Obamacare - remember, Obama started this attack on our healthcare system by attacking Doctors first (remember raising their income by amputating feet" and "doing more tonsillectomies"?

They are in the target income bracket for higher taxes

They are small businesses owners that have to now deal with higher costs of having employees due to Government mandates

They are generally self-employed -> a second round of getting nailed by higher taxes

They generally, being better off, INVEST their money (you know, the REAL definition of investing instead of the perversion said by Progressive Politicians to cover for "more spending"), so they get hit again.

Newer government regs are going to make it MUCH harder to deal with the labyrinth of the bureaucracy's new rules over the next few years

My only questions is: why wouldn't MORE just quit - it isn't going to be worth the hassle.  I think the bet that Obama and the Progressives are making is similar to that of the Republican Party to Conservatives has been: where else are they gonna go?

Well, for the latter, the answer has been the TEA Party and telling the Republicans where they can collectively put themselves.  In the case of the doctors, I can tell you where they are going:

"going Galt"

In fact, here's one right here.  She has decided that she is not going to be a victim in that she will deal with Government in her way (not the Government way) - which is to say, not at all.  From NRO (emphasis mine, especially at the bottom):

March 23, 2010

My Dear Patient,

As you must know, Congress has just passed extensive legislation governing health care delivery and insurance systems. Whether you agree with what it does or not, we are all now subject to this law and its sweeping changes.

I have always conducted my medical practice with my patient’s best interests as my first priority. Although not legally obliged to do so, I have routinely provided you with a receipt that has all the codes necessary to bill your own health insurance company for any reimbursement to which you are entitled. Until now, that insurance company was a free enterprise despite the fact that it was heavily regulated by state and federal laws. Now the situation is quite different. Through the new law’s mandates, regulatory powers and reform, health insurance is and will be largely a government activity which will have an ever larger jurisdiction over how doctors practice, make clinical judgments and are paid.

The new law provides for about 150 new government agencies, many of which are designed to be ‘oversight’ bureaucracies which will have the right to decide what medical care is legal to provide through insurance. Among other things,...

Continue reading "Physicians - Obama was warned - MDs going Galt" »

Posted by Skip at 12:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The TEA Party upset the apple cart for the Progressives - remember that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid wanted this healthcare bill done over a year ago.  If it were not for the TEA Party movement, they would be well on the road of what Obama said was "fundamentally transforming America".

From Canada Free Press comes the roadmap:

for the Obama Administration, there were three major pieces of legislation they had in mind that would radically change America. The first of these was government health care, an approach that would not only eventually lock in all Americans deeper into the government’s cradle-to-grave programs, but would also make it virtually impossible to reduce government spending while providing carte blanche for just about any mandatory public health program to be implemented.

Government Health Care was meant to implement control over the people. The second was to be Cap and Trade, which would implement government control over American industry and turn the financial markets into a government program to push the environmentalist agenda. The third was an overhaul of immigration that would aggressively seek to remake the American population and replace the base type of American with a more amenable and controllable type.

Actually, the author missed it a bit, so let me revise:

1. TARP - take over the control (not ALL the ownership, but essential control) of the financial markets and two of the big dudes of the Manufacturing markets
2. Stimulus - $787 Billion to prop up Government, make it bigger and stronger.  Jobs?  Not in the private sector, as we have seen.
3. Healthcare - we will now be dependent on Larger Government for that need.  In essence, Obama has just made us all part of the Welfare class in this regard
4. Cap N Trade - control Energy, and you control everything else that doesn't need Healthcare.  Obama now gets to set industrial policy by who gets the energy they need - and who doesn't
5. Immigration - Hey, Labour did it in the UK (as we just found out this year, to secretly fundamentally change British society - and it worked!)

What will Government NOT be in charge of, if we let this go on?  What will you tell your grandkids when they ask you

"Grammy and Grampa, what does Freedom really mean"?

And what will you tell them when they ask:

"Where is it now?  When do I get to choose for myself?"

Freedom requires action - get up off your A** and get to work!

Progressivism = incremental socialism

Posted by Skip at 2:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From that bastion of Conservative News - CBS

One such surprise is found on page 158 of the legislation, which appears to create a carve out for senior staff members in the leadership offices and on congressional committees, essentially exempting those senior Democrat staffers who wrote the bill from being forced to purchase health care plans in the same way as other Americans.

(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE-

(i) REQUIREMENT- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are-

(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or

(II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act). 

But as with a lot of legislative matters, the devil is in the details - or in this case, the definitions. As anyone who’s worked on Capitol Hill knows, the personal office staff for a member is governed by different rules than those who work on committees and in the leadership offices.

It appears from the way this language is written that those staffers NOT in personal offices, such as those working and paid under the committee structure (such as those working for Chairman Henry Waxman) or those working on leadership staff (such as those working for Speaker Nancy Pelosi) would be exempt from these requirements (emphasis added).

(ii) DEFINITIONS- In this section:

(I) MEMBER OF CONGRESS- The term `Member of Congress’ means any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate.

(II) CONGRESSIONAL STAFF- The term `congressional staff’ means all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC.

According to the Congressional Research Service, this definition of staff will only apply to those staffers employed within a member’s “personal office” - meaning that it will absolutely not apply to committee staff members, and may not apply to leadership staff. 

Add to that fact that Congress will not subject itself to the same Obamacare it is forcing on us.  Oh, sure, they talk how good it will be, how it will save money and lives and be better - but they exempt themselves from it.

The Political Class - the Progressives - creating the Two Americas that John Edwards (you know, the one we now know to have two moralities??)!  They created Obamacare for the Have Nots...

Silly us....only the Progressive Political Class will be the Haves.

Class warefare?  Liberty?  They turn us against each other when it is THEY that are the enemy!  Damn Democrats!  Hey, Blue Hampshire - your own "kind" sold you out too!

It's a feature, not a bug....

Posted by Skip at 2:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Skip at 1:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

He did beat Bush time-wise in the race to become #1, right?

I don't think he'll have to need much time at the rate his going; you?

This set of small biz owners that paid for the sign think he already is #1.

(H/T: RedState)

Posted by Skip at 7:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From NRO:

Then (President Obama, Sept. 5, 2009):

"We have to revive this economy and rebuild it stronger than before. And making sure that folks have the opportunity and incentive to save – for a home or college, for retirement or a rainy day — is essential to that effort.

"Now:

March 18 (Bloomberg) — Democratic congressional leaders would raise to 3.8 percent the Obama administration’s proposed new Medicare tax on investment income to generate an estimated $210 billion to help fund a health-care overhaul plan.

Surprised?  Just another tentacle of Obama "spreading the wealth"; most of that new tax will be taken from from those that have done the right thing to be independent and saved their money - most for their retirement.  Or, that money is used to start new or expand current businesses - re: new jobs.

Obama is not about wealth creation, a vibrant economy.  It is an ideological bent to take (steal) from folks who have followed the traditional American dream and expectation and forcibly take it.

So, once again, we see that what he says, we cannot believe - his actions belie his words.  

Ask yourself - why bother to save when you know that the Government is just going to take the fruits of your labor?  The old saying still holds true: tax something and you get less of it.  Obama either believes that it won't hold true for HIM, or doesn't care.  

Incentive to save; yeah, that lasted a long time, right?

Integrity.  You decide.

Posted by Skip at 8:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It ain't getting any better in the polls, ladies and gentlemen!  In a single year, he has joined Bush at the low of his Presidency - which took Bush until the end of eight years.

Posted by Skip at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Stunning - simply stunning:

President George W. Bush still holds the record for the most debt run up on his watch: $4.9 trillion. But it took him over four years to rack up the first two trillion dollars in debt.

It has taken Mr. Obama 421 days.

When the money runs out, the end result is Banana Republic status for the USA.  Obama is certainly #1 in leading the way....

(H/T: CBS via HotAir)

Posted by Skip at 1:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

...Responsibility and leadership in the 21st century demand more. In an era when our destiny is shared, power is no longer a zero sum game. No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold. The traditional division between nations of the south and north makes no sense in an interconnected world. Nor do alignments of nations rooted in the cleavages of a long gone cold war...

Well, how's that working out?  In the case of Israel, not so much - being an ally of the United States seems to be a downer instead of an upper.  Just for allowing building housing in an area that was exempt from a previous agreement?  Yes, sir - the Chicago way - the Alinsky way!  From Powerline:

Haaretz reports that Israel has not only received a tongue lashing from Secretary Clinton delivered to Ambassador Michael Oren, but has also received four peremptory demands:

1. Investigate the process that led to the announcement of the Ramat Shlomo construction plans in the middle of Biden's visit. The Americans seek an official response from Israel on whether this was a bureaucratic mistake or a deliberate act carried out for political reasons. Already on Saturday night, Netanyahu announced the convening of a committee to look into the issue.

2. Reverse the decision by the Jerusalem District Planning and Building Committee to approve construction of 1,600 new housing units in Ramat Shlomo.

3. Make a substantial gesture toward the Palestinians enabling the renewal of peace talks. The Americans suggested that hundreds of Palestinian prisoners be released, that the Israel Defense Forces withdraw from additional areas of the West Bank and transfer them to Palestinian control, that the siege of the Gaza Strip be eased and further roadblocks in the West Bank be removed.

4. Issue an official declaration that the talks with the Palestinians, even indirect talks, will deal with all the conflict's core issues - borders, refugees, Jerusalem, security arrangements, water and settlements.

It's quite a package, if accurate, and it's hard to see how any self-respecting Israeli government could submit to it. Item number three in addition gives expressive form to the notion that it is dangerous being an ally of the United States in the Age of Obama.

Oh, another thing from that UN speech:

We have fully embraced the millennium development goals.

Think the ONE campaign.  Think an additional tax on the US taxpayers - 2.5% of national GDP.  That's $350,000,000,000 / year. 

Obama said "...spread the wealth...".  He's working on that too.

Posted by Skip at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This post over at American Thinker by Greg connected a couple more dots for me.  Remember a bit earlier this month that Obama said that the emphasis was going to be jobs, jobs, jobs?

And now he's back on healthcare even as the majority of Americans are against it?  The words from his book "...I sought out the Marxist professors..." still ring here (emphasis mine):

It has been said often, and with more eloquence than I, that Barack Obama's priorities are misplaced.  Where are the jobs pundits are asking? But even as he lip-serves employment, he needles America.

Vladimir Lenin once said, "Medicine is the keystone of the arch of socialism," and it's clear that Obama and Lenin share philosophy.  Clearer still is that Obama doesn't care.  Not about November.  Not about your family.  Not about your job.  What he prioritizes -- as evidenced by his push for "reform" -- is the "fundamental restructuring" of the American economy.

Andy Stern, the most frequent White House visitor, gave a speech, recently, in which he said:

We now have a new metric.  The president says he wants to measure the economy by increases in the middle-class.  Whether we have shared prosperity, not just whether we have growth-a fundamentally different philosophy than we've seen in the country to date.

And Stern knows Obama.  The long-held assumption that empowerment of the lower-class will "grow the middle" is gone.  Stern went on to say:

Clearly government has a major opportunity to distribute wealth....  We stand at a cross-roads, we are at the historical cross-road, I think, economically, in terms of what a new president is trying to do, and a different way in which we're going to evaluate the economy.  All of a sudden, we are witnessing the first new American economy-led by the government and not the private sector.

Chilling.  President Obama fails to see America as a land of opportunity, rejects wealth creation, and intends to "grow the middle," not by lifting the poor, but by shrinking the top.  This explains his obsession with health care-the "keystone" is in reach.

And should he grab it, we will all be less free.

And many of us still remember that five and ten year plans by centralized planned economies do nothing but fail.  Yet, Obama at the national level and here in NH (where the Governorship, the House, the Senate, and the Executive Council) are all Democrats - and from the left wing to boot.

So, what just so darn gurn great about this crop of chuckleheads that they believe that they can succeed where far better at it have already failed?

It's never about freedom with people who want bigger government - it IS about their control of it, however.

Posted by Skip at 8:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Hmm:

"...Making matters worse, these bleak budget projections are based on relatively optimistic economic assumptions. The administration forecasts economic growth of 3.0 percent from the fourth quarter of 2009 to the fourth quarter of 2010, followed by 4.3 percent the next year. By contrast, the Congressional Budget Office predicts growth of 2.1 percent and 2.4 percent for these two years. Lower growth would mean less tax revenue, larger budget deficits and a more rapidly increasing debt-to-G.D.P. ratio...."

Sounds like more Obama lip service to me...like what what he was lampooned for here. Actions speak louder than words; taking down the deficit has been put as far forward as creating jobs.

(H/T: Greg Manikew)

Posted by Skip at 9:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From Instapundit:

READER BRENT KILPATRICK WRITES: “After watching the U.S. 4-man bobsled team win Gold for the first time in 62 years I had a thought. Since President Obama seems embarrassed by ‘American exceptionalism’ do you think he would have preferred a Bronze?”

RE: His dismissal of the concept of American Exceptionalism:

I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.

Thus, Obama doesn't believe that American Exceptionalism is all that big of a deal - everyone is exceptional!  He goes on to discuss his pride in his country....and then I remember that actions speak louder than words, and the term "determined weakness" (here, here) still applies.  That does not speak well to "American Exceptionalism".

Thus, I'm not surprised that the "poll bleeding" isn't getting any better:

Posted by Skip at 12:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

...to show his onery side that is.  As other pundits and bloggers are now zeroing in on - "thin, his skin is!".  Certainly not one who likes to be challenged and certainly doesn't like it when he is not regarded as the smartest guy in the room.

And his demeanor, I'm betting, is leading to the phrase "Obama is going down!" - his worst showing yet:

Hot Air (via Instapundit) points to this poll at CNN (freakin' CNN???) that shows:

• 56% think the federal government's become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.
• 37% Democrats
  
• 63% Independents and nearly
• 70% Republicans
  
• 44% disagreed.

On that 44%, there was this note at Instapundit:

Prof. Reynolds, please recall that some 40% or so of American households now pay zero federal/state taxes, so they really haven’t much incentive to agree with the founders about the debt crisis and the coming tax increases to pay interest on the debt.

I've said it for years now: EVERYONE should be paying part of the freight of the cost of Government.  As Progressives scream more and more that only the "rich" should be paying, there are certain hazards that become members of the "Law of Unintended Consequences" club:

• If the "rich" stop being rich, there is a severe and adverse effect on that level of government as we are seeing in CA, NJ, NY and NY City (all of which have very Progressive income taxes)
• The "poor" are disconnected to the real cost of running Government; not only do they want more but they will be hurt the most when the money runs out if Progressives continue their "transformation of America".

And as we all know, the vast majority of Politicians believe in the phrase "never having to say you're sorry". 

As Mark Steyn just said:

What's happening in the developed world today isn't so very hard to understand: The 20th century Bismarckian welfare state has run out of people to stick it to. In America, the feckless insatiable boobs in Washington, Sacramento, Albany and elsewhere are screwing over our kids and grandkids. In Europe, they've reached the next stage in social democratic evolution: There are no kids or grandkids to screw over...So you can't borrow against the future because, in the most basic sense, you don't have one. Greeks in the public sector retire at 58, which sounds great. But, when 10 grandparents have four grandchildren, who pays for you to spend the last third of your adult life loafing around?

President Ford liked to say: "A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have." Which is true enough. But there's an intermediate stage: A government big enough to give you everything you want isn't big enough to get you to give any of it back.

We hard-hearted small-government guys are often damned as selfish types who care nothing for the general welfare. But, as the Greek protests make plain, nothing makes an individual more selfish than the socially equitable communitarianism of big government: Once a chap's enjoying the fruits of government health care, government-paid vacation, government-funded early retirement, and all the rest, he couldn't give a hoot about the general societal interest; he's got his, and to hell with everyone else. People's sense of entitlement endures long after the entitlement has ceased to make sense.

So, it is the American people who have figured out that Obama and the Progressive policies are not in their own self interest - or their childrens'.  Sure, Obama wants to "give" us Universal Healthcare but the public also recognizes "yeah, but you're trying to give it to us with our own money!"

When the Progressives have bankrupted the country and re-jiggered the national spirit so as to have everyone saying "why aren't YOU paying for ME anymore??", will they say:

Sorry?

But wait, there's more - he's a boor!

Continue reading "Yeah, that Healthcare Summit w/the Republicans sure helped..." »

Posted by Skip at 10:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Skip at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

 The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."

        - President Barack Obama, Inauguration, 1/20/09

From Strategy Page comes this woeful tale of Government not quite making the grade for the elite Navy SEALs: 

Recreational Subs To The Rescue

February 23, 2010: A year ago, the U.S. Navy cancelled its ASDS (Advanced Seal Delivery Systems) minisub project, after over a decade of effort, and nearly a billion dollars spent. This inspired a commercial submarine company (Submergence Group) to try and build what the SEALs needed, but do it more quickly and cheaply. So, in less than a year, and spending about $10 million of their own money, Submergence Group delivered their S301 SEAL delivery system minisub to the navy for evaluation. The S302 was built to commercial standards. It can dive to 200 meters (600 feet) and has an air locks so that divers can enter or leave the S301 while submerged. The 13 ton, 8 meter (25 foot) S301 carries two crew and eight SEAL commandos. The S301 can fit into the 12 meter (38 foot) dry deck shelter that can be attacked to American SSNs. This allows the S301 crew and passengers to enter the minisub via a SSN hatch. Then the dry deck shelter is flooded, and the S301 can proceed to the target area. The S301 provides 12 hours of operation via lithium ion batteries. The navy was so impressed with the S301, that they leased it for a year, to see if it, or a variant, could meet the ASDS requirements. All this was made possible by the fact that commercial materials and shipbuilding technology had advanced so much in the last two decades, that a recreational submarine industry had developed. These private subs are not cheap, but for the very wealthy, and maritime research operations, they are affordable.

It was four years ago that the U.S. Navy SEALs were told that they were not going to get their six ASDS. Only the first one had been built, and it was not a success. After a decade of development, the ASDS had too many technical problems, and construction of the other five was cancelled. Only the first one remained, and it sort of worked. Then, fifteen months ago, the sole ASDS caught fire, and burned for six hours. The navy was reluctant to repair the vessel. Instead, it was decided to try and develop a similar vessel, using components of the ASDS that did work. In the meantime, the S301 showed up, rather unexpectedly...

...The S301 saves a lot of money by skipping lots of the high tech sensors, and "additional features" that some admiral or contractor tacked on for no particular reason (but that increased the cost, and complexity, of the system a lot.) The regular warship builders and defense contractors dismiss something like the S301 as a "civilian toy," but the troops have some input, and they are definitely interested.

"...but whether it works    ..."

Er, that seems to be, yet again, a big "Nope!". 

Posted by Skip at 12:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."

        - President Barack Obama, Inauguration, 1/20/09

This is working?  I know, having done such a job by myself, that weatherization can cost upwards of a few thousand dollars.  It can get even more expensive if one starts to include replacing windows and doors.  But this is a bit much, dontcha think?  From the Washington Examiner (emphasis mine):

Stimulated: Feds weatherizing at a cost of $57,362 for each home

ABC News reports on the failure of the Department of Energy to use stimulus money to weatherize homes:

A $5 billion federal weatherization program intended to save energy and create jobs has done little of either, according to a new report obtained by ABC News on the one-year anniversary of President Obama's American Reinvestment and Recovery Act.

Only 9,100 homes had been weatherized nationwide as of Dec. 31, according to the new report by the Government Accountability Office, to be released Thursday.

Though the ABC News report doesn't mention it, the Los Angeles Times does the math:

The Energy folks did tell ABC they've so far spent 522-million Recovery Act dollars on the program. So, let's see, about 9,100 homes divided into that chunk of stimulation change to believe in is -- gee! -- about $57,362 worth of very expensive weatherstripping for each home fixed up so far.

$57K per house?  Are they serious?  Take any middle class couple - would they ordinarily spend this much to WEATHERPROOF their home?  Sure, there might be those that are looking for "super-insulation" style results, but those are far and few between.  Most might spend that much on an entire renovation!

This is what happens when money is taken from you and spent by Government "experts" and bureaucrats on the behalf of others.

Can you really tell me that this is, as Obama said, Government that "works"?

I didn't think so....in the private sector, you'd get fired.

Posted by Skip at 8:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, I got nuthin' today - writers block.  In lieu of anything worthwhile, a bit of a story - my friend Warner Todd Huston (Mr. "Posting Everywhere!") was the first to report that Marvel Comics decided to show its Leftward bent by displaying a rather negative viewpoint of the TEA Party movement.

Isn’t it wonderful that a decades old American comic book hero is now being used to turn readers against our very political system, being used to slander folks that are standing up for real American principles in real life — and one called “Captain America” at that?

In issue number 602 of Captain America, a new story line has begun called “Two Americas.” In it the current Captain (there have been a few of them, apparently) is on the trail of a faux Captain America that is mentally deranged and getting chummy with some white supremacist, anti-government, survivalists types going by the name of “the Watchdogs.” While investigating this subversive group, Captain America and his partner The Falcon — a black super hero — have decided to try and infiltrate the secretive organization.

In preparation for the infiltration, Marvel Comics depicts the two super heroes out of costume and observing from a rooftop a street filled with what can only be described as a Tea Party protest. The scene shows crowds of people in city streets carrying signs that say, “stop the socialists,” “tea bag libs before they tea bag you,” and “no to new taxes.” Naturally, the people in these crowds are depicted as being filled with nothing but white folks.

The black character asks the out of costume Captain, “What the hell is this?” And follows that with, “looks like some kind of anti-tax protest.” The Falcon character then snidely tells his partner the Captain, “So I guess this whole ‘hate the government’ vibe around here isn’t limited to the Watchdogs.”

After the story went viral, Marvel apologized - specifically mentioning Warner by name - sorta.

Well, cartoon creator extraordinaire Chris Muir over at Big Hollywood his own take on this turning of Captain America towards the Dark Side:

Posted by Skip at 8:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Clean, green energy - yes, sir!  That's what the President wants and keeps telling us is our future - the New Economy (gee, didn't we hear that just before the .COM bubble?)!

Just one small problem, well, actually two:

• Spain has actually shown us that for every single green job created, you lose two regular ones
• Government is a lousy picker of "winners" - even with the (formerly) fat taxpayer checkbook

Here's a couple of examples of Oabama's splindiferous takes on trying to be a green Venture Capitalist from Planet Gore:

Solar-panel company Solyndra and electric-car maker Tesla — both financed (and one could argue, bailed out) with taxpayer money last year — are going public. Up first, analysis of Solyndra, which received over $500 million in loan guarantees:

Solyndra's innovative photovoltaic glass cylinders are full of it — full of vacuum, silicone and thin-film CIGS in a relatively low-efficiency configuration.  Several of Solyndra's VC investors have told me that the real value for Solyndra is in the cost savings in the Balance of System. Will the institutional investors who drive the success of an IPO buy the Solyndra BoS story?  Especially when the cost per watt of c-Si and FSLR CdTe continues to fall?  And the cost of Solyndra's product seems somewhat bloated?

A lot rests on the shoulders of Solyndra: the perception of the viability of CIGS technology, the perception of the viability of VC investment in solar manufacturing, and the skill of the DOE in picking technology winners.

We parsed the Solyndra S-1 here.

GTM Research analyst Shyam Mehta did a masterful job at dissecting the Solyndra situation.

Here is the Solyndra S-1.

An exploration of Solyndra's price per watt

Doesn't sound too good. How about Tesla?

Continue reading "On Goverment picking "winners and losers" with Porkulus" »

Posted by Skip at 3:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From Grant over at NH Watchdog (emphasis mine):

Adam Leech reports in the Portsmouth Herald that local officials have turned down “free money” from the federal government, because building a new water treatment plant with stimulus funds will be too expensive.

When the bids came in, the low bidder — Penta Corporation — presented final cost of $21 million with the stimulus funds and $17.3 million without. So the city said thanks, but no thanks, to the stimulus funds.

“It just didn’t make sense,” said Deputy Public Works Director David Allen. “It was going to cost us more money to take the money.”

Stimulus funds mandate workers are paid using Davis-Bacon Wage Determination, which sets the pay scale for workers on federal projects and added $2.5 million to the bottom line.

The “Buy American” provision would’ve added another $500,000 and Allen said there would have been significant administrative costs — upwards of $100,000 — for the city to track it the way the government requires over the course of the two-year project. 

Stimulus - $3.7 million more?  Not here.

So, unions (Davis-Bacon) will save the taxpayers money?  Not here.

Free trade to obtain best value for the taxpayer?  Not here.

So, Obama Administration making it easier for local governments?  Not here.

$3.7 million extra.  And that doesn't get you angry? And Statists get mad when people "refuse" free money?   And thanks to the Fathers of Portsmouth, this was made unnecssary:

Posted by Skip at 8:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Certainly a lot colder than when the President came to Portsmouth - but there were still folks there to let PBO know that his policies are not, um, well liked.  From Andrew over at Manuse Media Hub (with permission, as I had to work here):

and then the AFP folks put on their own meeting with Steve Moore from the Wall Street Journal (here):

Posted by Skip at 9:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Ben at CNSNews has the translations; next time you hear President Obama talk, have your trusty crib notes below at the ready! 

“Hope and change”: Socialism at home, surrender abroad. Obama uses this talismanic formula when he wants to activate his base, which responds to it like a jukebox when you drop in a nickel.
 
“False choice”: A very real choice Obama wants to pretend doesn’t exist. He uses this when he puts on his “pragmatic administrator” mask. Instead of facing up to the reality that we sometimes have to choose between scientific advances and morality, or between civil liberties and national security, or between environmental regulations and economic development, Obama pretends he can solve these conflicts through some sort of Hegelian synthesis only he is wise enough to comprehend.
 
“Deficit reduction”: Deficit increases. Obama suggests that he will cut the rate at which the deficit is growing—something he has never actually achieved—and acts as though this is actual deficit reduction. It’s the equivalent of a woman spending $2,000 on her credit card, then informing her credit card company that though she won’t pay off her debt, she’ll only spend $1,500 next month.
 
“Let me be clear”: Let me lie to you....
 
“This isn’t about me”: This is completely about me...
 
“Reaching out to the other side of the aisle”: Totally rejecting all ideas from anyone outside the Obama-approved bubble. Then suggesting that subsequent political impasses are their fault, and that they ought to bend down and grab their ankles to establish a new tone in Washington.
 
“Failed policies of the past”: Don’t blame me! Blame Bush!
 
“Tax cut”: Redistribution of money from those who pay a disproportionate amount of taxes to those who pay none.
 
“Transparency”: Deliberate opaqueness, hiding crucial facts from the American public....
 
“Stimulus”: Payoffs to friends.
 
“Shovel-ready jobs”: Jobs that no one wants and that last for two months.
 
“Green jobs”: Imaginary jobs....
 
“Recovery”: Continued economic stagnation.
 
“Jobs funded”: Jobs Obama will take credit for, even though he has done nothing to either save or create.
 
“It won’t happen overnight”: It will never happen.
 
“Progress”: Redistribution.
 
“Cynics”: Anyone who doesn’t believe in the Obama radical agenda. Obama uses this word to disparage his critics as angry and lacking in basic qualities of human kindness.

There's more - go and chuckle...

Posted by Skip at 8:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, I'm not all that surprised at the reactions - if you are on the Left, this was (at least, spoken out loud) equal to sliced bread.  On the Right, not so much.  I took it to be rather long, disjointed, and at the end, wondering about his speech writers.  Of course, TOTUS is starting to become a bore and given the ubiquity of it everywhere, I think most have come to the conclusion that he can't give a cogent speech without it.  I guess we can just think of it as the equivalent of his binky, blanket, or Amex card - for all ages (as we found out with our kids), one should never leave home without them.

All that said, what it really comes down to is how did the operator / Talent / President do?  During the campaign, he always seemed to keep his cool. Last night, though, he had another "face" - one that was more biting, more angry; like a father dressing down recalcitrant kids, or a teacher trying to maintain control over a classroom full of class clowns.  In other words, someone trying to fight to maintain (or regain) control of the situation.  

Much of it was standard fare, but on more occasions than necessary, rather than sounding and being Presidential, he came off as being simply petty.  Or what he really is: a Community Organizer - which really showed last night.  A C.O. needs an enemy to focus on, to ridicule, to make hay against, and thus, have a target to rally his troops to attack.

Problem is, he's trying to pit Congress and Senate and the Supreme Court all against each other while still doing what a C.O. does which is remain in the background and keep his troops in front of him.

Problem is, it is hard to be in that background when you are the President at the State of the Union address.  And that presented the problem to Obama, as he can be a campaigner, he can be a C.O., but seemingly is having more and more problems in being successful at what he is being paid to do: be President.  And last night, it showed.  And I'm not the only one:

Jules Crittenden: “But seriously, we have just witnessed an extraordinary exercise in presidential oratorical animation that may be without peer or precedent. Can it be said that any American president has ever tried to blame so much on other people, or has been willing to so rapidly abandon his own principles for the betterment of his standing with the people, to seize up the banner against himself in our nation’s time of need, that this nation should not stand against him? For this, the president deserves our unabashed, gaga-eyed astonishment.”

John Podhoretz: “One liberal trope after the speech, voiced by Chrystia Freedland of the Financial Times on Charlie Rose, is that Obama is putting Republican politicians on notice he will go after them as the do-nothing impeders of progress. Republicans should pray this is the case, and it may be the case.” In New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts he’s proven impotent. Why should people fear him more now, when he’s weaker?

Prof. Randy Barnett: In the history of the State of the Union has any President ever called out the Supreme Court by name, and egged on the Congress to jeer a Supreme Court decision, while the Justices were seated politely before him surrounded by hundreds [of] Congressmen? To call upon the Congress to countermand (somehow) by statute a constitutional decision, indeed a decision applying the First Amendment? What can this possibly accomplish besides alienating Justice Kennedy who wrote the opinion being attacked. Contrary to what we heard during the last administration, the Court may certainly be the object of presidential criticism without posing any threat to its independence. But this was a truly shocking lack of decorum and disrespect towards the Supreme Court for which an apology is in order. A new tone indeed.

and the most devastating: Meryl Yourish

Tonight, he addressed the American people, and he addressed Congress. Go back and look at the speech. He was earnest, and his chin was down, his head relatively level, when speaking to Congress. When he spoke to us, his chin rose, and he talked down to us—literally.

Go ahead. Take a look. Note his posture. You’ll see it, too. You and I, we are not his equals. He is above us.
That’s what sets my teeth on edge every time I listen to him.

(H/T: Instapundit)

Problem is

Continue reading "Last nite's SOTU speech - couple of observations" »

Posted by Skip at 7:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Just seen over at the Campaign Spot:

My Fellow Conservatives . . .

. . . it is time to rethink our opinion on President Obama, I suggest. "He has done more to discredit big government in one year than we could do in an entire decade."

An Engineer's definition of the word "interesting": intellectually stimulating, but boy, is it going to hurt!

Apply that definition to the above observation, and use the word "Amen!"

It's still gonna hurt for a while longer....

Posted by Skip at 12:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Does Obama (being a Progressive) really think that the masses are as dumb as most Progressives believe them to be?  Did he really believe that his "float this idea" was really going to rise to proclamations by Conservatives and TEA Party folks?

Er, is he really believing that he is economically reality based?  Certainly not by this:

It seems that Obama really believes that what is going on over "here" will distract us from what he is really doing over "there".  Unfortunately since we have learned that ALL of his campaign promises have expiration dates, we're watching as hard and as well as possible - and that with a jaded eye. 

When this grand pronouncement says a "spending freeze" is issued, but the details show it only covers 13.5% of the budget, that's hitting the fly instead of shooing the tiger out of the parlor room - the danger is not stopping the $15 billion but refusing to acknowledge that the problem is elsewhere.

Here's what POLITICIANS of all stripes try to divert you from when they start talking about discretionary vs non-discretionary spending - and those "classifications" are by law.

Then ask them this: "er, who wrote the laws?  Yeah, you did, you chucklehead!  Now, when are you going to do the HARD work we elected you to do and CHANGE that spending law?"

After all, they created the law that spends our money - don't let them off the hook when you demand that they CHANGE their own laws!

And again, that proposed 'bipartisan deficit committee" idea?  Tell your CongressCritter / Senator that no, you don't want that - we ELECTED you to make the hard decisions.

If they won't, I certainly put my hand up to make it for them!

(H/T: NRO for the graphic)

More graphics from USA Today:

Think the wealth is NOT already being redistributed?  Again, look at that 2010 number and think - the Boomers (er, I'm in that group) are JUST starting to retire.  Ask youself - do you REALLY think that Entitlement Spending is REALLY going to be sustainable?

Posted by Ann Marie at 12:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I've only been looking at this from the aspect that Obama would be inserting the Government into the marketplace and displacing those private entities that were serving the public.  Jobs lost, businesses lost - frankly, tell me one spot, other than specific instances of crony capitalism, where Obama has championed the private sector in both words and deeds?

Here, Erick brings up another aspect: When an institution takes Federal money, it is subject to Federal regulations - and Lord knows that Obama and crew are all about creating more and more regulations.

When Obama takes to the podium for the State of the Union, one of the things he is allegedly going to push is a wholesale federal take over of the student loan industry.

Already, his plans are causing a lot of students, particularly of private higher ed colleges and universities, problems with getting financing for education. Obama intends to shut out the usual third party lenders and put everything within the federal government — under a program that has been shown repeatedly to be highly inefficient and burdensome for academic institutions.

More troubling, by putting everything under the Department of Education, universities and colleges will be forced to adhere to federal rules, some of which conflict with the values of sectarian institutions that presently use the third party student loan system for their students.

The feds controlling the student loan industry means the feds get to tell academic institutions what values they can and cannot promote among the selection and disciplining of their students.

Bottom line: Obama, with one stroke of the pen, will not only nationalize the financial end of the equation with the students, but will also be in the position to "nationalize" the colleges and universities via HOW that money can be used on behalf of those students that have taken Federal monies.

If you hold values other than secular humanist ones, watch out.

A sad two-fer. Another reason why a limited government is preferable to this that forces ITS values (re: the values of the ruling party and bureaucracy) on you.

Don't believe me?  Look what happened to the banks, the car companies, the insurance companies, et al.

Posted by Skip at 8:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Gallup rolls it up and shows that the last two Democrat Presidents have been the most contentious since Dwight Eisenhower's Administration:

(H/T: NRO)

Posted by Skip at 8:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Hitler finds out that the Massachusetts Senate Seat was Won by a Republican.

Posted by Skip at 12:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Let's see, if Scott Brown (R-MA) can be the underdog Revolutionary, and Martha Coakley (D-MA) the staid "Royalty" of MA Democrat politics, this fits!

In my outlook, he is raising the alarm and a call to Patriots who wish to preserve their individual freedoms from an Obama Administration (and his fellow Progressive Democrats) that TRULY believe that we do not know how to run our own lives - ONLY Government elite should be making the major decisions (and not you).

If you live in MA (where I grew up until I moved to NH in my late 20's), please get out in vote: CONSERVE your liberties!  Yes, your vote DOES count (even in MA)!

(H/T: NRO)

Update:  From a Republican friend here in NH who received an email from a friend:

We went to the "People's Rally" in Worcester yesterday afternoon in Worcester. We haven't seen a crowd so revved up for a GOP candidate ever!  We took our grandson Aidan, got some pics (attached), and had a good time.

Aidan's Mom, who always voted Dem is now voting for Scott. And he'll be recruiting the daycare kids to get their Moms and Dads to vote Brown.

Also the people at the rally all said one thing, this is just the beginning, and a prelude to the fall election. They want a political blood bath this fall.

...Can't wait until 8 PM tomorrow.

Posted by Skip at 7:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Filed under "Obama Administration" - after all, the MA voters are voting on Obamacare!

It is looking like the political world in the US is about to undergo a huge explosion come the end of Tuesday night when we all find out how Massachusettsstan (my "birth" state) will have voted for either Scott Brown (the upstart Republican who decided to taken on the Democrat Machine) or Martha Coakley (the MA Attorney General that seemingly is about to grab the "Gaffe Crown" from the current champion, Joe Biden).

Not only will a Brown win put an end to the 50 year reign of the MA Kennedy family, it will signal to the rest of MA voters that Change is indeed possible in MA, and that Obama's Change is done.  While Democrats hold a 3-1 voter registration stranglehold on the state's voters, this will show that those at the top, Obama and MA Guv Deval Patrick, can run their brand into the ground as well as the Republicans did during the last administration

'Cept, the Dems seem to have done it in FAR faster time.  Once again, the axion of "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" plays its hand - and now the voters have caught on (I hope). 

On the other hand, even if Brown loses, it still will be a shockwave around the Right: "hey, we almost beat Blue in the Bluest state in the nation!".  Given the reports I've seen around the blogosphere, sure there will be disappointment if he loses, but nowhere as much if Coakley wins by a hair.

CrossTarget, in conjunction with Pajamas Media, has a poll showing the Big Mo is not with Obama, the Dem Machine, and Coakley:

The poll, conducted via telephone for Pajamas Media by CrossTarget, was of 574 Likely Massachusetts Voters and has a margin of error of +/-4.09%. CrossTarget used the exact method – Interactive Voice Technology (IVR) – it used in a similar poll for PJM on Friday. The previous poll showed Brown ahead by approximately 15%.

What follows are the details of Sunday afternoon’s poll as conducted by CrossTarget:

1. Thinking about next Tuesday’s special election for US Senate. The candidates are Republican Scott Brown and Democrat Martha Coakley. If the election were today, who would you vote for? If Scott Brown press 1, if Martha Coakley press 2. If you are undecided press 3.

1. Scott Brown 51.9%
2. Martha Coakley 42.3%
3. Undecided 5.7%

2. And do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Scott Brown? If favorable press 1. If unfavorable press 2. If you are undecided press 3.

1. Favorable 60.3%
2. Unfavorable 31.9%
3. Undecided 7.8%

3. And what about Martha Coakley? Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Martha Coakley? If favorable press 1. If unfavorable press 2. If you’re undecided press 3.

1. Favorable 39.7%
2. Unfavorable 54.2%
3. Undecided 6.1%

(H/T: Instapundit)

Posted by Skip at 9:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Skip at 11:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Guest post by A.W. Hawkins (with permission)

Somewhere in between the highly publicized rounds of golf and strolls on the beach that President Obama is currently taking while on vacation in Hawaii, someone in his inner circle needs to tell him there’s an important lesson to be learned from the failed terrorist attack on Northwest Airlines Flight 253. That lesson is that our posture towards terrorists (and terrorism) matters.

Let’s begin by agreeing that every successful terrorist attack against the United States doubles as a recruitment video for rabid jihadists, eager to spill the blood of infidels and strike terror in the heart of the “great Satan.”

We saw this after the Ft. Hood shootings on November 5, when militants Islamists took to American streets the very next day:

The message that should be taken from what took place yesterday at Ft. Hood … is that this war will be fought on American soil. That the blood of … American military personnel will run in the very streets they were raised in.

But when a terrorist attack is publicly thwarted, as was Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab’s attempt to ignite the incendiary material in his underwear on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day, militants aren’t as quick to take to the streets. In fact, they hastily distance themselves from the incompetent bomber by denying his ties to al-Qaeda (although we already knew he was tied to al-Qaeda).

Citizens understand this. Thus when passengers smelled the smoke Abdulmutallab created while trying to carry out his attack, they jumped him, subdued him, and dragged him to the front of the plane. As Fox News reported on December 26, 2009:

Experts say an aggressive response from passengers has become the common response [to attempted terror attacks] since … 9/11.

But where is Obama’s “aggressive response”? What do average everyday citizens know that he doesn’t?

For starters, they know that the militant Islamists are bent on killing Westerners, and Americans in particular. And although as recently as Sunday, December 27, NPR had not retracted its position that Abdulmutallab only had “possible ties to terrorism,” citizens aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253 had enough common sense to know that Abdulmutallab was attempting a terrorist act whether NPR-type thinkers could ascertain it or not.

More importantly, they knew his actions required an overpowering reaction.

Yet while the actions of these citizens send a strong, resilient message to individual terrorists they may get the chance to tackle before an act of terror can be carried out, Obama’s actions toward a multitude of terrorists — like those currently held at Gitmo — send a weak, faltering one. A message which could be easily be confused with an appeasement approach that will likely cost more American lives before we finally wake and fight as those aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253 fought.

Consider the contrasts here. Citizens choked and restrained Abdulmutallab to stop him from completing his attack; some citizens were even burned in the process. Yet Obama is so concerned with how the world views our handling of “suspected terrorists” — who are really actual terrorists captured on the battlefield — that he is moving them from Gitmo, in Cuba, to a maximum security prison in Illinois where they can be treated as well as the guy whose crime was twice violating his restraining order.

Moreover, when trials began for these “suspected terrorists” they will not be held in military courts but in a federal courtroom in New York City.

You remember what happened in New York City, don’t you? That’s where thousands of Americas were killed on September 11, 2001, when two airplanes were hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center by what NPR might still describe as men with “possible ties to terrorism.”

We must ditch this soft approach to terrorism. We need to understand that apprehending terrorists by whatever means necessary and then holding them somewhere where they cannot threaten the American people is the only sound approach to dealing with people bent on killing infidels (i.e., you and me).

This is the lesson the attack on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 teaches those who are willing to listen, and it’s one that President Obama needs to hear.

AWR Hawkins is a conservative writer who holds a Ph.D. in military history from Texas Tech University.

Posted by Skip at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii for his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body, the has never spoken out before about a government official, until now. He dictated this letter  to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president. 

Dear President Obama,

My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year.  People meeting me for the first time don't believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert.

I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos'n Mate.  Now I live in a "rest home" located on the western end of Pearl Harbor, allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service to my country.

One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man.

So here goes.

I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do, but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish.

I can't figure out what country you are the president of.You fly around the world telling our friends and enemies despicable lies like:
 
"We're no longer a Christian nation"

"America is arrogant" - (Your wife even announced to the world," America is mean- spirited. " Please tell her to try preaching that nonsense to 23 generations of our  war dead buried all over the globe who  died for no other reason than to free a  whole lot of strangers from tyranny and hopelessness.)
 

I'd say shame on the both of you, but I don't think you like America, nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do, for the obvious gifts this country has given you.  To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the White House.
 
After 9/11 you said," America hasn't lived up to her ideals."
 
Which ones did you mean? Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British? Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man, that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War?  I hope you didn't mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellas I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around, because we stand for freedom.
 
I don't think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination.  You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected.

Take a little advice from a very old geezer, young man.
 
Shape up and start acting like an American.  If you don't, I'll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue.  You were elected to lead not to bow, apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves.

And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. You mean you don't want us to do what you did when that white cop used force to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts, who was putting up a fight?  You don't mind offending the police calling them stupid but you don't want us to offend Muslim fanatics by calling them what they are, terrorists.

One more thing.  I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you're the Commander-in-Chief now, son.  Do your job.  When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him.  But if you're not in this fight to win, then get out.  The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you're thinking of.

You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president.  You're not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy.  That's not our greatest threat.  Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now. And I sure as hell don't want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle.

Sincerely,
 
Harold B. Estes

(H/T: Anne)

Posted by Skip at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Protestations to the contrary, I believe Obama chose his church well (according to already established beliefs).  Once again (from a post from John at Powerline back in Nov), we hear Rev Wright talk about his true beliefs:

Yeah, I betting that Obama did listen - and is now carrying this out "message" on the national scale.  This Universal Healthcare just passed by the Senate will neither be Universal (already, the CBO has established that the original goal, to cover the uninsured, will not) nor Healthcare (especially when all the money runs out in just a coupla / few years).

Look out, USA, there's more Marxism coming our way...

Rev Wright - the person that was a special mentor to Obama - rails against the same capitalism that has provided him with a very comfortable retirement and a 10,000 square foot home in a tony gated community.

There's a word that describes that - it starts with a big 'ole "H".

Posted by Skip at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Certainly, Obama's actions are determining his newly arriving political weakness - Rassmussen has the continuing bad news - a -21 (a new low):

55% hate Obamacare is part of the reason.

Although a bare majority, 51%, still blame Bush for the current economic problems, in no small part, Obama's handling of the economy is not helping.  That "robust" 3rd quarter that was touted to be 3.5%?

Er, not so much - down rated to 2.8% and today down rated to 2.2% (with most of that the Cash for Clunkers).  We're in the best of hands!

He's not doing so well with his Obamacare either - Quinnipiac reports that the public hates the idea 56-37%. For the economy, they report that the public gives him 56% - 37% thrashing in how Obama is creating new jobs...

And the Senators?  Still spending like there were real tax dollars coming in (which they're not - they've "gone Gault")! " Cash for Cloture!"

• PA, NY, and FL all get to keep the Medicare Advantage program (the rest of the states lose it).
• LA gets $100 million thanks to Mary Landrieu
• CA gets $300 millino for doc payments
• Unions get $10 Billion for underfunded medical funds
• Ben Nelson from NE gets free Medicaid payments from the Fed ($100 mill to start) FOREVER!
• VT and MA get some too - $1.2 Billion minimum over the next 10 years
• CT, via Chris Dodd (he of the "friends of Angelo" sweet mortgage deal) gets $100 million for a new med school
• Non-profit insurance companies are exempt from the new insurance company tax (cool $7 Billion)
• "Frontier" States get higher Medicaid and doctor payments (as the rest of us see them slashed).
• Iowa gets some "hospital payment" love too (unknown)
• Socialist Bernie Sanders (VT) get $10 Billion for more medical clinics and another $4B for personnel 
• Max Baucus, Montana, gets money for mine workers
• A sop to insurance - our adult children to age 26 will be classified as....children to enable larger family coverage
• AARP get about a $1B and stands to make more with their Medigap program when the Medicaid Advantage gets terminated for most of us.
  

And what it will mean for us?  The people that will have to pay the bills?  Try this for starters for our costs?  And here's more on the tax hikes that will get us all.  We also get to pay for over 100 new committees and government bureaus to regulate us all

Greg Mankiw: 

It is unclear whether such a reduction in the growth rate could be achieved, and if so, whether it would be accomplished through greater efficiencies in the delivery of health care or would reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care.

It is doubtful that even after a decade, if the "uninsured" will actually be covered...we're spending $1.5T and it won't do what the stated goal was supposed to be?

Fortunately, interest by the States (who are about to get porked by Obamacare by skyrocketing unfunded Medicaid mandates) in the power of the 10th Amendment is rising - they are not going to give up without a fight: South Carolina, Michigan, Washington, New Hampshire; more will probably will start looking.

(H/T: Michelle, Michelle, and others surfing around in bits and pieces....)

Posted by Skip at 8:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This was interesting:

Has the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act -- known more commonly as the stimulus -- been a well-intentioned failure as a jobs-creation bill, or is it a huge porky slush fund that was created without much thought?

President Obama promised that his stimulus package would be, among other things, "targeted." Our own Mark Hemingway reported recently a study of stimulus spending that demonstrated there is no rhyme or reason to stimulus spending in terms of local unemployment.

In that context, have a look at the chart below, which is based on data from Recovery.gov and the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

Each square represents a state (or D.C.), and each state sits along the two axes based on its unemployment rate and its amount of stimulus spending per congressional representative. (Congressional Districts contain roughly the same number of people nationwide).

As you can see, there is no pattern at all. Nothing in the data suggests that higher-unemployment states are more likely to get larger amounts of money per capita. It appears that very little thought went into directing funds toward the states most in need of jobs during the first round of stimulus funding, which ended September 30.

So, for all of you Big Government types, tell me - what does this say about one of the phrases from President Obama?

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."

        - President Barack Obama, Inauguration, 1/20/09

This is....working?  I know that my kids and their kids will be paying for this for a long time...

(H/T: Washington Examiner)

Posted by Skip at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

When I heard HOW Obama was going to spend the stimulus - Keynesian philosophy - I immediately thought

"Well, these jobs won't last long",

especially when I heard the magic word "paving".  And I was right....

All around NH, I saw (and heard of) a number of paving jobs being let and done.  But the thought was Er, we're paving roads, some of which have just been done in the last couple/few years.  These aren't NEW roads, merely repaving jobs for the most part.  How long can those seasonal jobs last?

And of course, all of the big paving contractors in NH were falling all over themselves to get the contracts and PUSHING for more - Instant jobs!  Infrastructure!  Money!  Stimulus!

Rent-seeking.  Tax dollars wasted (example - large swath on Rt 106 in front of and either side of the race track (think NASCAR) was done - aGAIN!.

Well, as Reverend Wright once said "the chickens have come home to roost!" - and the jobs have gone back to the henhouse....to sleep (emphasis mine).

Paving firms fear end of stimulus

BELMONT – The summer of 2009 was a boom time for Pike Industries and other paving firms in the state as $130 million in federal stimulus funds poured into the state, the equivalent of a full year of spending for the state Department of Transportation's typical highway and bridge program.

But with $110 million of the highway stimulus already spent or committed under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, prospects are not as bright for the coming construction season.

Boom to bust.  When one depends on government, and that level is depending on another, well, your business environment becomes "dynamic".  Essentially, paving firms live off the government and off of the taxes they raise.  And given that the Feds just delivered a dump truck load of cash to be spent in a short amount of time - well, you ramp up and when the truck load slides out the back end, well, you're done.

"We had a good year and I'm a big fan of what the stimulus did for us. The state Department of Transportation did a great job of getting the stimulus money out in a timely manner so it could have an immediate impact. But next year looks pretty bleak with only $20 million left," says Christian Zimmermann, Pike's CEO.

He said that the company, which employs 1,200 people across northern New England, faces the prospect of as many as 150 layoffs next year.

So, will they be knocking on the door of the politicians with outstretched hands...again?

..."The last time they went through reauthorization it got bogged down; we had to wait while funding was provided through continuing resolutions which kept it at the same level. Not knowing what the funding level is going to be takes away your ability to do long-term planning and make investments," said Zimmermann.

Ah, the bottom line - and where have I heard this before?  Oh yeah - pretty much from any business owner / manager.  The Obama Administration has created an environment in which there is chaos - what will taxes do?  Healthcare costs?  Environmental concerns?  Regulatory strictures?

When everything is all said and done, I'm betting that the Chinese are not about ready to fund another Porkulus ...

Posted by Skip at 8:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The big news over the weekend was that Congress was getting rolled threatened "taught a lesson in the Chicago way" informed that unless they pass the "Let's kill our economy" "Let's kill the energy industry" Cap N Tax  "Let Government micromanage all aspects of our lives" Cap N Trade, the Environmental Protection Agency would regulate greenhouse gases in a "command-and-control" fashion:

...But while administration officials have long said they prefer Congress take action on climate change, the economic official who spoke with reporters Tuesday night made clear that the EPA will not wait and is prepared to act on its own.

And it won't be pretty.

"If you don't pass this legislation, then ... the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."

So, this is what I don't get - does this mean that President Obama would allow an underling (the EPA Administrator) to "generate even more uncertainty"?  And do it in a command-and-control" manner?

Thus, wouldn't Obama be actually responsible for this?

I'm feeling that he'd love to take over another part of American life in toto.....

So, where am I wrong?

Posted by Skip at 1:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Sheesh, I just got through posting his latest decline here.  I'm betting that instead of crayons, His Official Flack, Robert Gibbs (The Presidential Press Secretary - now there's a job I'd only wish on Fergus Cullen) is going to be reduced to a sharpened stick covered with ashes fairly soon.

The Rasmussen's polling decline in Obama's "Strongly Approval" rating seems to be steepening its negative slope - fast to yet another new historic low!

 Adding some WD-40 to this slippery slide:

• The 23% who Strongly Approve matches the lowest level of enthusiasm yet recorded.
• Democrats: 41% Strongly Approve
• Republicans: 69% Strongly Disapprove.
• Unaffiliated: 21% Strongly Approve and 49% Strongly Disapprove.
  

Economy to be the most important issue?On the President's performance:

• 26% Strongly Approve
  
• 39% Strongly Disapprove.
  

Fiscal policy issues the most important?,

• 1% Strongly Approve
• 81% Strongly Disapprove.

1%???  1%  This should be cause for:

• Shame on the part of Democrats all over
• Shame on the folks that voted for Obama, knowing that they gave the most Liberal Senator the reins of government
• Hoping that this taste of hard line Socialism will be enough to swing that pendulum back QUICK to free market philosophies
  

Continuing:

• The Young are disliking Obama (Approval Index rating is -2 among voters under 30)
• The Seniors are really upset (and they vote!): -29 among senior citizens.
• He has lost the Middle Class": ratings are weakest among those who earn $40,000 to $100,000 annually.

I'm thinking that this rating is going to get worser and worser - I may have to put up that chart more often (yuck!)

(H/T: RedState)

Posted by Skip at 8:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Rasmussen has the continuing falling of the public's impression of Obama (once again #1 - fastest falling president, at this point within a First Term, EVAH!): 25% strongly approve, 41% strongly disapprove:

A gentleman, they say, is a man who is never unintentionally rude. That Barack Obama is, in this sense, a gentlemen I do not doubt.

..."Behind the thin veneer of politeness, there is, I suspect, something ugly lurking. In the first of the autobiographies that he claims to have written, Barack Obama frequently speaks of himself as being in the grips of rage. We would do well to take him at his word. If we are to stop him from doing great damage to this country and to our friends and allies, we must take every opportunity that comes our way to unmask the man."

It is in this light, I suspect, that we must interpret his conduct in Oslo, Norway on Wednesday and Thursday of this last week.

To the fury of the Norwegians, as The Guardian reported, the White House "cancelled many of the events peace prize laureates traditionally submit to, including ...most important of all, lunch with the king.

Why would he do such a thing?

Vanity, perhaps. That Barack Obama thinks highly of himself is evident in every speech he gives. Why should so great a man have to submit to protocol?

Malice, as well. As I noted in the first post in this thread, this was on evidence in 2008 in his campaign and later in his dealings with Gordon Brown and Benyamin Netanyahu...

...The reassuring speech he gave in Oslo was directed at those of us who fear that he will neglect America's defense. The snubs were directed at the Norwegians -- and the Europeans more generally.

Which represents the real Obama?

The latter, I fear. The America that he inherited and its traditional allies he hates. When the country turns on him, as it is doing step by step, and he recognizes that his fellow citizens are intent on reversing what he has done, he may openly turn on us.

We are, I suspect, in for quite a ride.

Malice sufficient to induce "Determined Weakness"?  One way to watch is how he will wield the power that the EPA is grabbing for itself via its ruling that CO2 is an "endangerment to the public" (Newsbusters):

"If you don't pass this legislation, then ... the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."   

Totalitarians work to build, obtain THEIR version of a "command-and-control"; will this be the vehicle by which Obama will step atop that command pyramid?

It remains to be seen if the Congress and the Supreme Court shall attempt to carry out Old Ben's words "A Republic; keep it if you can".  I fear Obama and the power accumulating bureaucracy of the Executive branch will not.

Posted by Skip at 8:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

So, we have Obamacare putting the Government in charge of how the Government will order our healthcare (regulations, mandates, taxes) - and just like we saw with the TARP money allowing politicians at the National Level (Obama, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd) to thrust their sticky fingers into the small details of running banks and car companies, they will do the same with the relationships between patients and doctors.  Reason? Why, because WE, the taxpayer, are paying the bill.  Just look at what has already happened with mammogram and Pap smear screenings; how FAST did healthcare get politicized?

And now the EPA is attempting to put itself absolutely in control of pretty much everything else - after all - carbon is energy!

I keep asking who owns who?  It is clear that Big Government absolutely believes it owns us, as if you can control something absolutely, you absolutely own it (even if you have misplaced the "title paperwork").  Yes folks, I will go there - Obama, via Obamacare and now the EPA - has made us all slaves to Government.

Ed Morrissey of Hot Air has some thoughts while riffing off of Mark Tapscott:

But even if the EPA expedited its findings, they didn’t come as a surprise.  The Obama administration warned Congress that a failure to produce climate-control legislation would result in an executive branch bypass of the legislature.  Mark Tapscott warns that this may be even more dangerous than the economic implications of EPA regulation of CO2:

There are so many deep flaws in the “Endangerment Ruling” announced Monday by President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency that it is quite possible the worst of them will escape notice. After all, it’s hard to top the drama of the millions of lost jobs and the crippling energy crisis that will result if the agency begins regulating greenhouse gases — mainly CO2. The agency unilaterally awarded itself authority to do just that with the ruling. But even worse will be the terrible damage this ruling will inflict upon one of the most basic of American constitutional pillars, the separation of powers among co-equal branches, in this case the president and Congress. Obama has launched a thermonuclear warhead aimed directly at the very heart of congressional authority.

Here’s why: The EPA Endangerment Ruling assigns to the agency authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate emissions not included under that law’s purview. Indeed, when the original law was approved by Congress, nobody said a word about any agency of the federal government telling any business or industry in America how much CO2 it could emit. By now saying the law gives it unilateral authority to declare CO2 dangerous pollutants, the EPA is grabbing power to regulate the 85 percent of the U.S. economy that depends on energy derived from the burning of carbon-based fuels. Those fuels — oil, natural gas, and coal — are heavy CO2 emitters. This ruling thus renders congressional intent irrelevant. If the ruling stands, the law will then be whatever the president and his bureaucratic minions in the executive branch decree, not what the people decide acting through their elected representatives in Congress.

Liberals used to screech about the Bush administration’s belief in the “unitary executive,” a concept they misunderstood from the start.  However, this power grab more closely resembles the point of their hysteria than anything Bush proposed.  Obama and Jackson have essentially bypassed Congress altogether and given the EPA the power to interfere in just about every transaction that takes place in the US.  That creates a juggernaut of an executive, unbounded in any practical way by Congress from using and abusing power.

In fact, the EPA’s timing makes that clear.  It intends to allow Obama to argue that he can implement any Copenhagen agreement by diktat, rather than wait to see if 60 Democrats in the Senate ratify a treaty in the proper manner and then legislate to enforce it.

So, what's to worry about with Obama, Jarrett, and Rahm at the controls? And Reid and Pelosi trying to shove Cap N Tax, er Cap N Crash, no - Cap N Trade through the House and Senate?

THIS:

Europol Reports Massive Fraud in the Carbon Credits Market

Europol, the European police consortium, has issued the following press release:

Continue reading "Combine this Environmental FAIL with a Chicago based Thugocracy - what could go wrong?" »

Posted by Skip at 8:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I keep putting these up thinking that the slid has to start slowing down at some point - but my prayers keep being answered!  No, I am not one of those that wish him harm except in a political manner.  I want his poll numbers, on all issues, to keep dropping like a rock until all (except, perhaps, the true socialist believers) politicians decide that the First Law of Politics has to be obeyed (er, keeping the job by getting re-elected) and finally throw Obama under the bus - the true believers will be thrown out of the bus by the voters.

The latest bad news for Obama from Quinnipiac:

December 9, 2009 - Obama Approval Falls To New Low, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; U.S. Voters Oppose Health Care Plan By Wide Margin

American voters give President Barack Obama a split 46 - 44 percent job approval, his lowest ever, and both the health care reform package that he wants Congress to pass and his personal rating on handling health care now win support from less than four in 10 Americans, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

It really does not look good:

• disapprove 52 - 38 percent of the health care reform proposal under consideration in Congress,
• disapprove 56 - 38 percent of President Obama's handling of health care
• voters trust Obama more than Republicans in Congress to handle health care 44 - 37 percent, down from 45 - 36 percent three weeks ago.
• Voters disapprove 58 - 30 percent of the way Republicans in Congress are doing their job
• disapprove 56 - 33 percent of Democrats in Congress.
• 63 - 30 percent that extending health insurance to all will raise their cost of health care
• 71 - 21 percent they do not think universal coverage is worth lower quality of care.

"It's a good thing for those pushing the health care overhaul in Congress that the American people don't get a vote. At this time, supporters are down 14 percentage points," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

"President Barack Obama's job approval rating continues to slide and it's evident the deterioration stems from voter unhappiness over domestic policy matters," Brown added.

You don't say!

• American voters disapprove 54 - 41 percent of Obama's handling of the economy (his worst score ever on this issue). 
• The President's support declines as one goes up the age and income scale. Analyzed by religion, Obama gets a thumbs up from 32 percent of white Protestants, 42 percent of white Roman Catholics and 52 percent of Jews.

"The decline in Obama's overall approval in the last month has been small, with the exception of independent voters who went from three points negative to 14 points," Brown said. "If the trend continues, it won't be long before he could be in the unenviable position of having more Americans disapprove than approve of his job performance.

Already in that group - to no one's surprise!  If the Democrats thought they had won a mandate, it is starting to look like it will be far easier to run against Obama and the Democrats than it was ever was against Bush...

(H/T: Instapundit)

Posted by Skip at 7:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."

                    -President Barack Obama, Inauguration, 1/20/09

As Grant pointed out a while ago, Recovery.gov, that entity that Obama promised as part of his "most open and transparent government evah!" has done a horrible job in reporting how and where OUR taxpayer (and Chinese) money has been spent.

Belated Sidenote: $18 million, and the frickin' programmers / project managers didn't even eyeball the data to see if it was correct?  Or were they that civic-ly challenged so as to not know the data didn't represent real like - like in ClimateGate /Climaqquidick?

Well, I "table-ized" a post from NRO on $11,000,000 Stimulus spent in Allenstown, PA without creating a single job. 

Examining zip code 18102 on Recovery.gov tells me that the "City of Allentown" was awarded $672,157 in total awards, and 0.00 jobs were created or saved from it.

Hey, President Obama, guess Gov't if a FAIL on that "find jobs" bit, eh?

At least they didn't try to pull a "Paul Hodes" (current NH CD-2 CongressCritter and Jr-Senator-wannabee) - claiming LOTS of jobs created here with no back up info (kudoes to Kelly Ayotte's campaign staff for finding it).  It quietly was removed (screen scrape here).

And then there is "distorting the marketplace" by Government by pouring $$ into training - for jobs that don't exist (except in the minds of the ideologically challenged):

Continue reading "Obama Admin - Lots of $$ spent and no jobs created" »

Posted by Skip at 3:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Courtesy of TownHall:

Posted by Skip at 1:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Skip at 12:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Continue reading "AFGHANISTAN - THE LEAST WORST OPTION" »

Posted by Bob Bestani at 7:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

(H/T: Don)

Posted by Skip at 8:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

When Chris Matthews starts to be a doubter, Obama has GOT to know he's in deep sneakers!  From Newsbusters:

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Will this long deliberation, Anne Kornblut, you've got the tough question here to start with. Whip around here. It took three months to make this decision. Will he look smart and deliberate for having taken all this time, or will the dithering shot still being cast in by people like former Vice President Dick Cheney, is that still going to hurt?

ANNE KORNBLUT, WASHINGTON POST: The gamble they're making is that he'll look smart and he'll look like the anti-Bush for having thought about it for so long.

JOE KLEIN, TIME: The anti-Bush part is really important because Bush really needed to do a strategy re-evaluation about Iraq six months in there and he never did.

MATTHEWS: Andrea, will it look good if he takes all this time?

ANDREA KRAMER, NBC: I agree. I think it will look good if he takes his time, if taking his time he comes out with something that adds up. If he doesn't then people will say you took so long and what did you deliver?

DAVID IGNATIUS, WASHINGTON POST: The long period of analysis, very deliberative, robs this of passion. This is, he is going to be a wartime president now, and he has to sell the country on the idea that our young men and women are going to go there, fight and get killed and I think this is not...

MATTHEWS: So, too much Chamberlain and not enough Churchill. 

When Mr. "Tingle Up My Leg" Chris publicly starts talking about Obama in ANY kind of a negative way, that's a huge problem.  Will this, Obamacare, the Stimulus, and high unemployment be Obama's Perfect Storm (as that would be well past that of a Katrina).

Posted by Skip at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From Chris Muir's Day by Day:

(H/T:  Powerline)

Posted by Skip at 8:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There is no doubt that with a Marxist outlook, there is no love lost between Obama and his advisors and the business community in general.  While there are large corporations that will be profiting from their relationship with the Obama Administration from "kissing up" ("rent-seeking" GE comes to mind, or the hospitals that are in bed with SEIU), many have been frozen in place.

Is some of the uncertainty presented to business owners (a short list):

• Healthcare costs
• Taxes at the business level
• Personal taxes flowing from the business
• Mandated benefits
• Expansion of unemployment benefits via the Stimulis Bill
  
• More aggressive stance of unions
• More intense regulation from all directions
  
• Possible abrogation of contracts by Government action
• crony capitalism - who do you know in government vs excellence in service or product
  

It comes down to politicians who have NEVER had to meet a payroll, never had to manage a business,

This abstract from David Boaz at the Cato Institute (H/T: Instapundit) is a good summary:

But the elite hostility to business — a holdover from Europe, perhaps, where aristocrats looked down on “trade,” or an unconscious echo of Marxism — is unseemly and harmful to both general prosperity and the individuals who are influenced by it to avoid productive enterprise. It crops up in President Obama’s commencement addresses sneering at students who want to “take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should buy” and in Michelle Obama’s urging hard-pressed women in Ohio, “Don’t go into corporate America.” It’s nice that some people, like senators’ wives, can make $300,000 a year in “the helping industry,” but it’s business that produces the wealth that allows such nonprofit generosity.

Gerson and the Obamas are disparaging the people who built America – the traders and entrepreneurs and manufacturers who gave us railroads and airplanes, housing and appliances, steam engines, electricity, telephones, computers and Starbucks. Ignored here is the work most Americans do, the work that gives us food, clothing, shelter and increasing comfort. That work deserves at least as much respect as “scholarship, teaching, writing, medicine, scientific research, law, the military and public service.”

And with that disrespect towards the business world (to the point where it seems that Democrats are trying as hard as they can to cost-shift welfare costs and entitlements from government directly to the back of businesses, especially the heartland of American businesses, the small ones.

Here in my own state of NH, the Democrat dominated Governor, Executive Council, Senate, and House of Representatives are already down the road to showing their disdain for the small business owners (which make up a much higher of businesses than nationally), by the following:

Continue reading "A touch of what he hates at play here? Sneers abound" »

Posted by Skip at 8:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From BoingBoing:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 27% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -15. This is the lowest Approval Index rating yet measured for President Obama (see trends). 

Lowest yet?  Not really something to be thankful for, that's for sure. It seems that as more and more Americans really start to understand where the Democrat Leadership, Obama chief among them, wants to lead them, the public is saying no.

Once again, if all of this "legislative agenda" to have Big Government pre-eminent in society were known as goals ahead of time, would he have been elected?  I don't know, but go ask your local MSM reporter if they did their job properly for keeping us informed...

And this as well:

Consider these six numbers: 62, 53, 54, 60, 60, 53.

Those numbers are the percentage of voters who supported Barack Obama last year in Westchester and Nassau Counties in New York, Bergen and Middlesex Counties in New Jersey, Fairfax County in Virginia, and Bucks County in Pennsylvania, respectively.

Now, here are the percentages of the vote that the top-of-the-ticket Democratic candidates got in each of those counties this year:  43, 48, 48, 44, 49, 45.

Over at The Campaign Spot, commenting on the role of Big Government in New Jersey, it seems that the general public is getting tired of "but we can't cut Government - people need our services!!!".  Instead, they are asking "Who is working for whom?":

New Jersey voters support 75 – 21 percent, including 70 – 26 percent among Democrats, a wage freeze for state workers to help balance the state budget, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today, three weeks after Christopher Christie toppled Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine...

...Garden State voters also support 61 – 33 percent layoffs for state workers to help balance the state budget, the independent Quinnipiac University poll finds...

Cut programs and services to balance the budget, 68 percent say, as 23 percent say raise taxes instead.  Service cuts win 46 – 43 percent support from Democrats, 73 – 18 percent backing from independent voters and 86 – 8 percent backing from Republicans.

“If Governor-elect Christopher Christie wants to consider a wage freeze, New Jersey voters, even Democrats and union households, say send out for ice,” said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. “And if he’s thinking about swinging the ax, voters will help sharpen it. Garden State voters agree with their new Governor – overwhelmingly – that the state’s in a fiscal mess.   And they agree he should use the ax, not the tax, to solve the problem.”

Posted by Skip at 8:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Of all of the folks on Fox, I believe that Brit Hume has THE most gravitas and studied view on the political scene.  He was a star before coming to Fox; his hold as one of the "senior statesmen" of the media has only increased. 

Today, he nails what Obama is all about - "Determined Weakness"

The transcript from Newsbusters:

"America is not what's wrong with the world," Hume said. "And a strong America, assertive in foreign policy, showing its strength, is good for the world, and it has a lot better effect on allies and enemies alike than what we're seeing now, this policy of almost determined weakness on the part of President Obama. Now, look. That decision you mentioned with the missile defense in Europe is militarily defensible. But it looked to all the world, and must have looked in the Kremlin, as if this was a capitulation. And these kinds of things add up over time."

And it's going to take more than charisma and popularity to gain strides in U.S. foreign policy, Hume added.

"And the president may think that because they think he's -- his -- the people love him, and he's a big rock star and a nice guy, and he's all respectful and bows to the -- bows from the waist to all of them, and that's all going to end up producing some result," Hume said. "It hasn't produced any, and I predict it will not produce any."

And it fits - I have yet to see a single policy or action, domestic or foreign, that has yet to actually show strength: massive borrowing will cause our financial demise, dithering on Afghanistan causes our military to lose heart, the rising unemployment due to his Stimulus is giving rise to a redeux of the "Carter Malaise", revealing our intelligence secrets causes our most at risk agents to go "I'm not sticking my neck out".  Couple that with "Dissing" our long term allies and we'll soon see that we will be on our own (the exact policy that The Won accused Bush of doing) as no one will work with us.

Determined Weakness - what better way to make the US no better than any other nation in the world?

Posted by Skip at 7:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

(H/T: Sue)

Posted by Skip at 9:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, getting used to being the only Grokster means shuffling things around a bit - it may take a little bit to readjust the schedule a bit for writing. That's fine - just know that posting may be a tad light for the next few days as I realign what needs to be addressed.

In the mean time, Andrew Hemingway sent this submission over - he calls out Obama's actions for what it is: "Obama has created this mess - and we ALL will pay for it because he won't 'own' it."

Guest Post by Andrew Hemingway:

As we have seen our President do so many times before, today we see another classic example of “watch my mouth not my actions”. This man has on countless occasions gone directly against what he  says he will do. He goes some where say China and because the Chinese are nervous about our debt he says:

“BEIJING, Nov 18 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama gave his sternest warning yet about the need to contain rising U.S. deficits, saying on Wednesday that if government debt were to pile up too much, it could lead to a double-dip recession.

With the U.S. unemployment rate at 10.2 percent, Obama told Fox News his administration faces a delicate balance of trying to boost the economy and spur job creation while putting the economy on a path toward long-term deficit reduction.”

Then the very next day we read in Bloomberg that the U.S. is about to try another round of Treasury sales. WHAT??

“Treasuries were little changed, with the yield on the 10- year note at 3.34 percent. The U.S. will probably sell $44 billion of two-year notes on Nov. 23, a record $42 billion of five-year debt on Nov. 24, and $32 billion of seven-year securities on Nov. 25, also the most ever, according to Wrightson ICAP LLC, a Jersey City-based research firm that specializes in government finance. The two-year note auction would match the record amount sold last month.”

So even while saying that our debt will send us into “double-dip” recession we are are going into record debt. Some one please help me understand this. My only thought is this...Maybe our President was thinking about a “double – dip ice cream sundae” and not the future of our country. One can one shake their head at this level of incompetence.

Obama complains (continually) that he inherited the debt problem....I think people are starting to notice that he accelerated it by a factor of 3 in his first few months at the reins. 

And those folks aren't just American voters - they are the "not American" people who will vote with their currencies....

Posted by Skip at 8:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

It is no secret that I love computers - after working with them for over 30 years, it has been quite the ride from paper tape as a storage medium to gigabyte thumbdrives, from 300 baud modems to megabit FIOS to the curb, and when an IBM 360/370 filled an entire room with raised tile floors with special power and air conditioning setups have morphed into wearable computers (computer clipped to one's waist, arm based keyboard, and a "monitor on glasses" rig).

You know, perhaps the White House geeks ought to get wearable TOTUS (TelePrompter of The United States) for the Cool One: he certainly seems to miss having podium sized TOTUS  at the ready ALL the time.  As Andy McCarthy at NRO points out (emphasis mine):

In a meeting with the press in China, President Obama said that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be "convicted" and had "the death penalty applied to him" . . . and then said he wasn't "pre-judging" the case. He made the second statement after it was pointed out to him — by NBC's Chuck Todd — that the first statement would be taken as the president's interfering in the trial process. Obama said that wasn't his intention. I'm sure it wasn't — he's trying to contain the political damage caused by his decision — but that won't matter. He has given the defense its first motion that the executive branch, indeed the president himself, is tainting the jury pool. Nice work.

Pshaw - The One couldn't have made such a gaffe, could he?  After all, he was "sold" to us during the Campaign as a "Constitutional Scholar" - this could not be, eh?  No "Constitutional Scholar" would ever make the statement that the result of a trial was a preordained "guilty", would they?

Why, that would mean....hmmm, not sure the ramifications of THAT thought are sinking through electorate just yet, but it does bring up the phrase "Truth in Advertising", doesn't it? Where is WTOTUS (Wearable TOTUS) when you need to keep Mr. HopeyChangey on message????

One more shoe dropping because of this....the distinct chance that Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) could end up "innocent" via a mis-trial.  There are far better folks that have been commenting at length on this all over the blogosphere - far be it for me to try to play being a lawyer, even on a blog, but that is the Rule of Law - guilty or innocent. Let's forget one of the most injurious parts of bringing an enemy combatant to the point of being a mere criminal that is that our intelligence system, already deeply wounded by Obama and Holder's actions, may not be revealed to the very terrorists we are fighting (and not always by what is said, but by what goes unsaid as well) during the Discovery phase of the trial.  This action now also affords the same rights as you and I as citizens - so what's the difference between us and them?

If the opportunity is there to be declared guilty, then there MUST be the opportunity to be held innocent as well - otherwise, what difference would there be between the current US and the old Communist show trials?  Is that the message that Obama screwed up on?

Effectively, Obama, in his headlong rush to "distribute our wealth" to other countries by devaluing the dollar, this one act goes a long way to devaluing the notion that being an American Citizen means something special in the world as well.

Tell me, what has Obama done to raise our standing in the world?  Right now, China, Russia, and Iran all seem to be taking Obama's community organizing "outreach" and responding back with a single upraised finger - so much for "smart power" diplomacy.  Add to that, the dollar is heading to into the toilet and we can, because of his debt ridden policies, hear the flush starting.

I am really starting to Hope that the 2010 mid-terms start giving us Real Change.

Oh, BTW, don't worry Fergus, I haven't forgotten about you yet. 

Posted by Skip at 6:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It seems that at every opportunity, Obama consistently tells an "anecdote" of how America has been wrong in the past - I'm betting that the 'bads' far outweigh the 'goods' from his speeches (but I have no intention of going back and counting).  He has also said that America should not impose it's will on any other:

• and tells China that
• and tells Russia that
• and tells Venezuala that
• Not sure about N. Korea, but it's getting late...

There's a problem here, though;

Having stated that, hasn't he meddled in Honduras (favoring the socialist president that was tossed for going against THEIR constitution?

and isn't he meddling in Israel's own business, in trying to tell them how to run their country?

President Obama on Wednesday called it "dangerous" that Israel plans to add 900 new apartments to an existing Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem -- an area Palestinians hope to claim as their capital absent a peace agreement with Israel.

President Obama on Wednesday called it "dangerous" that Israel plans to add 900 new apartments to an existing Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem -- an area Palestinians hope to claim as their capital absent a peace agreement with Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday that building permits were permitted for construction in Gilo for what would be upscale dwellings in the lower-middle class neighborhood.

"The situation in the Middle East is very difficult, and I've said repeatedly and I'll say again, Israel's security is a vital national interest to the United States, and we will make sure they are secure," Obama told Fox News in an interview in China Wednesday. 

Translation - "Don't you dare put up those 900 apts if you know what's good for your country"

Seems like Obama is putting himself at risk for going against his own rules (Alinsky's Rule #4 - Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules).  Mr. President, not so hot saying one thing and then doing another.

It makes your poll number drop:

"Although President Obama's job approval rating is below 50 percent for the first time nationally, it is not statistically different from his 50 percent approval rating in October. Nevertheless, in politics symbols matter and this is not a good symbol for the White House," said Brown. "Moreover, the percentage who approve of the way he is handling the economy has dropped from a split 47 - 46 percent approval in October to 52 - 43 percent disapproval today."

The President has a yawning gender and racial gap, with women approving his job performance 52 - 37 percent, compared to men's 47 - 44 percent disapproval. He gets 89 percent job approval among blacks and 62 percent approval among Hispanics while white voters disapprove 49 - 41 percent. His support also wanes as you go up the age and income scale.

Increasingly, "Hope and Change" is giving rise to "Shock and Horror" - while many voted for Change, they are increasingly losing faith in The Won as his policies become known, the ramifications of such come to center stage, and people are starting to count the cost to themselves and their families. 

At some point, even the elected Democrats are going to notice and start to Change their voting patterns.  Remember, the first (and some say, only) job of most politicians is to get re-elected.  The Blue Dog Democrats who are at most risk here will have to make a decision: their political futures or the Obama/Pelosi/Reid hard Left/Socialist agenda.

Swords, anyone?

Posted by Skip at 11:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I thought that Obama's promise was that the Stimulus was supposed to cap unemployment at around 8%?

Remember, he's never run anything before in his life - and he's voting only "Present" on this issue...

(H/T: Bill from the Sam Adams Alliance)

Posted by Skip at 10:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

After a while, the continued back handed slaps by the President at his own country, our country, seems to be summed up by this:

Posted by Skip at 8:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBacks (0)

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."

-President Barack Obama, 1/20/09

Porkulus - that now famous (and utterly unprovable) phrase "jobs created or saved".  Yeah, with an official unemployment rate of 10.2% and an effective one of about 17.5%, Obama is getting more and more desperate. 

The latest in this sad saga is how hard the Obamaites are trying to salve Obama's wounds in this area - there was that instance where a shopkeeper sold 9 pairs of shoes for $889.60 and Gummit said that those shoes saved 9 jobs.

Here another howler! You KNOW it is getting bad when the New York Times (ugh!) is reporting the absolute silliness of this madness of trying to make Mr. "Dithering" look good:

In June, the federal government spent $1,047 in stimulus money to buy a rider mower from the Toro Company to cut the grass at the Fayetteville National Cemetery in Arkansas. Now, a report on the government’s stimulus Web site improbably claims that that single lawn mower sale helped save or create 50 jobs.

...Those two extremes illustrate the difficulties in trying to figure out just how many jobs can be attributed to the $787 billion stimulus program. Last week the Obama administration released reports from more than 130,000 recipients of stimulus money in which they claimed to have saved or created more than 640,000 jobs, but a review of those reports shows that some are simply wrong, while others contain apparently subjective estimates.

$1,047 for 50 jobs - hmm, how many of us would consider a job that paid $20.94 a full time, year round job?

At least the shoe job paid better at $98.84 / full time job

Yup, we're in the best of hands!

(H/T: Hot Air)

Posted by Skip at 11:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This is not something that we just give lip service to"

- President Obama, speaking at the Native American Conference, 11/5/09, 5pm

Not until about 2:28 into the event does President Obama, the Commander-in-Chief, say anything about the men and women under his command at Ft. Hood, Texas where US Army Major Malik Nadal Nasan has taken the lives (at the time of this writing) of 12 people and wounded 31.

Leadership?  Oh really - he certainly flounced up to the stage, all happy-face and a cheery "shout out&