Another Great Vid

If you thought that orignality died years ago, you were WRONG!! This young lady is awesome! follow the link and watch her videos.

her handle is:

sweetafton23
on youtube.com...take a look she's original and ... really pretty to boot...lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tjC0mYfcrg&feature=player_embedded

I guess it doesn't hurt that I think she's absolutely adorable! If I was 20 years younger I'd be chasing her around to get her number...but that's not important...she really has talent...far more than I ever hoped I could have...or had...she's great...watch her vids dammit!

UPDATE: her name is Molly Lewis...and dammit, I wish I was 20 years younger, she's adorable

Originality Hasn't Died

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tjC0mYfcrg&feature=player_embedded#

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mf7cQfhJSA&feature=player_embedded

this young lady is cool...and take a look at her vid's...wish I had her talent.

Pomplamoose

I can't begin to praise the originality of the band Pomplamoose...their self produced and edited video's on youtube.com are awesome...once upon a time...my bestest friend tried to tell me we were this good...we weren't but these guys are! they are awesome!

SOMEONE PLEASE SIGN THIS GROUP...their talent is awesome@

An Interesting Point

comment # 16 from the thread on PJmedia about whether or not the GI's from Fort Hood deserve the purple heart or not...

The Obama decision to try the terrorists in a New York civil court is such a blatantly evil decision that it leaves me stunned. It is an anti-American decision. It has nothing to do with justice; nothing. It is a purely political decision.

1) Those on the left are defending it as ‘it will showcase the value of the American Justice system. Rubbish.
The American justice system is not now and has never been at question. There is therefore no need to defend it.
AND – that’s their only defense! A non-issue!

2) So, what’s it really about? It is one thing only. It’s a political strategy with ONE agenda. One agenda.

This has two parts: part one is to Bash Bush; this will satisfy the blood lust of the leftist crowds who are feeling let down by Obama’s weakness in their Pet Values of gay marriage, attacking the CIA.

Its other part is to make the American people feel guilty by showcasing America as The Cause of Islamic jihadism.
Result? Vote for post-Bush Obama.

3) Therefore, it is really a political strategy to DIVERT attention from the disasters of Obama’s presidential reign: his deficit, his pork-stimulus, his cap-and-trade, his health care..all of which are bankrupting America and doing nothing positive.

It’s a political strategy to counter the growing voices of the Town Halls, the Tea Parties (whom Obama himself denigrates by calling them TeaBaggers)..The Tea Parties are growing, are continuing, and that massive Tea Party in Washington, which the Obama Gang are pretending didn’t happen…has deeply worried them.
This is their response to the Tea Parties, the Town Halls, more and more open criticism, to FOX, to the American people who Dare To Criticize the Great Master, Obama.

4) What does he do with their criticism of Him?

He puts the American people on trial. That’s what he does.

They’ll manipulate the MSM so that this is ALL that will be talked about, the evil Pre-Obama regime…and the disasters of the Obama regime will barely get any air time.

5) Then, there’ll be the threats against America as this trial incites jihadists around the world. This trial will scream from the Islamic Press pages – and be used to recruit more and more terrorists.

There’ll be threats; there’ll be even attacks. These will be used as evidence of the Evils of the Bush era, and Obama will give noble speeches: ‘We Have Changed; This is Post-Bush; there is No Need to Attack Us. Oh..and Vote For Obama.

6) And think about it – the COSTS. Millions and millions, paid by the American taxpayers, for the lawyers for these terrorists. Millions for the security of them. Millions as well, for the security of New York. And what about the jurors? Will they and their families receive death threats from jihadists around the world?

A political campaign..paid for, not by the Democratic Party but by the American people.

Obama has done more to divide the American people than any president. He used race during his campaign, and continues to do so. He’s divided them politically, with his administration rejecting bipartisn work.

He’s cut Congress off from the people. Congress is supposed to represent the people and therefore, they must READ and DEBATE bills. Obama denies them this duty and insists that they pass His bills without reading or debating them. He treats Congress as his rubber stamp..not as the representatives of the People. The people have no representation anymore.

Personally, I think that Islam is fundamentally anti-Western Civilization. It's a religion that is rooted in the 7th Century and unless it under goes a fundamental change (a la The Reformation of Christianity) it will end up being a civilizational war that will last decades if not centuries. If it goes that root, then it's eventual extermination is the only result that will be viable to to survival of our civilization. I hope and pray that this isn't the direction chosen by our adversaries, because there are, out there...a great many reasonable people who are Muslims and only desire to live in peace...not all Muslims are terrorists, but unfortunately, many terrorists are Muslims. That is the story of the early 21st Century. Toward the end of the last century, many terrorists were communists and their sympathizers (the various incarnations of the "Red Brigades", etc). That has changed, but until Muslims themselves rise up and oppose those who wage Jihad on their behalf...this struggle will continue for many years to come.

More in U.S. Say Health Coverage Is Not Gov’t. Responsibility

More Americans now say it is not the federal government's responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage (50%) than say it is (47%). This is a first since Gallup began tracking this question, and a significant shift from as recently as three years ago, when two-thirds said ensuring health care coverage was the government's responsibility.

This is a huge turnaround from even last year where 56% wanted to replace the current system and the more than 60% who desired a change in 2006. What has occurred since then? An enormous bill that will literally wreck the current system and replace it with government run health care inside of 10 years. More importantly, 61% now desire to retain the current system, while only 32% desire to toss it out.

Health care in this country does need some sort of overhaul. However, throwing out the baby with the bath water won't improve the system. What needs to be done is to allow genuine competition. In other words remove the barriers that the various states have erected to protect favoured companies and allows unfettered competition. Additionally, tort reform must be accomplished despite the fact this is a favoured constituency of the Democratic party (i.e. John Edwards friends).

Without limiting in some way the huge lawsuits for malpractice, costs will never, ever come down. Do victims of medical incompetence deserve compensation? Certainly, but there must be some sort of limits upon what is permitted. I suspect that next fall, if the bills presently before Congress are passed and signed into law, there will be a lot of surprised politicians packing up in Washington next December.

Obama To Focus On Deficit In SOTU Address

According to Politico.com, the Obama Administration is planning January's SOTU address to be focused on deficit reduction. This is the equivalent to a heroin addict saying they'll quit tomorrow, but only after getting one last big fix. In just nine months this administration has spent more than the Clinton Administration spent in 8 years of office.

Additionally, there is no evidence Democrats are willing to aggressively cut the biggest parts of the budget, such as entitlement programs and defense. Former President Bill Clinton told Senate Democrats at their policy lunch this week that one of the biggest reasons to finish health care is to allow Obama to focus on economic concerns next year – in part with more spending. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said afterward that Clinton had advised getting health care out of the way to “clear the tables and allow the focus to be on jobs and education and infrastructure.” None of that is free.

This concern will be difficult for the country to swallow especially after this Democratically controlled Congress has passed the four largest spending bills in our history, the stimulus package, the TARP bailouts, the health care seizure and "cap & trade" bill that they plan to use to address global warming.

All of these bills have, or will add a huge amounts to the deficit and concomitantly to the debt. The only way at this point to balance the budget with this legislation will be to pass tremendous tax increases. During a period of economic down turn, tax increases are the death knell to recovery. Additionally, there is no reason to believe that Democrats are considering cuts to the most expensive parts of the budget, such as entitlement programs which are already underfunded as it is. They've already imperiled defense spending by reducing spending of inventories of spare parts, and training.

So, I think that next year, instead of a recovering economy what we will face is one that will grow steadily worse as Congress and this Administration continue to spend like drunken sailors. Mr. Obama certainly won't veto ANY spending bills that allow Democratic Congressmen to say "look what I'm bringing home to you". On the other hand, during the past election campaign, he did state unequivocally that he was for "income redistribution". America, brace yourselves, it's going to be a rough year.

What Do Democratic Leaders Really Want To Do?

The present wrangling in Congress over "Health Care Reform" (what I call Health Care Seizure) isn't about health care at all. It's about a radical restructuring of the American economic system. Those who lead the Democratic Party desire, first and foremost, to institute European (or Venezuelan, look how well that's working there, 25% inflation rate) style economic "reforms". What that boils down to is government direction (i.e. direct control) of the means of economic production as well as a more intrusive (or pervasive) involvement in the lives of the populace, just as the socialist governments in Europe and Asia do.

Unfortunately, that system doesn't work very well as a very high unemployment rate (above 8%) is considered normal. Rates that high are virtually unknown in a healthy economy here in America. It's only during periods of economic down turn that we have unemployment rates that exceed 5-6%. Additionally, the European socialistic model also requires vastly higher tax rates in order to pay for all those services that intrusive government requires. European average tax rates exceed 40% of the total income of workers.

This burden is so heavy that the economic fabric of those successful socialist states such as Sweden, for example, are now beginning to fray as the number of unemployed/unemployable workers has risen beyond the means to provide those blanket services that they have become accustomed to. Many of those governments are now considering reducing taxes and services in order to maintain those "core" services that are considered vital. Sweden, this year, has reduced taxes for the first time in 70 years as a means to jump start their economy and encourage businesses to hire more people. Unfortunately, neither the Obama Administration, nor this Congress understand the severe consequences of that which they are attempting to achieve.

On the other hand, the (nebulous) "people" understand a shell game when they see it. Mr. Obama ran as a moderate who would be willing to work with both parties. Unfortunately, once he was elected he reverted to his political Chicago roots and moved far to the left. The last election was the greatest bait and switch ever perpetrated on the American electorate. Thus, the growing unpopularity of many of the far left proposals now being considered by Congress and this administration.

What the Democratic leadership in this country are trying to do now is to enact those sweeping changes that they have long dreamed of while they still control both the Congress and the Presidency.Eventually, an election will come along and they will be swept out of power. Their main agenda is to enact huge entitlement programs while they have the opportunity, and hope that they won't be dismantled later (to date NOT 1 entitlement program, no matter how dysfunctional has ever been repealed). After all, Medicare, which has exceeded it's funding mandate more than 10x's it's predicted cost is still with us, despite those "triggers" that were emplaced.

UPDATE: This post started out as a response (#4) on http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/is-health-care-reform-popular-the-democrats-and-the-polls-disagree/ and then mutated into this post...some interesting comments there

Obama And The Dem's Worry About Jobs

Mr. Obama certainly should worry. His "stimulus package" is obviously a complete and utter failure. I predict that by next spring, unemployment will be above 12% and possibly as high as 14%. That in fact, the "stimulus package" has contributed to a much higher unemployment rate by robbing the private sector of funds by diverting huge amounts of money into government bonds, rather than being loaned to small businesses which would fuel new jobs. The "stimulus package" has in fact wasted money. In real terms, it costs roughly $350k per permanent job in the private sector, but the stimulus has cost roughly 5 times what it costs in private sector jobs. More over, those jobs created by the stimulus, are temporary because the funding will be terminated after a year or two.

The gloomy statistics are “a wake-up call,” according to Heidi Shierholz, an economist at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute. “Unless Congress authorizes substantial additional spending for job creation, unemployment will remain elevated for years to come,” Shierholz said in a statement responding to the Labor report.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Tuesday announced to Senate Democrats that he will take up an initiative on jobs, though he did not offer specifics. Reid is facing a tough reelection battle himself; Nevada has been hard hit by the recession and housing crisis.

In the House, Democratic leaders have resisted suggestions for a second stimulus, but they are working on a variety of proposals they believe would create new jobs, including a program that provides small businesses with new loans.

So, Democrats in Congress have every right to worry. The only way to turn this bad economy around is to return the unspent stimulus funds. Drastically reduce taxes and spending. That is the way to encourage economic recovery. Unfortunately, this administration and Congress won't do any of those, instead they will increase spending and the resultant debt, which will strangle any economic growth that might result by siphoning ever more money from the private sector.

Next November I predict that the Democrats will lose at least 100 seats in the House and 16-18 in the Senate...that of course, is only if unemployment doesn't rise above 12%. If it goes higher, then losses will be much, much worse. On the other hand, I don't think the GOP will gain many of those seats. I predict that 3rd party candidates and independents will the be true winners.

Erlich O'Malley, 2010 Rematch?

With the unexpected GOP victory in New Jersey, taken along with the very large margin in Virginia, might very well be the tipping point for former Maryland Republican governor Bob Ehrlich. He is rumoured to be considering another run for Governor in 2010. Martin O'Malley narrowly won the hard fought 2006 campaign. The huge movement of independents away from the Democratic Party toward the GOP in both Virginia and New Jersey last week is exactly what has given Mr. Ehrlich the motivation he needs for another successful bid.

"Independents, as you know, pretty much decide races these days," Ehrlich told his hometown Arbutus Times this week. Ehrlich, who in 2002 made history by becoming the Old Line State's first Republican governor in four decades, was especially encouraged by GOPer Chris Christie's victory in strongly Democratic New Jersey. "It's a blue state, a lot of labor, very organized Democratic Party, so it's a tough state for Republicans to win. So Christie winning there, it's a pretty big deal," Ehrlich said.

I suspect that the main reason he lost the 2006 race was due to voters growing tired of the GOP in Washington, and not to Mr. Erlich's governance. He is still relatively popular in the state, all the more so since Mr. O'Malley has had to raise taxes in every single session, all the while revenues from those taxes have been reduced by wealthier residents moving to states with lower tax rates.

Quinnipiac Poll in Ohio: WOW!

For the first time, Republican Rob Portman is inching ahead of the two Democrats in the 2010 race for Ohio's U.S. Senate seat, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. Also for the first time, Ohio voters disapprove 50 - 45 percent of the job President Barack Obama is doing, down from his 53 - 42 percent approval September 16 and 49 - 44 percent approval July 7.

In still another first, voters are split 40 - 40 percent on who is doing a better job handling health care, the President or Congressional Republicans, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh- pe-ack) University survey finds. In a September 16 survey on the same question, Obama was on top 49 - 28 percent.

Ohio voters disapprove 53 - 42 percent of the way the President is handling the economy and disapprove 57 - 36 percent of the way he is handling health care. In September, they approved of his handling of the economy 48 - 46 percent and split on his handling of health care 44 - 45 percent.

"The Democratic wave that swept through Ohio in 2006 and 2008 may be cresting. The Democratic lead in the Governor's and Senate races has evaporated and for the first time President Barack Obama is under water in the most important swing state in the country," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

"Ohio voters are not happy with the President's handling of health care and the economy. The fact that they now are split whether he or the Republicans in Congress are better able to handle health care should be a very worrisome number at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. since the GOP is still pretty much a four-letter word in most of America."

Independent voters, often the group that decides Ohio elections, disapprove 49 - 45 percent of the overall job Obama is doing and disapprove 54 - 39 percent of his handling of the economy. They disapprove 62 - 34 percent, almost 2-1, of his handling of health care.

Detroit News: Americans Don't Trust The Health Bill

An excellent summary of why many Americans just don't trust this health care bill. Here's the gist...

Big shock. Americans know this drill. In 1965, Medicare Part A was estimated to cost the nation $9 billion by 1990. Actual cost: $67 billion, according to the Cato Institute.

Similarly, in 1988, when a home health care benefit was added to Medicare, the cost was pegged at $4 billion. Actual: $10 billion. And the Medicare Part D drug benefit doubled in cost in the time it took to move from Congress to the president's desk.

Americans are also too familiar with how the federal bureaucracy works to trust that government management of care won't mean more hassles and hardship. Most Americans have had a least some contact with bureaucrats, and it's rarely pleasant. The House bill will increase the frequency and intensity of those contacts.

It sets up panels to dictate what procedures will be covered, panels to choose who can deliver the care, and panels to decide whether the treatment is necessary.

"Hello, I'm from the Government and I'm here to help"...yeah right.

20th Century's Biggest Lie

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialist) and the full name of Hitler's political party (translated) was "The National Socialist German Workers' Party" (In German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei)

But this point is constantly pounded home in our public schools and on our college campuses...a National Socialist is NOT a conservative! Yet reams of publications constantly bombard us with "facts" that the Nazi's were rightist. They weren't. Hitler wanted control of the German economy, and only by agreeing NOT to take over the businesses, was he able to make agreements with the large manufacturing concerns. What he did instead was to CONTROL the output, not the companies themselves....duh, that's socialism ain't it?

Jim DeMint, US Sen (R SC) Introduces "Term Limits For All" Constitutional Amendment

DeMint Introduces “Term Limits for All” Constitutional Amendment
Amendment would limit every House member to 3 terms, every Senator to 2 terms

November 10, 2009 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) introduced an amendment to the United States Constitution that would apply term limits to all members of Congress, limiting U.S. Representatives to three terms and U.S. Senators to two terms in office. The amendment is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), and Sam Brownback (R-Kansas). As an amendment to the Constitution, it would require a two-thirds majority vote approval in the House and Senate and must be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

"Americans know real change in Washington will never happen until we end the era of permanent politicians," said Senator DeMint. "As long as members have the chance to spend their lives in Washington, their interests will always skew toward spending taxpayer dollars to buyoff special interests, covering over corruption in the bureaucracy, fundraising, relationship building among lobbyists, and trading favors for pork – in short, amassing their own power. I have come to realize that if we want to change the policies coming out of Congress, we must change the process itself. Over the last 20 years, Washington politicians have been reelected about 90% of the time because the system is heavily tilted in favor of incumbents. If we really want to put an end to business as usual, we’ve got to have new leaders coming to Washington instead of rearranging the deck chairs as the ship goes down.”

Senator Coburn added, “The best way to ensure we are truly a government of the people, for the people, and by the people, is to replace the career politicians in Washington with citizen legislators who care more about the next generation than their next election. The power of incumbency has created an almost insurmountable advantage for Washington politicians. Incumbency allows politicians to raise millions of dollars in campaign funds in exchange for earmarks. Incumbency gives Congress the power to raise money for itself – Congress just approved itself an increase of nearly $250 million from the U.S. Treasury that members will spend to promote themselves. Finally, with redistricting incumbents can choose their voters rather than voters choosing their representatives. Term limits is the best way to break this cycle.”

- PDF of Term Limits for All amendment
- Download Senator DeMint's podcast on Term Limits for All -

“Some say only long-serving, seasoned elites have the skills to lead the people, but that’s exactly what we have today and how do you think it’s working out for us?” said Senator DeMint. “It wasn’t the ‘people’ who gave us a $12 trillion debt, an IRS tax code seven times longer than the Bible, over 1,700 departments of the federal government, trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, $100 trillion long-term shortfall in Social Security and Medicare, the Wall Street and auto bailouts, and the pending health care takeover.

“This nation can no longer afford these entrenched men and women who enjoy lives of luxury wholly insulated from the consequences of their major policy failures.

“I want to be clear: demanding that reformers adopt self-imposed term limits is a recipe for self-defeat on this issue. We lost the battle for term limits after the 1994 Republican Contract with America because we forced our best advocates for reform to go home, while the big-spending career politicians waited them out. We must have term limits for all or term limits will never succeed. Only when we apply the same rules to all will we be able to enact vital bipartisan reforms.

“Term limits will increase legislative turnover, expand the field of candidates who run for office, and instill transparency and accountability in our public officials. By ratifying this amendment, we can end the tremendous advantage enjoyed by incumbents in Washington, break long-lasting ties to special interests and lobbyists, and transform Congress from the body of career politicians that it has become, to a chamber of true citizen legislators,” said Senator DeMint.

I doubt it will pass, but hope springs eternal!

Stimulus Package Is Killing Jobs

Finally, there is genuine proof that massive government spending (the "stimulus package") is actually sucking funds from the private sector and stifling job creation. Money that would usually be spent by small businesses in job creation through the use of loans is going into government bonds to pay for the stimulus. Banks have in real terms, ceased loaning money to medium and small businesses and are instead purchasing Treasury Bonds.

Historically, small businesses have been the creators of most jobs, but unable to gain those loans that have in the past been used to create jobs, or new businesses, job creation has fallen dramatically. Thus, we have the highest unemployment rate in more than 26 years. Not since Mr. Carter's recession of the late 1970's and early 1980's has unemployment been so high, nor is it likely to end in the near term.

Small businesses-especially new small businesses-account for essentially all net job growth. However, business creation and expansion requires capital, and more and more of the nation's capital is being commandeered by the U.S. Treasury in the name of "stimulus".

The FY2009 Federal deficit was $1.4 trillion. This was almost a trillion dollars higher than FY2008. The capital to buy this additional debt had to come from somewhere, and much of it was squeezed out of business. Here are some indicators, both statistical and anecdotal:

• During FY2009, "Gross Domestic Private Investment" fell by 25% (almost $500 billion/year). It would have needed to grow by 5% to keep the unemployment rate from rising from an already-too-high 6.2%.

• Many venture capital firms are informing entrepreneurs that there is no money available for new startups. The firms say that they must husband their capital to meet the needs of their existing portfolio companies.

• The 500 largest U.S. non-financial companies now hold more than $1 trillion in Treasury bills, amounting to more than 10% of their total assets. Corporate cash flows are rising, but the money is being invested in government bonds, rather than growth.

• Banks have cut credit card credit lines by 25%, or $1.25 trillion. Because small businesses are often financed with personal credit cards, this has a direct impact on small business survival and growth.

So unemployment rates above 12% are not just likely, but will occur for much longer than had been forecast. Real jobless rates above 14% are more than just possible.

The "headline" (U-3) unemployment rate of 10.2% vastly understates the magnitude of the jobs crisis in America. John Williams' "Shadow Government Statistics" unemployment number for October is 22.1%. Williams estimates that we would have to create 22.6 million new jobs in order to get to "true" full employment. At $313,000 each, the private sector would have to invest an incremental $7.1 trillion to accomplish this.

Thus the Stimulus Package hasn't just been an object failure, it is causing much higher unemployment now. When you consider adding in a $1.3 trillion dollar Health Care seizure as well as a $1.5 trillion dollar "Cap & Trade" program, the economy will probably take at least a decade to recover, if then. At this point radically reducing Federal spending and cutting taxes, as Mr. Reagan did in the early 1980's is the only real solution to this depression. FDR's programs didn't end the Great Depression, World War 2 did, but at a cost to the world that is unimaginable today.

Camille Paglia Takes Congressional Dem's To Task on Health Care

here are some excerpts from Camille Paglia's Column, bold is my emphasis:

As for the actual content of the House healthcare bill, horrors! Where to begin? That there are serious deficiencies and injustices in the U.S. healthcare system has been obvious for decades. To bring the poor and vulnerable into the fold has been a high ideal and an urgent goal for most Democrats. But this rigid, intrusive and grotesquely expensive bill is a nightmare. Holy Hygeia, why can't my fellow Democrats see that the creation of another huge, inefficient federal bureaucracy would slow and disrupt the delivery of basic healthcare and subject us all to a labyrinthine mass of incompetent, unaccountable petty dictators? Massively expanding the number of healthcare consumers without making due provision for the production of more healthcare providers means that we're hurtling toward a staggering logjam of de facto rationing. Steel yourself for the deafening screams from the careerist professional class of limousine liberals when they get stranded for hours in the jammed, jostling anterooms of doctors' offices...

A second issue souring me on this bill is its failure to include the most common-sense clause to increase competition and drive down prices: portability of health insurance across state lines. What covert business interests is the Democratic leadership protecting by stopping consumers from shopping for policies nationwide? Finally, no healthcare bill is worth the paper it's printed on when the authors ostentatiously exempt themselves from its rules. The solipsistic members of Congress want us peons to be ground up in the communal machine, while they themselves gambol on in the flowering meadow of their own lavish federal health plan. Hypocrites! ...

International models of socialized medicine have been developed for nations and populations that are usually vastly smaller than our own. There are positives and negatives in their system as in ours. So what's the point of this trade? The plight of the uninsured (whose number is far less than claimed) should be directly addressed without co-opting and destroying the entire U.S. medical infrastructure...

How dare anyone claim humane aims for this bill anyhow when its funding is based on a slashing of Medicare by over $400 billion? The brutal abandonment of the elderly here is unconscionable. One would have expected a Democratic proposal to include an expansion of Medicare, certainly not its gutting. The passive acquiescence of liberal commentators to this vandalism simply demonstrates how partisan ideology ultimately desensitizes the mind...

I thouroughly enjoy Ms. Paglia's column. I don't often agree with her view point on many things, but now and then she is spot on.

On Democracy in Our Republic

The following was written anonymously. I have found it to be an interesting read...

Our Republic of the United States of America was founded upon the principles of Liberty (the right to do whatever one wishes so long as those actions do not infringe upon the equal rights of others) and limited government, not upon democracy. In fact, seldom if ever will one see reference to democracy in the founding documents of our nation, at least in a positive context. Peculiar, don't you think if we are suppose to live in a democracy as our politicians tell us?

Consider that in the past, we had Liberty coins, not democracy coins. We have the Statue of Liberty, not the Statue of Democracy. We pledge allegiance to the flag, and to the Republic for which it stands, not the democracy for which it stands. Patrick Henry said: "Give me Liberty or give me death!", not "Give me democracy or give me death".

So you may ask, if we live in a Republic founded upon the principles of Liberty and limited government, why do many of our politicians keep trying to shove this concept of democracy down our throats, as if freedom naturally followed? That is a very good question!

Perhaps they don't like the limits on the powers that have been granted them by our state and federal constitutions. Maybe because majority rule sounds legitimate and moral on its face, they wish to use our own ignorance to enslave us with the consent of the masses; and to extract from us every last penny that we have. Or maybe they have other self-serving motivations. Whatever the case may be, only knowledge of our heritage will enable us to anticipate such schemes and act accordingly to right the direction of our Republic.

Please take the time and consider the following selected excerpts copied without permission from Chapter 3 of The Unseen Hand: An Introduction to the Conspiratorial View of History (1985) by A. Ralph Epperson:

It is generally conceded that even a monarchy or a dictatorship is an oligarchy, or a government run by a small, ruling minority.

Such is also the case with a democracy, for this form of government is traditionally controlled at the top by a small ruling oligarchy. The people in a democracy are conditioned to believe that they are indeed the decision-making power of government, but in truth there is almost always a small circle at the top making the decisions for the entirety.

As proof of these contentions, one has only to read the 1928 United States Army Training Manual, which defined democracy as:

A government of the masses. Authority - derived through mass meeting or any form of 'direct' expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic - negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.
A democracy, according to this definition, is actually controlled by a demagogue, defined as: "A speaker who seeks to make capital of social discontent and gain political influence."

The 1928 definition of a democracy was later changed by those who write Army manuals, however. In 1952, this became the definition of a democracy in The Soldiers Guide, Department of the Army Field Manual, issued in June of 1952:

Meaning of democracy. Because the United States is a democracy, the majority of the people decide how our government will be organized and run - and that includes the Army, Navy, and Air Force. The people do this by electing representatives, and these men and women then carry out the wishes of the people.

So if democracies are in truth oligarchies, where the minority rules, is there a form of government that protects both minority and majority rights? There is, and it is called a republic, which may be defined as: "a society with a form of government based upon rule by law, in which both governed and government are subject to law". In the republican form of government, the power rests in a written constitution wherein the powers of the government are limited so that the people retain the maximum amount of power themselves. In addition to limiting the power of government, care is also taken to limit the power of the people to restrict the rights of both the majority and the minority.

Perhaps the simplest method of illustrating the difference between an oligarchy, a democracy and a republic would be to discuss the basic plot of the classic grade B western movie.

In this plot, one that the moviegoer has probably seen a hundred times, the brutal villain rides into town and guns down the unobtrusive town merchant by provoking him into a gunfight. The sheriff hears the gunshot and enters the scene. He asks the assembled crowd what happened, and they relate the story. The sheriff then takes the villain into custody and removes him to the city jail.

Back at the scene of the shooting, usually in a tavern, an individual stands up on a table (this individual by definition is a Demagogue) and exhorts the crowd to take the law into its own hands and lynch the villain. The group decides that this is the course of action that they should take (notice that the group now becomes a democracy where the majority rules) and down the street they (now called a mob) go. They reach the jail and demand that the villain be released to their custody. The mob has spoken by majority vote: the villain must hang.

The sheriff appears before the democracy and explains that the villain has the right to a trial by jury. The demagogue counters by explaining that the majority has spoken: the villain must hang. The sheriff explains that his function is to protect the rights of the individual, be he innocent or guilty, until that individual has the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. The sheriff continues by explaining that the will of the majority cannot deny the individual that right. The demagogue continues to exhort the democracy to lynch the villain, but if the sheriff is persuasive and convinces the democracy that he exists to protect their rights as well, the scene should end as the people leave, convinced of the merits of the arguments of the sheriff.

The republican form of government has triumphed over the democratic form of mob action.

In summary, the sheriff represents the republic, the demagogue the control of the democracy, and the mob the democracy. The republic recognizes that man has certain inalienable rights and that government is created to protect those rights, even from acts of the majority. Notice that the republic must be persuasive in front of democracy and that the republic will only continue to exist as long as the people recognize the importance and validity of the concept. Should the people wish to overthrow the republic and the sheriff, they certainly have the power (but not the right) to do so.

But the persuasive nature of the republic's arguments should convince the mob that it is the preferable form of government.

It is easy to see how a democracy can turn into anarchy [or, more likely, tyranny] when unscrupulous individuals wish to manipulate it. The popular beliefs of the majority can be turned into a position of committing some injustice against an individual or group of individuals. This then becomes the excuse for the unscrupulous to grab total power, all in an effort to "remedy the situation."

Alexander Hamilton [first Secretary of the Treasury] was aware of this tendency of a democratic form of government to be torn apart by itself, and he has been quoted as writing:

"We are now forming a republican form of government. Real liberty is not found in the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments. If we incline too much to democracy, we shall soon turn into a monarchy (or some other form of dictatorship)."

Others were led to comment on the perils of democratic forms of government. One was James Madison [fourth U.S. President] who wrote:

"In all cases where a majority are united by a common interest or passion, the rights of the minority are in danger!" Another was John Adams [second U.S. President] who wrote: "Unbridled passions produce the same effects, whether in a king, nobility, or a mob. The experience of all mankind has proved the prevalence of a disposition to use power wantonly. It is therefore as necessary to defend an individual against the majority (in a democracy) as against the king in a monarchy."

George Washington, in his farewell address to the American people as he was leaving the presidency, spoke about the amending of the Constitution:

If in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional power be in any particular [manner] wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way in which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation, for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.

It was about the same time that a British professor named Alexander Fraser Tyler wrote:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can exist only until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse (defined as a liberal gift) out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a dictatorship."

12 Reasons Why Unemployment Will Top 12%

via James Pethokoukis & http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis

Gluskin Sheff economist David Rosenberg, formerly of Merrill Lynch, thinks the unemployment rate is going to at least 12 percent, maybe even 13 percent.

1. For the first time in at least six decades, private sector employment is negative on a 10-year basis (first turned negative in August). Hence, the changes are not merely cyclical or short-term in nature. Many of the jobs created between the 2001 and 2008 recessions were related either directly or indirectly to the parabolic extension of credit.

2. During this two-year recession, employment has declined a record 8 million. Even in percent terms, this is a record in the post-WWII experience.

3. Looking at the split, there were 11 million full-time jobs lost (usually we see three million in a garden-variety recession), of which three million were shifted into part-time work.

4.There are now a record 9.3 million Americans working part-time because they have no choice. In past recessions, that number rarely got much above six million.

5. The workweek was sliced this cycle from 33.8 hours to a record low 33.0 hours — the labour input equivalent is another 2.4 million jobs lost. So when you count in hours, it’s as if we lost over 10 million jobs this cycle. Remarkable.

6. The number of permanent job losses this cycle (unemployed but not for temporary purposes) increased by a record 6.2 million. In fact, well over half of the total unemployment pool of 15.7 million was generated just in this past recession alone. A record 5.6 million people have been unemployed for at least six months (this number rarely gets above two million in a normal downturn) which is nearly a 36% share of the jobless ranks (again, this rarely gets above 20%). Both the median (18.7 weeks) and average (26.9 weeks) duration of unemployment have risen to all-time highs.

7. The longer it takes for these folks to find employment (and now they can go on the government benefit list for up to two years) the more difficult it is going to be to retrain them in the future when labour demand does begin to pick up.

8. Not only that, but we have a youth unemployment rate now approaching a record 20%. Again, this is going to prove to be very problematic for employers in the future who are going to be looking for skills and experience when the boomers finally do begin to retire.

9. The gap between the U6 and the official U3 rate is at a record 7.3 percentage points. Normally this spread is between 3-4 percentage points and ultimately we will see a reversion to the mean, to some unhappy middle where the U6 may be closer to 15.0-16.0% and the posted jobless rate closer to 12%. This will undoubtedly be a major political issue, especially in the context of a mid-term elections and the GOP starting to gain some electoral ground.

10. But when we do start to see the economic clouds part in a more decisive fashion, what are employers likely to do first? Well, naturally they will begin to boost the workweek and just getting back to pre-recession levels would be the same as hiring more than two million people. Then there are the record number of people who got furloughed into part-time work and again, they total over nine million, and these folks are not counted as unemployed even if they are working considerably fewer days than they were before the credit crunch began.

11. So the business sector has a vast pool of resources to draw from before they start tapping into the ranks of the unemployed or the typical 100,000-125,000 new entrants into the labour force when the economy turns the corner. Hence the unemployment rate is going to very likely be making new highs long after the recession is over — perhaps even years.

12. After all, the recession ended in November 2001 with an unemployment rate at 5.5% and yet the unemployment rate did not peak until June 2003, at 6.3%. The recession ended in March 1991 when the jobless rate was 6.8% and it did not peak until June 1992, at 7.8%. In both cases, the unemployment rate peaked well more than a year after the recession technically ended. The 2001 cycle was a tech capital stock deflation; the 1991 cycle was the Savings & Loan debacle; this past cycle was an asset deflation and credit collapse of epic proportions. And economists think that the unemployment rate is in the process of cresting now? Just remember it is the same consensus community that predicted at the beginning of 2008 that the jobless rate would peak out below 6% this cycle.

All this is what I've been saying for a while...that the unemployment rate is going to climb higher, if not far higher. I believe that it will hit 12.5% or perhaps 14% by the middle of next summer. I believe this because I don't think Mr. Obama really has a clue about "how things work". I hold to this because quite honestly, he's never really run ANYTHING before, and his grasp of economic is purely theoretical. He only knows what he's been told since college and all of his theorists have been...socialists, or communists. So...he really has no clue on what to do, in his heart of hearts, does he desire to "grow" the economy via traditional means. His desire is only to grow government, not realizing that government growth is a huge break on the economy.

11 November, 2009, Veteran's Day

To all those who have served in the Armed Forces of the United States of America, I give you my thanks for your service. You are all that is great about this country.

Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan: Traitor

Austin Bay is right. Nibal Malik Hasan has committed treason. There is no other charge that is possible at the moment.

Hasan's treachery is more like that of America's most infamous traitor, the Revolutionary War's Benedict Arnold. The fortuitous capture of a British spy foiled Arnold's plot to betray the Continental Army position at West Point to the British. Arnold committed treason for money and rank in the British Army, and his treachery put American soldiers and the war effort at risk. Hasan's treason employed terrorist tactics. Sure, the lawyers can argue Hasan attacked soldiers, with civilians as incidental targets, and the assault occurred on a military post, but the tactics are those used by jihadis in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Kenya, Indonesia and a score of other nations -- the armed killer entering an open facility and massacring unarmed men and women.

As a former US Marine, I take that question very seriously, I too once swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Try him under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and if he is found guilty...hang him in a public ceremony. Furthermore, that execution should be broadcast world wide. That is the message we need to send to those who would undertake Jihad against the United States. It's long past time to follow the wisdom of Theodore Roosevelt,

"Speak softly and carry a BIG STICK"!!!

More importantly, those who would wage war against us, need to understand that we are not afraid to wield that stick upon those who would war against us

GOP Now Leads Donkeys In Congressional Poll

Thanks to "Hope & Change" the GOP now leads the Democrats in Congressional polling. In a recent poll on Congressional leadership, 48% of respondents believe that the GOP can do a better job than the Democrats, who were chosen by 44% of repondents. That's a reversal of 22 points in less than a year.

'This administration has pulled off an astonishing hat trick -- they have irritated Democrats, alienated independents and energized Republicans," says the Republican National Committee in a statement on the poll released this morning. "Last Tuesday's election made it official -- Americans, and especially they independent-minded voters, are soundly rejecting the big-government, over-reaching policies of President Obama and Washington Democrats. The voters have demonstrated tremendous backlash to the Obama administration's hard turn to the left. Republicans are the party of conservative problem-solvers while the Democrats have clearly demonstrated they are the party of big-government simply by the policies they have supported -- a failed stimulus package, a trillion dollar government-run health care experiment, and a job-killing national energy tax."

Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Fire Thei Inspector Generals

The Huffington Post is reporting that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have fired their Inspector Generals. This will effectively prevent ANY investigation into the activities that led up to the collapse of the American financial institutions.

The ruling came in response to a request from the Federal Housing Finance Agency itself -- which means that a federal agency essentially succeeded in getting rid of its own inspector general. The FHFA is home to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks, which are jointly responsible for purchasing or guaranteeing more than 80 percent of new mortgages issued since the middle of 2008, according to FHFA numbers.

Basically, the government asked the Justice Dept to rule...and of course they did, just the way they should...to cover up any possible misdeeds.

US Unemployment Rate Passes that of Europe

So much for "Hope & Change". The US unemployment rate is now well beyond that of Europe. Our rate is 10.2%, or, as the NY Times is reporting:

A “broader measure of U.S. unemployment,” including discouraged workers, puts U.S. unemployment at 17.5 percent, reports the New York Times.

Openmarket.org is reporting that the average unemployment rate in Europe is 9.7%. That's 1/2 percentage point BELOW ours!

This is the highest rate in more than 26 years, and marks a huge change from the recent past, in which unemployment was double the American rate in much of Europe, such as in France. Unemployment is at 10 percent in France, which refused to adopt a U.S.-style stimulus package, and only 7.6 percent in Germany, which adopted a stimulus package that was smaller relative to its economy than ours was. (Countries that refused to adopt big stimulus packages have fared better than those that imitated President Obama. And the biggest-spending countries have suffered worst in the recession.)

So much for the much vaunted "stimulus package". It did nothing for our economy except pay off all those long time Democratic backers. It should have been labeled a Porkulus Package, that's all it was, is, or ever will be. At most, it's saved a couple of thousand jobs at a rough cost of $2.5 million dollars per job. For this we added $1,000,000,000,000.00 to our national debt.

Confronted with the specter of new burdens under the health-care bills and global-warming bills backed by the Obama administration, many businesses with the money to do so are afraid to hire people and create jobs lest they be stuck with a large tab for things like health care benefits for newly-hired, less-skilled employees.

And that is all there is to be said.

Sat Night Health Care Vote Sign of Weakness?

The American Thinker has an interesting take on the late night vote brought by Nancy Pelosi. Their take is that it shows weakness by the Democratic leadership in Congress. That by burying the vote late on a weekend, they limit the amount of exposure to constituent angst to members of the House.

The plan was simple. News generates interest. Interest leads to action. The last thing the Speaker wanted was wavering Democrats to be broadsided with calls and e-mails from irate constituents. With no Rush or Hannity or Levin on the airwaves, with conservative bloggers away from their keyboards, Ms. Pelosi, the House Democratic leadership, and President Obama worked the floor or the phones, promising wobbly-legged members more pork and the chance to "make history."

I'm not so sure that it worked out too well for them. I've been talking to a lot of people here in Blue State Maryland who are...quite pissed that the vote was hidden like this. In a state that has been reliably Blue for decades, to have voters openly complaining about Democratic machinations is...unique and may very well backfire next fall.

I don't think that here the GOP will make in-roads, but i strongly suspect that fiscally conservative independents will...but it points out the hipocricy of the MSM in NOT protesting this outrage at all. If George Bush and the GOP had done something like this the MSM would have been screaming at the top of their lungs!

Anita Dunn To Leave Obama Administration

Fox News is reporting that Anita Dunn, the Obama Administration's Communications Director is resigning.

"Anita Dunn is the person at the White House who decided it would be a good idea to try to freeze Fox News out of the White House operation, keep the president from doing interviews with Fox News personnel, keep high-level administration officials from doing interviews with Fox News personnel," Scott said Tuesday.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1109/goodbye_anita_dunn_4b3504bd-09e8-4db6-9419-c9c03b324d75.html#replyform

I'd say that this is a de facto admission by the Obama Administration that the war on Fox News wasn't just ill-advised, but stupid, and has failed. She's being thrown under the bus, yet another in a long and still growing list...

* Jim Johnson, Fannie Mae chief from 1991 through 1998, and who was on his Vice Pres search committee.
* Samantha Power, foreign policy advisor
*Austan Goolsbee, economic advisor
* Reverend Jeremiah Wright, friend and spiritual advisor
* Father Michael Pfleger, friend and spiritual advisor
* William Ayers, terrorist and ghost writer...

That's just the beginning...I predict that many more names will be added in the coming months.

Semper Fidelis

OORAH!




On today's date, 229 years ago, the United States Marine Corp was founded. Once upon a time...I too tread that hated parade deck at MCRD Parris Island.

Dems Raise Alarms At The Cost Of Health Care Overhaul

If the NY Times is reporting that Democrats around the country are freaking out over the hidden costs of the health care bills now snaking their ways through Congress, then the noise must be deafening. The bills claim to make upwards of $400 billion in savings on Medicare/Medicaid but don't address the real issues.

Both the House and the Senate are proposing cost-saving measures. The House bill projects $440 billion in Medicare savings over 10 years; the Senate Finance Committee bill projects about $420 billion. White House officials say there will be additional, substantial savings in the private sector, as well. But how much is not clear.

While the bills make "official" cuts in Medicare (the House version), other bills quietly reinstate those funds. The Senate recently attempted to side step on Medicare by not making the mandatory cuts that are required to be made each year. Every single year since it's inception, Congress has refused to make the mandatory legislative cuts in fees to physicians and health care providers.

This refusal has raised the underfunding of Medicare by approximately $5 trillion dollars. Yet, Congress insists that it can make health care, under government auspices, both cost effective and affordable. It's the old shell-game writ large. It can't be done, and voters are beginning to wake up to that fact, hence the majority who now oppose it by 54% to 41%.

Focus on Jobs Mr. Obama!

The Obama Administration has framed his signature issues as passing a monsterously huge seizure of the health insurance industry as well as "Climate Change"...but what we in this country is for this administration to focus on is jobs. It's the economy stupid!

We don't need health care overhaul, we need to right the economy. This administration has lost touch with what is the priority right now.

"Obama's focus on health care rather than jobs, when the economy is still so fragile ... could make it appear that the administration has its priorities confused," writes Robert Reich, former Clinton secretary of labor and a supporter of nationalized health care. "While affordable health care is critically important to Americans, making a living is more urgent."

The 1900+ page, Nancy Pelosi sponsored health care plan will completely wreck what is now an extraordinarily fragile economy. The whole host of new taxes/fees/fines that will compel Americans to pay for what will cost $1,300,000,000,000.00 health care plan will force small businesses not literally cease hiring new employees. As one newly unemployed, 10.2% unemployment rate is very personal now. If you count those that have ceased looking for work as well as those who are under-employed or working part-time, then the rate is far higher: 18+%...

Pelosi's Health Care Bill: The Problem...

Mickey Kaus repeats something I've been hearing since Sunday morning. The real problem facing Democrats in Congress is very simple: With a growing majority of Americans who oppose ALL of the health care legislation presently before Congress, Dems fear that they won't have the large majority that they presently hold in BOTH houses of Congress.

The problem facing health care reform, as Dick Morris and others have been arguing for months, isn't these tediously subtle legislative complications. They're what we see on the surface. The problem is the crude, primal politics underneath them--the legislature's' "id." It's the fear, among power-lusting Democratic Congresspersons, that if they vote for health care they won't be Congresspersons much past November, 2010 (or that even if they win, they will no longer be in the majority party). They're not worried about Cadillac plans. They're worried about castration.

If the House plan is passed through the Senate and then signed by Mr. Obama, I firmly believe that the present 60/40 split in the Senate will become 63 Republicans/Independents-37 Dems/Independents. Furthermore, I think that the Dems will lose at least 100 seats in the house.

I think that the Democratic leadership in the White House and Congress are under-estimating the genuine anger that many moderate (& or fiscally conservative) voters feel. Mr. Obama's reference on Saturday's pep-talk to Democrats in the house that called those who oppose his agenda "tea-baggers" will come back to bite him on his fundament...next November. More importantly Mr. Obama hinted that by supporting his seizure of the health care industry, his (now plunging) popularity will shield those who support him. On the other hand, Kaus makes this huge point:

"[Y]ou should get behind his plan and benefit from the from the political cover he'll work to give those who support him," Dickerson has Obama saying. You mean like the cover he gave Jon Corzine in New Jersey? ...

I for one, was genuinely shocked when Corzine lost last week. I thought that he would win with 2-4%...by those who supported Dagget during the campaign (as a protest) but who would actually vote for the incumbent...I don't think that our "elite" leadership in Wash, DC can under estimate voter anger at incumbent politicians. Nor do I think that this anger will soften over the next 12 months.

Unemployment Vs Stimulus Package

The Obama Administration claimed that with the "Stimulus Package" that unemployment would top out at 8%...that was more than 6 months ago. Now, unemployment has zipped past 10% and is still climbing. How do I know? I just lost my job, so I'm vitally interested in the economy.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like things will turn for the better any time soon. With the stock market sliding further, the temporary peak just above 10k at the NY Stock Exchange is a thing of the past. With the very narrow passage of the House's 1900 page health care seizure plan...one with a price tag that tops $1 trillion dollars (at the most conservative estimate), high unemployment levels are here to stay.

With manufacturing in a tailspin, lead by the destruction of the American auto industry (federal seizure of that vitally important sector spells it's eventual demise) means that if the Feds seize control of another 1/6th of the economy (i.e. health care) that small business won't be the engine of recovery most economist are hoping it will be. After all, if the government will require small businesses to provide very costly health insurance, they just won't hire new (or more) workers. In fact, most of the small business owners I know (I live in very Blue MD) are terrified of the taxation/fees that are listed in the House bill. Most tell me they will lay off workers rather than have what amounts to a 25% tax on their businesses.

I predict, that next fall, the Democratic Party will be shocked at the polls by the loss of at least 100 seats in the House and perhaps 12 seats in the Senate. I suspect that even "safe" seats will fall prey to challengers that pledge to overturn this bill. I suspect that those who do gain office won't necessarily be Republicans either, most will be independents, libertarians or fiscal conservatives.

Cable is Down...Blogging will be light for a few weeks

My cable internet connection will be down for the next couple of weeks. Some genius in my complex tried to hack into the cable nexus and get free cable...but they fried out the whole complex. It's going to be a couple of weeks while all of the wiring is redone...big sigh