Nemo me impune lacessit

No one provokes me with impunity


No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Article 1, Section 9, Constitution of the United States

If this is the law of the land...why in a republic (little r) and as republicans, do we allow mere POLITICIANS to the right to use a "title of office" for the rest of their lives as if it were de facto a patent of nobility. Because, as republicans, this should NOT be the case...just saying...

The Vail Spot's Amazon Store

Saturday, October 31, 2009

Obama says Cap and Trade Means Green Jobs For America

Mr. Obama says that the "cap & trade" bill means green jobs for America. That's why the huge wind turbine farm in Texas will be built in China. What more lies will he tell?
The Shenyang Power Group has signed on to supply 240 of its massive 2.5-megawatt wind turbines to a 36,000-acre development in West Texas. The Wall Street Journal reports that the wind farm is also slated to receive $1.5 billion in financing from the Export-Import Bank of China.

This comes as the U.S. has increasingly out-sourced much of its wind turbine development. Less than a quarter of wind turbine components installed in the U.S. came from domestic production, and Europe currently holds the lion's share of turbine manufacturing. A Norwegian firm launched the world's first full-scale floating wind turbine this September.
Good think Van Jones isn't around to take credit for allowing his ChiCom masters to take credit for this coup.

NY-23, Scozzafava Quits is reporting that Dede Scozzafava has suspended her campaign for NY-23. Here is her statement. Scozzafava's statement:
Dear Friends and Supporters:

Throughout the course of my campaign for Congress, I have made the people of the 23rd District and the issues that affect them the focal point of my campaign. As a life long resident of this District, I care deeply and passionately about its people and our way of life. Whether as a candidate for Congress, a State Assemblywoman or a small town Mayor, I have always sought to act with the best interest of our District and its residents in mind—and today I again seek to act for the good of our community.

The opportunity to run as the Republican and Independence Party candidate to represent the 23rd District has been and remains one of the greatest honors of my life. During the past several months, as I’ve traveled the district, meeting and talking with voters about the issues that matter most to them, I’ve been overwhelmed by the amount of support I’ve received as I sought to serve as their voice in Washington. However, as Winston Churchill once said, Democracy can be a fickle employer, and the road to public office is not always a smooth one.

In recent days, polls have indicated that my chances of winning this election are not as strong as we would like them to be. The reality that I’ve come to accept is that in today’s political arena, you must be able to back up your message with money—and as I’ve been outspent on both sides, I’ve been unable to effectively address many of the charges that have been made about my record. But as I’ve said from the start of this campaign, this election is not about me, it’s about the people of this District. And, as always, today I will do what I believe serves their interests best.

It is increasingly clear that pressure is mounting on many of my supporters to shift their support. Consequently, I hereby release those individuals who have endorsed and supported my campaign to transfer their support as they see fit to do so. I am and have always been a proud Republican. It is my hope that with my actions today, my Party will emerge stronger and our District and our nation can take an important step towards restoring the enduring strength and economic prosperity that has defined us for generations.

On Election Day my name will appear on the ballot, but victory is unlikely. To those who support me – and to those who choose not to – I offer my sincerest thanks.


Friday, October 30, 2009

The White House Was Behind NEA Propaganda Call

The Washington Examiner has found the smoking gun...that the Obama Administration was in fact behind the attempt to politicize and develop propaganda via the National Endowment for the Arts.:
Former actor and present White House associate director of public engagement Kalpen Modi was directly involved in planning the controversial conference call hosted by a National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) flack to encourage tax-supported artists to create propaganda for President Obama, according to emails obtained by Judicial Watch via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

The emails reveal that Modi worked with now-former NEA national communications director Yosif Sargant in planning the August 10 conference call that was first revealed by Andrew Breitbart's Big web site. Participants in the conference call were encouraged to use their talents to generate public support for the Obama agenda in Congres

· August 10, 2009, 10:23 am. Email from Yosi Sergant to Kalpen Modi: “[The call is] organized by me…I’d ask you to come on and give the exact spiel you gave on Saturday. Walk them through the WH Arts Policy. They won’t know it. Then I will take them into United We Serve and the NEA.”

· August 10, 2009, 10:29 am. Email from Kalpen Modi to Yosi Sergant: “Oy. This would be awesome to be a part of. Let me know if you think it’s going long, or maybe I can get someone from here to do it if I can’t because of the Social Security mtg.”

· August 10, 2009, 11:04 am. Email from Kalpen Modi to Yosi Sergant: “Let me see if we can move Social Sec by a few mins. Agreed, it would be great to be on the call and helpful for us also.”

· August 10, 2009, 1:37 pm. Email from Yosi Sergant to Buffy Wicks, Deputy Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement: “We have an important call at 2pm for UWS (United We Serve) and the Arts with my peeps. Indie producers around the country. Kal can’t join the call. Any chance you can hop on for 5 minutes and intro with Nellie and I?”
There it is...via a FOIA request. Mr. Obama's minions were behind the conference call and did initiate it. Yosi Sergant was merely the front man behind it. If Geo. Bush had attempted to do this, the MSM would have, rightfully, been screaming for his hide. Now, what do we do when a Democrat does it?

NY-23, Should Scozzafava (R) Drop Out?

A poll, hit the link in the title to vote on a poll:

Should Scozzafava drop out of the NY-23 congressional race and endorce Hoffman? The straw poll when I hit it was at 98% for her dropping out.

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Bloomberg's Carlson is Anti-Palin

Yet another MSM report files an anti-Palin article. Imagine that. Because Ms. Palin has announced that she will support CANDIDATES for public office regardless of party affiliantion,'s Margeret Carlson has published yet another anti-Palin screed.
Rather than endorse the Republican nominee, or just keeping quiet, Palin trashed Dede Scozzafava in favor of an independent, conservative Doug Hoffman, potentially handing the seat to a Democrat for the first time in about a century.
Honestly, it ain't what Margie says, it's HOW she say's what she say's...the left (i.e. EVERY JOURNALIST who EVER WENT TO JOURNALISM SCHOOL) genuinely hates Sarah Palin (despite the simple fact that this woman represents everything feminism has ever hinted at wanting to be...

But I digress...Dede S. is a RINO plain and simple. This woman is a Democrat (and a far left one at that) who is masquerading at that! She didn't actually "win" support of the local Republican party...but rather stole it in back room deals...if you follow this "local NY link" then you'll come to the conclusion that I did...Dede S was the winner of "the fix is in" deal of recent memory....

follow the link:
for a detailed local report of just how this dark horse won the GOP's friggin' ugly!

Obama Has Leaped Off the Precipice

Mr. Obama has leaped off the precipice when his minions initiated the assault on Fox News. He joined Richard Nixon and the famous enemies list with one of his own.

Mr. Obama's includes an news organization (Fox News), an organization of business ownder (US Chamber of Commerce), the Health Care Industry (1/6th of the economy)...and who else?

Who will be next to be named an "enemy of the state"? Who will be our 2 minute hate victim? Who?

The Donner Party...oh sh...t

I love this quote:
If you're an elected Democrat anywhere to the right of Barney Frank, and trying to defend a competitive seat next November, you've got to be starting to sweat.

You wake up in the morning and just like every other morning as far as the eye can see the only thing in the news is the president's health-care reform. It's starting to look like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are leading the Donner Party, the snowbound emigrants who bogged down in the Sierra Nevada winter in the 1840s and resorted to cannibalism to survive.
Well Nancy...are you part of the Donner Party? 1990 pages of health care seizure...sure must make you feel like it.

Pelosi Unveils New House Health Care Seizure Bill

Nancy Pelosi, for now, Speaker of the House of Representatives, has unveiled the new House Bill that will seize control of health care in the United States of America. All 2,000+ pages of it. Over the next few weeks I'll attempt to wade through it and post my analysis of it. It's not yet available online, when I discover where Ms. Pelosi, et al, have hidden it, I'll post that link as well.

Officially, it's supposed to be "deficit nuetral", but of course the CBO only analyses what it's told to analyse. What's missing from bill already, is a $250,000,000,000.00 deduction for Medicare costs that the Senate voted down last week. There are other smoke and mirror provisions as well, to the tune of $300,000,000,000.00 so far...but I've not pinned them down yet. I'll let you know what I find, when I find it.

Valerie Jarret, Child of the Revolution (wannabe)...

I don't, at least not often, quote entire entries from another's not nice and is considered bad form. But when a far better writer than I writes something that makes a great point...I copy it and bring it here. The link in the title take you to the raw feed from the Baltimore Mullet Wrapper (oops the Balt Sun).

From the WSJ blog...James Taranto:

David Zurawik, TV critic for the Baltimore Sun, notes a revealing exchange between CNN's Campbell Brown and White House consigliera Valerie Jarrett. (Note that neither Brown nor Jarrett is as fat as she appears in the video; CNN, for some reason, insists on presenting its online videos with the wrong aspect ratio.) Here's the transcript:

>Brown: So do you think FOX News is biased?
Jarrett: Well, of course they're biased. Of course they are.
Brown: OK. Then do you also think that MSNBC is biased?
Jarrett: Well, you know what? This is the thing. I don't want to--actually, I don't want to just generalize all FOX is biased or that another station is biased. I think what we want to do is look at it on a case-by-case basis. And when we see a pattern of distortion, we're going to be honest about that pattern of distortion.
Brown: But you only see that at FOX News? That's all that--you have spoken out about FOX News.
Jarrett: That's actually not true. I think that what the administration has said very clearly is that we're going to speak truth to power.

Good for Campbell Brown for sticking up for a competitor (albeit at the expense of a lesser competitor). And it's pretty funny how Jarrett, after smugly asserting, "Of course they're biased," did not make a pretense of standing by her position when Brown asked a question she would have been prepared for if she had spent any time thinking this through.

Even more risible, though, is the claim that the administration "is going to speak truth to power." Hello, Valerie? Your boss is the president of the United States! No one is more powerful. As we suggested Friday, it really seems as if Obama and his men do not understand what it means to be president. Because their power is constrained--thank you, Founding Fathers!--they labor under the delusion that they are powerless.

Yet while this is all hilarious, it is also scary when you think it through. Great power entails great responsibility. There is little to suggest that Obama and his aides appreciate their responsibility, and much, including their incessant complaining that the previous president did a lousy job, to suggest an attitude of total irresponsibility.

The job of those in power is not to "speak truth to power," though it would be nice if they spoke the truth once in a while. It is to exercise power responsibly. The effort to bully Fox News Channel would be an abuse of power were it not so pathetically inept.
**Mr. Taranto makes a strong point. The Obama Administration really doesn't have a clue about what they are doing. When you are on the outside, it's really very easy to throw grenades...but when YOU ARE THE BOSS, it's vastly different.**

DC Seeks $4.8 Billion Transportation User Tax

First of all, Washington, DC "city" government squanders millions of dollars that Congress, and their own gas tax (one of the highest in the country) brings in, BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE! Now they want to put a transponder in your car to track where and how far you drive and where you go...Big Brother is alive and well in DC.
"A comprehensive road-use pricing initiative in the Washington metropolitan area would be an extremely ambitious experiment," Brookings Institution authors Benjamin K. Orr and Alice M. Rivlin explained in a policy paper designed to garner the interest of regional authorities. "Leadership and upfront investment from the federal government would also be essential to get the experiment off the ground and ensure comprehensive implementation. Some recent indications of interest at the federal level suggest that this might be possible. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has recently stated that, due to the failure of the Manhattan congestion pricing initiative, the US Department of Transportation still has funds available for pilot congestion pricing programs."

"Vehicles would be fitted with a GPS transponder device similar to an E-ZPass, perhaps as part of the registration process," Orr and Rivlin explained. "This device would record the type of vehicle, the distance traveled, and the time and location of travel." Despite the privacy issues, DC officials insist that tolling is necessary for making up for the shortfall in gasoline tax revenues. The proposed mileage tax would solve this problem by increasing motorist taxation levels by a factor of ten. The additional revenue would be diverted to spending on buses and rail service.

"State gas taxes raise approximately $420 million in the Washington urbanized area every year," Orr and Rivlin wrote. "Revenues from the road-use pricing scheme described above would be between $2.96 billion and $4.79 billion, depending on the average fee.
I live in the "DC Metropolitan Planning Area" and I have 2 words for this entire transponder idea: F--k You!!! If you bureaucrats didn't waste so much money (just look at any county/state road crews...8 guys standing around, 2 guys ACTUALLY working...then you wouldn't need another FIVE BILLION DOLLARS!

5 Very Important Votes on the Senate Health Insurance Seizure Bill

From Keith Hennessy, the five steps toward passage of Mr. Obama's seizure of the US health care industry:

I. Cloture on the motion to proceed – Reid needs a majority (51) to pass the motion to proceed so the Senate can begin debating and amending the bill. If Republicans filibuster this motion, he will need 60 votes to invoke cloture and shut off debate. Members of the majority party traditionally stick with the leader on all votes related to the motion to proceed. If a D or Sen. Lieberman threatens to vote no on this cloture vote, then the bill is in huge trouble. If cloture is invoked on the motion to proceed, then the vote to adopt the motion to proceed becomes routine.

II. Sen. Lieberman’s recent comments suggest he will support cloture on the motion to proceed, but may oppose cloture on the bill (step 4 or 5 below). And Republicans may not even filibuster the motion to proceed. One can argue that the best way to kill a bad bill is to get on that bill quickly (and avoid looking obstructionist by granting the motion to proceed) and start offering amendments. The motion to proceed may be a non-event.

III. One or more votes to waive the Budget Act – If the bill in any way violates the numeric requirements set forth in the budget resolution, then a Senator (almost certainly a Republican, and a safe bet would be Budget Committee Ranking Republican Judd Gregg) could raise a budget point of order that would kill the Reid amendment. Reid can avoid this if he gets all the numbers right (very difficult). The politics of building a compromise among 60 Senators may, however, force him to spend more money than the budget resolution allows, or at different times than it allows. If so, he will have no choice but to violate the Budget Act. In this scenario he will need 60 votes to waive the Budget Act.
The Baucus/Finance Committee bill appeared to fit within the budget resolution parameters. This is unsurprising since the most experienced budget staffer on Capitol Hill works for Chairman Baucus. Will Reid’s version be as rigorous?

IV. A motion to strike or amend the public option – I assume someone will try to strike (delete) or amend (change) the public option part of Reid’s amendment. Assume all 40 R’s would support such an amendment. Q: How many D’s support it?
If 9 or fewer D’s support it, then the amendment fails and the public option as drafted by Reid remains in the bill.

If 10 D’s support it, then it’s a 50-50 tie, to be broken by Vice President Biden, who is also President of the Senate. If he votes no, then the amendment still fails.

If the VP would or might vote aye, or if there are 11 or more D’s supporting the amendment, then things get really interesting. A majority of the Senate would support changing the bill, but the overwhelming majority of those who would be expected to vote for final passage would oppose such a change. I would expect liberals (like Sen. Rockefeller) to filibuster the amendment, forcing the center-right to get 60 votes to invoke cloture on their filibuster. They won’t be able to do so.

This could provoke a stalemate within the Democratic party, in which liberals refuse to allow a majority of the Senate (all R’s + maybe 11 D’s) to strike or change the public option, and moderate D’s refuse to support cloture on the Reid substitute amendment (see step 4) unless their amendment is adopted.

IV. Cloture on the Reid substitute amendment – I anticipate Leader Reid will move to proceed to a “shell bill,” some random tax bill already passed by the House (so he doesn’t run into a Constitutional problem). If the motion to proceed is adopted, he would then take his proposal and offer it as a complete substitute amendment to the bill. As a technical procedural matter, the Senate will then debate and try to amend the “Reid substitute [amendment].” At some point, Leader Reid will try to shut off the debate and amendment process by filing a cloture motion on his amendment. He will need 60 votes to invoke cloture, and this is probably the determinative vote for success or failure. If he gets 60 votes or more to invoke cloture on his substitute, then adopting the substitute amendment is straightforward (he needs only 51). The fourth step likely becomes routine as well.

V. Cloture on the bill as amended by the Reid amendment – If his substitute amendment is adopted, there will be other procedural opportunities for opponents to slow down or block the bill. Reid will need to file cloture on the underlying bill as amended by the Reid substitute amendment. He will again need 60 to invoke cloture and 51 for final passage.

One Tribe At A Time

My father was a rocket scientist. Literally, he designed space suits and life support systems for, first the Air Force, then NASA. He taught me a profound lesson: If you hire an expert, and he gives you're an idiot if you don't follow it.

Just the other day, I stumbled upon Steven Pressfields site. On it he had a review and a link to a monograph by Major James Gant, USA, a Special Foreces field grade officer. Maj. Gant's monograph details a way to achieve victory over the Taliban as well as Al Quieda. It wouldn't be an easy victory, and it's a path that's frought with extreme danger and hardship for those chosen to execute it...presuming of course, out political masters are smart enough to implement it. I doubt they will, but "hope and change" springs eternal.

I am going to forward it to all of my Senators, as well as my idiot Congressman, you know the one who refused to hold ANY town hall meetings...I doubt they'll read it. After all it's 45 pages long, and has lots of big words...but any way, I hope you'll follow the link in the title and read it for yourself. It would work in because, once you actually put Americans WITH people in distant lands, they will learn the lie in the anti-American propoganda. But we must use the best and the brightest.

Thank you Maj. Gant for both your service and your excellent plan.

Larry Kudlow On More Government Regulation of the Economy

Mr. Kudlow makes a great point. Heavy government regulation was tried in several parts of the world. The Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact are excellent examples of where Mr. Obama and Barney Frank are heading. I only ask, where are the governments of those countries now? More recently, take a long hard look at strong is the economy there? What is unemployment like? How strong is the agrarian sector? NOT!

Take a look at the video and it will go a long way to explain in only a minute and a half, why this country had a 26 year long boom. That period was marked by only 2 mild and short recessions (economic corrections actually). Then call your Congressmen and it now.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

A Majority Now Say Country Is Going In The Wrong Direction

According to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News (remember THAT network anyone?) a majority of American say that the US is heading in the wrong direction. First politics and the economy:

3. All in all, do you think that things in the nation are generally headed in the right direction, or do you feel that
things are off on the wrong track?
Headed in the right direction...... 26
Off on the wrong track ............... 59
Mixed (VOL)............................ 9
Not sure..................................6

5. In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job that Congress is doing?
Approve........................ 24
Disapprove ................... 65
Not sure...................... 11

6a. Do you generally approve or disapprove of the job Barack Obama is doing in handling the issue of health care reform?
Approve.......................................... 43
Disapprove ..................................... 48
Not sure........................................ 9

9. In the next election for U.S. Congress, do you feel that your representative deserves to be reelected, or do you think that it is time to give a new person a chance?
Deserves to be reelected .......... 41
Give new person a chance........ 49
Not sure ................................. 10

10. I’m going to read you two statements about the role of government, and I’d like to know which one comes closer to your point of view.
Statement A: Government should do more to solve problems and help meet the needs of people, OR
Statement B: Government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals.
A/Government should do more ................... 46
B/Government is doing too many things...... 48
Some of both (VOL).................................. 5
Not sure................................................... 1

11. How much of the time do you trust the government in Washington to do what is right––just about always, most of the time, or only some of the time?
Just about always............................ 4
Most of the time............................... 19
Only some of the time...................... 65
Never (VOL).................................. 11
Not sure........................................ 1

15. Would you strongly favor, mildly favor, feel neutral about, mildly oppose, or strongly oppose building a new independent political party to run a credible candidate for president in the next presidential election?
Strongly favor ................................. 30
Mildly favor ..................................... 16
Feel neutral .................................... 20
Mildly oppose ................................. 10
Strongly oppose.............................. 20
Not sure ....................................... 4

16. As you know, the president and Congress are dealing with many issues facing our country such as the economy and health care reform. I’m going to read you two statements about these and please tell me which one comes closer to your point of view.
Statement A: When considering issues facing our country, it is important to have unity and compromise between the two political parties to ensure that the country comes together.
Statement B: When considering issues facing our country, it is important to have debate and differences between the two political parties to ensure that all options are considered.
Statement A/unity and compromise ........ 38
Statement B/debate and differences ...... 56
Depends (VOL) ..................................... 5
Not sure ................................................ 1

17. When it comes to the partisanship going on in Washington, do you feel that this is mainly due to an unwillingness of the Republicans to compromise and find a middle ground to work with the Democrats, or that this is due to an unwillingness of the Democrats to compromise and find a middle ground to work with the Republicans, or do you feel that it is equally the fault of both parties?
Due to unwillingness of Republicans......... 24
Due to unwillingness of Democrats........... 17
Equally the fault of both parties................. 57
Not sure................................................. 2

22. Which of the following two statements comes closer to your point of view?
Statement A: The president and the Congress should worry more about boosting the economy even though it may mean larger budget deficits now and in the future.
Statement B: The president and the Congress should worry more about keeping the budget deficit down, even though it may mean it will take longer for the economy to recover.
Statement A/Worry more about boosting the economy ............. 31
Statement B/Worry more about keeping budget deficit down .... 62
Depends (VOL) ...................................................................... 3
Not sure................................................................................. 4

Now we move onto to Mr. Obama's Atttempt to seize/nationalize Health Insurance/Health Care:

26. From what you have heard about Barack Obama’s health care plan, do you think his plan is a good idea or a bad idea? If you do not have an opinion either way, please just say so.
Good idea....................................... 38
Bad idea ......................................... 42
No opinion ...................................... 16
Not sure........................................ 4

27a. And from what you have heard about Barack Obama’s health care plan, do you believe it will result in the quality of your health care getting better, worse, or staying about the same as now? If you do not have an opinion, please just say so.
Quality will get better ....................... 21
Quality will get worse....................... 40
Quality will stay the same ................ 27
Do not have an opinion.................... 10
Not sure........................................ 2
* Asked of one-half the respondents (FORM A).

27b. And from what you have heard about Barack Obama’s health care plan, do you believe it will result in the cost of your health care going up, down, or staying about the same as now? If you do not have an opinion, please just say so. **
Cost will go up................................. 47
Cost will go down ............................ 13
Cost will stay the same.................... 25
Do not have an opinion.................... 11
Not sure........................................ 4
** Asked of one-half the respondents (FORM B).

28. Thinking about efforts to reform the health care system, which would concern you more?
Not doing enough to make the health care system better than it is now by lowering costs and covering the uninsured. OR
Going too far and making the health care system worse than it is now in terms of quality of care and choice of doctor.
Not doing enough ............................ 44
Going too far ................................... 51
Not sure ........................................ 5

Switching the War in Afghanistan:

39. When it comes to making major decisions on overall military strategy and the number of troops needed, such as in Afghanistan, who do you have more confidence in to make the right decisions––the president and secretary of defense OR the generals running operations in the country? **
The president and secretary of defense............... 25
The generals running operations in the country.... 62
Some of both (VOL) .......................................... 9
Neither (VOL) ................................................... 2

40. And now, thinking about Iran, if Iran continues with its nuclear research and is close to developing a nuclear weapon, do you believe that the United States should or should not initiate military action to destroy Iran’s ability to make nuclear weapons? And do you feel strongly about that, or not?

Should Initiate Military Action
Feel strongly........................................ 45
Do not feel strongly .............................. 7
Should NOT Initiate Military Action
Do not feel strongly .............................. 10
Feel strongly........................................ 27
Depends (VOL).................................. NA
Not sure............................................. 11

It's pretty obvious that a fairly strong majority don't approve of the agenda/direction that Mr. Obama has chosen to take this country...after running as a "pragmatic moderate".

Is Obama A Mysoginist?

Bonnie Erbe certainly thinks so. Here's an excerpt from her Newsweek column,
President Obama could invite Chamique Holdsclaw to the private White House basketball court and Billie Jean King to play tennis with him. I still wouldn't believe he's any more comfortable dealing with women or concerned about "women's" issues than the dearly departed former Sen. Jesse Helms. President Obama talks the talk a lot better and a lot louder than Helms. But Jesse Helms was so rooted in his atavist traditions, he chose to remain true to his misogyny rather than pose for cameras with faux female golfing partners. President Obama must hide the side of his personality that is clearly uncomfortable with women because he needs their votes much more than Helms ever did.

Whether it was his treatment of Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail (as in his condescending remark that she was "likeable enough") or his clearly career-oriented mate who has been toned down and remorphed into a Stepford Wife, I just don't get the impression this man is comfortable with women. Nor do I believe he cares about them beyond needing women's votes. It's an act and a thoroughly see-through, amateur one at that.
It's hard to mistake this as anything but a figurative "bitch slap"...

CNN Throws Grenades...At Itself

Politics daily has a great post on CNN's inability to actually report facts and figures. Instead CNN has become a partisan in pushing the Obama Administration agenda.
In an epic segment on Oct. 12, Stewart spent 11 minutes -- half of the entire Daily Show -- pouring through clips of CNN's blatant disregard for fact checking the statistics spewed by actual politicians and pundits on its shows. According to Stewart, "Fact checking is the function of news. This is the public service provided." Never one to make a point without sarcasm, Stewart added, "It is one of the reasons the health care debate has been so fruitful."

As usual, Stewart nails it. He argues that the news organizations should educate the nation with fact checking and an open, intelligent evaluation of each side of political debates so that the public discourse is not mired in lies and partisan bickering. Idealistic as it may sound, there is a word for this: journalism. Instead, CNN brings together partisan experts that bash each other in divisive quarrels masquerading as real information. Issues such as the uninsured and the deficit take a back seat to fiery buzzwords like death panels and socialism/fascism that have no basis in the reality of the health care overhaul. We are constantly bombarded by the explosive attacks of partisan conflict and emerge deaf to the real substance of our political debate.
Basically, CNN, MSNBC, NBC & CBS are failing in their mandate to report the news. They have become defacto propaganda arms of the Obama Administration. They never, ever report anything negative or adverse. On the other hand, they constantly reported on negative aspects of the Bush Administration. This goes hand in hand with the inability of the Obama Administration to take responsibility of any of their actions or of the present situation the country is in. It's all "inherited" and the "news" organizations fully support this meme. Fox News now has a larger audience than ALL the other news networks combined. Yet, those networks refuse to see the problem that their biased reporting as a problem, all the while they bleed viewers. Print media has the same problem...and I don't think either will wake up until it's too late.

Our democracy requires a robust news media that reports facts on what our political "elites" are attempting to inflict upon us. Without it, we are doomed. Right now, only Fox News the Wall Street Journal and a few regional papers attempt to present reasonably balanced reporting. This cannot continue...but the Obama Administration has declared war on Fox News, and is attempting to marginalize it because they are not fully supporting the aims of this administration. It's wrong and will probably result in a huge backlash, just as Nixon's "enemies list" did 37 years ago.

Harry Reid Announces Inclusion of Public Option in Senate Bill

Unfortunately, he doesn't have even 50 he's merely pandering to the far left. Cynical would be my take, especially as he's in a very tight race for re-election. He'll be the 2nd Democratic Senate majority leader to lose his seat in the past decade and a half. That rather begs the question that perhaps Democrats shouldn't lead the Senate, n'est pas?

Honduran Government Right to Oust Zelaya

The Law Library of Congress was asked to report in August 2009 on the Constitutional issues when the Honduran Supreme Court ordered Zelalya removed from the office of President of Honduras for attempting to circumvent the Honduran Constitution. The report was titled “Honduras: Constitutional Issues.” Unfortunately, the LoC didn't reach the conclusions they were supposed to when leading Democrats asked for it to report on the "crisis". The report was released last month and is evidence that the Honduran government was constitutionally mandated to instruct the Honduran military to remove Zelaya from office in late June.

But, John Kerry (D MA) and Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) have objected that
“The report, which has contributed to the political crisis that still wracks Honduras, contains factual errors and is based on a flawed legal analysis that has been refuted by experts from the United States, the Organization of American States, and Honduras,” Kerry and Berman wrote in the letter.
So, Mr. Kerry and Mr. Berman want the report retracted and will kick up a fuss because they didn't get the results they wanted. Imagine that. LoC researches the Constitution of another country, finds that the highest court acted as required by THEIR constitution, when the sitting President of that country attempted to subvert the law...and that's wrong? Some how, this just isn't right. What sort of things re they planning for us? Repeal of the 22nd Amendment? Personally, I think we need an amendment that not only limits Congressional terms, but also forbids our Congress from exempting themselves from ANY laws of the land.

28th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

1. No citizen of the United States shall be elected to the House of Representatives to more than four (4) consecutive, two (2) year terms to office.

2. No citizen of the United States shall be elected to the United States Senate for more than two (2) consecutive, six (6) year terms of office.

3. No citizen of the United States shall receive any retirement benefits from serving in either the United States House of Representatives or the United States Senate.

4. Congress shall not exempt itself from any laws of the United States of America, in whole or in part.

A New Gallup Poll Sends Trembles Through Democratic Party

In a newly released 15,000 person poll shows that 40 percent of Americans now self identify as conservative (up from 37 percent when Obama was elected), only 20 percent identify as liberal (down 2 percent). Many more independents (35 percent) now identify as conservative than last year (only 29 percent).

I can't avoid the simple conclusion that Democratic control of the executive and legislative branches of the government has ignited a conservative resurgence. Mr. Obama ran as a moderate, promoted moderate concepts, but once the election was history, lurched far, far to the left. Still, William Galston, a former member of the Clinton administration believes, as do many others, that the Clinton Presidency was derailed by the results of the 1994 midterm election. That election returned the GOP to control of Congress for the first time since the 1950's. It took more than a decade for the Dems to recover, he believes,
that Republicans won’t do as well this time, Democratic leaders should take seriously the possibility of a significant electoral reverse and act strategically to make it less likely...Still, Democrats must ask themselves whether there’s anything they can do over the next year--for example, a meaningful shift toward fiscal restraint--to reduce the intensity level of the conservative assault. If not, the combination of an energized opposition and an electorate battered by high unemployment, slow growth, and the perception of out-of-control spending could set the stage for an ugly outcome. This wouldn’t mean that Republicans had regained credibility as a governing party; odds are that it will take more than two years to erase the public’s sour memories of the Republican congressional majority and George W. Bush’s presidency. It would mean that a substantial portion of the electorate wanted to send Democrats a message that they had gone too far.
I don't believe that the Democrats will have the wisdom to reverse course. They have the bit in their teeth and are going to try to ram through a whole host of liberal policies from their wish list BEFORE they lose control of Congress again. After all, once a program is established...Congress never, ever will repeal it.

What Will Dems in Congress Gain or Lose by Ramming Through Health Insurance Reform

Personally, I think that they way Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid have gone about this they already "own" Heath Care/Insurance Reform. A majority of Americans (54% in a recent Rasmussen Poll) already oppose all of the various bills being tossed about in Congress. Those bills were fashioned behind closed doors by the most liberal members of both the Senate and the House. None included any Republican proposals. So, once these monstrosities are enacted and go into effect, and are shown to be the debacle that they look to be now, the Dems will face huge losses in the polls.

I think that by 2016, once the various plans are expected to be fully implemented, they will be disastrous to America...and America will, to put it mildly, be pissed off in a way that's not been seen in 234 years...mark my words it will be ugly.

ACORN Defunding Only "Temporary"

As I predicted, the Democrats only defunded ACORN temporarily. The "temp" defunding ends on Saturday, October 31, 2009. After that, funding levels will be restored. Yet another example of this Democrat led Congress saying one thing and doing the exact opposite.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Speaking Truth To Power: Charles Krauthammer

I enjoy CK's political punditry...

From the Daily Mail, in the UK

Selected quotes. On Obama: “He is a man of perpetual promise. There used to be a cruel joke that said Brazil is the country of the future, and always will be; Obama is the Brazil of today’s politicians. He has obviously achieved nothing. And in the American context, to be the hero of five Norwegian leftists, is not exactly politically positive.”

On Obama: “Look at Obama’s speech at the UN General Assembly: “No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation.” Take the first half of that sentence: No nation can dominate another. There is no eight year old who would say that — it’s so absurd. And the second half? That is adolescent utopianism. Obama talks in platitudes, but offers a vision to the world of America diminished or constrained, and willing to share leadership in a way that no other presidency and no other great power would.”

On the UN: “The UN is worse than disaster. The UN creates conflicts. Look at the disgraceful UN Human Rights Council: It transmits norms which are harmful, anti-liberty, and anti-Semitic among other things. The world would be better off in its absence.”

She was just a remarkable woman.

A Mensch..and a beautiful woman...I received this from a friend of mine who lives in Mexico. We don't a agree on much and she's a far left liberal type who loves to hug trees. But every once in a while, she comes up with something that I can agree with completely:

Irena Sendler

There recently was a death of a 98 year-old lady named Irena. During WWII, Irena, got permission to work in the Warsaw Ghetto, as a Plumbing/Sewer specialist. She had an 'ulterior motive' ... She KNEW what the Nazi's plans were for the Jews, (being German.) Irena smuggled infants out in the bottom of the tool box she carried and she carried in the back of her truck a burlap sack, (for larger kids..) She also had a dog in the back that she trained to bark when the Nazi soldiers let her in and out of the ghetto. The soldiers of course wanted nothing to do with the dog and the barking covered the kids/infants noises.. During her time of doing this, she managed to smuggle out and save 2500 kids/infants. She was caught, and the Nazi's broke both her legs, arms and beat her severely. Irena kept a record of the names of all the kids she smuggled out and kept them in a glass jar, buried under a tree in her back yard. After the war, she tried to locate any parents that may have survived it and reunited the family. Most had been gassed. Those kids she helped got placed into foster family homes or adopted.

Last year Irena was up for the Nobel Peace Prize ... She was not selected.

Al Gore won, for a slide show on Global Warming.

Powerful message, especially the "cartoon." Let us never forget!

63 years later

Please read the little cartoon carefully, it's powerful. Then read the comments At the end. I'm doing my small part by forwarding this message. I hope you'll consider Doing the same.

It is now more than 60 years after the Second World War in Europe ended This e-mail is being sent as a memorial chain, in memory of the six million Jews, 20 million Russians, 10 million Christians and 1,900 Catholic priests who were murdered, massacred, raped, burned, starved and humiliated with the German and Russian Peoples looking the other way!

Now, more than ever, with Iraq , Iran , and others, claiming the Holocaust to be 'a myth,' it's imperative to make sure the world never forgets, because there are others who would like to do it again.

This e-mail is intended to reach 40 million people worldwide!

Join us and be a link in the memorial chain and help us distribute it around the world.

Please send this e-mail to people you know and ask them to continue the memorial chain.

Please don't just delete it.

It will only take you a minute to pass this along. Thanks.

The Chicago Way: Eliminate ANY Opposition...

Eric @ has an excellent entry on the Obama Administration's adoption of the "Chicago Way" of political warfare. The WSJ was the news source that gives us the phrase "The Chicago Way"'s an indication that this administration has run amuck in ways that are anti-democratic and against all of our traditions.
A White House set on kneecapping its opponents isn't, of course, entirely new. (See: Nixon) What is a little novel is the public and bare-knuckle way in which the Obama team is waging these campaigns against the other side. In recent weeks the Windy City gang added a new name to their list of societal offenders: the Chamber of Commerce. For the cheek of disagreeing with Democrats on climate and financial regulation, it was reported the Oval Office will neuter the business lobby. Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett slammed the outfit as "old school," and warned CEOs they'd be wise to seek better protection.
Jarret is a protege of one of the founders of the 70's terrorist group SDS (and Ayers friend) Marilyn Katz. Additionally, her father has a long time member of the CPUSA (Communist Party of the United States) Chicago organization.

What worries me is the growing size of the Obama Enemy List. First it was just the health insurance industry. Then, he added Fox it's also the US Chamber of Commerce. Where will it end? Eric worries that,
Bare knuckles Chicago-style politics is one thing. But to see it directed at the Chamber of Commerce, from leftist radicals in the White House, is quite another. I'm glad to see that so far they haven't caved to pressure. My worry is that the reason the Chamber of Commerce is being so viciously targeted might involve more than just playing the game by Chicago politics. I worry that the target is the free market system itself.

How many Obama voters thought they were voting for that?
This administration should begin to worry about a backlash...soon, because they are stirring up a hornets nest...who will they come for next?

Monday, October 26, 2009

Al Gore, Global Warming Fraud

NY-23: Bad News For The GOP, Good News For Conservatives

In a third poll in the NY-23 Congressional race, Doug Hoffman now leads both the GOP (and RNC's anointed) Dede Scozafava as well as the Democratic candidate Bill Owens...
Washington - A poll released today by the Club for Growth shows Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman surging into the lead in the special election in New York's 23rd congressional district to replace John McHugh, the former congressman who recently became Secretary of the Army.

The poll of 300 likely voters, conducted October 24-25, 2009, shows Conservative Doug Hoffman at 31.3%, Democrat Bill Owens at 27.0%, Republican Dede Scozzafava at 19.7%, and 22% undecided. The poll's margin of error is +/- 5.66%. No information was provided about any of the candidates prior to the ballot question.

This is the third poll done for the Club for Growth in the NY-23 special election, and Doug Hoffman is the only candidate to show an increase in his support levels in each successive poll. The momentum in the race is clearly with Hoffman.

"Hoffman now has a wide lead among both Republicans and Independents, while Owens has a wide lead among Democrats. Dede Scozzafava's support continues to collapse, making this essentially a two-candidate race between Hoffman and Owens in the final week," concluded Basswood Research's pollster Jon Lerner, who conducted the poll for the Club.
...this is very good news for conservatives as well as America. On the other hand, it's very bad news for the GOP in general and RINO's in particular. They are, if Mr. Hoffman wins next week, on notice that their conservative constituents will not tolerate them much longer.

Health Insurance Reform Now Even Less Popular than Before

In middle America, the idea of Congress seizing health insurance and forcing everyone to get it or pay larges "fines" (i.e. taxes) is dropping in popularity. Rasmussen is reporting that 54% now firmly oppose the government taking over health insurance, while only 42% loosely support the idea. Yet, Congress, will flout the desires of America in order to force millions onto the public option.

In Massachusetts, the only state who has similar measures, insurance rates for private insurance have nearly only 2 years. Additionally, the bureaucrats have continued to "move the goalposts" back. What was, originally, permitted now is not.
Massachusetts resident Wendy Williams, writing recently in The Wall Street Journal, told how new state rules made her bare-bones policy unacceptable. She and her husband were told to buy a pricier policy or pay $1,000. “We hadn’t imposed our health care costs on anyone else,” she wrote, “yet we were being fined.”
Yet, this is what Democrats in Congress has in store for our country. First a "Public Option" to be the camel's nose under the tent. Within a few years, as unelected public bean counters change the regulations of what is permitted coverage, most people with private coverage will be forced to much more expensive plans or fined (or taxed for Cadillac plans) until EVERYONE is at the mercy of faceless bureaucrats who will literally have the power of life and death. Think about it...please.

AP Finally Fact Checks Democrat Claims Of Health Insurance "Skyrocketing Profits"

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In the health care debate, Democrats and their allies have gone after insurance companies as rapacious profiteers making "immoral" and "obscene" returns while "the bodies pile up." But in pillorying insurers over profits, the critics are on shaky ground. Ledgers tell a different reality.

Profits barely exceeded 2 percent of revenues in the latest annual measure. This partly explains why the credit ratings of some of the largest insurers were downgraded to negative from stable heading into this year, as investors were warned of a stagnant if not shrinking market for private plans.

Insurers are an expedient target for leaders who want a government-run plan in the marketplace. Such a public option would force private insurers to trim profits and restrain premiums to compete, the argument goes. This would "keep insurance companies honest," says President Barack Obama.

The debate is loaded with intimations that insurers are less than straight, when they are not flatly accused of malfeasance.

A look at some claims, and the numbers:


-"I'm very pleased that (Democratic leaders) will be talking, too, about the immoral profits being made by the insurance industry and how those profits have increased in the Bush years." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who also welcomed the attention being drawn to insurers' "obscene profits."

-"Keeping the status quo may be what the insurance industry wants. Their premiums have more than doubled in the last decade and their profits have skyrocketed." Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, member of the Democratic leadership.

-"Health insurance companies are willing to let the bodies pile up as long as their profits are safe." A ad.


Health insurers posted a 2.2 percent profit margin last year, placing them 35th of 53 industries on the Fortune 500 list. As is typical, other health sectors did much better - drugs and medical products and services were both in the top 10.

The railroads brought in a 12.6 percent profit margin. Leading the list: network and other communications equipment, at 20.4 percent.

HealthSpring, the best performer in the health insurance industry, posted 5.4 percent. That's a less profitable margin than was achieved by the makers of Tupperware, Clorox bleach and Molson and Coors beers.

The star among the health insurance companies did, however, nose out Jack in the Box restaurants, which only achieved a 4 percent margin.

UnitedHealth Group, reporting third quarter results last week, saw fortunes improve. It managed a 5 percent profit margin on an 8 percent growth in revenue.

Van Hollen is right that premiums have more than doubled in a decade, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study that found a 131 percent increase.

But were the Bush years golden ones for health insurers?

Not judging by profit margins, profit growth or returns to shareholders. The industry's overall profits grew only 8.8 percent from 2003 to 2008, and its margins year to year, from 2005 forward, never cracked 8 percent.

The latest annual profit margins of a selection of products, services and industries: Tupperware Brands, 7.5 percent; Yahoo, 5.9 percent; Hershey, 6.1 percent; Clorox, 8.7 percent; Molson Coors Brewing, 8.1 percent; construction and farm machinery, 5 percent; Yum Brands (think KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell), 8.5 percent.
It's almost like the Democrats are lying and merely trying to grab more power for the Federal Government. But, they'd never do that now would they. What really angers me is the simple fact that Congress has exempted themselves from the "government option" that they are planning to inflict upon the rest of us. I would be more inclined to accept it if they didn't say it was to be done equally to ALL American...not just those of us who aren't Federal Employees, or members of Congress or THEIR employees. That is wrong and sheer hypocracy.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Wisdom on Voting

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." -- John Quincy Adams

The Chicago Way

There was a very interesting column in today's Chicago Tribune by Clarence Page. He objects to the Obama Administration's attacks on Fox News. Not stridently, and really rather cautiously,
Surely President Barack Obama and his advisers don't really think that their feud with Fox News will do anything but enhance the cable network's viewership. A deeper problem is what the flap reveals about Team Obama, which seems to be more comfortable with campaigning than governing.

I'm not happy about that. It does not fill me with glee to see Fox News star Sean Hannity joyfully replaying Obama's 2004 come-together speech about how we're "not red states or blues states" but "the United States of America" and asking where is Obama's promise now?

I don't agree with Hannity on much. He's only a tad more serious-minded as a news clown, in my grumpy view, than his colleague Glenn Beck. But, as much as my wife might run from the house when she hears me say it, Hannity's right on this one
As far as it goes, it's at least a beginning...perhaps other voices will begin to question what is occuring. Here's my response to his column:

Mr. Page,
This letter is in response to your column on Mr. Obama's new "War On Fox News". Mr. Obama has more than Fox News on his "enemies" list. It apparently has entries for any organizations that oppose his policies. They are branded as "evil" and must be ostracized. Corporate leaders in the financial industry were stigmatized for "earning too much". Later the "enemy" was the health insurance industry for changing their minds about participating in their own destruction as an industry.

Yet another "enemy" who opposes some of Mr. Obama's policies is the US Chamber of Commerce who opposes the "Cap & Trade" bill which if enacted will literally destroy what is left of the economy. Individual household energy costs will add approximately $2000.00 per year. I'm barely making ends meet now. That kind of energy cost increase, along with the tax increases that are hidden in the various incarnations of the health care bills will literally put me and my family out on the street.All they, and Fox News are guilty of are opposing, as any American is permitted to do under the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution is to express their opinions, or report what they deem to be news. On the other hand, John F. Kennedy said in a speech to the American Newspaper Publishers Association, Apr. 27, 1961

" No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion."
Any president that does stifle opposition is skirting if not shredding, the US Constitution. Think about it. How much of a leap is it to being from being labeled "not legitimate" to "enemy of the state"...

Thank you for allowing me to take up so much of your time.


Richard A. Vail

Portents of Things to Come

The NYTimes is reporting that Anita Alvarez, the Cook County state’s attorney, who was elected last fall, is investigating the student journalists of Northwestern University's, Medill School of Journalism's, Medill Innocence Project. These students have over the years, freed at least 15 men and women on death row or serving life sentences.
“Every time the government starts attacking the messenger as opposed to the message, it can have a chilling effect,” said Barry C. Scheck, a pioneer of the Innocence Project in New York, who said he had never seen a similar demand from prosecutors.
This is the "Chicago Way" of politics. If you don't like what someone is saying about you politically, then you stigmatize them, drive them out. This is what Mr. Obama is doing to Fox News. Exactly the same thing.

If you begin to hound and organization, to name them as "enemies" then they are no longer legitimate and thus must be ignored. It's not a huge leap, from ignoring eliminating in a final solution. The National Socialist thought that way, so too did Mao Tse Dung in China. Mao eliminated at least 100 million "enemies of the state". Hugo Chavez is well on the way to doing this as he is imprisoning all who have vocally opposed his dictatorship.

My question is, who is next? What group, organization will be named, stigmatized and delegitimated? Who is next? That's an important question to ponder upon in the next few months as we watch this Chicago-bred politician's administration unfold.

This is the Face of Government Run Health Care

This photograph from from the ridiculously long Flu Shot line in Milwaukee. (Via Gateway Pundit). Mark Tapscott comments,
“President Obama’s late-night declaration of a nationwide public health emergency last night shouldn’t be allowed to obscure the most important lesson of the developing swine flu crisis – The same government that only weeks ago promised abundant supplies of swine flu vaccine by mid-October will be running your health care system under Obamacare.”
So, this is what Government Run Health Care will look like. I firmly think that it will be a disaster the like of which this country has never been forced to endure. But what truly enrages me is that Congress has excluded itself from ALL of the provisions in all the bills that are being considered. Additionally, they are excluding all federal employees and those who are employed by the executive branch. If this legislation is good enough for US, it's damn sure good enough for them.

NY-23, Palin Is Right To Back Hoffman

Sarah Palin has chosen to back Doug Hoffman, the Conservative Party candidate for the 23rd District Congressional seat for New York. On her page, her statement reads,
The votes of every member of Congress affect every American, so it’s important for all of us to pay attention to this important Congressional campaign in upstate New York. I am very pleased to announce my support for Doug Hoffman in his fight to be the next Representative from New York’s 23rd Congressional district. It’s my honor to endorse Doug and to do what I can to help him win, including having my political action committee, SarahPAC, donate to his campaign the maximum contribution allowed by law.

Our nation is at a crossroads, and this is once again a “time for choosing.”
The local Republican Party in the NY-23 district has made a serious miscalculation here by nominating a RINO. The RNC doubled down on that mistake by throwing their weight behind the wrong candidate. As Melissa Clouthier said in her blog on,
The Republican establishment made another miscalculation last year. They underestimated the resolve and force of the tea party movement. These folks are ticked. They are angrier at the Republican establishment than they are at President Obama and his Marxist minions.
One recent poll's findings were that 73% of the "base" is pissed at the "elite" leadership. A leadership that has made the mistake of thinking that running a moderate or RINO will win over moderate or independent voters. NOT, that's why Obama won last fall. His bait-and-switch, snookered the independent voters who are now as disenchanted with his unrestricted/undisciplined spending. The RNC has miscalculated the anger of the base and that of the "Tea Partiers" completely.
So the Republicans have seemed as stunned with the tea partiers as the tea partiers are stunned at their party. The grassroots folks have had it. They’re tired of being disrespected. They’re tired of being told to pipe down and go along to get along when the candidates the party picks stink and then lose.
Me? I've come to the conclusion that the leadership at the RNC hasn't a clue what the base wants, and moreover just doesn't care. That's the reason why the Tea Party has gained immense popularity. There is more than a small kernel there for the establishment of a new party, if the RNC and the leadership continues to ignore the desires of the base of this party.

Friday, October 23, 2009

Chris Dodd Wants To Move On

U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd would have us believe that it's time to put the allegations of his corrupt dealings with Countrywide Financial VIP loans. He claims that those loans were legitimate and would be available to ANYONE who applied to Countrywide. The Senate Ethics Committee has "cleared" Dodd while the House is still "studying" what that side of Congress can do.
"I feel the matter's behind us,'' Dodd said. "We ought to move on.''
Personally, I believe that Mr. Dodd is extremely corrupt and only obtained the loans because he sat as Chair of the Senate Finance Committee. I'm fairly certain, actually I'm utterly certain that Countrywide wouldn't give me the time of day in the CEO's office where the loans originated, much less the rates that were given to Dodd and Sen Kent Conrad.

What infuriates me is the simple fact that Congress is unable for any reason to enforce any sort of ethics. Charley Rangel can get away for decades for not paying taxes, and he gets no fines, no criminal indictments, nothing. The Democratic Party is now at the centre of a horrendous cesspool of corruption that will never end, just as the Republicans were a few years ago. It never ends, just the party affiliation initials after the corrupt politician's name.

The White House Turns Nixonian, An Analysis

An outstanding analysis of the White House/FoxNews battle that is ongoing. This week, when the Obama Adminstration attempted to block FoxNews from participating in a pool interview of the unaccountably appointed (i.e. no Senate confirmation hearinng) executive pay Czar, Kenneth R. Feinberg. CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS in a clear sign those networks weren't comfortable in the White House stance, Fox's competition refused to go along with the attempt to exclude Fox the interviews that was to be conducted with a camera crew shared by all the networks. The below analysis is from the comments on Michael Silence's blog from

If the other networks' reasons had been purely principled, they probably would've said something last week, when the "war" started. Since they didn't, I'm sure we can discount that as a reason.

Which leaves us with two points which differentiated this week from last week...

First, the WH stepped up the campaign last Sunday when Emanuel and Axelrod made their pitches against Fox on the Sunday shows. They went further than Anita Dunn had in her criticism, adding that the other networks shouldn't "follow Fox's lead." (My take on that was that they were suggesting not only that they shouldn't be critical of the WH like Fox was, but also that they shouldn't report on any stories of scandal Fox might break.)

Keep in mind, the WH was PO'd with Fox for things like reporting on Van Jones, the NEA being used as a propaganda tool, and the ACORN tapes -- all stories either unearthed by Fox or heavily covered by them, and they were the only major outlet to do so. When Van Jones resigned, suddenly the rest of the media had to report a story they'd been ignoring for a couple of weeks. When the same thing happened with ACORN, they ddecided maybe they needed to start paying attention to the stories Fox was reporting. And now, suddenly the WH is telling them to go back to sleep... So they're faced with either being completely irrelevant to their customer base because they go back to ignoring breaking news stories, or they have to follow Fox's lead, which will PO the WH.

Given that one choice seals their financial doom, it's not hard to see why they'd go in the other direction..

The other reason I think they waited until this week for the push-back was that Glenn Back started playing a new tape of Anita Dunn, which was made during an interview, post-election, in which she talked at length about how the campaign had controlled the media during Obama's bid for the WH.

There's nothing more stinging to a lackey press than to have the story of how the campaign played you like a fine Stradavarius splashed on a competing network...

So when the WH insisted that Fox be excluded... well, they suddenly overstepped. The press had no choice but to push back and defend one of their own, even if they kind of agree with the WH about Fox.

BTW... I do think they also started to realize with the Chamber of Commerce war the WH started this week, that ANYONE who crosses Obama once will be targetted. The only way to safeguard yourself from attack is to present a united front, since attacking on multiple fronts isn't a winning strategy. (That's not to say the WH won't try it, but given how much Obama loves to see himself on TV, I kinda doubt he'd give up appearing for countless interviews with news and late night talk show hosts..) So the WH had no choice but to relent. After all, when Anderson Cooper starts referring to your administration as "Nixonian," you know you're in trouble...

Posted by: elaine at October 23, 2009 10:45 AM

This Years Deficit is $1.885 Trillion!

The national debt stands at $11,910,000,000,000.00 at the end of the fiscal year on September 30. That's $1.885 trillion higher than last year. In other words, the reports that this years deficit was only $1.4 trillion is, in effect, a lie that leaves an "unreported deficit" of $468 billion. The Obama administration is playing accounting games to make the deficit seem to be much lower than reality by taking the remaining TARP funds and the auto bailout funds out of the equation. This is dishonest in the extreme as bonds were sold and the amount added to the debt just as much as if it were part of the deficit. This years deficit is only good when you compare it to the CBO's estimates,
CBO’s receipts estimate of $2.106 trillion was about $1.4 billion higher than actual. Its “outlays” estimate of $3.515 trillion was $6.7 billion too low. “Outlays” is in quotes because many disbursements the government makes, most notably those related to the Troubled Assets Relief Program, are treated as “investments,” and their Net Present Value (NPV) is excluded from “outlays,” even though by any sane reckoning the money involved in these “investments” has been “laid out.”

Though this move by Treasury conveniently serves to make what used to be mostly routine reporting on the deficit nearly indecipherable, we do know that when the conversion to NPV accounting took place, the government’s “outlays,” and therefore the reported deficit, went down by over $175 billion. There have been additional TARP “investments” made in General Motors and Chrysler since then. It’s pretty obvious that the reported deficit if computed handling TARP on a cash basis would be much higher than the officially reported $1.417 trillion. Based on the detail in Trea

Barack Obama Has Just Won...

Great video from! It's funny.

The March To Government Economic Control Marches On

Mr. Obama has decided that bankers and financial leaders make too much money so his administration will force those banks that idiotically accepted TARP money to cut executive pay by 90%.
As many as 25 executives at seven corporations that received the largest chunks of federal money will see their compensation cut by about half on average, according to the Washington Post. Cash salaries will be cut by about 90 percent compared to last year.
The administration's "pay czar," Kenneth R. Feinberg, will also slash some executive perks, including the use of corporate jets, chauffeurs, and country club fee reimbursement.
This is a vast overreach into the economic sphere that no President has ever dared to go. Yet this President has dared much. He has seized 2 of the three domestic automobile manufacturers and illegally parcelled out huge chunks of stock to his allies in the UAW in contravention of Federal Bankruptcy Statutes. His next bit is to seize control of another 1/6th of the economy by nationalizing the health care industry...when will it end?

What's The Best Way To Create Jobs?'s headline: Whats The Best Way To Create Jobs? Easy, reduce taxes on small business. Make the Small Business Administration open lines of credit to small businesses, and lower the interest rates on those loans.
More than 15 million people are now unemployed, according to the Labor Department. The 9.8 percent jobless rate in September was the highest since 1983. The rate in Michigan was 15.3 percent; for blacks nationally it was 15.4 percent. If you include people who have settled for part-time work or given up the search, the national rate is 17 percent. One-third of all workers will be jobless at some point this year. And the number of long-term unemployed is setting records: Nearly 36 percent of all those without jobs have been out of work for six months or more. In human terms, that's 5.4 million people.
Of course, the anti-business Democratic controlled Congress hasn't the brains to take that option. No, what they'll do is try to pass a massive tax increase under the aegis of "health insurance reform." That tax increase will hit those making less than $75,000.00 per year hardest, by tripling the cost of health insurance. Additionally, Congress will make everything more expensive by passing a Value Added Tax in order to pay for it. When you throw in "Cap & Trade" which will add roughly $1,800.00 per year per household for electricity...the economy will come to a screeching halt. Unemployment will reach 25% and we will see a severe recession turn into a full blown depression. Death knell to economic recovery. It will finish off what they've begun then demand emergency powers to sieze yet more areas of the economy.

Hope and Change is a beautiful thing ain't it?

Chavez Orders: Only Take 3 Min Showers!

According to, Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan dictator, excuse me, "President For Life" has ordered that Venezuelans may only take 3 minute showers. The government in the new workers paradise is having serious trouble providing potable water and electricity for the country. Low rain fall caused by the El Nino, as well as very low water levels in lakes behind hydroelectric dams have contributed to the problem. Additionally, his not investing in infrastructure maintenance has led to a significant reduction in electrical production.
Chavez announced energy-saving measures and said he would create a ministry to deal with the electricity shortages, which have affected the image of his socialist revolution before legislative elections due in 2010. Calling for water conservation, he said low rainfall caused by the El Nino weather phenomenon meant water levels were critically low in the El Guri reservoir, one of the world's largest dams.
So instead of actually investing in the country's infrastructure, he's going to create a bureaucracy to "solve" the problem.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Obama's Economist Says Bump From Stimulus Bill Over

Mr. Obama and his minions promised that unemployment wouldn't pass 8% with the stimulus. Then they promised that the depression would be over by the end of this year...but,
An interesting tidbit from Dr. Christina Romer’s testimony before the Joint Economic Committee. Citing economic analysts she says the fiscal stimulus will have its greatest impact on growth in the second and third quarters of 2009. (Editors note – those quarters are now behind us). By mid-2010, according to her testimony submitted to the committee, the “fiscal stimulus will likely be contributing little to growth.” What does that mean? Growth in the economy will be dependent on the private sector. And for those who think the recession is over – the Administration still predicts the unemployment rate won’t dip below 10% until the third quarter of 2010 – that’s next summer.
Now, the 2nd and 3rd Qtr's are more bump. So WHY ARE WE CONTINUING TO SPEND THE STIMULUS MONEY IF IT'S NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING? I realize that our "political elite" thinks that they are smarter than we, in flyover country, are. But seems to reason, that if it ain't working, why continue? As Jennifer Rubin points out in Commentary Magazine,
The administration promised that unemployment would remain below 8 percent if a trillion-dollar (interest-included) grab bag of liberal goodies passed. It hasn’t panned out — we have the debt but not the jobs. And the administration will not, I suspect, endear itself to the American people by claiming that the results “exceeded expectations.”
Yet these are the people who want to take over health care and say they'll "save the country money." Yeah, right. Governments, and ours in particular, do nothing efficiently. Take a look at medicare. It was projected to top out early this decade at roughly $400 billion in total's above 10 times that now. Pure efficiency at work. They tell us they'll be able to control corruption, but there are factual accounts that Medicare is rife with double payments and cost overruns. The Senate, for the first time in history defeated a bill that would remove the automatic price controls that were set in place to keep Medicare from ballooning in cost...THE FIRST TIME it's ever happened!

We're All Balloon Boys Now

RCP has a column by Daniel Henninger, titled "We're All Balloon Boys Now" from the WSJ's opinion section. One of the commenter's named Pat Schon Wrote:
> I'm a Democrat and I do not believe one single
> word that President Obama says. His
> message/agenda is all spin. How did we ever vote
> for him?

Here's my my answer to him:

You voted for him because you bought the "kool-aide" the MSM was selling. Because they decided that they HAD to get him elected so they threw aside their mandate to examine all candidates under the harsh glare of public scrutiny, and published exactly what the Obama campaign wanted you to hear/know (see: ) for the video of this interview of Anita Dunn in Guatemala...oddly where the America press DIDN'T report her comments:

"The Obama campaign's press strategy leading up to his election last November focused on "making" the media cover what the campaign wanted and on exercising absolute "control" over coverage, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn told an overseas crowd early this ?year.

In a video of the event, Dunn is seen describing in detail the media strategy used by then-Sen. Barack Obama's highly disciplined presidential campaign. The video is footage from a Jan. 12 forum hosted by the Global Foundation for Democracy and Development in the Dominican Republic.

"Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," Dunn said, admitting that the strategy "did not always make us popular in the press." "

Ms. Dunn is on record as saying literally, they don't want the press to ask Obama genuine questions...because they don't want to have to answer them....think about it. An American administration is actively trying to silence the one news organization that actually has the balls to question what this administration is doing.

Once upon a time an American president said:

" No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion."

John F. Kennedy
35th President of the United States
From a speech to the American Newspaper Publishers Association, Apr. 27, 1961
I can't see this President saying that...even though he ran on the platform of transparency. The Nixon administration was more transparent than this one...this one even has an enemies list. It's gotten so bad that anyone who disagrees with Mr. Obama's policies is labeled a racist, next it will be treason to oppose him.

Here's the list

Health Insurance Industry
Banking Industry
US Chamber of Commerce

Who else will be added.

Failure of the GOP Base...NY-23

The local party base is at fault here. This is true both in New York as well as the rest of the country. A very good example are the 52 "Blue Dog" Democrats who were elected in "right leaning" districts. If the local GOP had been effectively doing their jobs, those Congressmen wouldn't have been elected in those districts.

The local GOP organizations around the country have been complacent by allowing RINO's to take control of the local party apparatus as well as the state organizations. We as a party must take a long hard look locally, before we can do anything effective nationally. This is especially true in the Northeast and far west. If the local party organizations are run by RINO's then they will push RINO's to run in local and state elections.

We collectively have failed in not urging those individuals who are conservatives, not religiously, but fiscally, and will actually uphold the basic tenants of our party. Additionally, those Congressmen and Senators who claim the GOP as their party affiliation have forgotten what they are supposed to uphold. We, the base, have not held them accountable for their free spending stupidity. We, the base have allowed them to be captured by the "inside the beltway" mentality of "politics as usual" way of doing things. OUR members of Congress on their own, forgot what the "Contract With America" was about, because we allowed them to. They wandered far from our party's beliefs and tenets. Eight years of free spending under Mr. Bush (#43) is laid at OUR feet, because we didn't hold them accountable for what they wrought.

Now, in order to rebuild this party from the mess WE allowed to grow unchecked, we must look to the local party organizations, and rebuild those with genuine conservatives. If we don't take back control of the local party apparatus from RINO's, we won't be able to regain anything nationally. Let's begin to act locally by electing city councilmen and women, county commissioners, state legislators...THEN think about Congress.

UPDATE: I edited this for clarity as the final paragraph didn't have the meaning I intended.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

BigGovernment's New ACORN Video, Philladelphia

ACORN's been caught lying by Breibart once again. Hit the video link for's embedded video or cut and past for the version. Once again, Major Media has failed to adequately vet Bertha Lewis during the many interviews she's granted over the past several months. Her claims that Ms. Giles and Mr. O'Keefe were turned away from dozens of cites like New York, Philadelphia, San Diego are shown to be out right lies. When will the MSM realize that they are NOT doing their jobs? This is why FoxNews has such a huge lead in ratings over CNN & MSNBC, NBC, ABC and CBS.

The NYTimes, WaPo and Philly Inquirer have all posted stories claiming that Ms. Giles and Mr. O'Keefe were thrown out of the Philly ACORN office after 5 minutes to be a lie. The 26 minutes of video as well as an additional 6 minutes of audio (the batteries on the vidcam ran low, losing the video, while retaining audio), give lie to those stories. Will these "reputable" news organizations print corrections to their incorrect reports? I seriously doubt it.

ACORN is a corrupt and crooked organization that should be fully investigated, but won't be as the Justice Department has become far too politicized to do so under the present AG, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder is far more likely to investigate Giles & O'Keefe for violating the civil rights of the (mostly, now) former employees of ACORN who illegally attempted to assist a pimp and prostitute start a bordello with under age illegal aliens, especially considering Mr. Obama's close connection with the corrupt ballot stuffing initiatives that ACORN sponsors. Mores the pity...

Restatement Of The Obvious

“We have now sunk to a depth where the restatement of the obvious is the duty of intelligent men”

George Orwell.

Obama Desires to Stifle Debate

John F. Kennedy
35th President of the United States
From a speech to the American Newspaper Publishers Association, Apr. 27, 1961
" No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion."
Mr. Obama, 44th President, on the other hand, campaigned specifically on tranparency, has done just the opposite. His loyal minions have begun an assault upon the 4th Estate by deliberately attacking the voice with the largest audience of the three cable news outlets. He is doing so in order to stifle the debat from anyone in opposition to his Administration's policies. In 2001 radio interview, Mr. Obama is quoted as saying the US Consitution,
If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK
But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. {The Warren Court} It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.

And that hasn't shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.

Mr. Obama seeks to break free from the constraints of the Constitution in order remake America as a socialist country on the European model. He has ingored that fact that the majority of America's ancestors fled from Europe to avoid those governments that restrict civil liberties and the ability to rise simply upon your own merits, not who your family is.

Anita Mao Tse Dunn

Obama Administration Attempting to Eliminate Freedom of the Press

The Obama Administration's attack on FoxNews is merely the 2nd salvo in it's attempt to subvert the freedom of American press outlets. The first was their absolute control over contact with the press during the 2008 presidential campaign.
The Obama campaign's press strategy leading up to his election last November focused on "making" the media cover what the campaign wanted and on exercising absolute "control" over coverage, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn told an overseas crowd early this year.

In a video of the event, Dunn is seen describing in detail the media strategy used by then-Sen. Barack Obama's highly disciplined presidential campaign. The video is footage from a Jan. 12 forum hosted by the Global Foundation for Democracy and Development in the Dominican Republic.

"Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," Dunn said, admitting that the strategy "did not always make us popular in the press."

The video drew attention after Dunn kicked off a war of words with Fox News last Sunday, calling the network "opinion journalism masquerading as news." The White House stopped providing guests to "Fox News Sunday" in August after host Chris Wallace fact-checked controversial assertions made by Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Additionally, last week, Ms. Dunn announced the Obama Administrations attack on FoxNews by stating:
"The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party. And it is not ideological... what I think is fair to say about Fox, and the way we view it, is that it is more of a wing of the Republican Party. ..."
This is the same strategy that Hugo Chavez used in Venezuela to eliminate media opposition. There remains only 1 radio station and 1 television station there who are in public opposition to his regime. It's estimated that by next summer, neither will remain.

Here in the US, the FCC's announced plan to begin taxing media outlets that air "one point of view" with fee that will equal their operating costs will effectively close down most independent radio stations.
What we now also know is that the Obama Administration is circulating a proposal for a new "spectrum use" tax and another proposal for "diversity" of station ownership -- mandating racial and gender quotas as to who should be "allowed" to own radio stations.

What's at stake here ? Simply put--Free Speech on the Radio.

While the wider aim is to assert tighter government control over all radio programming, the immediate target here is conservative talk radio. The "progressive" tilt at publicly funded NPR, or the Big Business ownership of liberal leaning network news does not bother Obama. He knows that the executives at GE and NBC Universal will self censor to avoid criticism. In a recent meeting, GE CEO Jeff Immelt and NBC Universal President Jeff Zucker met to discuss how to limit criticism of Obama on MSNBC.
Thus, the Obama Administration while targeting FoxNews now, is actually assaulting the 1st Amendment freedoms of all Media outlets.

Donald Sensing, on his blogs believes (as do I) that, the Obama Administration is using the communist writer/theorist Saul Alinksy's playbook, who in his work, Rules for Radicals, wrote that one of the rules of "power tactics" is to,
Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and 'frozen.'...

"...any target can always say, 'Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?' When your 'freeze the target,' you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments.... Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the 'others' come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target...'

"One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other." (pps.127-134)
Let's consider the first sentence, which has become probably the most-quoted of the whole work, seriatim.

Pick the target. Do not make the mistake of thinking that FoxNews Channel is the actual target. The bullseye target of this campaign is all the public media. FNC's role in this much broader attack is the next two precepts.

Freeze it. This does not mean to shock the target into inactivity, but to fix a certain perception about the target in the minds of the broader community, in this case the media figures in general and the minds of the community (in this case, the whole nation is the community) as a whole.

The White House strategy here is twofold. First, to freeze FNC away from being thought of as just one of the universe of media outlets. White House Communications Director Anita Dunn opened this volley by declaring that FNC is not really a news organization, but the propaganda arm of the Republican party.

I hope and pray that the rest of the MSM wakes up in time to see that they have been played by the Obama Administration. Because if they don't we may well see the end of our Republic in my lifetime.

If Only This Was A Hoax

by Chris Weyant

Are We A Republic, Or Are We Becoming An Aristocracy?

As a republican (this doesn't mean the GOP), I am firmly opposed to granting "a life title" of elective office to someone. Such as calling a person Senator, or Governor AFTER they leave public office. As a republic, we as a nation should be steadfastly hostile to individuals using "titles" after they leave public office. It's only a short leap to personal titles becoming family one.

That short leap leads to families "owning" political offices (see the Roman Republic's Senatorial families who inherited seats in the Roman Senate). The Senate seats in Massachusetts came dangerously close to this with the Lodge families and then the Kennedy families. This is inimical to the principles of those men and women who rejected monarchy in favour of a republican form of government.

We should reject using "courtesy" titles and return to our republican roots.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

From Keith Hennessey's blog, and excellent recap on the unemployment rate and the possiblities for recovery, here is the entry in it's entirety, less only the introductory paragraph...lots of information:

*U.S. employment continues to decline, albeit much more slowly than at the beginning of 2009.
*Declining more slowly is not the same as increasing. The President’s team wanted to trumpet good news as early as possible and they jumped the gun. A few weeks ago they had to adjust their message (again) to a less optimistic one. This was a communications mistake, not a policy one.
*Employment growth will return. We just don’t know when, and the when is critical economically and politically.
*Most forecasters expect a strong Q3 GDP number, to be released Thursday, October 29th. The two big questions are: (1) will that GDP growth be sustained through 2010, and (2) will it translate into job growth? The fiscal stimulus is temporary, and needs to translate into job growth and consumption growth to be sustainable.
*It is normal for employment not to grow at the beginning of a recovery. As demand for their products begins to increase, employers typically make their employees work longer hours before hiring new workers. Once the increased demand looks stable and predictable, and once the current workforce is working as much as they can, then employers start hiring. First you increase hours per worker, then you increase the number of workers.

I recommend watching two numbers:
-1. the unemployment rate – It was 9.8% in September. Most economists consider about 5% to be “full employment.” When will it begin to decline, and how long will it take to regain full employment?
2. the net change in payroll employment – This was –263,000 in September. First this needs to turn positive. Second, since the labor force grows with population, this number needs to reach +100K to +150K per month to keep up with population growth and keep the unemployment rate constant. Finally, it needs to exceed this range for the unemployment rate to decline toward 5%.
-The press is paying a lot of attention to a third statistic, the U-6 measure of unemployment + underemployment. It’s an interesting and politically significant statistic, because it’s so much bigger than the traditional unemployment rate metric. But so far I don’t think it tells us a lot more about the trends than the above two metrics.
*I will begin to feel good about the employment picture when we have had two consecutive months of payroll numbers >100K. At the same time you would expect the unemployment rate to start declining. I think the most important question you can ask an economic forecaster right now is, “When do you think the unemployment rate will begin to decline?”
*Job growth was slow to start in the 2003-2004 recovery. You may remember the political attacks from the left about the “jobless recovery” in the 2004 campaign. The recent severe recession was cause by a financial shock. Economists have widely dispersed views on two questions:
*Did the jobless recovery of 2003-2004 signal a fundamental change in the pace of job growth in a “normal” recovery?
*Will the somewhat unusual cause of this recession affect the pace of job growth in the recovery?

*There is even more uncertainty than normal in projecting near-term job growth. I generally treat economic forecasts more than 12 months out as wild guesses. This year I have shortened that window to 6 months. I don’t think anyone has a clue what the employment picture will look like 9 or 12 months from now.
*This uncertainty makes it hard for businesses to plan. Consumer spending is about 70% of GDP, and the most important determinants of consumption are (1) how many people are working and (2) are their paychecks going up?
*Some on the right argue the fiscal stimulus is not helping increase economic growth. That’s silly. The government is pushing hundreds of billions of dollars out the door. At least in the short run, that’s going to increase GDP growth. We should see some of that effect in the Q3 GDP numbers nine days from now. The fiscal stimulus should continue to help increase GDP growth above what it otherwise would have been into and through most of 2010, especially in the first half.
*I believe the stimulus is helping boost GDP growth now above what it otherwise would have been, but that it is too late, poorly designed, and horribly inefficient and wasteful. They are getting some bang, but their bang-for-the-buck and effectiveness are terrible.
*At the same time, the Administration irresponsibly overstates and overspecifies the employment impact of the fiscal stimulus.
-Their “jobs created or saved” numbers are claims, not measures. Since we can’t know how many jobs would have been lost without policy changes, we can’t measure the change that policies have caused.
*This means they cannot prove their statements about the number of jobs saved or created by policy, and critics cannot prove those statements are incorrect. This lack of verifiability, and the vulnerability of these statistics to political bias, allow the Administration flexibility to adjust their claimed success to meet political demands. It is irresponsible for an Administration to use these numbers as definitive, and irresponsible for the press to report them without heavy caveats.
*Every time I hear “[number] jobs saved or created,” I ignore the number and assume I am being spun. This is particularly true when the numbers are specific, e.g., “250,000 education jobs saved or created.” I think this is irresponsible and misleading. It feels like they’re just making these numbers up. Reading the methodology behind the numbers only reaffirms this view.
*The fiscal stimulus is one of several policy moves contributing to stronger (or less weak) economic growth. The Fed’s and Treasury’s actions (begun last September) to stabilize large financial institutions and financial markets helped a lot. The Fed is also keeping interest rates extremely low. Administration officials routinely attribute all of the unmeasurable economic benefit to one of three major policy changes. This is invalid.
-Given the above caveats about unpredictability, the Administration’s forecast for 2010 is gloomy. The Administration forecasts an unemployment rate hovering in the high 9’s throughout 2010. If they’re right, there will be a period where net job growth will be slightly positive (say, 100K-150K jobs per month) and the unemployment rate will be inching downward. This could create a dangerous political dynamic, in which the Administration and Congressional Democrats will be tempted to argue that things are getting better, but where it won’t feel like they’re getting better because the unemployment rate is still so high.
*If this economic forecast plays out, it will pose an interesting question for the 2010 Congressional elections. Which is a more important determinant of how Americans vote: the level of unemployment, or the direction and rate of change? It’s possible that next November things will still be bad, but getting slowly better. Will voters punish the party in power for the level, or reward them for the change underway?
*Elected officials in both parties correctly think their rhetorical efforts can affect how voters view the economy. Expect the political jobs battle to continue for another year.

A great bit of commentary...