Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Rahm tells reporter to go f*** himself

From Hot Air:

What deeply personal subject did the reporter broach to warrant such a stern upbraiding?

Lobby reform, naturally:

Before a Democratic caucus meeting, a Politico reporter asked House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois about the language of the bill’s main provisions. After Emanuel demurred on the specifics, this reporter asked — in the effort for openness and disclosure — if a journalist could sit in to hear debate on the language.

“Why don’t you go f— yourself?” Emanuel replied, as he entered a men’s room in the Capitol basement.

Exit question: How will the nutroots distinguish this from Cheney’s similar remark to Pat Leahy?

(a) By youth. Rahm’s a sprightly 47, Cheney a wizened 66. We can forgive the former the excesses of youthful immaturity, but an adult really should know better.
(b) By stature. No one cares what a congressman says, even if he is one of his party’s leading spokesmen and the architect of their recent national election victory. Whereas the vice president is a moral example to us all.
(c) By the target’s stature. Greeting some no-name reporter’s question about ethics with the F-bomb is perfectly understandable, but dropping it on Senator Pat Leahy? Disgraceful!
(d) By temperament. Oh, that’s just Rahm. You know Rahm.
(e) By completely ignoring it.

Look, I have to admit I get a kick out of reporters being told to go self-fornicate, regardless of party affiliation of the one inviting him to do so. However, I am interested in seeing which of the above reactions the left will have, especially since they got their Barney Frank Thongs in a bunch when Cheney told Leaky Leahy something similar.

I do find it funny, though, that the topic of lobby reform is what got Rahm angier than Ted Kennedy in a dry county. The Dems haven’t exactly been role models on that “culture of non-corruption” thingy, have they?

Advertisements

May 15, 2007 Posted by | corruption | Leave a comment

Karma’s a female dog, ain’t it?

From Patterico:

Howard Dean and the DNC are being sued for defamation and discrimination by a former employee – claiming among other things that Dean discriminates against gays and violated the “D.C. Human Rights Act”.

So much for that “Big Tent Party” thingy. Anywho, it’s funny to see the top dawg of the party that caters to ambulance chasers getting this kind of treatment.

May 15, 2007 Posted by | ambulance chasers, Howard Dean, karma | Leave a comment

Padilla trial finally starting

Those of you who have been here for two years or longer know how I feel about the José Padilla situation: I think the government sucks for what they’ve been doing to him. He’s an American citizen, and thus entitled to Constitutional rights that have been deprived of him from the beginning. My prior thoughts are here.

Anywho, his trial is now getting underway. From MyWay News:

The trial of suspected al-Qaida operative Jose Padilla opened Monday with federal prosecutors arguing the U.S. citizen and two co-defendants provided money, recruits and military equipment to Islamic extremists involved in violence worldwide for nearly a decade.

“The defendants were members of a secret organization, a terrorism support cell, based right here in South Florida,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Frazier told jurors in his opening statement. “The defendants took concrete steps to support and promote this violence.”

Padilla, a former Chicago gang member and Muslim convert, has been in federal custody since his May 2002 arrest at O’Hare International Airport. He was initially accused of plotting to detonate a radioactive “dirty bomb” in the United States and held for 3 1/2 years as an enemy combatant at a Navy brig, but those allegations are not part of the Miami indictment.

He was added to the Miami case in late 2005 amid a legal battle over the president’s wartime detention powers involving U.S. citizens. His lawyers had fought for years to get him before a federal judge.

I think he’s a scumsucking terrorist camelhumper who will be found guilty, but as as American citizen, he’s still entitled to a speedy trial. This administration has argued against that, and I find their position reprehensible.

May 15, 2007 Posted by | Jose Padilla, religion of peace | Leave a comment

Lanny Davis resigns from Bush administration

Yes, you read that correctly. The same Lanny Davis who has been a Clinton sycophant for over a decade has been serving on the Bush administration. From MSNBC:

The White House was hit by two sudden resignations late Monday when Paul McNulty, a top Justice Department official, and Lanny Davis, the only Democratic member of the president’s civil liberties watchdog board, announced they were stepping down. Both resignations are likely to fuel allegations of White House political meddling in law enforcement and national security issues.

Two observations:

1. Hey, Dubya…how’s that “new tone” thingy working for you? You can’t throw bones to people who hate you, dude. Seriously, a Clintonista?

2. Read this again: “White House political meddling in law enforcement and national security issues.” If the president is the top law enforcement officer and national security official, then exactly how is it considered “meddling” in law enforcement and national security? I would argue that he’s doing his job. Granted, we could debate on how well he’s doing his job, but that’s neither here nor there.

May 15, 2007 Posted by | media bias | Leave a comment

Audacity defined

“Hypocrisy” doesn’t even do the word justice. From Boston’s online fishwrap:

Cuba characterized American filmmaker Michael Moore as a victim of censorship and the U.S. trade embargo as it reported Friday on a U.S. Treasury Department probe of his March visit here for his upcoming health-care documentary, “Sicko.”

Moore took the trip, for a segment in the film, with about 10 ailing workers involved in the rescue effort at the World Trade Center ruins.

The Communist Party daily Granma called the 45-year-old U.S. travel and trade sanctions “a criminal action that has cost lives and grave consequences for the inhabitants of the island,” as well as Americans.

“Any resemblance to McCarthyism is no coincidence,” the newspaper opined, referring to the political witch hunt that U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy carried out against suspected American communists in the 1950s.

The U.S. government’s targeting of Moore “confirms the imperial philosophy of censorship” by American officials, it added.

Cuba. Decrying censorship and McCarthyism. Man, does that Castro dude have a wicked sense of humor or what? I may have just officially seen it all.

May 14, 2007 Posted by | Cuba, hypocrisy, Michael Moore | Leave a comment

P.C. almost allowed Fort Dix Six to carry out jihadist plot

From the NY Post:

It all began on a frigid January day with 10 bearded Muslim men huddled in the parking lot of a Circuit City debating who would go inside to have a copy made of a tape showing them firing guns and praising jihad.

Eventually, the group – who’d been seen standing outside earlier that January 2006 week – selected two men to go inside while the rest waited in the parking lot, an employee who was outside smoking at the time recalled.

Once inside, the two men approached the television section of the electronics store where videos could be transferred to DVD and copies could be made.

They handed the teenage clerk a mini-cassette tape from a camcorder and asked for a $20 transfer to be made to DVD. As they waited, the two men calmly walked around the store looking at televisions, video games and DVDs.

What they didn’t know was that they had sealed their ultimate fate.

When the teen and another employee went into a back room and began the conversion of the tape, they saw a group of bearded men wearing “fundamentalist attire” and shooting “big, f-ing guns,” the teen later told co-workers.

Throughout the 90-minute-long tape, above the booming gunfire at a Pennsylvania target range, the jihadists could be heard screaming “God is great!”

The two employees “freaked out,” their co-worker recalled.

At first, the teenage clerk didn’t know what to do, his pal said.

“Dude, I just saw some really weird s-,” he frantically told his co-worker. “I don’t know what to do. Should I call someone or is that being racist?

Way to go, leftards. You have succeeded in making astute citizen observers second-guess themselves in assisting counterterrorism efforts. This young man’s common sense prevailed, but he hesitated…and that tells me that other people might have been inclined to keep their mouths shut.

I’ve said for some time that political correctness could be the death of us yet. I didn’t go out on a limb with that prediction, now did I?

May 14, 2007 Posted by | Fort Dix Six, political correctness, religion of peace | 1 Comment

Al Qaeda cites Democrats as allies

Well, at least we know who Al Qaeda likes. But don’t think the Dems are soft on security or anything, just because the AQ camelhumpers like them! From Ace:

Above the Fold Update: Al Qaeda knows who its allies are.

Mohamad al-Janabi, a reputed al-Qaeda member in the nearby city of Salman Pak, said in a interview that he was unable to contact his comrades in Mahmudiyah to determine whether they were responsible for the attack.

But he added: “I can assure you that we will start pressuring Bush in a new way at the same time he is facing pressures from the Democrats and the American people. And there will be no problem to sacrifice 10 soldiers in order to abduct a single American soldier and get him on television screens begging for us to release him.”

Notice Al Qaeda is not pressuring us to stay, which is odd, because I keep being told that Al Qaeda loves having American troops in Iraq and Bush is “playing right into their hands.”

I don’t think this is going to have the effect Al Qaeda seeks. It’s getting harder and harder for the media to pretend that Al Qaeda isn’t the major source of violence and terrorism in Iraq — and the biggest cause of US troop deaths — and they’re going to have a hard time avoiding using the words “Al Qaeda” when they run these tapes.

Question: Would these tapes be considered a “coordinated” media buy for the Democrats under McCain-Feingold? Will the FEC investigate?

Maybe that’s the way to get the media remotely perturbed at Al Qaeda — we can sell them on the idea that “Al Qaeda is swift-boating Iraq.” They really do seem to despise “swift-boating.”

May 14, 2007 Posted by | defeatism, Iraq, religion of peace | Leave a comment

Carbon debits?

We all know what a sham carbon indulgences…er, “offsets”/”credits”…are by now. Well, how about “carbon credits”? From Moonbattery:

Are you annoyed at the way high-profile indulgers in conspicuous energy consumption like Al Gore attempt to exempt themselves from the sacrifices they demand of everyone else by purchasing phony carbon credits? Don’t just grouse — do something about it. Counteract the carbon credits with carbon debits at CarbonCreditKillers.com.

Carbon debits can be purchased for as little as $5. With each carbon debit, CarbonCreditKillers.com will shred one living tree, send an email informing Al Gore, and send another to you certifying that you have done your part to put an end to the carbon credits scam.

Various packages feature extras like having “I Took Away Your Carbon Credits” plaques sent to liberal friends. Those willing to spring for the Premier Carbon Debit Vacation Package get the following:

Airfare to Arizona from any continental US state.

  • 1 day of carbon debiting using their tree-crushing FECON grinding head tractor — an average of 100 trees debited in a day.
  • 1 “My Carbon Footprint Is Bigger Than Yours” t-shirt with an imprint of you in the seat of the tree-killer.
  • 1 “Carbon Debit Gold Star Member” plaque.
  • 1 “I Took Away Your Carbon Credits” plaque sent to Al Gore.
  • 1 “I Increased My Carbon Footprint” t-shirt.

    CarbonCreditKillers.com can’t guarantee they are actually harming the environment, since the trees are apparently slated for removal anyway, but they do promise that trees will be destroyed at your expense — which is more of a guarantee than gullible moonbats are getting from swindlers like TerraPass.

  • I abso-freakin’-lutely love it! I wish I had thought of it!

    May 14, 2007 Posted by | global warming | Leave a comment

    Obama is anti-Wally…except when it comes to his own benefit

    Between Silky Pony’s attempts to procure a Playstation 3 from the retail giant and this flap from the Barry O family, one has to wonder just how anti-Wal-Mart these idiots truly are. From the Telegraph:

    As a fluent public speaker, independent-minded wife, devoted mother and professional woman, Michelle Obama has been hailed as an invaluable asset to her husband Barack’s mission to capture the Democratic 2008 presidential nomination.

    Yet, while her style and performance are winning plaudits on the campaign trail, a little-reported business interest of Mrs Obama’s has opened her husband up to one of the criticisms that politicians fear most – the taint of hypocrisy.

    Pfffffffff-bwahahahahahahahaha! Yeah, right…liberals lose a ton of sleep over being hypocrites! If you buy that, I’ve got some swampland here in fire-ravaged FL to sell you. Continuing:

    She is taking a break from her main job, as a well-remunerated Chicago hospital executive, to campaign for her husband. But she has just been re-elected to the board of an Illinois food-processing company, a position she took up two years ago to gain experience of the private sector.

    And the biggest customer for the pickles and peppers produced by Treehouse Foods is the retail giant Wal-Mart, the world’s largest corporation and the bête noire of American liberals, including Sen Obama, for its employment practices, most notably its refusal to recognise trade unions.

    As the Illinois senator prepared to join the presidential fray late last year, he threw his weight behind the union-backed campaign against Wal-Mart. He declared that there was a “moral responsibility to stand up and fight” the company and “force them to examine their own corporate values”.

    Because Wal-Mart’s desire to make money while saving peope money is soooo un-American. Continuing:

    According to the couple’s tax returns, Mrs Obama earned $51,200 (£25,700) for her work as a non-executive director on Treehouse’s board last year, on top of the $271,618 salary she was paid as a vice-president of the University of Chicago Hospitals.

    She also received 7,500 Treehouse stock options, worth a further $72,375, as she did the previous year, when she banked a $45,000 salary from the company.

    Joe Novak, a Chicago political consultant who runs an anti-Obama website, said: “The Obamas would have us believe that, when it comes to money and ethics and compassion, he is a different kind of politician.

    “What’s different here is that they actually seem to believe it. That’s the only way they can justify the contradictions between what they preach and what they practice. Defending Treehouse while attacking Wal-Mart is a blatant example of personal hypocrisy.”

    Sen Obama’s campaign team and Mrs Obama’s spokesman did not respond to requests by The Sunday Telegraph for comment. But the senator previously told Crain’s Chicago Business magazine that, while his views on corporate reform and social justice remained the same regardless of what happens at Treehouse, “Michelle and I have to live in the world and pay taxes and pay for our kids and save for retirement”.

    “I’m for the ‘little guy’, unless the peon gets in my way of making a buck.” You duplicitous, self-righteous, hypocritical b@stard! My friends, that’s the kind of hypocrisy that I truly loathe about the left and that I point out frequently about them: their “good enough for me, but not for thee” attitude. I have no tolerance for that pap, at all.

    See, Barry O thinks that Wal-Mart is evil and is not good for America. However, he’s not above getting a nice little chunk of change off of them. What’s worse than that, though, is his self-serving justification that he needed the money to pay taxes, save for retirement, and raise his kids. Are we to assume that he’s the only one that has to do all of that, that no one else is doing it? He seems to imply that while other people’s reasons to earn money are tainted, his are pure and noble.

    Sorry, Hussein, but that doesn’t fly with me, and it sure as hell won’t fly with normal America.

    May 13, 2007 Posted by | hypocrisy, Obama, Wal-Mart | 1 Comment

    Silky Pony to mimic Mondale

    From the AP:

    Presidential candidate John Edwards is offering more policy proposals than any other candidate in the primary and his ideas are winning loud applause from Democratic audiences.

    The question is whether other voters will cheer when they see the price tag — more than $125 billion a year.

    Edwards is quick to acknowledge his spending on health care, energy and poverty reduction comes at a cost, with more plans to come. All told, his proposals would equal more than $1 trillion if he could get them enacted into law and operational during two White House terms.

    Edwards says fixing the country’s problems takes precedence over eliminating the deficit or offering middle-class tax relief like he proposed when running for president in the last election.

    “I think for me, as opposed to the additional tax relief for the middle class, what’s more important is to give them relief from the extraordinary cost of health care, from gasoline prices, the things that they spend money on every single day that are escalating dramatically,” Edwards said in a recent interview with The Associated Press.

    To pay for some of his priorities, Edwards would roll back Bush’s tax cuts on Americans making more than $200,000 a year. He also said he would consider raising capital gains taxes to help fund his plans and raise or eliminate the $90,000 cap on individual earnings subject to Social Security taxes to help cover the projected shortfall in the system.

    Hmmm. This sounds awfully familiar. Where have I heard this kind of “raise your taxes” thing before?

    Edwards’ ideas have already opened him to accusations of being just another tax-and-spend liberal, a label put on Walter Mondale, the 1984 Democratic presidential nominee who said he would raise taxes and then lost 49 states to President Reagan.

    At least the only state Mondale won was his own state. That’s more than Al Gore (and Silky Pony, in 2004) can say.

    May 11, 2007 Posted by | economic ignorance, John Edwards, socialism | Leave a comment

    "Jabba the Hutt" Moore to be investigated for illegal trip to Cuba?

    Recall how award-winning fiction director Mikie Moore brought some 9/11 responders to Cuba for health care for his new mockumentary “Sicko”? The feds seem to have taken issue with that violation of federal law. From Breitbart/AP:

    Academy Award-winning filmmaker Michael Moore is under investigation by the U.S. Treasury Department for taking ailing Sept. 11 rescue workers to Cuba for a segment in his upcoming health-care documentary “Sicko,” The Associated Press has learned.

    The investigation provides another contentious lead-in for a provocative film by Moore, a fierce critic of President Bush. In the past, Moore’s adversaries have fanned publicity that helped the filmmaker create a new brand of opinionated blockbuster documentary.

    “Sicko” promises to take the health-care industry to task the way Moore confronted America’s passion for guns in “Bowling for Columbine” and skewered Bush over his handling of Sept. 11 in “Fahrenheit 9/11.”

    The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control notified Moore in a letter dated May 2 that it was conducting a civil investigation for possible violations of the U.S. trade embargo restricting travel to Cuba. A copy of the letter was obtained Wednesday by the AP.

    “This office has no record that a specific license was issued authorizing you to engage in travel-related transactions involving Cuba,” Dale Thompson, OFAC chief of general investigations and field operations, wrote in the letter to Moore.

    Granted, this kind of pub will likely drum up more interest in the socialist mockumentary. However, he’s not above the law, and if there’s any justice (I know, I know…dream on, right?), he’ll be fined for his infraction.

    May 11, 2007 Posted by | Cuba, Michael Moore, moonbats, socialism | Leave a comment

    American moonbats don’t have monopoly on calling Bush a Nazi

    Even the Russkies are getting in on the act of violating Godwin’s Law. From NewsMax:

    Russian President Vladimir Putin launched a thinly veiled attack on the United States, comparing American foreign policy to the “Third Reich” in a speech on Wednesday.

    Putin’s comments were the latest in a series of Russian criticisms of the U.S. on Iraq, missile defense and NATO expansion, as the Russian leader maintains that America is striving to single-handedly dominate world affairs, the International Herald Tribune reported.

    Putin delivered the speech from a podium in front of Lenin’s Mausoleum on Red Square as he marked Victory Day, the 62nd anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany.

    That’s rich, coming from the guy who is resorting to Soviet-style (and Nazi-like) freedom-squashing power grabs and intimidation tactics.

    May 11, 2007 Posted by | Putin | 1 Comment

    Satire alert: Belgium to pick up France’s slack

    Bookmark The Nose on Your Face now, or I’ll replace the whole blog with a single page that reads repeated “All work and no play makes Jonathan a dull boy” a la The Shining. From TNOYF:

    Long resigned to their role as the “Garfunkel” of the international punchline community, Belgium has seen their stock rise sharply on the news of the recent French presidential election. Nicolas Sarkozy’s vocal pro-American stance, along with his large margin of victory, may shift the balance of French-bashing away from the traditional favorites; the French.

    “I have to be honest with you, I’m not all that familiar with the Belgians,” said Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania resident James Dyer. “But I better get up to speed quickly; they certainly aren’t going to just mock themselves. This election is a wake-up call for many of us in the France-mocking community, and we ignore the will of the people at our own peril.”

    Dyer went on to say that although he does not know a great deal about Belgians, he does have some generic taunts “that can be utilized until more specific ones can be crafted.”

    Experts say that more than anything, this election was a referendum on the cliched French taunting that has become prevalent in recent years.

    “The French have given us so much material for so long, that it became almost too easy to mock them,” said veteran Francophobe Jack O’Malley. “Surrender, crepes, effeminate males, the f***ing beret? Comedy gold. I think that many people, myself included, have become complacent, lazy. On another note, let me be the first to welcome the gay, John Ritter-adoring, waffle-vendors of Belgium into their new role. You’ll be hearing from us.”

    May 11, 2007 Posted by | France, satire | Leave a comment

    Mike Wallace asks Romney when he and Mrs. Romney first bumped uglies

    ‘Cuz that kind of thing is the single biggest issue of electability! From Hot Air:

    Charming. It’s suggested, although not definitively stated, that Ann Romney was sitting right there, too, when he asked it.

    Romney’s wife, Ann, who converted to the Mormon Church before they were married, is also interviewed. When asked whether they broke the strict church rule against premarital sex, Romney says, “No, I’m sorry, we do not get into those things,” but still managed to blurt out “The answer is no,” before ending that line of questioning.

    Mitt’s “the Mormon candidate,” you see, so the media’s entitled to ask him embarrassing, prurient questions about his sex life — strictly in the public interest, of course, as a gauge of hypocrisy. Stay tuned for Mike’s hard-hitting interview later this year with Hillary Clinton, a.k.a. “the woman candidate,” in which he introduces the issue of women’s health by asking her at what age she first menstruated.

    Way to ask the tough questions, Mike! Nicely done on getting to the bottom of the question that’s tops on every American’s mind today. What would CBS do without you (use another forged document, I suppose)?

    Nope…no liberal media bias.

    May 11, 2007 Posted by | media bias, shameful | Leave a comment

    KS guv got her marching orders from Dean

    Interesting allegations that the “moderate” Democrat governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius, got her instructions from a guy that isn’t held in very high regard in the red state of KS. From Hot Air:

    XM Radio’s Quinn & Rose made the allegation that DNC Chairman Howard Dean called Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius early Sunday morning and instructed her not to request federal assistance in recovery from the Greensburg tornado, and to lie about the federal response to date, on their show, The War Room, today. After I discussed the story via phone with both Quinn and Rose today, here’s what they sent me.

    PLEASE NOTE: The following is information we have received from a reliable source. We have never been misinformed by this person in the past.

    It seems that, on Sunday, a few hours after Kansas Governor, Kathleen Sebelius, made her remarks about Bush sending all their National Guard Members and Resources to Iraq, she made a call to Brownback

    Sebelius, was calling to apologize to the Senator for making the Political statements that she did. She explained that she did not believe them and that they actually had too many National Guardsmen show up.

    Governor Sebelius explained “Sam, you know how political everything is right now and we’re not allowed to let an opportunity like this just pass.” She continued “I made sure not to blame you or Pat (Senator Roberts?) or anybody outside the White House. With his (Bush’s) numbers, you can’t really blame me for usin’ that.”

    Then Sebelius explained the path to her comments. After Brownback told her that he was very disappointed in her, She pleaded “You know me Sam, I wouldn’t have said it if I didn’t have to.” She declared “Howard (Dean) called me around 5 o’clock (in the morning) and told me not to ask The White House for any help or make any statements until I heard back. Dick (Durban?) called me an hour or 2 later and that’s when he told me we needed to use this ‘n’ said to talk about the Guard all bein’ at war.”

    She then explained the thinking; “Speaker and Harry got so much heat on them from both sides over this damn war, ‘n’ they need to get the press on somethin’ else. I didn’t think it was right to use it like this either, but I didn’t see’s I had much choice in this climate, Sam.”

    She the[n] apologized a few more times and promised that she’d try to move away from the comment when she and Brownback were to meet up later and tour the damage, but she had to so it without disappointing Dean and Pelosi.

    I asked them to characterize their source, and they replied that she or he would be in a position to have knowledge of the conversation between Sen. Brownback and Gov. Sebelius and has never misinformed them before. Sean Hannity has called Sen. Brownback’s office to either verify or debunk the story, but so far the senator has done neither. There is word that the senator may attempt a “limited hangout” strategy this weekend, in which he acknowledges that the conversation took place but won’t remember the Dean angle. Such a strategy, if that’s what Sen. Brownback does, might be an attempt to maintain comity in what has until now been by all accounts a smooth relationship between the Democratic governor and Republican officials in Kansas. Comity shouldn’t come at the price of truth, however.

    Nice to see that the guv has her state’s best interests at heart instead of her party’s interests. Delaying assistance so you can blame the easy target? I’m sure the families in Greensburg, KS, will be grateful, Ms. Sebelius. “Moderate”, my derrière!

    May 11, 2007 Posted by | Howard Dean, shameful | Leave a comment

    Tax revenue at highest levels…as is government spending

    According to the MSM, Bush gets no credit for the tax revenues, but he gets blamed for the record spending. From the AP:

    Federal revenue collections hit an all-time high in April, contributing to a further improvement in the budget deficit for the year.
    Releasing its monthly budget report, the Treasury Department said Thursday that through the first seven months of this budget year, the deficit totals $80.8 billion, significantly below the $184.1 billion imbalance run up during the first seven months of the 2006 budget year.

    So far this year, tax revenues total $1.505 trillion, an increase of 11.2 percent over the same period last year. That figure includes $383.6 billion collected in April, the largest monthly tax collection on record.

    Tax collections swell in April every year as individuals file their tax returns by the deadline.

    Note the little disclaimer there? Tax collections “swell every April”, so don’t read anything into it, right? Well, they still “swelled” to record highs, right?

    Before I get accused of leading some Dubya cheerleading brigade here, this also needs to be pointed out:

    For the first seven months of this budget year, which began Oct. 1, revenue collections and government spending are at all-time highs.

    However, the spending total of $1.585 trillion was up at a slower pace of 3.2 percent from the previous year.

    The spending total may be up at a slower pace, but it’s still up…and way too high, too. The feds are still spending about $80 billion more than they’re taking in. If I tried that, I’m pretty sure my bank would be calling me up post haste.

    The AP ends up contradicting itself in this paragraph:

    …But the 2001 recession, the cost of fighting a global war on terror and the loss of revenue from President Bush’s tax cuts sent the budget back into the red starting in 2002.

    Didn’t they just get done telling us that revenues were at an all-time high? They didn’t attribute the revenue increase to the tax cuts, but they darned sure attributed the red ink to the tax cuts, now didn’t they? Economic ignorance or media bias? You be the judge.

    At any rate, let’s not ignore the obvious here: tax cuts have increased the money coming in to the government, and the spend-happy Bush and Republican Party (when they ran the legislature) spent all that money and then some. Republicans they are, conservatives they are not.

    That’s like your boss giving you a Christmas bonus of $10,000 and you go spend it on a down payment on a $50,000 car. You had an extra $10k that you managed to turn into a $40k debt. Of course, if you’re a liberal, you blame the debt on the Christmas bonus (or your boss for giving you the bonus) instead of how you spent it.

    May 11, 2007 Posted by | economic ignorance, taxes | Leave a comment

    Baltimoron city spokesman endorses vandalism

    In another shining example of how the left vandalizes when they’re p#ssed, here you have a billboard in Baltimore that was defaced…and a spokesman for the city department responsible for, among other things, a clean infrastructure saluted the vandalism effort. From the Baltimore fishwrap:

    Apparently, somebody in Baltimore isn’t a fan of Rush Limbaugh.

    A large billboard advertising local air times for the conservative radio talk-show host has been defaced.

    Robert Murrow, a spokesman for the city’s Department of Public Works, saw the vandalism as he drove to work this morning on I-83 near the Guilford Avenue exit. He called The Sun, saying that someone had poured paint on the image of Limbaugh’s face.

    Limbaugh, who is nationally syndicated, can be heard on WCBM 680 AM from noon to 3 p.m.

    “It looks like they took globs of paint and threw it on his face. It looks great. It did my heart good,” said Murrow, who admittedly is not a Limbaugh fan.

    Needless to say, Murrow’s not that bright or he would be in a higher position than he is. Murrow’s boss shows the common sense and decency that Murrow lacks:

    Kurt L. Kocher, chief spokesman for the city’s Department of Public Works and Murrow’s supervisor, took issue with Murrow’s statement.

    “As much as you don’t like Rush Limbaugh, you don’t endorse vandalism, period,” Kocher said. “It’s an outrageous comment, and he shouldn’t have said it. It is not our policy. I think he got overenthusiastic about his feelings for Mr. Limbaugh. I am very upset about that comment, and I’ve let him know I’m very upset about that comment. It’s his personal comment and it’s wrong. It does not belong out there in any kind of official capacity. As far as I’m concerned, he was not speaking for the department.”

    Should you wish to give Mr. Murrow some “constructive advice”, feel free to e-mail him here.

    May 10, 2007 Posted by | moonbats, Rush, vandalism | 1 Comment

    Cheating dental school students…Bush’s fault!

    Remember just a couple of posts ago when I said “I have officially seen it all”? I was premature in that assessment. From Indiana:

    Nearly half the students in the Indiana University School of Dentistry’s second-year class have been disciplined for their roles in a cheating scandal in which students broke into password-protected files to view exam material before tests.

    “I see this as being a widespread problem, not just in dentistry,” said Dr. Anne Koerber, an associate professor of dentistry at the University of Illinois at Chicago who has written about the ethics of dental education.

    “When you have persons in high places who clearly lie about what’s happening with weapons of mass destruction, or CEOs who lie about where the money is going, I think the general public gets the idea that anything that makes money is what’s right.”

    You read it correctly, folks. According to this pointy-headed pseudo-intellectual “professor”, the reason that these kids cheated on a dental school exam was because “Bush lied”. Oh, and also because CEO’s make (and embezzle) a lot of money.

    If we’re going to inject politics into the equation, could we not say this? “When you have persons in high places lying under oath (committing perjury) and obstructing justice, and teaching our youth that oral sex is not sex, I think the general public gets the idea that anything that makes you happy, regardless of the legality, is what’s right.”

    How about seeing this for what it is (a cheating scandal) and not for what it isn’t (politics)?

    May 10, 2007 Posted by | moonbats, shameful | Leave a comment

    comPost whitewashes Beserkeley Dem’s image

    Lois Romano of the Washington comPost has quite the puff piece on Berkeley moonbat Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA). Excerpt:

    Lee, 60, is soft-spoken and is no lefty flame thrower. The daughter of a veteran of two wars (whom she still calls “Colonel”), she says she is not a pacifist.

    I don’t know how anyone could think she is a pacifist. I mean, it’s not like she was the only member of either chamber of Congress to vote against a response to the Sept. 11 attacks. Oh, wait a minute…yes she was.

    Well, it’s not like she was the only member of her party to vote against dropping bombs in Serbia over the ethnic cleansing grounds of Kosovo. Oh, wait a minute…yes she was.

    Hmmmm. Well, if it’s all the same to you, I’m gonna go ahead and tag her with the “pacifist” label.

    May 10, 2007 Posted by | media bias, moonbats | Leave a comment

    NYT: Our data mining is good, W’s is bad

    How many times have I illustrated over the last three years that liberals live in a “good enough for me, but not for thee” world? More times than Mikie Moore hits his neighborhood dim-sum joint. From Ace:

    In the Village Voice. The only good thing about leftist rags is that they hate establishment liberals almost as much as they hate conservatives.

    Barely a year after their reporters won a Pulitzer prize for exposing data mining of ordinary citizens by a government spy agency, New York Times officials had some exciting news for stockholders last week: The Times company plans to do its own data mining of ordinary citizens, in the name of online profits.
    The news didn’t make everyone all googly-eyed. In fact, some people at the paper’s annual stockholders meeting in the New Amsterdam Theatre exchanged confused looks when Janet Robinson, the company’s president and CEO, uttered the phrase “data mining.” Wasn’t that the nefarious, 21st-century sort of snooping that the National Security Agency was doing without warrants on American citizens? Wasn’t that the whole subject of the prizewinning work in December 2005 by Times reporters Eric Lichtblau and James Risen?

    And hadn’t the company’s chairman and publisher, Pinch Sulzberger, already trotted out Pulitzers earlier in the program?

    Yes, yes, and yes. But Robinson was talking about money this time. Data mining, she told the crowd, would be used “to determine hidden patterns of uses to our website.” …

    Do readers really want data-mining behavior from their newspapers—not just the Times but every other big media outlet? Do they want newspaper databases to store reading histories, minute by minute, until one day the government shows up to examine ordinary citizens’ shopping and viewing and chatting habits in detail? If you think it can’t happen, ask the librarians who’ve been told to hand over readers’ checkout records under the Patriot Act.

    It was pointed out at the time of the NYT’s revelations that data-mining was quite common in everyday business and marketing. The Times, nevertheless, pushed forward its editorial line that data-mining was dangerous, invasive, and patently unAmerican.

    How the Times has changed.

    Translation: data mining for terrorist activity is a horrible invasion of privacy; but data mining for profit is an acceptable business model. Got it. Thanks for the clarification. Obviously, W should have found a way to parlay his intercepts into some ca$h in order to pass the NYT’s smell test.

    May 10, 2007 Posted by | hypocrisy, media bias | Leave a comment

    Silky Pony: "Hedge fund taught me about poverty"

    I may have officially seen it all. From the NY Post:

    Democrat John Edwards said yesterday that he worked for a hedge fund between presidential campaigns, to learn about financial markets and their relationship to poverty – and to make money, too.

    The former North Carolina senator said his yearlong, part-time position with Fortress Investment Group helped his understanding of the connection, but he has more to learn.

    I’d say he does indeed have more to learn. Living in a 28k sq. ft. energy hog of a mansion while receiving a $400 trimming of his well-coiffed ‘do tells me he doesn’t know much about poverty. Hey, I don’t begrudge the man his money (except for that channeling cerebral palsy unborns thingy), but he needs to stop peeing on my leg and telling me that it’s raining.

    Anywho, back to the original point: he had to work for a hedge fund in order to learn about poverty. That gives me a great idea! I’m gonna go work for an adult video company as one of their “movie stars” so I can learn more about God and morals. Wish me luck. Bow-chicka-wah-wah!

    May 10, 2007 Posted by | John Edwards, shameful | Leave a comment

    Wisconsin forces gas station owner to raise his prices

    Kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy, isn’t it? Make a gas station owner raise his rates, then bellyache that Big Oil is responsible for high prices. Brilliant. Anywho, from the AP:

    A service station that offered discounted gas to senior citizens and people supporting youth sports has been ordered by the state to raise its prices.

    Center City BP owner Raj Bhandari has been offering senior citizens a 2 cent per gallon price break and discount cards that let sports boosters pay 3 cents less per gallon.

    But the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection says those deals violate Wisconsin’s Unfair Sales Act, which requires stations to sell gas for about 9.2 percent more than the wholesale price.

    Bhandari said he received a letter from the state auditor last month saying the state would sue him if he did not raise his prices. The state could penalize him for each discounted gallon he sold, with the fine determined by a judge.

    Bhandari, who bought the station a year ago, said he worries customers will think he stopped the discounts because he wants to make more money. About 10 percent of his customers had used the discount cards.

    Dale Van Camp said he bought a $50 card to support the local youth hockey program. It would have saved him about $100 per year on gas, he said.

    How crazy is that? “Raise your prices 9.2% or we’ll sue! We’re doing this for the consumers.” Yeah, I’m sure they love the higher gas prices you just gave them.

    Here in FL, we have a state law that forbids companies from selling their gas below their cost. The purpose of the law, whether you agree with it or not, is that it keeps companies with better cash flow from driving their competitors out of business, which would in turn allow the surviving companies to raise their rates once the competition has been eliminated. I submit to you that FL’s law is different, in that owners can sell AT their cost, while WI picks a number out of their butts (9.2%) to tack on to the owner’s cost.

    If government wants to “do something” about the price of gas, they could start by getting their hands out of the cookie jar! Government doesn’t have anything to do with the finding, procuring, refining, or distributing of gas, but the Big Leech will take a big bite out of every gallon that you pump. According to the DOE (2005 data, but the percentages have changed very little), federal excise taxes account for about 18.4 cents per gallon, while state excise taxes average 21 cents per gallon (eleven States levy additional State sales and other taxes, some of which are applied to the Federal and State excise taxes). That’s not even counting city or county taxes.

    In other words, the government is responsible for 40+ cents per gallon. And Wisconsin’s response? “Charge more!”

    May 10, 2007 Posted by | economic ignorance | Leave a comment

    Fort Dix terror plot

    By now, many of you are familiar with the attempted terrorist attacks on our soldiers at Fort Dix. Then again, as much as the MSM has downplayed this, maybe you haven’t heard much. Anywho, details are still coming out, but some of the more interesting notes:

  • Three of the terrorists were illegal aliens. I wonder if killing our soldiers would qualify for W’s “doing jobs that Americans won’t do”. Probably. After all, I wouldn’t do it.
  • It’s possible that the Clintons imported one or more of these terrorists from the Balkans in 1999. We bring them into our country and this is the thanks we get?
  • The processing center (or compound or whatever you want to call it) that housed these Kosovar refugees was named “The Village” after Shrillary’s book “It Takes a Village”. Read into that what you will.
  • A Balkan terrorist expert says this Fort Dix plot confirms his suspicion that Al Qaeda would employ a “White Al Qaeda” tactic, using Euro males because they raise less suspicion.

    May 10, 2007 Posted by | Fort Dix Six | Leave a comment

  • KS Dem guv pulls a Blanco, Reid joins in after debunking

    “Shame” is a word missing from the Dems’ vocabulary. From Hot Air:

    When disaster strikes, Democrats increasingly turn to blaming Bush rather than leading their voters through the proverbial–or literal–storm. Blame Bush first and ask questions later. That’s what looks like Kansas Gov Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat, tried in the wake of last Friday’s deadly tornado in Greensburg.

    With President Bush set to travel to now-razed Greensburg, Kan., on Wednesday to view the destruction wrought by Friday’s 205 mph twister, Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius said she planned to talk with him about her contention that National Guard deployments to Iraq hampered the disaster response.

    “I don’t think there is any question if you are missing trucks, Humvees and helicopters that the response is going to be slower,” she said Monday. “The real victims here will be the residents of Greensburg, because the recovery will be at a slower pace.”

    Sebelius said that with other states facing similar limitations, “stuff that we would have borrowed is gone.”

    The problem is, there is a question about all that “missing” stuff. It’s not missing. And Kansas doesn’t need it.

    Sibelius seems to have wanted to have her own Katrina, but it didn’t quite work out. First, she’s wrong and Brownback and WH Press Secretary Tony Snow rebutted her with the facts. Kansas got what it needed and FEMA even moved supplies in before requests came in. The Iraq war had no impact on equipment or the relief effort. Second, while Katrina worked out great for the DNC it didn’t work out so well for Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco. So Sibelius backtracked.

    As Snow pointed out, only 10% of KS National Guard is deployed to Iraq, and only 10% of the remaining 7000 were moved to the disaster area. Also, as Paula Zahn had to painfully point out, “Kansas has not asked for any reinforcements or extra equipment from neighboring states…. The Army says it has enough equipment for both a simulated drill and the real-life disaster, and argues, if the governor of Kansas has an urgent need for more bulldozers, backhoes, or Black Hawk helicopters, she only has to ask.”

    Having been confronted with those pesky fact thingys, Sebelius backtracked…but Reid did not. Oopsie.

    I am reminded of a skit on SNL where Daryl Hammond plays Chris Matthews and Dan Aykroyd plays Andrew Card. Card makes outlandish claims about Bush, such as “he is 10 ft. tall” and other widly insane stuff. Matthews asks: “Does it bother you that none of that is true?”, to which Card responds “If it doesn’t bother Rove, it doesn’t bother me.”

    This is the same kind of thing. Sebelius spits out some easily verifiable claptrap which is almost immediately debunked, yet Reid parrots the discredited lie anyway. Hey, if it doesn’t bother the Dems as a whole that none of that was true, then it doesn’t bother Reid or Sebelius.

    May 9, 2007 Posted by | Iraq, Reid, shameful | Leave a comment

    Pelosi to sue Bush over Iraq bill?

    Determined to demonstrate her profound ignorance of how our republican government works, House Speaker Pe-loco caters to her moonbat constituency. From The Hill:

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is threatening to take President Bush to court if he issues a signing statement as a way of sidestepping a carefully crafted compromise Iraq war spending bill.

    Pelosi recently told a group of liberal bloggers, “We can take the president to court” if he issues a signing statement, according to Kid Oakland, a blogger who covered Pelosi’s remarks for the liberal website dailykos.com.

    Nice to see Pe-loco standing up for normal Americans like the Kostards. Continuing:

    “The president has made excessive use of signing statements and Congress is considering ways to respond to this executive-branch overreaching,” a spokesman for Pelosi, Nadeam Elshami, said. “Whether through the oversight or appropriations process or by enacting new legislation, the Democratic Congress will challenge the president’s non-enforcement of the laws.”

    It is a scenario for which few lawmakers have planned. Indicating that he may consider attaching a signing statement to a future supplemental spending measure, Bush last week wrote in his veto message, “This legislation is unconstitutional because it purports to direct the conduct of operations of the war in a way that infringes upon the powers vested in the presidency.”

    I wonder if Pe-loco had a problem with her boy Bubba’s DOJ stating the following:

    If the President may properly decline to enforce a law, at least when it unconstitutionally encroaches on his powers, then it arguably follows that he may properly announce to Congress and to the public that he will not enforce a provision of an enactment he is signing. If so, then a signing statement that challenges what the President determines to be an unconstitutional encroachment on his power, or that announces the President’s unwillingness to enforce (or willingness to litigate) such a provision, can be a valid and reasonable exercise of Presidential authority.

    Maybe you agree with the concept behind (or usage of) signing statements or maybe you don’t. However, it’s clear that the very arguments that Bubba’s DOJ made were good enough for Bubba, so they’ll have to be good enough for Dubya. What am I saying? Since WHEN do liberals adhere to consistency?

    Anywho, does anyone want to break it to Nancy that she can’t sue the prez for refusing to let her have her way? The Supreme Court has weighed in on this before:

    In the 1970s, congressional Democrats tried to get the courts to force President Nixon to stop bombing in Cambodia. The courts ruled that dissident lawmakers could not sue solely to obtain outcomes they could not secure in Congress.

    May 9, 2007 Posted by | moonbats, Pelosi | Leave a comment

    Barry O’s gaffe

    From Breitbart/AP:

    Barack Obama, caught up in the fervor of a campaign speech Tuesday, drastically overstated the Kansas tornadoes death toll, saying 10,000 had died.
    The death toll was 12.

    “In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died—an entire town destroyed,” the Democratic presidential candidate said in a speech to 500 people packed into a sweltering Richmond art studio for a fundraiser.

    As the Illinois senator concluded his remarks a few minutes later, he appeared to realize his gaffe.

    “There are going to be times when I get tired,” he said. “There are going to be times when I get weary. There are going to be times when I make mistakes.”

    Obama spokesman Bill Burton said later that the senator meant to say “at least 10,” instead of 10,000.

    Yeah, I do that all the time: overstate something by a factor of 1,000. Matter of fact, I drove in to work this morning at a speed of 65,000 mph. And yes, I was tired.

    May 9, 2007 Posted by | Obama | Leave a comment

    Headline: "Sarkozy holidays as fresh violence hits French cities"

    From the French al-Reuters, AFP:

    President-elect Nicolas Sarkozy relaxed and strategised Tuesday on a luxury yacht in the Mediterranean, while back home “anti-Sarko” protests rumbled on into a third consecutive night.

    OK, I’ll bite: since he’s the president-elect and thus not the acting president, just what in the name of escargot is he supposed to or expected to do? Continuing:

    Sarkozy boarded the vessel in Malta with his wife Cecilia and their 10-year-old son Louis on Monday at the start of a three-day break to relax after the right-winger’s emphatic weekend election victory.

    Not “conservative”, but the more loaded term “right-winger”. Nope, no liberal media bias!

    OK, how about this gem?

    Sarkozy, a tough-talking former interior minister, is hated in the high-immigrant suburbs after he described young delinquents as “rabble” and for his stance on law and order.

    He’s hated by “immigrants” (that’s P.C.-speak for “Muslims”) for “his stance on law enforcement”? In other words, his stance on law enforcement is that he’s for it. You know, laws should be enforced and stuff? I know, that’s just heartless, unfair, cruel, and bigoted!

    May 8, 2007 Posted by | France, media bias | Leave a comment

    "We’re Paying War Reparations to Guam for What Japan Did"

    P.C. idiocy continues. From the Freepers:

    “House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and his eight compatriots, all of whom have co-sponsored a bill that would require that America pay reparations to the people of Guam for – get this – the actions of the Japanese in World War II.

    According to the bill (HR.1595, the “Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act”), the people of Guam:

    suffered unspeakable harm as a result of the occupation of Guam by Imperial Japanese military forces during World War II , by being subjected to death, rape, severe personal injury, personal injury, forced labor, forced march, or internment.

    For this reason (?), “the Secretary of the Treasury shall make payments” to WWII survivors and their descendants on Guam for the brutal actions of a third party.

    Makes perfect sense, doesn’t it? After all, the US is the largest aid donor on the planet; it’s only logical that we should rebuild, repatriate, and reparate every country that has been hurt by every war that we can find. Let’s not stop with Guam – let’s include everybody from Carthage on up to the present. Should we pay reparations to the Koreans for the Mongol invasions of the 14th century, and to the Spanish for the loss of their Armada in 1588? Why not?

    And while this bill holds up $126,000,000.00 for the repayment of the people of Guam for what the Japanese did (as well as $5,000,000.00 for “the Secretary of the Interior [to] establish a grants program [to]…award grants for research, educational, and media activities that memorialize the events surrounding the occupation of Guam during World War II, honor the loyalty of the people of Guam during such occupation, or both, for purposes of appropriately illuminating and interpreting the causes and circumstances of such occupation and other similar occupations during a war”), our soldiers can’t even get a dime in supplemental appropriations.

    Way to go, Democrats. Your “blame America first” (even for things we have nothing to do with), anti-US soldier attitudes, actions, and mindsets have just been taken to a new level.”

    May 8, 2007 Posted by | political correctness | Leave a comment

    Hillary: I’m not a socialist chick like that French loser!

    The Hildebeast is in damage control mode. From the Washington comPost:

    There was a time when advisers to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) looked abroad for proof that women can get elected to a top leadership role in the modern world: Margaret Thatcher, the former British prime minister; Angela Merkel, the German chancellor; and Michelle Bachelet, the president of Chile.

    But as presidential candidate Ségolène Royal was defeated by a conservative man who had been France’s chief law enforcement officer, the Clinton campaign was quick to dismiss comparisons between their candidate and her Socialist counterpart across the Atlantic. “Other than the fact that they are both women, they don’t have much in common,” said Howard Wolfson, Clinton’s communications director.

    Yeah, aside from that whole recurring “taking your stuff for the common good” thing, they’re totally different, huh? Continuing:

    Clinton advisers said that, if anything, Royal proved that a woman must run with a focus on her credentials. Clinton allies saw the race as evidence that the New York senator is running the right kind of campaign, a substantive one — even if it means she is sometimes accused of lacking charisma.

    “Sometimes”? She’s about as charismatic as a bullfrog with gonorrhea.

    Exit question: Do you think Shrillary’s handlers would be downplaying similarities if Segolene had won, crowing that Segolene’s win is good news for Her Highness as proof that voters aren’t afraid to support a “strong” woman as leader?

    May 8, 2007 Posted by | Hillary, socialism | Leave a comment

    Non-political post: Man falsely diagnosed with terminal cancer blows life savings

    From Hot Air:

    You know the punchline.

    The 62-year-old said he was told by doctors at the Royal Cornwall Hospital in Treliske that he only had a short time left to live.
    So he quit his job and stopped paying his mortgage, instead splashing out on a lavish lifestyle of hotels, restaurants and holidays.

    Then the hospital told him that he was actually suffering from non-fatal pancreatitis.

    Mr Brandrick said that in the year he thought he was dying he spent everything and now he faces losing his house.

    He’s suing, naturally. The hospital insists there was no negligence, that when he was diagnosed it looked like pancreatic cancer.

    Expect a modest settlement here, not because he has a case (he probably doesn’t) but because the bad publicity of not only a misdiagnosis but a misdiagnosis that ends up putting an old man out on the street would be horrendous for the hospital. They’ll probably pay off the mortgage payments he missed so that he can keep his house and then he’ll make up some of the rest in charity from people who read about him and want to help him out. Either that or he’ll end up in a cardboard box consoling himself with a bottle of whiskey and the fact that at least his pancreas is robust.

    Obvious exit question: Should he win the suit? He’s got a potential action in equity, but he can’t show that the hospital knew (let alone intended or induced) that he’d go out and crack his nest egg. I think he’s looking at a little bit of jack and a whole lot of squat.

    Put your lawyer-wannabe hats on for a moment and tell me what you think: does this guy have a case?

    On the one hand, personal accountability should come into play, and this patient behaved irresponsibly. The doctor never told him to p#ss away his nest egg on booze and broads. On the other hand, there is an aspect of civil law called “estoppel by representation of fact” that seems to have occurred. The link to “estoppel by representation of fact” is here, but in short, it goes like this:

    If A tells B something and A says it’s a fact, and B has reason to assume that A is factually correct, and A wants B to respond (or act) to the “fact”, and B acts to his detriment in reliance on the “facts” that A gave him, and A later tries to deny having ever told B of the “facts”…then A will be “estopped” from trying to prove he never presented the “facts” to B.

    Sorry for the legalese, but it seems to me that the above scenario may have occurred: Doc tells patient he’s got terminal cancer (facts), patient blows his life savings (acting to his detriment based on relying on A’s “facts”), then we see that the doctor was wrong. I think the patient may have a case here. What do you think?

    May 8, 2007 Posted by | non-political | Leave a comment