September 18, 2009
I'm the model for every social climbing political pig of the old, racist, anti-Semitic south; the prototype of that species of spiritless, sewer-trout evangelical normally found only in fiction and the mind of Manhattan liberals (but they love me anyway). My pole star is Revenge. With my bulging, gelatinous eyes, my yellow Chicklet overbite teeth, my blast-wound mouth and rubber-chicken pallor, next to Jack Murtha I'm the most gag-inducing figure in public life.
My political career has been one of the most macabre historical accidents in history. I've single-handedly launched the most luminous record of parochial idiocy, snotty parsimony, American humiliation, cosmic incompetence and buffoonery ever seen in this country. I fill the shoes of 10% of a human being.
I've gawked and grinned like a jackass eating briars, and shambled stooped and stupid in the company of dictators. I was joined on the public stage by my wretched harridan of a wife - the silverware and China hallmark inspector, and bitter counter of toilet paper sheets - Rosalyn. I claimed that I was a nuclear physicist after one no-credit Physics course in college.
To XM Radio's Bob Edwards (Oct 10, 2007) I once said:
"...I have a specific regret in not having one more helicopter to rescue our hostages. If I had one more helicopter they would have been rescued. I might have been re-elected President".
Recently, I said that you, dear readers, are racists because you oppose President Obama. That might be me posting here, occasionally, in the "Comment Deleted by Administrator".
Who am I? Better yet, what am I?
September 17, 2009
BTW, Bernie Goldberg is dead-bang right, we have been giving the media an accolade it never deserved by calling it the "Mainstream Media." It is not mainstream. It is leftwing.
And so I'm never going to refer to them as "MSM" again.
Another Good Point by Goldberg: In that same interview -- maybe Monday? -- Goldberg challenged O'Reilly's question about the leftwing media taking an interest in this, asking, basically, "Why do we care if they've taken an interest?"
His point is that this is no longer David vs. Goliath. (Or an Army of Davids vs. Goliath, if you will.) It's now more like an up-and-comer vs. an aging, past-his-prime boxer. Sure, maybe the older boxer still gets a bigger share of the gate, but it's getting close to an even match. Not there yet -- but it's not some huge gulf.
It's no longer really the Dominant Media vs. the Outlaw Media. Well, it is that, but it's no longer "Dominant" -- it's now merely "Establishment, But a Shadow of Its Former Self, and Losing Audience Every Day" Media.
So his point was: Who cares if this fossilized incompetent corrupt old media covers it? Why are we even giving them that validation that what they assert to be true is in fact true -- "It's only a story when we say it's a story" ?
That's not true anymore. They said it's not a story -- the practically screamed it with their silence -- and we said "Oh yes it is."
And who won?
So who cares about them?
We're covering it -- we, the mainstream media -- and that's all that matters.
And who really cares if they don't.
Anyone ever get linked by a legacy media outlet? We're linked right now by the NYT's blog and the referrals barely show up in the SiteMeter stats.
A link from a small blog throws a hell of a lot more traffic than the NYT. NiceDeb and Cassy Fiano are both linking us, as I can tell from my SiteMeter; there are zero referrals right now from the NYT. I only know I was linked because DrewM. told me so.
Who cares about them.
Who cares what they cover.
Who cares what they believe and what they think they "know."
The hell with them. They're losers. And they stink of desperation.
“Mainstream Media” Must Go!
Main or current thought or behavior: the ideas, actions, and values that are most widely accepted by a group or society, e.g. in politics, fashion or music
Since there is very little mainstream about the so-called mainstream media, it’s time for all of us to stop using such a misleading term – and come up with something new.
Is the New York Times or NBC News really mainstream when they ignore the Van Jones story?
Isn’t there something wrong when Glenn Beck, who doesn’t even pretend to be a journalist, scoops the “mainstream media” on all sorts of stories – from Van Jones to Acorn, to name just two recent examples?
The fact is there are lots of stories that Americans care deeply about that simply hold no interest for so-called mainstream journalists. I get the impression that if FOX News decides to run with a story that may, for example, reflect badly on President Obama or one that puts a spotlight on some liberal judge who lets child molesters off with (barely) a slap on the wrist, the mainstream media won’t go near it. That may be regrettable, but I fear it’s true.
Gordon Brown cannot understand why Socialism has not produced wealth and more jobs
Social security payments will cost almost £200 billion in four years time, accounting for one pound in every four that the Government spends.
By James Kirkup, Telegraph Political Correspondent
Nickie Goomba note: In the UK, cash aid to families and children, unemployment benefits, aid to the physically and mentally disabled, welfare for individuals, pensions, etc. all fall under the umbrella of Social Security. This gigantic amount of money does not even include the massive and moribund National Health Service.Combined with a debt interest bill of more than £63 billion, items Gordon Brown once called “the costs of failure” will absorb more than a third of all Government spending.
Leaked Treasury documents have revealed the Government’s own bleak forecasts for rising welfare payments and debt interest costs.
The figures, which were not revealed in this year’s Budget, show the scale of the damage that will done to the public finances by rising unemployment and the soaring national debt.
The papers show that the Treasury expects to pay out £193.4 billion on social security benefits in 2013/14. Paying interest on the Government’s outstanding debts will cost £63.4 billion.
Total Government spending in the same year will be £758.3 billion. Welfare and debt interest will be 33.8 per cent of that total.
Around 6 million people in Britain are estimated to claim some sort of employment-based benefits, and the figure is set to rise.
Official figures released on Wednesday showed that unemployment reached has 2.47 million, the highest since 1995. Most economists expect the total to peak at around 3 million early next year.
In his 2000 Budget, Mr Brown described money spent on debt and welfare as “the costs of failure” and lauded Labour’s record in reducing those payments.
He said: "Our promise was to reduce the costs of failure – the bills for unemployment and debt interest – in order to reallocate money to the key public services."
Nickie Goomba note: Don't you love this part? They've cut back what's spent on unemployment and interest on existing debts and used that money to... wait for it... fund MORE GOVERNMENT SERVICES. Why isn't there a revolution over there??Now, Mr Brown’s own figures reveal how those costs are set to grow dramatically.
Already the largest single item in the budget, by 2013/14 spending on social security will dwarf every other item of Government expenditure.
Then There's This 2007 story from The Daily Mail...
During Gordon Brown's student days, he produced a 200-page booklet, stating 'free money is available from social security'
Social security hand-outs should be regarded as "free money", the "so-called welfare State" should be used wherever possible and there's nothing wrong with squatting or being a "parasite".
These are views in a guide on how to scrounge off the State, "con" private firms and "use and abuse the system", published by the man set to become Prime Minister.
It is not a leaked copy of Gordon Brown's manifesto in his campaign to succeed Tony Blair, but a 200-page booklet produced as a socialist student leader in the Seventies, long before "stealth taxes" were invented.
However, cynics will say the seeds of the welfare State boom under Labour can be seen in the document edited by 22-year-old firebrand Brown when Rector of Edinburgh University.
Entitled Alternative Edinburgh, it provides a revealing insight into his attitudes to the State and the law in its suggestions of ways to live for free.
"If you're British and can give an address, free money is available from social security, basic £5.80 per week," it says.
"Social and medical benefits are your right, not charity hand-outs, so never be reticent about claiming them. For whatever the reason the so-called welfare State was brought into being, it can and must be used to its full extent."
Nor is it just the State that can be used to get something for nothing.
"For the experienced parasite the Edinburgh Festival is a gift," the booklet declares, with advice on gatecrashing receptions - "enter via the side door" - and getting a free bath and food at smart hotels.
It suggests: "Sit in the lobby until reception is busy, then walk quickly upstairs or into the lift. Even the plushest hotels have at least one public bathroom to a floor."
And for free food, it recommends: "Con your way to asking for a glass of water or sit beside drinkers and they will feed you for nothing."
Rector Brown's book also advocates sneaking into cut-price works canteens and even "masquerading as a student" in college canteens. "Just say you've forgotten your student card."
An "infallible" method of cheating your way into bring-a-bottle parties is to "use a carrier bag of empty cans with two half-bricks at the bottom".
The man who tried to hide the abolition of the 10p tax rate in his recent Budget was an early student of media manipulation.
"Counter-information is the key to success," students are advised. Direct action like squatting works because it attracts the Press."
The guide helpfully lists local Marxist and anarchist groups.
Job ideas hardly conform to Mr Brown's son-of-the-manse background.
"Factories: not recommended. Early starts and monotonous work," says the booklet.
Or a student could try the capitalist con of ordering the latest model of an in-demand car "reserving the right to cancel" and selling it on for £100 profit while awaiting delivery.
And if you're caught by police while working any scam, don't worry.
"You may think you are guilty but legal advice can show otherwise," says the future Chancellor's guide.
Young Brown had his own "five-year plan": a council takeover of shops, pubs and cafes, a crackdown on car owners and a 50 per cent rise in local taxes to help the working class.
Some may say little has changed.
September 16, 2009
We still don't know what the Republican alternatives to ObamaCare might be, except that they include medical savings accounts and intra-state competition for insurance providers. But where ObamaCare has the merit of theoretical and moral elegance because it works on paper, in flow charts, and promises to address real human needs - conservative solutions still seem like carpet tacks in a tornado. But ObamaCare is still losing. Why?
That ObamaCare is as unpopular as it is, must be attributed to something other than lucidity on the part of Republicans, or the proposals of talk-radio personalities. I think it's this: the deep politicization of all facets of American life over the past forty years has finally reached saturation. Millions of people now find themselves outside the generation-long default mode of liberal thinking, on all social issues. It's the end of The Great Society's assumption that The System is at fault; the driver of all individual disadvantage, deprivation and want. Once you force changes to The System, you eliminate the problems.
The reverse of this idea of social forces as destiny is the Dickensian idea that all misery, injustice and grief is the result of deficits of character. The innocent sufferer trapped in poverty was, usually, the pawn of someone much worse than he, but that no changes to The System would overcome the quality of the people who managed it, i.e., those in power. This is closer to the conservative view of life. It assumes that the evolved systems of association, church, fraternal organizations, school discipline and all the unofficial ways that populations devise to help one another are better at everything than government.
These are old ideas; they revived because their time came back round, and they existed before the arguments over universal health coverage began. They coalesced when the socialization of medicine became a real possibility. They need to be cultivated in that context because that's where they're expressing themselves at the moment.
Until some courageous figure on The Right makes a coherent moral case - and it is a moral case - for providing health coverage to the involuntary uninsured and liberating the power of the consumer, a case that doesn't have the charm of double-entry bookkeeping but ignites the listener with a righteous purpose, The Left will have the advantage. You can never overestimate the power of their sanctimony to pull them together and stampede them like cattle in the same direction. Once you've proven yourself to be better than they are, they've got nuthin'.
From my inside source Andrew Breitbart ... who is dressed as Abraham Lincoln and touring the White House with a mike as we speak.
B) "Is it too much to ask to keep Republican hookers out of our community organizing centers?";
C) "Brother, can you spare an ACORN?"; or
September 15, 2009
Obama Plans Back-to-Back-to-Back TV Appearances Sunday
It’s going to be awfully hard to avoid President Obama on television this Sunday.
The President is going to appear on seventeen Sunday shows – SEVENTEEN – to press his case for health care, White House officials disclosed. That will be a record. The previous mark of eleven different shows is one day is held by the late Charles Nelson Reilly.
Mr. Obama is going to appear on This Week with George Stephanopoulos on ABC, Meet the Press on NBC, Face the Nation on CBS, and Fox NFL Sunday. Later in the day, he will be making cameo appearances on SpongeBob SquarePants (Nickelodeon), Larry King Live (CNN), Ace of Cakes (Food Network), Masterpiece Mystery (PBS), Family Guy (Fox), The Soup (E!), Tool Academy (MTV) and House Hunters (HGTV).
In an episode of Cops, President Obama will be dragged shirtless from a suburban Las Vegas trailor park demanding to be taken to a single-payer emergency room. On a special edition of This Old House (PBS) Obama will team with 43 SEIU members and 11 Democrat members of Congress to remove an incandescent light bulb from a maternity ward.
The President's final appearance of the day will be offering an "Obama Collection" of knives and fighting swords on local stations nationwide. Newsmakers in the past have managed to pull off the unlikely feat of hitting the big three Sunday interview shows on CBS, NBC and ABC. But this is a presidential first.
If there’s one thing this White House doesn’t seem worried about, it is that Americans will get tired of seeing President Obama. His TV marathon will come after the speech on Wall Street today and a rally in Maryland later this week.
Obamacare will be one of many federal failures.
By Deroy Murdock at NRO
As the health-care reform debate roars on, Uncle Sam resembles a restless college senior who is flunking economics, finance, and management. Despite a report card full of Fs, he suddenly announces: “I want to go to medical school!”
Similarly, Pres. Barack Obama stood before a joint session of Congress Wednesday night and re-embraced a government option for health insurance. As he explained, “Sometimes government has to step in to help deliver” on the promise that “hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play.”
Alas, too often when Washington steps in, failing grades follow.
Medicare, the Great Society’s shining jewel, is a battered gem. Its hospitals program already bleeds ruby-red ink. “Medicare Part A again will spend more in benefits than it receives in revenues” this fiscal year, observes Heritage Foundation analyst Bob Moffitt. Its Trust Fund is an accounting fiction, but even that fantasy disappears in eight years, with depletion in 2017. Even worse, Heritage’s Brian Riedl calculates that between 2009 and 2083 Medicare’s budget will zoom from 3.1 percent to 14.8 percent of Gross Domestic Product. Its unfunded liabilities (promises backed by campaign balloons instead of cash) equal $36.3 trillion.
Social Security, the New Deal’s cornerstone, is as cutting edge as a 78 RPM record. In 2016, barely six years away, it will begin paying more in pension checks than it collects in payroll taxes. Congress then will be unable to use Social Security’s surplus like a ShamWow to absorb red ink. Social Security’s unfunded obligations equal $17.5 trillion — again not financed by anything but congressional speeches.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: These two government options in the home-mortgage arena are widely considered the twin jet engines that flew the economy into a hillside. These were supposed to be money-making, quasi-private companies, with no federal involvement beyond an implicit guarantee that government would cover their losses. Emboldened by this cozy federal safety net, these enterprises embarked upon financial acrobatics they otherwise might have avoided. Rather than generate profits between 2009 and 2019, the Congressional Budget Office estimates, Fannie and Freddie will cost taxpayers $389 billion.
The Hope for Homeowners program began last October 1. Congress gave it a hefty $300 billion to help some 400,000 homeowners avoid foreclosure. According to an August 10 Newsday editorial, “It has produced exactly one refinanced loan.” One down, 399,999 to go.
“UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right?” Obama asked in August. “It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems.” Yes, indeed. Its two-year fiscal deficit approaches $8 billion. It has pried some 60,000 mailboxes off of America’s streets, the Lexington Institute reports. It also is weighing the cancellation of Saturday services. Even as e-mail, digitally attached documents, and online banking decrease demand for first-class snail mail, the Post Office keeps hiking the cost of stamps. What sort of business actually raises prices while customers walk away?
World celebrities sing to stop global warming
GENEVA — British rock group Duran Duran and heavy metal band Scorpions are among 55 world celebrities who have joined in recording a song to draw attention to the global warming crisis, organisers said on Monday.
The song is part of a mass media campaign on the threats of climate change organised by the Geneva-based Global Humanitarian Forum, headed by former UN secretary general Kofi Annan.
The song entitled "Beds'r Burning", which was originally recorded by the Australian group Midnight Oil in the 1980s, can be downloaded from the Internet for free and will be presented to the public at a launch in Paris on October 1.
"If we do not stop the (greenhouse gas) emissions today, global warming will be still be with us in 40 to 50 years," warned Walter Fust, director of the Forum, at a press conference in Geneva.
The media campaign featuring the song is aimed at putting pressure on world leaders to reach an agreement on tackling climate change at a UN-sponsored conference in Copenhagen in December.
Some of the other popular artists who add their voices to the anti-global warming song include French 'Piaf' actress Marion Cotillard, Senegalese star Youssou N'dour, Irish singer/composer Bob Geldorf, Chinese singer Khalil Fong, and even a Nobel peace laureate, South African archbishop Desmond Tutu.
September 14, 2009
For most of the previous presidency, the Left accused George W. Bush of using 9/11 as a pretext to attack Iraq. Since January, his successor has used the economic slump as a pretext to "reform" health care. Most voters don't buy it: They see it as Obama's "war of choice," and the more frantically he talks about it as a matter of urgency the weirder it seems. If he's having difficulty selling it, that's because it's not about "health."
As I've written before, the appeal of this issue to him and to Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank et al is that governmentalization of health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture – one in which elections are always fought on the Left's issues and on the Left's terms, and in which "conservative" parties no longer talk about small government and individual liberty but find themselves retreating to one last pitiful rationale: that they can run the left-wing state more effectively than the Left can. Listen to your average British Tory or French Gaullist on the campaign trail, pledging to "deliver" government services more "efficiently."
So why can't the silver-tongued post-partisan healer seal the deal on this health care business? Surely it should be the work of moments for the greatest orator in American history to whip up a little medicinal Gettysburg, a touch of Henry V-in-the-Agincourt-casualty-tent, and put this thing away. Yet there he was the other night with the usual leaden medley of tinny grandiosity (all the this-is-the-moment, now-is-the-hour stuff), slippery reassurances (don't worry, you won't be "required" to change your present health arrangements), imputations of bad faith to anyone who takes a different view (they're playing "games"), and the copper-bottomed guarantee that you can have it all for no money down, no interest, no monthly payments, no nuthin' ("I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit").
This would barely have passed muster four months back. After a summer of seething town halls and sliding approval numbers, it was a joke. Or, rather, it would be a joke if the president's intention was to persuade an increasingly skeptical, if not downright hostile, electorate. On the other hand, if the intention is to ram it down America's throat whatever the citizenry thinks, then the joke's on us.
If it was about "health care," it would be easier. It was assumed, for example, that the president's sly revision of "47 million people without health insurance" in his summer speeches to the substantially lower 30 million was a concession to those who said that his "plan" (he hasn't actually produced one, but why get hung up on details?) will cover gazillions of illegal immigrants.
September 13, 2009
When I was nine we practiced a bicentennial program in our elementary school. As part of the program a teacher was explaining the verses of ‘America the Beautiful’.
“How beautiful for patriot dream,
That sees beyond the years,
Thine alabaster cities gleam,
Undimmed by human tears.
How beautiful for heroes, proved
In liberating strife,
Who more than self, their country loved,
And mercy more than life.”
She explained that the phrase ‘undimmed by human tears’ meant that we had never had an attack of a city on American soil.
Do yourself a favor. Pay a visit to Lynnae's site and let her know you were there. She's a Conservative fighting the good fight in the UltraLiberal Nortwest U.S.
"I’ve been loath to admit that the shrieking lunacy of the summer — the frantic efforts to paint our first black president as the Other, a foreigner, socialist, fascist, Marxist, racist, Commie, Nazi; a cad who would snuff old people; a snake who would indoctrinate kids — had much to do with race."The normally nonchalant Barack Obama looked nonplussed, as Nancy Pelosi glowered behind.
Surrounded by middle-aged white guys — a sepia snapshot of the days when such pols ran Washington like their own men’s club — Joe Wilson yelled “You lie!” at a president who didn’t.
But, fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!
The outburst was unexpected from a milquetoast Republican backbencher from South Carolina who had attracted little media attention. Now it has made him an overnight right-wing hero, inspiring “You lie!” bumper stickers and T-shirts.