Saving Lives - Two at a time.

I don't normal promote my local column, as it tend to narrowly focus on the city of Savage, but I think this one would be of interest to those who care about civil rights and life issues:

Why not save two lives at one time?
http://www.savagepacer.com/news/opinions/community-voices-why-not-save-two-lives-one-time-5930

Standing a post on the wall

I just got this from one of my good 2nd Amendment friends.
The more times you watch it, the more detail and precision you'll see. Some of the best editing and timing to detail I've ever seen.
It was filmed at 15 locations.

Talking Points

I hate responding to talking points - But Amendment X doesn't like me commenting in his posts, so here we go:

Talking point 1:
"Governor Huckabee has recently said that he would sign a federal smoking ban"

Answer:
Could you clarify your views on tobacco regulation?
MH: Certainly, I don’t believe that we as a govt have a right to tell people what to do or not do. The issue is one of workplace safety … the same reason that the govt regulates the exposure of radon and other toxic gases in the work place. In AR I signed a bill that banned smoking in certain public areas and businesses, but not in bars/restaurants, because those were places consumers could more easily choose to go to or not. So, in the work place, if we regulate smoking, it is an issue of worker safety. Even though I think it’s an unhealthy habit and is terribly expensive to the country, but when that smoke reaches my nose, that right ends. The responsibility initially lies with the states of course. The only way this would be a federal responsibility is for it taking on that roll as part of OSHA as it regulates other work place safety.
[Not a big OSHA fan, but don't see any issue here from a conservative point of view]
(*Also, Mitt fans probably want to stop pushing this -
"Governor Mitt Romney, who had said earlier in the year that he preferred to leave smoking laws to individual cities and towns, but who now says he is willing to consider a statewide ban." Boston Globe, 2003)

Talking point 2:
"Would push federally mandated, government run health care"

Answer:
MH: Government-run socialized medicine is not the answer but neither is employer controlled insurance. You should own your insurance.
MH: "I think the better idea is to turn [health care] over to each individual...I trust me a lot more than I trust the government or a lot more than I trust the insurance companies." The best way to fix our health crisis is to put the decision into the hand of Americans and reward them for making the correct one.
(*For a good discussion on why employer health care is starting to be a problem read - "liberal fascism", Employer owned, government mandated health care is the problem right now)
(* Also, don't think Mitt Romney fans want to go with this line of attack - Mitt actually implemented Gov't Run Health Care)

"Mandatory weight control"
See above, but even if he was for it can you blame him - look at that picture of him in AK and now.


Since people like talking points -
Romney's Health Care Plan:

Provides Taxpayer-Funded Abortions. Abortions are covered in the Commonwealth Care program that Romney created as Governor. Under the program, abortions are available for a copay of $50.

Guarantees Planned Parenthood A Seat At The Table. Romney's legislation created an advisory board and guarantees, by law, that Planned Parenthood has a seat at the table. Romney's plan established a MassHealth payment policy advisory board, and one member of the Board must be from Planned Parenthood. No pro-life organization is represented.

Incredibly, Romney used his line item veto to strike things from this plan that he found "objectionable" (such as dental benefits for Medicaid patients) but he DID NOT strike the $50 elective abortions or Planned Parenthood's demand that they be given a seat at the negotiating table to ensure the continued EXPANSION of abortion.

As someone said,
Is 50 bucks-per-baby "100% pro-life" to you.

That does not seem too conservative to me either fiscally or socially.

New Post Debate Update:
How about the Second Amendment -
Romney supported an assault weapon ban and the Brady bill yet still claim to support the second amendment?
He explains that those were bipartisan bills that he supported, but trust him, he won't take your guns. I assume he means unless there is bipartisan support to take them. Of course, why take them when he can just support the laws to effectively ban them.

Not quite 10 years ago

I agree with Savage Republican. I'd hate to have my present judged by what I said 10 years ago.
So here is a little something a bit more recent from Mike Huckabee:



And here is Governor Huckabee's recent (not 10 year) explanation about those statements. With an accompanying "Uh, no. That's not how it was Governor" by Carl Cameron:









[Note from Savage Republican:
Actually I think Mike would be very proud of this speech, when taken in context. This was the opening to a Special Session of the Democratically controlled legislature to meet budget shortfalls. So instead of saying no taxes, which he knew would fail anyway, he put a cap on the revenue increase.
If you noticed he says he doesn't care how they do it, just as long as it meets the needs - not feed more government.
One other not so minor note, the taxes that were raised here to met the budget shortfall were TEMPORARY- and were REPEALED 3 year later. When the last time you remember a temporary tax that was actually temporary]

Ya know Bob, that's twenty minutes of your life you'll never get back

OK, I need to see a job description for SecDef Robert Gates. I'd bet the farm that entertaining self-aggrandizing celebrities is not even in the supplemental pages.
So, as Bono keeps his millions and wants governments to force you to give so he can feel important, SecDef Gates takes twenty minutes to talk to Bono about African poverty.
So, Bob, I congratulate you getting a handle on all things important to the defense of America so that you can waste nearly half an hour on a subject that doesn't concern you with someone who lives the life of a millionaire while excoriating us for "not giving enough".
Hey Bob! Hope you at least got an autographed CD out of the deal.
We'll expect your resignation by Friday.

Mitt Romney, Conservative?

One of my core beliefs is that you can not be a Social Moderate and a claim to be conservative on other issues.

The reason being that to be Social Moderate (Pro-Abortion, Gov't Heathcare, Gay Marriage) requires you to use the force of government to go against the will of the people - Not a strong conservative position.
And all of those usually require lots of tax dollars (blowing the fiscal conservative tag.)

So it is with some concern that I see a few conservative I know support Mitt because they feel he is the most conservative of the remaining candidates.

I find this strange given his support for government health care, his implementation of Gay Marriage and he support for abortion and tax payer funded abortions.

He claims to have changed now - but using abortion as an example, even that proves my point. When asked about Roe v. Wade his answer is: "I would ban abortions."
The problem with Roe v. Wade is not just its outcome (abortion) but the main problem is that it is bad constitutional law. That is the answer I want to hear from my candidates (and the answer you hear from good Justices like Alito and Thomas).

As I google, Mitt and Abortion I found this year old post on YouTube.
While I would not want my present judged solely on what I said over 10 years ago - take a look and then tell me again how conservative he is now.

Social Justice, affordable housing and NIMBY

Ah, the truth that "Every revolution eats its children" is on parade and review in Minneapolis.
A left wing church, Mayflower Congregational Church where their motto is:"An open and affirming, peace with justice congregation" has made a decision to practice local social justice. And from that motto you know where that congregation is going. However, to show that they are willing to do as Christ said to care for the poor (not force others to do it) they donated their parking lot to have an "affordable housing" development built. Now, make no mistakes, "affordable housing" means "subsidized housing". But, that they were willing to do and not make others do is commendable.
However, it seems that others in the neighborhood that believe in and proclaim and preach "social justice" like to have that philosophy practiced, well, somewhere else.
Prairie Pravda has an article where a neighborhood resident Harry Kaiser says that he is active in social justice issues at his church, but:" he's not entirely comfortable opposing the housing project that's planned across the street from his south Minneapolis house."It's really tough for me to come out against affordable housing," he said. " Oh. Well then.
This guy shows the naked core and hypocrisy of the left :"Oh yes, I'm all for it as long as it doesn't cost me anything or I don't have to tolerate it!" As long as "affordable housing" is located far from him, well, let him sign the petition or vote for the government that will put it in YOUR neighborhood. But , oh no, not his.
These are the same people that want "smart growth" so, look at their protest signs(click for larger view):

















Ya just got to love the rich irony here and the chutzpah of these lefty frauds.


A P.S. Notice in the Prairie Pravda article that the "affordable housing" is being moved out of the worst areas of the city into middle class neighborhoods. Well, you people in Minneapolis elected R.T. Rybak and all this lefty ilk as YOUR representatives. Congratulations. How does it feel, Mr. Kaiser to hoisted on your own petard? To be face to face with what you force others to have to live next to? Seems that there's proverb about making and sleeping in a bed. Say, Mr. Kaiser, just a quick thought: have you ever asked the appropriate agencies and the City Council when "affordable housing" will be going into Kenwood? Or around Lake Calhoun? Or up and down Minnehaha Creek?
Just a thought.
A form of righteous schadenfreude now being exercised, thank you.

Would you please allow us to throw more money at you?

I've blogged before on the fact that we in America are not dependent on foreign oil. We choose to not use what we have. The liberty hating, capitalism hating radical socialists and radical environmentalists have had their way for far too long. We have incredible oil reserves within our borders: the Gulf of Mexico (which also mentions the abiotic theory of oil), the coastal shelf and the Naval Petroleum Reserve Number 4 (better known by it's new name ANWR). Oh, and let's not forget the huge potential of oil shale!
And so what is GWB doing right now in the Mideast? Pleading with the Saudis (and OPEC) to up production to bring down oil prices! We sit on huge reserves of our own, but GWB is intent on sending more dollars to the Mideast when we could just as easily be drilling and refining our own reserves without risking the dangers of the Straits of Hormuz and the political whims of the Muslim world.
I don't get it at all. And we waste money on ethanol all the while pushing food prices up.
Again, I don't get it.

The law of sowing and reaping

I've written many times about the multi-trillion dollar unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare. These two programs will sink the American Experiment within thirty years, if not sooner. There is not enough money to pay for two programs that currently require between $70,000,000,000,000 to $80,000,000,000,000 to meet those obligations for us Boomers. And the Financial Times reports (free registration required) that Moody's is warning that , based on welfare, Social Security and Medicare payments , the ability of the U.S. to keep exporting it's financial problems will also fail in a decade unless Congress takes real serious action-now! Right now. Junk bond status for Treasury bonds. OW! And that report dovetails with the projections that if major revisions of Social Security/Medicare are not accomplished in the next decade, the entire SS/Medicare system will be in free fall and the probable disaster becomes a certainty.
And when foreigners have no faith that their dollar instruments will hold value, they'll dump them for Euros or gold...just like is happening now. And the Congress and the President can no longer export our debt (Ron Paul has a excellent point when he talks about fiscal and currency issues)
There is a Biblical principle that like yields and produces its own (Genesis 1: 12,21,24). That what is sown is reaped. And so, with the predominance of the left for the last ninety years coupled with the dumbing down of the electorate, we are about to see what is harvested when the wind is sown.
Hang on!

2 for 2 - Ready to Call it

Some are still reading tea leaves, but with two states doing exactly what I felt would happen , I am ready to repeat my prediction from the Christmas Party and as I repeated on NARN.

First DFL - Hilary will win.
While everyone was talking about Obama's momentum, I reminded them Hilary has the machine and predicted there would be talk of issues in voting in NH.
Sure enough - Though not one poll showed her winning, she won.
She has even stronger machines for Super Tuesday.
Remember the Democrats do not just have a straight vote. In most places it is a highly scripted "dance" and he who pays the band gets to call the dance.

On the GOP Side -
- Fred: was 1-2% in NH, I don't anticipate a SC miracle.
- Romney: was also the other big loser in NH. He needed a NH/Mich double. He needs a blowout in Michigan to keep going and I don't see it happening.
- McCain: has his moment, but immigration kills him form now to Super Tuesday.
- Giuliani: Ignored NH, but still he got no mo., no excitement anywhere and Florida will be too late.

So that leaves Huckabee:
He did better in Iowa than expected, did as expected in NH.
I predict he will surprise in Michigan v. Romney & a good showing there leads to SC victory and a close finish in Florida.

So my prediction is Hillary vs. Huckabee

Quote of the day

"It takes a different skill set to campaign for President than to be President".
Fred Thompson is the only one that has that presidential skill set.
From Powerline " Fred Thompson addresses Social Security. He is an impressive and responsible candidate." Another brief but insightful quote: "Thompson: Fred did fine; I liked, for example, his refusal to demonize the oil companies. "
But, I agree with some other quotes on Powerline that points out Thompson doesn't campaign well. He doesn't have that fiery rhetoric that incites the crowds. And unfortunately that counts against him. It's not the message, it's the delivery? Make a good potential president a second tier candidate because he doesn't excite you?
I seem to remember a quote about a book and its cover.
Go to Fred Thompson's site and contribute.


[From The Savage Republican]
I would add that if you know someone in S.C. call them now - Fred needs a big showing there or it is probably over.

N.H. Prediction

Not a big fan of NH Primary so this based on my unscientific guesstimate from other polls.
If this is right on Giuliani - he is the big loser here.
Don't think this will have much effect on Fred unless he doesn't break 5%.
Hope I am wrong on Ron Paul or we will get another mass mailing
(Did anyone else get 10-12 pieces of mail from Ron over the Christmas break?)

I don't think NH will change things much, unless there is a big change over these numbers.

McCain 32%
Romney 31%
Huckabee 11%
Giuliani 10%
Ron Paul 10%
Fred 5%
Other 1%

Iowa Prediction

Here is what I was telling folks at the Christmas party - figured I would post it before polls close.

The Huck will win with at least 30%,
Romney and Fred will fight for second at around 20% each.
Ron Paul and McCain will also finish in the teens.

Unless Fred can win big in Michigan and then SC or Florida -
I predict Huckabee will win the nomination.

More later as to why, just wanted to get it out there.

9:15 Update
Looks like I was close.
Romney and Huckabee seem to have pulled votes I anticipated for Thompson.
Not a good sign for him, He will need to well in Mich but I think his time has past.
Everyone else is where I expected.

And Clinton did better then pundits were saying.
As I mentioned at Christmas, never underestimate the power of the Machine.
Who do you think are Precinct chairs?
Unless Clinton makes a big mistake, her people will allow her to win.
(Think LBJ & Texas for Kennedy)

Old college terms and MMGW

Years ago I first heard the term "gigo". I was in college at the U of M. "Garbage In, Garbage Out". In other words, you get out what you get in. Put water in the gas tank, the car's not running or not running well.
I started out taking microbiology for pre-med at the U of M. Chemistry, organic chemistry, calculus, physics. If my data in wasn't accurate or my observations were flawed, my results would also be flawed. GIGO. Now, if there are widespread data and policy reports based on flawed data, and that laws and mass ecocomic planning were to based on those therefore flawed reports,that would be dangerous. Even unforgivable. And so it is with every single Man Made Global Warming (MMGW) believer and supporter.
Patrick J. Michaels, a Ph.D who is also a senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, has authored an article called "Not So Hot" about the terribly flawed MMGW reports that swamp us. He and Ross McKitrick from Canada's University of Guelph decided to put to the test the theory that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that urban centers only account for 10% of the observed warming. Now, the basis of any experimentation is the ability to duplicate the results. Well, needless to say that Michaels and McKitrick found that the IPCC overstates warming by at least 100%.
One point: information from North American weather stations are fairly reliable. Information is terribly unreliable from Africa and South America (for instance,he cites that weather stations need to be painted white or the temperature data is too warm. And that the priority to keep a remote station painted white is low on the Need to Do list). They also factored in socioeconomic circumstances.
And Michaels asked "Where is the press?" Nowhere with the exception of a few blogs and one Canadian paper.
Go read the article. Send it off to Amy and Norm and Betty and Hakim and Jim. And remember that ethanol, no oil exploration, the new CAFE standards from the new Anti Energy Bill (all are unconstitutional) are all based on the seriously flawed IPCC. But, the left and many RINOs will still be true believers. They know the truth. The facts therefore become irrelevant.
Oh, and while you're at it, ask if Al Gore will be returning his Oscar and his Nobel Peace Prize.

Commodity prices

Drudge reports that gold has surpassed $850/oz and oil is over $100 bbl. And this is being widely reported as news. The price for crude in 1980 was $37/bbl. In inflation adjusted dollars this is about $99/bbl. So we've already been there over a quarter century ago. And again, with the watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) stopping any and all domestic oil drilling, India and Red China making significant demand on oil production that weren't there in 1980, I'm surprised it's taken this long to get back to these prices.
As for gold, at $850/oz spot, that translates to about $320/oz spot in 1980. In other words, at $850/oz, the current spot price is about 40% of it's 1980 high point (put another way, gold would have to be at $2270/oz in inflation adjusted dollars to be at the same price in 1980).
Now, the thing about commodity prices, specifically oil, is that production of the commodity makes for fungibility. In other words, if the fools in Congress get out of the way and allow us to develop our own oil reserves, that means we purchase less on the world spot market thereby freeing up production for the rest of the world and easing demand by increasing supply. And our own production is not open to choke points like the Straits of Hormuz and is much more easily defended than Saudi oil fields. Also, remember when the green wienies said that by me filling up my SUV I was pouring money into Al Queada? Well, by drilling our own oil, that problem goes away.
Oh ,and a BTW , if we'd been drilling in ANWR that oil would now be online. So, in effect, Norm Coleman and every single Republican that votes for ethanol, votes against drilling in ANWR and the coastal shelf and in the Gulf of Mexico has sent billions of dollars to Iran, Saudi Arabia and the like. They have cost the American citizens billions in extra costs for nearly everything.
I've said it before: the best thing Congress and any President can do for the American economy is to stay the hell out of the way! Leave us alone! We have done and will always do a better job with money and jobs that you people ever could. Ever!

Thompson: off the bus and into the trenches

I've been asked a number of times my thoughts about the Republican primary race. Ron Paul is the only true strict constructionist in the race. Where he leaves me flat and cold is foreign policy. It appears to me that he fails to fully realize that we smacked the tar baby of entangling foreign relationships in 1917 (those Founding Father guys really knew what they were talking about, huh?). Just another horrible legacy from the early 20th century presidents and Congress. So, Paul is unelectable. Sorry Paulites. Time to breathe real oxygen.
So, I tell people my favored candidate is Fred Thompson. But, his campaign just has not ramped up, caught fire, is a hang fire, whatever.
But today, he has a seventeen minute video that hits all the important points that I find necessary to show people that he is a campaigner of and a leader from the Reagan mold.

Appreciating blazing insight.

Ya know, when Prairie Pravda exhibits deep acumen and wisdom, well, I've just got to congratulate them. The top of the online fold reads "Crackdown Turns Around Crime in Minneapolis". The core of the article reads:"Apprehending the worst offenders and putting more cops on the streets has helped stem violent crime, which spiked last year..." The reporter states that apparently jailing lawbreakers and putting more cops on the streets works in reducing crime! WOW! Who could have known?
So, yah mean having a green roof on City Hall, having an Afro-American Mens Center, jobs training, etc didn't and doesn't reduce crime but arresting criminals does? Huh.
Well, welcome to a world where the sky is blue, Mayor Grossly Apparent.
However, there are still those race pimps that want everything their way. "Still, "I don't think people feel safe in Phillips," said Clyde Bellecourt, co-chairman of the Police Community Relations Council. "I don't see people walking alone at night, and more houses seem to have bars on windows." And yet, Bellecourt and the Police Community Relations Council are suing the Minneapolis Department (story here).
Yup, so the message from Bellecourt and the PCRC is "You're not doing enough to protect us while we're suing your butt!!!"
And if that isn't enough, read this article on Anti-Strib. Then remember how Hizzoner R.T. Rybak went to Governor Pawlenty to beg for more state money to put more cops on the streets of Minneapolis? (Notice how MPR [Marxist Propaganda Radio] spins the article as if the state is to blame for crime in Minneapolis? Your tax money well spent keeping them on the air).
Just a few more in the long list of reasons I don't and will never live in the sinkhole called Minneapolis.

Irony, shcadenfreude and 1968

I took Mom to get her four month surgical review. I was reading the October issue of Mpls/St. Paul magazine and saw a very friendly article about the eco street terrorists called "Critical Mass" who have now arrived in Minneapolis. What impressed me was the cheery, upbeat tone of the Mpls/st.Paul magazine article in light of what's been reported about these two wheel thugs here in Minneapolis. Here's my read on this: it's not a coincidence that radical, liberty hating, left wing anarchy groups are showing up here in Minneapolis and St. Paul. With the national Republican Convention just over nine months away, they are testing the response and resolve of the mayors and police departments in advance to plan maximum disruption of the convention. And they have fertile ground to be encouraged. Read the two linked articles again and see the similarities between the two cities responses. Critical Mass and other fellow travelers are well encouraged and emboldened. Mayors Rybak and Coleman have sown seeds that will bear bitter fruit. And here's what I find ironic: being the leftists they are, the Mayors of the Twin Cities support radical notions, though publicly distance themselves, by the prosecution that they cut short. The message "Don't do this or a nasty letter WILL be sent home in your backpack". Note that the San Francisco motorists and bus riders had had enough. That shows a failure at the city executive level. And shows the incompetence of lefty mayors who are the chief law enforcement officers first and foremost.
I vividly remember the Democratic Convention in Chicago in 1968. A very good friend of mine missed the bus that would have taken him into the center of that mayhem and chaos.
And who, pray tell, was the Mayor of Chicago at the time? One Richard J. Daley. And who became the single man focus for the blame for all the riots that occurred at the Convention? Richard J. Daley. And who will become the foci for any and all riots that occur in September 2008? Mayors Coleman and Rybak.
Watching Coleman and Rybak try to control their left wing friends while trying to keep the limelight on themselves should prove interesting.

Ron Paul and James Janos

I read my friend Ed Morrisey's blog Captain's Quarters . Ed and I meet from time to time. We discuss, what else, politics and an upcoming project attempting to right a wrong for a WWII veteran. That being said, I noticed that he rails against Ron Paul. Sometimes I think wrongly.
I notice the same thing from Michael Medved and especially unapologetic Mitt Romney acolyte Hugh Hewitt. Well, swing away at Ron Paul all they like, he still raises money like no one else. His supporters are incredibly passionate and motivated. I went to the AM1280 The Patriot Republican debate with Rusty Humphrey about a month ago. The Ron Paul Fan Club/MN Chapter was there in force. Congressman Paul won the straw poll at about 45+%.
The question I ask isn't about Ron Paul and his stance on the issues. I take a step back and ask a question that I haven't seen anyone else ask with any degree of honesty. That question is why or what do Ron Paul's supporters like or find so attractive about him? The major bloggers and pundits and talk radio hosts would and do dismissively ask that question. I ask it honestly and reflectively. I find parallels between Paul and James Janos. Janos had incredible support because he was "not either one of them". He wasn't a Democrat nor was he a Republican. His supporters believed that. I found him to be what I called a Democan or Republocrat. But, though he was pilloried and dismissed by the press, his supporters were loyal and passionate.
I believe that Paul's supporters find that same type of resonance with Paul. Paul doesn't nibble around the edges. Many of his statements are about important and sober topics that unfortunately still leave most voters looking for the mute button on the remote.
And so I posit that Paul's supporters find him not to be anything like all the other Republican candidates. That he gives them a reason to be excited and passionate. he gives them a reason to vote for him rather than voting against someone else. Dr. Paul runs all his congressional votes based on the same matrix: Is it Constitutional? Does it conform to my oath of office? Does it conform to my campaign promises? Though there are many things with which I agree with Dr. Paul due to how he votes, I'm also clear he has no hope of getting the nomination or of getting elected. But, again, he has attracted a number of ardent fans and contributors. Dismiss him at a certain risk and peril.
And in case you don't recognize the names James Janos, his ring name is Jesse Ventura.

Mike Huckabee introduces his Foreign Policy advisor: Rodney King

I'm a good driver (one chargeable accident in forty years of driving). That being said, it was God's grace that I was parked in my Mom's driveway when I heard Mike Huckabee's suggestion as to how to deal with Iran: Just talk to them. Like we talk to Mom. Like we talk to Dad:"We haven’t had diplomatic relationships with Iran in almost thirty years, most of my entire adult life. And a lot of good it’s done. Putting this in human terms, all of us know that when we stop talking to a parent, or a sibling, or even a friend, it’s impossible to resolve the differences to move that relationship forward. Well, the same is true for countries. " (Complete transcript here).
The more I thought of this completely inane statement, I thought "How would Huckabee's soon to be good buddy President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad respond if his advisors might suggest that Mike Huckabee be given a chance to dialogue ?" And the following scene kept coming to mind (I apologize in advance for the language) :



Yup. That's how I envision it playing out for Mike Huckabee with the object of his foreign policy attempts.
For another view, Hugh Hewitt and Michael Rubin dissect Huckabee's comments here.
This comment by Huckabee shows me once again why the MSM loves the guy. He would be a total pushover in any presidential race. Now, instead of a single line through his name as a presidential nominee, I'm putting two.

Priorities rethought, innocence found again.

My Mom has had a rough four months. Hip replacement surgery followed by major back surgery. And we had to put her dog Skipper down before the surgery marathon. With Mom not being able to drive, I've been doing double duty for a bit. But, there have been wonderful, and poignant times.
While waiting during Mom's back surgery, I noticed a little girl looking at the aquarium in the reception/waiting area at Southdale Fairview Hospital. She never said a word. She was so intently watching the fish silently pass by her eyes. And I had to catch this pure innocence with my cheap phone camera:
















And I decided to always carry a digital camera to be able to get much better photos than are obtainable with a phone camera.
I never saw her face. She left on her grandfather's lap as he was pushed to the door in his wheelchair. But, she was the picture of what, besides a relationship with Christ, is important.
A few weeks later my Mom was at a transitional care facility. She asked me if I'd wash one of her favorite outfits as it had taken on the aroma of her former hospital room. Well, I had washed one of her outfits after she had hip replacement surgery and put her lip balm through a thorough cleaning cycle (thankfully rescuing it before I put it through the dryer). Vowing not to do that again, this time I went through her pockets. As I was pulling out her ever present lip balm (this one being new, not reconditioned) and tissues, it occurred to me, that fifty years ago, she would have been going through my jeans pockets before washing them. And here I was doing the very same thing for her a half century later. And it gave me cause for pause as I looked at the tissue and the lip balm that I'd just put aside. It reminded me of a poem Mom gave me a few years back after Dad had died. The author was an older woman getting out of a car. As she opened the door, her adult son reached out to take her hand to help her. And she thought of the time when her son, as a little boy would reach up for her hand as he stepped up on a curb. And now the roles had become reversed. And she was relying on him.
And a tube of lip balm and a few tissues brought that idea home to me for good.

Lessons taught but never learned

I've been sober for over 22 years. Before my tenth anniversary sobriety date I took the time to reflect on what my sobriety has allowed me to learn. A few considerations:

1. Never confuse activity with progress. A dog chasing his tail can cover miles and stay in exactly the same place.
2. Never confuse the truth with honesty. People can tell part of the truth and lead people to believe that which is not true. It's called deception. And the deceiver walks away with a clear conscience.
   
3. Never confuse education, knowledge and wisdom. What you've been taught, what you know and how you apply it can all be neatly separate. I've seen people with double PhD's not be able to some seemingly simple tasks.
   
4. Never, ever confuse being taught the lesson with learning the lesson. "Well, I certainly learned my lesson!" is not accurate. It may very well be that the lesson was indeed taught. However, whether or not it was learned, and how well, will only become evident over time.
   

And as I read the new energy bill, it becomes all to apparent that those with their hands on the levers of power that force you and I to do their bidding have never , ever learned any lessons at all. The best that can be said is that it is an anti-energy bill. The anti-energy bill authors would be the ones who believe they have the power, wisdom and insight that if they can create and pass just the right bill, and that noisy barking dog next door will finally purr like a kitten and the whole neighborhood can finally get some sleep. Omniscient and omnipotent are terms and beliefs they all hold close to their intellectual breasts...and have, to our great and long term detriment, believed them to be true of them.
The Heritage Institute has a great analysis of the anti-energy bill. And instead of pushing failed ethanol , a real push should be oil shale. And Heritage also has a large number of research papers dealing with the huge oil reserves we have here in America that the anti-energy bill prevents us from using (go to the Heritage Foundation, go to the "search" function in the upper right hand corner and type in "oil" and click on any one of the drop down menu items. Incredible!). This anti-energy bill makes about as much sense as a law preventing a home owner from using his own fire extinguisher to put out a fire in his house.

I got a fever,

I got a fever! And the only prescription is...

http://www.savagepacer.com/node/5460

(Thanks to Nancy at the Savage Pacer)

"Stop the threat"... and the subtlety of agenda reporting

I just heard that the autopsy on the Colorado shooter has determined that the fatal shot was from his own shotgun and was self-inflicted. I've been reading all the screeds from Prairie Pravda and the AP attempting to subtly besmirch New Life Church and the security guard (Jeanne Assam). What her employment history has to do with her ending the threat, I have no idea. And that the AP just had to let us know that New Life Church was once led by Ted Haggard and why Pastor Haggard resigned from his position? Once again, nothing that adds to the story in any way, shape or form.
That being said, I'll lay better than even odds that as the left will tell us that Assam didn't kill the shooter and that somehow, that has significance how? Again, SO WHAT? Assam ended the threat. Murray was hit multiple times from her firearm. He was not able to continue his shooting. Again, she ended the threat. She saved many, many lives. As I've stated before, the only way these shootings end is with the shooter running out of ammunition (saving one last round for themselves) or the arrival or perceived arrival of matching or superior force.
Matching force met Murray.
Threat ended. Good on Assam and armed civilians.

Cars driving themselves again??

Three headlines up on the Strib today about car crashes:
1. "Two killed in crashes in Stearns, Carver counties"
2. "Close call with train and 2 drivers"
3. "SUV fails trying to pass on 2-lane road, hits oncoming car and kills other driver".

I of course read the third one wondering how the SUV was able to pass without a driver.

After reading discovered that the SUV did indeed have a driver, you find out in the fourth paragraph.

I am sure this is part of the Stribs SUVs are evil campaign.

The SUV driver was treated for non-life threatening injuries, the other driver died.

Because one was an SUV, no because, according to the state Patrol,
Both cars air bags deployed.
The SUV driver was wearing a seat belt.
The dead driver was not.

Maybe a more useful headline would have been:
Head on crash, driver not wearing seatbelt dies.

But that doesn't fit the template.

Best Political ad so far

So, I have concerns about Mike and fiscal issues, but still this is a great ad.

Quote of the week

"As always, I rely on the jury system"- Orenthal James Simpson

Why I envy my Mom in Oklahoma

She has a someone acting like a real conservative, her Senator, Tom Coburn.

For many years I have stated that there is no such thing as a moderate Republican.
The term moderate is usually used by some who claims to be a Fiscal Conservative but is a social moderate. But to be a social moderate you have to ignore the limits on the constitution and usually end up supporting some social program (SCHIPs being the latest) that is a massive growth of government.

I would also argue that you can not be a Social Conservative and a Fiscal moderate.
To wit, I quote from TheHill article on Sen. Coburn.

The greatest moral issue of our time isn’t abortion, it’s robbing our next generation of opportunity,” Coburn told reporters at a breakfast meeting Thursday at the National Press Club. “You’re going to save a child from being aborted so they can be born into a debtor’s prison?

While they are not moral equals, death is much greater than debt. I say it is wrong to be compassionate for life. Our government and elected officials should respect all those inalienable rights given by our creator: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To continue the reckless spending, make us slave to the state and attempt to steal our liberty.

More bad News for Norm

Our favorite RINO Senator has always been a big fan of limiting production of US Petroleum sources while spending (wasting) Billions of dollars on Bio-Fuels.

Well now a new report calls Biofuels a crime against humanity.

"A United Nations expert has condemned the growing use of crops to produce biofuels as a replacement for petrol as a crime against humanity."

Now while I usually ignore the UN and their weekly "this is a crime against humanity", but what will our liberal Senator do. Save the Farmer or Save the children.

Democrat Dream of Amnesty Act Dies Again - Thank You Norm, for letting us see you as the RINO you are

Let's all call Norm Coleman's campaign office and let him know how much we appreciate him standing up for Harry Reid and supporting the "Dream of Amnesty" Act.

Let him know how his many votes are motivating you this election.

Let him know how much you appreciate his making it clear where he stands - with you or with the Democrats.

Call Norm's Senate office before a vote, but be sure to let his campaign know how you feel after the vote - I know I did.

There you will find sweet, understanding campaign staffers who will treat you on the phone just like Norm treats us in the Senate.

Norm's Campaign contact info:
Contact Us:
Phone: (651) 645-0766
Fax: (651) 233-2405
Email: info@colemanforsenate.com

Tol ya

I've written before about the dollar, euro and oil. Nixon in the early 70's took America off the gold standard as Europe was draining out gold reserves (The Bretton Woods Agreement allowed nations to redeem their dollars for gold. It also established the World Bank and the IMF-International Monetary Fund) . He promised Saudi Arabia that if they allowed oil purchases were acceptable only in dollars, that the U.S. would defend the Kingdom of Saud. Hence, the creation of the "petro-dollar" and all oil was purchasable in dollars only. In other words, we switched backing the dollar with gold to oil.BTW,this is/was one of the sticking points with Osama bin Laden, that a hard commodity, oil, is exchanged for printed paper. Saddam Hussein and Iran have offered to sell their oil for euros. The problem with the dollar is, was, has always been the profligate spending of the U.S. Congress. And how the Congress affords all this spending it is to print more money via the Faustian bargain with the Federal Reserve. The problem is that as the Feds printing press runs, the dollars that reside in Saudi Arabia, China, et al, become worth less and less. So, then the dollar holders will begin to look for something that will hold its value. The alternatives seem to have been chosen: gold and euros.
This is a six+ year graph of the cost of gold delineated in dollars per ounce (compliments of Kitco):
















This graph shows that the dollar has, since January 2000, lost well over half its value (a dollar in 2000 is now worth $.43). A quick gold vs. dollar seminar: in 1907 a $20 gold piece and a $20 bill (silver or gold note) both bought a man's suit. In 2007 a $20 gold piece will still buy a man's suit. A $20 Federal Reserve note may buy the tie.
In other words, people don't trust the dollar.
And the proof? These headlines:
"Canadian Dollar Trades Even with U.S. Dollar for First Time Since 1976"
" Saudi Arabia Fears U.S. Dollar Collapse" (This headline and story is critically relevant).
"Euro Trades at $1.40 US-Highest Ever"
"Gold Hits Highest Level Since 1980"
"Oil at All Time High"- This is a parallel to gold's price, both being a commodity that holds value.
And it's all about Congressional spending and exporting our debt. And it's not Congress' fault. All those Representatives and Senators did all that spending because we sent them to do it. They did at our behest.
Well, at your behest.
I've always been an extreme fiscal conservative, a strict Constitutionalist (spending only according to Article I, Section 8 along with the 10th Amendment in the Bill of Rights [aka Amendment X]). Unfortunately, I'm on the same ship where you've elected reckless captains and crew for decades.
This a chickens home to roost story.
We'll see if we can dodge the bullet one more time.
But, I doubt that we'll learn the lesson, though it's been taught many times for many years.
My friend Thomas Brewton has an excellent post about the Federal Reserve, the dollar and the current true economic situation here in America. (Also be sure to read "The Unwritten Constitution")

Jim Ramstad to Retire - I say, good riddance.

While others are talking that we should show some respect for Jim Ramstad, I say good riddance.

Before redistricting I was unfortunate enough to be in his district.
He never was a Republican, did not share our core beliefs and whenever a vote was close you could depend on him to sell out the party and more importantly our ideals.

Some say he was better than a DFL candidate in that position.
B.S.

He was never there when it mattered.
And he blocked the way for a true Republican (can't challenge and incumbent) so when the conservative wave crossed the nation, Jim was there to help sink it.

And now it looks like some in CD3 want more of the same.

Either you think what you believe is good and right or you are just a politician and want to win.

But what is the point of "winning" if the result for you and the country are the same.


So long Jimmy boy, and don't let the flap on the big tent hit you on the way out.

Greenspan

When I read Drudge yesterday and saw the red screamer headline that Greenspan said the battle in Iraq was about oil, it definitely caught my attention. My thoughts were that in a sense the importance of oil may have been in the mix in some way. I mean, admit it, if it weren't for oil, if oil had never been found in the Mid East, would the Royal House of Saud ever been visited by any world leader? Would the sheikdom of Dubai be able to buy a new Bentley every minute instead of saving up goat skins for a decade to buy a used Chevy? The only reason Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Dubai are even blips is because of oil. And that gave the Arabs and Aryans (Iranians are not Arabs) money and power. So, because of a radical like Hussein and the delicate balance of Mid East politics, Greenspan has a point.
Nixon in the early 70's took America off the gold standard because Europe was demanding gold for dollars as promised in the Bretton Woods agreement. Nixon then promised the Royal House of Saud that if they accepted only dollars for oil, the U.S. would protect the sheikdom. So we created petrodollars and substituted oil for gold to back the dollar. As the world bought oil from the Mid East, and the Saudis determined what happened in all the oil economy and what price would be paid, the dollar again was the world's reserve currency. Saddam Hussein was threatening to accept euros for oil and thereby upset the petrodollar balance. Iran was threatening to do the same at the March oil bourse. Add that to a tyrant that was also willing to invade Kuwait and mix in radical mullahs and there is a recipe for worldwide financial collapse. All because of oil.
So, Greenspan's comments are accurate, but taken out of context. Captain Ed has more on this this morning.
As I searched the internet to find articles, I came across a few that reminded me that the Royal House of Saud is doing a very, very dangerous balancing act. It is seen as corrupt and decadent and is the target of Islamic radicals. And in my next post, I'll tie decadence in the House of Saud and Norm Coleman's stance on bio-diesel.

Reflection vs Refusal

"Why are we so amazed when fig trees bear figs?"
This is a quote from a men's book of meditations that I used to read about twenty years ago. I have used it often, especially when it comes to leftists and their radical bastard offspring. They are so precisely predictable. They may use different words or terms, but they are predictable.
I predicted that just as General Petraeus spoke his last sentence, as he was breathing his last comment, as he ended his report, that within milliseconds, if that long, the " I Love America Only When It's Defeated" lefties would predictably shoot from the lip. They would not even attempt to review, reflect and/or analyze any of the Petraeus/Crocker report let alone all any or all the collateral material that came with their reports. And I was not disappointed. General Petraeus hadn't even hit the door push-bar when Senator Klobuchar stated " It's time to chart a new course.... to get our troops out of harm's way.". No analysis, just the typical knee jerk "If Bush is for it, I'm against it!"
Micheal Yon said in NRO that he was asked by many journailsts what he thought of the Petraeus report, before it was delivered. His reply, after stating that the report will have to come out first:" Even this coming week, after listening to the general’s testimony before Congress, I will have to read the report and transcripts numerous times, sleep on the information, and reflect on it in light of my own observations of the situation in Iraq. The outcome of the war in Iraq, and to some extent the greater War on Terror, will largely depend upon our decisions today. The outcome is too important for quick words. Many will try to be the first to report on the report, and their reports likely will be the most unreliable." And which one of the left will be the first to truly do even a minimum,realistic analysis of the report?
The left does not see this conflict in its true light. They never will. It is not the War in Iraq. It is the Battle in Iraq Against Radical Muslim Jihadis. The left sees this as their Big Arrow against GWB. It is here that they can strike a hard blow against GWB and Republicans. This very same thought process took hold of the left in 1974-1975 when they saw Richard Nixon weak from Watergate. The Senate, led by Senator "Water Safety Instructor " Kennedy withheld funds to put the US military back into Vietnam as the Treaty of Paris required . And in the process condemned over 2,000,000 to death so Kennedy and his ilk could score points on Nixon. And those very same people that played politics with Vietnamese and SE Asian lives are now willing to proclaim that very same death sentence not only to the Iraqis and the Middle East but also to us, Americans. These are the same lefties who never consider consequences. The never see beyond the immediate or beyond their feelings. These are the same lefties who always need, require and force others to pay the consequences of someone else's actions. This is an enemy that has no geo-political goals. The VC (Viet Minh) and North Vietnamese wanted the Japaneses, then the French, then the Americans out of their country.The Islamists want us either Muslim or dead. As I wrote last year on the five year anniversary "Never forget who the enemy is. He wants you dead. He wants your neighbor dead. Your wife, husband, children,parents dead. He does not and will not discriminate. There are no negotiations, no compromises. There are no innocents. Not a one. And you will not be spared or shown any mercy."This enemy will kill the lefties- first. The lefties have no concept, none at all of this battle or what it is truly about let alone this war.
And so, they sing their Bush Derangement Syndrome National Anthem "I'm Against It" and risk condemning America and Americans and the West to the whims of radical Islam.
You hear it in their bleatings about Petraeus, their refusal to reflect.
And it bodes ill and danger to all. To all.
Oh and do something guaranteed to drive the left into frenzied deliriums: pray to The Lord:
"Father God, hear our plea. Thank you for keeping us safe. Thank You for those who stand a watch and walk the walls and risk all to keep us from harm. Remember them so kindly Father.We ask that You do not treat us as we so richly deserve. We have forgotten You. We have broken each and every one of Your laws. We chase after other gods. Bring us back to You. For Jesus sake. And in His name, the name that is above all names."

WWHD?

OK kids- let's see how well you've learned your lesson from Professor Amendment X:
It's 2014 and President Hillary Clinton is mercifully in her last two years as President. Chelsea Clinton is running for President hoping to out legacy/dynasty the Kennedy's.
The leading Republican candidate has just found that he has received $1,000,000 in illegal contributions from a front man from a foreign country who has spread the money around so it appeared that a large number of individuals made the contributions.
Now, think for a minute...WWHD? (Imagine or hum Final Jeopardy tune at this point in the exam).................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................
Pens down.
Answers please:
No, I'm sorry, That's incorrect. She would not do what the Republican administration will do...nothing. Remember that she's a Democrat and knows how to fight. The Republicans are, well, Republicans and are still looking for a pair.
The correct answer is: after having the Department of Justice flay the Republican alive, she would have the IRS become the Republican candidate's new proctologist. She would hamstring the guy badly. Not take him out. Just make sure that instead of running for office all he could do was hobble.
GWB has a golden opportunity for the Republicans here with an easy underhand pitch that he could easily hit into the parking lot if not the next county. But, he won't.
The Republicans have learned nothing. Nothing.
David Horowitz in his book "The Art of Political War" basically states that Republicans think of politics as the Oxford Debating Club. The Democrats see it as a knife fight.
GWB, surprise me for once.
"Carpe Commodum"

Photo of the Day

Why are these people smiling?

Photo by Jeff Wheeler Star Tribune September 12th 2007

Because they, and Governor Pawlenty, just gave away $157,000,000 of your hard earned money to people who made a mistake by living near flowing water. And they feel real good about themselves and their compassion... at your cost.
Now, go out and work just a bit harder today, and well tomorrow...oh, and the next few days to make up the difference to your families. And maybe ask the question "How does something happening to someone else give them a right to my hard earned money?"

One day, two days, three days, a week...or more

Help me with this: It took over two weeks for Hillary to decide to give back Bundler Hsu's $850,000? Any good reason she didn't do it the same day she found out? Couldn't she get in touch with Zipper Gate Willy's focus groups any faster than that? Seems she needs to work on her communications manager to snap it up a notch.

Ah the subtlety of the left

Bernard Goldberg has a chapter in his book "Crazies to the left of me, Wimps to the right" where he talks about how he noticed that the MSM always puts a slant on the news. You'll hear the term "so called" a lot: the "so called" war on terror, the "so called" tax cuts. Or you'll hear "hard core" or "radical conservatives" but will hear "democrats". Their go to for the womens view on any Republican proposal is almost always a representative from NOW. You know the drill.
Well, here is the headline for Clinton Illegal Campaign Cash Contributor Norman Hsu: "Democratic fundraiser apprehended in Colorado". Not a single Clinton reference. Not a headline "Criminal fugitive Democratic fundraiser apprehended in Colorado". Not "Criminal fugitive Hillary Clinton fundraiser apprehended in Colorado". Nope. Just a benign headline about another dirty foreign (Asian) and illegal cash contributor to the Clinton machine.

Moonbats, Kool Aid drinkers and true believers

The Prairie Pravda editors seemed fit to put the story about the 24 hour incarceration of jurisprudence corrupter Mike Nifong under the category of "Sports". Don't ask me why.One day for destroying the lives of three innocent men and their families. Anyhow, outside of the jailhouse, there were a group of Nifong supporters:" A small group of supporters accompanied Nifong with signs reading, "We believe in your integrity and goodness.''" I had to read that small , one sentence paragraph at least twice. "Integrity"? "Goodness"? What on earth do these people drink? I thought that lead water pipes were illegal. Obviously not. And the real dangerous aspect of this is that these people are eligible to vote...for another Nifong. Yah wanna bet that they have Edwards, Kerry or Clinton bumper stickers aplenty?

A question of culture(?)

OK kids, here's a question:
Which domestic culture gives a need for innocent and frightened citizens to ask this question and get this answer?
"What can be done about people blocking and loitering in the streets/traffic?
This type of conduct has increased significantly over the past 2 years. The behavior is often intended by the offender show dominance or defiance. The police are aware of the problem and have placed a higher priority of addressing the behavior. Officers will typically stop and direct the person(s) to the side of the road. There are a number of laws that officers will use if necessary to gain compliance."
Give your answer in comments. I'll maybe give hints later on if you get stumped.
The answer comes later in a video from a local television report.

So what am I doing about it.

Here is hoping Fred can remind people what a conservative believes.
I know I will be tuning in on the 6th
(But no party at the house yet, still recovering from summer remodel)

Now that Summer is over, I hope to be contributing more to both local politics and the blog.

And speaking on contributing - Here is a chance to send a message

The Republican future

I've blogged many times about the runaway train on the tracks headed right for us called the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare. $70,000,000,000,000 in current dollars. And expanding at an additional $4,650,000,000,000 a year.
In 20 years, I'll be close to 80 years old. And our children will be in their 30's to 50's. And they will have to eat/fund that debt. And not a bite at a time. It will set the stage for intergenerational war. As Baby Boomers, we have demographically gone through the decades like a pig through a python. We have paid for our parents and grandparents Social Security and Medicare. And we expect that our children will pay for us. And what will they do when we force them to pay exorbitant payroll taxes to fund Medicare? They will vote for those Senators, Congressman and Presidential candidates that promise to cut benefits. We will vote for those who won't cut benefits. And there are more Boomers than Gen X''s. And when the tax burden crushes our children and grandchildren, where will their incentive be to work?
The reason I bring this up is an article from Real Clear Politics. Albert Hunt from Bloomberg tells of the upcoming problem with the 18-29 year old voters that will hit Republicans. The younger voting block is diversity oriented. They see differences as cool. They see Republicans as standing against "diversity". The Republicans have a brief window of opportunity. In that 20 years I mentioned, the least of the young voters worries will be gay marriage , immigration and "diversity". It will be that huge payroll tax bill that stares them eyeball to eyeball.
Mike Osskopp, Congressman's John Kline's District Director warned that the old concerns of "guns, gays and babies" didn't and won't resonate with voters anymore.
I tried to recruit a bunch of 18 year old voters at our precinct caucuses in 2006 with the recitation of the SS and Medicare liabilities. They were elected CD2 delegates, but never showed up. Alas.
If these voters are deserting the Repubs, that means they are/will vote Democrat. And the lefties will never, ever vote to address SS/Medicare. And so the young voters will be voting for their own destruction.
There is a window here. But it is narrow and very, very short. Maybe a decade at most. Maybe.

In a week

In a week, there will be two events that will get my attention: It will be the 6th Anniversary of 9-11. And General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will give their progress report to Congress about the surge in Iraq.
And I'm waiting to see how the critics will respond. Their minds are already made up. For them, the Petraeus/Crocker report is wasted time that the Congressional critics and their cohorts in the MSM could be using to fine tune their barbs.
You know what I'd like to see? A critic come away from the report and say "General Petraeus has given an on point and convincing report. I'm persuaded to support the surge." or something to that effect. But that would mean a conversion to intellectual honesty and logical and reasoning discernment. I suspect, that as chameleons, they will change from criticizing the military aspects of the surge to criticizing the Iraqi political aspects of the surge, completely forgetting or failing to mention that the political changes are and will follow the military success. (Read Micheal Yon to see how this is occurring [and his dispatches "The Ghosts of Anbar" parts i-iii]) .
And the prospects for seeing three full moons in a month have a higher probability of happening than any intellectual honesty on the part of the critics.
P.S.: Michael Barone has an article titled "Surge Politics" that's a good read.

My sides are delightfully pained by the inclusion of the trusted document for your reading by confidence

I came across this from The People's Cube:

Hillary Employs Email Experts From Nigeria

By Hillary 8/29/2007, 12:10 pm

========================================================

> FROM: MS H.R. CLINTON
> TO: UNDISCLOSED PROGRESSIVE RECIPIENT
> SUBJECT: CONFIDENTIAL DONATION PROPOSAL USD$38.5M
>
> Dear progressive! I solicit your confidence in this transaction, this is by virtue of its
> nature as being utterly CONFIDENTIAL and TOP SECRET. I am Ms H.R. Clinton,
> a battered wife of an impeached president of a certain
> country sometimes referred to as Les Etats-Unis d'Amérique.
> I came to know of you via Daily Kos member list in my search for a reliable
> and reputable person to handle a very confidential transaction which
> involves the transfer of a huge sum of money to my campaign fund
> requiring maximum confidence.
>
> Norman Hsu, an honorable businessman who is wanted by authorities for
> failing to do a three year prison stretch based upon a no contest plea to
> grand theft swindling charges, needs to donate to my presidential campaign
> quid pro quo so that I could pardon him in case I collect enough money to
> become the next president of the aforementioned country.
>
> But the amount that Hsu and I had agreed on in this transaction exceeds the limits
> on campaign contributions from individuals. The political climate and legal issues
> preclude us from receiving the entire amount from Mr. Hsu as a lump sum donation.
>
> In order to avert this negative development, myself and some of my trusted colleagues
> here at the campaign headquarters now seek for your permission to have you stand
> as a donor to my election campaign, so that the fund, USD$38.5M would be
> subsequently transferred and paid into your bank account. All documents,
> including a personal will making H.R. Clinton beneficiary and proves
> to enable you get this fund have been carefully worked out and we are
> assuring you a 100% risk free involvement as long as you stay away
> from Ft. Marcy Park or train tracks.
>
> Though I know that a transaction of this magnitude will make any one
> apprehensive and worried, but I am assuring you that all will be
> well at the end of the day after
> I become president of Les Etats-Unis d'Amérique.
>
> For your assistance, your commission would be 15%. 10% has been set aside
> for expenses while the rest would be for myself and my colleagues for
> campaigning purposes in my country.
>
> If this proposal is OK. by you and you do not wish to take advantage of the trust
> we hope to bestow on you, then kindly get to me immediately via my e-mail
> furnishing me with your most confidential telephone, fax number ABA routing,
> account # and exclusive e-mail so that I can forward to you the relevant details
> of this transaction.
> Thank you in advance for your anticipated co-operation.
>
> Ms. H.R. Clinton
>
> Chappaqua

As I heard on Fox News, the MSM has told much, much more about gay sex public bathroom practices than we or anyone ever wanted to know. And they have comfortably, and quite predictably ignored a real scandal. Just as they did one Presidential administration ago. (I googled "Bill Clinton campaign contribution scandals" and got over 1,600,000 hits. And I had forgotten about about the tainted blood scandal where Slick Willy was at the center of close associates selling AIDS and Hepatitis C tainted blood from Arkansas prisoners).
Ah, yes. History past is history present.

The government , the left and failure...again...still...

I was traveling on Monday and heard part of the Mark Levin Show on KTLK (100.3). He referenced a report on poverty that was coming out Tuesday. In the report, statistics on the poor were highlighted. There were a few that caught my attention. The first was that the average number of hours worked in a year by a poor family was 800. That averages out to 16 hours a week (assuming a two week vacation from a part time job). The report states that if the family would be supported by 2,000 hours of work a year (the equivalent of one full time job), that would lift 75% of all children out of that "official" poverty. One adult working a full time job. One way out of poverty:Work. Who knew?
The second point was the high illegitimacy rate of poor families. In other words, absent fathers. If the mothers would marry the fathers of their children,again, nearly 3/4 of poor children would be out of official poverty. Another way out of poverty: Gonna have children? Get married. Wow. Another stunner!
The report also highlights the horrendous situation regarding immigrants (both legal and illegal). One quarter of the poor are either first generation immigrants or the children of first generation immigrants.
And the report goes on to point to the failed "War on Poverty"programs that have failed and failed miserably. And these programs have, in fact, increased poverty and misery. All the while taking money from working Americans who were then not able to fully provide for their own families with the money they rightfully earned.
Notice that both of the points (work and having children outside marriage) are decisions. Decisions that have bad consequences. The vast majority of the poor have made bad choices. Or they choose not to do what would eliminate their poverty and misery. And why should their bad choices give them a legal claim on my and your money, time, life? And then those claims on your money breed more (pun intended) of the same of what those programs were supposed to reduce or eliminate.
And then we have this from Pravda on the Mississippi "A Most Glum Report for State's Families". What the commies on the Strib's editorial board fail to mention is that for the most part poverty is a consequence of real bad decisions. Their pronouncement:
"Ever since President Lyndon Johnson declared a war on poverty in 1964, experts have debated the effectiveness of government antipoverty programs. But most analysts agree that a strong economy and a robust job market are the most powerful tools to cut poverty. Which is why it's troubling that the Minnesota economy seems to be doing so poorly now for low- and middle-income residents." No. It's not troubling at all. Well, at least not to rational and logical thinkers. The poor keep doing the same things that put them in poverty to begin with. They don't work enough and they keep having children out of wedlock. It's right there in the report that Prairie Pravda cites. Oh, and there is no debate. The Great Society's "War on Poverty" is a failure. A multi trillion dollar failure. End it.
But, once again, as I blogged before about the excuses lefties proffer as to the reason their programs fail:
1. Not enough money has been spent.
2. Not enough time has been allowed.
3. The right people haven't been in charge.
4. The program needs to be modified (read expanded).
So, the three best choices to stay out of poverty?
1. Graduate from high school. Get a diploma.
2. Get a job. Any job. Establish a work history.
3. No children outside of marriage. Period.
All studies show that if these three points are kept, there is a better than 80% chance that you'll escape poverty.
Oh, and by the way, the poor in America are the envy of the world.
And speaking of subsidizing bad decisions and choices: we go to the Feds and Katrina. Oi vay! Talk about high priced lunacy and subsidizing that lunacy.
The feds have put over $127,000,000,000 of your money into putting people right back into the same place that floods and gets hit with hurricanes. The annual GDP of Louisiana is $141,000,000,000. And people are still complaining that $127,000,000,000 extra dollars or the equivalent of nearly a full year's GDP is not enough because THEY haven't had enough money spent on THEM.
Yup. The Feds. This is Big Government on parade. This is exactly what to expect from government. The exact same results would be achieved no matter who's in the White House or which party is in control of Congress. The bureaucrats march and regulate on...and on and on.
New Orleans is a sink hole. What did these people not know about a city that sits on the Gulf of Mexico, has hurricanes, is at sea level and has Lake Ponchartrain right next door to the north (use Google Earth and see where part of the storm surge goes)?
And the Feds use an obscene amount of your money to move people right back to neighborhoods that flood!?!? And at $127,000,000,000 of federal money (and this does not count all the private money and donations and volunteer work that has also gone into Sink Hole, Louisiana) there are still whole neighborhoods that are still the same as two years ago, only drier. And so,I'll ask the same question again: why do these people in New Orleans have a legal claim on our money because of their bad decision to live in a flood prone area that is in hurricane territory? And remember, these are the same people who elected Ray "Chocolate City/School Bus" Nagin as mayor.
A little story. A friend of mine from church told me about his Dad. His Dad is a trucker. So, he and his fellow truckers, in a display of real (not fake like Social Justice) Christian charity, went to New Orleans, on their own dime, to help rebuild. They were directed to an ethnically non-diverse neighborhood. As these Minnesotans worked, the homeowners sat in lawn chairs and watched. The next day when my friend's father and his fellow truckers showed up, the lawn chair sitters asked for the workers' lunches as the sitters didn't have lunch. The workers immediately gathered up their tools and came back to Minnesota.
And this from Anti-Strib as far as what FEMA and the Feds should really be building in New Orleans (The Big Chocolate Easy):




















The left and lunacy.
Evidence large and clear of Einstein's pronouncement that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Or, in other words, if you keep doing what you've always done you'll keep getting what you've always got.