What is the legitimate basis for funding a memorial to a drunken philanderer who couldnÂ’t even get the presidential nomination of his own party when he challenged the worst president of the last half-century?

More than one out of every five dollars of the $126 million Massachusetts is receiving in earmarks from a $410 billion federal spending package is going to help preserve the legacy of the Kennedys.

The bill includes $5.8 million for the planning and design of a building to house a new Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the Senate. The funding may also help support an endowment for the institute.

Let Teddy raise money for his own memorial project – or better yet, let him leave some of his daddy’s bootlegging money to finance the project. Or even assign the rights to his soon-to-be-released memoir to a foundation creating the program.

And that $5.8 million? Spend it on establishing the Mary Jo Kopechne Institute for the Study and Elimination of Drunk Driving.

Posted by: Greg at 09:59 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 173 words, total size 1 kb.

How bad are Chicago Public Schools? Pretty bad, my friends. My buddy Hube linked to a piece showing that 4 of the 25 worst public schools in the nation are found in Chicago. And what's more, 14 of the worst 100 schools are part of the Chicago Public School system.

Who has been running these schools? Obama buddy Arne Duncan, who everyone describes as a great reformer. I think results show that isn't the case. But he's been brought in to do for the students of the entire nation what he did for kids in Chicago.

Call it one more example of Obama-class incompetence.

Posted by: Greg at 08:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

Now that the Obamabots are in charge at the Justice Department, law enforcement agencies that actually seek to enforce the law against criminals deemed "PC-protected classes" will be subject to witch-hunt investigations.

Federal authorities have told a high-profile Arizona sheriff that they will investigate his department over allegations of discriminatory practices and unconstitutional searches and seizures.

The U.S. Justice Department said in a letter delivered Tuesday to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio that the investigation will focus on alleged patterns of discrimination based on a person's national origin.

Arpaio told The Associated Press that he will cooperate with the Justice Department.

Got that -- going after illegal aliens will get you investigated for discrimination based upon national origin now that the Obama Regime is in power. After all, the overwhelming majority of illegals in Maricopa County are from a single country, and so any attempt to see to it that our nation's immigration laws are enforced will automatically produce enough of a statistical disparity to get you investigated. Watch for other law enforcement agencies to quit making such arrests because of this move.

Posted by: Greg at 03:19 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 191 words, total size 1 kb.

Gotta love Charlie Rangel when he gets asked about his illicit financial activities.

And to think that there was once a day when it was generally acknowledged that good government was the business of every citizen – and that elected officials were servants of the people, not peons to be brushed aside by an arrogant aristocracy.

And then there is another corrupt Democrat – this one in Chicago. Alderman Ricardo Munoz doesn’t think much of the rights of citizens to petition their government seeking a redress of grievances.

Your office, pendejo? I do believe that is the peopleÂ’s office, paid for with taxpayer money. Seems to me that youÂ’ve forgotten that all power in this nation comes from the people, and that you are their trustee, not their master.

Is it any wonder I call it the Jackass Party?

Posted by: Greg at 12:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 149 words, total size 2 kb.

Not, of course, that we should be surprised by such things – but it is impossible to reconcile the “unshackling of science” by funding fetal stem cell research with this position, which could be seen as equally “anti-science”.

President Barack Obama says human cloning is "dangerous, profoundly wrong" and has no place in society.

Obama made the comments as he was signing an executive order that will allow federal spending on embryonic stem cell research.

Some critics say the research can lead to human cloning. Obama said the government will develop strict guidelines for the research because misuse or abuse is unacceptable.

He said he would ensure that the government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction.

Why shouldn’t we clone? Moreover, why should government restrict cloning? After all, isn’t that a question better left to science and not politics, just like experimentation on fetal stem cells? And if not, why not – and how do you differentiate between the two sorts of scientific experimentation?

Posted by: Greg at 04:38 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 182 words, total size 1 kb.

Rather than smoothing over relations with one of our closest ally, Barack Obama has managed to insult the UK, not to mention British PM Gordon Brown personally.

Sources close to the White House say Mr Obama and his staff have been "overwhelmed" by the economic meltdown and have voiced concerns that the new president is not getting enough rest.

British officials, meanwhile, admit that the White House and US State Department staff were utterly bemused by complaints that the Prime Minister should have been granted full-blown press conference and a formal dinner, as has been customary. They concede that Obama aides seemed unfamiliar with the expectations that surround a major visit by a British prime minister.

But Washington figures with access to Mr Obama's inner circle explained the slight by saying that those high up in the administration have had little time to deal with international matters, let alone the diplomatic niceties of the special relationship.

Allies of Mr Obama say his weary appearance in the Oval Office with Mr Brown illustrates the strain he is now under, and the president's surprise at the sheer volume of business that crosses his desk.

A well-connected Washington figure, who is close to members of Mr Obama's inner circle, expressed concern that Mr Obama had failed so far to "even fake an interest in foreign policy".

Yeah, you read that right -- the Obamateur is surprised that he actually has work to do as president, and he is therefore overwhelmed and exhausted by it less than two months into his presidency. What's more, his aides don't know what to do and apparently don't care -- therefore insulting a major world leader.

As I asked earlier in a different post -- will there be a United States worthy of the name in 46 1/2 months when the next president is scheduled to be sworn in?

Posted by: Greg at 04:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 329 words, total size 3 kb.

Maria Conchita Alonso about her former co-star, Sean Penn:

"He's an amazing actor. I can't take that away from him," she said of Penn, who worked with her on the 1988 cop film Colors. "It's just that he has no clue at all what's going on in Venezuela. He's been praising Hugo Chavez, who is a dictator and a killer. He should shut up about what he doesn't know."

Will Sean Penn listen to an actual Venezuelan about the nature of the Venezuelan dictator? Or will he and the rest of the Hollywood Left continue to figuratively fellate the man who has made Venezuela less free?

Posted by: Greg at 04:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, it certainly seems that way to me.

President Obama declared in an interview that the United States was not winning the war in Afghanistan and opened the door to a reconciliation process in which the American military would reach out to moderate elements of the Taliban, much as it did with Sunni militias in Iraq.

While Barry Hussein may think that this is just like what was done in Iraq (by the way -- didn't he argue that we lost in Iraq?), thee is a big difference. In Iraq, the Sunni militias were not the major enemy we faced -- our nation's major concern by that time was with the al-Qaeda forces there -- and our president declared that we were in it to win it.

But in this case, the commander-in-chief has come out and said that the US is losing the war and wants to reach some sort of agreement with the very group we are fighting -- the very group that harbored Osama bin Laden and appointed them the head of their military at the same time he was preparing to attack the US on 9/11. In other words, this IS negotiating with the major enemy to end a war that he has publicly stated we are losing. That, my friends, indicates that Barack Hussein Obama is preparing to negotiate from a position of weakness with those who side with al-Qaeda -- and presumably end our involvement in Afghanistan on their terms. That constitutes surrender.

So, my friends, I must ask -- will there be a United States worthy of the name in 46 1/2 months when the next president is scheduled to be sworn in?

Posted by: Greg at 04:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 292 words, total size 2 kb.

This time it is Rachel MadCow.

RACHEL MADDOW: "It is one thing to say, ‘I hope that this guy's proposed policies don't pass. I hope those don't become the policies of our country.’ But once they become the policies of the country, and they are designed to save us from this economic collapse, you ought to hope they succeed, unless you are hoping for your country to suffer worse in an economic collapse. I mean, actually rooting for the failure of your own federal government is pretty creepy."

Oddly enough, this was not her view when the president was George W. Bush. She actively rooted for him to fail – especially in Iraq. Now she wants to deny others the very right she claimed for herself not too long ago – the right to be viewed as more patriotic because of one’s opposition to the policies and personnel of the president.

Oh, and on a related note, God bless Ari Fleischer for this zinger.

Are you going after Democrat members of Congress for why they aren't distancing themselves from Keith Olbermann?

That would never happen – such a denunciation would kill any Democrat’s chances among the crucial “tin-foil hat” constituency of the Democrat Party.

But we’ve seen that before – one local Democrat Party official and liberal blogger publicly wished for the execution of our nation’s elected leaders, urged the lynching of Ari Fleischer AND received a long suspension from his NASA job over his violations of the Hatch Act, but is still embraced by his fellow Democrat leaders and local elected officials. I guess the standard is different when you are a liberal – after all, you are presumptively such a good person that illegal activity and calling for the murder of your political opponents is simply seen as exuberance rather than anything to be condemned.

Posted by: Greg at 01:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 325 words, total size 2 kb.

Once Obama’s inflationary policies kick in, your wages may increase dramatically. Unfortunately, your purchasing power may not – and may drop. But you’ll still be rich according to Dear Leader Obama. Here’s why.

With a guarantee that only those making more than $250,000 a year will see a tax increase it is probably a good time to talk about something that has not been a problem for decades: Bracket Creep.

Bracket creep is the result of a progressive tax system in an inflationary environment. In a progressive tax system the rate at which income (or whatever the basis for taxation is, but for this discussion it is income) is taxed at a greater rate as income goes up. The increases are incremental in a discreet number of brackets, of which there are currently six. The net effect is that the last dollar earned is taxed at a greater rate than the first dollar earned as long as enough is earned to advance out of the lowest bracket.

So don’t worry – your rising salary will make you rich. And your government will therefore be able to take a large bite of your paycheck.

Posted by: Greg at 01:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 203 words, total size 1 kb.

If bishops carry through on this, will it lead to the repeal of a law designed to force participation in abortion by religious groups and medical professionals morally opposed to the taking of innocent human life?

A proposed bill promising major changes in the U.S. abortion landscape has Roman Catholic bishops threatening to close Catholic hospitals if the Democratic Congress and White House make it law.

The Freedom of Choice Act failed to get out of subcommittee in 2004, but its sponsor is poised to refile it now that former Senate co-sponsor Barack Obama occupies the Oval Office.

A spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said the legislation "is among the congressman's priorities. We expect to reintroduce it sooner rather than later."

FOCA, as the bill is known, would make federal law out of the abortion protections established in 1973 by the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe vs. Wade ruling.

The legislation has some Roman Catholic bishops threatening to shutter the country's 624 Catholic hospitals — including 11 in the Archdiocese of St. Louis — rather than comply.

Speaking in Baltimore in November at the bishops' fall meeting, Bishop Thomas Paprocki, a Chicago auxiliary bishop, took up the issue of what to do with Catholic hospitals if FOCA became law. "It would not be sufficient to withdraw our sponsorship or to sell them to someone who would perform abortions," he said. "That would be a morally unacceptable cooperation in evil."

Bishop Paprocki is a top-notch canonist with a firm grasp of the nuances of moral theology. He is exactly correct on this point.

But if 13% of all hospitals in the country close down, meaning that the 1/6 of Americans who use them are forced to fall back upon pubic or other private hospitals, that might just force the repeal of a law that is, in part, designed to force hospitals that donÂ’t provide baby-slaying services to do so.

I’ve long urged that Catholic bishops and religious orders (as well as non-Catholic Christian schools) do something similar to move the country forward on the issue of school choice. Simply announce failure to provide students with their fair share of the tax funds designated for their education will result in the closure of their schools – and the resultant flood of these students into the public schools. The shortage of space and increased costs associated with accommodating these students would quickly lead to the public demanding voucher programs for all students as the cheapest and easiest way to deal with the issue. Likewise, the closure of all these hospitals will make the policy choice crystal clear – allow religious groups to operate hospitals in accordance with their religious principles or accept the financial burden that goes along with driving them from the field.

More At Clayton Cramer's Blog, Hot Air. Athanasios Christian Ministries, Southern Appeal

Posted by: Greg at 01:42 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 491 words, total size 4 kb.

Yep, itÂ’s Wexler, taking illegal donations from non-citizens to finance his campaign.

After he proposed to expand the visas available to foreign models so they can work in New York, Rep. Anthony Weiner's mayoral campaign took contributions from some cat walkers from abroad.

Problem is, the models aren't allowed to donate because they're not US citizens or permanent resi dents.

Remember – compliance with the law is the responsibility of the campaign.

But what is particularly interesting is that at least one of the donors has no recollection of making a contribution at all. DidnÂ’t stuff like this happen in New York City during HillaryÂ’s campaign?

Posted by: Greg at 01:38 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 120 words, total size 1 kb.

IÂ’m not a huge fan of Joe the Plumber, but W3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUT">this is certainly one lawsuit that I whole-heartedly support.

A conservative group has filed a lawsuit on behalf of "Joe the Plumber," accusing three former Ohio officials of violating his privacy and right to free expression when they gathered his personal information in a records search.

The federal lawsuit filed Thursday by Washington-based Judicial Watch says Samuel J. Wurzelbacher suffered emotional distress, harassment and embarrassment as a result of the search. It seeks unspecified punitive damages.

The lawsuit names Helen Jones-Kelley, who resigned in December as director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, and two assistants.

Given that the state investigation already found that Jones-Kelley and her minions acted inappropriately, this should be an open-and-shut case. I wonder whether or not the suit references the Ku Klux Klan Act, given that these three public officials acted “under color of law” to violate the rights of Wurzelbacher to exercise his rights under the Constitution to speak freely and participate in the political process?

Posted by: Greg at 01:29 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.

And donÂ’t tell me you canÂ’t see the resemblance.

Word is that he may have finally ‘fessed-up to the dying Elizabeth Edwards.

Posted by: Greg at 09:18 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.

Coming soon to a radio near you in the event that the Obama Regime ever manages to bring back some form of the so-called Fairness Doctrine.

First, this bit from no-talent actress, no-brain talk host Roseanne Barr.

ohlmert you lie:

you say that twelve rockets were fired into israel since the end of the "war" (ethnic cleansing). Not one Israeli was hurt or killed by these rockets, and now you say you are going to go back and kill more palestinians to teach them a lesson!!!

I think rockets are being fired by your own sources, since less than ten israelis have been killed by them. You are bullshitting the world as you pocket money made from arms sales, along with bibi and your agents in Hamas. step down all men in power!

What this stupid cow doesn’t recognize is that the terrorists from Ham-Ass have taken credit for the attacks themselves. So not only is she a rabid anti-Semite, but she is also frighteningly ignorant – which is why the Left adores her.

And then there is this Leftist, who has now decided that dissent is most definitely not Patriotic in the Age of Obama – and makes it clear how dissenters should be dealt with when the president has a D after his name.

STEPHANIE MILLER, LIBERAL TALK RADIO HOST: I guess that is what Nancy and her friends want. As long as you have a place to listen Rush on the radio -- if he fails we all fail.

LARRY KING: If his policies fail, he fails, right?

MILLER: Exactly. To me that seems treasonous. [...]

* * *

If I could say something tonight that gets me that kind of attention, like maybe Rush Limbaugh should be executed for treason. How about that?

Interestingly enough, Larry king had nothing to say in response to these comments – so it would appear that the suppression of dissent against Obama is just peachy keen in his book, too.

It actually makes liberal talk moron Ed Schultz look rather restrained by comparison.

Now if you watch Limbaugh with the sound down, the drugster, he looks like Adolf Hitler! His animation is amazing! It's, the parallel is so striking.

That’s right – don’t listen to the words, just watch the pictures in silence. That will let you confirm your pre-conceived notions. But as an experiment, you might try something similar with the sermons of your average black preacher – the animation is equally amazing. But of course, it would be completely unfair to make a comparison to Hitler on such a basis – just as Schultz’s comparison is unfair.

Posted by: Greg at 09:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 452 words, total size 3 kb.

The people have spoken – and the California Legislature has now said that they don’t give a rat’s ass what the people have to say.

Both houses of the state Legislature passed resolutions Monday endorsing the legal effort to overturn California's same-sex marriage ban, just days before the issue goes to the state Supreme Court.

The resolutions passed along party lines, 18-14 in the Senate and 45-27 in the Assembly, with several members absent in both chambers.

The evidence that certain officeholders in the state are clearly not in sync with the voters – or with the basic principle of popular sovereignty that underlies the entire American system of government.

"We're talking about a radical revision to our Constitution," said Sen. Mark Leno, the San Francisco Democrat who sponsored the Senate resolution. "Do we have a constitutional democracy in California or do we have mob rule, where a majority of Californians can change the Constitution at any time?"

Excuse me, Senator Leno, but I’d like to remind you that the at the very heart of the notion of constitutional democracy is the belief that the power of government comes from the people, and that their grant of power to the government comes in the form of a constitution. The people have a right – indeed, they have an obligation – to alter or abolish a particular constitutional framework so as to establish a government that is responsive to their will so as to secure their essential liberties. To argue that permitting Californians to change their constitution at any time is antithetical to constitutional democracy is itself antithetical to constitutional democracy, as it places that document and the government it establishes above the people – essentially arguing that the people are the creature of the document and the institutions it establishes rather than the other way around.

Let me say this – reasonable people may disagree about the relative merits of gay marriage and Proposition 8. Reasonable people may even disagree about the question of revision vs. amendment under the California Constitution. However, no person can agree with Senator Leno’s words unless they fundamentally reject the words of Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, . . . — That. . . Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it. . . .

I’ve excerpted this quote in this form to provide the reminder that among the truths declared to be self-evident by the founding generation of the Republic was that the people are the only valid source of government power, and that it is the height of constitutionalism for the people to change a constitution, not a rejection of that principle. To argue otherwise is anti-constitutional – and, dare I say it, approaches being un-American.

Posted by: Greg at 09:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 525 words, total size 3 kb.

And another example of a story of unethical behavior by a politician that will lead to absolute silence from the Houston area's local self-appointed ethics watchdog because the perp, Ron Kirk, is a Democrat (and one that he supported for high office).

Ron Kirk, nominated as U.S. Trade Representative in the Obama administration, owes an estimated $10,000 in back taxes from earlier in the decade and has agreed to make his payments, the Senate Finance Committee said Monday.

The committee said the taxes arise from KirkÂ’s handling of speaking fees that he donated to his alma mater, and for his deduction of the full cost of season tickets to the Dallas Mavericks professional basketball team.

The disclosure made the former Dallas mayor the latest in a string of top-level Obama administration appointees found to have underpaid their taxes, following Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Tom Daschle, who withdrew as candidate for Health and Human Services secretary. Nancy Killefer, ObamaÂ’s pick for chief performance officer, also bowed out amid tax problems.

It might be easy to give Ron Kirk the benefit of the doubt if this was not one more example of a pattern of unpaid taxes by a prominent Democrat appointed by Barack Obama to high office. And given the high ethics standards that Obama claimed he was going to bring to the executive branch, I don't see how Kirk can be allowed to survive.

But then again, after putting a blatant tax cheat like Tim Geithner in charge at the Treasury Department, I guess anything is possible.

Posted by: Greg at 09:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 272 words, total size 2 kb.

If you want an example of how "hate crime" laws make for unequal protection of the law, here is a perfect example.

Assemblywoman Pat Eddington (D-Medford) is introducing legislation that would require law enforcement to treat any crime committed by a man against a woman as a potential hate crime.

Backed by fellow legislators and advocates for women's groups such as the National Organization of Women, Eddington said that recent reports of especially brutal crimes against women — including a Buffalo-area woman allegedly beheaded by her estranged husband — call out for for more prosecutions that make use of the gender category of New York's hate crimes law.

Eddington's legislation would mandate that officials apply the hate crime standard, which comes with harsher sentencing guidelines, before lesser charges.

Got that? ANY crime committed by a man against a woman. They will start out with the assumption of a hate crime.

Notice -- crimes by women against men will not get that assumption.

What next? Any crime committed against a minority by a white will be presumed a hate crime until proven otherwise?

Such legislation creates a two-tiered justice system. Thanks to Assemblywoman Pat Eddington for making the matter crystal clear.

Posted by: Greg at 09:08 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 212 words, total size 1 kb.

If you ever needed proof that there are too many government regulations and too many government officials enforcing them, this is it.

A Cedar Rapids group will do a symbolic tea dumping into the Cedar River on Saturday because state officials wonÂ’t let them use the real thing.

An anti-tax group wanted to pitch in real tea like the Bostonian revolutionaries opposed to EnglandÂ’s tea taxes.

Tea, although natural and quite tasty, is considered a pollutant that canÂ’t go into a body of water without a permit, said Mike Wade, a senior environmental specialist at the DNRÂ’s Manchester field office.

“Discoloration is considered a violation,” Wade said.

Where are Sam Adams and the Sons of Liberty when we really need them?

And where are the tar and feathers?

Posted by: Greg at 02:42 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.

Having already alienated large segments of the GOP base, I guess Gov. Rick Perry has decided that the surest path to reelection is to start digging for dirt on his primary opponent.

Gov. Rick Perry's re-election campaign has been asking Dallas City Hall for information concerning rival Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and her husband, a signal that the campaign could turn personal.

Ray Hutchison is a prominent bond attorney who has represented public agencies for decades.

Perry has promised a vigorous campaign if Hutchison challenges him in the March 2010 Republican primary, as she has said she will.

"We're interested, as most Texans would be, in how Senator Bailout's husband's bond business has benefited from her job in D.C.," said Perry campaign spokesman Mark Miner, using a nickname the campaign has applied to the senator for her support of the federal government's initial financial-industry assistance plan.

Ray Hutchison told the Dallas Morning News the Perry campaign has filed such open-records requests all across the state and that their fishing expedition was "stupid." He said he has not benefited from his wife's position as senator.

"I don't know what she does. I don't communicate with her staff," he said.
Hutchison's campaign said the request shows Perry intends to run a negative campaign.

"On the heels of some bad poll numbers, Rick Perry is taking the low road for an election that's 13 months away," said Rick Wiley, Hutchison's campaign manager. "Republicans don't want that kind of campaign, but he's already showing his hand and decided to go down that road. It's vintage Rick Perry."

IÂ’m struck by several things in the article.

First, the distinct lack of class shown by Perry spokesman Miner. I’ve yet to see the Hutchison campaign refer to the incumbent as “Governor Goodhair” or any other derogatory nickname.

Second, I’m struck by the sleazy innuendo. Miner states that they are checking to see “how” Hutchison’s husband benefited from her work as a Senator, not if it had benefited. This is an effort to imply that Ray Hutchison’s business has benefited, and that any benefits have been illicit. If Perry wants to make such a claim, let him produce some evidence to back it up.

Third, IÂ’m rather amused by the sort of stuff that has been requested.

The request, dated Feb. 24, asked Mayor Tom Leppert's office for copies of all documents in which Kay Bailey Hutchison's name appears with the words bond, bonds, funds, funding or project.

It also asks for any letters or correspondence to Hutchison or her office seeking federal action or support and any "letters of acknowledgment and thanks."

Good grief, the Perry campaign is even after thank you notes! ThatÂ’s a sure sign that we are seeing the campaign of a desperate and pathetic incumbent who wants to cling to power by any means necessary.

Posted by: Greg at 02:19 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 481 words, total size 3 kb.

You know, since President Obama has said he opposes reviving the policy, it should be a no-brainer for all the loyal Democrats in the House of Representatives to join with the Republicans to keep speech free on radio and television.

The Senate has barred federal regulators from reviving a policy, abandoned two decades ago, that required balanced coverage of issues on public airwaves.

The Senate vote on the so-called Fairness Doctrine was in part a response to conservative radio talk show hosts who feared that Democrats would try to revive the policy to ensure liberal opinions got equal time.

The problem, of course, is not one of denying equal time to liberals – if people wanted to listen to liberal talkers such shows would flourish. The problem is that programming in the broadcast industry is based upon what viewers and listeners want to see and hear. Liberal talk radio has failed time and again, even when it has had big bucks placed behind it. Even in liberal Washington, DC, a liberal talk station folded due to lack of listenership. Just as it would be nuts to require that hip-hop stations play a certain number of country and classic rock songs each day no matter what the listeners want, it is equally crazy to tell talk stations that they must program shows that their audience does not want to hear. And rest assured that if the Fairness Doctrine were to return, the next step would be to insist that there be balance in how the unpopular liberal shows were placed – no running Ed Schultz and his ilk at oh-dark-thirty while placing the top-rated national shows (all conservative) during prime listening hours. The end result would be stations abandoning the talk format – and the AM band left barren.

Better to slay this beast now to stop the ideological censorship of the broadcast media.

Posted by: Greg at 10:39 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 345 words, total size 2 kb.

I could have sworn that Barack Obama and his supporters told me that this constituted torture, and that such a policy was unworthy of the best traditions of the United States.

CIA Director Leon Panetta, in his first meeting with reporters. . . , also said that while CIA interrogations will have new limits, President Barack Obama can still use his wartime powers to authorize harsher techniques if necessary.

I don’t remember which distinguished blogger pointed out that promises by Barack Obama all appear to carry an expiration date. Well, this would certainly appear to be one more example of that. And while I generally agree with the policy shift, I can’t help but be struck by the inconstancy that the new chief executive is showing. Just call it one more sign of the fact that Barack Obama really needed a few more years of seasoning to gain the experience and wisdom to be an effective, competent president – especially when it comes to dealing with issues of national security.

I’m curious, though – will Barack Obama ever come out and apologize for his criticism of George W. Bush over a “torture” policy that he has now adopted himself.

And I wonder – since Obama has adopted the Bush policy that detainees outside the US in places such as Afghanistan have no rights under the US Constitution, will he do the right thing and ship the Gitmo jihadis to Afghanistan?

Posted by: Greg at 10:32 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.

You know, the sort that the media won't cover because it is articulated by "mainstream" liberal journalists like Chris Matthews and Helen Thomas. Both decided to make cheap shots at Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal over his Indian heritage.

First Matthews, whose comment may well be seen as the least egregious of the two. After years of seeing customer service jobs relocated to India by companies, is it really appropriate for a political commentator to state that having the nation's only Indian-American governor give the response to President Obama constitutes "outsourcing"?

They had to outsource the response tonight, the Republican party. They had to outsource to someone who had nothing to do with Congress because the Republicans in Congress had nothing to do with the programs he was talking about tonight or the record he referred to.

Aside from the racist slam, it is interesting to note that Matthews is ignoring the fact that Jindal was a member of Congress before winning election as governor.

And then there is Helen Thomas. The malignant old bat decided to yuck it up by making a "Slumdog Millionaire" joke.

“Bobby Jindal was ‘pitiful,’ Helen Thomas tells film crew, right before making a ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ crack.”

Yeah, I know -- the film is topical. But if the Left really wants to argue that the recent chimp cartoon in the NY Post is racist, let's use the same standard across the board. Where's the outrage?

UPDATE: Looks like liberal talk show host Mike Malloy decided to turn the American-born Rhodes Scholar Bobby Jindal into Apu the convenience store clerk.

Posted by: Greg at 11:33 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.

Words from Bill Ayers.

I don't regret anything I did it to oppose the war. It was -- I did it to oppose the war. I don't regret it.

Remember -- this is the man who helped launch the career of the current President of the United States. Do you really feel comfortable with Barack Obama making policy for the War on Terrorism?

Too bad Alan Colmes wasn't so keen to get this sort of admission before the election.

Posted by: Greg at 03:14 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.

1 The news media, how's that for a misnomer, did everything in their power to keep the voting public unaware of anything which would mar the supposed pristine aura of Obama. Anything which came close to revealing ObamaÂ’s attachment to home grown terrorism was quickly labeled as racist remarks or kook fringe ultra conservative rumors rather than doing any real exploratory journalism which would have uncovered Obama for the danger he is to the America which our founders tried to protect through the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Posted by: T F Stern at Tue Feb 24 17:00:21 2009 (Ruh11)

2 comment4, lindsay lohan breasts, ccnx, miley cyrus naked, %(, miley cyrus naked, =))), jessica biel pictures, 100963, adrienne bailon nude pics, vflsgj,

Posted by: adrienne bailon nude pics at Thu Oct 8 07:50:08 2009 (JhPAt)

3 online bachelors degree education, jennifer aniston nude, ztmfee, carmen electra nude, cvkd, carmen electra pussy, 00348, hayden panettiere nude, 614625, lindsay lohan hot, rbqcz, jennifer aniston sexiest gallery, 8-[,

Posted by: kelis sextape at Fri Oct 23 04:25:57 2009 (5Jc/8)

4 ministry of education, megan fox wallpaper, jrkc, ashley tisdale sex, 492065, ashley tisdale sex, %), katy perry sexy, =-((, miley cyrus pics, 854,

Posted by: carmen electra gallery at Wed Oct 28 14:20:30 2009 (Oouas)

5 indiana department of education, kim kardashian naked, qgu, pictures of miley cyrus, isxe, megan fox gallery, hlospd, lindsay lohan hot, > ((, holly madison pictorial, twi, paris hilton video, tdaym,

Posted by: megan fox fhm at Mon Nov 2 11:57:53 2009 (Upsro)

6 health education, lindsay lohan breasts, 445, carmen electra fucking, 8[, lindsay lohan sex, =-O, nude megan fox, 551, katy perry sexy, lybgi, ashley tisdale sex, =-]],

Posted by: jessica biel pictures at Mon Nov 2 23:55:31 2009 (iN3lv)

7 college education value, carmen electra fucking, =(((, holly madison photos, 22447, lindsay lohan breasts, =]], megan fox nude pics, 956457, jessica biel pictures, 92659,

Posted by: kim kardashian naked at Fri Nov 6 22:52:02 2009 (7qd4D)

8 missouri department of education, kim kardashian ray j, =)), kim kardashian nude pics, 482815, megan fox pics, fjuycu, kelis sextape, 81266, jennifer love hewitt cleavage, opy,

Posted by: megan fox pictures at Sat Nov 7 12:50:26 2009 (x7cxm)

9 general objectives of physical education, kim kardashian naked, =-PP, miley cyrus naked, 18443, jessica alba exposed, 8DD, holly madison photos, qnfjv, kelis sextape, >:[[[, kim kardashian naked, 773217,

Posted by: miley cyrus pics at Sun Nov 15 07:05:50 2009 (KhDn+)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

It must suck to see your approval rate sink so dramatically in only a month.

For the first time since Gallup began tracking Barack Obama's presidential job approval rating on Jan. 21, fewer than 60% of Americans approve of the job he is doing as president. In Feb. 21-23 polling, 59% of Americans give Obama a positive review, while 25% say they disapprove, and 16% have no opinion.

At this rate, we're going to be seeing Obama reach lows that it took 7 years for George W, Bush to reach.

H/T Don Surber

Posted by: Greg at 02:52 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 103 words, total size 1 kb.

In direct contravention of the US Constitution (Article III, Section 3), Obama supporters want to bring back the Great Treason statute of King Edward III.

When a man doth compass or imagine the death of the King, . . . [he] ought to be judged treason which extendeth to the King and his royal Majesty. . . .

After all, how else can you explain the outraged call for investigations, governmental action, etc on the basis of a chimp cartoon that may or may not have been directed at Barack Obama (I’d argue not)? Especially when some overwrought partisans go so far as to claim that the cartoon was “inviting the assassination of President Obama"?

Posted by: Greg at 10:36 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 2 kb.

In a stunning reversal of all of the rhetoric of the Democrats and other leftists over the last several years, the Obama Administration has issued a report that indicates that the Guantanamo By facility used to detain jihadi scum meets the requirements of the Geneva Convention.

A Pentagon report requested by President Obama on the conditions at the Guantánamo Bay detention center concluded that the prison complies with the humane-treatment requirements of the Geneva Conventions. But it makes recommendations for improvements including increasing human contact for the prisoners, according to two government officials who have read parts of it.

I wonder when the apologies to George W. Bush will start.

Posted by: Greg at 08:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 122 words, total size 2 kb.

Looks like they are sticking the people of Chicago with a $1.74 million bill for his victory party on election night.

Chicago has yet to recoup the $1.74 million cost of President Obama's victory celebration in Grant Park -- despite a burgeoning $50.5 million budget shortfall that threatens more layoffs and union concessions.

"The Democratic National Committee has not yet paid us,'' Peter Scales, a spokesman for the city's Office of Budget and Management, said Thursday after questions from the Chicago Sun-Times. "We're reaching out to them this week."

Funny, mayor Daley was shocked and offended by suggestions that Obama and the Dems might stiff the city for the bill back in November. Guess we know who looks the fool now.

And it appears that Chicago isn't the only city stiffed by the Obama campaign.

Posted by: Greg at 01:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 139 words, total size 2 kb.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- Thomas Jefferson, The Declaration of Independence

In what may be among the more shameful moments in American diplomatic history, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the repudiation of a central premise of our nationÂ’s founding document on behalf of the Obama Administration during a visit to one of the most repressive states on Earth.

Human rights violations by China cannot block the possibility of significant cooperation between Washington and Beijing on the global economic crisis, climate change and security threats such as North Korea's nuclear program, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday.

"We pretty much know what they are going to say" on human rights issues such as greater freedoms for Tibet, Clinton told reporters traveling with her on a tour of Asia. "We have to continue to press them. But our pressing on those issues can't interfere" with dialogue on other crucial topics.

Because after all, we canÂ’t let little things like the Red Chinese regimeÂ’s wholesale violation of the fundamental rights due its citizens to interfere with other, more pressing matters.

No doubt the Secretary of State and the President she represents are hoping that this courageous reordering of American priorities will win them this yearsÂ’ Neville Chamberlain Prize for Achievement in Diplomacy and the Stalin Prize for the Advancement of Freedom.

UPDATE: As if on cue, the Chinese have begun a new crackdown on those who oppose the government and want to exercise those inalienable rights. That's what happens when you put human rights second.

More At Don Surber, Hot Air

Posted by: Greg at 06:22 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 314 words, total size 3 kb.

While I personally don’t find “Abort Obama” to be a particularly helpful bit of political rhetoric, I also recognize that it is not a death threat. So would most folks. Too bad some cops in Oklahoma are incapable of doing the same.

The police officers who stopped Oklahoma City motorist Chip Harrison and confiscated a sign from his car told him he has a right to his beliefs, but the U.S. Secret Service "could construe this as a threat against President Obama," according to the incident report released this morning.

The sign was quickly returned by the department, where higher-ups recognized the First Amendment violation that had occurred. But by that time the Secret Service was on his doorstep.

'The Secret Service called and said they were at my house," Harrison said.

After talking to his attorney, Harrison went home where he met the Secret Service.

''When I was on my way there, the Secret Service called me and said they weren't going to ransack my house or anything ... they just wanted to (walk through the house) and make sure I wasn't a part of any hate groups."

Harrison said he invited the Secret Service agents into the house and they were "very cordial."

''We walked through the house and my wife and 2-year-old were in the house," Harrison said.

He said they interviewed him for about 30 minutes and then left, not finding any evidence Harrison was a threat to the president.

I’m curious – what would they have done if they had found that Harrison was a member of a “hate group”? Membership in “hate groups” is not illegal – and expression of extreme political sentiments (and Harrison’s position is hardly extreme) is fully protected by the Constitution.

HereÂ’s hoping that this law-abiding patriot, who dares to dissent from the pro-abortion orthodoxy of the Obama regime, files a lawsuit of sufficient size to quell the tendency of some law enforcement officers to violate the right of Americans to freely engage in political expression.

Posted by: Greg at 12:24 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 346 words, total size 2 kb.

Shall we guess whether this latest revelation will lead to the Democrats to get this alligator out of Nancy PelosiÂ’s Corruptocrat swamp? Or will we instead see them pull John Murtha still closer?

A $100,000 fundraiser for Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) held last year at a big-game ranch in Western Pennsylvania may have violated campaign-finance rules, according to campaign-finance experts.

Campaign-finance records do not reflect any payments from Murtha to LBK Game Ranch or the companyÂ’s president, Bill Kuchera, for the use of the site for the Aug. 21 fundraiser. The records also contain no mention of in-kind donations from Kuchera to MurthaÂ’s campaign for the event.

Federal election law allows private citizens to host fundraisers at their residences, and campaigns are not required to reimburse the hosts for costs associated with these types of events or to list the donation of space as an in-kind contribution in campaign-finance records.

Under that rule, a married couple can host a fundraiser in their home and spend up to $2,000 without triggering any campaign-finance disclosure laws. Single people may spend up to $1,000 of their own money on these events.

But campaign-finance experts say the Murtha fundraiser poses serious questions and may have broken the law because the event was held at a for-profit corporation. LBK Game Ranch owns the 161-acre ranch where the fundraiser took place, county property records indicate, so Murtha would not be able to benefit from the residential exemption even if Bill Kuchera occupies a house on the property.

In other words, this is an illegal corporate contribution to the Murtha campaign. And given that Kuchera and his companies (which have been the recipients of tens of millions of taxpayer dollars through the connection to Murtha) are now under federal investigation related to the misdirection of federal funds for the purchase of the property where the illegal event occurred, it seems clear that Murtha needs to divest himself of all contributions raised at the LBK Game Ranch and all funds raised from officers and executives of Kuchera’s companies. Oh, yeah – and go to jail or pay a hefty fine for his end run around the law.

Posted by: Greg at 12:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 365 words, total size 2 kb.

I noted recently that liberals often feel that we are undertaxed and ought to pay more of our hard-earned income to the government. I pointed out that any liberal who feels that way has the option of writing a check to the US Treasury for the amount they feel they are immorally holding back under the current tax code.

But some states offer another solution. Consider Massachusetts, which includes the option for taxpayers who view the stateÂ’s tax cut earlier in the decade to be bad policy which immorally withholds needed resources from the state. All taxpayers need to do is check one little box on their return to use the older 5.85% tax rate instead of the current 5.3% rate.

What has been the result?

Here are the latest DOR numbers. As of yesterday, 640,783 individual taxpayers had filed their 2008 returns. Of those 640,783, exactly 293 opted to pay at the higher 5.85 percent rate.

Back me up on the math here. If 640,000 is the number, then 6,400 would be 1 percent, and 640 would be one-tenth of 1 percent. And 293 is less than one half of one tenth of 1 percent. So the percentage so far this year is one-twentieth of 1 percent.

Moonbats, I beseech you! Send in some more of the dough from PaterÂ’s trust fund. Otherwise, how can we offer alms to the neediest among us, like Deval PatrickÂ’s unemployed neighbor with the new made-up $120,000-a-year state job, and the Bulger hack whoÂ’s been collecting for 15 years and now was just handed a brand new $150,000 made-up state job?

Actually, the state claims the Beautiful People are twice as likely to check the higher-rate box this year, but two times zero is still zero. Even sadder is how much the commonwealth has collected from these 293 individuals - exactly $24,098.

Again, these are rough calculations, but I think that works out to just under $90 per filer. If $90 is .55 percent of your taxable income, you made about $18,000 in 2008.

What does this show? It demonstrates that liberals are not REALLY against tax cuts. They need that extra cash – after all, the Kennedy clan needs every penny it can find to keep up the family compound at Hyannis and a sailboat fleet that dwarfs the navies of some third world countries – while Joe & Jane Workingstiff can be counted upon to cough up a couple hundred extra bucks a year to pay for the needs of the non-working class and illegal aliens among us. It is YOU, average American, who these rich liberals want to see pay more so they don’t have to – as demonstrated by their unwillingness to cough up a miniscule 0.55% when they have both the means and the option to do so.

We’ve gotten quite a demonstration of how rich liberals really view taxes over the last several weeks. Geithner. Daschle. Rangel. I could go on, but you get the picture. They simply cheat and don’t pay. And when offered the chance to show the courage of their convictions by voluntarily paying taxes at a higher rate that they claim is appropriate and fair (and 40% of Massachusetts voters opposed the tax cuts in a 2000 referendum on the matter), they don’t put their money where their mouths and their votes have been. Let’s call it what it is – rank hypocrisy of the grossest sort. But then again, that’s what liberalism usually is.

Posted by: Greg at 11:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 592 words, total size 4 kb.

If this report is anywhere near true, it doesnÂ’t appear so.

[T]he White House is looking to install a small video or computer screen into the podium used by the president for press conferences and events in the White House. "It would make it easier for the comms guys to pass along information without being obvious about it," says the adviser.

The screen would indicate whom to call on, seat placement for journalists, pass along notes or points to hit, and so forth, says the adviser.

Even George W. Bush could competently deal with the media. Apparently Barack Obama cannot do so. In light of that, IÂ’d like to know who the real dummy is, which one really operates at the level of a trained chimp? After all, Bush may not have been as pretty as Barack or have been a polished orator behind a teleprompter, but at least he could answer questions from reporters without being programmed by someone else.

H/T BizzyBlog

Posted by: Greg at 02:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.

But then again, heÂ’s just another corrupt Illinois Democrat, so he may survive this.

U.S. Sen. Roland Burris has acknowledged he sought to raise campaign funds for then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich at the request of the governorÂ’s brother at the same time he was making a pitch to be appointed to the Senate seat previously held by President Barack Obama.

Burris' latest comments in Peoria Monday night were the first time he has publicly said he was actively trying to raise money for Blagojevich. Previously Burris has left the impression that he always balked at the issue of raising money for the governor because of his interest in the Senate appointment.

In comments to reporters after appearing at a Democratic dinner, the senator several times contradicted his latest under-oath affidavit that he quietly filed with the Illinois House impeachment panel earlier this month. That affidavit was itself an attempt to clean up his live, sworn testimony to the panel Jan. 8, when he omitted his contacts with several Blagojevich insiders.

It is now apparent that Burris was involved in a quid pro quo for the Illinois Senate seat that belonged to Barack Obama before his election as president. Rod Blagojevich seems to have managed to sell the seat right in front of us, to a guy with a reasonably clean reputation for an Illinois Democrat. Now it is pretty obvious that he was as dirty as the rest of them.

Of course, this could have been avoided if the Illinois legislature had taken action to require a special election for the seat – but the desire to avoid allowing the people of Illinois the option of electing a Republican prevented that from happening. Will the Democrat-controlled legislature do the right thing now?

Posted by: Greg at 01:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 297 words, total size 2 kb.

I suppose this shouldnÂ’t come as a surprise. Dick Cheney urged a pardon for Scooter Libby, one that George W. Bush chose not to give.

In the waning days of the Bush administration, Vice President Dick Cheney launched a last-ditch campaign to persuade his boss to pardon Lewis (Scooter) Libby - and was furious when President George W. Bush wouldn't budge.
Sources close to Cheney told the Daily News the former vice president repeatedly pressed Bush to pardon Libby, arguing his ex-chief of staff and longtime alter ego deserved a full exoneration - even though Bush had already kept Libby out of jail by commuting his 30-month prison sentence.
"He tried to make it happen right up until the very end," one Cheney associate said.
In multiple conversations, both in person and over the telephone, Cheney tried to get Bush to change his mind. Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in the federal probe of who leaked covert CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity to the press.
Several sources confirmed Cheney refused to take no for an answer. "He went to the mat and came back and back and back at Bush," a Cheney defender said. "He was still trying the day before Obama was sworn in."

Now looking at this situation, I see three reasons for this decision by Bush. IÂ’d like to comment on each of them.

1. Last minute pardons can be controversial and tarnish the reputation of the president who grants them. Consider not just Clinton’s Marc Rich pardon, but also the pardons issued by George H. W. Bush shortly before he left office. Why should he have opened himself up to even more controversy? Besides – why risk damaging the presidency with such a pardon?


2. Pardons, especially of recently decided cases, can be seen as undermining respect for the law and jury verdicts. As the governor of Texas, Bush had a very limited power to pardon – n part because the Texas Constitution is designed to keep the executive from running roughshod over the decision of juries. Bush carried that philosophy with him to Washington – and so while he may have modified some punishments he felt were excessive, he held back on pardons in general.


3. Accepting pardons keeps the recipients from clearing their names. Libby, like Border Patrol agents Ramos and Campeon, is appealing his conviction in an effort to clear his name. A pardon would have mooted the appeal – and acceptance of a pardon is generally seen as an admission of guilt. Libby remains free to work to clear his name in the courts – and to possibly receive a pardon by a future president if that effort fails.

Personally, I view the last of these as the most important one – and it is why I consider Bush’s decision not to issue pardons to either Libby or Ramos and Campeon to be the proper one, despite my belief that in both cases there was a grave miscarriage of justice in both the decision to prosecute and the decision to convict.

H/T Hot Air

Posted by: Greg at 01:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 529 words, total size 3 kb.

I’m married to a liberal Democrat who voted for Obama – and even she is outraged by this move by Senator Diane Feinstein.

Contrast Roosevelt's slyness with Sen. Diane Feinstein's recent comment regarding the secret location of the launch sites for Predator hunter/killer drones — “As I understand it, these are flown out of a Pakistani base.”

Sen. Feinstein's defense for discussing this highly sensitive information, that she was only repeating what she read in the papers, is greatly unconvincing.
It is true that the Washington Post first reported Predators operating out of bases in Pakistan, and the senator's flak catcher Philip J. LaVelle says that this report was what she was referring to. But there is a difference between making an allegation in a local paper and having the chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence confirm it. After all, her remark was “as I understand it,” not “according to the papers.”

The response of my wife, a loyal part of the Democrat base, to FeinsteinÂ’s revelation?

“My God, why did she say that? What is she trying to do? Get American soldiers killed?”

No wonder the Washington Times note in the editorial about the senator’s irresponsible comments that “[t]his incident reinforces the growing impression that when it comes to national security policy the Democrats are not ready for prime time.” My only question is what they mean by “growing impression”. After all, throughout the Bush Administration we saw example after example of Democrats showing a distinct lack of seriousness in regards to national security – and I’d argue that this has been true for at least the last four decades. Here’s hoping that they grow up soon, given that they now control the two branches that control our national security policy.

Posted by: Greg at 11:54 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 304 words, total size 2 kb.

After all, it would be an even bigger financial crisis to expect his close aides and appointees to take the same pay cut as all the little guys and gals who actually make the state of New York run.

Gov. Paterson has secretly granted raises of as much as 46 percent to more than a dozen staffers at a time when he has asked 130,000 state workers to give up 3 percent pay hikes because of the state's fiscal crisis, The Post has learned.

The startling pay hikes, costing about $250,000 annually, were granted after the governor's "emergency" declaration in August of a looming fiscal crisis that required the state to cut spending and impose a "hard" hiring freeze.

One raise was approved as recently as last month - when Paterson claimed the budget deficit had reached an unprecedented $15.5 billion.

Is it time to remove yet another corrupt Democrat from the Governor’s mansion in New York – this time for feathering the nest of his closest staff after taking back the raises of every other state worker?

Posted by: Greg at 11:51 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 202 words, total size 2 kb.

And these are all promises that, in and of themselves, would cost the government nothing and would likely lead to the savings of millions of dollars. But they would have meant changing the “business as usual” culture that exists inside the Beltway, so they have been thrown under the bus by Barry Hussein and his administration

7 Broken Promises in Record Time

1. Make government open and transparent.

2. Make it “impossible” for Congressmen to slip in pork barrel projects.

3. Meetings where laws are written will be more open to the public. (Even Congressional Republicans shut out.)

4. No more secrecy.

5. Public will have 5 days to look at a bill.

6. YouÂ’ll know whatÂ’s in it.

7. We will put every pork barrel project online.

And to think that these were all supposed to be things that would result in more open, honest government that would “restore” the confidence of the American people in their institutions. But now that he has the power, such things matter less than the wielding of that power.

H/T Sweetness & Light

Posted by: Greg at 11:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 196 words, total size 1 kb.

Just a reminder that the government has no money of its own – only the money it takes from the people.

The Seattle City Council is expected Tuesday to approve a surcharge on city water customers to help cover the cost of a $22 million court-ordered rebate to water customers.

In other words, the city of Seattle ripped-off the customers of its city-owned water system and was ordered to repay them for things which should have been covered by the cityÂ’s general fund. So rather than rebate the cash from the general fund (from which the initial expenditures should have been funded rather than by increasing water bills), the city will raise the cash by increasing the water bills!

I donÂ’t know about you, but this sure seems to me to be a deliberate thumbing of the nose at the court that ordered the rebates.

Posted by: Greg at 11:30 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.

Texas Rainmaker offers us a look at how a debate between the great Communicator and the second-rate neophyte currently in the Oval Office might sound.

I began blogging a bit over four years ago to find an outlet for my grief at the death of the greatest president of my lifetime. This just reminds me how far the country has descended away from its founding principles in the two decades since Ronald Reagan left office.

Posted by: Greg at 07:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.