It Just Gets Worse And Worse...

This would be comical, if it wasn't so sad and insulting already. The White House has now announced that since no Iranian diplomats have accepted the BBQ invite, they're not invited after all.

"As you all know many weeks ago the administration extended an invitation to celebrate the freedom that this country enjoys. not surprisingly based on what we see in Tehran, no one has RSVP'd," said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

"Understand that July 4th allows us to celebrate the freedom and liberty that we enjoy. I don't think it's surprising that no one has signed up to come given the events of the last few days. Those invitations will be no longer extended."

It's like a childish mixture of 'sour grapes' and rapid back-peddling. Ridiculous from start to finish.

Stand by for the attempt to blame this on the prior administration.

Nonvite?

Officials: Obama reconsidering July 4th invitations to Iran

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Obama administration is seriously considering not extending invitations to Iranian diplomats for Fourth of July celebrations overseas, senior administration officials tell CNN.

The officials said intense discussions on the issue were taking place, but the final decision had not been made.

The criteria, apparently being which way the wind blows.

I would like to see the unvitation, though. "We're sorry, but people are really mad that we asked you over for pork chops, so we're going to have to ask you not to come. You don't eat pork chops anyway, so hopefully this all works out. Love, B."

Stop Beating Your People and Come Over For Dinner, Already

A little late to the party...

ABC World News reported President Obama "escalated his criticism of Iran's crackdown on protesters opposed to the outcome of the election, but he skirted the issue of how the unrest might affect future relations with Iran." Using his "most aggressive language yet," Obama condemned the "iron fist" of the Iranian government "cracking down on those protesters, but he said it was too early to determine whether or not there would be consequences."

Still, it's hard to be too critical when you've already written a letter to Iran's Oppressor in Chief asking if we can be friends, and hoping they'll bring something yummy to your little Independence Day cookout.

Your Next Hummer

Will be from China.

Up Next: Credit Card Socialism

Yes, it's everywhere.

"It will be a different business," said Edward L. Yingling, the chief executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation's biggest banks. "Those that manage their credit well will in some degree subsidize those that have credit problems."

Oddly, but not entirely surprisingly, the Times helps spin this as a good thing, essentially accusing people who spend responsibly and carry little or no debt as the freeloaders.

"There will be one-size-fits-all pricing, and as a result, you'll see the industry will be more egalitarian in terms of its revenue base," said David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, which tracks the credit card business.

People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel and other perks.

"Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you're making out like a bandit," he said. "That's a third of credit card customers, 50 million people who have gotten a great deal."

Yes, the nerve of those folks, meeting their fiscal obligations like that. Shameful.

Not-So-Hidden Agenda?

Maybe the guy is just... you know... genuinely concerned about the safety of our country. I know I am.

"Papa Joe" Obama?

This guy takes it one step further, but admit it... you've all been thinking it.

To hell with the Constitution, the rule of law, the integrity of contracts and any other written limitation on their power – they will do anything they can get away with. Which means that we are all at risk, and the only reason some of us haven't been targeted is that Obama simply hasn't turned his attention to that particular sector yet. But he will – it's only a matter of time.

Tell It

Read this whole thing.

Excellent.

We Go Way Back...

Arlen might need to adjust his campaign message:

Specter has been citing his seniority on the Appropriations Committee as he hits the campaign trail as a Democrat.

"My senior position on Appropriations has enabled me to bring a lot of jobs and a lot of federal funding to this state," Specter said at a town hall meeting on Monday.

Over and over, he made a point of telling an auditorium filled with medical faculty and staff about the hundreds of millions of dollars he delivered to the Keystone State, thanks to the power he's accumulated in his 29 years in the Senate.

"Pennsylvania has a big interest in my seniority, a big interest," he said.

A day later, the Senate stripped him of that seniority. The resolution, which set out committee assignments for the entire Senate, was approved on a unanimous voice vote.

Now... how do we spin juniority as a good thing?

Skeptical

David Freddoso in the corner frets about a Senate race:

It's not a good sign that Sen. Richard Burr (R, N.C.) leads by just one point in a newly released survey and polls in the mid-30s (35-34) against a hypothetical opponent. But it's not as though he has high negatives. It's just that no one in the state seems to have an opinion of him:

Very Favorable – 14%
Somewhat Favorable – 19.2%
TOTAL FAVORABLE – 33.2%


Somewhat Unfavorable – 8.7%
Very Unfavorable – 8.7%
TOTAL UNFAVORABLE – 17.3%


NO OPINION – 38.7%


NEVER HEARD OF – 10.8%

I'm always skeptical of polls that involved "hypothetical candidates" for one reason: The hypothetical is automatically granted the best characteristics in the mind of the person being polled and carries none of the negatives. Recall that prior to the 2004 presidential election, Bush was getting killed by the so-called hypothetical candidate. When the grim reality of Kerry's campaign ousted the imaginary candidate...eh, not so much.

Couldn't Resist

Loosely translated, the new Icelandic Premier's last name means "secure your daughters."

Yeah... and:

Reading through the Wolf's post (immediately below) and the linked article, I think the very last sentence in that article applies to far more than this single topic:

In other words, the debate over which Obama presided was all about what would help Obama. The debaters obviously knew their audience.

This is an administration that began running for it's second term about a year ago, and hasn't allowed that goal to fall second to any other since. Fiscal responsibility, national security, and all the rest can wait for someone else's watch (and wallet).

It's beyond naive to think that any of the changes taking place are designed to benefit anyone other than politicians, chief among them the One. What will be left afterwards?

Very Telling

Over at Powerline, a good analysis of the administration's proposed release of interrogation details. I was struck by Mirengoff's update at the end:

UPDATE: One more point. In the Post's account those who argued against releasing details about interrogation techniques were no more high-minded than the other side. Their main argument seems to have been that releasing the information "could spark a national security debate with conservatives that could undermine Obama's broader agenda."

One can only speculate as to why the Dems would fear having that debate. Clearly, they must think that they would come out on the short end of it. If that's the case, aren't they tacitly admitting that conservatives are correct about national security?

I've Got An Idea

Obama calls for new era of energy exploration in America

How about lifting the ban on drilling where we know we can get oil RIGHT NOW?

"The nation that leads the world in creating new sources of clean energy will be the nation that leads the 21st century global economy."

Agreed. Somehow the US managed to lead the world in creating new sources of cleaner energy from the 19th into the 20th century without a lot of government interference.

But Obama's promise of preserving natural resources and jump-starting the economy ran smack into the reality of this economically struggling town about 30 miles east of Des Moines. The wind energy plant where he spoke, and received a tour beforehand, is a shadow of what it replaced — a Maytag Corp. appliances plant that built washers, dryers and refrigerators.

It employed some 4,000 in a town of 16,000 residents in jobs that paid about $30,000 to $40,000 a year.

Trinity Structural Towers has roughly 90 people working at the old Maytag site, a number that is expected to grow to about 140. Mark Stiles, a senior vice president at Trinity, which builds the towers that support wind turbines, said workers at his factory make about $17 an hour, plus benefits.

"This is a piece of the recovery, but we think it's a nice piece," Stiles said.

My wife planted some flowers on our deck. They look nice too.

Newton Mayor Chaz Allen said many are still trying to recover after the loss of Maytag in 2007.

"You know, 115 years with one company was a great thing, but it's a different world now," Allen said. "Our economy has to be diverse and we can't put all of our eggs in one basket."

Right. Let's keep replacing plants that make products that people want to buy and employ folks at good wages with stuff that serves little useful purpose. Maybe that can be your next campaign slogan, chief.

Obama was at the plant to highlight his energy proposal that has slowed on Capitol Hill. Skeptical Republicans and some Democrats from coal-producing states complain that it will increase costs for consumers, send jobs overseas and hurt businesses.

Probably because it will increase costs for consumers, send jobs overseas and hurt businesses.

He pushed personal responsibility, calling on every American to replace one incandescent light bulb with one compact fluorescent. The president also said the leaders of the world's major economies will meet next week to discuss the energy crisis.

Because empty symbolic gestures will save us all from the imagined "crisis."

For his remarks, Obama chose Iowa, second only to Texas in installed wind capacity.

And, for a day, Iowa was in first place in windiness, thanks to the president.

He announced his administration is creating the nation's first program to authorize offshore projects to generate electricity from wind turbines and ocean currents. The Interior Department on Wednesday issued the long-awaited regulations governing how leases will be issued for the development of such energy sources and how revenue will be shared with coastal states.

So drilling for oil on the coasts would be an economic catastrophe, but building a sea of wind turbines would not. Gotcha.

Obama said that wind could generate as much as 20 percent of the U.S. electricity demand by 2030 if its full potential is pursued on land and offshore. It would also create as many as 250,000 jobs, he said.

"As with so many clean energy investments, it's win-win: good for environment and great for our economy," the president said.

Horsehockey. Go read for yourself.

The rest just makes me tired. It's the same old nonsense about reducing greenhouse emissions predicated solely on Obama's feelings of self-aggrandizement. Honestly, if we could harvest that, our energy CRISIS would be over.

Arms Control

South Africa: Food Used as Election Weapon, Say Monitors

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: careful where you point that churro.

Help Wanted

Hackers Swipe Terabytes Of Sensitive Pentagon Data

Chinese Hackers Penetrate US Electric Power Grid

Maybe instead of inundating my online e-mail accounts with offers of hot stocks, pleas for international banking aid for African royalty, and advertisements for medical supplies of questionable effectiveness... instead of hacking cheap computer games, setting up dumb viruses and worms, and phishing around... maybe some of the technically-skilled and obviously bored netizens out there could step up, show some patriotism, and put a stop to the threat.
Who knows, maybe there are some good recipes for lead paint and toxic pet food to be scored while you're at it.

Rock Me Gently

President Obama has begun giving his remarks on the economy at Georgetown University.

In the prepared excerpts, Obama says steps taken so far are starting to show signs of progress but there is a hard road ahead. He cites a parable from the Sermon on the Mount about a man who built his house on a pile of sand and another who built his house on a rock.

The first man's house "was destroyed as soon as the storm hit," Obama says in the excerpts, and adds: "We cannot rebuild this economy on the same pile of sand. We must build our house upon a rock."

Biblical scholars may note one minor distinction, which is that the rock described by Christ wasn't too expensive to afford in the first place, and heavily mortgaged on the backs of future generations. The Bible actually urges folks to go the other way... to leave something for their grandchildren, rather than steal from them.

Also, the Rock in the Parable of the Two Builders is a metaphor for God. Not sure if the President is intentionally suggesting that his economic plan is divine, but it's interesting that he uses Scripture to make his point here, when some of his policies have flown in the face of that same source of instruction.

No word yet on the general population's reaction to B.O. using a Sunday School lesson to make his point. I'm fairly certain that if W. had made this reference there would have been much indignation and gnashing of teeth, so let's just stand by and see...

Tick Tock

Not everyone is excited about the timetable-driven withdrawal of troops from Iraq.

La Propaganda

Anyone else find it odd that N. Korea's news agency publishes their stuff in Spanish?

Out of Context Quote of the Day

Ross Stein, a geophysicist at the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park, California:

This physicist from Italy has every right to pursue something, as do the cockroach people. But we all have to subject our work to the same standards of review.

Score one for the cockroach people.

Global Gun Control

One wonders if the soundest strategy for complete nuclear disarmament is really to volunteer to go first.

[Obama's] strategy [is] based on the idea that if the United States shows it is willing to greatly shrink the size of its atomic arsenal, ban nuclear testing and cut off the worldwide production of bomb material, reluctant allies and partners around the world will be more likely to rewrite nuclear treaties and enforce sanctions against North Korea and Iran.

And that strategy might not seem quite as silly if there were any indication whatsoever that it could ever work. Sanctions are meaningless unless they're unanimous (sort of like test ban or emissions treaties), and of course they never are.

There is nothing that can be done to punish N. Korea while China's support continues unwavered. The U.N. is meaningless, and can't even muster a slap on the wrist, having no ability to slap. When has scolding a dictator from afar ever worked?

Groundhog Day

BBC News: Obama Nominee Admits Tax Errors.

The sad part is that this seems to apply to nearly all of them, so without reading the article you have no way of knowing who specifically is the subject this time.

Tax dodging: it's the new black. Hollywood will need to come out with a new lapel ribbon, etc.

Of course the rest of us are expected to not only pay our taxes, but pay more of them. Not because it's fashionable, but because the current Congress and the Obama Administration have given government the biggest allowance in history. Good times...

No One Knows What It's Like

I'm glad I have green eyes. Dodged a bullet there.

And the trees were all kept equal by hatchet, axe and saw

An interesting story about the state of government-run health care in Sweden and some good stuff in the comments also. This bit stuck out:

His doctor's request was denied because the drug was 33 percent more expensive than the older medicine. Mr. D. offered to pay for the medicine himself but was prevented from doing so. The bureaucrats said it would set a bad precedent and lead to unequal access to medicine.

Right, so instead it will lead to complete lack of access to everyone. Welcome to the perversity of the socialist paradise.

As We Say, Not As We Do

Biden to local officials: Don’t use stimulus money on stupid ideas

Apparently that right is reserved exclusively for the federal level.

Tarnish on the Golden Calf?

WASHINGTON (AP) — Cue the outrage. For months, the Obama administration and members of Congress have known that insurance giant AIG was getting ready to pay huge bonuses while living off government bailouts. It wasn't until the money was flowing and news was trickling out to the public that official Washington rose up in anger and vowed to yank the money back.

Why the sudden furor, just weeks after Barack Obama's team paid out $30 billion in additional aid to the company? So far, the administration has been unable to match its actions to Obama's tough rhetoric on executive compensation.

The story itself isn't surprising, but the fact that this spotlight is being shown into this until-now largely-overlook crevice by the Associated Press is.

Could the honeymoon be nearing it's end?

Sounds Familiar

Where have I heard this before...

Funes promised to create a broad government composed of FMLN members and outsiders like himself. He said he sought a close working relationship with the United States and vowed to champion the cause of El Salvador's poor. "This is the happiest night of my life, and I want it to be the night of El Salvador's greatest hope," he said. "I want to thank all the people who voted for me and chose that path of hope and change."

Stay tuned for El Salvador Spending.

Whatchu Talkin' Bout?

Willis?

Prediction: This will not catch on quickly. I still call that other one the Amoco Building.

Tell Me About "Islamophobia" Again

A 75-year-old widow in Saudi Arabia has been sentenced to 40 lashes and four months in jail for mingling with two young men who are not close relatives, drawing new criticism for the kingdom's ultraconservative religious police and judiciary.

The woman's lawyer told The Associated Press on Monday that he would appeal the verdict against Khamisa Sawadi, who is Syrian but was married to a Saudi. The attorney, Abdel Rahman al-Lahem, said the verdict issued March 3 also demands that Sawadi be deported after serving her sentence.

He said his client, who is not serving her sentence yet, was not speaking with the media, and he declined to provide more details about the case.

The newspaper Al-Watan said the woman met with the two 24-year-old men last April after she asked them to bring her five loaves of bread at her home in al-Chamil, a city north of the capital, Riyadh.

Al-Watan identified one man as Fahd al-Anzi, the nephew of Sawadi's late husband, and the other as his friend and business partner Hadiyan bin Zein. It said they were arrested by the religious police after delivering the bread. The men also were convicted and sentenced to lashes and prison.

The remarkable thing about this is that there is absolutely nothing remarkable about it in some parts of the world. But we're not supposed to associate it with the people who perpetrate it. That would be unfair.

Incredibly Dumb Thing Said

EJ Dionne writes in the Washington Post:

"Wall Street conservatives — well-represented on the financial cable shows and the Wall Street Journal's editorial page — are arguing that the stock market is collapsing because Obama wants to institute a relatively modest set of tax increases on the wealthy, starting in 2011.

"But these voices supported lower taxes on the rich when the economy was bad, when the economy was good and when the economy was so-so. They have no credibility."

Well, golly, so Dionne finds that conservatives consistently favor lower taxes and then extrapolates that this somehow damages their credibility. That is a gobsmackingly dumb conclusion to draw.

Eye of the Beholder

Flashback: 2006 Poll Showed Most Democrats Wanted Bush to Fail

That must have been before Nationalized Hopeandchange.

It's Called What?

"It’s the Obama bear market," said Dan Veru, who helps oversee $2.8 billion at Palisade Capital Management in Fort Lee, New Jersey. “We don’t know what the rules are in so many different areas the government is touching.”

Where is this market, you ask? And is anyone actually buying these Obama Bears? Or is this the new name for Chicago's NFL team? I don't know, but it seems pretty obvious that they no longer only poop in the woods. Check your retirement account.

Tough to Sell Out if Nobody's Buying...

Looks like the attempt to mask the cave-in to Russian demands over the missile defence plans as something other than a retreat has hit a snag.

Russia’s president Dmitry Medvedev on Tuesday rejected any suggestion that Moscow would “trade or exchange” in policies in order to dissuade the US from installing an anti-ballistic missile system near its borders in Eastern Europe.

Maybe because everyone already knows that there are "no preconditions" for Team O. They'll sit down with anyone. More worrisome is the possibility that they will give in to anyone willing to spend our money or weaken our positioning.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Before you know it, we may be paying for a fence to protect Russia.

Halo2

Seriously??

Bernanke Thinks Economy Could Recover Next Year; No One Believes Him

Some veiled optimism from the Fed chief, buried in a stack of doom and gloom.

If actions taken by the administration, the Congress, and the Federal Reserve are successful in restoring some measure of financial stability — and only if that is the case, in my view — there is a reasonable prospect that the current recession will end in 2009 and that 2010 will be a year of recovery," Bernanke said.

This statement indicates that we'll know within 6-9 months if the trillions of dollars of spending are stimulating the economy or just the Socialists. Huzzah.

By the way, if anyone's keeping score, the DJIA closed yesterday at its lowest point since October, 1997. The index closed at 9.625.28 on November 4, the day BO won the election. The Inauguration Day close was 7,949.09. Yesterday: 7,114.78 (down 735.63 or 9.3% just since the Spending Bill was signed into law).

Hope for change.

A.C.O.R.N. adds B. & E. to the résumé

Hey, they've gotta come up with some way to fill the days between election fraud activities.

Surgin', General

Obama commits 17,000 more US troops to Afghanistan

I don't necessarily disagree that the region needs to be stabilized, though I think the locals need to step up first.

However, my prediction is that this is part of a broader goal. I think the administration has doubts that the World Record Spending Spree will actually fix the economy in 3 years. It would be a big boost to locate and track Osama Bin Laden, and I wouldn't be shocked by an election-timed capture or elimination.

Of course, it shouldn't take that long to find ObL, seeing as how UCLA already has.

Halo Halo?

This about sums up how the media sees B.O.

And, no, the "faith-based initiatives" mentioned in the article do not include the Democratic Party. At least, I don't think they do.

Yeah, That's Not Really Going to Cover It...

Teaser/promo on FOXNews tonight:

Tomorrow: Is Uncle Sam going broke? Karl Rove offers his two cents!

More like close to $200 from every living man, woman, and child on Planet Earth to cover the cost of our brand new Pork Law.

All Yours...

Kudos to House Republicans for staying strong, and making a statement. This bag of pork rinds belongs to the Democrats, and so does the fallout. And hey, if it works, they get all the credit (though they currently seem desperate to "avoid" that credit).

Now if the Senate Republicans could only muster up the same spine...

Any Republican who votes for this bill should be evicted from the GOP, forthwith.

On a related note, USA Today has a "breakdown of the billions" and how they will be spent.

Painfully obvious is that the "highlights" don't add up to anywhere near $789,500,000,000. Why? Take a guess.

Layers Of Editors, Epic Fail

The woman who swam the Atlantic? Well, she didn't really so much "swim" it as "ride across it in a boat." She may have taken a dip now and then. Naturally, the AP reported Figge's "accomplishment" last week with nary a word of skepticism. Of course, just crunching the numbers, or even taking a casual look a the numbers, would have made the hoax obvious.

If they can be taken in so easily on a harmless sports story, how gullible are they when they are being willfully deceived elsewhere?

"He's Sending the Wrong Message"

"I voted for him. Now I'm wondering... I think I made the wrong decision."

This woman has my sympathies, renewed. She basically has to relive this tragedy all over again. Needlessly.

I wonder how many Obama voters feel this way.

Also

To you Obama-ites, this is your Vice President:

"But let me move for a second to what I was supposed to talk about. I was asked to talk about foreign policy. You know that old joke, you know, an expert is anyone from out of town with a briefcase? I'm out of town, but I don't have a briefcase, and I know a lot of you know as much and more about foreign policy as I do, but it's like that old joke, I hope you Texans aren't offended, but in Delaware that old joke about the Texan who said ‘I don't now much about art but I know what I like?’ Well, I may not know much about it, but I know what I think, and I know what I think we have to do."

Just rolls off the tongue, doesn't it?

Be Careful What You Ask For

To those who voted for Obama but oppose the stimulus package: What else did you expect from Obama and a Democrat-controlled Congress?

To those "conservatives" who voted for Obama hoping he would govern as a centrist: Having buyer's remorse yet?

Brother Can You Spare A Trillion?

President Obama is reminding anyone who will listen that voters sent him there to bring change.

Instead of bringing change, he's asking for it. And not just change, but paper money. Big bills. Probably non-sequential, unmarked ones. From you, and your kids, and their kids.

This bill is robbery, no matter how urgently you press for it. The guy in the bank with the ski mask has a sense of urgency about him, too.

The Stimulus Bill Comes Home

Unlike hundreds of other cities, however, Daley said Chicago won’t make its list public.

“Yes, we do, we have our list, we’ve been talking to people. We did not put that out publicly because once you start putting it out publicly, you know, the newspapers, the media is going to be ripping it apart,” Daley said.

Translation: I miss the good old days, when we could fatten up on tax dollars without anyone knowing.

I Hope America Is Paying Attention

Interesting article here about the Other White Meat Package currently festering in the Senate. It starts off with the usual about how anyone who doesn't blindly agree with Team O can't possibly be bipartisan:

Any hopes for bipartisan cooperation that President Obama once harbored crashed on Capitol Hill just three weeks into his presidency as Senate leaders strained Thursday to pass his $900 billion economic stimulus bill with the minimum necessary number of Republican votes.

Yawn. Saying it over and over doesn't change the meaning of the word. Then we get a reminder of just how bipartisan the spirit in Washington really is:

After threatening to go through the night and warning that the financial markets could crash in the morning, Senate majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada said a bipartisan group of 16 senators would look for more spending cuts in the bill today

Can you say "Politics of Fear" anyone?

But wait a minute. Maybe there is some bipartisanship happening there after all...

Even getting all the Democratic votes is touch-and-go. Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, who is working on an alternative plan with a dozen colleagues on both sides, said "I told them I'd have a tough time voting for it." Asked if he had threatened a no vote, he said, "As a governor, I never said I'd veto. I just vetoed."

Any Democrat voting against Obama on his first big initiative to battle what he called a "catastrophic" problem would deal a body blow to his presidency before it gets fully under way.

So we have Democrats thinking about voting "nay" right there alongside Republicans. Hmm. Folks from TWO parties... someone lookup "bipartisan" again?

And, just in case you were wondering what "partisan" could be, by contrast:

Senate Republicans have followed their House colleagues into full partisan warfare against the stimulus program. Attacking narrow pieces of the bill - from payments to Filipino war veterans to aid for honeybees - as wasteful spending and proposing wholesale substitutes that would slash taxes instead, a largely unified GOP has battered public perceptions of Obama's first major legislative initiative.

Imagine. Those loons thinking that sending money to foreigners overseas won't create jobs here in America. The insanity!

Skipping ahead, there's an interesting point about the real reason Team O is anxious:

GOP critics, and some Democrats, insist that the bill contains enormous new spending and that much of it will come too late to do any good. But that is by design.

For Obama, the stimulus is a giant opportunity not just to address the immediate economic downturn but to begin building the new economic architecture he envisions. He might never again get a chance to spend so much money, certainly not in one fell swoop.

Dare to dream.

Read the rest. Once you get past the whiny "'Everyone' asked for this in November" nonsense, it's actually entertaining, recapping how Hope and Change have yielded to Scorn and Squabble.

Numb3rs

The Washington Post shares Obama's defense of his "stimulus" plan:

President Obama mounted a staunch defense today of the economic stimulus plan now before Congress, chiding critics who want it to focus primarily on tax cuts and asserting that Americans rejected their theories in the November elections.

That's easy to say, and all well and good, but it implies a much bigger consensus than is factual. Remember, we talked about this here.

As a refresher, only 53% of people (who even bothered to vote) picked Obama and therefore by implication his policies. Voter turnout was under 57%, mind you. Simple arithmetic tells you then that of all Americans of voting age, about 30% chose The O. Only 3 in 10.

You could do the same math on any election of course, but I don't recall other Presidents throwing their victory in everyone's face so often. "Hey, you picked me... so whatever I do is your fault."

Yes, Obama won the election. That does not imply universal agreement with everything he does after that point, and he should stop pretending it does.

Barring that, it certainly doesn't extinguish the right of the other 70% to call B.S. every now and then.

Tom Daschle vs. Al Capone

Capone doesn't stand a chance.

New Math

If you add these pork rinds up, you end up with a number somewhere in the neighborhood of a quarter of a trillion dollars.

My fingers got tired, but I came up with something like $234,833,500,000.00

Yes, those are U.S. Dollars.

People Unclear on the Concept

So now the Chief Performance Officer is caught w/ dirty tax laundry.

What strikes me in addition to Michelle Malkin's appropriate question, is what kind of moron do they have vetting these candidates? I mean, isn't it a pretty simple thing to add a question to the job application?

[ ] Please check the box ONLY if you have paid all of your taxes. Seriously.

For the Record

Just wanted to make sure this is noted, before it gets spun, adjusted, and interpreted with "what he meant was...":

"I will be held accountable. I have got four years [first term in office]," the president said. "I think a year from now people are going to see that we are starting to make some progress, but there is still going to be some pain out there. If I do not have this [economic recovery] done in three years, then there is going to be a one-term proposition [will not be re-elected]."
- President Barack H. Obama, aired Feb 02, 2009 on NBC

Set your watches:

Come Again?

WASHINGTON - Americans overwhelmingly want Congress to pass an economic stimulus bill, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, but expectations are low that it will have much of an effect on their own finances or turn the economy around this year.

I'm struggling to reconcile this. People admit it won't help them, but they still want it? These must be registered voters (you know, those easily swayed by sound-bites and blind to trivial things like facts, math, or economics).

About two-thirds of those surveyed predict that a package would make the nation's economy a lot or a little better. When it comes to their own family finances, however, just over half say it either would have no effect or even make things worse.

So, isn't that an admission that this is essentially a socialist bill? It may or may not help the general public, will definitely benefit government, but will make individuals' situations worse? And yet, complacency and tacit approval to run things down the crapper seem to reign the day...

Take That, Chekhov

PUNXSUTAWNEY, Pa. — The world's most famous groundhog saw his shadow Monday morning, predicting that this already long winter will last for six more weeks.

Congressional Democrats and probably a few "Republicans" are determined not to take this lying down. An enormous "Spring Stimulus" bill, intended to "fix" this seasonal problem, is expected any moment. In addition to funding for items like heat lamps, tulip bulbs, and mandatory recalibration of all thermometers to always display 72°F, the bill includes vast provisions for "necessary investments" in free sunglasses and iPods for anyone registered to vote Democrat, art supplies for convicts, and a new law forcing anyone earning more than $50,000 per year to hand their first-born over to someone earning less.

Expert meteorologists the world over agree that the bill will likely extend winter by an additional 8-16 weeks. Future generations are expected to spend half the year in total darkness.

More On The PorkFat Package

Over in The Corner, Ramesh Ponnuru wonders why liberals are so appalled at the lack of support from Republicans for the stimulus package:

"I'm not quite sure why so many liberals are spluttering with rage over the Republicans' failure to go along with their stimulus ideas. It's not as though Republicans kept it from passing the House, or can keep it from passing the Senate. And if opposition is as politically suicidal as a lot of liberals are also saying—see the Toles cartoon today—it seems like it's a win-win situation for liberals."

I think, on the one hand, he's right. If this bloated spending effort is such a good idea, they should be ecstatic that Republicans are on the "wrong" side of the debate. They certainly don't need Republican votes, so anything Republicans do to distance themselves from successful fiscal policy should benefit Democrats greatly. One would think.

So the outrage from Dems seems to belie their confidence in this spending package. As I said earlier, they should be eager to own the bill but they still want Republicans holding their hand as they jump off the cliff. Maybe they've been reading the public opinion polls of late.

Rahm Caught With His Pants Down

"These guys will roll over, they're afraid of being called the party of No. Believe me, I know them. They'll be easy."

That was Rahm Emanuel just before Republicans voted 100% NO on the PorkFat(tm) Bill.

You know, it's OK to be the Party Of No sometimes. Just depends on the question.

I think Rahm and Barry's biggest problem is that they lived too long in a political climate where they had no opposition and no one said "No" to them occasionally. I hope they find it a chastening experience.

More Caviar Anyone?

"Obama Scolds Wall Street Executives Over Bonuses"

I wonder if he did it over a frugal dinner of wagyu beef and cocktails?

Blago Rambles

Today, Governor (For Now) Blagojevich gave a rambling speech in defense of whatever shenanigans he was trying to pull to fill the vacant Illinois senate seat. As entertaining as that must have been, I was struck by the apocryphal heartstring-tugger he told about the Mexican immigrant woman who gets up at 5am every morning on the south side to get to her job at O'Hare. Uphill both ways, no doubt.

What struck me is how silly this is. Why not just move closer to O'Hare? It's not financially daunting--there are plenty of places within striking distance of O'Hare that would be comparable to where that woman lives now.

Secondly, what's the big damn deal about getting up at 5am? I get up around 6am to come to work. And a lot of those times I'm really hung over. Buck up, lady!

They Actually Got it Partly Right This Time

NY Times Headline: "Components of Stimulus Vary in Speed and Efficiency"

They somehow left off "... and Effectiveness."

Welcome to the United Welfare States of America, where the New Government ("Now Bigger Than Ever!℠") believes that the best way to create jobs is to make itself larger, and give more handouts to the least productive at the expense of the most productive.

Bipartisanship, Redefined

In attempting to get Republican signoff on the bloated "stimulus" bill, the news media have been continually touting Obama's attempt at "bipartisan support."

Katie Couric noted how "the President went up to the Hill to personally appeal to Republicans already," so, she pleaded, "what more can he do?"

Well, his appeal has to be more than an effort to get those idealogically opposed to him to simply agree. As it was throughout his campaign, Obama's definition (and, therefore, the news media definition) of "bipartisan" consists of others dropping their own agenda and signing onto his. In this case, bipartisan efforts should not be confused with compromise.

I said before the election when it became clear that Obama would win and the Democrats would achieve their bulletproof majority that the Dems would have to truly own their decisions over the next few years. So far they seem wary of doing so, despite their public confidence in their policies. I can only assume that they believe, like many conservatives, that their strategies won't work. That redirecting money to long-term public works projects won't jump-start the economy. That many of their "stimulus" plans are simply welfare projects disguised as something else. There is no reason for Republicans to sign on to these ill-fated plans.

I just hope in four years that voters remember whose ideas these are and that the effort is in no way "bipartisan."

Obama's Past Steeped In Islam Now Officially White House Approved

Apropos of Max's earlier post:

I seem to recall during the election campaign that no one was allowed to discuss that Obama's middle name is Hussein, or that he attended a Muslim school in Indonesia as a child. Lefties were frothing over any mention of these facts.

Oh, how times have changed.

Now it's being touted as a diplomatic advantage!

Eight Is Enough

"Woman gives birth to octuplets in SoCal hospital." Imagine such a thing happening in California.

The mother is reportedly doing well.

Nancy Pelosi is beside herself.

Bad News is Good News

CNNMOney.com Headline: "Unemployment Sweeps Nation"

Doesn't that make it sound like work being done?

Raise Your Hand When You Hear the Tone

I read the NY Times article today, "Obama Signals New Tone in Relations with Islamic World." They explain that "President Barack Obama struck a conciliatory tone toward the Islamic world, saying he wanted to persuade Muslims that 'the Americans are not your enemy.'"

They're right. That sounds completely different from the tone of the last president, who said things like:

All Americans must realize that the face of terror is not the true face of Islam. Islam is a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world. It is a faith that has made brothers and sisters of every race. It is a faith based upon love not hate.
Bigotry is not a part of our soul it is not going to be part of our future.
In our war against terror we must never lose sight of the values that made our country so strong values of respect and tolerance, the value that we believe that everybody ought to worship the almighty however they so choose.

Children: The Burden of Tomorrow?

Yeah, you read that right. I've been stewing for a while now about President Obama's executive order releasing federal funds to be used for abortion counseling foreign citizens outside of the United States.

Someone explain to me why, in these times when we're being called upon by the new Administration to tighten our belts, we should be sending taxpayer dollars to make sure strangers in strange lands don't have (to put it politely) / kill (to put it more plainly) pre-born babies?

Wherever you fall in the pro-life/abortion debate, this makes zero sense to me. They're not Americans. What is the benefit to Americans of this... less competition???

Perhaps as an unintended realization of this, Democrats resurfaced the issue by trying to include public funding for birth prevention measures here in America in the next "stimulus" package. Why stop with foreigners? After all, if no one made it to birth, we wouldn't have this economic crisis, would we?

Nancy Pelosi weighed in to explain:

The family planning services reduce cost. One of the elements of this package is assistance to the states. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs … The contraception [initiative] will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

So, to summarize, she (and apparently the Democrats) see children as costs. Never mind what their potential, etc. -- they're economic burdens to be cut from the ledger as soon as possible.

Obama today agreed to pull that part of the bill, but to those keeping score, the record seems pretty clear. Congressional Democrats not only want to drive up spending astronomically and leave the payment to future generations, they want to make sure there are fewer members of those generations available to share the cost... in effect, a kind of Tax to the Future for those yet to come.

The New State-Run News Media

From MRC, the Washington Post featured a special classified ads section in which readers could author a message to the incoming President. One caveat:

"All ads must be congratulatory in nature. The Washington Post reserves the right to reject any notice."

For those of us paying attention for at least the past decade or so, this isn't surprising. But consider the Orwellian notion of an ostensibly bias-free press organ requiring its readers' messages to a politician to be positive or be rejected. One can understand why, on the occasion of his inauguration, the Post would not want to be in the business of selling off space for rants against the man but then the question becomes...why do it at all?

At this point, feel free to humor yourself by imagining the Post offering paid congratulatory messages to an incoming Republican.

Canadian Border Agents Have More Discriminating Taste Than Our New President

Bill "Free As A Bird" Ayers turned away at the Canadian border. Damn, I was hoping they'd take him in and keep him.

Curious statement:

Jeffrey Kugler, executive director of the Centre for Urban Schooling, is deeply disappointed in the turn of events. For him it's a question of academic freedom. "It's kind of ironic the day before Barack Obama is going to become president this is what the Canadian border security has done," said Kugler. "It seems ridiculous that one university can't have a professor from another university to come and give a lecture on an important educational topic."

That's a head-scratcher. What's ironic about it? I don't think he knows what the word means.

The Coming Disaster

No, I'm not talking about Obama's presidency--the jury is going to be out a while on that one. I'm talking about the literal disaster declared in DC for the inauguration.

President Bush on Tuesday declared the District a federal emergency area, clearing the way for the city to receive federal money to help cover the overwhelming cost of providing security for official inauguration events.

Seriously? And where are the folks who were apoplectic over the cost of Bush's 2005 inauguration? Not to be found in the media, where they are actively campaigning for an expensive soiree. Unbelievable.

Unclear On The Concept

I don't think they understand the laws of supply and demand:

Facing an economic slowdown, possible deflation, declining readership and competition that gives away its product for free, the Los Angeles Times raises newsstand prices 50%.

Why don't they just sell the paper for $1 billion? That way, they only have to sell one and they're in the black!

You're welcome

Normally, the #622 train arrives at 7:41 and runs express to downtown after a quick stop at Dee Road, but today it arrived at 8:00. Not unusual, especially with all of the snow we've had lately, but it soon became apparent that we had an inexperienced crew as well. Here's what went out over the P.A.:

Conductor: "Ed - can you get on and give these people an update as to what's going on?" [click]
Ed: "...."
Conductor: "Ed - you on?" [click]
Ed: "Uh, ladies an gentlemen - the 622 is, uh, running approximately 19 minutes behind schedule today, and, uh, will be making additional stops at Jefferson Park and uh, Irving Park. We thank you for your, uh, inconvenience. Er..." [click]

You're welcome, Ed. And yes, everyone on the train was laughing at you.

Get Carter

Jimmeh Carter: "I know from personal involvement that the devastating invasion of Gaza by Israel could easily have been avoided."

Yes, if those damn Jews would just die already.

The Day After Tomorrow Looking More Like Thirty Years Ago

Sea ice levels are now back to where they were in 1979. This may come as a shock to the Global Warming(TM) faddists and a bloated ex-vice-president but not to sane people across the globe. Ironically, I seem to recall around 1979 that folks in some circles were sounding the alarm for a new ice age. Maybe they were right after all!

Earlier this year, predictions were rife that the North Pole could melt entirely in 2008. Instead, the Arctic ice saw a substantial recovery. Bill Chapman, a researcher with the UIUC's Arctic Center, tells DailyTech this was due in part to colder temperatures in the region.

Whoa, slow down there, Egghead! So what you're saying is that water exposed to colder temperatures froze? Imagine! No doubt one of the warmening enthusiasts will stop by shortly to explain why colder temperatures and more ice is somehow the product of global warming. With a straight face, even.