Thursday, February 25, 2010


Well, the Circus is over.  The six hour health care summit stretched to seven hours.  The breakdown on speaking was Obama - one hour 53 minutes, Democrats - three hours 53 minutes, Republicans - one hour 50 minutes.  Yeah, that's bipartisan.  Hot Air's Allahpundit has a great rundown on what he calls the 'Freakshow'.

Obama came off a little snippy and, surprise, surprise, arrogant.  Republicans really brought their A game, in my opinion.  Not that they got a lot of floor time, but that was to be expected, and they really made the most of the time they were allowed.  They were on point talking about the differences between what the dems want and what they want.  The democrats relied on a string of sob stories and some wild statements like Harry Reid saying no one has been talking about reconciliation.  Really, HarryReally? 

Queen Nancy went at it from another angle - jobs.  Yup, you got it - this bill is all about jobs.  Four million of them.  Apparently 400,000 of them will be created immediately.  The thing is, as ridiculous as it may sound, she's probably right.  Unfortunately, all of those jobs will be created because of the giant behemoth government bureaucracy they are trying to set up, but, hey, a job is a job, right?  Of course, all those doctors retiring and/or quitting will change those numbers a bit, as well as all of the jobs lost when the insurance companies start closing down because they are being priced out of the market or crippled by overbearing regulations and artificial pricing.

The republicans were talking policy and trying to find the points of agreement and explain their opposition to other points, and the democrats were busy spewing one sob story after another, working that liberal guilt to within an inch of their lives, either unwilling or unable to explain their positions.  It was a little pathetic, actually.

I understand that there are people out there who are victimized by shady insurance policies; I know that people fall through the cracks.  But they are talking about reshaping an entire industry from top to bottom when things like simple regulation to prevent discrimination against pre-existing conditions would be sufficient.  The republicans were trying to point out that lowering costs by implimenting tort reform and interstate commerce, among other things, would enable more people to afford insurance, so more people would be insured -  without a government takeover of the health care system. 

The problem with that argument, of course, is that, for the democrats, the whole point of 'reform' is government takeover.  There is no middle ground on this, because the two sides are diametrically opposed.  The democrats are offering socialized medicine in the European model, and the republicans are offering free market solutions.  The democrats refused to even discuss tort reform and interstate solutions because they would work (well, and also because they don't want to tick off the trial lawyers - they're a goldmine for campaign contributions).

For all of Harry Reid's denials, reconciliation is on the table.  Before the democrats jump on that grenade, however, they should consider that it might possibly be the death knell of their party for a generation or more.  Disapproval for their bills have been holding steady at about 56% for the past three months.  Over 60% want them to start from scratch.  A majority oppose the partisan tactic of reconciliation, including, apparently, one of the creators of the process.  They proceed with it at their own risk.  But considering how incredibly tone deaf they have been so far, don't be surprised if they pull the trigger anyway. 

I have to admit that I was worried that the Republicans would fare poorly today, but they did great.  And if Obama's surly expression and attitude are any indication, he knows it - and so do others.


There has been a theme in the media for the first year of President Obama's term that has been getting some notice on the right.  Considering all of the experts weighing in on things, all of the examination and consideration, there have been an awful lot of 'unexpected' things happening.  Just this week, for example, there are no less than three 'unexpected' reports.

The first is the 'unexpected' dip in consumer confidence.  And by dip, I mean a nearly 10 point drop.  The index last month stood at 56.5.  The 'experts' were expecting it to dip to 55.  Instead it dropped to a staggering 46.  Ooops.  Just a minor miscalculation, I'm sure.

Next came the 'unexpected' dip in new home sales.  Now, how this could possibly be unexpected is beyond me.  New home sales have been dropping since August (with the exception of a slight rise in October - which was touted as a leading indicator that the recession was officially over).  There is a lame attempt to blame the weather for some of the drop (no, seriously), but that is just a load of malarkey.  I'm pretty sure there weren't any blizzards back in August.  This is the biggest drop on record, bringing new home sales to a 50 year low, even with government intervention in the form of tax incentives to buyers.

And then there is the report on unemployment that came out this morning.  There was a - you guessed it - 'unexpected' rise in unemployment claims.  This, too is being blamed on the weather. 

I'm waiting for them to use these new numbers to push for Cap and Trade again - after all, the weather is caused by global warming, so global warming is to blame for unemployment and low home sales.  Thus, by that logic, not only will Cap and Trade save the planet, it will also save us from high unemployment and low home sales.  It truly is a miracle cure, isn't it?

You know, I remember when our 'experts' actually sounded like they knew what they were talking about.  I keep hearing about the Great Recession being over, but, aside from the stock market's hurkey jerky rise and a one month increase in new home sales, the evidence doesn't seem to support that position.  Every month we have new 'unexpected' numbers - the only time the numbers are expected is when they actually meet the sunshiny projections - a rarer and rarer occurance.   This administration's overly rosy predictions do these experts and the American people a disservice. 

It's time to start telling it like it is.  It's time to start getting real numbers, real projections and real debate over how the administration's policies are really going to effect us.  This constant atmosphere of 'unexpectedness' does nothing to promote confidence in the economy, the administration and the country in general.

There is one more 'unexpected' number that came out at the beginning of February - the 'unexpected' rise in inflation.   How this could possibly be unexpected is beyond me.  The FED has been pumping literally trillions of dollars into the economy with nothing backing it.  We have to get that money out of the system, and the only way to do that is to increase interest rates in order to buy back the debt.  The notion that an increase in inflation was unexpected is, well, unexpected.

If this is the best our 'experts' can do, I think it's time to get new experts.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010


Am I the only one having a hard time buying the concept of Barack Obama inviting Republicans for a "bipartisan" "summit", when the run-up to it has been nothing by threats of 'nuclear options', intimidation and name calling?  (BTW - am I the only one who gets a faint whiff of a beery aftertaste whenever I hear the term 'summit' anymore?)

This whole media circus  is rather reminiscent of, well, a circus.  In the Roman tradition of Bread and Circus, of course - and boy, is there a lot of bread at stake over this circus. 

Thursday's show is shaping up to be a real crowd favorite - Christians vs. Lions.  The Lions are starving so they will grab at anything, and they have been poked at for weeks by the public, so they are really out for blood.  The Christians are wary, but have managed to smuggle in a few weapons due to the Emperor's remarkably unobservant watchdogs.

The crowd has been whipped up into a frenzy by the aggressive posturing and antics of the Lions.  The Lions have already managed to scored a few victories over the Christians with their conquests of Omnibus Maximum and Stimulus Minimum.   These 'victories', however, have only caused the Christians to become more set in their resolve against the gluttonous Lions.

The Lions constant roaring about the Christians being unarmed but for their cries of 'No!" has distracted them and allowed the Christians to arm themselves with a few weapons of their own.  The Lions are aware of these weapons, but feel that their constant loud roaring is enough to combat that particular threat.

Tomorrow is the big day.  Tomorrow, the Lions and the Christians face off, and it is ostensibly up to the crowd to decide - thumbs up, or thumbs down.

Not that it really matters what the crowd wants.  The Lions have the keys to the dungeon and, regardless of tomorrow's outcome, have repeatedly threatened to lock the Christians out so they can continue to run amok.  Perhaps they assume that their new $15 billion infusion of bread will calm any ruffled feathers in the crowd and pave their way to a new season of Circuses next year.

A word to the wise on this tactic of Bread and Circuses - even they could not keep the mighty Roman empire from crumbling under the weight of it's own excesses.  Appeasing the crowds with a glut of meaningless showmanship will only go so far.  As they distract themselves with spectacle, the Barbarians are at the gate, and they will not be distracted.  The Lions, in their arrogance, fear not these Barbarians, for they do not carry torches and pitchforks - they merely carry tea and voter registration cards.

The Lions would be wise to sheathe their claws, stifle their roars and focus on the Barbarians as the Christians seem to be doing.  That is the pathway to redemption and success, and it cannot be reached through the Circus Maximus, no matter how 'media savvy' it may be.

cross posted at Sisterhood of the Mommy Patriots

Monday, February 22, 2010


In a don't-blink-or-you'll-miss-it story today, Politico is reporting that ACORN is closing down across the country.

Don't pop the champagne just yet, though because, much like most Progressive ideas, this just won't die easily. 

ACORN, in it's hydra-like way, is merely splintering into local groups, all with different names.  You know those Progressives - when the message doesn't sell, just change the name and try again!

"Consistent with what the internal recommendations have been, each of the states are developing plans for reconstitution independence and self-sufficiency," said the official, citing ACORN's "diminished resources, damage to the brand, unprecedented attacks."
The new organizations, he said "will be constituted under new banners and new bylaws and new governance," he said, consistent with the recommendations of an outside panel.

Sounds like they learned their lesson and are revamping their organization, right?  Eh, not so much (emphasis mine):

A person familiar with the New York reorganization said the new group has a new board, including some relative outsiders, like an official at the union Workers United, Wilfredo Larancuent, as well as most of the old leadership.

What it really boils down to is that they were having a hard time getting funded as a national organization because of all of the attention they have gotten for their shady election work and the questionable practices highlighted in those undercover tapes.  So, in typical progressive fashion, they will instead splinter into smaller groups that are only statewide, so they can then access state funding under their new names.

It's all about the dollars, baby.

But fear not:

"As far as the work in the communities and policy campaigns, no one will notice the difference," the source said.

Whew.  What a relief to know that this will not stop ACORN from it's basic mission.  Rest assured, too, that National ACORN is not yet dead, either - as a matter of fact, it seems the chapters that are peeling off (at least, so far) are the ones in states involved in those infamous videos, namely New York and California.

Go figure.

Saturday, February 20, 2010


I was quite skeptical of the 'health care summit' proposed by President Obama.  Considering the sneaky, backdoor dealings of this administration so far, I figured it was just a trap. The more I hear about it, the more I think my first instinct was right.  I had hoped that the democrats had seen the writing on the wall and were tacking to the center, but, as usual, it seems to be all smoke and mirrors. 

This whole things smacks of  a show for the American people by a remarkably media savvy administration.  The Democrats are attempting to look reasonable and willing to compromise.  If the republicans refused the meeting, they would look surly and partisan.  Unfortunately, accepting is just as much of a trap, because now they will be harangued, browbeaten and used as political cover for the mess of a bill that democrats are single-mindedly trying to ram down our throats.   Republicans requested starting from scratch and the Democrat's response is to bring their 2000 page nightmare of a bill (public option included) to the table, along with the hollow threat of reconciliation.

It's incredible that they are still talking about reconciliation - if this is possible, why haven't they done it?  Why bother with this meeting?  This whole exercise is pure propaganda, in my opinion.

Obama saying he will look at any options the Republicans bring to the table is more empty talk.  Sure, he'll look at their proposals - and then discard them for the behemoth public option he is so desperate to pass.  This isn't about reconciliation and compromise - it's about the Republicans bending to Obama's will and passing the 2,000 page nightmare Pelosi and Reid have cooked up and can't get enough of their own people to vote for.

This is just a dog and pony show to try to make the Republicans look like the party of no yet again.

Personally, I think the 'party of no' designation is a good thing.  They have been staunch in their denial of all things socialist.  They have been united in their condemnation of the insane spending policies of this administration.  They have held the line and refused to bend to pressure, bribery and threats.  They listened to the millions of Americans protesting the actions of this administration and tried their best to do the will of the people.  They said no to the radical agenda being pushed on us, and I, for one, am grateful, because it seems like those in power just aren't listening.  So, please 'obstruct' away!

This whole 'summit' idiocy is a desperate ploy by the Democrats to place the blame on the Republicans for health care reform not passing, because they realize the American people know that the only thing holding them back is themselves. 

Democrats are great at shifting blame - after all, they managed to blame all of Nancy Pelosi's spending and deficit inducing policies on George Bush (oh, and Pelosi refused to approve a 2009 budget from Bush, so the whole "budget for the entire [2009] fiscal year was largely set in place while Bush was in the White House" argument is a load of hooey).  The President may suggest the budget and spending policies, but Congress holds the purse strings. 

We were finally bouncing back from 9/11 and Katrina and bringing down the deficits when Pelosi took over.  In 2007, the year Pelosi became Speaker, the deficit was $163 billion - down from a high of $413 billion in 2004.  In 2008, Pelosi's agenda started to affect the country.  The result?  A $455 billion deficit, which has been blamed entirely on Bush.  But that wasn't enough.  They have also tried to blame the staggering $1.3 trillion deficit of 2009 on Bush and the Republicans as well.  They blame TARP for most of the deficit - a bill they voted for as well, including Pelosi, Reid and then-Senator Obama.  But TARP wasn't what blew up the deficit - Stimulus, the omnibus spending bill and a $3.6 trillion budget did that.  They increased spending by about 18%, and are still trying to blame the resulting deficit on a man who hasn't been in office for over a year.

Over and over again this administration has proven themselves to be duplicitous, conniving, hyper-partisan and willing to stoop to any low to further their socialist agenda.

I personally hope the Republicans boycott this sham of a summit.  It's a trap, pure and simple.  I suggest they embrace the title 'Party of No' and say no to this summit and this health care plan.   They are in agreement with more than 60% of the country if they do.

UPDATE:  Via HotAir' s Quote of the Day:
“And then when unemployment numbers started proving to be much, much tougher and it started becoming more clear that the stimulus package hadn’t worked properly, they just kept plowing ahead on health care. And this isn’t a communications problem. This is a reality problem. And I think they just made some grave miscalculations and as it became more clear that they had screwed up, they just kept doubling down their bet.
“And so I think, no, this is one of the biggest miscalculations that we’ve seen in modern political history.”
The exit quote for Cook's interview is fantastic:
But if I had a choice of the Republican Party's problems right now or the Democratic Party's problems, I think you could triple the Republican Party's problems and I'd still rather have their problems than the problems facing Democrats.

Amen, brother....

Thursday, February 18, 2010


When Eric Holder and the Obama Administration took their position on trying terrorists in civilian courts, the main reasons they gave for doing it were to showcase the fairness of the US justice system and to help restore America's standing in the world. 

Noble aspirations, indeed.

Too bad the White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs, sees the KSM trial in this way (via CNSNews):

On Wednesday, asked Gibbs, “The vice president (Joe Biden) said on Meet the Press that he guarantees that KSM (Khalid Sheik Mohammed) would not be acquitted. Isn't part of a civilian trial presumed innocent?”

Gibbs said, “Yes.” then asked, “And does the administration believe that he (KSM) is presumed innocent?”

Gibbs answered, “The administration is in charge of presenting the case against an individual that killed 3,000 people on American soil. I not only think he'll be convicted, I think he'll be executed for his crimes.”

In a follow-up question, asked, “Can you make that guarantee though?”

Gibbs replied, “I think he’s going to be executed for his crime.”

Luckily America isn't a third world country (yet), or the rest of the world might think our much touted legal system was more like a kangaroo court.  No doubt assuring the execution of a major figure in the jihadist world before he even goes to trial will do plenty towards winning our enemies over, too. 

If Gitmo is a recruiting tool, what do you think this fiasco will be?

Way to up our standing, guys.

Tuesday, February 16, 2010


I just found a great video about the ClimateGate scandal.

Check it out.

The wheels are really falling off the bus.

The fallout is reaching incredible proportions now.  There is a new report about IPCC claims of African crops decreasing 50% being completely false.   Claims of increased storm intensity is unsupportable.  Now that scientists aren't afraid of being blackballed for skeptical results, there are more and more of them out there checking the IPCC/CRU data and finding it wanting.  It seems that every day there is a new report of errors and fallacies in the Nobel Prize winning 2007 IPCC report on climate change.

The level of BS involved in the report is simply staggering. 

The African crop projections were based on theories that directly contradicted the information gathered.  Whole areas of the report were based on non-scientific magazine articles and unpublished student theses.   More and more true scientists, who propose a theory and then attempt to prove or disprove it scientifically, are testing the CRU's and IPCC's theories on AGW and finding major holes in the 'science'.

Finally, disgraced 'scientist' Phil Jones of the CRU came out this weekend and admitted that there hasn't been any measurable global warming for the past 15 years.  In addition, he admitted that temperatures during the Medieval Warming Period were higher than what we are experiencing now.  What's more, those temperatures remained high for a period of about 500 years, from about 800 AD to about 1300 AD.  The MWP ended with the Little Ice Age, a period of unusual cold that lasted until the early 1800's.

The MWP was a time of global prosperity.  It was so warm that wine was grown in England and Iceland.  The world's population exploded due to increased harvests of cereal grains, which are intolerant to cold, and warmer winters, which meant less illness and disease.  Trade flourished throughout Europe and the Mediterranean and into Asia.  The Vikings explored the ice-free Atlantic ocean in their longboats and discovered Greenland (which really was green then, thus the name), Nova Scotia and quite possibly northeastern America. 

Times were easier in the MWP because of the added warmth.  With full bellies and full purses, people were able to turn their attention from subsistence to leisure.  There was an explosion of scientific discovery and artisitic achievement.

AGW alarmists tried to hide the MWP, to pretend that it didn't exist, because it's mere existence put the lie to man-made global warming.  There were no cars or factories spewing CO2 into the atmosphere back then, and yet it was warmer than it is today.  The MWP was a huge threat to AGW, and so they tried to revise history yet again and pretend that the MWP never happened.  By the way, the Little Ice Age was possibly caused by the 'Maunder Minimum', a period of extremely low sunspot activity.  We are possibly going through another period of extremely low sunspot activity right now.  Coincidence?  Well, what do you think the odds are that less activity from the giant superhot ball of gas in the center of the solar system might cause temperature changes in our atmosphere?  I'd have to say the sun would have more effect on our climate than our exhalations and flatulent cows, but what do I know?

The MWP proves the theory of Climate Change, but not AGW, which is a very different thing.  Climate Change is a natural, cyclical phenomenon that has very little to do with the activities of man.  AGW, in contrast, blames man for everything.  Humans are the plague of the Earth, bent on it's destruction, in the minds of AGW alarmists.

Yes, the climate is changing.  It has always changed - the climate we have now is nothing like the climate of 10 million years ago, 10,000 years ago, or even a mere 1,000 years ago - a drop in the climate bucket.  We may be in the midst of a warming period that may or may not be over - in about 100 years or so we will be able to look back over this newest cycle and have a clearer picture what was happening. 

The AGW hysterics scream 'there's a difference between climate and weather, you know!'  Yes, I do know.  Do you

The people who are claiming a few blizzards and some broken records doesn't mean it is getting colder are the very same people who jump all over a summer heat wave and claim that it proves global warming - see, it's hotter outside!  They are also the people who touted the lack of snow a few winters ago in DC proved global warming as well.  Now they are saying the cooler temps and major snowstorms are proof of global warming.  To prove this theory, they have come up with a tortured, circuitous explaination involving the increased temps causing increased water vapor in the air resulting in more precipitation, but because it is happening in winter with colder temps, the precipitation shows itself as snow.  Basically saying it is colder and snowier because the temperature is rising.  They seem to have taken to heart the little adage "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with bullshit".

Even Donald Trump is calling AGW a hoax, and has called for Al Gore to be stripped of his Nobel Prize.  Considering he got it in conjunction with the fatally flawed 2007 IPCC report, they should all be stripped.  While they are at it, how about the Oscar, too?

Even liberal Penn State, home of Michael Mann, a leading climate scientist and crony of the CRU's Phil Jones and author of many of the incriminating emails released in December, has students that are demanding answers.  The Young America's Foundation protested the bogus internal 'investigation' of Michael Mann, claiming it is biased.  They are demanding the investigation be conducted by a neutral, unaffiliated, external group and that the findings be released to the public.  Right now the review is being conducted by three Penn State employees and the findings will only be released to donors.  By the way, Michael Mann just recieved $2.4 million in stimulus funds for his climate research - even in the midst of an investigation. 

Our federal masters are refusing to waver from their AGW stance, and have even talked about reviving Cap and Trade.  Tone deaf and crazy, right?  No, more like politically expedient.  The liberals seem to think that saying something often enough makes it true, so they are clinging on to their hysterical ranting about climate catastrophe.  Let's face it - they have a lot at stake, and they'll be damned if they are going to give it up without a fight.  Cap and Trade is a masterpiece of political money laundering.  They will use it to pillage literally trillions of dollars from corporations, small businesses and taxpayers.  They can put that money into a nice little slush fund and claim they are using it for carbon credit offsets and other such untraceable schemes.  They have created such an illusion of major catastrophes that when they don't occur they can claim that their Cap and Trade scheme was a success and saved us from annihilation.

But now it's all falling apart. 

As is usually the case with liberals, they pushed too hard, and their rhetoric just couldn't stand up to the facts.  They tried to silence their critics, but that only works for so long.  They have now resorted to name calling and claiming that any change in weather whatsoever is proof of their theory.  Those are desperate tactics and are being seen as such by a rapidly growing majority.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the climate is changing.  There is a great deal of doubt, however, that man is the cause.  Our AGW Icaruses have flown too close to the sun and are now paying the price.

Better them than us.

Monday, February 15, 2010


Happy President's Day!

Today has been set aside as a day to remember two of our greatest Presidents.  On this day we celebrate Abraham Lincoln's birthday on Feb. 12th and George Washington's birthday on Feb. 22nd.  These two men are inarguably the greatest presidents our nation has ever seen. 

One man created the Office and set the bar for being President.  The other finished the work of our Founding Fathers in ensuring that all men truly are created equal. 

Washington knew that as the first, he would be setting the precedence for the office and would be held up as an example.  Luckily for our young country, he was a man of great honor and integrity. He saw the boundless possibilities of the nation and it's people, but saw, too, the potential for grasping men bent on exploiting that greatness.  He came from a time when dictatorships were the rule, not the exception.  It was his mission to prove that there could be another way.

For Lincoln, the mission was to live up to the spirit of the Constitution by ensuring the Blessings of Liberty to all.  He had to practically destroy the country in order to do it, but it needed to be done, and we are stronger for it.  The hard choices that he made allowed us to live up to our rhetoric of being a shining beacon of freedom and equality to the rest of the world.   His bravery and unswerving devotion to the cause of freedom has made him a revered and beloved icon of American history.

As we celebrate these great men, let us study them and use them to compare and contrast potential leaders of the future.  We need people of strong moral fiber who understand that kicking the can down the road is not a good strategy; eventually there is always a price to pay, and someone must step up and make the hard choices, political expediency be damned.  We need people who revere the Constitution; those who see it not as a flawed document that needs revision for modern times, but as a magnificent document that has created the greatest country in the world, whose citizens enjoy an unprecedented level of freedom and prosperity.

We have been a remarkably blessed country.  Not just in wealth and freedom, but blessed by the amazing people who have brought us to where we are today. 

But we can't just sit around and wait to be saved.  If someone can't be found, then perhaps We the People, having learned the lessons of the past from the great men who came before us, can light the path and save ourselves.   That means staying awake, alert and vigilant; fulfilling the promise of the Constitution and returning this country to the ideals that made it great.  There will be hard choices ahead, and possibly very tough times, but as Washington and Lincoln have taught us, some things are worth the sacrifice.  

Our country has been through crises before and survived.  I hate to think that people like Obama, Pelosi and Reid can bring us down.  They are the types who expect us to crumble before their claims of 'consensus', give in to their engineering, be oblivious to their schemes.  That is the problem with revising history - you are changing reality to fit your perspective, and sometimes reality has a nasty little slap to the face in store.  They underestimate our intelligence, patriotism and fortitude at their peril.  We are made of sterner stuff than that; we can survive anything they dish out and come out the other side victorious and the better for it. 

With men like Washington and Lincoln as our models, we can't go wrong.

UPDATE:  RealClearPolitics' Jay Cost has a great piece on George Washington.

Thursday, February 11, 2010


My fury and disgust has left me practically speechless, so I will allow Mitch Berg at Hot Air do the talking, as he does it so succinctly.

The depths this administration will sink to is just mind boggling. 

The big question is, now that they are taking credit, are we allowed to say we won?  Can we finally give our troops the accolades for this victory that they so richly deserve? 

It is not a matter of if  they back away from this stance, but when. 

It had better be soon.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010


I have been a fan of Marvel Comics since I was a kid.  My personal favorites were the Silver Surfer and the X-Men of the early 1990's, with Psylocke and Gambit.  I was thrilled with the idea of some of my favorites becoming major movies with great special effects and compelling stories, and I always look forward to new ones.  I have been happy to see the resurgence of comic books and their blockbuster success.

But I have to say that I have been unhappy with some of the themes besieging our comicbook heroes and their movie incarnations.  In issue #602 of Captain America, the new villain seems to be, of all things, the American people.  More specifically, the crazy, extremist, right-wing, white-supremacist Tea Partiers (I highly recommend you read the whole article). 

Predictably enough, Captain America is joined in this issue by The Falcon, his black superhero sidekick.  After all, it isn't a Tea Party bashing without racist overtones, right?

Let's not forget the obnoxious pornographic slurs, too - check off another box on the how-to bash list.  (Marvel will be removing it in future printings, but the damage is done)

This latest lefty foray into ruining much-loved characters is incredibly disturbing to me, especially since I myself have attended a Tea Party or two, and have never seen any dangerous white-supremacist lunatics.  All I've seen is middle class people of all shapes, sizes, colors and political leanings peacefully coming together to protest a government gone wild.  They were safe enough for me to bring my children, who had fun singing, dancing, and reading the clever signs.  True, there are a few Obama=Hitler people, but those are the LaRuchies - democrats. 

It never ceases to amaze me that the left are so terrified of the movement.  I don't recall such fear and hysteria during the violent Bush era protests.  So far, the only violence (shouting at elected officials doesn't count as violence, no matter how much the left insists it does) has been perpetrated by SEIU members against protesters.

And now our superheroes are turning against us.  Captain America is afraid of common run-of-the-mill Americans.  Their belief in low taxes, smaller government and liberty are apparently the things nightmares are made of for him and the people at Marvel.

But then, why not?  They have been systematically destroying our heroes for decades.  From the mortal death of the immortal Superman to the most recent Superman movie in which he is depicted as, basically, a deadbeat dad who ditches his babymama and has feet of clay. 

All of our superheroes are flawed these days.  Why?

Has the liberal victim mentality finally invaded the cartoon world?  Or perhaps having such perfect, patriotic beings to look up to and attempt to emulate was perceived as too much of a challenge by our liberal nannies and so they had to be made more human.  The patriotic theme definitely had to go - after all, patriotism keeps us from joining the liberal utopian socialist global commune, so it's bad, bad, bad!

Think about it.  Batman should be in intense therapy.  The man is a mess.   It's hard to tell who's crazier and more tortured, him or his arch-villains.  The Watchmen was a mess of angst and human failings.  Even Spiderman explores and revels in his dark side for a while, and one of the most poignant scenes in the series is when he is in the subway car, unconscious and unmasked.  He's just a kid, he's one of us....

Only Iron Man (the movie) seems to buck this trend, and to me he is the best current incarnation of American hero out there today.  Tony Stark is a greedy capitalist pig/warmonger who only redeems himself with his superhero antics. I love that Stark's capitalist pig wealth and warmongering background in weaponry is what makes him so great.  In true American spirit, Tony adapts and excels and creates something fantastic.  He is an entrepeneur who has met the enemy and understands the game.  He was not broken by his time in the cave, he was made stronger. 

Sure, the main villain is another greedy capitalist-pig, but it is more about the man than the system, so that's okay.  To be fair, the comic, over the years, has seen Stark battle alcoholism as well as villains and other personal demons, but so far, the movies have been free of such human flaws.  Let's hope it stays that way. 

I like my heroes to act like heroes.  I live in reality, and it is filled with flawed people, myself included.  I don't need or want to identify my superheroes as being just like me; I don't want them flawed.  Their appeal is that they are better than me, a more perfect vision that I can look up to and try to emulate.  Noble, honest protectors of all Americans, not just those who share their political views.  I use them as an escape - a better world where there are brave people willing to fight for life, liberty and the American Way.

The creators of Captian America should be ashamed.  One would think that a character with a fanclub called the "Sentinels of Liberty" would be more sympathetic to the Tea Party cause.  Add in that his girlfriend was named Betsy Ross (aka Golden Girl) and he was created to fight nazis and communism, and you really have to wonder what the current creators were thinking.

Our brave, noble, anti-communist, pro-America superheroes have become sighing, fearful angst-ridden socialists in the making. 

I want my Superheroes back!!!

Tuesday, February 9, 2010


Oh, the irony.

In an article titled "NOAA: Blizzard Rearranges Climate Change Announcement" in the Wall Street Journal, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association had to resort to announcing by telephone the creation of a new Climate Service office:
“More and more, Americans are witnessing the impacts of climate change in their own backyards, including sea-level rise, longer growing seasons, changes in river flows, increases in heavy downpours, earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons in our waters. People are searching for relevant and timely information about these changes to inform decision-making about virtually all aspects of their lives,” the release says.

Yes, the office to study climate change had to cancel the live press conference to announce their existence because of a blizzard shutting down the government.  That's just too much.  Did I mention there will be more snow in DC midweek?  Damn that global warming. 

Hey, anybody seen Al Gore lately? 

Monday, February 8, 2010


In an interview with Katie Couric, President Obama defended his hopey-changey message.  "Democrats wrote to me," Katie began with an apologetic smile, "saying you campaigned on a slogan of change you can believe in, but their lives and the ways of Washington, they wrote, haven't changed at all."

President Obama then launches into a denial-filled explaination of how transparent his administration is.  He mentions the fact that his visitor logs for the White House are available to the public - something unheard of with other administrations (and you know who he means!).  Of course he neglects to mention that those same logs were kept locked up (even after two federal rulings that the informtion was public), until November of '09 and even then, the list wasn't quite complete, it just went back to Sept. '09.  The new era of transparency leaves much to be desired, in my opinion.

But it gets better.  "We are eliminating lobbyists from boards and commissions," Obama insists.  And what is happening to those lobbyists who are suddenly jobless in DC?  Why, they miraculously get waivers to work in the White House

He finishes up with "There's more transparency on something like the Recovery Act and how taxpayer dollars are being spent than there/s ever been on a project of this size and scale." (has there ever been a project of this size and scale?)  Sure, as long as you don't mind phantom zip codes and congressional districts that don't exist.  And why, exactly, does the website say that about 650,000 jobs have been 'saved or created', but the administration keeps citing 1.5 - 2.4 million?  Easy - they have now changed the rules so that if a company receives stimulus funds, any job within that company now counts as 'saved or created'.  Quite a racket, no?

Obama, Pelosi et al have a little problem.  They truly believe perception is reality, and that if they simply say something often enough, with enough conviction, it will be so.  For the rest of us living in the real world (which luckily has internet access and youtube - something the administration, as tech-savvy has it has been touted as being, seems to have forgotten about), we can hear the spin and find out what's really going on.  Apparently, for about 60% of Americans, their BS detectors are set to ultra sensitive, and claptrap like he was peddling to Couric just doesn't sell anymore.

Now Obama is calling for a health care summit, this time including Republicans and C-SPAN cameras.  I guess bipartisanship and transparency are only necessary if you can't manage to pass it strictly on party lines and behind closed doors.  Can you say 'political act of desperation'?  I know that he is 'pivoting' to jobs, but why can't he just drop the whole health care thing completely for a while?  Get the economy running again and then take up health care over the summer or fall (or, more realistically, next year).  Unfortunately, the administration has managed to sell to their progressive base that economic recovery just won't happen until the health care system has been reformed. 

One thing this administration has gotten really, really good at is painting themselves into corners.

What really strikes me, though, is the petulant tone of the democrats - particularly Obama.  Well, except for Pelosi, who apparently has decided that tone-deaf defiance is the way to go.  Hey Queen Nan - when you said you would "Go through the gate.  If the gate's closed, we'll go over the fence.  If the fence is too high, we'll pole vault in.  If that doesn't work we'll parachute in but we're going to get health care reform passed for the American people", who do you think is making all of those obstructions?  That would be the American people, Nan.  You know, your bosses? 

The woman is the poster child for power drunk career political hacks. 

She is the snarling, snapping, rabid pitbull to Obama's shivering chihuahua, barking furiously to cover his uncertainty and incompetence as he hides behind her.  If the republicans can manage to take back the House, she will be neutralized, and that is more than half the battle.    The spin for this administration has become so lame and transparently, patently false that it is hard to believe anyone is falling for it anymore.  Well, except for their hard-core base, which only comprises about 20% of the voting pool, thankfully.  The rest of us respond to the desperate spin with a hearty chuckle these days, as we mark off one more day on the calendar.

The administration will be learning a hard lesson that perception is not reality, come November.  Until then, let them spin away. 

Wednesday, February 3, 2010


Our senior intelligence officials were called to the Capital today to discuss national security in the wake of the Christmas Day bomber with the Senate Intelligence Committee.

CIA Chief Leon Panetta and his peers from National Intelligence and the FBI, in a rare moment of candor, admitted that the chances of an attempted attack were 'certain'.  Panetta also admitted that the new 'lone wolf' tactics were difficult to track.

To me, terrorists are like cockroaches.  With 9/11, they were successful as a large group because we weren't really aware that there was such a large, organized nest of them and that they were such a potent threat. 

Now we know that they are determined to do us harm but we have managed to scatter the nest; they are still coming, but it is individuals now instead of a swarm.  We have learned how to detect large groups and stomp them out, so they have adapted to splintering off and coming at us from many different directions.  They are taking their training, getting their drugs and explosives, and are on their own.  Sort of like a terrorist express line.   

So what do we do?  First and foremost, target the training camps.

We know it's nearly impossible to figure out who might end up being a bomber before heading off to camp, and there is no contact between the killer and the network after training.  They choose the time and place and research rudimentary pieces of information on line at home, like knowing where to sit on the plane so that you are directly over the fuel tanks.  So target the camps, where we know they are intending (and actively training) to do us harm but haven't managed to do so yet.  Destroy the nests, wherever they may be.  Demand help and approval from the UN and NATO for surgical strikes to any and all known terror training camps, be they in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, wherever. 

Once you've targeted the nests, you start picking off the stragglers.  One way is to go digital.  Shut down the network globally.  Bomb building website?  Deleted.  Radical Imam spouting 'Death to Israel'?  Detained, questioned and surveilled.

There will still be attempts, but the number will have shrunk dramatically.  A smaller suspect pool means more agents will be assigned to each case, thus upping the odds of  successful identification and disruption of plots. 

This administration is crippling our intelligence agencies with their insistence on treating terrorists as common criminals.  Their hands are tied, and our safety is at stake.  If there is a successful attack in the next three to six months, God help the democrats.  Their policies will be to blame and they will suffer the consequences on election day and beyond.

There's plenty more that can be done, I'm just offering up a few suggestions that seem like common sense to me - whether they are practical and possible are up for debate.  But at least I'm not throwing my hands up with an air of futility and telling the country we're helpless to stop it.  Our intelligence chiefs are somewhat less than inspiring when it comes to instilling confidence.

Thank God our intelligence and military personnel are more savvy and on the ball than their appointed betters.  They are the reason I'm not totally freaking out.  May they be ever vigilant and successful in destroying those vermin, down to the very last one.

Tuesday, February 2, 2010


The 2011 budget proposal was just released.  Can someone please explain to me how the budget increased by $200 billion despite a spending freeze?

While you're at it, could you please tell my why I should be excited by $20 billion in 'savings'?

Also, why, exactly, is Cap and Trade being discussed again?  The AGW argument is falling apart more and more with every day that passses, but for some reason we need to invest in green technology now, now, now!

While we're at it, I'd also like to know why Paul Kirk is still voting for legislation even though Scott Brown is the Senator from Massachusetts.  Brown won't be sworn in until Feb. 11th, so don't be surprised if they try to jam something reallly offensive through before then.

How exactly will repealing the Bush tax cuts on our small business owners and allowing the SEC to impose new regulations requiring companies to disclose potential risk to investors due to environmental regulations increase job growth and profitability?  Oh, I forgot - uncertainty and heavy taxation are the linchpins for a booming economy and low unemployment.

Those are just my top five questions so far this week.  I'm sure I will have many more before the week is out.

Hey, one more just struck me - why does Obama want Congress to rush the budget through, when it won't be effective until Sept. 2010?

Isn't it amazing how, with all of the spin explaining going on, there are still so many unanswered questions?