tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-90929210739193234012024-03-06T00:39:10.068-05:00Ripley ReportRipleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.comBlogger276125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-48249319808926239162012-11-06T15:20:00.001-05:002012-11-06T15:20:27.646-05:00THE INTIMIDATION FACTORToday's the big day! If the polls are right, this could be a real nail-biter. But there's a chance that those polls <em>aren't</em> right. Ace of Spades has a <a href="http://ace.mu.nu/archives/334683.php" target="_blank">great rundown</a> on why he doesn't have faith in the polls. I tend to agree. <br />
<br />
As Ace points out, the most glaring problem with many of the battleground polls is that they assume the electorate will turn out in droves for democrats. Not just keeping on par with the historic turnout of 2008, but often surpassing it - sometimes by half. That just seems wrong, coming on the heels of the historic loss of the House in 2010 and the Wisconsin recall elections, if nothing else. Add in the rather consistent fifty-two-<em>ish</em> percent of the electorate that disapproves of issues such as healthcare, the economy, the deficit, etc., and it just doesn't seem like the President has much wind at his back. <br />
<br />
But there is another dynamic that has been ignored by the press - the intimidation factor. For the past four-plus years, since Obama was still a senator running for president, those who don't support him or his policies have been called racist, sexist, and homophobic. They have been hectored, lectured, patronized and treated like simpletons. When polled, do these people tell the truth, or do they tell a little fib to keep the heat off?<br />
<br />
A friend of mine called me the other day and told me that an Obama campaigner had just knocked on her door. She was looking for the former resident, but upon learning that she no longer lived there asked my friend if she were registered to vote. She hesitated a moment, then answered that yes, she was, and she had already voted, hoping that would be the end of the conversation but bracing herself anyway:<br />
<br />
"Who did you vote for?"<br />
<br />
Again she paused, weighing her options. On the one hand, she could say it was none of the Obama supporter's business, but didn't want to come off combative and rude. What came blurting out of her mouth instead was:<br />
<br />
"Why, Obama, of course!"<br />
<br />
The thing is, that's not how she really voted. It just so happens that we went over our ballots together, researching and discussing the candidates and amendments, weighing the pros and cons. When she came home from her three-hour odyssey at the polling place (I voted by absentee ballot), she proudly recounted every moment of her experience, including her satisfaction at filling in the circle for Mitt Romney. For a little background, she had been flirting with a few of the libertarian candidates almost up until the moment she went to the voting booth. Ultimately, she decided that this election was too important to <a href="https://www.declarationentertainment.com/firewall/falling-principle" target="_blank">throw away her vote</a> on a third party candidate. <br />
<br />
She had a tough slog this election cycle. Not normally political, she has spent the past twenty years in Los Angeles, working in the entertainment industry. Her knee-jerk reaction to most things tended to be liberal. But once out of the bubble, she embraced libertarianism, leaning liberal socially and conservative economically. She spent a lot of time researching and bouncing from one libertarian candidate to another to Romney and back again. It was a tough decision for her, but ultimately, she was impressed by Romney's record and felt he was the most qualified person for the job, so she did what she felt was <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/11/03/why-mitt-romney-is-only-sane-choice-for-libertarians/" target="_blank">best for the country</a>.<br />
<br />
And yet, when confronted by an Obama campaign worker, she lied. Even after all of the thought and consideration, even though she has excellent, intelligent arguments for her vote, she lied. Why?<br />
<br />
"Because I didn't want a lecture."<br />
<br />
I don't believe she's alone in her thinking, either. There are a lot of independents and libertarians like her who have been lumped in with republicans when it comes to liberal hate. Their moderateness is no shield against the same accusations of racism, etc. that conservatives have had to endure for the past few years. So they have decided, as many conservatives have, that the best thing to do is keep silent unless challenged. At which point a fib is often the only other option to a long, potentially contentious debate and/or ad hominem attacks. And so fib they do. <br />
<br />
It makes me wonder. That OfA worker went back to her campaign office and reported my friend as a vote for Obama, when in reality she was a vote for Romney. How many others have done this? If their internal numbers use this information, and my friend is not alone in her reticence, their internals could potentially be as wrong as the polls showing President Obama with a <a href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/good-grief-cnn-poll-shows-a-tie-with-a-d11-sample-democrat-11/" target="_blank">D+11 edge</a>.<br />
<br />
It feels like enthusiasm is on Romney's side (<a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82348.html" target="_blank">looks</a> like it too), as are independents. But they are tired of the partisanship and name-calling and ultimately just want to be left alone to live their lives again. The big question is, how many of them are out there?<br />
<br />
The willful blindness of the media - including much of their polling - has helped create a reality in which President Obama, he of credit downgrades, deficit and debt upgrades, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, and the most unpopular, hyper-partisan social engineering law in modern memory - Obamacare - is competitive against a man who's record on turning around failed companies is, according to Bill Clinton, "stellar" and understands the engine of the economy in a way the current administration never will. The question is, will that reality stand? Or will the people who have been pretending to buy it step up and let their voice be heard from the anonymous confines of the voting booth?<br />
<br />
Here's hoping <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/04/george-will-predicts-321-217-romney-landslide/" target="_blank">George Will</a>, <a href="http://washingtonexaminer.com/barone-going-out-on-a-limb-romney-wins-handily/article/2512470#.UJQ8jcXA901" target="_blank">Michael Barone</a> and others are right and that this ends up being a big, red wave that sweeps Mitt Romney into the White House. A close election will invariably create more bones of contention at a time when there is already a very real feeling in the country that we have had enough. A decisive Romney victory (there is hardly any talk anymore of a decisive Obama victory, just slim O, slim R or decisive R) would send home the lawyers and even the most partisan, passionate progressive would have to concede the race. <br />
<br />
Hopefully we will have a decision by tomorrow morning. In the meantime, try to <a href="http://politicker.com/2012/11/obama-campaign-to-supporters-dont-panic-over-early-exit-polls/" target="_blank">stay calm</a>.<br />
Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-26658685774168373792012-10-09T20:47:00.000-04:002012-10-09T20:47:00.903-04:00SIX TRILLION DOLLAR MAN<br />
Catchy <em>and</em> devastating. What's not to love?!<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/XEjnyMyJYTI" width="425"></iframe><br />Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-19803532374664030712012-09-13T22:53:00.002-04:002012-09-13T22:54:34.492-04:00RANDOM THOUGHTSDoes anyone else here really love <a href="http://spectator.org/archives/2012/09/13/mr-president-mitt-romney-is-no/" target="_blank">Ben Stein</a>? Anyone? Bueller?<br />
<em></em><br />
<em>Finally!</em> Something Lorne Michaels and I have in common - <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/09/13/lorne-michaels-cant-crack-obama" target="_blank">neither one of us can find anything funny about President Obama</a>. Him because of hero worship, me because of a firm grasp on reality. But hey, let's celebrate that common cause, right?<br />
<br />
If even VP Joe Biden knows <a href="http://nation.foxnews.com/joe-biden/2012/09/13/biden-i-am-supposedly-expert-foreign-policy" target="_blank">he's no foreign policy wonk</a>, do you think someday the media might figure it out?<br />
<br />
Is there a betting pool up yet on when and where <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/13/kirsten-powers-yes-the-medias-reaction-to-romneys-egypt-statement-yesterday-was-utterly-insane/" target="_blank">Kristen Powers</a> is going to cross the aisle à la Artur Davis? <br />
<br />
Here's my favorite screen capture of the day. I was doing some research and saw these two articles listed in the order shown on the <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/" target="_blank">Baltimore Sun's</a> website, one from Sept. 7th and the second from Sept. 5th:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkC73M3GfsHh_FigZFqeU35tpuSQ2FhOCBaSoqlYwpRGh_fhXYCjkUr9YZu0LahytO__DxjmckqhxGg2DNanuC8dt0clQnqnJrCquZil_AndnlbNcrXvFF1ZjtbZJ64_WcXa36tYnA8us/s1600/small+media+bias+illustrated.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="318" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkC73M3GfsHh_FigZFqeU35tpuSQ2FhOCBaSoqlYwpRGh_fhXYCjkUr9YZu0LahytO__DxjmckqhxGg2DNanuC8dt0clQnqnJrCquZil_AndnlbNcrXvFF1ZjtbZJ64_WcXa36tYnA8us/s320/small+media+bias+illustrated.png" width="420" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Nope, no media bias there!<br />
<br />
There's no media bias <a href="http://www.therightscoop.com/exclusive-open-mic-captures-press-coordinating-questions-for-romney-no-matter-who-he-calls-on-were-covered/" target="_blank">here</a>, either.<br />
<br />
If breaking the law - the <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/09/12/2338358/report-sebeliuss-political-comments.html" target="_blank">Hatch Act</a>, to be exact - isn't enough to force the resignation of an administration official, what exactly is? HHS's comment that the trip was "<a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/12/special-counsel-cites-sebelius-for-hatch-act-violation/" target="_blank">reclassified</a>" and money was reimbursed is rather like a bank robber saying he filled out a withdrawal slip and then gave back the money anyway and so shouldn't be prosecuted.<br />
<br />
And finally...let me get this straight...criticizing a sitting president's foreign policy after a senseless act of violence is <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/barack-obama-used-troop-deaths-to-ding-bush-mccai" target="_blank">good when Obama is the candidate</a>, but bad when he is the president. <br />
<br />
Gotcha.<br />
<br />
<br />Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-86794671632783888682012-08-13T11:36:00.000-04:002012-08-13T11:41:54.559-04:00A WHOLE NEW GAME<br />
Mitt Romney's pick for VP has energized the conservative movement. Paul Ryan not only brings the tea party firmly onto the ticket (uh-oh, the<a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/ryan-brings-the-tea-party-to-the-ticket/?partner=rss&emc=rss" target="_blank"> NYTimes</a> figured it out!), he also brings a level of leadership and (desperately needed) mathematical competency that has been sorely lacking over the past few years. This is a whole new game now. The cheap thuggery of the Obama campaign isn't going to stand up well in comparison with the cheerful warrior-wonk Romney has recruited to carry his standard and rally the troops.<br />
<br />
The whole thing rather has the feel of a schoolyard bully scene at the end of a movie. The bullies have surrounded the prissy little rich kid and are taunting and maybe even pushing him around a little as the rest of the schoolchildren look away and pretend it isn't really happening. But then, out of nowhere, in comes this (<a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79632.html" target="_blank">dreamy?</a>) blue-eyed <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/54680410-68/ryan-republican-conservative-republicans.html.csp" target="_blank">former prom king</a>, who steps out in front of the bullies' victim and stands his ground with a polite smile on his boyish face, a steel-trap mind and rock-hard abs hidden under his buttoned-up button down shirt. Suddenly, the tenor of the moment changes, the prissy boy grows a spine, the bully boys back up a step and try to laugh off this new threat while the kids on the playground gather in and start chanting "Fight! Fight! Fight" in eager anticipation of the butt-whooping to come. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
In fact, the pick has so energized the base that it has actually bolstered opinion of Romney simply for making the call. It's boldness was unexpected from "<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/313674/milquetoast-mitt-mark-steyn" target="_blank">Milquetoast Mitt</a>", and it has resulted in some <a href="http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/ab-stoddard/243209-picking-ryan" target="_blank">reconsideration</a> of the man at the top of the ticket. There are some out there, myself included, who were hesitant to throw full support behind Romney, not because Obama was better (trust me, Ol' Milquetoast had my vote, but I was planning on holding my nose while I pulled the lever), but because there was still some concern that Romney was simply Obama lite. Those hesitations are gone, at least for me.<br />
<br />
No more middle of the road, hold-your-nose, one's-the-same-as-the-other elections. Not this time. While I'd hardly call Romney far-right, it seems he might have had a bit of a fiscal epiphany - no doubt brought to him courtesy of Mr. Ryan. Hard numbers tend to do that. Compassion is a wonderful thing, but those warm fuzzies don't pay the bills. A balance must be struck. The combination of compassionate moderate and hard numbers conservative is just the ticket to usher us out of the black hole vortex of debt and welfare that is the age of Obama and into a new, prosperous, market-driven American Century. <br />
<br />
Sunday afternoon, Romney and Ryan went to Wisconsin for a "Homecoming Rally". Ryan seemed a bit overwhelmed by the outpouring of support and <a href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/08/10000-greet-team-romney-ryan-to-waukesha-wisconsin/" target="_blank">huge crowds</a>, but still gave a rousing speech. It goes without saying that, being back home in Wisconsin and among friends (at least half of whom seem to be related to him or his wife), beer and brats were mentioned along with matters of national importance. But it was Romney's words that truly stirred this patriot's heart.<br />
<br />
It started off a bit rough, and at one point a heckler was shouted down with chants of "U-S-A! U-S-A!" until he was removed from the crowd. But then Romney warmed up and got his groove back. The rowdy crowd was, at one point, so quiet and riveted on his words that when he paused for effect, you could hear a pin drop. His story revolved around his time with the 2002 Utah Olympics. He had asked a gold medalist speed skater who had competed in the Games what the most memorable moment was for him. Instead of a tale of standing on a podium or crossing a finish line, he was told that the honor of carrying the 9/11 World Trade Center flag surpassed all else, and the magnitude of the moment and the response of the crowd overwhelmed him. It was a beautiful story, beautifully told, and it stirred up a deep sense of patriotism and national unity - a feeling of being in it together - that has been so sorely missing for far too long. It was truly inspiring and I encourage you to watch if you haven't seen it already(Olympics story starts at 8:35. <a href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/08/10000-greet-team-romney-ryan-to-waukesha-wisconsin/" target="_blank">Gateway Pundit</a> has the text of that portion of the speech and a video of the Utah Olympics flag ceremony):<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GrtPqGR6IP0" width="425"></iframe>
<br />
It's time to move past the politics of divisiveness so rife in the Obama years and remember that ultimately, we are Americans. We're all in this together, and it's time to thwart the Obama campaign's plans to divvy us up into grievance-based culture groups pitted against each other. We're losing sight of the forest through the trees. As Patrick Henry famously claimed:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Let us trust God, and our better judgment to set us right hereafter. United we stand, divided we fall. Let us not split into factions which must destroy that union upon which our existence hangs.”</blockquote>
<br />
In a <em>Rules for Radicals</em>-style<em> </em>textbook attempt at derision and division, Obama recently called Mitt "Romney Hood", and actually meant for it to have negative connotations. Too bad for him the real Robin Hood was a) a much-loved hero of the people and b) a man who fought the oppressive taxation of the government to give back to the people. If I were Romney, I'd embrace 'Romney Hood'. After all, doesn't that make Obama King John? If I recall my history properly, wasn't John the much despised monarch who was so awful that he ended up being forced to sign the Magna Carta, which effectively robbed the monarchy of most of it's power, instilling it instead in the people, by way of Parliament? Sounds like a good comparison to me!<br />
<br />
Expect the race to get nastier. A relatively non-political friend of mine, who was taken aback by the Priorities USA ad, asked why they are so desperate to make Romney look like a felon, a murderer, a thief and someone with a sense of compassion that ranks somewhere around homicidal sociopath levels. Simple. It's the only way Obama looks good by comparison. <br />
<br />
We face a fork in the road. To the left is California and Greece, to the right, Reagan's shining city on a hill. A collapsing welfare state squabbling over scraps as our 'leaders' <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9349286/President-Barack-Obama-must-do-more-than-manage-Americas-decline.html" target="_blank">manage our decline</a> or a vibrant small government, free market economy united in making us great again. <br />
<br />
Game on.<br />
<br />Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-71157918496810407002012-07-26T23:31:00.000-04:002012-07-26T23:39:42.396-04:00THE PLAN IS WORKING<br />
President Obama recently stated that:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-on-the-economy-we-tried-our-plan-and-it-worked/article/2502981" target="_blank">"We tried our plan - and it worked"</a></blockquote>
<br />
Needless to say, right-wing blogs ran with this and the left pretty much ignored it. But it is an important quote, and something to keep in mind as we inch ever closer to November. Today I'm going to do something that I try very hard to avoid. I'm going to take a step into the realm of conspiracy theory (hey, if it's good enough for a former cabinet-level advisor, it's good enough for me!) I generally try to stay away from those rabbit holes of circular logic and half-truths. I guess I just don't have that much paranoia in me. But there are a few - a very few - theories that have some weight to them, some merit. Sometimes it is possible to prove or disprove these theories over time. One such theory which is in the process of being proved and which I became acquainted with during the 2008 presidential election, involved something called the "<a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/theclowardpivenstrategypoe.html" target="_blank">Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Chaos</a>". <br />
<br />
This strategy, cooked up in the 1960's by Columbia University professors Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, is a plan to bring down our capitalist system by overwhelming it and causing it's collapse. What would they replace the capitalist system with? Why, a European-style cradle-to-grave nanny state, of course. A collapse would be the excuse needed to throw out the constitution and, as Obama himself said just days before his election, "fundamentally transform America".<br />
<br />
Transition to socialism is usually achieved through revolution or war. We have neither on our shores, and the wars we fight half a world away don't cause the deprivations that triggered the socialization of Europe after the two world wars decimated that region. In the absence of those things, then, how is change brought about? By overwhelming our system in other ways.<br />
<br />
Why is it important to talk about this theory now? Because, as President Obama says, he has implemented his plan, and it is working, right before our eyes:<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<ul>
<li>The payroll tax he instituted and demanded stay in place means taxpayers are contributing 2% less to the Social Security trust fund each week. Which is already overwhelmed and expected to collapse by <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-04-23/social-security-fund-to-run-out-in-2035-trustees-say" target="_blank">2035</a>. Surely this "tax holiday" the president put in place has something to do with the fact that we are now looking at running out of cash in <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/social-security-disability-trust-fund-projected-to-run-out-of-cash-by-2016/2012/05/30/gJQA3AfH1U_story.html" target="_blank">2016</a>.</li>
<li>The senate has not done its constitutional duty in more than three years by refusing to pass - or even seriously consider - a budget. As a result, <a href="http://www.npr.org/2011/01/25/133211508/the-weekly-standard-obama-vs-bush-on-debt" target="_blank">deficit spending has increased</a> from a high under Bush of $410 billion to an average of $1.4 trillion under Obama. For the record, that's $1 trillion more per year than Bush the Profligate at his worst.</li>
<li>There is a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/cardinal-tangles-with-doj/2011/09/13/gIQAhCMFdK_story.html" target="_blank">determined push</a> to get people on government assistance and entitlements, resulting in an unprecedented - and unsustainable - increase in participation. In addition, the absolute refusal by this administration to consider the effects their policies are having on job creation means unemployment has <a href="http://www.examiner.com/article/jobless-rate-goes-nowhere-unemployment-above-8-for-41st-straight-month-1" target="_blank">not gone below 8% in 41 months</a>. Keeping people reliant on government instead of themselves has a twofold benefit for the president. First, the more dependents, the more indebted voters. Second, increased dependent participation and reduced taxpayer income create an unsustainable burden, hastening collapse.</li>
<li>The housing crisis was never really dealt with, aside from a few confusing, unpopular government programs that helped few and harmed many. But that isn't the problem with this issue. The real problem is that Attorney General Eric Holder's Department of Justice is actually <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/cardinal-tangles-with-doj/2011/09/13/gIQAhCMFdK_story.html" target="_blank">forcing banks to do the very same things that helped cause the crisis</a> in the first place by bringing down the power of the DoJ against any banks that refuse to lend to unqualified buyers.</li>
<li>One of the first things Pelosi and Obama did upon his rise to power was to <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/cardinal-tangles-with-doj/2011/09/13/gIQAhCMFdK_story.html" target="_blank">revoke the main part of the Clinton-era welfare reform</a>. The key to the reform - aside from the job training - was removing the incentive for states to add to their rolls. States are now being seduced by much-needed federal dollars to encourage citizens to jump on the dole. </li>
<li>A month later, Obama's HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, dealt the final <a href="http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/238501-obama-kills-welfare-reform" target="_blank">death blow to the wildly successful welfare reforms</a> of the 1990's, wiping out the other key to the reform - the work requirements that had effectively ended generational welfare. This now adds potential welfare collapse to the toxic entitlement brew threatening to bubble over.</li>
<li>The <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304657804576401412033504294.html?mod=googlenews_wsj" target="_blank">requirements for entitlements have been reduced</a> so that more options are available to more people. In addition, active recruiting for candidates is going on, from the increased number and visibility of ads to parents being called by their children's schools to encourage them to apply for the lunch program. <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/27/will-food-stamps-help-make-you-look-amaz" target="_blank"> Selling foodstamps to seniors</a> as if it was a great way to lose weight ("Margie looks amazing! What's her secret?") instead of a humiliating state of dependence in their golden years is particularly loathsome. </li>
<li>Entitlement requirement reduction has resulted in an historic <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/03/us/03brfs-RECORDNUMBER_BRF.html?_r=1" target="_blank">45 million Americans receiving food stamps</a> (aka SNAP). This has not resulted in hand-wringing and promises to get people off the program and into jobs. If fact, the president hasn't really addressed the issue at all.</li>
<li>For two years, the democrats spent taxpayer money like it was their own private stash, <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/23/where-did-stimulus-money-really-go/" target="_blank">doling out favors and riches to cronies and donors</a> with very little check from republicans, who were so much in the minority that their input was neither requested nor desired.</li>
<li>Through executive fiat, regulation, and legislation, this administration has managed to make government a direct "partner" with the energy, health care, automotive and banking industries. Other sectors of the country are so crippled by the excessive regulation and looming taxation that they are unable to make forward progress. The result has been <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65514.html" target="_blank">a "recovery" that is worse than the original recession</a>.</li>
<li>At a time when we have been experiencing long-term unemployment and our workforce participation rate is at the lowest it's been in decades, the president just granted <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/young-illegal-immigrants-amnesty-could-tighten-competition-for-jobs-college/2012/06/15/gJQAmgV4fV_story.html" target="_blank">amnesty</a> and offered our job market to upwards of a million new workers aged 18-35. Can't wait to see the impact that has on the job market. </li>
<li>Obama's amnesty is a double whammy. Not only will it increase our stubbornly high unemployment with the added competition for jobs, it also allows those former illegals access to our social safety nets - most notably <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/politics/ci_20926392/obama-deportation-deferment-plan-leaves-many-questions-unanswered?IADID=Search-www.denverpost.com-www.denverpost.com" target="_blank">unemployment benefits</a>. </li>
<li><a href="http://news.investors.com/article/617233/201207061636/disability-climbs-faster-than-jobs-under-obama.htm" target="_blank">More people signed up for disability last month than got jobs</a>, and the administration seems to be just fine with that, if their absolute radio silence on the issue indicates anything.</li>
<li>Obamacare was designed to increase the cost health insurance for companies while simultaniously offering a cheap "penalty" to not offer insurance at all. This is what will make Obamacare what Pelosi and company promised it wouldn't be - <a href="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/conyers-obamacare-platform-creating-single-payer-system" target="_blank">single payer</a>. And just who is that single payer? Why, government, of course. When businesses start dropping coverage in favor of the cheaper penalty, their employees will be shunted into health insurance "exchanges" that will basically put people into Medicare or Medicaid instead of private insurance. After all, these two fine agencies are well in the black and can easily accommodate more citizens on their rolls. One-sixth of the economy will be under complete control of the federal government if we go to single payer. And, considering how well all of our other entitlements are doing, it's just a matter of time until Obamacare is teetering on the brink of collapse, too.</li>
<li>More than 20 million Americans out of work, and all we get from the administration is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/04/obama-pivot-to-jobs_n_918902.html" target="_blank">promises to "pivot" to the jobs</a> issue. Eventually. Maybe in his second term? </li>
<li><a href="http://www.whptv.com/news/local/story/US-poverty-on-track-to-reach-46-year-high/al11lFjj2UGuXekToDSS6Q.cspx" target="_blank">46 million Americans living in poverty</a>. Yet another historic first. Where's the outrage? </li>
</ul>
<br />
It's not possible to look at all of these things and not start to wonder about what exactly the "plan" is. The result of these policies and actions has been the dismal "recovery" we have been treated to, massive deficits and mind-boggling debt. They are combining to create an unsustainable welfare state that that is doomed to collapse. What Obama is offering Americans is welfare writ large. Everyone is on the dole. Remember, Barack Obama is a genius. He knows what he's doing. That's what they keep telling us. He's ivy-league educated. He's brilliant. <br />
<br />
So what did he study at those ivy-league colleges? Who did he hang out with? What ideas did he pursue? By his own admission, he <a href="http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/obama-college-marxism-occidental/2010/02/08/id/349329" target="_blank">espoused radicalism</a>, even taking Piven's classes in his time at Columbia. He was <a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/why_obamas_red_mentor_is_news.html" target="_blank">immersed in it as a child</a>, and even <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/227500/alinsky-administration/jim-geraghty" target="_blank">taught it</a> later in life. He admitted in <em>Dreams of My Father</em> to not just hanging out with radicals and communists, but actively seeking them out - they are the ones he identified with most. As for the ideas he pursued, his career after college has been a tribute to Cloward-Piven, from his time as a community organizer to <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-215_162-4145761.html" target="_blank">his church of twenty years</a> to his membership in the socialist <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/08/New-Party-Literature-Suggests-Obama-Paid-Dues-to-Join" target="_blank">New Party</a> to the people he has chosen as his <a href="http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/obama-surrounds-himself-with-the-most-extreme-appointees-in-american-history/" target="_blank">administrative inner circle</a> and the policy decisions they have made.<br />
<br />
When President Obama said the jobs numbers were "a step in the right direction", he wasn't misspeaking. When he claimed his plan was working, that wasn't a gaffe. In order for Cloward-Piven to work, this three-year sustained crisis is <em>exactly</em> the right direction and the plan is unfolding exactly as envisioned. An expansive welfare state funded by a shackled economy and scapegoat one-percenters And if it isn't, it means the president and everyone in his administration, as well as former Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid, are utterly incompetent. <br />
<br />
Either way, they need to go.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<em>Cross-Posted at <a href="http://sisterhoodpatriots.blogspot.com/2012/07/the-plan-is-working.html" target="_blank">Sisterhood of the Mommy Patriots</a></em></div>Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-18122252000729867852012-07-18T18:23:00.000-04:002012-07-18T18:23:20.235-04:00IN A NUTSHELLThank you, Bill Whittle of <a href="http://declarationentertainment.com/category/producer-notes-categories/firewall" target="_blank">Declaration Entertainment</a> (and <a href="http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=56" target="_blank">PJTV</a>) for so thoroughly putting President Barack Obama's first term of office into a six-minute nutshell. This video encompasses countless potential blog posts about why he absolutely should not be reelected, so thanks for the free time, Mr. Whittle! Enjoy, and share it with your friends! <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NJFgWA8odBM" width="450"></iframe>Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-45439957822050302162012-06-29T20:47:00.000-04:002012-07-09T09:29:05.316-04:00CONTEMPT IT ISAttorney General Eric Holder made history yesterday. He is the first Cabinet member to be held in criminal and civil contempt of Congress. This vote could have been avoided, if only he had turned over the requested documents. His refusal puts the entire blame for this exercise on his shoulders, and his alone. Holder brought the contempt charges on himself when he chose to ignore the US Congress' legitimate demands for information to which they had every right. His contempt for the US Congress and the American people in this and <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/eric-holder-ducks-congresss-questions-about-massive-terrorism-financing-trial/" target="_blank">other matters</a> has now officially been reciprocated. One hundred democrats refused to vote, choosing instead to <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/78015.html" target="_blank">walk out</a>. Seventeen democrats not only stayed to vote, but crossed the aisle and voted to hold Holder in criminal contempt. Twenty-one democrats voted to hold him in civil contempt.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Of course former Speaker Nancy Pelosi was decrying the political nature of the vote, and other democrats lamented the end of democracy as we know it. You know, the usual hysteria. I won't bother to link, I'm sure you've already heard it <em>ad nauseum</em>.<br />
<br />
The most important thing to come out of yesterday's vote could only happen if he was found in contempt: press coverage. It is a priceless commodity for a story like this, and one the media has most definitely been <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/06/20/Big-Three-Networks-Cover-Fast-and-Furious-Updates-Only-CBS-Satisfies" target="_blank">rationing</a>. I'd love to know who's brilliant idea it was to hold the vote on the same day as the Obamacare decision. Anyone could guess that, no matter which way the ruling went, it would suck all the oxygen out of the pressroom for at least a few days. It's a no-brainer that it would have been better to hold the comtempt vote next week, after the media had worked every possible angle on the Obamacare decision and was hungry for something new.<br />
<br />
The lapdog press have been desperate to ignore or underplay this scandal, but a contempt vote makes it something people want answers about. Adding in the walkout should normally up the media profile (they just love liberal indignation, don' t they?) , but everything is being drowned out by the Obamacare ruling. As usual, the Republicans snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Holder's comtempt vote, historic though it might be, isn't the type of history legacy media outlets like ABC, NBC or even CNN want to talk about in the first place. Giving them the cover of the Obamacare ruling to once again sweep OF&F under the rug is nothing short of idiotic. <br />
<br />
This story deserves press, and a lot of it. It's a sure bet that if more than 2,000 guns had been given to Mexican drug cartels under Bush, resulting in the deaths of not just 300 Mexicans, but also a US Border Patrol agent and an ICE agent, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales refused to hand over pertinent documentation to Nancy Pelosi, the press would be howling for not just contempt charges, but a deeper investigation into White House involvement and, of course, renewed calls for impeachment. <br />
<br />
The fact is, blood has been shed in a gunwalking operation that <a href="http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2b5_1308198279" target="_blank">never planned on tracking the guns</a>. The fact is, the <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/12/02/143067851/justice-withdraws-inaccurate-fast-and-furious-letter-it-sent-to-congress" target="_blank">DoJ admitted that information they had provided to congress about the operation was</a> false. The fact is, any way you slice it, this is a scandal.<br />
<br />
It's hard to image that Watergate, which is the gold standard for governmental scandal, was basically about people breaking into campaign headquarters. The cover-up is what brought down the administration. It's rather ironic that the week we observed the 40th anniversary of the Watergate break-in, President Obama inserted himself into the Operation Fast & Furious scandal by attempting to shield Holder with executive privilege.<br />
<br />
Watergate was the gold standard in scandals, and yet, unlike OF&F, <em>nobody died</em>.<br />
<br />
Is it front page news? Are there calls for more information, more transparency, more outrage over hundreds of deaths at federal hands? No. Nothing. The Terry family deserve answers, as does the Zapata family, the families of slain Mexicans and the Mexican government. If Holder had just handed over the documents, this contempt vote never would have happened. He brought it on himself. <br />
<br />
The left is arguing that the whole investigation is nothing more than election year politics. They're so desperate about this story that that irritatingly smug hack over at CNN, Soledad O'Brien, is actually trying to argue that there wasn't even any gun running! Congressman Mica actually <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/06/28/Congressman-Laughs-At-Soledad-OBrien-For-Suggestin-Gun-Walking-Didnt-Happen" target="_blank">laughs out loud at her spin</a> at one point. Never mind that head of the DoJ's criminal division, <a href="http://www.rollcall.com/news/pressure_builds_on_lanny_breuer_in_fast_and_furious_fallout-210858-1.html" target="_blank">Lanny Breuer</a>, admitted that guns were walked over the border. I guess when you are sitting in a corner with your fingers in your ears, rocking back and forth and self-soothing with the repeated chant of "there was no gun running, there was no gun running", it would be hard to hear the assistant AG's testimony.<br />
<br />
The interesting thing about the nothing-more-than-politicking argument is the reaction of proponents of that line of thinking when they discover that more than 300 people - so far; considering many of the guns have not been recovered, more deaths are likely - have died as a direct result of this operation. Even members of the Daily Kos <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/03/1042007/-DOJ-Withdraws-False-Letter-to-Congress" target="_blank">seem to be taken aback by it.</a> The media blackout has been effective. But the thing is, once they hear the truth, their ideas about Holder and the claims of politicization tend to change. People really sit up and take notice when they are told that our government willfully and knowingly sold high-powered weapons to Mexican drug cartels. And the question that always, always comes next is, <em>why?</em><br />
<br />
This is why the New Media is so important. More and more people are eschewing the corrupt, biased, mainstream, legacy media and getting their information online. Getting the information out, rebutting the claims of politicization with the facts of more than three hundred dead - so far - is imperative. The press knows there is no spinning this thing effectively, so they have decided the best bet is to <a href="http://www.redstate.com/msmarypotts/2012/06/21/media-ignoring-legitimate-scandal-in-fast-and-furious/" target="_blank">ignore it</a>. Their feet must be held to the fire, as should those members of congress who refuse to see past politics to the human cost of this operation. It's quite a commentary that <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbcsw5TPyas" target="_blank">democrats</a> in <a href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/06/28/nancy-pelosi-botches-brian-terrys-name-while-addressing-congress-hold" target="_blank">congress</a> can't even remember Brian Terry's name. Contact your representative, demand answers on Fast and Furious. Demand the administration uphold its claims of transparency and release the documents. Urge your friends to do the same. This is just too important to be swept under the rug.<br />
<br />
As for the practicalities of what happens now, well, it's sort of a stalemate at this point. The criminal contempt is toothless, as his case would then be referred to the DoJ for them to decide what charges to file. It's a pretty safe bet they'll <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303649504577497014129265788.html?mod=googlenews_wsj" target="_blank">decide not to press charges</a>, don't you think? The civil contempt is a different story, however. His contempt ruling can now be used to sue him in federal court to force him to relinquish the documents. The only problem with that is the length of time it takes for court cases to wind their way through the system. The only shot the republicans had at getting any traction on this was through press coverage. And, as usual, they screwed it up.<br />
<br />
With any luck, Mitt Romney will make justice for the Terry and Zapata families a campaign issue. I'm not holding my breath, though. Democrats have labeled this a partisan witch hunt, and you know how wobbly those RINOs get when their liberal counterparts make a pronouncement about something. Perhaps he could segue over to this the next time immigration comes up - "If the President is so concerned about the welfare of Mexican citizens, perhaps he should demand more answers from Attorney General Holder on the deadly gun walking operation known as Fast and Furious, instead of running interference for him." Oh, if only....<br />
<br />Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-88654334597379758262012-06-21T11:40:00.000-04:002012-07-09T09:29:46.143-04:00CONTEMPT AND PRIVILEGEIn the latest twist on the eighteen-month-long endeavor to discover what exactly happened in regards to Operation Fast and Furious, the House Oversight Committee <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/20/politics/holder-contempt/index.html" target="_blank">voted to cite Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress</a>. It passed the committee 23-17 - on party lines - and is now headed to the floor of the House for a vote that is expected to take place some time next week (where is is expected to pass - again on a party line vote). For those not familiar with OF&F, go <a href="http://theripleyreport.blogspot.com/2011/07/whiskey-tango-foxtrot-fast-and-furious.html" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://theripleyreport.blogspot.com/2011/07/noose-is-tightening-fast-and-furiously.html" target="_blank">here</a> for background.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
On a side note, many media outlets are calling Fast and Furious a "botched" operation. Just to be clear - <a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/katiepavlich/2011/11/10/fast_and_furious_was_not_botched" target="_blank">this operation was <em>not</em> "botched".</a> ATF didn't <em>lose</em> those guns, they had <a href="http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/ATF_Report.pdf" target="_blank"><em>instructions to stop tracking them</em></a><em> </em>(pp 14-18, "Trained to Interdict"). Who instructed them? Good question - and one that Rep. Issa is determined to get to the bottom of. Which brings us back to the issue at hand - the refusal of the DoJ to release tens of thousands of pages of information to Congress to assist in their inquiry into the deadly incidents involving ATF weapons. While Holder claims he has been very forthcoming in releasing documents, that's a tough sell when you realize he has released a mere 7,800 pages of documents to Congress out of an estimated 80,000 - not even ten percent.<br />
<br />
To add to the mess, President Obama has thrown the weight of the presidency behind his AG by claiming executive privilege. His political calculator seems to be on the blink these days, because it is difficult to see how this action does anything to help his cause in November. In fact, he has now tied himself inextricably to Holder in this matter. Exercising executive privilege means the executive branch had to have been involved in some way. In other words, he has opened himself up to questions over what he knew and when he knew it. Perhaps we will also discover just how much of a coincidence it was that the very guns President Obama was <a href="http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/07/obama-sold-tracked-same-guns-to-cartels-he-hoped-to-ban-because-they-were-tracked-from-cartels/" target="_blank">calling for increased regulation over were the exact same types of weapons walked over the border</a> just a few months later. <br />
<br />
Democratic defenders say the many hearings on the matter are purely political in nature. One can only imagine how very non-political they would consider this if it had happened under the Bush administration. After all, a <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/20/brian-terry-family-releases-statement-on-obama-executive-privilege-assertion/" target="_blank">Border Patrol agent</a> and an <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-57383089-10391695/second-gun-used-in-ice-agent-murder-linked-to-atf-undercover-operation/" target="_blank">ICE agent</a> were killed by weapons walked over the border by the ATF. And the mind simply reels at trying to imagine the bonus mileage the press would have squeezed out of the fact that, across the border, literally hundreds of Mexican citizens and government agents have been slaughtered by the weapons walked to the cartels (why does Bush hate Latinos so much?).<br />
<br />
It's important to note that the <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/01/nation/la-na-fast-furious-20120601" target="_blank">Mexican government has their own investigation</a> into OF&F currently underway, and they want answers, too. Foremost of which must surely be why they were not consulted on this deadly operation, when they had been working in concert with the Bush administration on Operation Wide Receiver. Never mind consultation, why in the world weren't they even <em>notified</em>? It's a damn good thing Mexico is such a close ally, because a more adversarial state could claim OF&F was an attempt by a foreign power to <a href="http://tucsoncitizen.com/view-from-baja-arizona/2011/08/22/m3-report-mexico-in-%E2%80%98civil-war%E2%80%99-with-drug-gangs/" target="_blank">incite a civil war</a>. We kept the Mexican government in the dark while we supplied weapons to dangerous, paramilitary forces that have made several attempts to assert their supremacy over the central Mexican power structure. The foreign policy implications are breathtaking. <br />
<br />
After an <a href="http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/holder-issa-meeting-contempt/2012/06/18/id/442717" target="_blank">exchange of letters</a> Issa agreed to a meeting with Holder, in which he was offered a briefing on OF&F and a paltry 1,300 pages (many of which Issa did not request) in lieu of the more than 70,000 pages being withheld. Holder calls this an extraordinary offer. It seems at this point that the only extraordinary thing about his offer was the fact that he had the nerve to waste everyone's time in this pathetically transparent attempt to obfuscate, slow and deflect.<br />
<br />
This scandal has been under investigation for eighteen months. If there was nothing to hide, one would imagine Mr. Holder would be happy to send over the records to the Oversight committee showing it was a local clusterfark with no ties to the administration. Instead, he has stonewalled, dragged his heels, and <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20116164-10391695.html" target="_blank">relocated key agents</a> to positions that kept them under his thumb and out of the committee chamber. One can only imagine the howls for his blood if it were 2007 and he were a Bush appointee (via <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-06-20/holder-contempt-House-vote/55717644/1" target="_blank">USAToday</a>):<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"You know, there's been a tendency on the part of this administration to — to
try to hide behind executive privilege every time there's something a little
shaky that's taking place," then-Sen. Obama said in an interview with <a href="http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/People/Journalists,+Media,+Academia/Larry+King" title="More news, photos about Larry King">Larry
King</a>. In the second interview, Obama said that "the issue of executive power
and executive privilege is one that is subject to abuse, and in an Obama
presidency what you will see will be a sufficient respect for law and co-equal
branches of government."</blockquote>
<br />
The president's attempt to shield Holder only makes the attorney general look more guilty. But now it also raises the question of what is in those papers, that Obama is willing to risk this scandal (<em>finally</em>) going national by stepping in with executive privilege?<br />
<br />
Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) have been able to keep this scandal on the down low, <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/13/nbc-reports-demand-for-holder-resignation-but-not-why/" target="_blank">even when it required a bit of a stretch</a>, but the press are going to have to start covering it, now that the president has weighed in. Of course it's going to be spun as a political witch hunt and nothing more. Oh, and racism; but that, unfortunately, is a given these days. Two dead government agents, hundreds of dead Mexicans, but no need to investigate! Nothing to see here...move along....<br />
<br />
...Hey, did you see there's a <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/other/233561-giant-pack-of-birth-control-to-follow-romney-on-campaign-trail" target="_blank">giant birth control pack following Mitt Romney around</a>? That's waaay more interesting. <br />
<br />
Really. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-53749249478983235852012-04-12T16:20:00.001-04:002012-07-09T09:30:33.636-04:00WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT: PROPAGANDA EDITIONDana Milbank isn't someone I agree with often, but his article in the Washington Post today was a real eye opener for me. Mr. Milbank is (somewhat surprisingly) not very supportive of President Obama's proposed "Buffett Rule", which is supposed to reach the Senate floor for a vote next week. It's not expected to pass.<br />
<br />
In fact, the president himself <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rebuffing-obamas-buffett-rule/2012/04/11/gIQA7m4HBT_story.html" target="_blank">called the whole thing a "gimmick".</a> Isn't it great that the Senate is spending its valuable time on this purely political attempt to re-elect one man instead of doing its constitutional duty and passing the first budget in more than three years? Good to know they have their priorities in line.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Milbank spends the first few paragraphs talking about the roll out the administration is doing on this useless piece of political propaganda. He talks about the set, complete with props:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Actually, the gimmick was apparent even without the president’s acknowledgment. He gave his remarks in a room in the White House complex adorned with campaign-style photos of his factory tours. On stage with him were eight props: four millionaires, each paired with a middle-class assistant. The octet smiled and nodded so much as Obama made his case that it appeared the president was sharing the stage with eight bobbleheads. <br />
<br />
<br />
And if that’s not enough evidence of gimmickry, after his speech Obama’s reelection campaign unveiled an online tax calculator “to see how your tax rate stacks up against Mitt Romney’s — and then see what the Buffett Rule would do.”</blockquote>
<br />
Milbank goes on to knock the proposed bill and the crass political nature of it all. I highly recommend it. But that's not what <em>this</em> post is about.<br />
<br />
No, the thing that struck me isn't the pure politicization of this issue (which is the worst I've ever seen - using the <em>Senate</em> as your lackeys to attack a political rival? <em>really</em>?), it's the "roll out" of the gimmick. As a child of the Cold War, this struck me as the most ham-fisted propaganda campaign since the fall of the Soviet Union. Any American of a certain age knows what I'm talking about. Little vignettes like this from the Soviet propaganda machine were laughed at on nearly every level of American society at one time. <br />
<br />
All that was missing was President Obama, dressed in a spiffy military uniform with lots of medals, saluting a vast army of middle class riding mobile printing presses spewing money as they passed in review; F-18's flying in formation overhead and carpet bombing the adoring masses with SNAP cards and government cheese. <br />
<br />
The left scoffs at conservatives' labeling of progressives as socialist or borderline communist (when you <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/35733956/DSA-Members-American-Socialist-Voter-Democratic-Socialists-of-America-10-1-09" target="_blank">don't have an answer</a>, deride, right?). But when faced with such blatant propaganda, well, it's hard to see it as anything else.Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-41892276968304816602012-04-09T21:50:00.000-04:002012-07-09T09:30:59.370-04:00VOTER ID AND REALITYThe Department of Justice has been busily blocking various and sundry state voter ID laws recently, arguing that requiring people to show a state-approved photo ID in order to cast a vote will disenfranchise many voters - particularly in urban areas, where many citizens don't drive. The NAACP have gone so far as to <a href="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/naacp-urges-un-human-rights-council-review-us-voter-suppression-laws" target="_blank">argue before the UN</a> that voter ID laws are human rights violations, even though many <a href="http://www.therightscoop.com/mrctv-asks-minorities-if-voter-id-laws-are-racist/" target="_blank">poor and minority voters seem to want their votes protected</a> by ID requirements. DoJ chief Eric Holder maintains that voter ID laws suppress voter turnout. <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123327839569631609.html" target="_blank">Eh, not so much</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Never mentioned in these arguments, of course, are the <a href="http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/115329449.html" target="_blank">many</a>, <a href="http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2012/mar/28/rick-perry/rick-perry-says-photo-id-required-purchase-sudafed/" target="_blank">many</a> other things Americans do that require state-issued photo ID. Silly things, like, say...<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZf25pmgR4c" target="_blank">entering federal buildings like the DoJ</a>. Also not mentioned is the increased chance that some bozo might come in and steal someone else's vote. Holder has pooh-poohed that argument, saying that the chance of voter fraud is minimal.<br />
<br />
Turns out, he was <em>juuuuuust</em> a bit wrong on that:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/P5p70YbRiPw" width="425"></iframe>Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-51789523599846071532012-03-19T16:06:00.000-04:002012-07-09T09:31:24.742-04:00ON CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS AND POND SCUMAt a recent fundraiser, President Obama called his republican competitors "flat earthers" in regards to his "all of the above" energy policy (via <a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/03/obama-fires-up-campaign-against-flat-earth-gop/1" target="_blank">USA Today</a>):<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"If some of these folks were around when Columbus set sail," he said, "they must have been founding members of the Flat Earth Society -- they would not have believed that the world was round."</blockquote>
<br />
Yeah, yeah, we get it, conservatives are anti-science. Well, <a href="http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2011/03/republicans-are-more-scientifically.html" target="_blank">except when they're not</a>, of course.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Since Mr. Obama is so fond of his snarky little analogies, let's just expand on it, shall we? So republicans who want to exploit our natural resources and understand that alternative fuels are just not where we need them to be yet are "flat earthers", are they? Let's switch things up for a minute: <br />
<br />
Our intrepid Barackopher Obambus's fleet wouldn't have used the conventional method of power, namely inexpensive canvas sails (of which there was an abundance) and would instead have relied on his favored green energy schemes. What a sight it would have been, watching our adventurous leader, chin tilted up in that oh-so-familiar pose, green halo shining above his head, hitting the high seas in his ships of the future: the Ninavolta, which <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/26/chevy-volt-battery-fire-electric-car-general-motors_n_1114193.html" target="_blank">bursts into flame</a> a mile out from shore and his beloved flagship, Solyndra Maria, which cost half a billion dollars but can't store enough energy with it's solar sails to make any forward progress, wallowing instead in the harbor as it's crew strips it down <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09-18/news/ct-met-kass-0918-20110918_1_solyndra-loan-guarantee-obama-fundraisers-obama-white-house" target="_blank">before the <strike>taxpayer</strike> Crown gets it's "investment" back</a>. Meanwhile, Ninavolta's sleek and sassy high-end electric sister, <a href="http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2012/03/video-bad-karma-our-fisker-karma-plug-in-hybrid-breaks-down.html" target="_blank">La Karma, can't even generate enough power to leave the dock</a>. As for the Pinta, well, it's still in drydock, waiting for it's new algae engine. Don't hold your breath on that one.<br />
<br />
We hear a lot of "all of the above" from the left these days; no one more stridently than our own Dear Barackopher Obambus. Unfortunately, his idea of "all of the above" is more like "anything but what we're using now". The sharp rise in prices is due, in part, to his over-active EPA, his catering to his activist base in shutting down the pipeline (even if it IS "just for now") and his drilling restrictions on federal lands (an <a href="http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2012/02/23/ier-analysis-oil-and-gas-production-declines-on-federal-lands-in-fy2011/#_ednref4" target="_blank">eleven percent drop</a> in the number of permits issued year-to-year is absolutely NOT increased drilling under his policies). There are of course other factors involoved; it's a complicated issue. So much more so than, say, four years ago when the answer was simple: Bush. But if Obama would back down on some of his policies and rein in his EPA a bit, prices would ease as the prospect of increasing production changed speculation. <br />
<br />
<br />
Obama is forcing Americans, via high fuel prices, onto a non-existent "green energy" market. <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-14/steven-chu-s-epiphany-on-gas-prices-the-ticker.html" target="_blank">Just as promised</a>. The impact of this policy of european-style energy prices will have wide-ranging ripples to the rest of our economy at a time when we <em>literally</em> cannot afford it. And that's apparently a-okay with Mr. Obama. He has taken to deflecting criticism with some version of, "do you think I'd be stupid enough to do that?", but it doesn't quite work because too many in his administration, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4" target="_blank">himself included</a>, are on the record stating that the only way to wean us off of evil fossil fuels is to price it out of range. So yes, since you asked, I do think you're stupid enough to do that. The problem is that I'm not stupid enough to be taken in by Chu's mea culpa.<br />
<br />
As for his much-mocked algae, that is still, at minimum, a decade away. They are still in the experimental phase, experimenting with over eighty thousand of varieties of algae to find (or create) the perfect specimen. Speaking of algae, check out this little quote from <a href="http://www.10news.com/news/27998393/detail.html" target="_blank">Stephen Mayfield</a>, one of the leading researchers in the algae field:<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Algae already makes oil that looks like crude oil. The oil we extract from algae goes directly into a refinery and gets converted into diesel or gasoline," said Mayfield</blockquote>
<br />
Huh. Just like crude, you say? Interesting. So here's a suggestion - how about we skip the whole making fake oil thing, and just go right ahead and drill for the real deal? Because if algae oil and fossil fuel oil are basically the same thing and would burn the same way, how exactly is it more ecologically superior? Now, while I see their point that fossil fuels will eventually run out (in <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/17/usa-an-oil-rich-nation-after-all/" target="_blank">about 200 years</a>) so having an easily replenishable replacement is important, but how exactly does that help us <em>right now</em>? And doesn't it make sense that while they are working on the fake stuff we should be drilling for the real stuff to hold us over? Algae twenty years down the road doesn't put gas in my tank today. <br />
<br />
If our president would only <a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2011/02/23/10-things-you-need-to-know-about-high-gas-prices-and-obama%E2%80%99s-oil-policy/" target="_blank">take a break from the demagoguing</a> for a moment and asked around, he would find that he would be hard-pressed to find anyone who <em>wouldn't</em> support alternative forms of energy if they were cheap and readily available - it's the American Way! - but wind and solar aren't even close yet, and the algae idea is, <em>at best</em>, at least a decade away. Instead he decides to create another commission to investigate high gas prices. Gee, <a href="http://theripleyreport.blogspot.com/2011/04/ripley-commission.html" target="_blank">didn't we already do this last year</a>? It's a safe bet that whatever recommendations this latest dog and pony show makes will be ignored as thoroughly as the last, just as he thoroughly ignored the recommendations of his debt commission. Just another wasteful, useless political ploy to make it look like he's doing something. <br />
<br />
One other thing - he hasn't really explained how, exactly, switching to wind, solar and algae will help us with high gasoline prices right now. Is anyone going to hold his feet to the fire on that? Anyone? Bueller? Well, hopefully there will be algae buses coming off the line right quick because under another four years of Obama's energy policy, the only people who will be able to afford to drive will be his <a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2012/02/23/morning-bell-obamas-crony-capitalist-trap-door/" target="_blank">crony buddies</a> in the <a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/03/01/president-obama-to-attend-fundraisers-in-manhattan-today/" target="_blank">top 1%</a>.Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-86430854595140856282012-01-31T15:54:00.000-05:002012-07-09T09:31:57.330-04:00ON NEWT, REAGAN, MUD AND MITTToday's the big day here in Florida. While I am not a registered republican and cannot vote in the closed primary, I'm happy today is primary day because that means that hopefully tomorrow the attack ads will stop. The Romney campaign has decided to run a scorched earth campaign against Newt Gingrich, and it ain't pretty. For every Gingrich ad there are three Romney attack ads. I have to say, I'm liking candidate Romney less and less as the campaign drags on. I have no problem with attack ads, but I do require that they at least be truthful. Romney's are not. <br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Let's start with the claim that Gingrich "resigned in shame". That is absolute malarkey. It is implied that he resigned because he was censured by the House and had ethics violations brought against him. In reality, he resigned <em>two years later</em>.<br />
<br />
And how about those ethics violations, anyway? What was that all about? Here's the beef in a nutshell (via <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204661604577185030808355916.html?KEYWORDS=gingrich+ethics+report" target="_blank">The Wall Street Journal</a>):<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
On the merits, the claim was that Mr. Gingrich diverted funds from a tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization for political activity. The Progress and Freedom Foundation sponsored his seminar "Renewing American Civilization," and Democrats charged its real purpose was advancing Professor Gingrich's career.<br />
<br />
<br />
In 1997, the speaker basically copped a plea and accepted the House rebuke to avoid further political damage. Yet a formal IRS investigation in 1999 exonerated Mr. Gingrich and found that the course was intended to educate students about American government and society.</blockquote>
<br />
Basically, it was an attempt by the opposition to hamstring a promising young politician. Please note <a href="http://www.infowars.com/pelosi-gingrich-will-not-get-the-nomination-there-is-something-i-know/" target="_blank">Nancy Pelosi's glee</a> in alluding that she was privy to information that didn't make the public record in an effort to conflate the issue into something serious (sounds like a little old fashioned liberal panic and bluster to me). Something similar happened to John McCain with the notorious "Keating 5" scandal. Much like Gingrich, McCain was eventually found to be <a href="http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message628952/pg1" target="_blank">innocent</a> of all charges - but dems still tried to use it to discredit him in 2008. The Romney camp seems perfectly happy to take a page out of that playbook.<br />
Romney's demand that Gingrich release the ethics report is disingenuous and is a blatant attempt to make hay. He knows full well that that report has been public record for well over a decade now and is <a href="http://ethics.house.gov/committee-report/matter-representative-newt-gingrich" target="_blank">easily accessible online</a>. How can Gingrich 'release' something that's public property? It's typical that Romney was lamenting Gingrich's supposed "Alinsky tactics", but has no problem using lies, innuendo, posturing and the politics of personal destruction to suit his own ends. <br />
<br />
Then there are the attacks on Gingrich's Reagan creds and the attempt to paint him as anti-Reagan. Not only is this line of attack ridiculous, it's also flat-out wrong. <em><a href="http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/nancy-reagan-gingrich-conservative/2012/01/26/id/425620" target="_blank">Nancy Reagan herself</a></em> said that "Ronnie" passed the torch to Newt. His son Michael has endorsed and is campaigning for Gingrich. While there are a few Reagan insiders who have refuted Gingrich's claims to the mantle of Reaganism or whatever it is exactly that they are squabbling over, there are also several insiders who <a href="http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/24/reagans-young-lieutenant/2" target="_blank">claim the opposite</a>. In order to view Gingrich's comments as anti-Reagan, a real effort has to be made to <a href="http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/27/elliott-abrams-caught-misleadi" target="_blank">take them out of context</a>. Romney's lame attack that Gingrich was only mentioned once in Reagan's diary sounds more like sour grapes than anything else. Besides, at least <a href="http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Reagan-McFarlane-Shirley-National/2012/01/27/id/425800" target="_blank">Gingrich was in the inner circle</a> - as opposed to Romney, who found it more expedient to <a href="http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message628952/pg1" target="_blank">distance himself</a> from Reagan policies - until it suited him to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQCInYfDEY4" target="_blank">embrace them</a>, of course.<br />
<br />
Quite frankly, the more I see of Romney and his resume, the more I see Obama Lite. <br />
<br />
We need someone in office who will shake things up. Romney has shown over and over that he is yet another 'go-along-to-get-along' progressive republican. In order to make the big changes needed to get our house in order, we need a reformer. That is NOT Mitt Romney. The only candidate out there right now with a real reformer resume is Newt Gingrich. <br />
<br />
The fact that the republican establishment has come out in force for Romney and against Gingrich really says it all, doesn't it? Who would they want in office, the one who will continue the policies that are good for them but bad for the country, or the one who will shake things up, clean things out and reprioritize for the good of the nation, not the party?<br />
<br />
A vote for Romney is a vote for the status quo. All he will do is slow down the rate of decline. He has no interest in fixing our broken system, because it works for him. If you don't mind deficits as far as the eye can see, Romney's your guy. His record in Massachusetts was every bit as big-government as Obama's, right down to being the blueprint for Obamacare. <br />
<br />
Let's pretend for a minute that the US is a train. Before we left the station, Engineer Obama and his regulators piled on to the already overloaded train and hooked up a few dozen extra cars for good measure. Then he put the pedal to the metal in an attempt at getting a running start on his section of track. Unfortunately, this leg of the American Journey happens to be through the Rockies, and we are stuck on a mighty steep incline. Engineer Obama's answer to our inertia is to add a few more cars to the train, perhaps in an attempt at crushing the mountain under it's sheer weight. No one is really sure, including, it seems, Engineer Obama. The result is a train stuck halfway up a mountain with it's boiler, fueled by inflated, flaming greenbacks supplied by an ever-printing Fed, fruitlessly pumping out geysers of useless steam as it's wheels spin frantically forward even as the train slips irrevocably backwards.<br />
<br />
Obviously we need a new engineer, and the country has been desperately looking for one for over a year now. Enter Engineer Romney. While he might uncouple the last car in the train - Obamacare - to lighten the load a bit, he will focus more on just applying the brakes and trying to keep the decline from being too sharp, as opposed to trying to get over the mountain. <br />
<br />
Engineer Gingrich would stop the train, decouple the cars added under Obama, upgrade the engine, streamline the train, ditch the regulatory dead weight (and hopefully the luxury cars that have latched on under Obama) and focus on getting us roaring up the mountain again. Those much vaunted Clinton Surpluses? Thanks to Gingrich. The Welfare reform the Clinton administration proudly takes credit for? Wouldn't have happened had Newt not dragged Mr. Bill kicking and screaming to the table.<br />
<br />
Is Newt a personable guy? Not particularly - especially if you listen to the Establishment. But I'm not looking for someone likeable. Barack Obama, by all accounts, is quite personable. But I'd rather swallow live scorpions than have him at the wheel for another four years. I want a leader. A reformer. Someone who will really shake up Washington. Is Gingrich a Washington insider as Romney claims? Well, if he was, he'd probably be better liked, because he'd be playing the game. But he is loathed in Washington. <br />
<br />
And you know what? That's endorsement enough for me.Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-79339792339714728022012-01-10T19:37:00.001-05:002012-07-09T09:32:36.479-04:00PROJECTION AND REVERSISM UpdatedIn yet another glaringly obvious case of projection, our esteemed President said a mouthful while attacking the republican agenda at yet another fundraiser last night (via <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-campaigns-osama-bin-laden-will-never-again-walk-face-earth-s-what-change_616238.html" target="_blank">the Weekly Standard</a>):<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The very core of what this country stands for is on the line"</blockquote>
<br />
Now, of course he was referring to the eeeeevil republican candidates destroying America as we know it. In reality, what <em>he</em> is trying to do is about as far from the core of what this country stands for as possible. Isn't that, in fact, what his claims to "fundamentally change" America were all about? Ostensibly, his point was that republicans won't make you your neighbor's keeper, but when was that <em>ever</em> the core of what this country stands for? It doesn't really jibe with our signature rugged individualism, but then, we all know <a href="http://www.knst.com/pages/garretlewis.html?article=9479903" target="_blank">how he feels about <em>that</em> little foible</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Projection is a favorite of the Obama Administration, as is what I like to call "Reversism". Reversism involves making claims of doing one thing and doing the exact opposite instead. The past three years have been rife with glaringly obvious cases of projection and reversism that were almost insulting in their blatant ridiculousness.<br />
<br />
Take their constant calls that republicans want to shut down the federal government. In reality, <a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/03/democrats-eager-to-talk-of-government-shutdown/" target="_blank">the only people talking shutdown have been democrats</a>. These are also the people whose vows of transparency boiled down to <a href="http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/03/obama-transparency-fail-white-house-will-keep-secret-big-pharma-o" target="_blank">secret meetings</a> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU" target="_blank">this little gem</a>. But it's the republicans who are deceptive, right?<br />
<br />
My favorites are the claims of a do-nothing Congress. This line of projection just kills me. Let's see, the Campaigner-in-Chief/First Golfer can't be bothered to acknowledge the very serious issues plaguing the nation or work with Congress for the good of the country (it would <a href="http://articles.cnn.com/2011-12-27/politics/politics_obama-do-nothing-congress_1_debt-ceiling-debate-house-speaker-john-boehner-trillion-in-deficit-reduction?_s=PM:POLITICS" target="_blank">mess up his narrative</a> and lets face it, reelection is far more important than the economy) and his democrat-controlled Senate refuses to bring even one of the <a href="http://www.speaker.gov/Blog/?postid=271218" target="_blank">twenty-five economic and job related bills the House has passed</a> to the floor. Oh, and the House has passed several budgets in the past year of republican control, but the <a href="http://www.cagw.org/newsroom/waste-watcher/2011/august/the-senate-budget-committee.html" target="_blank">democrat-led Senate hasn't passed one in more than a thousand days</a> - and probably won't until 2013. Even when they had a democrat-led House (who refused to create a budget so they couldn't be held accountable for their out of control spending) and a super majority. But it's the eeeevil republicans who have gridlocked Congress.<br />
<br />
From denouncements of Bush's "imperial presidency" as a candidate and then <a href="http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/senate-334838-obama-president.html" target="_blank">performing end runs around Congress</a> at a <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-01-05/news/ct-oped-0105-chapman-20120105_1_obama-pledges-barack-obama-enemy-combatants" target="_blank">breathtaking (and unconstitutional) level</a> as president to whining about a need for civility while simultaneously <a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/09/tea-party-wants-obama-to-apologize-for-hoffa/1" target="_blank">keeping mum</a> as his <a href="http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2011/06/wash-post-awards-debbie-wasserman-schultz-three-pinocchios.html" target="_blank">surrogates accuse his opponents</a> of everything from throwing grandma off a cliff to wanting poor children to starve, this administration is the unrivaled champion of projection. <br />
<br />
As for Reversism, the perfect example is Nancy Pelosi's acceptance speech when she took the Speakership in 2007:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"After years of historic deficits, this new Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: <a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2010/10/pelosis-paygo-ploy" target="_blank">pay as you go</a>, <a href="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/debt-has-increased-5-trillion-speaker-pelosi-vowed-no-new-deficit-spending" target="_blank">no new deficit spending</a>. Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not <a href="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/final-tab-pelosi-s-speakership-534-trillion-new-debt-or-366-billion-day" target="_blank">burden them with mountains of debt</a>"</blockquote>
<br />
Just take a moment to let that sink in....<br />
<br />
Their vows of transparency translated into <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/10/dems-lock-out-republicans-literally/" target="_blank">changed locks</a> and secret negotiations on Capitol Hill. Even their receipt of an award for transparency was received <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/31/obama-accepts-transparenc_n_843195.html" target="_blank">behind closed doors</a> with no press present. Probably didn't want any pesky questions like, 'How is it transparent to send staff to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/us/politics/25caribou.html" target="_blank">meet lobbyists at Caribou Coffee to get around visitor logs</a>?' and 'In what way was it transparent to argue that <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2011/11/03/holder-nixes-rule-telling-agen" target="_blank">misleading the American public</a> in regards to Freedom of Information Act requests was perfectly legit?'.<br />
<br />
What is interesting is the effect these deceptive projection tactics are having. In a recent poll, the thing Americans feared most - <a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/01/09/poll-americans-2-1-fear-obamas-reelection" target="_blank">by a two-to-one margin</a> - was President Obama's reelection. For the record, the second thing they feared was their taxes going up. Which explains number one quite nicely. The projector just doesn't seem to be working as well as the administration would hope and the problem with reversism is that eventually people start comparing words and deeds. After three years of saying one thing and doing the opposite, it seems the only people buying what Obama and the DNC are selling are those who happily live in the echo chamber already. <br />
<br />
The thing to remember about projection and reversism is that they are meant to deceive and distract. They are the smoke and mirrors by which the rest of us are kept in the dark - pure propaganda. Common sense would dictate that any administration that spends such in inordinate amount of time and energy on such devices is an administration up to no good. Guess we'll find out in November just how many voters possess that oh so important virtue and vote accordingly. <br />
<br />
<strong>UPDATE:</strong> <a href="http://townhall.com/tipsheet/erikajohnsen/2012/01/10/obama_to_the_epa_thanks_for_being_as_clear_and_as_least_bureaucratic_as_possible_riiiiight" target="_blank">Another ham handed attempt at reversism</a> to further prove my theory. Good gravy, does he really think anyone is buying this?Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-8633009854184654182011-12-06T11:23:00.001-05:002012-07-09T09:32:59.941-04:00STUCK IN THE PAST - UpdatedIt seems President Obama is now <a href="http://www.npr.org/2011/12/06/143178163/in-kansas-obama-seeks-teddy-roosevelt-comparisons" target="_blank">attempting to channel Theodore Roosevelt</a>. Sure, why not? It's amazing how many former presidents he (or the ever-fawning media) has tried to model himself after - it started with the comparisons to FDR and JFK, but continued with quite laughable attempts to connect him to Reagan and even Harry Truman. Now, I have to say, there is a bit of a similarity on that last one, but not the <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/278069/obama-lies-about-do-nothing-congress-deroy-murdock" target="_blank">bogus "Do Nothing Congress" angle</a> he's been working for all he's worth. No, the real similarity is that both are responsible for dropping huge bombs that crippled nations - Japan, in Truman's case, and the American economy via Porkulus, over regulation and Obamacare in Obama's. Unfortunately for President Obama, the rising consensus is that, performance-wise, he is a far closer match to Carter than any of the giants with whom he has attempted parity.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
By the way, am I the only one who finds it puzzling that a "progressive" - who, by definition, supposedly denotes progress and movement into the future - bases most of his ideas and campaign structure on the past? <br />
<br />
Teddy Roosevelt was the first progressive president, so it's not surprising Obama would turn to him. He also brings the added bonus of being a republican, which enables Obama to cloak himself in the smoke and mirrors of what he likes to pass off as 'centrism' (via <a href="http://www.npr.org/2011/12/06/143178163/in-kansas-obama-seeks-teddy-roosevelt-comparisons" target="_blank">NPR</a> - emphasis mine):<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Roosevelt used his speech to call for a more activist federal government, including thorough policing of the financial system and a graduated tax on high incomes. And just as Roosevelt defended himself against accusations of communism by quoting Abraham Lincoln, Brands said <strong>Obama hopes to fend off charges of class warfare by presenting himself as the heir to Republican Roosevelt</strong>.<br />
<br />
<br />
"<strong>One of the ways of deflecting criticism is to put your own positions in the mouths of great figures from the past</strong>," he said. "And for Obama, one of the great appeals of Theodore Roosevelt is he's a recognizable name brand. He's valued by both parties, even though a lot of what Roosevelt stood for has largely been forgotten."</blockquote>
<br />
See how moderate he is? He admires T.R.! He considers himself his heir! So let's see....T.R. fended off accusations of communism by using the moral equivalency of quoting Lincoln, and now Obama is fending off accusations of socialism by quoting T.R. Talk about a round-robin of equivalence! Rather dizzying, isn't it? God forbid they address criticism with facts and allow people to decide for themselves.<br />
<br />
Walking in the footsteps of giants does not make one a giant. But it is, at least, par for the course in Obama's pattern of leading from behind. Great men are incomparable; small men attempt to gain stature through comparison. <em>Individuality</em> creates greatness, not cribbing off people who lived and made policy a hundred years ago. But the modern progressive party and it's leader have no new ideas. It's the same old <a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/05/socialisms_downfall.html" target="_blank">flawed policy</a> they've been trying to sell the American people for a hundred years now, just in a shiny new package.<br />
<br />
Perhaps the next president Obama should emulate is <a href="http://theripleyreport.blogspot.com/2010/10/calvin-ism-for-modern-age.html" target="_blank">Calvin Coolidge</a>. And if he doesn't, hopefully the American people will cast him in the mold of several other former presidents such as John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren and William Howard Taft - one-termers all.<br />
<br />
<strong>UPDATE</strong>: It seems this speech should have been titled the "Declaration of Dependence" because all it talked about was government dependency. He even stated quite baldly that America's signature "rugged individualism" is a failure. He spoke of "fairness" but never mentioned who would decide what, exactly, "fair"<br />
is. In my opinion, it was his official coming out party for his hard-core progressive, neo-socialist agenda. Redistributionism is the order of the day and the lowering of all boats will be the result. <br />
<br />
Thanks but no thanks.Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-73164842622782747532011-11-29T07:13:00.002-05:002011-12-04T19:34:17.186-05:00MY OBAMAVILLEMY OBAMAVILLE<br />
(sung to Jimmy Buffet's Margaritaville)<br />
<br />
Nibblin' on soy cake<br />
Man, I am so baked<br />
All of those hippies covered with paint<br />
Bangin' my drum kit<br />
I bet you hate it<br />
The smell might make you want to faint<br />
<br />
(Chorus)<br />
<br />
Wasted today again in my Obamaville<br />
Lookin' for my last baggie of pot<br />
Some people say that it's just Wall Street to blame<br />
All I know is it's not government's fault<br />
<br />
I don't know the reason<br />
Private property seizing<br />
Nothin' to show but some lice and some fleas<br />
But I got of easy<br />
I'm not that sleazy<br />
So at least I don't have STD's<br />
<br />
(Chorus)<br />
<br />
Wasted today again in my Obamaville<br />
Lookin' for my last baggie of pot<br />
Some people say that it's just Wall Street to blame<br />
Now I think<br />
It might be government's fault<br />
<br />
Government fat cats<br />
Gettin' their kickbacks<br />
I'll wash yours if you wash mine<br />
How can this not be <br />
Laundering money<br />
Robbin' the taxpayers blind<br />
<br />
(Chorus)<br />
<br />
Wasted today again in my Obamaville<br />
Lookin' for my last baggie of pot<br />
Some people say that it's just Wall Street to blame<br />
Now I know it's crony government's fault<br />
Some people say that it's just Wall Street to blame<br />
But I know it's crony government's fault<br />
<br />
<br />
<div align="center">Cross Posted at Sisterhood of the Mommy Patriots</div>Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-17104979758849955822011-10-19T22:45:00.002-04:002012-07-09T09:34:35.810-04:00REALLY JOE? REALLY? UpdatedI'm going to keep this short and sweet because I am absolutely sick and tired of this demagogic crap.<br />
<br />
VP Joe Biden <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/19/joe-biden-rape-murder-jobs-bill_n_1020706.html">once again</a> claimed that people who oppose President Obama's so-terrible-even-the-<em>democratic</em>-majority-senate-won't-pass-it American Jobs Act apparently don't mind if people are raped or murdered because of the lack of cops on the beat due to budget cuts. (Doesn't that mean he's criticizing <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-campaign-says-gop-blocking-jobs-bill-after-reid-blocks-jobs-bill_595022.html">his own party</a>?)<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
My response would be that anyone who would rather lay off cops and firefighters (or teachers, for that matter) instead of pencil pushing bureaucrats is simply holding a gun to the head of the taxpayer in order to push through an agenda. <br />
<br />
BTW - you might be interested to know that $5 billion of what HotAir's Allahpundit has dubbed "<a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/19/jason-mattera-to-joe-biden-so-youre-really-going-to-sell-this-jobs-bill-by-talking-about-rape-huh/">The Federal Rape Prevention Act of 2011</a>" will be going to police and firefighters, but teachers will be getting <em>$30 </em>billion. Good thing democrats aren't cozy with the teachers unions, or that would look really bad. Oh, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=l1300">wait</a>.<br />
<br />
Disgusting.<br />
<br />
<strong>UPDATE</strong>: As usual, Biden's statement is factually challenged. Actually, it garnered four "Pinocchio's" from the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/bidens-absurd-claims-about-rising-rape-and-murder-rates/2011/10/20/gIQAkq0y1L_blog.html">Washington Post's fact checking Glenn Kessler</a>. <br />
<br />
The Office of the VP is reacting to the situation with the usual Alinsky-esque aggression that has been a hallmark of this administration. The new motto for this administration seems to be <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/189521-biden-complains-after-dust-up-with-reporter">"When you're losing the debate, fear not - investigate!"</a>Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-40484195320603278922011-10-05T16:00:00.002-04:002012-07-09T09:35:07.997-04:00AN EXERCISE IN THE MECHANICS OF CRONYISM AND THE USEFULNESS OF USEFUL IDIOTSCrony Capitalism in five easy steps!<br />
<br />
Step One: Warren Buffet, after a conversation with President Obama, loaned Bank of America $5 billion, even though BofA was protesting loudly that they were sound and didn't need a bailout. <br />
<br />
Step Two: Bank of America makes headlines by deciding to pass on the costs of the Frank-n-Dodd regulations to their account holders (as opponents of the law forecast last summer) in the form of a $5 per month fee for use of debit cards (not including ATM withdrawals). Rest assured the other banks will be following suit - after BofA takes the heat for them, of course.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Step Three: Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) spoke from the Senate floor Tuesday and <a href="http://www.stlbeacon.org/issues-politics/280-washington/113351-durbin-big-banks-exchange-swipes-over-debit-card-fees">called for a run on Bank of America</a> in retaliation for the $5 fee - also known as the "<a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-10-01/news/ct-edit-durbin-20111001_1_interchange-fees-debit-cards-retailers">Durbin Fee</a>". He urged people to take their money and put it in a credit union or community bank instead of BofA. A run on the bank would seal it's fate and Senator Durbin must surely know this. It was incredibly irresponsible of him to make that speech and it illustrates beautifully how much more interested our politicians are in making sure they aren't held accountable for their actions than they are in the economic health of our nation.<br />
<br />
In the meantime, BofA seems no better off, even after Buffett's infusion of cash. The bank seems to be teetering on the edge of disaster - protestations of sunny prospects from bank officials not withstanding. The problem is, as one of the only four remaining big banks, BofA has already been determined to be "too big to fail". <br />
<br />
Step Four: When it gets bailed out - <em>again</em> - Buffett will clean up by <a href="http://alfidicapitalblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/buffett-expects-bank-of-america-bailout.html">dumping his shares on the taxpayer</a> - at a tidy little profit, of course. And what might he do with some of those profits?<br />
<br />
<a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/25/buffett-to-host-high-profile-fundraiser-for-obama/">Step Five</a>, of course!<br />
<br />
<em>That</em> is what crony capitalism looks like, and it is a direct result of government intruding on the free market and picking winners and losers. Someone might want to give the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFVR9Nv43J4"><strike>useful idiots</strike></a>* twentysomethings 'occupying' Wall Street <a href="http://socialismdoesntwork.com/crony-capitalism-is-not-capitalism/">a heads up</a>. The corrupt system they are protesting is being headed by the same guy who has been raking in the campaign cash from those eeeeeevil bankers for <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/17/AR2007041701688.html">years</a>. No wonder they all seem so confused and unable to articulate the point of their protest. Their blind devotion to liberal orthodoxy and utter antipathy towards anything other than the nuggets of marxist ideology being spoon fed to them by their professors seems to be keeping them from realizing they are <a href="http://www.infowars.com/obama-machine-prepares-to-hijack-occupy-wall-street/">being used as shields and distractions to cover the cronyism running rampant</a> in this administration. <br />
<br />
How duped do you think they will feel when they finally discover that the people they believed were going to change the system are in reality the ones most deeply involved in it? <br />
<br />
<br />
*The dandy with the scarf looked on the verge of an epiphany until his rigid ideology kicked in and closed his mind to a different point of view. Ah, well...maybe next time. I wonder how supportive Harvard Girl will be of big government when the IRS comes a knockin' for her student loans in a few years thanks to the Obama administration nationalizing the student loan industry?Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-34110305245782936132011-08-18T19:32:00.001-04:002012-07-09T09:36:04.504-04:00HEAVENS HELP US UpdatedWell, there is now officially a new standard on crazy, and it was set by a highly respected, prize-winning progressive. Nobel laureate (in economics) and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman came out with quite a suggestion this week on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" dealing with the economy and what might help us climb out of the economic death spiral we find ourselves in. It was quite an eye opener, to say the least. But first, a little background.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
Think back, for a moment, to the heady days of President Obama's first few months in office. We were all told he was the second coming of <strike>JFK</strike> <strike>Lincoln</strike> <strike>Reagan</strike> FDR, remember? Well, Mr. O really took that to heart, and spent the next two years (and more than three <em>trillion</em> dollars) New New Deal-ing the hell out of us. The problem is, as expansive, well planned and far-reaching as it was ("<a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-fdr-was-fiscally-conservative">fiscal conservative</a>" FDR <em>doubled</em> federal spending - and <em>tripled</em> taxes) the original New Deal <a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2009/01/get-over-it-new-deal-didnt-do-the-job">didn't work</a>. Unfortunately, Obama and Pelosi had neither the vision, planning, nor common sense of FDR and his advisors. Where FDR brought us the Golden Gate Bridge and over three hundred new firehouses, BHO has given us guard rails to nowhere and turtle tunnels.<br />
<br />
Needless to say, the New New Deal was a big, big failure. <br />
<br />
So if the New Deal spending didn't get us out of the Great Depression, what did, and how can we use that to help us out of the Great Recession, Krugman pondered? Well, a major factor was, of course, World War II. Even before we became active participants, we had geared up the war machine to produce arms and armament to sell to our allies. This increased productivity did more to drag us towards prosperity than all of the top down engineering of the previous decade.<br />
<br />
It is obvious Mr. Krugman is a student of history as well as economics. As such, he has seen the path to liquidity, and it goes right through the Dept. of Defense. Yes, that's right, Krugman is calling for a war to get us out of the fix we're in. But not just any war - after all, we've already been at war for most of the past decade, and in two different theaters to boot. Since Obama took office, he has even expanded our military presence (albeit under the cover of NATO, which is 'multinational' - only 70% american funding) and gone hog wild with drone strikes here, there and everywhere.<br />
<br />
These wars aren't enough for our intrepid Mr. Krugman, though. No silly terrestrial-based conflict can possibly lift us from the morass in which we find ourselves. Under Obama's Keynesian economy, the ditch has become the Grand Canyon and the car of state has become an enormous, bloated Ford Pinto that's ready to blow. Seeing as how the problem is so big, <a href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/08/14/paul-krugman-calls-space-aliens-attack-earth-requiring-massive-defens">Krugman started thinking big</a>. Like, extra-terrestrial big. Like, <em>crazy</em> big.<br />
<br />
Okay, okay, just <em>crazy</em>.<br />
<br />
Nobel laureate Krugman was advocating for a <a href="http://blastr.com/2011/08/nobel-prize-winning-econo.php">ginned-up alien invasion</a> to pull us out of the slump. Yes, that's right, alien invasion. Apparently he thinks it would be great for our govenrment to lie to us and terrify us in order to get the economy moving (on nothing more than smoke and mirrors yet again). Doing what - making fake laser guns and tricorders - hey, how about light sabers, too? Maybe re-activating and retrofitting the space shuttles with gun turrets? And once the economy is booming again, what then? A Friday night document dump and a DoD mea culpa a week later? "Sorry, did we say <em>alien</em> <em>invasion</em>? No, we meant to say <em>saline invention</em> - we've figured out how to make safe drinking water from human tears! So, how 'bout that economy, huh? Hey - is that Michele Bachmann eating a corn dog?!"<br />
<br />
Is this where we find ourselves with the left nowadays? These are their big ideas, from their award-winning (and thus respect-demanding) shining lights in the firmament of liberal intelligentsia? Entitlement reform is irrational. Cutting spending is inhumane. Capping spending to GDP is irresponsible. A balanced budget amendment is impossible.<br />
<br />
But military mobilization against imaginary space invaders? We have a winner!<br />
<br />
It's really starting to seem like they hand out those Nobel prizes to just about anyone anymore, doesn't it? <br />
<br />
<strong>UPDATE:</strong> Good gracious, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/aug/18/aliens-destroy-humanity-protect-civilisations">the madness is spreading</a>.Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-49256510485776601032011-08-08T10:05:00.003-04:002012-07-09T09:36:24.777-04:00WHERE'S OBAMO? UpdatedCall me old fashioned, but in times of national crisis I, like many Americans, take comfort from hearing words of wisdom from my president. When the world seems to be on fire or collapsing around our ears, when tragic events unfold, we have always had the calming influence of our appointed leader to guide us through the dark times.<br />
<br />
Until now.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
On Friday, S&P downgraded our national credit rating from AAA to AA+. This is the first time the United States has been downgraded since credit reporting began in the early twentieth century. Stock markets globally have been sent into a tailspin. All weekend, Americans were asking themselves "what now?", anxious about how this would affect them personally. <br />
<br />
Also this weekend, the news rippled through the country that thirty of our best and bravest were killed when their Chinook helicopter was shot down during a rescue mission in Afghanistan. Twenty-two of those killed were from SEAL Team Six, the group that famously took out Bin Laden. Thankfully, none of the men involved in the Bin Laden raid were on the helicopter, but aside from keeping the enemy from having that coup to count, that really is very little comfort. The loss of those men was a blow to the country and the <a href="http://blog.usnavyseals.com/2011/08/worst-day-in-nsw-history-navy-in-mourning.html">single most deadly day in the history of naval special forces</a>. Since the OBL raid, we have collectively poured our national pride into that team (I myself had gotten my 'Navy SEALs 1, Bin Laden 0' keychain - a big seller - just this week), and this blow to them is a blow to all of us. <br />
<br />
And here we are, on Monday morning, with nary a peep from our President on either front, no calming words for his people, no reassurances. No statements about the lost men, no comments on the downgrade, nothing. All we've gotten are hacks like Sen. John Kerry and David Axlerod attempting to pin the blame of the downgrade on the Tea Party (a laughable attempt, considering the TP was the only group who was demanding a stop to the spending). The last We the People saw of our President, he was partying with celebrities, dancing barefoot in the Rose Garden in celebration of his 50th birthday. <br />
<br />
It all seemed so carefree and festive. How nice for him.<br />
<br />
It's really not good optics that all the American people have heard out of the White House is stories about a glitzy star-studded fundraiser while we wait and wonder what this downgrade means to us and our own personal debts, such as house and car loans and credit card interest rates. It's not that we resent his parties, it's that he's supposed to be there for us, and instead he's too busy sipping champagne and hobnobbing with Matt Damon and Tom Hanks. All we ask is that he come out and talk to us. Reassure us. Let us know he cares.<br />
<br />
Because right now, it seems like all he cares about is raising money and getting reelected.<br />
<br />
From the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzllR24e-FY&feature=player_embedded#at=16">Deepwater Horizon disaster</a> to the <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/16/march-madness-obama-fills-ncaa-bracket-missing-action-japan-libya-budget/">Libyan non-war</a> to the <a href="http://www.thedailypledge.com/component/content/article/931-obama-silent-on-storms-that-killed-dozens">deadly storms that swept through the South</a> this spring to the continuing <a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2011/06/23/cbo-obamas-new-budget-plan-no-plan-at-all/">budget</a> and debt ceiling crises, our Commander-in-Chief has been MIA. I don't know about you, but I'm getting pretty damn tired of playing "Where's ObamO?" with our president every time there's a crisis. <br />
<br />
<strong>UPDATE:</strong> Well, well, well, only three days (and <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/markknoller/statuses/100612989715103744">an hour</a>) late, Obama finally poked his head out of the bunker and made a ten minute statement addressing the downgrade <em>and</em> the SEALs. He didn't really say much unfortunately and, of course, he scuttled away right after his speech with no questions taken afterwards. Coward. I don't know about you, but I for one feel neither reassured nor comforted.<br />
<br />Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-81511540565128942562011-07-29T13:21:00.000-04:002012-07-09T09:36:52.329-04:00THE NOOSE IS TIGHTENING FAST AND FURIOUSLYI was going to post this as an update to my last post on Operation Fast and Furious but decided it was so important that it needed it's own post.<br />
<br />
In testimony this week, Bill Newell, the Special Agent in Charge of the Phoenix office stated to investigators that he had sent an email to a longtime friend in the White House that included information on Operation Fast and Furious. Eh, no big deal, right? A low-level exchange of information between friends that never went beyond their circle of two.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
The problem is, Newell's longtime friend was White House National Security Director for North America Kevin O'Reilly. It seems Mr. O'Reilly was making a request for stats on Project Gunrunner (via <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20083772-10391695.html?tag=mncol;lst;3">CBS News</a>):<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
Newell told Congress that O'Reilly had asked him for information.<br />
"Why do you think he asked for that information," Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA) asked Newell.<br />
<br />
"He was asking about the impact of Project Gunrunner to brief people in preparation for a trip to Mexico... what we were doing to combat firearms trafficking and other issues." </blockquote>
<br />
Hmmmm....if this program was restricted entirely to the ATF as Eric Holder would have us believe, how did someone from the White House have knowledge of this in the first place? O'Reilly isn't some low level guy, so one might argue that he would naturally be aware of the operation. The thing is, we all know how our agencies loathe to share information with each other, don't we? <br />
<br />
In fact, couldn't that be considered the basis of Holder's original argument when information started to leak out - that the whole fiasco was entirely in the hands of the ATF, and if Director Melson would only step down, everything would be put to rights because none of the other agencies had any awareness of the operation? <br />
<br />
With the drama of the debt ceiling crisis sucking all of the oxygen out of the room, this story has gone remarkably unreported, considering its explosive nature. It's easy to imagine that in a different time, news like this would have lead immediately to speculation on what the President knew and when he knew it. Calls for a special prosecutor would escalate. Who knows, once the debt ceiling issue has been resolved, those calls may well begin to increase.<br />
<br />
Not only do we have Newell's testimony to consider, but we also have video of an Obama Administration official discussing Project Gunrunner and (a yet unnamed) Operation Fast and Furious. In it David Ogden, Deputy Attorney General, is discussing efforts the administration was enacting with Mexico on <em>tracing illegal guns</em> - the portion of Gunrunner that was Operation Fast and Furious (the pertinent part is at the 0:41 mark):<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/TFrApLNmjtk" width="425"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
Please note he mentions the fact that the project was paid for with Stimulus dollars (to the tune of $10 million). He also states that the ATF was supposed to be working with Mexican authorities. Unfortunately, not only were <a href="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/mexican-official-wants-atf-workers-to-face-charges-in-mexico-for-project-gunrunner/">Mexican authorities apparently kept out of the loop</a>, but <a href="http://www.klpw.com/content/atf-agents-mexico-kept-dark-about-gun-trafficking-fast-furious-op-0">so were ATF agents</a> stationed in Mexico. <br />
<br />
There is also a transcript of none other than Attorney General Eric Holder speaking in Cuernavaca, Mexico about Gunrunner back in 2009 (via <a href="http://www.justice.gov/ag/speeches/2009/ag-speech-090402.html">US Dept. of Justice</a>):<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
I would like to thank the Mexican and U.S. experts who have worked so hard on this issue. On our side, Secretary Napolitano and I are committed to putting the resources in place to increase our attack on arms trafficking into Mexico. <br />
Last week, our administration launched a major new effort to break the backs of the cartels. My department is committing 100 new ATF personnel to the Southwest border in the next 100 days to supplement our ongoing Project Gunrunner, DEA is adding 16 new positions on the border, as well as mobile enforcement teams, and the FBI is creating a new intelligence group focusing on kidnapping and extortion. DHS is making similar commitments, as Secretary Napolitano will detail.</blockquote>
<br />
As we go along and figure out who is to blame for what, let's not forget that the entire fiasco was funded by 2009's democrat-created stimulus bill, including the provisions that funded Project Gunrunner (and it's offshoot, Operation Fast and Furious). Which means the leader of the party at the time, Nancy Pelosi, was <em>also</em> involved in this mess. After all, she held the purse strings back then, and made sure republicans were entirely shut out of the process. If nothing else, it would be interesting to know who told her to earmark that $10 million, wouldn't it?<br />
<br />
So is it a vast, left-wing conspiracy to gin up outrage in order to pass the liberal dream of stricter gun control laws? It's a bit too early to tell, really. But looking at the information out there already, it's certainly starting to resemble something like that. And we know how those crazy progressives just love to work in lockstep, now don't we? With their ends justify the means mentality, it unfortunately doesn't seem as far-fetched as many (myself included) would like.<br />
<br />
Rep. Issa certainly has his work cut out for him, but he seems more than up to the task. Keep up the good work!Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-13599697066768336862011-07-11T22:21:00.002-04:002011-07-12T00:45:11.926-04:00WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT: FAST AND FURIOUS EDITION UpdatedRep. Darryl Issa (R-CA) has been relentlessly attempting to unravel the Gordian Knot that is Operation Fast and Furious (aka Gunwalker) since he took over the chairmanship of the House Oversight Committee. This absolute clusterfark of an operation is utterly irredeemable. At best, it is an egregious example of how badly an operation can be mismanaged. At worst, it is a high level endeavor that allowed high powered weaponry to get in the hands of drug cartels, possibly for the sole purpose of spiking violence in order to implement stricter federal gun control laws in this country.<br />
<br />
It is certainly a <a href="http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/07/obama-sold-tracked-same-guns-to-cartels-he-hoped-to-ban-because-they-were-tracked-from-cartels/">remarkable coincidence</a> that the guns President Obama spoke of regulating back in 2009 - AK-47 type assault rifles and Barrett .50 BMG sniper rifles - are at the heart of the violent crisis on the border and are the very guns involved in Gunwalker (<a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/mega-scandal-was-gunwalker-a-pr-op-for-gun-control/?singlepage=true">Pajamas Media</a> has a great back story on this theory). In fact, this operation is such a catastrophe that the <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/la-naw-mexico-guns-20110311,0,3023651.story">Mexican government is demanding answers</a>. Having lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 150 agents to those weapons over the past eighteen months, you can't really blame them.<br />
<br />
Initial attempts at keeping the blame limited to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) only have failed miserably. As more sun shines down on this ugly piece of business, more agencies are shown to have their fingers in the pie. It's a veritable vegetable soup - ATF, DEA, FBI, DHS and DoJ. Can you spell "C-O-L-L-U-S-I-O-N"?<br />
<br />
The premise of the operation was simple: track weapons dealers and the path of the guns they bought over the border and into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels. These sorts of stings are done frequently by law enforcement officers around the country. Because these guns were going to be tracked across the southern border the operation was put into the hands of the ATF, with oversight by the Department of Justice. Sounds pretty straightforward, doesn't it? <br />
<br />
Yeah, not so much. <br />
<br />
First off, the "dealers" they were tracking turned out to be FBI informants already. Ooopsie. Which means the main premise for the operation was moot from the get-go. But fear not, they still poured two years, $10 million and countless man hours into the endeavor. Oh, and the life of one border patrol agent and several thousand Mexican citizens, <a href="http://www.bonzerwolf.com/today/2011/3/6/atf-youve-got-to-break-some-eggs-to-make-omelettes.html">not that they count in the grand scheme</a>. Ah, the gentle efficiencies of the government juggernaut....<br />
<br />
Second, for some reason no one has been able to explain, ATF was <em><a href="http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/news/local/atf-agents-we-were-ordered-to-let-guns-go-6-15-2011">told to cease surveillance</a></em> of the approximately 1,765 guns once they left the hands of the dealers. They were not to follow them on their trip across the border to their final destination, they were not to gather intel on the final buyer and they were not to work with the Mexican government on the sting. The official line is that the ATF (aka "The Scapegoat") "<a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/03/nation/la-na-guns-mexico-20110304">lost track of</a>" the weapons. In reality, there are memos and sworn testimony that show that the ATF was <em>instructed</em> to cease surveillance of the weapons. ATF Director Kenneth Melson (aka "The Patsy") isn't exactly willing to take the fall, as his secret testimony shows.<br />
<br />
By the way, did I mention this wonderful $10 million program was funded by the stimulus bill (just for that extra dollop of outrage). Unfortunately this operation might possibly end up being one of the biggest job creators in that boondoggle of a bill. Just think of all the additional police, border agents, forensics personnel, nurses, doctors, paramedics, undertakers, coffin makers and gravestone carvers who saw a big jump in demand as a direct result of Fast and Furious.<br />
<br />
Now that the scandal is starting to gain traction in the press and the investigation is gaining speed in Congress, the stench of cover-up has become strong:<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/iOCrS747L_0" width="425"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
The question now, as Mr. Hume so succinctly put it, was who knew what, and when? How high does this go? At this point, it looks like Attorney General Eric Holder's fingerprints are all over this - not just for his role in Gunwalker, but also his not so subtle attempts at <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/06/justice-department-obstructing-fast-and-furious-gun-probe-atf-director-says/">obstructing the investigation</a>. Primarily, though, Holder denied long-time knowledge of the program when he gave sworn testimony to the House Oversight and Government Reform committee back in May, but it seems there may have been some <strike>perjury</strike> "misspeaking" going on (via <a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/issa-says-he-doesn-t-believe-holder-s-te">CNS News</a>):<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>At the May 3 Judiciary Committee hearing, Issa asked Holder: “When did you first know about the program officially, I believe, called Fast and Furious? To the best of your knowledge, what date?”<br />
<br />
Holder responded: “I’m not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.”</blockquote><br />
Is that your final answer, Mr. Holder (via <a href="http://biggovernment.com/tag/gunrunner/">Big Government</a>)? <br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote> (...) the problem with Holder’s feigned ignorance is that he gave a speech in Cuernavaca, Mexico, on April 2, 2009, in which he boasted about Operation “Gunrunner” and told Mexican authorities of everything he was doing to insure its success.<br />
<br />
Holder told the audience:<br />
<br />
Last week, our administration launched a major new effort to break the backs of the cartels. My department is committing 100 new ATF personnel to the Southwest border in the next 100 days to supplement our ongoing Project Gunrunner, DEA is adding 16 new positions on the border, as well as mobile enforcement teams, and the FBI is creating a new intelligence group focusing on kidnapping and extortion.</blockquote><br />
Please note the inclusion of DEA, FBI and DHS in that 2009 speech, by Holders own admittance. Make no mistake, this thing is huge, and it's not going anywhere. If the mainstream press has a shred of investigative instincts left to them, they will start working this story. Hume's comments are right, this does have the air of a Watergate. But bigger. <br />
<br />
So far it looks like We the People might be needing some pretty top-level positions filled in the coming months. DoJ for sure. Holder's goose is cooked, and it's only a matter of time until he is either pressured by President Obama or has a 'moment of clarity' and resigns. How high up in DHS - all the way to Napolitano? What about the FBI? Higher? As the above referenced Pajamas Media piece so aptly put it:<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>At the same time in 2009 that federal law enforcement agencies (the ATF, the DOJ, and presumably Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security) were creating the operation that led to the executive branch being the largest gun smuggler in the Southwest, the president’s team was crafting the rhetoric to sell the crisis they were creating.<br />
<br />
<br />
On television, in various news outlets, and even in a joint appearance with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, Obama pushed the <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/testimony-on-assault-weapons-guts-obamas-90-percent-lie/">90 percent lie</a>, implying that 90% of the guns recovered in Mexican cartel violence came from U.S. gun shops.<br />
<br />
At the same time they were damning gun dealers in public, the administration was secretly forcing them to provide weapons to the cartels, by the armful and without oversight. More than one gun industry insider <a href="http://michaelbane.blogspot.com/2011/06/batfe-report.html">suggests</a> that the administration extorted cooperation and silence from these gun shops. As the ATF has the power to summarily shut dealers down for the most minor of offenses, that is very, very possible.</blockquote><br />
Does it go all the way to the top? Only time and a lot more investigation will tell. You can be sure there will have to be some pretty concrete evidence to even think of directly implicating the President in this thing (please note Owens' use of "team" when describing who fashioned Obama's rhetoric), so don't plan on DVRing an Obama "I am not a crook" moment any time soon. But there is a lesson here already, and we're no where near the end of this journey. The lesson here is that these are the policies we get when the policy makers follow the teachings of Cloward/Piven and Saul Alinsky. This is a textbook illustration of a worst-case scenario result to an "ends justify the means" method of policy decisions, right down to the innocent blood on the hands of the decision makers.<br />
<br />
Keep your eye on this story, folks. By the time Issa is done with his investigation, the administration may never be the same.<br />
<br />
<strong>UPDATE:</strong> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqOSiSr973k&feature=player_embedded">And so it begins</a>.Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-17223261014535219412011-06-05T15:45:00.000-04:002011-06-05T15:45:45.225-04:00WHAT'S THE PLAN, STAN?Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid recently said (via the <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-harry-reid-budget-20110520,0,973885.story">L.A. Times</a>):<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>"There's no need to have a Democratic budget in my opinion," Reid said in an interview Thursday. "It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage."</blockquote><br />
Let me repeat that last bit: "It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage". Really? The Senate has not passed a budget in over 750 days - more than two years. Isn't <em>that</em> a bit foolish, Sen. Reid? Passing a budget is essential for the economic health of this country. Not doing so would mean a repeat of the squabbling over bi-weekly continuing resolutions from earlier in the year, something we can ill afford to do again.<br />
<br />
What Reid <em>is</em> willing to do is finally bring the House-passed 2012 Ryan budget proposal up for a vote, where it was voted down 57-40. Why, all of a sudden, was he ready to bring the bill to the floor after letting it languish for more than a month? He was striking while the political iron was hot, of course. The NY-26 special election republican loss is being spun as a referendum against Rep. Paul Ryan's budget, particularly his take on Medicare reform. Reid's only motive is to get republicans on record as voting for the budget so it can be used against them in the wider <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/18/new-progressive-ad-paul-ryan-literally-pushes-grandma-off-a-cliff/">mediscare campaign</a> democrats are going to embark on in the coming months in a desperate effort to keep their majority. It's all about politicking, not the well-being of the nation.<br />
<br />
Reid also brought President Obama's original budget proposal introduced back in February to the floor for a vote shortly after the vote on the Ryan plan, where it was defeated <em>97-0</em>. In fact, the Senate voted down not two but <em><a href="http://in%20fact,%20the%20senate%20voted%20down%20not%20two,%20but%20four%20budget%20proposals%20that%20day,%20without%20offering%20up%20even%20a%20hint%20of%20a%20plan%20of%20their%20own./">four</a></em> budget proposals that day, without offering up even the merest hint of a plan of their own. And try as they might to paint Rep. Ryan's proposal as "radical", it still fared a heck of a lot better than Obama's. You'll be shocked - <em>shocked</em> - to learn there is zero media coverage of the complete repudiation of Obama's fiscal plans for 2012 - only the failure on party lines of the extremely extreme, radically radical Ryan proposal. <br />
<br />
Now that Senate democrats have put the kybosh on those budget proposals, one would expect them to introduce one of their own. That's normally how things work. It's really the heart of the negotiating process. Obama's own fiscal commission <a href="http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/TheMomentofTruth12_1_2010.pdf">cautioned against exactly what is going on</a> right now in the preamble to their report:<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>"Don’t shoot down an idea without offering a better idea in its place."</blockquote><br />
So what does Reid offer in place of the budgets he just voted down? Nothing. Squat. Zippo. Nada. Zilch. Well, aside from the usual demagoguing, of course. Demagoguery is rather like jello for left-wingers - there's always room for some. Unfortunately, it makes it seem like the welfare of this country and it's people is not at the top of the list of priorities for this administration. The agenda must be implemented, no matter how much pain it inflicts (or how vehemently it is rejected).<br />
<br />
It's tempting to make the case for incompetence as an excuse for this bizarre budgetary inaction in the face of a potential double-dip recession. The thing is, who's going to buy that almost an entire administration is incompetent? It then begs the question: Does incompetency on such a grand scale deserve to be in power?<br />
<br />
President Obama's own fiscal commission co-chair, Erskine Bowles, has called the coming fiscal collapse:<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote>“the most predictable economic crisis in history.”</blockquote><br />
And yet, even now, this administration refuses to make any serious proposals, or even tap the brakes on the runaway spending. Obama's 2012 budget proposal, introduced well after the fiscal commission gave it's recommendations to bring down spending and fast, actually <em>increased</em> spending by $200 billion over the most recent budget democrats passed - for FY 2010. Yup, his own commission strongly recommended immediate, deep spending cuts - including entitlement spending - and Obama's response was to <em>increase</em> spending in his budget proposal. Incompetence or willful negligence?<br />
<br />
Steny Hoyer is on the record saying <a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/house-minority-whip-hoyer-america-not-br">we are not broke</a> and Harry Reid is lamenting the possible loss of funding for such vital necessities as <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0311/Reid_Save_federal_funding_for_the_cowboy_poets.html">cowboy poetry</a> at the hands of those mean-spirited old republican meanie-heads. President Obama is jetting around the globe shaking hands, kissing babies and ignoring such petty details as debt ceilings and budgets in favor of <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/21/lawmakers-resist-obamas-offer-2b-loan-assistance-egypt/">promising aid we can't afford</a>. In fact - and this is a longstanding issue that predates Obama but which has only increased under his administration - it turns out that there is quite a <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1393960/US-gives-billions-foreign-aid-worlds-richest-countries-asks-borrow-back.html">circle jerk</a> going on with foreign aid. We give financial aid to wealthy nations and then ask to borrow back ten times as much. Talk about insanity! Wall Street is faltering (if a 279 point one-day drop and the <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-04/dow-falls-in-longest-slump-since-2004-amid-concern-about-economy.html">longest slump since 2004</a> can be called something as mild as 'faltering'), house prices continue to tumble, inflation has caused Memorial Day celebrations to cost an estimated <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1390822/Memorial-Day-cookout-cost-29-year-thanks-inflation.html">29% more</a> this year than last, gas is still over $3.60 per gallon, unemployment is back up to <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9NKG4AO0.htm">9.1%</a>, <a href="http://www.industryweek.com/articles/manufacturing_data_drives_u-s-_stocks_down_24752.aspx">manufacturing is down</a>, <a href="http://www.conference-board.org/data/consumerconfidence.cfm">consumer confidence is dropping</a> and experts are starting to talk about a <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/double-dip-recession-is-now-undeniable-2011-05-05">double-dip recession</a> again - <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/06/03/back_toward_double_dip_robert_reich/">even liberal ones</a>. <br />
<br />
Demagoguing the issue will only be tolerated for so long; certainly not all the way up to the election . Even some liberal talking heads are starting to remark on the lack of a fiscal plan from the left. It's time for Harry Reid and President Obama to get serious and put up a plan for getting us out of this mess instead of just attacking others. What sounds like great politicking inside the beltway looks like a complete disregard for the economy and the people suffering under it outside the beltway.<br />
<br />
It's time for a democratic plan that can be compared to the republican's offerings. Negotiation requires that both parties bring something to the table. What is going on now is nothing more than fiddling while Rome burns. It is said that Nero allowed Rome to burn so that he could rebuild it to his specifications. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvJJP9AYgqU">Sound familiar</a>?Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-26730438417960515352011-05-18T11:47:00.000-04:002011-05-18T11:47:53.091-04:00SAN FRANCISCO SAVORS THE GOURMET WAIVER FAVORSTwo hundred and four new Obamacare waivers were issued by the Obama Administration last month, for a grand total of more than thirteen hundred waivers. Of those 204, thirty-eight - <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/17/nearly-20-percent-of-new-obamacare-waivers-are-gourmet-restaurants-nightclubs-fancy-hotels-in-nancy-pelosi%E2%80%99s-district/">nearly twenty percent - went to Nancy Pelosi's home district</a>, namely to high-end establishments like TRU Spa - the <a href="http://www.truspa.com/">"best day spa in San Francisco"</a> - posh restaurants boasting $50+ entrees, luxury hotels and nightclubs. These latest waiver recipients join quite a long list of previous waiver winners, a majority of which seem to be comprised predominantly of labor unions and democrat supporters (but I repeat myself). <br />
<br />
This is bad optics on two levels. First, it once again illustrates how deeply the corruption and cronyism goes in this administration. Considering we are entering what is sure to be a contentious election cycle, exempting businesses in her district make it look like Pelosi is doing favors in return for local support. Whether that assertion is true or not is moot - perception is reality, and this looks really bad. You can rest assured, though, that conservatives will be watching those businesses during the election cycle to see what level of financial support they offer her campaign. There will also most likely be increased scrutiny (and lots of google mapping) of waiver winners to find other potentially advantageous groupings elsewhere. <br />
<br />
Second, it illustrates what a mess the healthcare legislation really is - it was supposed to bring down costs and provide access to coverage for everyone but instead costs have <a href="http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2011/05/12/health-care-costs-increasing-americans/">continued to rise</a> and people who currently have insurance now find it threatened. Even staunch supporters are looking for an escape hatch.<br />
<br />
Pelosi's response is that criticism of the waivers is <a href="http://nation.foxnews.com/nancy-pelosi/2011/05/17/pelosi-calls-waiver-gate-pathetic-palin-pounces">"pathetic"</a> (please note the usual Alinskyesque derision):<br />
<br />
<blockquote>"It is pathetic that there are those who would be cheering for Americans to lose their minimum health coverage or see their premiums increase for political purposes. These waivers are reviewed and granted solely by the Administration in an open and transparent process so workers currently enrolled in 'mini-med' policies like those in San Francisco and across the country will not be punished and lose the minimum coverage they already have. These waivers will be eliminated in 2014 when Americans will have an opportunity to shop for affordable coverage on the health exchanges and will no longer be at the mercy of insurance companies placing coverage limits on policies.<br />
<br />
The complaints coming from this crowd that supports ending Medicare is just another example of putting politics first."</blockquote><br />
What is really pathetic is her spin on this issue. It almost sounds like she is slamming her own legislation - "It is pathetic that there are those who would be cheering for Americans to lose their minimum health coverage or see their premiums increase for political purposes." That line could also be used to describe the jubilation with which she celebrated the passage of that horrible bill. Her attempt to make her critics look bad in reality only makes her signature piece of legislation look like what it is - an over-reaching, unsustainable jumble of crippling regulations that is so bad that it requires exemption. Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) said the waivers constitute:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>..."<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/17/restaurants-cafes-pelosis-district-eat-health-care-law-waivers/">tacit admission that the health care law is fundamentally flawed</a>." <br />
"Despite the president's promise, it appears that just because you like your health care plan does not mean that the administration will allow you to keep it," Upton said.</blockquote><br />
And to think this 'historic<strike>ally</strike> <strike>bad</strike> legislation' is the thing in which this administration is most proud. Now <em>that's</em> pathetic.<br />
<br />
Many of the groups that received waivers were some of the <a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/waiver_favors_bUBpjxSpY4NJsoL5gyGxcL">biggest, most vocal supporters</a> of the legislation - particularly the labor unions. The fact that they are now getting waivers is no surprise, however. After all, they already got <a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/unions_get_pecial_treatment_in_health_AB053CwqPIJlIxXAm37DOM">one heck of a concession</a> before the bill was ever even passed. This was after a failed attempt to <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/hca_20100113_9874.php">exempt them</a> from the law altogether. But fear not, union cronies - this administration is adept at making end runs around things they find inconvenient. Since they couldn't exempt them directly in the legislation, they will simply hand out waivers instead. That waivers are now being given at this level begs the question, who really <em>is</em> yoked to this harness? So far, it seems only those opposed to the law are being forced to comply - almost like a punishment. <br />
<br />
The waivers are for only one year! supporters will cry. But congress just loooooves to extend things, like debt ceilings, the Patriot Act, and Pelosi's personal favorite, continuing resolutions - CRs must be her favorite, since she seemed to prefer them to passing an actual budget last year. This desire to continue things ad infinitum is evident in their deep and abiding affection for tenure (or is perhaps an explanation for it). The waivers are only available in yearly increments until 2014, but, if past experience is any indication, that date, too, will be extended.<br />
<br />
What is becoming more and more evident is that under the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate, there are two laws of the land - one for the average Joe, and another for the administration and their supporters. Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-11703983934128686662011-05-03T12:46:00.000-04:002011-05-03T12:46:16.356-04:00CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUEWell, it's now been two days since Osama bin Laden was sent off to meet his <a href="http://www.syracuse.com/have-you-heard/index.ssf/2011/05/viral_video_of_the_day_bin_laden_death.html">72 virgins</a>, which, of course, means the politicization is really racheting up. Democrats are, naturally, trying to give the credit to President Obama. Republicans are reminding them that without the interrogation policies set up under President Bush, none of this would have happened. Quite a tug of war, and each side has a point.<br />
<br />
The Washington bubble is a remarkable thing, isn't it? You'd almost think Obama fast-roped himself out of the chopper and double-tapped Osama personally - after GWB ushered him personally into the compound. <br />
<br />
No, the real heroes responsible for this awesome get are the nameless, faceless men and women of our intelligence and military forces. Bush gave the order to collect and disseminate intelligence, and Obama gave the order to go into Abbottabad. But everything else that has happened over the course of the past 4-6 years, particularly what happened in that compound, was due entirely to career intelligence and military personnel. Period.<br />
<br />
This isn't a victory for Obama or the democrats, and it isn't a victory for Bush and republicans. It's a victory for the <em>American people</em>. It was our sons and daughters, our sisters and brothers, husbands and wives, who put together the information, geared up and went in to do what needed to be done. <br />
<br />
It's all well and good that our Commanders-in-Chief gave some orders, but words aren't what got it done. Deeds are, and those deeds were done by Navy SEALs and CIA intelligence officers.<br />
<br />
To those fine men and women, I offer my deepest, most heartfelt thanks and gratitude. Without their tireless, <em>non-partisan</em> efforts over a period of several years, we wouldn't be out in the streets shouting our relief to the heavens. Aside from a few college students in front of the White House Sunday night who were chanting "Four more years", the majority of Americans were chanting "U-S-A!" because it was a victory for all of us. This jockeying for credit in DC is an embarrassment. True heroes decline to take credit for the deeds they've done, or at the very least attempt to spread the accolades around. <br />
<br />
But then, why in the world would I expect heroic behavior from the denizens of DC? Silly me.Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9092921073919323401.post-38892277038816581002011-05-02T08:38:00.002-04:002011-05-02T12:49:48.098-04:00SWEET VICTORY!!! UpdatedOsama bin Laden is dead. God bless America and our fantastic fighting men and women! According to reports, a Navy SEAL team got him (GO NAVY!!), one of his sons, and Osama's youngest wife who, in the tradition of cowardly terrorists everywhere, was used as a human shield. <br />
<br />
Interestingly, bin Laden was found at a massive fortress deep in Pakistan. Apparently, he was in a million dollar complex complete with 18 foot tall, barbed-wire topped walls in Abbottabad, Pakistan. If the Pakistani government didn't know he was there, I'll eat my hat, since Abbottabad is an affluent suburb about 35 miles outside of Pakistan's capitol of Islamabad. On top of that, the compound was a few hundred yards from a Pakistani military training center. Go figure. Some of the questions we will be demanding answers to in the coming days will certainly include a few on who in the Pakistani government knew what and when. <br />
<br />
There were parties going on last night in front of the White House, in Times Square, and at the campuses of both West Point and Annapolis. One would imagine the Annapolis celebration will be going on for quite a while - the Navy certainly has a prize scalp to bolster morale and they will surely be revelling in it.<br />
<br />
Reports are still conflicting, but what seems to be coming clear is that this victory is going to bring up some hard truths that some on the left might not like. Most importantly, much of the intelligence that got us this victory started out, four years ago, as information received from Gitmo detainees at the hands of interrogators. It will be interesting to see how that narrative develops in the coming weeks. Hopefully those practices will be seen as the necessary evil that they are now that they have been instrumental in bringing Public Enemy #1 to justice. <br />
<br />
This victory has many fathers - most notably the CIA and SEAL Team Six, who developed the intel and kept their eyes on the prize. The lion's share of credit goes to them, along with the thanks of a grateful nation. Credit should also be given to both the Obama administration for making the call to go into Pakistan (quite a risky call, to be sure - kudos, Mr. President) and the Bush administration for extracting the initial information four years ago that put us on the path to Abbottabad in the first place.<br />
<br />
The joyous crowds filling the streets of NYC and Washington DC last night were just the beginning. As people wake up to the news today, there are sure to be many more celebrations across the country. This event has come at a time when we desperately needed unity. The divisiveness of the political scene and the economic fears gripping the nation will be put aside, at least for today, so that we can celebrate this major victory and remember that we're all in it together. This surge of pride in America is a welcome thing, and something that hopefully will not fade away any time soon.<br />
<br />
In five months, we will be observing the 10th anniversary of September 11th. While the observances will be solemn, they will have a new undercurrent this year. We the people have gotten a certain measure of closure with the death of bin Laden. Will it take away the pain inflicted on 9/11? No, but it sure does go far towards banishing that helpless feeling many Americans have felt for the past nine years. Perhaps now the real healing can begin.<br />
<br />
This isn't the end of this conflict by any means, but this is a watershed moment for sure. There will be much to discuss in the coming weeks as more information comes out. There will surely be controversy over bin Laden's burial at sea - a necessary thing, in my opinion, which will keep his tomb from becoming a pilgrimage site for future jihadis - and the role Pakistani officials may have played in keeping his whereabouts secret, but for now, let's just savor the flavor of sweet, sweet victory. Democrats, independents and republicans will put aside their differences today and celebrate this great triumph against an evil man.<br />
<br />
God bless America!<br />
<br />
<strong>UPDATE:</strong> <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/02/video-reactions-to-osamas-death/">HotAir</a> has a great roundup of last night's celebrations.<br />
<br />
<strong>UPDATE II:</strong> Initial reports had a police station near the OBL compound; turns out it is the Pakistani version of West Point instead. I've changed it in the post.<br />
<br />
<strong>UPDATE III: </strong>Questions already arising from the burial at sea, as expected. Imams are claiming it wasn't a sufficient burial, others are saying the body should have been brought back here. Why? To display it like a trophy - perhaps mount his head on a spike atop the ever-growing <a href="http://www.panynj.gov/wtcprogress/index.html">Freedom Tower</a>? Burial at sea ensures no shrine to the martyr's tomb. As it is, one will most likely crop up in Abbottabad. They should release the pictures, though, for sure - <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/05/white-house-officials-debate-releasing-photographs-of-bin-ladens-corpse-1.html">gore and all</a>. The wound can be blurred to make it more palatable. DNA tests might prove there's a 99.9% chance it's him, but I, for one, want to see him with my own eyes. And from the spontaneous outbursts of joyful patriotism breaking out all over the country, I don't think I'm alone.Ripleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084714996372103357noreply@blogger.com0