Saturday, July 25, 2009

"How not to get your a** kicked by the police"

I guess Gates didn't watch this video. *WARNING FOUL LANGUAGE!*

Where is Hillary?

Tina Brown recently wrote at The Daily Beast asking "for Barack Obama to let Hillary Clinton take off her burqa." She felt that Obama had purposefully reduced Hillary's spotlight. As Tina points out, it is curious that Hillary wasn't allowed by the president's message team to go on the Sunday talk shows until six months into her tenure as secretary of State.

The New York Daily News has a story up last week titled, "The curious case of the steadily shrinking Hillary Clinton,"which made the case for Hillary's reduced role in this administration. The author attributes it to some personal grudges with Obama, but I think it may be because Hillary has been.... how shall I put this? screwing up.

This week Hillary was being called names by N. Korea's foreign ministry. Her efforts to bring N. Korea to the table for six-party talks on denuclearizing have completely failed. Upset by Clinton's remarks on N. Korea, the foreign minister described Clinton as a "primary schoolgirl" and called her "unintelligent." They said her remarks were "vulgar." Which may provide some late night fodder, but it ignores the serious business of getting N. Korea to release two American female journalists imprisoned there, Laura Ling and Euna Lee.

Earlier this month Hillary took the apology cues from Obama, hoping that that might inspire the N. Koreans to release the journalists. Hillary said that the reporters had expressed "great remorse for this incident" and that "everyone is very sorry that it happened."

Not surprisingly, this didn't work. Now there were harsher words thrown back at N. Korea. A State Department spokesman said, "What is vulgar is that the North Korean government chooses to harvest missiles rather than enough food for its people. And what is unintelligent is the path that the North Korean government has chosen. It's a dead end, which dooms the North Korean people to a dismal future."

I'm not sure what it's going to take to get our journalists back. When one is dealing with a madman, I realize it's hard to figure out what will work. But after a while the United States just looks weak and ineffectual, and that is never good.

Then this week Hillary dropped this bombshell (excuse the pun):

"If the US extends a defense umbrella over the region, if we do even more to support the military capacity of those in the Gulf,'' she said, "it's unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer, because they won't be able to intimidate and dominate, as they apparently believe they can, once they have a nuclear weapon.''

The comment made Israel stand up and take notice since it suggests that the U.S. has come to terms with the idea that Iran will eventually be a nuclear-armed state. Aides to Hillary quickly said that Hillary didn't mean to imply that at all.

This "nuclear umbrella" policy is nothing new. We have it with NATO allies as well as Japan and South Korea. But any implication that we have accepted the notion of nuclear armed Iran is not only disturbing, but again makes us look weak.

In May Hillary declared that Iran was building a monster embassy in Nicaragua, "and you can only imagine what that's for." That turned out to be completely untrue.

I must say that this is a surprise to me. I may not like Hillary's politics, but I did think that she would be a decent Secretary of State. I never expected such blunders.

Lucky for Hillary, our media is too concerned with an arrogant Harvard professor's grievances with a policeman, to pay much attention to Hillary and her gaffes.

It ain't over yet....

If you thought the Gates controversy is over, think again. Obama managed to quite Rev. Wright. Let's see if he has as much luck with Prof. Gates.

It looks like Gates may file suit against Sgt. Crowley. On Gayle King's radio show He said that Crowley "falsified his report." That is a crime. Gates says his lawyers are looking into it.

He claims he never said "I'll talk to yo mama outside."

I think I can clear this up. What he probably said was "I'll talk to Obama outside."

Heh. Just kidding.

Below is one black man's opinion by way of Hip Hop Republicans:

Friday, July 24, 2009

Here Come The Race Baiters

You had to know that the Gates controversy would bring out race baiters. Commentary like this from Jeffrey Wright, an actor, only diminishes the real injustice that many black men in America experience.

Last July while filming the vile film "W" in Shreveport, Jeffrey and several members of the cast were arrested outside a bar there in the wee hours of the morning.

(Imagine for a moment if a Hollywood film were made about Obama showing him to be an inexperienced fool, exaggerating his flaws, and simply making things up about his past. The double standard is astounding)

Anyway, in Wright's commentary he paints a picture of out of control police who arrest him as if he didn't deserve it. What this had to do with race, I have no idea, since much of the cast was white, and they all acted like fools. Being drunk and saying insulting idiotic things about our President in a bar where people like him, I'm sure, had nothing to do with the trouble they got into.

But don't count on the details being in his commentary. He only says that the bartender "took exception to a comment I made." She asked him to leave. Another thing he leaves out of his commentary is that they refused to leave. When an owner of an establishment asks you to leave, the common sense thing to do is to leave. But drunks rarely use common sense. Which is another thing he fails to mention in his commentary. They were drunk. I have read in accounts of the event, that after the cops arrived the drunk cast members were belligerent and rude, cussing and showing a desire to fight with the cops. So much so that they had to call backup. Wright says, "A mess ensued." Right. A mess you created by being rude in the bar, by not leaving when asked, and by being drunk and physical with police officers.

I'm sure the reason the white bartender asked them to leave was because one of the cast members was black, NOT the fact that they were filming a movie maligning our President and were speaking badly about him around people who supported the President. Right? I mean it HAD to be about race.


Just as in the Gates incident, these shallow self absorbed men see themselves as a victim of racism. When in fact, in both cases, it wasn't racism at all.

What makes my blood boil about this, is as I have said before, that there really is a discussion to be had about arrests of black men compared to that of whites. We do need to look at it honestly, but commentary like that reduces it to the ridiculous.

Good grief. Let's hear from black men who have really suffered an injustice in being arrested unfairly. Not these "Do you know who I am?" types.

Update on Gates Controversy

I can't believe this has gotten to the point where Pres. Obama speaks to that and only that at the White House presser today.

What brought this on is the statement from Mass. Police Union:

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- A multiracial group of police officers on Friday stood with the white officer who arrested a prominent black Harvard scholar and asked President Barack Obama and Gov. Deval Patrick to apologize for comments the union leaders called insulting.

Obama said Wednesday that Cambridge police "acted stupidly" during the disorderly conduct arrest of his friend, Henry Louis Gates Jr., in his own home near Harvard University. Gov. Deval Patrick said Gates' arrest was "every black man's nightmare."

Dennis O'Connor, president of the Cambridge Police Superior Officers Association, said Obama's remarks were "misdirected" and the Cambridge police "deeply resent the implication" that race was a factor in the arrest.

Obama said that the issue had gotten out of hand and perhaps that speaks to racial issues in this country. But in reality it would not have gotten the national press it did receive had Obama not addressed it in his healthcare speech during the questions after.

It's strange state of affairs when a union is asking a Democrat President for an apology.

The problem here is that although the case can be made for Pres. Obama's original statement regarding the arrest of black men in this country, this incident was not indicative of that. Sgt. Crowley, by all accounts, followed protocol and has a past that reveals an outstanding officer who has even taught a class on racial profiling for five years at the Lowell Police Academy after being hand-picked for the job by former police Commissioner Ronny Watson, who is black.

In other words, it was the wrong incident and the wrong policeman for Obama to use to make his point.

Pres. Obama is realizing that today, and that is why he made his statement, saying that he spoke personally with Sgt. Crowley, and although he didn't outright apologize he did say he wished he'd "calibrated those words differently."

It was a nice statement and should smooth things over. I still find it a bit ridiculous that this was a national issue at all.

Healthcare and Abortion

Many years ago I was having an argument with my brother about politics. He said to me, "It's always about abortion to you." I replied, "Because it is always about abortion."

I've been right about that. It seemed to me the Democratic party was defined by abortion. When they nominated Obama it seemed even more so. Obama's past voting record told us that he was more pro-abortion than Bill Clinton. And that takes some effort. But even Clinton, I think, would not have voted against the "Born Alive Infants Protection Act."

Ever since Roe v. Wade, a Democrat cannot get nominated for President of his party if he is not pro-choice. A Republican cannot get nominated for President if he is not pro-life. That is how much abortion effects politics.

For years I have felt that the the pro-life movement was finally more about changing hearts than law. We fought for decades for reasonable restrictions like parental consent for a minors, 24 hour waiting period, informed consent, and a ban on partial birth abortion. We finally achieved these things and in the process Americans became more informed. Abortion rates have declined. Americans also saw that Planned Parenthood, the owner and operator of most abortion clinics, was not about compromise. They, and many Democrats, fought these reasonable restrictions every step of the way. Even now we have the Freedom of Choice Act waiting to wipe out all those gains by the pro-life movement. Obama promised during the campaign that one of the first things he would do is sign FOCA. But he saw the mood of the country, and realized that wouldn't be a good move. So he put it on the back burner, thank God.

But Obama can't get away from abortion. I read several days ago that Sen. Hatch had asked Sen. Barbara Mikuliski in a committee meeting on the health care bill if Democrats would be willing to take out the taxpayer funded abortion mandate in the health bill, and her answer was an emphatic, "no."

As I read that, I realized that once again abortion raises it's ugly head and infects everything it touches. And then, as I posted below, several Democrats in the house balked at the abortion mandate as well. Wait. Not just several, but over 40 of them. I can only imagine how the pro-abortion Pelosi reacted. She was probably tearing her hair out. Do you think she will back down on this issue? She won't. Make no mistake about it. This has almost everything to do with this bill not being passed by the August deadline that Obama wished for.

Peggy Noon at the WSJ summed it up perfectly:

......some of the bills being worked on in Congress will allow for or mandate taxpayer funding of abortion. Speaking only and narrowly in political terms, this is so ignorant as to be astounding. A good portion of the support for national health care comes from a sort of European Christian Democrat spirit of community, of “We are all in this together.” This spirit potentially unites Democrats, leftists, some Republicans and GOP populists, the politically unaffiliated and those of whatever view with low incomes. But putting abortion in the mix takes the Christian out of Christian Democrat. It breaks and jangles the coalition, telling those who believe abortion is evil that they not only have to accept its legality but now have to pay for it in a brand new plan, for which they’ll be more highly taxed. This is taking a knife to your own supporters.

I can't tell you what it means to me that some Democrats are standing up for life. It make my heart sing. Every single one of us who has been pro-life should be calling these blue dog Democrats, like Indiana's Baron Hill and Michigan's Bart Stupak, and letting them know how much we appreciate them.

There are many reasons not to like this bill, but there is a certain irony that a Democrat White House and a Democrat Congress can't pass a bill that they desperately want because of abortion.

I know many of the left believe that Republicans just want to defeat this bill to hurt Obama. But that's not true. Most of us out here in America want reform, but just not government run reform. It is my hope that the bill will be transformed into a health insurance reform bill that will allow people to keep their insurance when they are laid off, and that will allow for pre-existing conditions. These are things that we all agree on. I hope it happens and I don't care if Obama gets credit for it. We need reform. It's more important that that happen, than proving Obama can't do it. It will be a shame if abortion keeps that from happening as well.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

BigDog's Random Thoughts

The current debate is NOT about Health Care, its about Health Insurance. There is nothing wrong with Health Care in the USA. We have the best health care and medicine in the world, bar none. The question on the table is how we pay for it. The best costs. We pay 16% of GNP on medical care, Canada pays 10%, and they can have it. The current plan is just about the gov't stepping in and rationing.

I hope Obama does a press conference every week. The more he talks - as opposed to giving teleprompter speeches - the more clear his personality and competence becomes.

There are many things to say about the Gates incident. One of the things that strikes me: Gates is tight with Obama. He probably thinks nothing can touch him. Its a very tribal attitude.

These continuing stories of schoolteachers having sex with students shouldn't be a surpise. School teachers go to elementary school, then high school, then college, then go right back to elementary and high school. They have always been students, always been part of that culture and not the grown-up world. Why shouldn't they behave as teachers as they did when students? I generalize, but I'm afraid the front line of the infantilization of adulthood is the schools.

A man should be armed.

Sonia Sotomayor is a bigot. She is also not too bright nor well educated. She uses the wrong words in context: "imminent" instead of 'eminent' and dozens of others that she should know given her profession. Her body language gives away her lies when she says things like how her judicial philosophy is 'fidelity to the law' - did anyone note how she blinked? She will be confirmed anyway. I suspect she is a Party animal and doesn't take her job all that seriously.

Prof. Gates, Police, and Common Sense

It really showed bad judgement for Obama to have answered the question about his friend, Professor Gates being arrested, in the way he did. To say the police 'acted stupidly" without knowing the facts, brings the predicable reaction from the police in question:

The Cambridge, Mass., police officer who arrested Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and his union are slamming President Obama for saying they reacted “stupidly” to the incident at Gates house last week.

Obama was “was dead wrong to malign this police officer specifically and the department in general,” Alan McDonald, the lawyer for the Cambridge Police Superior Officers Association, told ABC News today.

Sgt. James Crowley, who arrested Gates for disorderly conduct also chimed in today, saying Obama’s characterization was “way off base… I acted appropriately,” Crowley told WBZ Radio in Boston Thursday.

“There was a lot of yelling, there was references to my mother,” he added, “something you wouldn’t expect from anybody that should be grateful that you were there investigating a report of a crime in progress, let alone a Harvard University professor.”

Obama has qualified what he said:

The White House says President Barack Obama was not calling a Cambridge, Mass., police officer stupid when he criticized last week’s arrest of black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. …
On Wednesday Obama said the police “acted stupidly” when they arrested Gates even after it was clear that he was not a burglary suspect. Gibbs said that Obama did not regret the remark, but wanted to clarify that he was not calling the arresting officer stupid.

Huh? What kind of difference does that make?

In what I have heard from people I have known who lived in Boston, it seems to be a pretty racist place. I've heard that it's "worse than the south." But I hate using that term because I don't think the south is worse. I think racists are pretty spread out all over now.

The police report says Gates originally didn't show ID, and when he did he started acting belligerent. Don't you see that on COPS all the time? Over and over I see people who believe because they think it's an unfair incident, it gives them the right to be rude, scream, or otherwise show attitude with a police officer. I just scream at the TV "SHUT UP." Almost always, without question, if you show respect for the police officer and don't give them attitude, you will not get arrested if you actually haven't done anything against the law.

Now does that mean there isn't blatant racism in some police forces? Of course not. I've seen it myself. That is why I have always felt that police officers should work in areas they themselves live or grew up in, so that they they have a connection to the community. This may sound extreme, but I think cops who serve black communities should be black. It would help solve alot of problems with the urban black poor not trusting cops.

Now that wasn't the problem in this case, but from all accounts Gates was hostile and rude from the get go. It doesn't matter if you have every reason to be mad, YOU DON'T SHOW ATTITUDE TO A COP. Period.

I told my teenagers over and over, if you get stopped and you think you didn't do anything wrong...IT DOESN'T MATTER. You say "yes sir" or 'yes ma'am" and you show respect no matter what. Why? Because you cannot win. You will never win. That is just the way it is.

Finally, Pres. Obama should not have even been asked such a silly question. It wasn't a national story. It had nothing to do with the issues of the day, which were mainly healthcare, and the reporter should be ashamed. But Obama did not need to pontificate for five minutes about race either, especially when it has become clear that Gates was a jerk to the police officer. It makes it seem as if Obama was defending that kind of behavior.

Read this for one black man's view.

via HotAir

The prize doesn't always go to the most deserving

Irena Sendler

This has been making the e-mail rounds this past year, and it has been verified to be true. This is about a beautiful soul and the injustice of the world (that obviously continues). Sent to me by my friend Peter Roff.

"There recently was a death of a 98 year-old lady named Irena. During WWII, Irena, got permission to work in the Warsaw Ghetto, as a Plumbing/Sewer specialist. She had an 'ulterior motive' ... She KNEW what the Nazi's plans were for the Jews, (being German.) Irena smuggled infants out in the bottom of the tool box she carried and she carried in the back of her truck a burlap sack, (for larger kids..) She also had a dog in the back that she trained to bark when the Nazi soldiers let her in and out of the ghetto. The soldiers of course wanted nothing to do with the dog and the barking covered the kids/infants noises.. During her time of doing this, she managed to smuggle out and save 2500 kids/infants. She was caught, and the Nazi's broke both her legs, arms and beat her severely. Irena kept a record of the names of all the kids she smuggled out and kept them in a glass jar, buried under a tree in her back yard. After the war, she tried to locate any parents that may have survived it and reunited the family. Most had been gassed. Those kids she helped got placed into foster family homes or adopted.

In 2007 Irena was up for the Nobel Peace Prize ... She was not selected.

Al Gore won, for a slide show on Global Warming."

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Tweeting Health Care Press Conference

Obama said what he thought Americans needed to hear, and left much unanswered, just as I expected. As I have said, Obama doesn't have to convince America, only a few blue dog Democrats. Sadly.

So.... I thought you guys might enjoy some interesting tweets during the presser from some well known tweeters like Rick Sanchez of CNN to Meghan McCain to Anna Marie Cox (who I might add, although liberal, is very funny)

marcambiner Newsweek's Fineman on MSNBC says Obama didn't accomplish much tonight and seemed wrote and over-talking-pointed. Do you agree?

McCainblogette I have always thought my father was a better speaker!

McCainblogette Yes, I watched the presidents press conference, I thought it was lackluster and I'm completely against universal health care and I'm biased

anamariecox RT @irenerep: I suggest adding "let me be clear" and "make no mistake" to permanent Obama drinking game // AND ANOTHER "this town" just now!

anamariecox So much for this presser being the debut of a tighter, more concise Obama. Also APPARENTLY HEALTH CARE.

anamariecox Shorter Obama: How are we going to pay for it? I TOTALLY SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT OF THAT! Congrats, AP's Ben Feller FOR TOTALLY STUMPING ME.

anamariecox New permanent #Obama drinking game word: "this town." Also BREAKING: Obama has good health care! (WHers patting self on back over that one.)

anamariecox Me: "Obama reminded us 4x that he's president." Colleague: "I bet Politico turns that into a story: Obama: OBSESSED WITH BEING PRESIDENT."

anamariecox RT @mikemadden: Least controversial line of the night? "The Cambridge police acted stupidly." // TV producers FREAKING OUT HERE disagree.

HeyTammyBruce Urkel's new spin: It's not "Health Care Reform" it's "Health Insurance Reform." And, btw, Sarah Palin is Mothra.

MattMackowiak Whoa. Howard Fineman on MSNBC: Tonight Obama was "tired, with same old talking points... he missed an opportunity here."

LarrySabato POTUS still might be able to force D majorities to deliver. But there could be a big '10 cost. Scaled back plan might be politically wise.

LarrySabato People fear O's plan will tax & cost too much, achieve too little, & add to deficits. History doesn't help. Govt promises rarely materialize

LarrySabato Least impressive of Obama's four prime-time pressers. Little passion until the last question about Prof. Gates. This didn't help O's plan.

kathrynlopez O failed the do no harm test

hughhewitt #hhrs When Howard Fineman, Juan Williams and Larry Sabato all agree that the president did badly tonight, you don't have to believe me.

ricksanchezcnn look, i know how cops can be, i've experienced myself. but a prez should not take sides w his friend on this, he prob should not have judged

ricksanchezcnn btw, listen to nixon tapes, gop link with big money guys opposed to health care taints them somewhat on this issue. no?

KarlRove Polls are turning against President Barack Obama’s health-care plan.

markknoller And he was not shy in stating his goal: "I'm the Presidnet and I think this has to get done" he said of his health

TIMEThePage (In)Artful Dodger (With Enemies): Obama deflects numerous questions at his East Room press conference, especiall..

charmaineyoest POTUS avoids abortion issue tonight, but tomorrow night already 17K joining webcast at Be sure to join us!!!

Depressing tweet of the night:

ricksanchezcnn btw, dems have the votes, my sources say this can't be stopped. it will eventually pass

What is holding up the health care bill?

Sure Republicans are against the spending and the overreaching of the government here, but that's not what is stopping this bill.

I'm about to write a sentence I never thought I would.

House DEMOCRATS are trying to ensure that taxpayer money will not be used to fund abortion in the healthcare bill.

Wow. I'm just going to take a moment and relish that.

You may be skeptical, but it's true.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Indiana Democrat Baron Hill, a Blue Dog congressman negotiating with leaders on health care, disagreed with Speaker Nancy Pelosi's statement Wednesday that Democrats have the votes to pass health care in the House.

Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, who is trying to change the bill to make it clear it would not use taxpayer money for abortions, also disagreed with the Speaker.

"It would be easier to fit a camel through the eye of a needle than to pass this bill," said Stupak.

Stupak said Democratic leaders can't lose 40 votes if they want to pass the bill and predicted "she [Pelosi] would lose more than 40 on the right to life issue alone. There's just no way."

Stupak said he doesn't want to block the bill, but wants leaders to agree to add language on the abortion issue before it comes to the House floor.

Obama and Pelosi may worship at the alter of abortion, but clearly we have some Democrats that understand a bit more about the sanctity of human life.

Maybe there is some hope for my father's party after all.

The Ongoing Attacks On Sarah Palin

My question for so many on the left is "Why do hate you Sarah Palin?" In all my years observing politics I have never seen such vile attacks on one person. I've written before why radical feminists and female leftwing writers hate her, and that is all about abortion. But I wonder about the everyday Democrat. I don't think they hate her. They may disagree with her beliefs, just as they disagreed with McCain or Romney. But I don't think it reaches the level of hate for everyday Democrats, like it does with the leftwing media.

I wonder what everyday Democrats think about the unending attacks on Palin. What do they think when a DNC official blogger post photoshops of Palin and her Down Syndrome baby with the baby's face photoshopped with an alien face. I wonder what everyday Democrat women think when the leftwing blogosphere makes crude sexual jokes about her and her daughters or when they photoshop pictures of her in a sexually crude way.

I think fair minded people of any political stripe think that the attacks must stop. Nothing this woman has done deserves this. We now know that Democrats have filed frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit on Palin, forcing her to constantly battle them. All have been thrown out. She accumulated over $500,000 in legal debt. Palin isn't rich like so many elite politicians. She has a regular family, with a regular income. Supporters began a legal defense fund for her to help cover the debt. The left has now filed a lawsuit saying that the only reason she is getting donations is because she is Governor, which is using her office for profit (she has nothing to do with the site btw). Of course the irony is that she would not have lawsuits to fight if she were not Governor.

This is what happened yesterday. The AP reported the following, but Palin immediately issued a statement saying that report was inaccurate:

An investigator for the state Personnel Board says in his July 14 report that there is probable cause to believe Palin used or attempted to use her official position for personal gain because she authorized the creation of the trust as the “official” legal defense fund.
The practical effect of the ruling on Palin will be more financial than anything else. The report recommends that Palin refuse to accept payment from the defense fund, and that the complaint be resolved without a formal hearing before the Alaska Personnel Board…
In his report, attorney Thomas Daniel said his interpretation of the ethics act is consistent with common sense.
An ordinary citizen facing legal charges is not likely to be able to generate donations to a legal defense fund, he wrote. “In contrast, Governor Palin is able to generate donations because of the fact that she is a public official and a public figure. Were it not for the fact that she is governor and a national political figure, it is unlikely that many citizens would donate money to her legal defense fund.”

"Were it not for the fact that she is governor and a national political figure?" Were it not for the fact that she is governor and a national figure, she would have no legal debt from people like you who have a political vendetta against her.

Palin posted this on facebook:

“I find the notion that I have taken any action pertaining to the legal defense trust fund misguided and factually in error. I am informed that this fund was created by experienced attorneys in DC and was modeled after other similar funds established for senators and others. The fund itself was not created by me nor is it controlled by me. Neither I nor my lawyer has received a penny from this fund, and I am informed the Trustee was withholding any action or payment pending final resolution with the Personnel Board. This is the hallmark of legal compliance and prudent conduct.
In short, I have not ‘acted’ relative to the defense fund and it is misleading to say I have. I have no doubt that the Trust will welcome guidance by the Board, as do we all, but it is my understanding that this matter was not resolved and the complainant’s violation of law has served to mislead the public and prejudice a fair review of this matter.”

Isn't it time for these attacks on Palin to stop? All fair minded people can see this for what it is. I think it's going to take everyday decent Democrats to demand a stop to this. It's up to them to rein in the political forces determined to do ANYTHING to damage Sarah Palin. It's time for decent Democrat leaders to demand this stop. I know you are out there. Step up to the plate and do the right thing.

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Bad News

It seems all news is bad news lately, and I hate to pile on, but James Pinkerton has a good overview of what the Obama administration has brought us in such a short time:

Warren Buffett, a strong Obama supporter, compares the stimulus package enacted in February to "Viagra" and "candy," predicting that unemployment will hit 11 percent.

(When you think about it, that is the perfect analogy. We are being screwed after all)

These gloomy points were further underscored by Mortimer Zuckerman, the real estate/media mogul, whose a editorial last week for The Wall Street Journal appeared under the ominous headline, "The Economy Is Even Worse Than You Think."

Zuckerman cites a grim armada of statistics to bolster his argument, the most telling of which is that the average work week for private-sector employees slipped to just 33 hours, the lowest level since the government began tracking such data 45 years ago. That is, more and more "employed" people are really only able to work part time. Meanwhile, hourly compensation is flat, averaging $18.53 an hour in June. So do the math: Declining working hours, multiplied by flat wages, equals declining income--the further erosion of the American Dream.

And in his grim litany, Zuckerman doesn't even mention the "cap-and-trade" legislation the Obama administration has already pushed through one house of Congress; that bill would cost the economy millions of jobs. Fortunately, Alaska governor Sarah Palin addressed that incoming torpedo on the op-ed page of The Washington Post recently; she correctly labels "cap and tax" as a way to "kill responsible domestic energy production or clobber every American consumer with higher prices." And of course, to accelerate the wipeout of manufacturing in the Heartland.

No worries. Obama's Council of Economic Advisers says aerospace and pharmaceutical industries will counterbalance all that. But....Obama is promising a cut back in defense spending and "controlling costs" in healthcare would seen to mean a dearth of new jobs in the healthcare industry.

OK, so let's see here: The first stimulus didn't work for anyone except a few favored constituencies. "Cap and tax," if it passes, will strangle the economy; and even if it doesn't pass, the continuing threat of anti-carbon dioxide activism--from litigators, state legislatures, and future Congresses--will cast a dark shadow over future economic activity. (Ask yourself: Would you build a factory in the same country as Carol Browner?) And the Obama administration is targeting two economic-driver industries, aerospace and health care, for drastic reductions.

Here's Zuckerman's conclusion:

"No wonder poll after poll shows a steady erosion of confidence in the stimulus. So what kind of second-act stimulus should we look for? Something that might have a real multiplier effect, not a congressional wish list of pet programs. It is critical that the Obama administration not play politics with the issue. The time to get ready for a serious infrastructure program is now. It's a shame Washington didn't get it right the first time."

God help us all.

Let's not forget the Clintons

I know these days make us yearn for the political corruption days of the Clinton administration, but did you realize that we haven't even begun to know the full story there?

Judicial watch has been trying for years to obtain Clinton's records. Just what has been discovered lately on the health care debate is interesting, but this is particulary disturbing:

• A February 5, 1993 Draft Memorandum from Alexis Herman and Mike Lux detailing the Office of Public Liaison’s plan for the health care reform campaign. The memorandum notes the development of an “interest group data base” detailing whether or not organizations “support(ed) us in the election.” The database would also track personal information about interest group leaders, such as their home phone numbers, addresses, “biographies, analysis of credibility in the media, and known relationships with Congresspeople.”

Big brother at work.

But we have only just begun to scratch the surface:

These records released by Judicial Watch were obtained from the approximately 13,000 records made publicly available by the Clinton Library. The National Archives admits there may be an additional 3,022,030 textual records, 2,884 pages of electronic records, 1,021 photographs, 3 videotapes and 3 audiotapes related to the Task Force that are being withheld indefinitely from the public. On November 2, 2007 Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the National Archives to force the release of all the Task Force records.

“These documents paint a disturbing picture of how Hillary Clinton and the Clinton administration approached health care reform – secrecy, smears, and the misuse of government computers to track private and political information on citizens,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “There are millions more documents that the Library has yet to release. The Clintons continue to play games and pretend they have nothing to do with this delay. The Clintons should get out of the way and authorize the release of these records now.”

A Gem

As I surf through the vastness that is the blogosophere, every once in a while I find a sparkling gem among the dirty rocks of blogs.

Here is one. "All The Best Things Come In Pairs...Tatas, husbands, & blogs"

It's not political. It's just beautiful. This lady is working through the hard times, I tell ya.

But I love this line:

I cheer myself out of bed and through each moment every single day. There's a very tired girl with pom poms living in my head, begging me to get over myself.

She is what we call in the south, a steele magnolia.

Writing about when her two year old was born:

She came to me in a dream.

Being pregnant with her was not a dream.

I went into heart failure at 34 weeks, and hung out in the hospital until it was safe for her to come out.

When they wheeled me from my room to the operating room, it was a scene out of one of those horrible ER episodes, where you don't know if you want to keep watching b/c the ending seems tragic. I could hear her heartbeat on the monitor as they were rushing me over...loud, and slower....slower...slower.

I put my right hand up in the air, and yanked some tubing around w/ it. The anesthesiologist pushing me the fastest said "Put your hand down." I said "No."

I'm giving her up to God. It won't matter if she comes to me or not, but it matters if she goes to Him. I never felt as much faith as I did in that moment. And never have again since then.

Just beautiful.

Go enjoy the read. If you find a way to help her, do that as well.

She is lalayu on twitter.

Healthcare Debate Update

There is so much going on today on healthcare, I'm just going to combine everything here, so you can look through it all.

Remember that provision in the Healthcare bill cited by Investors Business Daily that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance? Today Obama was asked if that were true, and he admitted that he wasn't even familiar with that provision!. Good grief! This could radically change whether you get to keep your private insurance or not, a claim that Obama keeps insisting that you can, and he doesn't even KNOW it's in the bill. Unbelievable.

Senate Doctors:

Join the Senate Doctors every Tuesday and Thursday 4pm EST. You can join in the discussion or ask questions via twitter, e-mail, facebook, or Youtube. Also see previous episodes.

More excellent stuff from Thomas Sowell here.

Great panel discussions on healthcare reform here.

A reminder of the Mayo Clinic's non-partisan reaction to the healthcare bill:

Although there are some positive provisions in the current House Tri-Committee bill - including insurance for all and payment reform demonstration projects - the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher-quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the opposite.

In general, the proposals under discussion are not patient focused or results oriented. Lawmakers have failed to use a fundamental lever - a change in Medicare payment policy - to help drive necessary improvements in American health care. Unless legislators create payment systems that pay for good patient results at reasonable costs, the promise of transformation in American health care will wither. The real losers will be the citizens of the United States.

Really, the bottom line here is that Republicans don't have the votes to prevent this devastating legislation. The fate of our healthcare is the hands of blue dog Democrats. If you are a Democrat and you do not like this, I suggest you let your Congressman know.

The "Green Jobs" Czar

Another great pick by Obama!

I mean, what's really wrong with stealing anyhow?

Monday, July 20, 2009


I've hesitated blogging on the healthcare bill. It's complicated and difficult to understand. There was never any doubt from the beginning, that having the government run any aspect of healthcare would be a disaster. But I waited for a informed respected non partisan voice to illustrate why. I found that at the the Health Policy blog at Mayo Clinic Health Policy Center:

Although there are some positive provisions in the current House Tri-Committee bill – including insurance for all and payment reform demonstration projects – the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher-quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the opposite.

In general, the proposals under discussion are not patient focused or results oriented. Lawmakers have failed to use a fundamental lever – a change in Medicare payment policy – to help drive necessary improvements in American health care. Unless legislators create payment systems that pay for good patient results at reasonable costs, the promise of transformation in American health care will wither. The real losers will be the citizens of the United States.

For a more partisan, but informative view, go here.

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Why Do Blacks Vote Mostly For Democrats?

*This post goes hand in hand with the post below. If you haven't read that post, please scroll and down and do so, and then come back to read this one!

Several commenters on my blogs have been asking me why I think blacks started voting for Democrats in such great numbers. I was sitting in my living room Sunday morning thinking about this and as I was thinking about it, the answer literally came on the T.V. screen.

CNN was interviewing Jesse Jackson. They were asking him if Obama was doing enough for the black community and inner city problems. Jackson smoothly muted his criticisms of Obama, and said that just as the banks received stimulus money, the urban areas need stimulus money as well. Interestingly, I saw Jackson interviewed on BBC world news when I was in Mexico. His criticisms were the same, but were not in muted tones. He was openly critical of Obama. It was a stark difference, and I wondered why he decided to tone down his rhetoric so much.

But I digress. The CNN host played the speech that Jesse Jackson gave at the 1984 Democratic National Convention. At this time Jesse Jackson was THE leader of the black community, barring none. He was charismatic and sincere. Remember, Jackson had been standing beside Dr. Martin Luther King when he was shot. He had held Dr. King's body. Dr. King's blood was on his suit. The black community was completely connected to Jesse Jackson. They looked at him as continuing Dr. King's dream. They looked to him for leadership, and saw him as a point of true change in politics for blacks.

In this rousing riveting 1984 speech, Jackson urges black Americas to vote for "progressive whites." He said, "When black folks vote in large numbers for progressive whites, we win. When progressive whites win, we win, and when when we win, mothers win, children win. We all win." He had been this kind of leader to them for 20 yrs before that, and had been preaching this same message for blacks that entire time. Jesse Jackson had spent years in cities across the country personally bringing blacks to register to vote in their hometowns. He brought hundreds of blacks to the court house in Jackson Mississippi in 1974 (I think that was the year) to register to vote for the first time. I know this because my father was Circuit Clerk at the time, and ran the courthouse. He kept the courthouse open after 5pm in order to register them all. I passed out voter registration forms to the crowd. Now, who do you think those blacks voted for when they did vote? Liberal Democrats of course.

So here was the answer I was pondering. You can think what you want about Jackson now, but at the time he was the personification of the continuing dream of black Americans to succeed and to prosper. Jackson urged black Americans to vote for liberal Democrats and they did. In droves. I don't think we can measure the profound impact Jesse had on the future of blacks in the Democratic party. Meanwhile, Republicans were ignoring the black community and allowing Democrats to paint Republicans as racist. It all adds up to what we have today in voting patterns in the black community.

But the segment on CNN got even more enlightening. As CNN is interviewing Jackson they put up a graph of poverty, unemployment, and single parent numbers in black America today compared to the numbers in 1984, when Jackson made that famous speech. The numbers were almost exactly the same. The CNN host asked Jackson, "Does this mean that there is still so much to be done?" After that, they played another part of Jackson's 1984 speech where he was encouraging the black youth to strive for success, urging them to not drop out of school, not to use drugs, don't let poverty keep them from a greater purpose. CNN then played a clip of Obama's speech to the NAACP last week with similar language and the same message. The CNN host asked Jackson, "Is imitation the sincerest form of flattery, or does this mean we just have far to go for real equality for blacks in America?" Jackson just stayed on message about the needs in the urban community for stimulus money. The real question that needed to be asked, wasn't asked.

What was ignored in this interview was the glaring fact that after Jackson implored black Americans to vote for liberal Democrats in that 1984 speech, and they did, NOTHING has changed for them regarding poverty levels, unemployment, and single parent households here in 2009. So much the same, that the speech Obama gave to the NAACP last week almost mirrored the speech Jackson gave in 1984.

And this clarifies exactly what I have been saying all along. Jackson turned out to be completely wrong in that 1984 speech. Blacks didn't win. Black women and children didn't win. The are still mired in the same problems today that they were mired in in 1984.

So, despite Obama's historic election, Republicans today have that truth to use to encourage and ask the black community to return to the party that did effect great change for them in history at one time. When Republicans were fighting for blacks in the 1800's and through to the 1950's and early 60's, it was then that blacks won the most equality, the most freedom, and the most liberty.

This should be our message. We are the party that will lift the urban black out of poverty, drugs, and broken homes. The Democrats have clearly shown that they cannot do this.

If we can clearly articulate this and, most importantly, address the problems in urban and poor areas, then we can bring black Americans home to the Republican party.

Lastly, I stumbled upon this while surfing today. I think you will enjoy it:

Letter From a Black Repubican