Friday, August 28, 2009

Pelosi's Disgrace

In all this Health Care debate, let us not let this important fact be lost. The Speaker of The House, Nancy Pelos LIED about the CIA never informing her of suspects that were being waterboarded. She knew and she never spoke up. Only later, when it was politically expedient to do so, did she fake outrage at the practice. More sickening is the fact that these CIA agents that kept us from being attacked again, are now being investigated themselves, and no one seems interested in the lies of the Speaker of the House.

I can hardly stand it. Shameful.

Speaker Pelosi's Disgrace [Peter Kirsanow] at NRO

As I noted yesterday, the CIA IG's report flatly refutes the claim made by Nancy Pelosi that the CIA never informed her in the fall of 2002 that terror suspects were being waterboarded. In other words, Nancy Pelosi knew that CIA interrogators were using Enhance Interrogation Techniques ("EITs").

These same CIA interrogators are now being investigated for conduct that Nancy Pelosi was well aware of, yet never protested. These interrogators face possible criminal prosecution and financial ruin for conduct — taken less than a year after 3,000 Americans had been slaughtered due to the efforts of some of the very terrorists being interrogated — that had been rigorously vetted and approved by counsel and that had the tacit approval of Nancy Pelosi and the other members of the congressional oversight committees.

Now the Speaker of the House skips away from responsibility by smearing the CIA as liars. And the media can't bestir themselves to confront the Speaker with basic questions about the bewildering inconsistencies in her story.

It's not overstating the case to say that this is an abomination on a host of levels. Where are the media's guardians of truth and protectors of the little guy now that there's evidence that the American people have been lied to on a matter of national security and low-level CIA employees are being made the scapegoats?

It's the Lies That Will Kill Health Care Reform

OutsideTheBeltway discovers the truth. We have been told over and over by Pres.Obama and other Democrat leaders that illegals will NOT be covered by this health care bill. Simply not true:

In what he called the "first myth" being spread by critics of his proposal for a government-run health care system, Obama said they are wrong in claiming illegal immigrants will be covered: "That is not true. Illegal immigrants would not be covered. That idea has not even been on the table." Obama said.
Well, Mr. President, that idea must have been tucked under a stack of background briefing papers over there in the corner of the table because the Congressional Research Service (CRS) says this about H.R. 3200, the Obamacare bill approved just before the recess by the House Energy and Commerce Committee chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-CA:
"Under H.R. 3200, a 'Health Insurance Exchange' would begin operation in 2013 and would offer private plans alongside a public option...H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens--whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently--participating in the Exchange."

HotAir points out that the reason you haven't heard this is because the CRS reports CRS reports do not get released to the public. CRS offers private analysis to members of Congress on request, but rarely does the public get a look.

David Freddoso got his hands on a copy of the 11-page analysis, "Treatment of Non-Citizens in HR3200″ late last night, and confirmed Tapscott's reading:

In its subsection on health insurance subsidies (known as "affordability credits"), HR 3200 does state, "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States." That would seem to solve the problem, but it's more rhetoric than reality. The bill contains no verification requirement or enforcement process for citizenship or legal residency, as exists for other federal benefit programs. The only verification required for the subsidies pertains to family income. Beyond that, as the CRS report notes, everything is left in the hands of the Health Choices Commissioner.

House Democrats defeated all attempts in committee to add an enforcement mechanism that would require proof of citizenship or legal residency for those getting subsidies.

It's the same with abortion coverage. They insist it isn't covered, but U.S. News and World News Reports:

The question revolves largely around an amendment to the House healthcare bill that was adopted by the Energy and Commerce Committee last Thursday. The amendment prohibits federal funds from explicitly subsidizing abortion in the private healthcare plans to be offered through the health insurance exchange. But it doesn't prevent "the public health insurance option from providing for or prohibiting coverage" of abortion.

You see what they are doing in both cases, right? It is the sin of omission. In both cases, covering illegals and abortion coverage, it is simply not prevented. This is why they are shooting down specific amendments that would prohibit those things. As long as it isn't prohibited, they can allow it.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive....

Update: Charles Krauthammer's on last night's Fox News (via NRO)

What's killing the Obama health plan is not the Republicans, it's not the Blue Dogs, it isn't the rallies in the town meetings. It's numbers. It's reality. Obama says: "I'm going to expand coverage and reduce the cost." And the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, steps in and gives you numbers. It says: No, it will not reduce. It will increase our costs by $1 trillion.

Obama says: "Oh, yes, [cost might rise] in the first decade , and then it will decline." The CBO says no. There will be an increase in the deficit in the second decade. It's the numbers and the reality that is sinking Obamacare.

....and the lies.

Sen. Kennedy liked jokes about Chappaquiddick

I would find it hard to believe (well, not really) if Kennedy's close friend and former editor of Newsweek, Ed Klein hadn't said it:

I don’t know if you know this or not, but one of his favorite topics of humor was indeed Chappaquiddick itself. And he would ask people, “have you heard any new jokes about Chappaquiddick?” That is just the most amazing thing. It’s not that he didn’t feel remorse about the death of Mary Jo Kopechne, but that he still always saw the other side of everything and the ridiculous side of things, too.

Hear the audio here.

Ugh. It just makes me sick.

Mark Hemingway feels the same:

EXCUSE ME? If that’s true it makes Kennedy kind of a monster. The odd thing is that if you listen to the whole show, the tone of everyone involved is nauseatingly haigographic and reverential. Klein apparently let his guard down a bit; after he lets it slip Kennedy liked to joke about the woman he killed you can actually hear in his voice that he’s trying to backpedal. The show actually cuts to a break as he’s trying to explain himself, and I seriously wonder if it wasn’t the producers trying to do Klein a favor. But I’m sorry, there appears to be little to that could explain this. It goes way beyond “you had to be there.”

via HotAir

Many say the dead deserve respect, but if he showed no respect for the death of Mary Jo, then why should anyone respect his death?

Update: The more I see the slobbering over Kennedy on the MSM, the more I am convinced that people who don't remember need to know the truth about Kennedy. We should not honor the dishonorable. Because if you think he "changed" after Mary Jo was killed, then you would be wrong. Read this insightful look at Sen. Kennedy written in GQ magazine in 1990 by Michael Kelly. This is no rightwinger writing this. This is a journalist who did three months of research on Kennedy.

Change The Republican Party From Within

We who have been involved in the Tea Parties know that as much a anger as there has been towards Democrats for their constant pursuit of expanding government, there is almost as much anger at Republicans for saying they are for limited government, but doing the opposite these last 8 years.

What we have here is a perfect opportunity to change our party from within. We have the attention of the American people, who now understand how critical it is to stay involved. It's time to clean house of Republican politicians who voted to expand government. It's time to find new leadership in almost all our local parties. Take a precinct chair in your district. Encourage strong conservative businessmen and women, engineers, doctors, and teachers to run for office(NO MORE LAWYERS!). It used to be that the local Republican party decided who would run for what, and that was it. But now we have facebook, twitter, and blogs. We can get our message out ourselves. WE can choose a candidate.

We need to take back our party. We are SICK of Republicans who act like Democrats. We are sick of Republicans who pass spending bills to appease the opposition when it is clear that there will never be credit given there. Pres. Bush caved in to the Democrats over and over and all they did was hate him. No more appeasement!

The people need to take back control of our government. This is supposed to be a government OF the people. No more spineless Republicans in name only. Let us only elect those who stand strong on conservative principles.

The time is now. We shouldn't let this opportunity pass.

There is a reason Rush Limbaugh is so rich

He knows the liberal mind and calls them out every time:

From Jonah Goldberg:

If you read the newspapers or watch the news, you will encounter a long list of accomplishments by the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. One thing you’re less likely to hear, however, is that in his death, Kennedy proved Rush Limbaugh right.

In March, the talk-show host and bĂȘte noir of progressives everywhere said that the health-care bill wending its way through Congress would eventually be dubbed the “Ted Kennedy Memorial Health-Care Bill.” At the time, the official position of the Democratic party was outrage and disgust.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee initiated a petition drive demanding that the Republican party formally denounce Limbaugh for his “reprehensible” and “truly outrageous” comments.

Fast-forward to a few hours after the announcement of Kennedy’s death. Suddenly, naming the bill after Kennedy would be a moving tribute.

ABC News reports that “the idea of naming the legislation for Kennedy has been quietly circulating for months” but was kicked into overdrive by Sen. Robert Byrd, the Democratic party’s eldest statesman. Intriguingly, this suggests that either Democrats already had the idea when Limbaugh floated it, which would mean their protests were just so much opportunistic and cynical posturing, or they actually got the idea from Limbaugh himself, which would be too ironic for a Tom Wolfe novel.

But that Kennedy’s death should be marked by cynicism, opportunism, and irony is not shocking, given that these qualities are now the hallmarks of the party he largely defined.

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Don't Lie....

This is why most Americans aren't buying what the administration is saying about health care reform:

Two weeks ago, White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod said in a now legendary "viral" email that, "It's a myth that health insurance reform would be financed by cutting Medicare benefits." This was sent out the day before Mr. Obama told a Montana town hall that he'd pay for health-care reform by "eliminating . . . about $177 billion over 10 years" for "what's called Medicare Advantage." And it was two days before Mr. Obama told a Colorado town hall he'd cover "two-thirds" of the "roughly $900 billion" of his plan's cost by "eliminating waste," again citing Medicare Advantage.

Did they just think no one would notice that they are lying?

People noticed:

Adding to the Democrats' woes are polls that show weak support for ObamaCare among Independents and Democrats. In the new ABC/Washington Post poll, only 45% approved of Mr. Obama's plan and 50% opposed it—with 40% "strongly" opposed.

Despite Mr. Obama's barnstorming tour, last week's Fox/Opinion Dynamics poll said "the health care reform legislation being considered right now" is opposed by 21% of Democrats, 50% of Independents, and 81% of Republicans. Only 37% of Democrats and 15% of Independents think their families would be better off if it passed.

Read the whole thing.

The Sad Life Of Joan Kennedy

I really wouldn't wish being a Kennedy on my worst enemy.

"Cash For Criminals"

Good grief:

The federal government sent about 3,900 economic stimulus payments of $250 each this spring to people who were in no position to use the money to help stimulate the economy: prison inmates.

The checks were part of the massive economic recovery package approved by Congress and President Barack Obama in February. About 52 million Social Security recipients, railroad retirees and those receiving Supplemental Security Income were eligible for the one-time checks.

Prison inmates are generally ineligible for federal benefits. However, 2,200 of the inmates who received checks got to keep them because, under the law, they were eligible, said Mark Lassiter, a spokesman for the Social Security Administration. They were eligible because they weren't incarcerated in any of the three months before the recovery package was enacted.

"The law specified that any beneficiary eligible for a Social Security benefit during one of those months was eligible for the recovery payment," Lassiter said.

The other 1,700 checks? That was a mistake.

Checks were sent to those inmates because government records didn't accurately show they were in prison, Lassiter said. He said most of those checks were returned by the prisons.

The Boston Herald first reported that the checks were sent to inmates.

The inspector general for the Social Security Administration is performing an audit to make sure no checks went to ineligible recipients, spokesman George E. Penn said.

The audit, which had already been planned, will examine whether checks incorrectly went to inmates, dead people, fugitive felons or people living outside the U.S., Penn said.

Here in Texas,more than 200 Texas state inmates were sent federal economic stimulus checks even though most were ineligible to receive them according to the Houston Chronicle.

What more can I say? This is what government does. It's inefficient and irresponsible. The idea that we could possibly hand over our health care to it is chilling. It will NEVER save money. It will NEVER reduce costs. Fraud will always be rampant. The less government in our lives, the better. That should be our mantra.

via JammieWearingFool

The Hypocrisy of the Anti-war Movement

I have to give credit to Cindy Sheehan. She practices what she preaches. She is heading up peace vigils at Martha's Vineyard this week where Pres. Obama is vacationing.

The left seems uninterested in the war now that a Democrat is President, even though141,000 American soldiers are still serving in Iraqi and 114 have lost their lives this year. 172 have lost their lives in Afghanistan this year. But the anti-war left is suddenly silent. Only Sheehan stands alone as not being a hypocrite.

Counter-Punch quotes Rush, and sums it up how the media is ignoring Sheehan when they once couldn't get enough of her:

"When she’s out there revving up people against George W. Bush, it’s, let’s cover her 24/7, let’s make sure we have our cameras out there outside Bush’s ranch when she’s there, whatever she’s saying, whatever she’s doing, if she goes down and meets with Hugo Chavez, our cameras will be there. They could not get enough of her. Now that she’s headed to Martha’s Vineyard, the State-Controlled Media, Charlie Gibson, State-Controlled Anchor, ABC: ‘Enough already.’ Cindy, leave it alone, get out, we’re not interested, we’re not going to cover you going to Martha’s Vineyard because our guy is president now and you’re just a hassle. You’re just a problem. To these people, they never had any true, genuine emotional interest in her. She was just a pawn. She was just a woman to be used and then thrown overboard once they’re through with her and they’re through with her. They don’t want any part of Cindy Sheehan protesting against any war when Obama happens to be president."

Sheehan has this to say about Pres.Obama:

Mr. Obama “doesn’t represent real change,” Sheehan charged, noting that July was the worst month yet for casualties of US soldiers in Afghanistan. The “only change I have seen in foreign policy is, unfortunately, things are getting worse” in Afghanistan and Iraq, Sheehan said on MSNBC.

So hats off to Sheehan for the consistency of her convictions. I may not agree with her, but I do admire people who practice what they preach.

The Culture of Death in Houston

My man Claver is still fighting the good fight. Go show him some support at
via LST

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Sanford Stays

I was hoping that Sanford's press conference would be about resigning, but no such luck.

Good grief. This guy needs to go and go now.

There are real journalists out there....

... and they are found on CNBC

Posted by BigDog

In a previous thread I posted about Whole Foods CEO John Mackey's suggestions for improving health care in the US. Mackey's 8 suggestions - as mild and sensible as they were - outraged liberals who called for a boycott of Whole Foods. Clearly this boycott is failing.

CNBC just this afternoon interviewed one of those people calling for Mackey's ouster. Unlike most modern journalists, these CNBC journalists were polite, objective and skeptical. The first two minutes were background, then it goes on to the interview.

CNBC Interview

This man, Bill Patterson, has nothing. He can't even support his assertations and by the end of the interview, he is shaking.

In reference to my earlier post by Bill Whittle about the Tyranny of Political Correctness: Mackey doesn't fit the narrative. As the CEO of Whole Foods, he is supposed to believe the liberal canon, but since he doesn't, he must be destroyed. So Mackey is attacked by Believers of the narrative. They don't offer an alternative, the only thing that matters is that Mackey is destroyed and removed from his post as CEO despite soaring profit and increased sales.

Edward Kennedy R.I.P

When a public figure like Kennedy dies, it is best to go by the old saying, if you don't have anything nice to say, say nothing at all.

So I will say nothing at all.

But if you are looking for the best overall look back at his life, one that looks at the good and the bad, go here.

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Political Correctness is not "Free"

Posted by BigDog

I wish I could embed these vids. Bill Whittle is on fire... in an understated, intellectual sort of way.

The Tyranny of Political Correctness

13 min, video

Fighting back without violence...

From GatewayPundit:

The Tea Party Express (website: is proud to announce that Mr. Kenneth Gladney will be joining the nationwide Tea Party tour hosting 35 rallies across the country, set to launch this Friday, August 28.

You might remember Gladney. He was the young black conservative that was beaten by SEIU thugs after a Russ Carnahan town hall meeting in St. Louis earlier this month.

Kenneth Gladney didn’t expect to be the victim of an angry mob when he went to a town hall meeting hosted by Rep. Russ Carnahan (D-Missouri). While selling "Don't Tread on Me" flags outside the town hall forum, he was physically and verbally attacked by members of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), who knocked Gladney to the ground and proceeded to punch and kick him.

“Kenneth Gladney was attacked for doing nothing more than exercising his right to free speech and engage in commerce. These are fundamental American rights that all of us should cherish and protect,” said Deborah Johns, Vice Chairman of the Our Country Deserves Better Committee which is organizing the “Tea Party Express.” Ms. Johns is also a Marine Mom, whose son, William, is currently serving in the United States Marines including multiple tours of duty in the War on Terror.

“My son has served multiple tours of duty overseas in the War on Terror. He has risked his life so that all Americans may retain the rights our Founding Fathers intended for them. However, some of President Obama’s supporters - who once argued that dissent is patriotic – now show zero tolerance for anyone not advocating complete support for the President’s big-government agenda,” said Ms. Johns.

“If President Obama’s supporters think they can use violence to silence the backlash against his policies of tax-spend-bailout, they are sadly mistaken. We are all Kenneth Gladney, and we at the Tea Party Express will stand with him and his right to speak his mind without fear of violence or intimidation,” said Johns.

Monday, August 24, 2009

Lieberman says it best....

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, today expressed his strong disappointment in the U.S. Attorney General's decision to name a prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogations:

I respectfully regret this decision by Attorney General Holder and fear our country will come to regret it too because an open ended criminal investigation of past CIA activity, which has already been condemned and prohibited, will have a chilling effect on the men and women agents of our intelligence community whose uninhibited bravery and skill we depend on every day to protect our homeland from the next terrorist attack. Career prosecutors in the Department of Justice have previously reviewed allegations of abuse and concluded that prosecution was not warranted, with the exception of one CIA contractor who has already been convicted. President Obama has established clear guidelines to ensure that past abuses are not repeated and has stated his desire to look forward rather than backward.

We cannot take for granted the fact that our homeland has not been attacked since September 11, 2001. That has occurred only because of the constant vigilance and unflinching efforts by those brave individuals in our military, civilian homeland security and counterterrorism agencies, and the intelligence community. These public servants must of course live within the law but they must also be free to do their dangerous and critical jobs without worrying that years from now a future Attorney General will authorize a criminal investigation of them for behavior that a previous Attorney General concluded was authorized and legal.

Update: Former Vice President Dick Cheney's statement following the release of CIA interrogation documents:

The documents released Monday clearly demonstrate that the individuals subjected to Enhanced Interrogation Techniques provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda. This intelligence saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks. These detainees also, according to the documents, played a role in nearly every capture of al Qaeda members and associates since 2002. The activities of the CIA in carrying out the policies of the Bush Administration were directly responsible for defeating all efforts by al Qaeda to launch further mass casualty attacks against the United States. The people involved deserve our gratitude. They do not deserve to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions. President Obama’s decision to allow the Justice Department to investigate and possibly prosecute CIA personnel, and his decision to remove authority for interrogation from the CIA to the White House, serves as a reminder, if any were needed, of why so many Americans have doubts about this Administration’s ability to be responsible for our nation’s security.

via NRO

Michelle Obama Was Right

You have heard of the "mobs" showing up at the Townhalls, right? You can meet some of the mob here. Where did they come from? What is motivating these people?

In February Michelle Obama spoke at UCLA, and you may remember that this part of her speech got a lot of play:

"Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed."

More prophetic words were never spoken. Obama did exactly that for millions of us. He woke us up and pulled us out of our "comfort zones." But not in the way Michelle or Pres. Obama ever expected or imagined.

The thing about conservatives, especially non political conservatives, is that they don't take to "protesting." They see it as silly for the most part. That's why what you have been seeing at the Townhalls has been so unprecedented.

We conservatives tend to be very busy. We work hard to pay our bills and taxes. We go to school. We raise our kids, and we spend our weekends watching our kids play sports, and going to church. We don't have time to "protest." Most of us don't even have time to pay much attention to politics, other than what we catch on the nightly news. We vote and we give to campaigns we agree with, and we have always felt that that was enough.

Until President Obama.

It all happened so fast. Bailouts and quadrupling the deficit. Government takeover of banks, then GM, and now health care?

The sleeping giant of hard workers across America got up from their computers, their sports games, their work, and their homes and that FINALLY came out of their "isolation." They moved out of their "comfort zones." They engaged, and they promised themselves they would never be so unaware of who we were really electing ever again.

Michelle Obama went on to say:

You have to stay at the seat at the table of democracy with a man like Barack Obama not just on Tuesday but in a year from now, in four years from now, in eights years from now, you will have to be engaged."

And so we became engaged. We showed up at Tea Party Protests across the nation. We showed up at Townhalls. We let Congress know that we are NOW paying attention. We now understand that Obama is not the moderate that he claimed to be while campaigning. We now understand that he is far left and wants to direct our country that way.

We are not the the young "anarchists" that barely work, and wait for text messages to tell them where their next protest is, and then show up not even knowing what they are protesting against. We aren't paid ACORN workers that show up on buses to register fake voters.

We are mothers, doctors, construction workers, and teachers. We are Americans from every socioeconomic background, who are seeing our liberty being stripped away. Who see a government long out of control, but now in such a downward spiral that we fear we can't reverse it.

We see precious freedoms being taken away. We see a government we can't trust wanting to direct the most intimate part of our lives.

Blue dog Democrats, libertarians, moderate Republicans, and conservatives put away their "divisions" on immigration, drug legalization, abortion, and a host of other issues, and we came together to fight "soft tyranny." We came together to fight government determined to expand and to regulate every aspect of our economic and corporate life. We came together to fight a government determined to control our very health.

Don't worry Michelle, we won't go back to our "lives as usual." We are now informed and involved.

And we have your husband to thank for that. You were right after all.

Wealth is not unlimited

Posted by BigDog

Millions face shrinking Social Security payments

Millions of older people face shrinking Social Security checks next year, the first time in a generation that payments would not rise.

The trustees who oversee Social Security are projecting there won't be a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for the next two years. That hasn't happened since automatic increases were adopted in 1975.

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

This is real trouble for Obama and the Democrats. They are squandering billions on his union friends and ACORN, but where are they to come up with money for Social Security? Democrats have opposed reform for SS for decades. Granted the Republicans didn't push as hard as they ought.

Remember that Bush tried to reform Social Security years ago. As much as I disagreed with Bush on fiscal issues, he was a foresighted and responsible President in many ways. I supported Bush when he suggested Social Security reforms and was disappointed when he gave up.

Our Efficient Government at Work

Like most of you, I have a "setback" control on my thermostat at home that automatically adjusts the temperature when no one is home and at night. Its a great energy saving device.

Remember when Obama was lecturing us that we can't keep our thermostats at
“72 degrees at all times?”

It turns out that our own government, you know the one who is constantly trying to tell us how to live our lives, can't manage this simple device.

But the hilarious (pathetic?) side of the story is that the Department that I am specifically referring to guessed it....The Department of Energy.

I kid you not. Tucked away in the Sunday Houston Chronicle on page A26, at the bottom corner, is the story of how an audit showed that the Dept. of energy failed to use that energy saving device in it's federal buildings (35 of them to be exact), wasting more than $11.5 million in energy costs. This is enough energy to power more than 9,800 homes each year.

The irony of this should highlight the inefficiency of our government and remind us of why there should be limited government.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Drill There, Drill Now

Just unbelievable. The WSJ reports on the Obama administration lending billions of dollars to Brazil for offshore drilling.

The Bush Administration's five-year plan (2007-2012) to open the outer continental shelf to oil exploration included new lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico. But in 2007 environmentalists went to court to block drilling in Alaska and in April a federal court ruled in their favor.

So do environmentalists only care about the environment of the United States?

As Charles Krauthammer on Fox News pointed out:

"...if you're subsidizing or underwriting drilling offshore in Brazil, then you're completely undermining the reason to prohibit drilling offshore in the U.S.

The reason Obama opposes it and the reason the liberals oppose it is because of the environment. But by not drilling here, we simply have the drilling end up elsewhere, and it doesn't reduce pollution on the planet. It simply exports it into poorer countries where the safeguards are much less, for example, in Nigeria, where there are oil spills and siphoning and explosions all the time.

So the net effect on the planet of drilling elsewhere instead of here is that there is more pollution and despoiling of the environment, and it reduces American jobs. It makes no sense at all.

It seems that nothing liberals do makes any sense at all.

Just Sweet Video

This is Democrat Rep. Brian Baird, who was one of the first to accuse town hall protesters of "brown shirt tactics" and compared them to a "lynch mob." He later apologized, but it is sweet to see this Marine verbally smack him down.

via HotAir

Things that should surprise no one

Posted by BigDog

McCain is voting with Republicans... now that it doesn't matter and Democrats don't need him.

The ACLU spied on CIA officers and took pictures of them at their homes, then showed these pictures to incarcerated terrorist planners. Yes, this really happened, and the ACLU is desperately covering their rears. If you don't understand what this means, imagine the ACLU spying on Federal prosecutors/judges/witnesses and showing what they learned to Mob bosses and drug cartel kingpins.

Obama - who criticizes others for using race, religion and lies - uses race, religion and lies more than others.

What Now?

Posted by BigDog

Victor Davis Hanson is one of the authors and scholars I respect the most. In his latest column he takes apart Obama's major weaknesses and gives him sage advice on how to change course. Well and good, but I am interested in his advice for Republicans:

And the Republicans?

1) Mea Culpa. At some point the opposition will have to offer counterproposals that are the opposite of the financial recklessness of 2001-06. On health care reform, they could offer tax incentives for private health care accounts, craft subsidies for the poor to purchase private catastrophic plans, and insist on tort reform. It won’t do any good to blast Obama for bankrupting the treasury if conservatives still vote in multi-billion-dollar agriculture subsidies, expand earmarks, and dream up new programs like No Child Left Behind and Prescription Drug expanded benefits. The Republicans gain from the Obama meltdown, but will be embarrassed when voters turn and ask , “And you? What have you got for us that is any better?” and they have no detailed reply.

2) Clean House. If opponents are to emphasize the Democratic sleaze—Rangel, Dodd, Murtha, the Obama Cabinet tax-cheaters, Axelrod, etc—then they must pledge no more Tom Delays, Duke Cunningham’s, Mark Foleys, and Jack Abramoffs. Parts of the success of the old Contract with America were provisions about congressional behavior.

3) Something Different This Time. Conservatives must appreciate that Obamism transcends the usual liberal challenge posed by past Democrats. For a variety of reasons, the liberal agenda this time is much more far-reaching and systematic. Obama proposes not just to grow government and absorb much more of the nation’s GDP into the state, but to create a lasting legacy of statism.

Emphasis mine. Politically, I think the Democrats will be in big trouble in 2010. But Republicans need to recognize that they are the minority because Republicans screwed up badly when they had the majority. They need a whole new class of Republicans candidates (like the Dems found Bluedogs to run against Republicans in 2006) and leaders who can articulate a viable message that is an alternative to the Democrats. I fear our political class is simply not up to the task. Democrats are criminal and ideological Leftists bent on destruction, and Republicans are shiftless and want to be liked by the Beltway denizens.