We were warned that this sort of a thing was going to happen, Glenn Beck said it long ago…:
NEW YORK — Clothing prices have dropped for a decade as tame inflation and cheap overseas labor helped hold down costs. Retailers and clothing makers cut frills and experimented with fabric blends to cut prices during the recession.
But as the world economy recovers and demand for goods rises, a surge in labor and raw materials costs is squeezing retailers and manufacturers who have run out of ways to pare costs.
Cotton has more than doubled in price over the last year, hitting all-time highs. The price of synthetic fabrics has jumped roughly 50% as demand for alternatives and blends has risen.
Clothing prices are expected to rise about 10% in coming months, with the biggest increases coming in the second half of the year, said Burt Flickinger III, president of Strategic Resource Group.
Devout Muslims do not believe all religions are equal. They believe there is one God, Allah, and submission to his law is the path to paradise. They do not believe in freedom of speech and the press if it means mocking the Prophet. They do not believe in Western dress codes or mixing men and women in schools and sports. They do not believe all lifestyles are equal. Some think adulterers should be stoned and honor killings are justified for girls who disgrace the family.
They wish to live their faith and their culture in our countries, to live alongside us but to dwell apart.
“If you come to France,” said Sarkozy last week, “you accept to melt into a single community, which is the national community, and if you do not want to accept that, you cannot be welcome in France.”
A little late for that. Some 5 million to 8 million Arabs and Muslims are in France, their birth rate is higher, and more are on the way.
The real questions: Whose idea was it to bring these people in? And what do France, Britain and Germany do if they say: This is a democracy, we will live as we wish to live, according to our beliefs, not yours.
How does a liberal, permissive society that celebrates diversity impose its values on a militant immigrant minority that rejects them?
Answer: It doesn’t. All the rest is chatter.
This is what James Burnham meant when he wrote that liberalism is the ideology of Western suicide.
Amen to that; if we do not wake up and realize that radical Muslims and some cases Muslims in general do not wish to intermingle with we Christians, but rather wish to destroy we Christians and our free capitalist system; it will one day be the death of us. Liberal Progressives and radical Muslims have one thing in common. They want to destroy America and it’s Christian values and it’s capitalistic system.
However, if says such things, he is reviled among the Blogosphere and called a bigot and a racist. These things comes with the territory. Also, something else I feel the need to say; because there are actually people stupid enough to say this; and believe me, blogging for six years brings experience with dealing with idiots, such as thesehere — these people will say, “Well, I thought you said this?:
Not only that but as that little cartoon on my “About This Blog” page says; whenever someone tries to preach disunity, through class warfare, race hatred or Religious intolerance — they seek to rob us of the one founding thing that this Country was founded upon — Freedom
To those people I say, I did say that and I totally stand behind it. However, I will point out to the unwashed masses of liberalism, that just happen to pass by the little blog of mine; that pointing out that fact that Muslims, especially of the radical sort, want to take away our religious freedoms and put all Americans under Sharia Law; that is not racist to mention that, that is simply stating the truth about Islamofacists. Now there are some, like th author quoted above, that believe that ALL Muslims are this way. I personally have not seen that here in America just yet. It is one thing to want that; it is another to be actually able to do such a thing.
So far, when Muslims have tried treading on American values, such as in our schools and so forth; they have been met with much resistance. Hopefully this continues.
But the core challenge of this time is not the cost of discretionary spending. Obama knows this; everyone knows this. The crisis is the cost of future entitlements and defense, about which Obama proposes nothing. Yes, there’s some blather. But Obama will not risk in any way any vulnerability on taxes to his right or entitlement spending to his left. He convened a deficit commission in order to throw it in the trash. If I were Alan Simpson or Erskine Bowles, I’d feel duped. And they were duped. All of us who took Obama’s pitch as fiscally responsible were duped.
The cynical political calculation is obvious and it is well put by Yglesias and Sprung. If Obama backs Bowles-Simpson, the GOP will savage him for the tax hikes, while also scaring the wits out of the elderly on Medicare. The Democratic left – just look at HuffPo today – will have a cow. Indeed, if Obama backs anything, the GOP will automatically oppose him. He has to wait for a bipartisan agreement which he can then gently push ahead. But that’s exactly why we are in this situation today. Because no president has had the balls to deal with it, and George W. Bush made it all insanely worse. Sprung says the proposal on corporate taxes is a trial balloon
I will not really get into all this; all I know is, we are in a crap load of debt, which is more then out entire Gross Domestic Product. Now, like some Right-Wing blogs, I am not going to sit here, like a chump and tell you it is all the Democrats fault. The truth is both parties are guilty of this nonsense of spending money we do not have; and now both parties are acting like total buffoons, instead actually trying to get it down. Which is not totally surprising.
However, I do find it mildly amusing that the same blogger, who was essentially Barack Obama’s poodle dog during the 2008 election cycle is now the first blogger to come out swinging against him. Which proves my theory entirely of the fact that liberals, which is what Sully is, not a Conservative; are just not much loyal to the one’s that they elect. My opinion? Sure, that is what I do here. However, based upon what I have been seeing in the left wing media in this day and age; my opinion not that very far off.
Having said all of that….. CUE THE MUSIC! HIT IT B.B.!
The huge oversized 243-page book Diversity Lane/ A Liberal Family Saga now available at the Diversity Lane website! Endorsed by FrontPage, Townhall, Brent Bozell, American Thinker and tons of others– THE most enjoyable conservative book of the year, guaranteed.
For more fun visit us at the Diversity Lane Page at Facebook or visit Zack Rawsthorne’s Facebook Profile to shoot the breeze. Don’t forget to read more at our website www.diversitylane.com or our blog www.diversitylane.wordpress.com.
Well, isn’t this just a lovely story to pick up on a Sunday Morning?
WASHINGTON – The Obama administration’s Justice Department has asserted that the FBI can obtain telephone records of international calls made from the United States without any formal legal process or court oversight, according to a document obtained by McClatchy.
That assertion was revealed by the department – perhaps inadvertently – in its response to a McClatchy request for a copy of a secret Justice Department memo.
Critics say the legal position is flawed and creates a potential loophole that could lead to a repeat of FBI abuses that were supposed to have been stopped in 2006.
The controversy is a legacy of the Bush administration’s war on terror. Critics say the Obama administration appears to be continuing many of the most controversial tactics of that strategy, including the assertion of sweeping executive powers.
For years after the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the FBI sought and obtained thousands of telephone records for international calls in an attempt to thwart potential terrorists. The bureau devised an informal system of requesting the records from three telecommunications firms to create what one agent called a “phone database on steroids” that included names, addresses, length of service and billing information.
Which proves to this old school, Paleoconservative, Fundamentalist Christian one thing and one thing alone. That the only difference between a Neo-Liberal; like President Obama and a Neoconservative like President Bush is this —- One loves big Government and the other loves big Government as long as they are the one’s controlling it.
I remember how doing the Bush era, people like Keith Olbermann,were wailing to the top of their lungs about how darned horrible of the Bush Administration to allow such stuff to happen; and now that the Obama Administration is in power, what do you hear?
(click to play)
That is right, absolutely nothing about it at all. That is because the socialist liberals do not give a damn about personal liberty, all they care about is winning elections. All of the attacks against the Bush administration about everything; Hurricane Katrina, 9/11, Iraq —- everything —was just partisan politics. It never was about the people; because socialists do not give a darn about the people! All they care about is power – governmental power — everything else to them is just second nature.
Which pretty much sums up why I stopped voted for the Democratic Party. I am pretty much on to their game anymore. They try to come off as the party of the people; but anymore, they are all about the party of the state.
More than four years after leaving public life, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld continues to believe the war in Iraq was worth the effort, and has no apologies for his decision-making in leading the campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In an exclusive interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer, Rumsfeld concedes that “it’s possible” that decisions on how many troops to send into Iraq marked the biggest mistake of the war.
“In a war, many things cost lives,” Rumsfeld told Sawyer.
Pressed on the fact that President Bush has written that cutting troop levels in Iraq was “the most important failure in the execution of the war,” Rumsfeld called that “interesting.”
I do not much care for the man. He is, in my humble opinion, an ignoramus. But he does have his opinions and he is a human being.
Get the Book:
I also highly recommend George W. Bush’s book as well:
Filmmaker Michael Moore has sued Harvey and Bob Weinstein, accusing the brothers of “Hollywood accounting tricks” and “financial deception” that cheated him out of at least $2.7 million in profits from the hit documentary Fahrenheit 9/11.
In a lawsuit filed today in Los Angeles Superior Court, Moore says the Weinsteins and an affiliated entity called the Fellowship Adventure Group agreed to split profits from the film 50-50 but then diverted monies to hide them from Moore.
The suit for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and constructive fraud claims that in 2008 Moore conducted an audit of the 2004 film, which grossed $222 million worldwide, and “discovered substantial irregularities in the accounting” that resulted in a “gross underpayment to [Moore],” the lawsuit says.
Those irregularities include an alleged secret deduction of $2.5 million in revenue that the Weinstiens claimed was paid to acquire an interest owned in the film by a predecessor company called Icon Entertainment International; a 7.5% “override” fee on advertising costs in the amount of $1.2 million, “despite the fact that [the Weinsteins] did not incur the advertising costs and the [deal] did not permit [them] to deduct these costs”; as well as additional improper deductions of fees paid to distribution consultants, accountants, residuals, foreign taxes and travel expenses, including what Moore says are the “grossly excessive and unreasonable” costs of hiring a private jet to carry a single passenger to Europe.
But of course, the Weinstein’s deny this:
Weinstein lawyer Bert Fields dismissed the claims in an interview.
“The Weinsteins have paid everything they should have paid,” Fields tells THR. “Mr. Moore has received a huge amount of money from this film and we believe he is overreaching. He should be ashamed of himself”
There seems to be much more to that and I suggest that you go read it. The ironic part is that this is the same clown, who fawned over Cuba’s healthcare system and is totally into the idea of “share the wealth.” So, it strikes me as ironic that this socialist twit would be whining about his profits from his movie, that basically promotes the tenants of socialism; have been stolen. I mean, what’s wrong with a little wealth sharing? Right? I know what you’re thinking… “That’s stealing!” Well, guess what? When you say “Share the wealth,” you are basically saying take money from those who have worked hard to earn their money and give it to those, who have not worked for it at all. In other words: Legalized Stealing.
The Huffington Post, which began in 2005 with a meager $1 million investment and has grown into one of the most heavily visited news Web sites in the country, is being acquired by AOL in a deal that creates an unlikely pairing of two online media giants.
The two companies completed the sale Sunday evening and were expected to announce the deal Monday morning. AOL will pay $315 million, $300 million of it in cash and the rest in stock. It will be the company’s largest acquisition since it was separated from Time Warner in 2009.
The deal will allow AOL to greatly expand its news gathering and original content creation, areas that its chief executive, Tim Armstrong, views as vital to reversing a decade-long decline.
Arianna Huffington, the cable talk show pundit, author and doyenne of the political left, will take control of all of AOL’s editorial content as president and editor in chief of a newly created Huffington Post Media Group. The arrangement will give her oversight not only of AOL’s national, local and financial news operations, but also of the company’s other media enterprises like MapQuest and Moviefone.
By handing so much control over to Ms. Huffington and making her a public face of the company, AOL, which has been seen as apolitical, risks losing its nonpartisan image. Ms. Huffington said her politics would have no bearing on how she ran the new business.
The deal has the potential to create an enterprise that could reach more than 100 million visitors in the United States each month. For The Huffington Post, which began as a liberal blog with a small staff but now draws some 25 million visitors every month, the sale represents an opportunity to reach new audiences. For AOL, which has been looking for ways to bring in new revenue as its dial-up Internet access business declines, the millions of Huffington Post readers represent millions in potential advertising dollars.
“This is a statement that the company is making investments, and in this case a bold investment, that fits right into our strategy,” Mr. Armstrong said in an interview Sunday. “I think this is going to be a situation where 1 plus 1 equals 11.”
Ms. Huffington and Mr. Armstrong began discussing the possibility of a sale only last month. They came to know each other well after they both attended a media conference in November and quickly discovered, as Ms. Huffington put it, “we were practically finishing each other’s sentences.” She added: “It was really amazing how aligned our visions were.”
One of The Huffington Post’s strengths has been creating an online community of readers with tens of millions of people. Their ability to leave comments on Huffington Post news articles and blog posts and to share them on TwitterFacebook has been a major reason the site attracts so many readers. It is routine for articles to draw thousands of comments each and be cross-linked across multiple social networks. and
Mr. Armstrong and Ms. Huffington say that AOL’s local news initiative, Patch, and its citizen journalist venture, Seed, stand to thrive when paired with the reader engagement tools of The Huffington Post.
AOL’s own news Web sites like Politics Daily and Daily Finance are likely to disappear when the deal is completed, and many of the writers who work for those sites will become Huffington Post writers, according to people with knowledge of the deal, who asked not to be identified discussing plans that are still being worked out.
I got one thing to say about the above. I give it a year; and Huffington Post and AOL will both be gone. The truth is, that Huffington Post was swirling the drain, according to some of my well-placed sources and Huffington was looking for a buyer. She finally found a sucker, with deep pockets. The problem is that AOL is quickly becoming a relic of the old days of the internet; as in Pre-web 2.0. AOL has tried to keep up; but the majority of internet users, like myself; recoil in horror, when people say, “I am on AOL!”
It should be an interesting transition to watch, though. None of these oddities takes away from Arianna’s success, either, in building a blogospheric empire and realizing a fortune from it.
Yeah, she built an empire of wealth; because she was already damned wealthy, because she supposedly “unknowingly” married a guy, who was involved in politics and he turned out to be gay. Further more, the Huffington Post exists for one reason and one reason alone. To propagate socialist Liberal propaganda and make a mockery of Conservatism. In other words; that marble-mouthed socialist got rich off of disparaging American values and our capitalistic system in this Country —- All the while getting rich off of it — or in her case, richer.
Again, it is pathetic and straight up hypocritical. But then again, we are talking about American socialist liberals, are we not?
The huge oversized 243-page book Diversity Lane/ A Liberal Family Saga now available at the Diversity Lane website! Endorsed by FrontPage, Townhall, Brent Bozell, American Thinker and tons of others– THE most enjoyable conservative book of the year, guaranteed.
For more fun visit us at the Diversity Lane Page at Facebook or visit Zack Rawsthorne’s Facebook Profile to shoot the breeze. Don’t forget to read more at our website www.diversitylane.com or our blog www.diversitylane.wordpress.com.
I have been meaning to write about this for a few days; but there were other things to write about and this one got cast aside.
I was going to put this one under the whole “Living Proof that liberals are classless assholes” banner. But this one just was just too great, too awful, too nasty.
It appears that Keith Olbermann has some sort of inbred hatred of our United States Military. Now why would I make such a wild accusation as that? For this reason:
I AM very happy that Keith Olbermann is no longer on MSNBC. I participated in more than 10 combat missions in Vietnam, so I know a mission is not a war. Someone should have told that to Olbermann, as he demonstrated his ignorance by equating the two for years on his show.
He would end by saying it has been so many days since President Bush declared “Mission Accomplished’’ in Iraq. Bush never said that. Olbermann was referring to a sign on an aircraft carrier that said “Mission Accomplished.’’ The president declared an end to major combat operations, and therefore the aircraft carrier was headed home.
In Bush’s speech, he said that much work has yet to be done. The sign was for the brave people who had completed their mission.
Olbermann can take the money and run. I don’t care where.
A gentle ribbing towards someone who, if anyone, had the right to say that; after all he was a military officer. Well, not to Keith, who hates anything remotely Military — this was his response: (H/T Nice Deb)
How Keith REALLY feels about our Military
That’s right, Keith believes that people that serve in our Military are dumb. This goes along with the whole mentality that whole idea, by the so-called enlightened liberals that most Military people are simple minded Conservatives who are too stupid to think for themselves. You see, Keith does not have his network bosses to answer to any longer, so, now he can spew his far leftist hatred of all things American; including our Military.
As some of you know and you can know this by searching this blog; I used to hold Keith Olbermann in very high regard. I was, at one point, a regular watcher of Keith’s show. That is, until he started with the intellectual dishonesty and straight up lying about everything under the sun. Well, writing about something is not enough, one must put their money where their mouth is.
So, as of this morning. I have removed the one book that Keith Olbermann wrote off of my Blog’s Bookstore. Unfortunately, I could not remove the one book itself. I had to remove the sections about George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Most of it was filled with Anti-Bush and Anti-Cheney books anyhow. I realize that it might not be that big of a deal, not many people buy anything from my Bookstore anyhow. However, with me. It is a personal decision; that I just will not support someone, who is taken to insulting our Military. This is a personal issue with me; it always has been, as I have had family members who served. This is why I have “Lost my shit”, so to speak, in the past, when people have insulted the Military in the Paleo-Conservative circles.
So, Keith, if you happened to even read this; You sir, are history in my book. You just do not insult Military officers, whether active or inactive. Not around me at least. You sir, are no better than the anti-war protesters in the 1960’s who spat upon and mocked the soldiers coming out of Vietnam. In fact, your little smart-assed tweet was, as far as this writer is concerned; was in fact, a virtual spit in the face of a Solider who served proudly in our Military.
For this sir, you are remanded to dustbin of history, as far as I am concerned. You sir are just another Anti-American socialist, who happened to get rich by spewing your lies and bigotry — all the while railing against the very capitalist system that made you rich. Which is a picture perfect example of the blatant hypocrisy of the liberal left. I do hope that you enjoy that money, that in all honesty, you do not deserve to own; and if you just happen to get lucky enough to land another job as a talking head somewhere else. I will be here to blog against your idiotic nonsense. Because as a former “Left of Center,” I am appalled to where you and your communist-lite friends have taken the party that my grandparents and parents voted and still do vote for.
Further more, I find your attacks against our Military sickening and I will be one of many, who will continue to attack you, for your idiotic political viewpoints; until you finally retire and eventually die relieving this Nation of your moronic bombast and empty headed pontifications.
I may be only a small cog in this machine that we call America; but I am a damned good one!
Please Note: The posting of this video does not constitute an endorsement of views presented in this video. It is simply posted for information purposes only.
—-
In this issue of the reality report:The Egyptian Revolution triggered a government shutdown of the web. Could it happen here? Is the internet kill switch back on the congressional table? If the Feds shut down the web in the United States how could “We the People” get around the internet blackout? Gary Franchi reveals what tools you need to bypass a Government sponsored internet blockade. In this edition, Ron Paul explains the how the Federal Reserve works outside of congress’ constitutional framework. We also look at Senator Chuck Schumer failing miserably while explaining the three branches of government. Beautiful words are uttered from the lips of the Florida attorney general about Obamacare. President and founder of Freedom Law School, Peymon Montehedeh, gives us the details on this years’ Freedom Conference, and we announce a new action taking place in March. We’ll take a dip into the mailbag, deliver the results of last week’s poll, a viewer brands a new Enemy of the State… and Nina returns to deliver the Headlines from the new Reality Report News Room.
RACISTS like this, are begging for war. Let’s give them one. It is 220,000,000 white people, against 37,000,000 blacks. You know what a genocide looks like? You don’t, because there is no one left, to remember it. Be? smart, though. Let them, make the first violent moves. Let the people, see their violence. Let them give us a reason. Be patient. Do not move, as an individual. Wait. Keep giving them rope, they need, to hang themselves. LOL!!!
It would be a radical departure from existing case law to hold that Congress can regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause. If it has the power to compel an otherwise passive individual into a commercial transaction with a third party merely by asserting — as was done in the Act — that compelling the actual transaction is itself “commercial and economic in nature, and substantially affects interstate commerce” [see Act § 1501(a)(1)], it is not hyperbolizing to suggest that Congress could do almost anything it wanted. It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place.…
In the final analysis, this Act has been analogized to a finely crafted watch, and that seems to fit. It has approximately 450 separate pieces, but one essential piece (the individual mandate) is defective and must be removed. It cannot function as originally designed. There are simply too many moving parts in the Act and too many provisions dependent (directly and indirectly) on the individual mandate and other health insurance provisions — which, as noted, were the chief engines that drove the entire legislative effort — for me to try and dissect out the proper from the improper, and the able-to-stand-alone from the unable-to-stand-alone. Such a quasi-legislative undertaking would be particularly inappropriate in light of the fact that any statute that might conceivably be left over after this analysis is complete would plainly not serve Congress’ main purpose and primary objective in passing the Act. The statute is, after all, called “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” not “The Abstinence Education and Bone Marrow Density Testing Act.” The Act, like a defectively designed watch, needs to be redesigned and reconstructed by the watchmaker.
This is going to really put a monkey wrench Obama’s plans. Although, I tend to think that the Obama Administration will argue it to the Supreme Court of the United States. The reaction from the White House is going to be an interesting one.
I do believe, that if this Healthcare Bill is scrapped, and they Democrats lose this issue; this may could very well render President Obama unelectable in 2012. Something tells me, that this entire Presidency is going to be Jimmy Carter all over again.
Stay Tuned.
Update: Memeorandum has the roundup of reactions so far.
That aside, the pattern once again has held that every Republican-appointed judge has ruled against the law’s constitutionality and every Democratic-appointed-judge has ruled for it. Now, the ultimate arbiter is the Supreme Court, where Republican appointees hold a 5-4 majority, though one of those 5 (Anthony Kennedy) is not a completely down-the-line Republican.
Given this divide, wouldn’t it make sense to… let elected officials decide? That’s the logic of judicial restraint, anyway, and it’s logic conservatives used to employ about a host of topics. But that was before they gained the ability to win huge victories in the courts that they couldn’t win at the ballot box.
What is a bit surprising is that Vinson went further and held that the mandate isn’t “severable” from the rest of the law — which means that the whole law is unconstitutional, not just the part that requires people to buy insurance. That’s unusual insofar as courts like to be modest when striking down statutes; if they can find a section of it unconstitutional while preserving the rest of it, they’ll do so out of respect for the democratic branches that enacted it. In this case, however, as we’ve been told by Democrats many times, you can’t have universal health care unless you force people to pay for it. Cutting the mandate out of O-Care and keeping the rest of the scheme intact would create a nightmare scenario in which people avoid buying insurance until they get sick, with insurers required to accept them by the new rules governing preexisting conditions. Before long, that cost burden would drive most insurers into bankruptcy, with the golden age of a public option or single-payer soon to follow.
[…]
A fun fact about ObamaCare: Unlike virtually every other federal statute, it contains no “severabililty clause” at the end requesting that if any part of it should be held unconstitutional in court, the rest should be preserved as good law. Vinson actually mentions that fact in the opinion and notes that an earlier draft of the law did contain such a clause, suggesting that it was deliberately dropped because even Congress agrees that you can’t sever any one part from such an elaborate scheme. The truth, however, may be more prosaic: According to a Democratic aide who spoke to the Times back in November, the clause was omitted because of … an “oversight.” Oops!
WASHINGTON — Nearly two-thirds of cars on the road could have more corn-based ethanol in their fuel tanks under an Environmental Protection Agency decision Friday.
The agency said that 15 percent ethanol blended with gasoline is safe for cars and light-duty trucks manufactured between 2001 and 2006, expanding an October decision that the higher blend is safe for cars built since 2007.The maximum gasoline blend has been 10 percent ethanol.
This decision was made despite repeated warnings from industry experts who have been pleading for more time to perform exhaustive testing. Were they being overly cautious? That’s a difficult argument to make, particularly since we told you last month that one delay in testing came from the fact that the higher ethanol blend fuel was melting down the seals in pumps and storage tanks during testing.
The laundry list of potential problems from this decision is extensive. Asking distributors to carry yet another fuel (even if it doesn’t melt their pumps) will require logistical juggling, equipment changes, new signs and other expenses which are inevitably passed on down to the consumer. Ethanol burns hotter than conventional fuel, leading to earlier failure of catalytic converters. (An expensive fix, as any of you who have been hit with it at the garage will attest.)
All of this is still being pushed under the cloak of a more environmentally friendly solution to energy challenges, a claim which current science has increasingly put in doubt. But would it at least produce any type of savings as we fight to get the budget under control?
Rather than furthering his goal to make America “the first country to have a million electric vehicles on the road by 2015,” however, Obama’s focus on biofuels as the way “to break our dependence on oil” would have the opposite effect if it means sending billions more taxpayers dollars to corn country to finance ethanol infrastructure, Cox said. “Building an ethanol infrastructure at taxpayer’s expense will just lock us further into the past rather than lead us to tomorrow’s energy future,” added Cox, who heads EWG’s Ames, Iowa, office.
Jazz makes a very, very, very, very good point here:
This is clearly a victory for King Corn, but lies in stark contrast to the President’s stated goals of Winning the Future. Exit question: Even if gas stations manage to offer this for cars built in 2001 and after, how will they ensure drivers of older vehicles don’t wind up putting it in their vehicles without retooling the entire delivery system?
Good question. I can see the lawsuits coming now. The first idiot that accidentally puts the corn-laced fuel into an older vehicle and tears the snot out of his engine; and ends up suing the gas station, the fuel delivery company and the oil company that produced the product and comes away with a few million dollars — will cause this little program to be stopped in it’s tracks. Think it would not happen? Think again; there are tons and I do mean TONS of lawyers out there, that are chomping at the bit to take a lawsuit like this and make money off of it.
Updated to add: ….and there is a alternative scenario — What will happen is, some person, who is barely getting by and making minimum wage, and can barely afford a car. This person will accidentally fuel up with this Ethanol laced gas, it will gum up his motor and the poor man will end up having to junk the car and will have scrape around for another one. That is the part that really bothers me. The fact that liberals are so damned hell-bent on fulfilling an agenda that they do not think of all of the possibilities — and because of that, someone out there, not necessarily someone of means; gets screwed in the end. That my friends is the sad part.
Just another example of your feckless Government at work. 🙄
I am going to be totally honest with you all; I do not even like Andrew Breitbart —- But this video right here, is pretty darned interesting.
If everything in this video is true, the Obama Administration could be looking at some problems down the road. To be fair to Mr. Breitbart, he also goes after Republicans for their cowardice in not checking this out. In short, it is fraud on a massive scale and hopefully when this story breaks, someone in the Republican Party — like in the House, will order investigations. The really funny part is, Breitbart says he hired someone from Huffington Post — of all places — to debunk the story and he could not.
Of course the cynical person in me thinks that nothing will become of this; because of race and other factors, none of the people involved in this scandal will see justice. It is just how our system works. Only those who ruffle the wrong feathers — so to speak — are the ones who are actually prosecuted.
A real humdinger of a story in this installment. But first, our official music:
Hit the play button to enjoy the music, while you read the story.
Here’s another real classless story from our asshole liberal folks on the left. Tonight’s installment was overseen at HotAir.com. As you all know Gabby Giffords was shot by a crazy gunman just a few weeks ago and already some Democrats are already wanting to toss her under the bus.
Behind closed doors, California Democratic Rep. Loretta Sanchez has proposed removing Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords from the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) until she recovers from injuries sustained after being shot in the head on Jan. 8 in Tucson, The Daily Caller has learned.
The proposal sparked an outrage, according to those in the room — including from those in Sanchez’s own party.
“It’s not appropriate,” Texas Democratic Rep. Silvestre Reyes told The Daily Caller, adding that there was outrage among some members in the room when Sanchez made the suggestion. “It’s bad for morale during her recovery period.”
Reyes and Rep. Adam Smith of Washington put up most of the fight against Sanchez, and helped squash the idea.
“From a woman who memorialized her cat, you’d think she’d show a little more compassion for a woman shot in the face,” said one GOP aide, referring to Sanchez’s 2010 Christmas card that paid tribute to her late cat, Gretzky.
Sanchez told her Democratic colleagues on the committee that every vote would be crucial, and since there was little indication Giffords would return soon, they should seek a replacement. A spokesman for Sanchez defended her proposal and called the criticism “ludicrous.”
“Gabby has always been one of the most active members on the Armed Services Committee, and Rep. Sanchez wants to make sure HASC Democrats preserve her voice until the congresswoman has returned,” Sanchez’s Press Secretary Caroline Hogan told TheDC. “Rep. Sanchez simply inquired whether a proxy could represent the Congresswoman on the Committee at Rep. Giffords’ request. That way, Gabby’s legislative priorities and seniority would be preserved until her return. Any other interpretation of her question is ludicrous.”
Get shot in the head, by a crazy, deranged, leftist gunman — get tossed under the bus as useless by your own damned party.
Just more living proof that socialist liberals are classless assholes.
Please note: The posting on this video does NOT constitute support for all of the views therein. It is posted for your education and information.
—–
Synopsis: In the 78th edition of the Reality Report, Gary Franchi draws the direct parallels America shares with Hitler’s Germany and provides the solution to avoiding their terrible fate. We take a look at Ron Paul’s Texas Straight Talk where he discusses what a new found interest in the Constitution could mean for America. CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, Peter Schiff tells us why the Chinese modeled their currency after the U.S. dollar. We also hear from the former U.S. military analyst who is responsible for leaking the Pentagon Papers, Daniel Ellsberg. He explains the recent war on whistle-blowers. Chris Mathews latest hypocrisy is revealed and Angie breaks down the news. As always we take a dip into the mailbag, reveal the results from last weeks viewer poll and brand a new Enemy of the State.
The huge oversized 243-page book Diversity Lane/ A Liberal Family Saga now available at the Diversity Lane website! Endorsed by FrontPage, Townhall, Brent Bozell, American Thinker and tons of others– THE most enjoyable conservative book of the year, guaranteed.
For more fun visit us at the Diversity Lane Page at Facebook or visit Zack Rawsthorne’s Facebook Profile to shoot the breeze. Don’t forget to read more at our website www.diversitylane.com or our blog www.diversitylane.wordpress.com.
But 8 million homes are today in foreclosure or their owners are delinquent in their mortgage payments. Some 5.5 million are occupied by families whose mortgages are at least 20 percent higher than the value of the property, making them prime candidates for foreclosure.
This weekend, Bank of America reported fourth-quarter losses of $1.6 billion and a 2010 yearly loss of $3.6 billion. Its credit card unit took a $10 billion write-down, and its home loan business is still reeling from the fallout of the exploded housing bubble.
Now, facing trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, House Republicans are balking at agreeing to raise the debit limit of $14.3 trillion, though the national debt just crossed the $14 trillion mark.
Rahm Emanuel was thrown off the ballot for mayor of Chicago Monday by an appellate court panel, a stunning blow to the fund-raising leader in the race.
An appellate panel ruled 2-1 that Emanuel did not meet the residency standard to run for mayor.
Appellate justices Thomas Hoffman and Shelvin Louise Marie Hall ruled against Emanuel. Justice Bertina Lampkin voted in favor of keeping President Obama’s former chief of staff on the Feb. 22 ballot.
Emanuel, speaking to reporters at The Berghoff in the Loop, said he is confident he will win an appeal and return to the ballot.
….and a collective “HEH” goes out though the Blogosphere…..
Of course Emanuel says that he will appeal and of course, someone will get a briefcase full of money and he will be allowed to run. Just how things are in Chicago; after all. Look how we got our President.
Actually, I wanted to call this one Exhibit IC for incessant whining, but I did not want to sound like a total jerk. However, this is exactly what this little piece is here.
It appears that some liberal wife of some hard working person feels that her man is not getting his fair share of the pot. She writes over at the liberal Blog FireDogLake:
This morning my husband got up at 5:00 a.m. to work outside in 7 degree F temperatures. He sat on the end of the couch, head in his hands sipping his coffee telling me how much he hates his job. How much it’s wearing him out. He makes $29.00 dollars an hour. Roughly $60,000 a year. He’s a union electrician. His health care premiums come out of his pay check; it is NOT subsidized by his “company.” His disability comes out of his pay check. It is NOT subsidized by his company.
I don’t think most people understand this about the unions. These men get paid what they do because they are subsidizing their own care. Men in suits thinks he makes too much money. Men in suits think he doesn’t deserve health care or disability, that he’s just a body to use and abuse.
They tell the men to talk about safety on their own time, not to take up time they could be “producing” to discuss “safety issues”. They don’t want to spend money on his safety or breaks for his aching back or freezing fingers. My husband worries if he takes too much time to warm up that they might lay him off. The men in suits know he is afraid, they even tease him about lay offs from warm offices when he walks through to take his 15-minute break. The high cost of labor, entitlement. The men in suits make you focus on the unions with their high paying jobs while they sit in offices pushing pencils making eight times the amount that my husband makes. Risking far less in stress and safety than my husband. And complaining about the high cost of labor.
First, before I rip this poor woman to shreds here, let me say something. Please note that I am very sympathetic to the working person’s cause — really, I am. I am one of those working man types myself. What troubles me about this entire piece is this; it sounds like this woman is whining about her husband actually having a job. Furthermore, this piece is your a-typical mentality of the liberals in this Country — and that is that the little person is being jacked around by the big, evil, corporate America. What these mentally depraved people do not seems to realize is this; if it were not for businesspersons, who decide to take risks and employ people like her husband, to build projects, like the one that he is working on, those hardworking people — would be unemployed.
Secondly, I find this piece to be offensive for another reason. This is where I might just run afoul of Conservatives who read this blog. I have been unemployed since 2005. This partially could be considered my fault and partially it could be blamed on the piss poor economy here in Michigan. The unemployment rate here in Michigan is I believe 30% or so. I believe I could find you a group of men here in Michigan, which would just love to have this man’s job that he has grown to hate. I know that I personally live very well at $60.000 per year and not complain one bit. The point I am trying to make is this, this man took this job knowing what it entailed and knows what is required of him. If he cannot handle that job, perhaps he should try finding something else, possibly even trying another career.
I hate to sound like some heartless jerk, which sits in some ivory tower somewhere and writes dismissively of some person who is really struggling to make it. Because that is not what I am — I am simply someone who has had my own share of problems in the past, when it comes to unemployment and when I see someone moaning and complaining about actually having job — I just really have to speak up and say trying living in my shoes for a while. I could really understand if this would have been written pre-stock market flash crash and economic recession, but it was not. There are some people out there that have it a hell of a lot worse that this person and his whining wife. I happen to be one of them and I think that this man and his wife both ought to be a bit more appreciative of what they do have, instead of whining about what they have to so-called “Suffer” through.
Just my thoughts on that one, and believe me, this comes from someone who is not even being counted among the 9% in America unemployed. They only count those who are collecting benefits. I collect none. I will not bother to even comment on the part where it says that the man was breaking the law, by giving free electricity to people that he knows. I mean, if that is not self explanatory, I do not know what is. 🙄
Most of us presumed that the protests were more about Bush than the wars when they took place, but even the skeptics have to be a little surprised just how uncool the anti-war movement has become since Barack Obama took place. The neo-Stalinist International ANSWER, one of the groups featured in this film, must have thought they were achieving some sort of mainstream penetration into politics when Democrats started flooding into their rallies. Now they’re back to street-corner protests and “Honk If You <3 Peace” rallies and wondering why it suddenly got so lonely.
To be fair, though, the driving force of the earlier anti-war rallies was the war in Iraq, not Afghanistan. While the Af-Pak fight has lost considerable public support, the first war had broader support, as it targeted the actual 9/11 villains and their cohorts. The protests against the wars got fueled mainly by our presence in Iraq, and peaked when Bush put the surge strategy into place. The success of that strategy and the Status of Forces Agreement that moved American troops out of the cities and into support roles has removed most of the objections to Iraq, and for good reason — why protest a war that’s all but over? Obama promised to have troops out in 16 months during the presidential campaign, but as Reason TV notes, he stuck with the Bush SOFA policy — and after 24 months, we’re still there and likely will be for years to come.
A very valid assessment. However, there is more to that too. The left just straight up hated Bush with a passion. The Anti-War protests were also less about Anti-War, and more about Anti-Bush. The left never, ever forgave Bush for winning the 2000 election. To this very day, the left still believes that Bush and Co. somehow or another stole the election. The left screamed and yelled and protested; that is, until it was very clear that challenging Bush’s election in 2000 was a lost cause.
Then 9/11 came along, and the entire Country stood behind Bush. The left basically stood down, and supported the President. Of course, there were outliers, but the majority of them were supportive. So, America went to war in Afghanistan, then Bush in 2003 decided that invading Iraq was necessary; which we now know was based upon faulty intelligence. Of course, there are some, within Neo-Conservative circles, that still, to this day, believe that Iraq had WMD’s. However, in this day and age of post-Bush, those people are big minority. Anyhow, At first, the MSM went along with Bush’s plans and the persons saying that Bush was wrong were a small minority. Over time, as it became clear that Bush’s intelligence was flat out wrong; the voices of dissent became louder.
By 2004, these voices had risen to fever pitch and the left was in fully in “Get Bush out of Office!”, an effort that ultimately failed; because of the total lack of electability of John Kerry as President of the United States. By 2006, however, independents and even some more main stream Conservatives had left Bush and realized that the man was just simply wrong. Of course, the loyalists defended him to the end and still do. But now, they are quite the minority. Thus was the reason why the Democrats won so big in 2006 and 2008; not because Obama or the Democrats were something wonderful — it was because American independents wanted something different than Bush’s Neo-Conservative, interventionist foriegn policy blunders.
However, there is one thing that this video totally missed; the voices of the Anti-War movement were not all Liberal or even Libertarian. There were some Conservatives, there were Paleo-Conservative voices. Pat Buchanan and some others formed a Magazine called “The American Conservative.” Which was formed for the sole purpose of convincing the White House that they were wrong about Iraq and foriegn policy. An effort, which ultimately failed. These same people, earned the scorn of people like David Frum. Which is pretty ironic, considering his position today on Bush and the Iraq war.
Of course, looking back; seeing all of the blunders of the Democrats and of the President — Bush does not seem that bad of a President. Bush was by no means perfect. However, the tone-deaf antics of the Democrats after the election of President Barack Obama, made Bush’s era seem a bit more sane. Prime example: Has the economy gotten better since President Obama was elected? No, it has not. In fact, it has gotten a bit worse. I have heard the following from committed Democrats: “President Obama got it exactly backward; he did healthcare first. That was stupid, he should have gotten the economy fixed FIRST and waited to see, if the fixes worked — THEN he should have tackled healthcare reform!” Which is right, Obama and the Democrats wanted to push it through, despite the consequences and for that they paid for it in the 2010 elections — and outside of a major change in the economy or something major in the terrorism world, like the capture of Osama Bin Laden and the totally destruction of Al-Qaeda; which will never happen, Obama and the Democrats will further more pay for this foolishness. Possibly by Obama being primaries out in 2012. Do not discount that theory, we do live in much different times and the America people have become more fickle in their loyalty. It could happen.
As a Bonus, I present a movie, the name of it is simply “Crawford” that basically proves what I said above. It is a little long. But it is well worth it:
Zack Rawsthorne is one funny dude. He is also a very gifted artist and, like me; loves to mock liberals.
Zack has produced a book from all of those cartoons that I’ve been posting here. He has also agreed to send me a book, for free, if I would post this ad.
So, if you would, click the link on the picture below and by the book; because he has to justify sending me the free book somehow or another! 😀
I swear, sometimes I feel sorry for the President. I know it sounds strange. But I do. Check out his op-ed:
For two centuries, America’s free market has not only been the source of dazzling ideas and path-breaking products, it has also been the greatest force for prosperity the world has ever known. That vibrant entrepreneurialism is the key to our continued global leadership and the success of our people.
But throughout our history, one of the reasons the free market has worked is that we have sought the proper balance. We have preserved freedom of commerce while applying those rules and regulations necessary to protect the public against threats to our health and safety and to safeguard people and businesses from abuse.
From child labor laws to the Clean Air Act to our most recent strictures against hidden fees and penalties by credit card companies, we have, from time to time, embraced common sense rules of the road that strengthen our country without unduly interfering with the pursuit of progress and the growth of our economy.
Sometimes, those rules have gotten out of balance, placing unreasonable burdens on business—burdens that have stifled innovation and have had a chilling effect on growth and jobs. At other times, we have failed to meet our basic responsibility to protect the public interest, leading to disastrous consequences. Such was the case in the run-up to the financial crisis from which we are still recovering. There, a lack of proper oversight and transparency nearly led to the collapse of the financial markets and a full-scale Depression — Read the rest @ Barack Obama: Toward a 21st-Century Regulatory System – WSJ.com
The reason I feel sorry for the President is this; from what I have read, on both sides of the political fence —- both side hate this, for some reason. The right says that the President says that Obama is just consolidating regulation, the left says that Obama is moving to the right. I mean, good grief people — can not the man just get credit for doing something right?
Again, I hate to be the one in the crowd to tell both sides, but I will — In November of 2008, the American people, in record numbers, elected a man to be different than George W. Bush. Millions of people cast thier hopes and dreams on one man. Now he might not be the perfect person that many on the far left assumed that he was; but the man is doing the very best that he can. What people have to realize is this, the President is the President of the United States of America, not the President of the Democratic Party. President Barack Obama represents all of us; Not just a select few.
I think that everyone; right, center, left and even middle of the road — ought to just take a step back, breathe a little and let the President do his job. The President might not do exactly what everyone wants him to do. But he will do what he was elected to do and that is Govern this Country fairly and according to the precepts set forth by the Constitution. Forget the hype and stupidity that is being promoted on the Fox News Channel and on the Neo-Con Blogs and some of the even more sillier nonsense on MSNBC and the left wing Blogs. President Barack Obama only has as much power, as the Constitution allows him to have.
Further more, I find it ironic, that very same people that worked to elect Barack Obama President and bring change of any sort to this Country are now the one’s bitching and griping because President Barack Obama is not catering to the special interests of everyone in the beltway and beyond.
