Police State: Detroit Standoff Ends in Gunfire

 

Video:

 

The Story via WXYZ-TV:

Detroit (WXYZ) – A routine eviction ended in a six-hour standoff on Detroit’s East Side.

It all started Thursday afternoon when witnesses say they saw a man with a gun at the River Towers Apartments in the 7800 block of West Jefferson.

Several swat teams converged on the location.

Those inside the apartment building were told to stay inside their homes.

Others were loaded on a bus to City Hall to wait it out.

Just before 9pm, a 78-year-old man opened fire on police.

They returned fire. He was hit and rushed to the hospital where his condition is unknown.

Initial reports indicate the man was about to be evicted.

As of 9:15pm all roads in the area were reopened to traffic and everyone was allowed back to move about the apartment building as needed.

Police State? You Decide.

Movie: Fiat Empire

Synopsis: Inspired on the book, THE CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND by G. Edward Griffin, FIAT EMPIRE discusses the effects of the Federal Reserve System on the U.S. economy and explains why the debt-backed "fiat" money it issues is no longer Constitutional. This 60-minute documentary is an excellent primer for the citizen or student who wants to get an understanding of how money is created and why the U.S. government has entered into a partnership with elite Wall Street banks. Featuring Ron Paul, Edwin Vieira, G. Edward Griffin and Ted Baehr

Get the DVD here

Police State:Alabama Cops Taser and Arrest a Deaf Black Man….. For being sick

This is just damn wrong….

Video: (Via the Republic of T)

The Story: (Via the AP)

MOBILE, Alabama (AP) — Police in Mobile, Ala., used pepper spray and a Taser on a deaf, mentally disabled man who they said wouldn’t leave a store’s bathroom.

The family of 37-year-old Antonio Love has filed a formal complaint over the incident on Friday.

Police tell the Press-Register of Mobile that officers shot pepper spray under the bathroom door after knocking several times. After forcing the door open, they used the stun gun on Love.

Police spokesman Christopher Levy says police didn’t realize Love had a hearing impairment until after he was out of the bathroom. The officers’ conduct is under investigation.

The newspaper says the officers attempted to book Love on charges including disorderly conduct, but a magistrate on duty wouldn’t accept the charges.

Sorry to say it, but is because of crap like this right here, is why stuff like THIS Happens: (Warning Graphic Language and Content)

Police State? You Decide.

Welcome to the New Socialist World Order police state. Brought to you by the Washington Elite.

Mobile Alabama’s Chief of Police: 251-208-1701 (No threats and be polite please, demand that something be done!)

Update: The Mobile police they were justified, here is their stupid and asinine justification for tazering a deaf and mentally handicapped man:

A spokesman for the Mobile Police Department said the officers’ actions were justified because the man was armed with a potential weapon — an umbrella.

But relatives of Antonio Love, 37, have asked for a formal investigation and said they plan to sue both the police and the store.

“I want justice,” Love’s mother, Phyllis Love, said Tuesday.

The woman said her son hears only faintly, has the mental capacity of a 10-year-old and didn’t realize that it was the police who were trying enter the bathroom.

[…]

Police spokesman Christopher Levy said Tuesday store workers called officers complaining that a man had been in the bathroom for more than an hour with the door locked. Officers knocked on the door and identified themselves, but the person didn’t respond.

Officers used a tire iron to open the door, but the man pushed back to keep it shut. Officers saw the umbrella and sprayed pepper spray through a crack trying to subdue the man, Levy said. They shot the man with a Taser when they finally got inside, he said.

Officers didn’t realize Love was deaf or had mental problems until he showed them a card he carries in his wallet, Levy said. He was arrested on a charge of disorderly conduct, but officers released him and took him home after a magistrate refused to issue a warrant.

Levy said officers were justified in using force against Love since he had an umbrella.

“The officers really worked within the limits of our level-of-force policy,” he said. “We had no information about who this guy was.”

An umbrella…. Yes, you read that correctly; an umbrella. What in the name of Almighty God has gotten wrong with this damned country, when the police can arrest you and jolt you with something that has enough electricity that can potentially kill you, over something as simple as having an umbrella? Something is wrong with this Country my friend, something is horrifically wrong. When will the people rise up and take this Country back, from the Military Police that controls it? When?!?!

I know some of you are wondering about I wrote here, about Black people. These are two different issues; for one, the man is deaf, for two, the man is handicapped, and for three. This man was doing nothing wrong. His race has zero to do with it; that is unless your a idiot White Nationalist. Which I am not.

Michelle Malkin Promotes Her Book on Hannity

I will be the first to admit; I have not always agreed with Michelle Malkin in the past. But I am totally in agreement with her on the Obama Administration and on Matters of the Military; and most importantly on the subject of the war on terror.

Michelle has released a new book on the Obama Administration. It is called:

michellemalkinbook

Here the video of Michelle on Sean Hannity’s show on Fox News Channel: (H/T and Thanks to the guys at HotAir.com)

I might even buy me a copy of this book, but really, I have blogged about most of it; so, for me, it would be a huge review. Big Grin

You can get Michelle Malkin’s Book right here or by clicking the link on the picture of the book above:

Secretary Clinton: Iran’s Pursuit of Nukes ‘Futile’

If you would have told me, a year ago, that I would be praising Hillary Clinton for something she said; I would have asked you what kind drugs you were on and to share some of it with me! (I kid about the drugs, but this still is a very good story.)

First the Video:

Quote:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that Iran will never achieve its goal of obtaining a nuclear weapon, declaring to Tehran: “Your pursuit is futile.”

“What we want to do is to send a message to whoever is making these decisions, that if you’re pursuing nuclear weapons for the purpose of intimidating, of projecting your power, we’re not going to let that happen,” Clinton said.

“First, we’re going to do everything we can to prevent you from ever getting a nuclear weapon. But your pursuit is futile, because we will never let Iran — nuclear-armed, not nuclear-armed — it is something that we view with great concern, and that’s why we’re doing everything we can to prevent that from ever happening. … We believe, as a matter of policy, it is unacceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons.”

As a security summit in Thailand earlier this week, Clinton raised the possibility of a “defense umbrella” over the Middle East to protect other nations from a nuclear-armed Iran, marking the first time a senior administration official has publicly broached the prospect of the Persian nation succeeding in building a nuclear weapon.

Clinton said the Obama administration might still engage with Iran’s regime, even though she thinks the people there “deserve better than what they’re getting.”

via Hillary Clinton: Iran’s pursuit of nukes ‘futile’ – Mike Allen and Daniel Libit – POLITICO.com.

The only question that I might have is this; Does President Obama agree with this position? Another concern that I have is that this could be a signal of War drums beating. I am sure that the Secretary knows, that our forces are still fighting in Afghanistan and that we do still have forces in Iraq and that the job there is still not entirely done yet.

However, I do commend Secretary Clinton for her tough stance towards Iran’s terrible President and Islamic Oligarchy.

I just hope that President Obama agrees with Secretary Clinton and does not try and back-peddle that stance and play the role of terrorist appeaser. If he does, it would mean the total discrediting of Secretary Clinton and further more of America’s leadership role in the World.

Update: No Quarter, who is a Pro-Hillary liberal Blogger; links in. Hey, we might not agree on politics. But I’ll any kind of linkie love that I can get! 😛 😀

Update #2: John over at Powerline disagrees:

In other words, negotiating with Iran at this time would indeed betray the protesters, but we’ve done this before and want to do it again now.

Fair enough, perhaps. Our experiences with the Soviet Union and China do establish that we have at times negotiated with repressive regimes. But it doesn’t follow that we should negotiate with Iran at this time.

In any event, this much is certain: our negotiations with the Soviet Union and China did not cause either power to eschew nuclear weapons. Indeed, to my knowledge negotiations have never induced any nation that was aggressively pursuing nukes to change its mind. That kind of persuasion takes a massive show of force (Libya and arguably Iraq) or regime change.

Thus, while the administration may have its own motives for negotiating with Iran, there is no reason for Israel to believe that such negotiations will protect Israel’s interest (potentially a life-and-death one) in preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Clinton’s case that Israel should rely on U.S. attempts to pursuade Iran not to go nuclear, rather than taking matters into its own hands by attacking Iran, is not a powerful one.

CBO Says Obamacare will save no money over 10 years

Do you think that maybe NOW Obama will understand why the blue dogs revolted?

For the second time this month, congressional budget analysts have dealt a blow to the Democrat’s health reform efforts, this time by saying a plan touted by the White House as crucial to paying for the bill would actually save almost no money over 10 years.

A key House chairman and moderate House Democrats on Tuesday agreed to a White House-backed proposal that would give an outside panel the power to make cuts to government-financed health care programs. White House budget director Peter Orszag declared the plan “probably the most important piece that can be added” to the House’s health care reform legislation.

But on Saturday, the Congressional Budget Office said the proposal to give an independent panel the power to keep Medicare spending in check would only save about $2 billion over 10 years- a drop in the bucket compared to the bill’s $1 trillion price tag.

“In CBO’s judgment, the probability is high that no savings would be realized … but there is also a chance that substantial savings might be realized. Looking beyond the 10-year budget window, CBO expects that this proposal would generate larger but still modest savings on the same probabilistic basis,” CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf wrote in a letter to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Saturday.

via CBO deals new blow to health plan – Chris Frates – POLITICO.com.

The Blue Dog Democrats revolted on this stupid plan, because they know; what the majority of clear-thinking Americans know. That the Nation’s Economy is in the Toilet and is not expected not to get any better anytime soon. The passing of this Health-care Bill and the Nationalization of our Health-care system is going to sooner or later drive America into Bankruptcy.  The Blue Dog Democrats know this, they are not under the spell of hope and change, like Obama wants them to be. In other words, they are not drinking the Kool-Aid on the Obamassiah.

One trillion dollars and The economy is at it worst since the 1980’s? Is this President serious?

I think the President and the Democratic Party need to seriously reconsider what they are attempting to do here. Because if they do not, this country may just end with a one party system after the damage is all done. Some Republicans might be thrilled at the prospect of the total and complete destruction of the Democratic Party; but I would not be thrilled at all. Why?

I will tell you why, because, like Bill O’Reilly; believe that a two-party system in this Country is important. I believe, personally, that neither of these parties; Republican Party or The Democratic Party have all of the answers. There is good and bad in both of them, and because of this, I believe that the Democratic Party is about to do one of the stupidest an horrific overreaches in many years. It was attempted in Clinton Administration and it failed, and now it is about to be attempted again.  This time, it will be a disaster.

Somebody up there on Capital Hill needs have some clear thinking and really seriously consider what might become of the Democratic Party, should this blow up in their faces. Because I have a feeling that this all is going to get much uglier, before it gets any better.

Others: RedState, Weekly Standard, theblogprof, Betsy’s Page, Cold Fury, Economix, PrairiePundit, Hot Air and The Hill

Here we go again — Bitter and Clingy Part II

First the Video via Verum Serum:

John sums it up quite nicely:

You begin to get the idea that, underneath all his efforts to talk to people like adults, he thinks there are really just two camps: Courageous progressives, e.g. himself and people who agree with him, and backward bumpkins who huddle around failure because they’re too afraid to be more like…him.

It must be an empowering way to see the world. It’s also arrogant, elitist and false. But I wonder if any of that can compare to the psychic kick of seeing oneself as a superhero among benighted mortals.

Rough translation:  President Barack Obama thinks the following: “‘Dem stupid Conservative honkey Hillbillies don’t know what good for ‘da Country; I do. ‘Cause I’m black and I’m down with ‘da struggle and chit…”

Ed Morrissey, who is much more refined that me, sums it up nicely as well:

Remember when Obama scoffed at the notion that he was an elitist during the campaign? I wrote at the time that Obama was deliberately confusing “elites” and “elitism”, and that having a sitting US Senator attempting to deny his elite status was a little odd anyway. This is a perfect display of elitism — someone telling people that they don’t know how to calculate their own self-interest and declaring that a few people in Washington can figure that out for them better than they can themselves. It’s patronizing, condescending, and in fact is the very kind of attitude that created the impulse for our separation from the paternalistic monarchy that refused to allow for the notion that the colonies should have a say in their own governance.

NYT Headline: HotAir’s Ed Morrissey calls for a Revolution against the Government! :rotfl: 😉

I kid, I kid! 😀 :-)) :laugh: :rotfl:

This above is another reason why I will never, ever vote for another Democrat for as long as I live. Because they snivel at the common class people; who disagree with them.  Janeane Garofalo proved this to me, which she uttered these works on Keith Olbermann’s show:

Which was when I decided that I no longer wanted to listen to what Mr. Olbermann had to say any longer.  You see, I am nowhere near to the far, far right that some of my fellow Conservatives are. I have always considered myself to be a bit of a moderate, in the sense that I just do not believe that the Republican Party has all of the answers. However, when I see a liberal Democrat actress getting on National TV; who is most likely not hurting for money, and sit there and call average working Americans rednecks and racists —- all because they happen to disagree with the President’s politics; there is something abysmally wrong with the politics that she represents.

The real kicker is the fact that these were the same group of people, that moaned to the high heavens about how the Conservatives were being “meanies” for saying that the Liberals were being Anti-American for not supporting George W. Bush and his policies. Albeit idiotic as some of them were; it still seems quite hypocritical to this writer, that the Liberals are engaging in some of the idiotic behavior that liberal Blogs and Media lambasted when the Republicans were holding the ball, so to speak.

But this is really nothing new really. I am sure this sort of nonsense has went on for years. It just has been become much noticeable to me. Because I have been paying attention to politics since running this blog. The overreach that has been taking place, so far; during the Obama Administration is classic, it happened during Clinton’s era, During Carter’s era. It even happened during both the Reagan and both Bush Administrations as well. Politicians always overreach, make promises they cannot keep, it is nothing new at all.

The tragic thing is this, Obama made a great deal of promises to many people that had never voted before. Many of thee people are not old enough to remember many of the previous Administration’s overreaches and hallow promises.   This could hurt Obama greatly come 2010, in the form of rejection of his Democratic Senators and Congressman and hurt him, should he decide to run in 2012.

Sounds like a good idea……But!

The Founder of the Largely Neo-Conservative Owned Free Republic, writes the following, While I think it is great. I have some problems with it myself. I will quote an underline the problem areas:

Here is our recourse as declared by our Founding Fathers:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

It cannot be denied that the central government has become destructive of our unalienable rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness and our rights to live free. The government is no longer responsive to we the People. They have stretched and shredded the constitution to the point that they have illegally seized for themselves virtually unlimited powers over the citizens and act as if we have no rights and no powers of our own. They are acting without our consent.

Our Founders established that when our government becomes destructive of our rights then it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

We have reached the point where the government’s long train of abuses and usurpations has achieved absolute Despotism, therefore it is our right, it is our duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for our future security.

Therefore, We the People of America choose to exercise our right to throw off and alter the abusive government by peacefully recalling and removing from office the President of the United States, the Vice President of the United States and all U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives effective immediately.

Okay first off; why does it have to peacefully? We did not separate from Great Britain peacefully. It took a war, and people were; gulp, killed. So, why are all of the sudden the Conservatives becoming peace-nicks? Just a thought, I am not advocating violence; just trying to make a point here.

The next wonderful little issue that I have with this article is this:

Our first unalienable right is the right to life. Protecting Life and Liberty shall be of paramount importance to our central government. Roe v Wade and all congressional acts, regulations, court opinions allowing legalized abortion or the taking of innocent human life are hereby rescinded, overruled, repealed, nullified and voided. Life is fully protected by the U.S. Government.

Now this is where I am going to get into trouble with the Pro-life, Right to life, Nazi Republicans.  I just do not believe that the Federal Government has the right to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body. What these so-called “Pro life” Zealots call the protection of the unborn life. I call the unconstitutional exertion of Federal Governmental power. Abortion is and always should be a State Governmental issue; it never,ever should be a Federal Government issue. One cannot have it both ways. Either you believe in limited Government or you do not. Either you believe that the Federal Government has NO RIGHT to controls one’s movements, life or property; or you believe it has the right to control ALL of your life, movements and property. These Republicans who speak out of both sides of their mouths are speaking a language that borders of a bi-polar disorder. The reason ROE v WADE was decided like it was; was because it was determined that the Federal Outlawing of the practice of Abortion was unconstitutional. I am afraid, as a federalist, that I agree with that decision. Not in the grounds that I support abortion; because I do not support such ungodly practice, but rather on the grounds of Constitutionality and because of my personal convictions towards a centralized Government. When the Government supposedly protects, it is exerting powers over the people. That is centralized Government and I oppose it in ALL of its forms. If people do not want to have an Abortion, they should be able to CHOOSE NOT to have an Abortion. It simply boils down to this. When the United States Government has to “Protect”, it automatically assumes that “We the People” are not smart enough to choose the right thing. That my friends flies in the face of the founding principles of what this Nation was founded upon.

The rest of this article is border bellicose and simply aspirational in nature. But it is interesting reading.

The Liberals, of course, are going to have fit about it. Because they believe in a socialistic form of Government, which is basically a Communist-lite form of a Government. Keith Olbermann will most likely feature it in his “Head-exploding” Worst person in the World segment.

Others: Little Green Footballs, Right Wing Nut House, and Macsmind

ACU Offers support for a price, Democrats rejoice; But! Democrats do the same thing….

Well, Maybe a little worse. But anyhow…Here’s the quote:

The American Conservative Union asked FedEx for a check for $2 million to $3 million in return for the group’s support in a bitter legislative dispute, then the group’s chairman flipped and sided with UPS after FedEx refused to pay.

For the $2 million plus, ACU offered a range of services that included: “Producing op-eds and articles written by ACU’s Chairman David Keene and/or other members of the ACU’s board of directors. (Note that Mr. Keene writes a weekly column that appears in The Hill.)”

The conservative group’s remarkable demand — black-and-white proof of the longtime Washington practice known as “pay for play” — was contained in a private letter to FedEx , which was provided to POLITICO.

The letter exposes the practice by some political interest groups of taking stands not for reasons of pure principle, as their members and supporters might assume, but also in part because a sponsor is paying big money.

In the three-page letter asking for money on June 30, the conservative group backed FedEx. After FedEx says it rejected the offer, Keene signed onto a two-page July 15 letter backing UPS. Keene did not return a message left on his cell phone.

via Exclusive: Conservative group offers support for $2M – Mike Allen – POLITICO.com.

Video via Politico:

Without missing a beat, the Democrat/Liberal bloggers all jumped up at once and said, “Ho Ho! See??!?! The Conservative are in the bed with BIG BUSINESS!”

….and the Democratic Party is without fault and never commits acts of dishonesty, right? Well, Not so much. As the Politico’s Glenn Thrush points out: (H/T to HotAir.com)

Three House Democratic leaders who were whipping members on the climate change bill gave tens of thousands in campaign cash to party moderates around the time of the 219-212 vote on June 26, according to Federal Election Commission records.

It’s impossible to tell if that torrent of cash was an attempt to schmear wavering Democrats — or just part of the usual cash dump made by leaders on the eve of the June 30 quarterly fundraising deadline.

Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-SC) doled out $28,000 to reps who eventually voted yes on June 24, two days before the big vote — on a day when House leaders were doing some heavy-duty arm-twisting.

Clyburn recipients who voted for the bill included a who’s-who of battleground district Dems: Steve Driehaus, D-OH ($2,000); Martin Heinrich, D-NM ($2,000); Suzanne Kosmas, D-Fla. ($4,000); Betsy Markey, D-Colo. ($2,000); Carol Shea-Porter, D-NH ($2,000), Baron Hill, D-Ind. ($2,000); Alan Grayson, D-Fla. ($2,000); Leonard Boswell, D-Iowa ($2,000); Jim Himes, D-Conn. ($2,000);  Mary Jo Kilroy, D-OH ($2,000); Kurt Schrader, D-Ore. ($2,000); Jerry McNerney, D-Calif. ($2,000) and Tom Perriello, D-Va. ($2,000).

On the other hand, Clyburn also gave at least $14,000 to Democrats who voted no despite his pressure: Mike Arcuri, D-NY ($2,000); Marion Berry, D-Ark. ($2,000); Bobby Bright, D-Ala. ($2,000); Chris Carney, D-Penn. ($2,000); Chet Edwards (D-Tx.), Travis Childers , D-Miss. ($2,000); Parker Griffith, D-Ala. ($2,000) and Harry Mitchell, D-NM ($2,000).

The same pattern held true for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who gave $4,000 to yes-voting Ohio Democrat Zack Space and the same amount to no-voting Chris Carney.

House Energy and Commerce Henry Waxman gave at least $16,000 to yes-voters on June, 25, FEC records show.

A Waxman campaign spokesman said the payouts were part of the usual “end-of-quarter activity.”

Ken Spain, communications director of the National Republican Congressional Committee emails this response:

“If this was a concerted effort by the Democratic leadership to purchase votes for Nancy Pelosi’s national energy tax at the eleventh hour, then it is unconscionable at best and corrupt at worst. The sad fact for those Democrats who were seemingly bought and paid for, is that it will take a lot more money than they received to defend such an atrocious vote.”

Of course, the Democrats right away sent Glenn a list of Republicans; who supposedly have done the same thing. Mostly vulnerable Republicans who may lose their seats in the 2010 election. (But of course!)

The point of this is, both of these parties are inherently corrupt and both need a good cleaning out and need new faces and new leadership; preferably ones that cannot be bought.

Others, on both sides of the fence: The Huffington Post, Michelle Malkin, Outside The Beltway, Right Wing News, Think Progress, Zandar Versus The Stupid, Firedoglake, Hot Air, The Note, Gawker, The Volokh Conspiracy, MoJo Blog Posts, Balloon Juice, Weekly Standard, Riehl World View, Washington Monthly, Democracy in America, Salon, Reason, The Corner, Newshoggers.com, The Atlantic Business Channel, Vox Popoli, Michael Calderone’s Blog, Say Anything, Eschaton, Conservatives4Palin.com and The Washington Independent

Pssst! Hey Liberals! Sarah Palin knows what she’s talking about!

As I am sure you all know Sarah Palin wrote in the Washington Post, an Op-Ed about the purposed Cap and Trade legislation.

Government Palin Writes:

There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America’s unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won’t bring jobs. Our nation’s debt is unsustainable, and the federal government’s reach into the private sector is unprecedented.

Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:

I am deeply concerned about President Obama’s cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president’s cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America’s economy.

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.

In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.

Of course, as if right on cue, every liberal in America is laughing at her and is saying that she is an idiot; and that she is trying to stay in the spotlight and so forth. Well, guess what? Not too long ago; on March 5, 2009. My own home paper, The Detroit News, wrote a similarly written editorial, basically saying the SAME THING. The Article itself is now offline, and you have to pay to get it. But luckily for me; I blogged about it.  The Article says and I quote:

President Barack Obama’s proposed cap-and-trade system on greenhouse gas emissions is a giant economic dagger aimed at the nation’s heartland — particularly Michigan. It is a multibillion-dollar tax hike on everything that Michigan does, including making things, driving cars and burning coal.

The president is asking for a system of government limits on carbon emissions. The right to emit carbon would be auctioned off to generate revenue for more government spending programs.

The president’s budget projects receipts totaling $646 billion through 2019 from the sale of these greenhouse gas permits.

The goal, according to the president’s budget outline, is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon dioxide to 14 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.

Doing so will drive up the cost of nearly everything and will amount to a major tax increase for American consumers.

Such a tax will hit the Midwest particularly hard, which is why House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, told the New York Times, “let’s just be honest and call it a carbon tax that will increase taxes on all Americans who drive a car, who have a job, who turn on a light switch, pure and simple.”

The carbon tax will be paid by energy companies, manufacturers and public utilities, who will pass the cost on to their consumers. Michigan will be especially targeted. It gets 60 percent of its electric power from coal plants, and the state’s economy is still reliant on heavy manufacturing such as car and truck assembly and auto parts production.

Michigan will lose as carbon tax money is shifted to states with a greater presence of high-tech and service businesses.

The proposed tax would take effect in 2012 and has the very real potential to throw the nation back into recession, if indeed the expected recovery has arrived by then. It’s impossible to raise costs for such basics as manufacturing and energy production by more than half a trillion dollars over a decade and not have the effects felt across the economy.

The nation’s gross domestic product contracted at an annualized rate of 3.8 percent in last year’s fourth quarter — the worst economic record in nearly three decades. Is this really a good time to be talking about a carbon tax? How will such talk impact investment decisions?

Obama promises to use some of the revenues for tax relief for certain workers and some of the rest for subsidies for alternative energy. But that won’t make up for the damage this huge new tax will do to the economy, especially in Michigan.

So, maybe, perhaps maybe, Sarah Palin is not as stupid as these liberals want to make her out to be. At least, she right on point about this Cap and Trade Legislation. It would raise taxes and be a job killer for Michigan and yes, for the rest of the Country.

Others, Yes, Including idiot liberals who are mocking her: The Fix, The Atlantic Business Channel, The New Republic, The Huffington Post, Washington Wire, The Daily Dish, The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room, Ezra Klein, Boston Globe, Hot Air, Right Wing News, PERRspectives, PoliGazette, The Strata-Sphere, Wake up America, Moe Lane, The Note, The Daley Gator, Democratic Strategist, Zandar Versus The Stupid, NY Daily News, The Politico, The Swamp, NewsBusters.org, No More Mister Nice Blog, Gawker, Gathering of Eagles: NY, Sister Toldjah, YID With LID, Macsmind, Classical Values, GOP 12, Stop The ACLU, TBogg, American Power, Real Clear Politics, Green Inc., Gateway Pundit, Cold Fury, PoliBlog, Balloon Juice, Latest Open Salon Blog and Left in the West

John Stossel takes on Liberal Propagandist Michael Moore

I happen to like John Stossel; because he dares to take on the Liberals. Not in a mean or nasty way. But by simply stating the truth.

He writes about Michael Moore’s latest Movie:

Michael Moore has been working on another documentary.  This time, he’s taking on capitalism:

“The wealthy, at some point, decided they didn’t have enough wealth. They wanted more — a lot more. So they systematically set about to fleece the American people out of their hard-earned money.”

How ridiculous is that?  The wealthy, and everyone else, almost always decide that they don’t have enough wealth.  People ask their bosses for raises.  We invest in stocks hoping for bigger returns than Treasury Bonds bring.  “Greed” is a constant.  The beauty of free markets, when government doesn’t meddle in them, is that they turn this greed into a phenomenal force for good.  The way to win big money is to serve your customers well.  Profit-seeking entrepreneurs have given us better products, shorter work days, extended lives, and more opportunities to write the script of our own life.

He goes on…:

Moore also fails to understand is that it was not “capitalism” run amok that caused today’s financial problems.   In reality, it was a combination of ill-conceived government policies and an overzealous Federal Reserve artificially lowering interest rates to fuel a bubble in the housing market.  Then it was government that took money from taxpayers and forced banks to accept it.

Moore ought to understand that, because he makes a good point when he says his movie will be about “the biggest robbery in the history of this country – the massive transfer of U.S. taxpayer money to private financial institutions.”

That is indeed robbery.  It sure doesn’t sound like capitalism.

Nope, sounds more like socialized Healthcare or simply Socialism in general; to me.

Mike Tennant writing over at Lew Rockwell’s Blog chimes in:

According to the press release you linked, Chris, “Moore has made three of the top six highest-grossing documentaries of all time,” which presumably means he has accumulated a great deal of wealth.  Apparently, since he continues to foist his so-called documentaries on an unsuspecting public, Moore has decided that he doesn’t have enough wealth.  He wants more–a lot more.

Like most anti-capitalists, Moore has no problem personally profiting from his own endeavors while demonizing other successful persons and attempting to have them dispossessed of their wealth.  The good news is that Moore ultimately has to answer to the marketplace and thus may find himself begging for work from the very people he now condemns if enough of his audience members wake up to the fact that he’s a charlatan and stop shelling out their increasingly scarce cash for his celluloid propaganda.

Mike is right on point; that is exactly how the socialists in America are. The Socialist left wants to preach to America, how evil, rotten, nasty and no good the evil capitalist system is; all the whole pocketing a profit from their lectures, Movies and the books that they just happen to make a profit at.  It is more of that “Yea for me, but Nay for thee”, type of mentality and outright hypocritical nonsense that the Far Socialist left is known for.

The troubling thing about it, is this; these knuckle-headed socialists basically control the Democratic Party and it’s message.  Hence my reasoning for not wanting anything to do with them or their Party any longer.

Give me Capitalism, Freedom and Liberty or Give Me Death!

Others: Wake up America

Unbelievable: Eric Holder Considering Prosecuting Bush Administration officials; for keeping America safe

This piece of sorry news comes from NewsWeek:

It’s the morning after Independence Day, and Eric Holder Jr. is feeling the weight of history. The night before, he’d stood on the roof of the White House alongside the president of the United States, leaning over a railing to watch fireworks burst over the Mall, the monuments to Lincoln and Washington aglow at either end. “I was so struck by the fact that for the first time in history an African-American was presiding over this celebration of what our nation is all about,” he says. Now, sitting at his kitchen table in wtcattack1jeans and a gray polo shirt, as his 11-year-old son, Buddy, dashes in and out of the room, Holder is reflecting on his own role. He doesn’t dwell on the fact that he’s the country’s first black attorney general. He is focused instead on the tension that the best of his predecessors have confronted: how does one faithfully serve both the law and the president?

Alone among cabinet officers, attorneys general are partisan appointees expected to rise above partisanship. All struggle to find a happy medium between loyalty and independence. Few succeed. At one extreme looms Alberto Gonzales, who allowed the Justice Department to be run like Tammany Hall. At the other is Janet Reno, whose righteousness and folksy eccentricities marginalized her within the Clinton administration. Lean too far one way and you corrupt the office, too far the other way and you render yourself impotent. Mindful of history, Holder is trying to get the balance right. “You have the responsibility of enforcing the nation’s laws, and you have to be seen as neutral, detached, and nonpartisan in that effort,” Holder says. “But the reality of being A.G. is that I’m also part of the president’s team. I want the president to succeed; I campaigned for him. I share his world view and values.”

These are not just the philosophical musings of a new attorney general. Holder, 58, may be on the verge of asserting his independence in a profound way. Four knowledgeable sources tell NEWSWEEK that he is now leaning toward appointing a prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration’s brutal interrogation practices, something the president has been reluctant to do. While no final decision has been made, an wtcattack2announcement could come in a matter of weeks, say these sources, who decline to be identified discussing a sensitive law-enforcement matter. Such a decision would roil the country, would likely plunge Washington into a new round of partisan warfare, and could even imperil Obama’s domestic priorities, including health care and energy reform. Holder knows all this, and he has been wrestling with the question for months. “I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the president’s agenda,” he says. “But that can’t be a part of my decision.”

[….]

Holder began to review those policies in April. As he pored over reports and listened to briefings, he became increasingly troubled. There were startling indications that some interrogators had gone far beyond what had been authorized in the legal opinions issued by the Justice Department, which were themselves controversial. He told one intimate that what he saw “turned my stomach.”

It was soon clear to Holder that he might have to launch an investigation to determine whether crimes were committed under the Bush administration and prosecutions warranted. The obstacles were obvious. For a new administration to reach back and 911firefightersmemorialinvestigate its predecessor is rare, if not unprecedented. After having been deeply involved in the decision to authorize Ken Starr to investigate Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky, Holder well knew how politicized things could get. He worried about the impact on the CIA, whose operatives would be at the center of any probe. And he could clearly read the signals coming out of the White House. President Obama had already deflected the left wing of his party and human-rights organizations by saying, “We should be looking forward and not backwards” when it came to Bush-era abuses.

Still, Holder couldn’t shake what he had learned in reports about the treatment of prisoners at the CIA’s “black sites.” If the public knew the details, he and his aides figured, there would be a groundswell of support for an independent probe. He raised with his staff the possibility of appointing a prosecutor. According to three sources familiar with the911attack process, they discussed several potential choices and the criteria for such a sensitive investigation. Holder was looking for someone with “gravitas and grit,” according to one of these sources, all of whom declined to be named. At one point, an aide joked that Holder might need to clone Patrick Fitzgerald, the hard-charging, independent-minded U.S. attorney who had prosecuted Scooter Libby in the Plamegate affair. In the end, Holder asked for a list of 10 candidates, five from within the Justice Department and five from outside.

[…]

The next few weeks, though, could test Holder’s confidence. After the prospect of torture investigations seemed to lose momentum in April, the attorney general and his aides 911attackfirefightersturned to other pressing issues. They were preoccupied with Gitmo, developing a hugely complex new set of detention and prosecution policies, and putting out the daily fires that go along with running a 110,000-person department. The regular meetings Holder’s team had been having on the torture question died down. Some aides began to wonder whether the idea of appointing a prosecutor was off the table.

But in late June Holder asked an aide for a copy of the CIA inspector general’s thick classified report on interrogation abuses. He cleared his schedule and, over two days, holed up alone in his Justice Depart ment office, immersed himself in what Dick Cheney once referred to as “the dark side.” He read the report twice, the first time as a lawyer, looking for evidence and instances of transgressions that might call for prosecution. The second time, he started to absorb what he was reading at a more emotional level. He was “shocked and saddened,” he told a friend, by what government servants were alleged to have done in America’s name. When he was done he stood at his window for a long time, staring at Constitution Avenue.

I hope that if and when Mr. Holder decides to appoint this special prosecutor; that he keeps the follow items in mind: (H/T to The Corner)

*  Alberto Gonzales did not attempt to mislead Congress in 2007 when he testified that the controversy that erupted at the Justice Department in 2004 was not over what was popularly known as the “terrorist surveillance program” (i.e., the NSA’s warrantless surveillance program to intercept suspected terrorist communications that crossed U.S. borders — the effort the Left smeared as “domestic spying”).  In fact, as Gonzales told the Senate judiciary Committee, the controversy was about other intelligence activities.

*  When congressional Democrats rolled their eyes, suggested that Gonzales was lying, and groused that a special prosecutor should be appointed, they well knew he wasn’t lying — but they also knew he couldn’t discuss the intellligence activities at the center of the controversy because those activities were (and remain) highly classified. That is, they knowingly badgered the Attorney General of the United States at a hearing in a calculated effort to make him look dishonest and to intimate something they knew to be untrue: namely, that the dispute at DOJ arose because senior officials believed warrantless surveillance was illegal.

*  Before Gonzales and President Bush’s then chief-of-staff, Andy Card, went to see Attorney General Ashcroft in the hospital (where he was being treated for pancreatitis), President Bush directed his administration to meet with top congressional Democrats and Republicans (Senate leaders Frist and Daschle, Speaker Hastert and House minority leader Pelosi, Roberts and Rockefeller from Senate Intel, and Goss and Harman from House Intel) to alert them that Ashcroft’s deputy, Jim Comey, had refused to sign off on intelligence activities that Ashcroft had previously approved.  Advised of the problem, the Gang of Eight did not agree to a quick legislative fix but, according to Gonzales’s contemporaneous notes, agreed that the intelligence activities should continue.  (Three years later, after Gonzales’s testimony, Pelosi, Rockefeller and Daschle claimed that they hadn’t agreed.)

*  Only after this meeting with the bipartisan congressional leaders, and with the prior 45-day authorization for all the program’s activities about to expire, did Gonzales and Card go to the hospital to visit the ailing Ashcroft — at the direction of President Bush.

*  Between the time the time the collection intelligence activities that came to be known as the “Terrorist Surveillance Program” was first authorized after the 9/11 attacks until the warrantless surveillance aspect of the program was exposed by the New York Times in December 2005, the Bush administration briefed the bipartisan leadership of the congressional intelligence committees 17 times about the activities involved in the program.

In sum, congressional Democrats knew about the program and knew that the dissent of the Justice Department’s senior leadership in 2004 was not about warrantless surveillance. They knew that if they postured that the dissent was about warrantless surveillance, Gonzales — not an adept communicator — would not be able to rebut them in a public hearing because the details of the dispute were classified.  Congressional Democrats also knew that President Bush agreed to make changes in the program in March 2004 to assuage DOJ’s concerns, and they knew that the program activities continued thereafter for a year-and-a-half (i.e., until the Times blew part of the program) without incident and with bipartisan congressional leadership continuing to be briefed.

The point I am trying to make is this, that the so-called “torture”; which was approved by Congress, prevented attacks on Los Angeles and various cities around the country.  It also saves lives and gets people to talk. It is also used to train our Military as well.

My advice to Holder is this; if you want to tear this Country apart, again, after a long eight years of it being sharply divided; go right ahead. If you want to tear down the Democratic Party; you know; the one of your own boss? The go right ahead and do this. If you want ruin the chances of America ever defending itself from another terrorist attack, then go right ahead and do this.  If you want to make a mockery of yourself and the entire polical system in America, go right Mr. Holder and do what you must do. It will be on your hands, what becomes of this Country.

I dread the next coming months.

Others: Gateway Pundit, Atlas Shrugs,

The Obligatory Leon Panetta, C.I.A., Democratic Party Witch Hunt posting

As I am sure you all have seen, The New York Times is running a story that basically attempts; albeit rather weakly, to vindicate Nancy Pelosi:

WASHINGTON — The director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Leon E. Panetta, has told the House Intelligence Committee in closed-door testimony that the C.I.A. concealed “significant actions” from Congress from 2001 until late last month, seven Democratic committee members said.

In a June 26 letter to Mr. Panetta discussing his testimony, Democrats said that the agency had “misled members” of Congress for eight years about the classified matters, which the letter did not disclose. “This is similar to other deceptions of which we are aware from other recent periods,” said the letter, made public late Wednesday by Representative Rush D. Holt, Democrat of New Jersey, one of the signers.

In an interview, Mr. Holt declined to reveal the nature of the C.I.A.’s alleged deceptions,. But he said, “We wouldn’t be doing this over a trivial matter.”

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Silvestre Reyes, Democrat of Texas, referred to Mr. Panetta’s disclosure in a letter to the committee’s ranking Republican, Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, Congressional Quarterly reported on Wednesday. Mr. Reyes wrote that the committee “has been misled, has not been provided full and complete notifications, and (in at least one occasion) was affirmatively lied to.”

Right on cue, the Liberal Democratically ran and financed media, immediately jumped up and started squawking that it was about Water boarding and all of the other Democrats pet gripes about the Government. Well, not so fast, says Rick Klein of ABC News’s The Note:

ABC News’ Jonathan Karl reports: Has House Speaker Nancy Pelosi been vindicated? That’s the way the speaker’s allies see it. Recent revelations by CIA Director Leon Panetta, the speaker’s allies say, prove Pelosi was right when she said the CIA routinely misleads Congress.

That is not, however, the way the CIA sees it.

Pelosi, D-Calif., may feel vindicated, but Republicans are delighted that this latest dust-up revives the controversy surrounding her war of words with the CIA just when it had seemed to fade away.

[…]

In May 15, shortly after the speaker made her allegations, Panetta jumped to the defense of his agency saying, "it is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress."

But now, in light of Panetta’s latest revelation, six Democrats on the Intelligence Committee have fired off a letter to Panetta demanding that he retract his statement and acknowledge Pelosi was right.

"In light of your testimony, we ask that you publicly correct your statement of May 15, 2009," the Democrats wrote Panetta.

No dice. 

"Director Panetta stands by his May 15 statement," says CIA spokesman George Little. "It is not the policy or practice of the CIA to mislead Congress. This Agency and this Director believe it is vital to keep the Congress fully and currently informed. Director Panetta’s actions back that up. As the letter from these six representatives notes, it was the CIA itself that took the initiative to notify the oversight committees."

According to an intelligence official familiar with the briefing, Panetta never said the CIA misled Congress.

"He took decisive steps to inform the oversight committees of something that hadn’t been appropriately briefed in the past," the official said. "He didn’t attribute motives to that."

And, in fact, not even Reyes, the Democratic chairman of the intelligence committee, sees this as vindication for Pelosi.

In a statement released last night, Reyes tried to navigate his way to a position somewhere between Panetta and Pelosi. He says he agrees with Panetta that "the Agency does not and will not lie to Congress … but, in rare instances, certain officers have not adhered to the high standards held, as a rule, by the CIA with respect to truthfulness in reporting."

That’s a far cry from Pelosi’s statement in May that "they mislead us all the time," but it leaves open the possibility they could have fallen short of those "high standards" of "truthfulness in reporting" when they briefed Pelosi back in September 2002.

What you have have here is a rather lame attempt by Panetta to give Pelosi cover from the critics on the right, that say that Pelosi tried to slam the C.I.A., instead, it is blowing up in his face. Because the Democrats in congress want to prove, so badly, that the Bush Administration Lied about torture and water boarding, so, they’re willing to pull little idiotic stunts like this one.

It is plain and simple; Nancy Pelosi should resign and so should Leon E. Panetta. They disgraced their offices and they have allowed partisan politics get in the way of their abilities to their jobs effectively. Of course, I realize that this will never happen. Not with the Communist Democrats in power.  

Others: JustOneMinute, Flopping Aces, Right Wing News, Neptunus Lex

Michael Goldfarb just cannot contain his racial bias

Michael Goldfarb in his Wilsonian Magazine writes:

Given that Palin is basically in a statistical tie with Romney and Huckabee for the pole position in the 2012 primary, it’s not clear why Steele keeps shooting his mouth off about a favorite among the rank and file, but he’d be well advised to zip it. Also, it would be helpful if Steele could just let us know which candidates he is grooming so that the party can quarantine them in case the stupidity is contagious.

Gee Mike, I wonder; would you have written that about Steele if he were a White Man? I highly doubt it. Further more, this speaks to the desire of the Wilsonian, Neo-Conservative wing of the Republican Party to want to still control that Party.

The man and his Wilsonian counterparts ought to just face facts, they lost; because of their elected leaders idiotic nonsense for past 8 years, They lost the country to a Neo-Liberal. Which now is going to lead the Nation down a very hard path. That what happens when you put Zionistic ideology in front of the best interests of the Country.  

No wonder John McCain lost the election and more recently, no wonder Rupert Murdock sold that idiotic magazine off. Rolling Eyes

How’s that stimulus working out for you Barry?

Apparently not too well it seems.

The Washington Post (!) Reports:

Five months after Congress approved a massive package of spending and tax cuts aimed at reviving an ailing economy, the jobless rate is still climbing and the White House is scrambling to reassure an anxious public that President Obama’s prescription for economic recovery is on the right track.

Yesterday, Obama took time out of his first presidential trip to Moscow to defend the $787 billion stimulus package, arguing that the measure was the right medicine at the right time. “There’s nothing that we would have done differently,” he told ABC News

So, beings the Democratic Party’s proverbial teeth chattering session, where they realize, “Uh-Oh, we messed up! Now how do we fix it?”

Back in Washington, senior Democrats on Capitol Hill were nervously contemplating whether additional government stimulus spending may be needed to pull the nation out of the worst recession since the 1930s. Senior administration officials acknowledged that the effects of the stimulus package have been overshadowed by an unexpectedly sharp drop-off in employment since the measure passed in February. But they reported that only about $100 billion has so far been spent and that as increasingly large sums flow out of Washington, the program is on pace to save or create 600,000 jobs over the next 100 days.

“It is clear from the data that there needs to be more fiscal stimulus in the second half of the year than there was in the first half of the year,” White House economic adviser Lawrence H. Summers said. “Fortunately, the stimulus program designed by the president and passed by Congress provides exactly that.”

Leading economists agree that the most powerful effects of the stimulus package have yet to be felt. But even if the measure lives up to Obama’s expectations, it would barely offset the 433,000 jobs the nation lost last month alone, and the resulting employment would represent a drop in the bucket compared with the 6.5 million jobs lost since the recession began in December 2007.

“Just 130 days out on the adoption of a very, very major effort to get the economy moving, certainly I don’t think we can make a determination as to whether or not that’s been successful,” House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said yesterday. But, he said, “I think we need to be open to whether or not we need additional action.”

Oh Yes! We just poured a couple generation’s worth of money into a Economic system that is basically; on it’s face, is broken and does not work. This did not work, so, we’re going to basically pour money into that same broken system and see if we can make the economy recover. Rolling Eyes

If anything this ought be a lesson for the Democratic Party that Keynesian Pump Priming, just does not work. But you think that the Democrats would learn that lesson? No. Because they’re dumb! Silly

Of course, the Republicans are a bit more smarter about this:

Republicans, meanwhile, pounced on news that the unemployment rate increased to 9.5 percent in June and accused the Democrats of sinking the nation deeper into debt to finance an economic recovery package that has failed to save American jobs. Noting that the Obama administration predicted earlier this year that stimulus spending would keep the unemployment rate under 8 percent, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), the No. 2 Republican in the House, said, “I think any objective measure would indicate there’s a failure when you have a commitment of nearly $800 billion in taxpayer funds and you have the type of job loss we’re experiencing.”

With many economists forecasting that the jobless rate will continue to climb — and is likely to stay above 10 percent through much of next year — Republicans vowed to make the 2010 midterm election a referendum on Obama’s stewardship of the economy. “I think they’re going to have some significant problems,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), who leads the GOP campaign operation in the Senate, “and I view those as opportunities for us.”

Hopefully, the Republicans will frame these opportunities properly. Of course, their track record here as of late, has not been too good.

Meanwhile, in the reality sector:

Despite the deepening pain of the recession, many Democrats in the White House and on Capitol Hill yesterday counseled patience. They said it would be extraordinarily difficult to win approval for more spending on the economy when Obama is pursuing a host of other expensive initiatives, including a $1 trillion expansion of the nation’s health-care system. And they argued that the current stimulus package should be given a chance to work.

The stimulus was designed to deliver a gradually stronger push to the economy through the end of next year. It contains about $499 billion in new spending and about $288 billion in tax cuts for working families, businesses, college students and first-time home buyers.

When the measure passed, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicted that about a quarter of the money would be spent by year’s end, and that about 75 percent would flow by the end of 2010. So far, economists said, spending appears to be on track.

According to administration estimates, about $158 billion in new spending had been committed to specific projects by the end of June, but just a fraction of that money — about $56 billion — had been delivered to struggling state governments, unemployed workers and other recipients. An additional $43 billion had been left in the pockets of individuals and businesses through uncollected taxes, much of it the result of Obama’s signature Making Work Pay tax credit for working families.

Those figures track closely with estimates by Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Economy.com, who calculates that the government made $242 billion in stimulus funds available for various purposes through the end of June and paid out about $110 billion. In a recent analysis, Zandi predicted that “the maximum contribution from the stimulus should occur in the second and third quarters of this year,” when it will add more than three percentage points to overall economic growth.

“It’s pretty much according to plan in terms of the payout and in terms of its economic impact. This is in the script,” Zandi said. The problem, he said, is that “the economy has been measurably worse than anyone expected,” with a surprisingly sharp “collapse in employment and surge in unemployment” that caught most economists off guard.

“That’s why the administration’s forecasts have been so wrong,” he said.

None of this surprises me in the least. I warned on this blog long ago that this would happen. But, of course, you have the Democrats spinning this, and very hard too:

The White House continues to predict that the stimulus package will save or create 3.5 million jobs by the end of next year. Zandi predicts it will fall short of that, producing about 2.5 million jobs — still a significant impact.

Whatever the number, Democrats are hoping it will be enough to convince voters that Obama is leading them out of the economic wilderness.

“I think the president was very clear that things were going to take a long time to turn around,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who leads the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in charge of electing Democrats to the House. Republicans “are making the argument to the American people that doing nothing would have been the best policy. And I don’t think people will buy that. . . .

“The measures we have taken have certainly prevented things from getting much worse.”

According to what figures? Because the charts I have seen, say otherwise:

stimulus-vs-unemployment-june-proj-dots

What this chart shows is that unemployment was far higher with the stimulus plan, than it would have been, if Team Teleprompter would have just left well enough alone.

What this means to me personally is this; I will most likely be unemployed until like 2010 or longer. Thereby making myself impossible to he hired anywhere, because I haven’t worked in so long. Which is just wonderful. Rolling Eyes

Thank you President Bambi Teleprompter for ruining America, you feckless idiot! Angry

Others:  Hot Air,  

A Libertarian Lefty Attacks me….

Some libertarian leftist slams me on a blog, that brought 40 whole readers over here… 🙄

Anyhow… here’s what the Anarchist wrote:

looks like Lew Rockwell’s strategy of printing non-anarchist essays snagged a state-lover. When Lew showed his true nature, anti-state, this person thought he was being anti-American. Hey, Pat. I love my country, but I hate your government. And so does Lew. When you’re ready to stop pointing guns at people over every little thing, we can talk. But I’m not going to close comments on my blog, like you did on yours. Afraid of a little debate, eh?

via WTF?: Starting to really wonder about Lew Rockwell’s Blog | End the War on Freedom.

3 years ago, when I first started blogging; I would have ripped this person a new one. But seeing that I am a bit more refined than this guy. I will simple answer the questions.

  1. No, I am not a Statist.
  2. If you so hate this Government; which is an extension of this country; so much, why don’t you leave? Nothing is keeping you here.
  3. I will stop pointing Guns at people, when people like the Islamic Terrorists, (I know, Islamic, Terrorist = Redundancy)   that you lefties just love to death, stop trying to kill people.

The whole problem with you lefty anarchists is this, you love chaos, and that chaos is used to forum a vacuum; which is quickly filled by big Government. Which I totally despise. Kinda like I despise the Socialism of your Democratic Cousins. (Again, Democrats, Socialism = Redundancy)

The problem with the puritan stance on the Libertarian foreign policy is that it is rooted in flawed thinking and conspiracy theory. Hence the reason that Ron Paul looked like a damn buffoon. He is absolutely right on Iran and So are you. I give you that; but Afghanistan is another story. Those bastards that flew those planes into the trade centers were not Jews, Not Christians, not anything, but Muslims, Islamic men. Terrorists? The whole damn religion is a religion of war.

The whole idea, that according to the Libertarian idea of foreign policy is that if we are attacked, we should just sit and take it and not do nothing; is idiotic at best. Hence the reason I am not involved in that party, in a formal manner.  I agree with the principles of free enterprise and capitalism. But that party loses me, when they beginning to speak of the federal Government in conspiratorial terms. I just do not believe that the Government is smart enough to do anything, like they believe that it does; much less keep it a secret.

Also, let me say another thing. Libertarians; especially those of the Libertarian left or anarchists is this. They hate our Country and it’s form of lawful Government. In the name of so-called freedom, they commit acts of, yes, terrorism. To further their political agenda. Kind of like Bill Ayers. Yes, that is correct, I said it. Al-Aqaeda and the Libertarian left have much in common. They both hate our Country and our values system, our freedom and our Capitalist system.  It was this same attitude that was on the mind of those who flew those planes into the trade centers. It is a sad thing to say, but it is the truth.

Admittedly, there have been times, when the Federal Government has overstepped it’s bounds. I have blogged about many instances where this has happened. That is why you have Conservatives and Right-libertarians, like myself, who have blogs, like me, that throw up the red flag and bring this sort of nonsense to the attention of the American people. This causes the Government, like in recent times to go, “Ooops! Our Bad!” and make changes to correct those mistakes. This is why people like me believe that big Government is BAD GOVERNMENT! Because of it’s tendency to make very stupid and sometimes horrific mistakes. Case in point; Waco, Ruby Ridge, and so on….

In fact, anyone that has read this blog, more than just coming and read one entry knows; that I am totally anti-centralized Government.  In fact, I, like many of my Southern Paleo-Conservatives believe that Abraham Lincoln was a traitor. Not because he freed the slaves; but because he introduced a centralized form of Government. Not to mention the form of barbarism or as it called today; Terrorism that he inflicted on the south, in a war; that was not even fought remotely fair.

Having said all that……. I did answer his accusations of me not wanting a debate. I do close comments here after 10 days. Because I hate getting comments about something that I wrote like, a year ago and have go back and see what they heck they are talking about. Running a blog is all about being current and fresh. Not about harping on the past. Hence the reason they automatically close. I think he wants a blog fight or a argument. I just don’t desire to debate people that I disagree with; it doesn’t change a damn thing. All it does is cause problems, and I just do not need it, nor want it.

Next time someone tells you that Islam is a Religion of peace; Show them this video

The Synopsis of this video:

This is a video of David Wood and Nabeel Qureshi asking questions at Arabfest, Dearborn. The date is June 21st, 2009. There was a booth at the festival which had a banner titled “Islam: Got Questions? Get Answers.” From their table, we picked up a pamphlet claiming that Islam promotes peace. We noticed that it was full of poor logic and errors, so we decided to make a video refuting it. We went to the booth that gave us the pamphlet to give them the opportunity to defend their claims. Security, however, stepped in and forced us to turn off our camera.

We left the booth, received advice from police, and found out that the actions of the security guards were illegal. We went back to the booth to record a potential answer again. Realizing that the Muslims present had no answer, we left.

When we came outside, we were asked some questions by two young men, who had been sent by security to entrap us. While we responded to them, festival security started assaulting us, as you will see in this video. The conclusion of this video is a mob of festival security attacking our cameras, pushing us back, kicking our legs, and lying to the police.

We ask you, is it a coincidence that the city with the highest percentage of Muslims in the United States is the city where Christianity is not allowed to be represented (let alone preached) on a public sidewalk? Is it coincidence that in this city, people will say “No way!” when we say “This is the United States of America”?

Is this what will happen when Islam takes over the United States?

You see Ladies and Gents, THIS is what celebrating diversity does to you. It gets you attacked by Islamic terrorist THUGS! Rick Warren and his purpose driven life, “Let’s love everyone and not judge”, kind of Christianity is just that; it celebrates diversity. Islam, a religion of peace….. What a lie! 😡 This is why, if I ever was going to film, I would go armed. Any security person who approached me and tried to hurt me, would be killed.

Enjoy this video! (Via Gateway Pundit)

WAKE UP AMERICA to the LIE OF ISLAM!

Acts 17 Apologists website.

Shocka!: Evidence Shows That Cheney Swayed White House reaction and response to CIA Leak

This is no big surprise; however it is news worthy:

A document filed in federal court this week by the Justice Department offers new evidence that former vice president Richard B. Cheney helped steer the Bush administration’s public response to the disclosure of Valerie Plame Wilson’s employment by the CIA and that he was at the center of many related administration deliberations.

The administration’s discussion of Wilson’s link to the CIA was meant to undermine criticism by her husband of administration allegations that Iraq attempted to acquire uranium, a matter that her husband had probed for the CIA, according to testimony presented in a 2007 trial.

A list of at least seven related conversations involving Cheney appears in a new court filing approved by Obama appointees at the Justice Department. In the filing, the officials argue that the substance of what Cheney told special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald in 2004 must remain secret.

via Court Filing Shows Evidence Cheney Swayed White House Response to CIA Leak – washingtonpost.com.

I would suppose that there are those will be shocked to the learn this or excuse it saying that we were at war. This writer is not among them. I have long argued on this Blog and in my previous incarnation as a “Left of center” Blogger the following; that the Bush Administration knew that they were over their hands, that there were no weapons of mass destruction.

My political criticism is not limited by party lines nor by any sort of partisanship.  Just as much as I criticize President Barack Obama for his socialist polices and lefty liberal nonsense; I also criticized George W. Bush’s Wilsonian, Neo-Conservative and quite frankly, Christian Theocratic Foreign Policy.  Unlike other bloggers in the Conservative Blogsophere; my criticism is not limited by party loyalty or blinded by partisanship.  That is a different between a Independent Conservative, like myself and the Republican establishment Bloggers and those taking their talking points from Irving Kristol and John Podhoretz.

The real knee slapper is this here:

The Obama administration has since agreed that the material should not be disclosed. A Justice Department lawyer at one point last month argued that vice presidents and other White House officials will decline to be interviewed in the future if they know their remarks might “get on ‘The Daily Show’ ” or be used as fodder for political enemies.

Ha! Forget National Security, we cannot let John Stewart get ahold of the stuff; Them Liberals might laugh at us! 😆 Now that is funny. 😀

(Update: Corrected rather silly grammar error… “We might laugh at us?” Good Lord; Must learn to not blog until I’ve drank my lot of coffee.)

Don’t believe the hype on the Coup in Honduras

That is what Octavio Sánchez is saying, and he should know; he’s there:

Tegucigalpa, Honduras – Sometimes, the whole world prefers a lie to the truth. The White House, the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and much of the media have condemned the ouster of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya this past weekend as a coup d’état.

That is nonsense.

In fact, what happened here is nothing short of the triumph of the rule of law.

[….]

Under our Constitution, what happened in Honduras this past Sunday? Soldiers arrested and sent out of the country a Honduran citizen who, the day before, through his own actions had stripped himself of the presidency.

These are the facts: On June 26, President Zelaya issued a decree ordering all government employees to take part in the “Public Opinion Poll to convene a National Constitutional Assembly.” In doing so, Zelaya triggered a constitutional provision that automatically removed him from office.

Constitutional assemblies are convened to write new constitutions. When Zelaya published that decree to initiate an “opinion poll” about the possibility of convening a national assembly, he contravened the unchangeable articles of the Constitution that deal with the prohibition of reelecting a president and of extending his term. His actions showed intent.

Our Constitution takes such intent seriously. According to Article 239: “No citizen who has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform [emphasis added], as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.”

Notice that the article speaks about intent and that it also says “immediately” – as in “instant,” as in “no trial required,” as in “no impeachment needed.”

Continuismo – the tendency of heads of state to extend their rule indefinitely – has been the lifeblood of Latin America’s authoritarian tradition. The Constitution’s provision of instant sanction might sound draconian, but every Latin American democrat knows how much of a threat to our fragile democracies continuismo presents. In Latin America, chiefs of state have often been above the law. The instant sanction of the supreme law has successfully prevented the possibility of a new Honduran continuismo.

The Supreme Court and the attorney general ordered Zelaya’s arrest for disobeying several court orders compelling him to obey the Constitution. He was detained and taken to Costa Rica. Why? Congress needed time to convene and remove him from office. With him inside the country that would have been impossible. This decision was taken by the 123 (of the 128) members of Congress present that day.

Don’t believe the coup myth. The Honduran military acted entirely within the bounds of the Constitution. The military gained nothing but the respect of the nation by its actions.

via A ‘coup’ in Honduras? Nonsense. | csmonitor.com.

But yet you have idiot douche bag Communist Liberals, like Hillary Clinton, Like President Obama and the U.N. trying to tell the people in Honduras; that this man was right for doing this. I guess Senator McCarthy was right after all. The Democratic Party has been taken over by the Socialists, who are basically Communist light.  So, to this writer; is no big surprise that President Obama and his right hand lady Hillary Clinton took sides with the Communists.

Franken-Gate Continues

It now seems that the Conservative owned and funded WSJ has bad case of sour grapes and in the process shows it’s horrid case of bias in the process.

The WSJ Writes:

The Minnesota Supreme Court yesterday declared Democrat Al Franken the winner of last year’s disputed Senate race, and Republican incumbent Norm Coleman’s gracious concession at least spares the state any further legal combat. The unfortunate lesson is that you don’t need to win the vote on Election Day as long as your lawyers are creative enough to have enough new or disqualified ballots counted after the fact.

Mr. Franken trailed Mr. Coleman by 725 votes after the initial count on election night, and 215 after the first canvass. The Democrat’s strategy from the start was to manipulate the recount in a way that would discover votes that could add to his total. The Franken legal team swarmed the recount, aggressively demanding that votes that had been disqualified be added to his count, while others be denied for Mr. Coleman.

But the team’s real goldmine were absentee ballots, thousands of which the Franken team claimed had been mistakenly rejected. While Mr. Coleman’s lawyers demanded a uniform standard for how counties should re-evaluate these rejected ballots, the Franken team ginned up an additional 1,350 absentees from Franken-leaning counties. By the time this treasure hunt ended, Mr. Franken was 312 votes up, and Mr. Coleman was left to file legal briefs.

What Mr. Franken understood was that courts would later be loathe to overrule decisions made by the canvassing board, however arbitrary those decisions were. He was right. The three-judge panel overseeing the Coleman legal challenge, and the Supreme Court that reviewed the panel’s findings, in essence found that Mr. Coleman hadn’t demonstrated a willful or malicious attempt on behalf of officials to deny him the election. And so they refused to reopen what had become a forbidding tangle of irregularities. Mr. Coleman didn’t lose the election. He lost the fight to stop the state canvassing board from changing the vote-counting rules after the fact.

This is now the second time Republicans have been beaten in this kind of legal street fight. In 2004, Dino Rossi was ahead in the election-night count for Washington Governor against Democrat Christine Gregoire. Ms. Gregoire’s team demanded the right to rifle through a list of provisional votes that hadn’t been counted, setting off a hunt for “new” Gregoire votes. By the third recount, she’d discovered enough to win. This was the model for the Franken team.

Mr. Franken now goes to the Senate having effectively stolen an election. If the GOP hopes to avoid repeats, it should learn from Minnesota that modern elections don’t end when voters cast their ballots. They only end after the lawyers count them.

Uh, Sour Grapes much guys? Look, I am about as happy about Al Franken being a damn Senator; as I would be about getting a root canal. But this petty whining and crying, because you lost a legal challenge is just downright childish. Besides, Norm Coleman was most likely out of money and just could not afford to keep fighting. Not only this, The G.O.P. most likely told Coleman to drop it, because the G.O.P. was already bruising from the Mark Sanford scandal.  Not only this, but the G.O.P. is looking towards 2010 and 2012, and the last thing they need; is to be viewed by the General public as a party desperately trying to grasp for power.

Patrick Stack makes a valid point, but in the process dredges up old Democratic Party conspiracy theories and sour grapes of his own:

First, Norm Coleman’s concession was hardly “gracious” — he drew out the process in court for seven months, leaving Minnesota down one senator the whole time. And if anybody is the model for election legal street fights and sketchy vote-count maneuvering through the courts, I think that would have to be the guy who “won” in the 2000 Presidential election.

Glass houses, yo.

Patrick (Nice name, by the way! :D) makes a point in the first part of that, but in that second part, he drags out the old dead tired conspiracy theory that  Bush stole the election.  There is absolutely no valid proof that Bush stole that election, if there was, how come John McCain did not steal this election in 2008? That’s because there was no election fraud at all. The SCOTUS made that decision based upon one big factor, there was no way those votes could be counted down in Florida accurately, in a reasonable amount of time and Bush won more states than Gore; so, the Court decided in Bush’s Favor.  Now am I happy about that? Quite frankly; No, I am not. Bush economic polices proved to be a disaster for this country, his authorizing the bailout of all these banks. The War in Iraq; which Bill O’Reilly himself even has said was a waste.  I could go on and on about that, but I think you know what I mean. I never was a Bush Cheerleader, anyone that reads this blog knows this to be a fact.

Chris Cillizza over at “The Fix” has a nice explanation of how Coleman won, sans the Conservative Sour Grapes.

Which brings me to my final and most important point. I was over at HotAir last night and I happened to watch this video here:

Now, first off this video is supposed to be what MSNBC calls “Fair and Balanced.” If that is fair and balanced, I think I want to move to another Country.  Secondly, If Markos and crew over at DailyKos think that the Democrats are going to now do every little thing that the “Nutroots” wants them to; they are going to be in for a HUGE surprise and letdown.  The Democratic Party establishment looks out for one person and one person alone; itself.  The only difference between the Establishment of the Democratic Party and the Republican Party; is the name.  Sure, the Grassroots or in this case the “Netroots”; may have some limited influence, but when the “Goodyear hits the Asphalt”, so to speak, the Establishment calls the shots and if Markos and company think that this 60 votes myth is going to change that, they are going to be in for a big surprise.

Change?: President Obama ready to sign order to Executive Order to Allow Indefinite Detention of Terror Suspects

This broke last night and the Liberal Blogosphere about went nuclear.

Via The Washington Post:

Obama administration officials, fearing a battle with Congress that could stall plans to close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, are crafting language for an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely, according to three senior government officials with knowledge of White House deliberations.

Such an order would embrace claims by former president George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war. Obama advisers are concerned that an order, which would bypass Congress, could place the president on weaker footing before the courts and anger key supporters, the officials said.

After months of internal debate over how to close the military facility in Cuba, White House officials are increasingly worried that reaching quick agreement with Congress on a new detention system may be impossible. Several officials said there is concern in the White House that the administration may not be able to close the prison by the president’s January deadline.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said that there is no executive order and that the administration has not decided whether to issue one. But one administration official suggested that the White House is already trying to build support for an order.

“Civil liberties groups have encouraged the administration, that if a prolonged detention system were to be sought, to do it through executive order,” the official said. Such an order could be rescinded and would not block later efforts to write legislation, but civil liberties groups generally oppose long-term detention, arguing that detainees should be prosecuted or released.

The Justice Department has declined to comment on the prospects for a long-term detention system while internal reviews of Guantanamo detainees’ cases are underway. One task force, which is assessing detainee policy, is expected to complete its work by July 21.

In a May speech, President Obama broached the need for a system of long-term detention and suggested that it would include congressional and judicial oversight. “We must recognize that these detention policies cannot be unbounded. They can’t be based simply on what I or the executive branch decide alone,” he said.

Shall we start calling him President George W. Obama? It sure sounds like it. When the Conservatives AND Liberals are calling this plan a disaster; something is dreadfully wrong.

Should be interesting to follow.

As always Memeorandum has the round up.