Green Gods Caught!

Can you say "Hypocrisy"! A Detroit News editor exposes Al Gore's and Thomas Freidman's. The great point:


"I'm not criticizing these eco-hypocrites for their lavish lifestyles. I celebrate them. If I had their money, I'd see their carbon excess and raise it by a couple hundred tons.

My point is that even for these environmental purists, human nature trumps nature worship. The more money people have, the greater their temptation to buy more and bigger things.

And it's why the green gods know so well that the only way to keep me and you from mimicking their offenses is to make sure we don't accumulate too much money. Money really is the root of all evil from an environmentalist's point of view."


Had never really thought about this perspective. Think this is the Dem's reasoning for breaking the country?

NYT Readers beware!

NYT buries poll results. And you want your news from these guys!

Karl Rove Shares the Real Problem with Obamacare

In Karl Rove's column "Obama's Great Health Scare" in todays WSJ he concludes with a concise explanation of why Obamacare will fail:


"Mr. Obama’s problem is that nine out of 10 Americans would likely get worse health care if ObamaCare goes through. Of those who do not have insurance—and who therefore might be better off—approximately one-fifth are illegal aliens, nearly three-fifths make $50,000 or more a year and can afford insurance, and just under a third are probably eligible for Medicaid or other government programs already.

For the slice of the uninsured that is left—perhaps about 2% of all American citizens—Team Obama would dismantle the world’s greatest health-care system. That’s a losing proposition, which is why Mr. Obama is increasingly resorting to fear and misleading claims. It’s all the candidate of hope has left."


It just does not make any sense! Get involved to save our health-care system!

10 Thought provoking questions...

you need to answer before supporting Healthfare.

Dennis Prager asks them and they are worth the read!

An example:

3. Why do supporters of nationalized medicine so often substitute the word "care" for "insurance?" It is patently untrue that millions of Americans do not receive health care. Millions of Americans do not have health insurance but virtually every American (and non-American on American soil) receives health care.

and

10. Contrary to the assertion of President Obama -- "we spend much more on health care than any other nation but aren't any healthier for it" -- we are healthier. We wait far less time for procedures and surgeries. Our life expectancy with virtually any major disease is longer. And if you do not count deaths from violent crime and automobile accidents, we also have the longest life expectancy. Do you think a government takeover of American medicine will enable this medical excellence to continue?

HOODWINKED!!

Thomas Sowell in "A Post-Racial President?" explains the deceit used by BHO to gather Centrist Dems around him. Such a good, concise summary I have the whole column below:

"A Post-Racial President?" by Thomas Sowell


"Many people hoped that the election of a black President of the United States would mark our entering a "post-racial" era, when we could finally put some ugly aspects of our history behind us.

That is quite understandable. But it takes two to tango. Those of us who want to see racism on its way out need to realize that others benefit greatly from crying racism. They benefit politically, financially, and socially.

Barack Obama has been allied with such people for decades. He found it expedient to appeal to a wider electorate as a post-racial candidate, just as he has found it expedient to say a lot of other popularthings-- about campaign finance, about transparency in government, about not rushing legislation through Congress without having it first posted on the Internet long enough to be studied-- all of which turned to be the direct opposite of what he actually did after getting elected.

Those who were shocked at President Obama's cheap shot at the Cambridge police for being "stupid" in arresting Henry Louis Gates must have been among those who let their wishes prevail over the obvious implications of Obama's 20 years of association with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Anyone who can believe that Obama did not understand what the racist rants of Jeremiah Wright meant can believe anything.

With race-- as with campaign finance, transparency and the rest-- Barack Obama knows what the public wants to hear and that is what he has said. But his policies as president have been the opposite of his rhetoric, with race as with other issues.

As a state senator in Illinois, Obama pushed the "racial profiling" issue, so it is hardly surprising that he jumped to the conclusion that a policeman was racial profiling when in fact the cop was investigating a report received from a neighbor that someone seemed to be breaking into the house that Professor Gates was renting in Cambridge.

For those who are interested in facts-- and these obviously do not include President Obama-- there has been a serious study of racial profiling in a book titled "Are Cops Racist?" by Heather Mac Donald. Her analysis of the data shows how this issue has long been distorted beyond recognition by politics.

The racial profiling issue is a great vote-getter. And if it polarizes the society, that is a price that politicians are willing to pay in order to get votes. Academics who run black studies departments, as Professor Henry Louis Gates does, likewise have a vested interest in racial paranoia.

For "community organizers" as well, racial resentments are a stock in trade. President Obama's background as a community organizer has received far too little attention, though it should have been a high-alert warning that this was no post-racial figure.

What does a community organizer do? What he does not do is organize a community. What he organizes are the resentments and paranoia within a community, directing those feelings against other communities, from whom either benefits or revenge are to be gotten, using whatever rhetoric or tactics will accomplish that purpose.

To think that someone who has spent years promoting grievance and polarization was going to bring us all together as president is a triumph of wishful thinking over reality.

Not only Barack Obama's past, but his present, tell the same story. His appointment of an attorney general who called America "a nation of cowards" for not dialoguing about race was a foretaste of what to expect from Eric Holder.

The way Attorney General Holder has refused to prosecute young black thugs who gathered at a voting site with menacing clubs, in blatant violation of federal laws against intimidating voters, speaks louder than any words from him or his president.

President Obama's first nominee to the Supreme Court is, like Obama himself, someone with a background of years of affiliation with an organization dedicated to promoting racial resentments and a sense of racial entitlement.

An 18th century philosopher said, "When I speak I put on a mask. When I act I am forced to take it off." Barack Obama's mask slipped for a moment last week but he quickly recovered, with the help of the media. But we should never forget what we saw."


My emphasis and now my comments:


Welcome to the land of the "Organizer in Chief"!

Do you feel hoodwinked? (deceived, deluded, mislead, duped, flimflamed, taken in, bamboozled, ripped off, taken for a ride, bilked)

You should!!

Where we are headed - towards disaster!

As the late Adrian Rogers said, "you cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." This man is truly a genius! An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had once failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan". All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A. After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

Cronies and the NYT cover for them

Michelle Malkin gives a little more realistic evaluation of Valerie Jarrett.

I ask again, how do you justify reading the NYT?

"Hope and Change" does have it's privileges!!

I wish them a great vacation!

The Genius of Shelby Steele

In the NYT today Shelby Steele explains affirmative action and why it exists. It is not why you think! His conclusion is pure genius - and should be listened to as it is coming from a successful black man. Here it is:



"Today's "black" problem is underdevelopment, not discrimination. Success in modernity will demand profound cultural changes -- changes in child-rearing, a restoration of marriage and family, a focus on academic rigor, a greater appreciation of entrepreneurialism and an embrace of individual development as the best road to group development.

Whites are embarrassed to speak forthrightly about black underdevelopment, and blacks are too proud to openly explore it for all to see. So, by unspoken
agreement, we discuss black underdevelopment in a language of discrimination and injustice. We rejoin the exhausted affirmative action debate as if it really mattered, and we do not acknowledge that this underdevelopment is primarily a black responsibility. And yet it is -- as historically unfair as it may be, as much as it seems to blame the victim. In human affairs we are responsible not just for our "just" fate, but also for our existential fate.

But continuing black underdevelopment will flush both races out of their postures and make most discussions of race in America, outside a context of development, irrelevant."



Read the entire column - it will put a lot in perspective. Challenge him - and me - particularly if you are on the left and an affirmative action fan! I look forward to the discussion.

Ben Stein: "We've Figured Him Out"

Ben Stein in The American Spectator concisely summarizes BHO and his administration.

"Wake up, beloved America."

Dem Silliness

Mark Steyn comments on "Gatesgate" and our "racist" President (my opinion - not Marks) commenting on a complex situation with no knowledge of what happened.

If you can read his humorous look at this situation and not clearly understand the silliness of the left you are a lot better than I. How do you lefties put up with this crassness? Do you think the arrogance will be brought under control?

An important conclusion he reaches:



"As Professor Gates jeered at the officers, “You don’t know who you’re messin’ with.” Did Sergeant Crowley have to arrest him? Probably not. Did he allow himself to be provoked by an obnoxious buffoon? Maybe. I dunno. I wasn’t there. Neither was the president of the United States, or the governor of Massachusetts, or the mayor of Cambridge. All of whom have declared themselves firmly on the side of the Ivy League bigshot. And all of whom, as it happens, are African-American. A black president, a black governor, and a black mayor all agree with a black Harvard professor that he was racially profiled by a white-Latino-black police team, headed by a cop who teaches courses in how to avoid racial profiling. The boundless elasticity of such endemic racism suggests that the “post-racial America” will be living with blowhard grievance-mongers like Professor Gates unto the end of time."


Let's hope he is not right, but I am afraid he is, particularly with the lefts "guilt trip" and support of these attitudes. We must do better!

A Real Concern about BHO's Healthcare and BHO's Administration

Michelle Malkin continues her research on the beliefs of John Holdren, BHO's Science Czar. An interesting read and a real concern!

Krauthammer: Why Obamacare is Sinking

"It's all about him." Charles Krauthammer concludes this on healthcare and points out the real motivation of BHO:


"This is not about politics? Then why is it, to take but the most egregious example, that in this grand health care debate we hear not a word about one of the worst sources of waste in American medicine: the insane cost and arbitrary rewards of our malpractice system?
When a neurosurgeon pays $200,000 a year for malpractice insurance before he even turns on the light in his office or hires his first nurse, who do you think pays? Patients, in higher doctor fees to cover the insurance.

And with jackpot justice that awards one claimant zillions while others get nothing -- and one-third of everything goes to the lawyers -- where do you think that money comes from? The insurance companies, who then pass it on to you in higher premiums.

But the greatest waste is the hidden cost of defensive medicine: tests and procedures that doctors order for no good reason other than to protect themselves from lawsuit. Every doctor knows, as I did when I practiced years ago, how much unnecessary medical cost is incurred with an eye not on medicine but on the law.

Tort reform would yield tens of billions in savings. Yet you cannot find it in the Democratic bills. And Obama breathed not a word about it in the full hour of his health care news conference. Why? No mystery. The Democrats are parasitically dependent on huge donations from trial lawyers.

Didn't Obama promise a new politics that puts people over special interests? Sure. And now he promises expanded, portable, secure, higher-quality medical care -- at lower cost! The only thing he hasn't promised is to extirpate evil from the human heart. That legislation will be introduced next week."


Read the column, it is full of Mr. Krauthammer's usual insight!

Think You Are Getting Honesty From Our President?

Read this AP analysis of last nights comments and you may think again!!

Bobby Jindal Offers a Bipartisan Guideline to Fix Healthcare

AN IMPORTANT READ!

In today's WSJ Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana suggest 7 actions to solve the problems in our current system. Doesn't this make more sense than turning it all over to our Government?

The seven actions we need to take as a country are:

1. Consumer choice guided by transparency. (Better records and use of them)

2. Alligned consumer interests. (Health savings accounts assuring public participation)

3. Medical lawsuit reform.

4. Insurance reform.

5. Pooling of small businesses.

6. Pay for performance, not activity.

7. Refundable tax credits. (Helping the poor acquire health insurance)


It makes sense to me and will not doom 15% of our economy and our healthcare to Federal control!!

Sotomayor Watch #10

We've all wondered if the words from Sonia Sotomayor during the Senate hearings for her elevation to SCOTUS were truthful - since they so often contradicted by her previous actions as a judge. I think we have the beginning of answers.

Redstate reports on her written answers to the Senate committee. Seems to be a little inconsistency. I interpret her verbal answers Clintonesque - "It depends on what the meaning of "is" is" - one thing for the cameras and another in performance of her duties.

It is truly unfortunate that the Dems cannot present their case honestly and ask for support, but have to lie to achieve their ends. Does that disgust anyone else?

"ARROGANCE": John Stossel comments on Healthfare

Read this before BHO's news conference tonight to put his comments in perspective. Important passages:



"It's crazy for a group of mere mortals to try to design 15 percent of the U.S. economy. It's even crazier to do it by August.

Yet that is what some members of Congress presume to do. They intend, as the New York Times puts it, "to reinvent the nation's health care system".

Let that sink in. A handful of people who probably never even ran a small business actually think they can reinvent the health care system."


LET THAT SINK IN!!

and:



"Who will save us from these despots? What Adam Smith said about the economic planner applies here, too: The politician who tries to design the medical marketplace would "assume an authority which could safely be trusted, not only to no single person, but to no council or senate whatever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it."


Do you really think BHO and his "medical council" can assure you good healthcare? Let's wake up and modify our current system - THE BEST IN THE WORLD! - and it is despite what the Dem's say.

IBD (Investor's Business Daily) Exposes ObamaCare: Please Read or you may Weep!

IBD seems to have the best coverage of the details of the House and Senate Healthfare plans and why they are not needed and do only harm to our nation.


"Reformers; Claims Just Don't Add Up" explains the false claims from the administration.

"Runaway Train To Less Freedom, Higher Taxes And Rationed Care" explains the "guaranteed" downside if we let this pass.


Important reads to understand what is being attempted. Better healthcare is not their goal, POWER is!!!

Investor's Business Daily Finds "uh-oh" in House Healthfare Bill

"It's Not An Option" in IBD Thursday reviews the House bill and exposes what we are not being told. Their conclusion:


"The public option won't be an option for many, but rather a mandate for buying government care. A free people should be outraged at this advance of soft tyranny."


Study the lies being used to gain power for the Dem government. Is this the way they should be doing business?

NYT: the most dishonest news source in our nation!

RealClearPolitics points out the NYT's burying of the CBO report on BHO's Healthfare and its obvious increased costs - despite what our leader preaches.

Does this embarrass any of its' readers?

Steve Chapman takes on BHO and Healthfare!

In "The 'Public Option' Health Care Scam" Steve Chapman shares some thoughts about BHO and his exploitation of our healthcare system.

I liked his opening 2 paragraphs:


"Some statements are inherently unbelievable. Such as: "I am an official of the government of Nigeria, and I would like to deposit $60 million in your bank account." Or: "I'm Barry Bonds, and I thought it was flaxseed oil." And this new one: "I'm Barack Obama, and I favor more competition in health insurance."

That, however, is the claim behind his support of a government-run health insurance plan to give consumers one more choice. The president says a "public option" would improve the functioning of the market because it would "force the insurance companies to compete and keep them honest.""


and the following obvious truth which you will not hear uttered by BHO:


"It will come as a surprise to private health insurance providers that they have not had to compete up till now. Nationally, there are some 1,300 companies battling for customers. Critics say in many states, one or two insurers enjoy a dominant position. But market dominance doesn't necessarily mean insufficient competition."


We had better get together and stop this SCAM!

Savings in Healthfare? Where? Asks the CBO!

BHO continues to bloviate about all the saving in the Healthfare plans. But the CBO - the guys who should know - see only increases. Now they work for BHO's government. What does that say about him?

Read the ABC report here.

"Team ObamaCare: Sanger, Ginsburg and Holdren"

If this column by Mark Alexander doesn't cause you to recognize Healthfare or what it is and work against it, I am not sure what would! This post is a follow up to my post of yesterday on John Holdren and ties in other aspects of Obama's administration and the left's desires for our country.

Yesterday, BHO made comments on his Healthfare and the need for the viable alternative of hospices in our society. His "public option" has a board appointed by him who will make the medical decisions for all of us, based on cost. These two things together had better wake up the elderly. The only way to read them is that since most medical costs occur in the last year of life, the hospices will see a lot of activity under his plan!

I don't know about you, but I want to make this choice myself! An example of points in the column:


"Considering the prospect of Socialists in charge of dispensing health care from cradle to grave, I was reminded, by none other than Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that when one is in need of health care, one should not depend on folks who advocate a "culture of death."

In an interview last week, Ginsburg said that she thought "at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of."

This comment was not some senile blunder from an aging jurist noted for nodding off during High Court deliberations.

In fact, Ginsburg's candid assessment of the Left's advocacy for abortion as a means for controlling propagation of undesirable ethnic groups is based upon the writings of atheist social activist and leftist icon Margaret Sanger.

Some 50 years before Roe v. Wade, Sanger founded the American Birth Control League, which later became Planned Parenthood, now the largest perpetrator of abortions in the U.S."

"Obama's Science Fiction 'Czar'"

David Harsnayi at the Denver Post comments on BHO's Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy - wow! that's a mouthfull! - Dr. John Holdren. A little scary to say the least! His conclusion:





"Holdren's past flies in the face of Barack Obama's contention, made on the day of the science czar's appointment, that his administration was "ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology."


Holdren embodies the opposite, actually."





Michelle Malkin posts on the same subject. Interesting reads if you want to figure out where this administation is headed!

"Nearly all my professors are Democrats. Isn't that a problem?"

Dan Lawton, a journalism student at the University of Oregon, writes an interesting column in the CSM on the political bias in our major universities. This is the "elephant in the room" that is redirecting our society and nobody wants to talk about , particularly the leftist professors who are confronted by Mr. Lawton.

I wonder if this bias could be contributing to Oregons governmental/financial problems at the current time?

Our childrens teachers have a great attitude as illustrated by the following excerpt:


"What I didn't realize is that journalism that examined the dominance of liberal ideas on campus would be addressed with hostility.

A professor who confronted me declared that he was "personally offended" by my column. He railed that his political viewpoints never affected his teaching and suggested that if I wanted a faculty with Republicans I should have attended a university in the South. "If you like conservatism you can certainly attend the University of Texas and you can walk past the statue of Jefferson Davis everyday on your way to class," he wrote in an e-mail.

I was shocked by such a comment, which seemed an attempt to link Republicans with racist orthodoxy. When I wrote back expressing my offense, he neither apologized nor clarified his remarks."



We all need to pay attention!

WaPo follow up - how low can they go!

On July 2 (see below) I posted "WaPo is caught in the act!" explaining the paper of record's efforts to hold "salon's" at the house of their Publisher, giving lobbyists access to BHO administration officials for a fee. Conflict of interest? I think so!

WaPo ombudsman - Andrew Alexander - yesterday reported on the incident. Remember, he is there to protect the public - us - from the misdeeds of his employer if they occur. The NYT has the same position. In fact this position is a feeble effort to placate critics.

Let me quote the 11th paragraph:


"Some at The Post view Pelton as overly eager and not attuned to the newsroom's ethical sensitivities. But Pelton raised questions about some of those very issues in a May 21 e-mail to Weymouth, Brauchli and Stephen P. Hills, The Post's president and general manager. Pelton reports to Hills, who declined to be interviewed."


So, we are to trust this ombudsman though his president and general manager can decline to be interviewed by his own ombudsman???

How anyone can read or trust the NYT or WaPo can only be driven by ideology or a "head in the sand" evaluation of news sources!

Honduras: BHO and his Secretary of State Clinton support the return of Zelaya

Read this analysis by Miguel A. Estrada and explain their logic to me. Why would they support an elected leader who clearly violated his Constitution and was removed from office?

Coup? There was no coup. This administration is upside down!

Pope Benedict XVI

Hearing the spin from the MSM yesterday regarding Pope Benedicts encyclical "Caritas in Veritate" and their view that it asks for a "world govenment" - at least this is what I thought I heard from them and I did not sleep well last night! - I was pleased to see this analysis from John Boehner and Thaddeus McCotter today.


"In the encyclical, the Pope stresses that the human being must remain as the center of our free-market system. He warns that individuals, families, churches, communities, and businesses must never become subservient to the state. He emphasizes that the sanctity of all human life must always be protected. And he advocates conservation, not radical environmentalism."


I hope the Catholics look into the encyclical a bit deeper than the MSM!

In "Plumage - But At any Price" Charles Krauthammer comments on the silliness of BHO's agreements in Moscow. We should all pay close attention to the lack of understanding in the current administration.

Key 'graphs:


"Useless because the level of offensive nuclear weaponry, the subject of the U.S.-Russia "Joint Understanding," is an irrelevance. We could today terminate all such negotiations, invite the Russians to build as many warheads as they want, and profitably watch them spend themselves into penury, as did their Soviet predecessors, stockpiling weapons that do nothing more than, as Churchill put it, make the rubble bounce.

Obama says that his START will be a great boon, setting an example to enable us to better pressure North Korea and Iran to give up their nuclear programs. That a man of Obama's intelligence can believe such nonsense is beyond comprehension. There is not a shred of evidence that cuts by the great powers -- the INF treaty, START I, the Treaty of Moscow (2002) -- induced the curtailment of anyone's programs. Moammar Gaddafi gave up his nukes the week we pulled Saddam Hussein out of his spider hole. No treaty involved. The very notion that Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will suddenly abjure nukes because of yet another U.S.-Russian treaty is comical."


I don't know about you, but I cannot laugh!

Healthfare Thought

Heard a comment from a Texas doctor this morning that made sense to me: the Dem push for "Healthcare Reform" - and I believe leading us to single payer healthfare - is to cover the coming disaster with Medicare. Single payer will shift the cost to the young thereby alleviating the Medicare problem with the old.

Problem is that our quality of health care and development of improved medicines and methods will rapidly go into reverse!

There has to be a better way. Don't let this "Healthcare Reform" happen!

Healthfare and Single Payer

WSJ editorializes with great accuracy on "The Public Option Two-Step". BHO and his minions are hoodwinking us.

The Clear Insight of Thomas Sowell on Ricci!

Thomas Sowell, who I am beginning to think of as the primary "thinker" in our society, writes a column today - "What Constitutes Discrimination?" - reacting to the law and the Ricci decision from the Supreme Court.

His logic in explaining the problem is clear and concise, and everyone who wants to understand why we are continuing to have our racial problems should read this.

A couple of important 'graphs:

"That is why courts split along ideological fault lines in cases like the New Haven firefighters' case, where the crucial facts are not even in dispute. The only real dispute is over whether a test is automatically biased if different groups pass it at different rates. Apparently the groups themselves cannot possibly be different, according to "disparate impact" theory."


and:


"Where in fact have blacks been most successful? Sports and entertainment come to mind immediately. These are areas where blacks have to meet the same standards as anybody else."

If Derek Jeter swings at three pitches and misses, he is out, just like any white ballplayer. If people stop watching Oprah Winfrey's program, it will get cancelled, just like anybody else's.

The biggest beneficiaries from the "disparate impact" dogma are those who claim to be helping minorities. They benefit by feeling noble, winning votes or attracting money. The actual consequences for blacks-- or for the polarization of American society-- seems to be of little concern."


If you read this and can still feel comfortable with the Dem approach to discrimination and the judicial activity in this country, I would like to hear where Mr. Sowell is wrong!

UNDERSTANDING SARAH PALIN

Three columns published today explain quite clearly, without the innuendo of the beltway pundits, and I include the right and center right pundits, the motivations that may have caused her action. All seem quite plausible to me:

Roger Simon: "The Sins of Sarah Palin", Politico

Matthew E. Berger: "For Palin, Rules Have Never Applied", Politico

Tony Blankley: "Sarah Agonistes", Washington Times


Enjoy the reads!

The Pad Throwers Can't Help Themselves!

Maureen Dowd goes after Sarah Palin again today with "Sarah's Secret Diary", a faux Palin diary entry. The Washington-New York corridor is really threatened by her!

One telling paragraph (is it really all about Palin being pro-life?):


"It’s just like when Obama, the One Who Must Be Obeyed, said his family was off-limits so everyone left them alone. But they never left mine alone. Thank goodness for that though because we hate being out of the limelight! It was a blast to see Bristol with my grandbaby Tripp on the cover of People as the ambassadress of abstinence!"


To imply that she wanted her family dragged through the dirt? A rather warped view caused by the hatred of any pro-life person of influence.

Read the entire column, it is interesting and telling!

"The Biden Curve" from WSJ's James Taranto: More on Dem's and Palin

In todays WSJ Best of the Web James Taranto documents more Dem unfounded attacks on Sarah Palin last year while letting BHO and Biden have a complete pass on their current identical stands on Israel/Iran. How can you Dem's stomach this? A sample of one pundits idiocy:


"Matthew Yglesias, who when he was young drew much praise for his thoughtful and fair-minded commentary, wrote a blog post titled "Palin: If Israel Wants to Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran, That's Okay With Me":

Palin reiterated her absurd view that the President of the United States shouldn't "second-guess" Israeli policy under any circumstances.

Palin is okay at repeating various "pro-Israel" buzzwords, but she can't run away from the fact that her underlying position on this topic is stupid.

So when Biden said the same thing, did Yglesias call it "absurd" and "stupid"? Well, is the pope Italian? Here's what he wrote yesterday:

This is being read by some . . . as a "green light" for an Israeli attack. . . . I think the most straightforward reading of what Biden said is rather different, he's trying to distance the United States from any possible Israeli military action by making it clear that what Israel does or doesn't do is decided in Israel rather than in Washington.

The main problem with this, I think, is that probably nobody's going to believe it. Already you see many Americans taking Biden's statement that the U.S. doesn't control Israeli policy to "really" mean that the U.S. is encouraging Israel to attack.

When Palin says it, it's stupid. When Biden says it, he gets graded on a curve: The problem is that other people are too stupid to understand the deep subtlety of Biden's thinking."

Read the entire analysis and see if you can understand their attitude! It is amazing.

Dem's should be ashamed of their "pad throwers"!! (read below to understand a "pad thrower"!)

Andrew Breitbart analyzes the MSM's part in the resignation of Sarah Palin. He is right on point! Below is the entire column. If my lefty friends can stomach the Democrat parties tactics (through their surrogates: the MSM), I have nothing but pity for you!

I suggest you read the Maureen Dowd column of July 5, 2009, to fully understand Mr. Breitbart.



"New York Times Barbie Strikes Again" By Andrew Breitbart

What a shock that Maureen Dowd devoted her New York Times column Sunday to attack Sarah Palin. It did not so much criticize Alaska's governor for prematurely stepping down from her official duties as to finish off what sister snipers Katie Couric and Tina Fey began last fall.

The assassination of Sarah Palin - by media.

For those who didn't pay attention, Mrs. Palin's unexpected stratospheric rise as a national political figure threatened the media's preordained presidency of Barack Obama.

In light of how the Obama machine took down Hillary Clinton, which unsettled many feminists who believed 2008 was their time, many who saw sexism at play - the destruction of an ascendant Republican female icon was an urgent imperative for the Democratic Party.

In conjunction with the laws of political correctness as perfected by the Democratic Media Complex, it would take prominent women to take down an unlikely and unexpected conservative feminist symbol that threatened to steal away Mrs. Clinton's votes from the Chosen One.

While the vanquished then-senator from New York conspicuously removed herself from this task - going so far as praising Sen. John McCain's running mate as "a very composed and effective debater" - a trio of media partisans, each with a unique skill set, rose to the task of tearing down Sarah Palin.

Misses Dowd, Couric and Fey - Obama's Angels (featuring Joy Behar in the role of "Bosley") - used a potent mix of mockery, snobbery and vitriol to undermine Mrs. Palin's feminist bona fides.

They are what my wife calls "pad throwers," an allusion to the shower room scene in the Stephen King film "Carrie," in which the popular girls throw sanitary napkins and tampons at the film's namesake.

Simply put, they are bullies. And female bullies - "Mean Girls" as Miss Fey's film calls them - are the cruelest kind.

Primarily motivated by a desire to keep abortion "safe, legal and rare," female liberals in the media have carte blanche to do and say anything.

But since Mrs. Palin, a mother of five including a boy who was known to have Down syndrome before he was born, is a potent symbol of the pro-life movement, she is considered an enemy of the sisterhood.

Miss Dowd's attempted takedown of Mrs. Palin is less skillful surgery than it is name calling using fun noun and adjective pairings. Think "Mad Libs." And, that's exactly what Misses Dowd, Couric and Fey are. Once the ladies did their job, liberal men like Jon Stewart and David Letterman had the cover to join the hate campaign.

While Mrs. Palin is at ease with her gender, as well as her place in the workplace and at home, Misses Dowd, Couric and Fey convey a base insecurity in their feminine skin. Their rage is fueled by liberalism's false feminist dogma and they take it out on a woman who chose not to join their angry sorority.

The governor of Alaska's compelling narrative - athlete, beauty queen, wife, mother, hunter, successful politician - shows adherents of narrow leftist dogma that, perhaps, women really can have it all. Most importantly: freedom of thought.

In calling Alaska's governor "Caribou Barbie," Miss Dowd used beauty as a weapon to diminish Mrs. Palin's achievements. A man would be reprimanded for this, but Miss Dowd is a Pulitzer Prize-winning pad thrower and is licensed for such vindictive pettiness.

"Caribou," of course, is a stab at Mrs. Palin's backwater, Red State ways, attacks on which an Upper Westside liberal snob can never get enough. Miss Dowd goes on to ridicule "Sarah's country-music melodramas." This is her barely veiled attempt to call Mrs. Palin "white trash." And this has been the loathsome subtext of all media criticism of the Palins. They even went after their children. Mercilessly.

And Mrs. Palin during the Letterman saga finally cried, "Enough!"

Exposed in the relentless Palin attacks is not just political bias, but unmitigated class bias. The American mainstream media in its current free-fall is begging for more comeuppance when it continues to berate the values and lifestyles of the folks in flyover country who in simpler times used to be considered valued customers.

While "empathy" and "tolerance" may be liberalism's highest values, Miss Dowd offers her conservative victims none. They are caricatured, demeaned and dehumanized. They are to be mocked and ridiculed to the point where the other students point and laugh. The MoDo template is so simple and repetitive it could be written into a software program.

Perhaps resigning from her first term in office may hurt Mrs. Palin's attempts to run for higher office. Even I, a Palin supporter, now have qualms about her seeking higher office. But politics is not the most important way to influence our country, and reinforce conservatism's relevancy in the current global disorder. Media is.

Sarah Palin may best serve her country by entering the media fray. In the pursuit of taking her down, Misses Dowd, Couric and Fey have created the person who burns the liberal media prom down.

Hopefully, when she leaves office Mrs. Palin starts to work on her telekinetic powers."



Only thing I would add is this: Misses Dowd, Couric and Fey are DIRTY pad throwers! And that is disgusting!!

Coulter re Palin

Ann Coulter gives a clear and concise opinion of why Sarah Palin is resigning as Governor. It makes sense to me. What do you think?

The closing paragraph:


""She’ll be much bigger now and can play on the national stage without constantly setting off state ethics investigations by loons, parasites and liberals. None of this applied to McCain or Kerry – both of whom went back to the Senate – because their national campaigns diminished them. Palin’s national campaign made her a major star. As she said, she’s not retreating, she’s advancing in another direction." (my emphasis)

Read Maureen Dowd today to understand "loons, parasites and liberals."

The Illogic of Ricci

Finacial Times' Christopher Caldwell comments on the problems with the dissenters in Ricci. The key point:


"In the Ricci case, the testing company and the city of New Haven took extraordinary steps to insulate their test against any hint of racial bias. But the city feared it could be sued under “disparate impact” provisions of civil rights law if it did not throw the test out. No doubt it was right. And the court’s dissenters, particularly the outgoing justice David Souter, are right to say that New Haven was put in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” position. What they see less clearly is that this trap is a product of the illogic of the law itself. If even fair tests leave you liable to litigation on the grounds of racism, then the system is arbitrary and abusive.

The dissenters’ argument goes on a wild goose chase after some grounds on which to protect the results-oriented vision of civil rights. “They had no vested right to promotion,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote of the firefighters. “Nor have other persons received promotions in preference to them.” But this argument relies on the assumption that there are some as-yet-unidentified black firefighters who do have a vested right to promotion." (my emphasis)


So Justice Ginsburg thinks they have a "vested right to promotion", and to heck with their abilities! It is sometimes depressing to analyze SCOTUS decisions.

Climate Change

Kimberley Strassel explains a growing "change" in the worldwide "settled science" of global warming. Seems it is not so settled! But don't ask Al or BHO!

An interesting read and commentary on our strongest ally: Australia!

WaPo is caught in the act!

If my Dem friends aren't disgusted by this from one of our papers of record - who of course says there is no bias at their operation - then you have swallowed the kool aid! The opening paragraph of Howard Kurtz' column:



"Washington Post Publisher Katharine Weymouth today canceled plans for a series of policy dinners at her home after learning that marketing fliers offered lobbyists access to Obama administration officials, members of Congress and Post journalists in exchange for payments as high as $250,000."




Read about this disgusting, obviously administration driven, operation.


Still think there is no bias at the WaPo?

MUST READS TO UNDERSTAND THE HEALTHFARE PROPOSAL

Two columns that explain problems with government healthfare.

John Stossel compares our current system with the Canadian single payer system which is where we will be headed if the BHO administration is successful. If it is implemented, you may wish you were a dog! Read the column to understand this comment!

George Newman explains in most simple economic terms the falacy of what is being presented to us by the BHO administration. I challenge anyone to take on any of his points and explain why her is wrong!

IMPORTANT READS! If you can read these two columns and still support the administration's plans, your ideology is overpowering your reason.