The Khaki Elephant

The Politics of Unemployment or How 8.3% Became Less Than 5.6%

2012-02-07T22:26:00.000-05:00

Every once in a while there's an interesting gem posted on those social networks and here's one I snagged from a friend. I figured the time is right to post it on the heels of yesterday's "the Presidency doesn't matter" riff.

This article comes from our friends over a Newsbusters and is worth a read by anybody who is curious about how the media could be thrilled over 8.3% unemployment in 2012, but was despondent with 5.6% in 2004. It's all in the spin . . . and dependant on which party is in office at the time.

Writer Noel Shepherd kicks of his article (yeah, click there to read it) with,

If you needed more proof of liberal media bias, just look at the orgasms created by Friday's announcement that unemployment in January dropped to 8.3 percent. By contrast, these same folks were practically suicidal as the jobless rate dropped to 5.6 percent when George W. Bush was President in January 2004.

Shepherd then goes on to to provide several examples of how the Obama's numbers are presented as proof for canonical consideration while Bush's superior stats were signs of the apacolypse. Worth a read, but only if you have a strong stomach. I only made it halfway through before my Pepto run.

What? It Doesn't Matter Who Is President?

2012-02-06T22:12:00.000-05:00

Remember four years ago? Way back when George W Bush was president, unemployment was under 8%, gas averaged under $2 a gallon and only 32 million people had to resort to food stamps? Oh, here are some comparative specs, just in case your memory needs a jog:

Remember how the media loved to blame Bush for all of the country's economic woes? Those woes which, by today's standards seem a bit like Nirvana?

Now, come back to today, when the presidential elections are drawing closer and Barack Obama is going to be called upon to defend his economic record, which reassembles the Jimmy Carter years minus a Billy Beer chaser. How can we expect the mainstream media to handle the Obama financial debacle?

Option 1: Continue to blame Bush. More on this in future posts . . . I'm sure there will be plenty of opportunities.

Option 2: Suddenly start proclaiming that it can't be Obama's fault because a President doesn't really have much to do with the economy. That's right, the same folk who only a few years ago accused Bush of personally melting America's wealth like Paula Dean's butter will now propose that a President has little or nothing to do with American prosperity. So be ready for more headlines like this one feature online by Yahoo: "Who Is President Matters Much Less Than We Think" where "experts" will say things like: "The president generally matters so much less than we think, especially when it comes to the economy." Or "[As] the president begins his reelection campaign in earnest, one must keep in mind that the Oval Office makes up just one part of the large governing pie."

Here it comes, folks. Bush was to blame when he was in the Oval office. But Barack Obama? Come on, he's only the President.

Chrysler's Patriotic Super Bowl Ad

2012-02-06T21:28:00.001-05:00

Sure, this year's Super Bowl ads gave us stripping M&Ms, a return of the Soup Nazi and Jillian Micheals' bedroom eyes, but for my money it was Chrysler's "It's Halftime in America" that stole the night.

Chrysler's spot was filled with inspirational zeal and Clint Eastwood. What's not to love? The message: things have been rough of late for America, but the game isn't over yet. "Yeah, it's halftime, America, and our second half is about to begin."

Now, I love the positive references to the D in the ad (that's "The D" as in "Detroit" for those of you distant from the Motor City) but it's the commercial's message of hope through effort that will keep it in my mind long after the rest of the night's funny pitches are long forgotten . . . well, except maybe Jillian Michaels.

Here is the full Chrysler add courtesy of YouTube.

Nevada Refuses to Gamble on Newt

2012-02-05T08:05:00.003-05:00

As expected, the infinitely unelectable Newt Gingrich lost the Nevada caucus by a substantial number; the overnight night tally placing the margin at 48% to 23%. Oh, apparently Ron Paul and Rick Santorum are still collecting some votes as well. Sure, voter turnout resembled a Richard Marx appreciation concert, but for Romney a big victory is a big victory.

Also as expected, Gingrich vowed to push a positive campaign against Romney who, in Newt's positive words, "has in his career been pro-abortion, pro-gun control, pro-tax increase and who ranks third from the bottom in creating jobs in the four years he was governor." Gingrich went on to dismiss the loss by pointing out that Nevada is home to oodles and oodles of Mormons who evidently have to vote for Romney. It's also the setting for the original CSI . . . is there a connection?

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney gave a victory speech that contained one of his best campaign lines to date: "This president began his presidency by apologizing for America. He should now be apologizing to America."

Jon McNaughton's Controversial "The Forgotten Man"

2012-02-04T22:23:00.000-05:00

If the pen is mightier than the sword, where does the paint brush rank? We all know that art can have an electric impact on political dialogue. I mean, who could forget Shepard Fairey's Obama boosting HOPE poster, which was plastered on more college dorm room walls than last night's partially digested beer & slider upheaval? Well, now entering into the conversation is Jon McNaughton's "The Forgotten Man."

McNaughton's work may never reach the iconic nor commercial success of Fairey's oft imitated print, but it is selling in the thousands and creating quite a stir on Al Gore's Internet with its controversial portrayal of presidents past and president. One look from those on the political Left have them steaming, "How could he disrespect President Obama by having him stand aloof and defiant with his foot on the Constitution?" Those on the Right undoubtedly also question the President's foot on the Constitution, suggesting, "He should be unzipping to relieve himself on John Hancok's looping signature, because that's what he's really doing to our document of freedom."

Regardless of where you stand, click here to read McNaughton's explanation of the work.

The Khaki Elephant is back

2012-02-04T20:47:00.000-05:00

After a nearly two-year hiatus, the Khaki Elephant is back.

What caused the site to disappear? Too much interference from a real job? Too much work dealing with stress-producing children? Too much money to buy back "khakielephant.com" that was snatched from under our noses? Too much stress watching Obama supporters defend an IBS inducing presidency?

It doesn't matter. The hiatus is over and the Khaki Elephant is ready to write. I hope you, faithful readers . . . the one or two of you that return . . . are ready as well.

And just to make sure we re-start on the right foot: here's a dude with a really weird sunburn.

Obama's Transparency = More Censorship

2010-04-20T20:15:00.004-04:00

Lafayette Park is to protests as Madonna is to STDs: it attracts them by the score. Why, during the Bush years your dog couldn't lift its leg without relieving itself on some liberal toting an "I hate" sign. Oh, how things have changed with Obama in charge.

A few would-be protesters decided to criticize the current administration for their stance on gays in the military and a few reporters decided to see what was going on and, well, the police assigned to the White House were dispatched to disperse the reporters and arrest the protesters. The park was suddenly "closed" (a move the reporters on hand had never experience before). So much for diversity.

Interestingly, this incident occured just after a delegation from the White House press corps (pronounced "core," Mr. President) met with Obama Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, to protest the administration's heavy handed control of the press. And, of course, this was not the first time some in the press have tried to shuck Obama's outrageous control. Who can forget left-leaning Helen Thomas joining Chip Reid to break ranks and question censorship from the Oval Office.

Kilpatrick: GUILTY

2010-04-20T19:15:00.003-04:00

Today Wayne County Circuit Judge David Groner found former Detroit mayor Kwame Kilpatrick guilty of several probation violations (including hiding some $650,000 that would pay a small portion of what he owes back to the city of Detroit). "You would be well advised to have your affairs in order before sentencing," the judge advised, and I'm guessing this wasn't a reference to former chief of staff Christine Beatty.

Sentencing is currently scheduled for May 20, 2010 when we all learn the punishment for gettin' your groove on Detroit's dime.

Z on Liz Cheney and Debra Burlingame

2010-04-19T19:01:00.003-04:00

One of my favorite bloggers took a trip to hear Liz Cheney and Debra Burlingame talk about national security. And when Z takes a trip the results are going to be an A delivery of info. Here summary . . .

Both women are formidable and as patriotic and informed as two women can be. And they're very worried for our country.

Ah, and speaking of fomidable, patriotic and informed women: I recommend that you can read Z's entire post here:

Liz Cheney and Debra Burlingame

Obama's Culture Of Dependency

2010-04-18T12:56:00.003-04:00

"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." -- John F. Kennedy (1/20/1961)

You're about as likely to hear a Democrat utter those words today as hear a BoSox fan wax eloquent about Derek Jeter. The ruling party in Washington is not your father's Democratic party and it has never been more revealing than during the era of Obama handouts. Just listen to Obama voters like DeCarlo Flythe who explains, " It's just going to be like Christmas, I mean it's going to be great. No worries . . ." or Henrietta Hughes and her tear-jerking plea for something free. It is the culture of dependence on which the current Democratic party thrives. Keep people begging for handouts and you're more likely to maintain power.

The fact that some Americans take umbrage with this approach explains the continued momentum of the Tea Party rallies, but the Obots in the press just don't get it. Take the much played footage of CNN's Susan Roesgen asking a tea party attendee if he knew "that you're eligible for a $400 credit?" And when the man continued to hold his "drop socialism" sign, she went on, "Did you know that the state of Lincoln gets fifty billion out of the stimulus?" She was even more dumbfounded than usual, unable to grasp the concept that not everybody was lining up for free stuff. Some folk, we'll call them Republicans, actually prefer independence to dependence, effort to endowment.

This stands at odds with the Obama Democrat philosophy that is built on a foundation of neediness. The problem this creates is succinctly captured by the Washington Examiner's Michael Barone

Public policy also helps determine the kind of society we are. The Obama Democrats see a society in which ordinary people cannot fend for themselves, where they need to have their incomes supplemented, their health care insurance regulated and guaranteed, their relationships with their employers governed by union leaders. Highly educated mandarins can make better decisions for them than they can make themselves.
That is the culture of dependence. The tea partiers see things differently. They're not looking for lower taxes; half of tea party supporters, a New York Times survey found, think their taxes are fair. Nor are they financially secure: Half say someone in their household may lose their job in the next year. Two-thirds say the recession has caused some hardship in their lives. But they recognize, correctly, that the Obama Democrats are trying to permanently enlarge government and increase citizens' dependence on it.

Gates: There Is No Policy To Stop Iran From Nukes

2010-04-18T10:59:00.006-04:00

According to a "classified document" with more leaks than a Cuban refugee escape vessel, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates is warning that the U.S. has no policy to curb Iran's rapid move toward nuclear weapons. I wonder how many Obama supporters still believe you can thwart terrorist objects through understanding and apology.

Those familiar with the memo, speaking on the condition of anonymity, reveal that:

Mr. Gates wrote of a variety of concerns, including the absence of an effective strategy should Iran choose the course that many government and outside analysts consider likely: Iran could assemble all the major parts it needs for a nuclear weapon — fuel, designs and detonators — but stop just short of assembling a fully operational weapon.
In that case, Iran could remain a signatory of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty while becoming what strategists call a “virtual” nuclear weapons state.

Like the Clinton administration, who practiced an appeasement policy that actually went so far as to supply North Korea with a nuclear reactor, the Obama team is counting on passivity to stop pugnacity, but the world does not work that way.

Equally frightening is that fact that a memo this explosive was leaked to the press (not that the mainstream media will cover it, given its obvious reflection on Obama). I'd suggest that from here on the administration place highly classified documents like this under the same security measures as Barack Obama's academic records.

Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution Is Health Care

2010-04-12T10:00:00.001-04:00

Yes, Oprah is annoying and Ryan Seacrest is, well, Ryan Seacrest, but both are now connected with a project that I've found myself drawn to: Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution, a program where the afore mentioned British chef (Oliver, not Seacrest) comes to a chubby American community in an effort to change the way it eats, from breakfast pizza at school to deep fryers at home. The show follows a similar effort by Oliver in Britain that actually resulted in a change to their school system's nutritional requirements.

Perhaps my interest in the program is sparked by the fact that it appeared on the tube just a couple weeks after I started my own Khaki food revolution, banning the likes of Coke (acola), processed foods, beer and the occasional cigar from my diet . . . OK, I still sneak the occasional cigar, but the rest of my former diet is swimming with Luca Brasi . . . well, except the beer. Anyway, Oliver's Food Revolution is a must see for any parent who has scanned the school lunch program in search of healthy offerings only to find chicken nuggets, french fries and cheese that smells suspiciously of Elmer's glue.

Oliver's message is as simple as it is critical:

I believe that every child in America has the right to fresh, nutritious school meals, and that every family deserves real, honest, wholesome food. Too many people are being affected by what they eat. It's time for a national revolution. America needs to stand up for better food!

If you're worried about American health care, take a close look at the school lunch programs. You may not sleep for a week. If we want to make a difference in our nation's health while at the same time decreasing the cost of care, let's start by removing heart-pummeling foods from the school lunch rooms. And you can take a first step by signing this petition: America's Food Revolution Petition

Freedom Lost A Friend In Polish President Kaczynski

2010-04-11T12:15:00.003-04:00

Unless you've been obsessed by Buzz Aldrin's departure from Dancing with the Stars, you are probably aware that Poland’s President Lech Kaczynski died along with his wife Maria and dozens of additional passengers in a tragic plane crash in Russia. It was a dark day for the world.

President Kaczynski was a conservative who stood in defense of European free nations and his voice will be missed in a climate marching toward the socialism that his country fought so hard to overthrow. Also among the crash victims was Anna Walentynowicz, whose firing from the Lenin Shipyards in Gdansk led to a protest that would help to birth the the Solidarity freedom movement, and several high-ranking Polish government and military officials.

A sad, sad day . . . though now you can prep for one of my favorite spectator sports: watching Conspiracy theorists ply their trade.

Sarah Palin Mocks Obama

2010-04-10T09:56:00.004-04:00

And before you haters start to claim that Sarah Palin is stupid, please complete the following quiz:

1) Which U.S. Political figure told a European audience that he didn't know how to say something in Austrian (which is not actually a language)?
A. Barack Obama
B. Sarah Palin
Correct Answer: A. Barack Obama

2) Which U.S. Political figure claimed that America invented the automobile?
A. Barack Obama
B. Sarah Palin
Correct Answer: A. Barack Obama . . . who also thinks America invented solar power.

3) Which U.S. Political figure gave British Prime Minister Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs in response to Brown's thoughtful and historically significant gift?
A. Barack Obama
B. Sarah Palin
Correct Answer: A. Barack Obama

4) Which U.S. Political figure claimed to have visited all 57 U.S. States?
A. Barack Obama
B. Sarah Palin
Correct Answer: A. Barack Obama

5) Which U.S. Political figure has a tough time figuring out the difference between windows and doors?
A. Barack Obama
B. Sarah Palin
Correct Answer: A. Barack Obama

6) Which U.S. Political figure thought that Arkansas was closer to Kentucky than his home state of Illinois . . . which actually shares a border with Kentucky?
A. Barack Obama
B. Sarah Palin
Correct Answer: A. Barack Obama

8) Which U.S. Political figure gave the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his/her own speeches?
A. Barack Obama
B. Sarah Palin Correct
Answer: A. Barack Obama

9) Which U.S. Political figure said this, "On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today . . ."?
A. Barack Obama
B. Sarah Palin Correct
Answer: A. Barack Obama

10) Which U.S. Political figure celebrated "Cinco de Cuatro" with Mexico's Ambassador to the United States, rather than Cinco de Mayo, and then repeated the blunder?
A. Barack Obama
B. Sarah Palin
Correct Answer: A. Barack Obama

The list could be endless when dealing with "the genius" currently in the Oval Office, but I suspect you get my point stopping with a nice, round 10 question quiz. So, now on to Sarah:

So Much For The Left's Diversity

2010-04-10T08:14:00.000-04:00

Oh, the Left loves to accuse Republicans of racism, but let an African American break ideological ranks with them and the invisible white, pointy hoods spring into action with chants of "Uncle Tom" and sudden slave speak. The true nature of liberalism is exposed . . . well, for those who haven't already recognized how liberal policies have consistently oppressed minority populations through promises of dependency.

Monica Crowley's post concerning the racist attacks on Dr. Christopher Metzler, Associate Dean of Continuing Studies at Georgetown University, after he voiced opposition to Obamacare are stunning . . . stunning unless you remember that Democratic Senator Robert Byrd was the top officer in his local KKK chapter by the age of 24, VP Joe Biden claimed that "You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent" and later described Obama as "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," while Bill Clinton tried to secure Ted Kennedy's support for his wife by explaining that Obama "would be getting us coffee a few years ago." So, I guess the post is only stunning if you have the observational skills of a cucumber.

But for Dr. Metzer's the racism of the left is an all to obvious and harsh reality. According to Crowley,

In an blockbuster interview airing this weekend on my nationally syndicated radio show, a prominent black conservative blew the lid off the racism of the Left. Dr. Christopher Metzler, Associate Dean of Continuing Studies at Georgetown University, told me of the racist attacks he endured after going public with his opposition to the Democrats’ health care bill and President Barack Obama’s overall agenda.

After an appearance a few weeks ago on “The O’Reilly Factor” on the Fox News Channel, Metzler began to receive despicable, racist voicemail messages. One caller swears at him profanely and tells him to get his “black ass back to Africa.” Another caller tells him that he looked like a “slave” and expresses his “embarrassment” over Metzler’s public position.

As Metzler explained to me, the Left engages in exactly the kind of disgusting, racist behavior which they unfairly and incorrectly accuse the Tea Party and all others who oppose Obama of engaging in. Unlike the Left, Metzler actually has the evidence to prove it. During his stunning interview, Metzler exposes the Left’s hypocrisy and dishonesty—and its very real racism.

So much for "the party of diversity.

Zo Deals With The Left-Wing Haters

2010-04-03T20:10:00.004-04:00

Gotta love the left: the political perspective that is obsessed with race and sexual orientation yet accuses Republicans of bigotry. The condescending corps (pronounced "core," Mr. President) that embraces "diversity" as long as it only extends to physical appearance and not ideological differences. That blessed liberal establishment that professes compassion while organizing marches that burn effigies of Bush and broadcast Sarah Palin gang-rape jokes. Such love. Such concern. Such tolerance.

But hey, you don't have to be politician to draw liberal love. I've been accused of everything from retardation to bestiality. And Zo . . . well, he's in a different league.

Regrouping Complete

2010-04-03T17:02:00.005-04:00

Ah, with everything going on in the complicated Khaki life it took a while for mental regrouping after the passage of Obamacare . . . but I'm back and ready to listen and inform (not necessarily in that order).

I want to pummel back in with a wonderful article by Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina. The message is clear and powerful concerning the coming crisis in America:

"The crisis is creeping forward: Every day in America more people become dependent on the government, demanding more services and benefits, while every day in America there are fewer people paying the price for these services . . . Many politicians have already figured out that dependency means more political power for them. Quite simply, a dependent voter is a dependable vote. A dependent America will vote for the politicians who promise the most from government and shift the cost to the "rich." But in the end, there is nothing compassionate about this massive disabling of Americans."

DeMint accurately and succinctly portrays the competing visions of the two major political parties, the Republican recognition of individuals and the Democrat's vision of a government-centric country where the individual disappears in dependency and group identification. (Guess which vision I prefer)

This article is worth your time. Read the entire piece here:

The Coming Crisis: How Government Dependency Threatens America's Freedom

Another ObamaCare Bribe

2010-03-18T22:45:00.004-04:00

The unprecedented corruption of the Obama administration continues as yet another bribe is uncovered in the 2,400 page health care bill. According to the National Review Online:

They're already calling it the Bismarck Bribe:
The legislation contains provisions apparently designed to ensure votes from wavering Democrats. As outlined in the House version, the compromise plan would give nonprofit loan providers in several states the right to participate, along with for-profit loan companies selected through a competitive process, in helping the Education Department distribute loan money to students.
A new element, included in the plan issued on Thursday, would give a specific right to the Bank of North Dakota to issue federally subsidized student loans, meaning that it would be the only lender remaining outside of the Education Department's direct-lending system.
The Bank of North Dakota is a state-owned lender that Democratic aides described as representing the type of nonprofit entity they want to encourage. Critics of the loan bill suggested the provision was designed to win the support of a key Democrat, Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.

Gee, I wonder why the president refused to fulfill his promise to have the health care dialogue "in front of the American people" on C-Span.

Biden Gaffes . . . again

2010-03-18T21:56:00.002-04:00

Seriously, why does the administration continue to give this guy a speaking part?

And they used to say that Dan Quayle was dumb? Speaking of which, the former VP mispelled potato one time and was marked a moron. How many spelling errors is Obama allowed before people realize that this guy is no genius?

Democrats Attempt To Slaughter The Constitution

2010-03-16T19:04:00.008-04:00

From The Wall Street Journal:

We're not sure American schools teach civics any more, but once upon a time they taught that under the U.S. Constitution a bill had to pass both the House and Senate to become law. Until this week, that is, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi is moving to merely "deem" that the House has passed the Senate health-care bill and then send it to President Obama to sign anyway.

Blinded by an ambition that makes Genghis Khan seem restrained, the Democrats are pressing on with their attempt to shred the constitution by passing . . . I mean "deeming" to pass a bill that is opposed by the majority of Americans. And the tool of Pelosi's subterfuge is appropriately named "Slaughter."

The House Rules Committee, Louise Slaughter (D-New York), is being asked to add a "self-executing rule" into the Senate passed bill, which means that the Congress won't actually need to vote on the bill. They'll simply add their own high-dollar pork to the already bursting bill during what is referred to by Congress as "reconciliation corrections" but Americans who are aware will recognize as bullshit.

As the Journal points out, this will allow the Democrats in Congress to send the bill on to Obama for approval while still claiming that they opposed it -- a critical need for them since "knowingly" passing this monstrosity that is sure to make insurance companies immeasurably rich and unemployment lines simply immeasurable will be political suicide.

This two-votes-in-one gambit is a brazen affront to the plain language of the Constitution, which is intended to require democratic accountability. Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution says that in order for a "Bill" to "become a Law," it "shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate." This is why the House and Senate typically have a conference committee to work out differences in what each body passes. While sometimes one house cedes entirely to another, the expectation is that its Members must re-vote on the exact language of the other body's bill.

True, this is not the first time "reconciliation" has been used, but in the past it has been reserved for expediting amendments, not a bill that would seize control of 1/6 of our country's entire economy.

Where are you Jeffersonian Democrats?

As Protests Mount, ObamaCare Sneaks With Reconciliation

2010-03-14T11:16:00.004-04:00

The number may be debatable, but we know that at least 2,000+ people gathered in the frigid Minnesotan air last night to protest the Democrats latest shenanigans to get ObamaCare passed. And this was in Minnesota, where some people actually voted for Al Franken.

Now I will admit that, while I don't trust the left any farther than I could throw up their authoritarian policies, even I never thought they would attempt the rarely employed tactic of reconciliation to pass a bill that most Americans want to see burned on the alter of fiscal responsibility. It appears even the Khaki Elephant can misjudge the depths of their desire for power. The dominion and control offered by government managed Healthcare is simply too tempting for Democrats to hear the voice of the people.

The reconciliation process would require the House to accept the bill already shoved through by the former Senate Super Majority . . . a bill that contains millions in bribe money to be paid out to states like Lousianna and Nebraska for their Senator's support. (Democrat Bribe List I -- Democrat Bribe List II). The tactic will prevent the House and Senate from re-examining the current debacle to look at alternatives that for years have been offered by the GOP. The tactic will prevent the American people from voting these power-hungry politicians out of office before they do their damage. The tactic would "Europeanize" the health care system and introduce the chronic unemployment numbers ever present on that continent.

Say your prayers, America.

What Did Pelosi Know About Massa?

2010-03-13T13:48:00.002-05:00

When Nancy Pelosi plays dumb it's rather difficult to determine just how much is "play." Let's just say that I don't think we'll find her listed in the Mensa directory. I'm sure that every Obot-free mind in America remembers her "stunned" response when she "learned" that 3 terrorists had been waterboarded . . . followed by her stuttering chatter when the rest of us "learned" that she already knew. And I suspect that every American bright enough to recognize a Michael Moore whopper (the kind he delivers in his "documentaries," not to his stomach) remembers her "shocked" discovery that there were massive CEO bonuses in the second bank bailout . . . despite the claim that she had actually read the bill.

Well, once again Nancy Pelosi was "surprised," this time after finding out that Congressman Eric Massa (D - New York) has been Barney Franking some congressional aides. When the story first broke the speaker told the world that she knew nothing about it. Oh, there "may" have been rumors, but there are always rumors on the hill. As Pelosi put it, "you know what, this is rumor city. There are rumors. I have a job to do." Apparently that job doesn't include protecting young, impressionable aides from lusty, powerful congressmen . . . so long as they're Democrats.

Now we are learning that these were more than rumors and that Nancy Pelosi's "surprise" was was again feigned:

It turns out that the San Francisco speaker's office got wind of the allegations in October. That's when Massa's chief of staff told Pelosi's office that the former congressman was living with his aides and behaving in ways that made them uncomfortable. But the speaker's office didn't do a thing about it.

And if my guess is right, Pelosi will handle her denial in the same way that she always has: deny, deny, deny until another story comes along to steal the headlines.

Kwame Kilpatrick Flushed Detoilet

2010-02-22T08:10:00.005-05:00

In the least shocking headline since "Roadrunner Escapes Coyote" the Detroit Free Press dropped this one yesterday: "Feds have evidence ex-Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick took bribes."

According to the freep,

A contractor who pleaded guilty in an ongoing corruption probe in Detroit has told investigators that he handed as much as $100,000 in bribes to then-Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick in 2002.

That's right, apparently the funds Kilpatrick pilfered from the city weren't quite enough to cover Escalade jaunts to Niagara and gold-studded earrings. The article goes on to explain:

The contractor, Karl Kado of West Bloomfield, . . . told authorities he paid Kwame Kilpatrick in four or five installments of about $20,000 each. Kado, who is awaiting sentencing for paying bribes to protect multimillion-dollar Cobo Center contracts, said he sometimes delivered the money in envelopes to Kilpatrick's office on the 11th floor at city Hall, and sometimes Kilpatrick dropped by Cobo to get the cash.

And the worst part, the Cobo Center's roof still leaks. Note to future Detroit politicians, if you're going to take bribes from contractors at least choose competent ones for the city's sake.

John Conyers Corruption To Continue?

2010-02-21T11:42:00.005-05:00

It looks like one of America's longest serving swindlers is prepared to continue his incumbent corruption. According to The Detroit News, 80-year-old John Conyers is planning to run once again for congress. If elected, it would be his 23rd term to the U.S. House, a record second only to fellow Michiganian Democrat John Dingell -- both evidently hoping to be rewarded once again for delivering the nation's worst economy to their home state.

It would be easy to ignore Conyer's record today in light of his wife, former Detroit City Councilmember Monica Conyers, recently pleading guilty to bribery charges and now sitting in their sweet estate to await sentencing. But let's give John his due since his name makes frequent stops on various "Most Corrupt Politicians" lists.

One can sweep aside some of Conyer's minor misdeeds, like his ridiculous Kangaroo Court, his staff allegedly stealing turkeys from charity and contacting federal agencies to supplement his own financial interests. However, the indictment from The Hill concerning his pattern of consistent ethics violations on the Judiciary Committee reveals a Dickensian level of dirt that should make even loyal supporters cringe at the ballot box. According to the report, Conyers has been involved with . . .

Demanding that his congressional aides work on local and state campaigns (for example, his wife's fail state Senate bid).
Forcing aides to baby-sit, tutor, and chauffeur his children.
Stiffing a catering company.
Allowing a staff member to use his office to obtain a fake passport in order to flee to Ghana after being convicted of fraud, making false statements, and government theft.
Conducting a private law practice out of his office.

Sadly, the pattern continues today as Conyers continues to rank #1 when it comes to questionable use of time and money.

And now Conyer's is having a go at the Haitians relief effort. Conyers, not please with having the administrator of USAID, Rajiv Singh, in charge of the helping the Haitians wrote a letter to Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, demanding that the Singh be demoted because the group of 12 that he brought to Washington to describe the heroic efforts in Haiti did not contain an African American. I'm not kidding. Conyers wrote:

“I was alarmed and chagrined to learn that none of the approximately dozen staff he brought with him were African American. This is so serious an error in judgment that it warrants his immediate demotion to a subordinate position at AID.”

So this is the 80-year-old "leader" looking for re-election: a corrupt lifelong politician who continues to define worth by the color of one's skin rather than the content of their character. I certainly hope his constituents finally see behind the curtain and pull the lever in a different direction.

CPAC Straw Poll Winner: Ron Paul

2010-02-21T10:07:00.006-05:00

In 2008 Ron Paul won the hearts of a small but zealous arm of the Republican Party. At this year's CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) Straw Poll, the Zacchaeus branch took center stage by giving their candidate a meaningless victory. The results:

Ron Paul 33%
Mitt Romney 22%
Sarah Palin 7%
Tim Pawlenty 6%

Must have been a blow to Pawlenty who was in attendance while Palin was not.

Naturally the poll is meaningless (I think Barry Goldwater won the 2008 vote) but it does tell us something. Paul is a Libertarian and it is precisely his personal freedom mantra that is resonating with the anti-Obama, anti-big government crowd. And while Paul leaves a lot to be desired in my book, his freedom approach is becoming a road map to victory.

Mo from Zo: Chris Matthews is the New Obama Girl

2010-02-20T17:09:00.001-05:00

Alexander Haig (1924 - 2010)

2010-02-20T16:54:00.004-05:00

Rest With God

"Practice rather than preach. Make of your life an affirmation, defined by your ideals, not the negation of others. Dare to the level of your capability then go beyond to a higher level."

"I'm the only American alive or dead who presided unhappily over the removal of a vice president and a president."

"We didn't lose Vietnam. We quit Vietnam."

"If they analyze the situation as thoroughly as they should, Muslims will realize they are the first targets. What are the fundamentalists really after? Simply taking over Islam and then turning its back on modernity."

"Let them march all they want, as long as they continue to pay their taxes."

"Sooner or later something had to give. But President Bush, faced with the unprecedented affront of 9-11, could not wait to take action. So he had to do what we were capable of doing, and he did it brilliantly."

"The warning message we sent the Russians was a calculated ambiguity that would be clearly understood."

"As of now, I am in control here in the White House"

Evgeni Plushenko: Russian National Insecurity On Ice

2010-02-20T12:52:00.006-05:00

I hate writing about Olympic figure skating. I mean, if somebody laces blades to their feet they'd better have a hockey stick or an attitude like Apollo Ohno. However, the gold-medal whining from Russian ice dancer (or whatever they're called) Evgeni Plushenko after losing the Olympic gold to an American has me thinking about current Russian culture in generally -- namely, a culture of national insecurity that grows by the day.

Just in case you were watching actual sports, Russian skate spinner Evgeni Plushenko was slap-fight mad after performing a spinning thing that had more spins than his competition, apparently believing that judging performance in this event should be based solely on the number of spins one does. In a Russian show of class (which fortunately cost fewer lives than their invasion of Georgia), Plushenko actually stepped onto the gold medal podium before descending to his rightful place during the award ceremony. Meanwhile, the American winner, Evan Lysacek, remained gracious.

Without doubt Evgeni Plushenko is a spoiled brat who obviously didn't get taken to the wood shedenv enough, but this story also reflects a growing sense of insecurity within the former super power. Russia's national behavior has grown increasing nasty, pointing missiles at Poland, Claiming international oil regions in the Arctic, invading neighbors, re-engaging the space race, etc, etc, etc. They are a proud nation and their ruling elite is beginning to feel the need to ascend to super power status once again -- by any means necessary. The mentality is trickling to their population and reflecting in their representative, like Evgeni Plushenko. It is a trend America must watch.

Ellie Light's Letter: Another Patch Of Obama Astroturf

2010-01-24T08:59:00.010-05:00

Democrats love to deny that the Tea Parties sweeping the nation are part of a grass roots movement. I suspect they'd have trouble recognizing a real one if they saw it since the only natural grass in their party seems to be smoked before policy meetings. For Democrats, "grass roots" tend to sink as deep into the soil as, well, multi-million dollar sign campaigns, fake doctors and shallow-planted town hall participants (though I do admit to finding it charming when Obama calls a random town hall participant by name before they introduce themselves). Grass? The left plays best on special interest sponsored AstroTurf.

The latest in a long line of Obama operatives posing as an ordinary grass roots citizen supporting their beloved president is "Ellie Light" who wrote a stirring letter of support for the Prez published in The Philidelphia Daily News saying, "It's time for Americans to realize that governing is hard work, and that a president can't just wave a magic wand and fix everything." Strange, no mention of Americans expectations that the President keep at least one campaign promise concerning the economy.

Now shoot over to Patterico's Pontifications where there's a post noting that "Ellie Light" has written the "same letter defending Obama to dozens of publications across the country, getting them published in at least 42 newspapers in 18 states, as well as Politico.com, the Washington Times, and USA Today." Oh, and "she" conveniently claims to be a resident of a different state for each letter - though given Obama's obvious challenges when it comes to Geography, Ms. Light can be forgiven that indiscretion. So it seems that our "Ellie Light" is not a grass roots citizen after all, but political spinster playing on DNC endorsed AstroTurf.

We may never know "Ellie's" true identity, but one thing is clear: this is one Light that isn't too bright.

Favorite Take On Scott Brown's Win

2010-01-23T10:09:00.005-05:00

Of all the pundits and experts who had a take on Scott Brown's win in Massachusetts, I have to say that my favorite was delivered on MSNBC. Just after the race was called I switched over to catch Rachel Maddow's take on the election results (immediately doubling her viewership). She tossed a question to Howard Dean about the finger pointing that had started between Democrats even before Coakley conceded and he responded that a lot of things went wrong. "There is no one person who can be blamed, well, except George Bush."

That's right, it has nothing to do with the fact that Brown's campaign was based entirely on opposition to the unscrupulous deal making and damning agenda that the democrats have finally revealed since they've gained control of both the congress and the Oval office. Nope, according to Dean it's Bush's fault.

Naturally, Obama and Gibbs would later echo the charge, claiming that people are still angry over Bush's policies so . . . so . . . so they're rejected Obama's soft on terror and hard on the pocketbook approach. The last three elections where Obama showed up to stump for the Candidate, New Jersey, Virginia and now Massachusetts (where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by 3.5 to 1) the GOP has won a resounding victory. But it's not Obama's fault.

Now I'm wondering what exactly Obama meant when he said "the buck stops here"? Was he actually referring to the troubling bucks given to his campaign that are still unreported? The bucks he was given by contributors and then paid back with taxpayer bailout money? The bucks he was given by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the financial institutions that led to our current banking crisis? The bucks he gave to Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) to buy her vote for ObamaCare? The taxpayer bucks in the "cornhusker kickback" given to Sen Ben Nelson (D-NE) for his support? The bucks exchanged in the sweetheart backroom deal with union brass. The bucks this administration continues to give to the heavily indicted ACORN organization? I'm seriously starting to lose count.

Terror Has A Friend In The ACLU

2010-01-19T21:57:00.005-05:00

The ACLU is demanding to know where Barack Obama gets the legal authority to launch unmanned drone missiles at terrorists in Pakistan. For his legal defense Obama may call to the stand victims from 9/11, the embassy bombings, the 8 CIA agents recently killed in Afghanistan . . . oh, wait, he can't call them to the stand because they were murdered . . . by terrorists.

I'm seriously wondering who the ACLU hates more, America, the soldiers who defend her or the God who inspired her.

More Job Losses For 2010

2010-01-09T07:08:00.004-05:00

President Barack Obama promised that if the stimulus package was passed unemployment would not reach 8%, so imagine the shock over at the Associated Press when the eventually noticed that, not only has the 8% barrier been shattered in 2009, the projections for 2010 are worse yet. Why, they may have to investigate. It's almost as if all of those people who said that the Stimulus Package wouldn't work were right.

WASHINGTON – Brace for a year of stubbornly high unemployment.

Gripped by uncertainty over the economic recovery, employers chopped 85,000 jobs last month, and difficulty finding work helped chase more than half a million people out of the job market.

The unemployment rate held steady at 10 percent. It did not creep higher only because so many people stopped looking for work and are technically not counted as unemployed.But the jobless rate is likely to rise in coming months as more people see signs of an improving economy and start looking for work again. Some economists think it could near 11 percent, which would be the highest since World War II, by June.

The highest unemployment since WWII? No wonder Obama's handlers have decided that he should start sounding like Harry Truman.

Civilian Judge Tosses Evidence About Gitmo Goon

2010-01-09T06:53:00.003-05:00

What happens when you apply the U.S. Constitution to enemy combatants who are not U.S. Citizens . . . besides revealing American intelligence information, providing a forum for radical terrorists to broadcast their warped philosophy to a broader audience and boosting the ratings at Court TV?

WASHINGTON – A federal judge has tossed out most of the government's evidence against a tarrorism [sic] detainee on grounds his confessions were coerced, allegedly by U.S. forces, before he became a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay.

In a ruling this week, U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan also said the government failed to establish that 23 statements the detainee made to interrogators at Guantanamo Bay were untainted by the earlier coerced statements made while he was held under harsh conditions in Afghanistan.

This is where the Left says, "Well, Bush allowed some terrorists to face trial in the Federal systems!" But didn't they promise to correct the mistakes that Bush made rather than use him as their chief defense witness?

Government Loans Have Worsened Housing Problem

2010-01-02T10:51:00.005-05:00

In the least shocking news since George Michael stormed out of the closet, The New York Times is reporting that the U.S. government loan program is adding to the housing woes. Gee, government intervention has made the problem worse rather than better? Who could have predicted that?

According to NYT:

The Obama administration’s $75 billion program to protect homeowners from foreclosure has been widely pronounced a disappointment, and some economists and real estate experts now contend it has done more harm than good.

And what then is the harm? For one thing . . .

Since President Obama announced the program in February, it has lowered mortgage payments on a trial basis for hundreds of thousands of people but has largely failed to provide permanent relief. Critics increasingly argue that the program, Making Home Affordable, has raised false hopes among people who simply cannot afford their homes . . . As a result, desperate homeowners have sent payments to banks in often-futile efforts to keep their homes, which some see as wasting dollars they could have saved in preparation for moving to cheaper rental residences. Some borrowers have seen their credit tarnished while falsely assuming that loan modifications involved no negative reports to credit agencies.

And for another . . .

. . . banks have been using temporary loan modifications under the Obama plan as justification to avoid an honest accounting of the mortgage losses still on their books. Only after banks are forced to acknowledge losses and the real estate market absorbs a now pent-up surge of foreclosed properties will housing prices drop to levels at which enough Americans can afford to buy.

And for yet another . . .

In 2008, more than 1.7 million homes were “lost” through foreclosures, short sales or deeds in lieu of foreclosure, according to Moody’s Economy.com. Last year, more than two million homes were lost, and Economy.com expects that this year’s number will swell to 2.4 million.

Like Cash for Clunkers (that cute project where people who already owned cars were able to use their neighbor's taxed income to turn old cars in for new cars, complete with higher car payments) this loan program has had a dismal effect on both the economy and its intended benefactors. Health Care, Cap and Trade . . . who else is excited to see what this administration tries to fix next?

Happy New Year???

2009-12-31T15:38:00.002-05:00

ObamaCare vs. The American Voter

2009-12-30T18:56:00.003-05:00

According to Rassmussen and virtually every other poll located outside of a barroom dance floor, the majority of Americans oppose ObamaCare. Yet the Democrats insist on pushing this monstrosity through as quickly as possible without even giving the American public a chance to view what the bill contains. And I thought my kids had a hard time listening.

Obama FINALLY On Northwest Crotch Bomber

2009-12-29T08:31:00.004-05:00

Anybody remember Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 and its claim that Bush reacted too slowly to a terrorist attack. Or how about that film representing a president who was always on "vacation"?

Christmas Day 2009: A Muslim student identified as Abdul Mudallad ignited a bomb in his panties during the final hour of a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit (a flight the Khaki Elephant has taken far too many times). The bomb burns, then fizzles -- a malfunction that saves the lives of some 300 passengers. A Dutch national, Jasper Schuringa, then seized the terrorist . . . oops, I meant, "potential terrorist" (sorry, Press Secretary Gibbs) and with the help of others on the flight was able to subdue the nutcase and prevent the arrival of 72 under-aged virgins.

Three Days Later: President Barack Obama finally responds to the attack . . . oops, I meant "alleged attack" (sorry, Mr. President ) . . . from his rented $9 million vacation estate in Hawaii.

Of course, Obama's response was not the first official comment by administration appointees. Robert Gibbs earlier referred to the incident as a "potential terrorist attack," by which he must have meant that a terrorist successfully igniting a bomb which he successfully smuggled on board a flight packed with civilian passengers but did not blow up ranks alongside fluffy bunnies on the current White House terror scale. I mean, it's not like we're talking about the potential tragedy of a friend's kid bumping his head. And then there was President Obama’s homeland security secretary, Janet Napolitano, who declared "everything happened that should have" and when it comes to national security "the system worked." Of course, a day later she claimed that her comments were taken out of context and what she actually meant by "worked" was "failed miserably."

And on the third day, enter Barack Obama -- the guy who promised that terrorists would be nicer to us if we simply said we were sorry over and over and over again (though what exactly we should be sorry for remains about as clear as Harry Reid's muddied ethics). Days after the attack, the President stepped forward to deliver another of his teleprompter-fed oratories, this time delivering a powerful message of commitment to al Qaeda, who claimed credit for the attack . . . oh, wait, he never mentioned al Qaeda. OK, well, he delivered a message of American strength to all terrorist organization who would threaten America . . . oh, I'm sorry, just re-read the transcript and he refers to this as the act of an "isolated extremist." Well, at least he firmly confronted bombing attempt as a legitimate act of terror against America . . . oh, just a minute, he actually described this by saying that "a passenger allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device on his body." One good thing, the bomb did fail and this guy was caught and now sits under watch as an enemy of the state who committed an act of war against America . . . oh, I see, it appears that he is actually sitting in a Michigan civilian prison with his lawyer and, as Obama says, "has been charged with attempting to destroy an aircraft."

Good Lord, how I hate to say that Hillary was right.

Obama's Top Ten Foreign Policy Debacles

2009-12-26T07:26:00.008-05:00

Lately we've been focusing on Barack Obama's domestic policy disasters, you know, seizure of public corporations, government control of health policy, soaring unemplyment rate . . . the whole redistribution of wealth/sacrifice our children thing. But leave it to the Brits to remind us of what the mainstream American media continues to ignore: what a dangerous and diluded foreign policy "The Chosen One" has. (wait, are we finally past everyone sans the sanity suppressed Obots thinking of Obama as "The Chosen One"?)

Nile Gardiner of the UK Telegraph has compiled a list of Barack Obama's Top Ten foreign policy follies in his first year of presidency. Fist of all, hats off to Mr. Gardiner for keeping the list to a mere ten -- yoeman's effort, that. And second, please don't read these until 30 minutes after eating if you want to avoid the bends.

Here is a list of the ten biggest foreign policy follies of Barack Obama’s first year in office. I’ve tried to make the list inclusive of all corners of the world, ranging from Tehran to Tokyo to Khartoum, and frankly could easily have expanded it to a top 20 or even top 30 list. There are plenty to choose from, including some of the most cringe worthy moments in modern American history.

1. Surrendering to Russia over Missile Defence
The White House’s betrayal of US allies in eastern and central Europe by reneging on the deal to establish Third Site missile defences sent a clear signal that Washington was more concerned about appeasing Moscow than defending its friends. It symbolized all that is wrong with Obama’s foreign policy – including the willingness to curry favour with brutal enemies while giving the boot to some of America’s
closest partners.

2. Appeasing the Mullahs of Iran
If Barack Obama makes a New Year’s resolution, I hope it will be that he stops appeasing Tehran. The White House’s strategy of engagement with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been nothing short of a spectacular failure. While Obama has been busy emulating the European Union’s dismal Common Foreign and Security Policy and sending polite video messages, the Mullahs and their puppets have been busy advancing their nuclear weapons programme, enriching uranium, supplying arms to the Taliban, capturing British sailors, test-firing long-range missiles, threatening the annihilation of Israel, and killing pro-democracy protestors.

3. Ending the War on Terror
Not only did Barack Obama order the closure of the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay within hours of becoming president, but he also embarked upon ending the entire War on Terror, which was swiftly renamed an Overseas Contingency Operation. Nearly a year later the threat from al-Qaeda remains just as great, if not greater, but President Obama refuses to describe the battle in terms of a global war, and balks at identifying the enemy – Islamist terrorists. At the same time he has given the enemy a huge propaganda victory by endlessly castigating the Bush administration for supposedly “torturing” terrorist suspects, and apologizing for the
counter-terror strategy of the previous US government.

4. Announcing a Surge while Declaring an Exit
There can be no doubt that the three months of dithering by President Obama over whether to deploy more forces to Afghanistan was highly damaging to the United States, and sowed considerable uncertainty within the NATO alliance. When Obama finally made an announcement in December to send an additional 30,000 troops to the battlefield, a huge step in the right direction, his decision was immediately undercut by the simultaneous announcement of an exit timetable, starting in 18 months. It is hard to imagine Churchill or Roosevelt declaring in the middle of the Second World War that they would fight the Nazis for another year and a half, and then start withdrawing their forces on the grounds of cost.

5. Apologising to France for America’s “Arrogance”
Barack Obama’s Strasbourg speech will go down in history as one of the most embarrassing moments ever for a US president on foreign soil. As I wrote earlier, “The President of the most powerful nation on earth traveled to France to deliver a grovelling, massive mea culpa for US foreign policy, including the War on Terror. Utter humiliation for America on European soil in front of a largely French and German audience who bitterly opposed the liberation of Iraq – not even Jacques Chirac could have dreamt it up.”

6. Giving DVDs to the British Prime Minister
I’m no fan of Gordon Brown, but the treatment of the Prime Minister at the hands of the White House on his visit to Washington in March was an appalling humiliation for Great Britain. The PM was received as though he were the leader of a third world banana republic rather than America’s closest ally, denied an official press conference and even a dinner. To add insult to injury, Brown was packed off with 25 discount DVDs ranging from Toy Story to The Wizard of Oz, which couldn’t even be played in Britain.

7. Siding with Marxists in Honduras
The Obama administration has certainly been consistent in its strategy of cuddling up to America’s enemies while kicking its friends. True to form the White House and State Department rushed to condemn the constitutional removal of left-wing, America-hating, Hugo-Chavez-backed despot Manuel Zelaya from power in Honduras, and his temporary replacement with pro-American Speaker of the House Robert Micheletti. Whatever happened to the good old days when the United States actually fought against Marxist tyrants in Latin America and backed anti-communists?

8. Bowing to Emperors and Kings
The last time I checked, Barack Obama was not a subject of imperial Japan, but his bow before Emperor Akihito was a scene straight out of the 1930s. A simple handshake with the descendent of Emperor Hirohito would have sufficed, but the president opted for a full-blown bow when the two met in Tokyo in November. It is one thing to pay respect to a monarch, but quite another for an American president to prostrate himself and his nation before a foreign leader. Needless to say, eyebrows were raised not only in America but across Asia as well. This was far from an isolated incident. Obama did exactly the same when he met with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia at the G-20 in April.

9. Embracing Genocidal Killers in Sudan
I’ve included this in the list because it illustrates the extraordinary lengths to which the Obama administration will go to appease the most evil tyrannies on the face of the earth. In October Obama extended the hand of friendship to the brutal regime in Khartoum led by Omar Hassan al-Bashir, responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands in Darfur, offering to lift sanctions if there were “concrete steps in a new direction”. The moral bankruptcy of this approach was summed up by Obama’s hugely controversial special envoy to Sudan, retired Air Force Major General J. Scott Gration:“We’ve got to think about giving out cookies. Kids, countries — they react to gold stars, smiley faces, handshakes, agreements, talk, engagement.”

10. Throwing Churchill out of The White House
Barack Obama’s decision to throw a bust of Sir Winston Churchill out of the Oval Office within days of taking power set the tone for his foreign policy. It sent a clear signal that the president cared little about the Anglo-American Special Relationship and the transatlantic alliance in general. It spoke volumes about Obama’s disdain for Britain, a nation that he has never mentioned in a major policy speech, as well as his scorn for the kind of powerful, assertive leadership that Churchill embodied.

H/T to Great Satan's Girlfriend: 44 So Far

Merry Christmas From The Khaki Elephant

2009-12-25T14:21:00.005-05:00

Botticelli's Mystical Nativity

The Grinch Who Stole Health Care

2009-12-24T09:13:00.004-05:00

I know it's not over yet. I know that there is a possibility that the House will not support the Senate version of the health care bill, especially since only a few house members have to recover from their spending stupor to shift the vote (the House legislation passed by a narrow margin of 220 to 215). I know that the will of the majority of Americans may still prevail . . . but I can't help being annoyed by the fact the the Senate Democrats, in their lust for power, took a step toward selling our children's future on Christmas Eve.

One thing I'll say for the Grinch, at least he only stole from the children of Whoville once. If this bill eventually passes several generations of future Cindy Lou's (who may be no more than two) will be victimized by increased taxes, high unemployment and a national debt the size of Michael Moore's appetite . . . and all for a health care system that most Americans and the medical industry oppose. Merry Christmas.

Bribing Democrats To Support ObamaCare

2009-12-24T08:49:00.003-05:00

If ObamaCare is so wonderful, why are Obama, Reid and Pelosi trying to bribe their own party to shove this thing through?

Of course, not even every Democrat can stomach this prostitution of our future. Rep. Bart Stupak (D., Mich.) recently told the National Review Online that Obama and Pelosi won't buy him off. As reported by NRO:

Stupak tells us that he’s disappointed that Democratic leaders have offered him legislative favors in exchange for supporting Obamacare. “This shouldn’t be a bill where you use hush money,” says Stupak. “This isn’t an appropriations bill where you try to get the best projects for your state.”“In the House, we need to bring equity back into the process,” says Stupak. “We need to cut out those sweetheart deals.” If the deals in question are not removed, Stupak will vote against the bill. In the meantime, he says, “my reservations are growing.”

Other things that are growing due to Chicago-style politics in the White House: our national debt, our national insecurity and bile in the stomachs of every American who is actually paying attention.

Senator Jim DeMint Challenges The Democrats Health Care Tyranny

2009-12-22T12:33:00.001-05:00

At first this may seem a bit like watching the hair on your legs grow, but it is critical. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) uncovers a late addition to the ObamaCare bill that would require a "super majority" to repeal the Death Panels (aka, "Independent Medicare Advisory Boards") section of the bill. Like a skilled lawyer, DeMint demonstrates that the Democrats are simply trying set up within this bill rules that would ignore current Senate rules.

Sooo, Still think ObamaCare isn't about government power? With these people it's about authoritative tyranny and "screw the laws." 200+ years of legislative operation . . . and this is a first.

Take a moment to contact your Senator about this travesty and let them know that we know what they're up to.

And drop an note of thanks to Sen. Jim DeMint.

ObamaCare Gives Law The Finger

2009-12-22T12:00:00.007-05:00

In yet another unbelievable stroke of villiany, Harry Ried and his Senate lackeys have added one more troubling section to Obamacare, one that would prevent the Senate from repealing the Death Panels (or, as Obama calls them, "the Independent Medicare Advisory Boards") section of the legislation unless there was a super majority to do so (in other words, making them all but permanent).

Section 3403 of Senator Harry Reid’s amendment requires that “it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection . . . Notwithstanding rule XV of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a committee amendment described in subparagraph (A) may include matter not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Finance if that matter is relevant to a proposal contained in the bill submitted under subsection (c)(3)."

This means that Reid wants to set up a rule to ignore Senate rules. Still think this Bill isn't about government control.

Time Magazine's Person of the Year: Bernanke . . . Seriously

2009-12-21T21:19:00.008-05:00

Not to be outdone by a Nobel Prize committee that just gave a peace prize to somebody who has done less for peace than Yogi Bear, Time Magazine has given its 2009 Person of the Year award to Ben Bernanke, the current chairman of the Federal Reserve. According to the rag:

He [Bernanke] knows that the economy is awful, that 10% unemployment is much too high, that Wall Street bankers are greedy ingrates, that Main Street still hurts . . . But Bernanke also knows the economy would be much, much worse if the Fed had not taken such extreme measures to stop the panic. There's a vast difference between 10% and 25% unemployment

So, their decision is based on two pillars of indefensible but unchallengeable liberal logic: the rich suck and the economy is bad, but it could be worse (apparently oblivious to the fact that unemployment under Bernarke's watch rose over 3%). It follows the same thought train as "let's saint Ted Bundy, he killed 30+, but at his age he could have killed as many as 50 and didn't."

Many of us believe the economy would have had a faster turnaround if left alone, that it is the extreme measures that heightened the crisis, but that economic philosophy wouldn't work for Obama apologists like Time who are trying everything within their power to justify the events of his destructive presidency.

The Snow Job In Copenhagen

2009-12-18T22:18:00.003-05:00

The "summit to save the world" (aka, the Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen) featured a number of noteworthy factoids like . . .

A record low cold front
The use of 1,200 limos by the earth friendly attendees
A promise by Hillary Clinton that America would give away $100 billion
A menu that included scallops, foie gras and sculpted caviar wedges
A squadron of 140 private jets
A lecture from Michael Moore and Sean Penn's pal Hugo Chavez explaining that “Capitalism is the road to hell”
And another hollow speech from Barack Obama

The Global Warming crowd has had a bad couple of weeks when you consider that their top scientists were caught fudging figures and their top proponent, Al Gore, was caught outright lying, and this summit in Copenhagen didn't help. What was intended to be a call to awareness became and overt show of hypocrisy by those present. And the speakers . . . well, their speeches furthered showed that this gathering was less about science than an attempt to redistribute America's wealth -- a wealth that only exists for the tax payers in this country because of that dirty word for liberals the world over: "capitalism."

Even "The One" couldn't save the summit's day according to The Guardian:

"Obama, who had been skittish about coming to Copenhagen at all unless it could be cast as a foreign policy success, looked visibly frustrated as he appeared before world leaders . . . The lacklustre speech proved a huge frustration to a summit that had been looking to Obama"

Apparently even the Obama's teleprompter is having trouble buying the whole global warming thing these days.

Climate Data Reconstruction

2009-12-13T10:42:00.006-05:00

Iowahawk has a great post about the reconstruction of climate data that was revealed by some carbon footprint loving hackers. It's long, but after a close read you too will be able to create a hooey hockey stick that looks a little like this:

And after an even closer read, you'll want to use a hockey stick a little like this:

The post places the climategate controversy in context and is a worthwhile read for anybody interested in whether or not they can turn in their parkas for speedos.

Read the entire post here:
Fables of the Reconstruction (Or, How to Make Your Own Hockey Stick)

Sarah Palin Jokes At The Gridiron Dinner

2009-12-06T07:35:00.004-05:00

Sarah Palin's book tour continued as she delivered her 11-minute speech at the Washington Gridiron Club's annual Winter Dinne. She was joined by the less-than-electric Barney Frank, but there is little doubt that it was the popular Palin's presence that pushed the events attendance to about double its average.

Palin's homespun humor often confuses the media elite, but I suspect they caught some of the shots she delivered.

When pointing out that her book did not have an index, preventing journalists from searching there for their names, she provided one on the spot: "A: Alaska, media not understanding it, page 1-432. B: Biased, Page 1-432."

She even took a shot at McCain, referencing her former running mate with, “The view is so much better inside the bus than under the bus."

And the current administration was not left out. “If the election had turned out differently, I could be the one overseeing the signing of bailout checks and Vice President Biden could be on the road selling his book, 'Going Rogaine.'” (for those of you living through CNN, Palin's book is called "Going Rogue.")

But, since the best jokes are always rooted in reality, my favorite was her dig at Obama. She said that as she was looking at a magazine cover of Obama and Chinese president Hu Jinato during an airplane flight when the passenger next to her said "Hu's the Communist." Palin added, "I thought he was asking a question."

Angelina Jolie Calls Barack Obama A Socialist

2009-12-05T10:55:00.005-05:00

Khaki Elephant fav Angelina Jolie has finally (if temporarily) broken the tabloid tongue wags of "Brangelina" with a recent US Weekly article where the actress is credited with dissing "The One."

According to the report,

"She hates him [Obama]," a source close to the U.N. goodwill ambassador, 34, tells the new issue of Us Weekly . . . "She's into education and rehabilitation and thinks Obama is all about welfare and handouts. She thinks Obama is really a socialist in disguise," adds the source.

Now, I'm a fan of Jolie's work and if I were Brad Pitt, beyond always walking around in speedos with a wink, I would without a doubt tap Jolie over Aniston, but I have to admit that I couldn't care less about her politics. I don't care what Hollywood lefties like Sean Penn, David Letterman or Alec Baldwin have to say about world affairs because they have no idea what they're talking about. If they want to drop some wisdom about drug rehab then I'll bow to their expertise, but please don't ask me to listen to their input on economic policy or the military. I feel the same way about celebrities when they agree with me.

So don't expect The Khaki Elephant to spend time talking about Jolie's insight concerning Obamunism . . .unless it is shamelessly used as an excuse to post a saucy picture of her.

Mo' Zo . . . A Rant On Obama

2009-12-05T10:08:00.001-05:00

Michael Moore's Letter To Obama

2009-11-30T19:19:00.006-05:00

The Khaki Elephant has not exactly been a defender of Barack Obama. In fact, the posts on this blog tend to revolve around the revelation that President Obama may well be the worst president in U. S. history, from his juvenile economic policies to his love affair with government control. His leadership has been so amateur and damaging that is seemed nothing could prompt support from these pages . . . enter Michael Moore.

Today Michael Moore released an open letter to Barack Obama criticizing any strategy that would increase troop size in Afghanistan. In Moore's words,

"If you go to West Point tomorrow night (Tuesday, 8pm) and announce that you are increasing, rather than withdrawing, the troops in Afghanistan, you are the new war president. Pure and simple. And with that you will do the worst possible thing you could do . . ."

This is a far cry from Moore's initial take on the Afghanistan War depicted in his the epic work of misinformation, Fahrenheit 9/11, where he used a clip of Richard Clarke claiming that Bush's response to 9/11 in Afghanistan was "slow and small," a claim that had Moore's implied agreement in the film since he did not contradict it. Of course, that was back in the day when Moore criticized the Iran war by claiming it wasn't justified because Bin Laden was in Afghanistan. Wait a minute, didn't Obama promise to track down Bin Laden by now? Anyway, back to Michael Moore . . .

I have two problems with virtually everything Michael Moore does. First, his work is always based an overt manipulations of the truth that only his supporters and the functioning brain dead fail to see through. Second, well, if you try to follow his logic for more than a few minutes you need only be mildly observant to determine that Moore simply isn't very bright.

His manipulation of the truth is ever present. If you found Fahrenheit 9/11 then check out Fahrenhype 9/11 which exposes the misleading edits and outright lies of his post-terrorist attack treatise . . . though, come to think of it, in Dude, Where's My Country Moore claims there is no Terrorist threat. His tactics shouldn't surprise us since he launched his career with the film Roger and Me, an alleged documentary containing the primary premise that he could not get an interview with then GM Chair Roger Smith, and the film never mentioned the fact that Smith actually granted an interview.

The letter to Obama contains Moore's trademark manipulations (my gentle-mood way of saying "lies"). In the letter he claims to know that there are "LESS than a hundred al-Qaeda left in Afghanistan," though how he counted them we may never know. He implies that Obama's actions are prompted by "corporate backers" who could only be the dreaded "big oil" that Moore claimed were behind the initial push into Afghanistan (though Moore has never explained why America has failed to get all that blessed oil Bush was after). Moore asks "what would Martin Luther King, Jr. do?" apparently forgetting the Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican with little tolerance for the laundry list of lies that are Michael Moore's make up. He asks Obama "What would your grandmother do?" apparently forgetting that she was a "typical white woman."

But what bothers me the most about Moore is that he's just not very bright, yet some people fail to see it. His logic is virtually non-existent. For example, here is his choice for shining example of a President doing what's right when it comes to avoiding war:

We are a civilian-run government. WE tell the Joint Chiefs what to do, not the other way around. That's the way General Washington insisted it must be. That's what President Truman told General MacArthur when MacArthur wanted to invade China. "You're fired!," said Truman, and that was that.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't Truman the only world leader to drop atomic bombs on populated cities? Nice choice of an "anti-military" president, genius. Of course, in the mind of Moore the intellect is hardly important when one can be blinded by hatred of the U.S. military. As his letter explains,

Let me be blunt: We love our kids in the armed services, but we f*#&in' hate these generals, from Westmoreland in Vietnam to, yes, even Colin Powell for lying to the UN with his made-up drawings of WMD.

Forget his ignorance that the intelligence agencies of the U.S., Great Britain, Israel, France and Germany all believed in the existence of WMDs in Iran, Moore's insincere "love" for our kids in the military is undercut but his obvious failure to acknowledge that our military leaders are those same "kids in the armed services" with added experience. They are not the rabid torturers Moore pretends them to be. Nor are they hell bent on sending "more poor people to kill other poor people" just for a few kicks (Note: I suppose Moore is referring to our soldiers as the first "poor" in that equation, once again ignoring Pentagon statistics that American soldiers come from families with a higher average income than non-military Americans . . . but let's not let facts get in the way).

The bottom line is that we cannot fail in Afghanistan. Barack Obama may have considered withdrawal while he was campaigning, but it appears as though reality has set in and he knows the price of failure. We paid it on 9/11/01. Michael Moore would have us pay it again.

Climate Change Data Trashed

2009-11-29T20:55:00.008-05:00

Climate Gate Continues . . .

The University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit has admitted that they threw a way the data on which their global warming theories were based. That's right, the data that allegedly supported Al Gore's apocalyptic environmentalism was tossed in the trash along side last year's Marks & Spencer ad. And here I'll drop the rather important side note that the UEA's Climate Research Unit is the primary source of data for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in their attempt to levy climate taxes on countries like America (taxes that Bush was wise enough to condemn while Obama, well, Obama is Obama). You may have heard of the Kyoto Protocol which bases its existence on this data.

Why, it's almost as if the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit had something to hide.

On the heels of last week's hacked e-mails exposing what appears to be a planned manipulation of data coupled with strategic attempts to discredit skeptics . . . oh, and let's not forget that New Zealand's climate change proponents were caught doctoring statistics . . . the doomsayers of the global warming crowd have been dealt another blow.

According to reports, the University of East Anglia could not comply with requests for their documents and data that were sought under Freedom of Information legislation because, well, they . . . um . . . they . . . threw it away, undoubtedly just before their dog was about to eat it. Of course, in their minds this should pose no concern as they "do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.” In other words, nobody should worry about reviewing our data, just trust us. So much for peer review.

Now I'm no scientist, but isn't science supposed to be based on analyzing data? And isn't that data generally maintained (i.e., not "thrown away") in case your hypothesis shifts during evaluation? And doesn't peer review require access to the raw, undoctored data? I guess I need to google the University of East Anglia since I don't know much about the school. Maybe I'm too harsh on them since the steps of scientific method generally aren't covered until the 3rd grade or so.

Party Crashing The State Dinner Prompts Obama To Action

2009-11-29T09:24:00.001-05:00

The military has been asking for decisive direction from Barack Obama concerning a certain deadly war in Afghanistan for months, but it took a pair of tax-dodging party crashers to swing the Commander in Chief into immediate action. And this despite his obvious affinity for tax cheats, having carried a number of them into the White House along with the new drapes.

According to NBC:

A Secret Service officer stationed at the first checkpoint at the White House state dinner last Tuesday did not verify the names of a couple allowed in even though they were not on the guest list, a senior law enforcement official told NBC News on Friday.
The officer saw that Tareq and Michaele Salahi were not on the list and, rather than verifying if they were legitimate guests, assumed they would be vetted at the next checkpoint and allowed them to pass, NBC learned.
The source also confirmed what two White House staff sources earlier told NBC News, that the Salahis were not “waved in” or had their names manually entered into the White House computer to gain entry.

The couple were vetted at the next checkpoint, but when their car was turned away they simply got out of the vehicle and walked to the pedestrian entrance. No need to call in Jason Bourne for this security breach.

Obama has called for an immediate investigation. No doubt there where soon be a panel, complete with a new "State Dinner Czar," to provide some expert advice on security . . . perhaps they could use automotive industry representatives for the task since they didn't use them for the "expert" panel on the automotive industry.

Meanwhile, what is Obama's plan for Afghanistan?

H/T: Hot Air

And here is some video of the grand entrance:

When An Apology Isn't An Apology

2009-11-28T09:00:00.007-05:00

I saw this over at Holycoast.com, describing yet another "meaning less apology where people who didn't commit the offense apologize to people who weren't harmed":

Members of one of America's oldest Protestant churches officially apologized Friday — for the first time — for massacring and displacing Native Americans 400 years ago."We consumed your resources, dehumanized your people and disregarded your culture, along with your dreams, hopes and great love for this land," the Rev. Robert Chase told descendants from both sides. "With pain, we the Collegiate Church, remember our part in these events."

Apology? This is nothing more than a typically liberal self-indulgence. Try as he might, the Rev. Robert Chase cannot give an apology for the acts of others to people who were not among the offended. And the good Reverend (and people like him) knows it. The Reverend knows that when he says "we" he is really saying "they." It's easy to apologize for the actions of others, especially when you can do so with a nod and wink that you would never have done something like that yourself.

Let's face it, this is not an apology but an attempt to elevate oneself with an air of innocence and superiority. It's a tactic Barack Obama uses virtually every time he steps on foreign soil.

New Zealand's Role In The Global Warming Hoax

2009-11-26T07:14:00.012-05:00

Watts Up With That? just dropped a report on the latest scandal cooling the jets of the global warming crowd. According the the award winning science blog:

The figures published on NIWA’s [the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric research] website suggest a strong warming trend in New Zealand over the past century
The caption to the photo on the NiWA site reads:
From NIWA’s web site — Figure 7: Mean annual temperature over New Zealand, from 1853 to 2008 inclusive, based on between 2 (from 1853) and 7 (from 1908) long-term station records. The blue and red bars show annual differences from the 1971 – 2000 average, the solid black line is a smoothed time series, and the dotted [straight] line is the linear trend over 1909 to 2008 (0.92°C/100 years).

But analysis of the raw climate data from the same temperature stations has just turned up a very different result:

In other words,

What did we find? First, the station histories are unremarkable. There are no reasons for any large corrections. But we were astonished to find that strong adjustments have indeed been made.
About half the adjustments actually created a warming trend where none existed; the other half greatly exaggerated existing warming. All the adjustments increased or even created a warming trend, with only one (Dunedin) going the other way and slightly reducing the original trend.
The shocking truth is that the oldest readings have been cranked way down and later readings artificially lifted to give a false impression of warming . . . There is nothing in the station histories to warrant these adjustments and to date Dr Salinger and NIWA have not revealed why they did this.

Ah, but perhaps we could venture a guess as to why the NIWA falsified statistics to "demonstrate" a global warming trend? Could it be, oh, I don't know . . . money? Al Gore is not the only one bent on getting fat from the foment of the global warming hoax.

Minnesota Still Sucks

2009-11-25T15:57:00.005-05:00

While driving through the rain today, maneuvering around construction pylons, I was struck by a random thought, "Minnesota still sucks."

It dawned on me that it is Minnesota's fault that we are on the verge of a Senatorial debate that could forever alter our country's leadership in health care/pharmaceutical innovation and economic stability. With their idiot election of failed talk show host and least amusing SNL alum, Al Franken, they gave the Senate the magical 60 left-leaning loons who are driving this country down it's current legislative path concerning health care. I know what you're thinking: Minnesotans didn't actually elect Franken, he stole the vote through judicial manipulation. True, but the fact that the vote was close enough to allow for that to happen should tell you all that you need to know about the state's voting population. Some suggest drug testing for Minnesota voters, I'd prefer IQ tests.

(Before some of you once again bring up the 2000 Presidential election with claims the Bush stole that election via the Supreme Court, I suggest that you review what the Supreme Court actually ruled on [hint, it was not the vote tally] and, more importantly, the fact that every subsequent recount of Florida not only proved Bush the winner, but demonstrated that he won the state by a greater margin that was officially recorded.)

Back to Minnesota sucking. First they introduce Gov. Jesse "the body" Ventura into mainstream political dialogue where he can continue to baffle the country with claims that 9/11 was an inside job, then they give us a babbling baboon like Franken who's presence allows for a Senatorial 60 leftest, giving the Dems absolute power in a critical time.

Not even the acquisition of Bret Farve can change the cold, cruel fact: Minnesota still sucks.

Debt Shock

2009-11-23T18:55:00.007-05:00

Even the laughably liberal New York Times is starting to experience Obamanomic sticker shock. According to the Times headline, the “Federal Government Faces Balloon in Debt Payments: At $700 Billion a Year, Cost Will Top Budgets for 2 Wars, Education, Energy.” The page one article explains that the debt is rising so quickly that "payment shock" is knocking on the door of the American economy so "there is little doubt that the United States' long-term budget crisis is becoming too big to postpone."

Little wonder. With his "brilliant" plans of bailout bucks to GM before bankrupcy and a stimulus package that has produced fewer jobs of late than the buggy whip industry, Obama has displayed the economic accumen of a '70s child star before their '90s rehab. And now he wants to add a trillion dollar government managed health care system to the mix. A system directed by the same people who have destroyed the fiscal condition of medicare, social security and the post office. Looks like we could be in store for generations of debt shock.

ObamaCare And The Louisiana Purchase

2009-11-22T19:27:00.011-05:00

When Thomas Jefferson dropped some coin for the Louisiana Purchase back in 1803, most folk considered it a pretty good deal. America had to borrow $15 millions from Britain (at 6% interest) to make the purchase from France but in the end gained 800,000 square miles of land and dialed down the growing threat of war with the French (and this in the days before their idea of conflict was arguing over the proper decorum for surrender).

Now that deal seems better than ever.

Obama and his cronies just made another Louisiana Purchase, this one borrowing over $100 million from our children's financial future, to pay for a single vote: Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) "YEA" vote to move forward with the Senatorial debate on their version of the ObamaCare bill. Well, it's been reported as a $100 million provision specifically for the state of Louisiana but Landrieu added a little clarification to the agreement, "I am not going to be defensive," she declared. "And it's not a $100 million fix. It's a $300 million fix." And you thought Napoleon had a complex about power.

Not only are we now talking $300 million in tax payers dollars that the Democrats have so easily given away, but they did so without even securing Landrieu's vote on the final bill as she explained that her vote to proceed with the debate did not ensure that she would ultimately vote for the bill.

So I wonder . . . when it comes time for the actual vote, how much will the Dems give to other fence-riders in order to buy their love and seize control of another private sector institution? With Harry Reid pimping Obama's agenda we're about to literally witness a parliament of whores.

Reid Secures 60 Votes For ObamaCare

2009-11-21T18:25:00.009-05:00

The will of the people be damned! The future of our children can go to blazes! The world's most powerful economy can collapse to Euro-standards! It appears as though the obtuse Senate leader Harry Reid has the 60 votes needed to move forward with the worst bill in America's long history.

After Sen. Mary Mary Landrieu of Louisiana sold her vote to Reid for a $100 million provision, Sens Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas became the 60th senator to agree to cast her vote in favor of this debacle. It's still unclear how much it will cost the American tax payers for Blanche's vote.

Let this be a lesson to the American people -- when you are voting for a Democrat you are not voting for a person, you are voting for a liberal agenda.

We just learned that the government run postal service lost $3.8 billion last year, and the left now wants to provide that same level of competence to the direction of America's health care system.

The Orwellian Obama administration has sealed government records, seized private corporations and now have their sites firmly set to subdue the populace through government controlled health care, despite the voice of the majority who believe the private sector is best equipped to provide medical care and advances.

Make your voice known. Contact every politician with a "D" affixed to their name and let them know that this will not stand. They have revealed their agenda of mass control and America will not stand for it!

The Global Warming Hoax Cont.

2009-11-21T09:44:00.005-05:00

Computer hacking is bad. Awful. Real, real naughty. That said, the hacking of e-mail exchanges from a British University has revealed that the hackers are not the only real, real naughty on the internet. And I'm not even talking about The Huffington Post.

Over 1,000 e-mails and 3,000 documents were lifted from the electronic banks at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in Britain, many of which contain discussions on how to manipulate climate change data and derisive attacks on skeptics of anthropogenic global warming. Oh, how I hate to use the word "conspiracy" but what do you do when it fits? Is this further evidence that the global warming movement is a hoax aimed at gaining funding for certain university departments and pocket-loads of spending cash for Al Gore?

The e-mail exchanges are between some of the most prominent proponents of the global warming hysteria including James Hansen (Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies), Michael Mann (of Mann's "Hockey Stick" fame), Stephen Schneider (Al Gore's buddy), and Gavin Schmidt (NASA climate modeler). Are the e-mails legit? Well, it has been verified by the BBC and the university itself that these self-serving servers have been hacked.

Since I doubt you'll see any of these damaging emails surface in the mainstram media, here are some examples of the exchanges for your edification:

From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@XXXX, mhughes@XXXX
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: //';l[1]='a';l[2]='/';l[3]='<';l[4]=' 110';l[5]=' 114';l[6]=' 111';l[7]=' 98';l[8]=' 115';[9]=' 111';l[10]=' 46';l[11]=' 88';l[12]=' 88';l[13]=' 88';l[14]=' 64';l[15]=' 97';l[16]= 102';l[17]=' 102';l[18]=' 105';l[19]=' 114';l[20]=' 98';l[21]=' 46';l[22]=' 107';l[23]='>';l[24]='\"';l[25]=' 110';l[26]=' 114';l[27]=' 111';l[28]=' 98';l[29]=' 115';l[30]=' 111';l[31]=' 46';l[32]=' 88';l[33]=' 88';l[34]=' 88';l[35]=' 64';l[36]=' 97';l[37]=' 102';l[38]=' 102';l[39]=' 105';l[40]=' 114';l[41]=' 98';l[42]=' 46';l[43]=' 107';l[44]=':';l[45]='o';l[46]='t';l[47]='l';l[48]='i';l[49]='a';l[50]='m';l[51]='\"';l[52]='=';l[53]='f';l[54]='e';l[55]='r';l[56]='h';l[57]='a ';l[58]='<'; for (var i = l.length-1; i >= 0; i=i-1){ if (l[i].substring(0, 1) == ' ') document.write("&#"+unescape(l[i].substring(1))+";"); else document.write(unescape(l[i])); } //]]> k.briffa@XXX.osborn@XXXX

Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,

Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow.

I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.

Thanks for the comments, Ray.

Cheers
Phil Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit
Telephone XXXX School of Environmental Sciences Fax XXXX
University of East Anglia Norwich

From: Kevin Trenberth
To: Michael MannSubject:
Re: BBC U-turn on climate
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:57:37 -0600
Cc: Stephen H Schneider , Myles Allen , peter stott , “Philip D. Jones” , Benjamin Santer , Tom Wigley , Thomas R Karl , Gavin Schmidt , James Hansen , Michael Oppenheimer

Hi all
Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming ? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low.

This is January weather (see the Rockies baseball playoff game was canceled on saturday and then played last night in below freezing weather).

Trenberth, K. E., 2009: An imperative for climate change planning: tracking Earth’s global energy. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 1, 19-27, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2009.06.001. [1][PDF] (A PDF of the published version can be obtained from the author.)***

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.***

From: Phil Jones
To: “Michael E. Mann”
Subject: IPCC & FOI
Date: Thu May 29 11:04:11 2008

Mike,

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith
will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!

Cheers
Phil
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit

From: “Michael E. Mann”
To: Tim Osborn, Keith Briffa
Subject: update Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:51:53 -0500
Cc: Gavin Schmidt

Guys,

I see that Science has already gone online w/ the new issue, so we put up the RC post. By now, you’ve probably read that nasty McIntyre thing. Apparently, he violated the embargo on his website (I don’t go there personally, but so I’m informed).

Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you’re free to use RC in any way you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about what comments we screen through, and we’ll be very careful to answer any questions that come up to any extent we can. On the other hand, you might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you’d like us to include.

You’re also welcome to do a followup guest post, etc. think of RC as a resource that is at your disposal to combat any disinformation put forward by the McIntyres of the world. Just let us know. We’ll use our best discretion to make sure the skeptics dont’get to use the RC comments as a megaphone…

This one is unattributed

Options appear to be:

Send them the data

Send them a subset removing station data from some of the countries who made us pay in the normals papers of Hulme et al. (1990s) and also any number that David can remember. This should also omit some other countries like (Australia, NZ, Canada, Antarctica). Also could extract some of the sources that Anders added in (31-38 source codes in J&M 2003). Also should remove many of the early stations that we coded up in the 1980s.

Send them the raw data as is, by reconstructing it from GHCN. How could this be done? Replace all stations where the WMO ID agrees with what is in GHCN. This would be the raw data, but it would annoy them.

The House Passes Obamacare (H.R. 3200)

2009-11-08T10:08:00.005-05:00

Last night the House of Reps passed the healthcare bill that The Wall Street Journal labeled "The Worst Bill Ever" by a vote of 220-215. And while 219 Democrats supported this national disaster, there was a truly bipartisan effort to stop it as 39 Democrats crossed the aisle to vote against it. One Republican voted in favor of the bill, Joseph Cao of Louisiana, a vote purchased by Barack Obama with a "commitment from President Obama that he would work together to address the health care issues of Louisiana, including the FMAP crisis and community disaster loan forgiveness, as well as issues related to Charity and Methodist Hospitals." Nice. Real nice. And given Obama's previous "commitments" to only raise taxes on the wealthy, provide a 72-hour review of legislation and support the 2nd amendment . . . let's just say I hope 'ol Joe has a back up plan (and hopefully another profession, come next election).

So, where do we go from here?

The fight is far from over. In fact, this is how we knew it would play out. The focus now turns to the Senate, where Harry Reid will need to score a super majority twice to proceed (a difficult task at this point) and the Republicans have vowed to read the bill in its entirety on the senate floor, which should take more time than an emergency room wait in Canada . . . though just barely. With that delay, the Senate debate will continue into next year -- an election year -- a year in which Americans can make the Democrats pay for their assault on freedom, just taxation, and the American health care machine that has produced more cures and innovation than any other in the world.

Sgt. Kimberly Denise Munley: American Hero

2009-11-07T10:24:00.003-05:00

There simply can't be enough press about Sgt. Kimberly Denise Munley, the police officer who took down Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood killer who decided to shoot the infidels who defiled his take on Islam.

Civilian police Sgt. Munley, a former soldier who spent a good deal of time at Fort Hood in her own right, was called into action after a 911 call at 1:23. Within 5 minutes she had shot the gunmen.

As reported in the NY Daily News:

Just three minutes after Hasan shot up his fellow soldiers, Munley tracked him down outside a pre-deployment facility and unloaded on him at close range.
"She fired on him twice and drew the attention toward her. He immediately spun around and charged her," said Chuck Medley, director of emergency services at Fort Hood. "She fired a couple more rounds and fell back, continuing to fire."
Munley was hit in both legs and her wrist during the gun battle but stayed on her feet and kept firing at the charging gunman.
"She struck him a couple times in the upper torso and he went down," Medley said. "When she rounded that corner, she made a split-second decision to put her life at risk. If she had not responded the way she had, we would have had an extremely high number of dead and injured."

Thank you, Sgt Munley, for your act of courage in defending those who defend America.

What's In That Health Care Reform Bill?

2009-11-03T21:15:00.006-05:00

Not sure what's in the House Health Care Reform Bill? Well, you're in pretty good company: namely the majority of house members who are actually going to vote on the thing. It's a little like watching my kitchen-challenged brother compete on the Iron Chef.

But if want to treat this bill like you did Tristram Shandy in your college days (which is to say, reading a Cliffs Notes version while you drink cheap beer that you bought at the party store by writing a check for $1.27) then you should check out the summary Ric put together over at Freadom Nation. You can find the whole post here: The final healthcare bill looks SCAAARY

WSJ: ObamaCare Is The Worst Bill Ever

2009-11-02T20:34:00.006-05:00

Washington has produced its share of terrible bills (and I will pass on the easy Bill Clinton shot . . wait, did I just do that?) but according to the Wall Street Journal's Op-Ed pages, the current Health Care bill is the "The Worst Bill Ever!" According to the article:

In a rational political world, this 1,990-page runaway train would have been derailed months ago. With spending and debt already at record peacetime levels, the bill creates a new and probably unrepealable middle-class entitlement that is designed to expand over time. Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually all medicine will be rationed via politics.

Um . . .

The Journal lists four primary reasons as to why this bill is a disaster waiting to happen.

The spending surge: while Pelosi and company continue to contend that the bill will only cost the country a paltry $829 billion, the CBO is figuring the cost to top a cool trillion, or roughly equivalent to the gallons of botox that Nancy Pelosi has poured into her jowls to keep that sneer in place.
Expanding Medicaid, gutting private Medicare: In this case the democrats are looking to take money from a Medicare program that already has "unfunded liabilities" of some $37 trillion over 75 years and drop it into an even larger government behemoth. Debt to pay debt? Only possible with Obamath.
European levels of taxation: Were talking $572 billion dollars in new taxes that is sure to pound American businesses. There is a simple truth about taxation: if you want to stop an activity, tax it. In this case we're talking about jobs. Rest assured that European levels of taxation are always followed by European levels of unemployment (though I still believe European techno club music will remain optional).
The insurance takeover: "The political incentive will always be for government to expand benefits and reduce cost-sharing" which means: defined coverage levels and medical rationing will be determine by Washingon D.C. And you thought Doctor visits were a pain in the past.

Nancy Pelosi has "reportedly told fellow Democrats that she's prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it takes to pass ObamaCare." I'm sure that passing this "worst of" bill will spell tremendous congressional gains for the GOP, but that would be small consolation after giving our children and their children trillions in national debt, government controlled insurance and rising unemployment.

The Obama Fix Fails

2009-11-01T09:31:00.006-05:00

As reported by the Heritage Foundation:

The White House and Democratic leaders are offering doctors a deal: They’ll freeze cuts in Medicare payments to doctors in exchange for doctors’ support of health care reform . . . [during the the secret Obamacare negotiations] the White House and Senate leaders have ordered Congress to pass a $247 billion dollar payoff to doctors groups for their support of comprehensive health care reform.

Well, in case you were out of the loop (or busy with hunting and fishing this time of year), the bribe failed on a 47-43 vote. And Dirty Harry wasn't happy:

Reid brought the $247 billion bill to the Senate floor this week as part of a deal to secure the support of doctors groups such as the AMA for passage of a separate, broader healthcare reform bill later this year. But the strategy has backfired.

…Reid told reporters on Wednesday that he was led to believe that more than two dozen Republicans would vote for the bill, though he did not mention the AMA by name.
“I was told by various people that we would have 27 Republican votes, which was pretty reasonable to assume since one of the co-sponsors of this legislation was [Sen.] Jon Kyl [Ariz.], the assistant Republican leader.

“I was stunned when I was told by his cosponsor Sen. Stabenow after we introduced this legislation that [Kyl] couldn’t support it. Even though he is a cosponsor he couldn’t support the legislation,” Reid said, making reference to Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), the lead sponsor of the 10-year doctor payment fix.

And while I'm ecstatic that this bill (S. 1776) failed, I still feel the need to give a shout out to fellow Michigander Debbie Stabenow who stood by her convictions and voted to bribe doctors despite its obvious ethical depravity and absolute failure. Vito Corleone is petting his kitty with pride.

Fire Rich Rod . . . Please?

2009-11-01T08:33:00.004-05:00

In a break from politics I have to take a moment to make an appeal to my Alma Mater:

Fire Rich Rod . . . please?

There were excuses last year, but all the crying in the world about installing a new system could never justify a 3 - 9 record while losing to Toledo at home (and do I need to remind anybody of the 42 - 7 beat down the Buckeyes delivered?)

Now the 2009 season has turned into another disaster. The Wolverines have dropped to 5-4 with a Big Ten record of 1-4. Are you kidding me? And Saturday provided a sleep depriving route at the hands of Illinois, giving the Illini their first win in weeks.

Enough is enough! This guy has turned the winningest program in the history of college football into a conference cellar dweller. RICH ROD MUST GO!!!

Campell Brown On The Obama / Fox War

2009-10-31T11:31:00.004-04:00

My girl Nikki posted a great piece by CNN's Campell Brown concerning the Obama team's attacks on Fox News. Check it out here: Campell Brown: You Go Girl!

While I question Brown's motivation a bit with her premise that Fox is too hard, MSNBC is too soft and CNN is juuuust right, the ultimate point of her story is a bullseye. The Obama administration sees bias where ever there is criticism, but ignores intent where there is agreement.

Khaki's editorial: When you discount editorial shows like Hannity and O'Reilly, which are intended to contain bias like their editorial equivalents on other networks, it's obvious why the Obamas fear the stellar ratings at Fox and took a frightening step for an American President in attempting to silence a news agency. It is the only network that still fully investigates the White House. Fox is still the only station asking hard hitting questions about healthcare legislation, the economy, unemployment, regulatory reform, Afghanistan, and Iran . . . questions the administration would rather not answer. Questions the administration doesn't have to face on other channels. Questions that illuminate Obama to a nation that is still largely in the dark about his agenda and the damage that it has already done to this country.

Who Is Visiting The White House?

2009-10-31T10:37:00.005-04:00

The Obama administration is attempting to continue their ruse of being a transparent administration by releasing some of the visitor records from the White House. Unfortunately, the promised transparency concerning campaign contributions, complete RNC and CBO access to proposed Health Care accounting figures, and providing a 72 hour public review of proposed legislation are still in the "monkey flying out of the ass" stage.

Close to 500 visitor records were released (far from the actual number of visitors) that include a who's who of liberal activism. Interestingly, William Ayers, Michael Moore and Jeremiah Wright appear on the list, but the White House contends that they were not that "William Ayers, Michael Moore and Jeremiah Wright." Still no word on the "actual identities" of these less familiar friends of the White House who carry those very familiar names. Doppelgangers? Just throwing out a theory.

The sad fact is that this is not the "major milestone in government transparency," which Norm Eisen, special counsel to the president for ethics, claimed it to be, but just another distraction to steer public conversation away from what the administration's left hand is up to. First, the White House is forced to admit that not every visitor's name has been released. And secondly, come on, is anybody shocked that Oprah, Kim Gandy and Andy Stern have graced the Oval Office love seat? And is it news that people who happen to have the names William Ayers, Michael Moore and Jeremiah Wright (but are not the famous William Ayers, Michael Moore and Jeremiah Wright) have stopped by to say hello?

If the Obama administration wants to talk about transparency, why not give us the type of information that really matters?

Did Jesus Name The Anti-Christ

2009-10-26T20:53:00.002-04:00

Talk amongst yourselves.

As for me, I don't think he's the anti-christ, just a putrid president.

Barack Obama's Nobel Prize

2009-10-13T18:32:00.006-04:00

Duck season . . . the salmon running . . . this has been a tough time for me to write with everything that's been happening in Michigan, a sportsman's paradise. But I'm back now and feel compelled to dig up some old news just so I can have my say. So, it's back to that Nobel Prize.

I have to admit that I'm not sure what the criteria is for selecting a Nobel Prize winner, but I suspect when it comes to prominent Americans nominated for the prize the prime requisite is criticizing America. Exhibit A, B, and C? Jimmy Carter blames America for racism and poverty and BAM: Nobel Prize. Al Gore blames America for destroying the earth and BAM: Nobel Prize. Barack Obama blames America for war and attacks on innocent civilians and BAM: Nobel Prize.

Of course, it's the latest Nobel Peace Prize award that is the most laughable. Barack Obama? Really? And when exactly did this nomination take place? When he had been in office for, what, two weeks? This leaves me wondering if he won this award based on the 100 days that he actually spent in the Senate, his community organizing with ACORN or the charming way that he sounds a bit like Mel Tillis when the teleprompters are off. The bottom line, which even his supporters are forced to admit, is that this guy has done absolutely nothing to deserve this honor, assuming that the soiled award can still be considered an honor.

What troubles me is that this "prize" is awarded out of Norway, the land of my blood, and we Norwegians used to be about accomplishment. Erik the Red left the homeland and crossed the ocean in a rowboat, allowing for his son to eventually make his way to the Americas. We celebrate Leif Erikson because of what he did. We acknowledge Thor Heyerdahl because of his expeditions, not because of his turn of phrase. Roald Amundsen had a great mustache, but the fact that he was the first person to reach both the North and South Poles is why history remembers him. Ibsen was the father of the modern play, Munch gave us the Scream. Let's face it, Norwegians used to be about what one actually did and now . . . now, a man who has done little beyond write two memoirs and spend his nation into debt without a single notable accomplishment toward peace has a Nobel Peace Prize.

In other news: please watch for Khaki's upcoming series:
All The Reasons America Sucks.
I'd like to thank the committee for this award. I am truly humbled.

Columbus Day

2009-10-12T18:16:00.004-04:00

I've never been a fan of Columbus, the man or the city in Ohio where Buckeyes (i.e., "worthless nuts") reside. As for Chris Columbus, the man who sailed to the Americas in 1482 not the director of a pair of Harry Potter flicks, I've always felt that the props he received over the years for "discovering" America were misplaced since the Vikings beat him by some 500 years. That said, I'm starting to grow weary of the PC Posse and their Columbus day attacks of "he couldn't discover America because people already lived here" or "he brought about the rape of paradise."

First of all, we all know what is meant by "discovering America" so can we stop the word games? Columbus came from a civilization that had a written language, so unlike the natives of the new land, he was able to communicate in perpetuity the nature of the world as he saw it without the "telephone game" of miscommunication that oral traditions create (for those of you who rely on oral traditions: Mackinac Island was never actually a giant turtle . . . and what the hell are you doing reading blogs?) Columbus gave us the vision of old America. In addition, Columbus' "discovery" brought inventions to the new world that allowed for the type of civilization that we enjoy today. Inventions like, say, the wheel. I don't know about you, but I for one am glad I can make it from my house to Montreal in a few hours, shaving off 30 days from Native American canoe trip.

Second, let's stop romanticising the "paradise" of the new world. Some Native American tribes practiced cannibalism, torched entire forests to destroy their enemies and sacrificed woman to the gods. My brother-in-law is a Native American and I have a deep respect for the many cultures and histories of America's first residents, but let's not pretend is was all love and flowers.

Finally, Columbus was Italian which means: Pizza -- perhaps God's greatest gift. So let's stop the nonsense and spend a few moments in recognition of this great adventurer.

Anne Frank Video On YouTube

2009-10-03T00:51:00.002-04:00

The Anne Frank Museum has uploaded the only existing video footage of Anne Frank to YouTube for mass consumption. The video is only 20 seconds long with Anne appearing around the 10 second mark in a second story window as she leans out to watch a bride and groom below.

According to the museum, the scene dates to July 22, 1941, prior to the Frank family going into hiding, resulting in the powerful diary penned by a brilliant little girl. If you've read the diary then I suspect you find this clip moving with unexpected power.

Biden Never Thought Stimulus Would Work This Well

2009-09-28T21:50:00.004-04:00

During a conference call with 55 governors, territorial officials or their designees, Vice President Joe Biden enthusiastically effused about Obama's stimulus plan: “In my wildest dreams, I never thought it would work this well.”

Really?

They promised this would prevent unemployment from reaching 8% and we are now pushing double digits. They vowed that it would not require another tax hike but we now know that was a lie. They claimed that the package would avoid special interest and pork spending, but the congressional pet projects in this spending orgy look like a sleazy Webkinz convention. They said it would not create deficit spending but the current projections calculate deficit spending over the next 10 years that is close to equalling the total deficit spending that was created over the past 200 years.

If Biden never thought the stimulus package "would work this well," I wonder what exactly they were planning for this country.

Mo' Zo: The Squirreliness of ACORN

2009-09-27T08:21:00.003-04:00

I'm so glad that making the big time with Pajamas Media hasn't changed Zo. Here's his take on the latest ACORN debacle.

Barack Obama's Vapid UN Speech

2009-09-25T22:21:00.008-04:00

It's amazing to hear the George Stephanopouloses . . .eses of the world still prattle on about the wisdom of Barack Obama as he dazzled at the UN. Of course, if you didn't hear Obama's vapid speech for yourself and want a clearer perspective, then I suggest you try the foreign press.

The United Kingdom's top circulating journal, The Telegraph, posed the only question a sane observer could have asked after listening to the speech: Barack at the UN: Was this Obama’s most naïve speech ever? According to journalist Nile Gardiner

It’s always a bad sign when a US president gets several rounds of heavy applause at the UN General Assembly, as Barack Obama did this morning in New York. Needless to say, the loudest cheers from the gathering of world leaders came when he condemned the actions of a close US ally, Israel, in continuing to build settlements in the West Bank. You can always rely on attacks on the Israelis to generate the biggest roars of approval at any meeting of the United Nations, and Obama dutifully obliged.

But Israel wasn't the only nation Obama attacked in his speech. I mean, no Obama speech to foreign dignitaries is complete without an attack on the good ol' U.S. of A. Of course, the president never impugns himself with these attacks. No, the Obama way is to talk about how horrible America was BEFORE he took control and led us through the darkness with his vision of light. Take this ember from the speech:

So for those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions that we have taken in just nine months. On my first day in office, I prohibited - without exception or equivocation - the use of torture by the United States of America. I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed, and we are doing the hard work of forging a framework to combat extremism within the rule of law.

All to the delight of those who hate us. Never mind that Obama's words were vapid utterances, he bathed in adoration.

But we owe it to ourselves to look at the facts. When Obama railed against "torture" he was, of course, talking about waterboarding. And how many terrorists were actually waterboarded by the pre-obama evil America? 3. That's right, only 3 all of whom where high level al Qaeda operatives, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed who couldn't tell us enough about his twisted organization by the time the intelligence officers were done. (and I've always found it amusing that some of those who think this butcher should be executed are so upset that the CIA got him wet). But what's more interesting is this actually happened 6 years ago, not "9 months" as Obama implies. Obama didn't stop waterboarding, Bush did.

Then Obama threw out the applause line of closing Guantanamo Bay, but what does that mean? Is he going to free all of those prisoners? Of course not, he's going to move them to facilities within the U.S. where they are sure to be treated worse than the were at Gitmo.

So once again Obama took cheap shots at his own country to elevate his self image. To bad Joe Wilson wasn't there.

And while Obama continued to take this naive approach to foreign relations, Iran continued to ignore UN regulations with the discovery of an secret nuclear facility that could only have been built to create weapons grade uranium.

9/12 Protest Pics

2009-09-14T00:40:00.000-04:00

There were so many outstanding pics and prints from the 9/12 protest that I decided to post a few. It's nice to see the creativity of the right versus the hanging George Bushes (or Republican of your choice) and endless "Nazi" signs that tend to be the outer limit of liberal inventiveness.

H/T Thanks to:
geeeeeZ!
According to Nikki
American Princess

Hot Air

Looking at the Left

Michelle Malkin

Debonair Dude's World

Vodkapundit

Clean Republicans & Dirty Democrats

2009-09-14T00:14:00.004-04:00

Here's a fun photographic essay from the Gateway Pundit comparing the recent trash aftermath of the recent 9/12 Rally to the Obama inauguration.

CLEAN Conservatives vs FILTHY Liberals-- A Photographic Essay

I just wonder who's going to clean up after 4 years of an Obama mess.

Massive 9/12 Rally To Limit Government Control

2009-09-13T08:17:00.008-04:00

Tens of thousands gathered yesterday to protest Obama's full scale attack on capitalism and individual liberty but all the left wants to talk about is that the crowd didn't reach a million. According to The New York Times,

The demonstrators numbered well into the tens of thousands, though the police declined to estimate the size of the crowd. Many came on their own and were not part of an organization or group. But the magnitude of the rally took the authorities by surprise, with throngs of people streaming from the White House to Capitol Hill for more than three hours.

The protesters formed a massive sea of outrage flowing through the streets of D.C., singing patriot songs and displaying their commitment to an America born and bred on individual freedom and limited government intervention.

But rather than address the darkening waters of the Obamanic lust for power, the left wants to talk about how it was mistakenly reported that a million people were at the rally rather than the merely tens of thousands who were actually there. They would love nothing more than to portray this gathering as a backyard BBQ with a few yokels complaining about Uncle Sam over a six pack of PBR.

I'll admit that I never expected a million or even tens of thousands to attend. Historically Republicans have refrained from rallies of this sort because . . . well, we tend to work during the day. But the radical agenda of those currently controlling the democratic party have passionately changed the way Republicans respond, perhaps forever.

Michelle Malkin sums it for us:

Activists were derided as amateurs who couldn’t turn out a crowd. Then they were smeared as corporate shills. They were criticized for not having a coherent message. Then they were mocked for ideological single-mindedness. They are resented by professional strategists who accuse them of organizing empty protests that won’t translate into electoral gains. But the movement has given birth to a new generation of movers and shakers who have rejected establishment partisan politics for nimble, Internet-facilitated, issues-based advocacy.

Amen, sister. Whoa, did that make me part of the "Religious Right"?

The left has made their first predictable attempt to avoid the growing outrage over their policies by ignoring the message to talk about the "poor attendance." So, what's next on their game plan? Just how long before they call the rally racism?

Cass Sunstein: Another Radical Czar

2009-09-12T09:27:00.010-04:00

And the freak parade of Obama wackoes continues. Guilt by association has become guilt by appointment as another of Barack Obama's endless stream of Czars is fished out of the radical left of the democratic party.

You are still probably wondering why Obama seems to appoint a Czar a week. I mean, don't we already have cabinet members and organizations to monitor some of these areas? The difference, of course, is that Czar do not have to go through the rigorous, high-profile confirmation process of a cabinet so the president can appoint bedlamites without fear of a damaging questions being posed on C-Span. But have no worry, Khaki is here to help spread the word.

Today's bizarre czar is Cass Sunstein, Barack Obama's administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (try to say that 3 times fast without throwing up in your mouth). But it his extreme view of animal rights that gives many of us paws. According to Cass, a dog or a horse is more rational than a human infant and should therefore be granted the same rights. OK. Beyond that, Cass equated animals to slaves, and he wasn't talking about the way Frederick Douglass kept his hair.

In truth, Sunstein extreme views are not very interesting to me in what they say about his affection for animals, though it has inspired me to have a word with my dog who tends to ignore my commands when she is apparently part of a slave culture. Heel. What interests me about Sunstein's beliefs is what they say about his view of people.

For Cass Sustein, it is his role to take care of animals because they are lower on the evolutionary scale and thus need his kind hand of wisdom for satisfactory survival and sustenance. For Cass Sustein, animals and people are in many ways the same. Can you see where I'm going with this?

The next time you wonder why the radical left is trying to addict those they consider "lower" than themselves to the nanny state, think of Cass Sustein. To him and people of his ilk, most Americans need him because they lack his insight and capabilities. He needs to save them from themselves. He needs to oversee the decisions they make and regulate the freedoms they have to ensure they don't do anything foolish. He masters their destiny for them and depends on a future where they will become dependant on him. And that is the definition of slavery.

9/11 . . . We Still Hear You

2009-09-11T21:25:00.001-04:00

Commercial Break

2009-09-11T00:04:00.000-04:00

For the best TV commercial ever made

Obama's School Speech vs. Bush's School Speech

2009-09-08T21:09:00.004-04:00

The loving liberals seem mystified that some people would rather not have their children subjected to the benevolent word of their Chosen one. As Jason Linkins wrote:

Earlier this morning, President Barack Obama gave his planned address to the nation's schoolchildren. This caps off a ridiculous period of time in the life of our Republic, in which a number of people completely lost their minds at the prospect of Obama talking to children about the importance of education, and the media -- to its great discredit -- pointed cameras at them and treated them as if they were sane.

Why, who wouldn't want their children hear the President of the United States praise the power of education?

Rewind: October 1, 1991, Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington DC

Then President George H.W. Bush decided to give a speech to a group of junior high kids praising the power of education. Unlike Obama, he didn't send out study questions, he didn't push for universal broadcasting and he didn't try to assign writing projects on how the students could help the president. He simply gave a speech where he told the kids to "Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart," and "Don't let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams." And how did the left respond?

The Washington Post dropped the headline: "The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props," while House Majority Leader, Richard Gephardt, complained "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students."

But democrats being, well, democrats, decided not to stop at bellyaching.

Rep. William Ford, then chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate the cost and legality of Bush's appearance. On October 17, 1991, Ford summoned then-Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and other top Bush administration officials to testify at a hearing devoted to the speech.

That's right, the noble left who simply want our children to learn and think it was a wonderful idea for the President to address the nation's children actually launched an official congressional investigation when a Republican president did so . . . and Bush's speech was on a much smaller scale. Naturally the General Accounting Office concluded that the Bush administration had not acted improperly, but that didn't stop them from giving it the ol' liberal try.

Obama's Vetting Process Isn't Broken

2009-09-07T13:06:00.005-04:00

The Washington Post has joined a list of media outlets questioning Barack Obama's vetting process.

The resignation of White House environmental adviser Van Jones has revealed a lapse in the administration's vetting procedures that, nearly eight months into his tenure, delivered President Obama with an unwelcome distraction as he begins an important week on behalf of his health-care reform initiative.

It seems that each time the Obama administration gets their hand caught in the commie jar their defenders in the media try to pass it off as a "vetting issue." Why, they had no idea that he had been involved in an activist organization with Marxist roots. Right, I believe that. Oh, and Obama also sat in Reverend Wright's church for 20 years and had no idea that his family's spiritual advisor was a batty bigot. So either the president is a functioning moron or an artful liar. So tell me, can he be that oblivious?

I don't believe there is an issue with the President's vetting process; I think he is selecting the same brand of radicals that he chose to hang with earlier in his career. Think for a moment, when he answered a plumber's question without the aid of a teleprompter he exposed that he supports the redistribution of wealth. He worked with Acorn, he's friends with William Ayers . . . is it shocking that he's tapping Marxists for his administration? Do you really believe that the most powerful man in the world didn't know about Jones' past? That he was unaware that Jones signed a petition that essentially asserted that America was behind the tragedy of 9/11?

Well, I suppose you might argue that he didn't know. After all, he was unaware the he signed a document supporting a ban on all handguns. Hmmm (he wrote thoughtfully) Can somebody be that oblivious?

The Van Jones Debacle Shows Americans Can Make A Difference

2009-09-07T12:24:00.002-04:00

The radical left has seized control of the Democratic party and by virtue of current representation the executive and legislative branches of the country. But before you you cross your fingers and your heart in hopes that the 4 year reign of Obama will pass with minimal damage while you do nothing, let the case of Van Jones demonstrate that you can make a difference. Don't sit silent while the Chosen one fiddles away our future, step up and be heard. Make a difference.

Van Jones was exposed as a radical nutcase and was forced to resign, but the battle is far from over. The current administration has more extremists than a nihilist skateboarding cult. So stand up and be heard.

You will be criticized. People like the lily white writers of the Huffington Post will call you a racist and characterize any attack against Obama a "lynching," but press on. This is not about race, it is about ideology. This is not about personality, it is about perseverance. This is not about Obama's hype of Hope, it is about the real Hope found in individual freedom and the pursuit of happiness. This is about America.

And when it comes to America,

Americans can make a difference!

Van Jones: A 9/11 "Truther" Blessed By Obama

2009-09-04T23:48:00.001-04:00

Those of you who voted for Barack Obama: Do you believe us yet?

When we voiced concerns about Barack Obama spending 20 years under a racist pastor who was his acknowledged spiritual advisor you thought is was just guilt by association. When we harangued about his friendship with unrepentant terrorist William Ayers you thought is was just guilt by association. When we were outraged by his praise the anti-Semitic terrorist Rashid Khalid you thought is was just guilt by association. When we identified the illegal and immoral practices of his favored affiliate ACORN you thought is was just guilt by association.

Well, do you believe us yet?

Now we are beginning to see that these were not simply associations, they are his people. They are the people he trusts. And now he is placing radicals who reflect his bizarre world view in positions of power.

Obama has appointed too many radical wackoes to list, but I'll try. Well, not here and now, you may never come back for more. But rest assured, like some of my Internet friends I will continue the public service of revelation that the main stream media seems to have forgotten is their responsibility.

The latest Obama nut to crack is Van Jones of "Republicans are Assholes" fame. Yesterday the news broke that Obama's Green Jobs Czar was part of the "9/11 Truther movement" that essentially blamed George Bush for 9/11. As a document Jones signed back in 2004 claims:

The media and Congress have failed to question the most basic White House' statements concerning the events of September 11th and the Bush administration's response . . . We haveto hold the U.S. government accountable for its role in creating terrorists and using terrorism against other countries.

The delegation will demand that these questions (and others) be raised and answered publicly- Who created, trained and funded the Al Qaeda Network? What is the relationship between Bin Laden, his family and the Bush family and the Carlyle Group? Why were no fighter planes dispatched to intercept the four hijacked planes on September 11h , in violation of standard procedures? Who actually was in control of the "hijacked planes"?

Can you say, "loon"?

And yet this is the type of intellectual insight that Barack Obama has given a home in his administration. And you thought associations didn't matter? Well, they certainly do when those associations a placed in positions of power.

What's even more amazing is how the mainstream media ignores the troubling facts about Obama's appointments until the blogosphere erupts and they are force to pass off a small acknowledgment (Section E, Page 7, right below the note about the opening hours changing for the local flea market).

Scott Whitlock reports:

From a Nexis search a few moments ago:
Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the New York Times: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the Washington Post: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on NBC Nightly News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on ABC World News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on CBS Evening News: 0.

If you were to receive all your news from any one of these outlets, or even all of them together, and you heard about some sort of controversy involving President Obama's Special Adviser for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, your response would be, "Huh?" If you heard that that adviser, Van Jones, had apologized for a number of remarks and positions in the recent past, your response would be, "What?"

The pen may be mightier than the sword, but when it comes to defending their oddly blind allegiance to a radical president with radical friends pushing a radical agenda it seems our current media are satisfied keeping the truth sheathed.

Barack Obama's Address To School Children

2009-09-03T00:26:00.005-04:00

Could you imagine the outrage from the left if George W. Bush had demanded that the public schools close the books and force their students to watch him on television? Well, I supposed there would be no reason for outrage since the teacher's union would not allow for it.

On the surface you may not recognize this as yet another maneuver of indoctrination by the left to create a Hitler . . . I mean, Obama Youth Corps. However, Michelle Malkin has written a brilliant piece exposing the objectives of the administration.

This is a must read:
Obama’s classroom campaign: No junior lobbyist left behind

Some highlights from her article:

Education Secretary Arne Duncan dispatched letters to principals nationwide boasting that “This is the first time an American president has spoken directly to the nation’s school children about persisting and succeeding in school.” But the goal is not merely morale-boosting. According to White House event-related guides developed by the U.S. Department of Education’s Teaching Fellows, grade-school students will be told to “listen to the speech” and “could think about the following:”

*What is the President trying to tell me?
*What is the President asking me to do?
*What new ideas and actions is the President challenging me to think about?

So when the Department of Education directs schools to gather children ‘round the TV monitors for Obama’s pep talk and then do this…

• Create posters of their goals. Posters could be formatted in quadrants or puzzle pieces or trails marked with the labels: personal, academic, community, country. Each area could be labeled with three steps for achieving goals in those areas. It might make sense to focus on personal and academic so community and country goals come more readily.
• Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals.

…parents have every right to worry about their children being used as
Political Guinea Pigs for Change.

I suggest to every parent that you ask your child how this was handled in his or her school and address any concerns you may have to your school's principle and board.

Van Jones And The @ssholes

2009-09-02T22:25:00.002-04:00

The video of Van Jones, Obama's Green Jobs Czar (aka, Czar # 103), calling Republicans "assholes" is making it's way around the web like kool aid at a B.H.O. rally. You can check it out over at theblogprof, who provides a succinct summary. And if you watch the video, try to ignore the ignorance of the questioner, who seems to be unaware of the massive stimulus fiasco and other money burning bills that the current democrats in power have passed.

But beyond his recent comments, what do you really know about Van Jones? Well, here's a primer. And just try to count the assholes in his inner circle.

Independents Disapprove Of Obama

2009-09-01T20:51:00.009-04:00

I admit that I've never been a big fan of the so-called "independents." Sure, I get that you vote for the person and not the party. And yes, there are some Republicans that I wouldn't support if St. Peter promised to give me a day running the pearly gates ("Hey, aren't you the guy who cut me off in traffic? Looks like the lake of fire for you.") But claiming you're an independent to me just speaks to a lack of fundamental philosophical grounding. As warped as their world view may be, at least liberals have one.

But "independents" do serve a purpose beyond making the beer run while the thinking people at the party have a fun-filled ideological debate. The uninformed undecided can provide a barometer for the emotional response to a candidate, and the emotional response to Barack Obama has gone from messianic to "what in God's name is this guy thinking?"

The left-loving CNN is suddenly in the uncomfortable position of divulging that the majority of "independents" now disapprove of Barack Obama.

Fifty-three percent of independents questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Tuesday say they disapprove of how Obama's handling his duties in the White House, with 43 percent in approval. That result marks the first time in a CNN poll that a majority of independents give the president's performance a thumbs-down.

And before you attribute the Chosen One's decline solely to his hapless health care plan, think again.

"Among all Americans, his rating on health care has dropped 13 points since March. Compare that to his 16 point drop on the deficit and 17 point dip on taxes and it looks like there is growing discontent with Obama's overall domestic agenda — not just his health care policy."

Oh, and we can't even stop with his domestic agenda. According to the same poll, opinion of his handling of "Afghanistan also fell 18 points since March."

So it could be that those who refused to study his record and examine his associations before the election are now finding out the hard way who Barack Obama really is.

Socialized Health Care Creates The Poor

2009-08-30T22:02:00.006-04:00

How many times have you heard, "we're the richest nation in the world and we still don't have universal health care"? And those who say it as an accusation apparently lack the logical aptitude to understand the connections in what they're saying. Folks, there is one reason that the United States of America is the wealthiest nation on the planet and it's called CAPITALISM.

Yes, France, Germany and Britain have socialized medicine, along with a few additional socialized scourges, and they also have an average family living space that rivals the size of an American closet and unemployment queues that are longer than the restroom lines at a bulimia convention.

There is no such thing as free health care. I lived in Germany and saw a huge chunk of my paycheck flow to the government health care plan while what was left paid for a small one-bedroom apartment filled with a pressed wood forest of cheap furniture. Expect the same to happen here. And rest assured that a socialized health care plan will need to cover the poor because there will be a helluva lot more of them. Unemployment will rise as businesses struggle to meet the tax burden while paychecks will shrink for the same reason.

The beauty of capitalism is that it's built for success without parameters. Regardless of your current social status, economic situation, gender or life choices, if you produce a good or service that somebody wants you can be successful. No other economic model offers such inclusive opportunity. These attributes should be applied to the health care debate as well.

First, consider those who provide health care services. Ever wonder why so many medical advance come out of America? It's because the U.S. health care industry is striving for profit and to be profitable you must produce something that people want. If a competitor develops a better, more cost effective treatment then you'd better make a breakthrough or you'll soon be stirring beans at the local Taco Bell. And where all of that much ballyhooed government research kick in? Those government research labs are responsible for only 5% or so of the treatments currently on the market. But I'm sure sticking a fork in the private sector will do wonders for our health care industry (that's sarcasm, in case you missed it).

Now let's look at the other key ingredient, the uninsured poor. Barack Obama loves to claim that there are 47 million uninsured in this country, but that is simply not the case (even though it would still only figure to some 13% of the population). But the truth about the uninsured looks more like this:

Analysis of data from earlier Census Bureau and other government reports shows that roughly 7 million are illegal immigrants; roughly 9 million are persons on Medicaid; 3.5 million are persons already eligible for government health programs; and approximately 20 million have, or live, in families with incomes greater than twice the federal poverty level, or $41,300 for a family of four.

So what does the real math look like for the uninsured?

47, 000, 000.00 - 7,000,000.00 (illegal immigrants) = 40,000,000.00

40,000,000.00 -9,000,000.00 (on medicaid) = 31,000,000.00

31,000,000.00 - 3,500,000.00 (eligible for medicaid but not enrolled) = 27,500,000.00

27,500,000.00 - 20,000,000.00 (choose not to be insured) 7,500,000.00

That's right 7,500,000 (or 2% of the population) are chronically uninsured. So here's a crazy idea: rather than destroy our current system while adding taxes that will increase unemployment and decrease income for the sake of 2% of the population, why not devise a system to cover that 2%?

So why does the President skew the numbers to push his radical health care agenda rather than look at ways to tweak a system that 84% of Americans do not consider to be a problem? Look deep in your heart, you know the answer. Obamacare is not about health care. Obamacare is not about the poor. Obamacare is about power. Obamacare is about seizing control. Obamacare is about another devastating attack on the private sector in order to shift more authority to the ruling elite in Washington D.C.

Sympathy For The Teddy

2009-08-29T00:08:00.005-04:00

Some readers have complained on the Khaki blog or via Khaki email about my less than sympathetic treatment of Ted Kennedy's death. So to honor their heartfelt (and deeply empathetic) request, I vow from this day forward to treat Teddy's passing with all of the sympathy and respect that he treated Mary Jo Kopechne's untimely demise.

I will take my lead from this exchange on NPR's Diane Rehm Show between Newsweek’s Ed Klein and Katty Kay:

Kay: Ed Klein, that's what I'm hearing today, that people are sad at his passing, and yet celebrating this huge life and its huge long list of accomplishments.

Klein: I think he'd be the last person who would want us, those he's left behind, to, um, be, uh, morose and, and full of bathos. I think he, he --

Kay: He would come in with a big guffawing laugh and make us laugh too.

Klein: He would, yes. You're so right, he would. And he'd probably have a joke to tell as well.

Kay: At his own expense.

Klein: Well y'know, he, I don't know if you know this or not but, one of his favorite topics of humor was indeed Chappaquiddick itself. And he would ask people, "have you heard any new jokes about Chappaquiddick?" . . . I mean, that is just the most amazing thing. It's not that he didn't feel remorse about the death of Mary Jo Kopechne (background music begins building), but that he still always saw, um, the other side of everything and the ridiculous side of things, too.

Kay: Ed Klein, former foreign editor of Newsweek, and author of a new book on Ted Kennedy.

So our dearly departed Teddy got a kick throughout his life from hearing and telling joke about the women he left dead in his car. I suppose that explains why he didn't report it to the authorities, he need time to develop a killer punchline.

So Ted, if you're down there watching, this one is for you and you're gonna love it!

John Stossel Exposes Obamacare

2009-08-27T23:39:00.002-04:00

Another great find via Nikki!

Remember Ted Kennedy; Remember Mary Jo Kopechne

2009-08-26T19:44:00.006-04:00

You know me. Good ol' Khaki leaves politics behind when it comes to tragedy. It's one thing to criticize the dementia of the left, but when it comes to darkest moments of the human condition, sympathy should be our light.

But . . . yes, but, there's a "but" . . . when it comes to Ted Kennedy I can't muster that loving feeling. It's not his politics of destruction. It's not his drunken binges. It's not even the blatant hypocrisy of his faux environmentalism. I can't muster sympathy for Kennedy because of the Black Water.

Quick, word association:
Ted Kennedy -- Chappaquiddick

In 1969 Ted Kennedy got away with killing a woman and the Democrats rallied to his side then and throughout his life. Maybe that's the difference between them and us. Nixon was forced out by his own party. Lott was kicked to the curb by his own party. And neither of them left an innocent woman floating face down in the water without contacting the authorities.

Kennedy claimed until the end that driving his car into a tidal channel on Chappaquiddick Island and leaving his female passenger there to die was an accident, but his story never made sense. His timeline was inconsistent, the tale of his actions that night do not add up, the investigation was poorly executed and the Kennedy money flowed.

So while others may take this time to remember the significance of Ted as a beloved Kennedy, I'll remember the woman he didn't find significant enough to alert the police after he caused her death, Mary Jo Kopechne.

Thad McCotter Targeted By MoveOn

2009-08-25T22:48:00.005-04:00

Representative Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich) must be doing something right. While I sat tonight skimming the Bass Pro Shop ad . . . ok, all right, I was actually skimming a Pottery Barn catalogue, but that doesn't matter, while skimming I heard a TV commercial buzz in the corner of my ear and looked up in time to see an attack ad against McCotter accusing him of saying no to 1.7 million jobs that would be produced by the Obama administration's energy plan. If you were drinking while reading a sentence containing "jobs produced" and "Obama" you probably sprayed milk or something less healthy from both nostrils so I'll pause a moment to give you time to recover.

............da dee dee da dee dee.............

Of course, the TV spot then closed with the quick announcement that the ad was paid for by the filthy rich and equally filthy fibbing MoveOn.org. And while the ad didn't mention the "religious right" it did foist up another favored bogeyman of the left: Big Oil. Yes, McCotter is accused of being in league with "big oil" because he opposes the "Clean Energy and Security Act" -- legislature that has been more aptly labeled "Cap and Trade." That's right, the liberal elite are attacking McCotter for opposing a bill that will kill more jobs than it could possibly create (as some democrats admit) while at the same time levying a massive energy tax on every American who pays for energy. When God was handing out scruples I guess the folk from MoveOn had stepped out of line to take a leak.

If you follow politics than you know that the bill has already passed in the house, despite the defection of several democrats, and may be wondering why the left is spending more than $1 million on attacking McCotter and other politicians who have already voted. Navin Nayak, an official at the left-wing League of Conservation explains that "the ad is intended to send the message to legislators that there will be a cost to opposing the cap-and-trade bill."

My hope is that a price will be paid, but it will be paid by those forcing through yet another economically disastrous Obama bill; this one under the guise of conservation.

So let your voice be heard. Take 3 or 4 minutes to send an email to Thad McCotter by clicking here to tell him that you appreciate the stance he is taking against the administration's misguided policies. And then send a note to your senators demanding accountability when it is their turn to vote.

List of opposition voices to Cap and Trade that are currently targeted by MoveOn:

Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.)
Denny Rehberg (R- Mont.)
Roy Blunt (R- Mo.)
Frank Wolf (Va.)
House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.)

National Debt Doubled Down . . . make that UP

2009-08-24T22:40:00.005-04:00

Back in February the Obama administration told us that their slaphappy spending spree would only increase the national debt by $7.108 trillion over the next 10 years. Amazing that I could drop "only" in that sentence. More amazing is that some people actually believed Barack Obama. Now Reuters has revealed that a report due from the Office of Management and Budget tomorrow will quietly announce that the administration is now projecting the increase over that period to be closer to $9 trillion. Oh, and that without their health care package which they estimate will cost another trillion (while those calculating above a 3rd grade math level expect the number to be about 4 times that). In fact, if you believe the $9 trillion figure due to be released tomorrow, then just hold your breath and I'll poke you next year when the number hits $12 - $13 trillion.

Here now is an amazing perspective producing point which came to my attention through the Say Anything Blog:

since America breathed it first breath as a nation over 200 years ago the Republic has accumulated a total debt of $11.67 trillion. Under Obama's leadership we will double that debt in 10 short years.

Can anybody with fingers and toes for counting still believe this guy's economic policy is sustainable?

Obama's Snitch-Line Shut Down

2009-08-23T23:15:00.004-04:00

It seemed like a good idea to Barack Obama at the time. If people are talking bad about you and your programs, why not start tracking their conversation. And since you've already spent billions on failed bailouts and federal favors why not try to gather the info for free by asking your faithful Obots to snitch on their neighbors for free.

As explained by the White House blog:

“There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.”

The plan: seek out those who oppose the administration's views and report them to big brother. Unfortunately for Obama, his grand plan to collect emails from those pesky people protesting his program hit a snag -- the constitutional right to privacy. So after intense Internet outrage the White House decided to shut down the email address, leaving lovers of free speech wondering what will be the next move by the insatiably power hungry left.

White House Violates Anti-lobbying Statues

2009-08-23T10:44:00.003-04:00

It took a while, but the administration finally came clean. Not so clean that you'd want to eat off of them, but they removed a bit of their murky mud to admit that they actually were behind the unsolicited email that flooded the internet on behalf of their radical health care reform agenda. According to a Fox News report:

The White House hired a private communications company based in Minnesota to distribute mass e-mails, helping to shed light on how some recipients received e-mails in support of President Obama's health care plan without signing up for them.

The company, Govdelivery, describes itself as the world's leading provider of government-to-citizen communication solutions and says its e-mail service provides a fully-automated on-demand public communication system.

It is still unknown how much taxpayer money the White House provides to Govdelivery for its services.

If taxpayer cabbage was used for this obviously agenda-driven e-barrage, then we are looking at a clear violation of anti-lobbying statutes.

The Oval Office is trying to pass of the whole sordid affair as a mistake on the part of Govdelivery massive mailings, but as reported by Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air, who took time off from his Marriage Encounter weekend to dip back into the truth (I hope his wife understands), Govdelivery is not taking the fall and dropped this exchange on their website.

Q: Where do GovDelivery clients get the email addresses and mobile phone numbers used to reach the public through the GovDelivery digital communications platform?

A: GovDelivery’s clients can offer updates on specific topics through their websites, and often include a subscription sign-up (opt-in) form. Some GovDelivery clients serving a similar audience cross-promote content (topics) from related government agencies by offering subscription items from other agencies (think of this as ‘one stop shopping’ for government information that is of interest to a particular citizen). Finally, GovDelivery allows clients to upload existing contact lists into GovDelivery. …

Q: Does GovDelivery ever share one GovDelivery client’s contact list with another organization?
A: No. GovDelivery does not share contact information collected and stored by one client with any other clients under any circumstances.

In other words, the address list of recipients for this taxpayer-funded spam was provided by the White House. Oops.

Obama Camp Caught Planting Fake Doctor & The Media Doesn't Care

2009-08-20T01:17:00.000-04:00

Obama and his minions in the press corp have gone to great lengths claiming that the protests against socialized medicine staged by malicious conservative operatives. Meanwhile that same Obama and his minions in the press corps praise how open and honestly the administration had presented their side of the health care debate . . .

. . . well, at least until they were caught planting a fake doctor to praise Obama's plan at a townhall gathering. As reported by CNN -- wait, they didn't really cover the story. The NY Times broke the story -- nope, couldn't find much there. AARP posted a story -- oops, that story has been mysteriously wiped from the internet.

I'm not the biggest Glenn Beck fan, but at least he covered this incredible story.

Mark Lloyd: The FCC's New Attack-Free-Speech Czar

2009-08-15T00:08:00.005-04:00

The administration is calling him "the new FCC Chief Diversity Officer," but it's unclear whether or not there was and old FCC Chief Diversity Officer. What is clear is that Obama has given America yet another Czar -- one of those ill-defined and unelected Washington power brokers who provide us in political carnage what they lack in qualifications. I'm not sure because my math skills are struggling with the current economy, but I think this would be Czar number 132 for the Obama administration. Guinness has been notified (naturally, I'm referring to the beer rather than the record book because I need a few stiff ones these days).

More frightening than the fact that America now has more Czar's than pimple-backed baseball juicers, is the latest addition's background and intentions. His name is Mark Lloyd and he is . . . well, how do I deliver this to you gently . . . a socialist rube who abhors free speech and is dedicated to the eradication of opposition voices.

In 2006 while at the liberal Center for American Progress Lloyd wrote a book entitled, Prologue to a Farce: Communications and Democracy in America. In the book he presents the idea the private broadcasters (private business) should pay a licensing fees which equals their total operating costs so that public broadcasting station can spend the same on their operations as the private companies do. By doing so he hopes to improve the Corporation for Public Broadcasting currently at $400 Million.

In other words, the wealth should be redistributed from successful private businesses and poured into public broadcasting through taxes equal to the total operating cost of the successful stations. That's just slightly insane since no company in America could survive paying Federal fees equal to their operating costs. But Mark Lloyd isn't concerned about their survival.

It's no coincidence that Obama has put in place a Czar to attack-tax free speech in an arena dominated by conservatives: talk radio. You can bet television will somehow escape this "search for diversity," unless the Oval Office can figure out a way to single out Fox News with more than snarky comments fed through a teleprompter.

In Lloyd's own words:

“The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) must be reformed along democratic lines and funded on a substantial level. Federal and regional broadcast operations and local stations should be funded at levels commensurate with or above those spending levels at which commercial operations are funded. This funding should come from license fees charged to commercial broadcasters. Funding should not come from congressional appropriations. Sponsorship should be prohibited at all public broadcasters.”

In the view of Obama's latest Czar, the market should never determine success. Instead, the government should determine what we can listen to. (sorry for ending that sentence with a preposition, but this frustrates the grammar out of me). The "Fairness Doctrine" may be dead, but the liberal state machine has not given up the fight to suppress the voices of those who oppose their will. They've just taken off the mask of "fairness" and replaced it with false faces of "diversity" and "localization."

The Grassroots Politics of America

2009-08-08T09:09:00.005-04:00

The Democrats and their media lapdogs are using the same techniques attempting to discredit the ObamaCare protests as they did to attack Tea Parties, claiming that they are nothing more than "Brooks Brothers" organized anti-Obama rallies . . . apparently forget that moments earlier they saw the rallies as a bunch of uneducated red necks gathering for free beer.

So how do these rallies really compare to . . . say, the grassroots gatherings of liberals. Hmmmmmmm

Them There Democrats Are Gettin' Bold

2009-08-08T08:34:00.003-04:00

Now that they control the Congress, the Senate, the Oval Office and the mainstream media the Democrats are are experiencing a fresh new boldness when it come to expressing what they truly believe. I wonder if Americans are listening? We'll know when their ears start to bleed.

And to think, some voter/lemmings still think this is about "economic justice" rather than a power grab by the liberal elite. And that Obama is just so cute when he reads from his eloquent teleprompter.

America's Villians

2009-07-23T10:21:00.003-04:00

My friend Lila made this astute observation about Obama's latest remarks:

"Basically Obama's speech yesterday summed up that the evil villains of this great land were Doctors, Republicans and the Police. This POTUS needs to be impeached."

Hard to argue.