Non PC Holiday Greeting

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year 2011 AD
Sincerely yours,
-t

PC Seasonal Greeting

To one and all,

Please accept*, with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral, celebration of the solstice holiday, practised within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.
And a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2011, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make our country great, (not to imply that our country is necessarily greater than any other country) and without regard to the race, creed, colour, age, physical ability, religious faith, choice of computer platform, or sexual preference of the wishee.
Yours truly, in political correctness,
-t

---

*By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms. This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for herself/himself or others, and is void where prohibited by law, and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher. This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year, or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first. Warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher.

Panel finds Justice reluctant to take cases of white victims - Washington Times

Panel finds Justice reluctant to take cases of white victims - Washington Times

A Real Inconveniet Truth

In between late night massages and  saving the planet, the prototype ecco-warrior Mr Al Gore emerges now filled with angst over his earlier choices.  He originally urged that we all switch to corn ethanol so we could burn up our food supply in our automobiles.  Al Gore admitted today that corn ethanol was “not a good policy,” according to Reuters.  "One of the reasons I made that mistake is that I paid particular attention to the farmers in my home state of Tennessee", Mr Gore said.  Sure he made a mistake, but dog gone it, the reason he made the mistake was his heart was just too big and he was too compassionate.  Now Mr Gore has become a real pragmatist.  Now he says don't use corn ethanol instead use the "second generation technologies which do not compete with food".   Second generation technologies convert glass clippings into bio-fuel, ala "Back to the Future Part 2". It seems that this change of heart about fuel sources also comes with a change in his funding.  It turns out that Mr Gore is a partner in a venture capital company, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, which is now promoting, wait for it.  Yes, you guessed it the so called "second generation technologies". 
There is a great post in the Green Hell Blog that details this newest hypocrisy  from the former VP:   Green Hell Blog   http://greenhellblog.com/2010/11/22/al-gore-cries-crocodile-tears-over-ethanol/
It turns out that former VP not only likes receiving those late nigh massages, he also will administer them to the public - for a fee.

US Tax System Explained Through Beer

15 October, 2008 by Scott Nolan Smith from the site "theSkittzo" http://scottnolansmith.wordpress.com/ "I received the following in an email earlier, thought it was clever and decided to post — though it is a bit of an oversimplification. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this: The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.” Drinks for the ten now cost just $80 total. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’ They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 ( 25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings). Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. 'I only got a dollar out of the $20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,'but he got $10!' 'Yeah, that’s right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!' 'That’s true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!' 'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!' The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier." While I agree this is over simplified it is a excellent illustration of our current tax system and by following the simplified illustration, anyone gets a gut level understanding of why  there is so much emotion over this issue.  And it really underscores the demagoguery of no tax cuts for the rich.

Insert your own joke here

White House Staffers Got a Bigger Raise Than You Did Last Year

Alarming Border Security Trend

The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The recent actions of the Tea Party are prompting an exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray, and to agree with Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck.

Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night. "I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn," said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota. The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry. He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. 

When I said I didn't have any, he left before I even got a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?”

In an effort to stop the illegal aliens, Greenfield erected higher fences,but the liberals scaled them. He then installed loudspeakers that blared Rush Limbaugh across the fields.

"Not real effective," he said. "The  liberals still got through and Rush annoyed the cows so much that they wouldn't give any milk.”

Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals near the Canadian border, pack them into Volvo station wagons and drive them across the border where they are simply left to fend for themselves."  A lot of these people are not prepared for our rugged conditions," an Ontario border patrolman said. "I found one carload without a single bottle of imported drinking water. They did have a nice little Napa Valley Cabernet, though."

When liberals are caught, they're sent back across the border, often wailing loudly that they fear retribution from conservatives. Rumors have been circulating about plans being made to build re-education camps where liberals will be forced to drink domestic beer and watch NASCAR races.

In recent days, liberals have turned to ingenious ways of crossing the border. Some have been disguised as senior citizens taking a bus trip to buy cheap Canadian prescription drugs. After catching a half-dozen young vegans in powdered wig disguises, Canadian immigration authorities began stopping buses and quizzing the supposed senior citizens about Perry Como and Rosemary Clooney to prove that they were alive in the '50s. "If they can't identify the accordion player on The Lawrence Welk Show, we become very suspicious about their age" an official said.

Canadian citizens have complained that the illegal immigrants are creating an organic-broccoli shortage and are renting all the Michael Moore movies. "I really feel sorry for American liberals, but the Canadian economy just can't support them." an Ottawa resident said. "How many art-history majors does one country need?"

The United Nations Human Rights Council

"The United Nations Human Rights Council, a conclave of 47 nations that includes such notorious human rights violators as China, Cuba, Libya and Saudi Arabia, met in Geneva on Friday, to question the United States about its human rights failings. It heard, among other things, that the U.S. discriminates against Muslims, that its police are barbaric and that it has been holding political prisoners behind bars for years. Russia urged the U.S. to abolish the death penalty. Cuba and Iran called on Washington to close Guantanamo prison and investigate alleged torture by its troops abroad. Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, told the U.S. it must better promote religious tolerance. Mexico complained that racial profiling had become a common practice in some U.S. states.  Some of these allegations, and many more, come from Americans themselves — especially from a stridently critical network of U.S. organizations whose input dominates the U.N. digest of submissions from 'civil society' that are part of the council’s background reading."  George Russell Published November 05, 2010 | FoxNews.com. 
Here is a little reported event or discussed event.  Anyone can (and does) criticize the US, about anything they wish.  And those of us who love this nation realize it has it flaws.  We should be constantly mindful of the faults of this nation and ever vigilant to correct them.   But going hat in hand before one of the most corrupt political organizations that ever existed and defending ourselves from insane, hypocritical charges is so grating that it is almost physically revolting.  Does it make any kind of sense to defend ourselves from charges of secret prisons or torture from the Cubans or the Iranians?  Do we want to take law and order tips from Mexico; or learn about religious tolerance from the government of Indonesia? 
The absurdity of this Kafkaesque world is simply too bizarre for rationalization.  But there is a reason.  But the State Department which is sending a high level delegation to participate in this US bashing feast has a reason.  But according to the U.S. State Department, which led a delegation of high-level American diplomats and government officials to Geneva, the Periodic Review is a major opportunity for Washington to lead the rest of the world by example.
“Our taking the process seriously contributes to the universality” of the human rights process, one State Department official told Fox News. “It’s an important opportunity for us to showcase our willingness to expose ourselves in a transparent way” to human rights criticism.
“For us, upholding the process is very important.”
The same official, however, declared that the “most important” part of the process is “the dialogue with our own citizens.” 
Why would the current administration sully the honor and prestige of this great nation in order to achieve a “dialogue with our own citizens”?    When is out government ever going to figure it out that participating in charades like this, does nothing to set an example for the many rogue nations around the world? I think the current US administration is trying to make some kind of point about how everyone is the same.  But apparently, they are unaware of  the vast differences between legitimacy of the US government and the legitimacy of most the other world governments.  "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" according to the Declaration of Independence.  This is a major premise of the US government and the Western democracies, not the rest of the world and certainly not the corrupt UN. 

WikiLeaks and Anti-US propaganda

I am so tired of hearing about Wikileaks, the Whistle-Blower site.  It is just not true.   The definition of a “whistle blower: an informant who exposes wrongdoing within an organization in the hope of stopping it".   Obviously. “WikiLeaks” is not inside any organization. More importantly, to print classified documents is not the same as exposing wrongdoing, unless of course you are believe everything the US does is wrong.

There is no "smoking gun" here.  Is it not obvious that war zone intelligence is full of unsubstantiated reports, rumors and just plain lies?  Particularly in a conflict like Iraq where just a few years ago the opinion makers were calling this conflict a civil war.  In a place where there are few uniformed combatants, every prinsoner can claim to be an innocent civilian.  In a conflict, rife with infiltrators, spies  and shifting alliances, every casualty  or alleged casualty was murderously gunned down from a now now vanished helicopter. Considering that this region of the world has a history of hundreds of years of tribal, ethnic, religious and territorial conflicts and these conflicts have been filled with brutality, murder, rape and torture; then the charge that these practices are continuing is hardly a revelation.  

What is ridiculous is to pretend that the publishing of classified documents is somehow a noble gesture, performed to expose and end the evil practices of the US. Instead, let's be honest about this site and call it what it is, “Wikileaks – ant-US propaganda site”.

 

 

 

At the Ft. Hood Memorial Service... The Crotch Salute Returns

          Here is the  President of the United States.  At a memorial for those killed at Ft Hood.  I know it would be too much to ask him to salute or hold his hand over his heart: but could he have the decency, to at least stand up straight with his hands at his side, instead of this crotch cradle prose.  It is amazing that this man will bow and scrape in the presents of any foreign dictator or psycho "President for Life" around the world.   But when it comes to honoring the men and women who were killed in the line of duty.  Well we get the bored waiter pose.  This transcends political affiliation, citizens of this country no matter what their party, should be highly offended by this behavior.

FOXNews.com - NASA Chief: Next Frontier Better Relations With Muslim World

This would be hilarious if it was not so ludicrous.


FOXNews.com - NASA Chief: Next Frontier Better Relations With Muslim World

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his "foremost" mission as the head of America's space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world.

Though international diplomacy would seem well outside NASA's orbit, Boldin said in an interview with Al Jazeera that strengthening those ties was among the top tasks President Obama assigned him. He said better interaction with the Muslim world would ultimately advance space travel.

"When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering," Bolden said in the interview.

The NASA administrator was in the Middle East last month marking the one-year anniversary since Obama delivered an address to Muslim nations in Cairo. Bolden spoke in June at the American University in Cairo -- in his interview with Al Jazeera, he described space travel as an international collaboration of which Muslim nations must be a part.

"It is a matter of trying to reach out and get the best of all worlds, if you will, and there is much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are possible from the Muslim (nations)," he said. He held up the International Space Station as a model, praising the contributions there from the Russians and the Chinese.

However, Bolden denied the suggestion that he was on a diplomatic mission -- in a distinctly non-diplomatic role.

"Not at all. It's not a diplomatic anything," he said.

He said the United States is not going to travel beyond low-Earth orbit on its own and that no country is going to make it to Mars without international help.

Bolden has faced criticism this year for overseeing the cancellation of the agency's Constellation program, which was building new rockets and spaceships capable of returning astronauts to the moon. Stressing the importance of international cooperation in future missions, Bolden told Al Jazeera that the moon, Mars and asteroids are still planned destinations for NASA.

Dow Repeats Great Depression Pattern: Charts - CNBC

For all my chartist friends, this is an alarming trend.


Dow Repeats Great Depression Pattern: Charts - CNBC

Dow Repeats Great Depression Pattern: Charts

• July 5, 2010 CNBC
  

The Dow Jones Industrial Average is repeating a pattern that appeared just before markets fell during the Great Depression, Daryl Guppy, CEO at Guppytraders.com, told CNBC Monday.

“Those who don’t remember history are doomed to repeat it…there was a head and shoulders pattern that developed before the Depression in 1929, then with the recovery in 1930 we had another head and shoulders pattern that preceded a fall in the market, and in the current Dow situation we see an exact repeat of that environment,” Guppy said.

The Dow retreated 457.33 points, or 4.5 percent last week, to close at 9,686 Friday. Guppy said a Dow fall below 9,800 confirmed the head and shoulders pattern.

The Shanghai Composite is seeing a very rapid collapse, falling below 2,500, which suggests the major fall in the Dow, he added.

In the European markets, Guppy says Frankfurt's Dax is witnessing a different pattern to London's FTSE.

Guppy uses the broad trading band as measurement- giving the Dax a downsize target of 1,500. The same head and shoulders pattern seen in the Dow can also being seen in the FTSE, he added.

© 2010 CNBC.com

Propose this song by Frank Loesse as the official song of the current administration

Sung while gazing in the mirror:

"Now, there you are
Yes, there's that face
That face that somehow I trust
It may embarrass you to hear me say it
But say it I must
Say it I must!

You have the cool, clear eyes
Of a seeker of wisdom and truth
Yet there's that upturned chin
And the grin of impetuous youth
Oh, I Believe In You
I Believe In You…"

Paul H. Rubin: Why Is the Gulf Cleanup So Slow? - WSJ.com

Paul H. Rubin: Why Is the Gulf Cleanup So Slow? - WSJ.com

From the Wall Street Journal July 2. 2010 by Paul H. Rubin

By PAUL H. RUBIN

Destin, Fla.

As the oil spill continues and the cleanup lags, we must begin to ask difficult and uncomfortable questions. There does not seem to be much that anyone can do to stop the spill except dig a relief well, not due until August. But the cleanup is a different story. The press and Internet are full of straightforward suggestions for easy ways of improving the cleanup, but the federal government is resisting these remedies.

First, the Environmental Protection Agency can relax restrictions on the amount of oil in discharged water, currently limited to 15 parts per million. In normal times, this rule sensibly controls the amount of pollution that can be added to relatively clean ocean water. But this is not a normal time.

Various skimmers and tankers (some of them very large) are available that could eliminate most of the oil from seawater, discharging the mostly clean water while storing the oil onboard. While this would clean vast amounts of water efficiently, the EPA is unwilling to grant a temporary waiver of its regulations.

Next, the Obama administration can waive the Jones Act, which restricts foreign ships from operating in U.S. coastal waters. Many foreign countries (such as the Netherlands and Belgium) have ships and technologies that would greatly advance the cleanup. So far, the U.S. has refused to waive the restrictions of this law and allow these ships to participate in the effort.

The combination of these two regulations is delaying and may even prevent the world's largest skimmer, the Taiwanese owned "A Whale," from deploying. This 10-story high ship can remove almost as much oil in a day as has been removed in total—roughly 500,000 barrels of oily water per day. The tanker is steaming towards the Gulf, hoping it will receive Coast Guard and EPA approval before it arrives.

In addition, the federal government can free American-based skimmers. Of the 2,000 skimmers in the U.S. (not subject to the Jones Act or other restrictions), only 400 have been sent to the Gulf. Federal barriers have kept the others on stations elsewhere in case of other oil spills, despite the magnitude of the current crisis. The Coast Guard and the EPA issued a joint temporary rule suspending the regulation on June 29—more than 70 days after the spill.

The Obama administration can also permit more state and local initiatives. The media endlessly report stories of county and state officials applying federal permits to perform various actions, such as building sand berms around the Louisiana coast. In some cases, they were forbidden from acting. In others there have been extensive delays in obtaining permission.

As the government fails to implement such simple and straightforward remedies, one must ask why.

One possibility is sheer incompetence. Many critics of the president are fond of pointing out that he had no administrative or executive experience before taking office. But the government is full of competent people, and the military and Coast Guard can accomplish an assigned mission. In any case, several remedies require nothing more than getting out of the way.

Another possibility is that the administration places a higher priority on interests other than the fate of the Gulf, such as placating organized labor, which vigorously defends the Jones Act.

Finally there is the most pessimistic explanation—that the oil spill may be viewed as an opportunity, the way White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said back in February 2009, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." Many administration supporters are opposed to offshore oil drilling and are already employing the spill as a tool for achieving other goals. The websites of the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, for example, all feature the oil spill as an argument for forbidding any further offshore drilling or for any use of fossil fuels at all. None mention the Jones Act.

To these organizations and perhaps to some in the administration, the oil spill may be a strategic justification in a larger battle. President Obama has already tried to severely limit drilling in the Gulf, using his Oval Office address on June 16 to demand that we "embrace a clean energy future." In the meantime, how about a cleaner Gulf?

Mr. Rubin, a professor of economics at Emory University, held several senior positions in the federal government in the 1980s. Since 1991 he has spent his summers on the Gulf.

Soaring costs force Canada to reassess health model - Yahoo! News

"Pressured by an aging population and the need to rein in budget deficits, Canada's provinces are taking tough measures to curb health care costs, a trend that could erode the principles of the popular state-funded system."   Interesting article, that outlines the future of Obama-care, and it is exactly like opponents predicted. To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, Socialism is great, until you run out of other people's money.

Soaring costs force Canada to reassess health model - Yahoo! News

'One Man - One Vote' - Definetly Not

I was appalled on so many levels by this article:  First that a "US judge" would impose this sentence.  Second, that this is being used in other places within the US.  Third, that there is a consulting company (or companies?)  that is devoted to implementing this kind of tyranny.  Fourth, there is no general upset about this across the nation.  Citizens should be outraged!  This is more of an opposite of democracy than dictatorship, because it it cloaked in the guise of an election.   When an election is deemed to be unfair because the expected racial outcome is not achieved, God help us. 


Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election - Yahoo! News

PORT CHESTER, N.Y. – Arthur Furano voted early — five days before Election Day. And he voted often, flipping the lever six times for his favorite candidate. Furano cast multiple votes on the instructions of a federal judge and the U.S. Department of Justice as part of a new election system crafted to help boost Hispanic representation.
Voters in Port Chester, 25 miles northeast of New York City, are electing village trustees for the first time since the federal government alleged in 2006 that the existing election system was unfair. The election ends Tuesday and results are expected late Tuesday.
Although the village of about 30,000 residents is nearly half Hispanic, no Latino had ever been elected to any of the six trustee seats, which until now were chosen in a conventional at-large election. Most voters were white, and white candidates always won.
Federal Judge Stephen Robinson said that violated the Voting Rights Act, and he approved a remedy suggested by village officials: a system called cumulative voting, in which residents get six votes each to apportion as they wish among the candidates. He rejected a government proposal to break the village into six districts, including one that took in heavily Hispanic areas.
Furano and his wife, Gloria Furano, voted Thursday.
"That was very strange," Arthur Furano, 80, said after voting. "I'm not sure I liked it. All my life, I've heard, `one man, one vote.'"
It's the first time any municipality in New York has used cumulative voting, said Amy Ngai, a director at FairVote, a nonprofit election research and reform group that has been hired to consult. The system is used to elect the school board in Amarillo, Texas, the county commission in Chilton County, Ala., and the City Council in Peoria, Ill.
The judge also ordered Port Chester to implement in-person early voting, allowing residents to show up on any of five days to cast ballots. That, too, is a first in New York, Ngai said.
Village clerk Joan Mancuso said Monday that 604 residents voted early.
Gloria Furano gave one vote each to six candidates. Aaron Conetta gave two votes each to three candidates.
Frances Nurena talked to the inspectors about the new system, grabbed some educational material and went home to study. After all, it was only Thursday. She could vote on Friday, Saturday or Tuesday.
"I understand the voting," she said. "But since I have time, I'm going to learn more about the candidates."
On Tuesday, Candida Sandoval voted at the Don Bosco Center, where a soup kitchen and day-laborer hiring center added to the activity, and where federal observers watched the voting from a table in the corner.
"I hope that if Hispanics get in, they do something for all the Hispanic people," Sandoval said in Spanish. "I don't know, but I hope so."
FairVote said cumulative voting allows a political minority to gain representation if it organizes and focuses its voting strength on specific candidates. Two of the 13 Port Chester trustee candidates — one Democrat and one Republican — are Hispanic. A third Hispanic is running a write-in campaign after being taken off the ballot on a technicality.
Campaigning was generally low key, and the election itself was less of an issue than housing density and taxes.
Hispanic candidates Fabiola Montoya and Luis Marino emphasized their volunteer work and said they would represent all residents if elected.
Gregg Gregory gave all his votes to one candidate, then said: "I think this is terrific. It's good for Port Chester. It opens it up to a lot more people, not just Hispanics but independents, too."
Vote coordinator Martha Lopez said that if turnout is higher than in recent years, when it hovered around 25 percent, the election would be a success — regardless of whether a Hispanic was elected.
"I think we'll make it," she said. "I'm happy to report the people seem very interested."
But Randolph McLaughlin, who represented a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said the goal was not merely to encourage more Hispanics to vote but "to create a system whereby the Hispanic community would be able to nominate and elect a candidate of their choice."
That could be a non-Hispanic, he acknowledged, and until exit polling is done, "it won't be known for sure whether the winners were Hispanic-preferred."
The village held 12 forums — six each in English and Spanish — to let voters know about the new system and to practice voting. The bilingual ballot lists each candidate across the top row — some of them twice if they have two party lines — and then the same candidates are listed five more times. In all, there are 114 levers; voters can flip any six.
Besides the forums, bright yellow T-shirts, tote bags and lawn signs declared "Your voice, your vote, your village," part of the educational materials also mandated in the government agreement. Announcements were made on cable TV in each language.
All such materials — the ballot, the brochures, the TV spots, the reminders sent home in schoolkids' backpacks — had to be approved in advance, in English and Spanish versions, by the Department of Justice.
Conetta said the voter education effort was so thorough he found voting easier than usual.
"It was very different but actually quite simple," he said. "No problem."

FOXNews.com - Conn. Town Can't Hold Graduations in Church, Judge Rules

FOXNews.com - Conn. Town Can't Hold Graduations in Church, Judge Rules

A Federal judge has ruled that two Connecticut high schools cannot hold their graduation in a Church because it "unconstitutionally entangled itself with religion by agreeing to cover much of the church's religious imagery. She also says the town coerced the plaintiffs to support religion by forcing them to enter the church". What in the world does that mean? "Entangle itself with religion by agreeing to cover much of the church's religious imagery", does that mean if the they did NOT cover the imagery it would be OK? How is walking into a building a form of coerced participation, endorsement or even acknowledgment of other events that occur within the building? If you walk into an apartment building does that designate support of all events that are occurring or have occurred or will occur within the building? How can government inspectors go into a church, synagogue or mosque without entangle itself with religion?
What of the pathetic people who sued to prevent this graduation ceremony? Do they think that they will start speaking in tongues and baptizing people uncontrollably? Presumably they were trying to prevent themselves and others from being exposed to religion. When did this become a right? When did the right to protect people from having to view any religious iconography or setting become more important that the rights of ordinary citizens to go about their daily lives without having the state micro manage their daily lives? Where is it in the Constitution that the rights of these anti-religion zealots can trump the rights of ordinary citizens to watch their sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, cousins and friends from graduating from high school? This IS a case of government becoming entangled with religion, but it is due to judicial prejudice not constitutional restriction.

Flotillas and Falsehoods - Mona Charen - National Review Online

Flotillas and Falsehoods - Mona Charen - National Review Online

State C vs State T

Hypothetically:  Governors  of two states, (lets call one C and one T), jogging with their dogs along a trail. Coyote  jumps out and starts to attack dog:
Case 1 state C:
#1. Governor starts to intervene and then realizes he  should stop; the coyote is doing what is natural. 
#2. Call animal control. Animal control captures  coyote and spends $200 testing it for diseases and $500 relocating it. 
#3. Call Vet. Veterinarian collects dead dog  and spends $200 testing it for diseases. 
#4. Governor goes to hospital and spends $3500  getting checked for diseases from the coyote and getting bite wound  bandaged. 
#5. Running trail gets shut down for 6 months while  wildlife services conduct a $100,000 survey to make sure the area is  clear of dangerous animals. 
#6. Governor spends $50,000 and starts a coyote  awareness program for people who live in the area. 
#7. State legislature spends $2 million investigating  how to better handle rabies and how to possibly eradicate it. 
#8. Governor’s security agent fired for not stopping  the attack and letting the Governor try to intervene. 
#9. Cost $75,000 to train new security agent. 
#10. PETA protests the relocation of the coyote.   
Case 2 state T: 
#1. Governor spends $1.23 on a .380 ACP Gold Dot  Hollow Point and he and the dog keep jogging. 
God, I am glad I live in T.

What Do We Believe About the Role of Government in the economy?

The endless effrontery of this administration to force its policies down our collective throats, is ubiquitous. But even in a regime that is so unashamedly self promoting, the scheduled committee meeting to intimidate business into promoting the Obamacare and by extension the law makers who favored it seems egregious. And, yet, I have heard very little comment about this. Certainly not the outcry this planned abuse of power deserves.

From a story on FoxNews.com April 14, 2010. "Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., has canceled a hearing intended to grill CEOs who took a charge against profits because of the health care reform bill. The cancellation came after they realized what everyone already knew - that the companies were required to do what they did because of accounting rules. Waxman and others had reacted with outrage and accused the companies of doing it - in essence, to make health care reform look bad."

The fact is that Obamacare ends a tax break that companies used keep drug benefits for their retirees instead of allowing them to go Medicare. The article then says, "The Democratic memo cancelling the hearing notes, 'These one-time charges were required by applicable accounting rules. Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles as determined by the FASB, companies are required to take a noncash charge against current earnings to recognize a tax liability for the estimated future tax effects of a new law.'

It goes on to read, 'This noncash charge must reflect the entire present value of the loss of future tax deductions on the subsidy, and it must be taken in the period in which the law is enacted. Moreover, if the level of the impact is deemed "material" under SEC regulations, the company must file the report promptly following the triggering event, in this case the enactment of the law.'"

This is a naked attempt to coerce businesses to act in a fashion that would benefit the law makers who voted for this legislation. Citizens should be outraged about this. This shows a complete lack of ethics. Has it come to this in our history, that we are so cowed by our government that we blithely ignore the open bullying of private institutions for the "offense" of failing to make the government policy's look good? This was unadulterated extortion, should be met with public outcry and government employees whether elected, appointed or hired should be terminated if they attempt to misuse their authority for their own benefit.

What does this say about us a citizens? What does this say about our government? What does this say about our future.

Misinformation about the tax burden

"'We are over-taxed as it is,' Doris said bluntly.
'Well, let's talk about that, because this is an area where there's been just a whole lot of misinformation, and I'm going to have to work hard over the next several months to clean up a lot of the misapprehensions that people have,' the president said." This is start of "The Washington Post" April 03, 2010 article entitled, "Obama's 17-minute, 2,500-word response to woman's claim of being 'over-taxed'".
Poor President Obama imagine his frustration. Here he was taking his valuable time to enlighten the ignorant battery plant workers; when, all of sudden, he comes face to face with Doris and many others like her who are "mis-apprehensive" about taxes. But even when faced with such massive ignorance the President still donated 17 minutes to explain to Doris, the petty factors in her life are nothing compared with the national issues. So while, Doris was merely struggling to say feed her family or maybe pay her mortgage, the President was fighting to keep keep funding national expenditures while the national debt is growing. While Doris was working to repair her car or replace those worn tires, his administration was striving to see that insurance companies were not becoming too profitable. And while Doris was laying awake at night trying to figure out how to get a new or better job; the President's flight on Air Force One was practically destroyed by Congressional reports on government overspending.
When one looks down at the pathetically small lives of battery plant workers like Doris from the lofty height of Presidential peaks, it becomes apparent, that that the "tax burden" of battery makers is just another barrier to the President. We can all be grateful that he took 17 minutes out of his important life to correct Doris' misapprehension.

Health Care Reform - the Protection Racket

The Federal government is compelling it subjects to buy insurance. They have given the hoi polloi a choice to buy health insurance; not just any insurance but officially approved, US Government certified insurance OR pay a repressive fine. All of this backed up by muscle of the closest this country has to a secret police - the IRS. Basically you buy the government's protection for your health or they take what you have and pay themselves. The leg tingling, media is swooning with the originality of this concept. But this is not a new design. This is the classic "protection racket" that goes back to the very first gang thug that walked into a place of business or private home and demanded that the owner buy "health and fire insurance" to protect the establishment from burning down with the owner in it. Once the proprietor purchases mafia health and life insurance, the collector comes back every week to demand another premium payment. Their is no fixed rate, each extortionist determines the victims "ability to pay" and charges accordingly. In addition to the premium, the collector will also occasionally charge additional "penalties" and interest if the victim resists in any fashion. Does this sound familiar?
The classic "protection racket" is actually less insidious than health care reform. In the classic model, the collector only demands protection for the victim's own property. But in the health care reform the victims will not only have to pay for their own protection, but will also be compelled to pay the insurance for the "less fortunate". You are considered "fortunate" if the government has left you with any means to pay.
The current administration laughingly assures us that this way, at least, the law abiding citizens no longer have to worry about the profits that the insurance companies were making. They have an excellent point here as anytime the government (or the mob) becomes involved in a business, profits vanish! Wouldn't it be better to "worry" about the insurance companies' profits than bear the yoke of government protection.

The importance of being Wal-Mart.

It seems like every day the news is bracketed with new Wal-Mart story. Here are just a few examples:
• BAKERSFIELD, Calif. -- A text message that's been circulating among Kern County's Hispanic community is causing some concern. The message claims that Wal-Mart gave permission for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to round up immigrants in its stores on March 20. The message adds to support the Hispanic movement by not shopping at Wal-Mart and to spread the word.
• YUCCA VALLEY — Two environmental groups suing Wal-Mart Stores Inc. settled this week, with the corporation agreeing to improve the energy efficiency of its planned Supercenter in Yucca Valley and donate money toward land conservation.
• COLUMBUS -- Police said a 68 year old man in a Wal-Mart store punched children with a key protruding from his fist and told investigators it was a thrill.
• The Supreme Court of Canada found for Wal-Mart and confirmed that a recently certified employer has no legal obligation under labor legislation to stay in business, and that a closure of one of its locations can constitute sufficient reason for the termination of the employees at that location.
Each one of these stories shows a kaleidoscopic view through a quintessential American institution. Wal-Mart has become the fabric that holds the tapestry of our lives. It amazes me that there was a period of time within my adult life time when hardly anyone outside of a few people in northwest Arkansas had ever even heard of Wal-Mart. When I got out of the service in 1970, I was hired as a part time employee to open Wal-Mart #26, I worked at night and on weekends while I went to school Monday through Friday. Fresh back from Vietnam, I had no idea that the “Wal” was actually the family name of the major owners, let alone that they would go on to become some of the riches people in the US. And the chain would become one of the most recognizable institutions in American life.
Given the relative short existence of Wal-Mart it is hard to imagine what a common frame of reference it has been become. Before Wal-Mart where did illegal immigrants stay away from to avoid the INS? I just don’t see the same level of impact if, for instance, illegal immigrants were avoiding Piggly Wiggle to stay away from a rumored immigration raid. And, if Wal-Mart had never existed who would be donating money to land conservation to assuage the sensibilities of enviro-activists? It seems doubtful that Stan’s IGA donating money for a new landfill would be quite so newsworthy. If 68 year punches children with a key in a Wal-Mart that is news; but a senile old man frightening children at Walgreen's; well, what did you expect? Without Wal-Mart it would be obvious that defunct employers could not provide jobs; but with Wal-Mart the people of Canada have to wait until the Supreme Court decides that once a business closes that is sufficient reason to terminate the former employees.
For better or for worse, the world as we have come to recognize it lives on, around, a through Wal-Mart. It gives scale to world events, it supplies a reference for human folly and paints the world in a uniquely American perspective. If the Walton family had not built Wal-Mart, we would have had to invent it, just so we could relate to today's society.

Everyone agrees that the health care system is broken?

One thing I hear over and over is that, "everyone agrees the health care system needs to be fixed". I don't. The problems with the health care system is one of cost not quality. Government programs always cost more and reduce quality. I really do not want to see some government run social experiment on health care with my family as the guinea pigs. It the politicians want to fix something, why not tort reform? If the health care industry could get the trial lawyers off their back, then medical costs would decline sharply. It is not only the direct costs, such as insanely high medical malpractice insurance premiums; but a much greater expense, defensive medicine costs. All those unnecessary extra tests and exhaustive record keeping so that so that health care providers can defend themselves from expensive malpractice suits.

Why play defense?

There are thirteen 9-year olds on our 7 man flag football team. The league requires that all players play either on the defense or on the offense for the entire game. Therefore there are 7 starters on offense and 6 starters on defense with one of the offensive players also playing defense. Assuming half the plays are offense and half the plays are defense, everyone plays at least half of the game. You think that would be a pretty equitable system. I coach the defense and the question I hear the most is, "when can I play on offense?" It does not matter how well or how poorly the player is playing, whether it is practice or in a game; all the defense drools with envy over the offensive players. In the last game our shut down corner intercepted a pass and took it in to the end zone for a touchdown. He came running over to the side where I gave him a high five and a pat on the back. "Good job, man", I praised him. He looked up at me grinning from ear to ear with the echo's of his team mate's cheers still pulsing through the air and he said to me, "Thanks, now can I play offense?" I told him he was playing offense he had just scored a touchdown. He looked at me like I had recently escaped from an asylum. He just continued on to the bench after giving me that nod that kids use when adults say things that make no sense to them. Clearly, in his mind what he had just done was NOT offense.
So why is it that playing offense is cool but playing defense is well a necessary evil, at best. Why do defensive players long to be offensive players? I think it is because offensive players have power. They know what play is called, they know what they are suppose to do and they challenge the defense to figure out what the offense is doing and try to stop it. Obviously, they are dictating the terms to the defense and it is up to the defense to try to react. Some how we have come to value the act more than the force that seeks so contain it.
Is this a metaphor for the society we will live in? It seems like we admire and emulate actors, musicians and celebrities that behave in the most debauched and depraved manner while shunning any conformity to standards of moral and decent codes. Is immorality offense and virtue defense in the modern world? Has the desecration of our founding principles and contempt for traditional values become the offense while morality and religion become defense?
Maybe that explains the way we have become. Everyone wants to be on the cool, hip, POWERFUL offense, challenge the stogy, weak defensive forces of morality, virtue and religion to try to contain them.

Why is the news media so interested in compromise?

Ever notice that every time a pollster prints anything about "bickering" in Washington, the media, which is usually too busy pushing the leftist agenda to notice anything right of Al Gore, suddenly is swooning over the need for "compromise" and "bipartisanship". There is a good reason. If you start with a democracy and then begin compromising you are moving away from a democracy. Every compromise is a step toward authoritarianism. It is not possible to move toward socialism without moving away from capitalism. So when Obamacare, for instant, could not be installed by fiat, suddenly the is now need for bipartisanship. When the administration thought they had a filibuster proof majority, neither they nor their life partners in the media saw a need for compromise or bipartisanship. Remember they pontificated, "Elections have consequences". So, now we have had several interim elections that have ended the filibuster proof majority and sent waves of horror and foreboding through the Democrat Congressional Caucasus. Now, suddenly, with the socialist agenda in trouble, the consequences from these elections has become the need to stop the bickering in Washington, end the partisanship. Partisanship being anything this administration does not approve. This administration has even condescended to reach out across the isle to tell the lowly Republicans what they are doing wrong. The administration has signaled that they will now accept surrender, to end the bickering; but, only if it is on the administration's terms. Of course, all of this in the spirit of "bipartisanship". God save this Republic.

FOXNews.com - Pelosi: Lawmakers Should Sacrifice Jobs for Health Care

Pelosi is demanding that Dems fall on their swords and vote for socialized medicine even if means that they will not be re-elected. This is the same kind of leadership that demands the suicide bombers run into a crowd and kill as many enemy as possible. This has moved outside the parameters of democracy and moved into the realm of cults.