This Really Is Not Helpful

Gateway Pundit:

The democrats in Congress finally jumped into action. The tax-and-spend liberals decided the best thing they could do to help out in the Gulf after the disastrous oil spill was to quadruple the gas tax.
What a complete stunner.
Here comes higher gas prices for everyone thanks once again to democrats.
The AP reported:

Responding to the massive BP oil spill, Congress is getting ready to quadruple—to 32 cents a barrel—a tax on oil used to help finance cleanups. The increase would raise nearly $11 billion over the next decade.

The tax is levied on oil produced in the U.S. or imported from foreign countries. The revenue goes to a fund managed by the Coast Guard to help pay to clean up spills in waterways, such as the Gulf of Mexico.

The tax increase is part of a larger bill that has grown into a nearly $200 billion grab bag of unfinished business that lawmakers hope to complete before Memorial Day. The key provisions are a one-year extension of about 50 popular tax breaks that expired at the end of last year, and expanded unemployment benefits, including subsidies for health insurance, through the end of the year.

The House could vote on the bill as early as Tuesday.

I think that over the past year and a half we've seen more than ample evidence of the undeniable fact that the instantaneous liberal reaction to literally everything that happens on the face of the Earth is to reflexively raise taxes.  This episode, in particular, really helps underscore Obama's promise to implement crushing environmental regulations and penalties that would 'necessarily skyrocket' energy prices.

This is no accident, friends.  This is a deliberate attempt to destroy the American domestic energy industry and to force all Americans to pay through the nose for energy in all its forms.  In a time of economic turmoil, this really isn't helpful.

Of course, we already know that Obama's intent isn't to provide relief to American families, so things like this should come as no surprise.

There's my two cents.

Super Genius President Rocks Our World And Solves The Gulf Oil Spill Problem In Just Four Words

Or something:

When Barack Obama ran for President, his followers went into fits of ecstasy about electing a Harvard intellectual to the office.   Finally, they argued, we'll have a real thinker in charge — as opposed, apparently, to his Yale- and Harvard-educated predecessor.  We'll get real solutions to heretofore intractable problems. Obama's complex intellect would outshine anything that preceded him in the Oval Office, and the oceans would recede and the Earth would cool, etc etc etc.

So what kind of insight and keen problem-solving do we get after one of the worst environmental emergencies in the US since the Exxon Valdez?  What brilliant, complex, and original solution has The Great Intellect delivered unto us?

This:

President Barack Obama has privately expressed his frustration to senior government officials that the Gulf of Mexico oil spill has not been stopped and has made clear his feelings about it.

"Plug the damn hole," he has told them, according to aides.

Whoa.  Just imagine if we didn't have Obama's superior intellect to solve the big problems.  Who ever would have thought that the solution to a broken pipe pouring out thousands of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico would be to plug it?

And just imagine –  his aides are so proud of it, they're telling the press all about it five weeks after the blowout.  It's the only answer Obama has supplied thus far, of course.  Thank goodness we have bona fide intellectuals running the show now.

And this is one of the primary differences between these liberal elites and the people who actually make this country work.  Obama sniffs down his nose at this aggravating distraction and simply decrees 'plug the damn hole', and then moves on to other *sniff* more important things, leaving the icky details, knowledge, and work of actually accomplishing this decree to the provincial, hayseed hicks like you and me.  Rather illustrative, don't you think?

Anyway, after seeing how *sniff* intellectuals have managed running things in the real world, I suggest we go back to the provincial, hayseed hicks that have, you know, built America into a global economic and military superpower.  That seems to have worked much better.

There's my two cents.

Economic Contrast

Two proposals. Two plans. Two very different outcomes. Check 'em out (emphasis mine)...

Democrats

...as Keith Hennessey suggests in his must-read deconstruction of the big-spending bill Congress will approve this week, the Call It Anything But Don’t Call It Stimulus Act. Nancy Pelosi calls it the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010, which forms the acronym AJCTLA, and that sounds like nonsense when spoken. It’s a perfect match for its title, as Hennessey explains, because it does nothing to help American jobs and everything to allow Congress to help itself to even more fantasy money.

In fact, it manages to both increase the deficit and hike taxes, a rather neat little trick that one might think would embarrass even Democrats in 2010. The CBO confirms that AJCTLA has the following long-term consequences:

• $40 B net tax increase
• $174 B spending increase
• $134 B deficit increase

How does it manage to do that? Hennessey gives us the bullet points:

• increases infrastructure spending by $26 B over ten years;
• extends a raft of expiring tax provisions, mostly for one year
• provides funding relief for certain employer pension plans;
• raises a bunch of taxes, mostly on businesses and a certain kind of partnership income called “carried interest;”
• extends unemployment insurance benefits, increasing federal spending by $47 B over the next two years;
• increases Medicare payments for doctors for eighteen months at a $63 B cost;
• increases health insurance subsidies for the unemployed (through “COBRA”) by $8 B over the next two years; and
• increases federal Medicaid spending by $24 B for a six-month policy change.

Yes, at exactly the moment when businesses need pricing signals for a decrease in costs in order to attract the kind of investment that spurs growth, Congress wants to hike taxes instead — in order to pay for its own aggrandizing public projects.

Republicans

Democratic attempts to paint Republicans as the Party of No got a little tougher today with the release of a new plan from the House Republicans on the Budget Committee. The GOP has demanded spending cuts, and today the group led by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) laid out a preliminary slate of specifics. If adopted, they predict that they can save over $1.3 trillion over the next ten years. In the preamble, the GOP caucus slams the Democrats for failing to provide a budget for FY2011:

Having shoveled out trillions of dollars in new spending and debt, House Democratic leaders now admit they cannot budget for all of it – and won’t even try. For the first time, the House will fail even to propose a budget. Instead the Democratic Majority will resort to an ad hoc, spend-as-you-go process that abandons any pretense of governing.

The primary responsibility of any Congress is to develop a budget for the next fiscal year. One hundred and ten Houses have managed to meet that responsibility, even when the chambers were narrowly divided along partisan lines, and when control between Capitol Hill and the White House was divided between Republicans and Democrats. In this year, Democrats have an 18-seat majority in the Senate, more than a 70-seat majority in the House, and they control the White House. What possible excuse could Democrats have for not producing a budget, other than incompetence or dishonesty?

In contrast, the Republicans list a number of spending proposals to close the budget gap, most of which has already been introduced to the House and ignored by Nancy Pelosi. It counters the entire narrative of the Party of No, showing that Republicans have attempted to offer ideas to reduce spending and the national debt, or at least to slow down the growth in both. Had Democrats decided to actually produce a budget, they would have had to consider the following:

• Cancel Unused TARP Funds. Prohibit the Treasury Secretary from entering into new commitments under the Troubled Asset Relief Program [TARP]. Ending TARP would prevent up to $396 billion in additional disbursements; CBO estimates savings of $16 billion. H.R. 3140 introduced by Rep. Tom Price of Georgia.
• Cancel Unspent ‘Stimulus’ Funds. Rescind all unobligated budget authority authorized under the “stimulus” bill and dedicate to deficit reduction. Saves up to $266 billion. H.R. 3140 introduced by Rep. Tom Price of Georgia.
• Cut and Cap Discretionary Spending. Return non-defense discretionary spending to pre-Obama (fiscal year 2008) baseline levels. Saves up to $925 billion. Legislation introduced by Reps. Ryan and Hensarling (H.R. 3964) and Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio (H.R 3298) include caps on discretionary spending.
• Reduce Government Employment. Hire one person for every two who leaves civilian government service until the workforce is reduced to pre-Obama levels (exempting the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs). Saves an estimated $35 billion. H.R. 5348 introduced by Rep. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming.
• Freeze Government Pay. Freeze Federal civilian pay for 1 year. Saves an estimated $30 billion.
• Adopt the Legislative Line-Item Veto. Enact a constitutional line-item veto law. The President’s FY 2011 budget included terminations, reductions, and savings that would achieve $23 billion in one year. While Congress may not accept all these savings, the Line Item Veto can help reduce spending. H.R. 1294 introduced by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.
• Reform and Bring Transparency to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Reform these companies by ending conservatorship, shrinking their portfolios, establishing minimum capital standards, reducing conforming loan limits, and bringing transparency to taxpayer exposure. According to CBO, the cost to taxpayers of putting government in control of Fannie and Freddie is $373 billion through 2020. Saves an estimated $30 billion. H.R. 4889 introduced by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas. H.R. 4653 introduced by Rep. Scott Garrett of New Jersey.
• Create a Sunset Commission. Establish a commission to conduct systematic reviews of Federal programs and agencies, and make recommendations for those that should be terminated; and provide for automatic sunset of programs unless expressly reauthorized by the Congress. H.R. 393 introduced by Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas.
  

Dems are being flamingly hypocritical on this by not only failing to play by their own financing rules, but by not even attempting to play by their own financing rules. They just rubber-stamp everything they want to do as an emergency so they can drive the debt truck through a loophole the size of Jupiter. There is also the usual bag of goodies for preferred lobbyist groups, the making permanent of temporary programs, and more accounting gimmicks than Enron had ever heard of. Hit the Hennessey link for all the details.

On the other side of the coin, ironically, some mighty big chunks of the GOP cutting plan are very similar to some of the things Pelosi promised when the Dems took over the House back in 2007. Not that they followed, through, of course, but these ideas are absolutely nothing new or shocking to them. They loooove to promise such lovely sounding things as tax cuts and reduced spending, but show me the last time a Democrat in national office actually did it (as opposed to just promising it) and I'll show you the very beginnings of the Moon Lander program.

This is the contrast between the two parties now. Pick which you like better, then remember that when you go vote this November. And bring some friends - this is one election America simply cannot afford to get wrong.

There's my two cents.

Danger, Will Robinson!

Heritage gives us yet another reminder of potential disaster:

We've been warned. In 2004, the Commission to Assess the Threat of the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) reported that "EMP is one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of catastrophic consequences." Yet, Congress has done next to nothing to protect the U.S. from an EMP attack.

As my colleague, Baker Spring explains an EMP can occur when a nuclear weapon is detonated high in the atmosphere above the Earth. The resulting explosion interacts with the Earth's magnetic fields, sending a pulse, or current, throughout all electrical systems. Nearly everything we depend on from day to day would be affected. Imagine a world without computers, ATMS, cell phones, water systems, the internet, ambulances and even cars. The U.S. would essentially be knocked back to the 19th century.

The idea may seem abstract, but the threat is real. Nearly 30 nations have the ballistic missile capabilities needed to launch such an attack, and reports have circulated that Iran, North Korea, Russia, and China have worked towards achieving EMP capabilities.

Given the magnitude of the threat, it is due time for the U.S. to work towards building a suitable defense against EMP attacks by hardening the nation's critical infrastructure. If properly shielded, the nation's infrastructure could survive even the strongest attack.

Join The Heritage Foundation tomorrow at 11 a.m. in Lehrman Auditorium at "Keeping a Finger on Electromagnetic Pulse," part of the Science and Technology series, as experts discuss technologies available to help harden critical infrastructure and defend the nation from the EMP threat.

Remember, it won't take an arsenal of nuclear weapons to reduce America to ashes.  It will take three.  At most.

Are our oh-so-competent leaders cognizant of this fact?  What are they doing to protect us from this threat?  These are questions worth asking, and questions that deserve an honest answer.

There's my two cents.

Putting The Crack In Crackpot

While animal rights activists put the crack in crackpot, it's immensely fun and informative to pay just enough attention to them to know what they're doing:

Animal rights crazies always come up insane ideas. PETA, for example, has come up with ideas like renaming fish "sea kittens", making ice cream with human breast milk, and opening a lobster empathy center. In Australia, kids were told they should die to help save the environment.

Considering the above examples, this isn't all that unexpected from the animal rights lobby. According to them, we need to start providing human rights for dolphins and whales!

Whales and dolphins should get "human rights" to life and liberty because of mounting evidence of their intelligence, a group of conservationists and experts in philosophy, law and ethics said Sunday.

Japan, Norway and Iceland, the main whaling nations, oppose such arguments that would outlaw hunting or even keeping the mammals in marine parks. They have long said there is no real evidence that they are smarter, for instance, than cows or pigs.

Participants at a University of Helsinki conference said ever more studies show the giant marine mammals have human-like self-awareness, an ability to communicate and organize complex societies, making them similar to some great apes.

"We affirm that all cetaceans as persons have the right to life, liberty and wellbeing," they said in a declaration after a two-day meeting led by the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS).

You know, I always find it amusing that, in animal rights activists' quest to prove that humans are no more worthy of life than the lowliest animal, they always seem to then suggest that human rights are what animals deserve.  Um, isn't that kind of a self-defeating argument?

Anyway, I hope you got a good laugh out of this.  I sure did.  But let's not forget that these crackpots quickly cease to be funny when they actually have the ear of radical Leftists in government who are happy to give them what they want, or influence policy...

There's my two cents.

Black Is White, Up Is Down...

...and Communist China lectures American President on economic reality:

Communist China warned Obama and Democrats about printing money last May.
Communist China warned Obama and Democrats about their historic deficit last June.
Communist China laughed at tax-cheat Geithner when he said their assets were safe last summer.
So it really came as no surprise that Communist China lectured the Obama Administration again yesterday about rampant borrowing and debt.
CNBC reported, via Free Republic:

Sovereign debt troubles in Europe underscore how important it is for the United States to control its own borrowing as its indebtedness reaches concerning levels, a senior Chinese official said on Thursday.

With China facing criticism for holding its currency in a de facto dollar peg, assistant finance minister Zhu Guangyao shifted attention to Beijing's own worries about U.S. policies, especially its soaring deficit, ahead of high-level bilateral meetings next week.

There will be "quiet discussions" about the yuan at the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, but external pressure will only delay the exchange rate reform that China wants to implement, he told a news conference.

The global economy's more urgent need is for financial conditions to stabilize in Europe in the wake of Greece's debt woes, Zhu said.

Who ever thought we'd see the day that the Communist Chinese would be lecturing our radical leaders about fiscal responsibility?

*sigh*

There's my two cents.


Related Reading:
Initial jobs claims rise again...unexpectedly
Democrats suddenly get uneasy with overspending
Stunner: new financial reforms may not prevent future economic meltdown, either

It's Official Policy Now: U.S. No Longer Bastion Of Freedom

This comes as no surprise, but it's still disheartening to watch:

Sometimes when presidents are elected, they siphon off old vestiges of previous administrations. Perhaps they discard a rarely used perk or discontinue a tradition such as the playing of “Hail to the Chief.” But never has this nation seen an administration treat the idea of American exceptionalism in the same manner you would a used Oval Office carpet. Sure, President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden recognize that America was once the leader of the free world, they simply think that the line of thinking is something to be admired in a museum, taught in history books, but practiced no longer.

Vice President Biden is responsible for the latest example of this White House’s disregard for American leadership. Speaking to the European Parliament in Brussels on May 6, Biden said: “As you probably know, some American politicians and American journalists refer to Washington, DC as the “capital of the free world.” But it seems to me that this great city, which boasts 1,000 years of history and which serves as the capital of Belgium, the home of the European Union, and the headquarters for NATO, this city has its own legitimate claim to that title.”

This is not a case of Joe being Joe. This was a deliberative statement read from a Teleprompter that abdicated American exceptionalism, and replaced it with a misguided view of European dominance. A speech of this magnitude is not drafted on the plane ride over, and this line was carefully considered. This ladies and gentlemen, was the Obama White House in living color.

This is a very big deal, mostly because of how this notion came about:

American presidents earned the title ‘leader of the free world’ not because “some American politicians and American journalists” decided so as the Vice President so obtusely and condescendingly implied. The title was earned during the nearly seventy years that the United States has been the last beacon of hope for nations and people yearning to be free. The U.S. has always acted in the best interests of liberty, especially when the United Nations or even European allies sat on the sidelines. It is in fact this leadership that gives nations in the European Union the comfort to not build up strategic defense operations knowing they can rely on our protection.

It is not an act of humility to give these cold hard facts the credit they’re due.

The problem, of course, with rejecting the idea of America as the primary bastion of freedom in the world, is that no one else has the will or ability to fill that position. Europe is filled with weenies and professional capitulationists who have no military power and no will to fight on behalf of weaker brethren in the name of freedom.

In short, if America refuses this honor and responsibility, it will disappear from the world.

Barack Obama & Co. are doing their best to do just that. This is yet another thing in which I hope he fails. It is the responsibility of the American people to rebuke such an administration and set them straight.

There's my two cents.

Obamanation: Lying And Hiding

Democrat Rep. Joe Sestak has started a firestorm with what should be front-page scandal news:

Former Clinton aide Dick Morris says that, if true, this is an impeachable offense:

How's that hope-n-change working out? Doesn't seem like so much hope, nor change to me.

There's my two cents.

Who Supports Barack Obama?

I think this trio of stories is very, very telling:

Communist Party USA official claims credit for DemCare's passage

Dan Margolis, chair of the New York State Communist Party USA and 2004 coordinator for the Democratic Party, recently wrote about the Communist Party’s influence in democratic politics.
KeyWiki Blog reported:

When there were setbacks in the fight for health care, there was demoralization and frustration. Our Bronx club, which was instrumental in building an Organizing for America-based local organization, helped fight this feeling and, in the process, gained a good deal of experience. It can be said that, without the Communist Party, and solid leadership from one comrade in particular, the OFA group could have easily disbanded itself. Also, the Party was able and is able to play a leadership role in the question of what we’re fighting for, and in what context: why not some kind of National Health Service, as in the U.K., right now, or for Medicare for All?

Unions to spend huge chunk of Obama stash to keep Dems in power

Unions hit the jackpot this past year thanks to the radical dems in charge of Washington.
They made off with $10 billion in the Obamacare bill.

Union bosses who have mismanaged benefits for their own members are poised to receive a $10 billion bailout from U.S. taxpayers in the form of a “reinsurance program” that has been folded into the healthcare bill, according to the Workforce Fairness Institute (WFI).

Now, they’ll return the favor.
Unions will spend over $100 million to keep the democrats in charge of Washington DC.
The Hill reported:

At least two influential unions will spend close to $100 million on the 2010 election, with most of those funds going to protect incumbents.

Corporate PACs turn to the GOP

In 2008, corporate PACs donated heavily to Democrats as the political momentum unmistakably swung their way. In 2010, the momentum has shifted enough for the majority of corporate donations to go to Republicans, even though they do not currently hold the majority in Congress as Democrats did in 2008. They’re betting on a big change in the House, the Washington Post reports:

Corporate America is gambling on the minority in its political giving this year, assuming that Republicans will win big in the November midterm elections, an analysis of campaign finance reports shows.

The pattern represents a distinct change from a year ago, when President Obama was sworn into office. Back then, corporate political action committees made a shift to the Democrats, giving 58 percent of their donations to the party. So far this year, 48 percent of the contributions from big business are going to the Democrats.

So, the Communists and union thugs are Obots, and corporate America has finally realized who is the biggest threat to their survival.

Interesting, is it not?

There's my two cents.

Linkage

It ain't over till the illegal alien wins.
Is Congress finally waking up to the need for the missile defense systems that Obama has killed?  Let's hope so...
Obama's Commie pals are now stalking bank CEOs' private residences.    That's right, it's 500 union thugs vs. 1 innocent teenager.  Ah, community organizing...the lifeblood of the liberal Democrat party.  And, coincidentally, the only thing Barack Obama had any experience doing before becoming President.
Irony: after denouncing the Arizona illegal immigration law they didn't read, it turns out that the Obama administration's own official policy actually agrees with it!
Double outrage: not just one, but two mosques are now being planned for Ground Zero in New York!
No, it's really not an equivalent thing: Birfers vs. Troofers
Is this more of that we're-in-a-recovery talk?  Because a new record high in mortgage delinquencies doesn't really strike me that way.
The iron-fisted control of the Obama White House is complete; they even shut down the Twitter account of the guest chef for a state dinner.
Tiny bank gets big bailout...why?  (probably because they practice Obama's brand of social engineering)
Obama's hope-n-change rejected in...Obama's hometown
America's decline is not inevitable
Um, there are no sea level rises, Mr. President...

A Finely Tuned Sense Of Priority

Or not.  You decide for yourself:

Beaches closed in Louisiana..

Officials closed the public beach here Friday as thick gobs of oil resembling melted chocolate washed up, a very visible reminder of the blown-out well that has been spewing crude into the Gulf of Mexico for a month.

Up to now, only tar balls and a light sheen had come ashore. But oil was starting to hit the beach at this island resort community in various forms – light sheens, orange-colored splotches and heavier brown sheets – said Chris Roberts, a local official who surveyed the area Friday morning.

Obama hits the links at St. Andrews Air Force Base

President Barack Obama took to the golf course on Saturday after returned from delivering the commencement address at West Point.

The president teed off at the Andrews Air Force Base course with three other people, according to a pool report, but only one could be identified: White House trip director Marvin Nicholson.

Golf is a frequent weekend pastime for Obama. The president headed to the course almost immediately after disembarking from Air Force One.

I seriously think they're trying to redefine the word 'farce'.

This is leadership?  This is the better judgment we were promised?  It's gotten so bad that even prominent Democrats are calling Obama's actions on this subject lackadaisical and disastrous.  I'd say that's putting it mildly.

There's my two cents.

American Views On Congress' Ability To Handle The Economy

A new Rasmussen poll shows something very interesting:

Even as Congress puts the finishing touches on legislation asserting more government control over the U.S. financial industry, most U.S. voters continue to believe the legislators have little idea what they're doing when it comes to the economy.

The latest national telephone survey of Likely Voters finds that just 27% are at least somewhat confident that Congress knows what it's doing when it comes to addressing current economic problems. An overwhelming majority (72%) are not confident in Congress to address these problems.

Um, okay.  First thought: it is tremendously heartening to see that over 7 out of every 10 Americans see Congress as the idiotic, self-serving, incompetent failures that they are.  Second thought: WHAT IS WRONG WITH 27% OF THIS COUNTRY???

There's my two cents.

Dangerous, Self-Destructive Non-Leadership

Unbelievable:

The dismantling of America continues…
This is far left insanity.
The Obama Administration will unilaterally announce US secret missile tests and satellite launches in the hope that other regimes will do the same.

The USS Lake Erie launches the missile to take down the rogue satellite. (ABC News)

The LA Times Top of the Ticket Blog reported, via FOX Nation:

President Obama has decided to pre-announce to the world once-secret American ballistic missile tests and satellite launches.

The Democratic administration’s goal is to show a friendlier face to other countries and to coax Russia to do the same.

It’s part of a confidence-boosting initiative launched, so to speak, last fall when Obama suddenly abandoned the U.S. missile-defense system in Eastern Europe that had exercised the Russians, though it was aimed at potential future missiles from Iran.

Obama hoped such a unilateral U.S. forfeiture would encourage Russia to put pressure on Iran to halt its nuclear weapons development. So far, no good on that.

Of course, the point of secret tests by any state in an insecure, suspicious world is to deny advance notice to potential enemies, making it more difficult if not impossible for them to gain intelligence by monitoring the tests themselves.

According to George Jahn of the Associated Press, a confidential U.S. note sent to 128 other countries two weeks ago said:

The United States … will provide pre-launch notification of commercial and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) space launches as well as the majority of intercontinental ballistic and submarine-launched ballistic missile launches.

Security experts note that Obama left himself some wiggle room by using the phrase “majority of intercontinental and submarine-launched ballistic missile launches,” many of which depart from Vandenberg Air Force Base on the California coast.

Washington’s hope is that Russia will resume doing the same.

Right. Because Russia has a long and consistent history of doing that.

Hey, if Obama wants to commit suicide, that's one thing. But I strenuously object to him trying to take America -- and a large number of Americans -- with him. I can't see any other result to insane moves like this.

The biggest danger to America is President Barack Obama.

There's my two cents.

Fun And Frivolity: Bordering On The Absurd

This Arizona illegal immigration thing has really stoked the flames of political humor, and I just couldn't resist. Hat tips to Patriot Post and Melekiop for all of this. Enjoy!

If you cross the North Korean border illegally you get 12 years hard labor.

If you cross the Iranian border illegally you are detained indefinitely.

If you cross the Afghan border illegally, you get shot.

If you cross the Saudi Arabian border illegally you will be jailed.

If you cross the Chinese border illegally you may never be heard from again.

If you cross the Venezuelan border illegally you will be branded a spy and your fate will be sealed.

If you cross the Cuban border illegally you will be thrown into political prison to rot.

If you cross the U.S. border illegally you get:

• a job,
• a drivers license,
• social security card,
• welfare,
• food stamps,
• credit cards,
• subsidized rent or a loan to buy a house,
• free education,
• free health care,
• a lobbyist in washington
• billions of dollars worth of public documents printed in your language
• the right to carry your country's flag while you protest that you don't get enough respect and, in many instances, you can vote.
  

Okay, I guess that one wasn't very funny because it's so true. The rest of these are good, though.






Have a great weekend!

The Party Of Doing Nothing

From House Minority Rep John Boehner's office:

President Obama went to Youngstown, OH earlier this week and said the GOP approach to the nation's problems is "do nothing."  But when you look at the past six weeks, the "do nothing" party in Congress is clearly the president's own party.  As a new analysis by the Office of the Republican Leader illustrates, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives has done literally nothing lately.

Another week has passed without House Democrats releasing a budget.  Another week of failing what House Majority Leader Hoyer once called "the most basic responsibility of governing."  So what have Democrats been doing instead?  What great issues has the House of Representatives grappled with instead of trying to save taxpayers money?  Not much.

Generally speaking, there are two types of bills that pass the House: "suspension" bills and "rule" bills.  "Suspension" bills must pass with a two-thirds vote, and are generally non-controversial, like re-naming post offices or congratulating sports teams.  They're often considered "filler" for the House floor.  By contrast, "rule" bills, generally speaking, are real legislation.  And for the past three weeks, the House hasn't passed a single "rule" bill. 

Remember that Democrats have complete control over the House floor.  Under the rules they adopted, the Speaker decides whether to schedule a bill for floor action, or pull it without a vote.  Over the past six weeks, the Speaker has decided to:

• Not pass a Budget.
• Schedule and then pull a "tax extenders after" because of disagreements among House Democrats.
• Schedule and then pull a bill on voting rights for the District of Columbia.
• Schedule and then pull the "COMPETES" Science Committee bill after a Republican motion to lower spending and improve the bill passed.
• Passed a Resources bill after a Republican motion completely changed the bill to strip new programs and lower the costs.
• Cancelled votes altogether on three days when they were scheduled: April 16, April 23, and May 21.
• Considered 131 suspension bills.
• Debated 2 bills under a Rule which passed with more than a 2/3 margin (meaning they could have been suspension bills).
• Pass one real bill requiring Puerto Rico to conduct a non-binding plebiscite on statehood. 

What other vital legislation have Washington Democrats moved through the House since Speaker Pelosi broke the back of her caucus in order to pass ObamaCare?  Here's a chronicle of what the House has done during the past six weeks, as compiled by the Office of the Republican Leader:

• H.Res. 1041 - Congratulating and commending the University of Idaho's football team for winning the 2009 Humanitarian Bowl in Boise, Idaho (Rep. Minnick - Ed & Labor)
• H.Res. 197 - To commend the American Sail Training Association for its advancement of character building under sail and for its advancement of international goodwill (Rep. Kennedy - Transportation and Infrastructure)
• H.Con.Res. 255 - Commemorating the 40th anniversary of Earth Day and honoring the founder of Earth Day, the late Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin (Rep. Obey - OGR)
• H.Res. 1131 - Expressing support for designation of the week of April 18, 2010, through April 23, 2010, as National Assistant Principals Week (Rep. Fudge - Ed & Labor)
• H.Con.Res. 247 - Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby (Rep. Hoyer - T&I)

Whew, that's a tough slate of heavy lifting there!

But seriously, what's going on?  It's not hard to figure out...they're trying to climb back up the cliff through inaction:

Instead of addressing the staggering deficits and debt Democrats are running up in Washington - $714 billion in deficit spending in the first half of fiscal year 2010 alone - Speaker Pelosi and Leader Hoyer are trying to shield their Members from taking any more "tough votes" during an election year.  Or as one Washington newspaper put it, "without much else on the House agenda, they simply don't have any good excuses not to do a budget beyond cowardice."

Economists say that Washington needs to cut spending now to create jobs, but Democrats aren't listening.  Out-of-touch Washington Democrats may think that by skipping the budget process this year, they can avoid the tough choices that come with governing - but they can't hide from our nation's problems, especially when their job-killing agenda is making things worse.

There's a silver lining to all this doing of nothing, though.  As long as the Dems are talking football and post offices, they're not passing new pieces of massive, unread, forged-in-secret, nation-altering bills.  No, that's what the Senate is doing right now.

I suspect it has a lot to do with the fact that all House Reps are up for re-election every two years, and thus their constituencies are very much remembering all of the massive, unread, forged-in-secret, nation-altering bills they've already rammed through over the strenuous and clear objections of the American people.  Maybe they should start packing up their offices, too.

There's my two cents.

The Mental Giants At The Helm

Moe Lane at RedState:

This is one of those 'funny when it happens to other countries' stories.  Some background: Senator Tom Harkin (D) of Iowa, having happily participated in saddling the American people with trillions of dollars of generational debt at the behest of his liberal party leadership, has decided to make things right for folks by introducing a bill to cap ATM fees.

Gee.  Thanks, Tommie.

Anyway, the bill died, but not before Senator Ben Nelson (D) of Nebraska reminded us that he lives in a wonderful, magic bubble land where things just sort of… happen… for him.  By invisible gnomes, no doubt:

The Nebraska Democrat pleaded ignorance when asked this week whether Congress should cap ATM fees. Nelson said that while he's no fan of unnecessary fees, he's unfamiliar with the charges.

"I've never used an ATM, so I don't know what the fees are," Nelson said, adding that he gets his cash from bank tellers, just not automatic ones. "It's true, I don't know how to use one.

"But I could learn how to do it just like I've . . . I swipe to get my own gas, buy groceries. I know about the holograms."

As Andrew Malcolm helpfully notes, "Hologram is Nelson for bar codes, those collections of little black lines on virtually every single product sold in America that tell genies inside magical little scanning machines how much to charge the purchaser in American currency." In other words, Andrew is as amused-appalled as I am at the thought that the good people of Nebraska continue to elect this man to the Senate. Although it may be that they've decided that electing him keeps him out of Nebraska; while that's a definite argument, it's kind of hard on the rest of the country…

Moe Lane

PS: He's not up until 2012, more's the pity.

And people like Nelson are the mental giants running the biggest economy, the most powerful military, and the driving force in the world today?!

Egad.

There's my two cents.

No, Actually, The System Didn't Work

So says the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, after studying the Christmas Day bombing attempt:

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has released an unclassified summary of its investigation into the attempted terrorist attack on Christmas Day 2009. The committee's bottom line is that the system did not work.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab should have been prevented from boarding Flight 253, but there were "a series of human errors, technical problems, systemic obstacles, analytical misjudgments, and competing priorities" that enabled Abdulmutallab "to travel to the United States on December 25, 2009."

The committee outlines "fourteen specific points of failure," but two are particular worrisome. A third and equally troubling point of failure was also identified by Senators Saxby Chambliss and Richard Burr in their addendum to the report.

First, even though Abdulmutallab's father walked into a U.S. embassy in Abuja, Nigeria, and told officials that his son may be a terrorist, Abuldmutallab wasn't watchlisted. Why? The committee offers this explanation:

Although U.S.  Embassy officials in Abuja recommended that Abdulmutallab be placed on the No Fly List, the determination was made at CIA Headquarters and at the NCTC [note: National Counterterrorism Center] Watchlisting Office that there was only sufficient derogatory information to enter Abdulmutallab's information in the general "Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment" (TIDE) database, but not sufficient derogatory information to place him on any of the watchlists. Because of the language of the watchlisting standard, the manner in which it was being interpreted at the time, or both, analysts responsible for making the watchlisting determination did not believe they had the ability to give additional weight to significant pieces of information from the field, such as the report that resulted from the meeting with Abdulmutallab's father.

So, State Department officials thought Abdulmutallab should be added to the watchlist, which would have prevented him from boarding Flight 253, but other officials at the CIA and NCTC decided against it. That was a significant misjudgment, to say the least.

The report goes on...

This brings us to the second point. The committee found:

Analysts' competing priorities contributed to the failure of the Intelligence Community to identify Abdulmutallab as a potential threat. Prior to the 12/25 plot, counterterrorism analysts at NCTC, CIA, and NSA were focused on the threat of terrorist attacks in Yemen, but were not focused on the possibility of AQAP attacks against the U.S. homeland. These other priorities contributed to the failure of analysts to recognize and collate the several pieces of intelligence reporting that mentioned Abdulmutallab.

Again, this is remarkably bad. These agencies still do not understand the basics of al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden's strategy. Al Qaeda's chief has worked hard to fold so called "local" jihadist groups into the al Qaeda network. The strategy has worked.

And finally...

Finally, we come to the third particularly noteworthy point of failure, which was identified by Senators Chambliss and Burr in their "Additional Views." The senators argue that in the wake of the September 11 attacks "several investigations" concluded that intelligence stove piping and the like were serious problems. Consequently, the senators write, the NCTC "was created to be the central knowledge bank for all terrorism related information" and is therefore "responsible and accountable for all terrorism related intelligence analysis."

That is not how NCTC sees itself, however. The senators write (footnotes omitted): 

Instead, the Committee found in this review that no one agency believes its analysts are responsible for tracking and identifying all terrorist threats, essentially the same problem identified six years ago by the 9/11 Commission, which found "the intelligence community's confederated structure left open the question of who was really in charge of the entire U.S. intelligence effort" to combat terrorism.  

Elsewhere in the report the Committee found that having multiple agencies working to counter the terrorist threat is beneficial in some ways. That is certainly true, but the entirety of the Committee's report makes it clear that no one agency in the U.S. government pulled together all of the available information on Abdulmutallab, even though the NCTC was specifically built to do so.

And yet, despite all this, we see the Obama administration continue to insist that the system works, so they're not going to bother with changing anything.

Whose side are they on, anyway?

I'm not sure I want to know the answer to that question.

There's my two cents.

American Sovereignty Under A Post-American President

Good stuff at Heritage:

Protect America Month 2010, the Heritage Foundation's annual series of events and publications aimed at highlighting key national security issues and promoting sensible defense and homeland security policies, hit the road today with a special address in Chicago by former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton.

Ambassador Bolton began his remarks by explaining why he refers to President Obama as a "post-American" president.

The first problem, he argued, is that President Obama doesn't care about national security. It is not where his attention is focused. The second problem is that he doesn't see threats to the U.S. overseas. He argued during his presidential campaign, for example, that Iran was a "tiny" country. The third problem is that President Obama appears to believe that American decline is not only inevitable, but also a good thing.

He looks at the world through a multilateralist prism and doesn't really believe in American exceptionalism–something first spoken about by a Frenchman, Alexis de Tocqueville. President Obama, by contrast, when asked whether he believes in America exceptionalism answers yes, only in the way that "Brits believe in British exceptionalism, and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."

Put those features together with a foreign policy based on radical moral equivalences–such as the Administration's outrageous equation of Arizona's new immigration law and China's routinely discriminatory and brutal treatment of foreigners and minorities–and you get what Ambassador Bolton calls the "Post-American" president.

Bolton argues that the Obama Administration's approach has failed on Iran, on North Korea, in the Middle East, and on numerous other security issues because it is based on the view that all of the problems in the world are the consequence of our failure to negotiate.

He cautions that the Administration's emphasis on negotiation could have serious costs. Negotiation–especially when waged ineptly and without moral clarity–often favors the proliferator. Ambassador worries that the Administration may have decided to accept a nuclear Iran, despite the fact that it would pose serious threats to the U.S.

Unless American's demand a changed approach, and unless we keep national security at the top of the agenda–as Heritage's Protect America month is doing–America could decline in ways that will be very difficult–if not impossible–to reverse.

I think this really helps explain the worldview of Barack Obama.  Unfortunately, he is so far away from the mainstream American worldview that many people simply couldn't believe the glimpses of his true self when they popped up during the campaign.  Now that Obama has been able to implement large chunks of his agenda on a national scale, many Americans are seeing it with new eyes, and they're rejecting it.

Let's hope the rejection at the ballot box happens quickly enough to set us back on the path to restoring American prosperity and freedom.

There's my two cents.

Idiots From Mexico And Future Blindness

When I say, "you just can't make this stuff up", I really mean it. The latest example is a brilliant juxtaposition by Rush Limbaugh, as reported by Gateway Pundit:

To recap Calderon's position: when it comes to Arizona, legally requiring 'papers' is racist, and enforcing one's borders is inherently anti-civil rights. When it comes to Mexico, it's obvious that one needs to require 'papers', and if someone is found to be present illegally, it's equally obvious that they should be sent home.

"Live from New York...it's Saturday Night!!!"

No, just kidding about that last part. But, is this not the most bald-faced hypocritical thing you've ever heard? And this is all in the same interview!

When Arizona passed their law, 64% of the American people supported it. In the time since then, that support has increased significantly, to 71%. Of course, not everyone agrees:

I'm sorry, but there is something fundamentally wrong with one of the two primary political parties in this country when they give a standing ovation to a foreign dignitary who decries a law legitimately passed by one of our states to protect its citizens from economic, criminal, and health dangers because the federal government has failed to do so.

Am I wrong here?

The problem is the Blame America First mentality, and the Obama administration is steeped in it, as are all dedicated liberals. I wonder if these people even have the brains to realize what would happen if they get their way? No borders, free handouts for all (until the tax revenue dried up), no law other than what is most politically correct at the moment, no freedom to choose their own car or TV or food, no ability to criticize anyone in a position of power... Is this really the kind of place they want to live in? Do these people not understand that if they succeed, the very same freedoms and prosperity they are using to attack America will evaporate? Are they really that blind to the logical conclusion of their efforts?

I can't decide if it's better or worse if they really are. Regardless, this is the battle we face, and it's one that will have dramatic consequences for this country and the whole world. We must not fail.

There's my two cents.


Related Reading:
Liberal outraged that Arizona also bans classes that teach how to overthrow America
Awesome: In response to LA mayor's suggestion that they boycott Arizona, Arizona power company 'boycotts' sending power to LA

Liberals Gone Wild

Peter Ferrarra has an outstanding column at The American Spectator this week that is a must-read for anyone who thinks liberals genuinely want a separation of church and state.  The truth is...well, not exactly what they say.  The whole article is long, but well worth the read.  Here's the beginning, to whet your appetite:

Even though the Constitution does not include the words "separation of church and state," liberals have long treated that concept as a hallowed fundamental doctrine of constitutional law. But no more. With the recent introduction of new Senate cap and trade legislation, ultraliberal supporters Barbara Boxer, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama and others have now completely abandoned that doctrine in their quest to establish global warming dogma as the official, established religion of the United States.

Under that legislation, everyone in America will be forced to tithe to the new religion through higher prices for electricity, gasoline, natural gas, coal, home heating oil, jet fuel, food (especially meat), and every product produced or transported with such energy sources. Indeed, prices will soar high enough to reduce fossil fuel use and the resulting carbon dioxide emissions back to the per capita levels of 1870!

The legislation will further force Americans to engage in ritual sacrifices to the established religion, slashing back on powerful, roomy cars and SUVS, air conditioning, heat, PCs, laptops, big screen TVs, cell phones, iPods, backyard barbecues, manufacturing jobs, and traditional American prosperity. They will be forced to worship the modern, hip, pagan dogma with smaller "carbon footprints." If they do not profess their true belief, they will be shouted out of public life as troglodyte "deniers," just as those who did not faithfully maintain membership in the established Church of England were disqualified from holding public office.

But if they do faithfully follow the global warming catechism of cap and trade, they will be rewarded with the eternal salvation of a reduction in the projected rise of global temperatures of 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit by 2050, based on the UN's own climate models. Hallelujah! Praise the AlGore!

Excellent, excellent stuff.  I strongly encourage you to read the whole thing, especially as the liberals in Congress are still kicking around their cap-n-tax proposals.

It truly is a green religion, and should be viewed as such.

There's my two cents.

Obama Administration Begs Press To Push False Storyline, Press Dutifully Complies

Jay Cost at RealClearPolitics.com breaks it down:

The White House is looking to push a storyline about the November elections - and for a job like that, there's nobody better suited than Obama water-carrier extraordinaire, Richard Wolffe:

Voters are lashing out at incumbents of both parties--which comes as a comfort to a White House braced for a Republican tidal wave this fall. And the president's political operatives aren't missing the chance to play up that message as they head into the biggest primaries of the midterm season thus far this Tuesday....

Inside the White House, Obama's advisers see a similar dynamic across the country.

"I think a lot of it is going to be hand-to-hand combat," said the senior Obama aide. "It's a weird environment. The real divide isn't between Republicans and Democrats. It's America and Washington. This is a continuation of the last election. But as the party in power, we are more vulnerable."

Dan Balz and Chris Cilizza equate the Specter/Obama debacle to Grayson/McConnell:

Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) could be the next incumbent to fall, but by late Tuesday night, everyone from President Obama to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) could feel the sting of voter anger that has shaped the election climate and that could produce a dramatic upheaval in Congress by November.

Ok. So, the idea is that the public mood is anti-incumbent in general, which means we should expect lots of "hand-to-hand" combat between Democrat and Republican candidates as they try to position themselves as being the most anti-Washington.

No. This is totally wrong.

It is a false equivalency being pushed because Arlen Specter is probably going to lose today. If that happens, Snarlin' Arlen will make the fourth high-profile pol that Barack Obama embraced in friendship who was later rebuked by the voters of a blue or purple state. Deeds, Corzine, Coakley, Specter. The White House doesn't want this "narrative" to get out - so they're pushing this alternative instead.

This isn't about dissatisfaction with the performance of the 44th President. Oh no. This is about demanding change in Washington - the very same change, by gum, that Barack Obama has been working so hard to bring about!

"Change that you can believe in" has gone from an over-worked campaign slogan to an unfalsifiable hypothesis. Vote for a Dem, you support the President's agenda for change. Vote for a GOPer, you support the President's agenda for change.

But how many Republican incumbents are in severe jeopardy of losing their seat in Congress to a Democratic challenger?

I count one: Joseph Cao of New Orleans.

Meanwhile, I count more than 20 Democrats in the House and Senate who are in severe jeopardy. Lower the threshold from "severe" to "serious" jeopardy, and I count maybe four Republicans and more than 50 Democrats.

The White House is absolutely, positively correct that there is a divide between America and Washington - but what they fail to appreciate (or, more likely, they appreciate it but want to fake-out the press) is that Washington, D.C. now belongs to Barack Obama.

Just as the student radicals of the 1960s became the tenured faculty of the 2000s, so the worm has turned in the District of Columbia. The gates have been crashed and the one-time insurgents are now comfortably ensconced as the establishment. And with the health care bill, Mr. Obama and his band of former rebels have enacted an extremely unpopular law that they cannot possibly blame on the old guard. George W. Bush may have "forced" Barack Obama's hand on the stimulus, but Dubya had nary a thing to do with the health care bill.

This is why President Obama was wrong to equate the election of Scott Brown to his own victory, and why he's wrong to push this story now. He is the ultimate insider now. That snappy "Hail to the Chief" he hears every time he walks into a room should be sign enough of this fact.

The White House likely knows this. They just don't want us talking about how Obama can't save a single high-profile candidate from a purple or blue state. They don't want us to realize that his coattails have been torn and frayed by the choices he's made in the last 17 months.

No doubt that Republican incumbents are being rebuked across the country by their primary constituencies. But it's all about who is closer to the establishment, which is currently commanded by a Democratic President whose job approval rating has been under 50% in the RCP average for five months. In this situation, challenger trumps incumbent, but Republican trumps Democrat. Republican challengers are farther than Republican incumbents from the establishment, so the latter better look out in the primaries. But in general elections, the dynamic will be very different. Republican challengers and incumbents will tar their Democratic opponents with a simple characterization: "A vote for my opponent is a vote for Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi's agenda." Democrats will have no such claim to make against Republicans.

This "anti-incumbent" meme is just a smokescreen designed to get the White House through some tough news cycles.

This is coming from a professional predictor of politics, mind you.  Just don't buy the smokescreen, and don't let anyone around you get away with it, either.  The truth is a powerful thing, and most people will recognize it just fine if just a little bit of the smoke is parted for just a small moment.

There's my two cents.

Where's The Budget?

Republican Minority Leader John Boehner once again raises the question:

"We continue to read about the Democrats' supposed pivot to jobs, but all the American people are getting from Washington is more spending and more debt.  Millions of jobs have been lost since President Obama signed the trillion-dollar 'stimulus,' and unemployment is near 10 percent.  The new health care law is going to kill small business jobs and increase Americans' health care costs.  And this out-of-control spending spree has got to stop.

"Our record national debt is about to hit $13 trillion, and Washington Democrats have no budget in place to deal with it.  They want to continue the out-of-control spending spree that is scaring the hell out of the American people.  And they want to do nothing but spend more at a time when economists say we need to cut spending to create jobs.  This would be the first time the House has failed to pass a budget in the modern era.  That's according to the Congressional Research Service.

"The American people want us to work together to stop the out-of-control spending spree and create jobs.  A responsible budget would be a good place to start.  Where is the Democrats' budget?" 

NOTE: In 2006, then-Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said enacting a budget was "the most basic responsibility of governing."  Rep. John Spratt (D-SC), the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, put it more succinctly that year when he said, "if you can't budget, you can't govern."

Hm, I might amend that last bit to read, "if you can't budget, you can't govern responsibly."  Governing badly is still governing.  Still, you get the point.

As I was reading Boehner's statement, it hit me that failing to put forward a budget is actually the most logical and natural course of action (or lack of action) for these Democrats to take.  After all, between the rampant spending, massive entitlements and bailouts, government expansions and takeovers, and failure to do a single economically responsible thing yet, they're clearly not holding to anything remotely resembling a budget.  They probably didn't bother with a budget because they know it's irrelevant to how they'll legislate and act.  So why waste the time?

Just remember this fact when you look at the country around you, and especially when you walk into the voting booth the next few times.

There's my two cents.