Saturday, May 12, 2012

Quick Hits - May 11, 2012

From Stephen Green - 'Vodkapundit' - "Sign 'O' the Times"

Steps taken to save on federal taxes - apparently the numbers of those renouncing their US citizenship is at a record high.  Change you can believe in.

The May 9th Quick Hits featured a couple of screen shots from the Obama campaign website regarding the President's policies on energy.  The shots noted that the President's energy plan did not include coal.

This was the day after 40% of the Democratic primary voters in West Virginia voted for a convicted felon currently serving time in a Texas jail as the Democrat nominee for President over President Barack Obama.

The Obama campaign has responded - sending this page through their Orwellian Ministry of Truth processing.  Note where the above chart has 'fuel efficiency' and then look at the chart from today...

Gone is the reference to 'fuel efficiency' and in it's place is 'Clean Coal'.  I wonder if the EPA got the memo.

The Hill, which is diving into the tank for President Obama almost as fast as the Washington Post is, is spinning this change as coming from the complaints of House Republicans - but that spin falls flat in the wake of not only the West Virginia primary results, but interviews from West Virginian Senator Joe Manchin where he is openly questioning if he can support President Obama in November.

Speaking of the Washington Post and it's leap into the Obama tank, yesterday's QH commented on the 5,500 word smear piece targeting Mitt Romney.  This focused on the 1965 prep school prank where he took a pair of scissors to cut the long hair of someone 'suspected of being a homosexual'.  We also noted that the person who made these statements in an interview with the WaPo - wasn't even present at the prank and didn't learn of the prank until a few weeks before he was interviewed by the WaPo.  None of those facts were in the original article - until earlier on the 11th when the WaPo 'corrected' their article - not via an official correction, but just slipstreaming the change into the text of the article.  Ethics do not appear high on the values of the Washington Post.

Beyond the WaPo's ethical challenges with the smear piece, the 'facts' are also starting to collapse around them...
Tonight, Christine Lauber, John Lauber’s sister, said that she didn’t know anything about the bullying incident. More importantly, she said that the story had factual inaccuracies. Betsy Lauber, another of John’s sisters, told ABC News, “The family of John Lauber is releasing a statement saying the portrayal of John is factually incorrect and we are aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda. There will be no more comments from the family.” Said Christine, “If he were alive today, he would be furious [about the story].” Jason Horowitz, the reporter on the Post story, did speak to both sisters and quoted them in the story – but apparently still botched the facts.
Reaching as far as it can to support President Obama, the Los Angeles Times brings us this piece of utter progressive crap - 'Is Obama too Brainy to be President?'

The farcical argument is that Obama is struggling as President because he's too damn smart to be President, and the majority of Americans are just to damn dumb to understand what the President is trying to do.

Frankly, I think the issue is far closer to being if Barack Obama is smart enough to be President.  All he's demonstrated in his time in office is being an ideologue - only promoting the standard progressive / far left ideological arguments, solutions, and policy agenda to respond to the challenges our nation faces.  A legitimately smart person would have done what Bill Clinton did - triangulated, moderated, and actually worked for compromise solutions.  What we got from Barack Obama was 'I Won' and the lockstep brinkmanship he's practiced for the last 40 months....not to mention forgetting about the economic challenges we face...

Sometimes people forget the magnitude of it....sometimes I forget....

In his effort to blame the last three and half years of economic challenges on his predecessor, the President, the 'too smart' President, admits that sometimes he forgets just how little he and his policies have done to correct the economic recession we face - and ended in June 2009.

This is the President who argued for a $800 billion stimulus package to be passed in the spring of 2009 - the one that was supposed to prevent unemployment from exceeding 8%, the one that was supposed to bring a 6% unemployment rate and a 6% GDP growth rate in 2012 - as his solution to halt the 2008-9 recession and rapidly bring the nation back. This was the President who said that if he couldn't correct the nation's economy in three years didn't deserve another 4 year term as President.

The stimulus failed. In fact, not only did the stimulus fail, so did spending more than another $1.2 trillion than the government brought in during 2010, 2011, and now in 2012. This President has spent more than that first stimulus program in each of the last 3 years in an effort to spend our way to economic growth. That's more than $5 trillion in national debt in 39 months - and all of this has brought us not to 6% unemployment or 6% GDP growth, but to 11.1% unemployment, a 30 year low of labor participation, and a 1.9% GDP growth in the 1st quarter of 2012 - coming off a 2011 annual rate of 1.1%.

The RNC has wasted no time with the President's 'Sometimes I forget' statement...

President Obama raised $15 million at his Los Angeles fundraiser for the Hollywood 1% hosted by actor George Clooney.  The President will be returning to foul up LA's traffic on June 6th - attending a LGBT gala and fundraiser - cashing in on his 'evolution' towards same-sex marriage which brought him from supporting same-sex marriage during his Illinois State Senate run, to opposing same-sex marriage during his US Senate run, to saying it was a state's issue during his Presidential run, to now supporting same-sex marriage, saying it's a state's issue, and deciding to not defend the law of the land - the Defense of Marriage Act.

Did I say this was because of political expediency?  It is only to a a degree - the degree that results in locking in a part of his progressive hard left base and encouraging them to bring the 'benjamins' to his campaign coffers.

As Big Hollywood notes...
For years, Hollywood’s key focus when it comes to politics has been same-sex marriage. Many in Hollywood are unhappy with President Obama’s confiscatory economic policies, but they universally support same-sex marriage. In fact, supporting same-sex marriage is a prerequisite for hiring in Hollywood. But President Obama had a problem: he and Mitt Romney had identical positions on the issue up until yesterday.

Furthermore, President Obama was having fundraising trouble with the gay community.

On Monday, the day after Biden’s comments, Greg Sargent of the Washington Post released information that “leading gay and progressive donors are so angry over President Obama’s refusal to sign an executive order barring same sex discrimination that they are refusing to give any more money to the pro-Obama super PAC, a top gay fundraiser’s office tells me. In some cases, I’m told, big donations are being withheld.”

Money is what is controlling the Obama agenda now - money to spend towards another 4 year term, to smear, attack, and spin...
The Post also reported that one out of six of Obama's campaign bundlers are gay and, as Obama declared his support for gay marriage against his previous vague stances, it was their big money that was talking.

Now, on principle alone, it's a given that Obama has probably always favored gay marriage based on his far-left orientation. But his most loyal constituents — including African-American and Latino voters, along with the majority of the voting public — are dead-set against it. That would explain why he's always hemmed and hawed about the issue, effectively voting "present."

In coming out for gay marriage, Obama showed that something's even more important to him than voter sentiment — campaign donations.

And don't forget Big Labor and its agenda.

Polls show the public detested the Card Check bill, Big Labor's effort to force unwilling workers into unions by ending their right to secret ballot. Obama supported the unions. Why? Big Labor gave $400 million to elect Democrats in 2008 and a similar amount in 2012. Only a poll-driven Congress stopped him.

In all instances for Obama, the campaign money trumped voter sentiment. That's how he rolls.

Is that democratic? Hardly. Instead of consent of the governed, Obama's decision making amounts to rule by plutocrats, whose desire prevails no matter how outrageous their agenda is to the voters.

It also suggests a cynical view of elections — that whoever has the most money necessarily wins, regardless of his political agenda.

And it represents open contempt for the voters — a certainty that they will vote for Obama no matter what distasteful decisions he makes. Interesting.

During the Watergate hearings, it became known that President Richard Nixon and his staff kept an 'enemies list' - a list of those hostile to the President and his Administration who would be targeted by the Administration (tax audits, dirty tricks, smear campaigns, etc) as a result for being on the list.  It was one of the abuses of power that turned many Americans against the President.  Rumors of recent President's having a 'list' of enemies and using the power of the Presidency against them have persisted.  For example, many prominent conservatives critical of President Bill Clinton, accused of being part of the 'Vast Right Wing Conspiracy', underwent annual IRS tax audits.  But now, it's in the open that Barack Obama and his campaign team have their own Nixonian 'enemies list' - and are actively working that list to intimidate, personally attack, and discredit those who are standing against Barack Obama...
Here's what happens when the president of the United States publicly targets a private citizen for the crime of supporting his opponent.

Frank VanderSloot is the CEO of Melaleuca Inc. The 63-year-old has run that wellness-products company for 26 years out of tiny Idaho Falls, Idaho. Last August, Mr. VanderSloot gave $1 million to Restore Our Future, the Super PAC that supports Mitt Romney.

Three weeks ago, an Obama campaign website, "Keeping GOP Honest," took the extraordinary step of publicly naming and assailing eight private citizens backing Mr. Romney. Titled "Behind the curtain: a brief history of Romney's donors," the post accused the eight of being "wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records." Mr. VanderSloot was one of the eight, smeared particularly as being "litigious, combative and a bitter foe of the gay rights movement."

Barack Obama, more Nixonian than Nixon. Is this the change we are supposed to believe in? Or is this indicative of the arrogance and contempt this President and his team has towards this country and its values?

Is this more consequences from the Administration working to cook the books regarding trying to make the unemployment numbers appear far better than they actually are?
Eight states will cut off long-term jobless benefits this weekend, which comes from an agreement in Washington to dial down the length of benefits from 99 weeks to 79. The move will add more than 230,000 to the numbers of those cut off in 19 other states, bringing the total this year to over 400,000 who have been dropped before the end of the 99-week provision. But Congress isn’t the only driving force behind the change. Thanks to the oddities of the jobs data, the federal formula for jobless funds have shut down the support:
Most states provide 26 weeks of benefits, and the federal government provides the rest, partially through a complicated formula that requires jobless rates to be both high and increasing to reach the benefit limit.

But the nation’s jobless rate has been steadily declining — from 9.1 percent in August, to 8.1 percent last month — causing the maximum benefit period to contract in most states. The extended benefits were reauthorized in February, but efforts by some Democratic lawmakers to adjust the formula in a way that would have kept the 99-week limit intact were unsuccessful.

The real problem is that we have added only 1.862 million jobs since the June 2009 recovery while adding 4 million people to the eligible workforce. We have spent the last three years falling behind, not catching up, and the media seems incapable of connecting those dots.

Ex-Obama 'Green Jobs' Czar, 9/11 Truther, and admitted Communist, Van Jones, is speaking out calling for more aggressive steps being taken to obtain the dictatorship he believes is needed to 'fix the country'.

"Comrade" Jones notes that despite having control of the White House / Executive Branch, and in 2009-10 a huge majority control of Congress (both House and Senate), the Obama Administration still was unable to ram through more 'fundamental change' than just the stimulus, Obamacare, and Dodd/Frank. He blames the lack of progressive control of the media - specifically naming Fox News and a stronger control of the people, specifically naming the Tea Party movement, as the reasons why the Administration was unable to do more to fundamentally change this country for the better.
“We thought we had this trifecta; in fact we only had one-third of what we needed to govern, because you also have to have, as we learned, a media operation, a media communications operation. Our opponents had one. It's named after a sneaky, furry mammal. A sneaky, low-down, predatory, furry mammal. They have a whole TV station named after this sneaky animal. Have you heard of it?...I don't want to mention Fox by name, but they had that.

And they also had a movement in the streets, the Tea Party. And if you only have formal control of the government but you don't have the media and you don't have the movement, you can be checkmated.

The implication by this progressive activist? That more power is needed in the government - and that power has to be used to silence any and all opposition. How Soviet of him.

Here's a policy report that demonstrates the long term economic effects of progressivism - as practiced in the once 'Golden State' which highlights why California is well down the path to economic failure...
California is no longer an incubator of high-wage jobs. The state lost 370,000 jobs paying 25 percent or more of the average wage between 2000 and 2008. This compares to a 770,000 increase in the previous 8 years. California is trailing Texas badly and the nation overall in creating criticial STEM jobs and middle skills jobs (Figures 2 & 3) Only two states have higher unemployment rates than California (Nevada and Rhode Island) . California has the second highest underemployment rate (20.8 percent), which includes the number of unemployed, plus those who have given up looking for work ("discouraged" workers) and those who are working only part time because they cannot find full time work. Only Nevada, with its economy that is overly-dependent on California, has a higher underemployment rate.

Read it all - it's a factual report of why California is not only America's Greece, but the canary in the mine for the rest of the country as the current Federal Government is rushing down this same path of failure brought on by the progressive ideology.

Massachusetts Senatorial candidate Elizabeth Warren has stopped answering questions about her use of the affirmative action minority status of Native American - but that has not stopped investigations into her actions and motives as well as those of the academic institutions who employed her.
Harvard University isn’t the only one of Elizabeth Warren’s employers to have described her as a minority; so did the University of Pennsylvania. According to Penn’s 2005 “Minority Equity Report,” it too identified Warren, who taught there from 1987 to 1995, as a minority. On page 16 of the report, the now-Massachusetts Senate candidate is listed as a winner of the school’s Lindback Award in 1994. Unlike other names listed, though, her name is italicized and bolded to indicate her status as a minority faculty member. It’s the first indication to date of another one of Warren’s employers having listed her as a minority.

What's really interesting about this is that Warren didn't always call herself a 'Native American'.
Meanwhile, the Globe has also obtained a portion of Warren’s 1973 application to Rutgers, where she attended law school. That document specifically asks: “Are you interested in applying for admission under the Program for Minority Group Students?” Warren answered “no.” In addition, a newly unearthed University of Texas personnel document shows that Warren listed herself as “white” when she taught at the law school there from 1981 to 1991. The undated document, obtained by the Globe through a public records request, supports Warren’s statement that she did not present herself as a Native American when hired for the job. But it leaves open the question of why she later listed herself as a minority in a legal directory that is often consulted by hiring deans.

Why the change if this is something she believed since she was a young child? In 1973, she wasn't a Native American. But when hired by the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard Law, she was. Then she again stopped referring to herself as a Native American. Why the changes - if not to game the system to her own personal advantage? Would any of these institutions accept this unethical behavior around their academic principles if done by a regular student? No, they wouldn't. Ward Churchill was dismissed from his University for his academic research failures and for his misrepresentation of his status, so why is Warren getting a pass? This is whom the Democrat Party wants representing the people of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the Senate? Well, perhaps that isn't much of a surprise given Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry were / are the US Senators from the state.

You should have Charles Krauthammer's Friday column on your regular reading list - if not, it should be.  Today, his column is on Israel - and notes the major fundamental change that took place this week in Israel....
What does change is Israel’s position vis-a-vis Iran. The wall-to-wall coalition demonstrates Israel’s political readiness to attack, if necessary. (Its military readiness is not in doubt.)

Those counseling Israeli submission, resignation or just endless patience can no longer dismiss Israel’s tough stance as the work of irredeemable right-wingers. Not with a government now representing 78 percent of the country.

Netanyahu forfeited September elections that would have given him four more years in power. He chose instead to form a national coalition that guarantees 18 months of stability — 18 months during which, if the world does not act (whether by diplomacy or otherwise) to stop Iran, Israel will.

And it will not be the work of one man, one party or one ideological faction. As in 1967, it will be the work of a nation.

Will Iran see the message behind this and change their course?

This Day in History

1864 - Confederate Cavalry General J.E.B. Stuart is mortally wounded at the Battle of Yellow Tavern - a battle where the Confederates tried to stop a major raid led by Union General Phil Sheridan.  Stuart would die on the 12th - a major blow to Robert E. Lee, one almost as serious as the loss of General Thomas 'Stonewall' Jackson, almost exactly a year before.

1981 - Reggae superstar, Bob Marley dies from cancer in a Miami, Florida hospital.  He was 36.

1988 - Kim Philby, one of the Cambridge 5 traitors to Britain who spied for the Soviet Union, dies in Moscow.  A former British SIS officer, he was the most famous of the group of 5 who worked for the Soviet's from the 1930's into the 1950's.  Other members included Guy Burgess, Donald Maclean, and Anthony Blunt.  John Cairncross has been alleged to the 5th member, and was identified as a Soviet agent in 1990.  All attended Cambridge University where they adopted communism and were recruited as Soviet agents.

1997 - Garry Kasparov, the world chess champion, lost his first ever multi-game match - losing to IBM's chess computer 'Deep Blue'.

No comments:

Post a Comment