Glenn Beck: Fannie & Freddie

Okay, let me give you the players. First one, Franklin Raines. Served as Clinton's director for the U.S. Management and Budget. He is now the CEO of Fannie Mae or I'm sorry, he was CEO until 2004. He served as the CEO from '99 to 2004. He took an early retirement while the SEC was investigating Fannie for accounting irregularities. Can you imagine if, while they were doing the investigation on Enron, if Ken Lay took an early retirement? Do you think anyone would have gotten up off of him?

They overstated under this guy, Franklin Raines, they overstated their earnings by $6.3 billion. Perspective: Do you remember how horrible things were with Enron? They overstated their earnings, Enron did, $567 million. Half a billion dollars as compared to $6.3 billion. The wheels of justice turn pretty slowly, but eventually they do turn. This year Franklin Raines settled a government lawsuit against him and, boy, we taught him a lesson. Listen to what we taught him. The headlines read that Rains agreed to $24.7 million settlement to have all of the charges dismissed, okay? So in other words, you can get out of it if you pay a penalty. You don't have to go to jail. You don't even have to have your name wrecked. Nobody even knows the name Franklin Raines. Nobody even knows he's one of the guys who caused all of this.

He got off for $24.7 in a settlement. However, we looked into the settlement. The agreement includes forfeiting stock options worth $15.6 million at the time they were issued. At the time they were issued, they were worth $77.10. He could buy the options allowed him to buy shares for $77. The stock is at $9 a share. He's not even he wouldn't exercise those options. Why would you buy $9 stock for $77? It's ridiculous. But we punished him. He can no longer buy that $9 stock for $77. Then he had to also pay $2 million to the federal government. Okay, so we get $2 million out of the guy, right? No, no, no, no. The $2 million, again if you look into it, is paid by you. It is paid by Fannie Mae's insurance policy for something like this. So you've been paying for the insurance policy so this guy doesn't have to pay the $2 million to the government.

Now, he also had to give up another $1.8 million in stock. It's going to be donated to programs aimed at assisting financially strapped homeowners. So this is you know, $1.8 million that he has in stock, the only thing he's got left, $1.8 million in stock and we're going to give that now to people who are financially strapped. Unfortunately again if you read the fine print and care to do your homework on this, that $1.8 million of stock, he doesn't even own. He was suing Fannie Mae for the $1.8. He said that's mine. They said, no, it's not. Yes, it is. No, it's not, yes, it is. All right, you got me, I'm going to say no, it's not. He didn't even own the $1.8. Now we're also told that he has agreed to part with $5.3 million in other unspecified benefits. I'd like to specify those. Could we get anyone in congress, can anyone on Capitol Hill? It's my money! Can anyone on Capitol Hill ask Mr. Reins, could you specify that for me, please?

Then we have James Johnson, former CEO of Fannie Mae. You know, this guy, because he was selected by Obama to head the vice presidential search committee when the news broke that he may have received preferential loan rates for his personal loans through Countrywide. That's another scandal. By the way, Obama threw this guy under the bus. What you may not have known is Mr. Johnson was the former chief of staff to vice president Walter Mondale and during his tenure accounting results were manipulated so that executives could earn larger bonuses. The accounting manipulation of 98 resulted in the maximum payoffs and payouts to Fannie Mae's senior executives. He personally got $1.9 million. So in other words, what happened was they cooked the books under this guy again, so that way they could get the maximum bonuses. If you look back and we did. If you look back at the bonus charts, these guys never, ever missed a bonus. But there's some way you never ever hit the bonus. They got the money but they never actually accomplished anything. Your government tax dollars at work. By the way, Franklin Raines, he is entitled to his monthly pension and he is taking his monthly pension from you of $114,393 for the rest of his life and for the life of his spouse, should she survive him. Fantastic.

Monthly, $114,000. He gets free medical and dental coverage for the rest of his life, for his wife, too, and his children until the age of 21. He gets free life insurance in the amount of $5 million until the age 60 and then $2.5 million after that. It's unclear how much of these benefits, if any of them, are in those unspecified damages.

James Johnson, post employment inflation consulting contract of $390,500 that began in 2002. He also gets two employees and a chauffeur, office space at the Watergate Hotel. He even began work at an investment firm that gave him his own office. It's been reported that Johnson was supposed to reimburse the company for 50% of the chauffeur's time, but that didn't apply to the time spent waiting for him or driving his wife around. He has, by the way, reimbursed Fannie for about 15% of that cost. On March 17th, 2005, Fannie Mae was engulfed in an accounting scandal. Johnson contacted board member Steven B. Ashley and said, "I should do my part to assist Fannie Mae's efforts to reduce spent tours at this difficult time." He temporarily reduced his consulting fees, which he had increased to $600,000 a year, and he decided to end his support staff and driver. No update on whether he's rescinded that deal and is getting by the way, who else works for Fannie Mae? How about this one, Jack Quinn, Esquire. Clinton appointee, he's a board member. He was the attorney working for the pardon for Mark Rich. How about Jamie Gorelick, Janet Reno's Justice Department who served on 9/11 commission. Gorelick, Gorelick, Gorelick, oh, she's the one who built the wall between the CIA and the FBI so they couldn't communicate. Remember her from 9/11? The compensation packages for Enron executives like Andy Fastow were similar to the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the CEO Franklin Raines bonuses. Fastow raked in $37 million. Do you remember what an evil dude he was? According to Business Week, Fannie had paid its top 20 executives combined $245 million in bonuses. Rains made $25.6 million in incentive pay, including stock options. $37 million for Fastow. $25 million for Rains. One is evil. One should be in prison for the rest of their life. One destroyed grandma and grandpa's savings. The other is is not that bad. You probably don't even know his name.

By the way, during all of this, when all of this was when the mortgage meltdown began, the total compensation package comes in at $18 million for Freddie Mac. The CEOs total compensation comes in at over $11 million for Fannie Mae. That's why all of this, that's why all of this is happening.

Now, let me ask the media. Where are you on this? Where are you?

Glenn Beck is one of my heroes.

SNL does it again :)

The Dem's Idea of a joke

Obama makes a Freudian slip

Notice how the reporter corrects him . . . .

NOW THIS IS A VEEP YOU CAN GET BEHIND!

SCUM

Kidnapping, sabotage part of anarchists’ plan to disrupt convention

Affidavit says group’s strategy included Molotov cocktails, urine-filled sprayers

By Pat Pheifer

Minneapolis Star Tribune

Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Almost a year to the day before the Republican National Convention began, members of a self-described anarchist group gathered to talk about ways to disrupt it, including kidnapping delegates, sabotaging air vents at the Xcel Energy Center, blocking bridges and “capturing federal buildings” in Minneapolis and St. Paul.

. . . .

In addition to buckets of urine, investigators seized homemade devices used to disable buses and other vehicles, weapons, gas masks, flammable liquids and rags that could be used to make Molotov cocktails, computer storage devices, documents, pamphlets and banners. Some materials, such as banners and signs, were returned Monday for demonstrators to use during the protest marches. Albert Goins Sr., attorney for the plaintiffs, said they are likely to file an emergency appeal to get the rest of it back.

How completely typical of the left's base. They are so ready to preach tolerance as long as they are the one's being tolerated. So ready to demand free speech for themselves and to deny it to others. So ready to claim peace while they commit violence.

Do you agree with Obama on the issues?

Take this test and find out.

A elitists view from the left

"no crackheads . . . . no . . . . black people." This is a perfect example of what the elites on the left think of the little people they claim to support.

JibJab does it again

Time for Some Campaignin' | Funny Jokes at JibJab

Pelosi Backs Obama on Repeal of Defense of Marriage Act

On the Spot (CNSNews.com) – If Barack Obama is elected president, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will support him in fulfilling his vow to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which currently protects states from having to recognize same-sex marriages contracted in other states as they ordinarily would be required to do by the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution.

“Yes,” Pelosi said Thursday at a press conference, when CNSNews.com asked if she would support Obama’s policy. Hear Audio

The DOMA defines marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman for purposes of all federal laws. Signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996, the DOMA protects states from having to recognize same-sex marriages contracted in other states.

Of course - has anyone seen this mentioned in the Media? Any discussion on ABC? CBS? NBC? CNN? Has the Times covered it? google news search for doma pelosi and obama turns up just this one hit. Searching Obama, Pelosi and "defense of marriage act" turned up just one more hit.

Putting Money Where Mouths Are: Media Donations Favor Dems 100-1

An analysis of federal records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 ratio over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans .

Two-hundred thirty-five journalists donated to Democrats, just 20 gave to Republicans — a margin greater than 10-to-1. An even greater disparity, 20-to-1, exists between the number of journalists who donated to Barack Obama and John McCain.

Searches for other newsroom categories (reporters, correspondents, news editors, anchors, newspaper editors and publishers) produces 311 donors to Democrats to 30 donors to Republicans, a ratio of just over 10-to-1. In terms of money, $279,266 went to Dems, $20,709 to Republicans, a 14-to-1 ratio.

And while the money totals pale in comparison to the $9-million-plus that just one union's PACs have spent to get Obama elected, they are more substantial than the amount that Obama has criticized John McCain for receiving from lobbyists: 96 lobbyists have contributed $95,850 to McCain, while Obama — who says he won't take money from PACs or federal lobbyists — has received $16,223 from 29 lobbyists.

A few journalists list their employer as an organization like MSNBC, MSNBC.com or ABC News, or report that they're freelancers for the New York Times, or are journalists for Al Jazeera, CNN Turkey, Deutsche Welle Radio or La Republica of Rome (all contributions to Obama). Most report no employer. They're mainly freelancers. That's because most major news organization have policies that forbid newsroom employees from making political donations.

As if to warn their colleagues in the media, MSNBC last summer ran a story on journalists' contributions to political candidates that drew a similar conclusion:

"Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left."

Butbutbutbut there is no bias in the media!

Howard Stern:‘I Will Never Vote For a Democrat Again’

Stern described a phone conversation he had with his agent, who he described as a “liberal Democrat kind of guy.”

“I go, ‘That’s it!’” Stern said. “[I] go, ‘You know what Don, I’ve voted Republican and I’ve voted Democrat. I have vowed I will never vote for a Democrat again. I don’t give a [expletive] – no matter who they are. I don’t care if God becomes a Democrat.’ I said, ‘I backed Hillary Clinton, I backed Al Gore, I backed John Kerry. I am done with them.’”

Stern took it a step even further and called Democrats on the FCC “communists” and referred to their tactics as “gangsterism.”

“The fact that these Democrats on the FCC are communists,” Stern said. “They’re for communism. They don’t want to see companies – this is gangsterism. I said, ‘This is crazy.’”

Econ 101: What does 'Recession' Mean?

The business community often refers to a recession as a period of two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP. This will generally follow the identification scheme of the Business-Cycle Dating Committee, but may not always. The Committee also considers the depth of the decline, and uses more indicators than just real GDP. However, a period of six months of declining real GDP will generally be classified as a recession.

There are a few things to notice about the definition of a recession. First, it is not a slowing of growth of GDP. The Committee puts it this way: “It’s more accurate to say that a recession – the way we use the word – is a period of diminishing economic activity rather than diminished activity.”

IF you know anyone who is saying that we are in a recession - show them this article and point out that it is impossible since we are experiencing GROWTH!

Ending Our Oil Addiction: Reality Check

Somethings to think about regarding biofuels . . . .

To replace the US oil consumption for a year with corn ethenol, you would need a farm more than 4 times bigger than the entire united states.

To replace the US oil consumption for one year with sugar cane based biofuels imported from Brazil, you'd have to slash and burn 730,000 square miles of virginal Amazon Rainforest.

Biodiesel? A one months supply would take a farm the size of Texas and California combined.

Switchgrass? A farm the size of Alaska.

Green Algae? A farm the size of Arizona flooded three feet deep with water.

What about electric cars? Just because they do not directly give off "greenhouse gas" emissions does not make them zero emission vehicles. The electric plants give off emissions remember.

SO - DO we want to reduce our food supply and give over large swaths of our country to producing "gas" or do we want to get over this idiocy and drill?

Be sure to read the linked article for an indepth examination of the IDIOCY of biofuels.

NAFTA and politicians - a different take on job loss

MUST READS ON JOBS AND THE ECONOMY

A Good Job Is Not So Hard to Find

Minimum-Wage Hike Would Hurt Low-Wage Workers

Justice Anthony Kennedy and Our Schizophrenic Supreme Court

Is Environmentalism a Bigger Threat than Global Warming?



read'em and pass'em on!

Trying to Put Lipstick on a Pig

Not only do I love the title of this article - but it was a great read as well.

In its early years Planned Parenthood was directed by Margaret Sanger who advocated for a "right" for women to choose to kill their unborn children. She also promoted a Congressional plan which would, in part, "apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring."

Sanger wanted to use reproductive controls to halt the "vicious cycle" of poverty and ignorance. She argued, "There is only one cure for both, and that is to stop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them. Herein lies the key of civilization."

Sanger advocated "choice" as a tool for eugenics. "Only upon a free, self-determining motherhood can rest any unshakable structure of racial betterment." Yet she did not believe that this exalted idea of choice should apply to "the undeniably feeble-minded." In other words, Sanger thought the mentally handicapped should be sterilized by force, people should be sterilized to remove unwanted traits from the populace, and the country should seek racial perfection.

Planned Parenthood's modern advocacy of "choice" is rooted in Sanger's lack of regard for the rights of the unborn. Sanger saw "choice" as a means of perfecting America through the destruction of millions of unborn children. Planned Parenthood perpetuates Sanger's legacy by presenting "choice" as a means of improving the lives of individuals and communities by eliminating unwanted, "inconvenient" children. Its clinics dispose of over 200,000 such children per year. The number of abortions provided by Planned Parenthood hit an all-time high in the 2005-2006 fiscal year.

Few people realize the connection that exists between Planned Parenthood and the "science" of Eugenics. Fewer still know that Eugenics is the same justification Hitler used in his search for ubermensch and elimination of undesirable bloodlines such as homosexuals, gypsies, and Jews.

This is an article to pass along. :)

Ethanol: The Fuel to Nowhere

Not only is the concept of using food to power machines horribly STUPID on every level, but the government pushing it and subsidizing is brings new levels to IDIOCY. First off - it's terrible as a fuel. The energy output vs energy input is abysmal and it does absolutely nothing to reduce "greenhouse" emissions. It's all about buying votes and convincing the STUPID that the government cares and is doing something about "the problem."

Advocates of the ethanol program claim that rising corn costs have only contributed modestly to overall food prices. They're not being entirely honest, as they're only counting the direct costs of ethanol. They don't count, for example, increases in soybean prices resulting from farmers switching to the more lucrative corn crop. Soybean crops dropped by 11 million acres last year - much of it used to produce corn.4

The corn growers and Big Ag, flush with new-found cash, have generously increased their campaign contributions, making everyone happy - everyone, that is, but consumers and taxpayers.

Taxpayers are shelling out billions of dollars while getting nothing in return, making ethanol truly a fuel to nowhere.

Worse, the ethanol program is not reducing greenhouse gas emissions as promised, but increasing them. That's according to two new, independent, scientific studies published in the journal Science.

One study, by the University of Minnesota and the Nature Conservancy, concluded that further converting the rainforests, grasslands and savannahs of Southeast Asia and South America to crops for bio-fuels will increase greenhouse gas emissions, perhaps for centuries, while destroying important habitat.

A second study, by researchers at Princeton University, came to a similar conclusion, finding that corn-based ethanol would produce twice the greenhouse gas emissions as conventional gasoline over the next 30 years.

The recently-passed energy bill is expected to create even greater demand for ethanol, since it requires the U.S. to ramp up biofuel production to 36 billion gallons by 2022 from 7.5 billion gallons today.

Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty

* Britain's Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor Will Defy Law Forcing Homosexual Adoption
* Northern Ireland MP Investigated for "Homophobic" Remarks
* Belgian Bishop Cleared of Charges for Church Teaching on Homosexuality
* Alberta Pastor Fined $7000 and Ordered to Publicly Apologize and Remain Silent on Homosexuality
* Canadian Catholic Priest Accused of Hate Crime


Well? How much longer before we have similar laws and criminal charges being leveled here in America?

Scientists Discover Renewable Energy Bug!

Welp, it seems we do not have to clutter the landscape with windmills and solar panels to get renewable energy. We can get it from the backside of a bug!

“Ten years ago I could never have imagined I’d be doing this,” says Greg Pal, 33, a former software executive, as he squints into the late afternoon Californian sun. “I mean, this is essentially agriculture, right? But the people I talk to – especially the ones coming out of business school – this is the one hot area everyone wants to get into.”

He means bugs. To be more precise: the genetic alteration of bugs – very, very small ones – so that when they feed on agricultural waste such as woodchips or wheat straw, they do something extraordinary. They excrete crude oil.

Unbelievably, this is not science fiction. Mr Pal holds up a small beaker of bug excretion that could, theoretically, be poured into the tank of the giant Lexus SUV next to us. Not that Mr Pal is willing to risk it just yet. He gives it a month before the first vehicle is filled up on what he calls “renewable petroleum”. After that, he grins, “it’s a brave new world”.

Of course, the environmental elitist will ignore and downplay this breakthrough - after all their goal is not to have us use renewable energy, but rather to CONTROL what energy we use and how much we consume. They like cap and trade - and ADORE "conservation" because through these policies they can further expand the control they have over our economy - and more importantly - over us. Remember: with the left, it's always about control.

Mass Extinction?

More than 56,000 species of animals and plants have been scrubbed from the rollcall of marine life after it was realised that they had been counted twice — or more.

Almost a third of all the named species in the seas turn out on renewed inspection to have been “discovered” at least twice by naturalists.

One species, the breadcrumb sponge, Halichondria panicea (left), has been named 56 times since it was first described 242 years ago in 1766.

Other lifeforms identified several times include the spiny dogfish, Squalus acanthias, with 21 Latin names, a type of sea squirt, Cnemidocarpa verrucosa, with 19 names and the basking shark, Cetorhinus maximus, which was named 40 times.

Rest assured that the left will spin this and count these duplicates as extinctions due to global warming in the future and will most likely blame Bush for it as well!

Labor Union Tactics Laid bare.

Obama's Monkey Business

"Bhama claims that while he has always been a supporter of Obama, the Democratic candidate’s devotion to Hanuman has strengthened his backing. "Barack Obama is a Hanuman devotee and so am I — hence I thought I should gift him the idol," said Bhama. "

And here we were thinking the Rev. Wright was the only thing funny about Obama's religious beliefs!

Supreme court makes another bad ruling

Once again we see a prime example of why we need a good conservative in office. With three members of SCOTUS in their dotage and on the verge of retirement or death, we have the opportunity to return the constitution as the primary source of US law. These twisted and engineered decisions based on feelings, the personal preferences of the justices, and in complete denial of the Constitution need to be stopped. Fred Thompson once again demonstrates why he was the best of the Republican field for president with his latest column on Townhall.com:

They could have saved us all a lot of time if they’d told us what was clearly on their minds.

They don’t trust military tribunals to deal with those accused of being enemy combatants, even if the tribunals are following guidelines established by Congress.

That the government has probably detained some prisoners at Guantanamo for longer than they should have.

And that Guantanamo should just be closed.

Though they are willing to give it lip service, they don’t really believe we are at war … at least not a “real” war.

Therefore, they should create a new right for our nation’s enemies commiserate with the displeasure that they and the rest of the “enlightened” people have with this “war,” Guantanamo and the Bush Administration.

Once again another gotcha moment engineered by the left in their long standing crusade against the "real enemy" George W. Bush - After all, he is the greatest threat to freedom in the world according to lefti-pundits. But Fred sums up things up wonderfully:

At this stage, no one can really tell the extent to which this decision is going to add to judicial confusion, additional administrative difficulty, time and attention of military personnel or how many more prisoners will be mistakenly released to join the at least 30 who were released from Guantanamo only to return to fight the United States.

In reading the majority opinion I am struck by the utter waste that is involved here. No, not the waste of military resources and human life, although such a result is tragically obvious. I refer to the waste of all those years these justices spent in law school studying how adherence to legal precedent is the bedrock of the rule of law, when it turns out, all they really needed was a Pew poll, a subscription to the New York Times, and the latest edition of “How to Make War for Dummies.”

It is truly stunning that this court has seen fit to arrogate unto itself a role in the most important issue facing any country, self-defense, in a case in which Congress has in fact repeatedly acted. This was not a case where Congress did not set the rules; it did. But the court still decided – in the face of overwhelming precedent to the contrary – to intervene. This decision, or course, will allow for "President Bush Is Rebuffed” headlines, the implication being that the Administration was caught red-handed violating clearly established Constitutional rights when in fact the Administration, and the Congress for that matter, followed guidelines established by the Supreme Court itself in prior cases.

Media ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ about Key Ruling

By Robert Knight and Julia Seward
Culture and Media Institute
June 12, 2008

When it comes to reporting on court rulings about the military’s ban on homosexuality, the media seem to have their own “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

A case in point was Monday’s ruling by the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Cook vs. Gates upholding the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy, established by Congress and President Clinton in 1993, which enables the military to remove open homosexuals from service.

There was no coverage by the TV networks, nor by the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, USA Today or the Washington Post. The Associated Press (AP) ignored the story as well. Only the Boston Globe and Boston Herald carried brief articles on it, because the case originated in Boston.

Another prime example of media bias. They cover what they want from the angle that best supports their own held beliefs and they claim to be impartial?

Make the Election About Iraq

We know Obama hasn't been to Iraq in more than two years, but does he not read the papers? Does he not know anything about developments on the ground? Here is the "nothing" that Iraqis have been doing in the past few months:

1. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki sent the Iraqi army into Basra. It achieved in a few weeks what the British had failed to do in four years: take the city, drive out the Mahdi Army and seize the ports from Iranian-backed militias.

2. When Mahdi fighters rose up in support of their Basra brethren, the Iraqi army at Maliki's direction confronted them and prevailed in every town — Najaf, Karbala, Hilla, Kut, Nasiriyah and Diwaniyah — from Basra to Baghdad.

3. Without any American ground forces, the Iraqi army entered and occupied Sadr City, the Mahdi Army stronghold.

4. Maliki flew to Mosul, directing a joint Iraqi-U.S. offensive against the last redoubt of al-Qaeda, which had already been driven out of Anbar, Baghdad and Diyala provinces.

5. The Iraqi parliament enacted a de-Baathification law, a major Democratic benchmark for political reconciliation.

6. Parliament also passed the other reconciliation benchmarks — a pension law, an amnesty law, and a provincial elections and powers law. Oil revenue is being distributed to the provinces through the annual budget.

7. With Maliki having demonstrated that he would fight not just Sunni insurgents (e.g., in Mosul) but Shiite militias (e.g., the Mahdi Army), the Sunni parliamentary bloc began negotiations to join the Shiite-led government. (The final sticking point is a squabble over a sixth cabinet position.)

The disconnect between what Democrats are saying about Iraq and what is actually happening there has reached grotesque proportions. Democrats won an exhilarating electoral victory in 2006 pledging withdrawal at a time when conditions in Iraq were dire and we were indeed losing the war. Two years later, when everything is changed, they continue to reflexively repeat their "narrative of defeat and retreat" (as Joe Lieberman so memorably called it) as if nothing has changed.

There is a reason why everyone else shuts up when Krauthammer speaks on Fox . . . . And here we see a perfect illistration. Now ask yourself how much of this have you seen covered in the Main Stream Media . . . .

Eliminate or Scale Back Corn Ethanol Mandate

76% of Americans Want Ethanol Law Changed; 41% Want Mandate Repealed Entirely

Washington, DC - Most Americans - including those in the Farm Belt - want Congress to reduce or eliminate the corn ethanol mandate, according to a new poll released today by the National Center for Public Policy Research.

The poll, published by the Public Opinion and Policy Center of the National Center for Public Policy Research, found that 41% of Americans want Congress to repeal the corn ethanol mandate entirely, while 35% want Congress to repeal the law it passed last December to double it. Just 6% want the mandate to increase as planned while 5% want it to be even expanded further.

"With grocery prices up 1.5% in April alone, or 18% on an annualized basis, Americans don't appear to be in the mood for anything that would push food prices up even further," said David A. Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. "While there is more than one reason that food prices are rising, diverting one-third of the U.S. corn crop to produce fuel rather than food is a significant factor and the American people know it."

The survey also found a majority in the Farm Belt want Congress to change the ethanol policy. Twenty-five percent want it repealed entirely while 30% want it scaled back.

"Senator Charles Grassley recently called on Iowans to protest what he called a 'smear campaign' against ethanol,'" said Ridenour. "Don't look for that massive protest any time soon. Ethanol is drawing criticism from the Senator's own backyard."

WELL IT'S ABOUT TIME! Food as fuel has got to be about the dumbest idea ever.

A Father is for life, not just conception

Fathers 4 Justice staged another brilliant protest, scaling the home of British feminist minister “Ms.” Harriet Harmon, who has been brashly destroying marriage and fatherhood in Britain for years. If feminists such as Ms. Harmon want to be known for standing firm for equality (which the larger body of organized feminists loudly suggest), they need to finally turn their feet in the same direction as their mouths.

. . .

The moral quandary faced by half of British and American men today, and stodgy inbred politicians, emanate directly from F4J’s new slogan “A Father Is For Life, Not Just Conception”. Only legislators can break the impasse on this moral quandary to finally put Britain and America back on solid paths to economic and social security.

The war on marriage and fatherhood is now at least forty years old — the longest-running war in American and perhaps British history. Responsible father’s and men’s rights activists have been fighting this war diligently and peacefully at least as far back as 1968.

Both countries can declare an end to this unjustified and immoral war, and preclude terrorism in the future, by openly giving legitimate men’s rights and pro-marriage activists a seat at the center of the table.

Those who think Fathers For Justice is radical climbing buildings and hanging banners from them must be reminded that the suffragette movement in Britain was not politically recognized until suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst attempted to burn down the homes of two ministers who opposed “votes for women”. Pankhurst was later convicted and imprisoned for burning down the home of British Exchequer David Lloyd George in 1913.

GO TEAM!

Tomato-e?

Remember when Dan Quail Made his famous gaff spelling "tomato" with an E at the end and how the press rode that mistake into the ground?

Welp, Obama has made a MUCH MUCH worse Gaff - a president and a presidential candidate should at the very least NEVER make this mistake:



Don't hold your breathe waiting for extensive press coverage of this incident in the press.

Pelosi in hot water

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., soon may be facing ethics charges from the Federal Elections Commission for a television commercial that apparently violated federal campaign finance laws.

The "We Campaign" advertisement features Pelosi and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a Republican, sitting on a sofa and declaring that though they disagree about many things, they agree on climate change. The commercial was paid for by the Alliance for Climate Protection, a non-profit group founded by Al Gore and funded in part by his 2007 Nobel Prize.

According to a formal complaint filed by Judicial Watch, a foundation that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, the commercial is, in effect, a campaign contribution, since it was funded by Gore's Alliance and aired in Pelosi's San Francisco district less than a month before her June 3 contested primary.

I thought it was only republicans who had ethics issues . . . .

Dems can't be honest about their agenda. :(

LIAR LIAR!

Obama has been a member of Wrights church since 1992 and he's going to try to claim that the CRAP that Wright spews is something NEW??? This says one of two things to me -

1 Obama's denunciation of Wright is fake. He did not mean a word of it - that he agrees whole heartedly with Wright and is only denouncing him to further his Presidential bid. Obama sat in wrights church - a church that Wright BUILT from a small congregation into a mega church - and he's going to try to convince us that he did not know what the man believed??

2 Obama's experience with Wrights church was purely political expediency. Wright's sermons did not mean anything to Obama because Obama was not listening from the start. If this is the case then we must admit that his "conversion" is suspect. His Christianity is also suspect. Perhaps the claims that Obama is really a muslim are not as far fetched as the once seemed.

The poor need afordable housing - just not in my neighborhood!

TYPICAL LEFTIST PROGRESSIVE HYPOCRITES!!

Homeless housing plans at Fort Lawton ruffle Magnolia residents

By Sanjay Bhatt

Seattle Times staff reporter

Many residents in Seattle's affluent Magnolia neighborhood are fuming over plans to house homeless people near Discovery Park at soon-to-be-closed Fort Lawton.

At one community meeting, some residents wondered whether homeless housing at the fort would attract wife-beaters, sex offenders and crack addicts. They rolled their eyes when city officials asserted that such housing increases property values. They worried about the impact on schools and scoffed at the idea of homeless people shopping at the closest grocery — which sells pheasant-and-rosemary pâté for $9.99 and ground coffee for up to $18 a pound.

"We're the ones who live here, and we want to have a nice, safe neighborhood to live in," Donald Raz, a King County deputy prosecutor and Magnolia resident, said later.

CONTINUED

It's okay to put these developments in YOUR neighborhood - but NEVER in the neighborhoods of these hypocrites. BTW - they want to take your money to pay for these developments. Rest assured that they will be spending their money to protect the endangered polar bear and the screech owl and loads of microbes that live in mud puddles.

Obama's latest endorsement

from: http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/21/the-littlest-bush-hater/

If this doesn't scare you - you need to get checked out.

Is Compassionate Conservatism an Oxymoron?

The conventional wisdom runs like this: Liberals are charitable because they advocate government redistribution of money in the name of social justice; conservatives are uncharitable because they oppose these policies. But note the sleight of hand: Government spending, according to this logic, is a form of charity.

Let us be clear: Government spending is not charity. It is not a voluntary sacrifice by individuals. No matter how beneficial or humane it might be, no matter how necessary it is for providing public services, it is still the obligatory redistribution of tax revenues. Because government spending is not charity, sanctimonious yard signs do not prove that the bearers are charitable or that their opponents are selfish. (On the contrary, a public attack on the integrity of those who don’t share my beliefs might more legitimately constitute evidence that I am the uncharitable one.)

To evaluate accurately the charity difference between liberals and conservatives, we must consider private, voluntary charity. How do liberals and conservatives compare in their private giving and volunteering? Beyond strident slogans and sarcastic political caricatures, what, exactly, do the data tell us?

The data tell us that the conventional wisdom is dead wrong. In most ways, political conservatives are not personally less charitable than political liberals—they are more so.

First, we must define “liberals” and “conservatives.” Most surveys ask people not just about their political party affiliation but also about their ideology. In general, about 10 percent of the population classify themselves as “very conservative”; and another 10 percent call themselves “very liberal.” About 20 percent say they are simply “liberal,” and 30 percent or so say they are “conservative.” The remaining 30 percent call themselves “moderates” or “centrists.” In this discussion, by “liberals” I mean the approximately 30 percent in the two most liberal categories, and by conservatives I mean the 40 percent or so in the two most con­servative categories.

So how do liberals and conservatives compare in their charity? When it comes to giving or not giving, conservatives and liberals look a lot alike. Conservative people are a percentage point or two more likely to give money each year than liberal people, but a percentage point or so less likely to volunteer.

But this similarity fades away when we consider average dollar amounts donated. In 2000, households headed by a conservative gave, on average, 30 percent more money to charity than households headed by a liberal ($1,600 to $1,227). This discrepancy is not simply an artifact of income differences; on the contrary, liberal families earned an average of 6 percent more per year than conservative families, and conservative families gave more than liberal families within every income class, from poor to middle class to rich.

If we look at party affiliation instead of ideology, the story remains largely the same. For example, registered Republicans were seven points more likely to give at least once in 2002 than registered Democrats (90 to 83 percent).

The differences go beyond money and time. Take blood donations, for example. In 2002, conservative Americans were more likely to donate blood each year, and did so more often, than liberals. If liberals and moderates gave blood at the same rate as conservatives, the blood supply in the United States would jump by about 45 percent.

The political stereotypes break down even further when we consider age: “Anyone who is not a socialist before age thirty has no heart, but anyone who is still a socialist after thirty has no head,” goes the old saying. And so we imagine crusty right-wing grandfathers socking their money away in trust funds while their liberal grandchildren work in soup kitchens and save the whales. But young liberals—perhaps the most vocally dissatisfied political constituency in America today—are one of the least generous demographic groups out there. In 2004, self-described liberals younger than thirty belonged to one-third fewer organizations in their communities than young conservatives. In 2002, they were 12 percent less likely to give money to charities, and one-third less likely to give blood. Liberal young Americans in 2004 were also significantly less likely than the young conservatives to express a willingness to sacrifice for their loved ones: A lower percentage said they would prefer to suffer than let a loved one suffer, that they are not happy unless the loved one is happy, or that they would sacrifice their own wishes for those they love.

The next time some self-righteous leftie tells you how selfish conservatives are - tell them to get a copy of this book written by an admitted liberal. Better still - pull out your own copy and show them the stats yourself. :)

Thought for the day

Saw a bumper sticker and I wanted to share it as a THOUGHT for the day:

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man,
which debt he proposes to pay off with your money.

Leftist Logic!

Thanks Again to Nancy for this little tidbit:

"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world.

I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it."

Sen. Barack Obama

FMG9

A grandmother I know sent me the link to this - and I can tell you, she'd have one if they made it. :) I know plenty of people who would agree.

ENJOY!

(thanks Nancy!)

Air safety proposal: shock-bracelets

FROM

Lamperd, a "firearm training system" company, has patented a bracelet that delivers debilitating shocks when remotely triggered. Their killer app for this is aviation safety: they're proposing that the TSA could force everyone who flies to wear one of these and then flight-attendants could zap us into a stupor if we turn out to be Al Quaeda.

I'd like to see these put into classrooms and on school buses and . . . .

5 YEARS TO MANY

Their idiocy is showing more than usual with this protest.

Zombie time has once again done a wonderful joy documenting the idiocy of the left. Make sure you read the whole story - http://www.zombietime.com/five_years_too_many/

Yet another study linking religious beliefs to happiness

Enquiring minds would, however, enjoy knowing where in Europe they FOUND enough religious people to make up a statistically significant sample. Aside from those whose religion causes them to get angry, strap bombs on themselves, and fly into many pieces, of course.

PRONOUNCE IT CORRECTLY!!

Divisive. (dĭ-vī'sĭv)

adj.

Creating dissension or discord.

devEYEsive. Stress on the second syllable AND note that it is an I (EYE) sound. Would someone please tell Sen. Obama who had the nerve to make fun of the ACCENT of President Bush and how he said Nuclear - that his pseudo intellectual pronunciation of divisive is far worse. EVEN THE BRITISH say DivEYEsive.

Deflection

I hope that I am not the only person to notice that what was a non-issue for the press a while ago has suddenly become an issue in the press - specifically the issue of Obama's FORMER pastor?

Anyone wondering why it was not worth covering when he first announced - but it IS worth covering now? Anyone notice that when Obama first announced the man was actively the pastor of Trinity Church - but now that the man has retired from that role (February 10, 2008) it's okay to cover this issue now?

Dig a little deeper.

Where is the press coverage and the difficult questions being asked of Obama about Mr. Rezko? The whole Wright story became okay to cover ONLY AFTER Mr. Rezko found himself on trial for corruption. Where are the probing questions about Sen. Obama's ties to a man on trial corruption? A man who was a fundraiser for Sen. Obama. A man who helped Sen. Obama purchase his current residence. A man who is currently on trial for influence pedaling.

Oh he's faced and taken some minorly difficult questions from the local Chicago press - but have any of the Major outlets addressed this issue?

The Dowager Duchess Holds Forth

As we were invited to make pithy pronouncements of a political nature on this blog, we shall, from time to time, hold forth upon those subjects which interest us. We invite comments, and do give fair warning that the cane we use is not merely for show, but is, in fact, a useful means of getting our point across. As soon, that is, as we have something to say...

Try not to laugh

The Ten Worst Teachers Contest! NOMINATE NOW!

GO HERE


and nominate those who you believe to be the WORST teacher currently working. Here's a chance to get that truly awful teacher the national exposure he or she so richly deserves!

Are Your Kids Getting High Legally?

Are you aware that a plant you may be growing in your flowerbeds might be getting your kids high? Are you aware that it is still currently legal?

GET AWARE!!!

Called nicknames like Sally-D, Magic Mint and Diviner's Sage, salvia has proliferated on the Internet and at college-area paraphernalia shops.

It is usually sold as dried leaves in various degrees of potency. Salvia causes hallucinations, a perception of overlapping realities and a loss of body, dizziness and impaired speech, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration says on its website.

Unlike hallucinogens like LSD or PCP, however, salvia's effects last for a shorter time, generally up to an hour.

Venezuela - state sponsor of terrorism

President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela has apparently been funding the Naro-terrorist group FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) - a Marxist front group with ties to Castro's Cuba. Latin American expert Humberto Fontova claims that a computer recovered during Columbia's cross boarder raid on a FARC camp in Ecuador contains information which contains evidence that Hugo Chavez has been funding the terrorist group - a commitment of MILLIONS of Dollars.

The ties between Chavez and FARC run deep. In the 1990s when Chavez was running for president of Venzuela it was known that he was being financed in part by FARC. Alejandro Peña Esclusa reports in an open letter to President Uribe of Columbia that Chavez was a close personal friend of the terrorist leader slain in the March 1 raid.

Further evidence of the ties the Chavez government has to the narco-terroist group has come to light in Venezuela. Joaquin Gomez, appointed to replace Raul Reyes the FARC second in command who was slain in the Coumbian raid, is being treated in a private clinic (NOTE THAT IT IS A PRIVATE CLINIC) and is being guarded by the Venezuelan military.

Given the growing list of evidence connecting the Chavez regime with Terrorist groups like FARC, it should come as no big surprise that Lawmakers are attempting to have Venezuela added to the list of state sponsors of Terrorism.

There's a name for that?

The name of the phenomena that revenues increase when taxes are cut is called the Laffer Curb.

Global Warming Concensus

Ever wonder why none of these people who claim "consensus" on global warming provide surveys or other information about their claim?

Probably because it's as true as the fact that people cause global warming.

The expert jury is divided, with 26 per cent attributing global warming to human activity like burning fossil fuels and 27 per cent blaming other causes such as volcanoes, sunspots, earth crust movements and natural evolution of the planet.

That's a survey of actual scientists.

Osama bin London and British Terror Training Camps

Osama bin London and British Terror Training Camps

Adrian Morgan

On Tuesday February 26th, after a trial lasting more than four months, it was announced that five men were found guilty of partaking in terror training on UK soil. The leader of the group, Mohammed Hamid, called himself "Osama bin London." Before his arrest, Hamid had boasted to his followers that he had been organizing terror training camps in Britain for 13 years.

Hamid was found guilty by a jury at Woolwich Crown Court of three counts of "soliciting to murder" and three counts of providing terrorist training. He was found not guilty on two other counts of soliciting murder and not guilty of providing training in weaponry. He was also found not guilty of possessing a document containing information useful to a terrorist.

Four others were on trial with him. After 22 days of deliberation, a jury found three of these individuals – Kibley Da Costa, Muhammad al-Figari and Kader Ahmed – guilty of attending terror training camps in Britain. 41-year-old property developer Mousa Brown was found not guilty, and was freed from custody.

Reporting restrictions were lifted when the sentences were announced. It was then revealed that two of Osama bin London's followers, Muhammad Kyriacou, 19, and Yassin Mutegombwa, 23, pleaded guilty on Tuesday to attending the training camps at a separate hearing. Under Section 6 (1) of the Terrorism Act 2006, receiving training in terrorism is illegal. Kyriacou and Mutegombwa, who both came from south London, were both given a three year and five month jail sentence. Mutegombwa's 18-year-old brother Hassan was convicted at an earlier trial of seeking funds for terrorism training overseas while at one of the camps run by "Osama bin London," and was given a 10-year jail sentence.

Has anyone seen this in the MSM yet?

Obama Nafta Memo

I thought that he was going to bring "change" - how exactly does THIS mess qualify as change?

Obama under fire over Nafta memo

By Andrew Ward in Washington

Published: March 3 2008 23:50 | Last updated: March 3 2008 23:55

A senior adviser to Barack Obama told the Canadian government that the Democratic presidential frontrunner’s campaign rhetoric on free trade should be viewed as “political positioning”, according to a leaked memo.

The memo provided the first firm evidence to support week-old allegations that the Obama campaign issued private reassurances to Canada while publicly criticising the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta).

So does the fact that this got leaked qualify as change? OR maybe it's the fact that a democrat is now on the record - albeit against his will - saying more or less that NAFTA was a good thing? It kills me that people do not realize how much business and how many jobs NAFTA has brought to America. Oh the low skill high wage union jobs are heading south where the unions have no sway - but I still don't see how that is a bad thing.

McCain and INFLUENCE PEDDLING

So everyone knows about the NYTimes non-story about the affair between John McCain and a certain lobbyist that turned out to be more insinuation than fact and how the pundits spun the story afterwards to make it about McCain and the influence peddling of lobbyists - but the pressing question in my mind at least - was WHY? Why go with a story that was custom made to accomplish exactly nothing given that McCain was their choice of Republican candidates and the fact that he had the nomination all but sealed . . . . What did they hope to accomplish with this non-story?

Enter Tony Rezko - personal friend of Barach Obama and Democratic fundraiser who just so happens to be on trial for what? INFLUENCE PEDDLING. Seems that Mr. Rezko - a Chicago entrepreneur and restaurateur - who toured Sen. Obama's Chicago Mansion with him before the purchase was made - and seems to have laundered the money which bought said mansion and his wife bought the plot of land next door and the sold him a 10 foot strip of land so that Mr. Obama could have a bigger garden - at a very DEEP discount.

How much coverage by the MSM have you seen of this issue? Do a search of New York Times and the names of the two parties and mansion on google and check out the results. The McCain story is going to be drug out by the leftist media during the general election any time they need to distract from Obama's connections to Mr. Rezko. Never mind that there is no truth to the McCain story - and TONS to the Rezko story. Since when did the facts matter to the NYTimes or the rest of the MSM? The impression will stand amongst the democratic base that McCain is guilty because the story was in the Times.

The McCain/Lobbyist Scandal - The REAL Reason It Was A Story

So everyone knows about the NYTimes non-story about the affair between John McCain and a certain lobbyist that turned out to be more insinuation than fact and how the pundits spun the story afterwards to make it about McCain and the influence peddling of lobbyists - but the pressing question in my mind at least - was WHY? Why go with a story that was custom made to accomplish exactly nothing given that McCain was their choice of Republican candidates and the fact that he had the nomination all but sealed . . . . What did they hope to accomplish with this non-story?

Enter Tony Rezko - personal friend of Barach Obama and Democratic fundraiser who just so happens to be on trial for what? INFLUENCE PEDDLING. Seems that Mr. Rezco - a Chicago entrepreneur and restaurateur - who toured Sen. Obama's Chicago Mansion with him before the purchase was made - and seems to have laundered the money which bought said mansion and his wife bought the plot of land next door and the sold him a 10 foot strip of land so that Mr. Obama could have a bigger garden - at a very DEEP discount.

How much coverage by the MSM have you seen of this issue? Do a search of New York Times and the names of the two parties and mansion on google and check out the results. The McCain story is going to be drug out by the leftist media during the general election any time they need to distract from Obama's connections to Mr. Resko. Never mind that there is no truth to the McCain story - and TONS to the Resko story. Since when did the facts matter to the NYTimes or the rest of the MSM? The impression will stand amongst the democratic base that McCain is guilty because the story was in the Times.

The man can not give a substantive answer to ANY question!

Boxers or Briefs? A rather ubiquitous question that is asked of most every "rock star" sooner or later. And how does the Democratic rock star answer?

I don't answer those humiliating questions. But whichever one it is, I look good in 'em!

Thanks for the hard answer Mr. Obama. Do you need another pillow?

Obama's Proposed Spending Now Tops $300 Billion

Change is right. If we elect Obama - Change is all we'll have left in our piggy banks! The man proposed adding $300+ BILLION to the budget - that despite pledges to gut the military and spend all of the national defense budget on handouts as well. Where will all of this money come from? If you think it's just going to come out of your neighbors pockets - you're sadly mistaken.

In late January NTUF provided cost estimates -- based on hard data -- for more than 450 of the major candidates' proposals that would affect the federal budget (at that time eight candidates were studied). NTUF assumed the most conservative cost estimates of federal outlays based on a variety of sources, including the candidates' own projections; summaries from the Congressional Budget Office, Congressional Research Service, and the White House Office of Management and Budget; and results from equivalent legislation from NTUF's BillTally cost accounting system. Among the latest findings:

* Since January 29, Barack Obama has outlined 34 additional policies that could have an impact on the federal budget (some are new proposals while others are expansions of existing proposals). These items add $20.3 billion in annualized spending to Obama's $287.0 billion total that NTUF originally calculated.
* Among Obama's larger new initiatives are a "National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank" ($6 billion), a New Orleans Hurricane Protection System ($1.6 billion), and a new "Universal Mortgage Credit" (the refundable portion of which could raise outlays by $4.4 billion).

I love how we're going to pay for New Orleans for a THIRD time if Obama gets his way. Not only did we pay for the levies to be built right the first time - but they weren't thanks to the New Orleans government - but we have had to pay for the clean up and rebuilding the city on the same spot where it WILL be flooded again - the question is only one of WHEN not IF - but now he wants us to shell out $1.6 BILLION for a prevention system?? I'd rather cast my vote for Slick Willy for the office of emperor of earth for life.

Bill Buckley and the Jews

Was there any major American personality in the last half-century who seemed more remote from the sensibilities of most American Jews than William F. Buckley?

Buckley, who passed away last week at the age of 83, was the fervent Catholic patrician whose work helped create the modern American conservative movement in the 1950s at a time when nothing could have been more removed from the thinking of most Jews in this country than his National Review. . . .

[T]he fact that as much as any other person, Bill Buckley cleared the way not only for a conservative movement where Jews would be welcomed, but that it was his leadership that set the stage for an American politics in which anti-Semitism was confined to the fever swamps of the far right and far left.

As conservative columnist George Will has written, without National Review, which Buckley started in 1955, much of what followed in American politics - including Barry Goldwater's capture of the Republican nomination for president in 1964 and then the electoral victories of Ronald Reagan and the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994 - is unimaginable. American conservatism as we have known it, with all of its subsequent ups and downs, has its origins in the pages of that magazine in which its editor helped create a coherent movement out of what had previously been a loose array of cranks.

In order to give life to that movement, Buckley specifically chose to rid its ranks of people who espoused the sort of anti-Semitism that once was inescapable on the American right.

A refershing and enlightening view of William F. Buckley. I'm glad to have read it - I hope you read all of it too.

The 1st Honest Democratic Debate this cycle. The 2nd One Too!

Trial begins of former Chicago Obama fund-raiser

Has anyone seen this on the news?

CHICAGO (Reuters) - A friend and fund-raiser to U.S. Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama went on trial on Monday in a case that has directed scrutiny at the often corrupt political culture of the candidate's adopted home state.

Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a property developer and restaurant entrepreneur, is accused by federal prosecutors of extorting bribes and campaign donations as well as money laundering.

Prince Harry hails real heroes of Afghanistan

Hats off to Harry for being real, being honest, and standing up for what is right. I love that in a interview he says that his experience in Afghanistan is the high point of his life.

The lack of a smile said it all. Head bowed and still dressed in dusty desert combat clothing, the young Prince cut a forlorn­figure as he descended the steps of the aircraft after landing at RAF Brize Norton late yesterday morning.

While many of the other 170 servicemen and women might have cheered as the RAF Tristar touched down, Cornet Wales - who craved the anonymity that came with serving in Afghanistan - was left to ponder what might have been.

Just 48 hours earlier Prince Harry was having the "happiest time of his life" serving as an Army officer on operations close to the former Taliban stronghold of Musa Qala.

Chavez: Colombia has become the Israel of Latin America

You've gotta love how he brings Israel into this mess. Columbia ENDS a known terrorist and drug runner - and Venezuela and Ecuador get their noses out of joint?

Chavez: Colombia has become the Israel of Latin America

Venezeuelan President Hugo Chavez ordered tanks and thousands of troops on Sunday to the border with Colombia, accusing it of pushing South
America to the brink of war and likening it to Israel for its U.S.-backed
attacks on militants.

Chavez called Colombian President Alvaro Uribe a criminal and branded his government a terrorist state, over the killing of a top rebel leader on Ecuadorean soil.

"The Colombian government has become the Israel of Latin America," an agitated Chavez said, reiterating his criticism of the Israel Defense Forces' strikes on Palestinian militants.

"We aren't going to permit Colombia to become the Israel of these lands. ... Uribe, we aren't going to permit you."

Denouncing Colombia's slaying of the rebel commander in a cross-border raid into Ecuador, Chavez said Venezuela would respond militarily if Colombia violates its border.

So . . . . what he's saying is . . . . Columbia we are not going to let you fight your enemies. We are going to harbor and support them and send them home to harry and harass you until you let them win.

Obama's "Defense" Policy?

Just in case you missed it he said:

“I’m the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning.
And as president, I will end it.
I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.
I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.
I will not weaponize space.
I will slow our development of future combat systems.
And I will institute an independent defense review board to endure that the quadrennial defense review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.
I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons.
To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons.
I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material.
And I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICMBs off hair-trigger alert
and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear program.”

How will McCain Choose his Running Mate?

When John McCain eliminated viable competitors for the Republican presidential nomination last Tuesday, he set off the next round of parlor games among pundits and political junkies: Pick the VP.

On Friday McCain was asked about his criteria for picking a vice president. He responded:

“The process will begin and the fundamental principle behind any selection of a running mate would be whether that person is fully prepared to take over and share your values, your principles, your philosophy, and your priorities. I think that's the first and only real criteria for the selection of a running mate.”

McCain also dismissed the notion that he must pick someone for geographic balance. He explained that, “From a practical standpoint, I think that former President Clinton and former Vice President Gore showed that you don't have to be regionally different. I think that America is such now, that the quote, regional differences, don't play the role that maybe they did in earlier times.”

His choice of running mate is going to be a make or break issue for me. If he goes left for a running mate - I'll know that his speech at CPAC was all sun shine being blown up our collective butts.

Now Hillary . . . . I can just imagine her picking Bill as her running mate. Wouldn't that be fun!

Obama - he'd have to pick Jesus as his running mate for me to even consider voting for him - and then I would only be CONSIDERING it.

BUYING AN ELECTION

Seeking Superdelegates

As the Democratic Party's superdelegates decide whether to support Clinton or Obama, will they take into account the $904,200 they've received from the candidates?

By Lindsay Renick Mayer

February 14, 2008 | (Figures in this story have been adjusted to reflect Sen. Ted Kennedy's contributions from the two candidates, which were overlooked in the original posting. Changes are in bold.) At this summer's Democratic National Convention, nearly 800 members of Congress, state governors and Democratic Party leaders could be the tiebreakers in the intense contest between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. If neither candidate can earn the support of at least 2,025 delegates in the primary voting process, the decision of who will represent the Democrats in November's presidential election will fall not to the will of the people but to these "superdelegates"—the candidates' friends, colleagues and even financial beneficiaries. Both contenders will be calling in favors.

And while it would be unseemly for the candidates to hand out thousands of dollars to primary voters, or to the delegates pledged to represent the will of those voters, elected officials who are superdelegates have received at least $904,200 from Obama and Clinton in the form of campaign contributions over the last three years, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Obama, who narrowly leads in the count of pledged, "non-super" delegates, has doled out more than $698,200 to superdelegates from his political action committee, Hope Fund, or campaign committee since 2005. Of the 82 elected officials who had announced as of Feb. 12 that their superdelegate votes would go to the Illinois senator, 35, or 43 percent of this group, have received campaign contributions from him in the 2006 or 2008 election cycles, totaling $232,200. In addition, Obama has been endorsed by 52 superdelegates who haven't held elected office recently and, therefore, didn't receive campaign contributions from him.

Clinton does not appear to have been as openhanded. Her PAC, HILLPAC, and campaign committee appear to have distributed $205,500 to superdelegates. Only 12 percent of her elected superdelegates, or 13 of 109 who have said they will back her, have received campaign contributions, totaling about $95,000 since 2005. An additional 128 unelected superdelegates support Clinton, according to a blog tracking superdelegates and their endorsements, 2008 Democratic Convention Watch.

. . . .

Welp - it seems that dems are still buying elections like the used to back in the old days! Trust the "party of the people" to be deeply entrenched in the graft and spoils system that marked the founding of their party. Jackson set the tone - and it seems that the democratic party he founded has not been able to deviate from that melody.

Iraqi Security Forces

[Baghdad] One of the most important measures of progress in Iraq is the development of the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF). In order for our troops to draw down without squandering the tremendous recent gains, Iraqis must be able to govern and protect their own country. There are conflicting reports concerning the ISF’s capability and reliability. Understanding that this is a complex issue which depends to a great extent on projections, predictions and interpretations rather than hard facts, I will describe the situation as I see it. . .

The ISF are comprised of the Army, Air Force, Navy, ISOF (Iraqi Special Operations Forces), Police, National Police, Department of Border Enforcement and Points of Entry. Iraqi and Coalition leaders have determined that the total force should number 600,000 to 650,000 personnel.

Speaking of surges, between June and December 2007, according to MNSTC-I, the ISF increased by:

• • 36,300 Iraqi Army soldiers. (Personal observation: The IA improves month by month. The Iraqi Army already is a capable maneuver force, proving lethal against al Qaeda.)
  • 2,000 new support troops.
  • 300 new Air Force personnel. The op tempo increased by about 1,000%
  • 300 missions per week.
  • 1,500 new Iraqi Special Operations Forces (ISOF). (Our Special Forces have told me ISOF is very good by regional standards.)
  • 30,400 new Iraqi Police. (This includes members joining from the “Sons of Iraq.”)
  • 7,400 new National Police. (I get a bad feeling about the National Police. I see them frequently and was at a meeting with American soldiers from 1-4CAV, National Police, and CLCs just yesterday on Monday, 12 February. On a local level, in South Baghdad, I do see improvement with National Police. However, many police in this Shia-dominated force are believed to be corrupt and/or sectarian. Dubik insists the NP are improving, and more Sunnis are being hired, although this contrasts with media reporting and my own observations. I believe LTG Dubik, but I work for the reader and must see this with my own eyes before I can report this as fact.)
  • 1,300 new Department of Border Enforcement and Port of Entry personnel . .

If you have never read Micheal Yons blog - consider subscribing to it. He's actually got his feet on the ground in Iraq and is reporting from the field not the green zone.