"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt

One of Salem Oregon's Unofficial Top 1000 Conservative Political Bloggers!!!

Monday, November 19, 2012

Dems Demand Fiscal Cliff Legislation Include More "Stimulus" After Rousing "Success" of First One

Yeah, the first "stimulus" failed miserably after spending $1 trillion on political payoff. Why not throw another $1 trillion at the same crap too?

From the Investor's Business Daily:

According to The Hill, Senate Democrats "say any deficit-reduction package negotiated in the coming weeks must include stimulus measures."

Sen. Charles Schumer, the New York Democrat identified by The Hill as the party's chief political strategist in the Senate, has said, "We need to do something on stimulus as part of the overall fiscal cliff."

Schumer believes a second stimulus is necessary "because the economy is not growing fast enough in the first year or two."

And politicians such as Schumer can make it grow faster?

Let's look at the country since the last stimulus, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, was passed.

On the day President Obama signed the bill, Feb. 17, 2009, the jobless rate was 8.3%. He promised that under the stimulus, unemployment would fall to 5.3% at the end of his first term. So where is it nearly four years later? It was 7.9% in October, only the second month since the stimulus became law that the jobless rate has fallen below 8.1%.

As poor as the unemployment numbers look, the reality is worse. America's workforce participation rate has fallen from 65.7% in January 2009 to 63.8% last month.

This makes the jobs situation look rosier than it is because the unemployment rate does not figure in the millions who have given up on finding a job in this economy and have left the workforce. If they were considered, the real unemployment rate would be about 11%. 
So, yes, by all means. Let's pass another stimulus bill and have more of the same.
But let's be fair to Schumer and check economic growth in the era of the Obama stimulus. Surely it will validate the legislation.

Well, no. The recession was over by the third quarter of 2009 when the economy grew 1.4% and then 4% in the fourth quarter. But the recovery stalled.

Average growth in 2010 was less than 2.4%. Then the economy fell flat in the first quarter of 2011, posting a 0.1% gain. In the last three quarters the growth has been anemic: 2%, 1.3% and 2%.

There has to be some economic measure that bolsters the case for another stimulus, right? What about income? Again, the Obama plan has failed. Disposable personal income per capita has fallen from $33,229 in 2008 to $32,677 through May of this year.

Median incomes have plunged, too, from $55,198 a year when Obama was inaugurated to $50,678 in August, a decline of 8.2%.

Despite all the economic measures that show the stimulus has been a failure, the Democrats say the country can't go on without another round.
This is absolutely insane. I mean do people not see the significant reduction in median incomes? Seriously? How about the rising price of fuel and the accompanying rise in cost of goods? Does anybody care?

It seems like people think that welfare is the answer, you know the stuff that got reduced in Ohio immediately after the election. It's amateur night in DC for the next four years, at least.

Own it Obama.

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Ohio Food Stamp Aid Reduced

"And if you need anything Ohio, there's some ants."

Strange how these notices weren't sent out until after the election... It's almost as though someone though that the news might put a damper on that Obamamania in the cities.

From the Toledo Blade: (via Drudge)

Ohio families receiving food stamps could get an unwelcome surprise come January: $50 less every month in assistance.

For the 869,000 households enrolled in the program for the poorest Ohioans, that could amount to about $520 million annually out of the grocery budgets.

Because of the way the federal government calculates utility expenses for people receiving the benefit, a mild winter nationwide last year, and a lower price for natural gas, many families could experience a significant cut in aid, those familiar with the program say.

Recipients should get a letter from the state Department of Job and Family Services this month explaining the change, said Ben Johnson, a spokesman for the agency.
Meanwhile, food banks and others that distribute food assistance are bracing for increased demand.


Ms. Hamler-Fugitt said her organization is particularly concerned that some seniors or persons with disabilities who have a low benefit amount could lose all their monthly assistance.

"We’re really worried about [the change],” she said.

What’s called the “standard utility allowance” — the amount deducted from a person’s income when the state determines his or her eligibility for the food stamp program — will decrease by $166 for 2013, translating to about $50 less per household in food assistance. State Job and Family Services officials tried to appeal the change to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the food stamp program, officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, but the USDA denied the request.

USDA officials did not respond to requests from The Blade for comment [bold mine].
Odd that adding a bunch of people to the food stamp dole results in a reduction of benefits. It's almost like there's limited resources out there or something. And mild winters result in a reduction of benefits? Well, let's hope we have a really nasty winter there so the feds won't reduce them again. Of course nasty winters have a way of being expensive and all... Uh oh, I sense a ridiculous bureaucratic cycle beginning.

In the meantime, it's pretty much looks like it's "thanks for the electoral votes Ohio, now suck it."

Monday, November 12, 2012

Prof. Barbara A. Thompson Actually Publishes Book Called: The Gospel According to Apostle Barack

Good God.

From Myra Adams at The PJ Tatler:

Seriously, this book entitled The Gospel According to Apostle Barack: In Search of a More Perfect Political Union as “Heaven Here on Earth” is not a joke. It is just an incredibly sacrilegious and downright embarrassing book given that its author, Barbara A. Thompson, is a professor at Florida A & M University.

Pity her poor students who are going into hock to attend her classes. Now I fear even more for the future of our nation if this is the kind of manure students are hearing from their professors.

The book’s premise is God spoke to Professor Thompson, telling her that Apostle Barack Obama’s 155 speeches made between February 10, 2007 and January 20, 2009 had the answers to unlock the kingdom of “heaven here on earth.”


In case you were wondering if there is any sanity remaining among Americans in light of President Obama’s reelection, read the customer reviews at the end of this piece. This one is my favorite:

I know Jesus, Jesus is a savior of mine. You sir (Obama), are no Jesus, or an apostle of Jesus.
Hoo boy. Light-bringer (Lucifer) alert...

From the Amazon Book Description:

Yes, Barack had worked tirelessly on behalf of the American people, especially those who elected him in 2008. His followers needed to re-elect him to a second term, so that he could continue to accomplish the promises he made, thus, realizing his vision of America as a more perfect political union or “heaven here on earth.”
Then, as I began to contemplate ways to assist Barack in his 2012 re-election bid something miraculous happened. I felt God’s (His) Spirit beckoning me in my dreams at night. Listening, cautiously, I learned that Jesus walked the earth to create a more civilized society, Martin (Luther King) walked the earth to create a more justified society, but, Apostle Barack, the name he was called in my dreams, would walk the earth to create a more equalized society, for the middle class and working poor. Apostle Barack, the next young leader with a new cause, had been taken to the mountaintop and allowed to see over the other side. He had the answers to unlock the kingdom of “heaven here on earth” for his followers. The answers were repeated – over and over – in speeches Barack had made from his presidential announcement to his inaugural address. Those speeches or his teachings contained the answers to the middle class and working poor people living in a “heaven here on earth.” For when the answers were unlocked and enacted, Apostle Barack’s vision of America would be realized.
About the Author
Barbara A. Thompson is a native of Tallahassee, Florida, with graduate degrees from Florida A&M University and Florida State University. She has been teaching for more than twenty-five years at the university level with experience in the areas of health, physical education and sport management. She is a professor at Florida A&M University, a former assistant vice president for academic affairs, past president of her university’s chapter of United Faculty of Florida, a graduate of the National Education Association’s Emerging Leader Academy and a two-time recipient of the Who’s Who Among America’s Teachers Award.

The Gospel According to Apostle Barack: In Search of a More Perfect Political Union as Heaven Here on Earth, her first work of nonfiction was inspired solely for the desire and the goal of re-electing Barack Obama, Jr. to a second term as President of the United States. The words contained in this manuscript were extracted from one hundred and fifty-five (155) speeches Barack made between February 10, 2007 and January 20, 2009. It is the intent of the Author to offer this manuscript as a guide to the President’s followers in their formulation of re-election focus groups based on the percepts espoused herein. Further, it is the intent of the Author to utilize the materials contained in the speeches as a means of teaching Apostle Barack’s followers about him and guiding them towards understanding “politics as religion” and “religion as politics” The manuscript would also serve as a guide for his followers – to unlock the answers – to creating and living in the reality of a middle class lifestyle that was so economically and ethically sound that it appeared to be “heaven here on earth.” Barbara, a newcomer to politics, enjoys writing in her leisure. She has been married to her husband, Willie for over thirty years. The Thompsons have one adult son, Gibran.

Customer Reviews
Well, once you read the title you can guess how bad the book is going to be. Booker T. Reader | 4 reviewers made a similar statement
“Beware of false prophets who come disguised as harmless sheep but are really vicious wolves.” KthomasVA | 1 reviewer made a similar statement
You sir (Obama), are no Jesus, or an apostle of Jesus. Joseph | 1 reviewer made a similar statement
Huh. Wasn't Heaven on Earth what Mao promised? I don't recall that working out all that well. Well, I'm sure Obama can do it. He's got a sterling record and all...

I wonder if this will be required reading for all those Obama halo photographers.

Obama Administration Posting 6125 Proposed Regulation in Last 90 Days


The only part I find surprising is that the Administration is bothering to make the regulations this easily available to the general public. I guess they looked at the amount of traffic on the site and said "why not?"

From CNS news:

It’s Friday morning, and so far today, the Obama administration has posted 165 new regulations and notifications on its reguations.gov website.

In the past 90 days, it has posted 6,125 regulations and notices – an average of 68 a day.
The website allows visitors to find and comment on proposed regulations and related documents published by the U.S. federal government. "Help improve Federal regulations by submitting your comments," the website says.

The thousands of entries run the gamut from meeting notifications to fee schedules to actual rules and proposed rule changes.

In recent days, for example, the EPA posted a proposed rule involving volatile organic compound emissions from architectural coatings: “We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act),” the proposed rule states. “We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.”


The website also links to a video of a speech President Barack Obama gave at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C. on Feb. 7, 2011, in which the president promised to remove “outdated and unnecessary regulations.”

“I've ordered a government-wide review, and if there are rules on the books that are needlessly stifling job creation and economic growth, we will fix them,” the president said.
A number of groups, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute, expect a rush of new regulations now that President Obama has won a second term:

CEI expects the EPA to move ahead on delayed rules on everything from greenhouse gas emissions to ozone standards. “Rules from the health care bill and the Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill will also likely make themselves known in the weeks to come," the group said on its website.
Apparently removing "outdated and unnecessary regulations" is a second tier priority to putting forth the stifling regulations needed to raise energy costs and gasoline prices. All for our own good, you know...

Friday, November 9, 2012

Massive Post-Election Layoffs; Will Continue

Own it!

I suppose this is a part of that slow but steady growth that Yahoo and other Left-leaning news sites have been trumpeting.

Do you think that this might have a small effect on the unemployment rate? Maybe.

A partial list from The Blaze (h/t Jacobson at Legal Insurrection):

  • Caterpillar Inc. will close its plant in Owatonna Minn.
  • Mount Pleasant’s Albrecht Sentry Foods
  • The Target store at Manassas Mall Va.
  • Millennium Academy in Wake Forest NC
  • Target Closing Kissimmee FL Location
  • The Andover Gift Shop in Andover MA
  • Grand Union Family Markets Closing Storrs Location CT
  • Movie Scene Milford Location NH
  • Update: TE Connectivity Closing Greensboro Plant – 620 Layoffs Expected
  • Gomer’s Fried Chicken in South Kansas City
  • Kmart in Homer Glen
  • Fresh Market on Pine Street in Burlington
  • AGC Glass North America to permanently close its Blue Ridge Plant in Kingsport Tenn.
  • The Target store at Platte and Academy in Colorado Springs
  • The Roses store on Reynold Road in Winston-Salem NC
  • Meanders Kitchen losing its West Seattle location at 6032 California Ave
  • Bost Harley-Davidson at 46th Avenue North and Delaware Ave. in West Nashville TN
  • Townsend Booksellers in Oakland
  • The Kmart store in Parkway Plaza off University Drive in Durham NC – 79 Jobs Lost

  • And more in the last 48 hours (links go to stories about the layoffs and cutbacks):



    Research in Motion Limited

    Lightyear Network Solutions

    Providence Journal

    Hawker Beechcraft

    Boeing (30% of their management staff)

    CVPH Medical Center

    US Cellular

    Momentive Performance Materials


    Brake Parts

    Vestas Wind Systems


    Center for Hospice New York


    OCE North America

    Darden Restaurants - The company, which was among those who had received an Obamacare waiver in the past, is looking to limit workers to 28 hours per week. A full time employee that is required to have health insurance (lest the employer pay a fine) works 30 hours per week, as defined by the Obamacare law.

    West Ridge Mine

    United Blood Services Gulf

    48 hours...

    You can't blame Bush this time buddy. Own it Obama. And to every single one of you who voted for that man.

    But you know, on second thought I now realize that it's not Obama's fault. I mean it's greed. If these terrible executives just simply stopped lighting their cigars with $20 bills and drinking their cocktails seasoned with the tears of minority children, they wouldn't have layoff so many hard working people. Greed. That's the ticket.

    A link to The Daily Jobs Cut via The Blaze.

    And let's not forget the "unexpected" multi-day retreat in Wall Street.

    But please, let's talk more about how we have this "Brown country" now, as Leftists love to assign colors to races. Let's talk about how Romney wasn't electable. Let's fiddle while it all burns...

    Thursday, November 8, 2012

    Some Good News for Conservatives

    It's been a hard last couple of days. Many bloggers I have had the privilege to come to know, like, and respect were about throw in the towel after the election loss.

    Believe me, I  understand the feeling. In fact, I was going to stop or at least severely curtail my own political blogging following a Mitt Romney inauguration. It takes up so much time and is mentally exhausting. I've written so little professionally, that I might as well hang up the towel at this point.

    Unbelievably, I never intended this blog to be so political, but it became that very quickly. I had intended to correct this, or just close up shop and start another blog about writing, philosophy, foreign cultures, movies, etc., after the dire threat from the Left had run its course. Well that didn't happen, so here I am again.

    Looking through the news and blogs, the most encouraging piece I found was by Dana Loesch and so I'll link to it and post some of it here.

    It's from her piece "Five Things We Did Wrong And Four Things That Went Right"

    I'll skip the part about what went wrong. Her analysis is fine and I encourage you to read it. My analysis is here.

    From Dana:

    1. We Control The House
    We control it and we even picked up seats. Democrats fell short in the senate of the 60 votes they need to implement Obama’s agenda without care. We retain the ability to slow the roll of legislative progressivism. Compromise isn’t compromise when the issue is modifying the enumerated powers of government. Compromise in that instance is surrender. I don’t want a country where everyone gets along and where everyone has to agree. We benefit the most when people fight to give us the best.

    2. More Republican Governors
    As the ballots are counted we will have picked up 32 governorships, a record unmatched since the 90s. The fight of the reform governor not only succeeded, it spread. This is the biggest and I believe most important story of this election. Governors have already stood their ground against the implementation of Obamacare and now the chance of more doing so has increase as a result of this election. Rick Perry is suing the EPA. Consider it a plan B in the offense against Obamacare.

    3. No Clear Mandate
    Barack Obama barely won the popular vote. The country is roughly divided 50-50. Congress is divided. There is no mandate, only gridlock.

    4. We Live To Fight Another Day
    I said this last night and it’s somewhat harsh, but accurate: those of you who want to take your balls and go home are demonstrating less resilience than our Founding Fathers. That’s not who you are, it’s not what America is, so buck up buttercups!

    We have scored some small victories last night and that’s something on which we can build. Midterms will give us another shot at the senate in two years. Two years after that, the White House. This battle wasn’t going to begin and end in one election cycle. This will be a multi-generational fight. The Framers established our system of governance in such a way so that one election, not even two, can dismantle our republic.

    There is still hope and still a battle to fight. Don’t squander your chances. Nurse your wounds and get back in the game.
    It's not the best day when one of the positives that can be said is that gridlock will continue. But that's what we need now. Don't give up. Hold the GOP to their promise of conservative principles. Phone them or write them and demand that they hold true to conservative ideals. Remember, they represent you.

    This fight isn't over. As frustrating as it is to cross over the finish line one-tenth of a second after a competitor, you cannot simply give up and say "well, now I'm going into seclusion." We're made of stronger stuff than that-- and so is the GOP if we hold them to their stated principles.

    Another positive came out from the Breitbart election night survey. Check it out here.


    From the article:

    The Breitbart News Network and Judicial Watch partnered with Public Opinion Strategies to conduct an election night survey that included 800 respondents contacted by land line (70%) and cell phone (30%). The partisan breakdown was D+3, within the margin of national exit polls, which suggested a D+6 electorate. The margin of error was 3.46%
    Voters’ responses suggest that the American public agrees with conservative policies--but does not trust the Republican Party to implement them.

    For example, voters dislike big government, with 71% agreeing (and 49% strongly agreeing) that: “The larger the size of government the more opportunities it creates for possible corruption.” In addition, 85% of voters said they were concerned about corruption in Washington, and 53% described themselves as “very concerned.”

    Yet voters do not trust Republicans more than Democrats to deal with corruption. Only 34% said Republicans would do a better job of cleaning up corruption; 37% said Democrats would. That is an indictment of the permanent political class, regardless of party. And despite the President’s talk of cleaning up Washington, his party is not viewed as better able to do so.

    Respondents cast a resounding vote of “no confidence” in the media. No less than 77% of voters agreed with the statement: “The press is more likely to favor one candidate for office over another at the expense of their journalistic objectivity.” More than half (57%) strongly agreed, while only 7% strongly disagreed. Republicans were much more likely (92%) to share that view than Democrats, yet even a sizable majority (58%) of Democrats agreed the media showed bias towards one candidate.

    In the aftermath of the election, journalists have pushed the idea that the Republican Party needs to change the substance of its position on immigration. However, when asked about Arizona-style immigration laws (“Would you favor or oppose a law requiring local law enforcement to verify the immigration status of people they reasonably suspect of being in the country illegally?”), voters favor them overall 61% to 34%, with only Hispanics disapproving (40% in favor to 58% opposed). Voters were evenly divided on President Obama’s recent immigration policy (as they understood it), with 40% in favor and 37% opposed.

    Perhaps most revealing of all were questions on issue of voter fraud. Fully 70% of voters believe voter fraud is a problem, and 76% said that voters “should be required to show a government issued photo identification before being allowed to vote on Election Day,” with 65% expressing that view strongly. Two-thirds of blacks (66%) and three-quarters of Hispanic voters (74%) agreed, as did 59% of Democrats.

    In sum, voters agree with conservatives on the issues.
    Conservatism and conservative principles are alive and strong, even in a D+3 poll. People do not believe that the GOP can deliver on them, however. The GOP needs to ignore the media, rebrand itself as the conservative party and campaign on these principles. America is still a center-right country.

    This was a base election. Romney and the GOP played it as an independent swing election and they lost. Obama and the Democrats played it as a base election and gave away phones in Ohio and pizza in Florida, and they won-- barely. They read it right, pulled out all the stops, played it negative and small and still managed to only convince 50% of the electorate. This is the absolute best that they can do now. They will never do better with Obama's policies. The layoffs begin now. The bad stuff in ObamaCare kicks in soon. The Dems will not be able to pull in even these unimpressive numbers in 2016.

    What happened last night was not a titanic shift to the Left, nor was it unprecedented. Both the numbers and Breitbart's survey show that apathy and a distrust among conservatives killed Romney. America is not a suddenly socialist loving country wanting free stuff, nor a suddenly brown country (whatever the hell that means-- I just love it when white people start assigning colors to everyone.). Brown like Texas, I guess. We still live in a sharply divided Blue / Red country. I believe that without a doubt, and this divisions will continue for some time.

    So there can be no apathy now. No giving up.

    If Obama had won by a landslide, and the GOP had been swept from the House, I'd say forget it and just throw in the towel, it's over. But that's not what happened. America is still a resolute, center-right country and we will survive the consequences that will come from Obama's incompetence and provably wrong ideology.

    And then we will rebuild from out of his mess.

    So hang in there. We're resolute, we're strong, and we're right. And most people know it.

    Why Obama Won: The Hard Answer is the American Cultural Divide

    It's been nagging at me since the results. How on earth was Obama re-elected?

    We have a dismal economy, historically high gas prices, 200+ Mexicans killed by Obama's gun walking scheme, historically long high unemployment, an unpopular and ruinous law in ObamaCare, our overseas embassies are under assault, and the president in charge lies about the attacks and then blames an American who made a film on YouTube. How do you put a proven loser and liar back in the presidency-- even by a razor-thin margin?

    The answer is two-fold. First let's look at Charles Hurt's Opinion piece "Obama victory means four more years with no hope of change" from The Washington Times:

    All that for nothing. It was the billion-dollar election that did not decide one single damned thing.

    Republicans control the House. Democrats control the Senate. And the White House remains in Democratic hands with absolutely no mandate whatsoever.

    Another four years with no hope of change.

    In this environment with this economy and all the gravely important matters pressing against the very existence of this country, it should have been a tsunami election. It should have been a landslide that sent President Obama into the dust heap of failed presidencies. Instead, the election was about Big Bird.

    It was the rape election. The contraception election. The binders full of women election.

    It was about who was born where and whether she really could claim to be a Cherokee Indian.

    It was about former President George W. Bush. And it was about gay marriage.

    It was about the 1 percent and the 99 percent and the 47 percent.

    It was about dancing freaking horses, for crying out loud!

    Just about the only thing the election wasn’t about was the economy, which everyone agrees was the only thing voters actually cared about. People tend to really care about the economy when real unemployment reaches double digits, welfare rolls fatten by one-third, politicians rack up $16 trillion in national debt and the largest tax hike in the history of the world looms just weeks away.

    Yet that obviously is not what decided this election. Politicians were too busy talking all about Big Bird, rape and dancing horses.

    The most disturbing issue of the election was how President Obama managed to win re-election in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania and Michigan by talking about the highly unpopular bailout of General Motors. By taking billions of dollars in hard-earned money from taxpayers during a deep recession and giving it to a couple of huge companies, Mr. Obama managed to buy the votes he needed to eke out re-election. Taxpayers remain on the hook to the tune of $25 billion.

    What happened Tuesday night is the same thing that has been happening for decades in America. Politicians deploy all this highly precise technology to slice and dice voters into little micro-groups and then talk to them all about dancing horses or Big Bird.

    The result is you have all these states vote for one side and all these other states vote for the other side and it all comes down to Florida and Ohio. You could have given me a lot less than a billion dollars and I could have told you that.

    Hurt is quite correct when he says that Obama and the Democrats correctly defined what would be the places that were really needed to win. It wasn't merely Ohio and Florida, it was the specific counties, the specific neighborhoods in these states. They found them, focus-grouped them, then lied to them in the manner workshopped to be most convincing. And if they didn't lie, they talked about Big Bird and dancing horses. A fair push from unions and possible voter fraud never hurts either.

    But this begs the question, how did it come to this? How is it that we knew this would be a close election, despite the economic and international chaos wrought by an ideologue, amateur president? How is that despite the fact that blue states were littered with Romney signs, that blue states remained blue in the presidential election? Why did people in these blue states not change their mind as their leader has demonstrated precious little leadership qualities in the last four years?

    The answer is cultural. The hard answer is America is not the country that people once felt it to be: a politically middle-of-the-road, common sense nation. It's no longer a nation that uniformly takes pride in its people and culture, who celebrate in its historical accomplishments.

    Gone are the days of Yankee Doodle Dandy, when a Democrat like George M. Cohan could wave the flag with pride and say "I'm just an average guy who knows what average guys wants to see." Now Democrats are people who revel in suffering under the burden of perceived oppression.

    Elizabeth Warren celebrates the fact that a woman of color like herself (let's not let a little thing like factual family history get in the way of such claims) can prosper against the evil tyranny that is the United States. When Michelle Obama said that her husband being elected was the first time she was proud of America she meant it. As the Obamas listened to Rev. Wright scream "Goddamn America!" they nodded in agreement. This is the culture of the Left that the Democrats have embraced.

    One can argue about the hypocritical and self-defeating values that they embrace-- victimhood hands over power to their perceived oppressors, just as begging for money gives power to those you beg from no matter if you raise your begging upon the "pedestal" of "social justice"-- but all of that is moot. This is what the Left possesses. And that's it. Paradoxically, they find cohesion with economic and racial division. It was no slip of the tongue for Obama to declare with deadpan seriousness that "voting is the best revenge." People on the Right asked exactly who voters were getting revenge against not knowing that it was against, not Romney, but against specifically them and all they believe and they represent. Culture wars are the Left's bread and butter, and social conflict their only course of action. George M. Cohan's Democratic Party is dead.

    Yes, this fragile framework of oppression and hate is a dead-end. It cannot continue indefinitely and would ultimately lead to frightful violence as it has in the past and continues to do so in central Africa, and parts of South America and Asia (such as Sri Lanka). But, and it pains me to say this, that doesn't matter. It has worked in this election. And this is what we're left with.

     Next let's look at Michael Barone's article "Two Americas" from the NRO. Read the whole piece at the link, but here's a lot of it:

    But whether Barack Obama is elected to a second term or Mitt Romney is elected the 45th president, the contours of their support during this fiercely fought campaign show that we live in two Americas.

    The culturally cohesive America of the 1950s that some of us remember, usually glossing over racial segregation and the civil-rights movement, is no longer with us and hasn’t been for some time.

    That was an America of universal media, in which everyone watched one of three similar TV channels and newscasts every night. Radio, 1930s and 1940s movies, and 1950s and early-1960s television painted a reasonably true picture of what was typically American.
    That’s not the America we live in now. Niche media has replaced universal media.

    One America listens to Rush Limbaugh, the other to NPR. Each America has its favorite cable news channel. As for entertainment, Americans have 100-plus cable channels to choose from, and the Internet provides many more options.

    Bill Bishop highlighted the political consequences of this in his 2008 book, The Big Sort. He noted that in 1976 only 27 percent of voters lived in counties carried by one presidential candidate by 20 percent or more. In 2004, nearly twice as many, 48 percent, lived in these landslide counties. That percentage may be even higher this year.

    We’re more affluent than we were in the 1950s (if you don’t think so, try doing without your air conditioning, microwaves, smartphones, and Internet connections). And we have used this affluence to seal ourselves off in the America of our choosing while trying to ignore the other America.

    We tend to choose the America that is culturally congenial. Most people in the San Francisco Bay area wouldn’t consider living in the Dallas–Fort Worth metroplex, even for much better money. Most metroplexers would never relocate to the Bay Area.

    There are plenty of smart and creative and successful people in both Americas. But they don’t like to mix with each other these days.

    They especially don’t like to talk about politics and the cultural issues that, despite the prominence of economic concerns today, have largely determined our political allegiances over the last two decades.

    One America tends to be traditionally religious, personally charitable, appreciative of entrepreneurs, and suspicious of government. The other tends to be secular or only mildly religious, less charitable, skeptical of business, and supportive of government as an instrument to advance liberal causes.

    The more conservative America tends to be relatively cohesive. Evangelical Protestants and white Catholics make common cause; the 17th-century religious wars are over. Southern or northern accents don’t much matter.

    That’s typical of the Republican party, which has always had core support from people who are seen as typical Americans but are not by themselves a majority in our always diverse country.

    The more liberal America tends to be diverse. Like Obama’s 2008 coalition, it includes many at the top and at the bottom of the economic ladder.

    That’s typical of the Democratic party, a coalition of disparate groups — immigrant Catholics and white southerners long ago, blacks and gentry liberals today.
    Americans have faced this before. This has been a culturally diverse land from its colonial beginnings. The mid-20th-century cultural cohesiveness was the exception, not the rule.
    We used to get along by leaving each other alone. The Founders established a limited government, neutral on religion, allowing states, localities, and voluntary associations to do much of society’s work. Even that didn’t always work: We had a Civil War.

    This is the divided America of today. We've been living in it for a while, blissfully ignorant and underestimating the cultural divide. It wasn't until this election that this issue really came to a head. People in blue states chose Obama, not because of his demonstrated incompetence, but because he's one of their own. He demonstrates their values, voices their hatred of traditional America, treats Red America with the contempt they believe that it deserves. Revenge indeed.

    Don't believe me? That anger is expressed daily on Twitter. Why were celebrities viciously assaulted and threatened when they exercised their right to disagree and vote for Romney (a quick sampling of cooments directed at Stacy Dash following her expression of pride in Romney's campaign after the loss: "die slow ho" "drink bleach and die. You're an uninformed, unemployed, has-been diva with a bad publicist" "Kill yo self BITCH" "Stacey Dash must die." "Die little hoe.")? Why are conservative blacks (or people perceived to be conservative) knocked to the ground by black and white Democrats and called "nigger" like Kenneth Gladney? Why did the Missouri NAACP support Gladney's attackers?

    They blamed Bush for not responding to Katrina because they saw him as Obama's anti-thesis, a petty and vindictive man who didn't care about others. This isn't considered to be a bad trait, mind you, simply the hard "truth." Remember Kanye said "George Bush hates Black people!"

    Why would the Left think this? Because they see their beliefs as universal truths. Their hatred focused at the other (the mainstay of community organizing), incorporated in the banner of the Right, is not perceived as a weakness nor as bigotry, but as a universal truth as taught by Engels and Marx. You see, no matter how we on the Right may think, they are sure that we will act according their "truth." 

    This is the same trap (both Engels and Marx fell into it) that allows bigotry to thrive in the face of millions of exceptions to the bigot's perceived "rule." I've long made the comment that what America sees as racism, is often generally considered truth in the rest of the world. "Of course those people [whatever social, racial class they may be] are inferior to us. I mean just look at them!" Does this sound familiar? Like something off of the TV or in a movie, or perhaps a celebrity interview? Of course the country people/Southerners are a bunch of inbred bigots/idiots/rednecks/hillbillies. Why just look at them.

    And since they know the truth, we must be behaving according to their laws, even if we appear not to. That's why they see the Right as so devious. Charitable acts, belief in morality and religion... it's all just a ruse to hold power. Romney gave millions to charity, but people who have given next to nothing confidently declare that he hates poor people and support a man whose policies guarantee an increase in poverty and misery. In their minds Romney is devious and immoral, while they're just honest. Belief in their universal truths demands this interpretation.

    The Republicans ran a safe campaign. They kept it reasonably positive, picked a moderate, ran against Obama's record. And they almost pulled it off.

    But they didn't and now reality must be faced. It smacked us in the head in this election. Breitbart was right about this being a cultural war-- and the Right lost. No more juvenile denials, no more bubbles. We live in a divided America now. Blue and red. Make no mistake about this. This election wasn't about any issues. It's useless to blame Sandy, Benghazi, the 47% comment, etc. None of that really mattered. People voted because of how they see themselves and then backed the candidate who most closely represented their values and beliefs-- no matter how horrifying those beliefs may be. It's ridiculous, self-defeating and petty. But it's true. Plus a little free stuff like phones and pizza in battleground states never hurts.

    Where do we go from here? It doesn't matter. Obama's policies cannot work, but he won't back down from them. They will fail. And the resulting political chaos will bring about a new political reality. The blue and red America of today will shift in ways impossible to predict.

    But what comes next for now? High unemployment, shrinking incomes, higher taxes, worse medical care, an anemic economy, a higher poverty rate, more homeless, a weaker dollar, lower life expectancy, blame shifting, more hate, more division. In all, a substantially weaker America.

    Hunker down. There are tough years to come.

    Wednesday, November 7, 2012

    This Pretty Much Sums it Up...

    A bitter heh. (h/t J. Hunter at Black and Red)

    Hours After Election, Obama Backs UN Arms Treaty

    From Reuters (h/t Gateway Pundit):

    Hours after U.S. President Barack Obama was re-elected, the United States backed a U.N. committee's call on Wednesday to renew debate over a draft international treaty to regulate the $70 billion global conventional arms trade.

    U.N. delegates and gun control activists have complained that talks collapsed in July largely because Obama feared attacks from Republican rival Mitt Romney if his administration was seen as supporting the pact, a charge Washington denies.

    The month-long talks at U.N. headquarters broke off after the United States - along with Russia and other major arms producers - said it had problems with the draft treaty and asked for more time.

    But the U.N. General Assembly's disarmament committee moved quickly after Obama's win to approve a resolution calling for a new round of talks March 18-28. It passed with 157 votes in favor, none against and 18 abstentions.

    U.N. diplomats said the vote had been expected before Tuesday's U.S. presidential election but was delayed due to Superstorm Sandy, which caused a three-day closure of the United Nations last week.

    An official at the U.S. mission said Washington's objectives have not changed.

    "We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout," the official said.

    "We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms," he said.
    Hmm. Words of reassurance that Obama will honor the U.S. Constitution. Well, Obama has such a great record of doing that...

    UPDATE: I forgot to mention that this is particularly bad news for Israel. Israel is considered by many nations to be a human rights violator --since they don't just allow terrorists to launch missiles into their cities or to blow up their children with suicide bombers. Will the U.S. be allowed to send arms to Israel under rules yet to be hammered out in the UN? Do you think the Obama Administration will fight for the right to support our ally? Have they in the past?

    So it Begins...

    US stocks crashed today.

    The Dow Industrial Average plummeted 300 points the morning following Obama's victory.

    "The S&P 500 and the Nasdaq were also sharply lower. The CBOE Volatility Index, widely considered the best gauge of fear in the market, gained above 18," says CNBC.
    But don't worry. Putin and France are very pleased.
    Among other stories the media are likely to "discover" now that voters have made their decision:

    • The economy really does stink. The press studiously ignored the ongoing economic catastrophe under Obama, while parading any "green shoot" they could find that suggested growth was around the corner.

    Don't be surprised if, after the election, they start to notice that three years of subpar growth have left the middle class further behind and more mired in poverty, and created a vast pool of long-term unemployed.

    • Massive debt and entitlement crises loom. Despite four straight years of $1 trillion-plus deficits and a national debt that now exceeds total GDP, the media largely treated the debt crisis with a collective yawn.

    Ditto the looming bankruptcy of Medicare and Social Security. These crises are nevertheless real and will have to be dealt with soon, a fact the press will almost certainly acknowledge after Nov. 6.


    • ObamaCare isn't what it was cracked up to be. After two years of ignoring health reform's fundamental flaws, the press will likely admit that ObamaCare is fundamentally flawed.
    Reports are sure to appear pointing out the law's lack of cost controls, its adverse impact on doctors and hospitals, and the fact that, after spending $1.76 trillion, it will still leave 30 million uninsured.

    • Obama's deficit-cutting plan won't work. The press let the president get away with one of the biggest whoppers yet — that his tax hikes on "the rich" would be enough to pay for his spending binge and bring down the deficit $4 trillion.

    Obama's own budget proved this wasn't the case. And after the election, you can bet the media will be "shocked" to find that his numbers didn't add up.

    Unexpected... of course. All of it. Just like the unexpected stock crash.


    How Widespread was Voter Fraud in this Election?

    Hard to say.

    Investors Business Daily has a small list of alleged voter fraud compiled.

    From the article:

    And Americans already smell a rat, with 62% of voters believing electoral fraud to be at least somewhat common, according to a 2008 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, and a 2010 Rasmussen poll finding 82% favoring photo ID laws.

    These were among the incidents of corruption, criminality and strong-arm tactics being reported within the Land of the Free on the day of perhaps America's most consequential election ever:

    • In Detroit, police were called when a Republican observer at a polling venue was chased away by a man claiming to have a gun.

    • PJ Media reported a GOP observer reporting three cases of fraud — all three victims being black — at a North Carolina precinct, including a woman in her 80s for whom someone else had apparently 'requested, filled out and submitted an absentee ballot in her name' and another older, infirm woman who was brought to vote only to find records showing "that she had already voted earlier in the day."

    "The GOP observer reflected that "in a matter of 3-1/2 hours at a relatively slow precinct, we had three different cases of pretty obvious voter fraud."

    • In Ohio, four Toledo men were arrested and charged with stealing Romney signs, some quite large, with a Sheet Metal Workers union pickup truck, according to Instapundit.

    • Wisconsin State Senator Neal Kedzie's son was attacked while trying to stop his Romney/Ryan yard sign from being swiped early last Friday, as reported by Powerline.com. After being choked and struck repeatedly, Sean Kedzie was hospitalized.

    • NBC News on Election Day reported that an electronic voting machine was removed in Pennsylvania after a video showed it changing an Obama vote into one for Mitt Romney. 'Republicans have also said machines have turned Romney votes into Obama ones,' NBC said.

    • A North Carolina election official on Tuesday told The Daily Caller of a Democrat possibly voting twice in rural Sampson County. County election board staff director Donna Mashburn said 'supposedly they voted absentee and then went to the precinct and also voted.'

    • In Houston, Breitbart.com's Brandon Darby reports that under the pretext of helping the disabled, 'Houston's NAACP chapter has taken over an election polling station.'

    • In Florida, robocalls told voters they had until Wednesday to vote.

    • In northeast Philadelphia, a judge ordered a campaign-style mural of Obama on the wall of a polling place to be covered.

    • An Obama poster saying 'Change the Atmosphere' was found on a wall at a Tallahassee polling station, the Media Research Center reported.

    • The New Black Panthers returned to a Philadelphia polling site after their infamous intimidation tactics favoring Obama four years ago.

    • Court-appointed Republican poll inspectors were being forcibly removed from Philadelphia voting stations, according to the Washington Examiner.

    Is this a case of sour grapes over a stinging, and frankly shocking, loss? Maybe.

    Every indication was that Romney would win this election. A bad economy, high unemployment, terrible gas prices, a high level of distrust of the Obama media, largely unpopular laws-- some labeled with the name of the president running. It's cloying.

    The GOP will likely tear into themselves for the next few weeks, with predictably unproductive results.

    Democrats are good at winning elections, and terrible at governing-- exhibit A: California.

    Certainly there was voter fraud in this election. Every election has a degree of fraud. But was it enough to turn the balance?

    I don't know.

    The Divided Times Ahead

    Cartoon from Legal Insurrection

    The AP is reporting:

    "With returns from 88 percent of the nation's precincts, Obama had 55.8 million, 49.8 percent of the popular vote. Romney had 54.5 million, or 48.6 percent."

    I'll be interested to see the final vote tally, but I imagine the percentages will not significantly change.

    This is hardly a conclusive stamp of approval given to Obama. Considering how divisive and bitter this race was, there's a great temptation to think that what will follow is a time of reconciliation, a time of coming together in a great group hug.

    As much as I might think that this is the preferable choice, it's unlikely. After the initial shock has worn off, and people begin to come to grips with the fact that four more years of Obama is inevitable, there will be a great deal of frustration.

    Much of what will come will depend on Obama. Should he see this election as the nail-biter that it was and work to build a consensus among those who employ him, he might enjoy the support of the majority of the American people.

    It is exceedingly unlikely that Obama will take this route.

    Obama does not come from a background that requires the building of consensus. As a community organizer, his role is to intensify the existing discontent and then focus it onto the "other," the "source" of community's problems. As an academic, his job was to suck up to those in authority with the ability to further his career, not to manage people, not to lead. I believe Obama is incapable of pulling people together-- even should he have the inclination, and I believe he doesn't have that desire.

    Obama's political strategy has been to divide and vilify. Please note, I said "political strategy" for this has not merely been a campaign strategy. Every significant policy offered by this administration has been presented as an answer to some threat perpetrated by some villain. Perhaps these villains are rich bankers cackling as they light cigars with $20 bills and drink martinis seasoned with the tears of impoverished children. Or perhaps the villains are evil doctors who needlessly remove tonsils and legs to pad their bank books. It matters little, as long as the villain is politically expedient. And the president's response to the opposition of these policies is to ignore it, then to cry racism-- and further divide the country.

    This is not the strategy of someone looking to unify and lead. Obama famously said that he was ready "to rule" after being elected in 2008. He meant it.

    The political reality is that America is deeply divided right now, and emotions are running high. Twitter (who's slogan should be the old heckler comeback: "Speak up! Only the people at your table know you're an asshole!") has increased this divide and increased bad feelings to a fever pitch as people name call one another while threatening to riot, to kill, to assassinate, and deliver death threats daily. I do not see this settling down any time soon.

    The raw numbers show an extraordinarily close election. It is political reality, as others have pointed out, that the results are not a mandate for Obama.

    Obama's history as president does not point toward someone who has the greatest grasp of political nor economic reality. Repeatedly, from ObamaCare, to the funding of green bankruptcies such as Solyndra, to "you didn't build that," to Benghazi, Obama has displayed the traits of the worst types of academics both in public and in action-- baseless arrogance, conviction of one's opinion as truth, indulgence in the denial of inconvenient facts, and an easily ruffled ego. These traits have demonstrated themselves as he steadfastly keeps true to ruinous policies that have brought about the rise of unemployment, prices, the devaluation of the dollar, the lessening of economic activity, and the dropping of median household incomes.

    The fact that Obama won, is all that he will need to double down on his green energy courses which will have disastrous economic results for America. The chaos that will result will be a hodgepodge of lying, faux bold political stances, blame shifting, and stalling. Tempers will flair. Prices will rise. Unemployment and poverty will increase.

    There is little doubt that divided times are in store. To what degree tensions will rise I will not predict.

    I'm not saying to hold up into the hills and stock up on food and water.

    But do be prepared for a type of political turmoil that is quite foreign to us. We're being intentionally put onto a course into dangerous waters. These next four years will not be like the last four.

    UPDATE: Added the Branco cartoon from Legal Insurrection.

    Tuesday, November 6, 2012

    The Road Ahead

    It seems a strange world where a moderate like Romney is presented as an extremist, and a proven extremist like Obama, both in actions and words, is presented as a moderate.

    Obama's economic policies have caused an increase in the price of gasoline, electricity and food. And yet Americans leave him in place to continue these policies unmolested?

    It's an odd world.

    So, will we allow Obama to continue to turn America's back toward Israel? Toward Poland?

    Will we allow our health care to be placed into the hands of bureaucrats?

    Will we allow Obama to dictate a permanent unemployment mark hovering around 8% to 9%?

    Will we allow the EPA to regulate away America's jobs and cause a sharp rise in electricity, in manufacturing goods, in food?

    Will we allow government funds to be given to campaign backers by the billions?

    Will we continue to deny common sense?

    We will allow all of this if we give up.

    An election is significant, but allowing ruinous policies to be initiated, and to not hold those in power accountable is the path to collapse.

    America cannot withstand the outcomes of Obama's policies. An election does not change that.

    So, we must go on.

    Four more years will be hard, but they need not be catastrophic. These four years can be moderated if we continue to fight. This has to be done. We cannot remain silent and capitulate to ruinous powers.

    We have to continue to do what's necessary to check the Left.

    And we will.

    New Black Panther Party Reported to be Back at Philadelphia Polls

    You don't prosecute and the thugs come back. It's very simple. Obama's Department of Justice is a joke.

    Actual voter intimidation and nobody (or very few) cares...

     Video and tweets at twitchy.com

    Also reports of GOP poll watchers being ejected from Philadelphia polling places-- perhaps as many as 25.

    Perhaps the result of lax DoJ enforcement?

    Story and tweets here.

    Obama's EPA Preparing Major Anti-Coal Regulation

    Not a surprise, but cloying nonetheless...

    From The Washington Examiner article by Conn Carroll (via Drudge):

    "President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has devoted an unprecedented number of bureaucrats to finalizing new anti-coal regulations that are set to be released at the end of November, according to a source inside the EPA.

    "More than 50 EPA staff are now crashing to finish greenhouse gas emission standards that would essentially ban all construction of new coal-fired power plants. Never before have so many EPA resources been devoted to a single regulation. The independent and non-partisan Manhattan Institute estimates that the EPA’s greenhouse gas coal regulation will cost the U.S. economy $700 billion.

    "The rush is a major sign of panic by environmentalists inside the Obama administration. If Obama wins, the EPA would have another four full years to implement their anti-fossil fuel agenda. But if Romney wins, regulators will have a very narrow window to enact a select few costly regulations that would then be very hard for a President Romney to undo."

    Hey, what's another $700 billion from the likes of Obama? I want to see just how much Obama spends in these next 2 1/2 months.

    Monday, November 5, 2012

    Obama's 2nd Term EPA Will Raise Gas Prices and Cripple Growth-- By Design

    That's according to this Forbes article by Larry Bell (h/t to Pat at And So it Goes in Shreveport...):

    "A new report released by the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Minority Committee enumerates a slew of planned EPA regulations that have been delayed or punted on until after the election that will destroy millions of American jobs and cause energy prices to skyrocket even more.

    "Titled 'A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013: Numerous Obama EPA Rules Placed on Hold Until After the Election Spell Doom For Jobs and Economic Growth', it lists and describes new rules concocted over the past year ranging from additional restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions, tougher water guidelines and tightening of the ozone standard. Taken together, they will further drive up pump prices, impose construction bans on local communities, and cripple oil, natural gas and coal production.

    "As the Washington Post notes, the report puts a spotlight back on the Obama EPA which has earned a 'reputation for Abuse', serving as a stark reminder that President Obama has presided over a green team administration that works every day to 'crucify' oil and gas companies and make sure that '…if you want to build a coal plant you got a big problem.'


    "Premised upon farcically flawed climate alarm conclusions pitched by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which were even disavowed by EPA’s own internal review of the matter, the agency is proposing the first source-specific emissions standards for new power plants which are so strict they will virtually eliminate coal as a fuel option for future electric power generation. While EPA has punted on standards for existing power plants as well as refineries — standards which will further drive up electricity and gasoline prices, once these regulations are in place, we can expect the agency to proceed under auspices of its Clean Air Act (CAA) to issue regulations, industry by industry, until virtually every aspect of the American economy is constrained by strict bureaucratic permitting requirements. These rules are projected to cost more than $300 to $400 billion a year, and will significantly raise the price of gas at the pump and energy in the home.


    "As reported in the New York Times last year, President Obama admitted that the “regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty” of tightening the ozone standard would harm jobs and the economy … but he still pointed to the fact that it will be reconsidered in 2013. EPA itself estimated that this would cost $90 billion a year, while other studies have projected that the rule could cost upwards of a trillion dollars and destroy 7.4 million jobs.

    "By EPA’s own projections, it could put 650 additional counties into the category of 'non-attainment,' which is the equivalent of posting a 'closed for business' sign on communities. Affected counties will suffer from severe EPA-imposed restrictions on job creation and business expansion, including large numbers of plant closures.


    "EPA’s proposed new guidance document for waters covered by the Clean Water Act (CWA), proposed in April 2011, reinterprets recent Supreme Court decisions to allow EPA to expand federal control over virtually every body of water in the United States, no matter how small. EPA’s own analysis of the document estimated that up to 17% of current non-jurisdictional determinations would be considered jurisdictional using the new guidance.

    "Further, the guidance applies to the entire CWA, which will result in additional regulatory responsibilities for states. This dramatic expansion has received tremendous push-back from the regulated community, states, and municipalities who do not want to have extensive new federal authorities and the costs associated with additional CWA compliance pushed through in guidance. As Inside EPA reported in the spring of 2012, the guidance looks to be delayed until after the election. This guidance, much like greenhouse gas regulations, failed to pass as legislation when Democrats enjoyed overwhelming majorities in the House and the Senate.


    "EPA’s Boiler MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) standards are so strict that not even the best-performing sources can meet them, so many companies will have no choice but to shut their doors and ship manufacturing jobs overseas. The rule has been projected to reduce U.S. GDP by as much as 1.2 billion dollars and destroy nearly 800,000 jobs.

    "Because of bipartisan Congressional opposition to the standards, the agency is now reconsidering certain aspects of the rule. In what can only be seen as another politically- calculated move, the new rule is now being held by the White House, presumably until after the election. Not only is this creating uncertainty among the regulated community, it is also fueling speculation that very few changes have been made to the rule, and that the White House would prefer that it not be made public until after the election.


    "The American Council for Capital Formation estimates that the new EPA regulations already in place will result in 476,000 to 1,400,000 lost jobs by the end of 2014. Management Information Services, Inc. foresees that up to 2.5 million jobs will be sacrificed, annual household income could decrease by $1,200, and gasoline and residential electricity prices may increase 50% by 2030. The Heritage Foundation projects that the greenhouse gas regulations will cost nearly $7 trillion (2008 dollars) in economic output by 2029.

    "According to the annual 'Regulator’s Budget' compiled last year by George Washington University and Washington University in St. Louis, the employment of federal government regulators has climbed 13% since Obama took office, while private sector jobs shrank by 5.6%. In fact, if the federal government’s regulatory operations were a business, their $54 billion budget would make them one of the 50 the largest in the country… bigger than McDonald’s, Ford, Disney and Boeing combined. It’s high time we voters issued pink slips to those responsible for mismanaging that bloated enterprise. [bolds mine]"

    There's more. These are just some of the highlights. Be sure to click on the link to the Forbes article above and read the whole thing.

    This shouldn't be a surprise. Obama told the San Francisco Chronicle that he would do much of this. Obama's quote: "Under my plan of a cap and trade system electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Businesses would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that cost onto consumers."

    If you think unemployment is high now, if you think the cost of electricity and goods (including food and gas) are high now, just wait until Obama's next term. Let's make doubly sure to vote this guy and his green agenda out. We simply can't take four more years of this guy's "fundamental transformation" of our country.

    CNN Shows Presidential Race Tied-- With a D+11 Poll

    Heh. Keep on wishing CNN. Don't give up the dream...

    A CNN poll shows that the race is tied. Problem is their methodology reveals they were running a Democrats +11 poll. "Among those likely voters, 41% described themselves as 29% described themselves as Independents, and 30% described themselves as Republicans." A little selective sure. And still the best they could muster out is a tie.

    Nice try CNN. May your ratings continue to be what you deserve.

    (h/t Gateway Pundit)

    Saturday, November 3, 2012

    Remember When Obama Promised Unemployment Would be at 5.2% by Now?

    Lest we forget, when Obama tried to sell us on his stimulus the White House's projections showed the U.S. should be at 5.2% unemployment in October 2012. Instead it's 7.9%.

    But all this is old news, right? And the economy was just so much worse under Bush that nobody could have done better and there was an oil spill and a European debt crisis and my shoes were too tight and my belt was too loose.

    I'm a little tired of the excuses.

    Only a few more days, and then when can see what havoc a lame-duck Obama will wreak.

    From the James Pethokoukis article at AEI:

    "Now let’s put those numbers in context:

    "1. If we suddenly had a string of months where job growth was the same as in October, it would take 7 more years — until 2019 ! — to get back to the Bush unemployment low of 4.4%. Even if we averaged 210,000 jobs a month, we wouldn’t close jobs gap until 2021.

    "2. We are now 41 months into the recovery, and we have recovered just 55% of the 8.9 million lost private sector jobs from the Great Recession. During the Reagan recovery, it took just 10 months.

    "3. Back in early 2009, White House economists Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein predicted the unemployment rate would be 5.2% in October 2012 if Congress passed the $800 billion stimulus. As the above chart shows, they weren’t even close.
    "4. In October, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged down by 1 cent to $23.58. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have risen by 1.6%. Yet inflation is up 2% over the past year. That means worker take-home pay is declining.
    "5. As economist Doug Holtz-Eakin notes: 'Average weekly hours of work declined. Average hourly earnings declined. The average weekly earnings and index of weekly hours showed sharp declines.' Not good.
    "6. The shrunken workforce remains shrunken, although the labor force participation rate did nudge up last month, a good sign. But if the labor force participation rate was the same as when President Obama took office, the unemployment rate would be 10.6%.
    "7. If the participation rate had just stayed steady all year, the unemployment rate would be 8.2%.
    "8. The broader U-6 gauge, which also measures underemployment, dropped just a smidgen to 14.6%."

    And there are those celebrating these numbers?

    Thursday, November 1, 2012

    Dr. Lowery, Who Delivered Obama's 2009 Benediction, Declares All White People are Going to Hell

    But this langauage isn't hatred, nor prejudice, nor bigotry, nor racism. It's... well, I don't know what exactly. Payback? Righteousness, maybe?

    From the Monroe County Reporter (h/t Tom Blumer @ BizzyBlog):

    "Lowery gave the benediction at Obama's inauguration as 44th U.S. president on Jan. 20, 2009. Speaking to the group at St. James Baptist, Lowery said he liked giving the benediction because it gave him the last word. The only thing that followed him on the program was the 'Star Spangled Banner.' He said it was the first time in his life he enjoyed the national anthem; he said the anthem is too militaristic. He said he would like to see the national anthem changed to 'Lift Every Voice,' which is known as the 'Negro National Anthem,' or to 'America the Beautiful.'

    "Obama bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian award, on Lowery on July 30, 2009.


    "Lowery said Obama lost Georgia by 200,000 votes in 2008 while 390,000 black folks in Georgia did not vote.

    "'I don't know what kind of a n----- wouldn't vote with a black man running,' said Lowery. 'All that he did with the stimulus was genius. Nobody intelligent would risk this country with Romney.'


    "Lowery said that when he was a young militant, he used to say all white folks were going to hell. Then he mellowed and just said most of them were. Now, he said, he is back to where he was.

    "'I'm frightened by the level of hatred and bitterness coming out in this election,' said Lowery.

    "Forsyth Mayor John Howard, a member of St. James who opened Saturday's program, said he was 'pretty shocked' by Lowery's comments. He said if a speaker had made the same comments about black people, he would have gotten up and left [But when the bigot is a black man, the mayor apparently keeps his seat].

    "He said the Bible gives set instructions on how to go to heaven and it doesn't say anything about skin color. Hearing the comments he said he looked at the face of his pastor, the Rev. Antonio Proctor, and could tell he was real shocked too. Howard said he and Proctor talked about putting a video of the event on Forsyth Cable TV but decided after his comments that it wasn't a good idea. [emphasis mine]"

    Nice to see the sort of stuff that earned Lowery his Presidential Medal of Freedom.

    Kinda funny how a man declaring that, essentially, only n*****s wouldn't vote for a black man, and that all white people are going to hell, can then turn around and declare that he's "frightened by the level of hatred and bitterness coming out of this election." I guess Lowery believes that his own hatred and bitterness just happens to coincide with the election, and thus really isn't a part of it.

    I think it's odd that so many of Obama's spiritual advisers tend to spew hatred and bigotry to black audiences. It's just such an uncanny coincidence, I suppose. Weird.

    UPDATE: Lowery is now saying that the white people going to hell thing was all a joke, and that he never even said/doesn't remember the stuff about "what kind of a n----- wouldn't vote with a black man running."

    From The Daily Caller:

    "'He was saying [that] based on all of the hatred that’s going on' towards President Barack Obama, Helen Butler, the executive director of Lowery’s Georgia-based Coalition for the People’s Agenda, told The Daily Caller.

    "'He just fell that he should feel the way he used to feel,' Butler, who attended the rally, explained.

    "'Of course he doesn’t believe that all whites should go to hell,' she added.

    "'That’s not him — he’s a very caring person.'

    "'He was trying to get people motivated to ensure they go and vote…. [and] he did make the point that there is a lot of hatred in this country,' she said.


    "When asked by TheDC about the other notable comment — 'what kind of a n—- wouldn’t vote with a black man running' — Lowery said he did not remember making that statement.

    "'I never said that, I don’t remember saying that,' he told TheDC."


    Apparently the "joke" was so subtle that it went over both Mayor Howard's and Pastor Proctor's heads. And then the mayor and Pastor Proctor decided not to post the video on local TV because of Lowery's comments. I guess the two just have really lousy senses of humor.

    Yeah. It was a joke. Lowery was kidding. He's a very caring person. He never ever remembered saying nor said "what kind of a n----- wouldn't vote with a black man running."

    So let's see the video. Until then, color me unconvinced.