Right As Usual

So, I'm catching up on the news - both on the computer, and with some "news" show in the background. Congress has shown a spine - a little late, but nonetheless, welcome.   They have passed a resolution applying the term "genocide" to the systematic elimination of Christians in the Middle East. Is there anyone who has a single doubt that Obama will fail to act?  Oh, he'll mouth some mealy-mouthed words, probably blaming Christians for the Crusades (Hey, O-man, at SOME point, a defensive action - which the Crusades largely were - should stopped being used to justify present-day slaughter, rape, enslavement, and torture). The "Trial of the Century" is being exploited for ratings on TV, with a heavily-slanted, pro-defense series.  The Goldmans were just on to register their strong opposition to the fictionalizing of the story.   People magazine did a nice piece about Ron Goldman, who they called "the forgotten victim". I've been reading ...

The gowns are lovely (although that dress that Shasha is wearing is a LITTLE too mature for a 14-year old). But - almost $20,000 for a dress for a TEEN?  When the economy is tanking fast? NOT good political thinking. Unless you're Marie Antoinette.

This is my last day of the weekend, during which I usually prepare for my next week's classes. Today, I've been looking at the news and analysis of that news, and it's not a calming scenario. We have a "Progressive" administration that believes in re-writing history (shades of 1984 and NewSpeak!). Central Command has been under investigation by the Pentagon's inspector general since last year when scores of CentCom intelligence analysts complained to the watchdog that their findings were being selectively edited to paint a far rosier picture in 2014 and 2015 about the U.S. campaign against the Islamic State than the facts warranted. The New York Times reported in November that military officials alleged that important e-mails and files that should have been turned over to the inspector general had instead been deleted. But that report also said the Pentagon's inspector general could not verify the files had been deleted. At the time, Nunes himself querie...

The next President must dedicate at least a little energy to halting the free reign of 501(c)4 organizations. They are organizations that are not supposed to be overtly partisan or political.  However, in practice, they usually are.   One such organization is Organizing for America (really, it's Organizing for America's Downfall!). Here are the rules for 501(c)4's. On a related note, universities seem to be particularly exempt from rules of basic decency.  They scream about "equal pay for equal work", yet ignore on of the most egregious examples of its lack on campus. Equal pay for equal work may be a national rallying cry. Yet for some reason, academia expects that it can pay a graduate-student teaching assistant or a PhD-holding part-time instructor a fraction of what it would pay a tenured full professor for teaching the identical class. The gulf between a full professor and a part-timer — in terms of money, power, and status — far exceeds that between the WalM...

So many things that governments spend money are not worth it.  But THIS hits a new low.

It's pretty clear that we're in a precarious position - we're fast running out of OPM (Other People's Money), any proposed changes are resisted - with FEROCITY! - and the clanging timpani of the Progressive cymbals is limiting our ability to think clearly. So, what to do? We have to look at a multi-pronged attack - fight on many, many different fronts.  In short, we have to form coalitions: Those that work to gain back our Constitutional Rights Those that dismantle the bureaucracy - getting rid of jobs/divisions/sections that are not the work of the Federal Government, flat-out working to GET RID OF newer departments - Education, Energy, Labor, Agriculture, for example. Those that chip away at the entrenched "civil" workers who are, variously - thugs, lazy, self-importantly building empires, unnecessary, and stealing - or, any combination of the above.  This group needs to build a case (criminal) and use that as leverage to force those employees out - WI...

...all apologies to Winston Churchill, who named his 1st of the WWII books that way. No, we in America are preparing for a Storm - of Classic Proportions.               It's beginning to look like a CORKER - and it's going to hit Barry's "natural constituency": Single women Part-time workers Artists, actors, musicians - anyone who works on a sporadic basis, and whose income fluctuates People who receive a regular paycheck, but may have received extra money outside of that - such as teachers What is the cause of that storm? Obamacare - or, for those who decided, after it turned out to be a stinker - ACA, the Affordable Care Act. Ya' see, people got those subsidies because they entered information in the website, or told the person over the phone, what they were making.  I'm betting that MOST of them wildly underestimated - either through wishful thinking, or because the fools didn't understand the meaning of NET pay.  It's amazing how many p...

It goes without saying that anything the Congress passes, the President and his cronies will work, overtime, to get around.  So, I think they have to build in automatic triggers: Don't just tie Department-specific cuts to the CR's being violated with Executive Action.  Make an AUTOMATIC 5% cut to ALL parts of government, if he uses EITHER bureaucratic regulation OR Executive Action to get more illegals "legalized". Don't fall for a long-term solution - ANY CR has to be short-term.  The new Congress has a right to act without having their hands tied. Go aggressive - use PR about the cost of illegal aliens to the country - in hospital care, incarceration, schools, spread of disease, lost jobs and downward pressure on wages, etc.  Have a daily update, and post it on Youtube, Twitter, and Facebook.  USE that alternative media - it can be an opportunity to influence younger and future voters. Set up a clock of the cost of illegal aliens, just as was done with t...

This is outrageous , and an excellent reason why politicians should have to wear sponsorship patches - like NASCAR drivers - on their clothing. I'm generally opposed to the whole bailout thing - if any investor screws up, and loses money, well, that's his problem.  The government (and, really, the taxpayers, whose money funds it) should NOT throw money at their feet. The most galling thing about this is that GOOGLE is a major investor in this ( Link to Financial Statements here ).  The other major player is NRG ( Link to Income Statement here ) Check out the links - do these companies deserve PUBLIC money to increase their profitability?  Especially since the taxpayers will NOT share in the expected return?

Here's some information about IVF and the increase in surrogacy - rent-a-womb services. "For women under the age of 35, 40.7% of fertility treatment attempts resulted in a live birth. So did 31.3% of the attempts by women ages 35 to 37; 22.2% of the attempts by women ages 38 to 40; 11.8% of the attempts by women who were 41 or 42; and 3.9% for women who were 43 or older. http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-ivf-births-record-high-20140216,0,6799611.story#ixzz2vffq6eRC" So, because most older women do NOT experience a successful pregnancy, even with a "test-tube" conception, SOMEONE has to carry the child for 9 months. Enter the "womb-man" - the person who is thought of only as a disembodied uterus. She needn't be the same woman who donates the egg - in fact, for the purposes of wresting the baby from her at birth, it's MUCH better if she is not.  It's easier to deny her parental rights if she has no genetic connection to the ...

Charles Cooke has an interesting analysis. He points out that, although the Kochs have some relatively common Conservative positions, the Kochs are not as simple as the hysteria would have them be. Indeed, even the lightest of research reveals them to be in favor of gay marriage, of drug legalization, of reforming and expanding the immigration system, of withdrawing troops from the Middle East, of cutting defense spending, of curbing the NSA’s overreach, and of helping to balance the budget by raising (some) taxes. Is it their money?  They made it legally, as did Warren Buffet - who is lauded by the Democrats. Is it that they donate money (their own) to affect the elections?  Unions do the same thing - with MORE money - NOT their own - and Democrats don't seem to have a problem with that. Is it that Harry Reid, and others who spew their name like a curse, believe that ANY opposition to the Democratic agenda must be annihilated? Sounds to me like some Democrats have a peculiar idea ...

There is a lot on my mind right now: Fast & Furious fallout continues. But the media treats the whole thing like a closed issue. Where is Congress on this? Please, PLEASE - write your Congressman , urging them to add their voice to continued hearings - INCLUDING getting access to all of the "privileged" communications. Then, right after that, you let them know that SOME of us care that over 300 Mexican nationals, and at least 1 Border Patrol agent, were killed by guns that the Obama administration authorized to sell to "straw purchasers". In fact, they didn't just AUTHORIZE the sale, they PRESSURED gun dealers to allow them. The Debt, and the non-existent Budget - 4 years without one - are crushing our economy - at least, that part that remains after the Obamacare juggernaut rolls on by. What is interesting is that the majority of the Tea Party is OLDER Americans - in contrast to the seniors of the AARP - who care more about not leaving debt to th...

Here's the link. I want everyone to visit it, and hit the Thumbs DOWN button.  It has less than 2,000 votes, so, if we do so, then send the link to everyone on our Facebook pages, and our personal email list, we can probably move that ranking to more DISLIKES than LIKES. Wouldn't THAT be FUN! I watched it today (I fell asleep waiting for it to come on - well, the convention was boring, but also I had an early - 7:30 am - interview). I noticed several things: Obama's got only a few gestures - he twirls his hands around his wrists, he puts his fingers against his thumbs and uses the whole hand as a pointing gesture of emphasis,  sometimes he separates the fingers and thumb, but does the same gesture, and he puts his flat palms about 6-10 inches apart, and does a karate chop (sometimes karate chops with fists).  He uses all of them a bit too much - he's clearly been coached by a "speech doctor".  Who wants to make a drinking game - a shot or chug for each time ...

I've been watching the DNC convention (yes, it was occasionally painful), and have noticed some talking points that are likely to come up in the debate: Obama talks about "free" contraception.  It is NOT free, as Mitt should point out, but "taxpayer-paid" contraception, as those who don't pay for their own contraception through their insurance premiums will receive them thanks to the taxpayers. Those "tax subsidies" for oil-producers - does Obama mean "reductions in taxes" for legitimate expenses?  Instead of requiring government to "invest" in alternative energy start-ups, why not let the PRIVATE sector do the investing, since that's what they're good at. BTW, IF any money is to be given to alternative energy, it should come from NEW oil and gas leases of public land.  That should encourage the federal government to open up land to oil producers.  And, in effect, the old energy will fund development of new ene...

When still a Senator, Barack Obama called President Bush: UNPATRIOTIC for adding $4 trillion to the national debt in eight years. Barack Calls Bush "Unpatriotic" Never mind that during that time, Bush had: The 9/11 attack Fought 2 wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan Dealt with the near-meltdown of the financial market (I've always been suspicious of the CAUSE of that "crisis" - it seemed too mysterious in its sudden onset, just before the election - and a near-copy of a Tom Clancy novel's plot). Today, $5 trillion added in just over 3 years is - well - OK.  Not a problem.  Not a reason to hunker down and cut expenses. Oh, come on!  Any sensible family in those circumstances would do the same - it's no time to take on NEW debt, and it's a great time to: Pare away the frills - the gym membership, the nights out on the town, the fancy home entertaining, etc. Ruthlessly comb the budget for ways to save - refinance the home or car, change shopping hab...

I've not before found an explanation that better capsulizes the Leftist philisophy, and makes clear why it is NOT sustainable: The left constantly approaches the economy like it’s a gigantic daycare. When people need something, “all we need to do is share.” If someone has something another person doesn’t, the solution is to have the “teacher” force him to share. This is how liberals approach the economy. But what is lost in this daycare mentality approach is that individuals need to put effort into creating, producing, and selling goods and services. They do not just  exist , like a birthday cake that should be cut up and handed to the rugrats on a plastic plate. And liberals don’t notice that after a few semesters, the teacher is really packing on the pounds. People, the tangible things of an economy don't just materialize.  They come into being because of the hard work of the producers.  If you think that people should just "share" their money, try this: Here's...

Are some people just destined to be poor?   I don't think so.  I think wealth has more to do with the actions of  individuals, than how "lucky" they are.   Dennis Prager agrees.  People who make less than $20,000 a year . . . told Kahneman and his colleagues that they spend more than a third of their time in passive leisure — watching television, for example. Those making more than $100,000 spent less than one-fifth of their time in this way — putting their legs up and relaxing. Rich people spent much more time commuting and engaging in activities that were required as opposed to optional. Hmmm.  Maybe there's a reason that network marketers are told "turn off the TV".

I found a rather disturbing story on Suitably Flip. It seems that Hillary is not above making small change from the little (and not-so-little) people that give to her campaign. What's the big deal? You can download that information from the FEB website , anyway. Yes, but you aren't allowed to make commercial use of it. By selling or renting the lists of donors, candidates can make additional money from people who are, then, ALLOWED to use the names for commercial purposes.