Questions about Right

Do you value the Constitution? Do you feel it needs to be defended?

or do you think it is in need of updating for the times...

Do you value individual liberty? Do you believe that our Rights are bestowed upon us by God?

or do you think the government gives you rights...

Why is it that Government is anti-individual? Why do we have to tell the government how much we earn? Why does the government need to know how many children we have? Why does the government need to know how much we are giving to Charity?

Why would anyone who values the Constitution and Liberty want a larger Government?

Must Watch Video (then act)

The Wiz at The Metaverse website posted this video with the following introduction:

When James Cramer, Ultra-Capitalist of Mad Money on CNBC agrees with Euro-Socialist Lawrence O'Donnell you know the Health Care Restructuring Bill being crafted by Congress is a complete disaster.

This is the most IMPORTANT 9 MINUTES you can possibly spend today. Watch it all.

Call Your Congress Person TODAY and demand they stop the current Health Care Legislation.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Credibility Gap - By S. Palin

Original posting here.

While I don’t wish to speak too harshly about President Obama’s state of the union address, we live in challenging times that call for candor. I call them as I see them, and I hope my frank assessment will be taken as an honest effort to move this conversation forward.

Last night, the president spoke of the “credibility gap” between the public’s expectations of their leaders and what those leaders actually deliver. “Credibility gap” is a good way to describe the chasm between rhetoric and reality in the president’s address. The contradictions seemed endless.

He called for Democrats and Republicans to “work through our differences,” but last year he dismissed any notion of bipartisanship when he smugly told Republicans, “I won.”

He talked like a Washington “outsider,” but he runs Washington! He’s had everything any president could ask for – an overwhelming majority in Congress and a fawning press corps that feels tingles every time he speaks. There was nothing preventing him from pursuing “common sense” solutions all along. He didn’t pursue them because they weren’t his priorities, and he spent his speech blaming Republicans for the problems caused by his own policies.

He dared us to “let him know” if we have a better health care plan, but he refused to allow Republicans in on the negotiations or consider any ideas for real free market and patient-centered reforms. We’ve been “letting him know” our ideas for months from the town halls to the tea parties, but he isn’t interested in listening. Instead he keeps making the nonsensical claim that his massive trillion-dollar health care bill won’t increase the deficit.

Americans are suffering from job losses and lower wages, yet the president practically demanded applause when he mentioned tax cuts, as if allowing people to keep more of their own hard-earned money is an act of noblesse oblige. He claims that he cut taxes, but I must have missed that. I see his policies as paving the way for massive tax increases and inflation, which is the “hidden tax” that most hurts the poor and the elderly living on fixed incomes.

He condemned lobbyists, but his White House is filled with former lobbyists, and this has been a banner year for K Street with his stimulus bill, aka the Lobbyist’s Full Employment Act. He talked about a “deficit of trust” and the need to “do our work in the open,” but he chased away the C-SPAN cameras and cut deals with insurance industry lobbyists behind closed doors.

He spoke of doing what’s best for the next generation and not leaving our children with a “mountain of debt,” but under his watch this year, government spending is up by 22%, and his budget will triple our national debt.

He spoke of a spending freeze, but doesn’t he realize that each new program he’s proposing comes with a new price tag? A spending freeze is a nice idea, but it doesn’t address the root cause of the problem. We need a comprehensive examination of the role of government spending. The president’s deficit commission is little more than a bipartisan tax hike committee, lending political cover to raise taxes without seriously addressing the problem of spending.

He condemned bailouts, but he voted for them and then expanded and extended them. He praised the House’s financial reform bill, but where was Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae in that bill? He still hasn’t told us when we’ll be getting out of the auto and the mortgage industries. He praised small businesses, but he’s spent the past year as a friend to big corporations and their lobbyists, who always find a way to make government regulations work in their favor at the expense of their mom & pop competitors.

He praised the effectiveness of his stimulus bill, but then he called for another one – this time cleverly renamed a “jobs bill.” The first stimulus was sold to us as a jobs bill that would keep unemployment under 8%. We now have double digit unemployment with no end in sight. Why should we trust this new “jobs bill”?

He talked about “making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development,” but apparently it’s still too tough for his Interior Secretary to move ahead with Virginia’s offshore oil and gas leases. If they’re dragging their feet on leases, how long will it take them to build “safe, clean nuclear power plants”? Meanwhile, he continued to emphasize “green jobs,” which require massive government subsidies for inefficient technologies that can’t survive on their own in the real world of the free market.

He spoke of supporting young girls in Afghanistan who want to go to school and young women in Iran who courageously protest in the streets, but where were his words of encouragement to the young girls of Afghanistan in his West Point speech? And where was his support for the young women of Iran when they were being gunned down in the streets of Tehran?

Despite speaking for over an hour, the president only spent 10% of his speech on foreign policy, and he left us with many unanswered questions. Does he still think trying the 9/11 terrorists in New York is a good idea? Does he still think closing Gitmo is a good idea? Does he still believe in Mirandizing terrorists after the Christmas bomber fiasco? Does he believe we’re in a war against terrorists, or does he think this is just a global crime spree? Does he understand that the first priority of our government is to keep our country safe?

In his address last night, the president once again revealed that there’s a fundamental disconnect between what the American people expect from their government, and what he wants to deliver. He’s still proposing failed top-down big government solutions to our problems. Instead of smaller, smarter government, he’s taken a government that was already too big and supersized it.

Real private sector jobs are created when taxes are low, investment is high, and people are free to go about their business without the heavy hand of government. The president thinks innovation comes from government subsidies. Common sense conservatives know innovation comes from unleashing the creative energy of American entrepreneurs.

Everything seems to be “unexpected” to this administration: unexpected job losses; unexpected housing numbers; unexpected political losses in Massachusetts, Virginia, and New Jersey. True leaders lead best when confronted with the unexpected. But instead of leading us, the president lectured us. He lectured Wall Street; he lectured Main Street; he lectured Congress; he even lectured our Supreme Court Justices.

He criticized politicians who “wage a perpetual campaign,” but he gave a campaign speech instead of a state of the union address. The campaign is over, and President Obama now has something that candidate Obama never had: an actual track record in office. We now can see the failed policies behind the flowery words. If Americans feel as cynical as the president suggests, perhaps it’s because the audacity of his recycled rhetoric no longer inspires hope.

Real leadership requires results. Real hope lies in the ingenuity, generosity, and boundless courage of the American people whose voices are still not being heard in Washington.

- Sarah Palin

Sarah Palins best seller experpts

Drudge got a sneak peek of the Former Alaskan Governor and VP Nominees book today:

HER TURN!
Fri Nov 13 2009 07:27:12 ET

Going Rogue: An American Life
by Sarah Palin
Chapter Four; Section 8, pages 255-257

By the third week in September, a “Free Sarah” campaign was under way and the press at large was growing increasingly critical of the McCain camp’s decision to keep me, my family and friends back home, and my governor’s staff all bottled up. Meanwhile, the question of which news outlet would land the first interview was a big deal, as it always is with a major party candidate.

From the beginning, Nicolle [Wallace] pushed for Katie Couric and the CBS Evening News. The campaign’s general strategy involved coming out with a network anchor, someone they felt had treated John well on the trail thus far. My suggestion was that we be consistent with that strategy and start talking to outlets like FOX and the Wall Street Journal. I really didn’t have a say in which press I was going to talk to, but for some reason Nicolle seemed compelled to get me on the Katie bandwagon.

“Katie really likes you,” she said to me one day. “she’s a working mom and admires you as a working mom. She has teenage daughter like you. She just relates to you,” Nicolle said. “believe me, I know her very well. I’ve worked with her.” Nicolle had left her gig at CBS just a few months earlier to hook up with the McCain campaign. I had to trust her experience, as she had dealt with national politics more than I had. But something always struck me as peculiar about the way she recalled her days in the White House, when she was speaking on behalf of President George W. Bush. She didn't have much to say that was positive about her former boss or the job in general. Whenever I wanted to give a shout-out to the White House’s homeland security efforts after 9/11, we were told we couldn’t do it. I didn’t know if that was Nicolle’s call.

Nicolle went on to explain that Katie really needed a career boost. “She just has such low self-esteem,” Nicolle said. She added that Katie was going through a tough time. “She just feels she can’t trust anybody.”

I was thinking, And this has to do with John McCain’s campaign how?

Nicolle said. “She wants you to like her.”

Hearing all that, I almost started to feel sorry for her. Katie had tried to make a bold move from lively morning gal to serious anchor, but the new assignment wasn’t going very well.

“You know what? We’ll schedule a segment with her,” Nicolle said. “If it doesn’t go well, if there’s no chemistry, we won’t do any others.”

Meanwhile, the media blackout continued. It got so bad that a couple of times I had a friend in Anchorage track down phone numbers for me, and then I snuck in calls to folks like Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity and someone I thought was Larry Kudlow but turned out to be Neil Cavuto’s producer. I had a friend call Bill O’Reilly after I was inundated with supporters in Alaska asking why the campaign was “ignoring” his on-air requests for a McCain campaign interview. I had another friend scrambling to find Mark Levin’s number. Aboard the campaign plane I was within twenty-five feet of reporters for hours on end. Headquarters’ strategy was that I should not go to the back of the aircraft and talk to the press. At first this was subtle, but as the campaign wore on, Tracey or Tucker would call headquarters to request permission, and someone in DC would respond, “No! Absolutely not- block her if she tries to go back.”

You might just be....

If you shout out that our president lies, you might just be a racist.

If you criticize our president, you might just be a racist.

If you listen to conservative talk radio, you might just be a racist.

If you watch Fox News, you might just be a racist.

If you suggest our president is racist, you might just be a racist.

If you are against the government takeover of health care, you might just be a racist.

I have no doubt that somewhere in the great country there are people who feel that ethnic origins make one superior, thus make another inferior. I further realize that genetics, environment, hard work and access to better education, can make a person "superior" in certain area's.

The term racism is now being bandied about as a tactic rather then fact. I believe it is now the liberal synonym to socialism. In other words both are being misused and thus redefined.

Can someone make a racist statement and not be a racist? Can a defined racist comment be rendered "non-racist" due to the commenter's ethnic origin?

Are there acceptable forms of discrimination? Are there acceptable forms of intolerance?

I'm getting really sick and tired of everyone being accused of racism, I hope everyone else is starting to feel the same.

America's Dim Bulbs

Original link:

Europe's ban on the incandescent light bulb began phasing in this month, and the U.S. will soon follow. Is Thomas Edison to blame for global warming? And why are we exporting green jobs?

When the warm-mongers assemble in Copenhagen this December to hammer out a successor to the failed Kyoto Protocol, no doubt their work to save the earth from the carbon dioxide that gives it life will take place under the eerie light thrown off by compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) mandated by the European Union to fight climate change.

The bulbs are more expensive, costing up to six times as much as an equivalent incandescent bulb. But they're said to be more economical in the long run because they supposedly use up to 80% less energy than old-style bulbs and don't burn out as quickly.

The change will be gradual. The clear 60-watt bulb will be allowed to be sold until at least September 2011 and clear 40-watt bulbs until 2012. In Germany there's a run on Edison's creation, with sales of incandescents up 34%. Is a black market in bulbs in the offing?

The Telegraph newspaper reports that European officials are conceding CFLs are not as bright an idea as first advertised.

An 11-watt CFL is advertised as being the equivalent of a 60-watt incandescent. Officials in Brussels responsible for the ban admit that this is "not true" and that such claims are "exaggerated."

Tests conducted by London's Telegraph found that using a single lamp to illuminate a room, an 11-watt CFL produced only 58% of the illumination of an "equivalent" 60-watt incandescent — even after a 10-minute warm-up that consumers have found necessary for a CFL to reach its full brightness.

The European Commission advises consumers of the environmental hazards posed by CFLs. If one breaks, you're advised to air out rooms and avoid using vacuum cleaners to prevent exposure to mercury in the bulbs. You can't just throw out an old bulb. It must be properly thrown out, lest your bedroom or family room become a Superfund toxic waste site.

Mercury is considered by environmentalists to be among the most toxic of toxic substances and, yes, it is dangerous if ingested or handled over time. We've been warned that high concentrations in fish are dangerous to pregnant women. We've been told mercury in vaccines causes autism.

So now it's safe in fragile light bulbs?

The lost art of debate.

Once upon a time, someone used the phrase "Straw Man Argument" I had no clue what that meant so I headed to the Jr. High Library and found some information about fallacious arguments.

A List Of Fallacious Arguments Something like this list provided via the information superhighway. (Thank you Al Gore!)

As of late there has been lots of dissent over health care and the general direction of our country. Some opinions are very strong, well worded with real world examples to draw conclusions upon. Other opinions are barking a party line.

While some tend to use tricks to deal with the issues while not dealing with them. Or President loves the Straw Man argument and has been diligently using this device with nearly each of his pleadings of support on his version of Health Care.

There are accepted ways to argue, debate teams are a prime example of this. Being able to argue either side of an issue really gives you a good clear understanding of the issue. This would be regardless of your personal belief.

There is a big difference between discussion and debate and argument. Recognizing a straw man, for instance, for what it is can give you a clearer picture. Same with other debate tactics.

Speculative Historical RetCon by James C Bennett

Jefferson was a mixed bag, as was Adams, although on balance Adams was probably sounder. Jefferson was an agrarian romantic who didn’t really understand the financial side of the Anglosphere toolkit, an ideological republican who had some of the shortcomings of all ideological romantics, and because of those things, a Francophile who lingered with the French revolution far too long. On the plus side, he understood the cultural roots of England and English-speaking society quite well, although in an excessively Whiggish way - he believed in the purity of Anglo-Saxon society and the corruption of the Norman yoke. He saw the American revolution as the vindication of the freedom-loving Saxon against the Norman crown and aristocracy - the Witangemot reborn in America. This was based on a fairly good reading of Montestquieu whose appreciation of English constitutionalism was basically correct. His Anglo-Saxon romanticism led him to institute Anglo-Saxon courses at the University of Virginia.

He was also good on decentralism, suspicion of Federal power, and entrenched rights. He was good on the Louisiana Purchase. He was bad on foreign policy in general, and the terrible Embargo.

Adams is better on his theoretical understanding of society, and particularly good on his appreciation of Common Law. He was too reflexively anti-British in foreign policy (Coincidentally, I am right now reading Kathleen Burk’s Old World, New World where she is discussing his record)

I had never liked Hamilton very much, as too much of a centralist - he was perhaps our first National Greatness Conservative - but as I start to understand the financial side of the Anglosphere Toolkit better, the more I realize what he was about. He understood the tools that England had been applying for a century, realized that American was getting the dregs of mercantilist policy while England was enjoying the fruits of a better policy, and understood that with independence we could use those tools at home — which he proceeded to do, and very well.

But perhaps best of all was Franklin. Underneath the homespun PR façade, he understood both England and America quite well (France too, which is why he was so effective there.) He spent so much of his life in London that he really should be considered a great Londoner. He had a very clear-minded picture of what American and Britain could do together if only they could create an effective constitution for it - and spent a great deal of his life trying to create such an Imperial constitution and promote it in England. He only gave up at the very end, and went home to make the best of an independent America, putting his insights to work at the Constitutional convention. That imperial constitution (of which the Comonwealth was only a weak realization) was perhaps the greatest of his inventions that never came to fruition.

It is Fair Week!

When you live in a more rural then city location the Fair takes on a different meaning.

Growing up in Orange County SoCal, the Fair was something that held different levels of interest, never a "must see". The rides were not up to par with Disney or Knotts. Who cared about the animals? Gobs and gobs of people and my Mom and Pop would not spring for food.

Here in Oregon the Fair is something that starts with a buzz in the air. People getting ready for various competitions, wondering who is going to perform this year, is there a new ride? Will my old favorite be back?

Living here you meet people and quickly find that you already have mutual friends. The 4H club is active and there is some really great animal shows. The Community really comes together in support. We get some good musical acts as well.

Tracy Atkins, Huey Lewis, Pat Benatar, Alice Cooper etc. The various food court people are run by the local organizations like the Lions Club. We even have free food if you sing a song for it.

Every year the one family member who looks forward to the Fair is Connor. He is big into tradition, certain times of the year you do certain things. He is a tough one to disappoint.

The first time we took him he would have nothing to do with the rides. The next year we had to curtail his wanting to ride the big slide, due to costs. After that we took him on the "ride-all-you-want" Kids day. If you go by admission price .vs. rides rode, we made a killing! He has expanded his repertoire a bit.

His smile makes it all worthwhile.

It's Fair time again!

Lessons in Government

Great story from MEP Daniel Hannan (link on the right):

I recently asked my friend’s little girl what she wanted to be when she grows up.

She said she wanted to be Prime Minister some day. Both of her parents, Labour supporters, were standing there, so I asked her, ‘If you were Prime Minister what would be the first thing you would do?’

She replied, ‘I’d give food and houses to all the homeless people.’

Her parents beamed.

‘Splendid: what a worthy goal.’ I told her ‘But you don’t have to wait until you’re Prime Minister to do that. You can come over to my house and mow the lawn, pull weeds, and sweep my yard, and I’ll pay you £50.

Then I’ll take you over to the supermarket where that homeless fellow hangs out, and you can give him the £50 to use toward food and a new house.’

She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked:

‘Why doesn’t the homeless man come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the £50? ’

I said, ‘Welcome to the Conservative Party.’

Her parents still aren’t speaking to me.

Please read and act.

This is a must-read, must act upon essay.

The Wiz in stark terms lays out the burning of Rome while the media fiddles.

Borrow and Spend has to stop, we the people have to stop this!

Contact your Representative.

Contact your Senator.

Words or Actions?

"Oh, but he has changed"

The above quote in any given context should be viewed with skepticism. Fact of the matter is people are slow to change, people dislike change and rally against change.

Ambiguity is public enemy number one. When someone says one thing, and does another, there is a dishonesty that needs to be noted. Yet, holding someone accountable for words and actions has a disconnect. Just as responsibilities for ones own words and actions is often redirected.

Honesty is more common in personal relationships then the national stage. Honor and loyalty has an air of naivete and quaintness.

Virtues that have been taught out of our society?

My Father-in-law prided himself on business deals made on a handshake. His reputation in his field was built on his high standards.

My own Father never considered his work ethic as a virtue, it was what it was, the way he was.

Both were satisfied with jobs done right, it was something that reflected upon them and earned them respect. People you could trust without reservation.

I consider myself lucky in the people whom I have that level of trust. I wonder if that number is smaller then my grandfathers and if my kids will have a smaller circle as well.

Memorial Day, formerly Decoration Day.

"Freedom is Never more than one generation away from extinction.  We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream.  It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free."  -- President Ronald Reagan.

100 days of this!

Looks like WaPo has something:

He is spending more then anyone has ever. Plans on spending even more.  And its not his money...

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has pwnd him. Fidel Castro, just called him superficial. 

Originally he said, "We can't keep looking to the past. We've got to look to the future here. So I don't think it would serve any purpose to prosecute or investigate former administration officials on these interrogations the CIA did." All of a sudden he changes his mind! 

Obama doesn't know what he's doing, he has no clue what's going on in his own administration. Janet Napolitano said the 9/11 hijackers actually got into our country through Canada. The National Post in Canada has a piece asking how did this woman get her job? She says it's not a crime to illegally enter the country, she is in charge of Homeland Security! 

If Eric Holder or Conyers does investigations of former Bush administration officials, It will be about destroying and criminalizing policy circumstances with which you disagree. Nancy Pelosi signed off on all of this in 2002. When they were explained waterboarding and all this, nobody in Congress objected. So if Holder proceeds, he's going to have to send out subpoenas not just to the executive branch, he's going to have to send out subpoenas to the lawyers, the White House counsel and anybody else who had anything to do with this!

 Nobody's going to go work for the executive branch ever again.

During a photo-op with King Abdullah, he says, "I'm going to let Holder go ahead and do what he wants to do. If he wants to investigate these people in the Bush administration, fine.” (paraphrased) 

The White House press office was just blindsided by this. The director of communications in the White House, she quit. She resigned the White House! 

It's embarrassing incompetence and inexperience. 

Admiral Blair admitting the CIA received high value, lifesaving information from terrorists, while President Obama is condemning the same interrogations as immoral and counterproductive. 

President Obama is throwing grand White House parties with Kobe beef, a hundred bucks a pound, while telling the nation to cut back in order to survive the greatest economic downturn supposedly since the Great Depression.

Bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia!

Listening patiently and respectfully while Daniel Ortega talks for 50 minutes about the “criminal country” he leads, Obama does not stand up for his country at one point during the Summit of the Americas. 

He has run around the world and apologized for the greatest, most compassionate, most innovative and freedom-loving country in the world.

Then we have the nominations of five tax cheats to his cabinet, including the man who oversees the IRS. 
We have Obama's press spokesman, who makes a complete idiot of himself daily. 

He sends back a symbol of freedom, that bust of Sir Winston Churchill to Great Britain just after moving into the White House. 

He insulted the prime minister of England, the queen of England, with embarrassing, thoughtless gifts. 

We have the French president Sarkozy ridiculing Obama's messianic complex, inviting him to walk on water at Normandy beach. 

We have Iran taking a hostage, an American journalist, as Obama promises better relations. 

We have North Korea humiliating Obama with their missile launch. 

We have Obama putting the country in debt for generations to come while promising fiscal responsibility, offering up laughable budget cuts, 

Banning lobbyists from his administration, while appointing them left and right. 

Lying that Caterpillar would hire more with the stimulus bill, then watching while that company lay’s off thousands after the bill passes. 

He pledges to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay. But then he keeps it open with no plan for its future. 
Proclaiming total transparency, while keeping secret who got the TARP funds, when, where, why. 

He is incapable of communicating without a teleprompter. 

He attacks a private citizen broadcaster from the White House. 

He makes a ham-handed attempt to nationalize the banks preventing financial institutions from paying back TARP money they don't need or want. 

He has made bad situations worse with car manufacturers, and the worst is yet to come. 

He has sparked hundreds of protests involving hundreds of thousands of Americans at tea parties regarding irresponsible government spending.

His Homeland Security chief labels peacefully demonstrating Americans and veterans as security risks. 
Moved the census over to the Commerce department to politicize that.

This was orignally my Rant on the Wizars blog.

If you pay people to be poor, you'll never run out of poor people

Taken from that spended conservative MP from the UK, Daniel Hannan.

"For most of my life, the question of how to relieve poverty has been owned by socialists. You might vote Conservative because you believed in low taxes, strong defence, controlled immigration, free enterprise or school discipline. But if you were chiefly interested in how to improve the condition of the indigent, you'd almost certainly end up voting Labour (read: Progressive)."

"Poverty is not simply an absence of money. Rather, it is bound up with a whole set of other circumstances: lack of qualifications, demoralisation, family break-up, substance abuse, fatherlessness. It follows that you do not end poverty by giving money to the poor: a theory that British welfarism has amply demonstrated over 60 years. Only when you tackle poverty holistically will you facilitate meaningful improvement."

"Conservatives naturally grasp the connection between living in an independent state and living independently of the state. IDS has done the poor the greatest service anyone could do them: he has ensured that they will no longer be left to the Left."

What would you think of this man???

Who did more to free the women of Afghanistan from oppression, then anyone?

Who established the first functioning democracy in Islam?

Who contributed more to the fight against AIDS than all of Europe put together?

 (Thus is responsible for the saving of millions of lives in Africa). 

You would equate him with Nazism, call for his demise, refer to him in derogitory fashion at every oppertunity...

The most noxious and rabid smear campaign I've ever witnessed has been against this president.

Following Shoo's lead on ODS

If you cannot honor the man, then honor the office. If you cannot honor the office, then one more patriotic bond has been severed.

The office of the president has meaning and importance that transcend the views of its current occupant. Though elected by a part of America, the president becomes a symbol of its whole. The respect we accord him does not imply agreement or endorsement. It reflects our appreciation for constitutional processes. So a presidential visit is always an honor. The televised arrival of Air Force One, the motorcade, the playing of "Hail to the Chief," the audience standing as the president enters -- all these express a proper respect for presidential legitimacy.

special thanks to Mr. Gerson

Must hear for everyone.

If only we had people like this representing us in Washington. 

"The truth, Prime Minister, is that you have run out of our money.  The country as a whole is now in negative equity.  Every British child is born owing around 20,000 pounds.  Servicing the interest on that debt is going to cost more than educating the child.  Now, it's not that you're not apologizing.  Like everyone else I've long accepted that you're pathologically incapable of accepting responsibility for these things.  It's that you're carrying on willfully, worsening our situation, wantonly spending what little we have left.  Last year, in the last 12 months, a hundred thousand private sector jobs have been lost, and yet you've created 30,000 public sector jobs.  Prime Minister, you cannot carry on forever squeezing the productive bit of the economy in order to fund an unprecedented engorgement of the unproductive bit."

There is truth layed out oh so well.

Lets do something, Stop the Obama Madness!

Hey, get ahold of your representatives and let them know if you like all the spending plans. Use the link and be part of this.

This crazy rampant spending is putting our country in the same mess that gets people forclosed on!

From the folks at the Wall Street Journal:

"But let's not stop at a 42% top rate; as a thought experiment, let's go all the way. A tax policy that confiscated 100% of the taxable income of everyone in America earning over $500,000 in 2006 would only have given Congress an extra $1.3 trillion in revenue. That's less than half the 2006 federal budget of $2.7 trillion and looks tiny compared to the more than $4 trillion Congress will spend in fiscal 2010. Even taking every taxable "dime" of everyone earning more than $75,000 in 2006 would have barely yielded enough to cover that $4 trillion."

(thanks for the source Wizard)

Govenor Jindal

Ugh, what an bland performance.  Why do we even have someone speaking from the "other side" after a state of the union address?  I read transcripts after speeches, I find what a politician says is much more important then how they speak.  When the two come together you have something amazing.  Unfortunately we have Obama who says nothing well (I'm against big Government??), and Jindal who states conservative policy in a stilted manner.

"You elected Republicans to champion limited government, fiscal discipline, and personal responsibility, Instead, Republicans went along with earmarks and big government spending in Washington. Our party is determined to regain your trust." -- Bobby Jindal

Here is why I like Bobby Jindal.  Watch him take two minutes to stake out the kind of economic policy territory I could back.

According to a January 27 press release from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, only one state in the entire union recorded an increase in employment in December: you guessed it, Louisiana.

"Who among us would ask our children for a loan, so we could spend money we do not have, on things we do not need? That is precisely what the Democrats in Congress just did. It's irresponsible. And it's no way to strengthen our economy, create jobs, or build a prosperous future for our children.…"

His awesome on-the-fly management of the response after two major hurricane one as a congressman who clearly outperformed the mayor and the past governor, the next as governor himself shows he has a quick mind, a strong will, a good heart, and a gut-level competence with can do mentality.

Nonetheless Jindal is still has a ways to grow. A very good work in progress.  While his speech did not live up to his "superstar" billing, he provided some necessary correctives to Obama's speech, along with some hope for the future.