And this one says: We are screwed.  So very screwed.

Comments (0) | Permalink

…let me just say that at least I’m not a liberal scoundrel.  Pardon my redundancy.  Charles Krauthammer nails it:

Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the “bitter” people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging “to guns or religion or” - this part is less remembered - “antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.”

Do yourself a favor and read the whole thing. 

And while we on the subject, I suggest this as well.

Comments (0) | Permalink

Talk about your summertime blues.  Obama’s “recovery summer” is driving the economy to unprecedented depths.  So bad people are talking about when Herbert Hoover ran things back in 1929.

How bad? The housing market’s worst-on-record June for new construction was followed by its worst-on-record July. In each case, the year-over-year decline from 2009, when what I have been calling the POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid economy since the middle of 2008 supposedly hit its trough, was about 10%. In what are usually two of the best months of the year for builders, in a nation with almost 130 million housing units, construction began on barely over 100,000 new ones. That’s about 65% lower than the 1959-2007 average for the same two months.

An economist quoted by the Associated Press on August 19 described the construction situation for office buildings, malls, and hotels in three words: “Dead, dead, dead.”

Send in the clowns.

Comments (0) | Permalink

…how much will you pay for Obama’s lies?

Comments (0) | Permalink

Man, I wish I’d written this:

But it wasn’t only liberal illogic that caused me to dump the whole program—much of it had to do with gradual changes in liberal attitudes and behavior. I’m old enough to remember when liberals were free-speech absolutists and conservatives tended to be the book-burners. But historical forces can blur, erase, and often invert party lines.

Over the years, I watched as liberals slowly became the group most likely to flat-out refuse discussing certain topics and answering certain questions, their purportedly “open” minds snapping shut like a giant clam. They became the group most likely to try and silence their opponents by shouting them down, defaming them, assaulting them, and even urging legislation to ban the use and expression of certain terms and sentiments. They became the group most disposed toward emotional appeals, double standards, wishful thinking, and wretchedly malodorous sanctimony.

Read the whole thing.  It’s good.

Hat Tip: Spleenville.

UPDATE:  I actually found the above on a blog a rarely read these days.  Following some links on even less frequently read blogs I came across this:

The book’s French cancellation is, I realize, a rather small cultural event. Yet it gives specific color to the recent revelations on the Daily Caller website that left-wing journalists conspired to suppress scandals that might harm Barack Obama and to the brouhaha over Breitbart’s online release of a video that resulted in a government worker’s momentarily losing her job. In both stories, one thing leaps out at me: everywhere, the Left favors fewer voices and less information, and conservatives favor more. Everywhere, the Left seeks to disappear its opposition, whereas the Right is willing to meet them head-on.

Take the e-mails that the Daily Caller obtained from the now-defunct lefty Web service Journolist. Never mind the personal or psychological implications of a radio producer who lovingly imagines Rush Limbaugh’s death or a law professor who doesn’t know that the FCC has no power to deprive Fox News of a license or a reporter who wants to smear Fred Barnes and other right-wing commentators as racist in order to distract the public from the hateful radicalism of Jeremiah Wright, then Obama’s pastor. The point is not these people’s animus or ignorance or wickedness. The point is that what they desired was not victory in open debate but silence—the silence of censorship, intimidation, or the grave.

When has Rush Limbaugh ever wished a liberal’s mouth closed forever? Really, who can deny that Rush would happily argue a point with absolutely anyone anywhere? When has Fox News ever done anything to its rival cable stations but trounce them in a free competition for ratings? When has Fred Barnes ever tried to bully or intimidate someone into shutting up?

But wait, on yet a third blog, I found this:

Progressivism offers — rather, promises: less freedom; less mobility; less prosperity; less comfort; less autonomy and sovereignty for individuals; less integrity and straightforwardness; less transparency among the ruling class, oversight of their capricious usurpations, and recourse to address the wrongs they encourage; less satisfaction in life; less self-respect and dignity; less of everything that makes life living, in sum.

But there are in fact some things they offer us more of: more government; more taxation; more overweening bureaucracy to exercise more control over our lives; more intolerance for differing ideas; more restriction; more strangulation.

Wow.  I’ve been saying this for the longest time…liberal, progressive, whatever you call it, is in fact just the opposite of what those terms have historically meant.  I am still the liberal here.  The rest of you have gone mad…

Comments (0) | Permalink

So says Glenn Reynolds regarding Obama’s Katrina.  Hard to argue the fact that there seems to be one common denominator to the problems we are facing in America these days.

Well, according to Bill Press, the problem is not Obama.  The problem is Americans.

I think this says more about the American people than it does about President Obama. I think it just shows once again that the American people are spoiled. Basically, spoiled– as a people, we are too critical. We are quick to rush to judgment, we are too negative, we are too impatient. Especially impatient. We want it all solved yesterday, and if you don’t, I don’t care who you are — get out of the way.

And again, basically spoiled. To the point where it makes me wonder if it’s even possible to govern today. I gotta tell you, I don’t think Abraham Lincoln — who certainly didn’t get everything right the first time — could govern today. I’m not sure Franklin Roosevelt could govern today, the way we are again. Just about like spoiled children. And it’s Americans, and it’s the media, and if we don’t get instant gratification, then screw you is basically our attitude.

Well, ok then.  I’m spoiled for wanting competent leadership.  Mianhamneeda.

Then again, Charles Krauthammer takes a look at the man behind the curtain and finds an empty suit.   All I can say in response is: Krauthammer, grow up and stop acting like a spoiled child!”

And pass me some more of that Kool-Aid.

Comments (0) | Permalink

Freedom and Democracy are beautiful things.  And so are the women of the Czech parliament.  Or at least the ones who posed for this calendar.

Czech out these samples (more at the link):

I guess in the game of politics, it would have to be Czech-mate for me.

Hat Tip: PowerLine

Comments (2) | Permalink

Er, not so much…

“This week’s spending cut, developed by Phil Gingrey, addresses one of the perpetual roadblocks to American private-sector job creation and economic recovery: federal-employee unions,” Cantor announced.  “There are many who collect generous salaries and benefits entirely paid for by taxpayers while simultaneously working for unions that spend a lot of money on political activities and lobbying. Taxpayers shouldn’t subsidize a union’s activities. Not only is this a bum deal for the American people, it also wastes well over $100 million a year and more than a $1 billion over the next decade. I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for this fair and fiscally responsible proposal.”

Comments (0) | Permalink

The schizophrenic American left is always entertaining:

• It was wrong for George H.W. Bush to have left Saddam Hussein in power.
• Regime change of Iraq under Bill Clinton: Good!
• Regime change of Iraq under George W. Bush: Really, Really, Really Bad!
• It was wrong for George W. Bush to have removed Saddam Hussein from power.
• General Petraeus under George W. Bush’s command: General Betray-us.
• General Petraeus under Barack Obama’s command: help us Obi-Wan Petraeus, you’re our only hope!

And let’s flash back to good ol’ Harry Reid:

Liberal advocacy groups and senators at the time accused Petraeus of misrepresenting the success of the surge of nearly 40,000 troops. …

[Harry] Reid told CNN in April of 2007 he did not believe Petraeus’s claim that the surge was working in Iraq.

“I don’t believe him, because it’s not happening,” Reid said. “All you have to do is look at the facts.”

At a press conference a few months later, Reid said: “For someone, whether it’s Gen. Petraeus or anyone else, to say things are great in Baghdad isn’t in touch with what’s going on in Baghdad, even though he’s there and I’m not.”

Well Harry, someone is a fool but it ain’t the General…

Comments (0) | Permalink

Well, this is certainly a sentiment I can whole-heartedly support.

For the record, I will not seek the nomination.  If nominated, I will not run.  If elected, I will not…him, if elected I done got me some idears I’d like to put in place before I got impeached.  Although I have to rule from a beach in the Philippines…

Comments (2) | Permalink

“Only the mediocre are always at their best.”

Of course, “it’s smarter to be lucky than it’s lucky to be smart.”  

And then there’s this warning from Germany:

“If Barack Obama isn’t careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the 21st century.”

Meanwhile, on the world stage it’s amateur hour.

What is most interesting about the items linked above is that these are the sentiments of Obama supporters!

So once again I have to ask: who are the rubes now? (which is far more polite than “I told ya so!”, don’t you think?)

Comments (0) | Permalink

Obama’s speech on the oil spill and future energy has been roundly panned by both the right and the left.  I mean, once you’ve lost Keith Olbermann, there ain’t much else to lose.

Meanwhile, the governor of New Jersey had these words of wisdom to share.

Ladies and gentlemen, I invite you to compare and contrast.

Comments (0) | Permalink

Student to Congressman: Do you support the President’s agenda?

Response here.  I’ll take that as a yes.

UPDATE:  Let’s hope for a change.

Comments (0) | Permalink

The salty, salty tears of the Obama-fellators as he augurs in are so very delicious.

From the comments in response to this post at Reason.

Comments (0) | Permalink

Here’s a candidate I can get behind.

“If she has experience managing whores, she would probably be well suited for politics.”

Comments (0) | Permalink

Well, it’s been awhile since I’ve weighed in on the whole global warming global cooling climate change issue.  And no, I’m not going to get snarky and mock Al Gore’s marriage woes.  I’ve noticed that the alarmists have been oddly quiet of late (hey, less hot air is a good thing right?).  And it’s no wonder given recent events.

All I’ve ever argued was that the science was far from settled.  So, with this I’ll consider myself vindicated.

Britain’s premier scientific institution is being forced to review its statements on climate change after a rebellion by members who question mankind’s contribution to rising temperatures.

The Royal Society has appointed a panel to rewrite the 350-year-old institution’s official position on global warming. It will publish a new “guide to the science of climate change” this summer. The society has been accused by 43 of its Fellows of refusing to accept dissenting views on climate change and exaggerating the degree of certainty that man-made emissions are the main cause.

The society appears to have conceded that it needs to correct previous statements. It said: “Any public perception that science is somehow fully settled is wholly incorrect — there is always room for new observations, theories, measurements.” This contradicts a comment by the society’s previous president, Lord May, who was once quoted as saying: “The debate on climate change is over.”

Maybe now I won’t have to die a slow and painful death from cancer, right Jacob? (heh, I see Jacob has sent his blog posting down the memory hole.  Not as sweet as an apology and admission he was wrong, but sweet just the same).

Comments (2) | Permalink

Well, this makes sense.  Who can deny that America is in dire straits?

Comments (0) | Permalink

“and they are not going to call me racist”.

I’m loving the fact that people like this are stepping up.  It gives me Hope for Change.

Comments (0) | Permalink

Meanwhile in the Middle East, Obama continues to undermine Israel.  Supporting a resolution in the UN for “a nuclear-free” Middle East while doing nothing to impede the efforts of Iran in acquiring nuclear weapons.  Nothing good can come of this of course.  I suspect Israel will do what she must for self-preservation and it will likely get ugly.

I think the growing anti-Semitic sentiment among the Left generally and in Washington in particular is also pretty scary.  I mean there is fairly recent history that should raise some red flags when folks start talking about  “good Jews and bad Jews”.  And no, I’m not referring to Nazi Germany.

hat tip: Lileks

Comments (2) | Permalink

Especially from all you Tea Baggers!

Three days after he decried the lack of civility in American politics, President Obama is quoted in a new book about his presidency referring to the Tea Party movement using a derogatory term with sexual connotations. 

OK then, I see where you are coming from Mr. President.

And while we are on the topic of hypocrisy, there’s this.

Comments (7) | Permalink