Yo: You're all lying to yourselves

  One cultural behavior that seems to be gaining steam is doing whatever you want, hoping you don't get caught, then crying about it and apologizing publicly.
  Sometimes you don't have to really apologize; all you have to do is say, "I take responsibility for my actions" and that's enough to get you off the hook. If you're a liberal Democrat that usually works anyway, unless the party's poll numbers start to go south.
  Take, for example, the two Canadian students who were caught taking part in the mob that  trashed Vancouver last week.
  One is a 17 year old with Olympian dreams. Oooo, I'm really sorry, the boy sobs, now that his picture is all over the internet.
  What did he do?
  He set fire to a police vehicle. Watch it here:

  Another student who got caught on film, merrily stealing clothing from a store, is also really, really sorry, as she states in her online apology, which appears to have been altered since her initial posting. Here are the paragraphs which appear to have been deleted:

At the time, being a part of the riot was simply to fulfill the adrenaline rush I was looking and hoping for – an adrenaline rush that I previously got from post-winning games: hugging randoms, dancing on the streets, honking car horns non-stop, and high-fiving just about everybody. In the same way that everybody enjoyed collectively showing pride in our team, it was enjoyable to express my disappointment in a collective manor.

I had no intentions of defiling the city. I love Vancouver as much as you do – I’ve lived here since I was 7 months old. But in my immature, intoxicated perspective all I saw was that the riot was happening, and would continue happening with or without me, so I might as well get my adrenaline fix.

  Now, in a remarkable suit, the Florida Education Association is claiming in a lawsuit that Florida had no right to ask them to pay 3% of their paychecks toward their pensions. (In Ohio, teachers pay 10%, soon to be 12%.) Apparently Wisconsin and Florida taxpayers have been footing the entire bill for their government employees' pensions and health care. 
  Now that they are being asked to pony up something for these benefits themselves, they don't like, claiming in Florida, in fact, that it's illegal for them to have to pay anything at all for these benefits.
  Back to the young woman's apology. Here she deals with the fact that she and others have been outed on social media and subject to harassment. She's being harassed and she doesn't like it!

Harassing people, ruining their lives, and finding unlawful punishments? Not at all helpful. It gives the cops more things to deal with, and is in a way a form of anarchy. The laws were made for everybody to follow: criminals and spectators alike. So for you to disregard the laws makes it seem like you are an anarchist…starting a mob…based on social media…starting to get the picture yet?

Anyways, long story short, venting your anger on people does not make the situation better, so feel free to ID people and help in ways that you can, but don’t ruin our lives!

  Also in the news was Jon Stewart's encounter with Chris Wallace at Fox News. Egad, Stewart claims, no (liberal) media outlets (except maybe MSNBC) are biased. Only the ill informed FNC viewers! (Liberal) Viewers of CNN or WaPo or the NY Times are WELL informed. All the studies show this.
  In fact, Stewart himself who, as a comedian, feels that he presents the news comedically but without prejudice.
  In all these cases, one point has to be made, as Greg Gutfield so insightfully puts it.
  You're all lying to yourselves.
  Nobody owes you anything; you have to pay a price for illegal behavior. You are the only one responsible for your lives.
  And everybody has biases.
  It just depends on how much you can live with them and still lie to yourself.

Followup on Daily Beast's Bachmann hit piece

  A couple days ago, Hoosierman wrote an article about the Daily Beast's hit piece on Michelle Bachmann; Michelle Goldberg apparently thinks being a Christian is a serious problem and doesn't make you a serious presidential candidate. 
  Goldberg quotes the terribly mediocre Frankie Schaeffer, apostate son of the wonderful and wise Christian theologian Francis Schaeffer, as claiming that Bachmann speaks in some kind of Christian code to get Christians fired up. Schaeffer, having been raised in the Christian community, now rejects it, having found some sort of higher calling to mock those with whom he previously shared affinity.
  After all, it's much easier being liberal, as Arianna Huffington, Andrew Sullivan, Kathleen Parker, David Brock and others have decided.
  You can pretend to be really, really smart, never have to worry about LSM criticism, act like you have some sort of holy radar that reveals all truth to you and not have to formulate cogent arguments for your various political positions.
  Of course, if Bachmann hadn't been gaining steam these liberal writers wouldn't have to be wasting their time writing hit pieces to try to discredit them and scare the voters, something liberals major in. Witness the current Politico article rehashing old rumors about Rick Perry. (Say, aren't liberals believers that there aren't many morals? That being gay celebrates life? That a break from a rocky marriage might be good for the ego? Huh.)
  Having said all that, the real intent of this article is to point y'all over to a Big Journalism piece that takes apart the Daily Beast's hit piece on Bachmann. The author notes that one particularly damning piece of evidence against Bachmann in which she ran away from a couple liberals and filed a police report against the two has only the liberals' point of view. The police report pdf link goes to another hit piece on Bachmann, which links to the police report pdf.
  Only it doesn't.
  The link is dead.
  Yep. It's really, really easy to be a liberal.

Serious Candidates Only!

Just for fun google " Jon Huntsman serious" and you will come away with the idea that "serious" is a political party maybe more important than either the Democrat or Republican parties. Certainly more important than the Tea Party. Mark Shields and David Brooks know Huntsman is serious or at least they suspect it.

MARK SHIELDS: But one test, Jim, that is a great test is how candidates handle something like this. And what I did was go through and look at how each of the Republican candidates, which one of them praised President Obama, while praising the SEALs and praising the action and the result.

Tim Pawlenty did, as you heard in Kwame’s piece. Mitt Romney did. And Mitch Daniels did. And Newt Gingrich didn’t, and Mrs. Palin didn’t. Gov. Palin didn’t. And, obviously, Rick Santorum didn’t. And the others didn’t

DAVID BROOKS: Yes. That’s actually a very good test, because of the people you mentioned who did, those are the serious candidates.

And I might throw in another. Jon Huntsman seems to be running. And I suspect he’s a serious candidate. I’m not sure what his odds are. But it’s going to be a — the good thing about this debate was, there were only five people up on the stage.

Ok, serious candidates praise Obama while they are praising the SEALS. Huntsman wasn't there but he is suspected of being serious. Is this inane drivel serious political commentary. Reread Brook's statement. It is a very good test because the people Shields think are serious are the people who say what he thinks they should be saying. Brooke Shields, excuse me Brooks and Shields seem to fancy themselves as the gatekeepers of The Serious People's Club and they will only admit Republican applicants who have sold out every last principle they ever had and have cultivated an unapologetic willingness to suck up. So don't be too concerned when Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, and Herman Cain don't make the cut.

ATF scandal breaks wide open

  The head of the ATF is rumored to be the sacrificial lamb for the "Fast and Furious," aka Gunwalker scandal that has come to light through House Oversight hearings.
  Perhaps you haven't heard much of this through the LSM, but the situation created by this administration is truly despicable. In particular, border agent Brian Terry was murdered with one of the weapons 
  From Pajamas Media, we have a summary of the events. Here's a start:

Instead, it appears that ATF Acting Director Ken Melson and Department of Justice senior executives specifically created an operation that was designed from the outset to arm Mexican narco-terrorists and increase violence substantially along both sides of the Southwest border.

Success was measured not by the number of criminals being incarcerated, but by the number of weapons transiting the border and the violence those weapons caused. An ATF manager was “delighted” when Gunwalker guns started showing up at drug busts. It would be entirely consistent with this theory if DOJ communications reflected the approval of the ATF senior officials they were colluding with — but as we know, Holder’s Department of Justice refuses to cooperate.

  The ATF employees whistle blowers (4 of them) who testified were suspicious of the motives of the ATF officials in charge, as are many others.
  And from Powerline:

The weapons that were permitted to be smuggled into Mexico under Fast and Furious contributed to the drug violence there. According to ATF agents who testified, that made ATF officials "giddy." One agent recounted a conversation with an ATF higher-up in which he asked, "are you prepared to go to a border agent's funeral over this or a Cochise County deputy's over this, because that's going to happen." Her response, in a chilling echo of Lenin, was that "if you are going to make an omelette, you need to scramble some eggs."

  Once the project was discovered, Powerline describes what happened:

The evidence suggests that the Department of Justice immediately went into cover-up mode. In January 2011, William Newell, Special Agent in Charge of the ATF's Phoenix Field Division, held a press conference in which he announced the indictment of 20 individuals. This was presented as though it represented the roll-up of a drug gang, but in fact, most of the indictments were for the relatively minor offense of "lying and buying," and nearly all of those indicted were straw purchasers whose identities were known to ATF long before Fast and Furious began. 

  Why such an operation? Some suspect that the administration wanted illicit guns to get into the hands of criminals to push for gun control in this country, since Obama said he was "working on gun control under the radar." Here would be the evidence of the need for gun control.
  Again from Pajamas Media:

At the same time they were damning gun dealers in public, the administration was secretly forcing them to provide weapons to the cartels, by the armful and without oversight. More than one gun industry insider suggests that the administration extorted cooperation and silence from these gun shops. As the ATF has the power to summarily shut dealers down for the most minor of offenses, that is very, very possible.

  So the purpose, again, is to achieve a lofty liberal goal of making the argument for gun control, by any means necessary, including hook or crook.
  This is a pattern we've seen before.
  As Eric Holder claims the DOJ is "again open for business," there are complaints that that's only true if your skin is a certain color.
  Executive orders accomplish what the administration cannot accomplish through law or Congress.
  Appoint a czar, accountable to no one. Throw billions, no trillions of dollars at stupid crap that won't accomplish anything. Spend $160,000 on one job.  Heck, spend $2,000,000 per stimulus job. There's nothing immoral about that. 
  Pass a health care plan that nobody wants, make all kinds of promises that won't be kept. Lie to get what you want.
  Yeah, that's a pattern. 
  Here's hoping this one goes down.
  It'd sure help if we had a real press corps.
  Or is it corpse?
UPDATE: Much more is here, including a specific timeline that shows the progression of the program.

Canada Doesn't Need A Weatherman

When radio personality Michael Savage was banned from entering England it was grist for front and editorial page alike. The story was big enough that National Public Radio invited Savage on air to discuss the issue. Media Matters, while extolling freedom of speech, in a round about way thought Savage had it coming. Now former Weatherman terrorist and good friend of Barack Obama, Bill Ayers has been refused entry into Canada and the media silence is deafening. To be sure Canadian academia is outraged but the mainstream media has ignored the flap. No news is good news or "you don't need a weatherman to know which way the blows."

Live Action 1 Planned Parenthood 0

Planned Parenthood has suffered a grave setback in its effort to suppress the unwelcome publicity arising from surreptitious videos captured by Live Action. Planned Parenthood had petitioned YouTube to remove the videos citing privacy concerns. Aided by Thomas More Society lawyers, Live Action has refuted that silly contention and the videos that caused Congress to vote to defund Planned Parenthood will remain in public view. More

Kucinich Keeps It Simple

The House is likely to vote this week on a measure that would limit financing for the American military efforts in Libya, using its appropriations power to push back against the White House, which did not seek Congressional authorization for the mission.
Representative Dennis J. Kucinich, (Dem Ohio) will likely introduce a sweeping bill that would cut off all funding for the ongoing operation. Oddly the House Republican leadership, who seem to care more about appearing non-partisan than upholding the constitution, will likely favor a more limited bill that would put conditions on the operation. Let's hope the freshmen Republicans take a partisan stance and make the Kucinich bill bi-partisan. More

Red State Gets It Right

Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham are wringing their hand over the direction the Tea Party has moved the Republican party on foreign policy. Red State has a great post on this. The two Senators have discovered an isolationist sentiment in the field of presidential candidates, something of a feckless unwillingness to face up to international responsibilities. This sentiment, I would argue, is not one of isolationism but rather constitutional-ism. We should have the debate before going to war. Congress and only Congress has the power to declare war. Those are the only logical positions one can take away from last week's debate and they square with the constitution if not conventional Beltway thinking.

The DeMint Pledge

Senator Jim Demint's Pledge:

I pledge to urge my Senators and Member of the House of Representatives to oppose any debt limit increase unless all three of the following conditions have been met:

1. Cut - Substantial cuts in spending that will reduce the deficit next year and thereafter.

2. Cap - Enforceable spending caps that will put federal spending on a path to a balanced budget.

3. Balance - Congressional passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution -- but only if it includes both a spending limitation and a super-majority for raising taxes, in addition to balancing revenues and expenses.

If this pledge is consistant with your own views you may want to sign it.

Weiner To Hustler?

Pay no attention to the rumor that former congressman Anthony Weiner will soon accept a position with Steak and Shake out in Massapequa on third shift.This man has a future in the media and a real job offer to boot. How many of his snarky detractors could work for Larry Flynt? It seems congressman Weiner's natural propensity to disseminate salacious photography may portend a bright career at Hustler. Flynt has offered Weiner a 20% salary increase, health benefits, and relocation expenses to California. Aside from shoring up his shaky household budget this opportunity would allow Weiner to transform a tacky personal hobby into a professional career, or in the street vernacular, to turn pro. More

The "I'm too educated" video

  Perhaps you've seen the video--tres amusant--that has been floating around the web that someone surreptitiously filmed of the extremely arrogant, snotty, condescending, petulant and spoiled young woman who didn't like being told to pipe down and not swear while she's on the train.
  Schadenfreude is good and healthy. We may not be able to do anything at the current moment about the arrogant, snotty condescending, petulant and spoiled men and women of the current ruling class, but we can smile gently knowing that, at least, this one young woman got hers.

Update: She's named and a DEMOCRAT intern. Ha.

Obama: high and really wide

  I will have the integrity not to steal all JWF's videos; he has video of W throwing a pitch at the College World Series, W throwing a pitch at the Yankees game just after 9/11 and the current girlie man winging a ball way far away from home base in an attempt to prove, um, something.
  What he proves is pretty self evident.
  The videos reveal a remarkable and unfortunately poignant contrast between the man and the girlie man. 
  Watch them here.

Don't that swing make ya proud to be an American?

Wisconsin: what's next?

  Now that the judicial and legislative process has progressed, the unions are hanging their hopes on recall elections and more judicial interference from Obama appointed judges, according to Ann Althouse:

The article mentions the "so-called in-kind work" which "gives union members the ability to go door-to-door lobbying to defeat Republican senators facing recall." Gives union members the ability...? You mean allows unions to pay people to do door-to-door work. If you're in a recall district, steel yourself for paid union activists coming to your door. Or maybe you already have the homeowner policy that I have: I don't answer the door unless I know who's there and want to see them. By the way, how many of the protesters in February and March were paid by the unions?

  It's always important to remember that, in winning an argument such as this and SB5 in Ohio, perception is probably more important than reality.
  So if you can convince people that your side is still fired up and mad as hell that their rights have been violated, then perhaps the majority will follow your lead.
  You also have to convince taxpayers that it is their best interests that your side of the argument is the right side.
  That is why it's important to support through media the Republicans who have taken a stand regarding the wages of union employees who are paid by the taxpayers.
  One group that is trying to make sure the other side is heard in Wisconsin is the Campaign to Defeat Barack Obama.
  You can contribute here at their website; this is a legitimate group who will utilize the donated funds in these various causes, Wisconsin being a primary one at this point.
  Even if it's only five bucks, anything will help defeat the unions who hope to enslave the public with their incessant demands for more money, free insurance and free pension plans.
  It's worth every buck.

Sunday's Super Senior Jim Glaser

The Glaser brothers; Tompall, Chuck, and Jim were brought to Nashville by Marty Robins after he discovered them in Nebraska. Robins had just hit the charts with A White Sports Coat And A Pink Carnation and needed some back up to do the "doo-waas". Here Jim Glaser sings Woman, Woman, a song he wrote that was recorded by Gary Puckett and the Union Gap. A great voice at 73!

Who Does Mitt Romney Think He Is Fooling?

Does Mitt Romney really think he is going to get the Republican nomination running as a liberal Democrat? First Romney paid the usual RINO deference to the global warming crowd, saying of course he thought the world was getting warmer and yes humans were the problem etc. We noted that on this blog. Now he has refused to sign the Susan B. Anthony group's anti abortion pledge. Citing "unintended consequences" as the reason for his refusal. Romney states:

“As much as I share the goals of the Susan B. Anthony List, its well-meaning pledge is overly broad and would have unintended consequences. That is why I could not sign it,” Romney writes. “It is one thing to end federal funding for an organization like Planned Parenthood; it is entirely another to end all federal funding for thousands of hospitals across America. That is precisely what the pledge would demand and require of a president who signed it.”

SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser in responded:

“He chooses to identify non-existent legislation that would defund hospitals as a reason not to sign. Defunding hospitals has never been considered by Congress, is not part of public debate, and is not part of the pledge. 95 percent of abortions are performed outside of hospitals. Instead, we outlined existing pieces of pro-life legislation that address taxpayer funding of abortion. We would like to know where he stands on each measure,”

Fortunately for Romney this kind of in party bickering doesn't usually make the papers but it will come out before anyone casts a vote and it will cost him dearly.

One Kind Word For Ron Paul

Debating is not Ron Paul's forte nor is pragmatism his long suit. Congressman Paul adheres to his principles of orthodox libertarianism too strongly to ever win the Republican nomination at least in this life. That said, let's make one thing clear. The affable Texan is not nuts. Almost 5 years to the month of the financial meltdown of 2008 he predicted it. Below is his speech in its entirety.

Ron Paul in the House Financial Services Committee, September 10, 2003

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on the Treasury Department's views regarding government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). I would also like to thank Secretaries Snow and Martinez for taking time out of their busy schedules to appear before the committee.


I hope this committee spends some time examining the special privileges provided to GSEs by the federal government. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received $13.6 billion worth of indirect federal subsidies in fiscal year 2000 alone. Today, I will introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act, which removes government subsidies from the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), and the National Home Loan Bank Board.


One of the major government privileges granted to GSEs is a line of credit with the United States Treasury. According to some estimates, the line of credit may be worth over $2 billion. This explicit promise by the Treasury to bail out GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps the GSEs attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than they would demand in the absence of the subsidy. Thus, the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital. More importantly, the line of credit is a promise on behalf of the government to engage in a huge unconstitutional and immoral income transfer from working Americans to holders of GSE debt.



The Free Housing Market Enhancement Act also repeals the explicit grant of legal authority given to the Federal Reserve to purchase GSE debt. GSEs are the only institutions besides the United States Treasury granted explicit statutory authority to monetize their debt through the Federal Reserve. This provision gives the GSEs a source of liquidity unavailable to their competitors.



The connection between the GSEs and the government helps isolate the GSE management from market discipline. This isolation from market discipline is the root cause of the recent reports of mismanagement occurring at Fannie and Freddie. After all, if Fannie and Freddie were not underwritten by the federal government, investors would demand Fannie and Freddie provide assurance that they follow accepted management and accounting practices.



Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges granted to Fannie and Freddie have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing. This reduces the efficacy of the entire market and thus reduces the standard of living of all Americans.



Despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government's interference in the housing market, the government's policy of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing.



Perhaps the Federal Reserve can stave off the day of reckoning by purchasing GSE debt and pumping liquidity into the housing market, but this cannot hold off the inevitable drop in the housing market forever. In fact, postponing the necessary, but painful market corrections will only deepen the inevitable fall. The more people invested in the market, the greater the effects across the economy when the bubble bursts.



No less an authority than Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has expressed concern that government subsidies provided to GSEs make investors underestimate the risk of investing in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.



Mr. Chairman, I would like to once again thank the Financial Services Committee for holding this hearing. I would also like to thank Secretaries Snow and Martinez for their presence here today. I hope today's hearing sheds light on how special privileges granted to GSEs distort the housing market and endanger American taxpayers. Congress should act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors who were misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope this committee will soon stand up for American taxpayers and investors by acting on my Free Housing Market Enhancement Act.

OMG Michele Bachmann Has Principles!

The Daily Beast has thrown an opening jab in the good fight to destroy Michele Bachmann. Hardly a haymaker, the article seems to be saying that she's not really crazy just religious. The article does remind us of one historical fact that most of us may have forgotten. It was born again Jimmy Carter who made the first political overture to evangelical Christians. Yes, James Earl Carter, the sort of soft shelled Baptist who wrote an article explaining his belief system in Playboy. Hey, separation of church and state crowd wasn't Jimmy Carter a deacon in his church? Anyway Bachmann and her husband campaigned for Carter and went to one of the inaugural balls but soon became disenchanted with Carter (as did everyone else).

While the article is written from a loony left point of view it does provide a few facts that shouldn't surprise us. In high school Michele Bachmann was a cheerleader and a member of the homecoming court and it was the school curriculum offered to her foster children that first got Bachmann into politics. What I take away from the article is that Michele Bachmann has since her teen years lived a life of faith and good works. She is, much to the Beast's consternation, a very plain spoken, strong willed, authentic politician.

The DeMint Litmus Test

Will there be a litmus test for Republican presidential candidates? Damn straight there will be. Senator Jim Demint of South Carolina, the lone Tea Party supporter in the Senate prior to the last election has compiled one with the aid of several conservative groups. Senator DeMint does not grade on the curve so candidates should be advised that the test will be pass-fail. The four parts of the test are: Cut, Cap, Balance, and Pledge. In this test a candidate must Pledge to oppose raising the debt limit without substantial Cuts, and enforceable spending Caps and the passage of a Balanced budget amendment. "I'm telling every presidential candidate, if your name isn't on this list, don't come see me," DeMint said.

Your tax dollars at work in Wisconsin

  Althouse shot this video at the Wisconsin capitol yesterday as the budget reform bill was passed.
  You will notice in this crowd a disproportionate number of wife beater t-shirts, mohawks, f word screamers and people just generally high. Not on life. Just high.
  Probably some of these protesters are not state employees or, God forbid, teachers and are just there having finally found a public cause that could garner themselves a bit of attention.
  The red shirts of the union are there, too, moving en masse together like lemmings, demanding...what?
  Why, they want money. 
  They want free health care. 
  They want free pension funds.
  They want to "tax the rich," as if the rich are going to stay in their state once they get a load of these greedy grubby pantywaists.
  I like this amorphous body of "the rich" that Democrats are always talking about. My understanding is that they all voted for Obama, who called them "fat cats" but who has had a sudden change of heart.

NLRB-No Longer Relevant Bureaucracy

The National Labor Relations Board is a child of the New Deal that is beginning to show a bit of senility. Born in 1935 by virtue of the Wagner Act the NLRB has once again slipped into a fit of dementia. First came the assertion that the Boeing Company had violated federal law by expanding its operation into a right to work state which struck business leaders as a monumental over reach of any limited government.
The Wagner Act sought to expedite the settlement of labor disputes in a day when the steel, mining, and railroad strikes could cripple the entire economy. It was intended to be a more or less fair arbitrator that could settle minor work issues between huge corporation and huge unions. In its latest lapse of sound judgment and mission creep, the NLRB has wandered into a dispute between a BMW car salesman and the dealership that employed him. The salesman was upset over the quality of hot dogs and bottled water his employer served its customers. Rather than protest directly to his boss, the aggrieved complainant posted his displeasure on Facebook. Eight days later he was fired. The salesman claims it was the result of that post; the dealership says it was the result of another post involving a fellow salesman. In any event he was fired.

Does the government of the United States have sufficient resources to litigate on the behalf of every rightly or wrongly discharged employee? Does the NLRB actually believe that employees have some sort of innate and inalienable right to hold there employer's up to public scorn before 300 million Facebook users? Congressmen looking for places to cut government waste might consider the well earned demise of the NLRB.