Sunday, February 28, 2010

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI): The Conservative Antidote to Obama

He's about the only guy who can leave Obama speechless (well, almost)!

During the health care summit setup Obama arrogantly put down Sen. John McCain with his remark that "we're not campaigning anymore, the election is over." It was an attempt to paint all GOP criticism of Obama Care as nothing more than political talking points. Never mind that one Dem after another was in full campaign mode when they trotted out heart wrenching stories of people denied medical care. If a story about a woman who had to use her dead sister's dentures [video] isn't campaign posturing I don't know what is.

But the GOP did have one card up it's collective sleeve to which Obama had no answer: The factual integrity and sheer scope of knowledge demonstrated at the summit setup by Rep. Paul Ryan, Republican from Wisconsin. Rep. Ryan just turned 40 but is already serving his 6th term in Congress. Compared to some of the old gray heads in the room for the health setup he's a bright, fresh face and no pushover for Obama.

Here are two of his shining moments at the summit/setup:

RYAN: "Hiding spending doesnt reduce spending."

RYAN: "The difference in our approaches is clear. We don't think all the answers lie in Washington."

Investor's Business Daily noted that some "news" analysts were wowed by Obama's command of the room at the health summit/setup. But they point out that none of these so-called analysts bothered to note "Obama's conspicuous non-rebuttal to Rep. Paul Ryan."

Here are some of the points stressed by Ryan that Obama failed to address:

• "This bill does not control costs (or) reduce deficits. Instead, (it) adds a new health care entitlement when we have no idea how to pay for the entitlements we already have."

• "The bill has 10 years of tax increases, about half a trillion dollars, with 10 years of Medicare cuts, about half a trillion dollars, to pay for six years of spending. The true 10-year cost (is) $2.3 trillion."

• "The bill takes $52 billion in higher Social Security tax revenues and counts them as offsets. But that's really reserved for Social Security. So either we're double-counting them or we don't intend on paying those Social Security benefits."

• "The bill takes $72 billion from the CLASS Act (long-term care insurance) benefit premiums and claims them as offsets."

• "The bill treats Medicare like a piggy bank, (raiding) half a trillion dollars not to shore up Medicare solvency, but to spend on this new government program."

• "The chief actuary of Medicare (says) as much as 20% of Medicare providers will either go out of business or have to stop seeing Medicare beneficiaries."

• "Millions of seniors who have chosen Medicare Advantage (Medicare through a private insurer) will lose the coverage that they now enjoy."

• "When you strip out the double-counting and ... gimmicks, the full 10-year cost of the bill has a $460 billion deficit. The second 10-year cost of this bill has a $1.4 trillion deficit."

• "The 'doc fix' (restoring cuts in Medicare reimbursements) costs $371 billion ... a price tag (that) made the score look bad. (So) that provision was taken out, and (put) in stand-alone legislation. But ignoring these costs does not remove them from the backs of taxpayers. Hiding spending does not reduce spending."

• "Are we bending the cost curve down or are we bending the cost curve up? If you look at your own chief actuary at Medicare, we're bending it up. He's claiming that we're going up $222 billion, adding more to the unsustainable fiscal situation we have."

In response to all this, Obama basically talked up the benefits of Medicare Advantage. Call us sticklers, but we expected something a little more, uh, professorial.
Rep. Ryan also gave a strong performance on Fox News Sunday in an interview with Chris Wallace.

Readers should also note that if the GOP takes control of the U.S. House of Representatives Ryan will become the Chairman of the powerful Budget Committee. He's another of the rising stars of young GOP leaders we can all be proud of as a they take their place in leadership positions!

Don't tell me that Republicans are just as bad as Democrats. With young leaders like Paul Ryan the GOP future is bright!

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Obama Plan to Kill NASA Rockets Will Kill 23,000 Florida Jobs

Outsourcing thousands of top technical jobs to Russia & China as well as destroying U.S. lead in space!

Bye Bye US #1 in Space!

The Obama Administration decision to cancel all further NASA development of new rocket technology including a replacement for the Space Shuttle and a rocket to the moon will also destroy the economy of the Florida Space Coast. In an era when Obama will spend a $trillion in taxpayer money to create a relative handful of jobs, he couldn't spare the few billions to save jobs in Florida and save America's reputation in space.

23,000 now expected to lose jobs after shuttle retirement
BY RICK NEALE
FLORIDA TODAY
February 26, 2010

...Revised projections now show that about 23,000 workers at and around Kennedy Space Center will lose their jobs because of the shuttles' retirement and the new proposal to cancel the development of new rockets and spacecraft.

That sum includes 9,000 "direct" space jobs and -- conservatively speaking -- 14,000 "indirect" jobs at hotels, restaurants, retail stores and others that depend on activity at the space center, said Lisa Rice, Brevard Workforce president.

Those 9,000 space jobs include some of the most highly desirable technical jobs. Jobs that will now be filled overseas by our space competitors. The idea that space launching on the scale required by NASA to maintain a manned space program will now be carried out by private sector firms is laughable.

Beyond the direct impact of lost jobs and skills, this decision undermines our national security capability. Congressman Rob Bishop (R-UT) reports:

Canceling the Constellation program and the Ares rocket will harm U.S. missile defense efforts and our national security. The same kinds of jobs and technology needed to send men to the moon are the same set of skills needed to build defensive missiles. Whether it's lifting man or missiles into space, the skilled work force and solid rocket motors come from the same industrial base. When you cut one, you hurt the other.

Last year, the administration cut our U.S. missile defense system and some jobs were lost. The cancellation of Constellation would essentially wipe out the rest. This would destroy the U.S. industrial base and make us militarily vulnerable to countries like North Korea and Iran.

A report to Congress last year pointed out that delays in the NASA Ares program could have "significant negative impact" on the industrial base for missile production. If delays are "significant" an outright cancellation would be overwhelming. We will lose not just our capabilities for space exploration, but our capability to protect our homeland. Our nation will be less secure.

Obama's decision accomplishes two longterm goals of left wing radicals: first, to weaken if not outright destroy the military industrial complex which has kept us safe for decades and second, to reassign NASA to support the political agenda of the global warming crowd.

In essence, Obama is politicizing NASA while at the same time destroying our ability to compete in space thus weakening national security.

Where is the vision to inspire future generations?

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Health Care Summit Setup

Q: Guess who did most of the talking?
A: The man who claimed he was there to listen.


And when he's not talking, he seems bored:



President Barack Obama listens during a meeting with Republican and Democratic Congressional leaders to discuss health care reform, Thursday, Feb. 25, 2010, in the Blair House across the street from the White House in Washington.
First impressions: GOP leaders made solid points putting Obama on the spot about wanting bipartisanship but not rejecting Democrats only plans to ram a health care bill through using reconciliation.

And why did they decide to hold this in what looks like the basement of Blair House when the White House East Room is so much nicer?

A running tally of who's doing most of the talking shows that Dems and Obama are outtalking Republicans by 2 to 1. So much for listening to the other side. And Obama claims "I Don't Count My Time Because I'm The President."

Then there was an infuriating exchange between Obama and McCain. McCain was citing the reasons the current bill should be scrapped and Obama interupted and later said: "we're not campaigning anymore. The election's over." Really? Obama's never stopped campaigning. And this latest comment is just another version of his "I won" we'll do it my way arrogance! What an ASS!

In the afternoon session Obama claimed that the American people don't care about Senate procedures like reconciliation. Yet Thursday, Gallup released a poll showing 52% of those polled oppose such a hyperpartisan tactic.

Protesters against national healthcare demonstrate across the street from Blair House, site of today's Health Care Summit.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Obama to Begin Setting Up Campaign Organization for 2012

Has he ever stopped campaigning?

Obama's been taking quite a pounding lately. Much of it coming from his friends. The suggestion in the Washington Post that Obama might want to move from the White House to the Supreme Court coinciding with a CNN poll showing a majority do not think Obama deserves re-election must have been disturbing inside the White House.

So, this article in the Politico describing discussions to lay the groundwork for Obama's re-election campaign in 2012 might have been a plant to squash the notion among some Democrats that Obama might not run again.

Apparently Obama plans to try and resurrect his successful 2008 strategy. Good luck with that. Many people were fooled into believing Obama would govern as a centrist. They learned their lesson and aren't likely to buy the snake oil a second time.

The other aspect of Obama's plan is a renewed focus on attacking potential GOP 2012 hopefuls. Is this something new? Since day one in office Obama has been attacking Republicans. Moments later he pleads for bipartisanship.

Does Obama really think he can pull the wool over the public's eyes again?

The Real Message: Dems Stay Out of 2012

The real message here may be a subliminal warning to Democrats who might consider giving Obama a primary fight for the 2012 nomination. Speculation suggests that Hillary Clinton can and may very well consider a run against Obama. There may be others like retiring Indiana Senator Evan Bayh ready to stake out territory for a potential run. Bayh has millions in unspent campaign contributions in the bank which could easily bankroll early primary contests.

The Politico story is as much a warning to fellow Dems as it is to potential GOP challengers. It's an early signal that Obama is ready to fight and isn't willing to slink away. The unknown factor in all these calculations are the expected loses Democrats will face in the coming 2010 elections. Obama may not have much room to run in 2012 if it's clear that voters overwhelmingly reject Democrats in November.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Rush Limbaugh Challenges Conservative Purists & Third Party Malcontents

If they really think we conservatives have done nothing to fight Obama then they need to show us how to do it better!

Great minds really do think alike. For years now I have been remarking on the fact that a certain percentage of people who claim to be conservative do nothing but complain about how our leaders in Washington, and their fellow conservatives are conducting themselves.

They complain we tolerate too many RINOS and that if we really believed in the conservative cause that we would go absolutely nuclear at every single moment in the fight against Obama in particular and liberalism in general.

Many of these people have NEVER been involved in any successful electoral effort to advance the cause. Mostly because there is no candidate with the level of conservative purity they demand. Only they themselves and perhaps one or two family members possess the ideological purity they see lacking in everyone else. But they won't run for office (not that they could get elected dogcather). All they do is damn everyone to hell for not being perfect, like them.

Is Scott Brown a RINO Now?

Rush Limbaugh waded into this swamp on Tuesday in the wake of the news that newly elected Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown (R) voted with the Democrats on the pared down jobs bill. Did anyone really think that Brown would vote the straight GOP party line 100% of the time? Perhaps some people did. Brown is certainly getting a load of abuse by those who call him a "turncoat" and "Benedict Brown." What total nonsense. This sad episode is the first good news Democrats have had in weeks and that should be a lesson to the complainers.

Rush apparently had his fill:

RUSH: This is the first inning of the first game of the World Series. A year ago, it didn't even look like we had a chance to make the World Series. So here we are in the midst of what anybody with any kind of objective view and a memory of at least one year's worth of history would have to proclaim is an amazing success story.

We all thought that by last August they would have health care. We all thought they'd have cap and trade. We all thought that we were going to be witnessing the actual makeover of this country from capitalist to socialist. And after a year we've held it off, but it's an every day thing. There's no rest. There's no respite from it. Now, if you happen to think a third party is the best way to go, then go out there and form it. You think a third party is needed? You go form it. You people who think everybody sucks, go show us how not to suck! You form a third party! Find your candidate, name your party. Go out there and name your congressional candidates and your Senate candidates. Show me how you're going to put together a third party governing force. Show me. You sit out there and saying everybody else sucks, then you say that I suck because I don't realize everybody else sucks.

Okay. So if you're the only ones that don't suck then you go show us who do suck how not to. Do it! You got all the answers. You're making all the success. You're in such a powerful mode here. I guess you can all call me and write me and tell me what you've done to bring about this massive success in this past year. Yeah, I want to me hear about it. I want to hear about it. I want to hear who your third-party leaders are. Who are you going to run for president in the third party? Who is it? Tell me who it is! "Well, I can't come up with one buh, buh, buh, buh (mumbling)." Well, then why are you so insistent the Republicans name one today? If you can't come up with somebody in a third party, if you've got somebody out there, call and tell me, and we'll discuss it. Ideas, my friends, and not personalities are what matter.
I got the much of the same load of malarkey when I praised GOP Senate leaders for the "masterful" fight they waged in delaying Obama's government takeover of health care. Even without Brown's 41st vote they were able to stall the bill for months while public pressure built. We have yet to win the final battle in that fight but the fact we haven't lost is a monument to our success.

Purist conservative complainers and third party agitators are the best friends Obama and the Democrats ever had. Imagine what we could achieve if they put all that energy they waste complaining into helping to build a winning conservative coalition?

Monday, February 22, 2010

Do They Award a Nobel Prize for Passing the Buck?

Candidate Obama slammed rival McCain for doing exactly what President Obama did last week!

The latest Mike's America video production:



Obama Then, Obama Now:

September 16, 2008 candidate Obama slams John McCain's idea of a presidential commission to recommend fiscal solutions: "The oldest Washington stunt in the book. You pass the buck to study the problem... We know how we got into this mess. What we need now is leadership that gets us out. I'll provide it and John McCain won't and that's the choice for Americans in this election"

So how about that leadership? How about that choice?

February 18, 2010 President Obama establishes a commsion to recommend fiscal solutions:

OBAMA: "[T]he politics of dealing with chronic deficits is fraught with hard choices and therefore it's treacherous to officeholders here in Washington. As a consequence, nobody has been too eager to deal with it.

That's where these two gentlemen come in. Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles are taking on the impossible: They're going to try to restore reason to the fiscal debate and come up with answers as co-chairs of the new National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform."


How's that hope and change working out for ya?

Old Wine in New Bottles Still Tastes Like Vinegar: Obama Unveils Health Plan!

Just the same old $Trillion Big Government Tax & Spend Monstrosity!

Did anyone really expect that when President Obama FINALLY unveiled a health care plan that it would be anything different or new from the hideous plans Dems in both the House and Senate have been trying to force down our throats?

Well, if you did think this one would be different, you were wrong.

This morning the White House released their new and improved health plan promising so much but delivering only the same old big taxes, big spending, big government solutions that the American people have overwhelmingly rejected.

So maybe Obama did remove the Cornhusker compromise, that $100 million payoff to Nebraska that Sen. Ben Nelson(D-NE) insisted be inserted into the Senate bill. He left in place the $300 million Louisiana Purchase for Sen. Mary Landrieu's(D-LA) vote. Obama's version rejects the House Stupak amendment prohibiting taxpayer funds to subsidize abortions in favor of the watered down Senate language. This violates Obama's earlier pledge that abortion will not be funded.

Worst of all, The White House made it clear that if Senate Republicans filibuster this repackaged version of the earlier Senate bill that Democrats are prepared to move forward and pass the bill using a reconciliation process that was designed only to be used to pass federal budgets.

Is this bill, with it's Democrats only ideas and the threat of unprecedented action to override GOP objections in the Senate, a model of the kind of bipartisanship Obama often refers to?

Republican Leader Boehner Not Amused

Boehner: President’s Health Care Proposal Jeopardizes Summit, Doubles Down on Failed Approach Americans Have Already Rejected

GOP Leader: “The President has crippled the credibility of this week’s summit by proposing the same massive government takeover of health care based on a partisan bill the American people have already rejected.”

Washington, Feb 22 -
Follow @GOPLeader on Twitter for updates.

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement in response to the partisan health care proposal posted online by the White House for discussion at the upcoming bipartisan health care summit:

“The President has crippled the credibility of this week’s summit by proposing the same massive government takeover of health care based on a partisan bill the American people have already rejected. This new Democrats-only backroom deal doubles down on the same failed approach that will drive up premiums, destroy jobs, raise taxes, and slash Medicare benefits.

“This week’s summit clearly has all the makings of a Democratic infomercial for continuing on a partisan course that relies on more backroom deals and parliamentary tricks to circumvent the will of the American people and jam through a massive government takeover of health care.

“The best way to protect families and small businesses in this time of economic uncertainty is to start over with a step-by-step approach to health care reform focused on lowering costs, and that’s exactly what Republicans are fighting for. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that the Republican bill reduces premiums for families and small businesses by up to 10 percent. The Republican bill reduces premiums by implementing common-sense reforms such as allowing Americans to purchase insurance across state lines. Despite their rhetoric to the contrary, none of the Democrats’ proposals – including the President’s – provides this much-needed reform in a manner that can actually be effective.

“Republicans are also standing with the American people by calling for health care reform to protect human life and not use taxpayer money to fund abortion. The Republican bill would codify the Hyde Amendment and prohibit all authorized and appropriated federal funds from being used to pay for abortion, which the President’s proposal would allow. Pro-life Democrats in the House have already pledged to vote against this provision. Health care reform should be an opportunity to protect human life – not end it – and the American people agree.”

Well folks here we go again! As the White House and their Dem allies prepare for the televised meeting on Thursday it's clear they don't intend to listen to the American people. In poll, after poll, after poll, after poll, not to mention the Senate race in Massachusetts where the issue was front and center, the American people have demanded Congress and the President start over from scratch. Yet, here they are once again trying to force this same socialist garbage down our throats.

Dick Cheney was right: Obama will be a one term president!

Sunday, February 21, 2010

ANOTHER Nail in the Global Warming Coffin

How long until the Warmer's admit it's all been a big fat LIE?

It was just a week ago that I posted on the near total collapse of global warming hysteria. No warming, no increase in hurricane's fury or frequency, no melting Himalayan glaciers or destruction of the Amazon rain forest.

The last few months have seen one domino after another dropping to expose the fallacy of man made global warming. Now, the latest, coming to us from the left wing Guardian newspaper in Britain:

Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels
Study claimed in 2009 that sea levels would rise by up to 82cm by the end of century – but the report's author now says true estimate is still unknown
By David Adam
Guardian.co.uk
Sunday 21 February 2010

Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.

The study, published in 2009 in Nature Geoscience, one of the top journals in its field, confirmed the conclusions of the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It used data over the last 22,000 years to predict that sea level would rise by between 7cm and 82cm by the end of the century.

At the time, Mark Siddall, from the Earth Sciences Department at the University of Bristol, said the study "strengthens the confidence with which one may interpret the IPCC results". The IPCC said that sea level would probably rise by 18cm-59cm by 2100, though stressed this was based on incomplete information about ice sheet melting and that the true rise could be higher.
...
Announcing the formal retraction of the paper from the journal, Siddall said: "It's one of those things that happens. People make mistakes and mistakes happen in science." He said there were two separate technical mistakes in the paper, which were pointed out by other scientists after it was published. A formal retraction was required, rather than a correction, because the errors undermined the study's conclusion.

"Retraction is a regular part of the publication process," he said. "Science is a complicated game and there are set procedures in place that act as checks and balances."

Nature Publishing Group, which publishes Nature Geoscience, said this was the first paper retracted from the journal since it was launched in 2007.

In a statement the authors of the paper said: "Since publication of our paper we have become aware of two mistakes which impact the detailed estimation of future sea level rise. This means that we can no longer draw firm conclusions regarding 21st century sea level rise from this study without further work.
And yet, despite ALL these revelations, the Warmers continue to insist that they are right after all and that the only way to combat man made global warming is to impose some huge tax on energy use (as if that would have the SLIGHTEST impact on lowering CO2 emissions).

Even as the lies, distortions and half truths of globaloney are exposed the Warmers cling to their religion. Remember what Obama said about people who cling to religion? He and his Warmer friends should know. But it is becoming increasingly clear that they are only deceiving themselves.

Obama Continues to Push Health Care When Country Needs JOBS!

Has Obama's ideological blindness caused him to destroy his presidency?

It's bad when the White House Press Corps (pronounced "core") stops laughing it up in your daily briefings. It get worse when one after another of your former friends in the "news" media start writing stories asking what went wrong?" You know you're headed downhill when the nation's first black governor tells the first black President he's got to shake things up. It's downright scary when the latest CNN poll has a majority (including many who voted for you) saying you don't deserve to be re-elected.

How did it happen? Simple. The top two issues for most Americans in 2009 and again in 2010 were the economy and jobs. President Obama promised in his State of the Union speech that "jobs must be our No. 1 focus in 2010." But just as Obama and fellow Democrats promised jobs were their big focus in 2009 (video), he again is spending his immediate political capital to push through yet another version of big government health care.

President Obama used his weekly radio address to once again attack the insurance companies and give a renewed push for his big government solution. I've lost count on the number of speeches he's made trying to sell his snake oil and convince people government can do a better job but it's clear he needs to do more listening and less talking.

Any hope Obama will be listening to GOP ideas in the big dog and pony show set for next Thursday on health care? Not likely as off the record Dems admit “This is a media event.” Obama is preparing to spring his latest version of health care reform on us on Monday. It remains to be seen whether what he offers is specific legislation or yet another set of concepts. But what we do know is that this latest "plan" is another product of the same backroom, secret negotiations, excluding Republicans, which has marred this process from the beginning.

Watch for Obama to pull yet another of his lame appeals to what the Washington Times calls "Sham Bipartisanship." Sure, they'll agree to one or two cosmetic GOP ideas, but somehow when the final bill comes up for a vote those ideas will be watered down to nothing. The real problem for Obama is that the only bipartisanship in Washington is found among the growing legion of Democrats who join Republicans in opposing his big initiatives.

Obama a One Term President?

When Dick Cheney announced that he thinks "Barack Obama is a one term President" (video) the normal hue and cry from the Cheney haters was more muted than usual. Perhaps because many of them would like to see Obama gone or because Obama has already raised the possibility he will be a one term President (video). And now, with the Washington Post running an article pondering on whether Obama might be better off moving to the Supreme Court the way is open for him to step down if things go from bad to worse.

As usual, Charles Krauthammer grasps the essential points of the entire discussion:

Excuses for Obama's Failure to Lead
By Charles Krauthammer
Real Clear Politics
February 19, 2010

WASHINGTON -- In the latter days of the Carter presidency, it became fashionable to say that the office had become unmanageable and was simply too big for one man. Some suggested a single, six-year presidential term. The president's own White House counsel suggested abolishing the separation of powers and going to a more parliamentary system of unitary executive control. America had become ungovernable.

Then came Ronald Reagan, and all that chatter disappeared.
...
Later, a highly skilled Democratic president, Bill Clinton, successfully tackled another supposedly intractable problem: the culture of intergenerational dependency. He collaborated with another House speaker, Newt Gingrich, to produce the single most successful social reform of our time, the abolition of welfare as an entitlement.

It turned out that the country's problems were not problems of structure but of leadership. Reagan and Clinton had it. Carter didn't. Under a president with extensive executive experience, good political skills and an ideological compass in tune with the public, the country was indeed governable.

It's 2010 and the first-year agenda of a popular and promising young president has gone down in flames. Barack Obama's two signature initiatives -- cap-and-trade and health care reform -- lie in ruins.

Desperate to explain away this scandalous state of affairs, liberal apologists haul out the old reliable from the Carter years: "America the Ungovernable." So declared Newsweek. "Is America Ungovernable?" coyly asked The New Republic. Guess the answer.
...
Leave it to Mickey Kaus, a principled liberal who supports health care reform, to debunk these structural excuses: "Lots of intellectual effort now seems to be going into explaining Obama's (possible/likely/impending) health care failure as the inevitable product of larger historic and constitutional forces. ... But in this case there's a simpler explanation: Barack Obama's job was to sell a health care reform plan to American voters. He failed."

He failed because the utter implausibility of its central promise -- expanded coverage at lower cost -- led voters to conclude that it would lead ultimately to more government, more taxes and more debt. More broadly, the Democrats failed because, thinking the economic emergency would give them the political mandate and legislative window, they tried to impose a left-wing agenda on a center-right country. The people said no, expressing themselves first in spontaneous demonstrations, then in public opinion polls, then in elections -- Virginia, New Jersey and, most emphatically, Massachusetts.

That's not a structural defect. That's a textbook demonstration of popular will expressing itself -- despite the special interests -- through the existing structures. In other words, the system worked.
How like liberals to hold the White House with the unbeatable majorities in both the House and Senate and then try and put the blame elsewhere for their failures. Mitt Romney said it best when he told the crowd at CPAC:

"President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and their team have failed the American people, and that is why their majority will be out the door. When it comes to pinning blame, pin the tail on the donkeys."

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Mitt Romney Jokes on Obama at CPAC

Obama going downhill faster than a Gold Medal Olympic skier!

In a speech in which former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney laments how Barack Obama has "failed America" he tossed in a few lighter comments...

CPAC 2010 wraps up tonight with speeches by Glenn Beck and Newt Gingrich. You can follow the conference live at CSPAN online.

Alexander M. Haig, Jr. 1924-2010

A Four Star career comes to a close.


Alexander Haig during his time in the Nixon White House circa 1973

Haig died Saturday morning surrounded by his family after complications from an infection. He was 85. It's hard to encapsulate a career as star studded as Haig's.

A graduate of West Point, then Military Aide to Douglas MacArthur in Korea, Awarded Distinguished Service Cross, the US Army's second highest medal for valor in Vietnam, White House Chief of Staff under Richard Nixon, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, Four Star General of the Army and First Secretary of State for President Reagan.

Haig was no stranger to controversy. At the center of so many difficult moments like Watergate and the attempted assasination of President Reagan, his actions sometimes drew criticism. James Rosen's report at Fox News traces the life of this great American:

Haig: A Photo Obituary

Continued at Flopping Aces.

Friday, February 19, 2010

The Racial Hypocrisy of Keith Olbermann

Here MSNBC's Olbermann slamming the Tea Parties. But we should ask where are the black faces at NBC?



Maybe if Olbermann had spent less time calling Tea Partiers racists and fascists and long list of other names, he might have seen the diveristy of the Tea Partiers with his own eyes. Check out this video montage!

President Shows Sen. Harry Reid the Obama Magic

The same kiss of death that ended Democrat hopes in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts!

Photobucket

President Barack Obama (L) gets a hug from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at a town hall style meeting in Henderson, near Las Vegas, Nevada February 19, 2010.

Photobucket

Notice the Mayor of Las Vegas was nowhere to be found? Mayor Goodman (I) who said Obama had a "psychological hangup" and was "not welcome in my city" (Video) did not greet Obama as he landed today in Las Vegas on his way to the fundraiser in suburban Henderson, NV.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Rhetoric vs. Results

House GOP Whip Eric Cantor chronicles Obama's jobs record!

Yesterday we began our look at the Obama jobs record one year after the Stimulus Bill which has failed to live up to it's promises. Today, House GOP Whip Eric Cantor gives us his 2 minute summary of Obama's failure:

At the Whip's web site Congressman Cantor presents the GOP No Cost Jobs Plan as well as a list of "lowlights" of wasteful spending from the Democrat bill that created so few jobs.

Marco Rubio and Liz & Dick Cheney at CPAC

Video highlights from day one
Check C-Span or Town Hall live video feed for more from the conference.

Marco Rubio!
Contribute to his campaign

"America already has a Democrat Party, it doesn't need two Democrat parties."


Text highlights from the transcript:
Rubio began talking about his grandfather, who was born poor and grew up disabled by polio in Cuba. He taught young Marco some very important lessons about American exceptionalism.

RUBIO: ...America where -- which is the only place in the world where it doesn't matter who your parents were or where you came from. You can be anything you are willing to work hard to be. The result is the only economy in the world where poor people with a better idea and a strong work ethic can compete and succeed against rich people in the marketplace and competition. And the result is the most reliable defender of freedom in the history of the world.

Simply put, there's nothing like America in all the world. And even today with the problems that we face, who would you rather be? Which country would you trade places with? Just remember, an afterthought, when was the last time that you heard news accounts about a boatload of American refugees arriving on the shores of another country? And yet there have always have been those who haven't seen it this way. There have always been those that don't recognize this. They think that we need a guardian class in American government to protect us from ourselves. They think that the free-enterprise system is unfair, that a few people make a lot of money, and the rest of us get left behind. They believe that the only way business can make its money is by exploiting its workers and its customers. And they think that America's enemies exist because of something America did to earn their enmity.

Now, the problem is that in 2008 leaders with this worldview won elections. And now they know that the American people will never support their vision of America. So, instead, over the last 12 months they have used a severe economic downturn, a severe recession as an excuse to implement the statist policies that they have longed for all this time. In essence, they are using this downturn as cover not to fix America, but to try to change America to fundamentally redefine the role of government in our lives and the role of America in the world.
...
And now as we near these midterm elections, what the American people are looking for is very clear. They are looking for leaders that understand what has happened, will come up here and stand up against it, and in its place will offer a clear alternative. First, we have to understand what's happening. Leaders at the highest levels of our government are undertaking a deliberate and systematic effort to redefine our government, our economy and our country. Now, people, as I said, all across America figured this out over a year ago, and they didn't wait for their senator or for their congressman to do something about it. They did it themselves. They have taken matters into their own hands, from tea parties to the election in Massachusetts.

From tea parties to the election in Massachusetts, we are witnessing the single greatest political pushback in American history. Now, the political class tries to make sense of all of this, but they can't, because never has the political class or the mainstream media that covers them been more out of touch with the American people than they are today. You see, 2010 is not just a choice between Republicans and Democrats. It's not just a choice between liberals and conservatives. 2010 is a referendum on the very identity of our nation.

And the issues are so big, so consequential, so generational that many of the old rules of political engagement will not apply. For example, a long list of early establishment endorsements will not spare you a primary. Clever one line slogans aren't going to spare you the need to discuss policy issues in detail. And the old, tired political attacks that worked once in the past aren't going to get you elected this time.

And the reason is simple because people get it, because they understand that if we get this wrong, there may be no turning back for America. That's why the second thing leaders want -- the second thing that people want are leaders that will come here to Washington, D.C. and stand up to this big government agenda, not be co-opted by it.

After all, the U.S. Senate already has one Arlen Specter too many. And after all, America already has a Democrat Party, it doesn't need two Democrat parties.

Rubio went on to offer a list of clear differences between conservatives and Democrats and the establisment. You'll want to see his entire speech!

CPAC Surprise: Nation's #1 Conservative Makes Surprise Appearance

Liz Cheney gave a solid speech shortly after noon (video). She discussed the screw ups and incompetence the Obama Administration has demonstrated in fighting terrorism. "That kind of incompetence gets people killed" Cheney said.

She went on to say:

LIZ CHENEY: During the 2008 campaign President Obama admitted he did n0t have a lot of experience. But he told us what he did have was wisdom and judgement. The kind of wisdom he said we would need in a nation facing tough crises. Well, the record is now clear: a wise man would not give the mastermind of 911 a platform in civilan court on American soil from which to preach jihad. A wise man would not usher Al Queda trained terrorists onto American soil. A wise man wouldn't fret on whether a terrorist had been read his Miranda rights. And a wise man would hire better people.
But the big surprise came at the end of her speech when she introduced her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney. The room erupted in sustained cheers.

From Politico:

The room exploded with excitement for the former vice president, who was greeted with cheers of “run, Dick, run!”

“A welcome like that is almost enough to make me want to run for office again — but I’m not gonna do it,” he said.

Cheney made clear that he has passed the torch to his daughter, of whom he said he is “enormously proud.”

“She said I could come with her, but that I had to be arm candy,” the former vice president joked.

Cheney said that he is excited for the opportunities this November’s elections present for conservatives, especially for the younger generation to step up and take control of the movement.

“The sky is the limit here. I think 2010 will be a phenomenal year. And I think Barack Obama is a one-term president,” he said.
Guess who drove his truck to CPAC?

Scott Brown declared:"I'm the newly elected REPUBLICAN Senate from Massachusetts!" He repeated the "REPUBLICAN" part in case anyone missed it. His video, which includes his introduction of and the remarks of former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is here.

CPAC Live Video

Our gal Skye will be reporting from the scene at the 2010 Conservative Political Action Conference being held this week in Washington, DC.

For those of us unable to attend, C-Span will broadcast much of the conference. Check their web site for schedules and videos.

If you would like to watch the major speeches live on your computer, Town Hall carries it:

Live Broadcasting by Ustream

At 10:22 AM EST Marco Rubio is just finishing his remarks. I'll post the video of his speech with highlights (preview)when it is available.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Dogs Do Bark at Obama Stimulus "No Jobs" Folly!

Reality barks at Obama's phony jobs claim!
Photobucket
President Obama was in front of the cameras again on Wednesday (when is he not?)trying to gin up support for the failed $trillion stimulus bill which has been in effect for a year now.

Obama's fighting a losing battle as people aren't buying the phony claim that the stimulus bill saved or created two million jobs. If that were true then unemployment which rose 2.5% as nearly 4 million Americans lost their jobs during the first year of the Obama Administration would have been cut substantially. As the Congressional Budget Office said in early 2009, the Obama Stimulus plan really is "worse than doing nothing."

From House GOP Leader John Boehner:
When Democrats rushed their massive 1,100 page, “stimulus” through Congress last year, they promised that unemployment would not rise above eight percent and that job creation would begin “almost immediately”. But one year later, more than three million more Americans have lost their jobs, the deficit is set to hit a record shattering $1.6 trillion, and Administration reports on how many jobs were “saved or created” have been “riddled with inaccuracies and contradictions,” noted USA Today.
By the metrics the Democrats themselves set, the “stimulus” hasn’t worked – it’s chock-full of wasteful government spending that’s funneled money to Congressional districts that don’t exist and claims of jobs “saved or created” were so exaggerated that the Administration quietly abandoned the metric at the end of last year.

Poll after poll confirms that an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose the “stimulus” program. In fact, a CBS/New York Times poll released yesterday found that “just 6 percent of Americans think it has created jobs.” Any wonder that a CNN survey reported that “3 of 4 Americans say much of stimulus money wasted.”
No Earmarks, Projects on the Merits in Stimulus Bill?

In his stimulus celebration Wednesday, Obama also mentioned this:

And I just want to point this out -- there has never been a program of this scale, moved at this speed, that has been enacted as effectively and as transparently as the Recovery Act. I’m grateful that Congress agreed to my request that the bill include no earmarks, that all projects receive funding based solely on their merits. And despite that, I was still concerned -- Joe and I were just talking in the back -- when this thing passed we said $787 billion -- somewhere there’s going to be some story of some money that ended up being misspent; $787 billion spent out over 18 months, that's a lot -- that's a lot of money. And it is a testimony to Vice President Biden and his team that, as Joe puts it, the dog, so far at least, hasn't barked. (Laughter.)
The dog is barking. Here's Ellie May with House Leader John Boehner:

And of course the bill was loaded with earmarks and special payoffs to liberal districts. By now, we've all got our favorite examples of government waste in the stimulus bill. My favorite is the National Endowment for the Arts stimulus grants to fund pornography in California. Talk about stimulating!

The Senate GOP web site has a fresh list of their favorites:

1. $100,000 IN STIMULUS FUNDS USED FOR A MARTINI BAR & BRAZILIAN STEAKHOUSE
2. $390,000 TO STUDY MALT LIQUOR AND MARIJUANA CONSUMPTION
3. $210,000 TO STUDY LEARNING PATTERNS OF HONEYBEES
4. $1 MILLION TO STUDY ANTS
5. $15,551 TO STUDY DRUNK MICE
6. $4,200-$5,500 TAX CREDIT FOR PURCHASING GOLF CARTS
7. $219,000 TO STUDY THE SEX LIVES OF FEMALE COLLEGE FRESHMEN
8. $1 MILLION TO RENOVATE “THE SUNSET STRIP”
9. $325,394 TO STUDY “MATING DECISIONS” OF CACTUS BUGS
10. $500,000 TO STUDY “SOCIAL NETWORKS LIKE FACEBOOK”
11. $3.4 MILLION FOR A TURTLE TUNNEL IN FLORIDA
12. $30 MILLION FOR A SPRING TRAINING BASEBALL COMPLEX FOR THE ARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS AND COLORADO ROCKIES
13. $54 MILLION IN STIMULUS FUNDS USED FOR THE NAPA VALLEY WINE TRAIN
14. $50,000 IN STIMULUS FUNDS USED FOR A TENNIS COURT IN MONTANA
15. $250 STIMULUS CHECKS WENT TO PRISONERS

The Stimulus bill was never intended as a jobs bill. It was intended as a $trillion payoff to Democrats to fund their pet causes. It would have been much cheaper to put in place greater tax cuts and job growth measures that actually encourage job growth. But when GOP Congressmen took their ideas to Obama at the beginning of his Administration in 2009 their ideas were dismissed when he said "I won" I'll do it my way. His way doesn't work.

There is a better way to create jobs and the answer doesn't lie in more government spending and bureaucracy. But it takes a president willing to put his ego and ideology aside for the good of the country. I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

Obama To Go on the Attack as Polls Decline and Partisanship Blamed!

Doubling down on a losing strategy means ego and ideology trumps true bipartisanship!

Sen. Evan Byah (D-IN) makes his surprise announcement to retire and follows it up with an interview on Good Morning America where he says:

"There's just too much brain-dead partisanship, tactical maneuvering for short-term political advantage rather than focusing on the greater good, and also just strident ideology."
Even Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank (D) said that partisanship is out of control. The statement seems odd coming from a man who consistently voted to block Republican proposals in Congress.

And then, there's Obama's role in matter. Who can forget that he dismissed GOP ideas for the economic stimulus plan last year by telling a GOP Congressman "I won."

Who can forget a year in which the Democrat majority, spurred on by Obama, attempted to ram through a socialist health care scheme and cap and tax global warming legislation? Legislative efforts in which nearly all GOP alternatives were rejected.

CNN Poll: Majority Would Vote Against Obama in 2012

Little more than one short year after the hope and change parade hit Washington, the dreams of a liberal political realignment led by Obama are in tatters. Elections in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts reveal that the Obama magic is gone and he and his fellow Dems may soon follow.
The latest CNN poll shows 52% would not vote to re-elect Obama in 2012. Only 44% said they would. That's a dramatic turnaround from his big win of 53% over 46% for McCain in 2008. The numbers for congressional Democrats are even worse.

And for anyone who thinks Republicans incumbents will suffer equally as Democrats in 2010, there's more bad news. Polls show that support for Republicans increases the more they confront Obama directly. One GOP study found dramatic shifts after House Republicans confronted Obama at the GOP retreat in Baltimore at the end of January.

And now Obama wants to double down with a more aggressive partisan attack strategy by inviting GOP leaders to the Blair House to discuss health care. (Does anyone even care about jobs any more?)

White House revamps communications strategy
By Michael D. Shear
Washington Post
Monday, February 15, 2010

White House officials are retooling the administration's communications strategy to produce faster responses to political adversaries, a more disciplined focus on President Obama's call for "change" in Washington and an increasingly selective use of the president's time.

The messaging adjustments are the result of an end-of-the-year analysis in which White House advisers said the president's communications team had not taken the initiative often enough and had allowed drawn-out debates in Congress, and relentless criticism by Republicans, to drown out his message.

"It was clear that too often we didn't have the ball -- Congress had the ball in terms of driving the message," communications director Dan Pfeiffer said. "In 2010, the president will constantly be doing high-profile things to be the person driving the narrative."

Senior White House aides described the changes as an aggressive response, aimed at producing fresh momentum for the president's faltering agenda and regaining the advantage ahead of the congressional midterm elections in November.

Vice President Biden's appearances on two Sunday morning talk shows were part of the new response -- in this case, to rebut former vice president Richard B. Cheney's accusations that the administration is weak on terrorism. Biden, who taped one of the shows in advance, said his predecessor was attempting to "rewrite history."

Obama's surprise news conference last week -- his first in nearly seven months -- is another example. After a bipartisan meeting with congressional leaders, Obama faced the media to declare his willingness to work with Republicans. But he warned: "I also won't hesitate to condemn what I consider to be obstinacy that's rooted not in substantive disagreements but in political expedience."
There you have it. The man who has already set a record for presidential speeches and appearances will have even more. And after more calls for bipartisanship, it's clear he intends to attack the GOP and attempt to blame them for his inability to convince members of his own party to agree to his demands.

It's clear that Obama learned nothing from the Scott Brown electoral earthquake. Ideology and partisanship cloud his judgement and continue to impair his ability to lead.

Good!

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Impeach Obama?

No way! We'd get stuck with BIDEN!

First it was the Bush "Miss me yet?" billboard in Minnesota. Now, the Impeach Obama billboard in Wisconsin:

Photobucket

Monday, February 15, 2010

The Death of Global Warming

If the science is "settled" why do the Warmists have to lie?

The past few months have seen a flurry (and I'm not talking about snow) of revelations which have fatally undermined the "scientific consensus" surrounding global warming.

In the latest revelation, Phil Jones, the scientist at the heart of the Climategate scandal admits that warming stopped in 1995 and that he lost the data which created the infamous hockey stick which purported to show that the earth had warmed like never before by omitting the Medieval Warm Period. The admission by Jones that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’ is the understatement of the year.

But the climategate scandal is just one of many which reveals the corruption which permeates the entire climate change process being used by one world socialist at the U.N. to feather their own nests. Writing in the Orange County Register Mark Landsbaum describes the many scandals which have recently come to light. The following is a Cliff Notes version of his article.
  • ClimateGate- The emails which describe how skeptics were suppressed and data was manipulated.
  • FOIGate- Violation of British law as scientists refused to comply with requests to show their data.
  • ChinaGate- 42 weather stations can not be found. Data is questionable.
  • HimalayaGate- UN's key finding which speculated glaciers were melting was lifted from a magazine.
  • PachauriGate-Head of the UN IPCC stonewalled Himalyagate. Also has a financial interest in global warming.
  • SternGate- British 2006 report made phony scare claims about Australia hurricanes.
  • AmazonGate-Green activists got UN to represent scare about rain forest as "peer reviewed" science. It was not.
  • PeerReviewGate -16 nonpeer-reviewed reports (so far) from the advocacy group World Wildlife Fund that were used in the IPCC's climate change bible.
  • RussiaGate-Readings from the coldest regions of their nation had been omitted, driving average temperatures up. Selective tree ring data misrepresented warming.
  • U.S.Gate- 4,500 weather stations cut. Mostly from areas which showed cooler temps.
  • IceGate- Claim that mountain ice in Andes, Alps and in Africa is melting based on magazine article and mountain guides; not measurements.
  • ResearchGate-Penn State "scientist" at the heart of warming debate investigated for "seriously deviat[ing] from accepted practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research or other scholarly activities."
  • ReefGate- Claim of coral reef degradation based not on science but Greenpeace articles.
  • AfricaGate- IPCC claim that rising temperatures could cut in half agricultural yields came from a 2003 paper published by a Canadian environmental think tank – not a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
  • DutchGate- The IPCC also claimed rising sea levels endanger the 55 percent of the Netherlands it says is below sea level. Actual figure is 20%
  • AlaskaGate- Previous studies largely overestimated by 40 percent Alaskan glacier loss for 40 years. This flawed data are fed into those computers to predict future warming.

Despite all this, the Warmists continue to insist that global warming is real and that it's man's fault. Their main prescription to address the problem is taxes on energy use in Western nations; though I have yet to hear many claim that taxes would reduce CO2 emissions in any way that would slow warming.

Much of the data the Warmists insist is still valid comes from temperature monitoring stations, not the newest satellite and ocean temp monitoring systems. That data, even when unmanipulated by scientists with an agenda is suspect. Weather stations from colder regions have been eliminated from reports and stations showing warming are often located next to areas with recent development and industrialization.

From the London Times:

“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.

The doubts of Christy and a number of other researchers focus on the thousands of weather stations around the world, which have been used to collect temperature data over the past 150 years.

These stations, they believe, have been seriously compromised by factors such as urbanisation, changes in land use and, in many cases, being moved from site to site.

Christy has published research papers looking at these effects in three different regions: east Africa, and the American states of California and Alabama.

See for yourself the photos of temperature monitoring stations located next to heat sources.

Tax CO2 Just in Case?

Warmists are reduced to the lame argument that we should tax CO2 just in case the scaremongers are right. Well, should we also drop everything we are doing and prepare for the remote possibility of an alien invasion?

Or, should we continue research on global warming but scrap the Warmists power hungry plans and address real human needs like global poverty, hunger, disease and illiteracy?

Boob Biden Bashes Brown

But Scott Brown could teach Biden a thing or two about Military justice!

Senator Scott Brown-(R MA) got his first lesson in how nasty Democrats who demand bipartisanship can be. After Vice President Biden was all smiles at Brown's swearing in, he took a cheap shot at Brown ten days later. From Politico:
Sen. Scott Brown thinks Vice President Joe Biden was “off base” when he suggested Sunday that the Massachusetts Republican get his facts straight on the legal procedures for military tribunals.

“It was insulting,” said Brown, who frequently jabbed the administration during his Senate campaign for giving suspected terrorists legal representation.

On CBS's “Face the Nation” last weekend, Biden shot back that he doesn’t “know whether the new senator from Massachusetts understands: When you get tried in a military tribunal, you get a lawyer, too.”

“He’s trying to give me a lesson on military law, and I didn’t think it was appropriate,” Brown told POLITICO. “And I thought he was off base when it comes to explaining to the American people that somehow I need a lesson on whether people get attorneys — of course they get attorneys. There’s a difference as to what type of attorney they’re going to get and when they’re going to get that attorney, and how are they treated, and what rights do they, in fact, get.”

Brown said he is particularly incensed by Biden’s remarks because he’s served in the Massachusetts Army National Guard for more than 30 years and is currently the Guard's top defense attorney in New England.

“I know the military rules and regulations and procedures from A to Z,” Brown said.


Why would Biden do something so stupid? Can he be this dumb?

Breaking News: Dem Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana to Retire

Likely handing GOP one more seat in the Senate in 2010 election.

Press conference at 2 PM Monday.

That takes the number of seats needed by the GOP to regain control of the Senate to nine.

UPDATE: Charles Lane at the Washington Post heads a blog post with "Bayh to Obama: take this job and shove it...His stunning retirement from the Senate is essentially a loud and emphatic “screw you” to President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid."

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Dick Cheney on ABC's "This Week"

Another reminder about what we are missing from a time when adults were in charge!

Joe Biden is out there claiming victory in Iraq is Obama's achievement. Former V.P. Cheney answers that lie and much more:



Some highlights [transcript]:

CHENEY: I do see repeatedly examples that there are key members in the administration, like Eric Holder, for example, the attorney general, who still insists on thinking of terror attacks against the United States as criminal acts as opposed to acts of war, and that's a -- that's a huge distinction.
...
I guess I shouldn't be surprised by my friend, Joe Biden. I'm glad he now believes Iraq is a success. Of course, Obiden and -- Obama and Biden campaigned from one end of the country to the other for two years criticizing our Iraq policy.

They opposed the surge that was absolutely crucial to our getting to the point we're at now with respect to Iraq. And for them to try to take credit for what's happened in Iraq strikes me as a little strange. I think if -- if they had had their way, if we'd followed the policies they'd pursued from the outset or advocated from the outset, Saddam Hussein would still be in power in Baghdad today.

So if they're going to take credit for it, fair enough, for what they've done while they're there, but it ought to go with a healthy dose of "Thank you, George Bush" up front and a recognition that some of their early recommendations, with respect to prosecuting that war, we're just dead wrong.
...
I believe very deeply in the proposition that what we did in Iraq was the right thing to do. It was hard to do. It took a long time. There were significant costs involved.

But we got rid of one of the worst dictators of the 20th century. We took down his government, a man who'd produced and used weapons of mass destruction, a man who'd started two different wars, a man who had a relationship with terror. We're going to have a democracy in Iraq today. We do today. They're going to have another free election this March.

This has been an enormous achievement from the standpoint of peace and stability in the Middle East and ending a threat to the United States. Now, as I say, Joe Biden doesn't believe that. Joe Biden wants to take credit -- I'm not sure for what -- since he opposed that policy pretty much from the outset.
...
I think the biggest strategic threat the United States faces today is the possibility of another 9/11 with a nuclear weapon or a biological agent of some kind, and I think Al Qaida is out there even as we meet trying to figure out how to do that.

KARL: And do you think that the Obama administration is taking enough serious steps to prevent that?

CHENEY: I think they need to do everything they can to prevent it. And if the mindset is it's not likely, then it's difficult to mobilize the resources and get people to give it the kind of priority that it deserves.
...
KARL: If you have somebody in custody like Abdulmutallab, after just trying to blow up an airliner, and you think he has information on another attack, I mean, do you think that those enhanced interrogation techniques should have been -- should have been used? I mean, would you -- do you think that he should have been, for instance, subject to everything, including waterboarding?

CHENEY: Well, I think the -- the professionals need to make that judgment. We've got people in -- we had in our administration -- I'm sure they're still there -- many of them were career personnel -- who are expects in this subject. And they are the ones that you ought to turn somebody like Abdulmutallab over to, let them be the judge of whether or not he's prepared to cooperate and how they can best achieve his cooperation.

KARL: But you believe they should have had the option of everything up to and including waterboarding?

CHENEY: I think you ought to have all of those capabilities on the table. Now, President Obama has taken them off the table. He announced when he came in last year that they would never use anything other than the U.S. Army manual, which doesn't include those techniques. I think that's a mistake.

KARL: OK. So -- so was it a mistake when your administration took on the Richard Reid case? This is very similar. This was somebody that was trying to blow up an airliner with a shoe bomb, and he was within five minutes of getting taken off that plane read his Miranda rights, four times, in fact, in 48 hours, and tried through the civilian system. Was that a mistake?

CHENEY: Well, first of all, I believe he was not tried. He pled guilty. They never did end up having a trial.

Secondly, when this came up, as I recall, it was December of '01, just a couple of months after 9/11. We were not yet operational with the military commissions. We hadn't had all the Supreme Court decisions handed down about what we could and couldn't do with the commissions.
...
I want to come back again to the basic point I tried to make at the outset, John. And up until 9/11, all terrorist attacks were criminal acts. After 9/11, we made the decision that these were acts of war, these were strategic threats to the United States.

Once you make that judgment, then you can use a much broader range of tools, in terms of going after your adversary. You go after those who provide them safe harbor and sanctuary. You go after those who finance and those who provide weapons for them and those who train them. And you treat them as unlawful enemy combatants.
...
KARL: I'd like to ask you about the big terror case now, which is the KSM trial. The administration very much wants to see the mastermind of 9/11 tried in civilian courts here in the United States. New York has obviously objected.

Do you think that's going to happen? Do you think this will be a civilian trial? Or are they not going to be able to do it?

CHENEY: It looks to me like they're going to have great difficulty doing it in New York. I mean, even the mayor's come out against it now. I think trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York's a big -- big mistake. It gives him a huge platform to promulgate his -- his particular brand of propaganda around the world.

I think he ought to be at Guantanamo. I think he ought to be tried at Guantanamo in front of a military commission. They've got difficulties now, because my guess is they don't want to send him back to Guantanamo, because that would validate, if you will, the value of Guantanamo. They're trying to close it, clearly haven't been able to get it done.

But my guess is, in the end, he'll end up being tried in front of a military commission on a military facility some place.
...
KARL: We're almost out of time. We're going to get you very quickly on a few other subjects. First of all, one more on Palin. Is she qualified to be president?

CHENEY: I haven't made a decision yet on who I'm going to support for president the next time around. Whoever it is, is going to have to prove themselves capable of being president of the United States. And those tests will -- will come during the course of campaigns, obviously. I think -- well, I think all the prospective candidates out there have got a lot of work to do if, in fact, they're going to persuade a majority of Americans that they're ready to take on the world's toughest job.


A reunion between Bush and Cheney is on the schedule for later this month. It will be another reminder about the competent leadership America is currently missing!

Friday, February 12, 2010

No Snow? Global Warming! Too Much Snow? Global Warming!

The global warming alarmists are an absolute joke!

Photobucket

ROME - FEBRUARY 12: Bare-chest guys enjoy the snow in front of the Coliseum on February 12, 2010 in Rome, Italy. Rome has seen today its heaviest snow since 1986.
For the first time in 14 years a significant snowfall is forecast here on Hilton Head Island, SC. Around the country and around the world record snows are a common feature of the winter of 2009/2010. But the Warmists will tell us that we can't use one or two isolated examples of cold snowy weather to disprove their theory that man's release of CO2 is causing the planet to warm.
But apparently, they can use anecdotal evidence to prove that global warming is real. Their words are coming back to bite them:


Now of course the Warmers are changing their tune. Big snowstorms are now PROOF of global warming. Fire Andrea Mitchell has a wrap up of the warped thinking that continues to pervade as well as expose the idiocy of the Warmers. And let's not forget that idiot Keith Olberman.

Here's what Dylan Ratigan of MSNBC said with a straight face:
“Here’s the problem – these ‘snowpocalypses’ that have been going through DC and other extreme weather events are precisely what climate scientists have been predicting, fearing and anticipating because of global warming.”
Really? Here's what the UN's International Panel on Climate Change said about snow:

FAQ 3.2:Observations show that changes are occurring in the amount, intensity, frequency and type of precipitation. More precipitation now falls as rain rather than snow in northern regions. For a future warmer climate, models project a 50 to 100% decline in the frequency of cold air outbreaks.
Yet, the Northern Hemisphere in February 2009 is blanketed in snow and ice which reflects sunlight back to space causing cooling, not warming. [full size image here.]

Climate Models Not Right in 20 Years!

The Warmists (global warming alarmists) tell us that weather is not climate and that the only way to verify the computer models upon which their theories are based is to look at climate over time. O.K., let's do that.

Prof. John Christy, a lead author of the U.N. International Panel on Climate Change, recipient of NASA's Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal testified (PDF) before the House Ways and Means Committee in February 2009. In the hearing he showed a graph showing the predictions of James Hansen, another NASA scientist who has become famous promoting the idea of manmande global warming:
Photobucket

Christy testimony: “GISS” A, B, and C are model projections of global surface temperature from James Hansen in Senate testimony in 1988. “A” and “B” are two “business-asusual” model projections of temperature which assume emissions similar to what has happened (though in actuality these estimates were a bit less than occurred). “C” is a model projection in which drastic CO2 cuts are assumed. “UAH” and “RSS” are two independent global satellite atmospheric temperature measurements (1979-2008) from the University of Alabama in Huntsville and Remote Sensing Systems adjusted to mimic surface temperature variations for an apples to apples comparison with the model projections (factor of 1.2, CCSP SAP 1.1, note all datasets are based on the 1979-1983 reference period). All model projections show high sensitivity to CO2 while the actual atmosphere does not. It is noteworthy that the model projection for drastic CO2 cuts still overshot the observations. This would be considered a failed hypothesis test for the models from 1988.
Clearly the models don't match reality but that won't stop the Warmists. Here's what one Alarmist scientist said: "Models are even difficult for the professionals to understand. Therein lies a problem. You have to take take my word for that"

Yeah sure. We're going to agree to be taxed by $trillions and remake our society and the economy based on the word of a scientiest who makes his living by promoting global warming alarmism?

Photobucket

One Prediction You Can Count On:

There is one computer model you can count on. By 2020, perhaps even earlier, the belief that man is to blame for global warming may be eradicated entirely!

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Victory in Iraq One of the "Greatest Achievements" of WHOSE Administration?

Bumbling Joe Biden tries to steal Bush legacy!

Saturday Night Live's "Weekend Update" segment had a story about the accomplishments of the Obama Administration which they secured with their supermajority in the Senate. Seth Meyers invited viewers to watch the screen as the accomplishments rolled by.....$787 billion "stimulus" bill....Cash for clunkers....

That was it.

Joe Biden to the rescue!

Clearly, with even their friends on the left laughing at their incompetence and impotence the Obama Administration is feeling more defensive than usual. So, they sent out V.P. Joe Biden to make their case on Larry King Wednesday night.

Here's the full story:


Iraq: "One of the great accomplishments of this Administration" -- Joe Biden, February 10, 2010

And we all know how Joe felt about Iraq when things weren't going so well (video). Then of course there is everyone's favorite community organizer, a man with ZERO experience in such momentous affairs (still zero):


Wrong, wrong and MORE WRONG!

Yet now they want to take credit for the very success they fought every step of the way? How stupid do they think we are?

Happy Birthday Governor Palin!

And what better present for Sarah's 46th birthday than a great column by the Dean of the Washington press corps praising her!

Photobucket

Sarah Palin displays her pitch-perfect populism
By David S. Broder
Washington Post
Thursday, February 11, 2010

The snows that obliterated Washington in the past week interfered with many scheduled meetings, but they did not prevent the delivery of one important political message: Take Sarah Palin seriously.

Her lengthy Saturday night keynote address to the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville and her debut on the Sunday morning talk show circuit with Fox News' Chris Wallace showed off a public figure at the top of her game -- a politician who knows who she is and how to sell herself, even with notes on her palm.

This was not the first time that Palin has impressed me. I gave her high marks for her vice presidential acceptance speech in St. Paul. But then, and always throughout that campaign, she was laboring to do more than establish her own place. She was selling a ticket headed by John McCain against formidable Democratic opposition and burdened by the legacy of the Bush administration.

Blessed with an enthusiastic audience of conservative activists, Palin used the Tea Party gathering and coverage on the cable networks to display the full repertoire she possesses, touching on national security, economics, fiscal and social policy, and every other area where she could draw a contrast with Barack Obama and point up what Republicans see as vulnerabilities in Washington.

Her invocation of "conservative principles and common-sense solutions" was perfectly conventional. What stood out in the eyes of TV-watching pols of both parties was the skill with which she drew a self-portrait that fit not just the wishes of the immediate audience but the mood of a significant slice of the broader electorate.

read the rest here.
Happy Birthday Sarah!
fsg053d4.txt Free xml sitemap generator