Russian Professor Predicts U.S. Will Collapse and Break Apart in 2010: Russian Media Loves His Predictions

A Russian professor has predicted a 45%-55% chance that the United States will collapse under the economic strain that it's under, a second American Civil War will break out and several new nations will emerge from the wreckage.

Yeah, right.

But his wild predictions have found an audience in the Russian media, which has been interviewing him like crazy. Despite his reputation as a KGB analyst, he couldn't predict the breakup of his own country in 1991, yet he's prognosticating an American collapse in 2009-2010. His anti-Americanism has found support in Russia and in the Kremlin, who blame Washington for everything.

His description of the six new American nations to emerge from the article: California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence. Texas will be the heart of "The Texas Republic," a cluster of states that will go to Mexico or fall under Mexican influence. Washington, D.C., and New York will be part of an "Atlantic America" that may join the European Union. Canada will grab a group of Northern states Prof. Panarin calls "The Central North American Republic." Hawaii, he suggests, will be a protectorate of Japan or China, and Alaska will be subsumed into Russia.

Thhhhp!

My prediction: 2009 will come and go. So will 2010. America will emerge from it's economic woes sometime in 2010, with a new focus on paying off the sizable debt that is currently being accumulated.

This guy has read too much Harry Turtledove (an alternate history author). Too many of his ideas look like they've been plagiarized from Turtledove and other "what if" authors that I've read.

Hamas Has Been a Disaster for the Palestinian People; Israel Has No Choice But to Put Hamas Into Its Place

Governments around the world have been quick to issue statements condemning the latest fighting between Israel and Hamas and called for a cease-fire between the two sides.

A CEASE-FIRE??!

Hamas is responsible for most of the civilian casualties. They're positioning their military hardware next to schools, apartment buildings and houses, and not allowing the residents to flee for their lives when they know that Israel is destroying Hamas hardware whenever and wherever they find it. Hamas knows full well what will happen when their hardware is hit by Israeli bombs while sitting next to an occupied building: noncombatants die.

Israel was content to leave Gaza alone, until Hamas broke the cease-fire and began firing rockets into southern Israel, which provoked the Israelis to fire back.

As far as this talk of a cease-fire goes, it would be like asking the United States to negotiate a cease-fire with al-Qaeda. Why should Israel be made to agree to a cease-fire with a terror group bent on it's destruction?

Hamas has proven it can't run a picnic, let alone the Palestinian government. Yet the Palestinian people voted for Hamas and got exactly the type of government that they wanted. All that Hamas has brought is death and destruction to the Palestinian people. I wonder if the majority of Palestinians will be thinking about that the next time they have an election.

So How Many Banks Have Restored Lines of Credit Since the Government Bailed Their Bankrupt Hineys Out?

The $850 billion question being asked of the major banks who took the government bailout is this: what did you do with the money, and why aren't you loaning money to your customers that the money was intended for?

Of the 210 banks who took the bailouts, how many have restored lines of credit to their customers?

Not many. They aren't answering questions as to where the money went, have reduced or eliminated lines of credit to their customers, and have paid out "golden parachutes" (bonuses) to their executives, despite claiming that they wouldn't do so.

If the banks aren't more forthcoming in what they've done with the money, then those loans should be revoked and the banks seized.

They cannot do what they've done and then pretend that they owe the taxpayers nothing. That won't fly.

This is just more proof that the sheer size of the bailout was a huge mistake, isn't working and is in desperate need of fixing.

Biden Talks of ANOTHER $700 Billion Stimulus: This is a BAD Idea

VP-elect Biden said during an interview today that the "...economy is in danger of absolutely tanking" and would take another stimulus (in the range of $600-700 billion) to get things back on track.

I would like to know if this will involve borrowing more money from China.

Because if it does, then I am absolutely opposed to this move. We CANNOT afford more debt. They should be doing these stimuli from money they already have in the bank from taxes. They need to be PAYING DOWN the debt, not increasing it.

The cumulative effect of all this debt will lead to the end that Biden is currently predicting, and the bill WILL come due eventually.

Kennedy Considering Asking Governor of New York to be Appointed to Clinton's Seat: Why This is a VERY Bad Idea

Now that Senator Sniper-Fire has been nominated to be President-elect Obama's Secretary of State, the race is on to fill her seat. Caroline Kennedy, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and Representatives Maloney and Millibrand, along with Bill Clinton, are currently the favorite picks of the talking heads on the news shows.

I don't like the attention that the media is giving to Kennedy, merely because of her last name. She should probably pick up some political experience and hold some other offices before asking the Governor of New York to appoint her to fill the remainder of Clinton's seat. And I'm talking about elected positions, not appointments due to her family connections.

She's an excellent fundraiser, having raised over $65 million for the New York public schools. But being an effective fundraiser does not necessarily translate into being an effective politician who responds to the needs of her constituents. The only track record that we have are position statements that she's made when her liberal media friends ask her for her opinions on the issues of the day.

She's already said that she supports gay marriage, abortion rights and supports gun control. If she ever ran for President, I would not vote for her based on those principles alone.

Her support for gay marriage and abortion rights is also contrary to her beliefs as a Catholic, and that's another serious issue for many people. You can't be pro-choice and be a Catholic; those positions are mutually exclusive from one another. Being Catholic is about being part of a pro-life religion. She's either a Catholic, or she's not. There is no such thing as a liberal Catholic. But it seems like many Catholic politicians from out East abandon their church's most sacred laws in the name of their politics.

Religious beliefs aside, the interests of New York would be better served by picking someone who has experienced going through a campaign and has at least held public office.

Name recognition alone isn't enough to hang one's hat on. We've all eyewitnessed the truth of this statement recently, when a virtually unknown politician named Obama beat a political star with the name-draw that Hillary Clinton has and went on to become the first African-American President. Name recognition is but one piece of the puzzle.

Governor Paterson would do his state a favor by looking elsewhere for a suitable and more seasoned replacement.

Bill Clinton Doesn't Need to be Involved in Senator Sniper-Fire's Confirmation Hearings: Obama's Calling the Shots, Not Bill's Charities

There's been a story circulating around that former President Clinton may be called into Senator Hillary Clinton's confirmation hearings to testify about possible conflicts of interests with regards to her nomination as Secretary of State.

He's already agreed not to accept foreign government donations to his charities. But more than that, Hillary's not taking orders from her husband on foreign policy matters; her boss is President-elect Obama.

Former President Clinton doesn't need to testify. It's a side-show that Congress doesn't have time for, and can handle privately with the Clintons and AWAY from the hearings. This hearing is about Senator Sniper-Fire, not President Clinton.

Oops, did I say that out loud?

Obama's Ties to Chicago Policitians May Be a Problem:Illinois Governor is Tip of the Iceberg

The shock waves are still coming out of Illinois, following the FBI arrest of the governor of Illinois on charges of graft, extortion and other corruption charges.

Governor Blagojevich has been accused of trying to sell the U.S. Senate seat of President-elect Obama following Obama's resignation from the seat to prepare his new Administration. And he apparently interfered in the Tribune Company's sale of Wriggley Field to extort the board to replace the editors at their newspaper (the Chicago Tribune) who were calling for his impeachment. Tribune filed for bankruptcy on Monday; the sale of the baseball field could have netted the company $100 million.

The accusations contained in the FBI summary are staggering.

I'm starting to get the feeling that the level of corruption that the governor is involved with runs much deeper than has been revealed so far; and because Obama was a legislator in Illinois for ten years, his involvement with other state legislators and associates who were involved with this corrupt governor will be under close scrutiny.

I'm very uncomfortable with another Administration coming in with the kind of potential baggage that dogged the Clintons for years. It feels all too familiar and is the kind of thing that, as we have already seen, will lead to never-ending investigations, regardless of whether the President-elect did anything wrong or not.

This is one of the reasons that I liked Bush in the beginning: when he first came into the White House; there were no skeletons rattling around in a closet; Clinton came in with lots of them.

Whose example will Obama follow, I wonder?

Auto Bailout Bill Passes House: Senate Bill Faces Filibuster

The House of Representatives passed their version of a bill which partially bails out the auto industry in exchange for a controlling interest in those corporations. It appears that the bill will face an uncertain future in the Senate as the GOP has threatened a filibuster unless changes are made in the bill.

I have mixed feelings about this bailout.

While I do think that the people of Michigan have suffered enough, I don't think that government will do a better job of making the auto industry better. I do not like the idea of a "car czar," nor his/her power to put the companies into bankruptcy or withdraw potential bailout money without some protections for the corporations, as well as some oversight of the "car czar."

And the government is already into too much private business.

I also do not think that copying Venezuela's economic model is a very smart idea. In fact, it's a really dumb move.

And now that we have an incoming socialist President, I fully expect this nationalization process to accelerate. The debt he's going to inherit and his current "tax and spend" plan is going to put the economy deeper into the hurt locker that it's already in.

The government needs to come to it's senses before it's presented with a bill that it can't pay.

Those Who Want Obama To Take Office Immediately Should Cool It: EVERY New Administration Needs Time to Get Set Up Properly

I was listening to Limbaugh today and he played back several sound clips of TV commentators wishing that the Constitution was amended so that Obama could take office on December 1st instead of January 20th. He's correct in telling Obama's TV news friends to settle down, but not for the reasons he listed.

He said that Obama doesn't want to take office due to the fact that the economy will worsen between now and January 20th, and that Obama doesn't want to be seen as being in charge when things really get bad this month; especially if one or more of our auto companies dies at the end of the month.

Putting the politics aside for a moment, the actual reason that there is a lag between the election and the time the new President takes office is that any new incoming administration needs time to fill many thousands of jobs, and not just the cabinet-level positions.

And until the adoption of the 20th Amendment in 1933, the lame-duck period was actually longer; Inauguration Day wasn't until March 4th prior to that. And the four-month period (between the election in 1932 and the inaguration in 1933) really hurt the country as the Great Depression was at it's peak during this time, and critical decisions were being put off.

There's no reason to alter the Constitution. Period. And even if they pulled it off, none of the states would be able to schedule votes before the January 20th Obama inauguration.

And I wouldn't be so anxious to rush a seasoned President out the door in return for someone who's been in federal-level politics for a grand total of four years. Obama will have his chance soon enough.

$10 Million Bonus for Merrill Lynch CEO Under Discussion: They Meant BOGUS, Not Bonus as Company Takes Bail-Out

Merrill Lynch became the latest bailout recipient to raise the ire of Congress and the public when their CEO asked for a $10 million bonus, weeks after the company took a taxpayer-funded bailout from the federal government.

If their executive board authorizes it, the government ought to consider revoking the company's bailout.

This is just one more proof that the entire bailout package was a very bad idea. There's no accountability, the companies aren't following the conditions of the bailout, and some of these companies will drive themselves into the ground pulling crap like this.

$2 trillion for stuff like THIS?

Nations Begin Signing Cluster Bomb Ban: Can We at Least Design the Weapon So ALL the Bomblets Explode?

One of the most infuriating things about cluster bombs is that when the weapon is deployed, and hundreds of bomblets are deployed, not all of them explode, which turns the impact zones into deadly minefields. Here's what a cluster bombing looks like:



Despite what the announcer says, not all nations that have cluster bombs deploy them correctly. Israel hit southern Lebanon with cluster bombs (supposedly the upgraded units with the self destruct units, but take a look at how effective the self destruct actually is.) The following video was taken by an Australian after the Israeli-Lebanese/Hezbollah war (audio commentary starts about 14 seconds into the video):



Israel and Russia both used cluster bombs in close proximity to civilian populations; the Russians disregarded the rules of war and dropped the munitions directly onto Georgian cities during their war earlier this year, deliberately targeting civilians. They did the same thing in both of their Chechnyan wars (Shali, Chechnya, in 1995, and in Elistanzhi, Chechnya, in 1999).

NATO used them in Yugoslavia, we used them in Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam. And in every use of them, there's a minefield left over. It's believed that ten million

And now there's an international conference going on; 100+ nations are going to ban them, including Afghanistan, Laos, Lebanon, Great Britain and 18 of 26 NATO countries. 88 nations are expected to sign it today, with 22 promising to sign tomorrow; when this is done, it will go to the United Nations where the remaining nations of the 192-member General Assembly can sign it as well.

The United States, Russia, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and several others have indicated that they will not sign it.

If we cannot design the damn thing to work as intended, perhaps we SHOULD sign the treaty and develop an effective system that will detect and detonate leftover munitions with minimum risk to the mine clearing teams.

Cluster bomb munitions can kill years after a peace treaty is signed between two warring nations, and that's not right, especially if little kids are the ones picking up the bomblets and having them explode in their hands, or blow their legs off.

I'm in favor of the treaty. These kinds of weapons, while very effective at destroying an enemy target, can be replaced with more reliable weapons that function as performed. The failure rate is simply too great to ignore.

Media Matters Goes After Bill Cunningham: Some of His Comments Earn Him Title of "Purveyor of Hate Speech" From Liberal Group

Media Matters has set it's sights on conservative commentator/radio host Bill Cunningham for some of his controversial comments about poor people, blacks, the unemployed and other groups.

He came into the national consciousness during the recently concluded Presidential elections when he introduced John McCain at an event in Cincinnati. He used President-elect Obama's full name (HOW DARE HE USE THAT NAME!) and said that he was a "hack" and a "Daley-style Chicago politician" among other things.

McCain didn't like it, and immediately repudiated what Cunningham said, which prompted Cunningham to say that he had been thrown under McCain's "Straight Talk Express" bus and trampled. He pulled his support of McCain and returned to his local talk-radio show. McCain knew who was introducing him, yet made no effort to find someone else to do the honors.

In the months since, he made some very nasty comments about Obama that Media Matters has zeroed in on. And truth be told, Cunningham is in the same vein as Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly; he sometimes says the right things the wrong way. The specifics that Media Matters quoted in their report are as follows (credit: Media Matters web site) :

• Alleging that "Obama wants to gas the Jews"

• Invoking "[s]ix-six-six" and "the beast" in discussing "Barack Hussein Obama"

• On Obama Sr.: "That's what black fathers do. They simply leave"

• On the poor: "[P]eople are poor in America ... because they lack values, morals, and ethics"

• Declaring that America's "so-called noble poor" don't use birth control so that "the mom can get more checks in the mail from the government"
  
  
• "We are the only country in the world where poor people are fat."

The part that Media Matters forgets is that as inappropriate as some of these comments apparently are (while out of context, mind you), it's also protected speech.

I definitely don't agree with everything that Savage, O'Reilly and Cunningham say. They're their own worst enemies at times, but I also disagree with Media Matters on how they cut and paste comments together to make their victims look as bad as possible.

If fascism does start in this country, it'll start in the media with the same kind of tactics that Media Matters employs when going after people they don't like.

The Post of U.S. Secretary of State is Part of the Foreign Policy Team, Not the National Security Team

I keep hearing that the Secretary of State is the head of the President's national security team. With all due respect, no it isn't. The Secretary of State is the head of the President's foreign policy team.

The head(s) of the actual national security team are the Homeland Security Director, the National Intelligence Director, and the Secretary of Defense.

The Secretary of State is the President's chief foreign diplomat.

The National Security Council, of which the Secretary of State is a member, also includes the President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, and the National Security Adviser as well as other departments as needed. The President is the chair of this council.

The President uses the National Security Council to get the experts in their various departments to come up with a comprehensive national security and foreign policy. Once the President decides, the Secretary of State executes the diplomacy, while the other departments execute their own part of the plan.

So it's quite confusing when the media portrays the post of Secretary of State as something other than it is.

Pentagon Preparing 20,000 Troops for Domestic Use: Conspiracy Theorists Run Wild Over This

This has been underway for some time, but the Pentagon is preparing a 20,000 strong military force for domestic deployment in the event of a city-killing terrorist attack, such as a chemical, biological, or nuclear strike.

Some talk-radio personalities are saying that this will be the tool used to overthrow the Constitution and establish fascism in this country. I disagree with Glenn Beck's assessment. When a nuclear attack happens (WHEN, not IF), we will be thanking God that these troops are available to help. If we are the targets of a Mumbai-style terror assault, people like Glenn Beck will be the first ones publicly calling on the government to use these troops immediately.

I do not believe that this force will be used to overthrow the Constitution, but to strengthen it, and to help our domestic institutions protect the American people from the kind of people (with their fourth-grade educations) who murdered so many in Mumbai, including six of our fellow citizens.

I'm not going to sweat it. The Fairness Doctrine is more of a threat than these troops are.

Are Our Big Cities Prepared for a Mumbai-Style Terror Hit?

One of the questions being asked in Britain and in the U.S. is whether there are enough anti-terrorism forces to go after terrorists in multiple locations in the same city, as it happened in Mumbai, India. Rather than army commandos, it would likely be SWAT teams that would be initially deployed in places like New York, L.A., Chicago, Detroit and Atlanta. Britain's got their own version of SWAT.

Focusing in on America, if a terrorist force hit multiple locations in one city and managed to dig in as they did in Mumbai, would there be enough SWAT units and other similar units to quickly deploy and begin immediate operations to secure whatever locations had been seized and rescue the hostages? And would reinforcements be quickly available from the federal government?

India was not prepared for an attack of this magnitude; it took 60 hours for them to clear the buildings that were captured by the terrorists. During that time, the terrorists were shooting hostages.

Are we ready for something like this?

Governments of India and Pakistan Need to Keep Talking: The Region Doesn't Need a War Between Two Nuclear Powers

Indians are asking exactly the same questions of their government that many Americans were asking after the 9/11 disaster in this country. "Why did the government fail to protect us?"

The Indian news media is reporting that the government knew a major attack was coming, but took no steps to warn their people that a disaster of this magnitude might happen in the near future. They kept their silence in the same way that the Bush Administration ignored the previous administration here about how dangerous al-Qaeda was and that an airborne terrorist attack might be mounted.

And India seems to be pointing the finger of blame at Pakistan, even as Pakistan attempted to ratchet down the rhetoric and keep everything low-key. They dispatched their intelligence chief to New Delhi to speak with his Indian counterpart, an act that many Pakistanis were unhappy with, but did so regardless of how it looked in Islamabad.

And Pakistan's president has promised to take action if it is proven that elements in his country were involved. Asif Ali Zardari is the husband of former Pakistani Prime Minister Bhutto, who was also killed by terrorists last year.

India and Pakistan need to be talking, not arguing and then fighting. They're both nuclear powers, and blowing one another off the map won't help matters. Pakistan really needs to come down on it's extremists, and India must do the same.

Government Should Forget About the Bailouts, and Reduce the DEBT: That's Going to Kill Us

When we take a hard look at what our nation is facing in this financial crisis, it becomes clear that a number of things need to be considered when formulating a strategy to dig ourselves out of this mess. And I think our government is failing to look at what lies over the horizon. They're really blowing it.

They've reacted by adding $5 trillion to our national debt.

Here's my impression of this fiasco:

• A stimulus package that requires us to borrow money from China to fund it? DONE!
• Fanny Mae is failing? So is Freddie Mac? QUICK!! TAKE THEM OVER! (Pass the buck.)
• Lehman Bros. is failing? Too bad. They didn't support my candidacy. Let them FAIL!
• AIG is failing? Bail 'em out. Then bail 'em out again!
• Stock market's lost 2,000 points in the last ten days? Drat.
• Bear Stevens is failing? Seize them, sell them and put the taxpayer on the hook for the bill!
• Citi is failing? Bail 'em out. More? Bail faster! Here, have some more taxpayer money!
• A $700 billion bailout? Add another $150 billion to bribe the opposition in Congress. Mo' money, mo' money!
  
• We're bailing out all the toxic debt??! Bail harder! Bail faster! Here, have some more money!
• What? What? Wall Street doesn't think it's the right fix now that they have it?
• Washington Mutual is failing? Seize 'em and bail 'em out!
• Dow's dropped 2,000 more points?
  
• Hmm...Dow added 936 points in one day, but it's still down for the week.
• Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Bank of New York Mellon and State Street all signed on to our $2.5 trillion deal, to take our money, whether they needed it or not! YAY!! MORE DEBT!! Oh those taxpayers are really soaking it up now! Hummana, hummana, hummana!
  
• WHAT DID ALAN GREENSPAN SAY?? Oh, man, there goes another 600 points off the Dow!
• "Bailouts Being Used to Finance Retirement Packages." Surprise, surprise, surprise.
• Now the TARP measure isn't being used to buy all toxic debt? What's going on now?
  
• Hmm...General Motors sales fell 45% from a year ago, Ford fell 30%, Chrysler fell 35%, Toyota fell 23%, Honda fell 25%, and Nissan fell 33%.
• Now the Big 3 want a bailout? Yes! No! Yes! No!
• The CEOs flew their private jets to Washington while claiming that their companies are BROKE??! GM is producing a 2009 Hummer??!
• Group says we entered a recession in December 2007. Well, DUH!

It seems clear to me that the auto companies are ALREADY bankrupt, if they're going to Congress and asking for an I.O.U. to stay in business through December. They don't have the guts to come right out and say it. Yet.

As for the rest, it was a mistake to begin with. I think that those companies that would have a negative effect on the value of the dollar overseas (should they fail) need to be bailed out, while the others should get on a payment plan and pay off their debts, just like Joe and Jane Six Pack does.

The government should take the money from this $5 trillion scheme and put it toward paying down our national debt. That'll kill us in the long run and will hurt many more people than the current downturn has/will.

Trouble in India Will Mean Disaster Between Pakistan and India: Last Major Attack Almost Brought Two Countries Close to War in 2002

The huge terrorist attacks taking place in India will cause serious problems between Pakistan and India. The Indians have been looking for an excuse to put Pakistan in it's place for a while, and the headline-grabbing terrorism taking place in Mumbai (formerly known as Bombay) may well provide it.

Kashmir remains a problem between the two countries, and at least one terrorist has cited the troubled region as being the reason for his taking hostages. Terrorists launched an attack on India's government in New Delhi in 2001, and that attack caused over a million Indian and Pakistani troops to take up positions on either side of their shared border and square off for months.

If Kashmir is the cause of this, and it's directed at the government of India, they might turn their attention from Mumbai to Kashmir, and trouble will follow.

I'm getting the impression that there's more than one terror group involved here; one group took a Jewish facility, several others attacked hotels, and others attacked elsewhere. Some have targeted Americans and British citizens; others targeted Jews, still others targeted Indians. Some have released their Western hostages. It's really confusing. If it is one large group, they're hiding their goals quite effectively by going after so many different targets.

It's going to take a while to sort all of this out.

ANOTHER $800 Billion Mistake? It Happened a Lot Faster Than I Thought It Would

Back when I was railing against the first $850 billion mistake to bail out Wall Street's Folly, I predicted that they'd be back in six months asking for another huge infusion of cash.

I was not expecting them to put up another $800 billion within 1 1/2 months to help Wall Street.

We can't afford this, nor should we be bailing out the auto industry. The fact that they're begging for money shows that they're already bankrupt, but haven't chose to admit it yet.

The government is setting us up for more falls in the future with all this intervention. This is a short-term strategy that will have serious long-term ramifications. A lot of these companies that we're busy rescuing were going to fail, and will probably fail regardless. And we'll still be stuck with the bill.

I don't like it.

Many Institutions Climb on Gravy Train: Corporations, States, Cities and Who Knows What Else

Let's see who else is requesting federal bailout money, now that the floodgates are blown open:

American Express
Transportation Corridor Agencies of California
Ford
Chrysler
General Motors
General Electric
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
State of California
State of New Jersey
State of New York
Independent Connecticut Petroleum Association
City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
City of Phoenix, Arizona
City of Atlanta, Georgia
City of Detroit, Michigan

There are now DOZENS of institutions trying to get onto the gravy train! They need to all be told to cut their expenses and live within their means. People do it; why can't they?

TERRIBLE Nebraska Law Allowing Parents to Drop Teens Off at Hospitals Being Reviewed: "Please Don't Bring Your Teenager to Nebraska" Comes TOO LATE

Nebraska's awful child-abandonment law is FINALLY being reviewed, as kids from other states continue to be dropped off by their idiot and incompetent parents.

The total number of kids abandoned so far is 34. On Thursday, a 17 year-old girl was dropped off at an Omaha hospital with her 14 year-old brother, and promptly ran away, leaving her brother behind.

This law has been a FARCE from day one and should never have been adopted by the legislature of Nebraska.

And the emotional damage being done to these children by their parents is immeasurable.

They say the way to hell is paved with good intentions. And this law was originally designed to help infants, but with the lack of an age limit in the law, parents began dropping their teenagers off. Of the 34 kids dropped off so far, not a SINGLE one has been an infant. Six of the children were under age 10, and the rest were teenagers.

All of these teens need to be returned to their relatives, and the ex-parents PROSECUTED! And in particular, those parents who crossed state lines to get rid of their kids need to be in federal court for what they have done.

I'm not interested in hearing why they've done what they've done. They had the means to travel to Nebraska from other states to drop their kids off; why couldn't they have contacted social services in their OWN states? EVERY state in this country has some kind of system to help parents in need, and family courts to order the kids into state custody to get the help that they need.

Nebraska needs to GET IT IN GEAR and FIX this terrible law!

Gay Activists Disrupt a Lansing-Area Church: How Low Can They Go?

Gay activists took a Lansing-area church by surprise and staged a protest during services, both inside and outside the building on Sunday.

Inside the Mount Hope Church, demonstrators yelled gay slogans, hanged a banner from the church balcony, threw fliers at members of the church and then pulled a fire alarm. Outside, activists had an upside down pink cross and picket signs.

Revolting behavior!

And no one was arrested for doing this? Pulling a fire alarm is not protected speech. I wonder how many of these protesters were locals, and how many were outside agitators?

Time to Repeal the $850 Billion Bailout Mistake: It Isn't Working

I wrote the following in the last couple of months:

September 24th: I think that $700 billion is just the start and they'll come back and ask for another $500-$750 billion in six months. We can't afford that!

September 28th: No $700 billion ever made can stop a crash of a financial system that people have lost their trust in and believe is unstable.

October 3rd: And we've only seen the beginning of this bailout. Now everyone will want one too.

October 5th: Two states--California and Massachusetts--want money as well. The floodgates are now open; where will this end? And how many states will try to climb on this gravy train?

October 6th: Welcome to the dark side of globalization....This has been the strangest bill in quite a while; the size of it is HUGE; Wall Street didn't want it, the politicians say they didn't want it but attached $150 billion in pork to buy off their colleagues to vote for it, Wall Street put it's reaction on public display by losing hundreds of points on the days that the House and Senate voted on this bill; then they said it probably wasn't the fix that was needed. Then Wall Street lost hundreds of points more over worry that the money won't come fast enough. And the taxpayer's on the hook for the entire $850 billion package with little to no hope for a return.

Then I took a hiatus to see if this $850 billion mistake was the miracle cure that would save us. What happened?

Since the signing of the bailout of Wall Street's Folly, the DJIA has lost another 1,950+ points. The federal government increased it's bailout of AIG from $85 billion to $150 billion. Now they're talking about bailing out the auto industry. And many companies that have been thrown a lifeline are sustaining HUGE quarterly losses.

And the U.S. government is up to about $5 trillion in additional debt, trying to solve this mess.

The bailout isn't working; the money's being eaten like candy, and the problems are continuing to cause mayhem in the American and global economies. I get the impression that this bailout money is being thrown away.

They need to repeal the entire mess. The bailout of Wall Street's Folly was ill-conceived, and we simply cannot afford to bail out industry after industry, as the politicians now seem to be hell-bent on doing.

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of U.S. Navy Use of Sonar Without Restrictions

Environmental wackos lost their case against the U.S. Navy today, when the Supreme Court ruled that the Navy could use sonar whenever and wherever it needed to.

Lower court judges had issued injunctions against the Navy to prevent it from using sonar to detect enemy submarines when in proximity to marine life, whether in practice or in an actual combat situations. The high court found that the possibility of having an untrained anti-submarine force being deployed against an enemy (with no such restrictions) presented a danger to the safety of the fleet, and outweighed the potential danger to the little fishies.

The Supreme Court decision is the correct one. It would be a HUGE gamble to have an inexperienced Navy crew going after a Russian or Chinese-built sub with a nuclear payload targeted at American cities.

If the wackos don't like it, why don't they take their money and find an alternative detection system that the Navy can equip their ships and subs with, so that the Navy can get rid of their EVIL sonars and save the little fishes?

Veterans Deserve More: Government Has Dropped the Ball

On this day that we honor America's veterans for their service to our country, I find it APPALLING that 1/4 to 1/3 of America's homeless are also VETERANS.

This is shameful.

They put their lives on the line for our country, and come back from America's wars with both obvious and hidden injuries. It's a sad state of affairs when our various elected federal governments have to be prodded AGAIN and AGAIN to take the necessary steps to care for America's wounded warriors, both from the current wars and from past wars as well.

And yet, some 300,000 to 400,000 veterans are out in the cold, and the VA takes care of 100,000 of them annually. If the 400,000 number is accurate, then that means that 300,000 (or 75%) are left to fend for themselves.

I'm glad that the budget for Veterans Affairs has doubled to $93 billion in the last seven years, but they had no choice, with so many wounded veterans coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan. I hope that the VA is expanding it's reach to help other, less fortunate veterans.

Thank you veterans, for putting on a uniform and putting it ALL on the line.

Obama Chooses a KLINGON for His Chief of Staff: So Much for Cooperation

President-elect Obama is not off to a smooth start to his new Administration. He chose the Democratic version of Karl Rove, Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, as his White House Chief of Staff. Emanuel is not equipped with an "off" switch, unlike Rove, who knew when to keep his mouth shut. The GOP labeled him a "hyper-partisan" immediately upon the announcement of his nomination to be White House Chief of Staff.

Here is an example of how a Klingon deals with an annoyance, which matches how Emanuel will deal with people in the White House:




This will be a VERY interesting appointment. Obama's found someone meaner than Michael Savage, which I didn't think was possible. Here's Emanuel's Wikipedia entry, including a recounting of the famous steak knife incident, which helped to earn him his nickname of RAHM-bo, owing to his "take no prisoners" strategy of dealing with people he doesn't like.

I though President-elect Obama would pick a Klingon-like person to fill the role of Chief of Staff, not an ACTUAL Klingon!

Where Does Obama Stand on Slave Reparations?

President-elect Obama hasn't made his stance on slave reparations clear yet, as he hasn't made his position clear on a great many issues.

According to NewsMax, Obama was opposed to slave reparations before he ran for Congress; after he was elected to the U.S. Senate, he stated that he was opposed to "...just signing over checks to African-Americans," which is a lot different than opposing the concept outright as he was before.

Where does he stand now?

I am opposed to court-ordered reparations, as the statute of limitations has LONG expired for slavery, which ended in 1865. Doing it in 1868 would have been better than in 2008, as it would have helped the direct victims of slavery. It's too late now.

And if American taxpayers will be called upon to pay reparations, does that mean that the decendents of Union soldiers who died during the Civil War to free the slaves will be made to pay as well? Is that fair?

I have other objections that I'm not going to get into now, but I think that Obama coming in on the side of the slave reparations crowd will fire up the kind of people who have already been arrested for plotting an assassination attempt.

And I agree with the Libertarian Party, in the assessment that a serious attempt to hand out checks to slave decendents for wrongs committed by a part of the population, long dead, will actually increase racism, rather than bury it. I think there's quite enough to be getting on with, without adding this complication.

Proposal 8 Succeeded in California Because Judges Didn't Listen to the Electorate in the First Place

If opponents of California's Proposal 8, which bans gay marriage, want to blame someone for the passage of the measure, they should start by blaming the judges who forced the issue in the face of strong opposition from California's voters. Instead, the left is blaming Christians for running a better campaign than they did.

Prop 8 succeeded because gay marriage was imposed by the judges on the voters of California, when they had already objected to it. The judges overstepped their authority, and there was a wave of resentment that went along with it. The U.S. Constitution makes it clear that marriage regulations are a reserved power for the states to decide. Activist judges like to assume this power for themselves.

Voters had already approved Proposal 22 in 2000 with 61% of the vote, which defined marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Five years later, the courts overturned Prop 22. Legal challenges tied up the issue until May of this year, when the California Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriages, to take effect in mid-June. Almost immediately, a new ballot proposal started gaining strength in the shape of Prop 8.

The feelings of the voters haven't changed that much. And they threw the issue back into the faces of the activist judges, who will almost certainly overturn it again, in another display of judicial activism. This debate will never go away.

Every state in the union has to decide this issue for themselves, and some definitely have, with varying degrees of judicial intervention. I continue to oppose any federal involvement in what is, under the Constitution, a state matter. Federal judges need to let the state supreme courts have the final say in matters related to state powers.

Senator Talks Up Fairness Doctrine Again: Assault on First Amendment Set to Begin

Senator Shumer is talking about the Fairness Doctrine again, setting the stage for the Democrats to begin their legalized assault on the First Amendment.

He was on Fox News on Tuesday and did a word play on Fox's own motto: fair and balanced. He said that the Fairness Doctrine would bring fairness and balance to the AM dial, balancing conservative shows with liberal ones.

Let's be frank.

Liberal talk shows are money-losing propositions for radio stations, while the conservative ones rake in the cash, and have tremendous staying power. Why should the radio stations be forced into such a money-losing proposition by carrying liberal talk-radio on an equal footing with the conservative ones?

Conservatives are afraid that since liberal shows are money-losers, that they would cut back on conservative shows as well in order to avoid the flak and fines that the FCC would be required to impose, as well as limit the damage to their bottom lines that liberal programming would bring.

Senator Schumer also said that those who opposed the Fairness Doctrine also wanted to limit the amount of pornography on the air. His argument makes no sense from a literal standpoint. Pornography isn't seen on radio.

And he's made no argument for more of a conservative viewpoint on TV news stations, such as CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, or NBC, or more liberal viewpoints on Fox News. Senator Shumer and his friends have targeted radio exclusively. That fact alone makes the Fairness Doctrine unfair.

Conservatives Should Declare Independence from the GOP: They'd Do Better With Their Own Party

I think the time has come for the conservatives to break with the GOP. They're Democratic-Republicans anyways!

The Republicans lost because they tried to out-Democrat the Democrats. And then they became the Democrats, spending money that isn't theirs, and not agreeing with anyone (including themselves) on anything. And they tried to push the conservatives out of the way in the process.

Being a conservative is about taking a stand, and living by it, not changing a stand when the wind of public opinion starts to blow in a different direction. All one has to do is look at the global warming hubris and how McCain embraced it to win over Democratic supporters.

And now we see the consequences of trying to out-Democrat the Democrats: the GOP's butt is in a sling, the result of voter dissatisfaction with Democratic-Republicans.

Will the moderates in the GOP learn?

Democrats Should Keep Their 15% Approval Rating in Mind: With Fewer Republicans Around, They're in the Hot Seat

Before they get too carried away, the Democrats need to keep their approval rating in mind. As of a CBS poll from last week, Congressional job approval stands at 15%, which is half of what President Bush's is.

And with fewer Republicans around to blame, and a Democrat preparing to move into the White House on January 20th, the Dems will be squarely in the hot seat.

It will be interesting to see if they succumb to the same pressure that the Republicans did, with one-party in control of the Congress and the White House.

If anything, the Democrats are even more vulnerable, as their party is a sewn-together coalition of competing factions. There's a few triggers that we've already seen will cause the Democratic Party to splinter; remember when Pelosi and Reid decided to knuckle under to President Bush and his war budget last year? The anti-war Democrats nearly rioted in the aisles.

We'll see how this goes.

Status of Forces Agreement With Iraq Needs to be Delayed: New Administration Doesn't Need Their Hands Bound

I think that the Iraqi and U.S. governments should put off agreeing to any Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) until after January 20th, when President Obama takes office and his intentions are made clear. There's no point in making an agreement like this if the Obama Administration will be withdrawing troops on a large scale, as he suggested during the campaign.

With the current mandate set to expire on December 31st, our troops will be required to suspend military operations in Iraq and return to their bases throughout Iraq. There is a need for U.S. troops to be able to defend themselves if their bases are attacked; I think it would be a good idea for both governments to extend the current mandate to mid-March, until the new U.S. government is in place and both governments can meet can plot out what the next 16-20 months will look like.

Why sign a SOFA with Iraq if our forces will be gone in 16-20 months?

WSJ Says Treatment of Bush Was "Disgraceful": Administration's Shredding of Constitution Was MORE Disgraceful

I'm at odds with the Wall Street Journal's op-ed piece on how President Bush was treated during the campaign of the last two years.

Frankly, I'm not concerned with what our enemies overseas are thinking. I'm much more concerned about the damage done to our Constitution in the name of national security that this Administration and this President have allowed to occur.

Indefinite detention of people? No habeas corpus? Star chamber justice? Not being allowed to confront their accusers? No trial by jury? No attorneys? No independent judicial review of the cases and sentences? Illegal evidence is allowed? A majority vote to decide guilt, and not a unanimous vote? Torture?

No, the Constitution of the United States is the SUPREME law of the land, and cannot be altered by lesser laws like the Patriot Act or the Military Commission Act of 2006. It's protections cannot be changed until the Constitution is properly amended and voted on as outlined in the Constitution itself. That has NOT happened.

It's true that the country hasn't been attacked since 9/11, but that's because it's easier for terrorists to shoot at American soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq, rather than trying to infiltrate over here and risk getting caught before being able to do any damage. And our soldiers are more than happy to return the favor and fire back.

I am in complete disagreement with the Wall Street Journal on this issue. The other issues quoted in the article are trivial, compared to the damage that President Bush has done and received criticism on, and rightfully so.

Michigan's Proposal 1 and Proposal 2 are ABOMINATIONS: I Despise Both of Them

Michigan voted to become a safe haven for growing pot, in the ugliest case of drug-fiendish group-think that I have ever seen.

Who will be authorized to grow medical marijuana? My drug-fiend neighbors? The local supermarket? And what's to stop criminal elements from registering as growers and engaging in criminal enterprise as well as supplying "medical" pot?

Will it come across state borders, in violation of federal laws? And which laws will trump the other laws? Federal anti-drug laws, or state ones?

I'll be the first one to admit that I absolutely despise Proposal 1, and am very perturbed that so many voters were hoodwinked into voting 'yes' on this proposal.

As for Proposal 2, I voted against this as well on religious grounds. In addition, by the ballot's own language, it will use embryos that are unsuitable for implantation, which means that they're using defective embryos, and will require taxpayers to pay for faulty research. This is a waste of money, as well as being morally objectionable.

It also closes the door on preventing future research along similar lines, which I object to as well. I'm no fan of Prop 2, but realize that this will be harder to reverse than Prop 1, which I will continue to rail against.

What a revolting turn of events!

Obama Wins; Definitely Not a Reagan Landslide, But More Than Enough to Beat McCain

Barack Obama made history, becoming the first African-American man to become President of the United States. It wasn't quite a Reagan-style landslide, but was still more than enough to put McCain away. Congratulations to the President-elect.

I'm more unhappy about Michigan's Prop 1 and 2 right now than I am about the race for the White House. I've been on record as not being happy with either candidate, but we have a new President, and without all the legal dramas of 2000. For that, I am grateful.

We'll see how President-elect Obama does. I'm looking forward to a lot of new source material in the next four years, especially if his Socialist views begin to take the shape of policy.

For now, he has a lot of work to do in order to straighten out the economy.

It Will Be Over Tomorrow; We Will Have a New President

As the rest of the country gets ready to vote starting in a little over eight hours from now, I still have mixed feelings on the candidates.

They are not the best that their respective parties have to offer, and we're going to be stuck with one of them for the next four years, assuming they stay healthy.

McCain has made too many compromises over his career to be called a real conservative. Obama is too young and inexperienced and is too far over to the left; he's going to be forced to move to the right in order to govern if he wins tomorrow.

I don't think that the polls are correct in their blowout predictions either.

They've gotten the last two Presidential elections wrong with their polling data, both before and during Election Day. The problem is that the media and the pollsters continually underestimate the turnout on the Republican side, while overestimating the Democratic turnout on Election Day. And they never seem to learn from their mistakes.

And when the polls do not match the election results, they start screaming about voter suppression and start looking for victims. They don't seem to understand that many people don't want to tell who they actually voted for. I'd tell a pollster that I wrote in Mickey Mouse, just to throw their numbers off. It's none of their business!

It'll be interesting to see if any coal states predicted to go to Obama flip to McCain. Very few of the networks carried the Obama/coal industry story.

I will be watching the results tomorrow night with great interest.

Newspaper Covers Up Obama Statements on Killing the Coal Industry to Keep Coal-Producing States in His Column

The October Surprise came in November, and might well change the complexion of the race for the White House.

The surprise was a statement by Barack Obama, made in January of this year, about the coal industry to the San Francisco Chronicler. Obama said, in the recording, that the companies could try to build all the coal-fired plants that they want, but they could only do it in a way that would bankrupt the coal industry if he had his way.

Really? And when was he going to tell the twenty-seven coal-producing states that little bit of information? And when was he going to explain that to the ten largest coal-producing states:Montana, Illinois, Wyoming, West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Colorado, Texas and Indiana?

And here's why the Chronicler withheld the information about their preferred candidate:




Many of the undecided/"leaning Obama" and "marginally McCain" states also have a sizable portion of their economies built around coal production, with thousands of voters depending on the coal mines for their livelihoods.

For this supposedly "huge" lead that Obama has on McCain, the race is still in the air and could go in a number of directions OTHER than the way that the media PREFERS.

I think it's going to be a lot closer than ANYONE thinks.

ATF Breaks Up Skinhead Ring That Wanted to Go After Obama; This is a Small Taste of Things to Come

The government announced today that it was charging two skinheads with plotting to kill Senator Obama and dozens of others in a blaze of hatred and gunfire. It's likely that this is the tip of the iceberg, and other plots are being planned.

The skinheads fully expected to be killed in the attempt to gun down Obama in a drive-by suicide attack. Luckily they were stopped before they could carry out this plot.

I hope that, regardless of the way the election goes, that the President stays alive and healthy for the entire term.

Fairness Doctrine is Fair in Name Only: It is Legalized Assault on First Amendment

With the Barak Obama/John McCain thing nearly over, Democrats in Congress are turning up the rhetoric to restore the Fairness Doctrine to push conservatives off the AM dial.

It's fair in name only. It will target only conservatives as they hold the lion's share of the market, and will ignore the smaller--and just as provocative--leftists and others who make just as many damning statements on their programs as Limbaugh, Savage and Hannity do.

And with the dawn of the internet, it's also unnecessary.

Liberal programs don't do well on the radio, as the Air America Radio experience showed us. But commentators like Rush Limbaugh rake in the dough because they understand marketing and advertising, which was the primary reason that Air America went under. They didn't follow a conventional business model that Limbaugh and the other successful opposition programs do.

All talk of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine should be shelved permanently.

OPEC Calls Emergency Meeting: What, They Didn't Make Enough Money When Oil Was $147 a Barrel??!

OPEC is calling an emergency meeting of the cartel next week to discuss solutions to the falling oil prices. It's dropped more than 50% (to it's ACTUAL price in my opinion) since hitting $147 a barrel earlier this year.

How many trillions did they make when oil was $147 a barrel?

What? What? $3.9 trillion at current production rate of 27 million barrels a day? And that's for ONE day??!

So what are they yelling about now? From the Jakarta Post on September 10th: OPEC President Chakib Khelil's comments, however, indicate that most members would rather accept less-costly crude than cut back and risk renewing the market turmoil that in recent months set one price record after another.

They sure aren't complaining about the size of their bank accounts from said record prices. And if we don't trust what our own oil executives are saying about how much they spend on R&D with regards to justifying high fuel prices, we sure can't trust anything that OPEC says about oil prices either.

They can make due with $68 a barrel.

Horrific Nebraska Child-Abandonment Law Needs to be Repealed NOW: Seventeen Kids Abandoned So Far

Back on September 25th, I wrote about the new Nebraska law that allows parents to abandon kids at local hospitals up to the age of 17, and not just infants. A father had just dropped off nine kids at a Nebraska hospital, and I predicted that the floodgates were open.

A blind man could have seen this one coming; Nebraska legislators have decided to hold a hearing on the new law after parents began dropping off their teenagers in increasing numbers. And for the first time since this abomination became law, parents are starting to drive in from neighboring states to abandon their kids in Nebraska too.

Who's the IDIOT or group of IDIOTS who came up with this STUPID plan? What were they thinking was going to happen? And how many kids are going to suffer devastating mental issues from being abandoned like garbage at a dump by their parents/guardians?

Yes, there's only 17 kids who have been abandoned since this law came into effect, but it's 17 new child placement cases, which is far too many. According to Nebraska officials, none of the kids were in life-threatening situations at home. The older kids said during interviews with child welfare experts that they had frustrated parents trying to deal with the issues normally associated with raising kids, and teenagers in particular and gave up.

This law is draconian, and I hope that the Nebraska legislature reverses a terrible mistake and takes care of the kids that it is partially responsible for orphaning. And it takes steps to strengthen their family and child welfare programs so the parents have more choices than abandoning their families to the state.

Voting for #2: My Choice is Already Made

I voted absentee today and dropped it in the mail with mixed feelings on the matter.

And for the first time, I didn't vote for the headliner on the ticket; I voted for the #2 slot this time around, because I think there's a distinct possibility that the VP nominee on the ticket will be President sometime before the end of the new Administration.

Our country still has a problem with violent racism, and I think that some redneck will inevitably take a shot at Obama. We'll almost certainly see a surge in racial hate groups, especially with the economy in the shape it's in now if Obama is elected President. They'll blame him for their not being able to hold jobs; and whatever excuse that they can come up with to go after him. And we'll have a problem with domestic terrorism as well as international terrorism.

And McCain's age is something to be concerned with. We know that the person who is the President ages a lot faster than normal, due to the heavy work schedule, stress and other issues. McCain is 72 now, with a history of heart trouble. That's an issue.

I hope that both stay alive and healthy, whether they are elected in November or not.

But for my vote, I was thinking about a possible President Biden or President Palin running the country. Biden has too many liberal votes and causes to his name for my taste, and I wish Palin had a little more experience on the political side of things. But ultimately I voted for the candidate who best matched my social views.

We also know that the President will surround himself or herself with the best economic advisers that can be found, so they don't necessarily need to be an expert on the economy themselves, so long as the advisers are expert's experts on the topic.

It's a bonus if the President does have experience in the business world, but what they have to be able to do is comprehend it, and then communicate it in a way that makes sense to the public.

The same thing can be said about every aspect of the Presidency; hopefully the President will chose wise advisers.

Stock Market Continues Adjustment: $700 Billion Mistake Didn't Make a Dent

I wrote on September 28th the following: No $700 billion ever made can stop a crash of a financial system that people have lost their trust in and believe is unstable.

And today's stock market results bear that out: the Dow was down over 800 points today before the market underwent a last-minute rally, which allowed the Dow to close down 300+ points instead of the 800 points that looked likely as the clock ran out.

The problem now is that the global markets are crashing as well. A lot of Western countries do not have an FDIC to safeguard their deposits as we do, and when a government rushes in to save a bank, it has adverse effects on their own stock markets, which are also tied into Wall Street. And investors are panic selling, because they believe that the financial system is weak and unstable.

Welcome to the dark side of globalization.

Is it too late to revoke the bailout? If it isn't going to work, then they should not proceed with it at all.

This has been the strangest bill in quite a while; the size of it is HUGE; Wall Street didn't want it, the politicians say they didn't want it but attached $150 billion in pork to buy off their colleagues to vote for it, Wall Street put it's reaction on public display by losing hundreds of points on the days that the House and Senate voted on this bill; then they said it probably wasn't the fix that was needed. Then Wall Street lost hundreds of points more over worry that the money won't come fast enough. And the taxpayer's on the hook for the entire $850 billion package with little to no hope for a return.

The entire mess should be repealed and re-thought; throwing money away like this is UTTER stupidity!

Now the States Want Handouts Too: California and Massachusetts Put in Their Wish Lists

Well, well, well.

Now the states are lining up for handouts too, wanting the same kind of deal that Wall Street got. Two states--California and Massachusetts--want money as well.

The floodgates are now open; where will this end? And how many states will try to climb on this gravy train?

And I oppose bailing out the states. They should not be treated like banks; they need to make cuts to their budgets so they can operate within their means, just as the federal government must as well. The states need to start lowballing their expectations for monthly income so that they can budget responsibly.

All bills and debts eventually come due, and yet everybody wants the federal government to pay for everything, in the here and now. WE CAN'T AFFORD IT:

The Gross National Debt

Eventually the time will come where the federal government will have to crash it's own budget to pay what it owes to foreign banks; it's going to be really ugly when it does. This is no way to run a government.

This gravy train shouldn't leave the station or see the light of day. The states are responsible for their OWN budgets.

$700 Billion Bailout/Mistake is Actually $850 Billion With Vote Buyoffs

The $700 bailout of Wall Street's Folly will actually be $850 billion with the bribes paid out to members of Congress to change their votes from "nay" to "yay."

Here is the list of pork that was added to the bill:

• $100 million for the construction of a race track.
• $49 million to spread the taxes out from the Exxon Valdez oil spill disaster over three years.
• $239 million payout to fishermen who suffered losses during the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
• $3.3 billion for a "Secure rural schools and community self-determination program."
• $3.3 billion in tax cuts for people who don't pay state taxes.
• $478 million for Hollywood.
• $148 million for wool subsidies.
• $33 million for development costs to American Samoa.
• $10 million for a fringe benefit to employers whose employees ride their bicycles to work.
• $322 million for manufacturers of efficient appliances--not for people who buy them!
• $192 million for rum duties. The pirates will be very happy about this provision.
• $2 million for production of wooden arrows for children.

The provisions listed above are the most objectionable ones (in my opinion) in the entire objectionable bill; here is the complete list as compiled by the Taxpayers for Common Sense watchdog group.

House Passes Senate Version of $700 Billion Mistake: Wall Street's Folly is Now Washington's Folly Too

The House rushed through passage of the $700 billion bailout bill, and President Bush hurriedly signed it, clearing the way for this new chapter of the fiasco to proceed.

And Wall Street didn't even bat an eye. When the Senate passed the bill, Wall Street rewarded it with a 350 point loss. When the House and the Administration did their thing today, Wall Street yawned, turned over and lost another 157 points.

Why?

Because now they don't think that this was the right thing to do. Thanks a lot, guys.

In the meantime, here is the complete list of Representatives who changed their vote:

Republican Representatives: Alexander, Barrett, Biggert, Boustany, Buchanan, Coble, Conaway, Dent, Fallin, Frelinghuysen, Gerlach, Hoesktra, Knollenberg, Kuhl, Myrick, Ramstad, Ros-Lehtinen, Schmidt, Shadegg, Shuster, Sullivan, Terry, Thornberry, Tiberi, and Wamp. One note: Welling didn't vote for the first time in his tenure.

Democratic Representatives: Abercrombie, Baca, Berkley, Braley, Carson, Cleaver, Cuellar, Cummings, Edwards (MD), Giffords, Green, Hirono, Jackson (IL), Jackson-Lee, Kilpatrick, Lee, Lewis (GA), Mitchell, Ortiz, Pascrell, Pastor, Rush, Schiff, Scott (GA), Solis, Sutton, Thompson(CA), Tierney, Watson, Welch (VT), Woolsey, Wu, and Yarmuth.

One important note: Jim McDermitt (D-WA) was the sole Representative to switch his 'yea' vote to 'nay' the second time around.

I don't think any of the Representatives listed above or any of their colleagues that voted 'yea' for this bill should be returned to Congress for another term by their constituents.

This is a huge and costly mistake. It should have been a $700 billion loan, not a freebie.

Time for some incumbents to be turned out of office. Specifically, 75 senators and 263 Representatives.

And we've only seen the beginning of this bailout. Now everyone will want one too.

House Did the Right Thing in Voting Down $700 Billion Mistake-In-Progress: Yesterday's Massive Stock Market Sell-Off Looks Silly Today

Yesterday's rejection of the $700 billion bailout plan of Wall Street's Folly by the House of Representatives was exactly what was needed. The vote SHOULD have been 435-0 against the plan, but some badly misguided Representatives were not on the side of the American taxpayer.

And yesterday's knee-jerk reaction on Wall Street was sheer panic, nothing more. They badly overreacted to a very bad plan that even Wall Street is lukewarm about, as evidenced by today's stock market results. The Dow Jones Industrial Average recovered 485 points of the 777 points that they lost yesterday. The way that it goes up and down, they could make that back within a day or two.

I REALLY enjoyed Speaker Pelosi's pre-vote speech. I could just see the votes flying straight out the window and into the nearest toilet. Nice job, Speaker Pelosi. Yesterday's vote was symbolic of both her speakership and of Democratic control of Congress. More from the do-nothing majority party.

Now, Congress should offer to LOAN Wall Street $700 billion, in exchange for certain concessions on the part of companies that accept the lifeline: a large share of their profits go back to repaying the taxpayer, in addition to repayment plans to the U.S. treasury, and so forth. And they can NEVER leverage mortgages again, and can only borrow a percentage of their total net worth, not thirty times their total net worth.

THAT'S fair to the taxpayer, and will allow the companies to survive. And if a company goes under, the proceeds from the sale of assets of the company go to reimbursing the U.S. treasury.

NO corporate handouts, Congress.

Foreclosed Property, Former Owners and New Owners: Who's to Blame More?

I was reading this Fox News story about a former homeowner stalking the family who bought his foreclosed home.

It started when the former homeowner couldn't keep up on his $532 a month mortgage payments and lost his home. He filed a legal appeal just before the auction was set to begin, then showed up at the auction to try to stop the sale. He was unsuccessful, and a developer bought the property, who then sold it to the current family.

And since then he's allegedly been stalking the family and has been charged numerous times with assault on the original investor, and trespassing against the current homeowners. And every time the charges were dropped because it was ruled that he was incompetent to stand trial, leaving him free to harass the family to the breaking point. It has been going on for eight years now.

And the family recently gave up, moving out of the house and losing much of their investment.

What a sad story. The legal system won't prosecute the guy, won't institutionalize him and won't intervene to keep this family safe. It isn't their fault that the original homeowner lost the house.

The former homeowner is a serial stalker and needs to be dealt with by those who have the power to get him some help. Someone needs to take some responsibility down there.

Wall Street is Putting WAY Too Much Faith on This Rescue: Government Needs A More Viable Plan

Wall Street needs to settle down.

They're putting WAY too much faith on one flawed plan, and if it gets delayed or doesn't happen, they need to be open to other alternatives before flying off the handle.

No $700 billion ever made can stop a crash of a financial system that people have lost their trust in and believe is unstable. The stock market IS overvalued by at least 1/3. It will be unfortunate if the inevitable adjustment comes in a short amount of time; it would be better if it was staggered over a decade or so, rather than in one week, as some business analysts are predicting.

It WON'T be the end of the world.

But I repeat my opposition to putting the taxpayers on the hook for Wall Street's Folly. They are expecting something for nothing, and that isn't right.

The mortgage meltdown is a separate problem from the leverage meltdown, and they are trying to fix one while ignoring the other. Leveraging should be outlawed and taken off the table permanently, so we never get into this kind of situation again. The people who authorized these kinds of shady financial dealings need to be in jail.

And I'm glad that the FBI is looking at the worst offenders to see if some kind of fraud was going on.

Surprise, Surprise: Obama Says He Should Get Credit for Curing Wall Street Folly: Since When?

Barack Obama blasted John McCain again, saying that McCain didn't do anything to deserve credit for the $700 billion mistake-in-progress plan, while he did.

Yeah, right.

Last time I checked, Obama scurried his butt out of Washington first. He also didn't want to even be in Washington (which I think was a smart initial move.) McCain stuck around, then left Washington to go to Friday's debate, then turned around and came back to Washington to confer with his GOP colleagues. Obama belatedly returned.

Obama said he deserved credit for making sure that there were taxpayer protections in the plan, but the fact is that his Democratic colleagues and many Republicans were calling for the same things long before Obama even realized that it was going to be a campaign issue.

Both candidates were equally ineffective and should have stayed out of Washington to begin with. Obama's statements are highly hypocritical.

And the "plan" that they came up with is not much of one.

On to Palin vs. Biden. Hopefully they have more of a pulse than their bosses did during Friday's debate.

Wall Street Should Fend for Itself: They Made That Bed, Now They Should Sleep in It

I am now opposed to bailing Wall Street out of it's "toxic debt" problem that it alone is responsible for. The American taxpayer should NOT be made to pay for Wall Street's Folly, beyond what has already been agreed to.

In my opinion, the bailouts of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG and Bear Sterns were correct, because of their interconnecting relationships to the U.S. and global currency markets. The damage from the collapse of those companies would not have been confined to Wall Street. Lehman Brothers was not bailed out because it was self-contained, as many of the other companies who stand to benefit from this $700 billion mistake-in-progress are.

The standard that the Bush Administration followed before should be the standard that is used now in deciding which companies to save, and which ones to allow to go by the wayside.

The other companies who have "toxic debt" need to get on a payment plan and pay off their debt. If the government wants to help, they should negotiate and set a fair interest rate with the creditors, which will allow the companies to clean up their own friggin' mess. People have to do the same thing; why should it be different for a company that goes into deep debt?

This is entirely appropriate for a system that cheers when blue-collar workers lose their jobs and pensions, while the system sees it's stock value soar. Why then, should blue collar taxpayers be stuck with the company's bill?

SHAME on Wall Street!

And the government needs to come up with a better plan.

Presidential Candidates Need to Get the Hell Out of Dodge: Their Presence at White House Didn't Help Matters

Talks aimed at alleviating the U.S. financial crisis ended in failure, with both sides blaming the other. And the presence of the presidential candidates didn't aid the summit in finding a solution to Wall Street's Folly.

They need to get OUT of Washington and put some distance between themselves and the ongoing fiasco at the White House. And McCain needs to get it in gear and quit wasting time on pointless political gestures. He needs to show up at that debate tomorrow night and give Obama what-for, or risk becoming a has-been former presidential candidate.

What a stupid stunt!

Nebraska Needs to Change It's "Safe Haven" Law: Dad Drops Off NINE Children at Hospital

Nebraska has the most liberal "safe haven" law in the country, and there are some major problems happening as a result.

"Safe haven" laws are laws that allow for mothers to drop off infants at hospitals, fire departments, police departments and government offices. Most of the states have them, but Nebraska went much further than all of them.

They allow children up to age 17 to be dropped off, and not just infants.

And a Nebraska dad did just that, dropping off nine kids between the ages of one and seventeen at an emergency room late Wednesday night. What a horrifying story! Nebraska needs to strengthen it's child welfare system and work to keep the families together, not allow parents to discard their families that they were responsible for creating.

Now that word of this is spreading, they may have a HUGE problem on their hands when others start doing the same thing. What were the legislators down there thinking?

Congress is Asking Administration All the Right Questions: $700 Billion Bailout is Unbelievable

Democrats and conservative Republicans in Congress appear to be asking all the right questions about the Administration's plan to take over all of the "toxic debt" that Wall Street ran up.

The Secretary of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Chairman appeared before Congress for a second day to push through the Bush Administration's bail-out plan. Congress gave the two a frosty reception again and started right in on the proposal, asking for modifications to the plan. And it appears that there has been a tiny bit of progress.

The Democratic position is that the plan should also help common people who are struggling with their mortgages and are in danger of foreclosure. They want to change the bankruptcy laws of the nation so that struggling homeowners can be thrown a lifeline too and restructure their mortgages.

Conservative Republicans think that this plan is financial socialism, which they don't agree with and won't support. They want everyone to stop and think this thing through before enacting a bad plan that gets rushed through just because the Administration wants it.

One of the committee members asked if it was possible to give Wall Street a fraction of what was asked for in the plan: $150 billion instead of $700 billion, with the possibility of the Administration coming back and asking for more. They got a big "NO!"

I'm still not convinced. I think that $700 billion is just the start and they'll come back and ask for another $500-$750 billion in six months. We can't afford that!

U.S. Navy Should Escort Russian Ships into Venezuelan Waters

It would be really funny if the entire U.S. Atlantic Fleet sortied and rendezvoused with the four Russian Navy ships heading to Venezuela and provided close escort for the Russians into Venezuelan waters.

The little commie runt in Venezuela would be SCREAMING his head off, wouldn't he?

Government Needs to Take Steps to Ensure That Current Wall Street Trouble Doesn't Happen Again

I've been holding off commenting on the current Wall Street crisis until I could understand what was happening and why. Here's how it breaks down:

1. People wanted to buy houses that were too expensive for them.
2. Mortgage companies wanted people to buy expensive houses too.
3. Banks lowered their standards to a point that people didn't even have to show that they had a job or could afford the monthly payments.
4. People got the loans and "bought" their houses with a mortgage.
   
5. Investment banks used a system referred to as "leveraging", which means that they borrowed money from other banks and countries to buy up the mortgages so that they would receive the income from the borrower. Since the interest rate on the mortgage was higher than the interest rate on the loan that the investment bank took out to purchase the mortgage, a profit would be made by the investment bank.
6. Some banks kept borrowing money to buy up more mortgages and make more money. Several of the big banks accumulated debt more than thirty times their TOTAL value.
7. Housing collapse began; people began to default on their mortgages.
8. So many people defaulted that the banks couldn't pay back their own debts that they had accumulated.
9. "Toxic debt" was the term coined to describe the debts that the investment banks accumulated to buy up mortgages.
10. On Friday, President Bush announced that the government would buy up the "toxic debt" to shore up the faltering financial sector. The U.S. taxpayer gets stuck with the trillion-dollar bailout. Some people need to go to JAIL.
    

That's it in a nutshell.

And I am not in favor of this move until we're told EXACTLY how much this is going to cost.

There's plenty of blame to go around:

• People shouldn't have taken out loans that were beyond their ability to pay back.
• The banks should NEVER have allowed these loans to be authorized.
• The government should NEVER have eased the leverage restrictions that were in place until the late 1990s. This was a total screw-up.
• Both parties are to blame as well. The party that SHOULD have seen this crisis coming DIDN'T, and the party that did didn't do ANYTHING about it.
  
• In addition, the Fed should have done much more to keep the dollar strong, which is their MANDATE.
• The government should have been cutting expenses at the same rate as their tax cuts. $1 of tax cuts should have translated into at least $1 of spending cuts. They should have been cutting our $10 trillion debt load up to a week ago, before committing the government to an additional $1.5 trillion (minimum) that they've taken up to save Fannie May, Freddie Mac, and all the banks that have failed in 2008. Put another way, this week has been the most expensive government spending surge in HISTORY.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has spent $600 billion in 2008. It has $30 to $45 billion left in reserves, which is approaching the minimum mandated by federal law. What happens if another 10-20 banks go under and they each have $3 billion in covered deposits?

Who's leveraging the GOVERNMENT??!

Pakistan Claims to Have Opened Fire on U.S. Choppers: Conflicting Accounts

Here's the conflicting versions of an "incident" involving U.S., Pakistani and tribal forces:

Pakistan security force: "Pakistani forces and local tribesmen opened fire on two U.S. helicopters who attempted to land along the Pakistan/Afghanistan border on the Pakistani side. The helicopters fled back across the border to Afghanistan."

Pakistan Foreign Ministry: "Local tribesmen opened fire on two U.S. helicopters escorted by U.S. gunships who attempted to land along the Pakistan/Afghanistan border on the Pakistani side. Pakistani security forces were not involved. The helicopters fled back across the border to Afghanistan."

Pakistani Army: "We deny it. Our border wasn't violated. But we did hear shooting in the area. We don't know where the firing was directed."

Tribesmen: "We saw that U.S. forces were gathering across the border, so thousands of tribesmen who were upset that the U.S. came in on September 3rd and killed twenty civilians gathered and were guarding the area. Good thing the U.S. left, otherwise the people were ready to give them the welcome that they deserved."

Pentagon spokesman: "The incident described by Pakistan didn't happen."

It seems like everyone has a version of what did or didn't happen.

It's probable that someone with an itchy trigger finger in the village got spooked, and everyone joined in the firing, without having a real target in sight. Once the firing stopped, someone claimed that U.S. helicopters had tried to land, and that's how the story spread.

I'm inclined to go with the Pakistani Army and Pentagon explanations. What a confusing story.

No American Candidates Should be Anywhere Near UN Next Week: Opening Session Being Attended by World Leaders

I'm not too happy to hear that the GOP ticket is planning on sending Sarah Palin to the U.N. to meet world leaders to build her foreign policy experience. That is precisely the WRONG thing to do; it's no better than Obama's grandstanding overseas a couple of months ago.

They need to reconsider this move. If McCain/Palin wins in November, she can build up her experience by attending funerals of foreign leaders and dignitaries, and acting as the President's representative while overseas.

This could backfire as badly as Obama's bungled overseas trip. I don't think they want to go there. Both tickets should avoid the UN like the plague!

Pakistan Orders It's Army to Open Fire on American Troops on Strike Missions Into Pakistani Territory: American Side Needs to Back Off

Pakistan is getting fed up with American troops crossing the border into their territory to destroy Taliban and al-Qaeda targets and has ordered it's army to open fire on American and coalition forces that they encounter inside Pakistan. This is not a healthy turn of events.

An American admiral went to Pakistan to talk to their new government about smoothing things over, but each time an American strike happens inside Pakistan and civilians get killed by American bombs and missiles, it destabilizes Pakistan's fragile government and increases the risk of an anti-American government coming to power in Islamabad. This is not a good way of keeping Pakistan on our side.

I don't think this is a correct course of action to take; we don't need to get into a shooting war with Pakistan over this. I think President Bush and the Pentagon need to decide if Pakistan is still our ally or if it's a nation that we intend to invade next. We're not acting like good friends to Pakistan.

No good can come of this.

When Is That Little Commie Runt in Venezuela Going to Get Indicted on Drug Charges?

The U.S., Venezuela and Bolivia are engaged in expelling one another's ambassadors; the U.S. has also frozen the assets of two Venezuelans who are engaged in drug dealing to raise money for FARC rebels in Columbia.

Screw that!

When will U.S. courts indict President Chavez on drug dealing charges? Forget about the lackeys, go for the head of the snake itself, and charge him as Manuel Noriega was. Better yet, get INTERPOL involved, as Chavez ordered his people to sell drugs for FARC, which he supports. That's grounds for INTERPOL involvement.

Further, Columbia, the U.S. and Venezuela are all signatories to the INTERPOL agreement. If the U.S. wants to isolate the Mouth of the South, this is a good way to do so, until Columbia's people get tired of Chavez and throw him out of office themselves.

Some People Need to CHILL: They're Creating the Very Gas Shortage That They're Afraid Of

There's been a great deal of rumor-mongering going on today, and it's created a self-fulfilling prophecy.

People are afraid that gas will hit $5 or $6 a gallon overnight; what a bunch of BULLSHIT! That wouldn't have happened, but since so many people went out and panic-bought fuel today, they're creating the very shortage that they're afraid of. And now there's a possibility that gas will hit $5 in the coming days and weeks because of the panic buying AND the potential disruption, which probably wouldn't have been so bad on it's own.

According to WLNS, the police had to be called to at least one gas station in the Lansing area today, to break up fights between drivers. State officials are telling everyone to follow their normal routines when it comes to fill-ups as it will minimize any ACTUAL disruptions in the fuel supply from Hurricane Ike.

People need to remember that as demand exceeds supply, the price will increase. If the hurricane tears up oil production and disrupts the supply, that's one thing. But for us to panic-buy and reduce the available supply faster than it can be replenished, and the price skyrockets as a result--without the price gouging factor--then we've shot ourselves in the a$$.

Shame, shame.

Who Cares What Bolivia Does? They Need Us More Than We Need Them

Regarding the Bolivian expulsion of our ambassador: WHO CARES?

They need us more than we need them. Let them throw our entire embassy out while their country goes to pieces, as it's currently doing.

The State Department can cut their budget accordingly and save the money that would be wasted on Bolivia's current government. They won't even be there in a couple of months! Their own people seem to be showing them the door.

Good riddance!

Foreign Governments Need to Stay the Hell Out of Our Business: We'll Elect Our Own President, Thank You Very Much

80% of the world wants Obama in the White House? Too bad; there might well be a lot of disappointed people around the world once AMERICANS have their say at the polls on November 4th. Americans don't like foreigners messing with OUR elections.

And what is with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown endorsing Obama and Obama's proposals that Obama withdrew his support from last month? I respect the Prime Minister, but not when it comes to OUR elections. He ought to get his OWN house into order before telling us how to run ours.

And speaking of elections, why won't he allow a general election in Britain? Is it because Labor's run out of gas and the Conservatives lead by David Cameron are taking seats away from his party in local elections across Britain? This man has some nerve endorsing Obama when he won't allow a general election in his own country.

And as predicted, Obama didn't earn any votes over here with his grand trip overseas, in which he WAS grandstanding. Shame, shame. Pandering to an overseas audience before he's even elected.

International community, keep your opinions to yourselves because we AREN'T interested. Run your own elections, and let us run ours.

Conyers Says She's Ready to Lead Detroit City Council: I Think Not

President Pro Tempore Monica Conyers says she's ready to lead the Detroit City Council once Council President Ken Cockrel becomes acting Mayor of Detroit.

YEAH, RIGHT.





She called Cockran "Shrek" in the above exchange. She was more concerned about being disrespected and was extremely rude herself.

Her temper will get the best of her and she'll turn the city council meetings into a bigger farce than they are now. And that's assuming that she comes out of the FBI investigation of the council in the clear.

Here's more of her fine leadership qualities on display:

• Yesterday she ran away from the press after calling them "evil" and requested an escort past them.
• During the Democratic National Convention she called the Denver police to moderate a dispute between her, her staff and the hotel that she was staying at. Calling the police for something like THAT?
• She threatened to shoot one of outgoing Mayor Kilpatrick's aides at a pension meeting and then threatened to have her four brothers "whup his a$$."

She's promised to behave, but given the type of politics that goes on at the City Council meetings, will she be able to keep order and stay in order?

Woodward Makes Brief Mention of New Technique for Tracking Terror Leaders: Media Should STAY OFF This Part of the Story

Bob Woodward's new book makes mention of a new system of tracking and targeting terrorist leaders in Iraq and Afghanistan that the military is taking great advantage of. But when questioned about it in an interview, Woodward declined to explain further.

Smart move, Bob. I hope the media follows his example and leaves this part of the story alone. Whatever the military is doing, it's working.

The last time that the press revealed that the military was able to track al-Qaeda's use of particular electronic devices, the group stopped using them, which made the system useless and lead to more American lives being lost on the battlefield. We don't want a repeat of that experience.

If there are any reporters out there who already know the details about this "system" that Woodward mentions, ZIP IT. Don't take another tool out of the hands of the military.

Detroit's Mayoral Nightmare Ends: Kilpatrick Pleads Guilty and Resigns

Detroit's long nightmare is finally over. Mayor Kilpatrick plead guilty to two counts of obstruction of justice, will resign, serve 120 days in jail, and will have probation for five years. In addition he will lose his law license, forfeit his pension and will repay the city $1 million.

The scandal has made international headlines for months and was a huge embarrassment to the city and to the entire state of Michigan. Today's developments are also generating international headlines.

Now they have to sort out the City Council down there. Several members are under FBI investigation for corruption and may be in big trouble.

Kilpatrick's resignation will go into effect in two weeks; the city council president will assume control of the city as Detroit's 61st mayor the next day; hopefully he cleans house.

GOP Platform Looks Good; Few Items of Concern

The 2008 GOP platform is now complete and is available on their web site. They have a lot of good stuff in it, not the least of which are:

• Support for the First Amendment right of association that protects the Boy Scouts of America and other similar organizations who are under attack from liberals.
• Support for appointing judges with a strict view of the Constitution to the federal bench and not political activists who believe in the "living document" crap.
• Support for the 2nd Amendment to keep and bear arms.
• Support for human rights, religious freedom and economic freedom overseas.
• A strong pro-life stance in the abortion debate.
• A commitment to maintain our friendship with Israel.
• Calls for an end to earmarking.
• Calls for a balanced budget amendment, except during times of war.
• A ban on human cloning and stem cell research which involves the destruction of embryonic human life, and the creation of human embryos for research purposes.
  
• A massive expansion of stem-cell research in those areas that do not involve the destruction of embryonic human life.
• Preserving property rights.
  

I'm not in full agreement with everything in their platform.

• They still refuse to recognize habeas corpus as a right as described in the United Nations charter and is an international right, not just an American one.
• They're maintaining their support of the death penalty as a party.
• I also don't believe that the Republicans will stop runaway government spending. The moderates who hold a majority in the party will keep spending and expanding the debt unless conservatives get in control of the party. THEN we'll see dramatic reductions. Not before.
• Global warming hubris. Where exactly does the science end and the politics begin?
  

They're also debating the 2012 primary system. Looks like two states will again enjoy primacy at the expense of all others; I had hoped they would get rid of this unfair system after two states--Michigan and Florida--rebelled against this system for the 2008 primary season. I think every state in the union needs to follow Michigan's and Florida's example and hold their primaries early in 2012. This issue needs to be forced; both parties are reluctant to go there.

Here's the platform.

DailyKos's Lies Exposed: Backpedals on Story that Governor Palin's Fifth Child Was Actually Her Grandchild

Slam dunk story...ultra-liberal blog site DailyKos tried to spread a vicious lie that Governor Sarah Palin's fifth child was not hers, that the child was actually her daughter's.

So the Palin family fired back, announcing that the daughter is five months pregnant right now, which blows the DailyKos story clear out of the water. They've already eliminated their original post in shame, posting the announcement of the daughter's pregnancy, with the tagline that the candidate "was SO not vetted" by the McCain camp.

That also isn't true; McCain knew about it already; confirmation came from a McCain aide before the Palins issued a joint press release.

I'm SO enjoying watching DailyKos squirm...

The Mainstream Media is Getting It Wrong Again: They Underestimate Conservative Turnout on Election Day

The word out in the media is that they're laughing at the GOP vice presidential nominee and consider it a joke.

GOOD.

Considering the outcomes of the last two Presidential elections, one would have thought that they had learned their lesson. Guess not. They're ignoring the effect that Governor Palin is already having on conservative voters, who have already proven that when they turn out in large numbers, their candidate wins the election.

There's some pretty silly articles out there put on by liberal pundits who have no clue as to what kind of strategy McCain is employing, including this one. The Politico article is one of the more clueless ones that I've seen so far.

It's still too early to tell if Governor Palin will be able to draw out conservatives who were sitting on the fence, waiting to see how things turn out before deciding to go vote on Election Day. But if she's successful and enough attention is turned onto Obama's time in the Senate and his super-liberal positions, the Democrats could be in deep trouble, considering that there's a statistical dead-heat going on in the polls.

The entire election will hinge on whether the conservatives turn out in force, and carry as few as two swing states that are leaning toward Obama at the current time. There's still two full months and change before Election Day, and it could go either way. But the MSM is underestimating the conservative turnout and overestimating the Democratic turnout, as they have over and over again. It'll be funny if they're dead wrong--again.

The conservatives are better at turning out voters than the Democrats and "rock the vote" are. When will the media be on the same page as reality?