Final Four Set for Tipoff

By LCR Contributor Barrell Rider

The 2011 Final Four is set. In the Goliath semi-final we have a matchup of traditional powers Kentucky and UConn. On the David side of the bracket, we have party crashers Virginia Commonwealth University and last season’s Cinderella, the Butler Bulldogs making an encore.

Butler made an improbable and magnificent run last season, falling one basket short of a national title in its loss to Duke. This season the Butler Bulldogs struggled early, starting the season 16-9 and 4-5 in conference play. But Butler put together a run, winning its conference tournament and receiving an automatic bid to the big dance. After a thrilling buzzer beater in its opener versus Old Dominion, the Bulldogs once again went into their tourney mode, taking down #1 seed Pittsburg from the mighty Big East, Wisconsin of the Big Ten and the SEC regular season champs and #2 seed Florida Gators. Butler has now won 13 straight games.

Virginia Commonwealth University is making its first ever appearance in the Final Four. The Rams run to the Final Four is equally as impressive and just as shocking as Butler’s two appearances. The Rams have gone from First Four to Final Four as they faced the USC Trojans in a play in game to qualify as an 11 seed. VCU has defeated a team from every major power conference in basketball having beaten USC (Pac-10), Georgetown (Big East), Purdue (Big-10), Florida State (ACC) and #1 seed Kansas (Big-12).

Kentucky is no stranger to the Final Four as the Wildcats are making their 14th appearance, this season is the first time UK has been there since 1998, a long drought by their standards. The Wildcats have also won 7 national titles. Kentucky took down the #1 overall seed Ohio State 62-60 in one of the best games of the entire tournament. UK then defeated North Carolina in the Elite 8 to complete their run to the Final Four. UK has displayed great defense and has seen excellent balance offensively with several players sharing the point totals. Kentucky has also closed games impressively, executed very well down the stretch.

Despite being considered a power program, the UCONN Huskies have made an improbable run to the Final Four in a season filled with controversy, turmoil and inconsistency. The NCAA found UCONN guilty of multiple recruiting violations in the offseason which resulted in the resignation of two assistant coaches and a 3 game suspension by head coach Jim Calhoun to start Big East Conference play in fall of 2011. Multiple players, both current and former, also received suspensions. Amidst all of the media scrutiny and doubt as to the future of their head coach, once again the Huskies find themselves in the Final Four having defeated the likes of Big East foe Cincinnati, streaking San Diego State, and red hot Arizona. UCONN is also lead by one of the nation’s finest players Kemba Walker who averages 23.9 pts and 4.6 assists. Walker has been amazing in the tournament scoring 33 versus Cincinnati, 36 vs. SDSU and 20 vs. Arizona.

The final three games should provide some great enjoyment for basketball fans. Who do you like to win it all?

In the Semi-final I think Butler edges VCU in a fantastic game 73-68, the Bulldogs have been here before. Kentucky outpunches UCONN and holds on for a 68-66 win. Kentucky wins their 8th championship by downing Butler in another thriller 75-50.

BTW, the NCAA tourney generates spending equal to Iceland's GDP. Check it out!

WI Unions resort to protection racket against small businesses

By Sam Foster

Big Government has the memeorandum thread, but I read about it in the unparrelled coverage over at Lonely Conservative.

According to JS Online, WI unions have created a political support protection racket:

Members of Wisconsin State Employees Union, AFSCME Council 24, have begun circulating letters to businesses in southeast Wisconsin, asking them to support workers’ rights by putting up a sign in their windows.

If businesses fail to comply, the letter says, “Failure to do so will leave us no choice but (to) do a public boycott of your business. And sorry, neutral means 'no' to those who work for the largest employer in the area and are union members."

Jim Parrett, a field representative of Council 24 for Southeast Wisconsin, confirmed the contents of the letter, which carries his signature. But he added that the union was also circulating letters to businesses thanking them for supporting workers’ rights.

This would surely hurt public opinion of unions, but the trick is always the media's blinders to such overt political threats. I mean, it's a story not about Sarah Palin. While you seeth, let me entice the steam rising from the top of your head and point you to a recent NY Post article detailing how public unions have been protecting state workers who abuse the elderly.

A small thought on the legality of all of this. The legal wisdom is that this form of political speech is not extortion. I wonder if this will be true if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Obamacare. I mean, they are treatening to withhold business, which we know affects interstate commerce.

Black Political organizations create “desegregation is racist” message for GOP

By Sam Foster

A concentrated urban area comprised almost uniformly of black residents has been a source of extreme political power for black politicians. However, the recent census is showing that black populations are dispersing into the mixed communities of the suburbs. The trend has black political organizations preparing a “desegregation means racism” message for Republicans:

With new census figures showing blacks less concentrated in inner cities and spreading to suburban communities, Morial says African-Americans must be vigilant against subtle discrimination when states redraw their political maps.

In Michigan, for instance, mostly black Detroit could see its clout diminish in Congress after losing a quarter of its population. Black lawmakers say they want to make sure that redrawn political maps - which are being guided by the Republican-controlled Michigan legislature - reflect the growing minority population in other cities and suburbs elsewhere in the state.

In Virginia, where almost a fifth of residents are black, African-American members of the state legislature are calling for a second U.S. House district that would favor black candidates. But some redistricting experts say that redrawing lines to do that could be difficult, partly because blacks are somewhat spread out in the state.

Republicans are racist because black populations are dispersing and intermingling with white populations. How dare people mix and live together without consulting black leaders first?

How Planned Parenthood uses Mammograms to increase counceling not access to mammograms

By Sam Foster

Pajama's Media has accepted and published my latest article on yesterday's Planned Parenthood Mammogram scandal. Below is a little taste:

In general, a referral could be seen as increasing access, because doing so reroutes a misguided caller to appropriate help. The problem in Planned Parenthood’s case is that they, seemingly, are intentionally misleading people seeking information. As a result, their actions constitute limiting access to mammograms.

Planned Parenthood in Southeast Iowa advertises free mammograms provided by the state. It is apparent from the webpage that Planned Parenthood is not performing the mammogram — but you’ll also notice helpful and valuable information is not provided, either. There is no reference to the state’s webpage with detailed information on the program, or to the county administrators in charge of the program. Instead, readers are directed to contact Planned Parenthood. Instead of being a conduit of access, they are using the program to drive bodies through their doors, thus injecting themselves into the process and standing in the way of people looking for access to free mammograms.

Google “free mammograms in Iowa” and Planned Parenthood tops the search list over Mercy Medical Center, a facility that actually offers mammograms and even refers potential candidates for free mammograms to the state program’s website so they can get informed without a consultation.

Please go to Pajama's Media to read the whole thing and if you like it, link it, tweet it and facebook it!

Anrdrew Napolitano, Freedom Watch, March 30, 2011, "The Matrix, In or Out"

by the Left Coast Rebel

This morning I had an idea: every morning I am going to upload Judge Andrew Napolitano's "Freedom Watch" show of the previous day. A couple of libertarian Youtube users are pretty diligent in uploading the show and I thought it would be a great way to introduce readers to the program.

Lots of conservatives still haven't had the chance to watch the judge daily or don't have access to the Fox Business Channel (myself included) so in addition to offering some unique, consistent content here at LCR (especially with my busy schedule early morning schedule, check the time stamp for this post for proof of this!), putting up Freedom Watch daily may just introduce Napolitano to a new audience.

-- Napolitano's show is probably the best political show on television, in my humble opinion, especially since Glenn Beck's program has become so bizarre.


More discussion on Libya and the federal budget via. Memeorandum, here, here.

Obama’s Approval Ratings Hit ‘New Lows’; He’ll Probably Win Re-Election in 2012

by Frank Hill, Telemachus

Recent reports trumpeted the news that President Obama’s approval ratings have fallen to 'only' 42% of the people approving of his performance in office. 50% of them say they 'disapprove' of his work so far.

With unemployment still in double-digits, millions of Americans out of work with many of them having zero chance of returning to their previous professions such as in residential or commercial real estate development anytime soon, gas prices rising to $4.00/gallon and beyond in many places around the country and now a third war front opened up in Libya, it is a wonder his approval ratings are still above 40% to be honest about it.

But Obama is still way ahead of previous lows set by every other President in recent memory. W got as low as 25% in October, 2008; Clinton hit a low of 37% in 1993; Bush 41 was at 29% in the summer of his re-election campaign in 1992 (bad time to hit a bad patch); even the now-revered Ronald Reagan hit rock bottom at 35% in 1983.

Carter hit 28% at one time. Nixon in the midst of Watergate flat-lined at 24% before he resigned. And the all-time bottom-feeder was Harry S Truman in 1952 at 22%.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both left office at the end of their two terms in office with the public almost cheering to see them leave the White House. Mister Jefferson and Mister Madison! Fathers of Our Nation! Imagine that!

What is it about US Presidents that make people not like them once in office?

But here is the deal: Even with President Obama hitting ‘new lows’ in his approval ratings, he probably will win re-election in 2012. In fact, if you want to actually make some money in this desultory economy, put some money down in Vegas and there is probably more than a 75% chance you could at least double your money as of Election Day, November, 2012.

‘What is that?’ you say. “Even Michael Moore and the left-wing of the Democratic Party have turned tooth-and-nail against Obama for his foray into Libya! Are you telling me that that means nothing when it comes to a presidential election?’

Two words to remember: ‘History’ and ‘Inertia’. Both are very important in American elective politics.

And both are very difficult to overturn when all things are considered and come down to a vote count total on a single day every 4 years.

First, a little history question:

‘How many sitting US Presidents out of our 44 total so far have been re-elected to another term while still sitting in the Oval Office?’

Answer- 18. Almost 50% for those of you who are counting at home.

Now some of these presidents, such as LBJ, ascended into the Office of President upon the death of their predecessor. So technically, they were not ‘re-elected’ to a second term but merely ‘elected to serve a second full term’.

Still, they got ‘elected’ once in office. That is the power of 'inertia', otherwise known as 'incumbency'. It is very difficult to dislodge any incumbent in any elective office anywhere in the nation simply because they are 'familiar' to the voting public and they can communicate to their constituents relentlessly while in office.

How many POTUSes have not been re-elected to a second term since 1980, the time when most of the adults now living have been paying taxes and wondering when American politics was going ‘to be straightened out’ finally?

1. Out of 4.

George Herbert Walker Bush 41 lost in a 3-way race in 1992 to William Jefferson Clinton who did not win a plurality of votes either since Ross Perot garnered 18% of the popular vote, mostly at the expense of Bush 41. But Reagan served 2 terms; Clinton served 2 terms and W served 2 terms.

That is a .750 batting average for those of you scoring at home. Just that plain fact alone means Obama might have as high as a 75% chance of winning re-election in 2012 regardless of who he runs against.

It may seem like right now President Barack Obama is not ‘popular’ with the American people. You know what would make him wildly ‘popular’ once again? The unemployment rate falling below 5% and economic growth hitting 5-6% per year from now through 2012.

Presidents get the benefit of great economies and win. And, rightly or wrongly, they get the brunt of bad economies, and they usually lose as a result.

So those are the key metrics to follow from here on until the 2012 elections are over: the unemployment rate; economic growth rate; Obama’s approval ratings and his ‘hard’ re-election number.

If he is under 40% in either approval or re-elect come November, 2012, and the unemployment rate is still in double-digits, then we may have a new President for 2013. But you have to beat an incumbent with a strong challenger, even in a bad economy, so who would that might be from the Republican side nowadays anyways?

If President Obama stays above 40% in approval and re-elect numbers, and the unemployment rate is around 8% and heading downward, we might see President and Mrs. Obama send their daughters off to a high school prom around about 2016 or so near the end of his second term as President of the United States of America.

Gotta admit, it would have to be pretty cool to have an after-party at the White House, wouldn't it?

At any age.

(Editor's Note: Frank Hill's resumé includes working as chief of staff for Senator Elizabeth Dole and Congressman Alex McMillan, serving on the House Budget Committee and serving on the Commission on Entitlement and Tax Reform. He takes on politics from a fiercely independent perspective at the blog Telemachus).

Via. Memeorandum, here, here. Also read: Reaganite Republican, "Obam's Razor: What's the Most Radical Explanation for Recent US Action in Libya?"

Kathy Hochul, Democrat for NY-26 special, thinks high speed rail will double the size of Buffalo

By Sam Foster

All liberal ideas seem to create a massive amount of jobs for Americans. Obama claimed his stimulus would create 4 million jobs. Sounds like a fish story considering the over 9% unemployment rate. I suppose that would explain why 6% believe him.

Like Obama, Kathy Hochul is all about jobs, jobs, jobs. And like Obama and his favorite spending boondoggles, Kathy Hochul is no stranger to exaggerating the number of jobs her favorite policies will create.

After a meeting on NY's high speed rail project, Kathy Hochul tweeted:

Just left a meeting in Niagara Falls about the high speed rail project: exciting opportunity to create a potential 247,000 jobs for WNY.

That's quite a figure Hochul has deduced given the fact that the train's most avid supporter, Louise Slaughter, estimates 21,000 jobs for all of Upstate, NY.

Hochul's slogan ought to be "I'll double the size of Buffalo with choo-choos"


This could be Kathy Hochul's theme song...

Democrats retreat on congressional races

By Sam Foster

A little bit of Democrat election fail from one of my favorite blogs:

IN NOVEMBER 2010, THE DCCC SAID IT WAS TARGETING 61 DISTRICTS CARRIED BY OBAMA: “The DCCC has identified 61 seats currently held by Republicans in districts that Barack Obama won in 2008. ‘Republicans won a lot of seats they have no business winning,’ said a top Democratic strategist. ‘It’s going to be a full-on recruitment cycle [and] Israel is the perfect person for that.’” (Brian Beutler, “Blue Dogged: Meet Steve Israel, The Incoming Chair Of The DCCC,” Talking Points Memo, 11/23/10)

EARLIER THIS MONTH, THEY SCALED THAT BACK TO 37 SUBURBAN DISTRICTS: “Representative Nancy Pelosi’s selection of Mr. Israel to lead the Congressional campaign had much to do with his district, a swath of Nassau and Suffolk Counties where Democrats hold a modest registration edge but independents decide elections. The path to retaking the House, both say, leads through 37 similar suburban districts, home to nine million independents who voted for President Obama in 2008 but deserted the party in the 2010 elections.” (David M. Halbfinger, “L.I. Congressman Leads Uphill Charge Toward a Democratic House,” New York Times, 03/19/11)

NOW, THE DCCC HAS BEEN FORCED TO FOCUS ON ONLY 14 DISTRICTS: “The Democratic Party is taking aim at 14 freshmen Republicans in the House, of 87 elected, whom it deems the most vulnerable…the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which is focusing on districts where Mr. Obama and Senator John Kerry both won as presidential nominees and where Democrats have a registration advantage.” (Jennifer Steinhauer, “Hardly Settled in House, but Already in Hot Seat,” New York Times, 03/27/11)

ACTUALLY, THEY EVEN GOT THAT NUMBER WRONG. IT’S 13 DISTRICTS WON BY KERRY, NOT 14: “All told, 63 Republicans in the 112th Congress will hold seats that President Obama carried in 2008 and, of that group, 13 will hold seats that Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) also won in the 2004 presidential race.” (Chris Cillizza, “The Obama Republicans,” The Washington Post’s “The Fix” blog, 11/11/10)

Yup, Steve Israel is a great choice for the DCCC, because the suburbs of NYC are just like the suburbs everywhere else.

Updated: And the new meme is that the country is 'cooling' on the Tea Party? Give me a break.

Updated x2: Memeorandum thread!

Cecile Richard’s, CEO of Planned Parenthood, lied and did more to limit access to mammograms than defunding

By Sam Foster

Do you need want a free mammogram in Iowa? If you want to go through a third party, great, head to your local planned parenthood. They will then instruct you that the state of Iowa has a program, they’ll point you to the state’s website where you can fill out the application, they’ll provide you an outbound mailbox for your application and then loan you a phone to call and make an appointment with a facility that actually performs the mammogram.

Yet according to Cecile Richards, CEO of Planned Parenthood, cutting Planned Parenthood limits access to mammograms:

If this bill ever becomes law, millions of women in this country are gonna lose their healthcare access–not to abortion services–to basic family planning, you know, mammograms.”

For this statement to be true, the loss of Planned Parenthood funding would need to coincide with a loss of access to google, the post office and a telephone. But, looking through the amendment, I see none of these additional restrictions.

Just to drive home this point, a pro-life group led a sting and called 30 clinics who all confirmed that Planned Parenthood does not do mammograms.

Looks like the sting is getting coverage and while media will pick up on Cecile Richard’s lie, there really is a much bigger nuance that I guarantee will be overlooked.

Cecile Richards argues that Planned Parenthood increases access to mammograms, the point of the sting was to show that they do not increase access, but as a result of Cecile Richard’s lie, she has reduced access to mammograms.

Listen to the calls below:

You’ll notice that the people on the call were not interested in counseling the caller and informing, merely passing the caller to someone else to handle the mammogram. In the first call on the tape, Planned Parenthood referred the caller to another Planned Parenthood, who then referred her to a third party. By misleading people, as Cecile Richards has, they are subjecting women to at least one useless step; literally complicating and standing in the way of women from talking to a provider that actually has mammograms.

Cecile Richard’s lie has probably done more to lower access to mammograms than defunding ever would have. In fact, if defunding means that people know Planned Parenthood does not offer mammograms, the defunding would probably increase access to mammograms.

via Memeorandum

Socialists Rally in Chicago for Socialist Revolution, Chicago Media Obfuscates and Ignores

by the Left Coast Rebel

Via, a recent march in Chicago touted by the local leftist media as "anti-war":

Background on the video via. Breitbart:
Chicago media reported on a recent march in Chicago as being an "Anti-War" march organized by students and "faith based groups" who "hope to spark change in our democracy." What they left out was the clear fact that the march and rally had much less to do with the Iraq war than it did about a far-left socialist agenda. Citizen journalist "Rebel Pundit" provides the information the media chose not to tell their viewers.

Meanwhile, one moron brings a stupid "witch doctor" sign to a Tea Party rally and we have a week's worth of stories about the '"racism in the Tea Party."
Gawd how I hate the lamestream press! Discussion via Memeorandum.

Donald Trump Beating the Lamestream Press at Their Own Lamestream Game, Releases "Official" Birth Certificate

by the Left Coast Rebel

Yesterday The Donald released his "official" birth certificate, here's a shot of it:

It's beyond funny watching The Donald masterfully command the birther issue, first deliberately releasing an unofficial birth certificate copy, only to follow up with releasing the real deal above.

Being that the lamestream press is so ragingly incompetent, leftist and corrupt, they clearly don't get what he is up to, which his simple: He has picked the most controversial, headline-grabbing topic to push that promotes his name and brand and makes the press look even stupider than they are. Let's face it, Trump touting a flat tax plan would not have as many people talking as the birther issue does.

And I am almost 100% certain that he is not serious about running for the Presidency of the United States, he's just promoting himself and his brand.

Also read: Another Black Conservative.
Discussion via. Memeorandum.

Tim Pawlenty for Cap and Tax Before it Became Politically Expedient to be Against it

by the Left Coast Rebel

Former Minnesota Governor has been caught with his hand in the "hey, look at me, conservative base I'm a global warming skeptic" cookie jar by Think Progress, of all sources. Think Progress has this audio taken from Laura Ingraham's show that highlights his hypocrisy:

I would love to get my hands on the actual commercial played above, has anyone seen it? Pawlenty's past indiscretions against the limited government movement don't just stop at support of junk science legislation.

I wrote this in 2009, alerting true conservatives and libertarians to the fact that I think Pawlenty is a liberal wolf in pseudo-conservative sheep's clothing:

I believe and know Pawlenty to be in the big-spending GOP camp. He would be a terrible choice. Albeit he would predictably start to strut around his conservative ideals only to govern like another quasi-RINO...

Cato lists plenty of Pawlentie's big-government spending track record. He was a big runner-up for VP under McCain.

Some of the things listed at the Cato Institute that Tim Pawlenty stood by in Minnesota -

  • Supports Massachusetts-style health care reform, including a “health care exchange” and an individual mandate;
  • Has called for banning all prescription drug advertizing, and seeks government imposed price controls for drugs offered through Medicare;
  • Proposed a $4000 per child preschool program for low-income children;
  • Pushed a statewide smoking ban smoking ban in workplaces, restaurants and bars;
  • Increased the state’s minimum wage;
  • Imposed some of the most aggressive and expensive renewable energy mandates in the country;
  • Was an ardent supporter of the farm bill;
  • Received only a “C” ranking on Cato’s 2006 Governor’s Report Card, finishing below such Democrats as Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack and tied with Democratic Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell.
How in the world will the Republican party spearhead sensible economic reform if they nominate an opportunist with a clearly statist liberal past? Being that I saw Pawlenty last night on Sean Hannity's show touting his "perfect CATO score", I imagine that many of you don't even know that his conservative bona fides are anything but.

Spread the word, Pawlenty is not the man for 2012. Related discussion: Memeorandum.

Who Is the Libyan Jefferson Davis?

By Proof

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

As bad as Mubarak and Qaddafi have been, one of the things that have bothered me about this administration's rush to remove Egyptian and Libyan dictators, is the uncertainty of who or what would be replacing them. I believe that part of the reticence to take out Saddam during the first Gulf War, was not knowing who would fill the vacuum of his passing. Better the devil you know...

And now, it appears that some of the "rebels" in Libya have Al-Qaeda connections. What's to prevent a radical Muslim takeover or either Egypt or Libya (or both)? The terrorist group Hamas was "democratically" elected to govern the Gaza strip. Merely holding an election is not enough to institute the democratic reforms needed to sustain a Jeffersonian democracy (or a democratic republic, if you will.)

What if a coalition of the great nations had intervened on behalf of our rebels a hundred and fifty years ago? Since there is a possibility of us backing the "wrong rebels", I offer the following:

Dateline Paris, 1862:

Tonight, I’d like to update the French people on the international effort that we have led in the United States –- what we’ve done, what we plan to do, and why this matters to us.

I want to begin by paying tribute to our men and women in uniform who, once again, have acted with courage, professionalism and patriotism. They have moved with incredible speed and strength. Because of them and our dedicated diplomats, a coalition has been forged and countless lives have been saved.

Meanwhile, as we speak, our troops are also fighting in Mexico. For generations, France has played a unique role as an anchor of global security and as an advocate for human freedom. Mindful of the risks and costs of military action, we are naturally reluctant to use force to solve the world’s many challenges. But when our interests and values are at stake, we have a responsibility to act. That’s what happened in the United States over the course of these last six weeks.

The American people are been ruled by Abraham Lincoln, who has denied his people freedom and exploited their wealth. He began attacking and killing his own people. I made it clear that Lincoln had lost the confidence of his people and the legitimacy to lead, and I said that he needed to step down from power.

Confronted by this brutal repression and a looming humanitarian crisis, I ordered warships into American waters. European allies, Britain and Spain declared their willingness to commit resources to stop the killing. We have instituted a blockade...a "no float zone" if you will, outside northern American ports.

We struck regime forces approaching Atlanta to save that city and the people within it. We targeted military assets that had been choking off towns and cities, and we cut off much of their source of supply.

It’s true that France cannot use our military wherever repression occurs. And given the costs and risks of intervention, we must always measure our interests against the need for action. But that cannot be an argument for never acting on behalf of what’s right. In this particular country -– the United States — at this particular moment, we were faced with the prospect of violence on a horrific scale. More Americans have died during this conflict than at any other time in their history.

I believe that this movement of change cannot be turned back, and that we must stand alongside those who believe in the same core principles that have guided us through many storms: our opposition to violence directed at one’s own people; our support for a set of universal rights, including the freedom for people to express themselves and choose their leaders; our support for governments that are ultimately responsive to the aspirations of the people.

For these reasons and more, we support Jefferson Davis and those "rebels" and their adherence to the right of self determination.

Thank you. God bless you, and may God bless the newly formed Confederate States of America.


Related discussion: Memeorandum. Cross posted at Proof Positive

Eric Holder’s DOJ exonerates itself from any wrongdoing in New Black Panther Party Scandal

By Sam Foster

I wish I could say that I was the first to point out that Eric Holder and Obama are instigating a whitewash of wrongdoing in the New Black Panther Party scandal, but unfortunately, J. Christian Adams prognosticated that it was coming nearly two weeks ago:

The New Black Panther fix is in. I have learned through sources inside and outside the Department of Justice that the long-awaited internal report on the New Black Panther voter intimidation dismissal is done, and sensible Americans aren’t going to be happy. In essence, it will adopt the outrageous position of Attorney General Eric Holder when he testified to Congressman Frank Wolf’s Appropriations subcommittee a few weeks ago: all this fuss about the New Black Panther dismissal does a disservice to his people, or to quote the attorney general at the hearing, “my people.”

And surprise, surprise, the DOJ did as Adams had predicted. Today it exonerated itself:

In a letter to the House Judiciary Committee, the department’s Office of Professional Responsibility said it had found no evidence that officials involved in decisions about the case acted inappropriately out of political or racial motivations.

The office said its conclusion applied both to officials who brought a sweeping civil lawsuit “We determined that the attorneys involved in the NBPP case made good faith, reasonable assessments of the facts and the law,” wrote Robin Ashton, a counsel in the office.

Robin Ashton is not part of some nonpartisan commission. She works for and reports to Eric Holder. She’s an Eric Holder appointment who was given the job of exonerating Obama since just last December right before Republicans took hold of the keys of executive oversight.

The DOJ findings stand in stark contrast with the nonpartisan Commission on Civil Rights which in January found that Obama’s administration was in fact, overtly culpable in the New Black Panther proceedings. But, since the commission issued this preliminary finding, Obama has appointed Democrat and Chicago attorney (as if there could be an Obama appointment from some other city) Martin Castro to chair the commission. Do you think we’ll ever get an official report now?

In the meantime, The Daily Caller has been busy digging up information on the Holder appointment, Loretta King, who was the AD in charge of dropping the New Black Panther case and she is a real piece of work. She fought voter verification in Georgia and is currently trying to argue an affirmative action case in direct contradiction to the Supreme Court ruling in Ricci v. DeStefano.

With a long list of Obama scandals that Darrel Issa is investigating, it sure does seem like Team Obama is working hard to tie up loose ends.

Cross posted at The Lonely Conservative

According to Public Policy Polling, people who didn’t vote or remember if they voted don’t approve of Florida Governor Scott

By Sam Foster

A week ago, I called out Public Policy Polling as a political spin machine instead of credible pollster:

Still, there are a number of things to consider before taking PPP at their word. After 2010 elections, which PPP did a good job polling, many have noticed a dramatic pull toward narrative building as opposed to informational reporting. Especially their Charlie Sheen/Sarah Palin gimmick (Nate Silver’s words, not mine).

While PPP is associated with Daily Kos, they’re accuracy in 2010 elections won over my doubts. However, in a very new development, they are also teaming up with the SEIU and given their narrative making, I’m not sure PPP should really be getting the unbiased press that they’ve enjoyed over the last few months.

And without fail, it looks like their recent polling on Republican Governor Rick Scott of Florida follows the template I laid out. Introducing the poll is a blog post called “Scott Incredibly Unpopular.” The narrative has carried over to David Weigel of Slate and the Orlando Sentinel, but once again, the cross tabs are revealing.

First of all, while Scott won the election by a percentage point, PPP gave Democrat Alex Sink a +7% edge in the demographics they used for the poll. That’s an 8 point difference from the election just 4 months ago. I cannot compare to their supposed December poll because it wasn’t a control question, however, even PPP has Scott polling low even before he took office?

Looking at the PPP crosstabs, we learn that Scott is not viewed well by those that voted for Democrat Sink. Anyone surprised? There seems to be some defection in those that voted for him in comparison to Sink, but the big population driving up Scott’s negatives are people who identified that they didn’t vote or don’t remember voting.

I suppose that this could translate into Scott being incredibly unpopular, but to be more accurate, he’s incredibly unpopular with those that don’t vote or are so disengaged they don’t remember voting.

It hardly merits the mindless narrative floating around the pundits, that Scott is linked to a widespread softening of Republican governors and is in an extremely weak position.

But, hey, it’s the media, just run with it ok.

Rand Paul Responds To Obama Libya Address

So Obama made some remarks on Libya to explain rationalize his unconstitutional actions there, but Rand Paul takes him to task for contradicting his statements as a candidate.

If I may say so, Rand is awfully presidential here:

Via: Memeorandum.

Governor Walker implements union employee paycheck increases today

By Sam Foster

I’ve wondered why Governor Walker has been pushing hard for the implementation of his repair bill. William Jacobson points out something I didn’t consider before:

With the law now in effect and paychecks getting an increase since union dues are not being withheld, Democrats are the party arguing for a reduction in state worker paychecks.

This is an angle that was missed in the WI mess and of course, will not get covered. Walker may have cut workers bargaining power with the state, but in demolishing automatic union due deduction, he gave union employees a very big bargaining chip in employee relations with their own unions. And when only half of union employees actually agree with what their unions are doing, this sounds like an undeniable benefit.

Plus, the extra money is nice.

However, I strongly doubt that this is going to significantly sway public or union employee opinions.

The Prefessor gets his own memeorandum thread. Nice!

Cost of Libya Intervention $600 Million for First Week- Pentagon

By Proof

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Attention: All you folk that want to carp about Bush's "unpaid for" wars, listen up!

One week after an international military coalition intervened in Libya, the cost to U.S. taxpayers has reached at least $600 million, according figures provided by the Pentagon. U.S. ships and submarines in the Mediterranean have launched at least 191 Tomahawk cruise missiles from their arsenals, costing $268.8 million, the Pentagon said.

One point four million per cruise missile. They were about a million when Clinton wagged the dog over the chubby intern.

U.S. warplanes have dropped 455 precision guided bombs, costing tens of thousands of dollars each. A downed Air Force F-15E fighter jet will cost more than $60 million to replace. And operation of ships and aircraft, guzzling ever-more-expensive fuel to maintain their positions off the Libyan coast and in the skies above, could reach millions of dollars a week, experts say.

...The three B-2 stealth bombers that flew from Missouri to Libya and back on an early bombing mission each cost an estimated $10,000 per hour to fly, a defense official said. That means the planes, each on a 25-hour round-trip flight, ran up a bill of $750,000, and the 45 Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) they dropped added at least $1.3 million more.

Cruise missile? $1.4 million.

F-15? $31 Million

Mind numbing hypocrisy over intervening in a country that did not attack us nor posed no imminent threat to us?


H/T Memeorandum
Cross posted at Proof Positive

Obama's Libyan Adventure - in His Own Words

By Proof

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

President Obama, clear as mud, as to why we bombed Libya:

(Gaddafi) has denied his people freedom, exploited their wealth, murdered opponents at home and abroad, and terrorized innocent people around the world

This makes him different from Saddam Hussein, how exactly?

...We then took a series of swift steps in a matter of days to answer Gaddafi's aggression. We froze more than $33 billion of the Gaddafi regime's assets.
And the fact that he has 14 tons of gold at his fingertips means that the freeze would not be as crippling as one might hope.

Joining with other nations at the United Nations Security Council, we broadened our sanctions, imposed an arms embargo, and enabled Gaddafi and those around him to be held accountable for their crimes. I made it clear that Gaddafi had lost the confidence of his people and the legitimacy to lead, and I said that he needed to step down from power.

Big whoop. If any other world leader looked at Obama's poll numbers and told him the same thing, any guesses as to what his reaction would be? Where are all the "We're not the cops of the world" Leftists to protest Obama intervening in the internal affairs of a sovereign country?

We knew that if we waited one more day, Benghazi – a city nearly the size of Charlotte – could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world. It was not in our national interest to let that happen

People dying in Dafur...does that not "stain the conscience of the world"? What does "staining the conscience of the world" have to do with the national security of the US?

...In this effort, the United States has not acted alone. Instead, we have been joined by a strong and growing coalition.
Oh, like the one G.W. Bush build before going into Iraq? Well, his was bigger! Again, how does this differ, other than the hypocrisy of the players, between Libya and Iraq? just one month, the United States has worked with our international partners to mobilize a broad coalition, secure an international mandate to protect civilians, stop an advancing army, prevent a massacre, and establish a No Fly Zone with our allies and partners.

And Bush took five months after receiving Congressional approval and all the mindless minions of the Left chided him for "rushing" into war. I'm sure we'll hear the same complaint from the same voices any minute now? (Crickets chirp.)

...I said that America's role would be limited; that we would not put ground troops into Libya; that we would focus our unique capabilities on the front end of the operation, and that we would transfer responsibility to our allies and partners. Tonight, we are fulfilling that pledge.

Translation from Obamaspeak: We will commit an act of war against a sovereign nation by firing missiles at them, without a proper consultation of the Congress of the United States. Plus, with the left bleating about the two wars Bush "didn't pay for", Obama launched $100+ million dollars worth of cruise missiles to begin an action AP estimates will cost upwards of one billion dollars. (That's "billion" with a "B".)

...We will safeguard the more than $33 billion that was frozen from the Gaddafi regime so that it is available to rebuild Libya. After all, this money does not belong to Gaddafi or to us – it belongs to the Libyan people, and we will make sure they receive it.
Oh, really? Did we ever "safeguard the billions" that belonged to the Palestinian people that Arafat siphoned off? And his Constitutional authority for redistributing Libyan wealth is found where exactly? I guess when he told Joe the Plumber he would "spread the wealth", he wasn't just talking about American wealth!

In this particular country – Libya; at this particular moment, we were faced with the prospect of violence on a horrific scale. We had a unique ability to stop that violence: an international mandate for action, a broad coalition prepared to join us, the support of Arab countries, and a plea for help from the Libyan people themselves.
Again, this differs from Oh, yeah. We have a Democrat in the White House!

To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and – more profoundly – our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.

Since CNN was hiding the images of mass graves in Iraq, I guess you didn't see them? And when Saddam gassed his own people or created the horrendous ecological disaster, by draining nearly 7,000 square miles of wetlands to punish the marsh Arabs living there, I guess there were no images of that, either. Neither of those rise to the "staining the conscience of the world" status, Mr. Obama?

...There will be times, though, when our safety is not directly threatened, but our interests and values are. Sometimes, the course of history poses challenges that threaten our common humanity and common security – responding to natural disasters, for example; or preventing genocide and keeping the peace; ensuring regional security, and maintaining the flow of commerce. These may not be America's problems alone, but they are important to us, and they are problems worth solving. And in these circumstances, we know that the United States, as the world's most powerful nation, will often be called upon to help.
Our values haven't been threatened in Darfur? In Iran?? Rwanda??? Obama's rhetorical obfuscation and doublespeak did not answer any of the questions about what he and Biden (and most of the Left) articulated about the Iraqi conflict. He did not address the fact that if fighting two wars strains the military and busts the budget, how there is a compelling interest in fighting a third, where American security interests are not directly threatened?

I think the Obama Doctrine needs to be defined somewhat beyond, "Because I said so".

Cross posted at Proof Positive

(VIDEO) Domestic Terrorist/Obama Friend Bill Ayers Wrote Dreams of my Father?

by the Left Coast Rebel

Bill Ayers is making headlines again, this time (again) whoring-out headlines by claiming that he wrote Obama's Dreams of my Father. This is nothing new -- if I recall correctly -- and seemingly (in my opinion) just another attempt by this moonbat commie former Obama buddy (sorry, I know that is redundant and vague) to get his 20 seconds of fame. Here's recent video shot at Montclair State University wherein Ayers makes the Dreams of my Father claim:

Did Ayers really write Obama's book? We'll never know. What is known, however is that Obama declared his higher office candidacy in Bill Ayers home and the two had other connections as well, dating back to Obama's radical past with community agitating and ACORN.

I'm sure the White House is not too happy to see this idiot running around the country making these claims as well.

Do you think that Bill Ayers wrote O's book? The fact that we even have to ask the question tells us how much trouble we are (and have been) in.

Related discussion: Memeorandum.

Politico: Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson to Launch Presidential Bid in April

by the Left Coast Rebel

Gary Johnson will announce his candidacy in April, here's an excerpt from Politico:

Gary Johnson will formally announce his candidacy for president in April while stumping in New Hampshire, an adviser told POLITICO.

The former New Mexico governor will skip the step of creating an exploratory committee, opting for an immediate start to his bid for the GOP nomination.

...Johnson occupies much of the same political space as Ron Paul, the Texas congressman who ran in 2008 and is considering another bid. Starting a campaign in April could provide such backdrops as the April 15 Tax Day and the annual April 20 push for legalizing marijuana.

Johnson’s new announcement timeline was first reported by Fox News.

Though frequently compared with Paul, the libertarian movement’s closest thing to a standard-bearer, Johnson has been distancing himself from the comparison. While they’re both libertarians, Johnson said, his reputation as “Gov. No” is different from Paul’s moniker “Dr. No.” He has emphasized his record as a governor who was prolific in using his veto pen.

“There was a big difference between Ron Paul and me when it came to the ‘no,’” Johnson recently told POLITICO. “His ‘no’ was philosophical. It was reasoned. It was right. My ‘no’ actually put a stop to legislation. It cut spending. Mine carried further than just ‘no.’ I had to follow through with the debate, discussion and dialogue on why my ‘no’ wouldn’t result in people starving, schools being shut down and the delivery of services to the poor wasn’t going to be curtailed.”

Citizen activism and blogging make for a smaller political world than one may think: Last year I was in discussion with Governor Johnson's assistant, setting up a potential meet-and-greet or phone interview for LCR. Unfortunately it didn't pan out but I would still love to get the opportunity.

Also read
: LCR friends Libertarian Patriot and the Humble Libertarian (who interviewed him here) are also a big fans of Johnson. Related discussion: Memeorandum.

(VIDEO) Reagan Shooting Closer Call than Originally Thought

by the Left Coast Rebel

I'm doing some drive-by blogging this morning, resuming a busy schedule and will be back here later today. A CBS News report (via Memeorandum) about President Reagan getting shot by John Hinckley Jr. in 1981 really caught my eye.

Here's an excerpt from the piece:

By chance, the closest hospital was on the campus of George Washington University, a hospital that had a dedicated team of trauma doctors and nurses standing-by – something few other hospitals had in those days.

“When I walked down the emergency room after being STAT-paged to go down there, I had no clue why they wanted me,” said Dr. Joe Giordano. “And I saw all these strange people around, you know, with their earplugs in and everything like that. And I said, ‘What are these people all doing here?’ I walked in and there he was on the gurney stark naked. So it was quite a shock.”

Five years earlier, when Dr. Giordano had taken over trauma care at George Washignton, its importance was only beginning to be appreciated.

“Surgeons were returning from Vietnam, and the first thing they noticed was that, gee, in the field they had everything they needed for resuscitation of the trauma patient, and the patients did very, very well because there was a trained team working by protocol with everything at their fingertips,” said Dr. Giordano.

“They came back to the United States and it was a disaster. Emergency rooms did not have experienced personnel seeing patients.”

Giordano believes the decision to bring Reagan straight to his emergency room made all the difference.

The New Gotcha Question

The gotcha question is a cherished tradition in American politics. It's a simple formula, e.g., ask a candidate how much a gallon of milk costs, hope he stumbles, then portray him as "out of touch" with the common man.

Now lefties have found a new source of gotcha questions for conservative candidates: Islam...
ThinkProgress, for example, caught up with GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain yesterday at the Conservative Principles Conference in Iowa... TP asked a good follow-up question: "Would you be comfortable appointing a Muslim, either in your cabinet or as a federal judge?" Cain replied:

"No, I would not. And here's why. There is this creeping attempt, there is this attempt to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government. It does not belong in our government. This is what happened in Europe. And little by little, to try and be politically correct, they made this little change, they made this little change. And now they've got a social problem that they don't know what to do with..."
So not unlike Juan Williams, Herman Cain has chosen to be honest about being uncomfortable with Islam in certain contexts. Not unlike Mitt Romney, Cain isn't planning to appoint Muslims to cabinet-level positions.

I find it absolutely fascinating to see that leftists, who are universally uncomfortable with a displays of the Ten Commandments in the court house, are so determined to put representatives of Islam there.

So here are some questions for the Soros suckers at Think Progress:

Would you like to see a Scientologist on the next president's cabinet? How about a Raëlian? Would you be comfortable with a member of the Westboro Baptist Church? Do you hope to see more Positive Christianity in the judicial system?

Maybe some of these questions should be directed toward Barack Hussein. Ask him if he plans to appoint any Black Liberation Theologists any time soon. Or did he renounce BLT when he threw his dear reverend under the bus?

Update: BigFurHat has questions, too...
[W]hat if [Cain] said that his cabinet would be completely secularized and contain nothing but atheists, adhering to the interpretation of the 1st amendment as stated by progtards? What would they say? Foul?
Update II: Via The Right Scoop...

Update III:

The Other McCain: Herman Cain Refuses to Be Intimidated by Political Correctness

Update IV:

CAIR goes crazy: CNN bases an entire story around CAIR and makes no mention of their well-known terror connections and recent testimony by FBI chief Mueller stating they cut off all contact with them over “questionable leadership.”

More From the Inconsistent Left... Just What Are Their Values?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism

The hypocrisy of the left continues to amaze. From Bloomberg.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the U.S. won’t enter into the internal conflict in Syria the way it has in Libya.

“No,” Clinton said, when asked on the CBS “Face the Nation” program if the U.S. would intervene in Syria’s unrest. Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s security forces clashed with protesters in several cities yesterday after his promises of freedoms and pay increases failed to prevent dissent from spreading across the country.

Clinton said the elements that led to intervention in Libya -- international condemnation, an Arab League call for action, a United Nations Security Council resolution -- are “not going to happen” with Syria, in part because members of the U.S. Congress from both parties say they believe Assad is “a reformer.”

“What’s been happening there the last few weeks is deeply concerning, but there’s a difference between calling out aircraft and indiscriminately strafing and bombing your own cities,” Clinton said, referring to Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi’s attacks on the Libyan people, “than police actions which, frankly, have exceeded the use of force that any of us would want to see.”
Unique Situations

“Each of these situations is unique,” Clinton said, referring to the Middle Eastern countries dealing with change and unrest, a list that now includes Yemen, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Syria and Bahrain.

Yup, the liberal hypocrisy of it all. No principles, no values, no consistency. Just fly-by-the-seat of-your-pants progressivism.

Wonderful! And these are are current and no-doubt future leaders? Glad I will be gone soon.

Read the rest of the story.

Cross posted to Rational Nation USA

Via: Memeorandum

England Gone Irrational

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservativism

The world is indeed upside down. The reliance on government to do everything for the people, even that which they ought to be doing for themselves, has become such a part of the modern English culture it has turned violent.

As can be seen in the following video clip the the once proud and reserved English have seemed to have lost their ability to reason. I guess once addicted to the candy store of Leviathan government and it's socialist handouts it is difficult to face a different and stark reality.

h/t The Telegraph:

Could the United States be next? Being somewhat a realist I would say there is a good possibility we will. Only time will tell.

More coverage on the uprising over governments budget cuts in Briton.

Cross posted to Rational Nation USA

Via: Memeorandum

Reconsidering Modern Realities... or Not

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism

I am first and foremost an avowed believer in the American Capitalist system as it once was. A system responsible for creating the greatest wealth the modern world has ever known. A system that created a nation of wealth (the USA) able to assist Europe and Japan in rebuilding their devastated infrastructure following the close of World War II. A nation responsible for the outpouring of the greatest foreign aid globally than ever seen bore in the annals of human civilization. A system that Ayn Rand understood needed to be unfettered by government interference or by business seeking special consideration either through subsidies or special tax "considerations" or favorable treatment. In other words in a true capitalist economy there would exist no such term as "to big to fail." The very fact our national leaders have accepted, and pushed this misguided notion on the American people should give all thinking Americans reason to pause and question what is really happening to our nation and its once vaunted economic system.

I am an independent conservative. Which means essentially that I favor change when experience, and or rational judgment, based on modern realities warrant it. Nothing in this dynamic world of ours remains static forever, save certain ethical principals of morality.

It is difficult, to say the least, for an independent conservative (see my Conservative Manifesto) to side with a known progressive. However, when said progressive presents an essentially sound argument based in reason and logic it requires their position be considered. And considered with an open mind unfettered by preconceived notions and beliefs. Only following additional research and consideration of the opposing viewpoint does it make sense to discard it to the recycle bin.

With this in mind Rational Nation USA asks its readership to consider the following comment from an independent small business owner left on one of my posts.. Having worked for both small business and multi-nationals in managerial capacities I can relate to, and understand his concerns.

Capitalism -- as it should and could be -- is the ideal. However, this ideal has been bastardized by both corporations and the government over many years. We as a nation are seeing the results of this today. So we have a choice. Continuing to do the same that brought us to this economic crossroads and fail. Or reconsider what "true capitalism" means and make a sharp course change to correct our ship. THE CHOICE REMAINS OURS.

Consider the following if you will with an open and unfettered mind. Then, and only then decide for yourself the right path to take. For if we become so compartmentalized that we cannot honestly consider opposing, and potentially valid views from our own cherished beliefs we are indeed lost.

Here then the comment from a reader of this independent conservative and rational sight.

TAO said...I am pro business because I own a business and have been in business for over 25 years now.

Not real sure how this competition ideal of yours would work in an economic system where "too big to fail" is just another term for monopoly.

So, pull the government out of the economy and let business compete! Tell me, are you going to break up these mega monster corporations before you do away with government? In case you have not noticed but during this "recession" we witnessing the greatest period of consolidation this nation has ever seen in banking and healthcare.

The only competition there could possbily be would be between small companies and large companies and lets be romantic...the small companies are losing their ass...

Our mega corporations have gotten so big that they have even taken over our government....and everyone on the right wants to make government smaller and let corporations compete!

I would advise all would be capitalists to read John Kenneth Galbraith if your goal is to save capitalism....

As a small businessman let me tell you, taxes are secondary right now inregards to jobs creation....what small business people need to create jobs is CAPITAL....and you can't get it from a bank me, I know that for a fact.
This progressive, and small independent business owner's comments certainly deserve consideration. While I may not agree with 100% of his views {and I certainly don't} their is, at least in this independent conservatives view, enough to give serious consideration.
As an independent conservative I have no agenda other than to seek the truth. The result of which I fervently hope will be America finding it's way back to the track from which it has been derailed by its own doings.

It is time American political dialogue returns to the traditional principals defined by the best of our founding fathers. And for those that are enamored by the current crop of GOP/Tea Party activists I recommend revisiting your history. That includes Thomas Paine, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Jay, Benjamin Franklin. James Madison et al. You may be surprised by the revisiting.

Cross posted to Rational Nation USA

Libyan Rebel Fighters Have Links to al Qaeda

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism

Having made my position clear the Obama administrations interventionist policy with respect to Libya was wrong on ethical grounds, new information confirming the leader of the so called "rebel" forces spent time in Afghanistan fighting against the U.S.A. gives additional reasons to question Obama's decision. In fact I believe it gives reason to question his sanity.

Reporting in The Telegraph:

In an interview with the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, Mr al-Hasidi admitted that he had recruited "around 25" men from the Derna area in eastern Libya to fight against coalition troops in Iraq. Some of them, he said, are "today are on the front lines in Adjabiya".

Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters "are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists," but added that the "members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader".

His revelations came even as Idriss Deby Itno, Chad's president, said al-Qaeda had managed to pillage military arsenals in the Libyan rebel zone and acquired arms, "including surface-to-air missiles, which were then smuggled into their sanctuaries".

I am sure his fighters are patriots. Patriots in the cause of  establishing an Islamic Theocracy. If  Iran is any indication the new regime will be as repressive, and deny human and civil rights just as the current government does. It will quite likely provide more safe haven's for the murderous al-Qaeda.

Even though the LIFG is not part of the al-Qaeda organisation, the United States military's West Point academy has said the two share an "increasingly co-operative relationship". In 2007, documents captured by allied forces from the town of Sinjar, showed LIFG emmbers made up the second-largest cohort of foreign fighters in Iraq, after Saudi Arabia.

Earlier this month, al-Qaeda issued a call for supporters to back the Libyan rebellion, which it said would lead to the imposition of "the stage of Islam" in the country.

Doesn't it strike you as very strange that the President of the United States would make a decision to support rebels who had fought against our troops, and worse in so doing essentially support al Qaeda who is supporting the Libyan uprising? One can not help but wonder what the Presidents end game is.

Obama's intervention made no sense before, it makes even less sense now. this whole affair looks to be headed to a bad end. At the end of the day if it does we'll just chalk it up to another Obama FAIL.

Cross posted to Rational Nation USA

Via: Memeorandum 

Put your Weiner back on the chopping block: Downstate NY could lose two congressional districts

By Sam Foster

After Anthony Weiner, NY-9, adamantly denounced the rumors that his seat might be one of the two congressional districts to be drawn out of the 2012 electoral map, the media dropped the subject. But, recent census shows Weiner may have protested a bit too much.

Weiner reasoned that there was no way Queens would lose a seat:

"If the Census Bureau shows the state gained 2.1 percent [in population], then there's just no way you can take a seat from downstate," Weiner told The Ballot Box. "The math doesn't work. There are just too many people."

Other NY Downstate Democrats went on to argue that all the population loss was coming from Upstate NY.

BUT…now the story has changed.

Bill Mahoney is out with a report this afternoon that shows that, thanks to the dissapointing census showing in New York City, the downstate region is due to lose two congressional seats in the latest round of redistricting.

The report notes that there was much more proportional growth in the Hudson Valley area, and that four New York City-based congressional districts—those represented by Gregory Meeks, Carolyn Maloney, Yvette Clark and Charlie Rangel—actually lost population, with Clark's and Rangel's losing over 10,000 people each.

Meeks’ district rubs right up against Weiner’s NY-9. Also, Maloney’s covers a portion of Queens as well. What happened to all that, Downstate is safe talk? Meanwhile, Weiner’s fellow Democratic Queens congressman, Joe Crowley has hired a lobbyist to defend his seat.

So what is Anthony Weiner doing to protect his seat? He is speculating for a new job!

I know that I’m just endlessly speculating on NY redistricting, but I think that pundits need to take another look at everyone’s favorite Weiner.

Kimesia Smith arrested for attacking Burger King while wearing a bikini

By Sam Foster

Bikinis can be worn on the beach while getting a golden tan or while commiting assault and battery while ransacking your local Burger King:

A complaint about a Burger King order at a beach location turned into a brawl last weekend.

Investigators said Kimesia Smith, 23, was caught on cell phone camera yelling at counter clerks in her bikini. At one point she jumps on the counter and hits a worker with a water jug.

Police say Smith was not on spring break, but rather a local of the area. An 18-year-old employee did decide to press charges.

Remember, whatever event you choose to wear your bikini to, have fun.

A better quality video below.

G.E Turns a 14.2 Billion Dollar Profit... Claims a 3.2 Billion Dollar Tax Credit!

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism

I am all for business organizations turning a healthy profit. We should all be in favor of this because profitable businesses generally create jobs that employ people, thus enriching lives.

A case can be made that profitable organizations ought to pay a "fair" share of their profits (gross revenue less legitimate business and operating expenses) to help support the infrastructure and financial stability of the country they call home.

It is just a tad disturbing {even for an avowed capitalist like myself} when I read about the phenomenal profits of G.E., 14.2 billion dollars, and at the same time find out they claimed a 3.2 billion dollar tax credit!

There is something very wrong with this picture. It reeks of special privilege secured by very aggressive lobbying tactics, and a tax code that is antiquated, burdensome, and is rife with loopholes and unjustified tax breaks for corporations and the very wealthy.

Now don't misread or misinterpret what I just said. I'm not talking about redistributing wealth. I am however talking about the need to revise the tax code and regulatory maize so as to make sense both for the individual taxpayers and businesses alike. For those who may be interested in my take on a simplified and more just tax code it can be found at, An Independent Conservatives View on Limited Government, an Objective Tax Code, and Regulatory Overreach.

Back to G.E.

N.Y. Times - Its extraordinary success is based on an aggressive strategy that mixes fierce lobbying for tax breaks and innovative accounting that enables it to concentrate its profits offshore. G.E.’s giant tax department, led by a bow-tied former Treasury official named John Samuels, is often referred to as the world’s best tax law firm. Indeed, the company’s slogan “Imagination at Work” fits this department well. The team includes former officials not just from the Treasury, but also from the I.R.S. and virtually all the tax-writing committees in Congress.

I presume knowing very influential people in high places doth have its advantages as well.

h/t Weasel Zippers

Cross posted to Rational Nation USA

Via: Memeorandum

Longing for those days where Party bosses picked Republican candidates

Sam Foster

Below is from Mike Murphy, a supposed Republican political consultant who has consulted all our favorite Republican politicians like John McCain, Jeb Bush and Arnold Schwarzenegger. God, I’m so glad he’s on our side???

There was a time in the Republican Party, before the chaos of the Internet, cable TV howlers and all the rest of the modern campaign circus when pragmatic political bosses would labor silently and effectively to prevent train wreck candidacies like Michele Bachmann from sprouting up and distracting attention from the very serious business of nominating the party's Presidential candidate. No more, alas.

Yes, how dare someone try and just run for an office. What do they expect in a Democratic primary process, democracy?

It’s the hubris of guys like Murphy that makes Bachmann so attractive. The best thing he can do to sink Bachmann’s candidacy would be for him and the Frums of the glorious pragmatic Republicans to stay silent.

via memeorandum

Big Brother is Tracking You

By RightKlik

Um, no thanks. Big Brother will NOT be tracking my every move:
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) this week released a report that said taxing people based on how many miles they drive is a possible option for raising new revenues and that these taxes could be used to offset the costs of highway maintenance at a time when federal funds are short.

The report discussed the proposal in great detail, including the development of technology that would allow total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to be tracked, reported and taxed, as well as the pros and cons of mandating the installation of this technology in all vehicles...

The report was requested by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who held a hearing on transportation funding in early March. In that hearing, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said the Obama administration is hoping to spend $556 billion over the next six years, much of which would go to federal transportation improvement projects.
Idea rejected.

Can we send Kent Conrad back to ND early?


Memeorandum discussion