Sunday, February 28, 2010

2 Cool SNL Music Videos

Boats N Hoes Video - Long Version

Why are most democrats know as the "flip floppers"? Because of people like Pelosi. I hope here in California, we remove Feinstein, Boxer and Pelosi in the real near future. This state has gone down majorly in the last 5 years and especially in the near 20 years all 3 have been in office.

ABC News:

VARGAS: Let’s talk a bit about the coming elections in November. You had recently– and the Tea Party movement, do you think it will be a force to be reckoned with? You had said last summer that it was a faux grassroots movement. You called it the Astroturf movement.

PELOSI: In some respects it is. Uh-huh.

VARGAS: Is the Tea Party movement a force?

PELOSI: No – No what I said at the time is, that they were — the Republican Party directs a lot of what the Tea Party does, but not everybody in the Tea Party takes direction from the Republican Party. And so there was a lot of, shall we say, Astroturf, as opposed to grassroots.

But, you know, we share some of the views of the Tea Partiers in terms of the role of special interest in Washington, D.C., as — it just has to stop. And that’s why I’ve fought the special interest, whether it’s on energy, whether it’s on health insurance, whether it’s on pharmaceuticals and the rest.

VARGAS: So, common ground with many people in the Tea Party movement.

PELOSI: Well, no, there are some. There are some because they, again, some of it is orchestrated from the Republican headquarters. Some of it is hijacking the good intentions of lots of people who share some of our concerns that we have about the role of special interests and many Tea Partiers, not that I speak for them, share the view, whether it’s — and Democrats, Republicans and Independents share the view that the recent Supreme Court decision, which greatly empowers the special interests, is something that they oppose.

Via memeorandum

Video: Pelosi Says, Yes, She Is Running The Most Ethical, Honest Congress In History

This lady is off the chain too. So with most major democrats and department secretaries have tax and now Charlie Rangel's ethical problems, she still stands behind those people (cause she's a huge ass kisser) and claims that they are running a clean congress. Give me a break.

For some reason I can't get the code to work so the video can be used. Click on the link -

Via Breitbart

More at CNS News and the latest on the Rangel affair can be found here.

Update: Memeorandum picked up the story at CNS News.

Flashback video from 2006 when she promised it as well

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Going Back To Work Monday - Updated

Well, I thought I was going back to work, but it was only a 1 day thing. Nevermind

Missing Poster: Al Gore Climate Alarmist

He’s been spotted ice skating in Central Park and protecting his assets while openly mocked at a shareholders meeting. Current whereabouts unknown. Chances are he got to his current location via private jet.

Via: Lonely Conservative

Huge Quake Hits Chilie

The New York Times reported a major earthquake has hit Chile.

A powerful 8.8-magnitude earthquake struck Chile early Saturday, shaking the capital of Santiago for 90 seconds and sending tsunami warnings along much of the Pacific basin.

Chile’s TVN cable news channel was reporting 122 deaths, with the toll expected to rise, as communications were still spotty around the center of quake, near the city of ConcepciĆ³n in the south. Chile President Michelle Bachelet declared a “state of catastrophe.”

The Associated Press quoted Mrs. Bachelet as saying that a huge wave had swept into a populated area in the Robinson Crusoe Islands, 410 miles off the Chilean coast, but there were no immediate reports of major damage there. Those reports bore out early fears that a major tsunami was on its way across the Pacific.

A Department of Homeland Security official said early Saturday that FEMA was monitoring the situation and was in contact with state emergency personnel in Hawaii, which is under a tsunami warning. But the decision to evacuate coastal areas and handling this evacuation is the responsibility of state and local officials in Hawaii, the Homeland Security official said.

The quake downed buildings and houses in Santiago and knocked out a major bridge connecting the northern and southern sections of the country.

CNN reported that this earthquake was much stronger than the one that hit Haiti.

A tsunami advisory was issued for the coast of California and an Alaskan coastal area from Kodiak to Attu islands as well.

God Bless

Friday, February 26, 2010

"Boner" From Growing Pains Found Dead.

Ex-Growing Pains actor Andrew Koenig was found dead. In the city of Vancouver, where the Olympics are attracting much publicity, police are hoping to shed some light on an open case of a missing adult.

The 41-year-old actor and former Growing Pains star lives in Venice, California but left for the Canadian city to visit friends. Koenig hasn't been seen since February 14, 2010 in West Vancouver.

Born as Josh Andrew Koenig, Koenig was most famous for his role in playing Richard "Boner" Stabbone on ABC's sitcom Growing Pains, but also had a small role in "Sanctuary," an episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine - A franchise for which his father, Walter Koenig, took part. The elder Koenig played "Chekov" on the Star Trek television series and movies.

Andrew Koenig was also "The Joker" in the movie Batman: Dead End and, before going missing, was a contributor and performer for the improv group "Charles Whitman Reilly and Friends".

According to media reports the actor, as said by police, "has recently been despondent and his family and friends are concerned for his well-being", leaving signs to friends and family that was deeply depressed. The family of Andrew Koenig is asking that anyone with information contact Detective Raymond Payette of the Vancouver Police Department at 604-717-2534.


Flashback Friday - The Country Version

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Libya's Gaddafi Urges Jihad Against Switzerland

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi called on Thursday for a "jihad" or armed struggle against Switzerland, saying it was an infidel state that was destroying mosques.

"Any Muslim in any part of the world who works with Switzerland is an apostate, is against (the Prophet) Mohammad, God and the Koran," Gaddafi said during a meeting in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi to mark the Prophet's birthday.

More Here: Reuters

This guy is off his rocker. This is a neutral country who has probably held billions of dollars in his state sponsored terrorism and basically has no military. It seems that he is still butt hurt over his son's arrest there in 2008 for beating his own staff. And why didn't we take him out during the Reagan years again? He was on his way to starting WW3 with the Pan-Am bombings.

The President's Health Reform Proposal: More Like $2.5 Trillion

President Barack Obama released an updated health care reform plan this week. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has not yet had an opportunity to review and assess this latest offering. However, Administration officials have claimed that it would cost $950 billion over a decade, is "fully paid for," and would cut the deficit in the short and long term.

Each of these claims, which were made also about the House- and Senate-approved bills, rests on highly questionable assumptions. A closer look at the President's plan shows that:

* Its costs are likely to come in well over $1 trillion over 10 years,
* Ten full years of implementation would cost closer to $2.5 trillion, and
* The plan would make the nation's budget outlook much worse, not better.

The Missing "Doc Fix"

Both the President and congressional leaders have signaled that they will not allow a scheduled 21 percent reduction in Medicare physician fees to go into effect in 2010 or later years. But the President did not include a permanent fix in his health care plan.

This is ironic, because the plan includes scores of other Medicare provisions, touching on just about every possible feature of the program. The only provision seemingly left out of the package is a long-term fix for physician fees, perhaps Medicare's most pressing problem and one that all sides acknowledge must be addressed soon.

Of course, the reason the so-called "doc fix" is not in the President's plan is cost. The Administration and Democratic leaders have said they want to pass a physician fee reform--but in a separate bill that does not provide any offsetting spending reductions or tax increases. In other words, their "doc fix" solution would require additional federal borrowing of at least $200 billion over the coming decade.

But it does not matter to taxpayers whether the Democratic health care agenda is passed in one bill, two, or even three. The total cost is the same. And when a permanent solution for the "doc fix" is properly included in the accounting of the President's health care plan, the total costs are pushed up to at least $1.15 trillion. Moreover, the added spending is enough to wipe out entirely all of the claimed deficit reduction between now and 2019.

Non-Coverage Spending in the Senate Bill

When the President placed a $900 billion limit on the total amount of spending in the health care bills, he did not say it was for a "net" number, with tax increases offsetting part of the cost. Nor did he say it was a limit for only some of the spending in the health care bills.

In the Senate-passed legislation, CBO said the cost of the coverage expansion would be $871 billion between 2010 and 2019. The Administration says it has made changes adding another $75 billion. In addition, the Senate bill included about $90 billion more in non-coverage spending, not counting closing the "donut hole" in the Medicare drug benefit, which would add billions more to the cost of the non-coverage provisions of the bill.

Adding 2020 to the Cost Estimate

Last year, CBO assessed the Democratic health care plans over the 2010-2019 time period. However, in January, the agency extended its baseline projection out to 2020. That means that any assessment of the Obama health plan should now go from 2011 through 2020.

Adding one more year to the cost estimate will substantially increase the 10-year price tag. CBO estimated that the coverage provisions of the Senate-passed health care bill would cost about $200 billion by 2019. If those costs were to increase by 8 percent each year, as CBO estimated, that would put the 2020 cost at $216 billion.

The CLASS Act Gimmick

The President's health care proposal picks up the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act, or CLASS Act, which was in both the House- and Senate-passed bills. The CLASS Act would stand up an entirely new entitlement program for long-term care services. Eligible participants would be required to pay premiums well in advance of receiving any benefit payments.

Consequently, starting this new program from scratch would produce one-time "savings" from premium collections before any cohort of beneficiaries starts drawing benefits. But the premium collections would be needed later to liquidate entitlement obligations, which means the premiums are being double-counted. The premiums are set aside in a fund to pay future claims, but they are also counted by the bills' sponsors as an offset for expanding health coverage. The CLASS Act premiums total $72 billion over 10 years in the Senate bill.

The True 10-Year Window

The President argues that expeditious enactment of his plan is necessary to provide better services to the uninsured, but none of the key provisions to expand coverage would go into effect until 2014. Meanwhile, many of the spending reductions, such as the cut in Medicare Advantage payment rates, would kick in much earlier, as would the tax increases. Consequently, the President's plan has 10 years worth of spending and revenue "offsets" paying for only seven years worth of spending.

Looking at these bills over a true 10-year window of full implementation reveals much higher costs. The Senate bill's provisions--even excluding the "doc fix"--would total $2.3 trillion over the period 2014-2023, with the coverage provisions fully in place.[1]Adding the "doc fix," the Obama team's admitted $75 billion add-on, at least $90 billion in non-coverage spending, and $72 billion for the CLASS Act, the true 10-year cost of the President's plan is almost certainly over $2.5 trillion.

The Certainty of Future of Entitlement Expansions

The President's plan assumes that the new entitlement spending for coverage expansion can be held in check with so-called "firewall" provisions. These are the rules that essentially preclude many tens of millions of individuals from gaining access to premium subsidies. If an employer offers "qualified" insurance coverage to a worker, the employee really has no choice but to take it if he wants to avoid paying the penalty for going uninsured. They could not go into the so-called "exchanges" to get insurance subsidized with federal tax support.

These firewall rules would create large disparities in the federal subsidies made available to workers inside and outside the exchanges. Under the Senate-passed bill, a family of four with an income of $60,000 with employer-sponsored health care (and thus not qualified for the exchange) would get $4,500 less in federal support than a similar family inside the exchange would get in 2016.[2]

And, according to CBO, there would be many tens of millions more families outside the exchange than in it. Today, there are about 127 million Americans under the age of 65 with incomes between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty line, but CBO expects that only about 18 million people will be getting exchange subsidies in 2016.

If the bill is enacted as currently written, pressure would build to treat all Americans fairly, regardless of where they get their insurance. One way or another, the subsidies provided to those in the exchanges would be made more widely available, driving the costs of reform much higher than CBO's estimates currently indicate.

Highly Questionable Tax Increases and Medicare Cuts

The President proposes to pay for his expensive health care program with a series of tax increases and Medicare spending cuts. But these tax increases and spending reductions are far less likely to occur than the entitlement expansions that are promised.

For instance, the President has proposed a new excise tax on "high cost" insurance plans, but he would not start the tax until 2018, well after any potential second term for his Administration. Yet he and his aides claim that hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue will come from this tax in the second decade of the program, thus more than offsetting the exploding entitlement costs that the bill would provide. But if the President is unwilling to impose this tax during his term, it is hard to see that another President or another Congress would be willing to do so later.

Similarly, the President's plan relies on deep cuts in Medicare payments to hospitals and other institutional providers. But the chief actuary of the Medicare program has said repeatedly that these cuts are not realistic because they would push many institutions into serious financial distress. Still, the Administration claims that hundreds of billions of dollars from these cuts will materialize from 2020 to 2030, thus justifying its claim of large deficit reduction during that time. But it is far more likely that the Medicare cuts and tax increases will never be sustained, even as the entitlement costs from the Obama plan soar.

Making Matters Worse

The President has said that he wants a health reform bill in large part because it is necessary to get better control of the federal budget. But his plan has evolved into a large entitlement expansion effort and not much more. The offsets are unrealistic, and the entitlement promises will grow with time. If enacted, the President's health care program would make a very dire federal budgetary outlook much, much worse.

James C. Capretta served in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) during the Bush Administration and is a Fellow in the Economics and Ethics Program of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

Via: Heritage

[1]Press release, "Budget Perspective: The Real Deficit Effect of the Health Bill," Senate Budget Committee Republican Staff, December 19, 2009, at (February 24, 2010).

[2]Eugene Steurle, "Health Care Reform: Implications of a Two Subsidy System," American Enterprise Institute, December 4, 2009, at (February 24, 2010).

Obama's Second Stimulus: It Won't Create Jobs

Still Losing Jobs

* Stimulus Failed: Obama's first $862 billion stimulus bill was supposed to create 3.5 million jobs by the end of 2010, but since it passed in February 2009, 3.3 million Americans have been put out of work. The unemployment rate hovers around 10%, and businesses continue to shed jobs, including 20,000 more lost in January.

* Second Stimulus: Congress is now considering yet another multi-billion-dollar stimulus that features tax breaks for businesses that hire new workers. The House of Representatives passed its bill in December 2009. The Senate voted recently to limit debate on its plan and will soon vote on final passage. After that, the House will have to vote on the Senate bill, or a conference committee must be formed to reconcile the differences in the two bills.

More Spending Won't Create Jobs

* Payroll Holiday and Credit: The centerpiece of the Senate plan suspends the 6.2% employer portion of the payroll tax that funds Social Security for businesses that hire workers who have been out of work for at least 60 days. The plan also gives businesses an additional $1,000 tax credit for every new employee they keep on payroll for one year. These provisions will likely remain in a final bill if one emerges from Congress.

* No New Jobs: The impact of these temporary incentives will be minimal because many of the employers that will receive the benefits would have added workers anyway.

* Could Reduce Employment: Funding job creation programs will require new government borrowing, but borrowing takes money out of private hands, causing jobs that private money would have sustained to disappear. In fact, when the jobs destroyed by the borrowing are subtracted from the few new jobs created, the net effect could be a reduction in employment.

* No Long-Term Jobs: Any jobs the payroll tax holiday and credit do create will likely be temporary--once the policies expire, additional workers will probably be let go.

* Transforms Social Security: Congress will need to replace the lost Social Security Trust Fund revenue due to the payroll tax holiday with a transfer from general revenue. This would begin a transformation of Social Security from an earned benefit paid for by workers and employers into one paid like welfare programs.

Better Options

* Agenda-Slowing Job Creation: Congress is continually threatening businesses with new taxes and more regulation. This creates great uncertainty over rising costs for entrepreneurs who want to hire workers or create new enterprises. A small, temporary credit will do nothing to overcome the job-killing agenda coming out of Washington.

* Stop Threatening Growth: Congress should drop its plans for higher taxes and more regulation. If it did so, businesses and individuals would get off the sidelines quickly and start investing again even without short-term tax gimmicks.

* Lower Taxes: Washington can encourage growth by cutting spending so it can further lower taxes in a way that will actually encourage economic growth and spur job creation. A short-term credit will do nothing to get businesses hiring, but reductions of marginal tax rates for businesses, individuals and investing will provide long-term incentives that will pave the way for real job creation.

Via: Heritage

Holy Crap. 10% Approval Rating For Congress?

Rasmussen reported:

Voter unhappiness with Congress has reached the highest level ever recorded by Rasmussen Reports as 71% now say the legislature is doing a poor job.

That’s up ten points from the previous high of 61% reached a month ago.

Only 10% of voters say Congress is doing a good or excellent job.

Nearly half of Democratic voters (48%) now give Congress a poor rating, up 17 points since January. The vast majority of Republicans and voters not affiliated with either party also give Congress poor ratings.

Seventy percent (70%) of voters say Congress has not passed any legislation that would significantly improve life for Americans, up 10 points over the past month and the highest level of dissatisfaction measured in regular tracking in over three years. Only 15% say Congress has passed such legislation.

Forty percent (40%) of voters nationwide now say it is at least somewhat likely Congress will seriously address the most important issues facing the nation. That’s down from 59% last March. Only 9% say it is Very Likely Congress will address these issues.

Gateway Pundit

Obama to McCain: ‘The Election’s Over’

So I was watching the first part of this sham they are calling a summit or reconciliation about health care reform, and Sen. McCain who I like, especially when I lived in Arizona, is trying to make his point or comment about where things are going or stand and the President gets arrogant as usual. I love Sen. McCain's response. Most of the time the President wasn't even listening to Republicans and at one point was getting condescending with Minority Whip Eric Cantor when he was trying to make his point.

This president and administration are going to go down in history as the most arrogant, self-absorbed bunch that has ever been granted power by the American people. Keep running your gums people.

"I'm reminded of that every day," Sen. John McCain said.

Via: Breitbart

Creepy New Logo for Missile Defense Agency

Where do you begin? It’s very akin to the hopey changey Obama campaign logo, with an added star and crescent. Good grief, these people are creepy.

Update: Silly me, I almost forgot the Islamic Crescent. Thanks, Drudge.

Via Fox News

Obama: Enough with the Socialist Rhetoric!

What The Heck?

The New York Times: The president’s appearance before the group, an organization of the nation’s leading chief executives known as the Business Roundtable, brought him to a skeptical audience at a time when he has been sounding more populist themes, attacking corporate greed, immense bonuses and Wall Street risk-taking.

Mr. Obama used the encounter to make the case that his policies would ultimately help business by guarding against excess and making it easier to create jobs.

“We’ve arrived at a juncture in our politics where reasonable efforts to update our regulations, or make basic investments in our future, are too often greeted with cries of ‘government takeover’ or even ‘socialism,’ ” Mr. Obama said. “Not only does that kind of rhetoric deny our history, but it prevents us from asking hard questions about the right balance between the private and public sectors.”

In his address, the president argued that the current debate about the government’s role misses the point. While business is primarily responsible for creating jobs and growth, he said, “government has a vital, if limited, role to play” by setting fair rules of the road, investing in infrastructure like roads and education and providing a social safety net for society’s most vulnerable.

Let’s see, how is Obama a socialist? Let me count the ways.

1-Taking over auto companies.

2-Trying to take over health care.

3-Expanding entitlements. (As if we didn’t have enough already.)

4-Taking over the mortgage industry.

5-Taking over parts of the financial industry.

6-Taking over the student loan industry.

7-Recruiting students at public schools.

8-Getting the arts community to do one’s bidding.

9-Calling for snitches to report fellow citizens for exercising free speech.

10-Appointing radical, unelected and unaccountable czars.

11-Spending the money of future generations on a green jobs pipe dream.

12-Cap and tax.

Did I miss anything? Please feel free to add to this.

Click on the link below for the video

Via Breitbart

Obama’s Energy Secretary Thinks Americans Should Decrease Energy Usage So Developing Nations Can ‘Grow Their Economies’

No socialism to see here. Just move along.

Dow Jones: U.S. energy secretary Steven Chu said Wednesday that the U.S. must decrease its energy use to allow developing nations the room to grow, while emphasizing that prosperity doesn’t have to come with a large carbon footprint.

“We believe we have to decrease our use of energy to allow headroom for the developing nations to grow their economies,”Chu said in a speech in Abu Dhabi, capital of the United Arab Emirates.

“There is no law of physics that says prosperity is proportional to carbon emissions,” Chu said.

Chu is visiting the U.A.E. Wednesday as part of a Middle East trip this week that has included a stop in top oil exporter Saudi Arabia and that will take him to Qatar Thursday.

What’s he even talking about? “Prosperity isn’t proportional to carbon emissions.” Good grief. Our own economy is shrinking. Millions of Americans have lost their jobs since Chu’s boss took over. And we’re paying for him to fly around the world, spewing nonsense (and carbon) while trying to shrink our economy even more. What, socialism here in the US isn’t good enough for Chu?

Note to Chu: We can’t afford our own socialism, let alone that of the rest of the world.

Lord help us.

Via Weasel Zippers

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Everyone Needs To Watch This When It Comes Out

The American Economy: The Wealthy Make The Mistakes But The Hard Working Middle Class Pays The Price

This is how the U.S. economy works much of the time - the wealthy make most of the big economic mistakes but the hard working middle class ends up paying for them. This time around is no exception. The financial crisis of the past several years was caused by Wall Street, but they got bailed out and relatively few of them lost their jobs. However, even though middle class and working class Americans were not the ones who made the mess, they are paying for it dearly. This is especially true when it comes to unemployment. While it is true that jobs are being lost on every level of American society, the reality is that unemployment is hitting Americans on the lowest end of the income scale the hardest.

Just check out the chart below. The ten percent of Americans that have the lowest household incomes have an unemployment rate of over 30 percent, while the ten percent of Americans that have the highest household incomes have an unemployment rate just about 3 percent....

Does this seem right to you?

After all, we were promised that we needed to bail out Wall Street so that they could help "Main Street".

But that didn't happen, did it?

Instead, it appears that previously bailed out corporations are going back to their old ways of paying out ridiculous bonuses.

For example, the CEO of General Motors is in line to get a $9 million pay package.

What in the world?

A company that was so flat broke that it would have likely collapsed without U.S. government intervention is handing out 9 million bucks to the CEO?

Something is very, very wrong.

And the truth is that working class Americans are getting pissed off.

For example, one Ohio man actually decided to bulldoze his own home rather than let the bank take it in foreclosure proceedings.

Now that is an incredibly destructive and vindictive act, but it just shows how angry some people are getting.

Many working class and middle class Americans feel powerless as the politicians and the wealthy recklessly destroy the U.S. economy.

Just consider the following chart. The U.S. government has massively increased spending at a time when revenues are decreasing sharply. Does this look like a "recovery" to you?....

The truth is that the U.S. national debt is wildly out of control. In 2010, the U.S. government is projected to issue almost as much new debt as the rest of the governments of the world combined.

In fact, it is anticipated that the U.S. national debt will climb to an unprecedented 200 percent of GDP by 2038 without a fundamental change in course.

Is this kind of reckless financial mismanagement going to cause an economic collapse?

Of course.

And Americans are starting to wake up and realize this.

In a recent ABC News poll, 87 percent of Americans said that they are concerned about the U.S. national debt.

In a new CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey, 86 percent of Americans believe that the U.S. system of government is broken.

And it is broken.

So is it still possible to repair it?

Feel free to leave a comment with your opinion....

Upcoming Shows For Quinn Hedges

Also the premier of the Quinn Hedges Band.

2/27/10 6:30pm @ WineStyles
915 Sutter St. #100
Folsom, CA

3/06/10 6:30pm @ WineStyles
915 Sutter St. #100
Folsom, CA

3/27/10 6:30pm @ WineStyles
915 Sutter St. #100
Folsom, CA

3/31/10 9:00pm
The Quinn Hedges Band
@ Marilyn's
908 K St
Sacramento, CA 95814

Cool Pictures

The Plane Crash In Austin From Last Week.

I had friends in town last week from out of state so I wasn't online hardly so I'm writing about this until now.

A software engineer furious with the Internal Revenue Service launched a suicide attack on the agency Thursday by crashing his small plane into an office building containing nearly 200 IRS employees, setting off a raging fire that sent workers running for their lives.

At least one person in the building was missing.

The FBI tentatively identified the pilot as Joseph A. Stack, 53. Law enforcement officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because the investigation was still going on, said that before taking off, Stack apparently set fire to his house and posted a long anti-government screed on the Web. It was dated Thursday and signed "Joe Stack (1956-2010)."

In it, the author cited run-ins he had with the IRS and ranted about the tax agency, government bailouts and corporate America's "thugs and plunderers."

"I have had all I can stand," he wrote, adding: "I choose not to keep looking over my shoulder at `big brother' while he strips my carcass."

Read more here:

Apparently, the pilot set his house on fire, with his wife and daughter in the home, earlier in the day. I also read that his tax bill was for $1700+ from the mid to late 90's. The great irony is that this tragedy might have been avoided. A competent tax attorney might have been able to straighten out Joseph Allen Stack's problems and, if he owed money, set up a schedule of payment that Stack could live with. It was his bad luck that he seems to have not chosen wisely where to get tax advice.

Obamanomics: It Could Take Years For The Unemployed To Find Jobs

Lots of change, no hope.

The New York Times: Even as the American economy shows tentative signs of a rebound, the human toll of the recession continues to mount, with millions of Americans remaining out of work, out of savings and nearing the end of their unemployment benefits.

Economists fear that the nascent recovery will leave more people behind than in past recessions, failing to create jobs in sufficient numbers to absorb the record-setting ranks of the long-term unemployed.

Call them the new poor: people long accustomed to the comforts of middle-class life who are now relying on public assistance for the first time in their lives — potentially for years to come.

Yet the social safety net is already showing severe strains. Roughly 2.7 million jobless people will lose their unemployment check before the end of April unless Congress approves the Obama administration’s proposal to extend the payments, according to the Labor Department.

What a disaster. Over four million Americans have lost their jobs since Obama took office. But all we get from him is more rhetoric. Oh, that, and trying to ram through a healthcare bill nobody wants. Thanks, Barack.

Find out what others are saying at memeorandum.

Via: Lonely Conservative

As I stated in my comment on the Lonely Conservative site, This is great news for me. I was laid off last month. Last year when I was laid off, it took me 7 months to find work (I had been there 4 years), so now I can expect years to find work? All change, no hope

Obama ’Seizing On Outrage’ Over Health Insurance Premiums

Maybe he is the most transparent president ever. It’s easy to see right through him. The New York Times inadvertently made the case for me.

President Obama will propose on Monday giving the federal government new power to block excessive rate increases by health insurance companies, as he rolls out comprehensive legislation to revamp the nation’s health care system, White House officials said Sunday.

The president’s legislation aims to bridge differences between the bills adopted by the House and Senate late last year, and to frame his debate with Republicans over health policy at a televised meeting on Thursday.

By focusing on the effort to tighten regulation of insurance costs, a new element not included in either the House or Senate bills, Mr. Obama is seizing on outrage over recent premium increases of up to 39 percent announced by Anthem Blue Cross of California and moving to portray the Democrats’ health overhaul as a way to protect Americans from profiteering insurers.

Last time I checked, states already regulate the insurance rates. Looks like Obama is looking to use another “crisis” to his advantage.

Find out what others are saying at memeorandum.

Democrats Are Trying To See If They Can Get Your Savings

Investors Business Daily: You did the responsible thing. You saved in your IRA or 401(k) to support your retirement, when you could have spent that money on another vacation, or an upscale car, or fancier clothes and jewelry. But now Washington is developing plans for your retirement savings.

BusinessWeek reports that the Treasury and Labor departments are asking for public comment on “the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams.”

In plain English, the idea is for the government to take your retirement savings in return for a promise to pay you some monthly benefit in your retirement years.

They will tell you that you are “investing” your money in U.S. Treasury bonds. But they will use your money immediately to pay for their unprecedented trillion-dollar budget deficits, leaving nothing to back up their political promises, just as they have raided the Social Security trust funds.

This “conversion” may start out as an optional choice, though you are already free to buy Treasury bonds whenever you want. But as Karl Denninger of the Market Ticker Web site reports: “‘Choices’ have a funny way of turning into mandates, and this looks to me like a raw admission that Treasury knows it will not be able to sell its debt in the open market — so they will effectively tax you by forcing your ‘retirement’ money to buy them.”

The only good news – they’re going to have trouble convincing some of their most ardent supporters not to fight their attempts to rob us of our savings.

Power Line: Will it happen? Clearly the Obama administration, inspired by Argentina, is exploring the option. Today, we have the first administration in American history that aspires to be a banana republic. But can they get away with confiscating millions of Americans’ savings? I doubt it. Because first on the list of those who have accumulated wealth in reliance on the laws governing private savings accounts are lawyers. Most people don’t realize it, but even lawyers of modest ability typically have, after three or four decades of diligent savings, seven-figure retirement accounts. (This is one reason why influential Democrats don’t care whether Social Security goes bust. They wouldn’t dream of depending on it.) Lawyers are the heart and soul of the Democratic Party; public employee unions are more important in some ways, but they are junior partners in the Dems’ coalition.

If the Obama administration were to announce an intent to confiscate Americans’ retirement savings, the howls that would arise from lawyers (and others, too, of course) would be deafening. I don’t think the administration could get away with it. Which doesn’t mean they won’t try, as the current efforts by the Departments of the Treasury and Labor indicate.

These people are dangerous.

Fox Business provides more information.

Obamacare Finally Unveiled

President Obama finally unveiled ObamaCare. It’s being billed as centrist, but it’s really only a compromise between the Senate and House bills. The fact that it includes a provision to crack down on Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse is hardly bipartisan. And why do we need a bill to do that, shouldn’t they be doing that anyway?

The headlines at Drudge sum it up pretty well.

'Increase in Fees on Brand Name Pharmaceuticals'...
Broaden 'Tax Base for High-Income Taxpayers'...
Orders 'Comprehensive Database' On Health Claims...
FORCED: 'Raises percent of income assessment that individuals pay if they choose not to become insured'...
BACKDOOR FIX: Healthcare 'Funds will be transferred to the Social Security Trust' if necessary...
White House Endorses Sen. Landrieu's 'Louisiana Purchase'...

John Boehner slammed the bill.

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

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

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

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

The Wall Street Journal points out that the bill will cost almost a trillion dollars and punish employers who don’t provide health insurance. Oh, that’s just what we need in this economy.

More taxes + more union protections + more regulation + more government all equal less freedom for the American people.

This is one more item in the progressive dependency agenda George Will talked about during his CPAC speech. And they’ll stop at nothing to ram this craptastic legislation through.

Update: Dan Riehl points out that the CBO can’t even score this crap sandwich. Maybe it will cost nearly a trillion bucks, or maybe it’ll cost a heck of a lot more.

ACORN Has A Friend In Obama, No Doubt He’ll Love Them After The Renaming

Not that anyone doubted Obama’s love for ACORN, but here’s video that was revealed at CPAC of The One talking about his tight relationship with the corrupt organization.

Via News Real Blog

Speaking of ACORN, they’re dissolving, splintering off into a smaller groups that will no doubt be just as corrupt as Obama’s beloved community organization. Or, as Dan Riehl calls it, a snake with fifty heads.

Update: Check out Maggie’s recent post for more on ACORN. There’s some pretty damning evidence, including their ties to the SEIU.


The "Grandfather Clause" Will Not Exist Under Obamacare

The WSJ looks at the new, improved, (but still only proposed!) Obamacare:

"The President's Proposal," as the 11-page White House document is headlined, is in one sense a notable achievement: It manages to take the worst of both the House and Senate bills and combine them into something more destructive.

We'll score that as "Undecided". Now, on to Obama's plan to kill Granddad:

The coercive flavor that animates this exercise is best captured in the section that purports to accept the Senate's "grandfather clause" allowing people who like their current health plan to keep it. Except that "The President's Proposal adds certain consumer protections to these 'grandfathered' plans. Within months of legislation being enacted, it requires plans . . . prohibits . . . mandates . . . requires . . . the President's Proposal adds new protections that prohibit . . . ban . . . and prohibit . . . The President's Proposal requires . . ." After all of these dictates, no "grandfathered" plan will exist.

Under Obamacare, if you like your current insurance, you are allowed to take a photo of the policy as a keepsake. That's change you better start believing in.

One Of Obama's Great Achievements May Be Unraveling

Was it only two weeks ago that Joe Biden explained that Iraq was on track to become "one of the great achievements" of the Obama Administration? Now Thomas Ricks, author of "Fiasco" and "The Gamble", warns us of the fragile stability in Iraq and the possible need for a delay in US troop withdrawals:

IRAQ’S March 7 national election, and the formation of a new government that will follow, carry huge implications for both Iraqis and American policy. It appears now that the results are unlikely to resolve key political struggles that could return the country to sectarianism and violence.

If so, President Obama may find himself later this year considering whether once again to break his campaign promises about ending the war, and to offer to keep tens of thousands of troops in Iraq for several more years. Surprisingly, that probably is the best course for him, and for Iraqi leaders, to pursue.

The best course politically? Yikes! I don't even want to imagine the reaction of Obama supporters who equate peace in Iraq with an absence of US troops (No, I don't know why that means we don't have peace in Darfur...). So, does "peace" mean "No US troops", or a stable (and democratic, bless us!) Iraq? Biden firmly straddled this two weeks ago:

I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.

When might Obama be obliged to announce a delay in the pace of withdrawals?

By late summer, the Obama administration could find itself in the uncomfortable position of reconsidering its vows to get out of combat in Iraq by August and to remove all troops by the end of next year. This will be politically difficult for the president, but he has shown admirable flexibility in his handling of Iraq. My impression is that the American people now wish they had never heard of Iraq, but understand just what a mess it is and are willing to give the president a surprising amount of leeway.

Late August or early September? Like, two months from the election? I don't see Obama making an announcement like this, unless he has a subtle political strategy that relies on every liberal in America sitting out the 2010 election. Of course, it is a bit late for Obama to pursue his 2007 strategy, which was to lose and blame Bush.

Ricks admits to great uncertainty:

The political situation is far less certain, and I think less stable, than most Americans believe. A retired Marine colonel I know, Gary Anderson, just returned from Iraq and predicts a civil war or military coup by September. Another friend, the journalist Nir Rosen, avers that Iraq is on a long-term peaceful course. Both men know Iraq well, having spent years working there. I have not seen such a wide discrepancy in expert views since late 2005.

Ricks could be wrong about the need to leave our troops there longer. And if Ricks is right the media won't cover it.


In Addition To The Story Below...

I was watching The O'Reilly Factor last night. I rarely watch Fox News and lately I have been, mainly because I lost my job recently and I am having most of my services shut off to save money because unemployment pays next to nothing in California and jobs are almost non-existent, so I figure "let's see what's on".

From the beginning, the "Talking Points Memo" stated the following:

President Obama says his health care initiative will cost almost a trillion dollars over the next 10 years, but some analysts believe the cost will be double that. And because the USA is nearly bankrupt now, higher taxes are coming.

The group Americans for Tax Reform estimates that over the next 10 years, the feds will raise nearly $750 billion in new taxes. That, of course, will affect everybody, not just the rich. So get ready.

Already some states are taxing car accidents. If you have one, you could pay for the cleanup.

Also, some places want 911 calls taxed. You make one, you pay. If police or firefighters respond to your emergency, you could be taxed. The government calls this a fee for services.

President Obama wants to tax tanning salons. And you can expect higher taxes on everything that might not be good for you like Frosted Flakes, Haagen-Dazs and gummy bears.

Here in New York state, they are now charging sales tax when you buy stuff out of state. So if I'm down in Florida and New York state people find out I buy a boat there, they'll come after me.

In addition, expect higher tolls on roadways, higher fees for licenses, registrations, inspections and just about anything else the government can think of.

So the big government expansion President Obama wants will affect every American. We will all pay a lot more money to the government.

The question then becomes: Is a health care entitlement, or increased aid to the poor, or more money to the Pentagon worth the toll, pardon the pun, it will take on working Americans?

"Talking Points" believes we are taxed to the max right now. Just look at every bill you get. There is a tax included, and those taxes are going up, and no one will tell you that.

Obamacare is perhaps the biggest entitlement expenditure in America's history. It will bring relief to Americans who do not have health insurance, but it will also punish working Americans who are barely getting by right now.

So Americans need to wise up and figure this out. It's not all about illness. A big part of this is government control, the ability to spread the wealth around.

We have put forth common sense solutions to getting health care premiums down, but they are not included in the president's latest bill, things like tort reform and interstate insurance company competition.

President Obama has never denied that he believes in income redistribution, and that's what's underway right now: taking more of your money to fund programs. Is that healthy? You make the call.

And that's "The Memo."

So before I was already taxed pretty well, I made basically the same in 08 as I did in 09 but I'm seeing a smaller tax return, Obama wants to let the tax cuts expire so everyone can go into a new tax bracket which will mean we will get taxed more, and the current taxes I already pay for that service the fire and police could be taxed more because it's a "service fee" and if I want something that Obama and his knuckleheads deem "unhealthy" I could get taxed? The fees for bridges such as the Golden Gate went up and back east and in the south you already have to pay tolls and expressways fees. A big WTF!!!!!!

Obama IS Going To Raise Taxes On Those Making Less Than $250K

This guy keeps getting better and better. Virtually breaking every campaign promise he made to America and especially the middle class who got him elected. Looks like "Joe Six Pack" was right.

He lied to the American people when he said no American family making less than $250,000 a year would see their taxes raised. He broke that “promise” almost immediately after taking office when he raised the tax on cigarettes. He had no intention of keeping that “promise”. At the same time he made the “promise” he also told us he would “give us” health insurance. He knew full well he’d have to raise taxes to deliver.

President Obama presented a new health care plan on Monday that calls for raising the Medicare payroll tax on some households earning less than $250,000, an apparent breach of his campaign pledge not to raise taxes on families earning less than that amount. The president’s plan also calls for increasing taxes on interest, dividends, annuities, royalties and rents.

In a Sept. 12, 2008 campaign speech in Dover, N.H, Obama said: “And I can make a firm pledge: Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase—not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”

But the new health care plan released in summary form yesterday by the White House specifically calls for increasing the Medicare payroll tax on “households with incomes exceeding $200,000 for singles and $250,000 for married couples filing jointly.”

Unless President Obama is prepared to say that the only type of “family” that qualifies as a “family” under his tax pledge is one that is formed around a ”married couple filing jointly,” then his new health care proposal violates his 2008 tax pledge on its face. The Internal Revenue Service, for example, makes clear that the “head of household” tax filing status is for “unmarried” taxpayers. A definition of the term “head of household” on the IRS Web site says: “Generally, you may claim head of household filing status on your tax return only if you are unmarried and pay more than 50% of the costs of keeping up a home for yourself and your dependent(s) or other qualifying individuals.”

His mouthpiece, Robert Gibbs, has repeated the lie. Do you still believe it?

Read the full story at CNS News.


Senator Inhofe Calls For DOJ To Investigate Global Warming Scam, Al Gore – Update – Sen. Boxer And EPA Admin Lisa Jackson Back Away From IPCC

I applaud Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) for his efforts, but I won’t hold my breath waiting for Obama’s Justice Department to look into this matter. The Obama would have to stop saying the science is settled, and he’d need a new excuse to kill the economy with cap and tax.

Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) today asked the Obama administration to investigate what he called “the greatest scientific scandal of our generation” — the actions of climate scientists revealed by the Climategate Files, and the subsequent admissions by the editors of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (AR4).

Senator Inhofe also called for former Vice President Al Gore to be called back to the Senate to testify.

“In [Gore's] science fiction movie, every assertion has been rebutted,” Inhofe said. He believes Vice President Gore should defend himself and his movie before Congress.

Just prior to a hearing at 10:00 a.m. EST, Senator Inhofe released a minority staff report from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of which he is ranking member. Senator Inhofe is asking the Department of Justice to investigate whether there has been research misconduct or criminal actions by the scientists involved, including Dr. Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University and Dr. James Hansen of Columbia University and the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Science.

Read the full story at Pajamas Media.

Update: PJM has a follow up story involving the testimony of Senator Barbara Boxer and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson at an EPA budget hearing. They’re now backing away from the IPCC, but not the claim that there are “climate risks” to the US. Please.'


I personally like what Mark E. Gillar from said on the comments for this original posting. Gore and The UN IPCC should be forced to give back their Nobel Peace Prize. The flaws in Gore’s film and the errors in the 2007 UN IPCC Report that have been discovered since the award was given should disqualify both parties. Irena Sendler who risked her life daily during World War II to save the lives of over 2,500 Jewish children is much more deserving. Please sign the petition to demand that Gore and the UN IPCC have their award taken away.

ABC News Reports On Number Of Jobs Created By Porkulus The Day They Announce Massive Job Cuts

ABC News reported that Porkulus created 2.1 million jobs. Okay, so they said the CBO said Porkulus created 2.1 million jobs. But they didn’t dispute the report. They didn’t say whether that’s net jobs gained after the 4 million jobs lost since Obama took office.

It’s weird that they were able to report such news on a day they announced they’re reducing the size of their own work force by up to 20%. Maybe the folks in the newsroom didn’t hear this news before reporting that other news. Maybe they were planning to get rid of 30% or 40% of their employees, but since Obama passed Porkulus they only have to chop 20%. Or, maybe the folks at ABC News are hoping for a bailout.

Does anyone else find this odd?

Find out what others are saying about the CBO report at memeorandum.

Also read my original post about the job numbers here:

Flashback 2005: Obama And Democrats Whine About Reconciliation

I heard they were talking about voting on judicial appointments. They weren’t talking about something as big as taking over one sixth of the US economy and wrecking the best health care in the world.

I love the “tyranny of the majority” line. And notice how they were calling it the “nuclear option” back then. Today it’s “reconciliation.” What a bunch of loathsome hypocrites.

Via: Breitbart TV

A Billion Dollar Embassy?

There’s no belt tightening going on by the folks in Washington, DC. The only people tightening belts these days are unemployed Americans, or those worried about losing their jobs. What a disgrace.

Times Online: The United States has unveiled plans for its new $1 billion high-security embassy in London — the most expensive it has ever built.

The proposals were met with relief from both the present embassy’s Mayfair neighbors and the residents and developers of the Battersea wasteland where the vast crystalline cube, surrounded by a moat, will be built.

The decision to abandon the former site in Grosvenor Square by 2016 came after a prolonged battle with residents angered by the security measures demanded after the September 11 attacks. More than a hundred residents took out a full-page advertisement in The Times to oppose tighter measures that they said would leave the area more vulnerable to attack.

The new embassy, on a former industrial site behind Battersea power station known for its gay clubs, will be designed by Kieran Timberlake, the Philadelphia architect.

The price tag doesn’t include the 17.5% VAT the British government wants to tack on.

Via: memeorandum

Disappearing Jobs

Here's a list of the top 10 industries expected to lose the most jobs by 2018 -- and what to do if you're working in one of them:

1. Department stores: Projected to lose 10.2 percent of the 1.56 million jobs they had in 2008.

2. Semiconductor manufacturing: Projected to lose 33.7 percent of the 432,000 jobs it had in 2008.

3. Motor vehicle parts manufacturing: Projected to lose 18.6 percent of its 544,000 jobs.

4. Postal service: Projected to lose 13 percent of the 748,000 jobs it had in 2008.

5. Printing and related jobs: Projected to lose 16 percent of its 594,000 jobs.

6. Cut-and-sew apparel manufacturing: Projected to lose 57 percent of its 155,000 jobs.

7. Newspaper publishers: Projected to lose 24.8 percent of its 326,000 jobs.

8. Mining support jobs: Projected to lose 23.2 percent of its 328,000 jobs.

9. Gas stations: Projected to lose 8.9 percent of its 843,000 jobs.

10. Wired telecom: Projected to lose 11 percent of its 666,000 jobs.

More here:

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Will Be Back Tomorrow

I had some friends come into town from San Antonio and Houston this last week. Was a great time. That's all I'm going to say about that.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Today's Politcal Funny

14 Fun Facts About The U.S. Government's Massive Debt Problem

The U.S. government is currently creating one of the most colossal monuments in the history of the world. It is the U.S. national debt, and it threatens to literally destroy the American way of life. For decades now, this generation has been recklessly spending the money of future generations and has been convinced that they have been getting away with it. Americans have been enjoying an obscenely high standard of living, but the party is almost over and the day of reckoning is fast approaching. It has been a great party, but it was fueled by the biggest mountain of debt in the history of the world. As many of us know, it can be extremely fun running up a huge credit card bill, but it can be even more painful to pay it off. Now our national "credit card bills" are starting to arrive and nobody really seems to know what to do. The U.S. national debt will forever be a lasting reminder of the greed and recklessness of this generation. The truth is that the United States is NOT the "richest and most powerful nation" in the world. Rather, we are a spoiled, bloated, greedy nation that has run up a debt so big that words simply do not do it justice.

In fact, the U.S. national debt is so bizarre that it is hard to know whether to laugh about it or cry about it. For today at least, we will have some fun with it. The following are 14 fun facts about the U.S. government's massive debt problem....

#1) As of December 1st, 2009, the official debt of the United States government was approximately $12.1 trillion dollars.

#2) To pay this $12.1 trillion dollar debt would require approximately $40,000 from every single person living in the United States.

#3) Now the U.S. Congress has approved an increase in the U.S. government debt cap to $14.3 trillion dollars. to pay this increase off would require approximately $6,000 more from every man, woman and child in the United States.

#4) The U.S. government's debt ceiling has been raised six times since the beginning of 2006.

#5) So how hard is it to spend a trillion dollars? If you spent one dollar every second, you would have spent a million dollars in twelve days. At that same rate, it would take you 32 years to spend a billion dollars. But it would take you more than 31,000 years to spend a trillion dollars.

#6) When Ronald Reagan took office, the U.S. national debt was only about 1 trillion dollars.

#7) The U.S. national debt has more than doubled since the year 2000.

#8) Barack Obama’s most recently proposed budget anticipates $5.08 trillion in deficits over the next 5 years.

#9) The U.S. national debt on January 1st, 1791 was just $75 million dollars. Today, the U.S. national debt rises by that amount about once an hour.

#10) The U.S. national debt rises at an average of approximately $3.8 billion per day.

#11) In 2010, the U.S. government is projected to issue almost as much new debt as the rest of the governments of the world combined.

#12) The U.S. government has such a voracious appetite for debt that the rest of the world simply doesn't have enough money to lend us. So now the Federal Reserve is buying most U.S. debt, and the only reason they can do that is because they basically create the money to lend us out of thin air.

#13) A trillion $10 bills, if they were taped end to end, would wrap around the globe more than 380 times. That amount of money would still not be enough to pay off the U.S. national debt.

#14) As if all of the above was not bad enough, according to the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government, which is an official United States government report, the total liabilities of the United States government, including future social security and medicare payments that the U.S. government is already committed to pay out, now exceed 65 TRILLION dollars.


Something In The Water In Eugene

Oregon tailback LaMichael James, one of the top freshmen in the nation, was arrested on domestic violence charges after his girlfriend said he grabbed her neck during an argument and pushed her to the ground.

James, 20, was in the Lane County Jail on Wednesday on misdemeanor charges of menacing, strangulation and assault. No bail amount was set and it was not immediately known if he has a lawyer.

Springfield police Sgt. Tom Borchers said the incident happened Monday evening outside a Springfield apartment complex. The 22-year-old woman, whose name has not been released, contacted authorities the following day and police located James in Eugene late Tuesday.

The woman sustained an abrasion but did not require hospitalization, Borchers said.

James began the season as the backup to LeGarrette Blount, but quickly became a star after Blount was suspended for most of the season for punching a Boise State player immediately after the Ducks’ season opener.


The 5-foot-9, 180-pound James rushed for 1,546 yards, the ninth-highest total in the nation and the most ever by a Pac-10 freshman. He had seven consecutive 100-yard games before Ohio State limited him to 70 in the Rose Bowl.

University officials did not immediately return phone calls and e-mails seeking comment.

The arrest comes the same week kicker Rob Beard was charged with assault for a Jan. 24 altercation that precipitated a brawl that left him badly beaten and in need of facial surgery. Another kicker involved in the incident, Mike Bowlin, left the team this week and defensive end Matt Simms was dismissed from the squad after he was charged with assault in what police say was an attack on someone Simms thought was involved in the Beard beating.

Story from Yahoo!

My two cents:

First of all, stick to a certain kind of uniform combo. You now have over 80 different combinations of football uniforms and honestly, they all look pretty dumb. I'm not a fashion expert, but your colors make me sick.

Second of all, Coach, get your players under control. You guys are starting to look like the Cincinnati Bengals of college football with all the off the field problems.

And thirdly, you never hit a woman, I don't care how much she may make you mad. Punch a wall, go for a drive, leave, but never get physical. It's not worth going to jail. If you feel that you may do something idiotic, call 911 on your behalf. Dumb asses.

It just goes to show that all the talent in the world cannot make up for stupidity.

Happy Porkaversary, America!

One year ago today the $787 billion Porkulus Act was signed into law. The unemployment rate was 7.6%. We were promised that putting our children into even more debt would keep unemployment from going higher than 8%. Today unemployment is at about 10% (officially, unofficially it’s much higher; in California it's over 12%) and the real cost of Porkulus is closer to $900 billion, plus interest. But that didn’t stop Obama from standing at the podium taking credit for saving the economy. This is the same guy who just signed off on raising the debt ceiling to over a whopping $14 trillion.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

While we’re recalling where we were one year ago, remember which party controlled Congress since 2007. Obama was part of that Congress. So the mess he “inherited” was a mess he helped create. And now he’s making things worse.

Rep. Eric Cantor put together a little Porkulus time line for your reference. Read it while listening to this yahoo spew his lies.

Via Breitbart
The Lonely Conservative

This is what happens when you give a false prophet the keys to the bank and play onto the fears of others so you can get whatever you want done and then blame it on others when it doesn't.