It's not called la la land for nothing

Fool's Golden State
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Thursday, February 19, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Competitiveness: When Silicon Valley-based Intel said this week that it would invest $7 billion to expand, it should have been a time of rejoicing for California. But it isn't. Indeed, it only underscores the state's problems.

The world's leading maker of microprocessors plans to create 7,000 jobs in new and expanded plants that will churn out computer chips 30% more powerful than the current generation of chips.
But California-based Intel won't make them in California.
Instead, the company is expanding in Oregon, Arizona and New Mexico. Anywhere but California, which is now so unfriendly to business, even its home-grown firms don't want to expand there.
This is bad news for the Golden State, which has one of the worst business environments in the country. And it won't be helped a bit by the recent budget deal reached between Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Democrat-led legislature.
That deal seeks to shrink an expected $42 billion state deficit with spending cuts of $15 billion, a $13 billion "temporary" tax hike and billions in aid from President Obama's stimulus plan.
Democratic lawmakers were able to get the last Republican vote needed to pass their tax hikes by trading a planned 12-cent-a-gallon hike in gasoline taxes for a quarter-point jack in the state's already-high income-tax rate. Some deal. It will only make living and doing business in the state costlier.
As Intel shows, businesses are struggling to stay and grow in California. In the first 10 months of last year, the state lost 25,000 high-quality manufacturing jobs — and has lost 25% of its industrial work force since 2001, according to the California Manufacturers & Technology Association.
As a story in the Wall Street Journal recently noted, "Several Western states are launching aggressive efforts to poach jobs, talent and industry from California, sensing an opportunity to capitalize on the Golden State's current political and financial woes."
Well-trained, well-educated Californians are leaving in droves — and are being replaced by poor immigrants from Latin America and Asia. Since 2005, there's been a net outflow of middle-class Californians — and 260,000 people left for other states in 2007.
Think this hasn't further hurt California's housing market? Nothing wrong with immigrants, mind you, but the last thing you want as a state is to lose the entrepreneurs and intellectual capital that made you great.
The simple reason for this is California has priced itself out of the market. Its environmental and industrial regulations are among the nation's strictest. Its taxes are high, and so is the cost of living.
Businesses face huge costs to remain or expand. According to the Milken Institute's Business Cost Index, California businesses face overall costs that are 23% higher than other states on average.
Taxes are 21% higher, and industrial and commercial space costs more. Even wages in a state that has millions of low-paid illegal immigrants are on average 15% higher than other states' wages.
This week, a business group criticized the Western Climate Initiative, an environmental pact among seven Western governors and four Canadian provincial premiers that seeks to slash greenhouse gas emissions by 15% by 2020.
For largely rural Western states and Canadian provinces, this shouldn't be much of a problem. But it will de-industrialize already costly California by hiking its energy costs sky-high.
This didn't just happen; it's been going on for years. As the state's leading historian, Kevin Starr, told author Joel Kotkin, "California is in no way a role model for anyone from outside the state."
Sad, but true. At one time, California meant business. Today, its political leaders are almost entirely lacking in understanding how a free economy works. For the once-Golden State, it's a real pity.

Did you know that government workers in California get 16 holiday days off while the private sector acknowledges 6.

The state teachers union has so much power that they have run the school system into the ground, yet they always want more money to provide even worse results.

The bureaucrats and elected officials think of themselves above the law: a planning board commissioner in Sebastopol did not pay her property taxes for years and was accused of vandalizing her neighbors car because she didn't like where he parked (legally, I might add). Government is the big money pot and that's where the crooks and miscreants head.

Democrat culture of corruption

Will Herb & Marion Sandler pay a price?
By Ed Lasky Sunday, February 22, 2009
The financial problems afflicting our nation were triggered by the mortgage crisis -- too many homes for too many people unable to afford them. Simplistic, perhaps, but true.
At the heart of the problem were mortgages designed and promoted to lure people into signing on the dotted line -- while unwittingly signing away their future. The epicenter of this earthquake was in California. But the true epicenter can be located with greater precision at the headquarters of World Savings, the nation's second-largest savings and loan, founded and led by Herb and Marion Sandler.
The type of mortgage sold by the bucketful were known as Option ARMs. They carried low "teaser" interest rates that had the potential to adjust up, which they disastrously did.
At the same time, housing values collapsed. Borrowers found themselves underwater. They were saddled with unaffordable mortgages and could not be bailed out by higher home values.
One additional feature of these mortgages pioneered by the Sandlers was called "Pick-A-Pay." This allowed borrowers to choose to pay unusually low monthly payments with their obligations being pushed back and made part of the principal of the loan. This was financially perilous, especially when the housing crash came.
Late last year, the U.S. attorney in San Francisco announced dual inquiries into whether World Savings engaged in predatory lending practices or misled investors about its financial well-being.
Major media have begun to scrutinize the Sandlers' role. Time magazine has listed them among the 25 people most responsible for our crisis. Last Sunday, CBS' "60 Minutes" featured a segment on World Savings. The "Pick-A-Pay" methodology was the focus. A whistleblower, Paul Bishop, was the star. He had warned the top management at World Savings that loans were being aggressively promoted and made to people with little or no regard for their ability to afford them. The term "Enron" was waved about like a red flag but to no avail.
The Sandlers were offered a chance to appear on the show but declined. Instead, they sent a letter disavowing responsibility for the problems and stood by their assertion that proper controls were in place and practiced and that the fault lies in the collapse of the housing sector.
Were the Sandlers responsible? For years, the financial press lionized them for their obsessive, hands-on approach toward leading and managing World Savings. They owned upward of 10 percent of the company. Relatives also owned shares. They were honored for their business acumen. As they should be, a cynic might remark, because they sold their company to Wachovia Bank at the peak of the housing bubble and right before the problems with "Pick-A-Pay" surfaced.
They strolled away with more than $2 billion dollars.
But the sale to Wachovia was a disaster -- for Wachovia, sinking it and sending Wachovia into the arms of Wells Fargo.
The jury is still out on the wisdom of the Wells Fargo purchase. The company now has on its own balance sheet those toxic assets, which go from one acquirer to another like the ultimate hot potato.
Will the Sandlers suffer more than just obloquy in the press? Will the U.S. attorney be successful? Will abused borrowers be able to bring successful class actions?
The answer might well be found in Washington.
The Sandlers are sugar daddies to the Democratic Party. The couple and their children have given more than $350,000 to party committees, candidates and liberal political action committees. They gave money to help fund the Obama transition team before he assumed office.
They, along with their political and ideological ally George Soros, are among the top five funders in America of 527 groups that promote a liberal agenda.
In 2004, for example, the Sandlers gave more than $13 million to such groups. Of course, they gave to Barack Obama's presidential campaign.
More significantly, these same people played major roles in the founding and funding of the Center for American Progress (CAP), which has become a very influential player in Washington. While headlines a few months ago noted the role of George Soros at the center, the Sandlers were ignored. Their foundation gave $50 million to help establish the center in 2004. Marion Sandler sat on the small board of directors.
The center now is providing people to man key positions in the Obama administration. John Podesta -- the head of CAP -- led the transition team.
Will levers be pulled to help the Sandlers avoid further scrutiny? Will Attorney General Eric Holder, not immune in the past to allowing political factors influence his decision-making, send a message to the U.S. attorney in San Francisco to focus on other issues than the Sanders? (my emphasis)
One more question: Why has House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., not looked in her own backyard for the people partly responsible for our nation's problems?

Our world, our times

Hating Whitey
By Selwyn Duke
While many believe that prejudice has diminished over time, it's not really true. Prejudice is much like the wind: Its direction changes, and the sheltered and well-situated may not sense it, but it's always blowing on some people somewhere. Put literally, every age has its fashionable biases -- and unfashionable people.
This was obvious during the presidential inauguration benediction, given by the Reverend Joseph Lowery. While making a supplication to the Lord, he made the following anachronistic plea:
". . . help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right [emphasis mine]."
Well, I wonder if the reverend has ever asked the Lord why He scourged the world with white people in the first place.
It isn't surprising that caucaphobia is in fashion. You can demonize any person, group or place; all you need do is focus on the object's failings to the exclusion of its/his accomplishments. It isn't even hard to do. To bastardize one of Abraham Lincoln's lines, if you look for the worst in a group, you're sure to find it. It's just as with a person. If I repeatedly disseminated information about your sins and mistakes among the town folk while downplaying your good points, how long would it be before they were chasing you with pitchforks?
So it has been with whites for a long time now. It is not correct to say that history textbooks, documentaries and entertainment inundate us with stories about slavery and civil rights abuses; no, they inundate us with stories about whites' practice of slavery and abuse of civil rights. There are Hollywood movies such as "Roots" and "Mississippi Burning" but none of note about the Aztecs' or Shaka Zulu's domination of neighboring peoples, or the current African slave trade or Zimbabwean "president" Robert Mugabe's persecution of whites and political opponents. Then, relating the American history guidelines of a prominent textbook publisher, the author of The Language Police, Diane Ravitch, writes:
"European Americans, the guidelines suggest, were uniquely responsible for bigotry and exploitation in all human history."
This philosophy imbues school textbooks. While featured prominently are the sins of whites, others' sins are whitewashed. For instance, due to special-interest-group pressure -- such as that applied by Moslem activists -- examples of slavery perpetrated by non-whites are in short supply or are sanitized. This, despite the fact that Moslem North Africans did at one time capture young boys of both the white and black races, castrate them, and sell them into slavery. And this bias is a continuation of decades of anti-white propaganda of the kind embodied in Susan Sontag's famous 1967 line, "The white race is the cancer of human history." It's an idea that has taken hold.
Only because such attacks exist do I mount a defense of the white race. But I want to preface it with a few remarks. First, don't ask why I undertake such an endeavor. When the president has a preacher talking about the black, brown, yellow, red and white, it's silly to ask why I speak of race. I'm not initiating such a discussion, I'm responding. I'm not throwing punches, I'm blocking. Second, because of this -- since I'm refuting those who assign blame by highlighting the sins of whites -- it's necessary that I trumpet whites' accomplishments. Unlike those I'm refuting, however -- who often ascribe the evils they feature to something inherent in whites -- I don't claim there is an innate quality in the race that should be credited with all these accomplishments. On the contrary, I believe the force primarily responsible for Western civilization's glories is Christianity, but that is grist for a different day.
It's not hard to figure out where a defense of whites must start: Slavery. It's the most odd of issues, in that we all thoroughly agree on the wrongness of it yet it is thoroughly divisive. It is the defining grievance of black America, something that apparently imbues millions of black psyches. As an example, I attended a gathering a few years ago at which there was a certain guest, a rather emotive and outgoing black fellow who was very good at relating every topic of discussion, from the meaningful to the mundane, to America's slavery. It was as if he could channel Kunta Kinte in every conversation.
Yet the reality of slavery is that, along with prostitution, it is one of the world's oldest institutions. It is mentioned in the Bible and Koran, and, to the best of my knowledge, every major civilization has practiced it. And, if we're to believe history and Afrocentrists (and I suppose you cannot believe both), the ancient Egyptians were black and enslaved Jews.
Moreover, the Islamic slave trade took at least as many Africans into bondage as did the European variety, and African tribes themselves had slaves and sold them to both civilizations. Additionally, while the word "slave" conjures up the image of a black person in the typical American mind, the term itself is derived from the word "Slav." This is because great numbers of Slavs were once sold into slavery by conquering peoples. In other words, no group ever cornered the market on slavery because it touched ever corner of the Earth.
Yet, in the history of involuntary servitude, something else should be noted. It is a startling fact: While whites weren't the first ones to practice slavery, they were the first ones to abolish it.
Let's be clear about this. Slavery was accepted. It was the status quo. It was an institution whose origin was shrouded in the mists of time. It was unquestioned.
That is, until Europeans said "No more."
It was not Asians who effected this bold and unprecedented social change. It was not South Americans. It was not Africans. It was not American Indians. It was not Aborigines. It was Europeans, that cancer of human history, and they were just as white then as they are today. They gave the world change you can really believe in.
People will try to explain away this historical fact, saying that this striking example of man’s humanity to man has nothing to do with race. I will simply reiterate that the why of the matter is a discussion for a different day. For now, if whites can be demonized without explanation for being one of many groups to enslave Africans, they can be credited without explanation for being the first group to outlaw the enslavement of anyone.One of the reasons we fixate on slavery that ended more than 150 years ago concerns the effects many believe it has today. This is called the "legacy of slavery," which, actually, seems not nearly as big a problem as the legacy of obsessing on legacies. Be that as it may, what is the real legacy of slavery?
A leading black journalist, Keith Richburg of the Washington Post, more than a decade ago wrote of his gratitude that his ancestors made it out of Africa to America, even if by the noxious means of slavery. Think about it: Many lament blacks' economic state in America, claiming it's part of slavery's legacy. But that legacy also includes their presence in America. West Africa's black population's economic state is far worse than that of American blacks.
In other words, there is no reason to agonize over an event - even an evil one - responsible for your presence in a country that has offered its citizens unprecedented rights and standard of living. (Of course, to be precise, most blacks currently in the U.S. would not actually have been worse off absent slavery. This is because they wouldn't have "been" at all, as ancestors whose procreation led to their existence would never even have met. The big picture is a funny thing, isn't it?)
The point is that most people who arrived on American shores were driven here by some kind of persecution. Whatever the reason, however, thank God we're in the land of opportunity and not languishing in a slum in Asia, South America, Africa or Eastern Europe. So, it's ironic, but blacks brought here in chains yesterday ensured that their descendants wouldn't have to wear chains today.Now we come to prejudice, another supposedly characteristic white fault. Yet the truth is quite the opposite. In reality, racial prejudice is probably found least among whites, due to political correctness.
Most white children are raised today with the idea that it's profoundly immoral to be prejudiced (I discussed this here). This isn't to say there aren't some Archie Bunker types extant, but they certainly aren't in fashion. Remember, it was mainly white people who originated, promoted and funded sensitivity-training classes, tolerance programs and multiculturalism (come to think of it, I may start hating white people myself). Now, while I consider these abominations to be worse than what they ostensibly remedy, this brings us to a relevant question: Can you think of another group that has gone to the point of self-flagellation to purge prejudice from its ranks? Heck, with how we beat each other up over this, no one really has to worry at all about whites. We're all black and blue.
Then we have the matter of white achievement. The vast majority of what makes the lives of all races better today -- modern science and medicine; our luxuries; Western art, literature, legal institutions; etc. -- is the handiwork of whites. Oh, this is simply a matter of circumstance, of opportunity, of a twist of fate, you say? Perhaps. Suffice it to say for now that if President Obama (PBUH) can frame matters in terms of race at his inauguration (and in his books and everywhere else, it seems), I can in an article. And if whites can be ridiculed for their transgressions, they can be recognized for their triumphs.
Yet, despite all this and more, caucaphobia is still not only accepted but often encouraged. And the hypocrisy is stark. The left admonishes against making even valid generalizations or entertaining intellectual discussions about group differences. And indulging stereotyping -- that specter of egalitarian nightmares -- can fast earn one pariah status in addition to a place on the unemployment line. Why, even the positive variety is off limits. We cannot say blacks are better athletes, even though the sports arena may bear witness to this; we cannot say Asians are more intelligent, even though they have the highest average I.Q. of any major racial group; we cannot say Latinos are good dancers (not sure about that one). The idea is that such beliefs can lead to stigmatization or resentment or, or . . . whatever the theory du jour may be.
But when the matter is whites, even baseless negative stereotypes aren't thought cause for alarm. A Reverend Lowery can imply that whites are uniquely flawed and immoral, they can be portrayed as the bane of man, as "the cancer of human history," and it's ho-hum.
Yet, are we to believe that such demonization magically becomes harmless when whites are the targets? What does history teach about the plight of consistently scapegoated and dehumanized groups? It's that they almost invariably end up suffering persecution. And given that current demographic trends indicate whites will becomes a minority in America during the lifetimes of many reading this, and given that even majorities sometimes are tyrannized -- as Sunnis' domination of Shiites under Saddam Hussein and the Spartans' enslavement of the Helots proved -- it's foolishness to dismiss the peril posed by mainstreaming caucaphobia. (In fact, whites already suffer the sting of persecution; I documented some cases here and here).
Yet, that increasingly-maligned dead white male Ben Franklin knew whereof he spoke when he said, "You cannot reason a man out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." Prejudice is a function of emotion, not logic, and emotion is like darkness, in that it can be blinding. A person who sees only color -- and through colored glasses -- will have a powerful immunity to facts. Thus, I only expect caucaphobia to intensify.
So what can we do? Well, prayer is always good, so I'll conclude with one of my own right now. Lord, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will cease the attack, brown will no longer frown, white will be all right -- and rhymes will fit the times.

A visit to one circle of Hell

http://www.vbs.tv/full_screen.php?s=DGFE2305DC&sc=1363196

Expect more of this under Eric Holder's regime

Judge blocks man's deportation, citing his mistreatment after arrest
By Brandon Lowrey, Staff Writer
Updated: 02/21/2009 01:07:03 AM PST


A federal judge has ruled that an undocumented worker was mistreated during his arrest by immigration agents, so he cannot be deported - a ruling that attorneys say may extend to dozens of other illegal immigrants arrested in the same raid.
Gregorio Perez Cruz, 24, was among 138 people arrested during a raid on Micro Solutions Enterprises in Van Nuys on Feb. 7, 2008. He and more than 100 other suspects complained they were mistreated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, and about 40 have challenged their deportation orders.
While the 19-page ruling allows only Perez Cruz to remain in the U.S., his attorney said it sets a precedent for the others arrested in the same raid.
"The implication of the decision is that many of the people, probably everyone arrested in the Van Nuys raid, will have their case dismissed," said attorney Ahilan Arulananthm, who is director of immigrants rights and national security for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Valerie Kice, a spokeswoman for ICE, said the agency will appeal the decision.
ICE officials also have denied allegations that they acted improperly when they raided the printer-cartridge company and demanded proof that employees were authorized to work in the United States.
But the ruling issued Feb. 12 by U.S. Immigration Judge A. Ashley Tabaddor includes allegations by Perez Cruz that his civil rights were violated during his incarceration.
"(Perez Cruz) states he
was held in a cold concrete cell overnight and forced to sleep on the concrete flooring," the ruling said. "He was also deprived of food and drinking water for approximately 18 hours.
"Under these conditions, ICE agents questioned (him) without informing him of the reasons for his arrest or that his statements could be used against him in removal proceedings."
Tabaddor, who is a former attorney with the Office of Immigration Litigation at the Department of Justice, ruled ICE agents violated Perez Cruz's rights and the agency's own policy by detaining him without having prior evidence that he was in the country illegally.
She also ruled ICE could not use Perez Cruz's responses or his Mexican birth certificate against him, because the evidence was obtained from an illegal investigation.
Kice declined to discuss specifics of the evidence but said other civil cases have been filed as a result of the Van Nuys raid.
Workplace raids may have had a role in reducing illegal immigration, according to "Homeward Bound," a report published last July by the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C.
Through May 2008, the number of illegal immigrants in the country declined by 1.3 million people compared with the peak during the previous summer. The center estimates the current illegal population at 11.2 million.
Perez Cruz said he hopes to move forward now, but sought to encourage some of the other workers who are still fighting to remain in the country.
"I was mistreated. Everybody there was mistreated," Perez Cruz said through a translator. "Like criminals. Like animals. They treated us unjustly."
He said he's now having a tough time finding work in the rough economy to support his wife and 6-month-old child.
"I'm hoping that not only it will help the others here in Van Nuys," Perez Cruz said, "but it will have a national impact."

Good for him and us

Andy Roddick advances in Memphis, pulls out of Dubai

Just in case you didn't know that UNWRA was in the bag for Hamas

U.S. Officials Outraged at U.N. Over Hamas Letter to Obama

The truth about Gitmo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5wXrDLLLaM

Some interesting numbers here

THE FORECLOSURE FIVE
A NATIONAL CRISIS? HARDLY. THE REST OF US ARE PAYING FOR THE IRRESPONSIBILITY OF A FEW STATES

Are all belief systems equal?

Satanist inmate sues county
BY GREG TUTTLEOf The Gazette StaffA Billings man in prison for drug possession has filed a $10 million federal lawsuit against Yellowstone County for alleged civil-rights violations, including interference with his satanic religious practices.Jason Paul Indreland claims in the U.S. District Court lawsuit that county jail staff took from him a religious medallion, denied him access to religious material and ridiculed and punished him for his religious beliefs.The lawsuit also alleges that Indreland was denied medical care for his drug addiction, that he was placed in situations where violence was expected and that he suffered harassment and retaliation while incarcerated.Indreland said he has been a practicing Satanist for the past decade and the confiscated medallion was a "protective symbol" in his religion. The lawsuit claims jail staff refused to return the medallion or allow Indreland access to a "Satanic Bible or Book of Satanic Rituals."Indreland, 35, is incarcerated at Montana State Prison for a term of five years, with two years suspended, for felony drug possession. Indreland was convicted of the crime after Billings police found him with 15 grams of methamphetamine in March 2007.Indreland has previous felony convictions in Yellowstone and Stillwater counties for bad checks and theft.Indreland is not represented by an attorney in his suit. An attorney for the county, Kevin Gillen, said the county has not been served with the claim and could not comment.Indreland initially filed the handwritten federal lawsuit last March while he was still held at the county jail. The lawsuit names as defendants the Yellowstone County Board of Commissioners, Sheriff Chuck Maxwell, Undersheriff Jay Bell and Sheriff's Capt. Dennis McCave, who oversees county jail operations.U.S. Magistrate Judge Carolyn Ostby reviewed the complaint and in October issued an order permitting Indreland to file an amended complaint. Ostby said in the order that there were several legal flaws in the original claim and it would be dismissed if not amended to comply with her order.Indreland filed the amended complaint Nov. 12. In that document, Indreland named numerous members of the jail staff he alleges participated in violating his civil rights. Among the claims, Indreland alleges jail staff placed "Christian natured greeting cards under (his) cell door describing how he was going to undertake a huge change in his life and how Jesus was ready to save and accept him."The lawsuit seeks $3 million for alleged civil-rights violations, $2 million for "the deprivation of his rights and injuries both mental and physical," and $5 million in punitive damages.

After reading this I had a couple of thoughts. Isn't satanism the worship of evil? Have we transformed the Devil into just another Rodeo Drive brand?

If he wins this suit why not then sue saying that according to his religion his crimes are not crimes at all but part of his religion practice. Are not the crimes of theft, bad checks and meth use only crimes if you believe in the Ten Commandments? Satanists and Islamists are not required to follow laws they don't like.

Note the highlighted portion

NYU'S SNIT-IN
By ANDREA PEYSER

THEY don't make radicals the way they used to.
Some 60 students - all elite, lily white and whiny - took over the cafeteria at New York University's Kimmel Center Wednesday night to stage not a party, but a protest.
The kids showed up armed for slumber, with sleeping bags, camera phones, laptops and plenty of cellphones for the homesick to call Mom.
Just minutes after the well-heeled warriors took over the room on the third floor, they made their first demand to the administration. Via cellphone, natch.
What was the No. 1 priority for this band of complainers? World peace? Free tuition? A hot bath?
Close. They demanded the right to use the bathroom.
"Not allowing us bathroom rights is a human-rights violation!" Emily Stainkamp, an 18-year-old freshman, said from her cellphone inside the cafeteria. The university relented, and students won the right to tinkle.
"My parents are a little worried," Fharah Khimji, 20, said from inside. "They're paying a lot of money to send me here."
With the kids' human rights indulged, they unfurled a dizzying list of 13 demands, which ran the gamut from lower tuition, to NYU pulling out investments in Israel, to giving freebies to Palestinian students. But their No. 1 demand was this: "Full legal and disciplinary amnesty for all parties involved in the occupation."
You can't say these kids are too dumb to look out for their own interests.
Outside, about 40 supporters held a rally. Keri Lyons, 20, and Nadia Collado, 19, walked around topless in some kind of protest over NYU's failure to expose where its money goes. Or something. It was cold.
A cop eyed the crowd and shook his head.
"It's pathetic," he said. "These are privileged kids. These kids have silver spoons in their mouths, and their parents send them here - so they can sit in the cafeteria."
As night turned into day yesterday, students, whose parents shell out an eye-gouging $48,000-plus a year for tuition and housing, slept in three-hour shifts, and e-mailed professors to ask if missing class was cool. The number of students dwindled to just over 20 by nightfall, as kids went to class or went home.
One who gave up was Colin Dillon, who bounded out of the building and reported that NYU would serve dinner. "A lot of people have very particular diets," he said. "Food allergies, or they're vegetarians or vegans."
NYU coddled its little radicals. A spokesman did warn, vaguely, that disruptive students "are accountable for violating university rules."
What will they do to these brats?
Give them a C grade? That would violate their rights.

Stimulus money to ACORN for more lock cutters?

Acorn Breaks into Home

Reported by: Brittney Gordon Email: brittney.gordon@wmar.com Reported by: Terry Owens

Some community activists could face criminal charges after breaking into a home in Southeast Baltimore.Police were at the home Thursday night looking for fingerprints and other evidence.The activists who staged the break-in belong to the Association of Community Organizations For Reform Now or ACORN.After snapping a lock with bolt cutters, ACORN member Louis Beverly told supporters "this is our house now."ACORN staged the demonstration to protest the foreclosure crisis sweeping the nation.The home in the 300 block of Ellwood Avenue used to be owned by Donna Hanks. She lost this home in September, after owning it since 2001. When things got tough she struggled to make her payments. Her mortgage? $1995 a month. Her income? $2200. Donna's story is one that ACORN is taking a stand against."We feel that it was unjust, we feel as though she was strong armed robbed, we feel that Wells Fargo could have modified her loan and that is what we are asking for right now," says Beverly.Acorn chapters across the country are staging similar scenes to drive their point home. They want state governments to enact moratoriums on foreclosures until this crisis can be worked out.ACORN says that they will move Donna Hanks back in despite the fact that she no longer owns the house. During the taping of this story a man by the name of William Lane told ABC2 News that he owns the house currently--and plans to sue Acorn.

The new administration and Israel

Is there a sanctions shift coming toward Iran?
By Ed Lasky
Barack Obama has extended an open hand to Iran. The hand was swatted away. Plan B? The candidate who at one time promised no preconditions to negotiating with Iran may very well be on the verge of applying a precondition on America that Iran would welcome: a shift on our sanctions policy toward that nation.
For many years, America has had in place sanctions that applied to various nations. These can be waived by the President or by the Commerce Department. The sanctioned nations have included Libya, Syria, and Iran. The Libyan sanctions were dropped as part of our rapprochement with Libya. Just two weeks ago, the Commerce Department ignored the sanctions on Syria and allowed Boeing to go ahead on a major overhaul of two 747 jetliners belonging to that nation's state-owned airline. Spare parts for airplanes have been an Achilles heel for nations that own American-made planes. They often depend on American manufacturers to supply them. They are crucial and a huge bargaining chip. Not anymore, apparently.
Now we have Hillary Clinton announcing that sanctions on Burma may be dropped:
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Wednesday that economic sanctions imposed by the United States and other Western governments had failed to pressure the repressive Burmese government, signaling a potentially major shift in U.S. policy.
Clinton, at a news conference here, did not deny that easing sanctions was one of the ideas under consideration by the Obama administration as part of a major review.
"Clearly the path we have taken in imposing sanctions hasn't influenced the Burmese junta" she said.
Now an exercise in logic:
Replace the word "Burma" with "Iran". The same reasoning justifying the dropping of sanctions on Burma might also apply to the ending of sanctions-or certainly the loosening of sanctions-on Iran.
The Washington Post identified one group as being responsible for advocating the ending of sanctions.
That group would be the International Crisis Group (ICG).
Regular readers of American Thinker might recall that we have written about this group before. The group seems a very congenial think tank for anti-American, anti-Israel, pro-Iranian and pro-Hamas/Hezbollah foreign policy "experts".
As well it should be since George Soros is a major funder of the Brussels-based group (it has offices in Syria, Washington, D.C. and other "hot spots"). Soros has long been a critic of the America-Israel relationship and has sought to weaken the ties between the two nations. He was also a generous supporter of Barack Obama's campaign.
The ICG gave Soros a -- who sits on its Executive Board -- a Founders Award. When he accepted the award he praised the group's work on the Palestinian question. No surprise that he would be happy with his investment. The group is chock full of "experts" who favor outreach towards regimes such as Iran and terror group such as Hezbollah and Hamas. The ICG has been critical of America and Israel.
The roster of people involved with the ICG gives some insight about why these views are promoted by the group. Zbigniew Brzezinski serves on the board of the ICG. He was an early foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama. Brzezinski (Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser) has a history replete with anti-Israel advocacy.
Robert Malley plays a key role at the ICG. Malley is controversial for his views towards the region (he seems to enjoy currying favor with Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, while criticizing Israel.
Who else is involved in the International Crisis group? None other than Samantha Power, who during the campaign was Barack Obama closest foreign policy adviser. She sits on the board of the ICG.
Her ties with Barack Obama extend back years (they are Blackberry and basketball buddies). She is also a harsh critic of Israel and has compiled quite a record of anti-Israel statements (for good measure, she can engage in some rhetoric that is not exactly philo-Semitic; when she commented about scrutiny of Obama's foreign policy views she complained that it all came down to "What is good for the Jews").
Now Power serves on the National Security Council. She is nominally in charge of dealing with multilateral groups.
Was Samantha Power behind the move to reconsider sanctions on Burma? Was she responsible for Barack Obama's decision to participate in the UN Conference Against Racism (Durban II) despite its anti-Israel agenda and despite the fact that she participated in the first conference that became an anti-Semitic hate-fest?
Will she fire up the Blackberry and suggest the dropping of sanctions on Iran?Ed Lasky is news editor of American Thinker.

Distorting the market for no good purpose

Biofuels may speed up, not slow global warming: study
by Mira Oberman Mira Oberman

CHICAGO (AFP) – The use of crop-based biofuels could speed up rather than slow down global warming by fueling the destruction of rainforests, scientists warned Saturday.
Once heralded as the answer to oil, biofuels have become increasingly controversial because of their impact on food prices and the amount of energy it takes to produce them.
They could also be responsible for pumping far more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than they could possibly save as a replacement for fossil fuels, according to a study released Saturday.
"If we run our cars on biofuels produced in the tropics, chances will be good that we are effectively burning rainforests in our gas tanks," warned Holly Gibbs, of Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment.
Gibbs studied satellite photos of the tropics from 1980 to 2000 and found that half of new cropland came from intact rainforests and another 30 percent from disturbed forests.
"When trees are cut down to make room for new farmland, they are usually burned, sending their stored carbon to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide," Gibbs said.
For high-yield crops like sugar cane it would take 40 to 120 years to pay back this carbon debt.
For lower yield crops like corn or soybeans it would take 300 to 1,500 years, she told reporters at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
"Biofuels have caused alarm because of how quickly production has been growing: Global ethanol production increased by four times and biodiesel by 10 times between 2000 and 2007," Gibbs said.
"Moreover, agricultural subsidies in Indonesia and in the United States are providing added incentives to increase production of these crops."
Gibbs estimates that anywhere from a third to two thirds of recent deforestation could be as a result of the increased demand for biofuels, but said an increased demand for food and feed also play a major role.
What is certain is that much of the expansion of cropland in response to growing demand and rising prices is occurring in the tropics where there is an abundance of arable land and climates ideal for growing biofuel crops like sugar cane, soy and oil palm.
Simply growing the biofuel crops in the United States or other non-tropical countries will not solve the problem, said Michael Coe of the Woods Hole Research Center.
Recent legislation mandating increased use of ethanol has already prompted US farmers to switch from soy to corn production. But since soy demand remains high, farmers in Brazil have responded by cutting down forests to expand soy production.
"Emissions from deforestation in Brazil -- even under our best scenarios -- still swamp any decrease in greenhouse gasses in the United States," Coe told reporters.
"We can't find a way that it makes greenhouse gas sense to grow ethanol in the United States."
These findings do not mean that biofuels cannot be an important part of energy policy, Gibbs added.
Growing biofuel crops on marginal lands can have an overall positive environmental impact and there are enormous tracks of degraded land in the tropics.
But since fighting soil erosion or reversing nutrient leeching with fertilizers costs more than cutting down forests, farmers must be offered economic incentives to do so, Gibbs said.
And policy makers must also decide if the climate would be better served by returning degraded land to its natural forested state so it could act as a carbon sink and provide ecological services such as rainwater recycling, flood mitigation and habitat for endangered species.
"There are tradeoffs in all these decisions that need to be made on a case-by-case basis," she said. "We need to keep in mind that more cropland will be needed to meet the global demands for food, feed and fuel, so the best options will likely vary by circumstance."

Hey, it was Richard Armitage and Colin Powell not Scooter.

There's no media bias, right! Who will hold Matthews to account. How's that thrill up your leg doing?

Matthews Suggests Water-Boarding Libby to Get Truth About Cheney's Misdeeds
By Brent Baker
Created 2009-02-19 00:48
In a Wednesday segment on worries President Obama, in not ruling out renditions and water-boarding, may be “slipping back into the dirty old ways” of “torture” supposedly employed by the Bush administration, Hardball host Chris Matthews blurted out: “Do you think if we water-boarded Lewis 'Scooter' Libby he'd tell us the role that the Vice President played in the outing of Joseph Wilson's wife?”
When guest Michael Smerconish's answer didn't satisfy Matthews, he turned to Salon's chief, Joan Walsh, and expounded on the scope of who he thought could be physically treated like a dangerous terrorist: “Do you think water-boarding works in the case of recent political figures in this [Bush] administration who are felons, disbarred, et cetera?...Do you think we'd get the truth through water-boarding here at home?”
On the February 18 show, Matthews fretted over Obama:
He's apparently, according to the testimony we've gotten from Leon Panetta and others, he is going to consider, as an option, rendition. He is going to consider, as an option, additional authority when it comes to squeezing prisoners, using harsher techniques of interrogation. Is he slipping back into the dirty old ways?
A couple of minutes later:
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Do you think if we water-boarded Lewis 'Scooter' Libby he'd tell us the role that the Vice President played in the outing of Joseph Wilson's wife? I'm asking you a simple question because you believe in this stuff. Do you believe he would give us an honest answer if we water-boarded Scooter Libby as to the role his boss played in what he did and got in trouble for?
MICHAEL SMERCONISH, PHILADELPHIA RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I believe that there must be some efficacy in water-boarding or we would not continue to have this debate. Does that answer your question?
MATTHEWS: It does in a very abstract way. I was hoping for something more applicable. Let me go to Joan Walsh. Do you think water-boarding works in the case of recent political figures in this administration who are felons, disbarred, et cetera, but will not get pardons because the President will not play ball with his Vice President? Do you think we'd get the truth through water-boarding here at home? Here at home? Do you think it works?
JOAN WALSH, SALON: Okay, this is easy for me, Chris. I don't believe in water-boarding, not even for Scooter. So I'm just -- I'm not even going to go there. So-
MATTHEWS: Okay. Good. Well let's go where we have to go tonight. In all seriousness, are you worried, as a supporter of Barack Obama in a general sense, you like his values. Do you believe he may be slipping away from them, backsliding into the old ways of torture?
WALSH: I am worried...

Another Islamist triumph

Hundreds of journalists have protested throughout Pakistan at the killing of a reporter who was covering a deal to bring Sharia law to the Swat region.

What will Obama do?

Syria samples reveal more uranium
The UN nuclear agency says it has found additional particles of uranium in samples taken from the site of an alleged nuclear facility in Syria.
Syria denied the site was a nuclear reactor and alleged the uranium traces found there came from Israeli missiles fired on it in September 2007.
But the International Atomic Energy Agency said the probability of the uranium coming from missiles was low.
The IAEA called on Syria to co-operate more with its inquiry.
Nuclear suspicions
It said Syria had not answered many of the agency's questions about the destroyed facility.
Israeli warplanes flattened the facility in the Syrian desert in 2007 on suspicion that it was part of a covert nuclear weapons programme.
The report for the IAEA board members has been seen by news agencies ahead of a meeting to discuss Syria next week.
It said IAEA inspectors had been blocked from making follow-up visits to the site.
The latest report comes after a November report said the site had features resembling those of a nuclear reactor site, but it did not exclude the possibility that it was being used for purposes unrelated to nuclear activity.
In that first report on its findings, the IAEA said "significant" traces of uranium were also found.
Syria has always maintained the site was a disused military building.

Another Democrat supporter

Charges Against Stanford a Long Time Coming, Offshore Banking Experts Say

It's okay because FARC is a leftist revolutionary group

Will the UN investigate? Never.

Yet Jim McGovern, Nancy Pelosi, and Bill Delahunt want to make friends with FARC and do what FARC wants - deny Colombia free trade. They want to bring FARC back into the political system as 'a humanitarian gesture' toward 'peace' and ensure that these killers gets representation. Here FARC is, in all is glory, busy killing Indians, lying about how many, and slandering them as informers afterward. Proud of yourself, Nancy?

Colombian rebels admit killing 8 Indians

BOGOTA, Colombia (CNN) -- Marxist guerrillas admit they recently killed eight Indians whom the rebels accused of collaborating with the Colombian government, media outlets reported Tuesday.
Human rights organizations and a state governor last week had accused the the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, better known as FARC, of killing at least 27 Awa Indians in southwest Colombia in the past two weeks.
The FARC issued a statement dated February 11 saying the guerrillas detained and "executed" eight people on February 6 in the town of Rio Bravo because the Indians were gathering information about the rebels to give to the Colombian military. The FARC statement was posted Tuesday by the New Colombia News Agency and Caracol Radio's Web site.
The statement said the guerrillas were not targeting indigenous populations but took the action "against people who independent of their race, religion, ethnicity, social condition etc. accepted money and put themselves at the service of the army in an area that is the object of military operations."
The FARC communication also urged the Indians not to be manipulated by government officials who say the guerrillas are out to harm indigenous populations.
"They know of our respect for the civil community," the statement said, adding that a government that "never has looked out for these indigenous communities and has plunged them into war can't be their defenders. They are their executioners!"
Last week, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe called the FARC "executioners" for killing Indians.
"Let the world know: The Democratic Security [forces] protect the indigenous because it is for all Colombians," Uribe said. "And the FARC deceive the country, they assassinate the indigenous."
The governor of Narino state, Navarro Wolff, said last week the FARC had killed 10 Awa in one incident a few days earlier and 17 others the previous week.
Luis Evelis Andrade of the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia, known by its Spanish acronym ONIC, said the FARC had targeted the Awa because the Indians don't want to get involved in the armed struggle and refuse to reveal information on government troop actions.
Speaking on Caracol TV, ONIC said the FARC has abducted 120 Awa since February 4 and 44 Awa have been killed this year.
Others also shared their concern.
"We are very worried about the Awa community," said Monsignor Gustavo Giron Higuita, the bishop of the city of Tumaco. "It is a community that is pretty unprotected and that in the past five years has received a type of persecution by armed groups."
The Awa, he said, "are pacifist, want respect of their organization and want to regain their traditions. We have been accompanying them in this process, and that's why this hurts so much."
Colombian Attorney General Alejandro Ordonez Maldonado ordered the nation's human rights commissioner to launch an investigation and take steps to help the Awa.
The Human Rights Watch organization said Wednesday that the guerrillas tortured some of the Awa before killing them with knives.
"These cruel killings violate the most basic principles of human decency and dignity," said Jose Miguel Vivanco, the Americas director at Human Rights Watch. "There is no possible excuse or justification for these horrific actions."
Monsignor Ruben Salazar Gomez, the president of the Episcopal Conference of Colombia, joined last week's chorus of criticism, calling the killings a "very grave ... crime the whole country should condemn."
New York-based Human Rights Watch said in a release that group members have made numerous visits to Narino, which is one of Colombia's 32 departments, or states. Narino is in southwest Colombia, on the Pacific Ocean and the border with Ecuador.
The area has a heavy presence of various armed groups and Colombian military forces and has among the worst human rights conditions in Colombia, the human rights group said. The Awa territories have been particularly affected.
The Colombian government has issued a "risk report" warning that civilians in the region are in danger.
The FARC is said to have "confined" some villages, cutting them off from the outside world and not allowing anyone to enter or leave.
The FARC, the largest and oldest guerrilla group in Colombia, has been waging war against the government since the 1960s.
Security analysts say the FARC has about 9,000 to 12,000 armed guerillas and several thousand supporters, mostly in rural areas.
The guerrilla group operates mostly in Colombia but has carried out extortion, kidnappings, bombings and other activities in Venezuela, Panama and Ecuador.

Radical Islam a perfect fit for the jailhouse set

Jailhouse Islam BehindCop Killing?
Sources: Suspect Said 'Can't BelieveI Shot A Cop'
PHILADELPHIA - The fact that Rasheed Scrugs allegedly announced he was going to kill a cop and then shot Philadelphia Police Officer John Pawlowski with a gun hidden inside his coat pocket has detectives digging deeper on Scrugs.
They're still gathering evidence and trying to unravel why Friday night's senseless murder happened, Fox 29's Dave Schratwieser reported.
"Pawlowski didn't stand a chance," Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey said Monday, as Philadelphia continued to reel over the killing.
A key witness went public Monday with the chilling words he heard the gunman say before the shooting.
"If you call the cop, I'll kill you and kill the cop," said Manuel Dias, who works in a newsstand at Broad Street and Olney Avenue, repeating what he told detectives.
Police believe Scrugs planned to shoot officers when they answered a 911 call about a fight on the highway at Broad and Olney at 8:20 p.m.
"This individual was very violent and was bent on killing someone," Ramsey said.
Scrugs was shot by Pawlowski's partner and another officer. He's now awake and talking, but he refused to be interviewed by homicide detectives.
Sources say Scrugs told a hospital staffer he was high on drugs at the time of the shooting and allegedly said, "I can't believe I shot a cop."
"Well, he's a cold blooded killer is what he is, and he knew exactly what it is he wanted to do," Ramsey said.
Ramsey told Fox 29 News that police are now trying to determine if Scrugs -- who also goes by the alias Rasheed Abdulghaffer -- may have converted to a radical form of "jailhouse Islam" during his years in prison.
Ironically, Ramsey said he was briefed by FBI agents on Friday about this radical form of Islam. That was just hours before Pawlowski was shot.
Ramsey said there's a growing concern among law enforcement.
"This is a radical form where certainly committing crime and killing police officers and so forth is part of it," Ramsey said.
Police experts and the FBI are now researching whether Scrugs and Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski' accused killers -- Howard Cain and Levon Warner, who are accused of wearing Muslim clothing during that murder -- were schooled in jailhouse Islam.
"Since Steve Liczbinski got killed, this issue has really been something that has struck home here in Philadelphia," Ramsey said.
Police sources said the .357 Magnum that Scrugs allegedly used was from out of state. Federal ATF agents are tracking the gun's owner down. Ramsey said whoever sold or gave the gun to Scrugs may be prosecuted.
Police said Scrugs had 19 packets of crack and 19 extra bullets in his pockets at the time.
Dias said he was watching Friday night when Scrugs carried through on his violent threat.
"As soon as the cop asked him to take his hand out of his pocket to give him something else, he just pulled the gun and shot the cop for no specific reason," Dias said. "Some screamed 'Help! Help!' right here, and they tried to put him on the car. … I was afraid to die because this is serious."
Dias hid on the floor of his newsstand, fearing for his own life, as police shot and wounded Scruggs.
Pawlowski's church community is gathering Monday night to hold a "life celebration" at his parish, St. Anselm's in Northeast Philadelphia. The mass begins at 7:30 p.m., and attendees are expected to hear a statement from the fallen officer's family read by his brother.

Thank you President Bush

Former El Paso Border Patrol Agents Released From Prison

The government owns you now...

Exceptions’ in Stimulus Bill Allow Sale of Health Records

Another slimy Democrat...

The Beginning of the End for Senator Burris

He will join the ranks of other Democrat Congress critters like Charlie Rangel and "cold cash" William Jefferson (D) La. who serve without problem.

I see that Rahm Emmanuel has joined the club as well.

It speaks for itself

Muzzammil Hassan, right, founder of Bridges TV, is charged with murder in the beheading of his wife, Aasiya Hassan, left, in Orchard Park.

Prominent Orchard Park man charged with beheading his wife
By Gene Warner
News Staff Reporter
Orchard Park police are investigating a particularly gruesome killing, the beheading of a woman, after her husband — an influential member of the local Muslim community — reported her death to police Thursday.
Police identified the victim as Aasiya Z. Hassan, 37. Detectives have charged her husband, Muzzammil Hassan, 44, with second-degree murder.
"He came to the police station at 6:20 p.m. [Thursday] and told us that she was dead," Orchard Park Police Chief Andrew Benz said late this morning.
Muzzammil Hassan told police that his wife was at his business, Bridges TV, on Thorn Avenue in the village. Officers went to that location and discovered her body.
Muzzammil Hassan is the founder and chief executive officer of Bridges TV, which he launched in 2004, amid hopes that it would help portray Muslims in a more positive light.
The killing apparently occurred some time late Thursday afternoon. Detectives still are looking for the murder weapon.
"Obviously, this is the worst form of domestic violence possible," Erie County District Attorney Frank A. Sedita III said today.
Authorities say Aasiya Hassan recently had filed for divorce from her husband.
"She had an order of protection that had him out of the home as of Friday the 6th [of February]," Benz said.
Muzzammil Hassan was arraigned before Village Justice Deborah Chimes and sent to the Erie County Holding Center.
gwarner@buffnews.com

Fighting the Communist surge

The New York Times and 'Book Banning'

update

The writing is on the synagogue wall

Think of the wider picture, of a worldwide violent revolution network

The FARC-ETA connection

SEMANA gained access to the investigation that the Spanish prosecutor’s office is undertaking about the relationship between ETA and the FARC. The dossier shows that those links are older and closer than was previously thought.
For years the FARC and the Spanish terrorist group ETA have publicly denied being allies. Although Colombian and Spanish intelligence services have sustained for a long time that the two organizations maintain a close collaboration, little could be proven and documented about those links. Until now. An investigation launched by a Spanish prosecutor has revealed unknown details about the alliance of those two terrorist organizations. The document, that SEMANA had access to, is dated November 14 and is signed by the Spanish prosecutor Vicente González. The report was sent to the Sixth Central Court and in its text the official orders the capture of five Spanish citizens identified as being ETA members who have links with the FARC. In 17 pages the Spanish prosecutor relates in detail the proof and evidence that they obtained in their investigation, that overwhelmingly demonstrate the FARC-ETA relationship. “From the investigation procedures it has been revealed that the collaboration between both organizations, which was suspected for several years, has been proven by demonstrating contacts and collaboration. That collaboration is centered both in terms of contacts among the heads of both organizations as much as in the providing of short courses on the use of explosives.” This is one of the initial paragraphs of the report by the Spanish prosecutor, in which he describes the alliance in detail. According to the Spanish investigation, the links between the two groups have existed since 1993. This relationship is much older than even the Colombian intelligence organisms had suspected. According to the Spanish prosecutor, the beginning of the relationship between ETA and the FARC was discovered thanks to some documents that were found in an operation that took place on August 6, 1993 in France. On that day, French authorities captured various ETA members who were hiding in France and found a computer of theirs. One of the computer archives, titled “Maritik 93 Otsaila” had a log of activities and contacts of Jokin Gorositidi, an important ETA member. The prosecutor states in his report that that terrorist authored several documents in which he narrated his meetings in Cuba with FARC heads. “Very interesting contact with a commander of the FARC of Colombia, their availability was total, they were very happy with the joint work from other occasions (regarding the input from our colleagues) and they showed themselves to be available for the matter,” says one of the excerpts cited by the Spanish prosecutor about a report that Gorositidi sent in 1993 to his superiors telling of his meetings with Colombian guerrillas. The Spanish prosecutor tells that in 1999 the ETA executive committee placed their man in Cuba, José Angel Urtiaga, in charge as the principal connection between that group and the FARC. He states that in other documents that were found in an operation that was undertaken in Paris against ETA members he also got information about links between the two groups. “The document title “A./Jose/Bilduma” contains information about ETA activities with explosives and weapons in the Venezuelan-Colombian jungle. From that document it comes out that the ETA member José Echarte requested authorization for that organization to undertake tests in Venezuela on an explosive device of 40 kilos,” says one of the investigation excerpts. The prosecutor says that at the beginning of 2003 several ETA members stayed one week in a FARC camp “maintaining contacts with four leaders of that organization, during which time they decided to have an exchange of experiences about terrorist procedures.” One of the damning investigation excerpts from the Spanish authorities is when it is categorically stated that “The collaboration of the ETA terrorist organization with the FARC was extended to the offering of courses in Colombia, in the Noel Matta and Luciano Marín 'Iván' camps, between July and the middle of August of 2003. At least four militants had received training in the use of explosives.” One of the most relevant and surprising aspects for the Spanish prosecutor was when it was discovered that a FARC guerrilla had been in Spain several times. “The FARC member Víctor Vargas traveled on two occasions to Spain in order to monitor the Colombian embassy in Madrid and Colombian president Andrés Pastrana. Vargas traveled to Spain on March 8, 2000 and on September 30, 2000 maintaining relationships with ETA terrorists and informing his commanders that it would not be difficult to attempt an assassination if they could count on the collaboration of ETA.” On page 13 of the report, the Spanish prosecutor tells how two ETA members identified as Martín Capa and Iñaqui Domínguez were not long ago in the Colombian jungles giving courses on explosives to FARC members and to members of the Bolivarian Liberation Front (FLB), a subversive group based in Venezuela that has publicly stated its backing for the Hugo Chávez government. “In the month of August of 2007 they gave a course to 13 FARC members and to seven from the FLB about the use of explosives. The course lasted 20 days in which theoretical and practical sessions on the use of the C4 explosive were given, an explosive that had the advantage of a destructive effect greater than dynamite, easily acquired in Venezuela. Domínguez gave a session on the use of cellular telephones as a mechanism to set off explosive charges,” says one of the investigation excerpts. In the document, the Spanish prosecutor also makes a reference to training sessions that had been undertaken in the “La Veremos” ranch, located between the settlements of El Amparo and Guasdalito in the state of Apure, Venezuela. Also, it refers to other ETA members, known by the aliases of “Angel,” “Teo” and “Enrique.” They also had given courses on explosives in the camp of guerrilla head Jesús Santrich in Venezuela. The Spanish prosecutor dedicates a good part of his report affirming that his investigation about ETA-FARC links coincides in many aspects with the facts found in the emails of “Raul Reyes,” which were handed over by the Colombian Fiscalía, the Colombian prosecutor general’s office, to their Spanish counterpart. Although the investigation that is taking place in Spain reveals for the first time concrete facts about the alliance among the two terrorist groups, it also leaves one worrying fact clear: the alliance is stronger and more solid than was suspected.

A footnote to history

French Holocaust role recognised

One of the tenets of Marxism is that everything is political. I think we're there now.

Former astronaut speaks out on global warming
By Associated Press

SANTA FE, N.M. - Former astronaut Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.
"I don’t think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect," said Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled to speak next month at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York.
Schmitt contends that scientists "are being intimidated" if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.
"They’ve seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven’t gone along with the so-called political consensus that we’re in a human-caused global warming," Schmitt said.
Dan Williams, publisher with the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, which is hosting the climate change conference, said he invited Schmitt after reading about his resignation from The Planetary Society, a nonprofit dedicated to space exploration.
Schmitt resigned after the group blamed global warming on human activity. In his resignation letter, the 74-year-old geologist argued that the "global warming scare is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making."
Williams said Heartland is skeptical about the crisis that people are proclaiming in global warming.
"Not that the planet hasn’t warmed. We know it has or we’d all still be in the Ice Age," he said. "But it has not reached a crisis proportion and, even among us skeptics, there’s disagreement about how much man has been responsible for that warming."
Schmitt said historical documents indicate average temperatures have risen by 1 degree per century since around 1400 A.D., and the rise in carbon dioxide is because of the temperature rise.
Schmitt also said geological evidence indicates changes in sea level have been going on for thousands of years. He said smaller changes are related to changes in the elevation of land masses — for example, the Great Lakes are rising because the earth’s crust is rebounding from being depressed by glaciers.
Schmitt, who grew up in Silver City and now lives in Albuquerque, has a science degree from the California Institute of Technology. He also studied geology at the University of Oslo in Norway and took a doctorate in geology from Harvard University in 1964.
In 1972, he was one of the last men to walk on the moon as part of the Apollo 17 mission.
Schmitt said he’s heartened that the upcoming conference is made up of scientists who haven’t been manipulated by politics.
Of the global warming debate, he said: "It’s one of the few times you’ve seen a sizable portion of scientists who ought to be objective take a political position and it’s coloring their objectivity."
___

Thanks to the Bits and Pieces blog

What is a grandparent?
(Taken from papers written by a class of 8-year-olds)
Grandparents are a lady and a man who have no little children of their own. They like other people’s.
A grandfather is a man & a grandmother is a lady!
Grandparents don’t have to do anything except be there when we come to see them. They are so old they shouldn’t play hard or run. It is good if they drive us to the shops and give us money.
When they take us for walks, they slow down past things like pretty leaves and caterpillars.
They show us and talk to us about the colors of the flowers and also why we shouldn’t step on ‘cracks.’
They don’t say, ‘Hurry up.’
Usually grandmothers are fat but not too fat to tie your shoes.
They wear glasses and funny underwear.
They can take their teeth and gums out.
Grandparents don’t have to be smart.They have to answer questions like ‘Why isn’t God married?’ and ‘How come dogs chase cat s?’
When they read to us, they don’t skip. They don’t mind if we ask for the same story over again.
Everybody should try to have a grandmother, especially if you don’t have television because they are the only grownups who like to spend time with us.
They know we should have snack time before bed time and they say prayers with us and kiss us even when we’ve acted bad.
A 6 YEAR OLD WAS ASKED WHERE HIS GRANDMA LIVED. ”OH,” HE SAID, ” SHE LIVES AT THE AIRPORT AND WHEN WE WANT HER WE JUST GO GET HER. THEN WHEN WE’RE DONE HAVING HER VISIT, WE TAKE HER BACK TO THE AIRPORT.”
GRANDPA IS THE SMARTEST MAN ON EARTH! HE TEACHES ME GOOD THINGS BUT I DON’T GET TO SEE HIM ENOUGH TO GET AS SMART AS HIM!
Thanks Brother Paul

Durban 2

"Incredible

"This is likely just one of many incredible decisions that will be made by the Obama government. "Incredible" not in the sense of amazing, but, literally, "hard to believe."It has been announced that next week the State Department will be sending "diplomats" to participate in the planning of the UN-sponsored World Conference Against Racism, known as Durban 2. This is a conference that is widely expected to be as virulently anti-Israel as the first conference in 2001 was.The announcement states that the decision on whether the US will actually participate in the conference, to be held in April, would be made following the planning discussions. But participation in the planning sessions is truly a pointless and, worse, a destructive exercise.~~~~~~~~~~A statement from the State Department said:"This will be the first opportunity the [Obama] administration has had to engage in the negotiations for the Durban Review, and - in line with our commitment to diplomacy - the U.S. has decided to send a delegation to engage in the negotiations on the text of the conference document.
"The intent of our participation is to work to try to change the direction in which the review conference is heading. We hope to work with other countries that want the Conference to responsibly and productively address racism around the world." ~~~~~~~~~~"Commitment to diplomacy..." This is breathtaking in its naiveté. Do President Obama and Secretary Clinton truly believe they can shift the tenor of the conference, which has been determined by a Muslim/Arab majority? US participation isn't benign: It runs the risk of lending the proceedings an air of legitimacy, and encouraging other nations that are still on the fence to participate. Israel will not be participating. Canada has already announced its decision not to participate as well. And President Bush had declared that the US would not be participating either, short of a guarantee that the conference would not repeat its one-sided attacks on Israel. In recent months our Foreign Ministry has sought to encourage other nations -- notably within the EU -- to refrain from participation. A wide-scale Western boycott of the conference would speak volumes.Now the US decision upsets matters and puts Israel on a collision course with the State Department. Our Foreign Ministry is working to keep the US from participating. ~~~~~~~~~~The NGO Forum statement from the first Durban Conference accused Israel of "apartheid," "crimes against humanity," "war crimes," "acts of genocide," and "ethnic cleansing." (Did they leave anything out?) The delegations from both Israel and the US walked out of that conference in protest.~~~~~~~~~~Much the same is anticipated the second time around. What we see now is this, from the draft of the outcome document:"Expresses deep concern at the practices of racial discrimination against the Palestinian people..."Reiterates that the Palestinian people have an inalienable right to self-determination, and that, in order to consolidate the occupation, they have been subjected to unlawful subjective punishment, torture, economic blockade, severe restriction of movement and arbitrary closing of their territories. Also notes that illegal settlements continue to be built in the occupied territories...""Reaffirms that a foreign occupation founded on settlements, laws based on racial discrimination with the aim of continuing domination...contradicts the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations..."Reiterates deep concern about the Palestinian people under occupation..."Re-emphasizes the responsibility of the international community to provide international protection...for civilian populations under occupation..."~~~~~~~~~~What must be understood for starters is that what is written here is exclusive to the Palestinians. There are no comments about the right of the Kurdish people to self-determination, or of the Chinese occupation of Tibet and the need for Tibetans to have protection. This is aimed exclusively at Israel.This is a highly politicized document designed with an agenda of delegitimizing Israel. The final clause, above, raises particular concern, as it suggests international meddling in our affairs.The US delegation will change none of this.One might hope that the difficulty that will be encountered here by the US delegation might open Obama's eyes to world realities, but this is not likely to be the case. ~~~~~~~~~~According to news reports, pressure has been put on Sec. Clinton to announce US participation in the conference -- and that this pressure has come in part from Susan Rice, now US ambassador to the UN, and Samantha Powers, now at the National Security Council. Reports from credible journalistic sources (which I cannot independently confirm) indicate that Powers was actually at the first Durban conference as the representative of an NGO. What is clearly on the record is that she has recommended cutting assistance to Israel, providing the Palestinians with billions of dollars, and putting into place "a mammoth protection force" to protect the Palestinians from the "major human rights abuses" committed by Israel. So we're in trouble here, folks.~~~~~~~~~~Please, if you are a US citizen, contact the White House and the State Department and urge that the United States not participate in the Durban 2 Conference.

The product of a revolving door justice system

The suspect in Friday night's murder of a Philadelphia patrolman is an "unsalvageable" career criminal who "should not have been among us, period," Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey said today.

Today's murderer; tomorrows liberal cause. Yes, that piece of feces Mumia Abu Jamal is still sitting in jail on your dime spouting anti-American venom on Pacifica radio stations every week.

Democrat culture of corruption- turning America into a third world country

Taxpayers consider cheating
By SANDRA BLOCKGANNETT NEWS SERVICE
The high-profile tax missteps of three of the Obama administration's key nominees could make it more difficult for the IRS to enforce the law, tax preparers and academicians say.
Numerous studies have shown that taxpayers are less likely to comply with the law if they believe other taxpayers are cheating, says Jason Mazzone, associate professor of law at Brooklyn Law School. "Taxpayers don't like to be suckers," he says.
Tax problems derailed the nominations of former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle for secretary of Health and Human Services, and Nancy Killefer as the government's chief performance officer. Earlier, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's nomination was delayed by revelations that he had failed to pay self-employment taxes.
"I think a number of Americans will take a look at this and say, "If they're getting away with it, why shouldn't I?' " says Scott Sandstrom, associate professor of accounting at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass.
Americans are among the most law-abiding taxpayers in the world, in part because the IRS uses computer matching programs that make it difficult to cheat, says Walter Pagano, a former IRS agent who is a partner at accounting firm Eisner.
According to a new survey by the IRS Oversight Board, 89 percent of Americans believe it's unacceptable to cheat on taxes.

Democrat culture of corruption

Rep. Grace F. Napolitano has collected at least $158,000 in interest on loan she made to her campaign
The FEC allowed the Democrat from Norwalk to charge an 18% interest rate on $150,000 she lent her campaign.

Now, who was President in 1998 and setting the model for all Democrats to follow?

Bwahahha. They were gullible on Nov 4 and still are...

http://www.katu.com/home/video/39598022.html?video=pop&t=a

A candidate for the Obama cabinet

USF Dean Admits Role In Bike Theft

A hotbed of Islamic activity. Bet he's happy there's no Shari a law penalties in Florida.

Everything is political, especially the DOJ

Justice Dept. Lawyers in Contempt for Withholding Stevens Documents
By Nedra PicklerAssociated PressSaturday, February 14, 2009; A07

An angry federal judge held Justice Department lawyers in contempt yesterday for failing to deliver documents to former senator Ted Stevens's legal team, as he had ordered.
U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan called it "outrageous" that government lawyers would ignore his deadline for turning over documents.
Last month, Sullivan told the Justice Department to turn over all its internal communications regarding a whistleblower complaint against the FBI agent leading the investigation into the former Alaska senator. The agent, Chad Joy, complained about some Justice Department tactics during the trial, including not turning over evidence, and an "inappropriate relationship" between another agent working the case and the prosecution's star witness.
Stevens was convicted in October of lying on Senate disclosure documents about hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts and home renovations from an Alaska businessman. In November, the Republican lost his bid for reelection to the Senate seat he had held since 1968.
Stevens and his lawyers complained during the trial about prosecutors withholding information. In December, they asked for his conviction to be tossed out. As part of their request, they asked for the documents related to Joy.
During yesterday's hearing, Sullivan repeatedly asked three Justice Department lawyers sitting at the prosecution's table whether they had some reason not to turn over the documents. They finally acknowledged they did not, and Sullivan exploded in anger.
"That was a court order," he bellowed. "That wasn't a request. I didn't ask for them out of the kindness of your hearts. . . . Isn't the Department of Justice taking court orders seriously these days?"
He said he did not want to get "sidetracked" by deciding a sanction immediately and would deal with their punishment later. But he ordered them to produce the material by the end of the day.
"That's outrageous for the Department of Justice -- the largest law firm on the planet," he said. "That is not acceptable in this court."
Sullivan held all three lawyers at the table in contempt and demanded repeatedly to know who else was involved in withholding the information. Another government lawyer sitting in the back of the courtroom stood up and gave her name.
Judges rarely hold prosecutors in contempt.
The most notable recent case occurred in September 2007, when a North Carolina judge jailed prosecutor Mike Nifong for one day on a contempt charge for lying during the rape case against Duke lacrosse players.
But sanctioning federal prosecutors is even more unusual. A Washington bankruptcy judge did so in 1987, ruling that the Justice Department unlawfully tried to put a financially troubled computer firm out of business. In 1995, a federal judge in Texas held a prosecutor in contempt for refusing to provide him information that had been sealed by another judge.

A good question...

Who Attacked Our Economy? Why Does No One Care?

Mr. Schumer and hate

I was listening to Senator Chuck Schumer's disparaging remarks about Republicans a few minutes ago. It was hate filled and pointed the finger at a group of Americans.

Does the Senator not understand that by taking this tack he encourages haters even those Jew haters. If you participate in group disparagement you encourage it everywhere. If Republicans are just evil then why not Jews?

And, so it grows...

Muslim mob attacks Jewish center in TorontoThomas Lifson

Something approaching open season for attacks on Jews appears to be in force in Toronto. On the campus of York University, a Muslim mob attacked the Hillel House, pounding on the door and yelling antisemitic slogans. Unbelievably, according to this account in YNet, the police demanded that the center itself close down -- punishing the innocent and achieving the goal of the mob. The website Mere Rhetoric commented:
This is the same country where it's in-bounds to compare Jews to Nazis -- but where the same charge leveled against these genuine modern-day Nazis would end with a trip to the Star Chamber. And it's the exact same city where calls to wipe Israel off the planet are treated as mere anti-Zionism.
Considering the degree to which Canadian "Human Rights Commissions" have attempted to persecute Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant for noting the contents of the Koran, the lack of attention to chilling mobs and their facilitators is startling.

Counterproductive tax policies...

How does this encourage me to spend or hire?

Schwarzenegger, legislative leaders settle on budget framework

"Californians would also take a substantial hit to their wallets.Vehicle license fees would nearly double, going from the current rate of 0.65% to 1.15% of the value of a car or truck. The sales tax would increase by 1 cent, raising the rate in Los Angeles County to 9.75%. Gasoline taxes would increase by 12 cents a gallon. And residents would pay a new surcharge on personal income taxes, amounting to 2.5% to 5% of their total tax bills, depending on how much federal money California gets."

A scam-artists dream...

Billions for weatherization in stimulus questioned

We are being ruled by people who have never held a productive job where actual work is done. They are thought experimenter. It's a long way between thinking of a project and effectively accomplishing it. This proposal will lead to most of the money going to bureaucrats with only pennies on actual weatherproofing.

Is this how the Democrats will act before the next election?

Chavez denounces new plot before Venezuela vote

The new tone in Washington...

A Stimulus Bill that no Senator or House member will have read in full. No five day period for public review. No transparency, no light of day, no media analysis.

No wonder they want to silence any dissent. The Democrats are simply managing what the public gets to know.

Congressional Offices Don't Have the Stimulus Bill, Lobbyists Do

Creating the benevolent dictator myth

Did anyone else note the similarity between the President's recent town hall meeting and an audience with a benevolent king. Since when did a town hall meeting become an opportunity to beg the President for largess? Instead of an opportunity to define political issues it's become a platform for beggars.

UPDATE: Henrietta Hughes says she's not milking the system
By Nick Spinetto, WINK News

SOUTHWEST FLORIDA - A woman making national headlines after a tearful moment with President Obama has a new home.Thursday morning, Chene Thompson handed Henrietta Hughes the keys to her home in Hendry County. Thompson is the wife of State Representative Nick Thompson (R-District 73). Hughes and her son will live at the home rent free.However, a local organization is coming forward saying Hughes isn't being honest about how much help she's had in the past.The director of We Care Outreach Ministry, Tanya Johnson, says just last month she offered Henrietta Hughes permanent housing and a place to stay free for three months, but Hughes refused."We would have allowed her to stay for the first 90 days, no income. You know free," said Tanya Johnson.We Care Outreach Ministry is a faith based organization in Fort Myers.Johnson says she also gave Henrietta and her son Corey, money, food and offered Corey job training courses, but it was refused."We have extended a lot of her services to her," Johnson said.But Henrietta Hughes says these services weren't free and the apartment in East Fort Myers came with a price tag.Hughes says Tanya Johnson wanted $400 a month immediately.The disability check Hughes gets is a little more than $800 a month.Hughes owes money on a loan, has her car insurance payment, a monthly storage bill and says she couldn't afford the rent."Where was I going to get $400 a month to give her if I got these expenses," Hughes told WINK News.WINK News Reporter Nick Spinetto went back to talk to Tanya Johnson and she stands by her story.Henrietta Hughes says she's never taken advantage of the system and doesn't choose to be homeless. Like other programs she's tried to get help from,she says We Care couldn't meet her needs.State Representative Nick Thompson and his wife Chene are standing by the Henrietta and her son, Corey. They spoke out against the allegations Henrietta is milking the system, even when confronted with the fact WINK News found out the Hughes' sold property, back in 2005. This is after Henrietta and her son lost thier home in 2003 and started living in their car. Henrietta and her son sold the land for $47,000 dollars. But Chene Thompson says that was all the money they had for several years and it's gone."They have nothing today. They need help today. They didn't need help in 2005. They need help today. So whether they had $47,000 or $147,000 in 2005, it doesn't matter. They don't have any money today," she said.The Thompson's say they are sad Henrietta has to defend herself against these allegations and they will continue to

And some more

A thought experiment...

Chavez cuts oil exports
Carmen Gentile UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL
MIAMI
Venezuela has made good on its promise to reduce oil exports, canceling several shipments to the United States in order to comply with OPEC production cuts and bolster its own fortunes by helping raise the price of oil worldwide.
Four shipments bound for the U.S. refiner NuStar LP were canceled totaling 1.2 million barrels, according to company officials. Two shipments were scheduled for this month, with the other two deliveries set for March.
While NuStar contends the company would not be adversely affected by Venezuela's decision to cut its exports, the company joins a growing list of U.S. energy firms not receiving Venezuelan crude.
As part of its own efforts to stem losses caused by falling oil prices, the Venezuelan state-owned energy company PDVSA last month said it was discontinuing shipments to two Southern U.S. refineries, Sweeney and Chalmette, in Texas and Louisiana.
The Venezuelan economy has been particularly troubled by the fall of oil prices from a high last year of around $150 a barrel.
The steep drop-off in the price of oil - a barrel today costs almost 60 percent less than it did in July - forced significant cost-cutting measures for the Venezuelan government and the sweeping social programs favored by leftist President Hugo Chavez.
Venezuela's budget for 2009 was created with a $60 per barrel price tag in mind. But with prices hovering in the $30 to $40 range, the Chavez administration has acknowledged that its social efforts, both at home and abroad, would surely suffer.
Despite the downturn caused by falling oil prices and a worldwide economic slowdown, Mr. Chavez recently expressed confidence in the Venezuelan economy and its oil industry to weather difficult times. "If you ask me what measures need to be taken, I would say we've been taking them," he said.
Mr. Chavez maintains that the reduced exports to the United States are part of his plan to increase exports to oil-hungry countries like China.
In 2007, Venezuela exported 1.28 million barrels per day of oil and other petroleum products to the United States from January through April. During the same period this year, export levels dropped to 1.13 million barrels per day, according to a recent report by the U.S Energy Information Agency.
His confidence aside, Mr. Chavez appeared to be caught off-guard by the severity of the OPEC cuts when it was announced last month that a favorite social program of the Chavez administration was being shut down: free heating oil for thousands of poor Americans.
The program was cut, then quickly restarted two days later following the international attention the project's cancellation placed on the plight of PDVSA and Venezuela's economy.
The discounted-oil program has riled anti-Chavez Washington. U.S. critics contended the program was more about propaganda than charity, part of the ongoing tensions between Venezuela and its largest oil customer, the United States.
While Mr. Chavez maintains his country will "endure difficult times in years to come, no doubt," it seems unlikely that PDVSA will be able to endure without some much-needed foreign investment.
Over the past few years, under Mr. Chavez's orders, PDVSA has been renegotiating contracts with foreign oil companies to give Venezuela a greater controlling share of projects. Several foreign companies chose to pull up stakes rather than endure a contract renegotiation.
But with oil prices dropping and PDVSA unable to meet even reduced production needs, the Venezuelan government has been forced to once again begin courting foreign oil in hopes of jump-starting production and perhaps provide PDVSA with much-needed capital for infrastructure improvements long put off in favor of Mr. Chavez's social spending.

If this were an American corporation, think of the howls of protest. This action targets the poor since this low grade oil is more appropriate for use as a heating fuel then anything else. This is young Joe Kennedy's oil supplier.

Second, notice how this action would "stem the loses" caused by the declining price of oil on the market. If there is the concept of losses in this socialist paradise then must there not also be its antithesis "profits". Will Hugo also now stop giving oil away to Cuba and other Leftist governments in Latin America?

Iran: the mad mullahs

Iran Buries the Past The Islamic republic bulldozes the mass graves of political victims

Democrat culture of corruption-Chicago chapter

Federal authorities are investigating five construction companies that collectively have gotten hundreds of millions of dollars in construction work at O’Hare Airport under Mayor Daley, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.

Use the link above to read the whole sorry story.

It's what the left dreams about...

Study: Cuban state workers come late, leave early

HAVANA (AP) - A government study of about 2,000 Cuban state businesses found that 60 percent of employees came late, left early or otherwise shirked their duties, official media reported Wednesday.
The Labor Ministry analyzed 2,042 state-run companies in May and June and detected "26,622 violations of labor discipline," according to the Communist Party newspaper Granma.
It's part of a push by President Raul Castro to improve productivity on an island where many government workers perform lackadaisically due to low pay and labor laws that make it tough to punish dismiss.
Nearly half the cases involved employees who arrived late and about a fifth featured those who took too much time for lunch or other meal breaks. Leaving early was a problem 10 percent of the time, while state workers engaged in "unauthorized activities" in 5 percent of cases.
About 4 percent of the cases involved employees who simply abandoned their posts without explanation.
The report did not divulge how companies were chosen or how representative they are. It also did not address another workplace problem the government has complained about in the past: state employees who steal government goods to sell on the black market.
Cuba's command economy allows private enterprise only by special license, meaning nearly everyone works for the state - here monthly salaries average 414 pesos - a little less than $20 - though the communist system provides free health care, education through college and food rations.
Raul Castro, who succeeded his brother Fidel nearly a year ago, has warned that such a high level of government subsidies are unsustainable unless productivity increases.
Cubans across the island complain that poor public transportation keeps them from getting anywhere - especially work - on time.

Spending is not the same as Stimulus

Roger Kimball offers a bit of useful advice:

Here’s my bit of pro bono work for the Democratic party: Ladies and Gentlemen (and all the rest of you): Spending money–even other people’s money–is not necessarily the same as undertaking a stimulus of the economy.

I am sorry you weren’t in class when this was explained. But think about it. Sometimes–often, in fact–spending is just that: an expense. You had X, now you have X minus whatever you spent. (Shakespeare touched on some of the more recherché aspects of this in his ditty about “The expense of spirit in a waste of shame”–”Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust; Enjoy’d no sooner but despised straight,” etc.)

A stimulus, on the contrary, is an expense that yields economic activity: investment, growth, jobs, confidence, i.e., the happy side of spending money.

Do you want to stimulate the economy, I mean right now, today?

1.) Cut payroll taxes by 10 percent.

2.) Eliminate the capital gains tax (not that there are a lot of capital gains to be had, but it will make people feel better, a necessary condition of the stimulation the stimulus is supposed to provide).

3.) Cut corporate taxes by 10 percent.

4.) Cut the marginal rate on personal income taxes by 10 percent.

5.) Finally, since no Democratic Congress can make it to the toilet without wanting to raise taxes, I also suggest imposing some tax on the more 43 percent who file but do not currently pay any income tax. It needn’t be much. But like the Metropolitan Museum here in New York, we should insist that partners in the social contract that is America pay something, just to give them a stake in the enterprise.

If the President of the United States could convince his colleagues in Congress to do this, he would unleash the mighty power of American capitalism. He would show that he was a political leader, not a grubby spoilsport who threatens to foul the play pen and go home (”Catastrophe!”) if you don’t give him what he wants. “If.” Little word. Big gap.

Futile, of course, but still worth saying.