Monday, March 29, 2010

Dying For A Glass Of Water

See: Dying Patient Was Refused A Glass Of Water

Ruth Sauter, the patient's daughter, said she was disgusted by the treatment her father had received.

She told The Daily Mail: "His condition was not life threatening, and nurses had specific instructions to keep close tabs on him.

"'But their appalling lack of care, and cruel behaviour killed my father...It's so much worse knowing that he died alone, thirsty and scared on that ward."

After being admitted in the morning, he was given antibiotics and oxygen, but was later forced to ring his wife to tell her that he was not allowed any more water as he had earlier knocked over a cup.

After ringing the switchboard, a doctor was called to the ward, only for a nurse to tell him that the patient was "overreacting".

This is a product of the English socialized medicine scheme.

It is important to keep in mind that in a socialized medicine scheme, the patient is not the customer. The real customer is the political-class that runs the socialized health-care administrative bureaucracy.

The patient is little more than a notation in a budget allocation.

Trusting your health to the benevolence and competence of politicians and bureaucrats is insane.


FinallyFree at CC Found another article on the same subject. It goes into a little more detail then the one that I found.

See: Dying hospital patient phoned switchboard begging for a drink after nurses said 'No'

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Global Warming Activists And The Rising Sea Level Lie

One type of Environmental Scientific Charlatanism is to hype Anthropogenic Global Warming as a cause for some notable environmental change when another far less frightening and very natural cause might actually be the source.

We can see an example of this in a report on the sinking of New Moore Island.

See: New Moore Island Sinks From Global Warming

New Moore Island has been sinking for 30 years. However, the island itself, known as New Moore, is no more. In fact, it's now completely submerged under water.

Scientists used satellite imagery to prove their point. Moreover, sea patrols have confirmed that New Moore Island has sunk. Now the Global Warming experts say it's because of Climate Change.

However, the fact is, the island has been sinking dramatically during the past decade. Global Warming experts claim that the sea level is rising in accordance with rising temperatures. The island is about two square miles.

The island itself could be the first of many islands to soon disappear. Reports say that around 10 other islands are at risk of being submerged by rising waters. It is either caused by rising sea levels or the island itself might be sinking in mud.

Note how even the headline for article at this link declares Global Warming to be the cause of the island's sinking.

It is bullshit. More to the point, it is a lie.

There is something very interesting about New Moore Island that is alluded to only in passing in that article, as if it shouldn't be given much thought. The key to understanding what is happening to New Moore Island gets an oblique half sentence mention in the fifth paragraph of the article " . . .or the island itself might be sinking in mud." In another half sentence, several paragraphs later, the island's “geological instability” is sited as the reason why neither India nor Bangladesh established permanent settlements on the island.

Sinking in mud?

Geological instability?

The article gives the truth of the mater the most casual and off hand treatment. Global Warming is hyped hysterically but the importance of the geological makeup of the island and its role in the the life of the island is all but ignored.

New Moore Island is a sandbar. The Island is made up of alluvial silts and muds flowing out of the Ganges-Brahmaputra Delta. In other words, it is not the kind of island that should be thought of as a stable land mass. New Moore Island is just sinking under its own weight, which is within the norm for sandbars. Sandbars are by their very nature, ephemeral structures, existing for fleeting geological moments at the whims of nature's tides, waves, winds and storms.

While the sea level itself may also rise and fall of its own accord, it would be irresponsible if not outright ignorant or deliberately deceptive to claim that the sinking of New More Island was primarily a product of Global Warming and a concurrent rise in the sea level.

It shouldn't take a rocket scientists to figure out that if the sinking of New More Island was solely due to global warming induced rising seal levels, we should be able to see the equivalent sinking of coastlines all around the world. That no such corresponding global coastline sinking is occurring all over the world should have given the writer and the editors responsible for that terrible piece of journalism a bit of pause. It didn't.

They left the truth out there to just sink in the mud.

See Also: Bengal Island succumbs to global warming nonsense – AP gets nutty over the loss of a sandbar
Wattsupwiththat critiques another news article on the same subject. They also have pictures and charts on the subject.

See Also:AP Lies: Island Sunk By Global Warming
Sweetness & Light goes after the same AP article as Wattsupwiththat.

Rushing The Sale.
A Look At An Environmentalist Propaganda Technique.

With the Cap and Trade bill comming up again, there will be many examples of crude environmentalist propoganda to highlight.

Here is one that claims that Anthropogenic Global Warming will cause the sea-levels to rise and destroy a coastal city.

See:How global warming might transform Vancouver’s shoreline

Rather typical of one of the most dishonest forms of Anthropogenic Global Warming propaganda, the article starts out by suggesting a picture of a well known place transformed (as if in an instant) into a devastated landscape of watery ruin. Many of these propaganda scare stories use this technique to induce an emotional response in the reader.

Granville Island, Kitsilano and Jericho beaches, the Stanley Park seawall, the Downtown Eastside, and the port all help to define Vancouver in the eyes of the world. But try to imagine what this city would look like if all of these local landmarks were underwater.

Ridiculous, you say? Perhaps. But it’s not so far-fetched if all of Greenland’s glaciers were to disappear, causing sea levels to rise—and if Vancouver didn’t take steps to ameliorate the effects.

Of course it is ridicules. It is an extreme picture painted in the most frightening and immediate terms possible in order to rush people into accepting a ready made prescription.

The AGW activist have a solution readymade. You are to transform your life, from everything that you are allowed to do and even everything that you are allowed to think. You are to surrender your body and soul to their benevolent guidance.

If you resist or ask troubling questions, you will be called a “denier,” akin to the insane people that deny the holocaust. With this type of rhetorical slight of hand, they will try to make troublesome AGW doubters into social and political pariahs.

Asking questions will not be allowed in the beautiful future they offer.

"Serve the state" you will be told. "Be happy. Surrender all of your cares and worries to those that can better manage you and the world around you."

And in whispers they will ask - (You aren't a “denier” are you?)


Climate change is real. The planet's climate is not static. It never has been. It never will be.

AGW is politics. It is a scheme to frighten enough people with something as natural as the rising and the setting of the sun to force the whole world's population to surrender to statist totalitarianism.

It's a Brave New World that the AGW activist are going to bring about. Their paradise of universal totalitarian chattel slavery will do nothing to freeze the climate. The climate can't be made static. Only the mad and the evil would try to shape people's lives on the AGW premise that the climate can or even should be made static. Unfortunately, there are mad and evil people in the world.

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Social Security In The Red

In the wake of the passage of the Democrat's Health Care Rationing Scheme, News comes out that our nations Social Security system has reached a point were it will be paying out more then it takes in.

See: Social Security Payouts to Exceed Revenue This Year

The problem, he said, is that payments have risen more than expected during the downturn, because jobs disappeared and people applied for benefits sooner than they had planned. At the same time, the program’s revenue has fallen sharply, because there are fewer paychecks to tax.

Analysts have long tried to predict the year when Social Security would pay out more than it took in because they view it as a tipping point — the first step of a long, slow march to insolvency, unless Congress strengthens the program’s finances.

" . . . unless Congress strengthens the program’s finances?"

How, pray tell, can "Congress strengthen the program’s finances" without raising taxes, cutting benefits, or some combination of both?

When the Democrat's health-care rationing scheme runs into problems, won't they have to raise taxes, cut benefits, or some combination of both?

Why would we want a government that can't manage a simple retirement plan to be put in-charge of rationing our health-care?

If the Democrats break Social Security, people will just be broke. If the Democrats break their health-care rationing scheme, people will die.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Did Democrats Lie About Racist Slurs?

There were reports during the vote for the Democrat's health-care rationing scheme that Tea Party protesters had hurled racial slurs at members of the Black Caucus.

See: Tea party protesters use racial epithet against Georgia's John Lewis
Demonstrators outside the U.S. Capitol , angry over the proposed health care bill, shouted "nigger" Saturday at U.S. Rep. John Lewis , a Georgia congressman and civil rights icon who was nearly beaten to death during an Alabama march in the 1960s.

When I heard the first reports of the slurs, I was afraid they were true, but struck by the fact that there was no sound or video being played in the media.

If it really happened, we should have heard and seen the evidence of it played over and over again a-la Rodney King.

There were video cameras everywhere.

No sound or video has surfaced that supports the claim that racial slurs were directed at the Black Caucus members. None.

None at all.

Was it all a lie?

See: MEDIA FRAUD– More Proof That the Leftist Media Lied About Racist Attacks On Black Reps While They Ignored Vulgar Attacks By Lib Politicians

See: Third Video of Tea Party Protest of Black Congressmen Reveals No Racial Taunts

Your friends and family on the left may bring this up in the coming days. Challenge them for proof. They don't have any. Then ask them "Was it all a lie?"

HT Amy Ridenour and Pi Guy @ CC

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

The Myth Of The Pro-Life Democrat

Bart Stupak sucker-punched the pro-life movement.

In the end, the power that the Democrats would gain by giving themselves the ability to ration health care was more important to Congressman Stupak than was the pro-life stance that he had claimed to hold.

You can hear Stupak try to explain as Megyn Kelly rips him a new one.

He had 4 votes. Enough to kill the bill.

Stupak sold out. (and cheaply at that.)

See also: Schlafly: Health Care Vote Set to Expose the Myth of the 'Pro-Life Democrat'

"Any formerly pro-life Democrat who casts a 'Yes' vote for this Senate health care bill tonight will be forever remembered as being among the deciding votes which facilitated the largest expansion of abortion services since Roe v. Wade."

"Mr. Stupak and his Democrat followers have now clarified that you cannot be pro-life and be a Democrat. If abortion was truly their biggest issue, they wouldn't willfully align themselves with the Party of Death."

I think that Phylis Schafly makes a strong argument. When tested, Stupak valued life less then he valued the Democrat Party's accrual of political power.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Fighting Back

Two things to do without delay.

1. Send a Republican a campaign contribution. It does not have to be a large amount. It just has to be something.

I will be sending some money to SarahPAC tonight.

2. Send a Thank You email to everyone that voted against that abomination tonight, even the Democrats that voted against it.

These people need our thanks. They fought the valiant fight.

The Count


H R 3590 RECORDED VOTE 21-Mar-2010 10:49 PM
QUESTION: On Motion to Concur in Senate Amendments
BILL TITLE: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Ayes 219, Noes 34

Ayes 0, Noes 178

Ayes 219, Noes 212

For the full list of names, See: FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 165

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Republicans Score A Huge Victory For The Constitution

In the battle over the Democrat's Health Care Rationing scheme, the Republicans have won a huge victory against the Democrat's consideration of using a shady and frankly unconstitutional gimmick to pass the bill in the house without a direct vote, with a slight-of-hand trick called the Slaughter Solution.

The Slaughter Solution is now dead.

See:House Opts Against 'Deeming' Health Care Bill Passed

House Democrats on Saturday decided against using a controversial tactic to pass the Senate's version of the health care bill,  a senior House source confirmed to Fox News.

The decision capped an ongoing discussion on whether to use a so-called "deem and pass" strategy that would allow House members to approve the Senate version of health care bill without an actual vote before casting votes on a second "fix-it" resolution, known as reconciliation.

This is a big win for Republicans.

Now the Democrats will have to put their names on the Yea's and Nay's of their plans to ration health-care. Now we can hold them accountable for this monstrosity without them being able to pretend that they did not vote for the damnable thing.

See also: Rules Committee meeting descends into chaos

HT: JCM, PiGuy & CC

Friday, March 19, 2010

The Democrat Health-Care Rationing Scheme Legislation As A Vote Winner

Can the Democrats really believe that their Health-Care Rationing Scheme will be good for them in the Midterms and beyond?

In a word, Yes.

See: EXCLUSIVE: Biden Says White House Getting Earful from Nervous Lawmakers Over Health Care

Biden said once these provisions take effect and the American people feel the impact, lawmakers who vote "yes" will reap the benefits.

"They're going to see right off the bat the horrible [things] aren't real and there are some very good things that become apparent immediately," Biden said. "Once the American public realizes that ... [legislators are] going to be rewarded."

Can the Democrats really believe that?

Yes they can.

We are talking about true-believers.

Many on the left believe that the rightly guided (god) state can make for a paradise on earth. To us, that is a madness, but to them it is in the realm of the possible.

In fact, our oppositions to their efforts to bring about thier new and inherently benevolent god-state is seen by them as proof our meanness and selfishness.

Sure, they understand that some of the things that they will do will make some people unhappy for a time, but they believe that the paradise of the god-state that they are ushering in is worth a few minor discomforts that some may experience. They believe that once the god-state is in place, that everyone that was discomforted will realize that it was selfish of them to complain of their discomforts and come to support with the whole of their heart and soul the greatness and the glory of the benevolent new god-state.

Can they really believe that the ends justify the means?

I think that they really do believe that they are doing a right and good thing. They believe that they are doing a good thing worth every effort and with an end so worthy that any means to bring it about can be justified.

We have seen the Democrats seriously entertain the Slaughter Solution. I think that made it clear that they really are based in a "the ends justify the means" world-view.

They are only held back by the limits of what they can get away with.


We are about to embark on a brave new future.

Thursday, March 18, 2010

FIghting The Democrat's Health-Care Rationing Scheme The Idaho Way

Idaho points the way.

See: Idaho challenges national health care proposal; more states may follow

Washington (CNN) -- Idaho on Wednesday became the first state to pass a law saying no thanks to part of President Obama's health care proposal.

The Idaho Health Care Freedom Act says in part, "every person within the state of Idaho is and shall be free to choose or decline to choose any mode of securing health care services without penalty or threat of penalty."

Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter, a Republican, said Wednesday he signed it because he believes any health care laws should ensure people are "treated as an individual, rather than as an amorphous mass whose only purpose in this world is to obey federal mandates."

The Democrats are not just a federal party. They operate on the State and local levels as well. They should all be made to feel the heat from the Federal Democrat's attempt to ration Health-Care.

The Democrats at the State level need to feel threatened by the blow-back from what their partners are doing at the federal level.

One way to do this is to contact your State government Representatives and ask them to pass a bill like Idaho's.

No Democrat should feel safe, no mater how low or obscure the office they hold. All Democrats need to know that they will be held accountable for the Federal level Democrat's attempt to screw the citizens of the United States.

Call your local state representatives and ask them (politely) to follow Idaho's lead.

There is no time to hesitate or wait. Call them today.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Just How Stupid Is Democrat Congressman Patrick Murphy?

It may be that he just thinks the voters in his district are stupid enough to accept his weird rationalization for voting for the Obamacare abomination.

See: Murphy supports health overhaul

The 8th District congressman said the measure, if passed, will result in the "largest middle-class health care tax break in our country's history."

Calling it the "largest middle-class health care tax break in our country's history," Congressman Patrick Murphy said Tuesday he will support health care legislation, and the process by which it becomes law doesn't concern him.

What planet does Congressman Patrick Murphy(D) live on?

[Additional - added at 11:45am]

Democrat Congressman Patrick Murphy has a press release on his website that offers his rationalization for voting for the Obamacare abominations.

See: Patrick Murphy Announces Support for Long Overdue Health Insurance Reform

Health insurance reform is deficit-reducing, a condition that Congressman Murphy, as a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, stressed was critical to his support for any health insurance reform measures. In fact, according to the independent Congressional Budget Office, all of the current legislative proposals reduce the deficit. Pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, and other industry groups, who will see millions of new customers under this legislation, are contributing hundreds of billions of dollars to pay for insurance reform.

How can effectively nationalizing what amounts to about one sixth of the US economy reduce the deficit? Is it possible that he really believes what he is saying?

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Rationing Health-Care By A Procedural Slight Of Hand.

By hook or by crook, the left-wing extremist that run the Democrat Party are going to get their "Health-Care" bill onto the President's desk one way or the other. The Slaughter Trick is beyond the pale. They will set them selves up to ration your healthcare if they have to rape the Constitution to do it.

See: House may try to pass Senate health-care bill without voting on it

Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers "deem" the health-care bill to be passed.

The tactic -- known as a "self-executing rule" or a "deem and pass" -- has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

We are down to the wire. Now is the time for you to do something.

Here are two toll-free phone numbers to the Capital Switchboard.

Try these ones first
877 762 8762, 866-877-4455 (Should work for both the House and Senate.)

800 965 4701 (House)
800 828 0498 (Senate)

As always, be civil and polite.

When you call these numbers, you will reach an operator. Ask the operator to transfer you to your congressman's or Senator's office. You will need to know your critter's name. Don't rely on the operator to know who your congress critter is. If you don't know, try this website. Enter your zip-code and your State. It will give you your congress critter's name and contact information.

This is important.

It is a game changing.

This is a watershed moment in our nation's history.


And here is one that needs to hear from all of us.

Nancy Pelosi - Phone (202) 225-4965, Fax (202) 225-8259

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Will The Democrats Slaughter The Constitution For Socialized Medicine?

Nancy Pelosi is expressing confidence that the Democrat's Health-care bill will pass. Her confidence may be well founded. The Democrats are contemplating a maneuver that has been dubbed The Slaughter rule. Named after Louise Slaughter (D., N.Y.), Chair of the House Rules Committee.

See: The House Health-Care Vote and the Constitution

Under her proposal, Democrats would pass a rule that deems the Senate's health-care bill to have passed the House, without the House actually voting on the bill. This would enable Congress to vote on legislation that fixes flaws in the Senate health-care bill without facing a Senate filibuster, and without requiring House members to vote in favor of a Senate bill that is now politically toxic.

Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution may pose a problem for the Democrats, but since the Health-care bill is an “all the marbles” play for them, I think that they would be willing to risk a constitutional chalenge, thinking that if in the off chance the court rules in their favor, they will own the whole of the Republic outright.

Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

M. Connell explains in the Wall Street Journal Article cited above:

As the Supreme Court wrote in Clinton v. City of New York (1998), a bill containing the "exact text" must be approved by one house; the other house must approve "precisely the same text."

Again, I think that the Democrats may be willing to gamble that the present makeup of the Supreme Court could possibly rule in their favor.

If they lose, its back to the status quo with a loss of a few seats in congress. The voting publics notoriously short memory will help them regain the lost seats in a few election cycles. No real penalty will be paid.

However, if they were to win at the Supreme Court, they will have made everyone in the Republic dependent on them for their health-care.

Lose a little versus win the whole damn enchilada.

(See also: Slaughter Solution Unconstitutional)

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Democrats Screwed If They Do And Screwed If They Don't

There is an important article in the Friday edition of the Washington Post.

Its available on-line now. Most every Democrat in congress will read it. You should too.

The article is written by two long time pollsters for the Democrats. It is an oracle of doom.

See: If Democrats ignore health-care polls, midterms will be costly

First, the battle for public opinion has been lost. Comprehensive health care has been lost. If it fails, as appears possible, Democrats will face the brunt of the electorate's reaction. If it passes, however, Democrats will face a far greater calamitous reaction at the polls. Wishing, praying or pretending will not change these outcomes.

Yep. The Democrats are screwed blue and true.

I did not think it possible for the Democrats to make such a disaster of things. They have made such asses of themselves that they now risk repeating the same congressional blowout that Clinton suffered after his over-reaching attempt to socialize health-care. It was a lesson that the Democrats did not heed. It may well be one that they can not fully grasp. They will blame others. Again.

Patrick H. Caddell and Douglas E. Schoen are very worried that the Democrats will suffer an “unmitigated disaster” in the midterms. They argue their case ably and well.

The links in the article are worth looking at too.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

A Climate Alarmist's /dev/null Debate Strategy

After the alarmists have politicized the science in a way that would make even Trofim Denisovich Lysenko blush, some are arguing that the best way for them to deal with those that have doubts about the credibility of AGW science is to just refuse to discuss it with them in public forums.

See: How Best to Debate Climate Deniers on TV? Simple: Don't.

The solution to the climate debate crisis is simple.

Since the Peer Review process is no longer credible, open source the data. If the data can stand on its own, it will stand. If it can't, it won't.

The email leak from the CRU proved that the much of the data and the whole of the Peer Review process must be reexamined and reformed.

No more secret data.

No more secret software.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Monday, March 8, 2010

The Political Lesson Of The Massa Scandal

Pick your staff carefully, with loyalty being paramount.

Massa's sin was in choosing his staff poorly. One of them betrayed him.

See: Massa Details 'Salty' Comment That Led to Resignation, Slams Dem Leaders

But Massa said the staff member "never said to me that he felt uncomfortable" and "never went to anybody." 

Rather, he said "somebody went to another staff member who was uncomfortable for him. It was a third-party political correctness statement."

The cruel truth is that everyone has a price. For some, the price is so impossibly high that you can trust your life to them. Others will drool for a mere thirty pieces of silver.

You need to know your people's price. What are their limits? What are their concerns? What are their weaknesses? What can make them fold on you?

In politics, when you select your core and your support staff, you must know these things.

Especially if you are a Democrat going up against Rahm Emanuel and the Obama Administration.

Republicans are not safe. While it is very unlikely that any Republican would "Massa" another, the Democrats would do it to you in a heartbeat.

Know your staffers.

Know them better than Rahm knows them.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

American Troops Begin Withdrawel From Haiti

We have been very fortunate that American troop presence in Haiti has thus far been remarkably trouble free. With UN troops taking over, American troops can pull out and leave Haiti to the UN and the people of Haiti to rebuild after that terrible earthquake destroyed what little that there was to wreck in that poverty stricken nation.

See:American troops withdrawing en masse from Haiti

Soldiers are not best suited to aid work. Putting American troops in a position where they might have to shoot and kill civilians in riot situations was very risky. The downside risks in this operation were tremendous. It is good that we have dodged this bullet.

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak To Undergo Gallbladder surgery.

It may not seem like much of a thing to take note of but think about what it could mean for Egypt and the world if something were to go wrong.

See: Egypt president to undergo gallbladder surgery

He is 81 years old.

He has been the President of Egypt since 1981. Now he is in his eighties. When he passes, Egypt may return to the strife and turmoil that preceded Mubarak's rule. The Muslim Brotherhood is a potent force in Egypt. They and a other factions will seek advantage and power in a post Mubarak Egypt.

Mubarak maintained stability in Egypt for almost 30 years.

His race is almost run.

What next then for Egypt?

UPDATE[19:53 March 7th, 2010] Operation Declared A Success.

He is still alive. But at 81 years of age, how long can we count on him to remain?

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Pentagon Shooter A Truther Loon

It won't be up for very long so click quickly to J Patrick Beddell's Page on Wikipedia.


This guy's mind was broken.

He was a nut along the lines of Theodore (Ted) Kaczynski and Joseph Stack.

UPDATE[00:25 March 5th, 2010]:The Wikipedia link is down.

It didn't take long. At midnight tonight, it was taken down.

Democrat Union Stooge, Sander M. Levin, To Chair Ways & Means

The Ways and Means Committee is the power center of the House of Representitives. It has the power to destroy. Taxation and the byzantine regulatory nightmare that details its applications are made here. If you run afoul of the Barrons and Lords that rule this thing, they can make your life a nightmare, and your business a wreck.

If you have ever wondered why businesses give money to anti-business Democrats, consider the tax-gun that these guys on the Ways and Means Committee are holding to their heads.

See:Levin to Replace Rangel as Ways and Means Chairman

Mr. Levin, a champion of organized labor who represents suburban Detroit, was elected in 1982 and is serving his 14th term. Emerging from a caucus meeting Thursday morning, he said that he would serve as “acting chairman” and appeared to have mixed feelings about the circumstances that led to his appointment.

With a Union puppet set to rule at Ways and Means, expect the Union agenda to become all but unstoppable.

Detroit, Levin's congressional district, is the model for the America of Organized Labor's dreams.

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Mort Zuckerman Bails

Mort Zuckerman has decided not to run for Senate.

See: Mortimer Zuckerman announces he will not run for the Senate

In my opinion, Mort Zuckerman would have been good for the country running as a Democrat. There was some speculation and indication that had he decided to actually run, he would have run on the Republican ticket.

As a Democrat, Zuckerman could have stood as an example of what a sane and rational Democrat would look like as opposed to the far left extremist that now dominate the Democrat Party. The Democrats and the country need more sane and respectable Democrats.

I don't think that Zuckrman, an otherwise life long Democrat, would have been a good team player as a Republican. I have doubts that Zuckerman is sufficiently committed to the Republican vision of citizen primacy over the government. The Republican's need to elect more people to office that believe enough in their mission to actually fight for it while they are in office. We don't need anymore weak Republicans who are more interested in making friends with the Democrats then in fighting for the rights of citizens against a rapacious and ravenous government.

Party politics is a team sport. Mavericks that are looking to govern from the middle destroy team cohesion.

Monday, March 1, 2010

Record Levels Of Welfare, Unemployment And Other Government Benefits

See: American reliance on government at all-time high

Without record levels of welfare, unemployment and other government benefits as well as tax cuts last year, the income of U.S. households would have plunged by an astonishing $723 billion — more than four times the record $167 billion drop reported last month by the Commerce Department.

Moreover, for the first time since the Great Depression, Americans took more aid from the government than they paid in taxes.

[emphaisis is mine]

All of that is paid for somewhere. Watch your wallet.

Fun times ahead.