Sunday, October 31, 2010

Daniel Hannan Interview on his New Book The New Road to Serfdom: A Letter of Warning to America

Click the linked image above to see a genuinely great 5 segment interview with Daniel Hannan discussing his new book that warns Americans to refuse to go down the road that America's Democrat and Republican statists are doing their very best to herd us down. Definitely worth the time it takes to watch all five segments

Barney Frank, The Fat Fox Guarding the Hen House

More Fun Facts from, This time from Massachusetts' 4th Congressional District Race featuring 30 year incumbent, Barney Frank vs. newcomer Sean Bielat.

Below you'll see that the people sending the most money to Frank are those who work in and/around the very same industry he regulates.

The counter-intuitive truth about regulations is that they most help those who are the richest players in the regulated industry. How's that work? Because the cost of compliance acts as a barrier to entrance to start-ups.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure Barney doesn't really want his liberal constituents understanding who pulls his strings.

Top Industries

2010 Race: Massachusetts District 04

Most members of Congress get the bulk of their campaign contributions from two main sources: the industries that make up the economic base of their home district and the Washington-based interest groups that pay more attention to the member's committee assignments in Congress. In addition, most Democrats receive substantial sums from labor unions.

From this table, you can get a flavor of which are the top industries giving to the candidates running for Congress in your district. Do the industries match your local economy, or are they more Washington-based? If the latter, the candidate may have divided loyalties on issues where the interests of their cash constituents conflict with those of the voters who elected them.

Barney Frank (D)

Securities & Investment$251,958
Real Estate$213,750
Lawyers/Law Firms$170,714
Misc Finance$102,750
Commercial Banks$70,800
Business Services$35,750
General Contractors$30,350
Misc Unions$27,500
Finance/Credit Companies$24,000
Health Professionals$23,080
Misc Manufacturing & Distributing$22,900
Printing & Publishing$21,700
Hospitals/Nursing Homes$21,190

Sean D. Bielat (R)

Securities & Investment$35,600
Lawyers/Law Firms$21,826
Misc Finance$12,850
Real Estate$11,950
Misc Business$10,500
Health Professionals$7,050
Commercial Banks$6,450
Civil Servants/Public Officials$6,150
Business Services$6,150
Printing & Publishing$3,400
Chemical & Related Manufacturing$2,250
Misc Manufacturing & Distributing$2,000
Oil & Gas$1,750
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products$1,650

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Himes vs. Debicella: Where the Money is Coming From

Fun Facts on the Himes vs Debicella Race in Connecticut's 4th from Here's a rundown on where Jim Himes and Dan Debicella are getting their campaign funds. And the Democrats keep telling us they're the party of "the little guy". Yeah!

Click the hyperlink above to go to the page I culled this data from. From there you can click on various tabs to see the data broken down in a number of helpful ways, such as which industry sectors provide most of the cash.

Top Contributors

Jim Himes (D) *

General Electric$48,050
Goldman Sachs$22,850
Metropolitan Museum of Art$19,200
Brown Brothers Harriman & Co$16,800
Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance$15,000
United Technologies$15,000
Tudor Investment$14,800
Credit Suisse Group$13,900
Bank of America$12,900
Deutsche Bank AG$12,600
Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder$12,600
Teamsters Union$12,500
First Marblehead Corp$11,100
JPMorgan Chase & Co$11,050
Credit Union National Assn$11,000
Travelers Companies$11,000
Citigroup Inc$10,300
American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees$10,000
American Resort Development Assn$10,000
AmeriPAC: The Fund for a Greater America$10,000
Hartford Financial Services$10,000
Honeywell International$10,000
IMS Health$10,000
International Assn of Fire Fighters$10,000
Investment Co Institute$10,000
KPMG LLP$10,000
National Assn of Letter Carriers$10,000
National Assn of Realtors$10,000
New Democrat Coalition$10,000
New York Life Insurance$10,000
Operating Engineers Union$10,000
PAC to the Future$10,000
Service Employees International Union$10,000
Sullivan & Cromwell$10,000
Synergy PAC$10,000

Dan Debicella (R)

Wexford Capital$22,800
PepsiCo Inc$14,800
Haebler Capital$14,400
Bank of America$14,255
McKinsey & Co$12,850
Kamber Management$12,600
Laverack Partners$12,000
State of Connecticut$11,163
General Atlantic Partners$10,900
Axiom International Investors$10,204
O'Shaughnessy Asset Management$10,100
Cowen Healthcare Royalty$9,600
Rangeley Capital$9,600
Southgate Alternative Investment$9,600
Morgan Stanley$9,550
Impala Asset Management$9,150
Edgewood Management$8,700
Round Hill Capital-Atlanta$8,275
JPMorgan Chase & Co$8,250
Auspex Group$8,200

“Rally to Resore Sanity” pledges to “strictly prohibit filming” at National Mall | Washington Examiner

Un-Flippin Believable.

More proof the narcissistic leftards think they alone are entitled under the 1st Amendment and bestowed with a right of exclusive access to FEDERAL land.

To paraphrase the old Kix Cereal commercials (and betray my age-group in the process): SILLY LEFTISTS, FREEDOM IS FOR EVERYONE

What follows is an email exchange between Steve Albani at Comedy Central and Richard Pollock at Pajamas Media

From: “Albani, Steve”
Fri, 29 Oct 2010 14:59:27 -0400
Richard Pollock
RE: DC Rally Update

Richard – you should have received notification yesterday. Unfortunately, due to extremely limited riser locations, we are not able to accommodate your request for credentials. However, the event is free and open to public so we encourage you to attend with the general audience.

Please note, taping for television or any other filming is strictly prohibited between 3rd and 7th Street without a media credential. The event will be broadcast live on Comedy Central and and a clean feed will also be available by satellite – coordinates will be released when they are available. Please contact Renata Luczak to receive the satellite coordinates.

From: Richard Pollock
Friday, October 29, 2010 3:14 PM
To: Albani, Steve
Subject: Re: DC Rally Update

Dear Steve,

Thanks for your reply. Can we get media credentials without a riser position?



From: Albani, Steve
Friday, October 29, 2010 3:15 PM
To: Richard Pollock
Subject: RE: DC Rally Update

The only camera crews that will receive credentials are those for the riser. We are not issuing any other TV credentials.



From: “Richard Pollock”
Date: Oct 29, 2010 6:33 PM
Subject: RE: DC Rally Update
“Albani, Steve”

Hi Steve,

Well your risers, you own. As Comedy Central, you have property rights and complete control over that. No one will deny you that. We are content, though disappointed with your decision to withhold media credentials to us.

However, the last I heard the First Amendment still does apply to America. It not only applies to TV hosts, show producers and to networks, but extends to the public and to events held on federal land. Yes, public lands! Although it may not make any sense to you at this moment, the National Mall is not a TV set, although it may look like one.

As the former chief Washington producer for ABC’s “Good Morning America” for nine years, let me assure you that you cannot bar cameras from public walkways on the Mall. It has never happened.

And so we will be there crew and all.

It does seem a bit incredulous that a rally for “reasonableness” should exclude freely based camera crews exercising their First Amendment rights to cover your attendees walking on public property. Unless this is Prague in 1968. And unless Comedy Central own tanks. Or unless it deploys a Comedy Police with enforcement powers.

On the other hand maybe I got this all wrong…I thought you were merely trying to be clever when you said it was a rally for fear. If is that, then I certainly understand your attitudes and rules.

See you tomorrow!

All the best,


Read more at the Washington Examiner:

“Rally to Resore Sanity” pledges to “strictly prohibit filming” at National Mall | Washington Examiner

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Ahhh, Now the Swedes Have Come to Understand that Al Gore is an Entitled Blowhard Hypocrite

Here's a fun piece on how some Europeans are waking up to the B.S. spewing out of America's environmental left.

Einar: Over here, we've known about Al Bore's hypocrisy for quite a long time. If only you'd asked, we'd have happily told you all about him, but better late than never.

Frankly Sir, You Are an Embarrassment

Posted: 27 Oct 2010 10:35 AM PDT
By Einar Du Rietz

Al Gore -- He did it again.

Recently, Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore toured again. Or maybe he does that all the time. This time, he turned up in Gothenburg (Sweden) for the usual alarmist talk. In advance, all distinguished guests were politely advised to – if possible – use any form of public transportation to go to the event, in order to minimize CO2 emissions.

Intriguingly, the Master of World Climate himself arrived in a rental car (with or without driver is unclear), from the airport, and subsequently left the engine running for the entire lecture. That is to say, about one hour. Incidentally, local legislation prohibits – for very good environmental reasons, i e pollution – any car engine running on empty for more than 60 seconds. Fines are severe. As far as I know, he was not fined.

It starts to form a pattern.

After the ceremony in the Norwegian capital Oslo, it is customary that the laureate is invited to the Swedish capital Stockholm, for a cordial visit. The train ride, supposedly the environmental choice according to Mr. Gore, is approximately four hours. However, he opted for the cosier ride with one of the Swedish government aircrafts. As these can, according to the rules, only be used when a cabinet member is on board – and as the Swedish government after a short ceremonial visit – offered to fly him to Frankfurt (Germany) for his flight to the US, you can calculate both the manpower and the fuel used for this grand tour against man's destruction of the planet.

Stupidity and hypocracy [sic] – as well as vanity – are, like it or not common human traits. I admit to some of them occasionally, but I don't demand taxpayers to finance my stupid talks at dinner (yes, I love doing that). Here's the deal Mr Gore: get out of my way, and I will keep out of yours.

Michelle Malkin to Joy Behar: "That’ll be Senator Bitch to you, Joy."

Great post up at Michelle Malkin's site....

Behar: So what? I call all my close friends “bitches”

Years ago, when stuck in traffic, I used to hear talent-less Joy Behar spew on WABC radio. As I remember it, she was on for a year. I believe the suits at WABC let her contract lapse without renewal. I'm guessing Barbara Walters will be increasingly inclined to do the same.

Dan Malloy: Pay to Play Politics Raises Serious Ethics Questions

I just came across this eye-opening video by Maureen Boylan on Dan Malloy's 14 year tenure as Mayor of Stamford. I had been pretty ambivalent over the Governor race here in Connecticut but now I'll be voting for Tom Foley.

Things That Make Ya Go Hmmmmmm.....

Combing through Drudge's titles this morning, I found this curious piece from CNBC.

Posted By: John Melloy | Executive Producer, Fast Money
| 26 Oct 2010 | 02:26 PM ET

The overwhelming volume of sell transactions relative to buy transactions by company insiders over the last six months in key leading sectors of the market is the worst Alan Newman, editor of the Crosscurrents newsletter, has ever seen since he began tracking the data.

The strategist looked at insider trading activity amongst the top ten companies that make up the Nasdaq such as Apple , Google and Amazon .

Then he analyzed the biggest members of the Retail HOLDRs ETF like Gap , Target and Costco , as well as the top insiders in the semiconductor industry at companies such as Altera , Broadcom and Sandisk .

The largest companies in three of the most important leading sectors of the market have seen their executives classified as insiders sell more than 120 million shares of stock over the last six months. Top executives at these very same companies bought just 38,000 shares over that same time period, making for an eye-popping sell to buy ratio of 3,177 to one.

The grand total for the three sectors are “as awful as we have ever seen since we began doing this exercise years ago,” said Newman, who was ahead on such trends as the dangers of high-frequency trading and ETFs before the ‘Flash Crash’. “Clearly, insiders are seeing great value only in cash. Their actions speak volumes for the veracity for the current rally.”

But the overall market doesn’t seem to care. The S&P 500 is up 16 percent since its 2010 low hit on July 2nd on the back of strong earnings driven by cost-cutting and the hopes for even more quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve.

The insider data “is good reason for considerable caution once the price action fades,” said Simon Baker, CEO of Baker Asset Management. Still “insiders normally buy early and sell early too. Longer term -- 12 months out -- it is more of a red flag.”

Newman isn’t alone in warning about insider selling. The latest report from Vickers Weekly Insider, a publication that makes investments based upon these transactions, shows that total insider sell transactions relative to purchases on the New York Stock Exchange are running at a ratio of more than four to one over the last eight weeks. The normal reading, because of options selling and other factors, is about 2 sales for every buy, according to Vickers.

To be sure, many investors feel the heavy insider selling is just an anomaly based on other reasons.

“These are folks that have had to dip into their stocks for the first time in years, as their salaries have been cut and their bonuses, outside Wall Street, have been significantly curtailed,” said J.J. Kinahan, chief derivatives strategist for TD Ameritrade. “ This may speak more to a cash flow problem, then a market belief.”

Still Newman, who is also a favorite commentator of Barron’s columnist Alan Abelson, sees the insider selling as just the latest reason, along with the mortgage foreclosure mess and fully invested mutual fund managers with no fresh powder to put to work, to be cautious on the market.

“At the risk of sounding like a broken record, we expect a significant correction,” said the newsletter editor.

I'm no market genius; alas, its just not part of my skill set. Still, this one tells me that lots of smart money-wise types are expecting a shit-storm to hit soon. What do you bet Soros is silently making a killing on our backs, YET AGAIN.

UPDATE: Perhaps this explains it.

Aren't most of these corporate insiders DEMOCRATS who are all for the Sunsetting of the Bush "Tax Cuts?"

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

The Other McCain: Good-Bye California

The Other McCain has a great post up titled Good-Bye California that says it all about the naivete of republican candidates in the once great California Republic.

My only complaint: the moderator didn't publish my comment. Such is life.

Update: Comment published.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Jerry Brown: Documented Self-Admitted Liar

Jeff Dunetz at Yid with Lid, just put up what ought to be an EXPLOSIVE post on Jerry Brown's 1992 Televised admission that he LIED while running for Governor of California in the 1970's. Now there's a big surprise: Democrats lie!

Here's the exchange:

Interviewer: You said something a moment ago that I have to follow up on and I have to draw you out on. You said you don’t have to lie anymore now that you’re not a politician. What did you lie about when you were governor?

Jerry Brown: It’s all a lie. You’re pretending there’s a plan…

Interviewer: What did you lie about?

Jerry Brown: You run for office and the assumption is “Oh, I know what to do”. You don’t. I didn’t have a plan for California. Clinton doesn’t have a plan. Bush doesn’t have a plan.

Interviewer: You said you had a plan for California and you lied because you didn’t have a plan?

Jerry Brown: You say you’re going to lower taxes, you’re going to put people to work, you’re gonna improve the schools, you’re going to stop crime… crime is up, schools are worse, taxes are higher. I mean be real!

RULE 4 Post: Look Who Visits Libertarian Advocate

Click the image to see the stat

I had thought this humble blog would trudge along in nearly complete obscurity forever, but NO! Someone's taken notice.

Thanks for the visit Cathy Zoi. You've provided me with the perfect opportunity to engage in some Rule 1 Shameless Blogwhoring and Rule 2 Full Metal Jacket Reach-Around

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Iran Islamists Curb Western-based Educational Programs

Tolerance toward, understanding of, and dialogue with Islam is a central tenet of America's loony left academics and intellectuals. So why is it that Iran's ISLAMISTS won't return the favor to America's Left?

The Russians had a term for American Leftists during the cold war: Useful Idiots. Seems like there hasn't been too much CHANGE after all.

From Associated Press
October 24, 2010 10:03 AM EDT

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran has imposed new restrictions on 12 university social sciences deemed to be based on Western schools of thought and therefore incompatible with Islamic teachings, state radio reported Sunday.

The list includes law, philosophy, management, psychology, political science and the two subjects that appear to cause the most concern among Iran's conservative leadership — women's studies and human rights.


Saturday, October 23, 2010

DUNCE CAP AWARD: Plagiarist in Chief Joe Biden

There he goes again, misstating reality....

From The New York Times Caucus Blog
October 22, 2010, 3:07 pm

$200 Billion in Ads, Mr. Biden? That’s Real Money

Conservative groups have not dumped $200 billion in political ads on the heads of Democratic candidates.

It evidently just feels that way to the White House.

In an interview with Al Hunt of Bloomberg News scheduled to be shown Friday night, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. commented on the need for disclosure when corporate interests contribute to political groups.

“I was amazed at the amount of money, this $200 billion of money that is — where there’s no accountability,” he said. “When I say accountability, we don’t know where it’s coming from. There’s no disclosure, so the folks watching the ad can’t make a judgment based upon motive when you say it’s paid for by so-and-so.”

Mr. Biden clearly meant “million” with an “M,” not “billion” with a “B.”

But his tongue slipped again a moment later. “So it really — I’ve never seen this before, so the only caveat I’d put in terms of the House is how much impact this $200 billion are going to mean.”

Mr. Biden was elected to the United States Senate, representing Delaware, a few years after the departure of Everett Dirksen, the Republican Senate minority leader for more than a decade, who died in 1969. It was Mr. Dirksen, from Illinois, who once said, “A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon, you’re talking real money.”

... and the left make fun of Sarah Palin????

Friday, October 22, 2010

How to Spot A Liar - Look for the smirk, and then the correction.

A clip of Harry Reid on the Ed Schultz Show is embedded below. Watch the timing of Harry Reid's expressions as he goes through his narcissistic explanation of how he alone averted a worldwide depression.

H/T Breitbart TV

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Randy Barnett, Georgetown U Law School Prof and Senior Fellow at Cato Institute and Goldwater Institute on Obamacare Individual Mandate

Embedded below is a very fascinating discussion by Georgetown University Law Prof. Randy Barnett who is also a Senior Fellow at the Cato and Goldwater Institutes. The address was delivered very recently at N.Y.U Law school's annual Friedrich A. von Hayek Lecture.

Prof. Barnett discusses his view that the Individual Mandate compelled under ObamaCare is in fact unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. The clip is long, but well worth listening to because Barnett provides an illuminating discussion of Supreme Court ruling history on the Commerce and Necessary & Proper clauses.


H/T Becky Chandler & Randy Barnett, posting at the Volokh Conspiracy

Left Coast Rebel: Send Rover to the Dog House... Permanently

Click the link below for an interesting discussion on recent Carl Rove comments regarding the "sophistication" of the "Tea Party" movement vs. the Reagan Revolution By RightKlick at Left Coast Rebel

Left Coast Rebel: Send Rover to the Dog House... Permanently

Tuesday, October 19, 2010


Great news out of Connecticut's 4th Congressional District.

From Dan Debicella's campaign comes the announcement that he now leads Obamaphate sycophant and Pelosi pet Jimmie Himes...

New poll: Debicella in the lead!

Dear Friends,
We just released the results of a new poll – and we’re in the lead!

Just days after announcing we out raised Congressman Jim Himes by over $200,000 and Real Clear Politics upgraded the CT-4 race to “toss-up,” our latest survey shows we’ve catapulted over incumbent Jim Himes, and now lead 46 to 42 percent!
With less than two weeks to go until Election Day, there’s no doubt we have the momentum. Will you make a contribution of $50, $250 or $2400 today to help us keep the heat on through Election Day?

Friends, nearly 40 percent of Fairfield County voters disapprove of Jim Himes’ job performance, while less than 45 percent would vote to re-elect him – these are troubling numbers for a sitting Congressman, but not surprising given Himes’ support for the failed Washington agenda he’s rubber-stamped. As more people get to know me, my favorability numbers have spiked, rising from 31 percent in September to 51 percent in today’s poll. Now, we need your financial support through November 2nd to make sure we pull off an upset victory in just 13 days. Can I count on you?

Thank you again for your firm commitment to our campaign.

All my best,

Dan still needs your help, in any amount you can give: $10, $20, $50. Its the totals that make the difference. Give what you can, if you can.

So, Now We Know Why D.O.J. is Aggressively Working to Ensure Military Ballots are Timely Issued...

From The Washington Examiner via Weasel Zippers comes the nauseating news of how the Obamaphate's Afghanistan R.O.E. are further endangering and seriously demoralizing our troops.

Troops chafe at restrictive rules of engagement, talks with Taliban

By: Sara A. Carter
National Security Correspondent
October 19, 2010

A U.S. Army Chinook helicopter from the 101st Airborne Division transports U.S. infantrymen from one position to another in Zhari District, southern Afghanistan. (AP file photo)

KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN -- To the U.S. Army soldiers and Marines serving here, some things seem so obviously true that they are beyond debate. Among those perceived truths: The restrictive rules of engagement that they have to fight under have made serving in combat far more dangerous for them, while allowing the Taliban to return to a position of strength.

"If they use rockets to hit the [forward operating base] we can't shoot back because they were within 500 meters of the village. If they shoot at us and drop their weapon in the process we can't shoot back," said Spc. Charles Brooks, 26, a U.S. Army medic with 1st Battalion, 4th Infantry Regiment, in Zabul province.

Word had come down the morning Brooks spoke to this reporter that watch towers surrounding the base were going to be dismantled because Afghan village elders, some sympathetic to the Taliban, complained they were invading their village privacy. "We have to take down our towers because it offends them and now the Taliban can set up mortars and we can't see them," Brooks added, with disgust.

In June, Gen. David Petraeus, who took command here after the self-inflicted demise of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, told Congress that he was weighing a major change with rules for engaging enemy fighters in Afghanistan. That has not yet happened, troops say. Soldiers and Marines continue to be held back by what they believe to be strict rules imposed by the government of President Hamid Karzai designed with one objective: limit Afghan civilian casualties.

"I don't think the military leaders, president or anybody really cares about what we're going through," said Spc. Matthew "Silver" Fuhrken, 25, from Watertown, N.Y. "I'm sick of people trying to cover up what's really going on over here. They won't let us do our job. I don't care if they try to kick me out for what I'm saying -- war is war and this is no war. I don't know what this is."

To the soldiers and Marines risking their lives in Afghanistan, restrictions on their ability to aggressively attack the Taliban have led to another enormous frustration stalking morale: the fear that the Karzai government, with the prodding of the administration of President Obama, will negotiate a peace with the Taliban that wastes all the sacrifices by the U.S. here. Those fears intensified when news reached the enlisted ranks that the Karzai government, with the backing of senior Obama officials, was entering a new round of negotiations with the Taliban.

"If we walk away, cut a deal with the Taliban, desert the people who needed us most, then this war was pointless," said Pvt. Jeffrey Ward, with 1st Battalion, 4th Infantry Regiment, who is stationed at Forward Operating Base Bullard in southern Afghanistan.

"Everyone dies for their own reasons but it's sad to think that our friends, the troops, have given their lives for something we're not going to see through."

Other soldiers agreed. They said they feared few officials in the Pentagon understand the reality on the ground.

From the front lines, the U.S. backing of the Karzai government, widely seen as riddled with corruption by the Afghans living in local villages, has given the Taliban a position of power in villages while undercutting U.S. moral authority.

Corrupt government officials have made "it impossible for us to trust anyone," said elder Sha Barar, from the village of Sha Joy. The people of that village and many others profess fear of the Taliban, and recount tales of brutality and wanton killings by the Taliban and their sympathizers. But they don't see the Karzai government as a positive force in their lives.

Karzai said that talks need to continue with the Taliban "at a fixed address and with a more open agenda to tell us how to bring peace to Afghanistan and Pakistan."

But U.S. troops and Marines interviewed during the past month in Afghanistan question what negotiations would really mean, to both them and the Afghan people. And they almost universally believe that negotiating would be a mistake before achieving decisive gains they believe are attainable once oppressive rules of engagement are relaxed.

"What does it mean if we give in to the Taliban? They are the enemy," Brooks said. "This place is going to be a safe haven for terrorists again. The government doesn't care about the sacrifices already made. As far as the mission goes, I want to see these kids go to school and have a future but not at the expense of my friends -- not anymore."

Sara A. Carter is The Washington Examiner's national security correspondent. She can be reached at

Monday, October 18, 2010

AP Sacrifices What Little Credibility it Retained for the Obamaphate

Its sad to see a once respected press institution completely sacrifice its little remaining credibility and reputation for a political party that is fundamentally undeserving of the gift and will most likely prove ungrateful for the sacrifice as well.

Below, is the AP's "assessment" of why voters are extremely angry at Congress. The piece betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the underlying dynamics in this election cycle and seems to verbatim parrot the WH position, that one has to wonder if it wasn't penned by Axelrod himself... AMAZING!

A productive Congress gets no respect from voters
From Associated Press
October 18, 2010 9:10 AM EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) — The public panned it. Republicans obstructed it. Many Democrats fled from it. Even so, the session of Congress now drawing to a close was the most productive in nearly half a century.

Not since the explosive years of the civil rights movement and the hard-fought debut of government-supported health care for the elderly and poor have so many big things — love them or hate them — been done so quickly.

Gridlock? It may feel that way. But that's not the story of the 111th Congress — not the story history will remember.

Democrats are dearly hoping history won't repeat itself. In 1966, after Democrats created Medicare and Medicaid and passed civil rights laws, they got hammered in the election, losing 48 seats in the House and four in the Senate. They maintained their majorities in both at the time, but an identical result next month would turn the House over to Republicans.

In the 1960s Democrats paid the price for events largely outside their control — an escalating war in Vietnam going badly, rowdy anti-war protests and violence in American cities, said Linda Fowler, professor of government at Dartmouth College.

"I think that's what's going on this time too," Fowler said, "despite a very significant record of accomplishment."

Democrats struggling now to retain majorities in the House and Senate must deal with a public that is quick to blame Washington for the prolonged economic downturn, and that resents the bank bailouts that were actually passed by the previous Congress.

In terms of legislative successes, the current session of Congress is "at least on a par with the 89th Congress" of 1965-1966, said Norman Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

But, he added, Republicans have done all they could to discredit Congress and Democrats have failed to sell their agenda. Moreover, it will take years to fully feel the effects of the health care law and financial regulation.

"A world dominated by bickering and epithet-throwing and bomb tossing in Washington obscures accomplishments," Ornstein said.

Congress passed an $814 billion economic stimulus package soon after President Barack Obama took office, tapping a staggering sum of money to avoid a full-blown depression. Democrats have trumpeted the gains from that effort, but know it's not enough for restive voters. "Americans still see themselves in a ditch," said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.

The two other landmark acts of this session were the health care overhaul, a giant step toward universal coverage that had eluded presidents back to Franklin Roosevelt if not Teddy Roosevelt, and the Wall Street accountability act.

Obama has also signed into law at least a dozen other pieces of legislation of significance. They include:

—Making college loans more affordable.

—The Cash for Clunkers program that helped rejuvenate the auto industry.

—New consumer protections for credit card users.

—Making it easier for women to challenge pay discrimination.

—Increasing federal regulation of tobacco products.

—Cracking down on waste in Pentagon weapons acquisition.

—Making attacks based on sexual orientation a federal hate crime.

—Giving businesses tax incentives to hire unemployed workers.

—Tax credits for first-time homeowners.

So where is the love?

Polls suggest three-fourths of Americans disapprove of Congress.

The 1960s were a time of upheaval, and Medicare only arrived after a bitter debate echoing with cries from the right that socialism was on the march in America. Yet people had a lot more faith in government to do the right thing, polls from that time indicate.

And Medicare grew to be so popular that Republicans, the party that resisted it, have been quick to accuse Democrats of trying to cut it when they proposed to slow its growth and use the savings to help provide medical care to millions who lack health insurance.

An erosion of trust in institutions in general has enabled Republicans to score points by arguing that Democratic Big Government programs are exploding the national debt, Ornstein said. The result, he added, is that not many Democrats are campaigning on the benefits of the stimulus package, even though one-third of it was tax cuts that put money in most people's pockets.

"The amazing thing is that we have had such a productive Congress despite the obstructionism," Hoyer said. "Republicans and their media have successfully sent out a message that the Congress has failed."

Democrats cling to a hope that voters in the last two weeks before the election will come to a more favorable view of how the party handled health care and the economy.

But in taking on issues for the history books, Democrats have failed on some matters close to the hearts of allies whose energy is vital in an election. Legislation making it easier to unionize workplaces is stalled, Hispanics are still pressing for an overhaul of the immigration system and environmental groups want action on climate change.

Democratic leaders put off action for nearly two years on preventing a massive tax increase come Jan. 1, when the Bush-era tax cuts run out. And they couldn't even put a budget together this year. But it's not what Congress didn't accomplish the past two years, it's what it did do that seems to have voters most riled.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press.

Friday, October 15, 2010

My Connecticut A.G. Endorsement: MARTHA DEAN

Martha Dean is a very bright and wonderful breath of fresh air after more than half a century of Democrat control of the Attorney General's Office, 20 years under documented liar and creepy self-promoter Dick Blumenthal.

Martha accepts campaign contributions only from individuals and, unlike her opponent George Jepsen, she has turned down public campaign funds.

Embedded below is an audio clip of a radio interview Martha held last weekend on Sunday Morning Coffee’s “Interviews with the Candidates” series:

The clip is long at 53+ minutes, but contains a very thorough expression of Martha's legal philosophy and her plans to reform the A.G. office. If you really want to know what she believes and understand her values, listen to the whole of it, you won't be wasting your time.

Click Martha's photo to go to the audio

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

This Is Why California is F***ED.....

Stoner Logic From Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown:
The conventional viewpoint says we need a jobs program and we need to cut welfare. Just the opposite! We need more welfare and fewer jobs. Jobs for every American is doomed to failure because of modern automation and production. We ought to recognize it and create an income-maintenance system so every single American has the dignity and the wherewithal for shelter, basic food, and medical care. I'm talking about welfare for all.
Oh, that'll work for sure dude; now lets go surfing....

What an astonishing PUTZ!

Moonbattery via Reaganite Republican

One more reason to Money Bomb Sean Bielat....

Barney Frank, the nauseatingly fat and ugly congressperp ostensibly representing the people residing in Massachusetts' 4th Congressional District - and a primary contributor to the economic collapse of 2008 - has been a very hypocritical little piglet (but then there's nothing new about that when it comes to Frank):

Here's the juice:

Rival blasts Barney Frank’s swanky free jet ride

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, immersed in one of the toughest political fights of his career, took a free private jet to the Virgin Islands courtesy of a Maine congresswoman’s billionaire fiance — whose company received a $200 million federal bailout, the Herald has learned.

Frank, who’s facing feisty Republican challenger Sean Bielat, flew to the tropical paradise for a vacation in 2009 on a $25 million jet owned by Paloma Partners honcho S. Donald Sussman, the fiance of U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine). Paloma Securities — a subsidiary of Sussman’s Greenwich, Conn.-based hedge fund — received $200 million in 2009 as part of the $180 billion federal bailout of troubled insurance giant AIG, records show.

Frank, who chairs the House Financial Services Committee, said his partner, Jim Ready, lives in Pingree’s district and the couples are “personal friends.”

“She and I have become friendly and they invited us to the Virgin Islands and I checked with House ethics (officials) and they gave it the OK,” Frank said. “It was purely personal.”

Republican National Committee spokesman Parish Braden said: “Barney Frank’s acceptance of a lavish gift from a hedge fund manager, an industry he is responsible for regulating, is a troubling conflict of interest that raises serious questions about his judgment.”

Bielat added: “Typical. Barney keeps showing how career politicians work — they use our dollars for their favors. It may be legal, but it’s wrong and that’s why we need a change.”

Frank called the GOP criticism “nonsense” and said he has backed legislation to crack down on hedge funds.

“I’ve never talked with him about any favorable treatment,” he said of Sussman. “I voted to raise his taxes. That’s one of the most backwards things I’ve ever heard. I’ve taken the anti-hedge fund position.”

Frank, who voted for the bailout in October 2008, took the trip around Christmas 2009. He reported the trip in required House financial filings and valued the flight at $1,500. He originally listed the trip vaguely as “first class round trip travel by private aircraft” in a congressional filing in May. In July, he amended the report to show he traveled from Portland, Maine, to the Virgin Islands. He called the discrepancy a “clerical error.”

Sussman, a huge Democratic campaign donor with homes in Maine and Connecticut, lives in St. John, Virgin Islands. Spokespersons for Sussman and Pingree declined to comment. Pingree also is facing criticism from the Maine GOP for using Sussman’s jet.

h/t to Christopher Fountain, my nearby neighbor in Greenwich where Sussman keeps a "cottage."

DAVID AXELCREEP: Master of Innuendo and Scumbag Extraordinaire

UPDATED With this compelling video commentary from Americans for Limited Government

Original Post from 10-11-2010:

The hot story of the day is how Obama and his greasy spin-master David Axelrod are trying desperately to divert the attention of voters away from the Obamaphate's numerous and manifold failures by insinuating the existence of some dark conspiracy of foreign origin seeking to derail Demoncrat rule in the United States come November 2nd.

Basically, this is Obama's allegation in a nutshell:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is using foreign contributions of "mysterious" origin to derail his agenda by buying advertising in support of Republican candidates around the country.

The Obamaphate's problem is that the allegations are so devoid of any substance, that media outlets normally very friendly to the Incompetent in Chief, find themselves compelled - if only to preserve what little is left of their collective credibility - to challenge the spin as less than credible.

From Jeff Dunetz writing Yid With Lid comes this illuminating bit:
Folks who watched CBS Face the Nation yesterday were greeted by a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence, host Bob Schieffer taking a contrary position to one of the Administration’s talking points. Talking to White House political director David Axelrod about the President’s charge that the Chamber of Commerce is using foreign donations to support GOP candidates, he asked:

SCHIEFFER: Now, I want to ask you about that because the New York Times looked into the Chamber specifically and said the Chamber really isn’t putting foreign money into the campaign. That it does charge its foreign affiliates dues that bring in less than $100,000 a year. A lot of organizations, including labor unions, do that. But the Chamber has an annual budget of $200 million. Along with that it keeps these foreign dues separate. They do spend heavily in politics — $25 million so far. They expect to spend $50 million. But this part about foreign money, that appears to be peanuts, Mr. Axelrod. Do you have any evidence that it’s anything other than peanuts?

AXELROD: Well, do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob? The fact is that the Chamber has asserted that but they won’t release any information about where their campaign money is coming from. That’s at the core of the problem here. What we’ve seen in part because of a loophole that the Supreme Court allowed earlier this year, we now see tens of millions of dollars being spent by the chamber and a number of organizations some of which just cropped up. Ed Gillespie and Karl Rove run one of them. Tens of millions of dollars from undisclosed donors under benign names like the American cross roads fund. They’re spending heavily in all of these elections. One race in Colorado, there are six different organizations running negative ads against the Democratic senator there, Michael Bennet. No one knows where the money is coming from. My question back to you and for your next guest is, why not simply disclose where this money is coming from? And then all of these questions will be answered.

In other words Axelrod and the Democratic Party pulled this charge out of nowhere, threw it against the wall and are praying it sticks, or as Schieffer said;
I guess I would put it this way. If the only charge three weeks into the election that the Democrats can make is that somehow this may or may not be foreign money coming into the campaign, is that the best you can do?
What's most interesting to me is the question raised by Seiffert and not answered by Axelcreep.

Both the President and his chief political Apparatchik have in effect publicly accused the U.S. Chamber of Congress - a leading AMERICAN private sector business association of allowing itself to become the tool of un-named foreign persons bent on nefarious and possibly illegal interference in the U.S. electoral process. When challenged to provide evidence of the conspiracy alleged. Their feeble response is: Well, do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob?

Hey, Axelcreep, the burden of proof is on you and dumbass. You and your nit-witted B'Oz are the ones alleging impropriety and possible violations of law. Its up to you to tender the evidence of the wrongdoing you allege. If you can't do that - because there ain't any - then STFU.

These three great bloggers are all discussing this story and/or parallel themes:

Jeff Dunetz at Yid with Lid

Pat Dollard at Young Americans Documentary

and the very attractive Michelle Malkin, here discussing the Democrats' own very serious foreign money problems.

Halloween Costume Picks....

'nuff said.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Georgi Soros: I Can't Stop A Republican Avalanche

From the New York Times' "The Caucus" comes the official announcement that George Soros is cutting puppet Barack Obama loose....

October 11, 2010, 8:38 am

Soros: I Can’t Stop a Republican ‘Avalanche’

George Soros, the billionaire financier who was an energetic Democratic donor in the last several election cycles but is sitting this one out, is not feeling optimistic about Democratic prospects.

“I made an exception getting involved in 2004,” Mr. Soros, 80, said in a brief interview Friday at a forum sponsored by the Bretton Woods Committee, which promotes understanding of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

“And since I didn’t succeed in 2004, I remained engaged in 2006 and 2008. But I’m basically not a party man. I’d just been forced into that situation by what I considered the excesses of the Bush administration.”

Mr. Soros, a champion of liberal causes, has been directing his money to groups that work on health care and the environment, rather than electoral politics. Asked if the prospect of Republican control of one or both houses of Congress concerned him, he said: “It does, because I think they are pushing the wrong policies, but I’m not in a position to stop it. I don’t believe in standing in the way of an avalanche.”

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Every so often, SNL Gets it Right: Ask Gloria Allred

SNL's writers (perhaps working without adult supervision) have video-pilloried NPD "victim" Gloria Allred in the embedded video below.

As my post title states, occasionally, SNL gets it right. A famous but now banned skit from 2008 skewered Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Georgi Soros, and Herbie Sandler for their roles in helping along the collapse of the economy. Purportedly, threats of suit by Sandler's lawyers induced NBC to yank the skit.

Click the image to see the skit

Back to Gloria Allred

2 Open Questions:

(1) Did Gloria Allred violate her ethical duty to her client by encouraging Nicky Diaz Santillan to put herself in legal jeopardy by appearing on national television admitting to her undocumented alien status and fraudulent use of identity documents?

(2) If the answer to question #1 is yes, does the Disciplinary Board of the California Bar have standing to punish Allred absent a complaint by Diaz?