We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility and provide for the common def---aw, f*#@ it, let's just be Socialists!
Gina Elise is a southern California model who recently started a project called Pin Ups for Vets. Says Ms. Elise about her project:
"A few years ago, I started seeing news articles about under-funded Veterans’ healthcare programs. Then, there were stories about older Veterans who lay in bed day after day, never receiving any visitors. Reports started surfacing on TV about the severe injuries sustained by our troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The more I heard about the uphill battles of our Wounded Warriors, the more convinced I was of the need to produce a project that would bring in funds to support all of our hospitalized Veterans.
My late Grandpa Lou served in the army for 4 years during World War II. I wanted to do something to honor his name. I always loved the romance of those bygone eras - especially the 1940’s - and I drew inspiration from the World War II pin-up girls, whose photos and paintings boosted morale for our soldiers fighting overseas. "
There is nary a cause more worthy. Thus, I give you Pin Up Rule #5 Friday!
Previously, I posted a point by point take down of an attack video posted at a libtards blog. Once the libtard in question finally got over his childishness, he did what he should have in the first place, which is to respond to my post. Now that we have the response, let's pick it apart.
"One of Paul Mitchell’s fellow wingnuts, the laughably misnamed Classicaliberal..."
How many people out there haven't heard of Wikipedia? Hands? Only you meatard? Well, you see, its this site that's just like a traditional encyclopedia, only it's all online. It helps ignorant people, such as yourself, learn new things. Since you seem to be allergic to using it, I'll provide for you a definition of classical liberalism:
"Classical liberalism (also known as traditional liberalism[1], laissez-faire liberalism[2], and market liberalism[3] or, outside Canada and the United States, sometimes simply liberalism) is a form of liberalism stressing individual freedom, free markets, and limited government. This includes the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, individual freedom from restraint, equality under the law, constitutional limitation of government, free markets, and a gold standard to place fiscal constraints on government[4], as exemplified in the writings of John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, Thomas Jefferson, Voltaire, Frédéric Bastiat, Montesquieu and others."
Those would be considered conservative principles now days, thus the only irony here is that meatfool is to dumb to figure it out on his own.
At the risk of beating an already dead horse... "The claim that the video wasn’t taken down from Youtube is a lie. The removal was documented. Youtube later restored the video, but this does not change the fact that “Classicaliberal” lied about the fact that the video was, in fact, removed."
An attempt, and success are two very different things. As everyone who has seen the video is keenly aware, the video is still posted on youtube, and therefore it has not been removed. From the mouth of the jackass himself:
"he attempted to have a video that exposed his intellectual dishonesty removed from Youtube. He failed."
Regardless of the fact that it may have been down for 10 minutes, or 10 years, the video is back online, and viewable by anyone with an internet connection. Did I know that the video had been taken down and reposted? No. Does it matter in the overall scheme of things? No. The crucks of the post are ill-effected by whether or not the video was taken offline for a period.
Further beating an already dead horse... "Now, when I pointed out on Twitter that “Classicaliberal” had lied, he quickly changed the post; he now tries hard to gloss over his lie. Unfortunately for “Classicaliberal”, I’m used to dealing with his ilk. I’d already mirrored the post, thus preserving his lie for posterity."
Yes, you caught me. I was working so underhandedly to erase all of the details surrounding the matter that I posted it at the top of my blog detailing everything... Way to go. And I almost got away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling meatpackers.
"As for his “point by point take down” of the video, “Classical Liberal” carefully avoids addressing the full meaning of the central argument of the video"
Its funny, being accused of avoiding the topic of the video, because for a fact, the video avoids the topic of Anthony Watt's investigation and subsequent report. Luckily for me, meatstain took the bait.
The conclusion of 'Is the US Surface Temperature Reliable' was that after reviewing more than 860 of the 1,221 temperature stations, 9 out of 10 of these stations 'fail to meet the National Weather Service’s own siting requirements that stations must be 30 meters (about 100 feet) or more away from an artificial heating or radiating/reflecting heat source.' And further that the study observed 'changes in the technology of temperature stations over time also has caused them to report a false warming trend. We found major gaps in the data record that were filled in with data from nearby sites, a practice that propagates and compounds errors. We found that adjustments to the data by both NOAA and another government agency, NASA, cause recent temperatures to look even higher.'
You see, the second finding is truly the key because it is not addressed in the video at all. The video grabs the first claim, that 9 out of 10 stations 'fail to meet the National Weather Service’s own siting requirements that stations must be 30 meters (about 100 feet) or more away from an artificial heating or radiating/reflecting heat source' and then does a comparison of the data from so called bad stations with so called good stations. The problem with this is, if the system is outdated and using technology which causes them to report false warming trends AND large gaps of data were missing, then all of the data must be thrown out because none of it can be considered useful. However, the video glosses over the second finding and attempts to make Anthony Watts look like a loon cause he reports the weather for a station which plays Michael Savage's radio program. Intellectual honesty on full display.
In the video, it's reported that NOAA adjusts for environmental anomalies like concrete or exhaust ventilation which might skew the data. This is like Usain Bolt and Carl Lewis competing in a 100 meter dash, with Bolt wearing brand new running shoes and Carl Lewis wearing a 30 year old pair with no laces. At the end of the race, Bolt has won by a 3 second interval, but the officials adjust for footwear anomalies and give Lewis 3.5 seconds back.
"“Classicaliberal” objects that the graph doesn’t show several hundred years of data — which is a red herring. He is deliberately ignoring the fact that Watts’ accusation was that the temperature data is inaccurate because of nonoptimal siting of many climate stations."
Wrong on so many levels... Watts' accusation, as detailed above, is that the data is unreliable both due to placement of the stations and outdated technology and missing data blocks. The video then uses data from this system to show a warming trend over the last 30 or so years. Again, you have to throw out the data due to the inconsistency under which it was recorded. But, secondly, if you are going to take temperature data to display a warming trend, you must take at least one full cycle, which at a minimum is 60 years. Allow me to illustrate: This is an image of a sound wave. You can plainly see by looking at this image that sound waves continue to ascend! There is no peak, this wave will continue to ascend! The sound waves must be stopped!
Of course, no one truly believes this, because we've all seen the next image: You see, the at the end of the video, the assertion is made that AGW is real, that we are responsible, and we have to stop. In order to make a truly informed decision on the matter, you must have as much data as possible. AGW advocates cite recent warming activity as proof positive that AGW is real and is occurring now. Of course, what they are seeing is this: When you take a step back and look at more evidence the picture becomes clearer and you can see that it's all apart of a naturally recurring cycle and that the current warming trend as subsided and we're beginning the next cycle of cooling. It is, in fact, a part of the 60 year cycle mentioned before. Once again, for effect: Bottom line, Meathead is an anti-intellectual fool for posting such tripe on his blog and standing behind it as reasoned evidence. When called on this, he dissolves into the 3rd grader on the playground and calls everyone within earshot a liar. Well played sir, well played.
(UPDATE)When confronted with this blogpost, the Meatbeater read exactly 2 sentences before his liberal brain shriveled up and he could handle no more. The reason for his loss of bowel control? Originally the second sentence read "Meathead makes reference to an attempt by Mr. Watts to have the video removed from Youtube, something that has not happened.' Immediately, Meatbrain's eyes began to flood with tears, and he quickly had to out me as a 'liar' so that harmony and balance could be restored to the universe. The only problem is, I didn't lie. The video is, in fact, still posted on Youtube, and linked in this post. The video was taken down for a short while, but ultimately reposted on Youtube. Which means that Mr. Watts' attempt to get it taken down failed. If you were going to tell this tale to a friend, you would say that Mr. Watts attempted to get the video pulled, but ultimately he failed, or it hasn't happened.
However, in an attempt to have a logical debate with this ass, I changed the line to read, as it does below. Unfortunately, Meat-for-brains took this as evidence of a lie, and heralded it from the highest twitter peaks, at right is his twitter stream to me. There is no intelligence on the left, and Meatbrain is exhibit A.
But the larger story is here that Meathead knows that he does not possess the ability to dispute any of the facts listed in the blog post below and so instead of taking them on, he must resort to calling me a liar. It's a very old trick, and one that is worn out. You see, if you can call the author a liar, then it doesn't matter what's in the article, or in this case blogpost. That way you don't have to address the overwhelming facts within the post itself. Where do we first behold this behavior? In the 2nd grade. This leads me to believe that Meatheads momma set him up with a blog, and since he can't run with the big boys, he just calls the liars from the sideline. Insinuating that someone is a liar implies intent. Meatass cannot prove intent, and as such his name calling is nothing more than libel. Proof once again that libtards are on a completely different evolutionary path from conservatives. While conservatives continue to evolve and become better and brighter, the left peaked with Nathan Bedford Forrest, and have been steadily deteriorating ever since.
Bottom line, Meathead is an anti-intellectual fool for posting such tripe on his blog and standing behind it as reasoned evidence. When called on this, he dissolves into the 3rd grader on the playground and calls everyone within earshot a liar. Well played sir, well played.
---
Paul's favorite libtard of the week, Meathead has the following video posted at his blog which he purports to 'spank' Anthony Watts 'hard.' Meathead makes reference to an attempt by Mr. Watts to have the video removed from Youtube. Apparently the video was pulled and later reposted, but that is inconsequential to the facts below, get over it. Just what is in this video that so totally spanks Anthony Watts? Let's see:
Okay, let's go through this video point by point to view the utter carnage it's wreaked upon Anthony Watts and 'climate change deniers.'
Anthony Watts works for KPAY 1290 which also happens to feature Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage.
Sweet Jeezus! He's obviously part of the vast rightwing conspiracy! Really, unless KPAY sanctioned his work, I have a hard time seeing how the on air talent at the radio station has any bearing on this issue... Guilt by association much?
He's recruited volunteers in his efforts to photograph weather stations in question.
Can't trust them uneducated rubes to take photographs! If he were relying on volunteers to take radiation readings for proof of some nuclear fallout or something, I could understand discounting the effort based upon the involvement of some rookies, but pictures?! Who can't work a camera? This is an attempt to discount the data based upon the perceived incompetence of the volunteers.
Anthony Watts' book was published under the hospices of The Heartland Institute, who also happens to advocate Free Market Principles and champions smokers rights!
Bastardz! Who the eff would champion smokers rights?! This is obviously proof that this far right wing group hates all humans and is looking for causes to support based upon how many humans will be killed as a result... Or not. The fact that The Heartland Institute supports smokers rights has NOTHING to do with this piece, and once again is an attempt to vilify Anthony Watts based upon association.
The Heartland Institute makes lots of money and is a right wing organization!
The reality is that Mr. Watts more than likely does not earn enough money as a radio meteorologist to publish a book. The fact that he found THI who agreed to support his efforts to publish a book means little. Is anybody really shocked when a book supporting socialized health care is backed by a leftwing organization? Then why is anyone shocked that an organization with rightward leanings is helping to publish books which call into question the validity of AGW? The only time any of us should be shocked is if it were a leftwing organization publishing a book decrying communism or something... Once more, guilt by association.
The Heartland Institute has been a primary facilitator behind the initiative to 'distort and obfuscate the science surrounding' global climate change.
Because we all know that the science behind global climate change, or more specifically AGW is settled, right? The fact that an individual or a group questions a theory or produces evidence that some of the science used to support a theory is not sound is hardly 'distortion' or 'obfuscation.' If there is, in fact, distortion or obfucsation going on, the video provides NO evidence of either.
NOAA responds, agreeing that the stations in question could be (and are, in fact) giving false readings.
The fact that NOAA corrects the data that they are receiving from these stations is an indication that the readings are being influenced by their surroundings... Which is exactly what Mr. Watts asserted. So, Anthony Watts was right? That appears to be the case.
After correcting for surroundings, the data taken at the stations in question matched the overall trend of warming noticed via the data taken from stations which were not in question.
Great! Fantastic! But, why does the graph in the video only show data going back to the 1950's? You see, the earths climate is cyclical. In order to get a true understanding of what's happening to global temperatures, you have to look at hundreds of years of data, because if you only look at a couple of decades, you paint an incomplete picture and people might accuse you of being 'a politically motivated liar!'
Here's the graph from the video.
Here's that same graph highlighting the cyclical nature of warming and cooling. It's amazing what you can discern from graphs when you have more information, isn't it?! If there were, say, 100 years worth of data here, what you would find is a cyclical warming trend lasting approximately 30 years followed by a cooling trend lasting the same amount of time. These cycles take place in a much larger cycle which takes place over periods of about 300 years. We have been in an overall warming trend since about 1700, at which time, the earth was in the depths of a cooling trend. Want proof? From teh Wikipedia:
Hudson Bay was the growth centre for the main ice sheet that covered northern North America during the last Ice Age. The whole region has very low year round average temperatures. (The average annual temperature for Churchill at 59°N is -5°C; by comparison Arkhangelsk at 64°N in a similar cold continental position in northern Russia has an average of 2°C.) Water temperature peaks at 8°-9°C on the western side of the bay in late summer. It is largely frozen over from mid-December to mid-June when it usually clears from its eastern end westwards and southwards. A steady increase in regional temperatures over the last 100 years has been reflected in a lengthening of the ice-free period which was as short as four months in the late 17th century.
Growing seasons have changed drastically in recent decades
See above. This would make sense given the cyclical nature of warming and cooling in our environment.
A recent peer-reviewed NASA study analyzed several global biological markers and their reaction to climate change
Again, if the trends of warming and cooling are cyclical in nature and they last for 30 years (on average) then animal and plant life, as well as ice would be effected and in the case of animals and plants, would adapt to these changes. This is not damning evidence against the AGW deniers, but evidence for the cyclical nature of warming and cooling.
The very same people who told you that WMD's were real are now trying to tell you that climate change is not.
Sometimes, I really hate flogging the left so handily, but they continue to just tee it right up... For the last time, EVERYONE believed there were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, because Saddam wanted the world to believe it. Hell, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Algore, Hillary and Bill all stated that Iraq possessed WMD's, so can we get off that? Besides, WTF does it have to do with AGW?
Secondly, no one is claiming that climate change is not happening. What we are disputing is man's role in the change. The fact is that the earth has been warming and cooling for a millennium, without the help of my Suburban, mmkay?
You want to make Anthony Watts look like an ass because you don't agree with his political viewpoint? Fine. Foisting bad science and attempting to bring him down because of is associations, that's called intellectual dishonesty, something the left has mastered.
It's been a long, rough day and I should apologize for not having time to blog as freely as I have within the last week. Hopefully this picture of Jenna Presley will help make up for it! I have just a couple of quick links for you to check out. Enjoy and talk amongst yourselves.
Shocker... No one is surprised to learn that the party who crafted the Obamacare bill is ill-informed as to its contents. What's surprising is that a media outlet is telling you that the Republicans know more about the bill than the Democratards.
Here's essentially what's gone down: Dems craft Obamacare legislation and call it QAHCAA for some unknown reason. Next, they tell the members of the party to go out an push the bill promising that it fulfills every wet dream nanny-state fantasy a good young communist has ever thought of. Dem congressional representatives rush to the microphones and constituents and champion the bill they haven't read. Finally, after being made to look like the idiots they are, the congressional representatives go back and ask for clarification on what's actually in the bill.
Meanwhile, Republicans actually sat down and read the steaming pile of QAHCAA. They obviously read and understand 'The Art of War,' or at least the old adage 'Know Thine Enemy!'
Want proof they haven't actually read the bill and are going off the word of party leaders? Just take a look at this.
Very few in Washington have any credibility. Even fewer have credibility on health care and the QAHCAA bill, especially the Democratards.
In another stunning display of Hopenchange, PeeBo has cut aid to Honduras in response to the ouster of (Former) President Zelaya. The Obama Regime has called for the re-installment of Zelaya after he was forcibly removed from the country earlier this year.
For a refresher, click here. In a nutshell here's what went down. First, President Zelaya, in defiance of Honduras' constitution sought a voter referendum to allow him as President to stay in office for more than one term. The Honduran Constitution explicitly states that no President can serve more than a single term, and anyone who advocates a longer term will be ineligible to serve for several years. The Supreme Court ruled his actions unconstitutional. Zelaya had Hugo Chavez, the monkey who runs Venezuela, ship ballots with the referendum to Honduras, so Zelaya could carry out the vote. The Military seized the ballots, where upon, Zelaya had ACORN break into the military installation where they were being stored, and begin to distribute the ballots. When approached by Military Commander, Gen. Romeo Vásquez Velásquez who informed the President that his actions were not legal, Zelaya promptly fired him. The Supreme Court then ordered Gen. Romeo Vásquez Velásquez reinstated, yet Zelaya refused. At this point the AG announced that the referendum was illegal and anyone caught participating in the disbursement of the illegal ballots would be subject to arrest and prosecution. Zelaya did not back down, was arrested, and ultimately deported from Honduras.
It's important to note that the Honduran Constitution does not have a method in place for impeachment or removal from office of a standing president. As a result, the Honduran Congress, Supreme Court and Attorney General acted in accordance with the law available to them and had Zelaya arrested and deported. Not only was what happened in Honduras not a coup, it was the exact opposite. It was in fact, the prevention of a coup.
Now, President PeeBo has cut off military aid and is threatening to cut more aid if Zelaya is not reinstated as President in Honduras. Most of us knew PeeBo was dummer 'n a box a rocks, but isn't there someone in the federal government somewhere (like I dunno, the State Department) who understands the constitution of Honduras?! Instead we have the Clown in Chief cutting off aid to an ally for practicing, wait for it... Democracy!
This one is hard to comprehend, but hopefully with the issuing of this report from the DODIG (Department of Defense, Inspector General), guidelines will be followed, responsible parties will be punished and future lives will be saved.
Apparently there have been multiple troop deaths in the War on Terror as a result of faulty work on the part of contractors and the military's failure to inspect. So what is the correct response to this? Do we arrest Bush and Cheney because obviously they hand picked KBR and directed them to produce faulty work? Do we criminalize all contractors who have ever worked with/for the military, cause we know Haliburton was a contractor and everyone knows how evil they are, right? Do we pull the troops out and bring them home now, because we do not want to waste anymore life at the hands of faulty electrical work in a misguided war?
No. We hold the individuals responsible, period. The commanding officer within the Army who was responsible to ensure that the inspections were carried out should be reprimanded and made to personally apologize to the families of those injured and killed as a result of the negligence on his/her watch. The individual soldiers in the field who were responsible to physically inspect the work should be reprimanded and possibly charged with negligent manslaughter as a result of failing to carry out their mission(s). KBR should be fined, and the monies recovered should go to the families of those soldiers who were killed and injured as a result of the faulty work. Finally, the officer(s) responsible for authorizing the message that was given to the families as the reason for the death of their loved ones, should be court martial-ed. Lying to the family of service members about the manner in which their loved ones died should never be acceptable outside matters of the utmost national security.
People want to believe that the Government has their best interests in mind. Although they know politicians lie on a minute by minute basis, people want to believe their representatives are telling them the truth. People want the simple answers. People want something new that costs them little to nothing.
I have just given you all the reasons why the support for nationalizing health care is as high as it is. As we all know, the people who give in to the temptations listed above, are naive. You see, the Government already runs 3 major health care programs; Medicare/Medicaid, Veterans Benefits(VA), and Native American health care(IHS). A couple of weeks ago, Ed Morrissey brought to light the perils of the IHS system.
Question, what do you think happens to medical benefits provided by the government in a recession or depression cycle? Let's look at California to see! 'Wait a minute!!! Nobody told me that if we go to a nationalized health care system, in recessionary or depressionary cycles my benefits will get cut!' That's right Sherlock, Government cuts spending in the most cost intensive areas; terminally ill, handicapped, seniors and in CA's case, children.
Democratard Chris Can Hollen (D-Mars) said that negotiations between Dems and the GOP may have to be ceased, citing 'lack of political will.' Translation, 'we don't give a f*&@ what they want.' This congress has the shameful distinction of being one of the few to completely shut out the opposition on helping craft new legislation; i.e. American Reinvestment & Recovery Act. So, why start now?!
Democratards quickly forget that roughly 58,343,671 people voted against their agenda in the last election cycle. That number is rapidly growing; see PeeBo's latest approval index. So when learning of their refusal to negotiate with Republicans, I say 'carry on!.. They are non-negotiating themselves into irrelevancy!
When confronted with being one of the most despised politicians in the universe, Nancee Belagosi replied "...I don't care."
When asked if it was important to her that the President of the United States be a US citizen, Belagosi replied, "...I don't care."
When asked about the fates of the millions of unemployed in America, Belagosi replied, "...I don't care."
When asked about rising gas prices. Belagosi replied, "...I don't care."
When informed that no one believed her shtick about the CIA lying to her, Belagosi replied, "...I don't care."
When confronted with incontrovertible evidence that images of her face causes nightmares amongst 3 year old's the world over, Belagosi replied, "...I don't care."
When asked if she wanted fries with that, Belagosi replied, "...I don't care."
When America stood up and said, we're going to make you the first single term female Speaker of the House, Belagosi replied, "...I don't care."
Good, we'll see to it that it happens then, Mrs. Belagosi!
Can we toss this guy out on his pampered ass, now? Turns out Dodd knew, because Countrywide disclosed up front, that he was getting a sweetheart deal on his mortgage. I'll give a $3 bill and a 36 pack of Keystone Light to the first person who can name me ONE Democratard Congressperson who isn't embroiled in, related to, a witness of or in an exclusive club that is involved in a scandal.
433,000 Americans added to the long-term unemployed last month, and this is what your Congress is up to...
Listen, for the record, I don't believe PeeBo was born in Kenya, Zimbabwe or Niger, but why in the name of all that is good an holy in the world wont the most transparent administration ever release the long form birth certificate? The reality is the longer they hold out, the more nutty the Republicans look. This issue is a major issue for about 22% of the Republican party base. It's effectively an annoyance to the Republicans and something keeping them from cohesively focusing on bringing down PeeBo's initiatives. The Birth Certificate issue allows Dems to pigeon hole Republicans as supporting kook fringe conspiracy theories, even if this one isn't so kooky or fringy.
McCain's team vetted the Birth Certificate issue and found nothing worthy of chasing, so let us all slowly let it fade away. Please?
(Update) Michelle Bachmann blocks... This doesn't look like it's going to end well.
For the record, I can't stand the politics of most of the posters at the Gawker websites, that being said... The posters at Jalopnik are reporting that the EPA has been secretly bumping up MPG figures for cars that fall within the 'clunkers' category in the Cash for Clunkers program. Saith the Jalops:
"New Jersey resident Jeff Chase was considering trading in his 1989 Mazda 929 for a new car and checked the government's FuelEconomy.gov website and it said it met the 18 MPG threshold to be considered a gas-guzzling clunker. He went back later to buy the new car only to discover the numbers had been changed and the combined mileage was now 19 MPG and therefore disqualified from the discount."
Paul at Mean Ol' Meany, someone with more time and patience than common sense, has apparently read the first 200 pages of HR3200. He learned by first hand personal experience (aka doing the research his'self) that the QAHCAA Bill makes it impossible to obtain private insurance after the bill is enacted. Here's what Paul writes:
"From HR3200, page 16, Line 11-16, says that a "Grandfathered" private insurer CANNOT enroll new people into their program after year one. So, if you are NOT in a private plan before year one is over, YOU CAN NEVER GET IN ONE. So, what does that do? It makes private insurance IMPOSSIBLE because they can NEVER sign up new clients. GET IT, MORON?
Plus add to that the fact that private insurers who DO have clients already enrolled in their plans, CAN NEVER INCREASE PREMIUMS WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT."
So essentially, HR3200 makes it impossible for private insurers to enroll new clients after one year from it's enactment date. It also disallows insurers from raising premiums without permission from the FedGov.
Joey gets all misty when he thinks about the success of the stimulus.
My successor, Joey Plugs, has an Op Ed over at the Terrorist Times. In it, he claims that as a result of quick action on the part of PeeBo and hisself, we were brought back from 'the precipice.' He claims that because of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, the sky high monthly unemployment claims of 700,000 experienced before it was enacted have plummeted. The whole basis of his piece is that without the quick action of the executive and legislative branches of government, we'd be in hell right now.
Let's examine the miracle afforded us by PeeBo and Plugs! Unemployment claims in January 2009 were 598,000 which have fallen to 467,000, effectively 22%. The overall national unemployment percentage has gone from approximately 7.5% in January 2009 to 9.5% in June 2009. A report entitled 'The Employment Situation: June 2009' states:
"The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) increased by 433,000 over the month to 4.4 million."
In fact, from January all unemployment duration measurements except the 'Less than 5 weeks' category increased. Total unemployment for this period jumped from 16.4 Million to 22.9 Million a loss of nearly 6.5 million additional jobs... So why the back patting by Joey Plugs?
Joey then goes on to explain the ARRA so that he can 'set the record straight.' If there are two things we can all agree upon, it's that Joey ain't nothin' if he ain't a straight talker and Joey speaks for everyone in the Administration! He claims that 1/3 of the 787 Billion Dollar stimulus (before interest) goes to tax cuts, and that 95% of the American public has experienced a tax cut as a result of it's passage. Question: Who in their right mind would believe that as a result of the Government spending money, the public has received a tax cut?
Let's see, the government gets its money through taxation of the citizenry. A tax cut is the government allowing me to keep the money that it would normally take as a tax. So... where exactly did this money come from? I mean it's impossible to have the government both take money from me and allow me to keep it at the same time. Those two things are mutually exclusive.
Two nuggets of truth in Joey's piece; unemployment benefits have been extended for the unemployed, and money is being spent on roads. However, he also claims that rural water systems are being improved... Has he ever been to California?! Has he ever heard of the Delta? Has he heard about the major dairy owners who have committed suicide just this year due to many economic reasons one of which being access to water?
Joey then goes on to tout the Recovery.gov website. That's be the same website that disclosed the $2 Million 2lb. ham purchase earlier this week...
See, here's the overall problem with Joey's Op Ed piece, even he doesn't believe the horsepucky he's peddling. He spends nearly the whole piece extolling the outstanding job they have done with this debacle after he told ABC that the White House had misread the economy just three short weeks ago. So first he goes out and admits they didn't know what the f#@% they were doing, then just three short weeks later SUCCESS!
Exit question: If the stimulus is working so great, why do we need another one?
Mark Steyn has a great piece over at NRO discussing the cyclical nature of warming and cooling trends which seem to occur in 30 year intervals.
"Things warmed up a bit in the decades before the late Thirties. Why? I dunno. The Versailles Treaty? The Charleston?
Then from 1940 to 1970 there was a slight cooling trend. In its wake, Lowell Ponte (who I believe is an expert climatologist and, therefore, should have been heeded) wrote his bestseller, The Cooling: Has the new ice age already begun? Can we survive?"
He then goes on to quote Media Matters who claim that the most recent cooling trend of 10 years is not part of the natural cycle of warming and cooling, but is in fact part of a larger warming trend... --wait, WHAT?! Let's see, we had a cooling trend from about 1940 to 1970. Then we had a warming trend from 1970 until about 1998, where upon it's been progressively cooling for the last 10 years. So... 30 years of cooling, 28 years of warming, then 10 years (so far) of cooling, but we are not supposed to believe that this 10 year trend is the first 10 years in the next cycle of cooling-No! It's merely a short term break from the long term warming which will melt the makeup off Hillary's face and drown us all in a molten river of Maybelline.
"I’m a natural scientist. I’m out there every day, buried up to my neck in sh**, collecting raw data. And that’s why I’m so sceptical of these models, which have nothing to do with science or empiricism but are about torturing the data till it finally confesses. None of them predicted this current period we’re in of global cooling. There is no problem with global warming. It stopped in 1998. The last two years of global cooling have erased nearly 30 years of temperature increase."
The Other McCain has a great post for us newb bloggers on how to help drive traffic. In honor of his outstanding post, and because it's an idea I can get behind, I'm offering up our first Rule #5 Sunday!
The Daily Mail offers up a post on the most beautiful politicians and some BREAKING political news. I was shocked to learn that Sarah Palin is the Vice President Elect of the United States... Hmm, learn something new every day.
I'm not sure who Sara Jean Underwood is, but I'd like to find out!
Rasmussen is reporting in a recent poll that 54% of Americans still blame George Bush for our current Economic situation... Seriously, sometimes I just want to pack it all in and hang myself by my scrotum from a tree, as I believe that would be less painful than dealing with these 54% of Americans, but I digress. In another poll, roughly the same percentage of those surveyed state that they look at the toilet paper after they wipe... coincidence?!
Help me out here... which President wanted their legacy to include the greatest increase in minority homeowners in spite of the risk of increased loan defaults? Which President's Justice Department threatened banks with investigation if they did not increase the number of home loans to at risk (read: minority) borrowers? Which President recently flushed $1.3 Trillion down the toilet?
The answer? NOT BUSH!
Which Congressional Members denied there was inherent risks in allowing Fannie May and Freddie Mac to continue the sub-prime loan insuring? Which Congressional Members got sweet heart deals from Lenders for homes for themselves? Which (gay) Congressional Member got their boyfriend a sweet executive position at one of the GSO's? Which Congressional Members recently passed a jobs killing Minimum Wage increase?
The answer? NOT REPUBLICANS!
Okay, so where and how does blame land on Bush's shoulders?
Nicholas Stephanopoulos at the Huff'nPuff tries to put words together in order to fashion sentences, but fails miserably. In his hackneyed piece he claims that conservatives not only have adopted a non-constitutional/common law approach toward the role of the judiciary, but have embraced the french revolutionary philosophy regarding judicial constraint.
Stephanopoulos writes:
...[W]hat document said that "the courts may not directly or indirectly take any part in the exercise of the legislative power," adding that "judicial functions... will alyaws remain separate from the executive functions?" Was it a proposal by President Bush's Department of Justice? Or perhaps a bill submitted by congressional Republicans to prevent "legislating from the bench?" Actually, no. It was France's famous Law on Judicial Organization, enacted at the height of the French Revolution
Pop Quiz: What major European revolution was inspired by the American Revolution? Bonus Question: Which country did Thomas Jefferson assist in writing their 'Declaration of the Rights of Man?'
That's right, FRANCE. You see, the French were not always douche bags, like they are now. At one time, they understood that rights were a gift from G_d and inalienable, just like a few pretty famous Americans. The french, after helping the United States in it's own Revolution, soon launched their own and leaders from the new Democratic Republics shared philosophies and ideals on where rights came from and how man was to be governed. All this to say, the revolutionary french shared constitutional ideologies (including judicial philosophy) with the United States. So, to insinuate that the quotes above are completely foreign to our way of governing or judicial philosophy is ignorant.
Stephanopoulos then goes on to claim that the common law method allows for judges to interpret law and legislate, or "...consult non-textual sources and take policy considerations into account in their decisions." Small problem
The problem with this claim is that the 'common law method' although practiced in the United States today is no where to be found in the enumerated powers of the Judicial Branch within United States Constitution. The Constitution is clear, the Legislative Branch is the body which proposes new law and the Judicial Branch interprets those laws.
The other flaw in this theory is that there are somehow documents crucial to the rule of law in the US which lie outside of our legal founding documents... I'm not even going to waste my breath on that one
Paul at Mean Ol' Meany has a post about his personal experience with the recently (today) raised federal minimum wage. He also has an extensive post history regarding the truth of minimum wage and it's effect on the economy and business.
The reality is that the argument for a minimum wage is ludicrous. Why is $7.50 an hour an acceptable wage, but $7.25 is not? If $7.25 is unacceptable, why stop at $7.50? Why isn't minimum wage $10/hour or $15/hour or even $1,500/hour?! Why is there an artificial floor and ceiling on the permissible lowest wage that can be paid? Questions libtards cannot answer...
This report is old, but the facts remain true, and if I weren't nearly as lazy as I am, I could link to newer studies which confirm the fact that minimum wage, and specifically raising the minimum wage kills small business and hurts the economy.
Alright!!! We got us summore CHANGE!! Now, you know this is the fault of the Republicans, right? I mean, it always is.
So, he ran on tax cuts and actually increased them and he ran on fiscal responsibility and has been the most irresponsible POTUS on spending, evah! Can we call him what he is now?! He's a lightweight pantywaist in over his head socialist, who doesn't know what the h*#k he's doin'!
Apparently some libtards have their panties in a wad over a picture of Peebo as a Witch Doctor. Even going so far as to call the picture 'racist.' Just a question: is there anything the GOP has done in the last 50 years for which the Democratics have not accused us of being racist?! Yes, it's par for the course but it needs to be pointed out wherever it rears it's ugly head. Why? Because it's the epitome of hypocrisy!
How many links can I provide to documents or statements referring to both Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell as 'house slaves?'
Learn the difference, and know it well. If you're a black republican, it's okay to be called a house slave or a ni**a, but if you're a democratic, IT'S RAAAAAACIST!
Nothing brings joy, quite like seeing the faces of defeated morons. Luckily there is a website (albeit a lefty website) that catalogs and stores pictures of libtards who are whining like the worthless idiots they are. God Bless America!
No need to thank me, its all part of the value added service that we provide here at 'I am classicaliberal and you should, too!'
This picture of Obama's new Health Care Czar brought to you by the good people at The People's Cube
I didn't waste my time watching PeeBo drone on about his post-partisaniness, or how he has so far t go on the economy because Bush didn't tell him the whole truth or how the Pork-a-palooza is such a great success. I'm sure he made some asinine statement about how his plan for Socialized Medicine, a.k.a. government health care, isn't the only thing out there and he fully intends on having a full debate. He probably said something about listening to both sides on the issue, but that he wants Congress to hurry up and git 'er done before the August recess. Did I nail it?! Yeah, I'm good like that.
Well, and I know this is going to shock you, he lied. No, seriously. When a democrat or 'progressive' tells you that they are interested in debate or looking at both sides in a political issue they are blowin' sunshine up your skirt. Don't believe me? Let's see how Teh Speekar of teh Howss Nancee Belagosi handles 'debate.'
Sooo, PeeBo says he wants debate, after he says the time for talking is over... He was agin' it before he was for it. And he says that democratics are open to ideas from both sides, but House democratics are blocking the GOP from sending out a mailer regarding health care to their constituencies... Hmm, you smell something? I live not too terribly far away from a diary, and it's a very similar smell...
Let's start things off with health care. As mentioned previously, I happen to be from the Californistan. The Republic of California has been experiencing a major budget deficit, you may have heard something about that. Recently, the Governor announced cuts to health care which will affect; the elderly, the handicapped, the poor and children. For those of you paying attention, these happen to be the folks who are dependent upon Government Funded Healthcare... But, if you ask a libtard, single payer government issued healthcare is the answer to all our problems.
Now, recently PeeBo stated that California is a model for the rest of the country. HAS HE BEEN TO CALIFORNIA?!?!?!??!?!!??!? I have-- not sure if I mentioned that... And things aren't exactly what I'd call rosy. Businesses are leaving the states in record numbers, social services are swamped, healthcare is in crisis, bot government and private. California from a business/government point-of-view is a pretty schiesty place! Obama states that CA's economy has '[kept] pace with the rest of the country, and yet they have been able to maintain their energy usage at a much lower level than the rest of the country.' Uh, no. Not even freaking close. We use proportionately less energy because people are fleeing the state!
What's the answer? PRIVATIZATION! Let's start with health care. Competition breeds lower prices, and improved services: fact. By reducing the government's current profile within the health insurance market, we can improve care to recipients. Right now health insurance pays for everything! Need to see your doctor for a routine check-up? Covered! Need to get your teeth cleaned at the Dentist? Covered! Follow me here, what if your car insurance covered your oil change? What if it covered, with a small co-pay of course, windshield wipers? Now add in a government oversight bureaucracy. How flippin' expensive you figger your insurance would be? Is it any wonder then, that your health insurance is so expensive, and so royally screwed up? The fact is you should be paying for routine visits, eye exams, teeth cleanings, etc. out of pocket. Health insurance should be there for emergencies and catastrophic care, period.
How about California, how do we fix that? Beyond several high powered charges placed along the San Andreas fault line, or removing voting rights from those who think it's the obligation of government to provide everything for everyone regardless of citizenship, I'm stuck...
I would like to suggest that we join with other reputable blogs and back Iowahawk for Car Czar. After all, he is the man with the vision who brought us the 2012 Pelosi GTxi SS/RT Sport Edition.
ZOMG!!1! You’re steam powered RC Car is eating my legs!!! Insert Terminator Skynet joke here…
Anybody out there still want to deny that abortion was championed by liberals to control the black population?! It’s called the Eugenics Movement, look it up.
And you thought the economy was getting better… Sucker! You see the real unemployment rate is far above the 9.5% that the media is fond of throwing out. Unfortunately a part time job counts as a job, and therefore those folks are not counted in the unemployment reports. Tell me, if you went from a full time salaried position to an hourly part time job, are you better off than you were before?
A) Yes, you would be better off. You don’t know what it was like working in that cardboard shredding facility! B) You would be approximately the same, cause Mervyns didn’t pay managers that much anyway. C) Hellz to tha no! It’d totally suck, y’all D) I… am… job E) None of the above
Another number that seems to be tossed about lightly is the unemployment claims. Recently US Garbage and World Whatever reported that initial unemployment claims dropped, touting it as a good economic indicator. The problem is IT’S NOT! Why are unemployment claims a poor economic indicator? Well, because it does not account for folks who were in full time positions who are now working part time, or the self employed. Remember all those real estate agents that were running around making a million bucks in commission every week? They were/are self employed, baby. They are not eligible for unemployment and are therefore not counted in the new claims numbers.
For whatever unknown reason, you've stumbled across my bloggywebnet. Whether you were referred by a friend, or you were just dumb enough to pass by and gaze upon the full glory of this masterpiece of the web, I am truly sorry. There is no doubt after visiting this blog, your life will never be the same. You will most likely be enlightened, educated, inspired or you'll just run out into the street in front of a car. Either way, that's what I'm here for. Thanks for stopping by.
I'll post here as little as humanly possible, and you'll like it. I'll allow you to leave comments, up until I don't like them any more. Then, I'll delete them, or change them to relate what you really meant to say.
