CA Deficit $41 Billion, So Who Wants a Raise?

While everyone else in the state is dealing with unemployment or severely cut wages, including many state employees who were forced to take unpaid days off, the CA Assembly is handing out raises! Looks like I chose the wrong career path, how about you? From an article posted at KMJ580:

"Here is a list of California lawmakers who increased pay for their staff members between January and June [2009]. Explanations are included where lawmakers chose to comment.

ASSEMBLY:

Assemblyman Joel Anderson, R-La Mesa

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $1,500 to $2,279. Anderson's office said the staffer went from part-time to full-time and moved to a new position.

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles

_ Three staffers whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $17,745 to $19,593.

Democratic Caucus

_ Three staffers whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $15,756 to $17,696.

Assemblyman Jim Beall, D-San Jose

_ Four staffers whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $26,199 to $27,510.

Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan, D-Alamo:

_ One staffer whose monthly pay rose from $1,666 to $2,916.

Assemblywoman Anna Caballero, D-Salinas

_ Six staffers whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $17,756 to $19,278.

Caballero said through frugal spending, she was able to reward staffers who have taken on extra responsibilities, several of whom were hired at below-average pay. Five of the six still earn $40,000 or less.

"It did not seem excessive given that we had taken the cuts that we were asked to take. ... It's also important to keep good staff,'' she said.

Assemblyman Wes Chesbro, D-Arcata

_ Three staffers whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $16,790 to $18,387.

Assemblyman Joe Coto, D-San Jose

_ Two staffers who received promotions, increasing their cumulative monthly pay from $3,950 to $4,740.

Assemblyman Hector De La Torre, D-South Gate

_ Six staffers whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $27,484 to $29,170.

Assemblyman Mike Duvall, R-Yorba Linda

_ One staffer's pay rose from $2,000 to $2,917. Duvall's office said she went from part-time to full-time and the office is still down in staff.

Assemblyman Mike Eng, D-Monterey Park

_ Two staffers whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $7,561 to $8,304.

Assemblywoman Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa

_ Five employees whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $20,124 to $22,401.

Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles

_ Seven employees whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $40,157 to $43,356.

Assemblyman Ted Gaines, R-Granite Bay

_ Two employees whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $4,833 to $5,798. Gaines' office said both employees have taken on new duties and more hours.

Assemblywoman Cathleen Galgiani, D-Tracy

_ One employee who received a promotion, increasing his monthly pay from $4,600 to $4,825.

Assemblyman Curt Hagman, R-Chino Hills

_ Three staffers whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $6,731 to $7,419. Hagman's office said all three are working extra hours.

Assemblyman Isadore Hall, D-Compton

_ One staff member received a promotion, increasing his monthly pay from $4,583 to $5,133.

Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael

_ Three staffers whose cumulative monthly pay increased from $25,507 to $26,782.

Assemblyman Steve Knight, R-Lancaster

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $1,500 to $3,000. Knight's office said the employee started at halftime and moved to full-time.

Assemblyman Tony Mendoza, D-Artesia

_ Two employees whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $13,918 to $13,989. Mendoza said both are doing more work after other employees left and were not replaced.

Assemblyman Bill Monning, D-Monterey

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $3,378 to $3,716. The employee now works for Assemblywoman Alyson Huber, who took over chairmanship of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee.

Assemblyman Pedro Nava, D-Santa Barbara

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $6,122 to $6,734. Nava's office said the employee was promoted from senior field representative to principal assistant and took on additional work when another employee left.

Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, D-La Canada Flintridge

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $2,120 to $3,095. Portantino's office said he went from part-time to full-time.

Assembly Republican Caucus

_ Two employees whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $6,667 to $7,125. Raises occurred while Assemblyman Mike Villines, R-Clovis, was minority leader. Villines' office said the employees took on additional duties when two higher paid staffers left and were not replaced.

Assemblyman Ira Ruskin, D-Redwood City

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $2,917 to $3,063.

Assemblywoman Lori Saldana, D-San Diego

_ Five employees whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $22,065 to $25,478. One employee was promoted from legislative assistant to senior field representative.

Sergeant-at-Arms (Capitol Security)

_ Twelve employees whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $43,956 to $46,740. One employee's duties changed to working for the Rules Committee, which also oversees the Sergeant-at-Arms office.

Assemblyman Jose Solorio, D-Santa Ana

_ Three employees whose cumulative monthly pay rose from $7,131 to $7,488.

Assemblywoman Audra Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $6,714 to $8,393. Strickland's office said the chief of staff and some other employees shifted from part-time to full-time based on legislative activity, such as the budget, to save money: "That's part of the assemblywoman's budget plan _ we have various staffers who come in and out,'' said Rondi Guthrie, district director for Strickland.

Assemblyman Alberto Torrico, D-Fremont

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $3,200 to $3,429.

Two Assembly employees moved from the Chief Clerk's office to new jobs with Assembly members, increasing their cumulative monthly pay from $5,600 to $5,880.

SENATE:

Sen. Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $4,348 to $4,493.

Sen. Ron Calderon,

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $5,060 to $5,412.

Alicia Trost, a spokeswoman for Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said the following raises were due to employees working increased hours or returning to regular hours after being on leave:

Sen. David Cogdill, R-Modesto:

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $10,078 to $11,540.

Sen. Robert Dutton, R-Rancho Cucamonga

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $1,646 to $3,292.

Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth, R-Temecula

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $2,750 to $4,604.

Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $1,424 to $2,652.

Revenue & Taxation Committee

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $5,674 to $11,348

Senate Office of Research

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $9,416 to $10,594.

Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento

_ One employee whose monthly pay rose from $1,810 to $2,424."

In some Assembly Members' future, I foresee unemployment...

Can't believe I have to...

Glenn, you're obviously an idiot, so I am going to use small words here to help you understand it:

Al Gore lied and undermined our war effort, Mike Huckabee is disagreeing with a US President dictating an ally's domestic policy. One of these is arguably treason. Here's a hint, it ain't Huckabee.

Damn it, you made me defend Mike Huckabee... I hate that guy!

Codgers Revolt!

Uh oh, looks like AARP is bleeding customers... Maybe it's because of their inattentiveness and refusal to listen at a town hall meeting where the speaker explicitly said, "we called [this] a listening session" and "we want to hear from you..." Maybe it's because the AARP claims it is a non-partisan organization while simultaneously hiring a libtard lunatic marxist supporting douchebag as a spokesman.

Or maybe, just maybe, it's because they support stupid political measures opposed by a majority of Americans.

If we really want to understand why AARP members are cancelling their memberships, we should ask one. So, how about it Paul?

AARP=FAIL!

SAVE ME, GOVERNMENT!

Annette Sowder, victim of her poor choices

Last week, here in the Central Valley, Annette Sowders was murdered along with her mother by her estranged husband, Robert Dale Fuller. Fuller broke into the Sowders residence early on the morning of August 8th. He fatally shot Annette and her mother Sharon Sue Canon in front of his two childern. Sowder's 8 year old daughter called the police and identified her father as the party responsible for the shooting death of her mother and grandmother.

After hearing about cases like this, the first natural response after sorrow for the family is 'how did this happen?' Unfortunately, it's very easy to place blame on those around us, and difficult to lame blame at the feet of the victim. Annette Sowders is dead because of the actions of Annette Sowders. Harsh?! Taken from the Bakersfield Californian article regarding the murders:

"She went to court just last week to maintain a restraining order against him. She called the sheriff's department when he showed up at her home in Oildale. She even had him arrested last Tuesday for violating the restraining order."

However, Fuller was still able to get to her. Some in local media have blamed the Sheriff's Department, and judicial system in general for not keeping Mr. Fuller behind bars when he proved to be a danger to himself and those around him. Others lay blame not only at the feet of law enforcement but at the feet of Annette Sowders for not seeing the warning signs. From Lois Henry's column:

"In the [previous] marriage dissolution order listing who would got what (including the horse that ultimately introduced him to Sowders through her stables), the judge mandated that Fuller couldn't have his guns for one year. He had to give them all -- and he had an arsenal -- up to the Sheriff's Department.

That's where they stayed until he filed the paperwork to retrieve them in early 2001.

That paperwork was filled out for him by Annette Sowders, according to her signature.

On March 5, 2001, Fuller was allowed to collect all of his dozen or so rifles, shotguns and handguns, including his Remington 870 Wingmaster, a 12-gauge shotgun."

That 12-guage shotgun is the assumed murder weapon.

Lois Henry is moving the right direction, but still falls short in the primary causal reason for the death of Annette Sowders. What is that you ask? Annette Sowders did not own a gun. Sure, sure call me a gun freak, whatever, I'm from California and get called worse daily by my friends. When there is a person as dangerous as Robert Dale Fuller in your life, and the relationship hits the skids, that's when you take a drive down to your local gun store of choice, and pick up a hand gun. Take the steps to train yourself and file for a CCW permit. That old adage, unfortunately, once again proved to be true: When seconds count, the police are minutes away.

Did law enforcement fail Annette Sowders? The jury is out on that one. They definitely did not deal with a violent man in the manner which I would have desired. He was able to bail out of jail for violating a restraining order 8 times within an 11 day period, this is unacceptable. However, Annette knew the type of man he was and still chose to live with her family unprotected. Blaming everyone but the victim in this case does nothing to help potential future victims empower themselves. There is one person responsible for your safety, YOU!

As we are consumed in the debate over farming out our health care coverage to the government, do yourself a favor and don't farm out your security.

Jim Costa, MIA

HotAir has a post up at their place, as does Michelle Malkin, that got me wondering... Where in the world is Jim Costa?

Where is Jim Costa, and why wont he meet with his constituents? His office claims that he has not taken a position on the Health Care legislation. Unfortunately, he has not given his constituents in Kern, Tulare and Fresno counties a chance to voice their opinion, either for or against the legislation. Why?! What is Jim Costa afraid of? There are existing Town Hall meetings which Jim Costa can piggy back in order to stake out his position for his constituents, but instead he is AWOL.

Who is Jim Costa working for? When he was running for CA20, he claimed that it was for those living in the 20th Congressional District of California, however, when those he represents want to meet with him to discuss legislation which he will vote on, he is no where to be found. Jim Costa claims to be a Blue Dog Democrat on his congressional web page. If this is true, then Costa's only option when it comes to Health Care reform, if he wishes to be reelected to represent CA20, is to vote 'No.'

If you are living in the 20th Congressional District of California, be sure to contact Representative Costa to let him know how you feel about Health Care Reform. Even if you're not a constituent of CA20, contact Jim Costa's office to inquire as to why he doesn't feel it necessary to have a town hall meeting.

Fresno Office
Suite 940
855 M Street
Fresno, CA 93721
Phone:559-495-1620
Fax:559-495-1027

Bakersfield District Office
2700 M Street
Suite 225
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Phone:661-869-1620
Fax: 661-869-1027

Washington, DC Office
1314 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone:202-225-3341
Fax: 202-225-9308

Moderates: Liberals With Commitment Issues

Political Moderate

From the "Duh!" files; moderates are liberals with commitment issues. Wanna fight about it?! Let's go!

Yes, ModerateVoice, you can promote posts from other blogs and call them 'Guest Posts' claiming that the views are those of the author alone and do not represent those of your site. Then again, why the eff would you promote a blog post with which you totally disagree? Protesting Whole Foods becuase the CEO took out an OP ED denouncing government take over of health care sounds anything but moderate... I mean, by definition, wouldn't a moderate do something like be angry, while still shopping at WF? Or maybe, shop at WF half as often. You could even get as dramatic as politely letting the manager on duty know that you disagree with John Mackey's piece. However, boycott is decidedly drastic for those who define themselves as:

"a person who is [not extreme, excessive, or intense] in opinion or [is] opposed to extreme views and actions"

The reality is that moderates are soft. Too soft to take a hardcore stance on anything. Therefore, they are weak, and easy prey for the villainous lions on the left (/melodramatic prose).

Let me paint a picture for you here. Water runs to the lowest point. Moderates will seek reconciliation above principle, becuase, by definition they don't have principles. Principles would be intense opinions, duh. Therefore, Moderates are going to side with whoever is the loudest voice in an attempt to appease. Who is the loudest group of whiny beeotches on the planet? Pregressicuvus Moronicus aka the modern left.

Moderate = Libtard.

(UPDATED) Rule #5 Sunday

UPDATE! Glory be, I have arrived!!! I should hang up my keyboard now, because I'll never ascend beyond this bloggy milestone! With great thanks to Smitty!

---

In honor of the most important pillar of blogging, today's feature is Summer Altice. She's been a huge help around here the last few days. I was having the worst time finding a few of my favorite belongings, and good ol' Summer was kind enough to come through and connect me with them. Just look!

Hey, Summer! You found my belt!

And my cowboy hat! Well, looks like we're ready to hit the road. Wait... where did I park the car?

Hey! You're way better than My Little Reminder! Now all we need is something to eat.

That's very generous of you to offer me your apple, but I was thinking something a little more greasy spoon, you know what I mean?

Perfect!

You know, Summer was a joy to have around this week. It really was a shame I had to fire her though... Do you have any idea how hard it is to get ass cheek dents out of a classic mustang hood?! Oh well, there's always next week!

(UPDATED) In Case You Didn't Know

UPDATE- Andy and ChristinaJade share their political leanings! Also, I've adjusted where a few folks lie on the political spectrum. Let me know your thoughts!



---

Lifted from Conservative Cotton

I align with the political 'Far Right.' I am one of those nut jobs your President warned you about.

My Political Views
Classicaliberal is a far-right social moderate. He is also a neo-con and culturally conservative. Classicaliberal's scores (from 0 to 10):
Economic issues:+8.78 right
Social issues:+0.19 libertarian
Foreign policy:+4.52 neo-con
Cultural identification:+4.15 conservative

Political Spectrum Quiz

However, as most of us know, the political spectrum as illustrated above is a misnomer. It should look more like this:

Some notes:

• Obama is the most radical leftist President America has known.
• Reagan is placed where he was philosophically at the end of his Presidency. He started off with a much more aggressive stance on the size and role of Government (i.e. he ran on eliminating the Dept. of Education).
• Notice the little difference between Johnny Mac and Billy Jeff.
• Ron Paul is an isolationist who wants to repeal the Federal Reserve. In my limited study on currently serving politicians, he would be the most 'anarchist' candidate around.
• I believe I align closely with where Reagan was as a candidate. Less government, specifically in the form of eliminating the Dept. of Education and scaling back the role of the Dept. of Engery, however, I believe that some government involvement is required in our monetary supply. That's why I'm a little closer to center than Ron Paul.
  
• America is a center right country, thus the big blue dot. Most Americans are content with the amount of government currently, and the country leans just a little liberal on social issues.
• This graph clearly indicates that the whole 'Right Wing Nazi' thing is a farce. Nazi is the German word for Nationalist Socialist Party. Nationalists and Socialists are in favor of complete governmental control, which falls on the far left of the political spectrum. It is impossible to be politically conservative and a nazi, or fascist.
  

Where do you fall? Let me know in the comments below. Where do you think the Founders would fall on this list? Feel free to download the image and MS Paint your name in where you feel you belong. Email your graph back to me. If I receive enough of a response, I'll post the results later this week. Happy painting!

Rule #5 Wednesday Link Dump

Rebecca is going to help me introduce this post...

So, I blog about things that interest me. Sometimes those things happen to be major news items, however, usually that just lasts for the first few days of the news story, then I'm over it. Gotta say, everything that's up at Memeorandum has been up for more than 48 hours... BORING. For that reason, I am going to try out 'Alternative Link Dump Day!' We'll see how that works out...

Super Hero!
Social Media FAIL!
Real White Trash Wednesday!
How Not to meet girls at a costume party.
Internet Protocol Awesome!
Doubleyoo Tee Eff?!
Parent WIN!
Ingenuity!
Creepy Weird.
Blue Beer!
Sweet new(old) conspiracy of the day!

Something I missed? Let me know in the comments!

Things You'll Never See In This Blog... Probably

After having cruised the web for awhile now, I've decided there are a few things that I resolve to never put on my blog, and some things which I will never put on my blog, again. Below, I've compiled a list of those things. If I happen to link to your blog, don't take it personally, but do answer me this: Doubleyoo Tee Eff?

A picture of my feet.
A picture of this travesty of human development.
Nekkid Men. WTF was I thinking?!
Weird fetishes... Get that checked out!
Stories of emasculated men, catering to women like this!
I will not engage in snitching on my fellow citizens, even if they are 'mouth breather(s)'.
Double Entendre... you have no idea the google search results that redirect to your site. No, I'm not kidding.
Tales of what my brother had to do to be the first one to get an iPhone... Family, huh?
Brag about how much better my desktop theme is than your Mac, loser.
Brag about how awesome my car is.
Video of my chief of staff in drag.
Video of one of my favorite comedian's in drag.
Stories about how I toyed with internet scammers until they curled up in a ball and cried for the vile poisonous womb that brought them forth. No one can do it better than this guy, anyway.
Pictures of diseases...

This is 'I'm Classicaliberal And You Should, Too's' promise to our valued customers*. Anything I left out? Be sure to let me know in the comments below.

*Void where prohibited, see dealer for details. Tax licensing, document and DMV fees extra. Must take ownership by 6/6/06.

Drag Queen Loses Cool, Only To Find Out Question Mistranslated

I totally LOL'ed when I read this over at Jake Tapper's blog. If you haven't seen the original video of the freak out, HotAir has it at their place.

The translator apparently misunderstood the question from the Congolese student who was attempting to ask how President Obama felt about the Chinese somethingorother. Anyway, when it was translated into English, the translator asked how President Clinton felt, 'through the mouth of Mrs. Clinton.' At 0:33 is when her head begins to spin and vomit starts shooting out. It's great. I miss the old days, you know when we had a professional Secretary of State... sigh.

Things I'm Entitled To, Because:

Entitlements. There are two intrinsic reactions to that word. If you're a liberal, it's about justice, equality and sticking it to the man. If you're a conservative, you just cringed. Entitlements, in this day and age, are government funded programs which provide some 'service' to a certain segment of the population. The reality is, if you look at the 2009 Federal Budget, entitlements combined take up more than any other part of that 2.9 Trillion Dollar disaster. Viewing the budget, and ruminating on what this country can do to better care for it's citizenry, short of stealing a higher amount of tax dollars from those who actually pay to fund such programs, I decided to take a look at the crux of the argument on both sides. The root of the solution for one side, just happens to be the root of the problem, as far as the other side is concerned. I speak, of course, about the government.

Conservatives (and I'll lump libertarians in with them) view the massive bureaucracy and burdensome regulations and redtape that inevitably come along with said bureaucracy as the root of the overriding cost issue at the heart of the 'health care crisis.' We believe that with the lifting of the heavy handed involvement of said entity, the free market and economies of scale will right the ballooning costs of health care coverage, and ultimately drive insurance cost lower. This coupled with returning health insurance to it's rightful state; catastrophic care provision, will solve 99% of the issues that people have with today's insurance providers. Leftists, on the other hand, believe that only by increasing the government's involvement can a level playing field be ensured, and thus cost and care can be controlled.

Thinking over this issue, I struggled to comprehend how government involvement in any issue can simplify it or make it cheaper. It's obvious to me that if higher government involvement in any area is needed, it's in the area of entertainment movie making. If all were right in the world, Tom Selleck and Gary Sinise would be the most cast leading men ever, and George Lucas and Sean Penn would be hungry and penniless tag-teaming at the Sunset Exit off the 405 with a 'Will Direct for Food' sign.

Can someone please explain to me why we're not entitled to food? Why aren't we entitled to shelter? Why aren't we entitled to clothing? Why aren't we entitled to a freezer full of Filet Mignon? Why aren't we entitled to land? Why aren't we entitled to a mate? Why aren't we entitled to a car? Why aren't we entitled to a Slap Chop? Why are we not entitled to free internet? Why aren't we entitled to iPhones? Why aren't some of us entitled to get this point?

So since the universe is not just, and entitlements seem to rule the day, here is a short list of items to which I am entitled, in no particular order:

2010 Aston Martin DBS
Kate Beckinsale (suck it, Paul!)
A 40 acre estate overlooking Lake Tahoe on the California side
Two American Mastiffs named Zeus and Apollo
George Clooney's shack on Lake Como, Italy
A G650 Business Jet
A Personal Chef
A time traveling DeLorean
The Wynn Hotel and Casino
Tool
Peju Province Winery
The Batmobile

There'll be more to follow don't you fret none. In this new era of entitlement, what is it you're entitled to? Let me know in the comments.

My Apologies

More than likely, copyrighted by Disney

Unfortunately, due to my extrablogging activites, posting here has slowed. So to the both of you that read, my apologies. However, I am making a renewed attempt to get some content up, so I can continue my personal delusion that I am, in fact, a 'real live' blogger. That being said, read on.

Much ado has been made of Sarah Palin's recent statement regarding 'death panels' and nationalized health care in general. In fact, some angry momma dog with a dark coat seems to be beside herself over the statements!

Hyperbole seems to rule the day on both sides of the isle regarding health care. The reality is that health care is no more of a right than a car, a home, or food for that matter. Why are libtards aiming so high? Work your way into nationalizing programs! Food seems to be a pretty simple one to me. Is there any more basic right than food? I mean, its obvious to me that just by virtue of me breathing, someone owes me a Whopper with no cheese and extra pickles. And make it quick, please.

The fact that you are alive guarantees you nothing. Everything that you desire must be bought and paid for, whether by the sweat of your brow, or through the exchange of money (earned by the sweat of your brow). Were this 1830, libtards would be arguing that every American has the right to a slave. Because... because... well, cause they want one, that's why. As much as I love the culture, and the technology that we enjoy today, it seems to have damned us by moving us farther away from the society that understood implicitly that through great toil comes great reward. Now, it's not a question of how great the reward is going to be, merely when the Government is going to step in and hand it to me.

Damn shame...

Second Hand Smoke Kills.... Me. Seriously, who comes up with this schtick?!

As I enjoyed a nice Padron 1964 Anniversary, I thought there's not enough being said about smoker's rights. So, I'll say it. Read on!

Now that we’ve dispensed with the pleasantries, let’s move on. Put out that light! No, really. If anybody is unsure of the Nanny State’s intentions toward your smoking habit, all one has to do is take a look at my home state, the Hippies Republic of California. I live in a town of 350,000+ people and can think of 3 establishments where it is permissible to smoke indoors. I dare not mention any names because, it might be permissible, but the legality is definitely in question! The attack on smoking rights takes a two pronged approach health of the individual and second hand smoke exposure.


Let’s end the second hand smoke myth, right now. There is no risk to those who are not already predisposed to lung diseases. Would you be shocked to find out that the Government manipulates data to produce a desired result? Me either. Were you aware that the United Nations World Health Organization (that’d be UNOWHO for you Clue fans) produced a report in 1993 stating that second hand smoke might actually have a protective effect toward many of the diseases associated with smoking? Of course not, because it doesn’t fit the template. Now that we’ve established that Second Hand Smoke carries few if any ill health effects, the only prong left in the war on smoking is the health of the individual. To which, I answer; it’s none of your damn business, period. As long as health care remains free-ish from government intervention, and I still pay for the service I receive, it’s no one’s business but my own (and my family) what I choose to do with my pack of Marlboro Reds… The point here is as long as health care remains privatized. Once health care goes to the single payer, public option, you’re ability to smoke will go away, period. If you haven’t already, check out Crowder’s video on Canadian health care. It’s long, but worth the watch. It summarizes what our fight is against quite succinctly.

FireDogLake, Libtard Sewerhole

One of the leading stories within the last 24 hours at Memeorandum was this post by Mike Stark over at FDL. Mike attended a recent YAF event where Newt Gingrich was the featured speaker, and found the two young conservatives who produced the 'Young Cons' rap video. Admittedly, I am not a huge fan of rap, and this isn't the greatest representation of conservatism or rap, however, they had the ballz to get on the interwebbynets and post thier beliefs, so bravo. Anyhow, Mike Stark begins to question the two gentlemen about Reagan's legacy stating that he was 'sorry to put [them] on the spot like this,' but justifying it by stating that the two have 'taken on a very public role.'

Stark asked the following questions of the Young Cons:

• Did you know that Reagan doubled the Social Security Tax? It was at 6% and he took it to 12?
• Did you know that Jimmy Carter didn't give an inch to 'those Iranian bastards' who took the American hostages, refused to negotiate? What he did do is send in some helecopters that got lost in a sand storm, kind of like the sand storm in Iraq that slowed our progress right in the beginning. On the other hand, Regan traded arms for hostages with the Iranians. Did you guys know about-?
• Did you know that he bailed out of Lebanon? I spent four years in the Marines, he kind of bailed out of Lebanon, you know, after, you know, 280 some of our 'Devil Dogs' got blown up. Do you think that- does that improve or diminish his image in your view?
• Do you think Barack Obama is in a 'terrible time' in Iraq and he should pull us out of Iraq as soon as he can to get us out of that terrible [crosstalk]?
• Why didn't you guys join, just out of curiosity, why didn't you join the military?
• What did you think was more important than serving your country?

So, as we've done before, let's analyze the questions and posit the answers that should have been given and would have, had the Young Cons known that they were going to get ambushed at the YAF event.

Reagan doubled the Social Security Tax from 6% to 12%.
The question makes it seem as if on the morning of January 20, 1981 the Social Security Tax rate was 6.0% and by the morning of January 21, 1981 Reagan had doubled it to 12.0%. Unfortunately, that just isn't the case. Looking at this chart we can see that in 1981 when Reagan took office the total rate of contribution from Employees and Employers, each to Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance and Hospital Insurance combined was at 6.65%. The rate of contribution from the self employed to Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance and Hospital Insurance combined was at 9.3%. When Reagan left office in 1989, the Employee/Employer rate had risen to 7.51% and Self-Employed rate had risen to 15.02%, neither considered a doubling. Here is another chart for comparison.
Something liberals tend to forget when going after Reagan is that during his entire Presidency, the congress was controlled by Democrats. Even though he won with a large majority of the electorate voting for him in '80 and in '84, Reagan's policies still had to pass through the Democratic controlled congress for approval. I can't remember anyone claiming that Reagan never raised taxes, as a matter of fact, he raised taxes in a few areas.
However, Reagan was also able to cut taxes in several other areas, most notably corporate tax rates. We can see here what the result of those tax cuts have been.

Reagan traded arms for hostages with Iran
That's right, Reagan himself handed Mahmoud Ahmadinnerjacket the keys to a hummer, 1,000,000 lbs. of C4 and the triggering device for a nuclear device. Or not... That insinuation is patently false and intellectually dishonest. After a long investigation by Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, it was never proven that Reagan even knew about let alone authorized the arms sales to Iran. This, of course, has come to be known as the Iran Contra. Certain individuals within the Defense Department authorized the sale of military weapons to Iran in order to help secure the release of 6 US hostages being held by Hezbollah. A portion of the monies generated from the sales of these weapons was diverted to fund anti-Sandinista and anti-communist rebels, or Contras, in Nicaragua. So Reagan did not trade weapons for hostages. As to the Jimmy Carter thing, what can I say that hasn't already been said. Arguably, if it weren't for him turning his back on the Shah, Iranian riots never would have taken place and the US Embassy in Tehran never would have been over run leading to the (separate) hostage crisis in Iran.

Reagan 'bailed out' of Lebanon after the Marine Barracks Bombing, In Beirut.
Here is Reagan in his own words on why we were in Lebanon to start with:

"The purpose of having our troops and those of the other three nations in Beirut was to help keep the peace and to free the Lebanese army to go after the various militias and warlords who were terrorizing the country. We never had the intention of getting involved in Lebanon's civil war. For a while, our policy seemed to be working. There was genuine peace on the streets of Beirut. Still, as we were learning, the situation in Beirut was much more difficult and complex than we initially believed."

In fact, the Syrians were informed that the Marine presence in Beirut was defensive in nature. After the attack on the US Marines, Ronald Reagan authorized retaliatory attacks against enemy artillery points. Here is Reagan in his own words on that event:

"Although there was some resistance from Cap and the Joint Chiefs over whether we should retaliate, I told him to give the order for an air strike against the offending antiaircraft batteries. We had previously let the Syrians know that our reconnaissance operations in support of the marines were only defensive in nature. Our marines were not adversaries in the conflict, and any offensive act directed against them would be replied to. The following morning, more than two dozen navy aircraft carried out the mission. One crewman was killed and another captured by the Syrians. Our planes subsequently took out almost a dozen Syrian antiaircraft and missile-launching sites, a radar installation, and an ammo dump. When the Syrians fired again at one of our reconnaissance aircraft, I gave the order to fire the sixteen-inch guns of the battleship New Jersey on them. Two days later, we had a new cease-fire in Lebanon, a result, I'm sure, of the pressure of the long guns of the New Jersey..."

And finally, here is Reagan on the decision to pull the Marines out of Lebanon:

"As 1984 began, it was becoming clearer that the Lebanese army was either unwilling or unable to end the civil war into which we had been dragged reluctantly. It was clear that the war was likely to go on for an extended period of time. As the sniping and shelling of their camp continued, I gave an order to evacuate all the marines to anchored off Lebanon. At the end of March, the ships of the Sixth Fleet and the marines who had fought to keep peace in Lebanon moved on to other assignments. We had to pull out. By then, there was no question about it: Our policy wasn't working. We couldn't stay there and run the risk of another suicide attack on the marines. No one wanted to commit our troops to a full-scale war in the middle East. But we couldn't remain in Lebanon and be in the war on a halfway basis, leaving our men vulnerable to terrorists with one hand tied behind their backs."

The insinuation, again, here by Mike Stark is that we were attacked and Reagan immediately ordered the withdrawal, and the US left with it's tail between it's legs. In fact, the original attack was on October 23, 1983 and the order for withdrawal wasn't given until February 7, 1984, three and half months later.

Should Barack Obama pull US troops out of Iraq.
Mike attempts to draw a parallel between the circumstances of Lebanon 1983 and Iraq 2009, a comparison that is murky at best. The Marines had been stationed in Beirut as part of an international peace keeping force, something liberals love, and to free the Lebanese Army to do battle with the PLO. Our involvement in Iraq was to dispose the despotic murderous tyrant Saddam Hussein. A military presence in Iraq must be maintained until such time as the Iraqi government and military can take over the daily security concerns for the fledgling democracy. For the United States to pull out before said time could possibly result in a massive civil war, or lead to an invasion by a more powerful neighbor, further destabilizing the region. The Marine presence in Lebanon was merely defensive in nature and their presence ultimately was inconsequential to the security of the government as a whole. The force of 800 marines were part of a larger Multi-National Force assigned to cover the evacuation of Syrian troops and PLO fighters from Beirut.
Different mission, different stakes.

Why didn't the Young Cons enlist and serve in the Military? What was more important to them than serving the country?
The beautiful thing about the United States Military is that it is an all volunteer force, and no one can be compelled to serve. Each person has their own reasons for why they choose to, or not to enlist and serve in the military. However, an individual's viewpoint on political matters cannot and should not be discounted because of their involvement or lack thereof in the military. Where the hell would Barack Obama be as POTUS if his views were discounted as a result of him choosing not to serve in the military? As a Marine, Mike has the right to ask these two why they did not serve, but again their choice to serve, or not to serve should have no bearing on the validity of their political philosophy.

Overall, I think it was bullshit for Mike to grab these guys coming out of a speech by Newt Gingrich and put them on the spot regarding some political history, most of which occurred before these guys entered grade school. His justification for putting them on the spot is worthless... Using his reasoning, these guys should be Obama experts, and ready to give a defense of the $1.3 trillion stimulus package and his attendance at Reverend Wright's church for 20 years.

As an aside, the Young Cons can't be any more than 26 years old, which would place them being born in 1983. Do you have a real good grasp on the President or policies that were in place the year that you were born, or the first 6 years of your life? Can you be a vocal proponent of a political philosophy, or a fan of an individual without knowing all the details on their life? I certainly hope so, otherwise there is no explanation for all the Bill Clinton fans running around the world...

64 Years Ago; US Drops Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima

I've already seen sites around the web chastising the US for it's use of nuclear weapons against the Empire of Japan, calling the acts cowardly and unconscionable. I've also seen some sites that are mourning the loss of Japanese life. What I haven't seen nearly enough of is praise of the military commanders and the Commander in Chief for choosing to use a weapon that would save American lives. People are quick to point out the 70,000-80,000 lives that were lost as a result of the initial blast, and the 70,000 more that would die as a result of the exposure, however, few cite the estimated 1,000,000 casualties that the US anticipated suffering as a result of an invasion on the Japanese homeland.
Bombing population centers was standard operating procedure during WWII, practiced by the Germans, British, United States and yes, even the Japanese. It is an unfortunate side effect of war that civilians are killed and it stands a testament to the US military and weapons developers that civilian casualties have been minimized to the effect that they are now.
Military commanders and the President of the United States were faced with the very real prospect of having to invade the Japanese homeland. When casualty and death estimates were worked up by top commanders and the Department of War, numbers for US soldiers ranged from 125,000 to 4,000,000. These deaths in addition to the already suffered 400,000+ troop deaths from the beginning of the war.
The answer to this situation presented itself in the form of two atomic bombs, results of the top secret Manhattan Project. Targeted for destruction were Hiroshima and Nagasaki. From teh Wikipedia:

Hiroshima was described as "an important army depot and port of embarkation in the middle of an urban industrial area. It is a good radar target and it is such a size that a large part of the city could be extensively damaged. There are adjacent hills which are likely to produce a focussing effect which would considerably increase the blast damage. Due to rivers it is not a good incendiary target."

Hiroshima had escaped earlier bombing raids by allied forces so it was seen as a blank canvas upon which to review the effectiveness of the experimental weapon. Moreover, the goal was to gain the greatest psychological effect against Japan and create a very real example for the Japanese nation and the rest of the world of the immense power of the new weapon that the United States possessed.
The order was given, and on August 6, 1945 'Little Boy' was dropped from the B-29 Enola Gay at an altitude of 32,330'. The bomb took 57 seconds to fall to the predetermined height of 2,000' where it self-detonated resulting in the worlds first nuclear attack against a hostile nation.
Unfortunately, the Japanese command did not surrender at once, and a second bomb was ultimately dropped on Nagasaki, an arms manufacturing and port city to the southwest of Hiroshima.
Somewhere between 125,000 and 4,000,000 American lives were saved on that day, and by that decision. I regret that the Japanese allowed the war to get to the point that we had to drop these bombs on their homeland, but I do not regret the lives saved as a result of their use.
God Bless the United States, and God Bless the men who had to make that fateful decision.

¿Puede usted decir SMOKIN'?

I don't have the patience to translate that for you.  Go look it up yourself on babelfish... The following however, needs no translation. For your enjoyment, via Flabber, Ana Beatriz Barros!

¡Caliente!

Please take the time to comment!

How To: Win A Debate Without Using Facts

Okay, maybe the title was a little misleading, because there's no way using this formula that Libtards are going to win a debate. Hell, the memo tells them not to get into a debate to start with. See, right here, rule number 1:

Do not debate on their “policy” points. Remember, they are seeking a platform to distort the truth about
reform by making health care about abortion, rationing, euthanasia, etc. Rather than try to reply with the truth
(which won’t move them anyway) we should respond with our message and at every turn re-focus the agenda on
communicating with the Member of Congress.

You should read the rest of the instructions for a good laugh. I would also recommend it for those of you who are planning to attend any recess town hall's put on by your representatives, just so you're up on the left's tactics.

Favorite quote from the instruction manual:

Remember, these Members need cover and they are
getting beaten up by right wing zealots in these meetings.

These members of congress are lying and attempting to force through a highly unpopular health care bill, so give 'em cover!

Rep. Gerry Connolly says Freshman Dem Assaulted?

Libtard attacks on citizens concerned over the nationalization of health care took a step in a new direction today. NoThink Progress is reporting that Rep. Gerry Connolly says a Freshman Democrat recently was physically assaulted at a local event.

"As lobbyist-run groups encourage conservative activists to “rattle” members of Congress at local town hall events, Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA), the president of the freshman Democratic class has revealed that “at least one freshman Democrat” has already been “physically assaulted at a local event.” Connolly warned that conservative groups had taken things to a “dangerous level“"

Connolly goes on to attack Fox News for inciting the violence. The post links to a Roll Call article which is on the pay side of the website, something I do not have access to. When doing a Google search for the terms 'Gerry Connolly' and 'assaulted' I came up with several blog posts and articles about the story, but everyone of the posts linked back to NoThink Progress. I was unable to find a police report or information stating that Rep. Connolly pressed charges against the individual.

15 different reports of an assault carried out by 'the right wing mobs' on a Democratic Representative and they all link back to the same original posting; claims of an assault without a victim or perpetrator being named...something smells fishy here. No pictures at events that are highly covered by both sides, no names, dates, etc. I am not accusing TP or Roll Call of making this up, but I would like to know what the Roll Call article says. If anyone has a membership at the site and would like to share with me, I'd love to have some more details.

"Dollar Bill" Jefferson Convicted

 Courtesy nola

He's movin' on up... err maybe not. William Jefferson, Democrat, and former Congressman from Louisiana was convicted on 11 of 16 counts today in a federal court. Bummer dude. Next time don't hide the money in your freezer, just funnel it to a lobbyist group founded by a former aide. At least then you can call your constituents redneck hillbilly racists, and get reelected! Hell, you can even funnel earmarks to your state and build an airport named after yourself that no one uses... sigh, what a rookie.

William Jefferson was accused of helping promote Siemens 'iGate' technology in Africa after nearly $400,000 in bribes were paid to a company controlled by Dollar Bill's wife. Accusations he vehemently denied up until his conviction. The total value in bribes lies somewhere between $400,000 and $1 Million.

Courtesy People Get Ready

Be sure to write Nancee Belagosi and thank her for bringing us 'the most ethical congress, evah!

Press 1 For Awesome!

Finally, a reason for pressing 1 during a phone call that I can get behind! The RNC redirected incoming angry telephone calls to the DNC! SCORE! Earlier the DNC released a video calling constituents of Blue Dog Democrats who are upset with health care reform, 'angry mobs.' The video accuses the GOP of inciting mob behavior to combat the Democrats plan for nationalized health care. At the end of the video, viewers are encouraged to call the RNC to 'tell them you've had enough of the mob.' When the angry phone calls started to come in to the RNC, a message was added on the recorded answer instructing the caller to press 1 in order to voice their concern over the angry mobs. Once the caller pressed 1, the call was forwarded to the DNC's main switchboard.

Moral Equivalence

NO!

YES!

Soooo, remember when the worst thing in the world was owning a private jet as a means to get VIP's around quickly? Yeah, me too. Well, NO MORE! I am happy to report that it's perfectly acceptable to buy private jets to get your VIP's around even if you're a part of an institution with a horrible track record and a history of failure!

Yes, you see, it's highly improper for private industry to own private or corporate jets as a means to get their officers around the world, but if you're a member of the most corrupt institution on the face of the planet, well maybe second most corrupt, it's not only acceptable, it's recommended!

Couldn't they at least have purchased planes powered by cow farts or wheat grass or something? I mean, jeez we're all super worried about melting ice caps, you know?

Recipe For Success!

The 9th Circus Court of Appeals once again proves that they are on the side of truth, justice and absolute stark-raving, barking at the moon, lunacy. WTF are these guys thinking? This is what is called States Rights FAIL. A Federal Appeals Court overriding a State's decision. I'm feeling all 10th Amendmenty, aren't you?

If you needed a reason to get the eff outta Dodge, here it is on a silver platter. I say screw releasing them, put them on death row. That'll drive down the number of repeat offenders, no?

If you're up for self torture, the PDF is here.

This Can't Be Good...

When will the Arabs learn not to provoke the Joos?

Veteran Flys Flag Until Son Returns Safely

A Fresno man is refusing to take down a tattered flag until his son returns home from his tour of duty in Iraq. Louis Haros, a Vietnam Veteran, says that he made a promise to his son to fly the flag until the he returned safely.

"I made a promise to him that it won't come down until he's home," Haros told FOXNews.com on Tuesday. "Well, it's still there. I feel if I bring it down and something happens to him … I don't know."

This has become an issue in the neighborhood in which Haros resides. He is receiving a lot of pressure to bring the flag down, and replace it with a new flag.

Recently, there was a discussion over at Paul's place regarding flag etiquette. I'm torn on this issue. I can understand respecting the flag and the symbolism involved, but this isn't about disrespect. This is about honor and love for country and love for family.

What say you?

Boobs in the Classroom!

For the record, I HATE the Patriotwats.

Apparently a Physics Professor at George Mason University is so desperate to get his students to pay attention and learn sumthin' that he's employing cheerleaders for a series of online lesson videos. I'm all for cheerleaders. I am also all for learning. I don't see a downside here...

US Military; Now With Less Beef!

A visual representation of US Military strength.  Seen here is the Military under Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43 and Obama.  Can you guess which one is which?

The Terrorist Times has a story about the rusky's parking two subs off the east coast of the United States. Iran could have nuclear weapon in as little as one year. NOKO is firing off ICBMs like its New Years on the Thames. And guess what PeeBo is doing? Cutting Military spending. I totally get that logic, can't you? Don't worry, when NOKO starts blowing up west coast cities and pummeling Hawai'i (Obama's birth state, dontcha know) back into the stone age, well PeeBo's just gonna sit down and have a nice little chat with Kim Jong to talk him down.

There, don't you feel better?

Juan Cole is a Flaming Idiot, And Other Things I Learned At Salon (UPDATED)

(UPDATE) Not sure how I missed it, but this is, in fact, an opinion piece at Salon.

--



Once again proving that there is NO intelligence on the left...

In what appears to be a 'not opinion' piece at Salon, Juan Cole displays his lack of functioning cerebrum as he, with straight face, compares Sarah Palin to Mahmoud 'Batshit Crazy' Ahmadinerjacket. Let's see, why it almost seems like yesterday when Sarah Palin stole the election with the support of the political elite and spit in the face of the civilized world, seeking a nuclear weapon with which to threaten the destruction of a tiny 'undesirable' neighbor. Why yes, I remember when she portrayed members of the public at large who protested her 'democratic' election 'as pampered young people from the wealthy neighborhoods...' and used the military and known terrorist organization to harass and shoot said public in the heart! And who can forget when she organized and held the Holocaust Was a Big Fat Lie conference in Anchorage last year, inviting David Duke as the keynote speaker.

The similarities are striking, are they not?

Joker Face! (UPDATED)

Please, no! Is Joel Schumacher directing another Batman movie?! He already ruined the franchise once before...

Courtesy Cafepress

Courtesy Zazzle

No doubt in my mind, if he casts this @ss as the Joker, it'll kill the Batman movie franchise for EVAH!

--

(UPDATE) Allahpundit claims never to have seen The Dark Knight... Is he an alien or something? Way to reinforce that beta-male stereotype, there genius! Saith the AP regarding the Obama/Joker images:

"I think it’s stupid and was surprised to find that a bunch of other righties on Twitter agree. What’s the point, exactly? I didn’t see “Dark Knight;” was the Joker into socialism? Murder, mayhem, and deficit spending? Wasn’t his salient characteristic the fact that he was … a homicidal maniac? I realize we’re supposed to put nothing past The One but that seems a bridge too far."

To which, respondeth I, quoting the great Alfred Pennyworth:

"Some men just want to watch the world burn"

Peebo has made a mockery of the US in front of our allies, and seems determined to destroy our economy and 'return the nation's wealth to it's rightful owners.' He wants to see the traditional US burn. The Joker moniker is more than fitting, and a great way to marginalize the 0ne with a very simple straight-forward message.

I'm Back! And the Latest In The Greatest Nonstory of The Bush Administration

Bane of Libtards everywhere.

Sorry for the lack of posts over the last 72 hours, I've been all over the beautiful state of Californistan, just over 650 miles in 24 hours. Anyhow, I'm back home now and jonesin for a bloggy fix! Let's dive right in, shall we?

The Washington Post recently had an article covering the new testimony from Karl Rove in closed door hearings over the 9 fired US Attorneys. Being questioned is what, if any, role did White House staffers have in the firings of the 9 US Attorneys back in 2006-2007.

The reason that the firings of the US Attorney's is because no President had ever fired a sitting US Attorney, since the founding. None except Reagan, Bush Sr., and Clinton, who axed all 93 soon after taking the White House. The difference, libtards claim, is that W Bush did it for political reasons and he did it in the middle of his 2nd term.

First, let's back up here and cover the appointments of US Attorneys and under what circumstances they serve. From teh Wikipedia:

"The U.S. Attorney is appointed by the President of the United States for a term of four years, with appointments subject to confirmation by the Senate. A U.S. Attorney shall continue in office, beyond the appointed term, until a successor is appointed and qualified. By law, each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President. The Attorney General has had the authority since 1986 to appoint interim U.S. Attorneys to fill a vacancy."

US Attorney's serve at the pleasure of the President, and 'By law, each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President.'

Another claim is that W fired the attorney's for political reasons...gasp! Once again quoting from teh Wikipedia:

"By tradition, U.S. Attorneys are replaced only at the start of a new White House administration. U.S. Attorneys hold a "political" office, and therefore they are considered to "serve at the pleasure of the President." At the beginning of a new presidential administration, it is traditional for all 93 U.S. Attorneys to submit a letter of resignation. When a new President is from a different political party, almost all of the resignations will be eventually accepted. The attorneys are then replaced by new political appointees, typically from the new President's party."

Let's see, after accepting the resignations from or firing an attorney, the President selects a new POLITICAL appointee? Huh, so then that whole 'political reasons' thing doesn't hold any water...

Okay, so we've established that W's three predecessors had removed US Attorney's from office, and that each had the constitutional authority to do so. So... that leaves Bush fired them in 'an unprecedented' middle of the [second] term. I'm sorry, but 'who cares?' Oh, that's right, the law enforcement hating left...sigh.

The reality is that Federal Prosecutors (aka US Attorneys) are in what is considered a political position and are subject to Presidential dismissal at any time, regardless of reason. This story is nothing more than the continuation of the liberal attack machine attempting to bring the Bush Administration down for: stealing the election in 2000, starting the war in Iraq, lying about WMD, stealing the election in 2004, refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol, causing global warming, creating the AIDS virus to keep the black man down, lying about man landing on the moon, Haliburton, Blackwater, Enron, ad nauseam, etc., so on and so forth, insert crackpot conspiracy theory here. Getting anyone in the executive branch, but especially in someone within the President's circle was the libtard's wet dream with Bush being at the top of the list, and Karl Rove being number two.

The facts are: The Federal Prosecutors are POLITICAL appointees. The Federal Prosecutors serve at the pleasure of the President, and can be terminated at his discretion. End of story, get over it and move on with your lives you bitter, defeated bastards.

72 Hour Moritorium on Blogging OVAH!

I'm back and rarin' to go! Let's get this blog party started!