What Is It With Democrats and Taxes? Part 3

Bumps in the Road: Obama's HHS Secretary Nominee Faces Tax Questions Over Car and Driver

ABC News has learned that the nomination of former Senator Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., to be President Obama's secretary of health and human services has hit a traffic snarl on its way through the Senate Finance Committee.

The controversy deals with a car and driver lent to Daschle by a wealthy Democratic friend -- a chauffeur service the former senator used for years without declaring it on his taxes.

It remains an open question as to whether this is a "speed bump," as a Democratic Senate ally of Daschle put it, or something more damaging.

Why do we want to trust these guys with our money when they can't even pay their own taxes?

Getting Their Ox Gored

Somehow, I doubt the bloggers at Delaware Liberal were concerned when a teacher went on an anti-George W. Bush rant in class. Or when a teacher gave an anti-George W. Bush vocabulary test.

No, I'm sure they'd tell you that it was just truth-telling and no big deal.

But let one of their little darlings get exposed to six words not praising Teh One's administration and there are calls for the teacher's head on a platter (or at least questioning his credentials).

I guess freedom of expression is only for liberals, and they really don't like object lessons that support facts.

My opinion is that when teachers express opinions you dislike, you handle this with your child. Explain about dissenting opinions and that nearly half the electorate didn't vote for Teh One and don't agree with his decisions. And, for that matter, anyone familiar with the new Veep is probably more than happy to get rid of that liar, as well.

But I'm sure the fine people at DL were equally outraged at criticism of George W. Bush from elementary school teachers. Riiight.

What Happened to that Shared Sacrifice?

Via Hot Air:

Last week, Barack Obama caused quite a stir when he allowed himself to be photographed in the Oval Office without wearing a suit jacket, ending the Bush tradition of coat-and-tie for the West Wing. The New York Times reports on how Obama made that possible during a colder-than-usual Washington winter. All Obama did was turn up the thermostat to Hawaii hothouse levels...

Of course, the comfort of Teh One is more important than his campaign rhetoric about conserving energy and lowering greenhouse gas levels. If Obama expects me not to keep my thermostat at 72 degrees year round, then he better put his damn jacket back on and lower his OWN thermostat.

More Democrat Civility and Bipartisanship

Maybe I should just make this a weekly feature, since every few days we have a new example of Democrat civility and bipartisanship, which looks a lot like a big, raised middle finger to the GOP. Take this:

"We gave the president what he asked for, a temporary stimulus bill,” said a senior Republican, “at half the cost of what the Democrats wrote. He knows it. They handed him a monster of spending. Rahm did this, and now he takes this to the Senate. Does Rahm want to be an honest broker, or does he want to be the guy who socks Republicans in the face? He isn’t helping with the Democrats, and he’s hurting with the Republicans.”

“Polling showed us that when we took the vote, independent support for the bill was collapsing,” a senior Republican said. “Democratic support was climbing while the independents ran away.”

“What does Rahm do? Is he going to go to the Democrats and say ‘no’ to this? Or is he going to make his president sign it?”

Emanuel’s answer to the Republican shutout is to announce that the Democratic Party will target Republicans by running campaigns in their districts to tell the voters that their representative “voted against 4 million jobs.”

Democrats will attempt to blame Republicans for a lengthy recession, even though they have the votes to do whatever they want. It's a stupid ploy, and, hopefully, Republicans will be able to counter it with ads pointing out that this "stimulus" package contained almost NO stimulus.

Conversation with a 9-Year-Old

"Mommy, why hasn't a girl ever run for president?"

"What do you mean, sweetheart? Hillary Clinton ran for president this year."

"Never heard of her."

"She ran against Barack Obama in the primaries. Your teachers should have told you about the historic candidacy of both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin."

"She didn't. Mommy, are girls not allowed to be president?"

"No, honey. Girls can be president just like boys can."

"But we've only picked boys, right?"

"Well...yeah."

"Why is that?"

"Well, you remember the reasons given for why we haven't elected a black person?"

"Yeah."

"Well, those also apply to women. Some people just don't think women can do the job. But they're wrong."

*silence* Then...

"Mommy?"

"Yes, honey."

"Maybe if a girl dressed up like a boy, she could get elected."

"Only in the movies, dear."

Pandagon Watch: If They Only Had a Brain

That's the title of Jesse Taylor's post castigating Glenn and Helen Reynolds for having jobs with security and decent wages.

Jesse seems to think that such things are unavailable to the vast majority of people, but that's not true.

The fact that others don’t have the financial capability and planning capacity of Glenn and Helen Reynolds isn’t an indictment of everyone else’s ability to plan as much as it is an indictment of the fact that the kind of great jobs that let you plan like this aren’t readily available. I surely wish that the kind of jobs available in my hometown lent themselves to permanent guarantees of employment barring retirement or gross incompetence or unethical behavior. I wish that the kind of jobs generally available to people with high school, associates or bachelors degrees lent themselves to paying speaking engagements, subsidiary radio shows or publishing deals. I can’t help but think how great it would be if most of our jobs not only allowed us but were explicitly structured to allow us to pursue outside ventures in prominent and public ways, the nature of which may cause us to say things that our employers are uncomfortable with, but must accept. That jobs like these exist is great, because the people in them often provide vital scholarship and leadership to society.

Actually, jobs like that do exist for the rest of us, but most of us don't want to work in them. The median salary for a registered nurse (that is, a nurse with a bachelor's degree) is $61,603. No, that's not $200k, but it's far from poverty. And nurses have virtually guaranteed employment as long as they are not "grossly incompetent or unethical."

There are also air traffic controllers, who make a median $100,000, and aren't likely to be fired because of economic downturns.

I have family members in these fields, which is how I know about the marketability and job security of these career paths. But there are other similar jobs that make decent money with little instability.

Jesse's right, though. If you work at the mall or in an office, you probably don't have the same low turnover and higher salaries. But isn't that up to individuals to choose careers that suit both their aptitudes and their lifestyles?

Pork Bill Passes Without Republican Help

As The Weekly Standard says, this is change we can believe in.

Too Serious by Far

Here's the video:



I thought it was actually kinda funny, but evidently some people don't think so.

This whole thing went down, I shit you not, at a National Automobile Dealers Association conference, where the ugliness of feminists is obviously an important topic. Those guys laughing in the background? Those are the dudes that want to sell you your next car, con you into the undercoat you don't need and generally treat you as an inferior being because you're a female who, naturally, knows nothing about big, complex machines.

Is a joke about an ugly woman campaigning for abortion rights really about all women? I don't think so. But I think if you see yourself in such a joke, then you need to examine why you are ugly (and now, I'm not talking about physical features).

There are plenty of things to complain about with car dealers, but I don't think a joke like this qualifies as a 'douchebag.'

Glad to See

The Taliban approves of Barack Obama.

A 40-Year Wish List

From the Wall Street Journal:

There's $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There's even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.

In selling the plan, President Obama has said this bill will make "dramatic investments to revive our flagging economy." Well, you be the judge. Some $30 billion, or less than 5% of the spending in the bill, is for fixing bridges or other highway projects. There's another $40 billion for broadband and electric grid development, airports and clean water projects that are arguably worthwhile priorities.

Add the roughly $20 billion for business tax cuts, and by our estimate only $90 billion out of $825 billion, or about 12 cents of every $1, is for something that can plausibly be considered a growth stimulus. And even many of these projects aren't likely to help the economy immediately. As Peter Orszag, the President's new budget director, told Congress a year ago, "even those [public works] that are 'on the shelf' generally cannot be undertaken quickly enough to provide timely stimulus to the economy."

I guess when you haven't been able to foist your agenda on unsuspecting America for years, you get that pent up feeling.

But it's really about fixing infrastructer. After all, we haven't done that in so long.

Spending Other People's Money

Worried about the stimulus package? Don't be! Make it bigger. After all, financial crises like these only come around once every 30 years or so, and you really can't waste an opportunity to get extra funding for your super duper projects, boondoggles, and constituents.

Well, that seems to be the thinking by Democrats, who want to cram all sorts of spending into a bill that's ostensibly about helping the economy. Except much of what they want to do either won't stimulte the economy (see: contraceptive spending) or won't happen for years (see CBO estimates).

If Democrats were honest, which they aren't, they'd admit that all this talk about pouring tons of money into green energy technologies and bridge projects is mainly about repaying Democrat constituencies and trying to cement their hold on government as opposed to helping anyone. That's why so many dislike tax cuts that could actually create jobs as opposed to giveaways that keep people unemployed as long as possible. And in the spirit of bipartisanship and civility, Democrats reject virtually every amendment Republicans offer that would actually stimulate the economy.

So, let's stop the lying here. This isn't a stimulus package. It's just the same ol', same ol' pork barrel politics that Democrats have always played so well.

Ever Notice...

That when the leftwingers approve of something, then you shouldn't complain about tax money supporting it? But if they disapprove of constitutionally protected behavior, they are the first to scream that tax money shouldn't support it?

It's hard to believe that the same people who argue for billions for contraceptions think that allowing Boy Scouts to stay in the building they built is an insult to the average citizen. I'd bet the bank that most people would rather pay taxes to support the Boy Scouts that Planned Parenthood.

From the Founding Fathers

"[T]he opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves, in their, own sphere of action, but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch."

--Thomas Jefferson, letter to Abigail Adams, 11 September 1804

Moonbats Still Looking for Excuses

They control both houses of Congress and the presidency but, somehow, Democrats are still impotent wankers who need to blame somebody else for their failures.

Must Not Have Gotten a Big Enough Cut of the Profits

Michelle Obama: 'Inappropriate' to use daughters to sell dolls.

They’ve been in the White House less than a week, but the first daughters have already been co-opted by marketers — and Michelle Obama isn’t happy about it.

Ty, the toy company responsible for the popular Beanie Babies dolls, is now marketing “Sweet Sasha” and “Marvelous Malia” dolls.

The first lady’s office said Friday Ty was out of line. “We feel it is inappropriate to use young private citizens for marketing purposes,” said a spokeswoman for Michelle Obama in a statement.

Given the number of Obama commemoratives out there, Michelle's objection can't be about anything else.

Obama Takes Swipe at Rush Limbaugh

Like Bill Clinton before him, Barack Obama makes the mistake of taking a swipe at Rush Limbaugh.

President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill today that they need to quit listening to radio king Rush Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats and the new administration.

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.

Obama also threw punches at Sean Hannity during the campaign (quotes that have become part of Hannity's opening), but such snipes, which might be understandable from a candidate, look downright churlish from the POTUS.

But maybe Teh One should be worried.

The timing was no coincidence: after a rocky first week in office, the Obamists are also faced with a resurgent Fox News Channel, where ratings have been climbing since the moment he took office.

In particular, Hannity's Limbaugh interview, which took place in the latter's Florida studios, scored fantastic audience figures for the former's network. In overall viewers, Thursday's Hannity nearly trebled his MSNBC competition and almost doubled CNN's Larry King.

And after a wildly successful fall ratings survey, talk radio is looking forward to record numbers with the installation of the Obamists.

It's natural that the nearly half of the country who didn't vote for Obama are going to look for sources critical of Teh One, particularly when you have supposed journalists giddy to be calling him "Mr. President."

And Obama sniping at Rush Limbaugh and declaring that "he won" (therefore, you should do what he says) isn't likely to make conservatives more conciliatory. If Obama wants opposition, I can't think of any better way than to lower himself to the level of talk show hosts or to rub salt in the wounds of the minority party.

Still, this worries some, who see Obama reinstituting the unFairness Doctrine to silence critics. Personally, I think that would reenergize conservatives in a way much to the Obamessiah's disliking.

UPDATE: Limbaugh responds.

To make the argument about me instead of his plan makes sense from his perspective. Obama's plan would buy votes for the Democrat Party, in the same way FDR's New Deal established majority power for 50 years of Democrat rule, and it would also simultaneously seriously damage any hope of future tax cuts. It would allow a majority of American voters to guarantee no taxes for themselves going forward. It would burden the private sector and put the public sector in permanent and firm control of the economy. Put simply, I believe his stimulus is aimed at re-establishing "eternal" power for the Democrat Party rather than stimulating the economy because anyone with a brain knows this is NOT how you stimulate the economy. If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of this TRILLION dollar debacle.

LOL of the Day

Ahh, the wonder of British place names.

In the scale of embarrassing place names, Crapstone ranks pretty high. But Britain is full of them. Some are mostly amusing, like Ugley, Essex; East Breast, in western Scotland; North Piddle, in Worcestershire; and Spanker Lane, in Derbyshire.

Others evoke images that may conflict with residents’ efforts to appear dignified when, for example, applying for jobs.

These include Crotch Crescent, Oxford; Titty Ho, Northamptonshire; Wetwang, East Yorkshire; Slutshole Lane, Norfolk; and Thong, Kent. And, in a country that delights in lavatory humor, particularly if the word “bottom” is involved, there is Pratts Bottom, in Kent, doubly cursed because “prat” is slang for buffoon.

As for Penistone, a thriving South Yorkshire town, just stop that sophomoric snickering.

“It’s pronounced ‘PENNIS-tun,’ ” Fiona Moran, manager of the Old Vicarage Hotel in Penistone, said over the telephone, rather sharply. When forced to spell her address for outsiders, she uses misdirection, separating the tricky section into two blameless parts: “p-e-n” — pause — “i-s-t-o-n-e.”

Obama to Republicans: "I Won"

So much for bipartisanship.

President Obama listened to Republican gripes about his stimulus package during a meeting with congressional leaders Friday morning - but he also left no doubt about who's in charge of these negotiations. "I won," Obama noted matter-of-factly, according to sources familiar with the conversation.

The exchange arose as top House and Senate Republicans expressed concern to the president about the amount of spending in the package. They also raised red flags about a refundable tax credit that returns money to those who don’t pay income taxes, the sources said.

Elections have consequences. Remember this the next time somebody acts stunned at the Democrat definition of bipartisanship.

Pro-Abortion Obama

President Obama, true to his pro-abortion roots, is expected to rescind the executive order barring taxpayer funding of overseas abortions. The move could come as early as today.

In most instances, Obama wants Congress to play bad guy and produce legislation codifying pro-abortion and anti-life policies, such as embryonic stem cell research. Such moves can only be called "anti-life," given the fact that adult stem cells have been found to be as effective--and less controversial--than ESCR ever hoped to be. President Bush's order didn't stop ESCR, it merely restricted its use of taxpayer money. If ESCR were really so promising, private funding would have come forward.

But none did.

To endorse ESCR now, when it has been proved unnecessary, can be seen as nothing less than a slap in the face to the pro-life community.

Obama Irritated When Not Every Journalist Genuflects at His Entrance

Well, who can blame him for being irritated at substantive questions? It's not like he's had much practice with them.

Asked how he could reconcile a strict ban on lobbyists in his administration with a Deputy Defense Secretary nominee who lobbied for Raytheon, Obama interrupted with a knowing smile on his face.

"Ahh, see," he said, "I came down here to visit. See this is what happens. I can't end up visiting with you guys and shaking hands if I'm going to get grilled every time I come down here."

Pressed further by the Politico reporter about his Pentagon nominee, William J. Lynn III, Obama turned more serious, putting his hand on the reporter's shoulder and staring him in the eye.

"Alright, come on" he said, with obvious irritation in his voice. "We will be having a press conference at which time you can feel free to [ask] questions. Right now, I just wanted to say hello and introduce myself to you guys - that's all I was trying to do."

The president was quickly saved by a cameraman in the room who called out: “I’d like to say it one more time: ‘Mr. President.’ ”

See, that's the sort of journalism we like: fawning over the Obamessiah, even when he gets his nose out of joint. *sarcasm off*

UPDATED: With video:

Not the Obama Ad You Expect

Gosh, that's 2 things from The Other McCain. I think that's enough for a while! Sorry!

Employee Not Free Choice Act Ad

Nice ad regarding card check.



H/T The Other McCain

Pandagon Watch: Lefty Orgasms Over Obama

Geez, some things make you throw up a little in your mouth, and then the same things can make you laugh so hard you cry.

This saccharin post by Amanda is a great example.

The Obama campaign became this yelp of hope and love from this country, and even hardened cynics like me got swept up into it. After all these years, we found we had it in us to believe again. The right accuses of us of making Obama some kind of messiah, but that’s not how it’s really experienced. We aggressively believe he’s just one man. We know that we are the real story, the everyday Americans who reached past the cynical destruction of the Bush era into ourselves and found that we do, we really believe that humanity can be better than this. We can transcend racism and sexism and homophobia and all our other petty bigotries. It may not happen in our lifetimes, but we can strive. We can be better. I hope the history books note this, but the brilliance of the Obama campaign was not that they dictated this feeling of movement, but they spotted it and rode the wave. “Yes we can,” became a slogan not because it was demanded on high, but because people responded to it, and the campaign responded to the people. It didn’t feel canned to say it. It felt real, because in a sense, we invented it, not them. On the night of Obama’s election, I went to a party and people did spontaneously chant, “Yes we can! Yes we can!”, and frankly, through all my cynicism, it felt real. They weren’t say that Obama could. After a point, it wasn’t about him. We can. We do believe in this country, and this election proves it.

It's no wonder Amanda sold 4 copies of her book (3 to her mother and cats, 1 to Jesse Taylor). That writing is absolutely Teh Suck. Read the whole thing if you choose, but have a barf bag next to you when you do.

I always wonder about people who are so utterly wrapped up in their ideas and opinions that they honestly think it's the most important thing on earth. Your guy lost in 2000 and 2004. Get over it. The U.S. didn't fall apart and most of us are still doing pretty well. Your guy won this time and while he's gonna suck, I'm not gonna sit around in my jammies using up boxes of Kleenex over it. There's a lot more to life that that crap.

I've been watching the reaction of liberals to Obama's win and inauguration, and one of the strangest parts of it is that they aren't just happy their guy is president. They're happy that conservatives are unhappy and they want conservatives to hate everything Obama does. I say that takes a pretty twisted person to make that the standard for their behavior.

The funniest part of all of it is watching the Pandagonistas doggedly not cover Democrat scandal after Democrat scandal. Not Timothy Geithner's tax evasion (or Caroline Kennedy's, for that matter). Not Bill Richardson's ethics problems. Not the hold-up of HIllary Clinton's confirmation. We heard and read numerous times about how terrible Mark Foley was for sending texts to pages, but you can't find a word from these guys about the Democrat governor who had sex with a teen.

These numbnuts are going to spend the next two years trying to convince their sycophants that all is well now that the evil Republicans are no longer in charge. And then they'll be back to sitting around in their jammies and sulking when they lose in two years.

For God's sake, Amanda. You're a 30-something-year-old woman. It's time you grew up and behaved like an adult, not like a besotted teenager.

What Is It With Democrats and Taxes? Part 2

Housekeeper and Taxes Are Said to Derail Kennedy’s Bid

At least she isn't blaming TurboTax. Oh, and she wasn't trying to head up the Internal Revenue Service.

One (Wo)Man's Dissent Is Another's Obstructionism

Why is it that dissent was patriotic when Democrats were in the minority but it is obstruction when practiced by Republicans?

When Your Congressman Is Contemptuous of You

Democrat Jack Murtha Says Guantanamo Prisoners Can Come to His District.

The same guy who called his constituents rednecks and racists thinks putting 9/11 terrorists near your homes is acceptable. Hey, you're all clinging to your guns, anyway. At least you can defend yourselves.

Joe Biden Is the Comic Relief in This Administration

Making Good on Talking to Terrorists

Obama Should Quit War on Terror; Talk to Hamas and Taliban.

The place to start on a new course is to leave the "war on terror" behind and recognize that Hamas, Hezbollah and the Taliban -- all of which have legitimate nationalist aspirations, but wrapped in Islamist garb -- cannot be lumped into the same category as the cosmic terrorists of Al Qaeda who want to attack the US directly. The former you can negotiate with by addressing their grievances. You can't deal with Al Qaeda because their claims are in another realm beyond this earth.

Their grievance? The existence of Israel. Well, maybe not the Taliban. They just hate the West.

Barack Obama: Administration Willing to Talk to Iran 'Without Preconditions'
One campaign promise to keep.

Obama Blows Off Medal of Honor Recipients

'Cuz the Frito Pie inaugural was more important.

Do's and Don'ts

Here's the "play nice" list.

Here's the "don't let 'em get away with anything" list.

Gentleman George W. Bush

This portrait of George Bush's flight home tells a lot about this man unjustifiably vilified. Mainly what it shows is that Bush is a better man than his critics.

HopeNChange

U.S. Stocks Slide to Worst Inauguration Day Drop

Most of Stimulus Won't Be Spent Before 2011, CBO Says.
Change!

Plans to Close Gitmo Angers 9/11 Families

Not everyone thinks we are the problem.

Democrat Scandal du Jour

What is is with Democrats and scandals (and the lack of coverage by liberal bloggers)? Via The Other McCain comes news of yet another Democrat scandal, this one including sex with teenagers. And here I thought only Republicans had sex scandals (if you read liberal blogs, you'd think so)!

Robert S. McCain notes that, once again, AP doesn't bother noting the party affiliation of the offending official, but by now, we know that if the party label is left off, the offender must be a Democrat.

Inauguration Day

Time to celebrate the fact that George W. Bush can no longer be blamed for anything that happens from noon onward.

President Bush Does the Right Thing

Bush commutes sentences of former US border agents Compean and Ramos.

What's Your Pledge?

Here's the video of Hollywood celebrities pledging fealty to Teh One.

MySpace Celebrity and Katalyst present The Presidential Pledge


Ok, here's my pledge:

1. To laugh mercilessly at stupid people who make dumb pledges to grab attention.

2. To recognize that smiling at my fellow Americans isn't going to do a damn thing to help the economy.

3. To refrain from participating in hero worship of a U.S. president.

4. To mock those who think "being a mentor to my siblings" is a political statement.

5. To question what took these people so long to decide to be good parents, help their siblings, and generally behave like responsible adults.

I add these to my outstanding pledges about Barack Obama:

1. I won't call for Obama's impeachment because he enacts policies with which I disagree.

2. I won't compare Barack Obama to Adolf Hitler or Nazis.

What's your pledge?

UPDATE: Good explanation of just how loathesome these people are.

President Bush was not holding back Moore from “free[ing] one million people from slavery in the next five years.” Nor was he holding back the Obama-biquitous Will.I.Am from “chang[ing] how [he] live[s].” Ditto: Aaron Ekhart (”To be a better person,”) Marisa Tomei (”To integrate into my heart what I already know in my head which is that we are all in this together,”) Kutcher (”To the abolition to 21st century slavery,”) Anthony Kiedis (”To be of service to Barack Obama,”) P. Diddy (” pledge to turn the lights off, cause I used to leave the lights on but we want to conserve energy so I’ma turn the lights off, you turn the lights off,) and all-in-unison (”Because together we can, together we are, and together we will be the change that we seek.”)

Guilt and Good Parenting

Guilt is just a part of being a good parent.

Somewhere in between "buckle your seat belt" and "eat your squash," America's moms and dads have discovered guilt - and not guilt for doing a bad job with their kids, but guilt for doing a good job. Sounds screwy, but it's true.

I'm of the opinion that everybody grows up with the strictest parents. At least, it seems like it at the time. I had to go to bed at 7 p.m. in first grade and was still expected to be in bed by 9 p.m. in eighth. We had to clean our rooms before we could go out to play. We did homework, then watched television. And we weren't allowed to see R-rated movies until we were 17.

As an adult, I can tell you that such rules did no long-lasting damage, and I still tend to do chores first and then play.

What I find most often about people whose parents didn't impose limitations is that such people have a hard time enforcing their own rules. So, they stay up too late, eat the wrong things, and let their kids do things they know they shouldn't (or, at least, don't need to). These problems are even more apparent when parents divorce.

I've spent a lot of time over the years policing what my kids watch, eat, and read, when they go to bed, how often they bathe, and who they hang out with. Kids always hate these inconveniences and embarrassments, but, in the end, they are better off for them.

First Love and Marriage

The Other McCain has a short post up about this article on how first love can ruin future relationships.

Sociologists found that the euphoria of young love can become an unrealistic benchmark against which all future romances are judged.

According to the report, the best way to ensure long-term happiness in a relationship is not to fixate on how you fell head over heels the first time.

Those who take a more pragmatic view of what they need from a relationship rather than striving to recreate the intense passion they once shared with an old flame are more likely to have successful long-term partneship, it argues.

Young love is different from later romances. For one thing, once you've been in love, you start having an expectation about what love should be like and whether your current situation fits that model.

I suspect that this experience also affects who gets married, who stays married, and why. If you watch too much TV as a teenager and read too many sappy romance novels, you come away with a wholy unrealistic view of what marriage is like, which is why so many people enter their 20s looking for their "one true love" and won't settle for anything less than perfection.

Let's get something straight. Perfection is a great goal, and we'd all like to attain it. But there are plenty of great guys and gals who don't get married because they keep waiting for someone who likes eating cold pizza in the morning just like they do. It doesn't seem to occur to them that you can develop a taste for cold pizza because you like the company.

And that really is the point: lasting relationships grow and people adapt to each other over time. You learn to deal with your spouse's flaws, which helps you enjoy their better qualities.

Which leads back to dwelling on first love. I remember my first love, but I remember all of him, not just the fun stuff. There are reasons you aren't still with that first love, and perhaps you need to keep that in mind when you start measuring all others to that one.

They Really Think Like This

You can't make this stuff up (comment #3):

The more I think about it arthur, the more I think that we can probably all agree that Obama’s defeat of wingnut Republicanism this fall was as important to our nation’s continuance as our defeat of Nazi Germany or Japanese militarism.

So, there you have it. Winning an election is compared to the horrors of Nazis and imperial Japan in World War II. And they wonder why we laugh at them.

Here's more:

“After eight years of it being hijacked by a bunch of fascists, I’ve got my country back”.

Get it? It's only "their" country when they are in charge. Oddly, I don't hear many Republicans saying the country isn't "theirs" anymore.

Dear New York Times

I know you weren't raised properly, which probably explains why you think it's suddenly cool to wave the Stars and Stripes, but my dad always hung a flag outside our house on federal holidays throughout my life, throughout the awful Democrat presidencies and the good Republican ones. Oddly, patriotism wasn't dependent on one's political bent.

From Newsbusters:

You see, to the left, nothing American is "cool" or "theirs" when they are not in political control. They hate the half of America that leans center right so much that when folks with that ideology are in charge leftists feel that the country is not "theirs."

On the other hand, conservatives and Republicans claim the flag, the military and the country as theirs no matter who is in charge in Washington D.C. Oh, conservatives and Republicans may not be happy when leftists are in charge, but they rarely completely disown the whole country because of it. Conservatives and Republicans remain proud of the U.S. and its history whether the Democratic Party wins or not.

That's cuz we were raised right.

Reality Check

I've always had a soft spot for Honest Abe because he and I share a birthday spot on the calendar. By the time I was in third grade, I'd read every biography of the great man I could get my hands on. I used to kid people that being born on Lincoln's birthday meant I would either become president, grow a beard, or get shot.

So the Obama campaigns coopting of the greatest president of our country is sort of a personal insult to me. And these comparisons are embarrassing.

“It’s very hard to say who has a tougher job,” says Holzer. “Is it the man who’s facing a fiscal crisis worse than any since the Depression and also the specter of nuclear war, terrorism, health pandemics, and all of the issues that a 21st century president has to deal with and hopefully solve? Or is it the President who is facing the destruction of the entire country that he’s been elected to lead?”

Is he serious? He wants to compare the disintegration of our nation to an economic slowdown? This sort of thing is insulting and diminishes both men.

Lincoln presided over the single costliest war in U.S. history. We lost more than 600,000 men in that conflict and the economic devastation to the South was unparalleled, taking generations to rebuild. The problems with race relations today can be traced directly back to the fighting of that war and the harshness of Reconstruction after it (why do you think the Texas governor is not the seat of power?).

And outside of the actual human costs, there was the loss of innocence about what the republic was about. If you read the Federalist Papers, there's this implied consent of the states to be joined to the federal government, a consent that can be withdrawn through secession at any time. But Lincoln recognized that a country whose states could withdraw from the union at will was a country without much of a future. While the history taught to children is that the Civil War was all about slavery, there is this other crucial aspect to the fight.

And while I don't dislike Barack Obama (although I'm starting to) and I am happy for a black person to be president, these inflated comparisons to Lincoln are starting to anger me. I pray that Obama doesn't measure up to Lincoln, because it would mean another Civil War here. What Obama will be dealing with are simply the typical difficult duties of being the chief executive of the United States. Of course, he'd be better prepared for it had he actually had some experience, but too many voters wanted style over substance.

UPDATE: The differences are far more obvious.

Funny

Prosecuting Bush Officials

Queen Nancy Pelosi is making noises that she would be open to prosecuting Bush administration officials for protecting the country.

"I think you look at each item and see what is a violation of the law and do we even have a right to ignore it," the California Democrat said. "And other things that are maybe time that is spent better looking to the future rather than to the past."

Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, announced Friday he wants to set up a commission to look into whether the Bush administration broke the law by taking the nation to war against Iraq and instituting aggressive anti-terror initiatives. The Michigan Democrat called for an "independent criminal probe into whether any laws were broken in connection with these activities."

President-elect Barack Obama has not closed off the possibility of prosecutions, but hinted he does not favor them.

Like DRJ at Patterico's Pontifications, I think this means that President Bush needs to issue a blanket pardon for every person in his administration so as to head off these political prosecutions.

Pardon anyone and everyone in your Administration who participated in wiretapping, interrogations, detentions, and related efforts. Don’t depend on the vague, indecisive words of Barack Obama and his surrogates. Just as you depended on them, the people who helped you combat terrorism are depending on you.

Will moonbats howl about their guilt? Sure, but that would have happened anyway. The important thing is to stop the fringe from crucifying their political opponents, especially since Republicans will not return the favor.

New Strategy for Paying Your Mortgage

Film, Port Shoots Sought by Los Angeles Homeowners Hit by Slump

Gupta, a clothing and jewelry designer, is among an increasing number of recession-pinched Los Angeles homeowners turning to Hollywood for help, offering their houses as sets for feature films, commercials and even adult movies.

“We are getting a lot of calls,” said Joseph Darrell, whose Los Angeles-based Joe Darrell Location Service represents Gupta. “They say, ‘Can you help me to bring a production to my home, because I have trouble making my payments.’”

The daily fee paid for the sort of work done at Gupta’s 3,000-square-foot condo in the city’s signature 90210 ZIP code is usually $2,000 to $3,000, Darrell said. That would cover about half of her monthly household bills, including maid service.

Do they need any Texas locations, by chance?

Homosexuality 101

Wisconsin high school features homosexuality course.

I guess it was bound to happen.

11-th grade English teacher Sarah Arnold says she was inspired to create the curriculum, entitled "Exposing Hidden Homophobia," when she heard an "anti-gay undertone" in students' conversations, which included making fun of "anything that defied gender stereotype," according to an article printed in the pro-homosexual publication by the Southern Poverty Law Center "Teaching Tolerance."

"Some people would say we don't have a wide demographic variety here," Arnold said of the mostly white Elkhorn Area High School. "It's more accurate to say that we have demographics that aren't acknowledged."

The program Arnold developed included "in-depth exploration of depictions" of homosexuality in mass media; several homosexual-themed films, documentaries, books and novels; internet research on "the nature of homophobia"; and a "homophobia questionnaire" coupled with a "heterosexual questionnaire" designed to take questions "commonly asked of homosexuals and ask them of heterosexuals" - e.g., "When did you decide to become heterosexual?'"

Although students were reluctant and parents "balked," particularly Christian parents, Arnold would argue that the project supported "higher-order thinking skills" because students were asked to perform such tasks as assembling and presenting portfolios of their research into homosexual culture and media.

The article claims that, thanks to the program, students began to adopt a more favorable view of homosexuality, as evidenced by portfolio essays and an increased membership in the school's Gay-Straight Alliance.

At a time when we're told it is not the proper place for schools to teach morals, is it right for schools to teach this?

Remember When Bush Supporters Broke Federal Law in Support of Him?

Ah, good times. Good times.

And what's more patriotic than paying taxes? Organizing.

Obama Won't Give Up His Blackberry

Perhaps Barack Obama has decided the law doesn't apply to him, or maybe he just thinks he won't ever send something that he doesn't want to be part of a Freedom of Information Act request. Either way, he's refusing to give up his Blackberry.

Interviewed by CNN Friday, Obama said the smartphone was among the tools that he would use to stay in touch with real Americans and avoid becoming trapped inside the presidential "bubble."

"I think we're going to be able to hang on to one of these. My working assumption, and this is not new, is that anything I write on an email could end up being on CNN," he said.

"So I make sure to think before I press 'send'," he said of his Blackberry, which was an ever-present fixture on his belt or in his hand on the campaign trail.

Obama did not divulge just how he will overcome legal constraints, given the requirement of the post-Watergate Presidential Records Act of 1978 to keep a record of every White House communication.

Nor did he say how he would persuade his Secret Service protectors that the Blackberry does not pose a security risk, for instance if it is hacked over the air.

Regardless of Teh One's personal belief, there are enemies who would love to hack into his e-mail and find out what's on the POTUS's mind (if anything).

About That Shredding of the Constitution Thing...

FISA Court backs Bush.

a major August 2008 decision released yesterday in redacted form, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, the FISA appellate panel, affirmed the government's Constitutional authority to collect national-security intelligence without judicial approval...


But the Constitution bans only "unreasonable" search and seizure, not all searches and seizures, and the Fourth Amendment allows for exceptions such as those under a President's Article II war powers. The courts have been explicit on this point. In 1980, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Truong that "the Executive need not always obtain a warrant for foreign intelligence surveillance." The FISA appeals court said in its 2002 opinion In re Sealed Case that the President has "inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information" and took "for granted" that "FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."

Many critics of President Bush have argued that warrantless wiretaps are an unconstitutional search under the Fourth Amendment. The FISA court disagrees.

Unintended LOL of the Day

Had to chuckle at a pullout from this post, slamming Joe the Plumber as unqualified to run for public office:

I guess being unqualified for the job, cheating on your taxes and going under an assumed name are the hallmarks of a good conservative these days.

After the election of Barack Obama to POTUS, I find it amazing that anyone could actually say with a straight face that any other person was unqualified for public office. Obama had no executive experience, no business experience, and little legislative experience. At least Joe the Plumber has worked for a living.

As for "cheating on your taxes," I guess the blogger hadn't heard of Timothy Geithner, Obama's pick to head the Internal Revenue Service, a man who didn't pay his taxes for years, even after receiving notice that he owed them. This is a man who tried to claim his child's sleep away camp as a child care deduction (I can't make this stuff up). Lord knows what else he tried to claim as deductions.

And "going under an assumed name"? What the heck is that? We aren't allowed to go by middle names now? It's not like Joe invented that practice. I guess it's, somehow, underhanded to do it if you're a Republican.

All of this is to say that, yet again, IOKIYAD.

Your Tax Money at Work

Just a sample of what Democrats mean when they talk about "infrastructure."

-$6 billion to weatherize "modest income homes."
-$6 billion to provide internet in "underserved" areas
-$6 billion for "higher education modernization."
-$20 billion in health information technology to "prevent medial mistakes."
-$20 billion to increase food stamp funding
-$87 billion to provide a "temporary" increase in Medicaid funding

More at the link.

Do you feel your pocketbook wincing? I do.

Food Police to Prevent Waste?

Bismarck has a link to a story out of the U.K. on the food police.

Householders are to be visited by officials offering advice on cooking with leftovers, in a Government initiative to reduce the amount of food that gets thrown away.

Home cooks will also be told what size portions to prepare, taught to understand "best before" dates and urged to make more use of their freezers.

The door-to-door campaign, which starts tomorrow, will be funded by the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP), a Government agency charged with reducing household waste.

The officials will be called "food champions". However, they were dismissed last night as "food police" by critics who called the scheme an example of "excessive government nannying".

It bears repeating that this is the sort of silliness that happens when we assume the government should be in charge of everything. Food police? I just sat through a lecture last night at the P.T.A. meeting from a doctor telling us not to make our kids clean their plates. And while some people like leftovers (I don't), most of us remember mushy reheated veggies and meat that tasted terrible after a warm-up or two.

I'm not saying that preventing food waste is a bad thing. You can run a public service announcement if you want, or try to get on Oprah. But do we want to go down this road, paying people 16 bucks an hours to lecture people on not wasting food?

Obama: We Don't Have to Kill Osama bin Laden

I'm waiting for the Left to howl and scream about Obama's statement that we don't have to kill Osama bin Laden.

"My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him," he said. "But if we have so tightened the noose that he's in a cave somewhere and can't even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America."

Liberals have sneered endlessly that George W. Bush was incompetent because he didn't capture or kill bin Laden. And before the election, Obama insisted that capturing bin Laden was paramount. But now Obama suggests that being trapped in a cave somewhere is just as good. He's right, of course, but it was just as true when President Bush said it.

It was better to contain bin Laden than kill him. Killing him would have created a martyr. Capturing him would have left us with the unpalatable problem of how to give him a trial without giving up every national secret we have. Personally, I preferred that the soldiers who captured him accidentally shoot him in the head, but that's just me.

As things have turned out, we get treated to a video periodically with Osama pathetically challenging us, but not much else comes of it. Which is better all around.

I Wish I Didn't Have to Pay Taxes

One of the things you hear a lot at moonbat sites is how you just don't want to pay your fair share if you think raising taxes is a bad thing. And it's not just that you think raising taxes on "the rich" is a bad thing. It's if you think voluntary taxes, such as gambling, are better than mandatory ones, you must be some rich bastard. And we all know that rich bastards don't pay their "fair share" of taxes. In other words, you must be Timothy Geithner.

Would it be OK if I stopped paying my taxes until Barack Obama names me to be his secretary of the treasury?

That is a deal I would like to get. That is the deal financial wizard Timothy Geithner got.

He didn’t pay all of his federal taxes for years. Then, after Obama decided to name him treasury secretary, Obama’s vetting team discovered Geithner’s little oversight.

Not paying your taxes is considered serious for some people. But not for Geithner, a Wall Street “wonder boy” — he is 47 — who is president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and was instrumental in putting together the recent Wall Street bailout package.

You would think a guy like this would know about paying taxes, but no. Mistakes were made.

Geithner failed to pay the proper self-employment taxes for 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004, even though he was sent documents telling him he had to do so.

But in 2006, Geithner got a document he couldn’t ignore. The IRS sent Geithner a notice saying he had not paid his taxes for 2003 and 2004, and Geithner paid up.

But he did not pay up for 2001 and 2002, even though he must have known that he skipped taxes for those years, too.

He didn’t pay those taxes until Barack Obama decided he wanted Geithner to head the treasury and Obama sent vetters to look into Geithner’s past.

Shockingly, you aren't hearing any complaints from the Left that Geithner, a.k.a., Rich Bastard Not Paying His Fair Share, skipped out on his taxes until Teh One called him to run the--*snort*--I.R.S.!

It really is too good to be true, and were Geithner a Republican, Jon Stewart would be making endless jokes at his expense. But this is, after all, the coronation of His Obamaness, and so all those pesky ethics rules kinda fly out the window.

NLRB Precedents in Jeopardy Under Obama

This article outlines the Top 10 precedents from the Bush era NLRB which are in danger during the Obama administration.

There will also be a changing of the guard at the National Labor Relations Board in 2009 that promises to roll back the pro-employer decisions of the 2004-2007 board, led by President George W. Bush-appointed Chairman Robert J. Battista.

Between 2004 and 2007, the so-called "Bush board," utilizing a 3-2 Bush-appointed majority, established several precedents favorable to employers, reversed several Clinton-era board precedents and was subject to heavy criticism by unions and its own minority members. Now, President-elect Barack Obama, who just selected Hilda Solis, a strong union supporter, as his secretary of Labor, will have the opportunity to dramatically reshape the NLRB by appointing pro-union board members.

It is widely predicted that the new Obama board will reverse as many of these controversial pro-employer Bush board precedents as they can get their hands on.

Wanna slow the recovery? Back unions.

Assessing the Bush Presidency

History will be much kinder to George W. Bush than moonbats who don't appreciate the fact that no American died to terrorists since 9/11.

That really does bear repeating: George W. Bush has prevented any further attacks on Americans either at home or abroad since September 11, 2001. That's no small feat, considering that we'd all spent 20 years becoming numb to various attacks on Americans by those people we're told we should try to make like us. This included attacks on military facilties, embassies, airliners, and private citizens. But since 9/11, there hasn't been a single American killed by radicals who think we're the great Satan.

For all the talk about dismantling the Fourth Amendment, the inconvenience of removing your shoes at the airport is worth the safety on your airplane. Liberals will never admit that George W. Bush made America safer, just as they cannot concede he won in 2000. But history will ignore the noise of the moonbats and recognize that Bush has been a good president.

Our Image to the World Is Improving Already

One of the worst arguments for voting Democrat is that it would "repair our image to the world." I've always called B.S. on that logic; anyone over 30 has seen enough presidents come and go to know that those who hate us will hate us regardless of who is in office. And, lo and behold, I was right.

Iranian demonstrators burned photographs of Barack Obama today as they protested against America’s inaction over Gaza.

Dozens of people gathered in Tehran waving Palestinian flags and defacing and setting fire to images of the President-elect...

The demonstrators, waving Palestinian flags, some chanting “Death to Obama”, had gathered outside the Swiss embassy which handles US interests because Tehran and Washington have not had diplomatic ties for nearly three decades.

Pictures showed the president-elect’s image laid on the road for cars to drive over it and other images showed demonstrators burning an Obama poster.

Ahh, I feel that image improved already.

Obama Dines With Rightwingers Conservatives

Proving, yet again, that he's a politically savvy guy, Obama has dinner with conservative columnists. Rumor has it that El Rushbo was there, but that rumor has been squelched. And Teh One is to break bread with liberal commenters tonight.

It makes sense to me that he would try to shake hands across the aisle, so to speak with some of the same people who will be criticizing his policies. I'm sure conservatives will be kinder and more polite than the leftosphere ever was to George W. Bush, who discovered that Washington is a bipartisan place only in the sense that they eat in the same lunchroom. Some even enjoyed movie night with the POTUS until he didn't spend 24/7 in sitting in his office looking concerned (psst. Grey hair tell the story, dude).

Obama's honeymoon will be short, regardless of who samples the soup with him. With a slow economy and various foreign entanglements, he's sure to hack off those on the right, but also, delightfully, those on the left, as well.

UPDATE: Condescension from the laughable left:

I actually don't find it terribly surprising that liberals haven't shown any outrage over Barack Obama's dinner party with George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, and David Brooks. I'll get to my hypothesis why liberals aren't upset in a moment. But first imagine this counterfactual: George W. Bush (or maybe a victorious John McCain) sat down before his first inauguration with Paul Krugman, E.J. Dionne, and Frank Foer. Would conservatives have reacted with the same equanimity? No, I think they'd have gone nuts. And the reason is that they wouldn't have confidence in Bush or McCain to be surrounded by liberal ideas without being deeply influenced by them. I don't think they'd have reacted this way if, say, a President Mitt Romney did the same thing.

And that's why liberals aren't having a cow. They know that Obama understands far more about policy than any of his right-wing dinner companions, is used to being exposed to opposing ideas, and won't come out of that dinner telling his staff, "Hey, did you know we cut half the capital gains tax and raise more revenue?"

Oh, yeah. That's why he picked a tax evader to head the Treasury. But, at least, they aren't calling Geithner unpatriotic.

Pandagon Watch: We Stick Our Fingers in Our Ears and Ignore the Bad News

The midget minds at Pandagon still can't report on the multiple Democrat corruption scandals, from Blagojevich to Bill Richardson to Baltimore mayor Sheila Dixon. In the immortal words of Amanda Marcotte, "What's to say? He's an idiot." Oh, if only she saved that scathing analysis for her mirror.

Instead, Amanda is begging for votes in the Weblog awards. One can assume that she'll find votes in the back of her car, in the finest Democrat tradition if Pandagon doesn't win.

But when she's not shilling for votes in what she herself called a stupid contest, Amanda does important stuff, like bash Texas cuz, you know, the high pregnancy rate is only because of abstinence only education. Poor dear. I guess she forgets all those Democrat governors who ran Texas since Reconstruction, like Mark "No Pass No Play" White and Ann "Big Mouth" Richards. But I suppose we can't hold it against her. It must be really stressful ignoring all the real stories happening out there.

What Is It With Democrats and Taxes?

They don't pay theirs but want to raise everyone else's.

The Real George W. Bush

Interesting column on a bunch of Texas reporters interviewing President Bush and seeing the guy we knew as governor shine through. Most particularly, I liked the list of Bush's accomplishments, the ones liberals don't want to acknowledge:

Keeping America safe from a post-9/11 terrorist attack. Measuring school results through No Child Left Behind. Giving seniors access to prescription drugs through Medicare. Creating a record number of community health centers. Presiding over 52 consecutive months of job growth. Pressuring Libya to give up its weapons of mass destruction. Tackling AIDS in Africa. Responding to China and India's engineering prowess through expanding math and science research. Responding with the surge in Iraq.

President Bush gets little credit for the important things he did right, but plenty of blame for things that went wrong. It's pathetic, actually, that so little attention has been paid to the compassionate part of his conservatism and too much time has been spent castigating him for not being nice to terrorists.

Joe the Plumber, Citizen Journalist

You don't need a fancy degree to be a good journalist, but you do need to think that reporting the news is important.

There's plenty of legitimate criticism of the way journalists have behaved while covering our wars in the Middle East. But arguing that reporters should be banned from war zones is appalling. There are plenty of important stories for journalists to tell, and doing so does not necessarily mean giving aid and comfort to our enemies. Wanting better journalism out of supposedly seasoned reporters doesn't mean becoming mouthpieces for the government, but, unfortunately, Joe the Plumber is the story, rather than just the historian.

H/T The Weekly Standard.

Obama Closing Gitmo Immediately?

Not quite.

According to aides, one of Barack Obama's first duties will be to order the closing of Guantanamo Bay. Liberals think this means Gitmo will be closed immediately. Remedial reading skills, ftw!

I suspect that this "leak" is designed to counter Obama's own words that closing Guantanamo Bay could be difficult. But moonbats will hear none of this. They think that prosecuting terrorists is just like dealing with your average drug dealer. Of course, lots of drug dealers walk the streets, too.

My suspicion is that Obama will issue some sort of order about investigating the closing of our Cuban facility, but I wouldn't be expecting it to shut down any time soon.

UPDATE: Suspicion confirmed.

Poor Lawyers

A sort of interesting topic came up in the comments at this thread. So, the question becomes, are there poor law students?

Don't get me wrong. I understand that there are a lot of people who live on very little while they go to school, but I don't think I ever considered them poor. The definition of poor to me includes eating popcorn and ramen noodles three times a day and not being able to pay for simple expenditures like, say, an unexpected medical bill. Of course, I put poverty at a lot lower than even those things because I've done and had to deal with those things, both when I had money and when I did not.

But it appears that there can be poor lawyers in a bad economy.

As law firms downsize, laid-off attorneys and new law school graduates unable to find jobs have been turning to an option they may never have imagined at law school: becoming contract attorneys -- hired guns for $35 an hour.

Yet in the past couple of months, even that field appears to be showing signs of a slowdown.

Blogs devoted to the topic of contract attorneys are rife with complaints about the lack of work, particularly in New York and Washington; sudden ending of jobs that were supposed to be long term; and the demise of such formerly standard perks as free lunches and car fare.

Thirty-five bucks an hour still isn't chump change, but for the lawyer used to making $150 an hour, it's quite a comedown. Still, it's always interesting to see professionals have to live in the world of the average employee.

Blogs devoted to the topic of contract attorneys are rife with complaints about the lack of work, particularly in New York and Washington; sudden ending of jobs that were supposed to be long term; and the demise of such formerly standard perks as free lunches and car fare...

Resounding with complaints about working conditions at temp agencies -- including cockroaches and a lack of air conditioning -- nosediving fees and tax nightmares, as well as advice about which agencies to avoid, the blogs do not paint a pretty picture of life as a contract attorney.

One Washington attorney who did not want to be identified said that he worked as a contract attorney for a year after first moving to Washington "because it was the quickest thing I could do."

The attorney worked for several staffing firms and was sent out to several law firms. Some places he worked were acceptable and some bad, he said. At one job, he was not allowed Internet access and had to sign out to go to the bathroom. At another job, he was allowed to listen to music on the Internet, which made the 14 hours a day he was "looking at boring e-mails" bearable.

It's interesting when legal jobs sound amazingly like the same environment your average office worker lives in.

Question of the Day

Why don't zero population supporters kill themselves?

Thank You. George Bush

Think Progress: Bush: I Approved Torture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Only moonbats think approved military interrogation techniques of terrorists constitutes torture. The rest of us think it helped save many lives.

Does This Mean Al Gore Has to Return His Nobel Prize?

Earth on the Brink of Ice Age.

Bush's Achievements

10 of them, to be exact.

Teenagers Are Gonna Have Sex, So Let's Help Them Out!

That's the message moonbats have about teenage sex.

Perhaps instead of gearing our entire system of sex ed towards a distinct religious minority made largely of upper middle-class white Christian conservatives we could, oh, I don’t know, not do that? We could approach the entire nation of under-18 potential sex-havers as uptight WASPs who’ll be persuaded by hamhanded references to knights and princesses and condoms t=hat work like penis netting rather than prophylactics,

Or we could use the screwed up (pun intended) approach of leftwing nuts who think emphasizing self-control is for the weak and teaching children that having sex as children has frequent and undesirable outcomes is old fashioned. That approach, of course, is to spend endless time helping teenagers "explore" their sexuality and not bother teaching them that there's only one way to avoid pregnancy when you really, really, really don't want it (and it's not abortion).

but given that we aren’t all Those People, it would make a lot more sense to maybe switch it up.

Nothing racist or classist about "Those People," is there?

It always amazes me that people who approach everything else with a supreme reverence for federalism believe that we can talk an entire nation of horny teenagers out of having sex based on what scares Timmy and Tammy Whitebread of Anytown, U.S.A.

What the hell does this mean? One of the logical fallacies so prevalent at Pandagon (and other batshit crazy sites) is this strawman argument that conservatives think no child will have sex if you teach abstinence only. No person on this planet believes abstinence only education can have a 100% success rate. But what morons fail to understand when they reference these discussions is that telling kids they're gonna have sex doesn't do a lot to discourage them from doing it.

This approach is designed to teach children that sex is great...as long as you wear a condom. Forget all that love and marriage and commitment stuff. Just get it on with whoever you feel like today. So, if that includes half the guys in the marching band (or girls, since we want to be inclusive), then that's just dandy. Guilt and standards are for losers.

Shooting Stupid Fish in a Barrel

Morons ask questions:

The recount shows that he won the Minnesota Senate race. The lying liars who say otherwise have no evidence of cheating.

Well, ok. How about this?

Meanwhile, a Ramsey County precinct ended up with 177 more ballots than there were recorded votes on Election Night. In that case, the board decided to go with the extra ballots, rather than the Election Night total, even though the county is now showing more ballots than voters in the precinct. This gave Mr. Franken a net gain of 37 votes, which means he's benefited both ways from the board's inconsistency.

Hmm. More votes than voters. I think that qualifies as cheating.

Journalistic Credentials

Leftwingers are sneering at Joe the Plumber (Joe Wurzelbacher) becoming a war correspondent. These people obviously don't know or understand what "freedom of the press" means or how journalism works.

First of all, there's no certification to become a journalist. That means you don't need any education whatsoever to publish your thoughts. Your nail specialist at least has to get a license from the state to practice. But journalists? Nope. Any guy or girl can be a reporter.

About 35 years ago, newsrooms around the country decided that, to cover school board meetings, you really needed some shlub with a B.A. in communications (or a shlub that, at least, was in college trying to obtain that B.A.). That's because taking that Chemistry of Photography course made you a better picture-taker and fact-checker (true story: reporter is hired from fancy named paper. Writes story and gives to editor who asks, "Did you fact check this?" Reporter says, "I thought you had people who did that." Editor replies, "We do. They're called 'reporters.'").

Secondly, war correspondents have always come from a variety of backgrounds. Ernest Hemingway never went to college and I don't think the same sniffy news readers looking down on Joe Wurzelbacher would call Hemingway a hack.

There's also the most famous correspondent of World War II, Ernie Pyle, who never had a degree.

None of this is to say that having a bachelor's degree is a bad thing, but having a piece of paper doesn't make you a good reporter. What makes good reporters is a natural curiosity, a desire for truth, and a personality that allows a person to ask inconvenient questions, like how increasing taxes on business owners isn't punishing success.

Back when I was in school a million years ago, my teacher told us that it was important for journalists to be well-rounded; that is, a good reporter should know about a lot of things besides writing and sitting on his ass in front of a computer. The idea was that if a reporter understood the world around him, he'd be better at writing about the things he was covering. Unfortunately, today's news readers and P.R. hacks think that journalism is a "profession," and one only worthy of those chosen few who didn't flunk their exams in college because they were drinking too much the night before and who hold the proper opinions. Journalism is actually better when a variety of opinions and viewpoints get expressed.

Obama Wants Talks with Hamas

The Guardian is reporting that the Obama administration is preparing to engage in "low level" talks with Hamas, even though (as Allahpundit notes) Obama condemned talking to terrorists just last April). Chalk it up to the latest round of flip-flops by Teh One, a flip-flop soundly applauded by the usual moonbat sources who never met a terrorist they didn't think we should negotiate with.

The Tough Part Is Deciding Who to Pick

Burger King: Unfriend 10 Facebook friends, get a free Whopper

When will the madness end at Burger King?

The publicity department at Burger King (NYSE:BKC) is at it again with another campaign that is sure to disturb many — including your best friend. The nation’s No. 2 burger chain is offering Facebook users a coupon for a free Whopper if they “unfriend” 10 people from their social network database.

After reading about the crazy campaign on The Hamburger Today blog, I immediately went to Facebook to see if the program was legit.

Sure enough, I spotted Whopper Sacrifice challenge. Here’s an excerpt from the ad copy:

“What would you do for a free WHOPPER? Would you insult an elected official? Would you do a naked handstand? Would you go so far as to turn your back on friendship?”

It goes on to say that if you “sacrifice” 10 friends on your Facebook profile, you’ll get a free Whopper.

But wait, it gets better. When you initiate the program, the application pulls up the mug shots of all your friends — taunting you to make picks as they stare you in the face.

Then the big warning comes: Once you select someone to unfriend, the program will — insert gasp here — notify that person that you have sacrificed them for a burger! (And, by the way, ‘friend’ is now a verb, as my Facebook friend June keeps telling me.)

Repeat a Lie Long Enough and People Think It Is the Truth

Remember this?



Obama supporters thought Tina Fey was Sarah Palin.



And a lot of morons still believe it. Examples:

Heaven forbid we should have “standards”, and rightfully judge a candidate as unprepared when she can’t name a single newspaper she reads, and tries to claim she understands foreign policy because she “can see Russia from my house”.

Sarah lost and the World now knows Alaska has a true idiot for a Govenor let’s move on. Sarah should try raising her kids so they wont keep having babies as their only children themselves. We know she only reads the news from a Starbucks cup, we know she sees Russia from her window and we know she uses sex to get what she wants.

It doesn't matter what Palin said, or the fact that she was grilled in interviews whereas Obama was lobbed softballs. It only matters that they hate her.

Why Obama Will "Own" The Recession

Basically, because his policies are destined to prolong the downturn.

Now today's Obamacrats are apparently going to try and Hooverize President Bush in an effort to shield themselves from the potential political fallout of a prolonged recession. It will take years to fix the American economy, Obama says, and years of trillion-dollar budget deficits to do it. And everyday it seems that Team Obama tries to lower economic expectations, such as bearishly predicting that unemployment would hit double-digits.

The not-so-subtle message in the middle of all these pessimistic prognostications: When ya'll go to vote in 2010 and 2012 and a) unemployment is still as high as it's been in decades, b) income growth is sluggish at best, c) the budget deficit is running at a trillion bucks a year, and d) stock prices remain stubbornly low -- hey, don't blame us, you can't rebuild Rome in a day or even in a first term. Remember, Bush really left us a mess.

That's precisely the strategy behind leftwing lunacy like this, where Democrat control of Congress is dismissed as unimportant to the overall point that every bad thing that happens is because of Republicans.

The fact is, Obama is already warning Americans (and doing everything short of getting on his knees for Democrats in Congress) that the recession is going to get much, much worse before it gets better. I suppose he thinks if he warns Americans before January 20, they won't hold him accountable in four years when he reminds them that he warned them.

Alas, such will not be the case. If Obama and the Democrats don't see a turnaround within a year, I suspect most voters will dump Democrats in 2010 and Obama in 2012, history-making presidency or not. Americans are an impatient lot, and if unemployment gets even close to double digits, voters will be panic-stricken. We haven't seen 10% unemployment in a generation, and there's a whole bunch of 20-somethings who think having a job is a constitutional right.

The problem with Obama's stimulus recovery plan manifold. First, the jobs his We Piddle Around programs will product are ill-suited to today's work force. Office workers aren't skilled in the building industry, and most women simply can't do the sort of physical labor required to build bridges and roads (sorry, Amanda). Worse yet, Obama's plan is predicated on the idea that the unemployed American is a 20-year-old male. But with women making up nearly half the workforce, you have to wonder how many of them will want to operate backhoes and cranes. This isn't to bash women; we just tend to work in offices, service industries, and other less labor-intensive jobs.

Secondly, the amount of money involved may not be enough to encourage spending. Our economy runs on consumption, and consumers aren't doing that right now. We've heard nothing but how terrible the economy is, how bad jobs are, and how we're going to hell in a handbasket for a couple of years. What do these morons who say these things think is going to happen? Outside of the hapless idiots taking out interest-only mortgages, most people have spent the last year reducing their expenses. That's what people did with the 1,200 bucks they got last spring.

If Obama wants people to spend, he's either going to have to let the cycle go (with it's obvious pain and suffering) or he's going to have to pass out such huge checks that people are comfortable spending it. I'm thinking in the neighborhood of $5,000 to $10,000. Not because I think the government should be passing out welfare to everybody, but if Democrats honestly expect people to buy refrigerators and cars, then they have to make the payoff large enough to overcome people's reluctance to let go of any extra money right now.

Finally, Obama's plans include so much radical restructuring of our economy that even people who support some of his ideas are going to balk. Lots of people lurv the idea of a single payer health care system (well, until they live with it, that is), but remaking 1/7th of the U.S. economy would cause even more turmoil, expense, and unemployment than leaving things as they are. What happens to all the insurance company employees when insurance is no longer needed? Are they all supposed to become health care workers? What happens to all the doctors and nurses who don't want to work under socialized medicine? How do we handle the radical change that's being discussed?

And, really, how can Obama avoid taking responsibility when he will be so actively meddling in the economy? It will be his decision to forego deep and permanent new tax cuts, his decision to not extend the Bush tax cuts, his decision on how to spend the remaining $350 billion in TARP money, his decision to quasi-nationalize healthcare, his decision to push a cap-and-trade carbon emission program and his decision to spend hundreds of billions on a "green" industrial policy. It might even be his decision to try and reunionize the American laborforce. Obama will "own" the battered economy, perhaps almost literally, given Uncle Sam's bailout binge.

Liberals think that every unemployed person can go work in "green technologies" and that this will fix the economy. But not all Americans will either want to work in those industries or have the skills to do so (not to mention not living where these industries develop). No matter how much the useful idiots try to blame George Bush, this recession will be Barack Obama's come January 20.

Maybe Obama needs a little help.

Fighting Crime by Fining the Victims

Via Lone Star Times, comes this object lesson:

A Dallas woman acted fast after hearing someone try to break into her home.

She pushed the panic button on her security alarm.

The police came, even made an arrest, so why was she charged a false alarm fine?

Jill Frederick lives alone. She's been burglarized twice. So when a stranger banged on her door at 11 p.m., she hit the panic button on her alarm.

"I thought if I wait one more second, then this guy is coming in. I just did the thing I thought would make them respond fastest," she said.

The panic button triggered what police call a "code 3 call." Officers use their lights and sirens. They got there in six minutes. The man was still there and was drunk so they arrested him.

"To me, that's what a panic button is for," said Frederick.

But a few weeks later, Frederick got a $100 fine for a false alarm.

Jill Frederick said she would do the same thing next time. Police told her there wasn't really an offense, since the man didn't actually try to break in.

"I think that's not right and I don't think anyone should have to pay a $100 to have the police come out and arrest somebody," said Frederick.

Dallas police say there's a city ordinance that allows them to fine people who use their panic buttons in non-emergency situations.

"We encourage people to use their panic alarm where there really is an emergency when there is an offense going down when someone is kicking in, coming in or trying to get into the house," said Lt. Chris Aulbaugh from Dallas police.

DPD says instead of pushing the panic button, Frederick should have called 911.

So, you've been victimized twice, a guy bangs on your door in the dead of night and you're supposed to hope the 911 operator sends someone out? And what's this about waiting till the guy is in the house before hitting the panic button in an apartment?

Even if the police got there in six minutes with the panic alarm, this woman could have been dead or seriously injured if she had to wait till he crossed the threshhold before hitting the button.

If a panic button isn't for people in bad areas of town to avoid becoming victims, what is it for?

More Equivalence

Pro-Palestinian Protester Calls for Jews to "Go Back to the Oven" at Anti-Israel Demonstration

But some protesters at this rally in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., took their rhetoric a step further, calling for the extermination of Israel — and of Jews.

Separated by battle lines and a stream of rush-hour traffic outside a federal courthouse last week, at least 200 pro-Palestinian demonstrators faced off against a smaller crowd of Israel supporters.

Most of the chants were run-of-the-mill; men and women waving Palestinian flags called Israel's invasion of Gaza a "crime," while the pro-Israel group carried signs calling the Hamas-run territory a "terror state."

But as the protest continued and crowds grew, one woman in a hijab began to shout curses and slurs that shocked Jewish activists in the city, which has a sizable Jewish population.

"Go back to the oven," she shouted, calling for the counter-protesters to die in the manner that the Nazis used to exterminate Jews during the Holocaust.

"You need a big oven, that's what you need," she yelled.

I'm sure there are multiple examples of Israel supporters calling for the extermination of all Palestinians because, you know, there's no difference between them.

Pandagon Watch: No Bad News for Obama

The Pandagonistas still haven't found room to address the Blagojevich scandal (even as it illuminates the hypocrisy, incompetence, and race-baiting of the Democrat party), nor have they found time to discuss Bill Richardson's embarrassing fall from grace. But they do find time to bash Ann Coulter yet again!

I don’t think there’s a politically aware person in America who can’t make predictable fag and woman jokes about Democrats to their heart’s content without giving this idiot more play.

No, these days, we just need to let Harry Reid do all the clown scenes in this pathetic comedy.

The explosion of bad and embarrassing news surrounding Democrats (before Barack Obama is even inaugurated) must be rather difficult to ignore at Pandagon. You have to give them credit for stubbornness, that's for sure.

Quote of the Day

"I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious."

--Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Cooper, 29 November 1802

Jefferson hadn't met Democrats yet.

For the Record...

-- The passenger forced to cover up his T-shirt in order to get on an airplane deserves the $240,000 he's been awarded. The guy's shirt was in Arabic, which made other passengers uncomfortable. Sorry, guys. The First Amendment specifically allows you to be uncomfortable.

-- Roland Burris should be seated in the U.S. Senate. There's nothing barring the seating of a member because a state's governor is under investigation. Regardless of how one feels about Blagojevich, he's still the governor and had the right to appoint Burris. For Democrats to refuse to seat him shows how little regard for democracy Democrats actually have. When the guy they want doesn't get in, they want to nullify the results. This is as true in 2009 as it was in 2000.

-- Judging from his cabinet nominees, Barack Obama lacks discernment as well as experience. Sanjay Gupta for Surgeon General? Well, at least this guy's got an M.D., as opposed to Panetta's experience in intelligence work. Having a medical media mouthpiece fill the role of medical media mouthpiece isn't the worst thing, I suppose, but doesn't Obama know anyone with actual experience to fill these positions? Or is it all about kissing and making up with those constituents offended by a five-minute lapse?

-- Whatever the reasons for canceling her, booking Ann Coulter for tomorrow's Today show is about as close to "Oops, we screwed up" as we're likely to see from the MSM. NBC says they didn't ban Coulter "for life," but haven't offered up a better explanation. Does anyone really believe that Perez Hilton could only have done an interview today, rather than tomorrow? It sounds to me like there was some heat applied to NBC for caving to the morons at Media Matters and sounder minds prevailed.