"The difference is that instead of dirt and poison, we have rather chosen to fill our hives with honey and wax, thus furnishing mankind with the two noblest of things, which are Sweetness and Light." - Jonathan Swift

« These Mug Shots Have What In Common? | Home | Kilpatricks, Conyers Named In FBI Probe »

Selected News For Jan 31 – Feb 6

This thread is for the busy bees of S&L to post news items themselves.

In order to make the articles as readable as possible, please try to stick to the format described in the first of these weekly editions here. Please eschew articles from blogs or hugely popular sites like the Drudge Report, since most people will presumably see such material elsewhere.

Of course articles that fit under the topic of a recent thread should be posted there. As always, remember to excerpt heavily and to provide a link to the original source.

Related Articles:

 

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Saturday, January 31st, 2009 at 12:00 am. You can leave a response.

102 Responses to “Selected News For Jan 31 – Feb 6”

  1. BillK
    January 31, 2009 at 6:52 am

    You can say this for the man – he keeps his promises, country be damned.

    From Fox News:

    Defense Official: Obama Calling for Defense Budget Cuts

    Some overall budget figures are expected to be announced Monday.

    The Obama administration has asked the military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff to cut the Pentagon’s budget request for the fiscal year 2010 by more than 10 percent — about $55 billion — a senior U.S. defense official tells FOX News.

    Last year’s defense budget was $512 billion. Service chiefs and planners will be spending the weekend “burning the midnight oil” looking at ways to cut the budget — looking especially at weapons programs, the defense official said.

    Some overall budget figures are expected to be announced Monday. …

    http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....dget-cuts/

    Finishing up in Iraq.

    The “good war” in Afghanistan.

    Why not cut the military budget? Who needs ‘em.

    • sheehanjihad
      February 1, 2009 at 8:24 pm

      This is like a 1930’s redux…obama is mirroring every mistake made by FDR and his band of merry men, from destroying the economy, huge pork barrel projects, new governmental controls over banking and businesses, but most of all, allowing the country to become woefully unprepared to defend itself if attacked because of plain ignorance of what was happening, and that pie in the sky liberal democrat attitude of plugging your head so far in the sand that the only thing showing is your behind.

      What in the world is the matter with these people? Have they not learned from History? Oh, yeah, they havent, History has been revised, eliminated, or ignored by our “feel good” education indoctrination teams called liberal teachers and professors.

      Well, that “doomed to repeat it” saying is going to rear it’s ugly head soon enough….they should have waited another twenty years, because by then, those of us who were a part of history, or were taught history would be dead or too old to do anything about it. Fortunately, there are a lot of us who are just young enough to stand up and fight one more time for our children’s future that is being squandered so vociferously by a very uncaring power mad culture of ignorant self centered morons

      . It’s gonna be a bumpy ride boys! But it will be damn well worth it in the end. This evil will not prevail. It just seems like it will right now. Unfortunately, those who think they have control have no idea how tenuous their grip on power is……and how hard it is to see when you sacrifice light to remain in the darkness.

      Yeah, I know how it sounds…but there are millions who will echo my sentiment….by the pen, and by the sword. whatever it takes to replace the foul stench of socialistic dogma with the fresh air of Freedom.!!!

      (insert appropriate cuss words here_____________________________)

  2. BillK
    January 31, 2009 at 7:07 am

    Just a prelude to spending even more money we don’t have, I’m sure.

    From the AP:

    Obama: No Single Action Can Cure the Economy

    President says his administration will outline a new strategy in the coming days for spending billions of federal dollars to pull the nation out of an economic crisis.

    WASHINGTON – President Obama said Saturday his administration will outline a new strategy in the coming days for spending billions of federal dollars to pull the nation out of an economic crisis he described as “devastating.”

    Obama and his top advisers are weighing how to structure the remaining $350 billion that Congress approved last year to save financial institutions and lenders from collapse. The new president also warned there is no single action that would allow his administration to fix the struggling U.S. economy, a stark statement at the end of a week that saw hundreds of thousands of Americans lose their jobs.

    “No one bill, no matter how comprehensive, can cure what ails our economy,” Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address. “So just as we jump-start job creation, we must also ensure that markets are stable, credit is flowing and families can stay in their homes.”

    Obama and his aides spent his first two weeks in power working on the nation’s economic troubles. The final three months of last year sent the economy into its worst downhill slide in a quarter-century. The economy stumbled backward at a 3.8 percent pace, government economists said Friday; that rate could accelerate to 5 percent or more this quarter.

    Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner met with the administration’s top officials and advisers in recent days, trying to finish a plan to overhaul the $700 billion bailout program that is already half gone. Geithner previously said the administration is weighing the possibility of using a government-run “bad bank” to buy up toxic assets that are weighing on the books of financial institutions, but some officials now say that option is gone because of potential costs.

    Many of the measures under consideration could end up costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars beyond the original $700 billion price tag. Aides would not rule out the possibility of the administration’s asking for more than the $350 billion already allocated.

    Obama didn’t commit his administration to any decision Saturday but broadly described his ideal final package.

    “Soon my treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, will announce a new strategy for reviving our financial system that gets credit flowing to businesses and families,” Obama said. “We’ll help lower mortgage costs and extend loans to small businesses so they can create jobs. We’ll ensure that CEOs are not draining funds that should be advancing our recovery.” …

    http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....y/100days/

    Why would any bank bother making loans now that the Feds have made it quite clear that they reserve the right to rewrite the terms of those loans at any time including forgiving balances and summarily reducing principal amounts?

    If I ran a bank I’d certainly take the TARP money I could from the first round and then keep it to pay down costs and existing bad loans.

    But make more bad loans? That’s just insane.

    Worse yet is the recent legislation severely restricting the ability of credit card companies to adjust interest rates, so I certainly wouldn’t be issuing credit cards, either.

    Nope, for the foreseeable future, providing a reliable safe haven for depositors, paying a decent interest rate and only issuing loans to those with a FICO score of 650 or higher seems like a really, really good market niche to occupy.

    I know I’d put my money in such a bank.

  3. BillK
    January 31, 2009 at 7:14 am

    But I thought this was the “good” war?

    From the AP:

    Obama Unlikely to Widen Afghan War

    Less than two weeks into the new administration, Obama has had little to say in public about what his top military adviser says is the largest challenge facing the armed forces.

    WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama campaigned on a promise to redirect U.S. troops and resources to Afghanistan from Iraq, but he has done little so far to suggest he will significantly widen the grinding war with insurgents in Afghanistan.

    On the contrary, Obama appears likely to streamline the U.S. focus with an eye to the worsening economy and the cautionary example of the Iraq war that sapped political support for President George W. Bush.

    “There’s not simply a military solution to that problem,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said last week, and Obama believes “that only through long-term and sustainable development can we ever hope to turn around what’s going on there.”

    Less than two weeks into the new administration, Obama has had little to say in public about what his top military adviser says is the largest challenge facing the armed forces. He did say Afghanistan and Pakistan are the central front in the struggle against terrorism, a clue to the likely shift toward a targeted counterterrorism strategy.

    After Obama’s first visit to the Pentagon as president, a senior defense official said the new president surveyed top uniformed officers about the strain of fighting two wars and warned that the economic crisis will limit U.S. responses. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because Obama’s meeting with the Joint Chiefs of Staff was private.

    Obama said he wants to add troops to turn back a resurgent Taliban, but he has not gone beyond the approximately 30,000 additional forces already under consideration by the previous administration. Those troops will nearly double the U.S. presence in Afghanistan this year, but they amount to a finger in the dike while Obama recalibrates a chaotic mishmash of military and development objectives.

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates last week warned of grandiose goals in Afghanistan, prescribing a single-minded strategy to prevent Afghanistan from being a terrorism launchpad.

    “Afghanistan is the fourth or fifth poorest country in the world, and if we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of Central Asian Valhalla over there, we will lose,” Gates said, referring to a haven of purity in Norse mythology. “Nobody in the world has that kind of time, patience or money, to be honest.”

    Obama has ordered a fast internal review of his military, diplomatic and other options in Afghanistan before he makes decisions that define how aggressively he will answer the growing threat of failure in Afghanistan.

    Along with that review, coordinated by the National Security Council, Obama will have results of a just-completed classified Joint Chiefs of Staff assessment of a largely stalemated fight against the Taliban and counterterrorism efforts against al-Qaida and affiliated groups along the Pakistan border.

    That report, which has not yet gone to the White House, talks broadly about tamping down expectations in the Afghan war.

    Instead, it suggests that key goals should be to make modest gains to stabilize the governance and to eliminate terrorist safe havens, senior defense officials said. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the report is secret.

    It also calls for military commanders to better articulate what their objectives in Afghanistan are because only then can leaders determine what types of troops should be deployed and how many.

    The Joint Chiefs review also stresses that the strategy must be driven by what the Afghans want and that the U.S. cannot impose its own goals on the Afghan government. …

    http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....r/100days/

    So after a couple years of bashing Bush for not doing more in Afghanistan, Obama is going to… not do more in Afghanistan.

    That’s what I call “change”…

    • pdsand
      February 2, 2009 at 10:57 am

      Why bother with fighting the war on a noun? All any reasonable person would do is issue a warrant for Bin Laden’s arrest, withdraw the troops, and start shipping food and medical supplies to Afghanistan’s rightful rulers, the Taliban so that it can widen its efforts at community organization. We have to learn that we as decadent Americans are weak and feeble next to the overwhelming might of the world proletariat. Say no to the evil American empire!

  4. BillK
    January 31, 2009 at 7:22 am

    The “Stimulus” bill is also a protectionism bill, proving Obama wants to duplicate not just the New Deal, but Smoot Hawley as well:

    From Fox News:

    ‘Buy American’ Rule in Stimulus Bill Sparks Protest

    U.S. businesses and trading partners are resisting a new “Buy American” provision in the $819 billion economic stimulus package making its way through Congress.

    The provision, included in the House bill that passed on Wednesday, generally prohibits the purchase of foreign iron and steel for any stimulus-funded infrastructure project.

    The goal is to boost the U.S. iron and steel industries, which have been pummeled by the current recession. Shipments in the steel industry, for example, fell 40 percent last year.

    Yet John Murphy, vice president of international affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said 50 million Americans whose jobs depend on exports would pay the price.

    “If the U.S. raises these barriers to international business, we’re likely to see massive retaliation around the world,” he said.

    The massive tax cuts and spending package has moved to the Senate, where lawmakers are working on their own version that extends the “Buy American” initiative beyond the House’s iron and steel mandates to include all U.S. manufactured goods.

    President Obama has pushed for swift passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as vital to prevent the collapse of the fragile U.S. economy as it wobbles from the global financial crisis.

    Yet Obama is set to get an earful when he visits Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Ottawa in a few weeks, his first official visit abroad.

    “We want to avoid protectionism in this economic slowdown,” said Harper, whose country ships 40 percent of its steel to this country under the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). “This is obviously a serious matter and of serious concern to us.”

    A European Union spokesman said it was premature to take a stance on a text that had not yet been seen.

    “However, the one thing we can be absolutely certain about, is if a bill is passed which prohibits the sale or purchase of European goods on American territory, that is something we will not stand idly by and ignore,” said Peter Power, spokesman for EU trade commissioner Catherine Ashton.

    There was no immediate reaction from China, another major steel producer.

    Obama, who criticized international trade agreements, including NAFTA, in his presidential campaign, has wasted no time in taking a tough stance on trade since taking office January 20.

    The next day, the Obama administration branded China a currency manipulator, setting the stage for a trade war with the Asian giant, which has overtaken Japan as America’s biggest foreign creditor.

    A steel and iron industry survey suggested the provision is quite popular, showing 90 percent of Americans support it.

    But Murphy, of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, noted the Smoot Hawley tariffs triggered a wave of protectionism that helped turn the recession of 1929 into the Great Depression of the 1930s.

    At a summit meeting former President Bush hosted in November, leaders of the world’s 20 richest nations agreed not to adopt protectionist measures to deal with the current economic crisis.

    But the global downturn is pressuring other countries to bend. Britain’s government, for one, came under fire for allowing Italian and Portuguese workers at a refinery project.

    Murphy warned that’s just a harbinger of things to come.

    “We could see a real epidemic if we’re not careful,” he said.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....s-protest/

    So we’ve got Obama simultaneously printing money and pissing off our biggest investor.

    We’re going to add protectionist provisions to the “stimulus” bill requiring the purchase of American goods even if foreign goods are priced uncompetitively.

    We really are going to see a second Great Depression; the Democrats are guaranteeing that knowing the worse the economy gets, the more socialists they create.

    If Americans didn’t have such poor backgrounds in history, they’d see it coming.

    Thanks to those self-same clueless individuals, there’s also not a damn thing we can do about it except watch it happen and say “I told you so” afterwards. :-(

    • Confucius
      January 31, 2009 at 9:39 am

      This won’t help our image around the world, Messier/Senor/Comrade Obama.

    • BillK
      January 31, 2009 at 9:47 am

      That should, of course, read “requiring the purchase of American goods even if they are priced uncompetitively.”

      It would, of course, make perfect sense to buy American goods if foreign goods were priced uncompetitively. :-) :-)

    • papapoli
      January 31, 2009 at 11:57 am

      There is really no question that there are far too many things wrong with the existing “stimulus” package. From the protectionism aspects detailed in this article to the progressive special interest projects to be funded in the billions.

      I disagree that there is nothing that can be done about it though. Our comments here and elsewhere registering our opposition is something. Letting our representatives in Congress know of our discontent is something. As of yesterday, Fox News reported that, based on an Opinion Dynamics Corp. poll, less than 45% of Americans are convinced the package will have the desired impact.

      I have written an Open Letter to the 111th Congress which is on its way to my Congressional delegation. It is also posted at Petitions Online at http://www.petitiononline.com/.....tion.html.. It asks Congress to question their acts on the spending measure, I think in an artful way. As constituents, we may not have the direct ability to vote this measure down, but we have the ability to call on our representatives to be responsible. If you feel inclined, visit the petition site. If you believe the letter captures you sentiments, feel free to sign in support, or even use its language to direct communications to your representatives.

  5. BillK
    January 31, 2009 at 7:27 am

    From Fox News:

    Anti-Gay Marriage Donors Fear Increased Threats After California Judge’s Disclosure Ruling

    By Joshua Rhett Miller

    Supporters of Proposition 8, the California constitutional amendment that banned gay marriage in the state in November, say they expect discrimination, harassment and intimidation to continue after a federal judge denied a request to keep private the names of donors to the initiative.

    Douglas McDermott, president of McDermott Financial and Insurance in Sacramento, donated $15,000 to the Prop. 8 campaign in September. While his business hasn’t been targeted, McDermott said some angry callers have left threatening messages.

    “You get telephone calls, you get threats,” McDermott told FOXNews.com. “Ask anyone — If you’ve donated, your name is published everywhere, all over California. That’s what’s happening.”

    “They come all day and night,” he said.

    Another donor, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals, said employees at his California real estate development and investment company received an anonymous e-mail in October outing him as someone who gave $30,000 to support Prop 8.

    “Did you know you work for a judgmental bigot? I know I could not work for someone who encourages bigotry and hate,” the e-mail read.

    “Something like that isn’t the nicest thing to get when you come into the office on a Monday,” the executive told FOXNews.com. “Another fellow left a message on my voicemail saying, ‘What goes around comes around, and now you’re going to experience the comes around part. Have fun.‘”

    Both men said they’re worried that the harassment will continue in the wake of Thursday’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Morrison England. Attorneys for the Prop 8 campaign have indicated they plan to appeal. An official for the Yes on 8 campaign has said another 1,600 donors will be put at risk with the release of the reports on Monday.

    “You don’t know in today’s world where threats will lead,” the real estate executive told FOXNews.com. “There’s a delicate balance between the rights of an individual and disclosure.”

    The judge’s ruling upheld California’s campaign finance law, which specifies that information on political campaign donations be made public. Nationwide, such laws aim for transparency in the political process by shining a light on where the money is coming from and where it’s going.

    Brian Brown, executive director for the National Organization for Marriage California, said stopping the disclosure of smaller donors is the group’s “main concern.” The names of major donors already have been disclosed on the secretary of state’s Web site.

    “I am worried that more threats and intimidation is going to occur because of [the judge's] decision,” Brown said. “But this isn’t the end of the line.”

    Brown said he’s particularly troubled by a Web site that shows a map of donors, how much they donated and when.

    “These are things that should not happen in a democracy,” he said. “People should not be punished for their deeply held beliefs. This is a core part of what our system is about and it’s being threatened by this sort of intimidation and harassment. People shouldn’t have to choose between their safety and supporting what they believe in.”

    But Fred Karger, founder of the gay-rights group Californians Against Hate, said he was “delighted” with Thursday’s ruling that upheld the campaign finance disclosure law — while at the same time denouncing any threats or violence from either side of the issue.

    “It’s deplorable that things have happened, but it’s happened on both sides,” Karger said. “It’s very unfortunate. It’s a very emotional campaign. We are in the midst of a civil rights struggle for equal rights and this will continue until hatred is gone.” …

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,485967,00.html

    Really, this is no different from card check – intimidate voters into not supporting PC positions on issues “or we won’t be responsible for what might happen to you – or your family.”

    I guess the left learned a few things from watching all those seasons of The Sopranos.

    • Confucius
      January 31, 2009 at 9:47 am

      If they’re threatened, then do as the other side did. Be a victim and have the courts imprison the intimidators on a hate crime.

      Prisoners love their gays. And vice versa.

    • Barbie
      January 31, 2009 at 10:20 am

      ‘But Fred Karger, founder of the gay-rights group Californians Against Hate said …“It’s deplorable that things have happened, but it’s happened on both sides,” Karger said. …

      How has this happened on ‘both sides’? One side is tracking down donors and making threats and insinuations of violence against the physical safety and privacy of those donors while posting a map on a website where donors’ addresses and locations are listed (fill in your own insinuation)… and the other side merely exercised their right to vote and to donate to a cause? This is what happens when one group of people becomes a ‘protected class’ (or is desperate to become one in this case). This makes me so po’d I’m going to donate in honor of the oppressed voters of Prop 8 – I’m going to make a donation to a ‘Protect Marriage’ organization. I hope the voters don’t back down and I hope they refuse to be intimidated. I’m sorry now I didn’t donate to Prop 8 -

    • Flession
      February 1, 2009 at 2:02 am

      Does anyone else find the ironry in the name of Mr. Karger’s group name “Californians Against Hate” as he approves of what is happening to these people?

    • JohnMG
      February 2, 2009 at 11:20 am

      Not entirely off-topic, but think about this. If this judge can make these donors’ names public (effectively by decree), how soon before some federal judge rules that NICS checks on firearms purchases must be made public, despite current law. This is only one more of the many chips from our right to privacy.

      Freedom of expression? Not in Obama-world!!

  6. BillK
    January 31, 2009 at 7:33 am

    Whoops, we haven’t bashed Sarah Palin in a week or so!

    From a “we must never let this woman show her face again” AP:

    Alaska lawmakers question Sarah Palin’s focus

    By Anne Sutton

    JUNEAU, Alaska — Driving home at night from her Capitol office, the leader of Alaska’s House Democrats often passes the governor’s white-columned mansion and wonders why more lights aren’t on.

    Rep. Beth Kerttula assumes Gov. Sarah Palin is out of town, though Palin’s staffers say so far their boss has been there for most of the legislative session that began Jan. 20.

    It’s a small matter, but it’s part of the buzz around the Capitol among lawmakers who are seeing less of their governor than in years past and wondering what it means in the wake of a Republican vice presidential run that brought Palin global fame and notoriety.

    They’re accustomed to spotting her striding past, using two BlackBerries, stopping to chat in the hallway or inviting reporters into her office while she prepares for a speech.

    Palin insists her focus is still on Alaska.

    “I swore to steadfastly and doggedly guard the interests of this great state like a grizzly with cubs,” she said in her State of the State address two days after the session began. “We’ve got to fight for each other, not against, and not let external sensationalized distractions draw us off course.”

    Some say she appears more tense than the vice presidential candidate who delivered sly jokes and incendiary speeches to packed rallies across the Lower 48.

    “Not so sparky,” said Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, who wonders if the distractions of her newfound celebrity will keep Palin from devoting her full attention to Alaska’s looming budget shortfall.

    Others grumble that she didn’t seem to reach out to the nearly 60 lawmakers assembled before her.

    “I think her speech was not directed to us but right over our heads to a national audience,” said Rep. David Guttenberg, D-Fairbanks, who remembers a much different Palin from just six months ago.

    “There were days when she walked around the building with (her daughter) Piper, handing out bagels. I think those days are gone,” he added.

    Speculation that Palin is positioning herself for a presidential run in 2012 was fueled by news that she formed a political action committee.

    “The half-life of political celebrity is really quite short, so she has to make a move,” said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics.

    Some pundits say Palin should go after U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s seat in 2010, but Sabato doubts Palin would win that contest.

    He said she would do better by running for re-election and launching a White House bid during a second term as governor. She’ll have to prove that she’s engaged and energized over Alaska issues, though.

    “If she gives any indication that she’s bored, she will literally get herself in trouble with what would otherwise be a slam dunk re-election,” Sabato said.

    Some Alaska lawmakers say Palin already has proved she’s engaged.

    “So far, I’ve seen the governor deliver her energy package, she delivered her budget on time and she met with the majority caucus,” said Sen. Gene Therriault, R-North Pole. “I’ve not seen or heard anyone come up with anything the executive is supposed to be doing that she has not done. It appears to me she’s back on the job full-time.”

    Palin’s spokesman says her press office continues to receive hundreds of media requests for interviews, most of which she turns down. She has yet to hold a press conference at the Capitol this year.

    However, just a few days ago, she walked out of the mansion after meeting with majority lawmakers and took reporters’ questions. She greeted the small group with a cheerful, “Hi guys,” then she addressed the issue of her priorities.

    “I’m sure legislators know I am the governor of Alaska, and this is first and foremost on my mind and my agenda. Any travel or meeting or participation outside of Alaska will only be if it’s good for Alaska,” she said. …

    http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2.....ns,00.html

    I love the woman, and leave it to Democrats to decry the fact that she’s not giving away freebies anymore.

    Perhaps after the Presidential campaign she’s seen a bit more of the true character of her “fellow lawmakers” on the opposite side of the aisle.

    • Confucius
      January 31, 2009 at 9:49 am

      I enjoy these articles. They keep Mrs. Palin fresh in my thoughts and my prayers.

    • JohnMG
      February 2, 2009 at 11:33 am

      …..“I think her speech was not directed to us but right over our heads to a national audience,” said Rep. David Guttenberg, D-Fairbanks, who remembers a much different Palin from just six months ago.

      Imagine that!!?? Just slightly less than 6 months ago, democrats of every stripe, and the MSM (I know, I know, that’s redundant) were lined up and taking viscious and un-founded swipes at her in an effort to completely discredit her, and ruin her–both personally and professionally. Doubtless many of them could have weathered such an assault at all, much less with the dignity as did she. Now they wonder that she has ‘changed’? They’re lucky she hasn’t set about personally exterminating them a’la the book “Open Season”.

      And there’s no question in my mind she has not only the skill, but the ability to get the job done.

      Go, Sarah!!

  7. Media_man
    January 31, 2009 at 8:38 am

    Mark Steyn’s column this week, discussing the “porkulus” bill.

    http://www.ocregister.com/arti.....ill-pelosi

  8. BillK
    January 31, 2009 at 9:22 am

    Remember, this is economic stimulus it’s imperative we pass now!!!

    From the (Denver) Rocky Mountain News:

    Stimulus to pump life into wildlife refuge

    Salazar says arsenal, other sanctuaries to benefit from package

    By Todd Hartman

    The massive federal stimulus package would rain dollars on Colorado’s wildlife sanctuaries, shoring up visitor centers, tour routes and wildlife habitat, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Friday.

    Touring the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge in Commerce City, where a $7 million “green” visitors center is in the works, Salazar said the project and others could benefit from hundreds of millions of dollars in spending on national parks and refuges.

    Salazar called the visitors center at the arsenal “shovel-ready” and said the work could translate to 120 jobs. Other projects at the former Army chemical weapons factory site northeast of Denver could include an expanded bus tour route for visitors and improvements to habitat for the refuge’s resident bison herd.

    “If we can get the stimulus package through, then three years from now we can come out here and we can celebrate what is going to be the core of the national wildlife center here at this 27-square mile” refuge, Salazar said with Canada geese honking in the background.

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees the refuge, hopes stimulus money could lead to several other projects across Colorado, including an auto tour route at the Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge in the San Luis Valley, fish ladders in the Colorado River basin on the Western Slope and improvements to a black-footed ferret conservation center near Fort Collins, among others.

    The U.S. House has approved an $819 million stimulus plan. The Senate will likely consider its own version next week.

    “The president’s recovery and reinvestment plan will . . . pump life into our national wildlife refuges, national parks and other public lands by allowing us to undertake much-needed maintenance and improvement projects for visitors and wildlife alike,” Salazar said.

    Arsenal officials have already raised $4 million for the visitors center and say another $3 million could accelerate the project. A bigger, more modern center would improve the experience of a growing stream of visitors to the site since its transformation from a closed military area to an easily accessible urban wildlife refuge open to the public, they say. …

    http://www.rockymountainnews.c.....fe-refuge/

    Wildlife refuge area visitor centers and fish ladders?

    I continue to be amazed that people aren’t storming Washington D.C. with torches asking how “a black footed ferret conservation center” is going to protect their jobs.

    Of course it’s never been about that, it’s always been about political payback and making sure the only jobs created are Government jobs for liberals’ pet programs.

    Still, you’d hope a larger proportion of the American public wouldn’t be quite so stupid.

    Tax cuts?

    Nah, 120 phony “make work” jobs to create centers that will need to suck off the Government teat forever more is a much better use of money the Government will need to create out of thin air.

    • caligirl9
      January 31, 2009 at 6:24 pm

      The fish ladders go up as the levees and bridges and other infrastructure used by human beings fall down.

    • JohnMG
      January 31, 2009 at 7:53 pm

      Let’s see if I’ve got this right. Rob the federal treasury for a stimulus package , borrow that money from abroad, because we don’t have it, spend the borrowed money on wildlife refuges and National parks, and tour routes that none of us will ever be able to visit because we can’t burn fossil fuels, and even if we could, we can’t afford the fuel because we don’t have jobs and can’t take vacations, and our kids and grandkids won’t be able to, either, because they’re being saddled with enormous debt just to fund a stimulus package where we borrow that money from abroad, because we don’t have it, spend the borrowed money on wildlife refuges and National parks, and tour routes that none of us will ever be able to visit because we can’t burn fossil fuels, ad even if we could, we can’t afford the fuel because we don’t have jobs and can’t take vacations……………

    • caligirl9
      January 31, 2009 at 8:06 pm

      JOhn MC,, you are correct.

      It’s not our problem because by the time the debt is paid, those of us alive today, and our children and grandchildren, will have become fossil fuel.

  9. DGA
    February 1, 2009 at 11:54 am

    A couple of days old, from Specialty Equipment Marketing Association:

    Politicians Want to Use Tax Dollars to Crush Newer-Model Trucks and SUVs

    Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) Oppose S. 247 and H.R. 520

    SEMA ( Specialty Equipment Market Association) is opposing an effort by some Washington lawmakers to include a national car crushing program in the upcoming economic stimulus package. Vehicles targeted for the scrap pile will likely include Chevy Blazers, Silverados, S-10s and Tahoes; Dodge Dakotas and Rams; Ford Explorers and F-Series; Jeep Cherokees and Wranglers; and any other SUV or truck that obtains less than 18 mpg.

    The so-called “Accelerated Retirement of Inefficient Vehicles Act” is “Cash for Clunkers” with a twist. Instead of focusing exclusively on old cars as is typical with scrappage programs, this bill will target any vehicle with lower fuel-economy ratings. Participants will receive a cash voucher to purchase a more fuel-efficient new car or used car (model year 2004 or later) or receive credit for the purchase of public transportation tickets.

    Under the legislation, “fuel efficient” means at least 25% better mileage than the CAFE standard. It will be illegal to resell the scrapped vehicles. Bill sponsors want to destroy 4 million pickups and SUVs over the next four years.

    The program will fail to achieve its goal of improving fuel efficiency and stimulating car sales, but will increase unemployment and the cost of used cars and parts. Here’s why:

    * Given the minimal $1,500–$4,500 voucher value, the program will lure rarely driven second and third vehicles that have minimal impact on overall fuel economy and air pollution. This is not a wise investment of tax dollars.

    * The program will reduce the number of vehicles available for low-income individuals and drive up the cost of the remaining vehicles and repair parts. This is a basic supply-and-demand reality.

    * The program will remove the opportunity to market specialty products that are designed exclusively for the targeted pickups and SUVs, including equipment that increases engine performance and fuel mileage. Congress will be enacting a program to eliminate jobs and reduce business revenues in the automotive aftermarket.

    * The idea that the trucks and SUVs must be scrapped in order to save energy is irrational. The program’s “carbon footprint” does not factor in the amount of energy and natural resources expended in manufacturing the existing car, spent scrapping it and manufacturing a replacement car.

    * The program fails to acknowledge driver needs, such as the ability to transport a family, tow a trailer or rely upon the performance, safety and utility characteristics associated with the larger vehicles. Instead, these vehicles will be destroyed.

    * There is no evidence that the program will achieve the goal of boosting new-car sales or increasing fuel mileage. Many states have considered scrappage programs in the past as a way to help clean the air or increase mpg, but abandoned the effort because they simply don’t work. The programs are not cost-effective and do not achieve verifiable fuel economy or air-quality benefits.

    * The program will hurt thousands of independent repair shops, auto restorers, customizers and their customers across the country that depend on the used-car market. This industry provides thousands of American jobs and generates millions of dollars in local, state and federal tax revenues.

    “Our members, like all business entities, are suffering the effects of the stalled economy,” said Steve McDonald, SEMA vice president of government affairs. “In fact, for our members that market product for newer vehicles, we depend on a thriving and vibrant auto industry to create new business opportunities. We support efforts to spur new-car sales. We don’t, however, support public policy efforts that we are convinced don’t work and will waste tax dollars in the process.”

    SEMA Urges You to Oppose This Legislation

    http://tinyurl.com/dktolp

    I would hope that this pisses off the obama voters who live off driving around old pick ups for a hauling business, all those obama voters who have low budget mechanic shops, have old pickups and repave driveways, etc etc.

    Sadly they are too brainless to figure it out and will stand up for their $1500 for their old truck, then go on welfare because they have no source of income anymore.

    • BillK
      February 1, 2009 at 8:08 pm

      I think of things like this every time I see a Suburban or Tahoe driving around with an Obama sticker on the back…

  10. Steve
    February 1, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    A GENTLE REMINDER TO ALL:

    Please remember to link to the original source for the item you post. Please try to use the proper format for easier reading.

    Please do not just post a link without citing the source, giving the headline and a brief excerpt from the article.

    And most of all, please remember to EXCERPT HEAVILY. Posting less than a third of the article, is a good rule of thumb.

    Thank you!

  11. caligirl9
    February 1, 2009 at 3:51 pm

    Oh brother.

    White House Lawyers Look to Limit Commercial Use of President

    Barack Obama’s popularity makes him a marketer’s dream. Now, the honeymoon may be over for those trying to profit from his appeal.

    White House lawyers want to control the use of the president’s image, recognizing the worldwide fascination about Obama’s election, First Amendment free-speech rights and easy access to videos and photos on the Web.
    “Our lawyers are working on developing a policy that will protect the presidential image while being careful not to squelch the overwhelming enthusiasm that the public has for the president,” White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said…

    Riding the wave of Obama’s popularity may become a concern when advertisers use his likeness without permission to imply that Obama is endorsing a product or cause. The White House through the years has objected to commercial use of presidential faces, such as footage of President George H.W. Bush in a Cold War-themed 1989 television ad for cold medication.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/.....refer=home

    Wanna bet they are just trying to figure out a way to license TCO’s image and make a buck, that they will, of course, fail to pay taxes on?

  12. proreason
    February 1, 2009 at 5:31 pm

    The Moron’s Pravda division gets a little testy if you aren’t fully on board with hopeychangey. From the usually reliably Far Left Columbia Journalism Review:

    Who’s Undercutting Obama?
    For the moment, at least, it’s his press office


    It’s 3 p.m. and the phone in the White House press secretary’s office is ringing. It rings and rings and rings. Eventually, a recorded voice asks callers to leave a message—followed by a second voice saying the voicemail box is full.

    After a full week of such calls, a human being answers. But Ben LaBolt immediately bristles when asked to spell his name, refuses to give his job title, and says he is going “off the record” until I stop him to explain that the reporter grants that privilege, not the other way around—a basic journalistic standard that LaBolt seems unaware of. He soon hangs up without even hearing what I called to ask about.

    A return call is answered by Priya Singh, who spells her name when asked, but does not know (or will not say) what her job title is and several times describes requests for information about how the Obama administration press office is operating as a “complaint” which she would pass on. She says she is not authorized to comment, though she at one point tells me she is a spokesperson.

    This might be the simply the problems of a new administration struggling to cope with a flood of calls and perhaps the complex machinery of the modern office. But it might also indicate that President Obama’s messages about open government have not reached press secretary Robert Gibbs and his staff.

    While it is too early to judge just how this will work out, the early signs are troubling. And interviews with a dozen Washington reporters indicate that the Obama press operation tends to embrace friendly questions, while treating skeptical questions as not worth their time or, worse, as coming from an enemy.
    …

    http://www.cjr.org/campaign_de....._obama.php

    It’s ever so shocking to think the hopeychangey administration might not be receptive to unfriendly questions.

    Like the little tax distractions we hear about, this is probably ginned up by those pranksters at Columbia just to fill a slow day in the news cycle, now that the Depression and Obamy’s wars are under control.

  13. BillK
    February 1, 2009 at 8:13 pm

    There’s an old saying that you should only have faith in God, not people, as people inevitably disappoint.

    From the AP:

    GOP governors press Congress to pass stimulus bill

    By Beth Fouhy

    NEW YORK (AP) — Most Republican governors have broken with their GOP colleagues in Congress and are pushing for passage of President Barack Obama’s economic aid plan that would send billions to states for education, public works and health care.

    Their state treasuries drained by the financial crisis, governors would welcome the money from Capitol Hill, where GOP lawmakers are more skeptical of Obama’s spending priorities.

    The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, planned to meet in Washington this weekend with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other senators to press for her state’s share of the package.

    Florida Gov. Charlie Crist worked the phones last week with members of his state’s congressional delegation, including House Republicans. Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas, the Republican vice chairman of the National Governors Association, planned to be in Washington on Monday to urge the Senate to approve the plan.

    “As the executive of a state experiencing budget challenges, Gov. Douglas has a different perspective on the situation than congressional Republicans,” said Douglas’ deputy chief of staff, Dennise Casey.

    Not a single Republican voted with the majority last week when the House approved Obama’s $819 billion combination of tax cuts and new spending. The president’s goal is to create or preserve 3 million to 4 million jobs.

    Republicans led by House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio complained that the plan is laden with pet projects and will not yield the jobs or stimulate the economy in the way Obama has promised.

    The measure faces GOP opposition in the Senate, where it will be up for a vote in the week ahead.

    But states are coping with severe budget shortfalls and mounting costs for Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor. So governors, including most Republicans, are counting on the spending to help keep their states afloat.

    This past week the bipartisan National Governors Association called on Congress to quickly pass the plan.

    “States are facing fiscal conditions not seen since the Great Depression — anticipated budget shortfalls are expected in excess of $200 billion,” the NGA statement said. “Governors … support several key elements of the bill critical to states-increased federal support for Medicaid and K-12 and higher education; investment in the nation’s infrastructure; and tax provisions to spur investment.”

    Clyde Frazier, a professor of political science at Meredith College in North Carolina, said it wasn’t politically inconsistent for Republican governors and members of Congress to part ways on the stimulus plan.

    “For governors, it’s free money — they get the benefits and they don’t have to pay the costs of raising the revenues,” Frazier said. “Senators and representatives get only some credit for the expenditures, and they have to pay the bill.”

    That’s not to say Republican governors are entirely enthusiastic about the plan. Some worry about the debt incurred through so much federal borrowing.

    Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a former member of the House, said he would accept the stimulus money but would have voted against the bill if he were still in Congress. Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, said he wasn’t sure whether he would accept the approximately $3 billion his state would be in line for.

    “Yes, we need some help and we appreciate the help,” Barbour said in an interview. “But I don’t know about the details and the strings attached to tell you if I’ll take all of it or not.” …

    http://www.google.com/hostedne.....AD962B5480

    No bias in this graph:

    Not a single Republican voted with the majority last week when the House approved Obama’s $819 billion combination of tax cuts and new spending. The president’s goal is to create or preserve 3 million to 4 million jobs.

    But the severe disappointment I spoke of?

    Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, planned to meet in Washington this weekend with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other senators to press for her state’s share of the package

    Well, hey, conservatives can’t be perfect, right?

    That’s good, given:

    Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a former member of the House, said he would accept the stimulus money but would have voted against the bill if he were still in Congress

    Oh, that’s so good to know – he would have voted against it, but as long as the Feds are giving out cash, gimme gimme gimme. No hypocrisy there.

    Also:

    Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who is widely viewed as a potential presidential contender in 2012, said governors have little choice but to accept the relief being offered. “States have to balance their budgets,” he said. “So if we’re going to go down this path, we are entitled to ask for our share of the money.”

    Funny, I’ve never heard Pawlenty mentioned as a candidate for 2012, but does it matter when Palin’s as ready to grab for cash from the Feds as anyone else?

    I think my “Sarah Palin 2012″ sticker may have to come down now that we see she’s no different than any other Governor in wanting that Federal cash if it’s being given out. :(

    • proreason
      February 1, 2009 at 9:20 pm

      You’re being too tough, BillK. There’s a difference between accepting and promoting.

      I’m opposed to most government benefits, but by golly, if the deadbeats are collecting, I sure as hell want what I can get. I view it as a tiny offset to the million dollars in taxes i’ve paid in my life. If not, then the deadbeats will get that much more. More to the point, I’m going to spend a lot of time this year making sure I get every “benefit” I possibly can, including giving myself the benefit of the doubt on every single detail of the tax code. It’s my personal Depression prevention program.

      Jindal has the right attitude. So does Pawlenty. Can’t tell from Palin’s comments in the clip whether she is in favor of the crap sandwich or just making sure Alaska gets it’s allotment of the booty.

    • pdsand
      February 2, 2009 at 11:24 am

      That’s funny, I was talking to a lady at our office the other day about how a rock-ribbed conservative governor could come up with a program to do this that and the other, say fight illegal drug use in his state, and ask for federal money to fund it. He could pass the program into law, get it funded, and on his newfound popularity run for the U.S. Senate, win and immediately deny funding to his own program on the basis that it’s not the proper place of the federal government. My position was that this would be entirely consistent with principled conservatism. That at least is how I understand the 9th and 10th amendments.

  14. sheehanjihad
    February 2, 2009 at 9:17 am

    While nobody was looking, the predictably spineless cowards at the UN passed a resolution making it a crime worldwide to denigrate Islam. Giving the offended the right to extradite anyone who says ANYTHING that the muslims find offensive….which pretty much means you cant say or even think out loud any portrayal of islam without the threat of being sought out and punished. This is what we have warned repeatedly here, and now the lapdogs of the UN have made violent jihad legal, and any dissent a crime.

    Excerpt: “on Dec. 18, in the passage by the U.N. General Assembly of a nonbinding resolution (with strong advice to its members) that condemns “defamation of religion,” ESPECIALLY ISLAM,”

    In an 83 to 53 vote, with 42 abstentions, the U.N. General Assembly urged nations to provide “adequate protections” in their laws or constitutions against “acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general.”

    Only Islam and Muslims are specifically named in this resolution against religious defamation, sponsored by Uganda on behalf of the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference, and cosponsored by Belarus and Venezuela. Opponents included the United States, a majority of European countries, Japan and India.

    Those in favor said they do not want to limit free speech but do intend to stop such expressions as the 2005 Danish cartoons disrespecting the Prophet Muhammad that ignited violent protests by Muslims around the world.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com.....ch-killer/

    these are the peaceful tolerant and understanding muslims that Obama is certain will listen if we just extend our hand in peace……such astounding ignorance. A lot of innocent people will now have to die before “the One” realizes that there is no appeasing a dog with rabies. It must be put down.

    • 1sttofight
      February 2, 2009 at 9:28 am

      F**k Islam.

      Bring it on, beatchs.

    • JohnMG
      February 2, 2009 at 9:43 am

      I guess advocating the extermination of Israel wouldn’t count, huh? So what do we do with people who defame religions? Well, if you’re islamic you can always saw off the guilty party’s head with a dull knife. Or bomb them. Or launch a rocket into their residential neighborhoods.

      Yep. I’m sure glad we are members of the UN. I feel sooooo much better now. These are the same people who advocate for a global ban on the private ownership of firearms.

      Now all that remains is for Obama to increase our monetary contributions to this horse shit organization. I agree, 1st. Bring it on. It’ll be easier the sooner we get started. And faster, too!!

    • Helena
      February 2, 2009 at 9:48 am

      Appalling. More from your link, sheehanjihad:

      Among the opponents, including myself [Nat Hentoff], of this U.N. move to have its members legislate, with penalties, against such very broadly designated “religious defamation” is Floyd Abrams, the nation’s leading protector of the First Amendment in the Supreme Court and in his writings. In his Dec. 9 lecture on global communications, issues at the United Nations itself in New York, he cited a recent study by the European Center for Law and Justice finding “that laws based on the concept of ‘defamation of religion’ actually help to create a climate of violence.”

      “Violators of these laws, as applied in most Muslim countries, are subject to the death penalty,” Abrams continued. He cited from the study a 22-year-old Hindu in Pakistan who “was beaten to death by co-workers at a factory for allegedly committing the crime of blasphemy, which is a crime punishable by death in the country.” The three workers were “charged not with murder but with ‘failure to inform the police that blasphemy was under way.’ “

    • JohnMG
      February 2, 2009 at 9:50 am

      ……”these are the peaceful tolerant and understanding muslims that Obama is certain will listen if we just extend our hand in peace……”

      PS. I will un-clench my fist toward these vermin, and when I do, the spoon will depart the body, the mousetrap will arm the device, and I will extend my arm forcefully in the direction of my adversary, delivering my own brand of peace proposal.

    • BannedbytheTaliban
      February 2, 2009 at 10:42 am

      So what if I create my own “religion” whose sole purpose is to denigrate Islam? Whose rights would triumph, my right to worship as I choose, or the law of the UN, rhetorical of course.

      But I can see it know. All one needs to do to prevent persecution of any kind is to declare their acts a religious right. What makes one religion more important that another? The will be sects of pedophiles, rapists, homosexuals, etc all ready to practice their ‘religion’ without condemnation.

      Part of “End Times” doctrine is that the world will unite under one ruling body. That body will eventually be ruled by the Antichrist. As leader he will promote all religions over Christianity. Some have argued that the Antichrist will not be one man, but a collection of men. Just wait until we all need a license to buy and sell goods or hold a job. The current “economic disaster” may just bring about a unified economy; many in Europe are promoting this idea. Scary stuff, but then again, people are always seeing the end in news stories.

    • Steve
      February 3, 2009 at 10:20 am

      “While nobody was looking, the predictably spineless cowards at the UN passed a resolution…”

      The resolution was actually passed back in March of 2007:

      UN Resolution Protects Islam From Defamation | Sweetness & Light
      http://sweetness-light.com/arc.....defamation

  15. caligirl9
    February 2, 2009 at 12:27 pm

    So maybe we don’t need as many of those H-1B visa workers as we think we did …

    Layoffs mean more than lost wages for H-1B visa holders
    For the two out-of-work engineers, it’s a race against time. They’ve lost their Silicon Valley jobs and need to quickly find others at a time when companies everywhere are tightening their belts.

    Both are Indians whose advanced degrees were earned at American universities. And both are facing the inflexible rules of their H-1B work visas.

    Technically, as soon as they lost their jobs, they were required to leave the country. In reality, they can probably wing it for a week or two, but not much longer.

    This stark dilemma is being repeated with increasing frequency across Silicon Valley, according to immigration specialists, as companies downsize to weather a punishing downturn. It’s a small number compared with the layoffs of H-1B visa holders during the dot-com crash. But the downturn has sent a wave of concern through the community of immigrant workers who hold the visa, which companies use to hire skilled noncitizens…

    A perennially contentious issue, the H-1B visa has drawn fire in recent weeks as layoffs have multiplied. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, told Microsoft it should lay off guest workers before “similarly qualified American employees.” Grassley has co-sponsored legislation to give priority in hiring to American workers…

    http://www.mercurynews.com/bre.....source=rss

    Congratulations to Senator Grassley for having the testes to stand up and look out for Americans first. It would be a big step in the right direction if this legislation did come to fruition. The next big step could be protection to the “older” American worker.

    The trickle-down effect could mean lower rents … I’d welcome that.

    • JohnMG
      February 2, 2009 at 12:36 pm

      Reminds me of the joke about applicants for a job being asked to use the words green, pink, and yellow in a sentence.

    • sheehanjihad
      February 2, 2009 at 1:09 pm

      Protect the “older” American worker? I am just that, and in the past months, I have been passed over 27 times for a younger less experienced, but cheaper applicants. The place that laid me off still employs all of the illegals though, because they dont get paid overtime, nor can they complain about it. Oh, repeated attempts to have that situation addressed have been met with local governmental non action. None. They tacitly allow the law to be sidestepped for whatever reason, and oh, the job that I used to do is now being done by a very low paid but desperate for any kind of job “non gringo”. The funny part about this, if it’s funny at all, is this guy who stated he couldnt afford me anymore is opening his third franchise in as many states…..yeah, dont you love how people can get away with this kind of crap? It probably helps immensely that his father in law is the City manager too…..but what else is new? A mini Washington right here….and I am screwed. Where’s my gun and bible I can cling to? I am getting rather bitter as I watch everything I have worked for begin to ossify before my eyes….it sucks.

    • caligirl9
      February 2, 2009 at 8:28 pm

      You too, SJ? It boggles my mind all of the wasted assets and brainpower by employers going El Cheapo or all affirmative action and turn away from qualified American workers with can-do attitude who want to work.

      Rather than just hiring what is assumed to be a “cheaper” young person, why not try someone who knows how to do a job? I think the only way people like us will ever get a break is for some sort of tax credit for businesses that choose to hire older workers. Perhaps it’s cheaper in the long run to hire someone experienced; the learning curve is probably a bit quicker. Some “older people” are pretty darn computer saavy!

      I’m not even sure what I define as older. I’m Caroline Kennedy’s age, and I know this happens to people in their mid- to late-40s. That’s by no means old!

      I was at the community college I used to work at last week, and the job the full-time affirmative action PIO is doing is horrendous. Her first stab at a newsletter (all of 4 pages) was horribly written and the agenda was 100% Hispanic propaganda. To look at it, you’d not know that there are also black, Asian and a few white people on campus.

    • dulcimergrl
      February 3, 2009 at 12:16 pm

      This whole H1B thing has been a major thorn in the side of American tech workers for some time. I work in the IT industry, and my company has been doing its best to get rid of us for years. They tried offshoring software development to India; it didn’t work out too well for a number of reasons, mainly because the company found it difficult to control folks who weren’t company employees. But we still have lots of H1Bs here. The latest thing they’ve been doing is to open company offices in foreign countries (like Chile), hire people down there, have us train them, then lay us off. I’ve been with the company for almost 14 years (survived a layoff in 2003 and was rehired within weeks). I’m biting my fingernails and lighting candles that I survive there another couple of years. We are totally screwed if I don’t; the way things are going, I don’t expect to ever get another job in the industry (I’m 55 now and my husband has been out of the industry since 2001).

      Here’s an article that Washtech.com e-mailed me about banks getting bailouts and hiring more H1Bs: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....gn_workers

  16. caligirl9
    February 2, 2009 at 8:20 pm

    I kow this was in Canada and I’m sure it’s happened in the U.S., but to what outcome? From our friends in the Great White North, The Toronto Star

    Order to take off niqab pits law against religion: Woman to appeal ruling forcing her to unveil face in sexual assault trial

    A judge has ordered a Toronto woman to testify without her niqab at a sexual assault trial – raising the thorny issue of whether Muslim women should be allowed to appear as witnesses wearing a veil that covers everything but the eyes.
    The issue is a collision of two rights, pitting religious freedom against the right of a defendant to face an accuser in open court.
    The case could be precedent setting because it doesn’t appear there is any Canadian case law addressing the question of Muslim women in the courtroom. In Canada, home to about 580,000 Muslims, the case will be closely watched, amid fears about Muslim women coming forward in criminal cases.
    In October, Ontario Court Justice Norris Weisman reached his “admittedly difficult decision” to force the complainant to testify with her face bared after finding her “religious belief is not that strong … and that it is, as she says, a matter of comfort,” he wrote in his ruling…

    When the complainant indicated last fall she wanted to wear her veil while testifying at the preliminary hearing, defence counsel told the judge that assessing her demeanour was of “critical importance” when tailoring questioning.
    Weisman asked the woman to explain her objections.
    “It’s a respect issue, one of modesty and one of … in Islam, we call honour,” she replied. “It’s also about the religious reason is to not show your face to men that you are able to marry. … I would feel a lot more comfortable if I didn’t have to, you know, reveal my face.”

    …In his judgment, Weisman wrote “at the 11th hour we learned … she has a driver’s licence with her unveiled facial impression upon it.” She told court she took comfort the picture was taken by a female and there was a screen between her and potential male onlookers.
    But Weisman wrote the “driver’s licence can be required to be produced by all sorts of males,” such as police officers and border guards.
    “In investigating just how important a belief this was, it came down to her candid admissions that it was a matter of her being `more comfortable’ and to me that really is not strong enough to fetter the accused’s rights to make full answer and defence,” the judge added.

    http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/580790

    I lean toward the accuser’s right to face this woman. At first blush I was thinking “why should the Court ask to see her face?” but not being able to see facial expressions would prove difficult for the jury, judge and attorneys to honestly assess her truthfulness.

    But I’m open for argument. Obviously she’s taken her veil off in public for her driver’s license and she didn’t melt.

  17. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 4:35 am

    What are schools going to do with that educational bounty in the “stimulus” package?

    Perhaps more things like this, from Madison’s Wisconsin State Journal:

    Nerad seeks OK to study 4-year-old kindergarten in Madison

    By Melanie Conklin

    Superintendent Dan Nerad rekindled a debate over 4-year-old kindergarten in the Madison School District on Monday evening by asking the School Board to approve a community 4K planning effort at next Monday’s meeting.

    “My commitment is to take this step,” said Nerad, who helped bring 4K to Green Bay, his former district. “It’s a proposal to answer remaining questions to see if this is viable in our community.”

    Nerad doubted a plan could be in place for next fall but didn’t want to see a protracted debate. It would be a half-day program, open to all students.

    It was dropped seven years ago due to problems with funding and contract issues with the teachers union. These are issues again, said Assistant Superintendent Sue Abplanalp. But some things have changed. “We have a new superintendent and we’re bringing in a neutral facilitator.”

    New analysis shows that 19 of Madison’s 32 elementary schools have space for 4K and day-care centers are also potential sites.

    This means reaching agreement with those who are child-care providers. All the speakers on 4K at Monday’s School Board committee meeting had ties to the child-care industry. None opposed 4K, but all stressed this message: Collaborate with us.

    “We’ve been doing pre-kindergarten programs for decades … and we have an understanding for what it really takes,” said Wendy Rakower of the Madison Area Accredited Early Childhood Association and director of Red Caboose. …

    http://www.madison.com/wsj/mad/latest/436253

    Because there’s no such thing as any Government program that is already too broad; all can suck in more.

    More children in Government-funded schools means more Government spending.

    Of course schools will need to be expanded as well once the “empty” space in them is used for “4K”…

  18. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 5:04 am

    A pity that incomes don’t automatically increase.

    Never stopped a Democrat.

    From the (Madison) Wisconsin State Journal:

    Doyle: Bring back gas tax indexing

    By Jason Stein and Mark Pitsch

    The state should consider returning to automatic increases in its gas tax, Gov. Jim Doyle said Tuesday.

    A return to the so-called “indexing” of the tax would represent a reversal for the Democratic governor. In the face of a widespread concern over rising gas prices in December 2005, Doyle and the Republican-controlled Legislature repealed the yearly increases in the state’s gas tax, the second-highest in the nation.

    But the state is now facing a $5.4 billion projected budget shortfall as well as challenges for the state road fund, which uses gas tax money to pay for highways and bridges. And some business groups have signaled a willingness to return to the automatic increases.

    “The simple fact is that where Wisconsin went, where Republicans took us, is unsustainable for transportation (infrastructure), where you say, that’s basically it on the gas tax, regardless of what the costs are and what the needs are,” Doyle said in a year-end interview with the Wisconsin State Journal. “I think that indexing had served us pretty well for a long period of time.”

    Wisconsin’s motor fuels tax is now 30.9 cents per gallon, which as of January made it second only to the 36-cent tax in Washington state, said Dale Knapp, research director for the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance. Wisconsin also adds 2 cents per gallon for an environmental clean-up fund.

    The annual increases linked the gas tax to the federal consumer price index, which tracks inflation. Chris Klein, executive assistant at the state Department of Transportation, said it’s not possible to predict the amount of an inflationary increase going forward. But in the past, automatic increases in the tax amounted to about 1 cent a year — or about $30 million statewide.

    Senate Minority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, said the governor was going back on a change that created “greater accountability” for taxpayers by making lawmakers vote on each increase in the gas tax.

    “Consumers have finally found some relief at the pump, and now the governor wants to increase their burden during these uncertain economic times,” he said. …

    http://www.madison.com/wsj/mad/latest/430109

    No surprise at all.

  19. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 5:15 am

    Why does this make sense?

    I thought roads were evil in that they are used by those nasty, energy guzzling private cars?

    Of course it’s a joke – the roads will never pass environmental review anyway, but it sounds good to the sheeple.

    From a conspiring AP:

    Democrats promise boost for road building

    By Andrew Taylor

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Top Democrats plan to add a big increase in highway and mass transit funding to President Barack Obama’s economic recovery program Tuesday, even as others in the president’s party hope to rein in the plan’s almost $1 trillion cost to taxpayers.

    A move by Patty Murray, D-Wash., to add $25 billion in infrastructure projects is first in line as the Senate begins thrashing through dozens of proposed changes to the sprawling $885 billion measure.

    Murray’s plan would increase the money in the bill for highway projects by almost 50 percent, to $40 billion, reflecting complaints from lawmakers in both parties that Obama’s plan doesn’t do enough to relieve a backlog of unfinished projects. Mass transit programs would get a $5 billion boost, while water projects would get $7 billion more.

    Republicans, for their part, readied a plan to lower mortgage costs to try to jolt the housing market out of its slump.
    The $885 billion Senate economic plan faces assaults from both Democrats and Republicans during debate this week, as lawmakers in both parties aim to kill ideas that won’t jolt the economy right away.

    “The goal is to shape a package that is more targeted, that would be smaller in size and that would be truly focused on saving or creating jobs and turning the economy around,” said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. She said ideas like $870 million to combat bird flu should be dumped.

    Democrats already are under pressure from moderates in their own party to scale back spending in the $885 billion bill, and Obama met with party leaders at the White House late Monday to discuss strategy.

    “What we can’t do is let very modest differences get in the way” of swift enactment of the legislation, Obama said several hours earlier as new layoffs rippled through the economy and the Commerce Department reported an unexpectedly large sixth straight drop in personal spending.

    In the Capitol, Republicans said their goal was to change the bill, not to block it. “Nobody that I know of is trying to keep a package from passing,” said Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader.

    “We need to fix housing first,” he said. Republicans are expected to seek a vote on their proposals this week as part of the debate on the overall stimulus measure.

    Officials said the GOP was coalescing behind a proposal designed to give banks an incentive to make loans at rates currently estimated at 4 percent to 4.5 percent. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were seized by the federal government in September, would be required to purchase the mortgages once banks have made them to consumers. …

    http://customwire.ap.org/dynam.....S_STIMULUS

    Let’s ask a simple question:

    If Dems add $40 billion in road projects, who is going to build those roads?

    Road construction, after all, takes skilled operators of heavy machinery. They’re not going to show up overnight. You don’t just instantly get to drive a ‘dozer, grader, or other jobs.

    Let’s not forget they’re also Union jobs. Concrete forms? That’s the carpenter’s Union.

    Rebar? Ironworkers.

    So are the ex-Lehman Brothers workers going to take a job at $7.00 hour as an apprentice? Didn’t think so.

    It’s all going to be such a failure on such a grand scale it’s impossible to know where to start.

    Though it’s not like the GOP’s bank loan proposal isn’t just as bad.

  20. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 5:24 am

    When the Government gives you money for something you don’t want, what else are you going to do?

    From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

    MPS may be in line for millions in stimulus package

    By Alan J. Borsuk

    Milwaukee Public Schools would reap $88.6 million over two years for new constructionunder the economic stimulus package just passed by the U.S. House of Representatives – even though the district has 15 vacant school buildings, a large surplus of property and no plans for new construction.

    No district in the state would stand to benefit as much as MPS. In addition to the construction money, the district would get $115.5 million for special education and low income students over two years, according to detailed projections developed by congressional staffers. That totals $204.2 million for Milwaukee.

    Overall, the 400-plus school districts across the state would get $729.6 million for those uses, including $317.2 million for construction.

    In other words, 28% of the total number would come to Milwaukee.

    The U.S. Senate is almost certain to change the numbers when it takes up the economic package this week. Then Senate and House negotiators would need to meet to come up with a compromise bill.

    But if the amounts come through even close to where they are now projected, they will provide substantial infusions of money to school districts that are, like so many enterprises, under sharp budget pressure.

    The amounts for MPS are particularly eye-catching, and not only because they are the largest in the state. Enrollment is declining every year, and the last major wave of construction in MPS – the $102 million Neighborhood School Initiative launched in 2000 – resulted in projects that are underused, have not met enrollment projections or have closed. A series in the Journal Sentinel in August detailed how tens of millions of dollars in construction spending did not produce the expected results, and the project as a whole has not led to a higher percentage of students attending neighborhood schools.

    In general, MPS facilities have been described by school officials as being in good to better-than-good condition. The kind of situations that create urgent needs for renovation or new construction in some cities have not been on the priority list for MPS officials in recent years. …

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/e.....62217.html

    But hey, as long as it “stimulates” the economy (and pays back the teachers’ unions for their support…)

  21. BannedbytheTaliban
    February 3, 2009 at 11:10 am

    It was only a matter of time:

    Durham considers backing effort to restrict bullet sales

    Durham, N.C. — The City Council has been wrestling with whether to throw its support behnind an effort to change state law to require background checks on people trying to buy bullets.

    Such a restriction would require a change in state law, but some advocates said support from Durham could create the needed momentum to push a bill through the General Assembly.

    “We don’t sell guns to criminals, so why are we letting them buy the bullets?” said Rev. Melvin Whitley, a community activist who has fought gangs and crime in Durham for years.

    Whitley emphasized his point Monday by going to an intersection where a 14-year-old was hit by a bullet.

    “If you’ve never been robbed and you’ve never had somebody stick a gun in your face (or) you’ve never had a gun to go off near you, you probably won’t understand this issue,” he said.

    Gun-owners said the so-called “bullet ownership bill” won’t prevent crime.

    “We need to focus on the person and not the object, because a gun never jumped up off a table and went and committed an armed burglary,” said Wallace Chambers, who said he has twice had to show his gun to protect himself in threatening situations.

    http://www.wral.com/news/local.....y/4453061/

    Of course this is just like all anti-gun legislation, and will do nothing to stop people who use guns illegally. They steal the gun; of course they are going to steal the bullets. In related news Durham as a $40 million budget shortfall. Where are they going to get the money to pay for all this? They will probably by increasing taxes on guns and ammo.

    The real heart of this story lies in this gem:

    Whitley emphasized his point Monday by going to an intersection where a 14-year-old was hit by a bullet.

    It is nobodies fault the child was hit, the bullet acted alone and must be punished.

    • caligirl9
      February 3, 2009 at 12:15 pm

      Guess that’s why we are supposed to keep guns and ammo in separate places.
      So the crooks have to work to find the ammo.

      Next thing you know there will be a requirement to keep guns/ammo in safe deposit boxes in banks.

      I thought you Southerners had more brains than that.

      In the Bay Area we have a trial working its way through the courts—10-year old boy sitting at a piano taking a lesson at school was hit by a bullet discharged by a previously convicted felon during a robbery at a nearby gas station. The boy is paraplegic. The perp’s buddies plead out. Perp and buddies responsible for carjacking former Senator Don Peralta’s state-owned Charger a couple of weeks earlier because they wanted the rims.

      Do you think the perp bought that guy and ammo at Big 5? Me neither.

  22. caligirl9
    February 3, 2009 at 12:34 pm

    Are you sitting down? Good. You’ll need to after reading this. From the kumbaya Bay Area, natch.

    Justice without jail: East Palo Alto poised to launch youth court

    Fed up with a juvenile justice system they say doesn’t do enough to keep kids out of jail, East Palo Alto leaders are turning to those same kids to provide an alternative.
    The vehicle is a youth court, staffed almost entirely by teens trained as legal advocates and jurors. The court met last week for a final test run before it starts receiving actual cases of young people who vandalize, steal and smoke pot, among other similar crimes.
    Police officers here now have a new choice: They can send teenagers suspected of low-level offenses to juvenile hall or offer them a chance to avoid the weighty consequences of a criminal record. As many as 50 youths annually could eventually move through the court, in a city where 113 juveniles were arrested last year, including three 10-year-olds and more than a dozen children 12 and younger…
    Youth courts function differently in cities across the country, including Santa Cruz, Oakland and San Francisco. With varying degrees of success, the peer justice and victim compensation model has been effective in reducing recidivism, studies show.
    In East Palo Alto, youths referred to the court must admit guilt and submit to a peer jury for sentences that could include essay-writing, community service and joining the court as a juror. Youths who fail to abide by the terms of their sentences will return to the more formal juvenile system.
    In court, teenage “lawyers” are trained in restorative justice …
    …Critics in the county justice system caution that teenagers may not be mature enough to be fair and consistent in court — a pretty girl, for instance, might get a light sentence when a homely one gets the maximum penalty…
    East Palo Alto police officer Rami Khoury expressed his concern after witnessing Thursday’s hearing. “The jury felt sorry for the suspect — well, what about the victim?” he said, noting that the “shoplifter” was granted a 10-hour community service sentence, not the maximum 25. “I know it’s a mock trial, but I think it should be more than 10 hours.”

    http://www.mercurynews.com/bre.....i_11612157

    For those unfamiliar with East Palo Alto, let me preface by saying it is the polar opposite of affluent Palo Alto, home of Stanford University, located on the western side of Highway 101. EPA is a hood. Thirty seven percent of teenagers in this hood graduate from high school; ¼ aren’t even enrolled. The city’s population is Pacific Islander, black and Hispanic. Many illegals … plenty of home robberies, shootings, etc.
    As a lesson in how courts work, I’d have no problem if this was a one-off event. But to think that this is going to have any impact whatsoever in a community chock full of absentee (or druggie) parents and kids who are experts in the ways of the streets, well, that’s silly. I 100% agree with officer Khoury’s assessment—what about the victims in this little lesson in civics? Do they have to get an attorney to plead their case? Do they have to waste a day in court only to see a shoplifter/vandal etc. be sentenced to writing an essay?

    And to think you might be “sentenced” to act on the jury! That’s letting the inmates run the jails, don’t you think?

    Please.

  23. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 5:41 pm

    Fun update, from the AP:

    Mass. couple who led gay marriage fight to divorce

    BOSTON (AP) – A lesbian couple who led the fight for gay marriage in Massachusetts has filed for divorce.

    Julie and Hillary Goodridge were among seven gay couples who filed a lawsuit that led to a court ruling making Massachusetts the first state to legalize same-sex marriages in 2004.

    The couple became the public face of the debate in the state and married the first day same-sex marriages became legal.

    The divorce case was filed last week in Suffolk Probate and Family Court and was not unexpected. The couple announced they were separating in 2006.

    Messages left for the Goodridges were not immediately returned Tuesday.

    http://www.9news.com/news/worl.....;catid=347

    I wonder how much money divorce lawyers have given to pro-gay marriage campaigns over the years?

    It opens up a whole new revenue source…

  24. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 5:57 pm

    We’re seeing more and more of this around the country as in a down economy, is there any better time to stick it to the taxpayer?

    From the AP:

    Vehicle fee increase heads to full Senate

    DENVER (AP) – A proposal to raise vehicle registration fees to pay for road and bridge repairs is headed to the full Senate for debate and a vote.

    The Senate Appropriations Committee backed the Democratic measure on a 6-4 party-line vote Tuesday.

    Democrats say the state needs more money to repairs highways and bridges. They also say thousands of jobs will be created by the construction projects.

    Republicans are worried about raising fees during a recession and want the state to focus on fixing the bridges most urgently in need of repairs.

    Owners of passenger cars and many SUVs would pay an extra $32 this year and $41 the following year. After that, the fee would automatically increase with inflation. …

    http://www.9news.com/news/arti.....;catid=346

    Once again, the Democrats in Colorado and nationally are talking about all the jobs that will be “created” by these road projects.

    Where are these hundreds or thousands of qualified road crew workers going to suddenly come from? Are there thousands of heavy equipment qualified workers sitting idle? How about ironworker union members to set rebar? Carpenter union members to build concrete forms?

    This isn’t 1939, you don’t just hand people shovels and pay them a daily fee to build roads. You need engineers, equipment operators, experienced concrete workers, etc.

    Are laid off Denver office workers going to be willing to undergo a two or three year apprentice program to stand in the sun all day wearing an orange vest?

    Somehow I don’t think so…

    • proreason
      February 3, 2009 at 6:05 pm

      They can hire laid off policians to write computer models to ouiji-board when the projects will finish, and later to explain why it’s actually better for the projects to be late and over budget than on-time and on-budget.

      Oh wait, there aren’t any laid off politicians.

  25. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 7:52 pm

    The “truthers” are getting major media exposure soon.

    From the Treason Times:

    The Political Suspicions of 9/11

    By Brian Stelter

    A coming episode of the acclaimed FX drama “Rescue Me” will tackle what may sound like a far-fetched plot line: that the attacks of Sept. 11 were an “inside job.” The actor who espouses the theories on camera, it turns out, also subscribes to them in real life.

    Claims that Al Qaeda terrorists were not solely responsible for the attacks have a lively following on the Internet, including on YouTube, but the second episode of “Rescue Me’s” fifth season, starting in April, may represent the first fictional presentation of 9/11 conspiracy theories by a mainstream media company (FX is operated by the News Corporation).

    “They’re not discussed a lot in the press,” Daniel Sunjata, the actor who plays Franco Rivera on “Rescue Me,” told reporters at a television press tour last month. He predicted that the episode would be “socio-politically provocative.”

    In the episode, Mr. Sunjata’s character delivers a two-minute monologue for a French journalist describing a “neoconservative government effort” to control the world’s oil, drastically increase military spending and “change the definition of pre-emptive attack.” To put it into action, he continues, “what you need is a new Pearl Harbor. That’s what they said they needed.”

    Mr. Sunjata surprised some of the TV reporters when he said that he “absolutely, 100 percent” supports the assertion that “9/11 was an inside job.”

    The alternative theories “seem to me to make a lot more sense than the ones that are popularly espoused,” he said, calling it admirable that the conversation was allowed within “Rescue Me.”

    Peter Tolan, an executive producer, said Mr. Sunjata is “well read” and has “done a lot of research.”

    “Look, obviously not all of us buy in,” he told reporters. “But we went: ‘Wow, that’s interesting, and he’s passionate about it. Let’s use that.’ ” …

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02...../02fx.html

    Do you suppose were one or more of the cast members a well-read conservative Christian, they’d be willing to do an episode on say Intelligent Design, why abortion is murder, the need for Gitmo or the very real threat posed by Islamic fundamentalists?

    Didn’t think so.

  26. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 7:57 pm

    From the Treason Times, news that the left has been successful yet again in disparaging achievement:

    Wall St., a Financial Epithet, Stirs Outrage

    By David Segal

    Monday was the last day of Iris Chau’s 11-year career at JPMorgan Chase and she says there’s a lot she’ll miss about the job, including her colleagues, her paycheck and her role managing a technical support team. But one thing she won’t miss about JPMorgan: telling people that she works there.

    “For a long time, it was kind of glamorous and I had friends who’d ask me ‘Can you get me a job there?’ ” says Ms. Chau, 35, who was part of a recent round of layoffs at the firm’s Manhattan headquarters. A few weeks ago, she mentioned her work to a photographer she’d met through a friend. “And he looks at me and says, ‘Oh, you’re one of them.’ ”

    Nobody in the investment banking world is expecting pity, or even a sympathetic ear, these days. But while the rest of the country fumes over the billions spent on government bailouts and year-end bonuses, the financial industry is focused on its new role as national pariah and its own lengthy list of anxieties.

    There are the endless rounds of corporate implosions to sweat. There is the widespread sense of being unfairly singled out for vilification in a crisis that a host of players helped create — among them homeowners, who were only too happy to feast on the bounty that Wall Street helped cater in the flush years.

    On top of all that, there is a lot of wincing about the profession’s catastrophic loss of cultural cachet. Wall Street has become a target of populist rage, raw material for talk-show tirades, the occasional street protest and a lot of punch lines.

    A recent political cartoon in The Record, a newspaper in Hackensack, N.J., shows rats fleeing a sinking ship, labeled “Wall Street,” with treasure chests held aloft tagged “CEO” and “Bonus.” There are “I Hate Investment Banking” T-shirts for sale online. Last week on “The Daily Show,” Jon Stewart rolled a clip of John A. Thain, Merrill Lynch’s chief executive, defending bonuses as a way to keep “your best people.”

    “You don’t have ‘best people’!” Mr. Stewart shouted. “You lost $27 billion! Do you live in Bizarro World?”

    All of this has taken a toll on the few industry veterans willing to discuss the subject.

    “I’d almost rather say I’m a pornographer,” said a retired Wall Street executive who, for self-evident reasons, asked not to be identified. “At least that’s a business that people understand.”

    Financiers tell their not-for-attribution account of the mortgage crisis like this: Americans undersaved and overspent for decades, relying on rising property values to bankroll their lifestyles. But nobody on Wall Street forced United States homeowners to take out loans on houses they couldn’t afford, or refinance mortgages to spend money on cars they shouldn’t have bought.

    The esoteric securities underneath the current mess are, to the people who invented and marketed them, analogous to pharmaceutical drugs. Used correctly, they can enhance your life. Abused, they are lethal.

    Of course, mistakes were made on Wall Street, says Emanuel Pleitez, a 26-year-old former Goldman Sachs employee who resigned from his job a few months ago to run for Congress in his hometown, Los Angeles. But to a great extent, he says, those mistakes were born of misplaced trust.

    “Look, you can talk about collateralized debt obligations all day long,” he said, referring to a type of asset-backed security that has turned famously toxic. “But there were ratings agencies that were supposed to tell us how risky these securities were. We essentially closed our eyes and said, ‘O.K., you say this is rated triple-A, fine, I believe you.’ ” In hindsight, he said, “Everyone should have been more skeptical.”

    You hear a lot about the failure of regulators, too. But it’s difficult to find anyone in the financial trenches who thinks the problem is Wall Street itself. Difficult, but not impossible.

    “People say ‘Well, the Fed is to blame because there was all this loose money,’ ” said Luis E. Rinaldini, a former partner at the investment banking firm Lazard Frères, now at the merchant bank Groton Partners. “But guys who run banks are paid to be cautious when there’s loose money around.”

    “I mean, if you had a bus driver who went 100 miles an hour on an icy road, you’d think he was crazy,” he adds. “But if his boss said, ‘It’s our policy to drive faster as the roads get icier,’ you wouldn’t be surprised if the boss ended up in jail.” …

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02.....nkers.html

    You can almost hear the reporter laughing out loud as he typed the truth disparaging it along the way as the fantasies of Wall Street workers:

    Financiers tell their not-for-attribution account of the mortgage crisis like this: Americans undersaved and overspent for decades, relying on rising property values to bankroll their lifestyles. But nobody on Wall Street forced United States homeowners to take out loans on houses they couldn’t afford, or refinance mortgages to spend money on cars they shouldn’t have bought.

    That’s exactly what happened.

    But why let the truth get in the way, especially in the Times.

    Obama and the left have won, much more than an election:

    And for all the talk about taxpayer-financed bonuses, a lot of junior and midlevel executives have been told that they shouldn’t expect anything but their salaries this year. In a business where your bonus is often five times your base pay, that’s devastating news. And we’re talking about a line of work in which virtually all satisfaction is paycheck-dependent.

    “Fact is that this is a terrible way to make a living — except for the money,” Ken Miller, a former vice chairman at Credit Suisse First Boston and now a private investor, said. “The lifestyle is terrible — the hours, the sucking up. These guys must feel like they’re the victims of a capricious god.”

    That’s especially galling to the many in investment banks who had nothing to do with the mortgage end of their company’s business. Maria Anguiano, who works in Barclays’ municipal finance department, has yet to hear if she is getting a bonus this year, but she thinks she deserves one, given the millions her department earned.

    “If you just take your base home, the question becomes, why not just work at a nonprofit from 8 to 4 instead of a bank where you’re expected to work weekends and every night till 10 or 11?” she said.

    Ms. Anguiano isn’t the only one asking that question. As money and prestige drain out of Wall Street, and as layoffs mount, other careers are starting to seem more appealing. Mr. Chen has helped start a retail company, GreenSoul Shoes, that sells sandals made by Cambodian villagers out of discarded rubber tires. He calls it a for-profit business with a social mission. Ms. Chau, a friend, is going to be joining him soon.

    To some longtimers in the industry, this reordering of priorities is overdue. Robert J. Birnbaum, the former president of the New York Stock Exchange, sees an upside to Wall Street’s diminished reputation.

    “It’s taken a hit, but so what?” he said. “We don’t need all the bright people going to Wall Street, chasing money. There’s a lot of things bright people can do. Like find a cure for cancer.”

    Sigh.

  27. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 8:27 pm

    A study in press spin.

    From a “How dare they!” AP:

    Bailed-out Wells Fargo defends, then cancels, Las Vegas casino junket

    WASHINGTON — Wells Fargo & Co. is canceling a pricey Las Vegas casino junket for employees after a torrent of criticism that it was misusing $25 billion in taxpayer bailout money.

    The company initially defended the trip after The Associated Press reported it had booked 12 nights at two of the city’s most expensive hotels. But within hours, investigators and lawmakers on Capitol Hill had scorned the bank, and the company canceled.

    The conference is a Wells Fargo tradition. Previous all-expense-paid trips have included helicopter rides, wine tasting, horseback riding in Puerto Rico and a private Jimmy Buffett concert in the Bahamas for more than 1,000 of the company’s top employees and guests.

    http://rockymountainnews.com/n.....no-junkets

    How dare Wells Fargo try and defend themselves with the truth?!?!

    Their response (which was only provided as a PDF, because it’s not like anyone is going to read it anyway – it’s just more lies from one of those banks):

    W ells Fargo Responds to Misleading Reports About Employee Recognition Events

    The following is a statement from Wells Fargo:

    Today’s Associated Press story about Wells Fargo’s recognition events is intentionally misleading. The event is not a “junket” for executives but a four-day business meeting and recognition event for hard-working team members who made homeownership achievable and sustainable for borrowers across the nation. In 2008 alone, the team members who were invited to this event and their colleagues produced $230 billion in mortgage loans for U.S. homeowners.

    Through all economic cycles, our recognition events have been an important part of our company’s culture. Late last year, we cancelled recognition events for 2009 except those where the financial commitment was so great that no meaningful savings would occur by cancelling these events. We had scaled back the mortgage event, but in light of the current environment, we have now decided to cancel this event as well. We do not plan to have any other recognition events this year.

    The Associated Press story also misleads readers by implying Wells Fargo used the government’s investment to pay for these events. As we’ve said before, we’ve used the government’s investment to lend to creditworthy customers and to help homeowners avoid foreclosure.

    Since credit began contracting 18 months ago, Wells Fargo has made almost half a trillion dollars in new loan commitments and mortgage originations. Last quarter alone, we made $22 billion in loan commitments and $50 billion in mortgage originations. That’s more than $70 billion or almost three times the amount of the U.S. Treasury’s investment in Wells Fargo — which has begun to benefit from our performance through the dividend we will pay to the Treasury this quarter. …

    http://media.rockymountainnews.....tement.pdf

  28. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 8:37 pm

    Just when you thought things were bad enough.

    From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

    Economic crisis could jumpstart health care reform

    By Guy Boulton

    One possible byproduct of the economic crisis and the stimulus plans it is spawning: significant health care reform.

    “It’s probably the best window we’ve had for a long time,” said Susan Giaimo, a political science professor at Marquette University, as the House of Representatives debated a recovery plan last week that would provide tens of billions of dollars in spending on health care programs.

    The $819 billion package approved by the House included:

    • $20 billion for electronic health records.

    • $1.1 billion to establish a research center to evaluate the effectiveness of medical treatments.

    • $1.5 billion for community health centers.

    • Billions of dollars for preventive care and other health programs.

    The plan also would make unemployed workers eligible for Medicaid programs, such as BadgerCare Plus in Wisconsin, and it would help pay for insurance purchased through a former employer.

    Whether those provisions will be included in the Senate’s plan may not be known for several weeks. But the provisions in the House bill suggest that instead of crowding health care reform off the agenda, the economic crisis could increase its chances.

    “Health care reform will rise or fall on whether it gets on the economic-recovery train,” said Drew Altman, president and chief executive of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a health policy research organization.

    The House’s approval of the two-year plan overshadowed the Senate’s passing its version last week of legislation that would increase funding for the health program that provides coverage for children and, in some states including Wisconsin, parents who are not eligible for Medicaid and cannot afford private insurance.

    In normal times, that in itself would mark a landmark victory for advocates of expanding coverage. But last week showed that the economic crisis has created a political climate unlike any seen in generations.

    Still, Giaimo, Altman and others are quick to note that the obstacles to health care reform remain formidable.

    Because of its size, complexity and fragmentation, the U.S. health care system simply isn’t conducive to sweeping reforms. The United States is projected to spend more than $2.5 trillion this year on health care – an amount, as one policy analyst has noted, roughly the size of France’s economy.

    The partisan split over the House plan – not a single Republican voted for it – also doesn’t bode well for future compromises on health care reform. For that reason, even those who are optimistic about the chances for health care reform can be pessimistic.

    “Just because the time is right doesn’t mean it is actually going to happen,” said Giaimo, author of “Markets and Medicine: the Politics of Health Care Reform in Britain, Germany, and the United States.” …

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/s.....42092.html

    Nice spin on the “children covered until age 30 and you’re poor if you’re making under $70,000/year” SCHIP program, isn’t it?

  29. BillK
    February 3, 2009 at 8:41 pm

    Remember this when you read of dollars going to education.

    From the (Madison) Wisconsin State Journal:

    Proposed Madison abortion clinic will meet a true health-care need, some doctors say

    David Wahlberg

    From fetal defects and women’s health risks to late recognition of pregnancy and lack of money, the reasons for second-trimester abortions vary, say doctors who support a clinic that would perform the procedures in Madison.

    “Unfortunately, some women don’t find out that there is a lethal anomaly or other problems with their fetus until quite late,” said Dr. Julie Fagan, a women’s health specialist at University of Wisconsin Hospital.

    But opponents say the only situation where a woman should consider an abortion at any stage — a serious threat to her life — would require her to go to a hospital, not a clinic.

    “It’s illogical that if something is life-threatening, you’re going to schedule it as an outpatient,” said Dr. Karla Dickmeyer, an obstetrician-gynecologist at Meriter Hospital. “A clinic would make it too easy.”

    The UW Hospital board is scheduled to vote today in a public meeting on whether to support the proposed clinic at the Madison Surgery Center.

    The surgery center, owned by UW Hospital, its doctor group and Meriter, is at 1 S. Park St. Its board is expected to take up the proposal in a private meeting Feb. 25. The boards of Meriter and the doctor group, the UW Medical Foundation, have decided to support the clinic.

    Doctors would perform about 125 abortions a year on women 19 to 22 weeks pregnant, according to Dr. Laurel Rice, chair of obstetrics and gynecology at the university. Abortions are restricted after viability, or 24 weeks.

    The service would replace the practice of Dr. Dennis Christensen, who performed abortions up to 22 weeks at a Planned Parenthood clinic on the East Side until he retired in December.

    Planned Parenthood will continue to offer abortions up to 19 weeks. Milwaukee is the nearest place offering abortions after 19 weeks.

    Anti-abortion groups say the proposed clinic in Madison could violate laws against using government money for abortions and force unwilling employees to participate. UW officials say no state funding will be used for the abortions, though the doctors’ salaries include state money. Anyone can opt out, the officials say. …

    http://www.madison.com/wsj/topstories/436364

    I’m sure that pesky law about government money will be going by the wayside soon anyway.

  30. BillK
    February 4, 2009 at 2:23 am

    Now, I see – TV is a civil right.

    From CNN:

    Congress must act on TV switch, rights group says

    By Alan Duke

    A civil rights group says that unless Congress delays this month’s scheduled death of traditional television broadcasts, millions of people — many of them poor, disabled or elderly — will see only static on their sets.

    The House is set to vote again Wednesday on allowing local TV stations to keep their analog transmitters plugged in until summer, to give Americans more time to buy analog-to-digital converters for their older TV sets.

    An official with the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights said a delay is needed, but so is more money, after the federal government’s fund to give people $40 coupons to help buy converters ran out of money in recent weeks.

    “Funding is necessary to extend the coupon program and support local groups to help all Americans get the assistance they need to keep access to free over-the-air television service,” said Mark Lloyd, the group’s vice president. “We urge Congress to act as soon as possible.”

    The transition to digital-only broadcasts has been set for nearly a decade, but 6.5 million households, mostly lower-income, that get television signals through antennas have not bought the newer digital TVs or converters for their old sets, according to a study by the Nielsen Co.

    People who pay for cable or satellite TV service will be unaffected by the change.

    Those who will be cut off from free TV after February 17 — barring a delay — include “often communities of color, people who speak a language other than English, people with disabilities, low-income families and the elderly,” a Leadership Conference on Civil Rights statement said.

    “Though we’re reaching a lot of the people who will be affected by the transition, what we’re hearing is that folks are aware of the transition but confused,” said Tania Maria Rosario, the group’s coordinator for Seattle.

    The delay passed in the Senate but was stopped by House Republicans last week.

    All local stations will eventually pull the plug on the analog transmitters they’ve used since the invention of television. The stations have begun digital broadcasts over the past several years

    Two members of the Federal Communications Commission sent a letter to Congress last month “to express our deep concern” that they were “nowhere near” ready for the deadline “to pull the plug on television service in millions of American homes.”

    Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein called for a delay to give the government more time to get “boots on the ground” to help with the transition. …

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/0.....index.html

    The article doesn’t detail why the “poor, elderly or disabled” have taken no action during the past year.

    It also makes clear the next step – why the Government must put boots on the ground – apparently sending Government agents door-to-door to make sure people have hooked up their Government-paid converter boxes.

    Come summer, I suspect they’ll be back before Congress, saying there needs to be an ongoing program of people continuing to go door to door to assist anyone who calls and says they need the Feds’ help.

    This is why we have a nanny state, apparently – because the populace has become too incompetent to do anything for themselves, and of course anything and everything is now a “right.”

    • caligirl9
      February 4, 2009 at 12:51 pm

      Cool! If TV is a right, when is my HD television coming to me?
      How long has this change been in the works? How many public service groups have done outreach? (Answer: plenty!)
      You’ve had to live in a cave to not know about this digital switch.

  31. BillK
    February 4, 2009 at 7:42 am

    The fun just never stops.

    From Denver’s KUSA Television:

    Bill wants to let illegal immigrants pay in-state tuition

    By Tim Hoover

    DENVER – If passed by the state legislature, a new law would mean illegal immigrants in Colorado would be able to go to college and pay in-state tuition.

    Senate Bill 170, proposed by Sen. Chris Romer (D-Denver), would let undocumented students pay the same tuition rate as resident students at public universities like the University of Colorado or Colorado State University.

    The bill stipulates that in order to qualify for in-state tuition, high school students would have to have gone to a Colorado public or private high school for three years, have graduated from a public or private Colorado high school, or get a general equivalency diploma (GED), and they would have to enroll in a Colorado higher learning institution within five years of earning their high school degree.

    Ten other states in the U.S. have passed similar legislation within the past 10 years.

    The bill has been endorsed by the University of Northern Colorado Board of Trustees, the Boulder Valley School District and Denver Public Schools.

    “Students with a college education are more productive and more likely to be civically engaged,” Romer said in a news release. “Passing this legislation will help keep us economically competitive with our neighboring states and give these kids the chance to give back to the Colorado communities where they have grown up.”

    Federal law mandates that all children, regardless of immigration status, receive a kindergarten through high school education.

    Supporters of the bill say that education is wasted if those students can’t go on to higher education.

    Sen. Dave Schultheis, a longtime proponent of greater restrictions on illegal immigration, told 9NEWS’ partners at The Denver Post that the bill would just invite lawsuits from out-of-state students who would want the in-state tuition rate as well.

    “I will seek students that will sue, frankly,” Schultheis (R-Colorado Springs) said. “This is totally opposed to what I believe the citizens of Colorado want to see happen.” …

    http://www.9news.com/news/arti.....;catid=339

    So federal criminals should get even more benefits for having broken the law.

    Ah, life in our United States.

    • caligirl9
      February 4, 2009 at 12:47 pm

      Here in California it’s called AB540 and it’s a reality.

    • oldswimcoach
      February 4, 2009 at 2:15 pm

      So, under the equal protection clause of the bill of rights, does this mean that any state granting illegal immigrants (by definition not state residents) in state rates means that effectively the out of state rates are unconstitutional if challenge in the courts? My bet is they are.

      “Students with a college education are more productive and more likely to be civically engaged,” Romer said in a news release.”

      I read that as: “We have 4 years to indoctrinate liberalism and activism.”

  32. BillK
    February 4, 2009 at 7:55 am

    The “Freedom from Religion Foundation” strikes again.

    From the (Madison) Wisconsin State Journal:

    Complaint ends opening prayers at Dodge County Board meetings

    By Aaron Martin

    JUNEAU — For as far back as anyone can remember, Dodge County Board meetings have begun with a prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance.

    Not anymore.

    After allegations by the Freedom from Religion Foundation that the Dodge County Board unconstitutionally opened meetings with prayers that invoke Jesus Christ, the prayer will be replaced by a moment of silence at future meetings.

    The foundation’s allegations follow a complaint filed by board member Dean Fuller who was elected in April as a write-in candidate with one vote to represent Waupun’s 1st and 3rd wards.

    “The first time I heard the prayer, it shocked me,” Fuller said. “The invocation is done by the same person, and Jesus Christ is always invoked at the end of it. That’s clearly unconstitutional and illegal. My personal beliefs have nothing to do with it.”

    Board member Randy Grebel has administered invocations at County Board meetings since he was elected to the board in 2004. Before Grebel’s arrival, area ministers of various denominations took turns leading the board in prayer before each meeting.

    Fuller said he spoke with County Administrator Jim Mielke and Corporation Counsel John Corey before the Jan. 20 board meeting and told them he would file a complaint if the meeting was opened with a Christian prayer.

    It was.

    Rebecca Kratz, an attorney who represents the foundation, stated in a letter to Chairman Russell Kottke that, “The prayerful practice at Dodge County Board meetings is unconstitutional and must end immediately. These prayers offered by a county supervisor during an official government meeting open to the public demonstrates the county’s preference for Christianity and illegally promotes religion over non-religion.” …

    http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/436467

    I certainly hope a lawyer from the ACLJ contacts this county soon.

    • oldswimcoach
      February 4, 2009 at 2:26 pm

      And here I thought it was “congress” that was limited with regards to a state religion. Maryland came into the union as a “catholic” state with Catholicism as the state religion.

      “…prayers that invoke Jesus Christ,…”

      I wonder if the poor offended man would have taken the same actions against a Muslim prayer? My bet is he would have extolled their “diversity”.

  33. BillK
    February 4, 2009 at 8:04 am

    From the lefties at Bloomberg:

    Richest Americans’ Income Doubled as Tax Rate Slashed

    Jan. 30 (Bloomberg) — The average tax rate paid by the richest 400 Americans fell by a quarter to 17.2 percent through the first six years of the Bush administration and their average income doubled to $263.3 million, new IRS data show.

    The 17.2 percent tax rate in 2006 was the lowest since the IRS began tracking the 400 largest taxpayers in 1992, although the richest 400 Americans paid more tax on an inflation-adjusted basis than any year since 2000.

    The drop from 2001’s tax rate of 22.9 percent was due largely to ex-President George W. Bush’s push to cut tax rates on most capital gains to 15 percent in 2003.

    Capital gains made up 63 percent of the richest 400 Americans’ adjusted gross income in 2006, or a combined $66.1 billion, according to the data. In all, the 400 wealthiest Americans reported a combined $105.3 billion of adjusted gross income in 2006, the most recent year for which the IRS has data.

    “The big explosion in income for this group is clearly on the capital gains side, although there are also sharp increases in dividend and interest income,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research in Washington.

    In addition, “they are realizing more of their gains due to the lower tax rate,” Baker said.

    The data show that the population of the top 400 income-earners has fluctuated over the 15 years the agency has tracked it, according to an analysis by the Washington-based Tax Foundation, a research group. Some 3,305 different taxpayers have been included at least once on the list, the Tax Foundation said. Only 27 percent of those taxpayers have appeared more than once on the list, and only about 15 percent have been on it more than twice.

    The data may provide ammunition for Democrats such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who say they intend to increase the capital gains tax rate even as the credit crunch roils markets and is producing more investment losses than gains.

    President Barack Obama pledged during the presidential campaign to increase the rate. He has said he wants to let the rate rise to 20 percent for families making more than $250,000 and eliminate it for small businesses. …

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/.....5uxG_wV87A

    Never mind that decreasing the Capital Gains tax rate increases revenues to the Government.

    Tax policies for those making over $250,000 annually are now to be determined by what happened to the tax rates of Gates, Soros and Kennedy.

    Yeah, that makes sense.

    The Government, when raising taxes on cigarettes, at least claims to understand that higher tax rates will discourage an activity, like smoking.

    But when it comes to a desirable activity like capital gains-generating investments, they seem to think an increase in capital gains taxes will somehow increase revenue instead.

    The disconnect is amazing.

    • proreason
      February 4, 2009 at 1:53 pm

      So the top 400 paid just over 1% of their fortunes in income tax for the reported period.

      Sweet huh. What rate did you pay?

      But of course, the top 400 pay much higher rates than the tier just below them. Many in the top 400 are still actively creating income. Warren Buffet, for examply, probably skews the numbers considerably.

      But I have nothing against rich people who actually work and/or invest. They are capitalists and help the economy.

      The ones who hoard fortunes, hide them offshore, cheat on their taxes, and invest only in tax-free instruments are parasites. That’s the vast majority of the richest 100,000 families in the country.

      On another post, I suggested a tax rate of 5% on fortunes above $50 to $100 million. My hunch was that wealthy people could easily generate 6% income on their fortunes and hence could grow them even if taxed at 5%. The data BillK posted shows that the Fortune 400 reported income of about 6% on their fortunes (Fortune pegged the average fortune at 1.7 billion in June 2008, an increase of 2% over the prior year). You can bet there was a lot of unreported income as well.

      And rest assured that parasite Theresa Kerry didn’t report 6%, nor that she paid 1% in taxes either.

      Do you find it interesting that fortunes of the most wealthy grew 2% in the last Forbes reporting period despite the stock market meltdown? How did you do? Maybe their tax rate of 1% had something to do with that difference.

    • oldswimcoach
      February 4, 2009 at 2:32 pm

      This is interesting, because the lower taxes result in more federal income. So the question has to be asked: are the Democrats interested in generating tax revenue for their social programs, or simply punishing those that have capital gains or large earned incomes?

      The conclusion one is forced to draw is that this is about class warfare and punishing certain classes and has nothing to do with revenue policies.

    • proreason
      February 4, 2009 at 4:02 pm

      Coach, the purpose of the article is to increase the tax rates on YOU, not the super rich.

      No tweaks of the current tax structure are going to touch the super-rich. They have umpteen ways to avoid taxes.

      The only reason the Fortune 400 is mentioned in the article is because that generates big numbers. But those big numbers are a tiny fraction of what the idle rich have.

      Let’s say, for example, that The Moron lifts capital gain rates to 40%. The super-rich simply will move the little they now invest in the stock market to tax-free Municple bonds. But YOU are likely to be impacted by thousands of dollars a year. But you say….I can do the same thing. In theory, you can, but since tax-free bonds typically beat inflation by about 1%, that would mean your savings would never grow. It simply doesn’t make sense for an ordinary person to invest in tax-free instruments.

      Or let’s say The Moron lifts the top rate on income to 50%. The super-rich again will just move to tax-free bonds or not sell any property, or hide more money offf-shore. But YOU will have to pay thousands more a year because you don’t have those option. Why not? Because you work for your money.

      The only way to tax the idle super-rich is to tax wealth, not income. That way, they will be forced to take risks to stay whole, and the country will be enormously better off because of it.

      So the purpose of the whole article is beat the drums to tax WORKING TAXPAYERS more. The Fortune 400 thing is a device to make you think it is about rich people.

  34. BannedbytheTaliban
    February 4, 2009 at 9:14 am

    An all too typical story from the “what bias” media:

    Polling group censures Iraq toll researcher

    The Associated Press
    Posted : Wednesday Feb 4, 2009 7:35:37 EST

    WASHINGTON — A prominent group of polling researchers has accused the lead author of a 2006 study suggesting massive civilian deaths in Iraq of violating the polling profession’s codes and ethics.

    The Executive Council of the American Association for Public Opinion Research said Dr. Gilbert Burnham, a Johns Hopkins University professor, had repeatedly refused to cooperate with an eight-month investigation into his research on the Iraqi death toll that made headlines in October 2006 when it was published by The Lancet, a British medical journal.

    The widely publicized study headed by Burnham contended that nearly 655,000 Iraqis had died because of the U.S.-led invasion and war in Iraq.

    “When asked to provide several basic facts about this research, Burnham refused,” the council said in a statement. It noted that the group’s Code of Professional Ethics and Practices calls for researchers to disclose their methodology when survey findings are made public so they can be independently evaluated and verified.

    http://www.marinecorpstimes.co.....hs_020409/

    Most logical people knew his numbers were inflated anyway. Still, those numbers got a lot of lip service from the MSM; probably the reason they were inflated in the first place. For some reason I doubt as many people will here about this than heard about the death toll he claimed. I still here people quoting those numbers. It is amazing how many people go around making decisions based on the misinformation propagated by the MSM, more amazing still is the willingness of people to believe without question.

  35. BannedbytheTaliban
    February 4, 2009 at 1:38 pm

    An important lesson for the Socialist out there…..Obama:

    SAS reports 5.1 percent revenue increase

    CARY, N.C. — Privately-owned SAS Institute says its revenue rose again last year to $2.26 billion despite the poor economy.

    The North Carolina software company said Wednesday that revenue rose 5.1 percent last year, marking the 33rd year of revenue growth.

    Chief executive Jim Goodnight said in a statement the company prospered in the poor economy because its private status allows it to build long-term relationships with customers and workers.

    http://www.wral.com/news/state/story/4465739/

    Truth be damned! The reason for the current meltdown is problems with the private sector. Quick, more government PDQ so there will be another depression…um…I mean so there won’t be another depression.

  36. BillK
    February 4, 2009 at 5:09 pm

    Why look here! Obama’s already having an (argumentatively positive) effect on the banking industry!

    From the loving folks at Reuters:

    Goldman Sachs CFO Looks to Repay TARP Money

    NEW YORK — Goldman Sachs Group Inc Chief Financial Officer David Viniar said the bank is keen to avoid restrictions it agreed to after receiving funds from the U.S. government late last year and it is looking to pay the money back as soon as possible.

    The investment bank, which received a $10 billion capital injection from the U.S. Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program in October, is not happy with the strings that came attached to the money.

    Compensation restrictions and certain capital requirements were part of the original injection, and extra limitations may be in store after U.S. President Barack Obama imposed tough new rules limiting pay for companies receiving government aid.

    “We would like to get out from under that,” Viniar said, adding that the bank aims to pay back the $10 billion this year.

    Viniar said Goldman Sachs is also cautious about buying a bank, a move many have urged upon the investment bank to ensure its access to stable deposit funding.

    Banks have come under heavy fire for paying executives too much after receiving more than $300 billion of capital from the government and trillions of dollars of additional U.S. support. A report last week said that banks paid out $18.4 billion of bonuses, a fact that Obama called “shameful.”

    But Goldman can potentially pay back its $10 billion, and avoid salary caps, by issuing preferred stock rather than common stock, Viniar said.

    Shares of Goldman Sachs were up $6.13 or 7.4 percent at $88.94 on the New York Stock Exchange Wednesday afternoon, amid a broader rally in shares of financial companies.

    Obama said Wednesday that compensation at TARP recipients would be limited to $500,000 a year, adding that lower compensation is a crucial element of restoring taxpayer trust. …

    http://www.foxbusiness.com/sto.....arp-funds/

    This is actually a good thing, not unlike the way a variety of cities and states are considering not taking the pork stimulus cash because of the Government strings that will inevitably be attached.

    Anything that gets institutions weaned from the Federal teat faster is a net win, in my book, and if it takes draconian conditions attached to that Federal cash, so be it.

    The problem will be at institutions who aren’t in the position to break free, and one wonders why the CEOs of AIG and Citigroup haven’t resigned already knowing they can make $500K running a small local bank without the headaches associated with running a huge institution with billions of dollars of bad debt on the books.

  37. proreason
    February 4, 2009 at 6:04 pm

    Obama roasts in the WH while Kentucky suffers. From the IBD, doing the msm’s job, since they won’t:

    Blue Skies For Obama

    By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, February 03, 2009 4:20 PM PT

    Media: Katrina crashes into New Orleans, FEMA responds feebly and President Bush is blamed for the loss of life and limb.
    Winter smacks middle America, killing 55, FEMA’s late again, but President Obama gets a pass.

    Last week’s winter storm, paying no attention to Al Gore’s warnings about global warming, has left a trail of dead and broken bodies and wrecked property from the Plains to the East Coast. Of the 55 deaths, 24 have been in hard-hit Kentucky.

    Throughout the region, hundreds of thousands are still without power and some survivors have had to resort to using melted snow for their water supply. A shortage of gasoline and heating oil has made life miserable for many.

    Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear called the ice storm “the biggest natural disaster that this state has ever experienced, at least in modern history.” The Federal Emergency Management Agency, however, apparently didn’t get the memo. Much as they did in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, locals are complaining that FEMA has not been swift enough in delivering aid.

    Nothing remarkable about that. FEMA, whose performance in the 2005 Katrina disaster wasn’t exactly sterling, is a federal agency that supplements state and local authorities. It’s not an on-site organization and can’t respond instantly. That’s the job of the city, county and state governments.

    Sensing that the gloomy stories gushing out of New Orleans were the perfect platform from which to lash into the president, an opportunistic media-political-celebrity pack roundly accused Bush of negligence, incompetence and outright malice.

    …

    Meanwhile, Obama, whose administration on taking office vilified Bush on Katrina, has done no more for the victims of the winter storm. Yet no tirade has been forthcoming from either the media or the loopy orbit of Celebrity Planet.

    The double standard is what we’ve come to expect, but it’s not what we should continue to accept.

    http://www.ibdeditorials.com/I.....7909400135

    Looks like it might not go well in the next 4 years for states that didn’t vote for His Eminence.

    Or maybe overlooking an epic natural disaster in Kentucky is just a by-product of The Moron fine-tuning compensation packages for Wall Street. Even gods can only do so much.

    • BannedbytheTaliban
      February 5, 2009 at 9:26 am

      Well there aren’t people eating each other at the SuperDome, and Kanye West is telling everybody that Barack hates white people. The media doesn’t get much attention when they show the suffering of white people, so there isn’t 24/7 coverage of the aftermath like Katrina.

  38. BillK
    February 5, 2009 at 1:14 am

    From Fox News:

    Mexican Drug Cartels Armed to the Hilt, Threatening National Security

    By Matt Sanchez

    In November, along the border with Texas, Mexican authorities arrested drug cartel leader Jaime “el Hummer” Gonzalez Duran — one of the founders of “Los Zetas,” a paramilitary organization of former Mexican soldiers who decided there was more money to be made in selling drugs than in serving in the Mexican military.

    As El Hummer was being transported to the airport in an armed vehicle, his fellow cartel members launched a brazen attack against the federales.

    They were armed to the teeth. Their arsenal ranged from semi-automatic rifles to rocket-propelled grenades. When the smoke finally cleared and the government had prevailed, Mexican federal agents captured 540 assault rifles, more than 500,000 rounds of ammunition, 150 grenades, 14 cartridges of dynamite, 98 fragmentation grenades, 67 bulletproof vests, seven Barrett .50-caliber sniper rifles and a Light Anti Tank (LAW) rocket.</b.

    This is modern Mexico, where the leaders of the powerful drug cartels are armed to the teeth with sophisticated weapons, many of which are smuggled over the border from the United States. It is with this array of superior weapons that drug cartels are threatening the very stability of their own country. And it’s why America’s outgoing CIA Director, Michael Hayden, says violence in Mexico will pose the second greatest threat to U.S. security next year, right after Al Qaeda.

    “Americans are understandably focused on the flow of drugs and migrants into the U.S. from Mexico,” says Andreas Peter, author of “Border Games: Policing the U.S.-Mexico Divide.”

    “But too often glossed over in the border security debate is the flow of weapons across the border into Mexico,” he told Foxnews.com in a statement via the Internet.

    The cartels are obtaining arms from America by using “straw man” buyers, who legally purchase weapons at gun shops and gun shows in the U.S. The weapons cross into Mexico, where border security is much weaker heading south of the border than it is going north. …

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,487911,00.html

    Though many Americans are unaware of the danger in Mexico, this story reads like something put out by the Brady gun control folks.

    Remember, it’s the weapons that are to blame, not the people using them.

    However, the article does point out the more important factor:

    The connection between the drug cartels and the Mexican army has given cartel leaders access to military grade weapons like the high powered Five-Seven semi-automatic pistols.

    A favorite with the cartels, the Five-Seven has the advantage of being light: under 2 pounds, with a 20-round clip filled with bullets the cartels call “matapolicias’ — “cop killers.”

    “The 5.7 x 28, armor piercing (AP) rounds are not available for sale to the general public and are probably coming from the Mexican military,” said Stewart who has analyzed U.S.-Mexican border security issues for half a decade.

  39. BillK
    February 5, 2009 at 1:18 am

    From a thrilled AP:

    Colombian court: No extradition in US kidnap case

    By Frank Bajak

    BOGOTA — The Supreme Court on Wednesday denied a request from the U.S. to extradite a guerrilla captured during last year’s rescue of three American military contractors.

    The court said its decision is not subject to appeal. U.S. Embassy officials had no immediate comment.

    Alexander Farfan, alias “Gafas,” or glasses, cannot be extradited on kidnapping and terrorism charges because “the crimes for which he is wanted were committed in national territory,” the court said in a written opinion.

    The court said its decision was based on careful consideration of Colombian law and multilateral treaties such as the 1979 International Convention against the Taking of Hostages.

    President Alvaro Uribe had no immediate comment, but Uribe’s close adviser, Jose Obdulio Gaviria, called the ruling “a political decision.”

    “It means to say that from now on the court can’t extradite anyone,” he told The Associated Press. “I think it’s a decision that should be reconsidered.”

    On July 2, Colombian military agents posing as members of a humanitarian mission spirited to safety U.S. captives Marc Gonsalves, Tom Howes and Keith Stansell, along with French-Colombian politician Ingrid Betancourt.

    Farfan and a second rebel from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, Gerardo Antonio Aguilar, or “Cesar,” were captured during the operation. Both were indicted and the United States requested their extradition a week later.

    The three Northrop Grumman Corp. contractors were on a surveillance mission when their plane went down in rebel territory in February 2003.

    Gonsalves’ mother, Jo Rosano, told the AP by e-mail that while she understood the court’s reasoning, “these demons took 5 1/2 years of the guys’ lives away.” …

    http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2.....on,00.html

    I’m sure Colombia was just afraid the man might be “mistreated” in the US; The Chosen One should have this cleared up in no time.

  40. BillK
    February 5, 2009 at 1:32 am

    No real surprise, but a followup on a story above:

    University of Wisconsin Hospital Board supports proposed abortion clinic

    By David Wahlberg

    The UW Hospital board voted 11 to 3 today to support a proposed abortion clinic at the Madison Surgery Center after hearing from supporters and opponents at a public meeting.

    The action leaves the final decision on the clinic to the surgery center’s board, which is expected to take up the issue in a private meeting this week. The surgery center, at 1 S. Park St., is owned by UW Hospital, its doctor group and Meriter Hospital, all of which have approved the plan.

    Doctors at the clinic would perform about 125 abortions a year on women 19 to 22 weeks pregnant, said Dr. Laurel Rice, chair of obstetrics and gynecology at the university. The service would replace the practice of Dr. Dennis Christensen, who performed the procedures at a Planned Parenthood facility in Madison until he retired in December. …

    http://www.madison.com/wsj/topstories/436703

    The University Hospitals: Killing babies private providers don’t have the guts to.

  41. BillK
    February 5, 2009 at 1:48 am

    From our friends at Reuters, news that Obama is concentrating on what’s really important:

    Obama administration moves to heal rift with Europe

    By Ross Colvin

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Vice President Joe Biden will seek to break with the unilateralist tilt of the Bush years by emphasizing cooperation and diplomacy in a major weekend foreign policy speech in Germany, U.S. officials said.

    His remarks on Saturday to the Munich Security Conference, a gathering of defense and security experts, will be scrutinized for more details on the new administration’s policies on Russia, Afghanistan, the Middle East and NATO expansion.

    Analysts said Biden’s trip to Munich could go a long way toward repairing ties with Europe that were severely strained by former U.S. President George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003, his policies on climate change and his confrontational approach to Russia.

    “It is critical in setting the tone between this administration and the Europeans,” said Sam Brannen, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

    “Clearly they (Europeans) want him to say the transatlantic relationship is central,” Brannen said.

    Biden, on his first trip abroad as vice president, will head a delegation including retired General James Jones, President Barack Obama’s national security adviser; the U.S. military commander for the Middle East and Afghanistan, General David Petraeus; and Richard Holbrooke, newly appointed special envoy for Afghanistan.

    Biden, who headed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for a long time, will hold bilateral talks with other leaders at the conference. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy are on the guest list.

    “My instinct is that the message will be that we are here to listen, I am here to take notes,” said Steven Weber, a political science professor at University of California, Berkeley. …

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200.....taQ–

    Sad, just sad.

  42. BillK
    February 5, 2009 at 4:39 am

    The work to overturn the will of the people continues.

    From the San Francisco Chronicle:

    State high court to hear Prop. 8 case March 5

    By Bob Egelko

    02-03) 15:09 PST SAN FRANCISCO — The state Supreme Court will hear arguments March 5 on the validity of California’s ban on same-sex marriage, which voters approved in November after an emotionally charged and expensive campaign.

    The court said Tuesday that it would hold a three-hour hearing on Proposition 8, from 9 a.m. to noon, at its chambers in San Francisco . The proceedings will also be televised statewide on the California Channel, the court said. A ruling is due within 90 days of the hearing.

    Prop. 8 amended the state Constitution to declare that marriage only between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. It overturned the court’s May 15 ruling throwing out state laws that banned same-sex marriage.

    Along with arguments over the constitutionality of Prop. 8, the court will hear views on whether 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California before the November election should remain legally recognized if the ballot measure is upheld.

    Final reports filed with the state this week showed that the opposing sides spent $85 million on the campaign – $40 million for supporters of Prop. 8, $45 million for opponents – the highest total in U.S. history for a ballot measure on a social issue.

    Suits challenging Prop. 8 were filed by two groups of same-sex couples and by local governments led by the city of San Francisco. They argue that a measure depriving a minority of fundamental rights is such a drastic change to the state Constitution that it is a revision, which exceeds the power of initiatives.

    A revision can be placed on the ballot only by a two-thirds legislative vote or by delegates to a state constitutional convention. The court has upheld such challenges to initiatives only twice in its history.

    Prop. 8 foes also argue that it violates the constitutional separation of powers by preventing the judiciary from protecting a minority group.

    Attorney General Jerry Brown has sided with opponents of the measure and argues that it is invalid for a different reason: that it abolishes “inalienable rights” such as equality, guaranteed by the state Constitution, without a compelling justification.

    Brown, whose office defended the previous same-sex marriage ban, said he disagrees with the plaintiffs’ view that Prop. 8 is a constitutional revision and violates the separation of powers. …

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....15MMOH.DTL

    Government is wonderful – where else can you explicitly go against the will of your employers and not care?

  43. BannedbytheTaliban
    February 5, 2009 at 9:53 am

    Since the Democrats are in power and we are no longer a nation of laws, but people, let us examine some of these people/peoples that have come to lead this once great country:

    Daschle = Tax Cheat
    Rangel = Tax Cheat/Housing Fraud
    Killefer = Tax Cheat
    Geithner = Tax Cheat
    Clinton = Real-estate fraud/Financed by terrorist
    Biden = Plagiarist
    Sheila Dixon = Fraud/Corruption
    Pelosi “500 million unemployed” = Idiot being low on her crimes list
    Blagojevich = Extortionist (pay to play)
    Richardson = Extortionist
    Judd Gregg = In bed with Abramoff
    ACORN = Voter fraud
    Al Franken = Election fraud
    Murtha = Abscam/Shady deals with contractors

    This is just a start, feel free to add. But I am reminded of the last time we had such an inexperienced president. His name was Grant, you can find is presidency listed under “s” for scandal.

  44. BillK
    February 5, 2009 at 9:58 am

    If you hadn’t already seen this, from an adoring AP:

    Ashley Judd Rips Sarah Palin In Video

    Actress Takes Aim At Alaska Gov. Online

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Actress Ashley Judd is helping an animal rights group take on Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and a program that allows killing wolves and bears from airplanes.

    Palin is one of the hunting program’s chief supporters and said it’s scientifically based. She called it an important tool to sustain moose and caribou populations for Alaska subsistence hunters.

    “It’s time to stop Sarah Palin and stop this senseless savagery,” said Judd in a new Internet video for the group Defenders of Wildlife.

    In Alaska, private citizens are permitted to shoot wolves from the air or conduct land-and-shoot hunting of wolves in rural areas.

    Palin said it’s “reprehensible and hypocritical” that the group would use the state and her administration as a fundraising tool. …

    http://www.thedenverchannel.co.....etail.html

    It is those things, but what it’s not is surprising.

  45. BillK
    February 5, 2009 at 10:04 am

    CNN actually did some math:

    How much $$ per taxpayer?

    Question: “If we just gave all the bailout money to taxpayers, how much would we each get? I’ve seen $25,000, $300,000, $1 million – what’s the real answer?” — Miranda Marquit, Logan, Utah

    Answer: $9,718.49M

    To arrive at that figure, CNNMoney.com took the total of the bank bailout, $700 billion, and added that to the proposed stimulus spending in the House of Representatives bill, $819 billion. That totals $1.519 trillion.
    We then divide that number by 156.3 million, which was the total number of U.S. filers in 2008.

    So: $1.519 trillion divided by 156.3 million equals $9,718.49 per U.S. taxpayer.

    http://money.cnn.com/galleries.....index.html

    Of course the better question is what the long-term net cost of this fiasco will be, and no one knows.

    Meanwhile there are many, many editorial pages filling with letters from “ordinary citizens” complaining we aren’t spending enough fast enough.

    Sure…

    • proreason
      February 5, 2009 at 4:10 pm

      They neglect to mention that about 40% of the 156.3 million “taxpayers” pay nothing or get rebates.

      So if you don’t fall in that category, the average will be about $17,000 per.

      But that also includes people who pay minor amounts.

      Most people reading this likely pay above average taxes, so the good news for you is you will take on debt of more than 17K (a LOT more for many of you)………..while 60 million people will be getting handouts……from you.

      But not to worry. It will be worth it for the improvements in birth control, the arts, and plasma tv’s for “the poor”

  46. gipper
    February 5, 2009 at 10:09 am

    From a mullah correspondent at the AP:

    Obama says faith shouldn’t be used to divide

    By NATASHA T. METZLER
    Associated Press Writer

    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is telling the National Prayer Breakfast that even though faith too often has been used “as a tool to divide us from one another,” there is no religion in the world that is based on hatred.

    Obama, in prepared remarks, said, “There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being.”

    Obama is also telling the gathering that the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships that he is announcing Thursday won’t favor any religious group, or favor religious groups over secular groups.

    He says it will help organizations that want to “work on behalf of our communities,” without “blurring the line” between church and state.

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s.....TE=DEFAULT

    “There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being.”

    What about the innocent child of a botched abortion? Even a child of a correctly performed abortion?

    • Odie44
      February 5, 2009 at 10:14 am

      Oh Bambi…

      it’s the radical Islam nations who use the Koran as their “tool to divide us”, not the other way around, at least not for the last 1500 years.

      This guy, Allah they keep referring to – is in fact a religious diety. And that other guy, you kow the pediphile Mohammed – is also a religious figure.

      I just wanted to set the record straight for any 7 year old and Obama…

    • BillK
      February 6, 2009 at 2:18 am

      It’s hard to get more “innocent” than an unborn child, even if conceived in incest or rape.

      But nah, he can’t mean that…

  47. proreason
    February 5, 2009 at 5:51 pm

    Scientific American barfs on the Depression Stimulus. SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN!!!???

    Why Shovel-Ready Infrastructure is Wrong (Right Now)

    The term “shovel-ready”—as in, infrastructure projects that are ready or almost ready to begin—has become a favorite of policy makers in recent weeks. As the Senate gets ready to vote on a stimulus bill, it looks like the idea has stuck: The latest bill gives only projects that are able to start construction within 90 days eligibility for funding from the $90 billion set aside for infrastructure. Here is why the shovel-ready mandate could make the infrastructure crisis worse.

    By Erik Sofge
    Published on: February 5, 2009

    The term arrived with all the muscle and blue-collar authority of a bulldozer: “shovel-ready.” As in, infrastructure projects that are ready or almost ready to begin, the antithesis of some dimly imagined earmark or budget-sucking bridge to nowhere. Then-president-elect Obama used the term on a December 7th visit to NBC’s Meet the Press, describing the kinds of projects that would be supported by the upcoming economic stimulus bill. Soon the phrase was being repeated by policy-makers only an almost daily basis. …Only projects that are able to start construction within 90 days of selection are eligible for funding from the $90 billion set aside for infrastructure.

    From Buzzword to Multibillion-Dollar Policy
    So what exactly is a shovel-ready project? As the Washington Post recently pointed out, the term “shovel-ready” may have been introduced in the 1990s by New York-based electric utility Niagara-Mohawk Power, which later became National Grid (it is the current owner of the URL shovelready.com). There are no specific parameters or requirements that define shovel readiness. But according to civil engineers, the idea behind this new buzzword could help scuttle the stimulus bill’s highly publicized, though secondary, goal of infrastructure reform. At issue is that 90-day restriction stipulated by Congress, an even narrower window than the bill’s original 180-day limit. “They’re well intentioned, and they know their infrastructure sucks, so they’re trying to do immediate reactive management to what is a very deep, endemic problem,” says Robert Bea, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. “If you want to patch some potholes in the road, this is a good program. But if you’re hoping for anything long-term with this approach, throw away all hope. It can’t happen.”

    The programs that would meet the bill’s 90-day restriction are, for the most part, an unappealing mix of projects that were either shelved after being fully designed and engineered, and have since become outmoded or irrelevant, or projects with limited scope and ambition. No one’s building a smart electric grid or revamping a water system on 90 days notice. The best example of a shovel-ready project, and what engineers believe could become the biggest recipient of the transportation-related portion of the bill’s funding, is road resurfacing—important maintenance work, but not a meaningful way to rein in a national infrastructure crisis. …

    http://www.popularmechanics.co.....02578.html

    The msm vacuum must now be sealed. All sorts of publications are rushing in to do real news analysis. What next? Playboy? Redbook? Vogue?

    And the information in the article is enlightening. The only really useful Shovel Ready project appears to be covering the Moron and his Idiot Mouthpiece with horse manure. Now THAT would be priceless.

    • Steve
      February 5, 2009 at 6:49 pm

      It’s from Popular Mechanics, as opposed to Scientific American.

      PM is actually fairly sensible. (Cf. their anti-truther articles.)

  48. BillK
    February 6, 2009 at 2:22 am

    From the AP:

    Obama Declares Major Disaster in Kentucky Over Ice Storm

    FRANKFORT, Ky. — President Barack Obama on Thursday issued a major disaster declaration for Kentucky in the wake of a deadly ice storm, ordering federal aid to supplement local recovery efforts.

    Gov. Steve Beshear sought the major disaster status earlier this week. The storm has been blamed for 27 Kentucky deaths.

    Beshear said such a declaration would open the state to immediate federal financial assistance in the wake of the devastating ice storm, which cut power to more than three-fourths of a million homes and businesses, a state record. …

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,488569,00.html

    Can you imagine the cries of “Katrina!” that would be rampant if it were Bush that had taken days to declare Kentucky a major disaster area?

  49. BillK
    February 6, 2009 at 2:46 am

    If you hadn’t heard about this, it’s kind of fun.

    From (sorry) tmz.com (IMPORTANT: Most of their site is rather family un-friendly; I’ve edited the appropriate words below)

    Etta James to Beyoncé: I’ll Whoop Your A**!

    This is not a joke: 71-year-old Etta James actually threatened to beat the cr*p out of Beyoncé Knowles — and it’s caught all on tape!

    The war is all over Etta’s song, “At Last ” — Beyoncé sang the tune at Obama’s 1st Inauguration Ball on Jan. 20th … but last week at a concert in Seattle, James was still pissed. …

    http://www.tmz.com/2009/02/04/.....-your-ass/

    But the important thing is to listen to the audio, in which she refers to Obama as “Your big-eared President” and says “He’s not my President” at least twice.

    I’ve no idea what Ms. James’ politics are – I highly doubt she’s a conservative – but you’ll note that even the gossip-hungry MSM hasn’t exactly spent a lot of time on this and the agencies that have covered it have concentrated on the feud between the singers rather than her comments about the person whom Beyoncé was serenading.

    Meanwhile, could you imagine what would have happened if it were, say, Toby Keith, or for that matter any non-liberal who had made the same comments about The Chosen One?

  50. BannedbytheTaliban
    February 6, 2009 at 1:03 pm

    From the flag waving folks at the AP:

    Rise in public opinion spending raises concerns

    By Chris Tomlinson – The Associated Press
    Posted : Friday Feb 6, 2009 12:13:16 EST

    WASHINGTON — As it fights two wars, the Pentagon is steadily and dramatically increasing the money it spends to win what it calls “the human terrain” of world public opinion. In the process, it is raising concerns of spreading propaganda at home in violation of federal law.

    An Associated Press investigation found that over the past five years, the money the military spends on winning hearts and minds at home and abroad has grown by 63 percent, to at least $4.7 billion this year, according to Department of Defense budgets and other documents. That’s almost as much as it spent on body armor for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan between 2004 and 2006.

    This year, the Pentagon will employ 27,000 people just for recruitment, advertising and public relations — almost as many as the total 30,000-person work force in the State Department.

    “We have such a massive apparatus selling the military to us, it has become hard to ask questions about whether this is too much money or if it’s bloated,” says Sheldon Rampton, research director for the Committee on Media and Democracy, which tracks the military’s media operations. “As the war has become less popular, they have felt they need to respond to that more.”

    Yet the money spent on media and outreach still comes to only 1 percent of the Pentagon budget, and the military argues it is well-spent on recruitment and the education of foreign and American audiences. Military leaders say that at a time when extremist groups run Web sites and distribute video, information is as important a weapon as tanks and guns.

    ……..In 2003, for example, initial accounts from the military about the rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch from Iraqi forces were faked to rally public support. And in 2005, a Marine Corps spokesman during the siege of the Iraqi city of Fallujah told the U.S. news media that U.S. troops were attacking. In fact, the information was a ruse by U.S. commanders to fool insurgents into revealing their positions.

    http://www.marinecorpstimes.co.....r_020509w/

    So what this really boils down to is a couple liberal senators are mad because the Military is using the liberal media effectively against their terrorist buddies. The article also fails to mention how much of the the AP’s budget is spent on propaganda against the US and the Armed forces, which of course is ALL OF IT. Besides the media leaking any information about on going operations is treason and should be punished with death, which of course it is not. Instead they give “excellence in journalism” awards to these traitors.

    • sheehanjihad
      February 6, 2009 at 7:19 pm

      Banned….all of the “reporters” and “editors” who leaked this and continue to support the terrorists are going to realize the err of their ways, and for many it’s already too late… What they dont realize is, somebody kept track before google could disappear their articles…for years now. The day of reckoning will come….and you can count on it.

  51. Al Morone
    February 6, 2009 at 6:37 pm

    Obama’s potty mouth:
    http://www.aprilwinchell.com/w.....index.html

  52. caligirl9
    February 6, 2009 at 9:15 pm

    From our bleeding-heart friends at the NY Times … an editorial. Wah wah wah take out your kleenex and prepare to cry.

    Arpaio’s America

    It has come to this: In Phoenix on Wednesday, more than 200 men in shackles and prison stripes were marched under armed guard past a gantlet of TV cameras to a tent prison encircled by an electric fence. They were inmates being sent to await deportation in a new immigrant detention camp minutes from the center of America’s fifth-largest city.

    The judge, jury and exhibitioner of this degrading spectacle was the Maricopa County sheriff, Joe Arpaio, the publicity-obsessed star of a Fox reality show and the self-appointed scourge of illegal immigrants. Though he frequently and proudly insists that he answers to no one, except at election time, the sheriff is not an isolated rogue. As a participant in the federal policing program called 287(g), he is an official partner of the United States government in its warped crackdown on illegal immigration.

    The immigration enforcement regime left by the Bush Administration is out of control. It is up to President Obama and the new secretary of homeland security, Janet Napolitano, to rein it in and clean it up. This applies not just to off-the-rails deputies like Sheriff Arpaio, but to the federal enforcement agencies themselves.

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol have been shown in recent news accounts to be botching their jobs. Border Patrol agents in California have accused supervisors of setting arrest quotas for undocumented immigrants, and a recent Migration Policy Institute study showed that a much-touted campaign of raids against criminal fugitives was a failure. It netted mostly the maids and laborers who are no reasonable person’s idea of a national threat.
    The burden of action is particularly high on Ms. Napolitano, who as Arizona’s governor handled Sheriff Arpaio with a gingerly caution that looked to some of his critics and victims as calculated and timid.

    Ms. Napolitano, who is known as a serious and moderate voice on immigration, recently directed her agency to review its enforcement efforts, including looking at ways to expand the 287(g) program. Sheriff Arpaio is a powerful argument for doing just the opposite.

    Now that she has left Arizona politics behind, Ms. Napolitano is free to prove this is not Arpaio’s America, where the mob rules and immigrants are subject to ritual humiliation. The country should expect no less.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02......html?_r=1

    Is Joe an American-born citizen? I’d sure vote for him to fix the border problem!

    Guess the writer of this editorial doesn’t know how many resources illegals use in California … I’d like to send a few C-10 cargo planes full of ‘em to NY and let them see what we live with here! Let’s see how NY state’s economy become as ruined as California’s is.

  53. JohnMG
    February 6, 2009 at 9:32 pm

    …….”Ms. Napolitano, who is known as a serious and moderate voice on immigration……”

    Let me translate this NY Times shitsandwich into plain english:

    Ms. Napolitano, who is known as a serious liberal ball licker who masquerades as a moderate voice on immigration, and whose policies occupy the sphere somewhere to the left of V.I. Lenin, will completely emasculate the entire ICE and Border Patrol organizations in deference to her ‘hero’ BHO.

    It is laughable to me, to think that someone who couldn’t even control the illegal immigrant situation in her home state of Arizona, is now magically able to oversee the entire US operation, once again proving that it, indeed, possible to fail upward.

    The entire Obama administration is populated with morons. The only one I hope stays on is Gibbs. He’s positively funny to observe.

  54. BillK
    February 6, 2009 at 10:12 pm

    No surprise, but the fun continues in Madison, WI.

    From the (Madison) Wisconsin State Journal:

    Madison center to offer second-trimester abortions within few weeks or months

    By David Wahlberg

    The board of the Madison Surgery Center unanimously approved an abortion clinic on Friday, meaning second-trimester abortions will be offered there within a few months.

    The facility, at 1 S. Park St., will provide abortions primarily to women 19 to 22 weeks pregnant.

    The service will replace the practice of Dr. Dennis Christensen, who had performed abortions up to 22 weeks at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Madison until he retired in December. Planned Parenthood will still do abortions up to 19 weeks.

    Peggy Hamill, state director of Pro-Life Wisconsin, repeated earlier calls for a boycott of the facility and said protests will continue.

    “There will be an active presence outside of the clinic that we anticipate will only increase,” she said.

    Lisa Subeck, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin, said second-trimester abortions are rare but the service is necessary.

    “They stood up for the community and for women,” she said.

    The surgery center is owned by UW Hospital, the university’s doctor group and Meriter Hospital. Boards of those organizations recently approved the plan, despite protests and petitions from opponents. Friday’s vote by the surgery center board was 6-0. …

    http://www.madison.com/wsj/topstories/437041

    At least the current staff of the facility has some moral character:

    Fredericks said three of four anesthesiologists at the surgery center will refuse to take part in abortions. Brunette said the volume of procedures — about 125 abortions a year are expected — is low enough that staffing will be adequate.

    For those who aren’t good at math, 19 – 22 weeks is basically five months pregnant.

    That’s way beyond “choice.”

  55. Consilience
    February 6, 2009 at 10:19 pm

    These people are immoral savages! Choice? I think not; infanticide is more like it.

  56. BillK
    February 6, 2009 at 10:46 pm

    Could it be there are judges out there with a clue?

    From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

    Judge halts sick-leave ordinance

    By Georgia Pabst

    A Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge today halted enforcement of Milwaukee’s paid sick-day ordinance, just four days before the measure was scheduled to go into effect.

    Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Thomas R. Cooper granted the temporary injunction that was sought by the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce. The pro-business group had challenged the ordinance, which had been passed overwhelmingly by city voters on Nov. 4, 2008.

    “This has really shaken up the community,” Cooper said. “This call is such a big deal to everybody that we better do it right from the start.”

    The city did not object to the temporary injunction, but attorneys for 9to5, the national organization of working women, argued in court against the injunction, saying that it has been passed by the electorate and should be enforced.

    9to5 led the petition drive that brought the measure to the ballot. That group also has criticized Mayor Tom Barrett and city officials for not fighting to enforce the ordinance.

    http://www.jsonline.com/business/39208057.html

    Note that the up side of the passage of this ordinance in Milwaukee is that a number of surrounding suburbs in the Milwaukee area have passed new laws explicitly stating that no sick leave ordinance can be enacted in those cities.

You must be logged in to post a comment.


« Home | To Top
« These Mug Shots Have What In Common? | Kilpatricks, Conyers Named In FBI Probe »