Back Talk

The once great newspaper, the New York Times, continues to degrade and embarrass itself and its long-time readers by becoming a left-wing propagandist with shrinking credibility.

The Times did its best to destroy John McCain’s presidential bid with the rumor-based story of McCain’s so-called affair with a lobbyist nine years ago. They had been holding this until the perfect moment to do the most damage – probably during the general election run-up, but got word that another outlet was going to print it so they let it fly. The Times Readers are catching on and saw the story for what it was - a calculated hatchet job. Liberals are, if nothing, persistent; this week the paper printed a story questioning whether McCain should be ruled out as a president because he was born in the Canal Zone to parents serving in the military there. The fabricating Times poses this as a question that people are asking when, if fact, the Times brought up the issue and is alone in posing the question. It is no surprise to me that the Times editorial board, always anti-military, would favor punishing an American citizen by banning him from running for president because his parents were serving their country at a Military base outside the country - even though the base was technically U.S. territory. The paper has been getting by with this type activity for quite some time with its reporters fabricating stories, catering to leftist groups, and biased news coverage, but the public is tumbling to the facts. In a new Rasmussen poll, some interesting data popped up: Just 24% of American voters have a favorable opinion of the New York Times. Of readers who followed the McCain story, 66% believe it was an attempt by the paper to hurt the McCain campaign. One of the most interesting findings was the difference between parties; Republicans, by an 87% to 9% margin, believe the paper was trying to hurt McCain’s chances of winning the White House. Democrats were split evenly; a telling statistic considering the Times writers are generally Liberals and swing the news in a way favorable to Democrats.

Posted by Jim at 09:09 AM | Permalink

I had a good friend in San Jose who told me she no longer read the San Jose Mercury newspaper nor did she watch the major network evening and late night versions of the news programs.

She said the major outlets do not report the news, they report the bad-news and they invariably left her feeling mildly depressed. I merged this information with my more recent awareness that the major media are monopolized by liberal thinkers who color their news writing with liberal ideas. I am still surprised at how long it took me to recognize how much news reports influence public opinion. I have accepted this condition as one of those things that I cannot change ala the serenity prayer, however, it still rankles me when I read articles that the Associated Press writers, who provide most of our so-called news stories, provide articles that are tainted with opinions. The most recent hackle-raiser was one more of those gloom and doom, the sky is falling, pieces in the business section scaring us about our country’s economic future, warning us of that worst of all ogres, stagflation. The writer clearly relished this one big time as it sends a double-barreled fright into the public – recession and inflation at the same time. These economic ignoramuses have been calling the economy “troubled” for Bush’s entire presidency, even during the economic boom after the tax cuts, either oblivious to the fact that economic problems are 80% mental or, more likely, hoping their bad news drumbeat will create the situation where people stop buying, investing, and contributing to growth and cause a recession. The writer filled in what few bad news statistics he could find with phrases such as, the economy is “probably” barely growing, and, the economy “nearly stalled” in the last quarter. The thing is that the economy is growing, albeit at a slower rate, and the economy did not stall in the last quarter. This twaddle came from an AP economics news reporter, no less.

Posted by Jim at 09:12 AM | Permalink

Social Security, Medicare, and Entitlements (a nice sounding word for social welfare) are choking the American economy and the entrepreneurial spirit and the congressional Liberals have their hand on the national throat.

If welfare socialist Clinton or Obama gain the presidency, the grip will tighten. Hillary has slumped badly after having been “Obombed” in the last couple of weeks. The fact that candidate Obama is the likely nominee bodes badly for the country, not just because he is reportedly the most liberal member of the Senate but because he is so inexperienced and naïve about foreign affairs. He thinks he can use his soaring but vapid schmoozing on totalitarian leaders such as Hugo Chavez and the nutjobs in Iran and North Korea and have the same success that he is having with the American public. People are reportedly swooning in ecstasy at his speeches, not from what he is saying but how he says it, lots of sizzle but no steak. Moreover, if he becomes president and makes bad decisions as you know he will almost certainly do, the media will be reticent to question those decisions knowing the Jesse Jacksons, Al Sharptons, Charlie Rangels, and the ACLU who use racism as a livelihood – and it pays well as evidenced by Jackson’s millions - will scream the big “R”, racism. Also, little left-wing diversity groups around the country such as our little PCTN in Paradise that need racism issues to justify their existence and see racism in every sidewise glance will be all over it, like white on rice, like Bill Clinton on a Big Mac, like Harry Reid on a Nevada land deal, like Ted Kennedy on happy hour. In our politically correct world, we have our modernized scarlet letter and the letter is “R” not “A.”

Posted by Jim at 03:28 PM | Permalink

A photograph circulating on the Internet of Barack Obama dressed in traditional local garments during a visit to Kenya in 2006 in which he looks all the world like a Taliban terrorist, is causing a bit of a stir considering his distant past relationship with Islam.

Last week, Obama’s wife, Michelle, proclaimed after one of her husband’s empty but charismatic speeches that she felt proud of her country for the first time in her life. The Obama camp naturally put the old political spin on it – she didn’t mean it, she is inexperienced, she meant relatively proud, she loves America, and, besides, she didn’t really say it. Nobody says something like that if there is no basis for it in their thinking. Obama has made some similar expressions in the past. Michelle Obama’s college thesis has not been available for public scrutiny because it had been “withdrawn from the Princeton library until after the general election.” This was drawing suggestions that there were statements in the 98 page document damaging to the campaign if made public so they have released the document to the web site “Politico.” Racial considerations were definitely in evidence. She wrote, “I really don’t belong. Regardless of the circumstances under which I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second.” And, “no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates are toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus.” She stated that the Black culture and the White culture are totally separate, not a single homogeneous one.

Posted by Jim at 03:36 PM | Permalink

It is so nice to see that cow flatulence is back in the news – not counting all the political speeches, of course.

A Chico State professor, having taken a sabbatical from his teaching for a few months to get out there and make a few bucks by capitalizing on the Enviro-scare industry gave a typical speech. He naturally blames carbon dioxide global warming on man except in New Zealand where the culprit seems to be farting cows. An interesting digression: It’s odd that carbon dioxide, which is the main life source for trees, grass, and all other forms of plant life is now considered a pollutant. He told us that “only 7.5 to 8 percent of global warming is due to natural causes.” This is not a fact; this is somebody’s guesstimate. Apparently biology, which is the professor’s specialty, somehow qualifies one as an environmental and meteorologist expert. I thought all biologists did was dissect frogs and examine parameciums under a microscope, but I can understand why he is hitting the college speaking circuit. It would be much more fun and way more lucrative to give impassioned speeches about the coming end of the world than to try and teach a bunch 18 year-olds biology. The most off-putting thing about the enviro-scare activists is that they have closed their minds on the man-is-killing-our-environment issue. Al Gore, you remember him, their guru and man who once told us he invented the Internet, said the discussion is over. He says the hypothesis has been proven. This in spite of the fact that there is nothing resembling unanimity in the scientific community; 250 scientists signed a declaration disputiing the scare claims and reminded us that scientific outcomes are not reached by majority vote. The enviros throw wild claims at us and back them up convincingly with charts and graphs which are worth nothing if based upon speculation and approximation. They make future estimates using the current trend and assuming the trend will continue indefinitely; that doesn’t happen in nature. In 1973, the alarmists told us that global cooling was going to turn us into mom and popsicles. The biologist told us that in a few years, 22% of our August days will be over 100 degrees. Nobody knows this. He told us the ocean will rise one meter. Al Gore told us it would rise 20 feet. Hmmm. Now, I’m no biologist but I don’t have to check my metric conversion table to know that 20 feet does not convert to 1 meter.

Posted by Jim at 01:35 PM | Permalink

Is there anyone left out there who still has not grasped that our country’s major newspapers are biased to the left?

I turned a blind eye to this long after I should have known better – even after having the truth hit me in the face when I took a communications class in college titled, “Propaganda Analysis.” The New York Times, once a great paper now reduced to tabloid-quality credibility since they became a propaganda arm of the American left, printed a front page piece attempting to destroy John McCain’s run for the nomination. That same paper virtually ignored one of our most degrading incidents involving a major political figure, Bill Clinton, when Juanita Brodrick swore that he raped her. They gave no sources, no evidence, photographs or proof, and they held this garbage for some time waiting for the perfect moment. They had it even before they endorsed McCain over the other Republican campaigners because they feared that Romney, Thompson, or Giuliani would be more difficult for the Democrats to defeat. Once it became clear McCain would win the nomination, they printed this hatchet-job. This could be a new low for the NYT, ever lower than the moveon.org full page ad calling our commander in Iraq, “General Betray us” or having to fire new writers for fabricating news stories to discredit the President. The major papers are now filled with agenda journalists, partisan professional obfuscators, and ideological indoctrinators.

Posted by Jim at 01:01 PM | Permalink

I hope this is really just a matter of a political shenanigan for which politicians are famous of planting shills in the audience for campaign speeches:

According to a Drudge Report item, Barrack Obama’s speeches are so uplifting and exhilarating that audience members are fainting. Obama is a good speaker, you know, nice voice inflections, resonant tone, good delivery; however, he has given up nothing but generalities and platitudes – a good trick if he can continue to get by with it – and stayed with the sound good, offend nobody phrases about “change, make a better America, new beginning,” blah, blah, blah. If these swooners are legitimate, I am definitely beginning to worry that H.L. Mencken was right when he said, nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American people – an idea I have always resisted accepting. Obama is a first term senator with no credentials except a meager voting record that is strictly along the liberal line, no bills authored, nothing exceptional except the ability to speak well. In fact, the only way we have to know what he stands for is to look at his voting record which is pure welfare state liberalism. Yet our liberal press and the Democrat electorate are elevating him as some kind of messiah, all based upon flowery speeches. I hear Blacks calling into talk radio shows extolling the Obama virtues even though they cannot name a single specific Obama idea. Several have stated unashamedly that they are voting for him, not because they think he is the best candidate as the next leader of the free world, but because he is the same color as them. The pundits and political correctness police scold us for even thinking about making decisions about people because of their skin color, but that lofty precept seems not to apply to the Obama disciples. Someone wrote that “Barack Obama is an elevator Muzak campaigner full of all the glibbest hand-me-down myths in liberal iconography – which is probably why he's a shoo-in.” Issues such as broken borders, social security bankruptcy, medical care chaos, tax system mess, runaway tort system, bloated inept government, and cultural rot are nowhere in evidence in his speeches.

Posted by Jim at 05:08 PM | Permalink

Did you notice how quickly the Congress enacted the tax rebate the President requested to shoot a little adrenalin into the American economy?

Although the Democrats were not altogether happy with the final reading of the bill, we saw a rare occasion of the two parties coming together in a more or less bi-partisan way. Of course it was merely election year pandering where the Pols can get some attaboys for presenting something superficially beneficial to all and proving that they actually do something out there in Washington besides posture and bloviate, and, best of all, something that will lose them no votes. Naturally, the Democrats wanted more freebies such as an extension of unemployment benefits. Harry Reid and Ways and Means Committee chairman Charlie Rangel were very vocal on this point since they have either no clue or no care about the economics reality. Extending unemployment means more potential workers will stay out of work for longer periods, remaining on the government dole, allowing them to look for that perfect job. It is axiomatic that, if you reward behavior, either good or bad behavior, you will get more of it, whether it is welfare payouts, farm subsidy contracts, or benefits to illegal aliens. The inept, inefficient Congress passed this rebate bill in just two weeks. There are 180 people that have been nominated for federal positions, including 28 judicial nominees that are waiting for Senate confirmation – a constitutionally defined Senators’ duty. Of the overall group, 30 have waited more than a year and nine have waited more than two years.

Posted by Jim at 08:43 AM | Permalink

Footnote to previous comments about the Democrats walking out without renewing the terrorist intelligence bill:

Congressman Dennis Kucinich, that great American who traveled to the Mideast, met with the Syrian Dictator and publicly trashed his own country on Syrian television, was a principle opponent of the intelligence gathering bill; no surprise there, right? Regarding the DemPols reluctance to deprive their lawyer cronies the chance to line their pockets by extorting the telephone companies, columnist Robert Novak stated that “66 trial lawyers representing plaintiffs in the telecommunications suits have contributed $1.5 million to Democratic senators and causes. Of the 29 Democratic senators who voted against the FISA bill last Tuesday, 24 took money from the trial lawyers (as did two absent senators, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama). Eric A. Isaacson of San Diego, one of the telecommunications plaintiff's lawyers, contributed to the recent unsuccessful presidential campaign of Sen. Chris Dodd, who led the Senate fight against the bill containing immunity.”

Posted by Jim at 04:44 PM | Permalink

We haven’t had another attack since 9/11, the Surge in Iraq is working, the Associated Press has had fewer terrorist incidents to spotlight and feature, so editorial boards such as the Enterprise Record are taking the elitist liberal high road to protect free speech and congratulating the Congressional Democrats for walking out on their 12 day recess and denying the President and the country signing off on the anti-terrorism intelligence bill.

Amazingly, the article seemed to think that a wire-tap request through the snail-like legal system is acceptably speedy and commented that the wire-tap “warrants are almost always approved.” The problem is that, by the three weeks it may take, the opportunity for valuable intelligence against terrorists has passed. The editorial board stated – and I love this one – the warrants are sometimes approved “in the middle of the night.” I assume this phrase is intended to conjure up images of the Gestapo breaking down your door in the middle of the night. This is the same old slippery slope argument the pseudo free speech advocates used when they protected our freedoms by defending internet child pornography. The high-minded progressives are no doubt unconcerned about the 41 class action lawyer enrichment lawsuits pending against the telephone companies who monitored foreign related calls at the request of our intelligence agencies. Anti-business by nature, Liberals are sanguine about the effect upon the companies and uncaring, or unknowing, that the consumers are the poor chumps who will ultimately have to put the money in lawyers’ pockets because of the higher tele-communications costs.

Posted by Jim at 03:36 PM | Permalink

I mentioned earlier the metaphor, “death by a thousand cuts” as it applies to our freedoms.

The Mississippi Legislature has provided us with another small example of the erosion of rights in America: The Mississippi legislators introduced a bill that would make it illegal for Mississippi restaurants to serve obese patrons. I didn’t read the bill contents to learn who gets to decide whether a patron is obese or not and do not know what they plan to use as criteria. What’s next? Banning ugly people from bars, right along with the smokers? Banning quiet people from sporting events? I see that Berkeley (Sillyville, USA) is banning Marine Recruiters from their city, and, in fact have set up a private parking spot in front of the recruiting office for the group “code pink” to make it easy for that motley, Marxist, militant group to demonstrate and block young men from entering the Marine Corps office. Code Pink is one of those way off left outfits that makes one a little embarrassed for the silent majority in that town. In spite of Berkeley and San Francisco, we are the best country in the world with the best form of government despite the problems; however, we are far from being a free country. A free country is one in which the government provides for national security, protects its citizens from foreign aggression, coins money, builds roads, provides a judicial system, and little more. It refrains from whittling away at individual rights and watering down our independence and freedom of choice like the choice that young Berkely men have to talk with a Marine recruiter free of harrassing demonstrators.

Posted by Jim at 04:36 PM | Permalink

The House Democrats stooped to another low by disregarding President Bush’s request to renew the anti-terrorism spy law that expires today.

They walked out to begin a 12-day recess, and the President said, correctly, that by their refusal, they are “undermining the safety of the United States” and “making it harder to protect the American people.” One of the main sticking points for the DemPols is the clause that would shield from frivolous lawsuits telephone companies who provide our intelligence agencies with information about phone calls by persons on the terrorist watch list. Put aside for the moment the DemPols’ seemingly inherent tendency to misunderstand or underestimate the threat of terrorism, a pacifist ideology, and resistance to anything and everything President Bush attempts to accomplish. They foolishly believe we should surrender Iraq to al Qaida, that the surge failed, in spite of the facts, that we could come home, close the door on the way, the terrorists will leave us along, and we can live happily ever after in a Socialist wonderland. The crux of the matter is that the DemPols are all legal lizards who do not want to deny all the other lawyers out there the chance to make a few million on class action suites against the phone companies. The best defense this useless group could come up with to counter the President’s urgent request and angry response to their disregard of the country’s security was that Bush was engaging in election-year fear-mongering. The Senate passed a bill to replace the so-called "Protect America Act" that gave the government the ability to track enemy targets without a court order, but, again, Democratic lawmakers blocked it from coming to a vote. They said “it failed to adequately protect the privacy rights of American citizens.” By their actions, they are, instead, protecting al Qaida and the other terrorist cells around the globe.

Posted by Jim at 03:22 PM | Permalink

Why is Congress sticking its nose into the habits of baseball players?

Why are they allowing California Congressman Henry Waxman, who relishes this sort of foolish witch hunt, spend untold millions of taxpayers’ money to investigate something that is not a crime and should be left to the baseball commissioner to resolve? Why aren’t they spending all that time and money fixing the bankruptcy-bound social security or Medicare systems, or addressing the destructive illegal alien issue, or revising the out of control tax system, or tort reform to stop the runaway frivolous lawsuits and litigation lunacy? Nobody tells the truth in this type of show trial and nothing productive will result, yet, Congressmen love to preen and posture on television, spend more time speechifying than questioning, and pretend they are conducting the Nixon hearings. The committee Democrats are trashing Clemens, while the Republicans are trashing the one-time personal trainer; I have no idea why they are aligned by party – just habit, I guess. Roger Clemens will deny he took steroids and the alleged supplier will say he administered them personally. Then what? Arrest both of them and let God sort it out? So what if Roger Clemens did take steroids? The whole thing is beyond ridiculous. The other big event the politicians are crowing about, in an attempt to gain some ground on their record low approval rating, is the cash rebate program to stimulate the economy. The fact that it is a non-partisan bill means three things. It is a band-aid that is all show and no substance, it will have bad unintended consequences long term, and the tax payers should run for cover because they are going to get screwed in the deal. This is pure election year posturing, particularly for the Democrats; if they really believed that putting more money in the public’s pockets would stimulate the economy, why do they want to discontinue Bush’s tax cut?

Posted by Jim at 07:21 AM | Permalink

The Paradise Center for Tolerance and Non-violence has not been having much luck stirring up any real or imagined concern about racism problems here on the Ridge, so they sent out a return postage paid survey to determine the race of responders and details of any prejudice they may have experienced.

I'm going out on a limb here and guessing that the PCTN is comprised of, excepting a couple of stars-in-the-eyes college kids, a handful of aging flower children with way too much time on their hands out trying to save the world with love. It’s political correctness in high gear, the kind that pretends to lead the way in diversity, and they clearly do believe in diversity – that is, diversity in everything but freedom – the freedom to hire, fire, and rent to whom one desires. Freedom to say something stupid or untoward without losing one’s job or being forced to attend diversity training. Sadly, the do-gooders probably do more harm than good regarding prejudice by endlessly chattering about it, promoting non-existent problems and spotlighting those, if any, that actually exist. They may be unwitting pawns of the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons who turn every negative incident involving blacks into a racial prejudice storm and do it for money because it is their livelihood. They have made a fortune extorting money from deep-pockets companies who would rather settle for big bucks than get involved in a racial controversy. The PCTN would fit in famously in Berkeley where political correctness is a creed.

Posted by Jim at 03:12 PM | Permalink

Bill Clinton, an huge icon in the Democrat Party, has been making news waves in stumping for Hillary.

I wrote earlier about my puzzlement at one of our cultural oddities that the Democrat Party considers Senator Ted Kennedy a senior statesman whose political endorsement is golden for any fellow DemPol. That, in the rational world, this man of such great esteem should have served prison time for causing the death of Mary Joe Kopechne, leaving the scene, and so on. Almost as mind-numbing is the Party’s idolization of former President Bill Clinton. The supreme court disbarred him for lying to a grand jury, the House of Representatives disbarred him for lying to the Grand Jury and obstructing justice, and he peered straight into the camera with his most earnest look in an address to the country and lied about his relationship with Miss Blue Dress. Top this off with the most vile episode of his life, or arguably any U.S. President; he raped Juanita Brodrick, and three credible witnesses who spoke with Miss Brodrick and observed her physical condition – a swollen and bloody mouth - right after the rape, came forward to verify her claim. The Clinton-loving media virtually ignored the story and gave him a virtual pass. Except for a couple of remote instances, the liberal press never questioned him in a news conference and never wrote about the incident. This is the very same press who unconscionably rationalized that character and principle are not necessary criteria for the President and leader of the free world. This ugly episode is the thing that converted me from a Liberal to a Conservative.

Posted by Jim at 04:36 PM | Permalink

Global warming update from a Midwest news outlet:

“It was so cold Sunday in the Upper Midwest, and visibility was so poor in blowing snow, that church services were called off in parts of Michigan. At noon, thermometers in one North Dakota town still registered only 20 below zero. The windy, bitterly cold weather blanketed a region from the Dakotas across much of Minnesota into Wisconsin and Michigan. Subzero temperatures at midday extended into northern Iowa, the National Weather Service said.” My home state, Iowa, has had the worst winter in years, and, in fact, we have had the most severe winter here on the ridge since we have lived here. I’ve done so much snow shoveling, I thought I was back in Middle America. I am so thankful that we have this “man-made global warming” catastrophe underway that the Enviro-kooks keep telling us about. Without it, I would have to buy a snow plow.

Posted by Jim at 04:52 PM | Permalink

The media has been pushing John McCain very hard for the GOP Presidential nomination over all the other candidates because he is the least Conservative of the credible aspirants, but they will drop him like a bad habit once he wins the Republican race and starts running against their Democrat candidate, whether Obama or Clinton, in the general election.

This brings me to my central thought which is that we have a situation in America where the major media picks the candidates and decide the issues, not the public. The worrying part for me as a Neo-Conservative is that 90% of the media is Democrat/Liberal/Socialist in its makeup. The media is a bit torn in its preference this election season because, although they have always adored the Clintons, regardless of what the dirty duo has done, they are titillated by Obama, the first real Black man to vie for the top office not including the first ersatz Black man, Bill Clinton. Conservatives and Republicans must simply accept the fact that the media is predominately liberal, will always shade their coverage in favor of the other party, and quit agonizing about it. We know that several studies showed that the media presented favorable stories of Democrats to Republicans by a four to one ratio. Our principle news provider, the Associated Press, has admitted that they have senior news writers who are also liberal opinion writers, but that those writers never allow bias to enter their news reports. Of course not; whoever heard of a person’s opinions creeping into his writing?

Posted by Jim at 03:53 PM | Permalink

Some activists visited the jails and helped inmates who have not yet gone to trial vote in the Primary election.

Now, call me a cynical old Neo-Conservative if you wish, but I couldn’t help pondering this in terms of partisan political activism. For starters, this has the distinct smell of another Democrat attempt to garner votes for their party that is similar to voter shenanigans in the past such as the motor voter episode, not even mentioning all those dead people that manage to vote Democrat every year in places such as Chicago’s Cook County. Last election, a couple of places had more Democrat votes than registered voters. What are the odds that a person in jail would vote for Republicans, the party that is much tougher on law and order issues over Democrats who are historically soft on crime, tend to favor shorter sentences, general criminal coddling, and nominate liberal judges? Pollsters will now have to add a category called the “slammer vote.” Do you think these jail voter enthusiasts actually care whether prisoners vote? They want them to vote for the same reason the Democrats want to grant amnesty to 15 or 20 million illegal aliens – so that they can inherit a block of new Democrat voters. Since Hispanic voters already vote overwhelmingly Democrat, and with our failure to control our southern border allowing a million new illegal aliens to come across annually, the DemPols see this as a way to take permanent control of politics and therefore the country.

Posted by Jim at 10:14 AM | Permalink

Former President Bill Clinton was in Denver, Colorado theoretically helping his wife in the campaign.

In one of his long self-serving speeches, he informed the U.S. and other industrialized nations what they should do to combat global warming with the following remarks: "We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren." To say that this is an odd suggestion at a time when the country and the world are concerned about a possible recession is the mother of understatements. Put the brakes on our economy at a time when the Federal Reserve has just cut the interest rate two times to protect the economy? What does “slow down the economy” translate to in rational terms? It means we would have a lower living standard, more concern about how much we spend for groceries, rent, and things such as transportation. Spend less on entertainment and cancel vacations. Some of us will lose our jobs because of the general domino effect upon businesses of the general fall-off of activity, growth, and decreased capital spending. Yes, Willie, that’s a super idea. Not to worry though; if the Democrats gain power in November, they will raise taxes, increase spending for welfare, social programs, and earmarks, toughen restrictions on business, take money out of the pockets of consumers and investors by allowing Bush’s tax cuts to expire, and we will go into a recession. All those jobless people won’t be out there committing commerce, creating carbon dioxide, and adding to global warming. Of course, they will have to drive to and from the welfare office.

Posted by Jim at 02:02 PM | Permalink

All right, the lunacy is over with. The Super bowl is behind us for another year.

All the ad-nauseum, repetitive, redundant sportscasters’ blather about the two touchdown favorite Patriots on the doorstep of setting an all-time record of season wins, the biggest super bowl yet, and all the speculation whether Tom Brady is the best quarterback of all time, and, if not, who was the best, Marino, Montana, Bradshaw, Fouts, Staubach, blah, blah, blah. Talking heads told us that bettors placed $1.5 million on the game and the figure could possibly be up to $3 million if one factors in the illegal gambling. E-bay auctioned off tickets for thousands of dollars, fans spent their hard earned money to fly to Arizona at twice the regular fare, hotels and restaurants cleaned up with inflated prices, and golf courses charged $300 for green fees. All this silliness and hype because of a schoolboy game – a game that a bunch of overgrown physically talented but maturity-challenged adults play for millions and millions of dollars. The salaries go through the stratosphere, the teams keep increasing the seat prices, and all the poor schlumpfs keep paying for it all. Insanity, irrationality, absurdity, folly, nuttiness. Of course, if my team, the Green Bay Packers had just won the big game, well, I might have to rethink this a little bit.

Posted by Jim at 01:25 PM | Permalink

Shock of shocks, hold on to your socks, a New York Times writer, who has probably endangered his job in doing so, has written that “Mr. Bush (Liberal New York Times writers cannot rise above their pettiness to call George Bush ‘President’) has presided over an economy that other Presidents would envy, yet, much to his advisors’ consternation, he has had trouble getting credit for it.”

A pretty amazing admission since the leftist NYT has been propagandizing their readers about the Economy with distortions and downright lies ever since Bush took office - reference recent diatribe by badmouth Bob Herbert. Their transparent tactics have always been to discredit the President and get Liberals back in the White House. We have had 52 months of economic growth so propagandists like Herbert have had their work cut out for them. The outstanding economic performance under Bush has been all the more remarkable since the president faced an unusual number of unexpected problems such as an inherited recession, terrorists attacks, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, mortgage loan problems, and record high oil prices. We have had low unemployment and low non-oil inflation and, contrary to the DemPols and their media friends’ attempt to characterize it that way, the American economy is not in recession.

Posted by Jim at 01:16 PM | Permalink

The media made an enormous deal of Senator Kennedy’s endorsement of Barack Obama, and that other clan members, son Patrick and niece Caroline Kennedy, also announced their support for Obama.

Edward Kennedy said “the country needs a leader who can bring people together and create change.” The only change in store for America in the wake of an Obama presidency is one more giant step toward Socialism, but that is not the main thrust of the bafflement I have regarding the Kennedys. The Ted Kennedy phenomenon is one of those developments that occurs where, if one read a summary of it without knowing the identity of the subject, he would think it was an episode about a leader in a South American or third world country. Ted Kennedy is a scion of a wealthy and powerful family and an elder respected elder of one of our major political parties. This man, had he not been a Kennedy, would have surely served prison time for manslaughter when he caused the death of Mary Joe Kopechne in 1969. He drove his car off a Chappaquiddick bridge with Mary Joe in the passenger seat. He did not try to save her, he did not walk across the road, knock on a door and call the police or an ambulance, he, instead, merely walked home. He did not report the incident until the next day because the long night had given him plenty of time to realize there was no chance of plausible deniability, and he was able to talk with his lawyer and his personal manager about strategy. Our leftist media gave him a virtual freee pass; in his recent book, “Whitewash,” Brent Bozell tracks the almost non-existent press coverage of that disgraceful event from that time until now, no questions, no criticism, nil. Astonishing.

Posted by Jim at 12:32 PM | Permalink