tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-114801642012-02-16T22:16:06.892-06:00Books, Life, Computing, Politics, and the tracks of the domestic Moose through hill, dale, and lovely swamp.bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.comBlogger19311100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-52983504783298736742012-02-16T22:16:00.000-06:002012-02-16T22:16:06.902-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/02/who-killed-the-jobs.php">Who Killed the Jobs? | Power Line</a><div><br /></div><div>Great chart that shows the decline in the percentage of people working in the US ... FRIGHTENING!!!<br /><br />Gee, if you can get 99+ weeks of unemployment, why is it that you would be rushing back to work again??<br /><br /></div><div>Oh, and if you rush back to work you are likely not eligible for any of the $26B in vote buying that BO just announced. Suppose you can get elected if you pay off a bunch of people that bought into homes they could not afford?? </div><div><br /></div><div>So we are now borrowing .40 on every dollar we spend and 40% of the people eligible workers are not working. No relationship there I'm sure!!</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5298350478329873674?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-53049807740234325602012-02-15T13:03:00.000-06:002012-02-15T13:03:19.206-06:00<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/02/15/the_progressive_legacy_part_ii/page/2">The Progressive Legacy: Part II - Page 2</a><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Thomas Sowell is in the middle of a 3-part series on "progressivism" (regressivism in my dictionary) ... it is all good, but I found the following statement to be concise and clear on the subject:<div><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>In other words, the government -- politicians, bureaucrats and judges -- are to intervene, second-guess and pick winners and losers, in a complex economic process of which they are often uninformed, if not misinformed, and a process in which they pay no price for being wrong, regardless of how high a price will be paid by the economy.</blockquote></span> </div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5304980774023432560?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-23239173801150836802012-02-07T07:42:00.000-06:002012-02-07T07:42:02.189-06:00<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/02/07/a_defining_moment/page/2">A Defining Moment - Page 2 - Thomas Sowell - Townhall Conservative</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Make no mistake, I'll vote for anyone but BO ... but there are certainly plenty of things for a conservative to worry about with Romney. Is his indexing of the minium wage promise just useless "hit the middle" campaign rhetoric or is he that stupid??<br /><br />Anybody that has even looked a tiny bit at basic economics knows that there are few things more devastating to the employment prospects, and thus general life prospects of the young and especially the black than minium wage laws. As typical, the eminent Mr Sowell sums it up very well:</div><blockquote><div><p style="margin-top: 10px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-size: 14px; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">The economic reason is not complicated. When you set minimum wage levels higher than many inexperienced young people are worth, they don't get hired. It is not rocket science.</p></div></blockquote><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2323917380115083680?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-77324351275871811072012-02-06T19:42:00.000-06:002012-02-06T19:42:48.496-06:00<a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/president_obamas_civilian_soldiers.html">Articles: President Obama's Civilian Soldiers</a><br /><br />Short and sweet ... a teaser, but read it all. <br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">There's a harsh logic to this. Ever since Karl Marx, liberals have rebelled against the fat, sloppy way of voluntary cooperation that leaves no room for political power and civilian soldiers. So voluntary cooperation must go. Forget about humans as social animals. Think soldier ants.</blockquote><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-7732435127587181107?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-13059063892386016602012-02-06T19:37:00.000-06:002012-02-06T19:37:43.910-06:00<a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/02/06/the_citizens_united_catastrophe__113023.html">RealClearPolitics - The Citizens United Catastrophe</a>: <br><br><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a><br /><br />An unbelievable double standard. Obama spends $750M in '08 vs McCain's $350M, and it is no story whatsoever. Obama doesn't report any contributions of less than $50, so in this age of computerization, all the $49 contribuions could be provided by ANY large individual or organization completely untracked!! His main contributors (AFAWK) were Wall Street, Unions, and Trial Lawyers. I think they invested their money pretty well!! Can you spell bailout? Can you spell "stimulus" going to bail out union car companies and state public workers?? Isn't it "odd" that there was no tort reform in BOcare?? Well, I guess only if you don't follow the money!!<br /><br />Oh, but now the free speech as been expanded to people that EJ doesn't like. FOR SHAME!!! Get out the pitchforks, we can't be having any speech that doesn't meet EJ's rigid standards!!<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1305906389238601660?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-51953790895460010992012-02-04T10:17:00.000-06:002012-02-04T10:17:08.567-06:00<a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/obamacare-vs-catholics_620946.html?page=2">Obamacare vs. the Catholics | The Weekly Standard</a>: <div><br /></div><div>In this last week, we have seen another vista into the hubris at the center of of Obama's narcissist soul. First we find that he knows that both Jesus and Mohammad would support his taxes on the rich, now he is issuing religious edicts on the subject of contraception to the Catholic Church.<br /><br />Excellent column that covers a possible political calculations at the core of this -- It is like Keystone, he is just shoring up his far left base, then will hang them out to dry in 2013 if he wins. <div><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; text-align: -webkit-auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>Which means that what is actually on the block are precisely the kind of social-justice services​—​education, health care, and aid to the needy​—​that liberal Catholics believe to be the most vital works of the church. For conservative Catholics, Obama merely confirmed their darkest suspicions; for liberals, it was a betrayal in full.</blockquote></span></div><div><div style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><span ><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;">One should never discount pure political motive, but in this case I really suspect that when you get as far left as BO, what is roiling his passion is this:<br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>The subjects of contraception, abortion, and sterilization are not ornamental aspects of the Catholic faith; they flow from the Church’s central teachings about the dignity of the human person.</blockquote></span></div>The central teaching of the left is "the dignity of the state". The state is what endures, not the individual -- there is no namby-pamby afterlife for the individual in left liberal theology, you must submit to the earthly state. "Immortality" exists only for the state.<br /><br />Individual man has no dignity, only contribution for the state -- and since there are too many individuals already, stopping, killing babies or creating non life creating unions (gays) is sacramental for the state. Human life is sacred to Jesus and the Christian Church, human destruction is sacred to the State, Satan, and BO. It has a certain symmetry.<br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5195379089546001099?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-26639778054743547722012-01-29T21:26:00.000-06:002012-01-29T21:26:38.658-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/01/mitch-daniels-responds.php">Mitch Daniels Responds | Power Line</a><br /><div><br /></div><div>Good column, but this is priceless. BOnomics is simply the removal of the nose to spite the face.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: italic; line-height: 22px;"></span><br /><blockquote><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: italic; line-height: 22px;">No feature of the Obama Presidency has been sadder than its constant efforts to divide us, to curry favor with some Americans by castigating others. As in previous moments of national danger, we Americans are all in the same boat. If we drift, quarreling and paralyzed, over a Niagara of debt, we will all suffer, regardless of income, race, gender, or other category. If we fail to shift to a pro-jobs, pro-growth economic policy, there will never be enough public revenue to pay for our safety net, national security, or whatever size government we decide to have. …</span></blockquote></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2663977805474354772?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-92165763217765566892012-01-28T11:31:00.001-06:002012-01-28T13:24:51.371-06:00<a href="http://www.the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=1183">The Once and Future Liberalism - Walter Russell Mead - The American Interest Magazine</a><br /><div><br /></div><div>A slightly long, but needs to be read by all. An excellent summary on where we have been politically during our history and why it is so hard to get on with the hard work of the next release of "liberalism" (in the true, not common usage). Hint:: Too much success.</div><div><br /></div><div>Liberalism 1.0, 1688, The Glorious Revolution</div><div><br /></div><div>Liberalism 2.0, 1776, The US Revolution</div><div><br /></div><div>Liberalism 3.0, 19th Century, "Ending Slavery"</div><div><br /></div><div>Liberalism 4.o, 4.1 20th century, before and after FDR, "The Iron Triangle"</div><div><br /></div><div>Liberalism 5.0 -- ?????<br /><br />A good description of why we are just spinning our wheels at the moment.<br /><div><blockquote><span style="line-height: 19px;">Our real choice, however, is not between blue or pre-blue. We can’t get back to the 1890s or 1920s any more than we can go back to the 1950s and 1960s. We may not yet be able to imagine what a post-blue future looks like, but that is what we will have to build. Until we remove the scales from our eyes and launch our discourse toward the future, our politics will remain sterile, and our economy will fail to provide the growth and higher living standards Americans continue to seek. That neither we nor the world can afford.</span></blockquote></div><div>A good summary of the current state of affairs.</div><br /><blockquote><span style="line-height: 19px;">Finally, in this regard, the blue model has impoverished our lives and blighted our society in more subtle ways. Many Americans became (and remain) stuff-rich and meaning-poor. Many people classified as “poor” in American society have an historically unprecedented abundance of consumer goods—anything, essentially, that a Fordist factory here or abroad can turn out. But far too many Americans still have lives that are poor in meaning, in part because the blue social model separates production and consumption in ways that are ultimately dehumanizing and demeaning. A rich and rewarding human life neither comes from nor depends on consumption, even lots of consumption; it comes from producing goods and services of value through the integration of technique with a vision of social and personal meaning. Being fully human is about doing good work that means something. Is a blue society with our level of drug and alcohol abuse, and in which the average American watches 151 hours of television a month, really the happiest conceivable human living arrangement?</span></blockquote><br /><div>Amen to his description of the current discussion and a little shape to how the 5.0 discussion format might look. My view would be that a cornerstone of that discussion is some variation on the theme of "A Lifetime Learning Nation" or "All America as "Silicon/Innovation/Advanced Tech/???" Valley" ... or ???</div><div><br /></div><br /><blockquote><span style="line-height: 19px;">We must come to terms with the fact that the debate we have been having over these issues for past several decades has been unproductive. We’re not in a “tastes great” versus “less filling” situation; we need an entirely new brew. But this is nothing to mourn, because both liberalism 3.0 and 4.0 died of success, just as versions 1.0 and 2.0 did before them.</span></blockquote><blockquote><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-image: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 20px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;">For those blue Democrats clinging to liberalism 4.1, this is a time of doom and gloom. For those red Republicans longing for a return to liberalism 3.0, it is a time of angry nostalgia: Ron Paul making a stump speech. This should be a time of adventure, innovation and creativity in the building of liberalism 5.0. America is ready for an upgrade to a new and higher level; indeed, we are overdue for a project that can capture the best energies of our rising generations, those who will lead the United States and the world to new and richer ways of living that will make the “advanced” societies of the 20th century look primitive, backward and unfulfilled.</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-image: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 20px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;">We’ve wasted too many years arguing over how to retrieve the irretrievable; can we please now get on with the actual business of this great, liberal, unapologetically forward-looking nation?</div></blockquote></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-9216576321776556689?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-44678136698572089022012-01-28T11:14:00.000-06:002012-01-28T11:14:30.753-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/01/warren-buffett-shut-up-he-explained.php?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+powerlineblog%2Flivefeed+%28Power+Line%29&amp;utm_content=FaceBook">Warren Buffett: Shut up, he explained | Power Line</a>: <div><br /></div><div>I've written enough about this, my point here is just to point out one reason why we have so much division in the US today, we have just seen the creation of a new Meme -- "Buffet's Secretary". </div><div><br /></div><div>The left / MSM listeners / Democrats etc will see it as some version of the following depending on their memory, friends, degree of paying attention, etc:</div><div><br /></div><div>"Buffett's secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does". </div><div><br /></div><div>"Buffett's secretary pays more taxes than he does"</div><div><br /></div><div>If someone that has dug into a bit more tries to have a reasoned discussion on the topic, they will respond with something like:</div><div><br /></div><div>"Well, I don't see why he would lie about it". </div><div><br /></div><div>"You must listen to Fox News too much!"</div><div><br /></div><div>"It was all over, I didn't hear anything about the stuff you are saying ..."</div><div><br /></div><div>or basically, as the title of this says "shut up". </div><div><br /></div><div>This has now entered the mind of the American voting public as a bunch of interlinked "factoids" have, most of which have only emotional and often very close to 100% incorrect content of any sort. Some examples: </div><div><br /></div><div>"Bush lied" (forget about what, in the known definition of "lying" he didn't lie about WMD, yellowcake, Valerie Plame, or anything else commonly attributed ... but the meme has stuck)</div><div><br /></div><div>"Death Panels" ... the true origin is long lost. This started on the right, probably in the Tea Party, now it is just "a complete fabrication" from the left, and "a hyperbolic euphemism for healthcare rationing" from the right. </div><div><br /></div><div>"Tea Party" ... there really isn't much of an organization. It could be people opposed to runaway government of most sorts ... spending and BOcare in particular ... but in general it is "bad, stupid, racist" from the left, "mostly good, maybe a little carried away conservative" from the right. </div><div><br /></div><div>"The 1%" ... From the left, a symbol of Wall Street, Corporations, The Koch Bros (or wealthy devil of the day) ... all manner of financial evil, greed, malfeasance and corruption. THE ENEMY in the 2012 campaign of Class Warfare. From the right, the level of income that they would like to achieve someday. </div><div><br /></div><div>One could go on forever, but the bottom line is that in this time of massive info overload, our information delivery systems have actually been reduced to delivering "only the tag cloud" with next to no content behind them -- but more importantly, essentially 180 degree different content depending on your "political tribe". Is it any wonder that nothing even approaching discussion or debate happens anymore?? </div><div><br /></div><div>Like most things, there is a whole book "The Shallows" http://www.theshallowsbook.com/nicholascarr/Nicholas_Carrs_The_Shallows.html that covers this general phenomenon as it relates to the the Internet. </div><div><br /></div><div>No time for true content, depth, nuance, honest emotion, thought, context ... just a raw emotional "meme/tag", then silence. </div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4467813669857208902?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-48155148515695839822012-01-27T15:48:00.000-06:002012-01-27T15:48:08.557-06:00<a href="http://news.investors.com/Article/599062/201201261809/obama-small-ball-visionary-solyndra-buffett.htm">Obama Was Once A Visionary But Now He's Focused On Little Things - Investors.com</a>:<div><br /></div><div>It is quite easy to see the path from a successful economy to riots, car burnings and worse. Obama displays the symptoms of infection -- the willingness to instigate things he sees as "fair" even if it known that the net effect on everyone is negative. He still wants to "get the rich". It is possible that this all merely a political ploy -- he has to run on something, and it certainly isn't going to be his record. It appears that "fairness / class warfare" is the choice. </div><div><br /></div><div>Pretty good Krauthammer column over all. </div><div><blockquote> "Back in 2008, Obama was asked if he would still support raising the capital-gains tax rate (the intended effect of the Buffett Rule) if this would decrease government revenues. Obama said yes. In the name of fairness."</blockquote><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4815514851569583982?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-31294843153659881462012-01-27T13:55:00.000-06:002012-01-27T13:55:39.665-06:00<a href="http://americanglob.com/2012/01/25/meet-warren-buffetts-poor-secretary/">Meet Warren Buffett’s Poor Secretary » American Glob</a><br /><br />Remember Joe the Plumber? When he showed up in the '08 campaign the MSM had a load of deep background investigation on him that included all his&nbsp;financials, questions about his plumbing license, questions about the veracity of his potential interest in "buying the plumbing company", and a tax lein.<br /><br />Forbes has done some speculation on how much Buffet's secretary "may make" if her rate somehow gets over 15% ... apparently she likely has to be over $200K, and maybe as much as $500K. In other words, very well off --- adding to this view is the fact that she just purchased a fairly nice 2nd home in Arizona.<br /><br />Unlike Joe the Plumber -- who just had the audacity to ask "The One" (now "The Zero") a question on the campaign trail which resulted in the famous "spread the wealth around" comment.<br /><br />So why so little interest in the particulars of Buffett's secretary? If he is paying her over $200K, she is approaching the evil 1%. Are we REALLY going to get into shedding tears for someone that makes over $200K because they **MAY** pay a higher rate than the richest guy in US??<br /><br />Some points:<br /><br /><ul><li>Let's face it, Warren and BO have both mislead Americans to think of Warren's secretary as "middle class at best". But wait, if Warren was say "one of the Koch brothers" that alone would cause an outcry as in "Why does he pay her so little?".&nbsp;</li><li>If she is paid as Forbes surmises, then Warren isn't so hard hearted, but we are talking about tax rates for two 1%ers. There are something like 3 Million of those folks in a country of 300M, the vast majority of which make more like $200 - $400K, rather than whatever Warren makes.</li><li>The control of the MSM is still amazing -- BO and ABC can use this lady as a mascot and the general media doesn't ask a single hard question. Get a symbolic conservative of that nature and the story INSTANTLY becomes about any skeletons in their closet, their families closet, how they bungle some offbeat question thrown at them by the media, etc, etc. In other words, THEY become the story, NOT whatever point the conservative was trying to make with them.&nbsp;</li></ul><br />We are borrowing 40% of every $ we are spending and we are talking about differential tax rates between the richest guy in the country and his secretary. Meanwhile, the richest guy in the country is viewed as a "hero" even though he is the top of the top of the 1% who are supposedly villans. Why?? He "wants his taxes raised" -- in the meantime he is transferring his wealth to a foundation rather than the US government upon his death, and his businesses have $1B in back taxes that are being litigated.<br /><br />Can we get any more insane??<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3129484315365988146?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-19721565978030539462012-01-24T07:51:00.000-06:002012-01-24T07:51:36.746-06:00<a href="http://news.investors.com/Article/598018/201201171910/newsweeks-andrew-sullivan-defends-president-obama.htm">Newsweek's Andrew Sullivan Says President Obama's Critics Are Dumb - Investors.com</a><br /><br />Seriously, must we EVER talk about bias in the MSM again??? How many $$$ must Republicans raise to counteract this kind of "reporting"??? &nbsp;Essentially infinite!<br /><br />The title is very scary if you look at it right. They mean "dumb" as in the colloquial meaning "stupid", but of course it really means "unable to speak". Obama's critics -- the people for restraint in spending, pro-business / jobs government, family values, etc; &nbsp; don't have the kind of media wallop to do a cover / article like this on a magazine that will glare from&nbsp;newsstands&nbsp;across the nation, so they are "unable to speak", they truly are "dumb"!!!!<br /><br />They are "less dumb" today ... Fox news, talk radio, "corporations as people" money, but we are still far short from having a NewSpeak cover like that. How hard does the left want to work to get Citizens United (the SCOTUS case that allows corporations to contribute to politics) overturned??? VERY ... BO railed against it from a SOTU address with the justices in the room!!<br /><br />The left is constantly at work to win the only way they really can -- by shutting up the opposition, and therefore the truth. From the Gulag, to Hitlers Germany, to Mao, to Pol Pot, to China today, the strategy of the left is ALWAYS "keep them dumb" ... and dead if possible.<br /><br />They work to hide it, but the truth tends to cry out when least expected.<br /><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1972156597803053946?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-43288773294724861622012-01-24T07:38:00.000-06:002012-01-24T07:38:06.301-06:00<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/chucknorris/2012/01/21/my_endorsement_for_president">My Endorsement for President - Page 1 - Chuck Norris - Townhall Conservative</a><br /><div><br /></div><div>I thought I was ready to finally accept and start getting exited for "Mitt", "Mittens" Romney, then the people of SC rose up, and now I read that Chuck Norris has endorsed Newt! My god, Chuck Norris doesn't do "push ups", he pushes the planet down!!<br /><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; text-align: left;">That is why Gena and I have committed the rest of our lives to help Old Glory rise again to its heights of splendor. And that is why we are endorsing and standing with Newt Gingrich, because we believe he can lead all of us who have committed to the same.</span></blockquote>After 2 in a row, I was hoping that the party could unite behind Mitt, but the fact is that didn't happen. I love the Newt combativeness and at least seemingly straight talk. What I hate is the hubris, the meanness, the history of breaking things and the sense that he can't be trusted. One of the reasons that womanizing is accepted for Democrats is because nobody EXPECTS then to follow though on their promises ... marriage or otherwise. (See BO ... campaign finance, raising debt limit, Gitmo, unemployment staying under 8.1, more open government, recess appointments, etc, etc).<br /><br />Newt displays core Democrat values at times ... womanizing,&nbsp;petulance, flip flopping (doing a commercial with Pelosi on GW), massive inside the beltway deal making, etc ..<br /><br />But CHUCK NORRIS!!! If anyone can keep him in line, it is Chuck!!!&nbsp;</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4328877329472486162?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-54821635622984332682012-01-24T07:25:00.000-06:002012-01-24T07:25:05.574-06:00<a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/01/23/why_the_fed_slept_112849.html">RealClearPolitics - Why the Fed Slept</a><br /><div><br /></div><div>Economics is often called "The Dismal Science" for much the same reason that we say "What goes up must come down" ... or young pilots are admonished that taking off is a decision entirely in their hands, landing, not always so much. </div><div><br /></div><div>The salient point of this article is:</div><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; text-align: -webkit-auto;"></span><br /><blockquote><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; text-align: -webkit-auto;">There's a paradox to economic policy. The more it succeeds at prolonging short-term prosperity, the more it inspires long-run destabilizing behavior by businesses, banks, consumers, investors and government. If they think basic stability is assured, they will assume greater risks -- loosen credit standards, borrow more, engage in more speculation, relax wage and price behavior -- that ultimately make the economy less stable. Long booms threaten deep busts.</span></blockquote></div><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; text-align: -webkit-auto;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; text-align: -webkit-auto;">There is a paradox to everything human -- we aren't endowed with the god-like powers of "final solutions", and when we attempt them, what we create are even bigger problems. </span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; text-align: -webkit-auto;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;">Humility</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; text-align: -webkit-auto;">, humility, humility --- but hubris is our nature.</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5482163562298433268?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-36608233427653477632012-01-20T11:33:00.000-06:002012-01-20T11:33:09.385-06:00<a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/205371-online-activists-triumph-as-congress-buries-piracy-bills">Online activists triumphant as Congress buries anti-piracy bills - The Hill's Hillicon Valley</a><div><br /></div><div>Lots of folks in congress supported this bill on both the right and the left -- both MN Senators, and Marco Rubio were sponsors. </div><div><br /></div><div>People on BOTH the left and the right on FB were adamant in opposition. </div><div><br /></div><div>Here is my view on WHY:</div><div>1). The internet is very precious to both the left and the right, AND the idea of "government control of speech" is a huge fear of both sides. </div><div><br /></div><div>2). What one had to do to support the bill was to trust government AND to some degree corporations to do the right thing. The left doesn't trust the corporations and the right doesn't trust the government -- so we agree on stopping it, just for somewhat different reasons. </div><div><br /></div><div>3). On both the right and the left, the high regard for free speech on the internet changed the "calculus". The normal corporate supporters realized that the natural caution of corporations would likely make them overly restrictive if there was a CHANCE they would come under legal jeopardy if copyright material was found on their sites. The normal government supporters thought of government bureaucracy, paranoia and incompetence and their scale fell down hard on the side of "keep your hands off my internet". </div><div><br /></div><div>So where might we go from here? </div><div>1). Realize what happened!!! People that we normally argue vehemently with were in complete agreement --- maybe not for precisely the same reasons, but it is MUCH easier to "see the other side" from a position of agreement rather than opposition. </div><div><br /></div><div>2). Think about this in different areas. It we think that corporations (especially big ones) are likely to be overly cautious when faced with laws in THIS CASE, why do many think so differently in other cases??? Are the characteristics that we worried about from the government ALSO valid in healthcare? Spending money prudently? Making decisions on wealth allocation?</div><div><br /></div><div>3). Perhaps we actually AGREE on "smaller" for BOTH government and corporations??? It is actually true that both go together -- big corporations work to influence government, and the bigger the government, the bigger the corporations that are best suited to influence and "partner" ("collude"?) with it.</div><div><br /></div><div>EVERY human institution -- Government, corporations, sports teams, glee clubs, etc. is "flawed, fallible, self perpetuating ...." It IS NOT "one or the other" ... that best approach in nature and in human affairs is checks and balances. </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3660823342765347763?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-41901780795227642282012-01-17T21:37:00.000-06:002012-01-17T21:37:39.300-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/01/cohen-head-defending-big-money-in-politics.php">Cohen-Head: Defending Big Money in Politics | Power Line</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Nearly always, liberals follow a maxim that I refer to as "consistency is NOT an issue"!! Which means it isn't even a consideration -- I get bored of pointing it out because it is so obvious. Money in campaigns for Republicans, BAD ... BO spends record amounts, NO PROBLEM!!! Gitmo with Bush, BAD ... under BO??? Gitmo what?? ... "civility" ??? really really bad if Tea Party said anything ... OWS??? Whatever ... </div><div><br /></div><div>BUT, here we have a case of a liberal columnist, Richard Cohen, pointing out that Eugene McCarthy's NH candidacy was financed by a few fat cats that were fed up with Vietnam ... SO, since he supported that, and generally supports free speech, he can't see how he can go against conservatives that do the same thing!!! Wow, my hat is off to a liberal for taking a CONSISTENT POSITION !!! If this caught on, one could actually have reasoned discussion with liberals!!</div><div><br /></div><div>The quote from George Will in the piece is priceless and right on ... </div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: italic; line-height: 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "></span></div><blockquote><div><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: italic; line-height: 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">"C]ampaign reformers constantly argue that, a) there’s too much political speech in this country, b) they know the right amount and, c) they want to criminalize speech in excess of that."</span></div><div></div></blockquote><div>The classic "liberal"position ... I know what is "right, fair, correct, proper, environmentally sound, diverse, etc" ... AND, I'm willing to lock you up if you disagree!!</div><div><br /></div><div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4190178079522764228?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-60203785964567718512012-01-17T19:35:00.000-06:002012-01-17T19:35:24.596-06:00<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/16/travel/cruise-ship-safety/index.html?hpt=hp_t1">After sinking, some wonder: Is cruising safe? - CNN.com</a><br /><div><br /></div><div>The modern media wags the public like the dog wags it's tail. We are forever trying to compare current events with events of the past as if there were some correlation. <br /><br />The Titanic was a completely new technology ship trying to break the speed record from Europe to the US through the ice infested N Atlantic. It went down hundreds of miles from land with over 1,500 dead. Yes, some&nbsp;remembrance&nbsp;might be in order since it was 1912 ... 100 years ago this April.<br /><br />The Concordia is a big fat cruise ship that was transporting nobody anywhere except for hoped for R&amp;R. It ran over a reef trying to do a show-off "flyby" at a little Italian town and ended up on it's side less than 200yds from shore. We may see 20ish dead out of over 4K.<br /><br />My how far we have come in 100 years. The people on the Titanic were generally going somewhere -- ships were mostly for transportation, not recreation. Much like planes occasionally crash, ships occasionally sank. People had some overblown hopes for technology ("unsinkable"), but at least they were doing something and had some hopes.<br /><br />The Concordia capsized on the shores of Italy -- one of the many formerly sovereign European states that traded their sovereignty for supposed wealth and are well on the way to reaping bankruptcy. It was just "wasting time" as is the case with so many in the modern world. The captain of the Titanic and many of his officers went down with his ship. The captain of the Concordia left early and had to be arrested in town even though he had been admonished to stay with his ship -- 100 years of mostly soft liberal outlook tend to breed some very weak character.<br /><br />The left leaning educational and media establishments have drilled into our heads the folly and hubris of the Titanic for 100 years now. What they have failed to see is the hubris is as human as the AM bathroom trip and just as hard to eradicate. What they failed to see is their own hubris in moving from an overly proud and optimistic world moving faster and farther to an overly proud and generally pessimistic world on a bankrupt slow cruise to nowhere.<br /><br />Massive recreational technology lying on it's side 200yds from shore may be one of the very best symbols of our times. Perhaps that is the real unintended link to the majestic Titanic.&nbsp;</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6020378596456771851?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-43114853154262966822012-01-17T19:17:00.000-06:002012-01-17T19:17:20.194-06:00<a href="http://city-journal.org/2012/22_1_otbie-european-debt-crisis.html">The European Crack-Up by Theodore Dalrymple - City Journal</a><br /><div><br /></div><div>A little on the longish side but worth it. Many times people can only understand reality by being given multiple examples of what it is and how it works. Turns out that Belgium is a pretty good example -- and the differences between Flanders and Wallonia could well be Red vs Blue in the US. </div><div><br /></div><div>This is then painted on the larger canvas of Europe with the differences between Ireland and Greece highlighted. Both of them went on a bender, it appears that Ireland has opted for black coffee and a couple of aspirin as the AM solution, Greece is hell bent on bloody mary's with a beer chaser. </div><div><br /></div><div>Most of all, as is commonly the case with Dalrymple, it is an eyes wide open appraisal of human nature, unintended consequences and the boundless hubris of government and the "progressives".</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4311485315426296682?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-50428843392852398352012-01-17T19:15:00.000-06:002012-01-17T19:15:46.181-06:00<a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/15/niall-ferguson-a-conservative-take-on-america-s-economic-divide.html?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=newsletter&amp;utm_campaign=in_newsweek&amp;cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bin_newsweek&amp;utm_term=Tina+Brown+List">Niall Ferguson: A Conservative Take on America's Economic Divide - The Daily Beast</a><br /><br />Like most things from Ferguson, a worthy read. I have no idea what Murray means by a "guaranteed income", but I'll read the book and figure it out -- no, it doesn't sound like a good idea to me.<br /><br />The diagnosis of how we got in this ditch sounds right on to me though.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5042884339285239835?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-53306394934859685832012-01-17T08:05:00.000-06:002012-01-17T08:05:27.108-06:00<a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100130000/why-are-barack-obama%e2%80%99s-critics-so-smart/">Why are Barack Obama’s critics so smart? – Telegraph Blogs</a>:<div><br /></div><div>When W was president, any little foreign criticism that could be dredged up was worthy of front page treatment here. "See, Europe hates us!!!". </div><div><br /></div><div>My how times have changed!!! Now NewsSpeak is essentially an extension of the WH press office and some people in Europe disagree with both it and the BO administration. </div><div><br /></div><div>Newsworthy?? Barely. </div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5330639493485968583?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-72477806321237572292012-01-16T21:28:00.000-06:002012-01-16T21:28:29.896-06:00<a href="http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/10/explain-it-to-me-john-316/?hpt=hp_t3">Explain it to me: John 3:16 – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs</a>:<br /><div><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px;"><b>Despite Stewart's story, many sports fans continue the tradition of evangelizing at sports games by holding up John 3:16 on placards.</b></span></blockquote></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px;"><b>Uh, despite John Hinkley's sad tale, many people continue to attend movies?? Despite the Nazi's (National Socialists) not being very nice people, there are still a quite a few people who espouse socialist principles??</b></span></span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px;"><b><br /></b></span></span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px;"><b>One could go on and on forever.&nbsp;</b></span></span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px;"><b><br /></b></span></span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px;"><b>So one guy that displays John 3:16 goes crackers and thus everyone should ??? &nbsp;uh, nor ews John 3:16 anymore??</b></span></span></div><div><br /><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-7247780632123757229?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-38184226826792284502012-01-16T20:47:00.000-06:002012-01-16T20:47:22.333-06:00<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/opinion/brooks-where-are-the-liberals.html?_r=1&amp;ref=opinion">Where Are the Liberals? - NYTimes.com</a>: <br /><div><br /></div><div>It is amazing how liberal a guy the NYTs puts up as their "conservative" -- Brooks voted for Obama. </div><div><br /></div><div>Here his thesis is basically "liberals are right, but they have fouled the pool" ... so they need a "State Martin Luther" to clean it up ... Luther cleaned up the church, now we need a state version of Luther. Neat. </div><div><br /></div><div>Some thoughts:</div><div><br /></div><div>-- Luther moved the western church to BIBLICAL principles, not some "Catholic cleanup". It is true that he WANTED to reform the Catholic Church, but what he did was essentially give the Bible to the people (German translation) ... a cause that was also helped by Gutenberg. Luther applied "technology" (printing press) to Christian faith, thereby basically decentralizing the control of faith and creating an explosion of churches. The Catholic Church survived, but it never again had the power it had pre-Luther.&nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>-- If one was going to apply Luther to government, it would make people MORE self governing, which would make the Democrats even more wrong than they are now.</div><div><br /></div><div>-- Rent seeking, &nbsp;profit, &nbsp;market share, competitive advantage, we won the election, currying favor, political influence, inside information, etc, etc. Those are all HUMAN ideas ... and they are pretty much the same thing. Luther didn't make himself Pope, King, Chief, wealthy, or anything -- neither did Christ. Our founding fathers were very successful people that took huge risks (including their lives) to give us liberty. A "government reformation" would operate on WHAT set of "transcended principles"??<br /><br />-- The idea that "capitalism failed us" relative to the sub-prime crisis is like saying "technology failed us" when there is a car or plane crash, nuclear plant problem, power outage, or discovery of large defect in some product. **ALL** our systems --- government, private, military, corporate, non-profit, religious, educational, etc, etc are HUMAN designed, built, and operated. They are **ALL** subject to failures great and small. Government is pretty much the bottom of the barrel on quality of systems because:<br /><br /><ol><li>&nbsp;It's primary motivation is short term votes. In the long run, the politicians at hand are out of office.</li><li>It plays to constituencies, not science, principles, results (other than votes), efficiency, etc.&nbsp;</li><li>It can't be destroyed by "lack of profits" or "measured failure", or consumer dissatisfaction like any other business.&nbsp;</li></ol>Making government work "better" is much like building a bigger H bomb or tiger, or fuel tanker. There may or may not be an UPside, but there is ALWAYS a DOWNSIDE!!!</div><div><br /><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3818422682679228450?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-39743083589005187542012-01-15T18:48:00.000-06:002012-01-15T18:48:01.198-06:00<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/13/the-class-warfare-toxin/">GHEI: The class warfare toxin - Washington Times</a>:<div><br /></div><div>Good column on how Obama and the left has already made a lot of progress at moving us from being the land of opportunity to being the land of envy. </div><div><br /></div><div>One of the huge "successes" of the BO administration has actually been in one of the areas that they constantly talk about "doing in the future" -- a vast reduction in wealth disparity by the destruction of wealth.</div><div><br /></div><div>That is precisely what "transfer of wealth" accomplishes. If you demand that some of Bill Gates wealth be transferred, the act of the transfer means that the wealth is no longer optimally allocated, so therefore the total wealth of the nation is lowered. For example, the wealth might have been invested in a new project at Microsoft that now has to be cancelled. Rather than potentially providing the next big computing breakthrough, it is transferred to a series of people that buy large screen TVs ... and becomes a depreciating rather than appreciating asset. </div><div><br /></div><div>The economic pie is NOT fixed -- in the zest of the left to divided it to their political advantage, they completely lose sight of just how easy it is to SHRINK it. </div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3974308358900518754?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-51503349985096677312012-01-11T19:30:00.000-06:002012-01-11T19:30:12.625-06:00<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/mile-high-halo-over-broncos_n_1194204.html?ref=mostpopular#s599488&amp;title=Halo">'Mile High Halo' Forms Over Tim Tebow And Mile High Stadium During Broncos Steelers Game (PHOTOS)</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Hey, it's in HuffPo, it MUST be true!!</div><div><br /></div><div>Of course there is too much Tebow hype -- is anyone aware we have 24x7 cable sports and news + internet and other media??? There is ALWAYS too much hype of EVERYTHING from now on. People just decide which things to complain about ... and there are off switches, filters, etc. </div><div><br /></div><div>I do really really enjoy seeing him do well playing football. </div><div><br /></div><div>How many sorts of weird "Nation of Islam" statements, ex-cons, drug charged, criminal charged, strage haircuts, tats, demonstration "dances", completely off the wall statements about professional sports being like "slavery", "love boats", pushing meter maids with your car, etc, etc have we seen??? Endless. </div><div><br /></div><div>But a practicing Christian and kneels and prays. Now THERE is something to really get bent out of shape about. </div><div><br /></div><div>In the Superbowl??? Providing my Pack is there I hope he has the worst game in the history of the sport !!!! Otherwise, it would be fun to see.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5150334998509667731?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-86723058287591815122012-01-11T19:18:00.000-06:002012-01-11T19:18:55.440-06:00<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/11/guantanamo-10th-anniversary_n_1200557.html">Guantanamo 10th Anniversary Protests: Demonstrators March From White House To Supreme Court (PHOTOS)</a>:<div><br /></div><div>Remember Gitmo??? It was a HUGE "stain on America", it "made us less safe", it was "against international law" ... it was HORRIBLE!!! </div><div><br /></div><div>St. BO promised to "close it as his first act"!!!! </div><div><br /></div><div>oops ... not so easy. It is still open. It is the 10th anniversary and at least some of the lefty groups took the time to do a little demonstration. No doubt there will be VERY little press coverage, and to the "99%" of the US public sheep, this issue is as dead as a dodo. </div><div><br /></div><div>Bias??? Oh, come on, there is no such thing!!!</div><div><br /></div><div>If Bush promised to close it but didn't, that would be a LIE!!!<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-8672305828759181512?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-76688873870086501682012-01-11T08:42:00.000-06:002012-01-11T08:42:52.896-06:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204257504577151100762427204.html">William McGurn: The Stephanopoulos Standard - WSJ.com</a>: <br /><div><br /></div><div>Good article on how Republicans need to handle the obvious press bias. Reagan tended to do a good job of not confronting Carter's obvious attempts to build off the press picture of him as some sort of "dangerous, wacko" and to calmly let people realize what Carter was trying to do. Thus Mitt with Stephanapoulos ... no need to get ones undies in a bundle, just calmly point out that it is "silly" to be asking questions about something that is on no agenda anywhere.</div><div><br /></div><div>I question the wisdom of having so many Republican primary debates. We know the MSM / Democrat establishment approach will be to do their best to make sure that EVERY Republican candidate is "damaged goods" by the time they get through the debates and step up to face their guy BO. Why make it so easy for them??<br /><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-7668887387008650168?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-52963801054934768022012-01-09T20:37:00.000-06:002012-01-09T20:37:08.562-06:00<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/08/us/income-gap-profile/index.html?hpt=hp_c1">Poor, but feeding the rich - CNN.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>This was the center CNN headline this AM, it was "news". A few points:</div><div><br /></div><div>-- The "poor" have been feeding "the rich" since Biblical times. I suspect that the "poor" will ALWAYS feed the rich ... and work for them, and wait on them in restaurants, clean their homes, park their cars, etc, etc, etc ... this is "news" in the sense that the sun rising in the east is news. When "the rich" are Democrats, they love to have the folks taking care of them be illegal aliens ... that is why they want open borders. </div><div><br /></div><div>-- One thing that has changed over history is that the "poor" didn't get poor after divorce/re-marriage, living in a home that cost 2.5 times their yearly income and having hi-tech stents put in their hearts. These guys would call me "rich", and I never paid 2.5x my yearly income for a house.</div><div><br /></div><div>-- The "poor" in the past -- and in not very many places today, get heart stents put in. They also typically didn't and in most of the world yet today, don't get enough to eat to have enough cholesterol in their arteries to even need a stent. The 2.5 Billion ACTUAL POOR in the world TODAY that have no sanitary facilites usually die in smelly ways way before they need stents. Oh, and their buck a day lifestyle means that there aren't any of their cardboard "homes" that are 2.5x their income. </div><div><br /></div><div>-- Ruth's Chris Steakhouse is for "the 1%" only in the dreams of CNN. I've not been to one since I get to go to IA and have steaks nearly as good for $10 ... so it just isn't cost effective, but I know plenty of people that are maybe "upper 20%" who have been to one more than once.</div><div><br /></div><div>-- He serves "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">the 1% of Americans who have enjoyed nearly 60% of all gains in income over the last three decades.". Well, this couple was poor, "sort of made it" with a $100K home and $40K income in the last "15 years", and now they are "poor". Doesn't that tell anyone anything??</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Fortune top 10 1980 --- Exxon, GM, Ford, Texaco oil, Chevron oil, Gulf Oil, IBM, GM, Amoco oil</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Fortune top 10 2010 -- WalMart, Exxon, Chevron, GE, Bank of America, Conoco Phillips Oil, AT&amp;T, Ford, JP Morgan Chase, HP</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Guess what? They aren't the same. Oil, Cars and tech are still there --- but many of the names are different, and banking/finance has become more important. The retail giant WalMart has become top of them all. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">So the "top 1%" enjoys a lot of gains (and losses), but THEY ARE NOT THE SAME PEOPLE OVER 30 YEARS!!!!! My guess would be that there is virtually nobody that was top 1% in 1980 that still is in 2010. It is like being the top 1% of anything -- QBs, hitters, etc ... your time at the very pinnacle is SHORT, and then someone else takes over in the 1% spotlight. The top 1% of hitters did some high percentage of the hits in the last 30 years as well -- thing is, NOT ONE of the top 1% of hitters from '80 is still playing at all!!! Talking about "gains of the 1% over 30 years" is like talking about "percentage of beer drank by the top 1% of beer drinkers over the past 30 years". I GUARANTEE you that not a single top 1% beer drinker from 1980 was still in that category by 2010!!! </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">So the bottom line is that this headline and article is the equivalent of an Obama ad, since we know he is going to run on "the wealth gap". CNN figures that they need work hard so that everyone is suitably angry about how HORRIBLE this "gap" is ... even though the gap is pretty much 100% a fabrication just to produce more polarization in our society -- of course since this is polarization that the Democrats and the MSM want, this is GOOD polarization!!</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Democrats are just so completely incensed about the SCOTUS ruling on "corporations being able to contribute as people" ... it means "more money" that they believe is going to go to Republicans -- of course Google, Apple, most of the Banks / Stock houses, etc contribute to DEMOCRATS, but never mind. Even if they didn't, it would take INFINITE money to counter the MSM doing campaign literature as "news".</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">We have a LONG way to go before a significant number of the sheep figure this out. </span></div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5296380105493476802?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-56680778753539962172012-01-08T19:58:00.000-06:002012-01-08T19:58:50.714-06:00<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/08/newt-gingrich-new-hampshire-occupy-protesters_n_1192769.html">Newt Gingrich New Hampshire Event Disrupted By Occupy Protesters</a>: <div><br /></div><div>I often hear people get all bent out of shape about "the shout shows", or "the blowhards on conservative radio" -- sometimes they say things like "why do conservatives support that stuff??". </div><div><br /></div><div>I went to hear Newt Gingrich speak in Rochester about 15 years ago -- not long after the Republicans took over the house for the first time in over 40 years. In order to get in, my friend and I had to walk right through a loudly chanting union picket line being led by a Democrat that ran for the congressional seat here a number of times. We didn't mind, both of us solidly over 6' tall and 200 lbs, we figured they would stop and let us pass without problem, and they did. No question however that they were loudly and directly trying to intimidate people. </div><div><br /></div><div>Fast forward close to a decade, and it is '02, a Senate debate in Rochester. Paul Wellstone and Norm Coleman are there. The crowd is of course admonished to not demonstrate and not interrupt the speakers. The Republicans followed that with the exception of some clapping and a few cheers. The Democrats??? Even people that I recognized from work or retirees were wildly booing and screaming in a manner that went beyond even what you typically see out of drunk fans at a game. They cheered with such joy for "their guy" and booed and yelled derogatory things at the Republican with such fervor you could tell that the "snake brain" was fully in charge. Their politics was a blood sport of a sort I was completely ignorant of. I know we are not to talk about "Nazis", but the films of the Germans were the only reference point I had to that level of emotion being attached to politics. </div><div><br /></div><div>There have been a few other cases over the years where I've observed such things -- even on the media. "Code Pink" for example disrupted both the '04 and '08 Republican conventions. I'm sure that nasty left-wing demonstrators will be heavily in evidence around, and likely breaking into this years Republican convention as well. </div><div><br /></div><div>I checked around the web a bit. CNN has nothing on the disruption of the Gingrich event. I know when any Tea Party people at all showed up at Obama events -- even though they were quiet and I don't believe there has had to be a single arrest at one of their events,but never the less the media tended to look at the Tea Party as "threatening". This weekend was the anniversary of the AZ Giffords shooting -- we all remember that the media went INSTANTLY to WILDLY blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea Party without a single shred of evidence. They were 100% wrong, but that is so standard for the MSM, it really wasn't news. </div><div><br /></div><div>The whole "Occupy" movement has been nothing but a stream of ill-formed obscenities aimed at some chimera of "anyone with any money" --- although most of them seem to have smart phones, laptops and other baubles, they do seem committed to a solidly slacking lifestyle. The media certainly has no trouble with them shouting, blocking things, swearing, beating drums, carrying signs that talk about violence, etc. -- from the MSM POV, there is nothing remotely threatening about OWS -- in fact, the most common comparison is "Arab Spring". </div><div><br /></div><div>It seems that any form of "protest", including wild statements by entertainers at awards shows, shouting down people, blocking people, defacing all manner of property, burning flags, etc is somehow "positive grass-roots democracy in action". </div><div><br /></div><div>On the other hand, Fox, Rush Limbaugh, etc -- money making media formats with really not very much actual "shouting", and certainly no profanity, calls to violence, etc are somehow "bad / dangerous / hard to understand / etc". </div><div><br /></div><div>I truly believe that the well reasoned intellectual position of the left relative to the thoughts and speech of the "right" is "SHUT THE F UP!!!!" ... and they remain ever angry that the nasty folks on the right don't just do so. </div><div><br /></div><div>Meanwhile, whatever they want to do -- shout down folks, try to intimidate and block people, spend billions of dollars collected by public unions for and against whatever they want, overturn elections via recall efforts ... "whatever", is completely protected and "good news". </div><div><br /></div><div>No double standard here. </div><div><br /><br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5668077875353996217?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-67636652283261542372012-01-07T13:10:00.000-06:002012-01-07T13:10:17.785-06:00<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/in-iowa-a-foreign-country-called-the-gop/2012/01/04/gIQAtWIRaP_blog.html">In Iowa, a foreign country called the GOP - PostPartisan - The Washington Post</a>:<div><br /></div><div>Having grown up in heaven (WI) and then moved to MN for a 34 year career, I often feel about IA as I once did about my younger siblings. I'll beat them up all I want, but if you try, you are toast. </div><div><br /></div><div>Full disclosure, my wife is from deepest darkest IA. Couple of my favorite IA jokes:</div><div><br /></div><div>Did you hear that IA put in artificial turf in their stadium? ... They were having too much trouble with their cheerleaders grazing ... </div><div><br /></div><div>Do you know why IA doesn't have any professional sports teams? Ans ... Because then MN would get jealous and want to have some as well. (that one is really good considering my background)</div><div><br /></div><div>But I digress ... here we have Rochard Cohen, from the Washington Post, declaring IA and Republicans to be "foreigners". SOMEBODY is a "foreigner" in what was once America. That is exactly what this election, and indeed all the elections since the '30s have been about. The "liberals/progressives" believe that "Nation" means "United States of Europe". Pay no mind to the fact the Europe is in danger of collapse on an even more rapid timetable than the $15T in debt and $60-200T in unfunded liabilities bankrupt US. The "progressive" answer is Mo-Bigga Government ... and abortion on demand, and smaller families, and no religion, and everything an entitled right, and ... </div><div><br /></div><div>C0hen's "America" is "Europe" ... probably some gauzy combination of Norway, Sweden, Germany and France. Secular, paternal, snobbish, soft, entitled, smug and opposed to all the attributes that once made American exceptional. To some degree, some of those exceptional American attributes still live on in IA and other "fly-over states" ... TX, ND, SD, etc. and Cohen hates them. He hates them because they ARE very very "foreign" to him -- so outlandish he can barely imagine the form of "lower life" that would cling to guns, God, family and honest work, rather than sneeringly demand "rights". </div><div><br /></div><div>There really are "Two Americas" ... one is "Europe", where Cohen lives, and yes, the other is out here in flyover country, the remnant of a once-great exceptional nation. </div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6763665228326154237?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-36677225240372540952012-01-07T10:10:00.000-06:002012-01-07T10:10:56.945-06:00<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/government-the-redistributionist-behemoth/2012/01/05/gIQAFqqpfP_story.html">Government: The redistributionist behemoth - The Washington Post</a>: <div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>People are less dissatisfied by what they lack than by what others have. And when government engages in redistribution in order to maximize the happiness of citizens who become more envious as they become more comfortable, government becomes increasingly frenzied and futile.</blockquote></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 21px;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 21px;">or as I put it, wealth is finite, envy is infinite.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 21px;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 21px;">Good one by George -- he hits the salient point that needs to be made OVER AND OVER. The US entitlement state is busily transferring wealth from the poorest Americans -- the young, to the wealthiest Americans -- the elderly, while the Democrats react </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 20px;">politically</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 21px;"> to the only current attempt to remedy that -- the Ryan Plan, with the cynical pushing Grandma off the cliff ad. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 21px;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 21px;">It is the partisanship (usually of the right) that is constantly derided in the press. The </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 20px;">hypocrisy</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 21px;"> (mostly of the left) needs more equal time!</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 20px; "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 20px;"><br /></span><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3667722524037254095?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-11544085314822625792012-01-06T18:11:00.000-06:002012-01-06T18:11:35.781-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/01/a-word-from-zeb-zobenica.php">A word from “Zeb” Zobenica | Power Line</a>: <br /><div><br /></div><div>Well worth the read. He pretty much nails OWS and unfortunately WAY too close to 50% of our current population for comfort. </div><div><br /></div><div>A quick listen to the posturing on the straits / gulf out of Iran and the Chinese flexing their airpower, aircraft carrier, space muscles and of course economic power ought to be enough for people to realize that the world is still a very large, competitive and dangerous place. </div><div><br /></div><div>But as always, it isn't -- until hit up aside the head with some serious lumber, around half of the population stumbles on without any clue ... </div><div><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1154408531482262579?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-37003852217135563022012-01-04T17:08:00.000-06:002012-01-04T17:08:26.648-06:00<a href="http://www.startribune.com/local/136599018.html?page=1&amp;c=y">Will false diagnosis cost Minnesota girl her life? | StarTribune.com</a>:<br /><br />In a nation by and for lawyers, this is an example of something that we have to fight. I don't care how adorable the little girl is -- this is a cancer that is diagnosed 350 times per year!!! So to not diagnose a "bump" on a baby as something that only shows up 350 times a year in the nation as cancer is malpractice?? Do you know what that means??<div><br /></div><div>It means that we add to the never ending set of biopsies and tests to the already bloated list, all to save AT BEST 350 kids per year (and we won't save half that many). SIDs kills about 2,500 every year by comparison -- just as cute, just as dead -- they just don't have to do all the chemo. </div><div><br /></div><div>We can't just keep rolling up the costs of "defensive medicine" endlessly. We are all going to die, some of us young. As technology gets better the supposedly "preventable" death potentials rise, but if we demand that Doctors test for all possible conditions, no matter how rare, and then sue them if they fail to, our medical costs will continue to grow so much as to bankrupt the system and prevent reasonable care for any of us!!</div><div><br /></div><div><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3700385221713556302?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-63810770766008539402012-01-03T08:46:00.000-06:002012-01-03T08:46:42.969-06:00<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/03/world/meast/iran-u-s-/index.html?hpt=hp_t1">Iran warns U.S. over aircraft carrier - CNN.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>BO assured us he would just sit down and talk with Iran. Gee, I wonder why they would issue us a warning??? Did they forget that "The One" was our leader??? Oops, perhaps we were "off by one" and we are being led by "B ZERO" ???</div><div><br /></div><div>Perhaps he could just apologize to them?</div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6381077076600853940?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-8437041430481144152012-01-02T14:37:00.000-06:002012-01-02T14:37:58.203-06:00<a href="http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2011/12/the-chance-of-a-lifetime.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29">Seth's Blog: The chance of a lifetime</a>:<div><br /></div><div>Seth has written a bunch of books -- a number of which I've read. "Purple Cow" is just a memorable name. </div><div><br /></div><div>I read his blog most days on NewsFire -- I think his New Years advice is worthy of a wider audience.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-843704143048114415?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-29113247280670778362012-01-01T19:05:00.000-06:002012-01-01T19:05:06.379-06:00<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/30/voter-id-terrifies-democrats/">KNIGHT: Voter ID terrifies Democrats - Washington Times</a>: <div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "></span><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">South Carolina Attorney General </span><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/alan-wilson/" style="color: rgb(22, 74, 110); text-decoration: none; padding-top: 2px; padding-right: 2px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Alan Wilson</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "> rejected </span><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/thomas-e-perez/" style="color: rgb(22, 74, 110); text-decoration: none; padding-top: 2px; padding-right: 2px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Mr. Perez</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">’s math and explained on Fox News why the law is necessary. The state</span><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/department-of-motor-vehicles/" style="color: rgb(22, 74, 110); text-decoration: none; padding-top: 2px; padding-right: 2px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Department of Motor Vehicles</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "> audited a state </span><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/election-commission/" style="color: rgb(22, 74, 110); text-decoration: none; padding-top: 2px; padding-right: 2px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Election Commission</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "> report that said 239,333 people were registered to vote but had no photo ID. The </span><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/department-of-motor-vehicles/" style="color: rgb(22, 74, 110); text-decoration: none; padding-top: 2px; padding-right: 2px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">DMV</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "> found that 37,000 were deceased, more than 90,000 had moved to other states, and others had names not matched to IDs. That left only 27,000 people registered without a photo ID but who could vote by signing an affidavit as to their identity.</span></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; text-align: justify; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "></span></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">So Mr Fast and Furious, Eric Holder bandies about 239K voters that MIGHT be "disenfranchised", and the real number shows 302,333 potential fraudulent votes -- still registered, but no longer </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;">eligible</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;"> -- and DUH, had no photo ID!!</span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;">There can ONLY be ONE single reason that Democrats are </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">foursquare</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;"> against photo ID. They are well aware that they run at least 10s and probably 100s or thousands or more illegal votes through key areas of the country that are high percentage Democrat!!! If voters have to have a photo ID, something around 5% of "the vote" in many key areas will suddenly "disappear", and it could be FAR worse than that!!! </span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;">At present we have NO IDEA how big the number of fraudulent voters are out there, but every number that I'd seen looks like it is at least 100's of thousands in most states!!</span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;">It is little wonder that Democrats are in COMPLETE PANIC on this one!!</span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;">Oh, I bought a new iPhone 4 this weekend -- guess what? I had to produce a state provided photo ID!! Hear any complaints about cell phone companies requiring photo ID?? Know anyone with a cell phone?? I rest my case!!</span></span></div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2911324728067077836?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-16513863848008597182012-01-01T07:28:00.000-06:002012-01-01T07:28:05.086-06:00<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/31/politics/obama-defense-bill/index.html?hpt=hp_t3">Obama signs defense bill 'with reservations' - CNN.com</a>:<div></div><blockquote><div> "I want to clarify that my administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens," Obama said in a statement Saturday. "Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation."</div></blockquote><div>However he WILL kill US citizens abroad, and HAS already done so .... at least with drones.</div><div><br /></div><div>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/09/30/national/main20113853.shtml</div><div><br /></div><div>Do we have a press in this country at all?? They raised holy hell about W detaining FOREIGN fighters at Gitmo. Now they are silent as lambs on Gitmo, and on BO KILLING US CITIZENS abroad ... but are completely willing to support complete BO gibberish that he is somehow holier than thou because he won't hold them "indefinitely". I bet he doesn't claim he supports endless Trillion $$$ deficits as well, but they look pretty darned "indefinite" to me!!!</div><div><br /></div><div>I guess in this case he is "moral" because he ONLY supports the death penalty.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1651386384800859718?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-42233504744064515772011-12-29T09:34:00.000-06:002011-12-29T09:34:52.976-06:00<a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2011/12/28/even-the-warmists-dont-believe-in-global-warming/">Even the Warmists Don't Believe In Global Warming - Forbes</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Good little summary of the weakness of the warmist position. The most damning to me is that the group would blatantly oppose technology that allowed carbon to be sequestered, even though it may be vastly more effect. Pretty clear that their agenda is "control of fossil fuel use" ... or just "control". Climate related outcomes would be incidental.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4223350474406451577?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-91981904021737895632011-12-27T19:59:00.000-06:002011-12-27T19:59:24.901-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/12/kickbacks-dont-always-work.php">Kickbacks Don’t Always Work | Power Line</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Good little PL post. Democrats are sure that everyone can be bought. Maybe there are still some people with a little more moral fibre than that left in America??<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-9198190402173789563?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-30183921372567766962011-12-23T16:53:00.000-06:002011-12-23T16:53:52.653-06:00<a href="http://harpers.org/archive/2011/12/0083720">The accidental universe: Science's crisis of faith—By Alan P. Lightman (Harper's Magazine)</a><div><br /></div><div>Man lives by faith -- we can't even really choose our faith. We can reject God, in which case Satan helps us believe we have no faith at all. Oh, but we do -- we are all play the eternal faith game at the price of our immortal souls. </div><div><br /></div><div>As I've commented in other blogs, it has become quite well accepted in theoretical physicists that our goldilocks universe is WAY too precise to be anything but directly "created for us", or a happenstance in something like 10 to the 500th universes. So you get to have faith that our universe was the random accident in a huge number of existing universes, and then you believe that over billions of years with no intelligent selection, we happened to evolve here with consciousness, a built in desire to know our origins and a randomly selected meme to postulate an infinite God. You can either believe in that, or you can believe in God ... either way, you have faith in what you believe.<br /><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>That same uncertainty disturbs many physicists who are adjusting to the idea of the multiverse. Not only must we accept that basic properties of our universe are accidental and uncalculable. In addition, we must believe in the existence of many other universes. But we have no conceivable way of observing these other universes and cannot prove their existence. Thus, to explain what we see in the world and in our mental deductions, we must believe in what we cannot prove.</blockquote></span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3018392137256776696?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-65182344597723731032011-12-23T10:27:00.000-06:002011-12-23T10:27:46.458-06:00<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/286595/gop-s-payroll-tax-debacle-charles-krauthammer?pg=2">The GOP’s Payroll-tax Debacle - Charles Krauthammer - National Review Online</a><div><br /></div><div>Good coverage of the way politics has trumped any sense of intelligent policy or propriety in the interest of pure politics. Certainly a two month extension makes no sense at all -- but that is the beauty of it-- if all you care about is political theatre and raw political power. Republicans just never quite understand Machiavelli !!! It makes NO DIFFERENCE how foolish, damaging, inconsistent, evil, counterproductive, or any other negative something is. If it wins politically, IT WINS!! </div><div><br /></div><div>The fact that Charles feels the House Republicans are like the Animal House band shows that in his heart of hearts, he would rather be politically savvy and thus "a winner", than right. I'd like to think that I would stand for the right and allow my self to be fed to the lions as the early Christians did while the Romans laughed and hooted, but I don't know -- the pain of being torn to shreds vs the joy of at least imagined intellectual superiority?? It isn't hard at all to follow the arrow of human nature on that one.</div><div><br /></div><div>The thing that needs to be remembered is always the longer run. In the long run we are ALL "torn to shreds" (dead) ... and if we continue to follow the kind of behavior of BO, the Democrats, and now capitulated by the House Republicans, we are dead as a nation -- if not already, very very soon. </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6518234459772373103?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-23790157494267950522011-12-21T08:59:00.000-06:002011-12-21T08:59:29.139-06:00<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/21/newt-gingrich-f-cking-a-hole_n_1162639.html">Newt Gingrich Called 'F-cking A--hole' By Man At Campaign Stop</a><div><br /></div><div>Nah, Gingerich is as Republican!!! You can call them whatever you want -- er as long as it isn't positive, the MSM tries to avoid publishing that. </div><div><br /></div><div>BO??? He says he thinks he is the 4th greatest President in US History during a CBS 60 min interview, and they CUT IT!!! How often does the MSM tell us that Gingerich is arrogant?? </div><div><br /></div><div><p class="rteindent1" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 40px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Georgia, 'Nimbus Roman No9 L', serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, we're not done yet. I've got five more years of stuff to do. But not only saving this country from a great depression. Not only saving the auto industry. But putting in place a system in which we're gonna start lowering health care costs and you're never gonna go bankrupt because you get sick or somebody in your family gets sick. Making sure that we have reformed the financial system, so we never again have taxpayer-funded bailouts, and the system is more stable and secure. Making sure that we've got millions of kids out here who are able to go to college because we've expanded student loans and made college more affordable. Ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Decimating al Qaeda, including Bin Laden being taken off the field. Restoring America's respect around the world.</p><p class="rteindent1" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 40px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Georgia, 'Nimbus Roman No9 L', serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">The issue here is not gonna be a list of accomplishments. As you said yourself, Steve, you know,<strong style="font-weight: bold; "> I would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president -- with the possible exceptions of Johnson, F.D.R., and Lincoln -- just in terms of what we've gotten done in modern history. </strong>But, you know, but when it comes to the economy, we've got a lot more work to do. And we're gonna keep on at it</p><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12px; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br />Read more: <a href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/pj-gladnick/2011/12/16/60-minutes-broadcast-edits-out-laughable-obama-claim-4th-greatest-presi#ixzz1hBJMuYAw" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); text-decoration: none; ">http://newsbusters.org/blogs/pj-gladnick/2011/12/16/60-minutes-broadcast-edits-out-laughable-obama-claim-4th-greatest-presi#ixzz1hBJMuYAw</a></span></div><div><br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2379015749426795052?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-24365437657930294802011-12-20T22:10:00.000-06:002011-12-20T22:10:58.104-06:00<a href="http://breakthroughjournal.org/content/issues/issue-2/modernizing-conservatism.shtml">Breakthrough Journal: Issue 2 : MODERNIZING CONSERVATISM</a><div><br /></div><div>Generally well written but longish. </div><div><br /></div><div>Three major points I tend to agree with:</div><div><br /></div><div>1), "Victory" in an ideological sense is impossible in the US given our political structures</div><div><br /></div><div>2), Liberals and Conservatives have fundamentally different world views -- we will not "finally get educated and all get along"</div><div><br /></div><div>3). Entitlements are not going away -- so we better figure out how to reform, restructure, innovate, etc on them</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>I worry about #1 the most ... with the MSM, the SCOTUS and legal system in general being basically liberal, the education system being liberal, the ever increasing number of government workers both liberal and unionized, and the "minority" birth and legal/illegal immigration rate turning those "minorities" into future majorities, it seems that the Statist Re-Distributionist movement MAY have a shot to "win" at some point.</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2436543765793029480?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-64151500923938817442011-12-20T10:56:00.000-06:002011-12-20T10:56:20.758-06:00<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500202_162-57345474/lie-of-the-year-dem-take-on-gop-medicare-vote/">"Lie of the year": Dem take on GOP Medicare vote - CBS News</a><div><br /></div><div>Wow, the generally left-leaning "politifact" has picked the constant Democrat claim that Republicans "voted to end Medicare" as the lie of the year. </div><div><br /></div><div>I love the runner up, Michelle Bachman saying "A woman came up to me and said .." ... the "LIE" is not that "no woman came up to her" ... it is that the woman's claim about a vaccine causing retardation is wrong. </div><div><br /></div><div>Lovely. I suspect we ALL know one or more people that believe that some vaccines cause illness. Do they? Well, almost certainly not nearly as often as people claim, but in some cases it is admitted that the vaccines CAN cause disease. Much like "plane crashes do happen" ... but we worry about them far more than is warranted. I have a VERY tough time calling this a "lie" in the same way as the winner. If we make politicians responsible for the correctness of what they pass on when "a guy on the campaign trail told me ..." they will need to be a lot quieter. </div><div><br /></div><div>How about Eric Holder testifying he had no knowledge of Fast and Furious, then sending a memo with the same statement, then having to withdraw both because it came to light he had been briefed on it multiple times?</div><div><br /></div><div>How about the constant claims about "The Bush Tax cuts for the wealthy", when by BO's own definition, "the wealthy" are people that make $250K or more, and over 10 years they got $700B and the rest of the income levels got $3T out of the Bush cuts. </div><div><br /></div><div>For extra credit, when the DEMOCRATS failed to even try to raise taxes in 07-08 when they had both houses of congress, then proceeded to not bring it up in 09-10 when they had both houses, 59-60 votes in the Senate, plus the WH they never took action until they were lame ducks at the end of 10, and then THEY EXTENDED THEM!!!! Could there POSSIBLY be any bigger lie then to still complain about the cuts "for the wealthy"???? </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6415150092393881744?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-49299208555873612092011-12-19T10:45:00.000-06:002011-12-19T10:45:35.982-06:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203893404577100330414585006.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">Jeb Bush: Capitalism and the Right to Rise - WSJ.com</a><div><br /></div><div>Very well done. The choice between the false hope of the "straight line of Statist progress" that is really a FLAT LINE, and the very statistically real, but never certain hope of "the jagged line of market progress". </div><div><br /></div><div><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 8px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 8px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 1.4em; line-height: 1.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "></p></div><blockquote><div><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 8px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 8px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 1.4em; line-height: 1.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">In short, we must choose between the straight line promised by the statists and the jagged line of economic freedom. The straight line of gradual and controlled growth is what the statists promise but can never deliver. The jagged line offers no guarantees but has a powerful record of delivering the most prosperity and the most opportunity to the most people. We cannot possibly know in advance what freedom promises for 312 million individuals. But unless we are willing to explore the jagged line of freedom, we will be stuck with the straight line. And the straight line, it turns out, is a flat line.</p></div><div></div></blockquote><div><br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4929920855587361209?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-15848259576583043232011-12-15T16:04:00.000-06:002011-12-15T16:04:50.586-06:00<a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-13-2011/kabulvision">Kabulvision - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 12/13/11 - Video Clip | Comedy Central</a>: <br /><div><br /></div><div>Jon Stewart is a very intelligent and very smug guy. </div><div><br /></div><div>It is so strange that Muslims hold virtually all the social beliefs that Stewart would normally hate, only on steroids -- young earth, need for wives to be submissive (even covered), very anti-gay, anti any sort of nudity, no extra-marital sex, no booze, no drugs, no respect for the snotty elite, etc. In fact, they hold these beliefs SO strongly that under Shariah law, many of these offenses are punishable by death. Fornication and homosexuality for example. While these "American Muslims" may not hold to a death penalty for those offenses HERE, it is nearly certain that they would STRONGLY support the right of Saudi Arabia (location of Mecca) to continue hold to strict Sharia Law that the holy sites not be defiled by the infidels.</div><div><br /></div><div>An equivalent analogy to what Steward is laughing at here would be a world in which Mel Gibson, a Fundamentalist Catholic, &nbsp;supported the right of Italy to put Jews, Homosexuals, Muslims, Fornicators, etc to death, since Rome is the center of the Catholic Church and can't be defiled! In the analogy, Mel would have a show on how normal he and Fundamentalist Catholics were -- but said nothing about what was happening in Italy.<br /><br />Since Saudi Arabia -- location of Mecca, DOES do those things today, I'm really not joking. &nbsp;The folks he feels are "ok" ... laudable even, support that, but he is A-OK with that!! It is nice they don't directly do or support terrorism, but in the Mel case, I don't think Jon would be so sanguine even if none of the analogized fundamentalist Catholics in the US blew things up.</div><div><br /></div><div>In comparison to a current "Moderate Muslim", a current "Fundamentalist Christian" is as cosmopolitan as Stewart believes himself to be in comparison to those backward hick Christians doing the boycott. &nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>Where Jon would normally feel hatred of "ignorance, closed mindedness, lack of respect" toward a Christian he feels very different toward a Muslim. Why??<br /><br />Some thoughts:</div><div><br /></div><div>- Ignorance. He may just not know. We are ALL ignorant, just about different things.<br /><br />- He sees Muslims as a "minority" vs Christians, or "the underdog", so he naturally feels he wants to support them.<br /><br />- He just really hates Christians -- so someone that is generally an enemy of Christians is his "friend". It is Christians that bug him, not Muslims -- it matters not to him that Muslims hold most of what he would see as the "bad" views of Christians -- only much more so. His hatred of Christians makes him blind.<br /><br />- Nobody says "Muhammad&nbsp;H.&nbsp;Prophet!!", or "Buddha&nbsp;Damn" -- the&nbsp;Judaeo&nbsp;-- Christian deities really ARE special. Cleave onto that which the "wise" spit upon!!! Man is a servant --- of either God or Satan. Rejecting God makes your choice for you. Are you more free in God's church yard or on Satan's leash?<br /><br /></div><div><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1584825957658304323?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-64221816085685804932011-12-13T21:53:00.000-06:002011-12-13T21:53:03.955-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/12/a-fast-furious-state-of-mind.php?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+powerlineblog%2Flivefeed+%28Power+Line%29&amp;utm_content=FaceBook">A Fast &amp; Furious state of mind | Power Line</a>: <br /><div><br /></div><div>From Eric Holder's Fast and Furious testimony this week:<br /><blockquote><div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: italic; line-height: 22px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">That the recently withdrawn letter from the Justice Department to Congress denying federal responsibility for the program was not a lie, “because it all has to do with your state of mind and whether or not you had the requisite intent to come up with something that would be considered perjury or a lie.”</div></div></blockquote><div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: italic; line-height: 22px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></div><div p="" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: italic; line-height: 22px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></div></div><div>Remember Slick Willie? "That depends on what your definition of is is".</div><div><br /></div><div>Remember W? He "lied" because we didn't find the WMDs that essentially everyone in the world was certain that Iraq had -- including all the prominent Democrats of the day. Both Clintons, Gore, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid, etc, etc. </div><div><br /></div><div>Remember Scooter Libby? He "lied" because he recalled a date which he talked to Tim Russert about Valerie Plame wrong. He was NOT responsible for the actual leak, that was determined to be Richard Armitage, and since he wasn't close to Cheney or Karl Rove, nobody cared. Scooter was CONVICTED of "perjury" for giving the wrong date even when he wasn't the leaker!!!<br /><br />I don't believe it is possible for a liberal to either lie or tell the truth, except accidentally. Their world seems to be completely ideologically based so that truth/falsehood, right/wrong, and many other concepts are completely fluid depending on ideology.<br /><ul><li>Public unions spending vast amounts of money are no issue whatsoever -- but corporations spending even much less money is a horror beyond horrors.&nbsp;</li><li>George Soros spending millions on MoveOn.org and many other left causes is a complete non-issue. The Koch brothers spending any money at all on politics??? Major league problem!!</li><li>Following Campaign Finance limits and rules? Completely critical until Obama thumbed his nose and spent 100's of millions more than ever before, and then no issue at all.&nbsp;</li><li>Deficits that maxed at $400B and smallest was $165B under Bush were a HORROR. Deficits a TRILLION higher (and more) PER YEAR as far as the eye can see under Obama? They aren't high enough!!!</li><li>Gitmo under Bush? A stain on the nation, critical to be closed IMMEDIATELY, etc, etc. Under Obama? Still open, no problem.&nbsp;</li></ul>Why are our politics sharply divided? Because one side has completely moved to thinking in terms of ideology vs reality. The difference between reality and an ideologically conjured universe are always larger than the differences that would be found if we were all in the real world!!</div><div><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6422181608568580493?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-65164640720227044092011-12-13T21:49:00.000-06:002011-12-13T21:49:30.846-06:00<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/285324/obama-s-campaign-class-resentment-charles-krauthammer?pg=1">Obama’s Campaign for Class Resentment - Charles Krauthammer - National Review Online</a>: <br /><div><br /></div><div>A great one by Charles. </div><div><br /></div><div>How often it is the case that people (especially the young) set out aflame with hope -- yes, hope for some largely unstated "change" that indeed can be "believed in" because it is so non-specific. </div><div><br /></div><div>And then -- specific reality meets imagined hopes, wishes, and beliefs, and not only is it a disappointment, there is a tremendous sense of loss. Where did that wonderful feeling that we all shared together go?? How could it happen? </div><div><br /></div><div>Well, it is GOING to happen when you hire a "leader" that accepts responsibility for NOTHING!! To be young and foolish is somewhat expected. To be supposed leader of the former greatest nation on earth and have no more sense of responsibility than a baby dirtying it's diaper is simply unconscionable!!</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; line-height: 24px;"></span></div><blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; line-height: 24px;">In Kansas, Obama lamented that millions “are now forced to take their children to food banks.” You have to admire the audacity. That’s the kind of damning observation the </span><em style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; line-height: 24px; text-align: -webkit-auto;">opposition</em><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; line-height: 24px; text-align: -webkit-auto;"> brings up when you’ve been in office three years. Yet Obama summoned it to make the case for his reelection!</span></div></blockquote><div><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6516464072022704409?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-90849198375840622182011-12-13T21:47:00.000-06:002011-12-13T21:47:49.604-06:00<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/canada-formally-pulls-out-kyoto-protocol-on-climate-change/2011/12/12/gIQAWE1NqO_story.html">Canada formally pulls out of Kyoto Protocol on climate change - The Washington Post</a>:<br /><div><blockquote>"“It allows us to continue to create jobs and growth in Canada,” Kent said."</blockquote></div><div>Dear me, choosing jobs and growth today over future worries over Warming / Change / Nasty Weather , or some sort of future branding of Doom?? Where is their sense of pessimism?</div><div><br /></div><div>I doubt this will make much of a splash in the news, because even though Slick Willie never put the Kyoto treaty up for a vote, he never said he wouldn't -- which W did, therefore he was evil. Canada dropping out likely won't meet the rigorous standards for MSM "news".</div><div><br /></div><div>Of course HAD we signed, we would have ended up where Canada has, only quicker.</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; line-height: 22px;"></span></div><blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; line-height: 22px;">“To meet the targets under Kyoto for 2012 would be the equivalent of either removing every car, truck, ATV, tractor, ambulance, police car and vehicle of every kind from Canadian roads or closing down the entire farming and agriculture sector and cutting heat to every home, office, hospital, factory and building in Canada,” Kent said.</span></div></blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; line-height: 22px;">So given the choice between stopping all vehicle traffic, stopping all agriculture or cutting off all heat, the Canadians have chosen to leave the Kyoto treaty. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; line-height: 22px;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; line-height: 22px;">How selfish and short sighted. The evil W should have gotten it signed! I'm sure BO would be happy to shut down whatever was required rather than make the terrible choice that Canada has now made. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; line-height: 22px;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; line-height: 22px;">Oh, the shame. </span></div><div><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-9084919837584062218?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-87272127454089973142011-12-07T16:07:00.000-06:002011-12-07T16:07:20.049-06:00<a href="http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7319858/the-people-hate-tim-tebow">Chuck Klosterman on Tim Tebow - Grantland</a>: <div><br /></div><div>This guy seems smart, but one has to wonder about all these words. </div><div><br /></div><div>My explanation for this is:</div><div><br /></div><div>1). Hatred of Christians isn't particularly new. Christ was crucified, Christians were used as living (for a bit) torches and fed to wild animals for entertainment by the Romans, killed or sent to the Gulag in the USSR, and persecuted openly or not so openly in the Muslim world around the globe today. Hating the Christian faithful is not new at all!</div><div><br /></div><div>2). All sorts of prognosticators had made their determination on Tebow prior to him ever suiting up with the Broncos. He can't throw, he throws wrong, he can't make decisions, he isn't tough, etc, etc. Lots of people in the press and out of it believe the press -- the press is often wrong, never uncertain. The press also doesn't like someone obviously proving them wrong -- especially someone that they don't like (see #1). He is a rookie -- he throws a lot better than a lot of QBs that have done not so horrible in the NFL (Trent Dilfer comes to mind ... but the list is long, even of just NFC N QBs). Beside that, he is big, quick, and athletic. There are claims about his IQ, but I'd bet he bests Favre or Bradshaw in that dept, and both of them did all right. </div><div><br /></div><div>3). So far, Tebow goes against the media approved view of faithful Christians in that he is actually bubbling over as all Christians really ought to be. I'm pretty certain he (like Aaron Rogers) has some flaw / sin / defect / etc. Christ didn't die for the perfect -- and while he definitely aids in constant improvement for Christians that allow his work to go on, there is usually a challenge, flaw, tendency, etc that will break out at a really bad time, and the media will have TOTAL joy in the maximum exposure of that flaw. Then Tebow will be a "hypocrite" -- as all people with any sort of standards always are to some degree. They may like him better then, because they will feel that his witness has been destroyed.</div><div><br /></div><div>BTW, here is Aaron Rogers on "the faith thing" <a href="http://offthebench.nbcsports.com/2011/11/30/aaron-rodgers-on-tim-tebow-religion-controversy-i-believe-in-letting-my-actions-speak-about-the-kind-of-character-i-have/">http://offthebench.nbcsports.com/2011/11/30/aaron-rodgers-on-tim-tebow-religion-controversy-i-believe-in-letting-my-actions-speak-about-the-kind-of-character-i-have/</a></div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-8727212745408997314?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-77413439673094845852011-12-07T15:12:00.000-06:002011-12-07T15:12:01.267-06:00<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-06/heartbreak-awaits-republicans-who-love-gingrich-ramesh-ponnuru.html">Heartbreak Awaits Republicans Who Love Gingrich: Ramesh Ponnuru - Bloomberg</a>: <div><br /></div><div>I don't particularly like reading this -- I don't trust Romney, and I generally like the quick wit and willingness to think outside the box that is Newt. Sadly though, Ramesh has a point. I'm starting to think in terms of how wonderful a cruise ship is to be on, but how if the ship were to sink, one would not turn down any piece that was floating -- even a primitive rubber raft would be "luxury" compared to drowning in the ocean at night. Yes, I know, that is unfair to drowning, BO is much worse than that, but it is a start. </div><div><br /></div><div>My favorite paragraph is the following:</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px; "></span></div><blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px; ">Conservatives who dislike </span><a href="http://topics.bloomberg.com/george-w.-bush/" density="full" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 15px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; color: rgb(0, 102, 204); text-decoration: none; font-family: Arial; line-height: 24px; text-align: -webkit-auto; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; ">George W. Bush</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px; text-align: -webkit-auto; ">’s compassionate conservatism have Gingrich to thank for it. After Gingrich lost the budget battles with President </span><a href="http://topics.bloomberg.com/bill-clinton/" density="sparse" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 15px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; color: rgb(0, 102, 204); text-decoration: none; font-family: Arial; line-height: 24px; text-align: -webkit-auto; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; ">Bill Clinton</a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px; text-align: -webkit-auto; ">, it took 15 years for any politician to take up the cause of limited-government conservatism that he had discredited.</span></div></blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px; text-align: -webkit-auto; ">Newt very much lost the hearts and minds on smaller government. Being a Republican is means you deal with the burden of the liberal MSM -- so it is VERY hard, but it is a task that comes with Republican leadership. Newt let the discussion go to where the Republicans took all the blame for the "cuts" (reducing the rate of growth) in spending, and Slick took all the glory for the very short lived internet bubble capital gains "surplus". 100% as illusionary as the W '07 $165B housing bubble deficit number. </span></div><div style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;">My heart still pines for Newt, but next to drowning in the icy cesspool of BO II, Romney is starting to look like at least a piece of driftwood -- if not a nascent rubber raft. </span></span></div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-7741343967309484585?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-25445604664893740762011-12-06T15:06:00.000-06:002011-12-06T15:06:13.914-06:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204630904577062661910819078.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop">Alan Reynolds: Tax Rates, Inequality and the 1% - WSJ.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>The drunk who lost his keys up the street, but is looking under the street lamp because the light is better there comes to mind. There is a human propensity to look at what we measure and forget all the impact that our actions may have had on changing measured values. We changed tax rates since '79, and we famously lowered them again in '01 -- surprise, the REPORTED income equality went up.</div><div><br /></div><div>One way of looking at REPORTED inequality is that when tax rates on the wealthy are "favorable", they will actually report the income and pay the tax. When the rates aren't, the business will buy another truck, retain the earnings, etc, or the person will take some of the income in stock, insurance, invest in tax free bonds vs stock, etc. </div><div><br /></div><div>Being rich, like being heathy, presents one with more options. In my mind, by definition, if you are rich, you don't HAVE to work -- but if the taxes are reasonable enough, you may. </div><div></div><blockquote><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">The larger truth is that recessions always destroy wealth and small business incomes at the top. Perhaps those who obsess over income shares should welcome stock market crashes and deep recessions because such calamities invariably reduce "inequality." Of course, the same recessions also increase poverty and unemployment.</span></div></blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "></span></div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2544560466489374076?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-54135130600105448942011-12-05T16:48:00.000-06:002011-12-05T16:48:51.255-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/12/occupy-dilbert.php">Occupy Dilbert | Power Line</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Pretty much covers it!!</div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5413513060010544894?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-20670163690474938752011-12-05T13:20:00.000-06:002011-12-05T13:20:55.259-06:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.empireonline.com/images/features/100greatestcharacters/photos/90.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.empireonline.com/images/features/100greatestcharacters/photos/90.jpg" width="284" /></a></div><br /><br /><a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/197173-pelosi-plans-to-reveal-information-about-gingrich-when-the-time-is-right">Pelosi: I’ll reveal information on Gingrich 'when the time is right' - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room</a>: <br /><div><br /></div><div><br /><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2067016369047493875?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-84371172674122522362011-12-04T21:50:00.000-06:002011-12-04T21:50:38.514-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/12/georgia-on-my-mind.php">Georgia On My Mind | Power Line</a>: <div><br /></div><div>When many of the lefties were talking about leaving the US when W was re-elected, but then few (any?) of them did, one wondered where they might go??</div><div><br /></div><div>In case BO is re-elected and the flame that was liberty in America actually sputters out, it appears that Reagan successfully sowed a better understanding of the facts of freedom than is generally left here in the US. Sad, but also in a strange way gratifying. </div><div><br /></div><div>It is always nice to see the flame of freedom passed on to new vistas.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-8437117267412252236?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-38214053726170084272011-12-02T15:57:00.000-06:002011-12-02T15:57:54.102-06:00<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-vs-newt/2011/12/01/gIQAtSfOIO_story.html">Mitt vs. Newt - The Washington Post</a>: <div><br /></div><div>The eternal question of the heart vs the head. Charles is an optimist -- he believes that America can return from BO's FIRST term. I'm not so sure, but it is what it is now. He is certainly right that a second would be both unconscionable and unsurviveable. </div><div><br /></div><div>So the adult answer is Mitt. Ah, but the heart yearns for the fire, the comebacks, the "in your face", the "risk factor" of Newt. </div><div><br /></div><div>There can really only be one acceptable answer. Damn that heart!!!</div><div><div><br /></div><div><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 22px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 1.5em; line-height: 1.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "></p><blockquote><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 22px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 1.5em; line-height: 1.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">"If Obama wins, he will take the country to a place from which it will not be able to return (which is precisely his own objective for a second term).</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 22px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 1.5em; line-height: 1.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Every conservative has thus to ask himself two questions: Who is more likely to prevent that second term? And who, if elected, is less likely to unpleasantly surprise?"</p></blockquote><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3821405372617008427?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-67827773980783213642011-11-25T08:54:00.000-06:002011-11-25T08:54:44.506-06:00<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/24/showbiz/nbc-bachmann-apology/index.html">NBC apologizes to Bachmann over song - CNN.com</a><div><br /></div><div>Oh, OOPs!! It was Late Night with Jimmy Fallon, Michelle Bachman, and just the song ... sorry. Oh, and they apologized!</div><div><br /></div><div>No story here, move along ... and I'm sure if it had been FOX and Michelle, the an apology would be just fine as well. </div><div><br /></div><div>We live in a civil and reasonable country after all.</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6782777398078321364?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-20111973690883105322011-11-22T10:05:00.000-06:002011-11-22T10:05:09.954-06:00<a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/11/22/alice_in_liberal_land_112148.html">RealClearPolitics - Alice in Liberal Land</a>:<div><br /></div><div>He left out what I notice most about liberal land -- if you actually want to do anything, you have to run twice as fast due to all the regulations and taxes.</div><div><br /></div><div><blockquote>"The history of the 20th century is a painful lesson on what happens when collective choices replace individual choices. Even leaving aside the chilling history of totalitarianism in the 20th century, the history of economic central planning shows it to have been such a widely recognized disaster that even communist and socialist governments were abandoning it as the century ended.<br /><br />"<br /></blockquote><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2011197369088310532?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-89049206550251209132011-11-21T16:44:00.000-06:002011-11-21T16:44:03.671-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/11/james-hansen-and-the-corruption-of-science.php">James Hansen and the Corruption of Science | Power Line</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Oops, James Hansen, one of the big Warmists "forgot" to report $1.6 Million in income. I'm sure he is a Democrat, so at least it isn't "illegal" -- as near as I can tell, if you are a good enough Democrat, taxes are at best "optional" ... Tom Daschle, Tim Geitner, Warren Buffett, and many many more just over the past few years. </div><div><br /></div><div>The thing is, is it even POSSIBLE that a Warmists views could be influenced by cash? </div><div><br /></div><div>Nah, never mind. No story here ... let's move along and talk about the evil of the Koch Brothers! </div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-8904920655025120913?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-9179809354645738312011-11-20T13:15:00.000-06:002011-11-20T13:15:42.500-06:00<a href="http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2011/11/20/kicking-our-spending-habit/blhI4zdnOIq0rnfy06sOqM/story.html">Kicking our spending habit - Opinion - The Boston Globe</a>:<div><br /></div><div>Here is BO talking of spending ... and the article covers what he has done. Biggest spender in history, and HOW would one ever trust him???<br /><div></div><blockquote><div><br /></div><div> "We cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next budget, the next administration, or the next generation,’’ Obama told a White House summit on fiscal responsibility . “You don’t spend what you don’t have.’"<br /></div></blockquote><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-917980935464573831?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-16186908609886523022011-11-19T13:32:00.000-06:002011-11-19T13:32:08.145-06:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/11/obamas-job-destroying-machine-grinds-on.php?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+powerlineblog%2Flivefeed+%28Power+Line%29&amp;utm_content=FaceBook">Obama’s Job-Destroying Machine Grinds On | Power Line</a>: <div><br /></div><div>The rule is never pick malice unless incompetence has been disproven ... but 100's of thousands of jobs and tremendous economic potential are being at least delayed if not destroyed under BO. In the final analysis does it make any real difference if the US economy was killed by incompetence or malice??<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1618690860988652302?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-48836624961006681042011-11-18T09:31:00.000-06:002011-11-18T09:31:30.513-06:00<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/283442/pipeline-sellout-charles-krauthammer">The Pipeline Sellout - Charles Krauthammer - National Review Online</a>:<div><br /></div><div>Must read column. There is no need to listen to any more BO rhetoric about "Republicans playing politics" after this. This helps NOTHING environmentally ... it just means that the oil goes to China rather than our refineries. It probably HURTS it because I doubt if China's refineries or cars are as "green" as ours. Killing jobs for NOTHING ... except votes, and we know that is ALL that really matters to a politician. </div><div><br /></div><div> <blockquote>"Sure, the pipeline would have produced thousands of truly shovel-ready jobs. Sure, delay could forfeit to China a supremely important strategic asset — a nearby, highly reliable source of energy. But approval was calculated to be a political loss for the president. Easy choice.<br /><br />It’s hard to think of a more clear-cut case of putting politics over nation. This from a president whose central campaign theme is that Republicans put party over nation, sacrificing country to crass political ends."</blockquote><br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4883662496100668104?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-12357313176697131422011-11-18T09:04:00.000-06:002011-11-18T09:04:03.524-06:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204323904577040373463191222.html">Sarah Palin: How Congress Occupied Wall Street - WSJ.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Good article, no matter how much you love or hate Sarah. After awhile one would think that Americans would get sick of serial mashers like Slick Willie going to Washington as the dirty poor and coming out as the dirty rich. </div><div><br /></div><div>The Washington Pols make Wall Street "insider trading" look like "whispering in class" by comparison to the Washington methods, which have a lot more in common with the Mafia than anything in civil society. </div><div><br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1235731317669713142?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-40961608364041563612011-11-17T18:18:00.000-06:002011-11-17T18:18:43.006-06:00<a href="http://prospect.org/article/why-we-need-occupy-wall-street">Why We Need Occupy Wall Street</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Warren Buffet, richest man in the US and tax dodger is STILL lamenting how much money he made (note, he isn't giving any to the US government, NOR is he going to given them any when he dies -- he is putting it into a FOUNDATION, NOT into inheritance taxes!!). That is one reason we need OWS?? Oh, the other is because the President of the Reserve Bank in Dallas called for breaking up some of America's big banks. That, and the fact that Republicans are still fighting the idea of raising taxes in a recession. </div><div><br /></div><div>One "good" thing that OWS has done is increased the number of articles on Inequality! Super. When the brokest nation on earth just keeps getting broker, with NOTHING to show in real spending cuts after the 2010 landslide for Republicans, unemployment still hovers at 9%, public unions are still winning votes in OH and BO recently shot us in the forehead by delaying the Keystone Pipeline -- but SUPER, we have more articles on "inequality". </div><div><br /></div><div>It is the INCOME part that we ought to be worried about ... as in we need LOTS more of it and all our actions -- including trying to "spread the wealth" are very likely to get us less of it as a nation. One can't re-distribute what they don't have!!!<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4096160836404156361?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-11113748770062962282011-11-17T14:53:00.000-06:002011-11-17T14:53:21.623-06:00<a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/164286/tebow-exposed">Tebow Exposed | The Nation</a>:<div><br /></div><div>Is anti-Christian hate speech possible? Note, I don't think there should be such a thing as "hate speech" PERIOD, but since we DO have it for other groups, let's take a look. </div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 20px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>The Christian right hasn’t had such a bad day since their leaders discovered rentboy.com. Tim Tebow, Focus on the Family spokesperson, missionary, and anti-abortion crusader, found out yesterday that all the charisma, good looks, and athleticism in the world won’t help you play quarterback in the NFL if you can’t throw a football.</blockquote></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 20px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">So how many Christian leaders have discovered "rentboy.com"??? (apparently some sort of a gay escort service). We know that one thing that liberals love is "Christian hypocrisy" ... or to translate, "humans having any standards". Since liberals eschew standards, they are certainly immune from hypocrisy, but can't just a glance at say the Tea Party vs OWS not pretty much prove they are ANYTHING but immune from bad behavior?? What in the world does "rentboy.com" have to do with Tebow having a bad game ... or maybe even not qualifying to play QB in the NFL. Would he even REMOTELY be the first hyped first round QB choice that flamed out in the big league??? Uh, maybe take a check on Ryan Leaf ... and a ton of others.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 20px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>There’s something noxious about seeing, in real time, someone being manufactured as a leader, a poster boy and even an icon without his proving it on the field. The Tebow experience has been like seeing the DC political media establishment swoon over the “next big thing” for higher office. The difference is that in football, there are no speech doctors, no slickly produced ads, no one who can just play “quarterback” at press conferences and photo ops. You can either play or you can’t. But pity not Tim Tebow. With that smile and sparkle, he can always find a home in national politics: a profession in which neither substance nor merit is required.</blockquote></span></div><div>There may indeed be something "noxious" about putting a person of questionable capability in a key position. Having the stench of BO in the WH has turned out to be exceptionally "noxious" ... at least if you need to work, or have some idea that you may be paying for his deficits for the next 100 years or so. Does this guy REALLY think that it is BETTER to put some guy with no ability beyond reading a teleprompter in the WH vs giving a guy with a questionable arm a shot at NFL QB??? Color me incredulous. </div><div><br /></div><div>Especially when since this tirade, Tebow has won two in a row, and last week was the 7th best QB rating. </div><div><br /></div><div>Why oh why would a columnist for a national publication like The Nation come to an istant conclusion against an NFL QB after his SECOND NFL GAME unless he HATES HIM??? Why would he be hating him except for his religious views??? If he hated him because he was black, or muslim, or gay, or whatever, could he get away with this in a national publication?? I don't think so.</div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1111374877006296228?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-957203826546925672011-11-16T10:34:00.000-06:002011-11-16T10:34:08.323-06:00<a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100117124/paul-krugman-is-rewriting-history-now-that-the-eurozone-beloved-by-us-liberals-is-going-down-in-flames/">Paul Krugman is rewriting history now that the eurozone, beloved by US liberals, is going down in flames – Telegraph Blogs</a>: <div><br /></div><div>I often think that the reason liberals get so angry about "Fox News", the "GW Deniers", "Conservatives Re-writing History", "Framing", "Corporations / Money in Politics" is because they have been doing all of them so successfully, and live in fear of a facts based discussion eventually showing through. Biased reporting is old hat, it was just supposed to be one sided; using pseudo science to drive policy, making sure their folks had both the first (MSM) and last (university) drafts if history, the Madison Ave view of issues as the liberal and ONLY frame, and most of all Unions, "Non-Partison" organizations like the Sierra Club, and people like Soros pouring unlimited funds into politics for their side. </div><div><br /></div><div>The linked article is a good rebuttal of a Krugman article that attempts to get an almost laughable rewrite of very recent history into the mix, so there is AT LEAST "questions about what happened". Here is a rebuttal of the Sweden comments -- the fact that Sweden has made a relatively hard right turn is virtually a "state secret" to the US media. </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(40, 40, 40); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "></span></div><blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(40, 40, 40); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Krugman cites Sweden as an example of a social welfare success in Europe, but fails to mention two important points. Firstly, in recent years, Sweden has begun rolling back the welfare system and government expenditure while adopting important free market reforms. Secondly, Sweden decided to stay out of the eurozone, another key reason why it has so far kept out of the financial mess engulfing southern Europe. As Johnny Munkhammar, a Swedish member of parliament noted</span><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704698004576104023432243468.html" style="color: rgb(35, 75, 123); outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; text-decoration: none; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; text-align: -webkit-auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "> in a piece for <em>The Wall Street Journal</em> </a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(40, 40, 40); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; text-align: -webkit-auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">in January, Sweden owes its success not to welfare statism but to reforms that have increased economic freedom, including greater competitiveness in the provision of health care and other public services:</span></div><div></div></blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(40, 40, 40); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; text-align: -webkit-auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(40, 40, 40); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; text-align: -webkit-auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">The following paragraph is why Krugman and the left really have no other choice but to try to confuse people. The system that they have espoused for DECADES is clearly imploding, and that fact just becomes more starkly obvious each and every day.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(40, 40, 40); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; text-align: -webkit-auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(40, 40, 40); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>The reality that Krugman refuses to accept is that Europe offers a glimpse of America’s future if it continues down the path of European-style big government. The root of Europe’s financial crisis lies in decades of over-spending and over-borrowing, largely to pay for overgrown and bloated welfare systems, vast public sectors, and incredibly generous pension plans. Europe has a huge entitlements disaster heading its way, with graying electorates unable to sustain the status quo. Added to this has been the disastrous euro experiment, which has created a one-size fits all approach for 17 EU countries, with varying levels of economic advancement. It has been a huge leap into the dark, without a shred of democratic accountability.</blockquote></span></div><div><br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-95720382654692567?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-67418431342077853762011-11-09T13:35:00.000-06:002011-11-09T13:35:46.624-06:00<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/08/world/europe/france-sarkozy-netanyahu/index.html?hpt=wo_c2">Sarkozy, Obama bemoan Netanyahu over open mic - CNN.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>The old "open mike" is a lot more fun with Republican Presidents. </div><div><br /></div><div>There was a Bush and or Cheney referring to someone as a "Major league A**hole" that was picked up and gladly and widely reported with no qualms at all. Reagan had some "Bombing starts in 10 min" that was clearly just testing a mike, but was good for a lot of weeping and nashing of teeth about being "scary". </div><div><br /></div><div>It just doesn't get much coverage if BO is involved. </div><div><br /></div><div>He has already made it pretty clear that he hates Netanyahu and given what church he went to, likely all things Jewish, anyway. Guess it really isn't "news" to anybody when he says it.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6741843134207785376?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-33353703305385024302011-11-08T13:23:00.000-06:002011-11-08T13:23:38.160-06:00<a href="http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/11/ta_110311.html">Think Again: Dowd, Not Coulter, ‘Falters’</a>: <div><br /></div><div><blockquote>"As with the late, unlamented Sen. Joe McCarthy—of whom Coulter remains an unapologetic cheerleader—she corrupts us merely by our association with her species and coarsens our culture by her very presence in it. Shame on Maureen Dowd for enabling her to do so with the imprimatur of The New York Times."</blockquote></div><div><br /></div><div>In a place like "American Progress", "progressives" can be honest. Their objective has never really changed from 1900 through Wilson, through Hitler, through Stalin, through FDR, to now. Put your opposition in concentration camps, kill them if you can get away with it. Make them non-human, their own "species". Those execrable people that deign to have different views from your "progressive openness" simply deserve to die, and be forgotten. The nation is "corrupted" by the very presence of those that refuse to bow to the "progressive" mantra. </div><div><br /></div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3335370330538502430?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-31542724550501683722011-11-07T13:05:00.000-06:002011-11-07T13:05:12.921-06:00<a href="http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/columnists/jonathan_gurwitz/article/Turning-up-the-volume-on-federal-spending-2252487.php">Turning up the volume on federal spending - San Antonio Express-News</a><br /><br />Interesting and slightly different perspective on BO spending. I kind of like the idea of Nigel Tufnel day ... 11-11-11.<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">Where does it all end? In the real world, when you push spending, deficits and debt to record levels — 11, 11, 11, right across the board — the national fuses blow and the music of prosperity ends. When it does, you're left with a country in fiscal crisis that looks a lot like Greece does today. But, as Nigel might say, “That's just nitpicking, isn't&nbsp;it?”</blockquote><div><br /></div><div>With any luck, by 2013, "Puppet Show" could get top billing over Barack Obama!</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3154272455050168372?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-45025688515901793072011-11-03T22:21:00.000-05:002011-11-03T22:21:14.891-05:00<a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/164349/how-wall-street-occupied-america">How Wall Street Occupied America | The Nation</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Bill Moyers is left of left. Not that surprising, he is a multi-millionaire author, producer and PTV personality. </div><div><br /></div><div>This column is quite interesting to read, especially when contrasted with the actual memo it attempts to frame <a href="http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&amp;d=5971">http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&amp;d=5971</a></div><div><br /></div><div>The infamous on the left "Powell Memo", sent to the US Chamber of Commerce shortly before Powell was appointed to the Supreme Court is a cause celeb on the left, exceeding things like "Rules for Radical" and "Cloward Piven Strategy" for conservatives. From the POV of folks like Moyers, it is the beginning of evil. </div><div><br /></div><div>Much as we see in the memo itself, Moyers seems to feel that conservatives, business, corporations, etc should not be allowed a voice. To allow them such is to "deny the people". One wonders who it was that elected his worshipfullness Obummer in '08? Oh wait, "The One" himself is not far enough to the left for Moyers. While the "radical", Powell, found the idea of class warfare to be a danger to the nation, Moyers relishes it ... much like Robespierre, he believes that "equality of outcome" must be obtained at all costs, including blood in the streets -- a common cost for the "utopians". </div><div><br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4502568851590179307?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-1628254469083542662011-11-01T16:49:00.000-05:002011-11-01T16:49:43.180-05:00<a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/10/30/niall-ferguson-how-american-civilization-can-avoid-collapse.html">Niall Ferguson: How American Civilization Can Avoid Collapse - The Daily Beast</a><br /><br />A MUST READ!!!<br /><br />Essentially, either we reboot out killer apps or we collapse WAY faster than anyone is thinking.<br /><br />Remember how stupid the left thought Reagan was when he talked about the USSR and "the Ash Heap of History"??<br /><br />It can happen VERY VERY fast!!!!<br /><br />Here is the list of "Killer Apps", but READ IT!<br /><br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px;"></span><br /><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; z-index: 2;"><strong style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Western Civilization's Killer Apps</strong></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; z-index: 2;"><strong style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">COMPETITION</strong><br />Western societies divided into competing factions, leading to progressive improvements.</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; z-index: 2;"><strong style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION</strong><br />Breakthroughs in mathematics, astronomy, physics, chemistry, and biology.</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; z-index: 2;"><strong style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">THE RULE OF LAW</strong><br />Representative government based on private-property rights and democratic elections.</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; z-index: 2;"><strong style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">MODERN MEDICINE</strong><br />19th- and 20th-century advances in germ theory, antibiotics, and anesthesia.</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; z-index: 2;"><strong style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">THE CONSUMER SOCIETY</strong><br />Leaps in productivity combined with widespread demand for more, better, and cheaper goods.</div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; z-index: 2;"><strong style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; font: inherit; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">THE WORK ETHIC</strong><br />Combination of intensive labor with higher savings rates, permitting sustained capital accumulation.</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-162825446908354266?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-57016385524655360642011-10-30T20:03:00.000-05:002011-10-30T20:03:37.959-05:00<a href="http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/class-war-2011-10/index4.html">Frank Rich on Occupy Wall Street and Class Warfare -- New York Magazine</a>: <br /><div><br /></div><div>A long and rambling column, not worth reading. The bottom line ... if there is any, "Hooray for class warfare"! </div><div><br /></div><div>Anybody remember when the Tea Party was "scary"?? Was there ever ONE person arrested at any sort of Tea Party rally, demonstration, etc??? What would the total number of arrests on OWS be now? A grand? </div><div><br /></div><div>Oh, that is a GOOD thing! At least now ... with the Tea Party, ANY ... even made up, thought of racism, violence, etc was tantamount to time to call out the guard. Now? Anti-semitic? No, they just don't like "Jewish Bankers" ... hmm.<br /><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5701638552465536064?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-12226514619667801392011-10-30T20:02:00.000-05:002011-10-30T20:02:12.942-05:00<span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"></span><br />The following "myth, parable, story, tale, joke, etc" has made many rounds of the net. It has been considered "debunked", because the AUTHORSHIP attributed is often wrong. Truth doesn't need an attrbuted author, and it certainly is not "improved" by being alledgedly sent from a PHD or journalist, or whatever.<br /><br />The point is to look at the numbers and realize how foolish it is to continue to abuse the top for being successful. It would be FAR better for the rest of us to do some thinking, education and most of all DOING in order to improve out own rate. Perhaps we can pay our own bar tab someday<br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br /></div><blockquote><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-top: 0in;" valign="top"><div><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-top: 0in;" valign="top"><div><div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our income taxes, it would go something like this:<br /><br />The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.<br /><br />The fifth would pay $1. (1% of the bill)<br /><br />The sixth would pay $3. (3%)<br /><br />The seventh would pay $7. (7%)<br /><br />The eighth would pay $12. (12%)<br /><br />The ninth would pay $18. (28%)<br /><br />The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. (59% of the bill)<br /><br />So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers", he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.<br /><br />The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"<br /><br />They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.<br /><br />And so:<br /><br />The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings on his previous tax payment for 5th man)<br /><br />The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).<br /><br />The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).<br /><br />The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).<br /><br />The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).<br /><br />The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).<br /><br />Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!" "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.<br /><br />The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!<br /><br />And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.</span></div></div></div></td></tr></tbody></table></div></td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"></div><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-top: 0in;" valign="top"><div></div></td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"></div><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-top: 0in;" valign="top"><div><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-top: 0in;" valign="top"><div><div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span></div></div></div></td></tr></tbody></table></div></td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"></div><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div></div><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1222651461966780139?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-82633884619318830752011-10-29T18:16:00.000-05:002011-10-29T18:16:53.631-05:00<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/29/us/east-coast-storm/index.html?hpt=hp_t1">Early snowstorm hits Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, crimps travel - CNN.com</a>:<div><br /></div><div>Weather is not climate ... so neither this or heat records in TX last summer counts as "climate change". </div><div><br /></div><div>"Strange or chaotic weather" is not proof of climate change, and certainly not proof a causal relationship with humans. Whatever the old record was in 1869 was "chaotic weather" as well -- happening over 100 years ago. Our lifespans are short, 100 or 200 years is a very short span for "climate". Climate is something that DOES change in large and small ways ... eg. ice ages, medieval warming period, little ice age. It always has, and it probably always will ... however it will be 10s of thousands of years before we have observed at least on cycle from warm to cold (ice age), back to warm again. Note however that ONE is not necessarily a pattern. </div><div><br /></div><div>Political ideology tends to be "reality independent". The left, those oriented toward government control are ALWAYS going to see conditions, both real and imagined, as reasons to increase their "benevolent" control on the rest of the recalcitrant human race. </div><div><blockquote><div> "Lesser, albeit still significant amounts were measured in other locales around the northeast, including 1.3 inches of snow in New York's Central Park as of 2 p.m. -- the most ever for this date since record-keeping began in 1869. And snow continued to fall Saturday evening, as the system moved over New England."</div></blockquote><div><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-8263388461931883075?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-37365695927907639832011-10-28T08:57:00.000-05:002011-10-28T08:57:49.566-05:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204777904576651532721267002.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop">Allan H. Meltzer: Four Reasons Keynesians Keep Getting It Wrong - WSJ.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Short and sweet ... here is my REALLY short and sweet version, but his is a bit more "educational". Why or why do so many people not understand this????</div><div><br /></div><div>1). Current high deficits promise higher taxes or inflation in the future (if you run up your credit card, you have to pay it + interest in the future)</div><div>2). Redistribution to non-workers is a less optimum asset allocation than distribution to workers so you have less overall. ( if you drink your beer from a lawn sprinkler vs a can, you get less)</div><div>3). Regulations are painful ... and uncertainty about them is painful too. ( Making you walk on broken glass today is painful, promising to nail your feet to the floor in the future doesn't make it any better)</div><div>4). Short term fixes are short term fixes ... Going out for an expensive dinner and getting drunk if I lose my job may make me feel better tonight ... but in the AM, not so much.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3736569592790763983?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-56925606425040270062011-10-26T16:10:00.000-05:002011-10-26T16:10:15.535-05:00<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/26/news/economy/occupy_wall_street_backlash/?npt=NP1&amp;hpt=hp_t2">The 53%: Occupy Wall Street backlash - Oct. 26, 2011</a>: <div><br /></div><div>NOTE, if it is really really true that 53% still pay Federal Income taxes, we need to get this tide turned RIGHT NOW!!! (I thought we already were less than 50%). </div><div><br /></div><div>We need to get it to like 90% that pay Income taxes ... "taking part" is very very important. It is really hard for any adult to believe that this is "their country" when they are paying nothing in income tax. </div><div><br /></div><div>Once you are taking part in paying, the situation gets to be a lot more relative to "the 1%" as the rest of the Packers are to Aaron Rodgers. Yes, he is ONE GUY, but he is the QB ... negatively affect his performance and your season takes a turn for the worse. </div><div><br /></div><div>When you are taking part, paying taxes, and "on the US Team", you have a whole different attitude about your income producing star performers!</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5692560642504027006?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-42042407653936389442011-10-25T08:17:00.000-05:002011-10-25T08:17:41.954-05:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/10/our-money-good-their-money-bad.php">Our Money = Good, Their Money = Bad | Power Line</a>: <div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Good coverage of how Mark Dayton's ex-wife, a Rockefeller heiress, is a heroine for spending millions on liberal causes, including explicitly targeting Republicans in the MN legislature so that her ex can have a friendly legislature to deal with in the 2nd part of his term. </div><div><br /></div><div>Isn't all that hard to contrast that with the treatment of say, the Koch brothers in the very same media outlets. </div><div><br /></div><div>Of course, they aren't biased, it is just a matter of business / conservative views being bad, and liberal anti-business views being good!</div><div><br /></div><div>Simple, no bias here, move along.</div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4204240765393638944?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-87745614283034690472011-10-23T22:03:00.000-05:002011-10-23T22:03:36.519-05:00<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/opinion/sunday/bruni-occupy-wall-street-and-hollywood.html?_r=1">Occupy Wall Street and Hollywood - NYTimes.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Wow, what's a mother to do? The Times is having trouble with the hypocrisy and cynicism of 1%s with Hollywood connections hanging out with the OWS movement? Wassup wid dat??? </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: georgia, 'times new roman', times, serif; line-height: 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>The rap mogul Russell Simmons and the rapper Kanye West <a title="Observer." href="http://www.observer.com/2011/10/kanye-west-visits-occupy-wall-street/" style="color: rgb(0, 50, 91); text-decoration: underline; ">meandered over</a> to Occupy Wall Street’s cradle, Zuccotti Park. By all accounts West was wearing more bling, though Simmons has bigger bucks: his net worth has been estimated as being between $100 million and $340 million. West’s is below that, and he made only $16 million or so last year.</blockquote></span></div><div><br /></div><div>I mean, come on! The Kennedy's have been friends of the "little man" forever while they lived in their estates and trust funds. Our own MN governor is filthy rich with his money stored out of state to avoid even the current taxes which he feels are way short of hard enough on "the rich". Buffet and Gates talk a great game --- yet they propose to give their billions to charity through foundations on their own terms, not have it confiscated by the government through estate taxes. </div><div><br /></div><div>The hypocrisy of the wealthy left has been obvious to even a casual observer for decades --- it is just that the NYTimes isn't usually one of those places that takes any note of it at all. </div><div><br /></div><div>All that said, this is TWICE in the last couple weeks that I've been surprised by the perspective of the Times as being somewhat rational!!! </div><div><br /></div><div>Maybe there IS a chance after all.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-8774561428303469047?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-21409106692653412072011-10-23T16:50:00.001-05:002011-11-02T14:25:35.261-05:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/10/what-do-samuel-alito-sr-and-mario-rubio-have-in-common.php">What Do Samuel Alito Sr. and Mario Rubio Have In Common? | Power Line</a>: <br /><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22px;"></span></div><blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22px;">Still, it is good to know that America’s reporters haven’t completely forgotten how to do research. Given the lack of interest they have shown in Barack Obama’s early life–that is, his life before 2004–to say nothing of his <i style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-style: italic; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">father’s</i> history–and the studiousness with which they avoided learning anything at all about John Edwards, I thought maybe they had given up researching presidential candidates altogether.</span></div><div></div></blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px;">It nothing short of incredible how i</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 20px;">ncurious</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px;"> the US press was and is about the background of BO, let alone his father and family. The contrast with how massively interested they are in Rubio, Palin, Bachman, Perry, etc. </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">The MSM tells us that isn't do to bias, so it must be that Republicans have inherently more interesting lives than Democrats. </span></span></div><div><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2140910669265341207?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-37770194980685433802011-10-22T12:41:00.000-05:002011-10-22T12:41:01.673-05:00<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/opinion/nocera-the-ugliness-all-started-with-bork.html?_r=1">The Ugliness All Started With Bork - NYTimes.com</a><div><br /></div><div>I'm not sure it really "all started", but there is no doubt that relative to any sense of comity in the Senate, Bork was "Pear Harbor". </div><div><br /></div><div>The frequency of completely partisan take-downs is much greater than the column suggests -- the destruction of Dan Quayle, the attack on Clarence Thomas, the complete fabrication of the need for investigation of the alleged Scooter Libby leak. </div><div><br /></div><div>Yes, yes, it happens on both sides, but it happens FAR more often from the left, because while the left might actually own up to things (a tiny bit), 24 years after the fact, when they circle their wagons, the NYTimes, NPR, CBS, etc are not doing any talking out of turn. Maybe a quarter of a century after the fact ... but really, so what??</div><div><br /></div><div>Will we have to hit bottom before we realize that a reasoned discussion on the constitution would be far more beneficial to our nation than a hyperpartisan personal takedown or a learned, intelligent public servant?? </div><div><br /></div><div>I seriously don't know ... but a quarter century is better than never for someone to admit the facts, and it ought to be applauded.</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3777019498068543380?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-10306003491207087512011-10-20T13:46:00.000-05:002011-10-20T13:46:09.059-05:00<a href="http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/artificial-intelligence/how-google-self-driving-car-works">How Google's Self-Driving Car Works - IEEE Spectrum</a><br /><br />Well worth the read. We are very close to having the technology, how will we deal with the legal repercussions?? We lose 10's of thousands of people on the road now. Say we lost "100's" each year due to errors / failures in this technology. Could Google (or anyone) survive the law suits from the "few hundred" that die because of "automated systems failure"??<br /><br />It could likely save more energy than everything BO has even proposed to date (smoothness, efficiency, less need to hurry on the drive since you are working / on the net anyway, drafting on the highway, etc).<br /><br />The top execs at Google are of course in the "1%" that OWS is targeting. Guess they are "evil" after all.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1030600349120708751?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-44849715786223733532011-10-18T10:49:00.000-05:002011-10-18T10:49:11.365-05:00<a href="http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/588254/201110170805/The-Austerity-Myth-Federal-Spending-Up-5-This-Year.htm">The Austerity Myth: Federal Spending Up 5% This Year - Investors.com</a><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>In fact, in the first nine months of this year, federal spending was $120 billion higher than in the same period in 2010, the data show. That's an increase of almost 5%. And deficits during this time were $23.5 billion higher.</blockquote></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">So statements like the following from Biden's old adviser and Krugman are either extremely misinformed, or lies. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px; "><p style="margin-top: 10px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 23px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 5px; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-align: left; "></p><blockquote><p style="margin-top: 10px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 23px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 5px; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-align: left; ">Jared Bernstein, former chief economic adviser to Vice President Biden, wrote over the summer that "government spending cutbacks have been a large drag on growth in recent quarters and have led to sharp losses in state and local employment."</p><p style="margin-top: 10px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 23px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 5px; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-align: left; ">Economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman argued in September that "the turn toward austerity (is) a major factor in our growth slowdown."</p></blockquote></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px;">The MSM keeps convincing people that the evil Republicans have "cut spending", and that has "hurt the economy". The fact is that we are spending worse than ever, AT BEST, the RATE OF GROWTH may have been cut a bit.</span></div><div style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px; "><p style="margin-top: 10px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 23px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 5px; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-align: left; "></p><blockquote></blockquote></span></span></div></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 19px; "><p style="margin-top: 10px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 23px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 5px; font-size: 14px; line-height: 24px; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-align: left; "></p></span></span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4484971578622373353?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-71800227426160629592011-10-16T22:01:00.000-05:002011-10-16T22:01:17.758-05:00<a href="http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/07/wisconsin-schools-buck-union-cut-health-costs">Wisconsin schools buck union to cut health costs | Byron York | Politics | Washington Examiner</a><div><br /></div><div>The big reason that the unions and the Democrats fought so hard in WI is that WEA Trust was sucking money out of the taxpayers that was being funneled into the coffers of the Democrat party!! Along with stopping the state from being the bagman for union dues, this is a huge hit at the standard union corruption that has been feeding the $$$ into state and national level Democrats. </div><div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>The problem for Hartland-Lakeside was that WEA Trust was charging significantly higher rates than the school district could find on the open market. School officials knew that because they got a better deal from United HealthCare for coverage of nonunion employees. On more than one occasion, Superintendent Glenn Schilling asked WEA Trust why the rates were so high. "I could never get a definitive answer on that," says Schilling.</blockquote><span style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; font-size: 13px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><br /><br /><br /></span></span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-7180022742616062959?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-50520948522373613902011-10-16T21:26:00.000-05:002011-10-16T21:26:05.384-05:00<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/africa/africa-obama-troops/index.html?hpt=wo_c2">Obama orders U.S. troops to help chase down African 'army' leader - CNN.com</a><div><br /></div><div>Can you even IMAGINE the MSM if this was Bush??</div><div><br /></div><div>We are doing what? We are the brokest nation on earth and we are sending our boys to god forsaken Africa to chase some wacko leader??</div><div><br /></div><div>Think of all the folks on the left that loved to say "what if it was YOUR son that was being sent" --- to Iraq, when no WMD was found. As if it was "meaningless" to serve your country if no WMD had been found. If YOUR son was killed running around in some forgotten jungle hell hole looking for an idiot that has absolutely NOTHING to do with US interests??</div><div><br /></div><div>Oh wait, BO is a Democrat. It is OK to send US troops off for whatever reason as long as you are a Democrat!!</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5052094852237361390?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-45624443992842617372011-10-16T20:22:00.000-05:002011-10-16T20:22:35.102-05:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204002304576628673446417268.html">The Weekend Interview with Mortimer Zuckerman: The Exasperation of the Democratic Billionaire - WSJ.com</a>:<br /><br />Gee, even the billionaires for BO are having second thoughts. Mercy!<br /><br /><blockquote>"His words struck a chord. When I visit Mr. Zuckerman this week in his midtown Manhattan office, he reports that three people approached him at dinner the previous evening to discuss his August op-ed. Among business executives who supported Barack Obama in 2008, he says, "there is enormously widespread anxiety over the political leadership of the country." Mr. Zuckerman reports that among Democrats, "The sense is that the policies of this government have failed. . . . What they say about [Mr. Obama] when he's not in the room, so to speak, is astonishing."</blockquote><br />And this was before BO decided it was time to open another war front. Is 4 wars at once some sort of a record?<br /><br /><br /><a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk" style="font-size: 13px;">'via Blog this'</a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4562444399284261737?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-4694297522303803002011-10-15T10:59:00.000-05:002011-10-15T10:59:14.284-05:00<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/opinion/martin-occupy-politics/index.html?hpt=hp_t2">Occupy Wall Street should be a moral, not political, movement - CNN.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div><blockquote>"The time has come for men and women of conscience in this nation to stand up. It's vital that we elected individuals, regardless of party, who choose not to be an incestuous relationship with the rich in this country who are only about fattening their bottom lines while ignoring the plight of others.<br /><br /></blockquote></div><div>There you have it. The time has come to stand up and TAKE what is ... er, "theirs". The time has come to abandon the rule of law and confiscate the wealth of "the 1%". The time has come for the masses to leave all sense of merit and propriety behind -- to "occupy" the nation formerly known as America. </div><div><br /></div><div>America, the land of the unwashed squatter shitting in a public park and braying about not being handed enough, and being honored by a major news outlet as being "moral".</div><div><br /></div><div>Elections have consequences, thanks BO.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-469429752230380300?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-13936399210816130792011-10-11T23:50:00.000-05:002011-10-11T23:50:27.449-05:00<a href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/the_occupiers_world_awaits.html">Articles: The Occupiers' World Awaits</a><div><br /></div><div>What an opportunity! North Korea has already met the demands of our illustrious Wall Street Occupiers! Hope they all get a chance to enjoy a trip to that fabled land!</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-1393639921081613079?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-83439118683957926702011-10-10T16:02:00.000-05:002011-10-10T16:02:33.916-05:00<a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20117575-37/what-i-learned-from-steve-jobs/?tag=TOCmoreStories.0">What I learned from Steve Jobs | Apple - CNET News</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Some very good insights would go a lot farther than marching on Wall Street to enrich all our lives at a lot of levels!</div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-8343911868395792670?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-41053312785092513472011-10-08T12:03:00.000-05:002011-10-08T12:03:07.001-05:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203476804576616990829919216.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop">Review &amp; Outlook: 103,000 vs. 1.1 Million - WSJ.com</a><br /><br />Policies have consequences.<br /><br />82-83 was a worse recession by every statistic, and it came on top the sick 70's, a decade where the US looked like dogmeat. September of '83 is the greatest month of job creation in US history, 1.1 Million -- Because of government being put on a leash and the private sector driving.<br /><br />Government doesn't create jobs, BUSINESS creates jobs. If we can't get that right, nothing works.<br /><br />We know how, JUST DO IT!!!<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4105331278509251347?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-52380305773065444222011-10-08T10:19:00.000-05:002011-10-08T10:19:13.351-05:00<a href="http://www.tnr.com/article/the-vital-center/95926/elizabeth-warren-george-will-liberalism">How George Will Misunderstands Both Elizabeth Warren And Liberalism | The New Republic</a>: <div><br /></div><div>The title is a very nice turn of phrase -- one applied by William F Buckley to John Kenneth Galbraith. It reminds me of how much I miss the Godfather of "WFB"s everywhere. </div><div><br /></div><div>In this context it shows how the left tends to raise "not getting the point" to high pedantic art. </div><div><br /></div><div>Nobody that I know is talking of NO TAXES on the wealthy, millionaires, private jet owners, or any other group. The Democrats current approach is to willy nilly tack $50K of new taxes on an income of a million, out of the blue. </div><div><br /></div><div>Why all the long lectures on "nobody gets rich on their own"?? Nobody said they did -- the upper incomes are ALREADY paying around 70% of the income taxes!</div><div><br /></div><div>As is often the case, Galston creates yet more straw men to do battle with rather than Will. The problem at hand is LIMITED government. Higher income people are already paying over 50% of their income when FICA, state, and local taxes are added in. When the government is already taking over half of your income and still wants more it seems very reasonable to talk about "limits", it is completely UNreasonable to discuss the straw man of "everybody ought to pay some taxes".</div><div><br /></div><div><br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-5238030577306544422?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-62444480388050562822011-10-07T15:47:00.000-05:002011-10-07T15:47:19.633-05:00<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/gone-in-60-nanoseconds/2011/10/06/gIQAf1RERL_story.html">Gone in 60 nanoseconds - The Washington Post</a><br /><br />I'm not sure I agree with Charles on the extreme import this may have. If true, much like the discovery of quantum effects, it will put Einstein's model in a "bounded domain" much as Einstein put Newton's model in a similar bounded domain. Newtonian physics still works just fine for well over 90% of physics work, because we humans live in the speed and weight range where Newton's model is explanatory. So it will likely be with Einstein's Relativity. Again, **IF** this is proven to be true.<br /><br />What I DO really like about this article is:<br /><br />1). Way short of all that is newsworthy is political. Out current world is WAY to heavily tilted to the overblown focus on things political. This is real hard science happening that COULD make fundamental changes in the way we compute and communicate, and who knows? Faster than light??<br /><br />2). How complete an absurdity it is that "Climate Change" could be "settled science" by ANYONE, when E=MC**2 is not, and SHOULD not be!!!<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6244448038805056282?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-45009419994449882222011-10-02T09:37:00.000-05:002011-10-02T09:37:06.022-05:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204226204576602524023932438.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read">The Weekend Interview with Harold Hamm: How North Dakota Became Saudi Arabia - WSJ.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>Great article, just read it! If we can just get B0 and Democrat cronies out of DC, we are more than poised to have an economic burst bigger than the 80's + pay off the national debt. </div><div><br /></div><div>Oh wait, that is an OPTIMISTIC assessment, and these days we are back into the Carter era gloom and woe. </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "></span></div><blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Mr. Hamm's rags to riches success is the quintessential "only in America" story. He was the last of 13 kids, growing up in rural Oklahoma "the son of sharecroppers who never owned land." He didn't have money to go to college, so as a teenager he went to work in the oil fields and developed a passion. "I always wanted to find oil. It was always an irresistible calling."</span></div><div></div></blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">He now is the 33rd richest guy in America. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px; "></span></span></div><blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px; ">Washington keeps "sticking a regulatory boot at our necks and then turns around and asks: 'Why aren't you creating more jobs,'" he says. He roils at the Interior Department delays of months and sometimes years to get permits for drilling. "These delays kill projects," he says. Even the Securities and Exchange Commission is now tightening the screws on the oil industry, requiring companies like Continental to report their production and federal royalties on thousands of individual leases under the Sarbanes-Oxley accounting rules. "I could go to jail because a local operator misreported the production in the field," he says.</span></span></div><div></div></blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px; "><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px; ">Now why is it again that US corporations are sitting with trillions of dollars on the sideline talking about "uncertainty"??? </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px; "><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; line-height: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 8px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 8px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 1.3em; line-height: 1.5em; display: block; "></p><blockquote>Mr. Hamm calculates that if Washington would allow more drilling permits for oil and natural gas on federal lands and federal waters, "I truly believe the federal government could over time raise $18 trillion in royalties." That's more than the U.S. national debt, I say. He smiles.</blockquote><p></p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 8px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 8px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 1.3em; line-height: 1.5em; display: block; ">Oh wait, it might be only half that ... this guy is an optimist, and this is the age of fools -- we invest $500 million in bankrupt "green energy" companies, and stick it to guys like Hamm. </p></span></div><div><br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4500941999444988222?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-77867642473382843872011-10-02T09:21:00.000-05:002011-10-02T09:21:02.399-05:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203405504576603313410902934.html">Killings Pose Legal and Moral Quandary - WSJ.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>The "far right news outlet" WSJ seems to be "troubled" by BO killing a US citizen in a foreign land with no judicial review at all. Golly. </div><div><br /></div><div>I'm old enough to remember a time long ago and far away in the evil W administration where even tapping a phone WITH FISA court review was a TERRIBLE destruction of our Constitutional rights.</div><div><br /></div><div>Back then the MSM/left were some might strict Constitutionalists. </div><div><br /></div><div>Now BO can KILL a US citizen with no attempt at capture and trial. Just go ahead and blast them??? Presidential power as judge, jury and executioner of US citizens? These are the same pople that are against the death penalty even after a full scale trial and years of appeals, because "there is never 100% proof someone is guilty", but they are completely UNtroubled by BO whacking this guy? </div><div><br /></div><div>Yes, I know, my own maxim of understanding the liberal mind "Consistency is NOT an issue!!!" ... but each new proof of that frankly unbelievable maxim gives me a little shiver, just like each new finding of some new weird quantum effect in physics.</div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-7786764247338284387?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-67485413548984052542011-09-27T11:12:00.000-05:002011-09-27T11:12:25.427-05:00<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703514904575602943209741952.html">W. Kurt Hauser: There's No Escaping Hauser's Law - WSJ.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>The history of taxation in the US shows that one has a maximum revenue choice unless we drastically change taxation with something like a VAT. </div><div><br /></div><div>Since the '50s we have been running between 15 and 19% of GDP through good and bad. So the max is 19% of a growing GDP pie.</div><div><br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6748541354898405254?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-6036878371683108722011-09-27T10:30:00.000-05:002011-09-27T10:30:28.264-05:00<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="344" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Hrg1CArkuNc?fs=1" width="459"></iframe><br /><br />This ought to be required viewing for every American. It is PRODUCTION that matters, not SPENDING!<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-603687837168310872?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-28892903181542924322011-09-23T16:04:00.000-05:002011-09-23T16:04:41.487-05:00<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/return-of-the-real-obama/2011/09/22/gIQAf7dsoK_story.html">Return of the real Obama - The Washington Post</a>: <div><br /></div><div>As Charles quotes Goldwater at the end "A choice, not an echo". </div><div><br /></div><div>The real B0 is back -- with the stench of complete re-distributive "spread the wealth around" at all costs, even a LOSS of revenue to the federal government. </div><div><br /></div><div>Why? Because to liberals like BO "fairness" in some cosmic abstract sense that none of them can truly define, is of infinite value. "Fair is good", even if it impoverishes us all. </div><div><br /></div><div>And it does. It is DIVERSITY that gives us life, vigor, excitement, hope, success, wealth. Tic Tac Toe becomes boring quickly, far too easy for all to be "equally good". DIFFERENTIAL ABILITY is the essence of humanity -- it is what makes us special. It was no accident at all that the once-greatest nation on earth allowed vast differences in wealth. It allowed vast differences in speaking, math, sports, and acting ability as well -- and compensated people accordingly. </div><div><br /></div><div>Aaron Rodgers makes much more than 100x the salary of the worst active QB in the country -- probably on a sandlot near you this weekend. Aaron Rodgers makes millions, the worst QB makes ZERO. </div><div><br /></div><div>Zero is strange, and I am very afraid of our ability to escape the clutches of B-ZERO before he multiplies our nation completely by zero. </div><div><br /></div><div>40% of those that reported a million dollars in '08 have already gone missing. How many more "millionaires" have to be done away with before we realize that we are hurting ourselves most of all.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-2889290318154292432?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-30713273102662279292011-09-23T15:42:00.000-05:002011-09-23T15:42:38.079-05:00<a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-gaffe-jobs-act-speech-brent-spence-bridge-ohio.html">New gaffe: Obama hails America's historic building of 'the Intercontinental Railroad' - latimes.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>I bet he meant TRANScontinental . Hey, but at least they are starting to show up more and more now. Remember our how our nation used to reel with laughter at every "Bushism"? Why they even had funny calendars once. </div><div><br /></div><div>Those were the good old days though. Now that we are mired in the grips of B-ZERO-nomics, the world just feels a lot less light and funny.<br /><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-3071327310266227929?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-63238734225180649312011-09-22T21:45:00.000-05:002011-09-22T21:45:17.690-05:00<a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/09/more-math-jokes.php?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+powerlineblog%2Flivefeed+%28Power+Line%29&amp;utm_content=FaceBook&amp;ref=nf">More Math Jokes | Power Line</a>: <div><br /></div><div>This is unbelievable! If the MSM doesn't have some fun with this one, they are so in the tank that it completely defies description. </div><div><br /></div><div>Some one said "They asked the group, Who wants Barack Obama to be re-elected??" </div><div><br /></div><div>Certainly this COULD have happened to anyone, BUT the MSM enjoyed killing the career of a VP for misspelling "potato" (when it was misspelled on the card he was to check against). </div><div><br /></div><div>If you want "fair", don't run for president!</div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-6323873422518064931?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-91565244894081948012011-09-21T09:54:00.000-05:002011-09-21T09:54:52.565-05:00<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/story/2011-09-20/buffett-tax-millionaires/50480226/1">Fact check: The wealthy already pay more taxes – USATODAY.com</a>: <div><br /></div><div>No surprise here to anyone that is awake and not making money off higher taxes. </div><div><br /></div><div>Buffet is in the group making more money off higher taxes -- tax sheltered funds are one of the things he sells, and all his income is capital gains, thus, he is GREAT with people having pay more in taxes. It means they will have more of a tendency to buy his tax sheltered investment products. </div><div><br /></div><div>BO and Buffet would seem to be strange bedfellows ... until one looks just a little below the surface it makes perfect sense.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-9156524489408194801?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-44880415100532308952011-09-20T14:35:00.000-05:002011-09-20T14:35:26.407-05:00<a href="http://spectator.org/archives/2011/09/19/the-carbon-cults-price-signal">The American Spectator : Welcome to the Carbon Cult</a>: <div><br /></div><div>It isn't how many people (scientists or otherwise) believe something, it is wether it is correct or not!!!</div><div><br /></div><div>Friedman has gone just plain nutty on Climate Change.</div><div><br /></div><div>The following from <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 17px; line-height: 23px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">Dr. Ivar Giaever's resignation letter from American Physical Society based on their climate claims:</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 17px; line-height: 23px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><blockquote>His letter to the APS gets right to the point of how science has been perverted by the Carbon Cult: "In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period." It's no wonder that Giaever realizes that "global warming has become a new religion," and that "We frequently hear about the number of scientists who support it. But the number is not important: only whether they are correct is important."</blockquote></span><br /><a style="font-size:13px" href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/pengoopmcjnbflcjbmoeodbmoflcgjlk">'via Blog this'</a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4488041510053230895?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11480164.post-42598604649235960872011-09-20T09:26:00.000-05:002011-09-20T09:26:49.179-05:00<a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/09/obama-jobs-speech-right-now-dick-durbin.html">Obama's urgent jobs plan: Right now, 'right now' means sometime next month maybe - latimes.com</a><br /><br />When the MSM is on your side, you can be completely 100% shameless!! Note, this is the LA Times, not Fox ... so it IS "0ut there", it is just so quiet that it is very hard to find.<br /><br /><p></p><blockquote><p>So, given the president's professed urgency, the next day, Sept. 9, everyone asked where was his jobs legislation?</p> <p>And, well, it seems the urgent jobs bill hadn't actually been written yet but should be ready in a week or two. When the laughter died, the White House said on second thought the legislation would be ready for a photo op the next Monday.</p> <p>Well, here we are on the next Monday after that next Monday and we've just learned from the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, Dick Durbin, that actually it seems that body won't really be seriously getting into the legislation for a while yet. The Senate has some other more important business to handle. And then there's this month's congressional vacation, which in Washington is called "a recess," like elementary school.</p></blockquote><p></p>Turns out all those claims about "The Republicans being slow on the "jobs bill"??? Complete hogwash ... it hasn't been SUBMITTED yet, and the SENATE, Controlled by Democrats is in NO HURRY to pick up this dogs breakfast of flim flam and already failed policies to jack up the deficit even more than it is now!<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/11480164-4259860464923596087?l=bilber99.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>bilberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05484017289750901445noreply@blogger.com0