The cartoons come from:

www.townhall.com/funnies.

If you receive this and you hate it and you don’t want to ever read it no matter what...that is fine; email me back and you will be deleted from my list (which is almost at the maximum anyway).

Previous issues are listed and can be accessed here:

http://kukis.org/page20.html (their contents are described and each issue is linked to) or here:

http://kukis.org/blog/ (this is the online directory they are in)

I attempt to post a new issue each Sunday by 2 or 3 pm central standard time (I sometimes fail at this attempt).

I try to include factual material only, along with my opinions (it should be clear which is which). I make an attempt to include as much of this week’s news as I possibly can. The first set of columns are intentionally designed for a quick read.

I do not accept any advertising nor do I charge for this publication. I write this principally to blow off steam in a nation where its people seemed have collectively lost their minds.

And if you are a believer in Jesus Christ, always remember: We do not struggle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places (Eph. 6:12).

This Week’s Events

The hole in the BP well is not yet capped, but some oil is being gotten from this well. The other half is gushing into the seas.

The oil has already hit 220 miles of coastline across four states: Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida.

The President announces a 6 month moratorium on drilling at 33 deepwater wells.

It has come out the BP’s contingency plan for a disaster in the gulf was boilerplated from the Alaskan Contingency plan. This report contains mention of a number of animals only found in or near the Arctic and which do not live in the gulf. Apparently, the U.S. government agency in charge of oversight, read and agreed to this plan.

Environmental groups, who demand that we remove carbon from the atmosphere, no matter what it takes, are almost completely silent on this oil disaster.

Who’s making money from this oil spill? Google, Bing, and other search engines. BP pays them millions of dollars, so that, when you type gulf oil spill or words to that effect into your search engine, at the very top is a BP website with happy pictures of the cleanup process, and which indicates that everything is fine right now.

China choose not to have a meeting with Secretary of Defense Gates.

Businesses are now sitting on more cash than at any time since 1963. Several reasons are suggested: difficulty in getting loans, preparing for the worst, and/or expectation of higher taxes.

A great deal of information is coming out now as to various options which the White House has had to clean up the gulf oil mess, and how the WH and BP have rejected much of the help that they could have received.

President Obama has not met with BP CEO yet because he already knows that he will just shine him on.

Democrats elect Alvin Green in Senate primary. Turns out that Green had no website, did not campaigning, and had been charged with sex crimes before election day. Some Democrats have blamed Republicans for planting him in this race (this is a race Republicans will easily win in November against any candidate).

President Obama urged reluctant lawmakers Saturday to quickly approve nearly $50 billion in emergency aid. For the gulf disaster you ask? Of coures not; this is for various state and local governments, who are still unable to balance their budgets, so they need money to avoid "massive layoffs of teachers, police and firefighters." This will also, according to the President, support the still-fragile economic recovery.

Hearst newspaper woman, Helen Thomas, retired this week, after making anti-Semitic comments last week.

New York City Mayor Bloomberg is looked to balance the city’s budget by freezing teacher salary so that they can keep layoffs to a minimum. They are bitterly opposed by the teacher’s unions.

Unions spent $10 million to defeat Democrat Blanche Lincoln in her Arkansas primary. She won the primary against an opponent who was more liberal than she.

Did you know that there was actually an internet buzz all about whether Sarah Palin had breast implants? She answered the question on Greta’s show (no).

Say What?

Obama explaining why he has not yet spoken with the CEO of BP: “I have not spoken to him directly," Obama said. "Here's the reason. Because my experience is, when you talk to a guy like a BP CEO, he's going to say all the right things to me. I'm not interested in words. I'm interested in actions.”

The President reveals his strategy: “I don't sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar. We talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick.”

And let me remind you of James Carville’s words of the previous week: "It just looks like he's not involved in this," an angry Carville said on "Good Morning America" last month. "Man, you got to get down here and take control of this, put somebody in charge of this thing and get this moving. We're about to die down here."

Rosie O'Donnell offers up her solution to the oil crisis: “Seize British Petroleum's assets. Takeover bp. Call it socialism or communism if you must.”

This week’s elections were very favorable to Republican women. ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas said “So many women saying - doing so well, and many saying perhaps Hillary Clinton helped by running for president. All these other women about to possibly take office, high office, in those states.”

President Obama, on his radio address, said, "[I am] absolutely willing to take the difficult steps necessary to lower the cost of Medicare and put our budget on a more fiscally sustainable path. But I'm not willing to do that by punishing hardworking physicians or the millions of Americans who count on Medicare. That's just wrong. And that's why in the short-term, Congress must act to prevent this pay cut to doctors."

Jodi Miller: “President Obama continues to blame Republicans for the bad economy. And now some Republicans almost want Obama to get a second term so he will be in office long enough to blame himself.”

California Senator Barbara Boxer on the greatest national security threat: “I'm going to put in the record, Madam President, a host of quotes from our national security experts who tell us that carbon pollution leading to climate change will be over the next 20 years the leading cause of conflict, putting our troops in harm's way. And that's why we have so many returning veterans who want us to move forward and address this issue, so we can create those new technologies that get us off this foreign oil. ”

Bill Mahr, from a month ago (I forgot to include this quote): “It's ridiculous to say that all Republicans are racist. That of course is not true. But nowadays, if you are a racist, you are probably a Republican.”

Speaking of Republican racism, Hearst Newspapers columnist, the very liberal Helen Thomas, was asked if she had, "Any comments on Israel?" Her response -- that Israeli Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go home" to Germany, Poland and America. Since then, she has resigned and retired.

 

This was not her first unguarded remark of racism:

 

In 2002, Thomas asked Fleischer: "Does the president think that the Palestinians have a right to resist 35 years of brutal military occupation and suppression?"

 

Mark Rabin, a former freelance cameraman for CNN, said that in a 2002 conversation at the White House, Thomas said "thank God for Hezbollah" for driving Israel out of Lebanon, adding that "Israel is the cause for 99 percent of all this terrorism."

The rabbi who asked Helen Thomas the Israel question, has received, among other communications: "Hitler was right. Time for you to go back in the oven."

One point that Glenn Beck makes is that, many of our founding fathers were very strong Christians and not deists (a deist believes that God started everything up, and then wandered off). Joseph Palermo wrote a column in The Huffington Post, saying, “It's not that Beck is wrong about the ambiguity of the personal beliefs of the subject by the Founders, but he and others like him are monumentally wrong by overstating the relevance of the intent of the 18^th Century views on the thought and practices of the 20^th and 21^st Century America”

From a recent Glenn Beck show: “It was opening of a Cirque du Soleil show. And we were sitting amongst all the celebrities...[and] James Gandolfini was sitting right behind me,...and I turned around and I see Jim and said, ‘Hey, Jim, we have a mutual friend.’ And I told him and shook his hand. He said, ‘What is Satan doing here?’ ” [Gandolfini later apologized to Beck for that remark].

Liz Cheney on Obama’s [lack of] leadership with regards the gulf oil disaster: “You’ve got a president now who thinks, saying something makes it so...he said ‘I’m going to have the most transparent administration in history;’ but that doesn’t actually mean that you are going to be open and transparent; it’s not the same thing, as we have seen with him...the words themselves are not enough. And, you know, going down to Louisiana and saying, ‘Gosh, I’m heartbroken, I’m angry, I’m frustrated;’ and then go on vacation to Chicago, really doesn’t send a message that this is a man who is leading...I think people sense when an administration is really in charge and really leading, and when they aren’t. And so I think the Obama administration has a problem here of not having learned from the lessons of Katrina, and confirming in people’s minds that, a gift for reading a teleprompter is not the same as leadership.”

John Stossel about the claims that Obama’s policies kept us from sliding into a deep depression: “He kept us from falling into a great depression. How do we know? It’s like clapping your hands to keep elephants away.”

Warning label printed along side U.S. Constitution: "This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work."

Joe Biden Prophecy Watch

Our enemies have to be watch Obama and his inability to mitigate the disaster in he gulf, and some of them must be thinking, it is time to move forward. Even Iran publically announced their new Uranium enriching site.

North Korea threatens an all out military strike against South Korea in order to destroy their news services which conflict with [North] Korean Central News. Before you write this off as simply bluster, always bear in mind, the North Koreans could lose 1 or 2 million men in war without that being a problem for them.

Saudi Arabia gives Israel clear skies to attack Iranian nuclear sites (that could be a good thing).

Must-Watch Media

Glenn Beck on James Madison (if you have not seen Founder’s Fridays, you need to catch this one, and see why this is one of the most watched and most important programs on television):

http://watchglennbeck.com/video/2010/June/Glenn-Beck-Show-June-11-2010-Founders-Friday-James-Madison/

Beck’s Monday’s show on the abandonment of common sense:

http://www.watchglennbeck.com/video/2010/June/Glenn-Beck-Show-June-7-2010-Common-Sense-Abandoned/

Glenn Beck on Road to Serfdom:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELOEWMCXenE

George Bush’s Inaugural address (for his Facebook page):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBjJkDf2AvA

Liz Cheney’s great comments about Obama lacking leadership with regards to the gulf oil disaster:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE7XaOUsGMo

The environmental impact of the border invasion (this is quite good, even if you are not that concerned about environmental impact):

http://www.youtube.com/v/PkK7g2NdE8g&hl=en&fs=1&

MSNBC interviews Nancy Pelosi

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/37675

If you do not believe that Barbara Boxer said that, then watch her:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/06/12/saturday-night-funnies-boxer-says-co2-leading-cause-conflict-next-20-years

Rosie O’Donnel suggests that the United States seize the assets of BP.

http://infidelsarecool.com/2010/06/08/rosie-odonnell-calls-for-communism-in-america-seize-their-assets/

You might not be able to watch or read this; Taliban hangs a 7 year old boy for spying:

http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/06/10/taliban-hangs-7-year-old-boy/

Remember all of the (fake) concern about TEA party attendees turning violent, with every bit of video which even suggested such a thing posted and commented on by the alphabet media? I bet they never showed you this (non TEA party person attacks a TEA party person):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwZ5X0JMd3Q

A Little Comedy Relief

Obama sings the kicks-ass song (this is funny; watch it all):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yghFBt-fXmw

BP executive meeting and the coffee spill:

http://www.ucbcomedy.com/

Short Takes

1) I mentioned last time about a tenant who makes about $3000/month from social security because her husband died and she has 3 children. There was a time when men purchased life insurance for this exact same thing. How many people are out there who probably have not even contributed $10,000 into social security and are now collecting on it much like they would collect a life insurance policy? Is this what you think social security is?

2)  Nikki Haley wins Republican primary for governor of South Carolina. During the campaign, she is accused of having 2 affairs. One opponent asked her to take a lie detector test on her alleged marital affairs. GOP state Sen. Jake Knotts on Thursday called her a "raghead" (Haley is Indian). Flyers were sent out identifying her as a Hindu (she is Christian). It is my personal wish that everyone involved in these slurs is never elected ever again for any office. After the campaign, the Washington Post describes her as a small-time agitator (a description which apparently they forgot to use 2 years ago).

3) I had been wondering about deep water drilling, and whether environmentalists had a hand in pushing drilling out so keep. Dick Morris recently explained that there were government incentives for deep water drilling. If you drilled far enough out, you pay no oil royalties.

4) Any attempt to destroy, bankrupt or criminalize BP will end up with taxpayers taking the hit for the gulf oil mess.

5) One of the reasons to watch Beck is, you will see things there you will not see on any other news show. His Founding Father shows are legend, and among the highest rated on cable television. No one touched his Crime Inc. series; you saw no reporting of it anywhere (that I am aware of). No liberal columnist wrote voluminous columns saying, “This is just a log of hogwash and here is why.” It is a series of shows, the White House wishes had never been done, and no liberal wants any attention drawn to them (remember what happened when Beck was the sole voice telling America about the background of Van Jones, and then, suddenly, out of nowhere, Van Jones resigns?). Beck sees relationships that others do not. When Nancy Pelosi and the Black caucus walked through the TEA party protesters, on their way to pass the most unpopular bill ever passed by Congress, and they locked arm in arm for a few photos, I did not realize what they were doing. Beck (or someone on his staff) did. They were recreating an iconic photograph of Dr. Martin Luther King and some other black activists walking arm-in-arm through a crowd of shouting, angry racists (you can draw the obvious parallels they were trying to establish). This is one of the most amazing shows on television and worth DVR-ing.

6) I forgot who made this point (Beck?); but President Obama, when he says, “I didn’t talk to the BP CEO because I know he is just going to tell me what I want to hear” (not an exact quote), he is giving this answer from personal experience. How often has the President faced down the CEO of a big company and gotten the runaround? Probably never. However, he is the CEO of the largest corporation in the world—the United States—and, when pressed for an answer, Obama will simply tell you what you want to hear. So, in making this statement, Obama is telling us more about him, than about BP and CEO’s.

6 con’t) Do you doubt me on that point? Remember, Obama added these exact words to his explanation: “I'm not interested in words. I'm interested in actions.” Now, who else do you know who is the CEO of a large corporation who seems to be good with words, but not with action? Hmm?

7) From Beck: if there is a central planner, then there will be those who agree and disagree with his aims, goals and plans. In a free society, we make as many decisions as possible for our own lives. With a central planner (someone high up in government), they make many of our decisions for us (what sort of healthcare we can have, for nistance; and what majors we can take in college if we take federal aid). What do you do with the recalcitrants who will simply not go along with a central planning system? The communists and Nazis simply killed them. Don’t think it cannot happen; it has happened all over the world in hundreds of nations.

8) The Obama administration is looking at removing the home ownership tax deduction. Now, it is not that I am against simplifying the tax code—in theory, there is nothing wrong with that. But that is not their aim. They simply want more taxes, and they have to figure out new ways to get money from the middle class, whom they said they would not tax.

9) Nancy Pelosi’s comments on when they will stop blaming Bush. Essentially, her answer was, “As soon as everything is hunky dory, then we will stop blaming Bush.”

10) Have you noticed that Obama’s solution for almost everything is, slick rhetoric and more taxes?

11) When I was last in California, I was watching TV while my mom and Uncle Bill were playing scrabble. Sarah Palin comes on, and they both quickly remark how stupid she is (not listening to anything that she says). Along these same lines, I have had several people tell me they cannot watch Glenn Beck because he will cry (and one claims that he is able to just turn this crying off and on for effect). For this reason, they will not watch Glenn Beck. This is what passes for political thought and discussion in portions of California. I will agree that, Obama probably has a higher IQ than Sarah Palin. However, when it comes to this oil spill, I’d rather see Palin, McCain, Bachmann, or almost anyone else in charge, including Bill White or Rick Perry. I’ve seen Bill White and Rick Perry, both from opposing parties in Texas, work together during a disaster, and one thing I never saw from either person was, finger-pointing or party-bashing. They both had parts to play, which involved a great deal of cooperation, and, given the circumstances (a hurricane far more devastating the Katrina), things went rather smoothly. And, if you live outside of Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana, you probably did not have any clue as to what a big deal Ike was. Only people who live here—particularly those whose neighborhoods no longer exist—actually know about this storm.

By the Numbers

I heard that 40% of BP’s pension funds are held by Americans.

If we were to look at all of the national economies in the world, the 2009 Stimulus Bill would, by itself, rank as the 17^th largest economy.

Polling by the Numbers

A recent study by the Centers for Disease Control indicates that teen attitudes toward safe sex and pregnancy out of wedlock are a bit more lax than they used to be.

64% of boys and 71% of girls feel it is okay for an unmarried woman to have a child (a 14 percent increase for males and a 6 percent jump for girls from the last study, done in 2002).

A Little Bias

This past week, a gaggle of Republican women won their primaries, along with Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas. NBC's Today and CBS's Early Show both headlined "Ladies Night," while ABC's Good Morning America's take was "Women Rule." ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas gave credit to Hillary Clinton for this. I don’t believe that Sarah Palin running for vice president or her support for these women was even mentioned. She did not mention how diametrically opposed these women are to Clinton’s political viewpoint, nor did they say anything about the dramatic differences between the background of these women and Hillary Clinton.

Most of the problems associated with Katrina was local. Policemen were told to get out of town, so that there was no authority or structure at the Superdome, where some people gathered during Katrina. There were buses enough to evacuate people, but they were never utilized. People died during Katrina because the local government did such a sloppy job (and I know this for a fact, having lived through Ike, which was a far more devastating storm, with far more damage, and very few lives lost). Then, there was a jockeying for power, when Bush was going to bring in the national guard, to deal with the mess left by Nagin and Blanco. However, all over the news we heard about Bush’s failure to deal with Katrina and how Bush hates Black people. This time, in the gulf, there is no local failure with regards to the oil spill. It is just a big, flipping disaster. There have been numerable offers of help, from people and nations who could have actually helped, and most of them have been turned down or ignored, by both the White House and BP. Where is the outrage in the new coverage?

Saturday Night Live Misses

The scene: the head offices of BP with secretaries answering the phones (or, for effect, BP CEO answering the phones); and a split shot of Obama answering the phones at the White House. Call after call comes in with suggestions and offers of help, and they are all turned down.

Split shots of inventors, oil people, and heads of state calling in and offering their help; and one-by-one, being turned down.

The President to the Saudis, “But those aren’t union ships right? They might suck up a lot of oil, but we just can’t have non-union ships coming into the gulf. Hey, but, uh, thanks anyway. Oh, before I let you go, uh, whose ass do you think I ought to kick?”

The President, “Bobby Jindal wants to dump sand into the ocean? Are you kidding me? That might destroy the ocean and all the wildlife. Send this to EPA, and tell them to stall. We can’t have Jindal dumping sand in the ocean.”

Political Chess

Rather than deal with the problem of the BP oil disaster, the President is treating this like a campaign, so that he can clearly identify the villains against whom he faces.

Yay Democrats!

To Nancy Pelosi for admitting that they will not stop blaming Bush until the economy is excellent again. I should add, she would probably be satisfied for the economy being equivalent to the Bush’s first 7.5 years in the White House.

Obama-Speak

Unsustainable means that, we have a socialist or big government solution for this.

That is a debate we are willing to have = do not ever expect to see us debate this point.

Questions for Obama

Whose ass did you kick? Or, whose ass are you planning to kick?

More Proof Obama is an Amateur

Obama’s handling of the gulf oil disaster. He has not yet met with the BP CEO. He has refused help from several nations would could have cleaned up a great deal of the gulf mess. He appears to have had no meetings with other oil executives to determine if BP is doing everything that it can. He is doing very little in the gulf but going down and looking concerned. The press tells him to show emotion, so he makes a lame attempt to show emotion.

You Know You’re Being Brainwashed if...

You believe that Obama is doing a good or a fair job in the gulf.

If you believe that all reasonable options are being tried.

News Before it Happens

There will be a second recession in 2011 (according to Laffer, with whom I agree); Dick Morris says the same thing. I have been saying this for months.

The misery index of the Jimmy Carter era will be resurrected in the media around 2011.

Prophecies Fulfilled

We are not quite there yet, but long ago, I said we would not recover and turn the economy around, but go into a double-dip recession. Ben Bernanche recently was making ominous pronouncements about our economy.

My Most Paranoid Thoughts

We have already seen just how incompetent Obama is facing a real crisis (the oil in the gulf). What if there is another crisis? Or 2 more?

Missing Headlines

Big Night for GOP women

Whose ass will you kick?

Obama Won’t Talk to BP CEO?

Come, let us reason together....

Cleaning up the Oil in the Gulf

It is slowly beginning to come out, what a lousy job this administration is doing with respect to the gulf coast oil disaster.

Now, quite obviously, the gusher needs to be capped. Is Washington able to do this? I doubt it. So, we are dependent upon BP to do this. However, President Obama needs to be meeting with a number of oil executives and kick around different ideas about capping this well. That may be fruitless; but the president ought to speak to other people besides BP when it comes to capping the oil gusher (and, besides, the president is not talking to BP anyway).

Meanwhile, it is not the right approach to just let the oil move about the gulf and onto the gulf coast until the gusher has been capped. Something ought to be done, and the president is doing very little.

First of all, on day 3, the Dutch offered us an oil skimmer; and the Saudis offered us a host of oil skimmers, all of which have proven track records (the Saudis faced a greater amount of oil in their waters). Apparently, we have some old law on the books, called the Jones Act, which disallows them from coming into the Gulf of Mexico (George Bush suspended this law for the Katrina disaster; Obama has not).

Bobby Jindal wanted to build sand islands out in the gulf to catch the oil before it got to shore. The EPA reported that it was unsure about the environmental impact of pouring sand in the ocean (really). About 2 or 3 weeks passed, and then the administration gave Jindal the okay to do much less than what he asked for, and at his expense...after the oil had soaked the Louisiana wetlands.

There have been dozens of people who have offered partial solutions to this problem, the simplest of which is using hay, which will suck the oil out from the sea water, and which can then later be burned as a fuel. There are several different products out there which can separate oil from salt water. I don’t know how costly they are, but hay is pretty darn cheap.

Huckabee just had a show with nothing but American entrepreneurs showing various ways of getting the oil out of the gulf (and, in most cases, saving the oil).

There were about 10 people with various ideas and different products, all of which we saw demonstrated on his show.

At least 2 of these products deal with wildlife. One protected the wildlife before they get dirty with oil; and the other removed the oil quickly from a bird’s feather (and from Huckabee’s hand).

Some of the websites for these products:

http://www.aplusabsorbent.com/

http://www.ecospheretech.com/

This would be a time for all hands on deck. This would be a time for the President and Congress to take a few million or billion dollars and spread it around. We do have an oil cleanup fund of $3 billion just sitting there.

How many times has this president and other Democrats warned us about all of the carbon in the air, and their solution is to pretty much bankrupt our economy because this is so important to deal with. However, when it comes to carbon products in the Gulf of Mexico, our President send his Attorney General, our President makes threats, and our President is determining exactly whose ass he ought to kick; but he is not leading us toward actually dealing with the problem which is at hand; nor is he delegating this to anyone.

I am very much against the whole idea of czars; I think they simply allow the President to bypass Senate approval. However, right here, right now, would be a reasonable time to appoint a temporary czar, Gulf Oil Czar, to oversee the cleanup of the gulf and the capping of the well.

There were 2 or 3 guys on the Huckabee show who have been in this business for 30 years, and yet are able to still think outside of the box. One of these men would be an excellent choice.

Alphabetical List of Black Republicans

from Wikipedia

Bill Mahr said, “It's ridiculous to say that all Republicans are racist. That of course is not true. But nowadays, if you are a racist, you are probably a Republican.”

A

Akindele Akinyemi, CEO of One Network and Conservative Educator

Claude Allen, former White House Domestic Policy Advisor

Renee Amoore, health care advocate & founder and president of The Amoore Group, Inc.; former candidate for Republican National Committee Co-Chairwoman

 B

J. Kenneth Blackwell, former Secretary of State of Ohio, former gubernatorial candidate

Lynette Boggs, former Las Vegas City Councilwoman, former Clark County, NV commissioner, former candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives

Peter Boulware, former NFL linebacker and Republican candidate for the Florida House of Representatives, District 9.

Jennette Bradley, former Treasurer of the State of Ohio

Edward Brooke, former U.S. Senator from Massachusetts, first African American elected by popular vote to the U.S. Senate

Janice Rogers Brown, a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals

Blanche Bruce, former U.S. Senator from Mississippi, first African American to serve a full term in the U.S. Senate

Victoria Buckley, former Colorado Secretary of State[1]

Keith Butler, Republican national committeeman from Michigan, former councilman for Detroit, minister and former U.S. Senatorial candidate

 C

Herman Cain, businessman and media personality

Jennifer Carroll, Florida State Representative[2]

Clarence H. Carter, Director of the District of Columbia's Department of Human Services, former administration official under President George W. Bush[3]

Ron Christie, former advisor to Vice-President Dick Cheney.[4]

Octavius Valentine Catto, civil rights activist and African American baseball pioneer

Henry P. Cheatham, former U.S. Representative from North Carolina

Eldridge Cleaver, author and civil rights leader

William Thaddeus Coleman, Jr., fourth United States Secretary of Transportation, first African American Supreme Court Clerk[5]

Ward Connerly, political activist, businessman, and former University of California Regent

 D

Oscar Stanton de Priest, former U.S. Representative from Illinois

Frederick Douglass, abolitionist, editor, orator, author, and statesman

 E

Larry Elder, talk radio host and commentator

Robert Brown Elliott, former U.S. Representative from South Carolina

Melvin H. Evans, former U.S. Representative from, and former Governor of, the U.S. Virgin Islands

 F

James L. Farmer, Jr., civil rights leader

Arthur Fletcher, official in the administrations of Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush; considered the "father of affirmative action"

Gary Franks, former U.S. Representative from Connecticut

Ryan Frazier, Aurora City Councilman, Candidate for United States Senate elections in Colorado, 2010

Samuel B. Fuller, founder and president of the Fuller Products Company, publisher of the New York Age and Pittsburgh Courier, head of the South Side Chicago NAACP, president of the National Negro Business League, and a prominent black Republican

Ada M. Fisher, MD, MPH" North Carolina Republican National Committeewoman elected 2008.

 H

Jeremiah Haralson, former U.S. Representative from Alabama

Ted Hayes, activist for the homeless

Amy Holmes, CNN political commentator and independent social conservative

John Adams Hyman, former U.S. Representative from North Carolina

 I

Niger Innis, commentator and activist

 J

Alphonso Jackson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development

Raynard Jackson, political consultant and political analyst for WUSA*9 TV (CBS affiliate) in Washington, DC

Dr. Mildred Fay Jefferson, first African-American woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School; pro-life movement leader; Republican candidate for U.S. House and U.S. Senate[6]

Wallace B. Jefferson, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas

 K

Alan Keyes, former member of the Republican party and nominee for the U.S. Senate

Alveda King, former member of the Georgia House of Representatives. Niece of Martin Luther King, Jr.

 L

John Mercer Langston, former U.S. Representative from Virginia

Jefferson Franklin Long, former U.S. Representative from Georgia

John Roy Lynch, former U.S. Representative from Mississippi

 M

Lenny McAllister, political analyst, community activist, and author

Angela McGlowan, political analyst

Donald K. McLaurin, mayor of Trotwood, Ohio[7]

James Meredith, civil rights leader

Thomas Ezekiel Miller, former U.S. Representative from South Carolina

George Washington Murray, former U.S. Representative from South Carolina

Steven Mullins, Connecticut politician, Planning & Zoning Commissioner, City of West Haven, 2009 Republican nominee for Mayor of West Haven, 2002 Republican nominee for State Comptroller

 N

Charles Edmund Nash, former U.S Representative from Louisiana

Constance Berry Newman, U.S. diplomat; former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs; member of International Republican Institute

 O

 P

Rod Paige, seventh U.S. Secretary of Education

Sherman Parker, Missouri state representative, ran for U.S. House of Representatives

Star Parker, author, activist, and founder of CURE

Edward J. Perkins, first African-American U.S. ambassador to South Africa

Jesse Lee Peterson, civil rights activist, founder of Brotherhood of New Destiny

Samuel Pierce, former HUD Secretary

P. B. S. Pinchback, twenty-fourth governor of Louisiana; first African-American governor of a U.S. state

Homer Plessy, plaintiff in Plessy v. Ferguson[citation needed]

Colin Powell, 65th United States Secretary of State

Pierre-Richard Prosper, former Bush Administration war crimes official

 R

Joseph H. Rainey, former U.S. Representative from South Carolina, first African American to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives

James T. Rapier, former U.S. Representative from Alabama

Hiram Rhodes Revels, former U.S. Senator from Mississippi, first African American to serve in the U.S. Senate

Condoleezza Rice, sixty-sixth U.S. Secretary of State

Jack E. Robinson II, Boston-area businessman, civil rights activist[8]

Jack E. Robinson III, former U.S. Senate, Secretary of State, and U.S. House nominee from Massachusetts

Vernon Robinson, former candidate for U.S. House of Representatives from North Carolina

Joe Rogers, former Lieutenant Governor of Colorado, youngest Lieutenant Governor in Colorado history

Carson Ross Mayor of Blue Springs, MO, Fmr. Missouri State Rep

 S

Paul H. Scott, Michigan State Representative

Robert Smalls, South Carolina

Joshua I. Smith, appointed commissioner of Minority Business Development by President George H. W. Bush

DeForest "Buster" Soaries, former New Jersey Secretary of State

Thomas Sowell, economist, writer and commentator

Michael S. Steele, political commentator, former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland, former candidate for the U.S. Senate and elected chairman of the Republican National Committee

Lynn Swann, former NFL player, former Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate

 T

Noel C. Taylor, mayor of Roanoke, Virginia from 1975 to 1992[9]

Clarence Thomas, associate justice of the United States Supreme Court

Sojourner Truth, abolitionist speaker and suffrage advocate

 U

James L. Usry, former mayor of Atlantic City, New Jersey

 V

William T. Vernon, Registrar of the Treasury under President Theodore Roosevelt[10]

 W

Dale Wainwright, Associate Justice of the Texas Supreme Court

Booker T. Washington, educator and activist

Maurice Washington, Nevada State Senator

J. C. Watts, former U.S. Representative from Oklahoma

Ida B. Wells, civil rights advocate, co-founder of the NAACP

Allen West, candidate for U.S. House of Representatives from Florida

J. Ernest Wilkins, Sr., Assistant Secretary of Labor under President Eisenhower[11]

Armstrong Williams, radio and television commentator

Michael L. Williams, Texas Railroad Commissioner

Walter E. Williams, author, commentator, economist

Vern Williams, member of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel

There are quite a number of new African-American Republicans who are running this year which I don’t believe are on this list; e.g., Augustus Shaw, running for the House in Arizona and endorsed by Sheriff Joe Arpaio; Damon Dunn, secretary of state in California (endorsements include Howard Jarvis); Stefani Carter (state house candidate in Texas (endorsed by the NRA and many others—and she is a babe); Shawn James, for the House in Georgia; Vernon Parker, for the House (AZ); Allen West for the House (Florida); Ron Miller (check out his beliefs); Virginia Fuller Congressional candidate Virginia; Robert Allen Mansfield, running for Pennsylvania governor; Michael Williams for U.S. Senate (TX); James White for state rep in Texas; Isaac Hayes for Illinois U.S. Congress (probably not that Isaac Hayes); Barb Davis White running for U.S. Congress from Minnesota; Charles Lollar for U.S. Congress (MD); Dr. Marion Thorpe running for Congress (FL); Dr. Deborah Honeycutt for U.S. Congress (Georgia); Les Phillip for U.S. Congress (AL); Chrystopher Smith U.S. Congress (CA); Tim Scott U.S. Congress (SC); Joe Watkins Lt. Governor of Pennsylvania; Eddie Adams for U.S. Congress (FL); C. Mason Weaver U.S. Congress (CA); Jean Howard-Hill U.S. Congress (TN); John Arrington U.S. Senate (IL); Eric Wallace U.S. Senate (IL); Chuck Smith U.S. Congress (VI); Mike Muhammad U.S. Congress (PA); and Martin Baker U.S. Congress (MO). In glancing through the websites, the only guy who gave me pause was Mike Muhammad (his quotes seemed lame to me; e.g., "Mike Muhammad is 100% convinced that he can make a Difference" Mike Muhammad followed by "Ask Not, What Your County Can Do for You, But What You Can Do For Your Country" President John F. Kennedy).

Some gleanings from the websites:

“Government is a poor substitute for the care and compassion of our families in the home, our neighbors on the block, and the houses of worship down the street. In order to reclaim our unalienable rights to life, liberty and the opportunity to create wealth and enjoy the full fruits of our labors, we must reestablish God's design and the Constitution's direction for government - to keep order and administer justice, to be a protector and enforcer, not a provider." Ron Miller.

C. Mason Weaver plans to introduce a bill to return all unspent and returned TARP funds to the taxpayer (okay, sure, it probably won’t get ot the floor):

http://www.cmasonweaverforcongress.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Return_America_to_Freedom_Act.pdf

Wisdom from Tiffany and Co.

Around 1980, Tiffany and Co. Posted several print ads, and here are some of them:

Can Full Employment Be Accomplished by Government Action?

Yes it can; How can government create full employment? Here's how.

1 - Begin winding down the bureaucracy.

2 - Stop increasing taxs on people who work.

3 - Stop spending the people's money irresponsibly.

4 - Ban all price fixing and transportation rate fixing.

5 - Release vast quantities of capital funds by discontinuing double-taxing on dividends.

6 - Take vigorous steps to encourage savings and capital formation.

7 - Free the people from the poppa knows best policy.

8 - Repeal government regulations that prevent corporations from competing with each other.

9 - Cease deficit spending.

10 - Stop persecuting God.

Is Profit a Dirty Word?

No it is not, but it is very misunderstood. By profit, most people only think of net profit but net profit is only a tiny part of it. The profits generated by all economic activity pay for everything, including raw material, tools, rents, machinery, wages, union dues, interest, advertizing, pensions, dividends and all other costs associated with mines, farms, industry and commerce. Out of profits to come all taxes from corporations or individuals which pay the entire expense for federal, state and local government, including social security, welfare, public schools, and national defense. And every dollar you earn or receive comes out of profits, directly or indirectly, and pays for your food, clothing, shelter, education and all other living expenses. So let us stop damning profit and start defending it. Not only from government over-regulation but also from well-meaning people and some not so well-meaning, or we will end up seriously injuring our economy. Only by defending profit can we achieve more equitable wages, generate the capital needed to employ more people, create jobs for future generations, and gain prosperity for all.

The Nitty Gritty about Socialism:

Socialism is the final result of the erosion of democracy and replacing it with ever-growing bureaucracy. More and more bureaucracy results in less and less freedom until finally, the multitude of decisions formerly made by free men and women are made by power-mad bureaucrats. So let's look at the record:

1. Bureaucracy is making it impossible to solve the energy crisis.

2. Bureaucracy has seriously crippled the automobile business.

3. Bureaucracy has ruined the railroad business.

4. Etc., etc. etc. So if we want to halt this juggernaut, we will have to stop frustrating the efforts of free Americans and begin to cut down on bureaucracy to more practical and sensible limits.

The Truth about Capitalism

Some people think that there are many economic systems, namely socialism, communism, fascism, or capitalism; this however is not true. Socialism, communism and fascism are not economic systems; they are political system. There is only one economic system and that is capitalism. Russia, China and America and all others operate under the capitalistic system no matter what they call it. The difference is, in some countries, the capital is owned by the government and in others, by private individuals or groups of private individuals. Now when governments own, interfere with, or over-regulate private ownership of capital, they invariable destroy the initiative of the people and eventually get into trouble. The only capitalism which has produced prosperity in the long run is the one which promotes freedom for its citizens. It is hoped that the world will someday wake up to this important truth.

Who Owns the Capitalist System?

Do the big corporations own it? No. Does the government own it? No. Do the bureaucrats own it? No. Do the rich own it? No. Okay, who owns it? Here's who: farmers, businessmen, professionals, government employees, corporate employees, members of labor unions, and all the owners of government and corporate and government securities; in short, everyone owns the free enterprise system. So since we all own it, let's stop trying to beat it to death. Instead, let's treat it with the respect that it deserves.

I heard these when listening to the teaching of a former pastor of mine (R. B. Thieme, Jr.), and he read several of these at the beginning of a lesson which he originally taught in 1980.

I first posted this here:

http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/06/11/truth-from-tiffany-reader-post/

Someone there found links to all of the Tiffany ads and posted them there.

Tax Hikes and the 2011 Economic Collapse

Today's corporate profits reflect an income shift into 2010. These profits will tumble next year, preceded most likely by the stock market.

By Arthur Laffer

People can change the volume, the location and the composition of their income, and they can do so in response to changes in government policies.

It shouldn't surprise anyone that the nine states without an income tax are growing far faster and attracting more people than are the nine states with the highest income tax rates. People and businesses change the location of income based on incentives.

John Fund of WSJ's Political Diary breaks down Tuesday's most interesting primary contests. Also, WSJ Columnist Mary Anastasia O'Grady translates the latest economic signals from Washington.

Likewise, who is gobsmacked when they are told that the two wealthiest Americans-Bill Gates and Warren Buffett-hold the bulk of their wealth in the nontaxed form of unrealized capital gains? The composition of wealth also responds to incentives. And it's also simple enough for most people to understand that if the government taxes people who work and pays people not to work, fewer people will work. Incentives matter.

People can also change the timing of when they earn and receive their income in response to government policies. According to a 2004 U.S. Treasury report, "high income taxpayers accelerated the receipt of wages and year-end bonuses from 1993 to 1992-over $15 billion-in order to avoid the effects of the anticipated increase in the top rate from 31% to 39.6%. At the end of 1993, taxpayers shifted wages and bonuses yet again to avoid the increase in Medicare taxes that went into effect beginning 1994."

Just remember what happened to auto sales when the cash for clunkers program ended. Or how about new housing sales when the $8,000 tax credit ended? It isn't rocket surgery, as the Ivy League professor said.

On or about Jan. 1, 2011, federal, state and local tax rates are scheduled to rise quite sharply. President George W. Bush's tax cuts expire on that date, meaning that the highest federal personal income tax rate will go 39.6% from 35%, the highest federal dividend tax rate pops up to 39.6% from 15%, the capital gains tax rate to 20% from 15%, and the estate tax rate to 55% from zero. Lots and lots of other changes will also occur as a result of the sunset provision in the Bush tax cuts.

Tax rates have been and will be raised on income earned from off-shore investments. Payroll taxes are already scheduled to rise in 2013 and the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will be digging deeper and deeper into middle-income taxpayers. And there's always the celebrated tax increase on Cadillac health care plans. State and local tax rates are also going up in 2011 as they did in 2010. Tax rate increases next year are everywhere.

Now, if people know tax rates will be higher next year than they are this year, what will those people do this year? They will shift production and income out of next year into this year to the extent possible. As a result, income this year has already been inflated above where it otherwise should be and next year, 2011, income will be lower than it otherwise should be.

Also, the prospect of rising prices, higher interest rates and more regulations next year will further entice demand and supply to be shifted from 2011 into 2010. In my view, this shift of income and demand is a major reason that the economy in 2010 has appeared as strong as it has. When we pass the tax boundary of Jan. 1, 2011, my best guess is that the train goes off the tracks and we get our worst nightmare of a severe "double dip" recession.

In 1981, Ronald Reagan-with bipartisan support-began the first phase in a series of tax cuts passed under the Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA), whereby the bulk of the tax cuts didn't take effect until Jan. 1, 1983. Reagan's delayed tax cuts were the mirror image of President Barack Obama's delayed tax rate increases. For 1981 and 1982 people deferred so much economic activity that real GDP was basically flat (i.e., no growth), and the unemployment rate rose to well over 10%.

But at the tax boundary of Jan. 1, 1983 the economy took off like a rocket, with average real growth reaching 7.5% in 1983 and 5.5% in 1984. It has always amazed me how tax cuts don't work until they take effect. Mr. Obama's experience with deferred tax rate increases will be the reverse. The economy will collapse in 2011.

Consider corporate profits as a share of GDP. Today, corporate profits as a share of GDP are way too high given the state of the U.S. economy. These high profits reflect the shift in income into 2010 from 2011. These profits will tumble in 2011, preceded most likely by the stock market.

In 2010, without any prepayment penalties, people can cash in their Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs), Keough deferred income accounts and 401(k) deferred income accounts. After paying their taxes, these deferred income accounts can be rolled into Roth IRAs that provide after-tax income to their owners into the future. Given what's going to happen to tax rates, this conversion seems like a no-brainer.

The result will be a crash in tax receipts once the surge is past. If you thought deficits and unemployment have been bad lately, you ain't seen nothing yet.

From:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704113504575264513748386610.html

Clinton Catalyzed Gulf Oil Drilling Boom

By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann

Just as the subprime mortgage crisis had its roots in the Clinton Administration decision to require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to find enough low income borrowers so that half their loans were subprime, the Gulf oil spill also had its roots in misguided policies begun by the Clinton Administration.

In 1995, President Clinton signed the Outer Continental Shelf Deepwater Royalty Relief Act which exempted oil wells drilled deep in the Gulf from the normal royalty payments they would normally have owed the government for their oil. Usually, these payments amount to between 12% and 16% of their revenues, so exemption from this requirement did a great deal to catalyze drilling in deep waters in the Gulf of Mexico. As a result of the Administration action, deepwater oil production in the Gulf increased rapidly, growing from 42 million barrels annually in 1996 to 348 million in 2004. The latter figure represents about 6% of total United States oil consumption and about 15% of domestic production. Natural gas production from deepwater Gulf drilling increased tenfold during the same period.

The Deepwater Horizon well was one of those catalyzed by the Clinton legislation and began drilling in 2001.

The legislation was pushed avidly by Republicans in Congress, particularly those representing the very Gulf states now engulfed by the oil that is flowing from the wells they encouraged.

Unfortunately, the Clinton Administration - and the Bush and Obama Administrations that followed - failed to consider seriously what to do if things went wrong. In contrast to the licensing of nuclear power plants, where vast time and money has been spent developing fail safe systems, very little thought was given - obviously - to what how to stop an explosion that would trigger a vast spill, how to plug the hole, and how to stop the oil from reaching Gulf and Atlantic coast beaches.

Instead, the oil industry took its cue from Washington and went full speed ahead into drilling and production in deepwater Gulf oil wells with the predictable result that something, somehow, sometime would go very, very wrong and that nobody would have the faintest idea of what to do about it.

This decision to embark on vast Gulf oil drilling was, of course, the correct one. But the failure to think through how to avert a disaster on the magnitude of that which is now on our hands is the height of irresponsibility.

All three Administrations - Clinton, Bush, and Obama - bear the blame for this abject failure. None took the danger of a massive spill seriously or sought to hold up the massive expansion of off shore drilling until failsafe measures could be developed.

But, as with the subprime crisis, policy initiatives taken during the Clinton years - with the best of motives - were implemented without adequate regulation and without due consideration of the dangers involved. We are now suffering mightily for this failure of foresight and planning.

From:

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2010/06/10/clinton-catalyzed-gulf-oil-drilling-boom/#more-1080

Why Women Won

By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann

Ever since the passage of the 19th Amendment permitted women suffrage, feminists have anticipated a sea change in our politics. When the women's movement of the 1960s and 1970s cut its vast swath through our consciousness, its leaders felt sure that the time for women power had come.

But the results have always fallen far short of the expectations. While women have gained in influence and risen in rank, they are still only 18% of the House of Representatives and 17% of the Senate. While the gender gap has helped elect Democrats throughout the nation, there has never been the gender revolution predicted by feminists. Until today.

The primaries of June 8, 2010 were historic in that they represented a sweep by women in states as diverse as California, Nevada, Arkansas, and South Carolina. The feminists of the 60s would be upset that most of the candidates nominated in this landslide were Republican and pro-life, but the upsurge of women cannot be denied.

Why is it happening?

A clue might come from some polling we did for Hillary in 1990 which sought to assess how women would fare in bids for elective office. We found that the analogy between black and female candidates was fundamentally flawed. When voters contemplated an African-American candidate, they reacted in one of three ways: they either were racist and voted against him or they were black themselves and supported him, or they were not in either category and considered him on his merits.

But when it comes to women candidates, a totally different calculus is involved. Most voters are neither so feminist that they would automatically back a woman or so sexist that they would never do so. But all voters shared a common stereotype about female candidates that influenced how they voted on them.

Whether the voters was male or female, pro-life or pro-choice, supportive of the Equal Rights Amendment or opposed, they had the same predisposition to see women as better than men at certain tasks and less able to perform others.

Asked who they would trust more to win a war, all voters of both genders said they would opt for a male candidate. Who did they think would be more honest and less corrupt? All chose the hypothetical female candidate. Men were better at defense, battling terrorism, and fighting crime. Women were preferred for educating children, fighting poverty, restoring integrity to government, and protecting the environment. They were equal on the economy and creating jobs.

What was odd about the poll results was that even the most sexist of men - anti-ERA and pro-life - gave women the edge in these categories. And the most feminist of women - pro-ERA and pro-choice - accorded men the advantage in the remaining areas.

So the question of whether a man or a woman has an advantage relates less to the candidate than to the nature of the times. In 2004, when we were in the midst of our recovery from 9-11, we wanted men. In 2010, when we are sickened by the stench of wheeling and dealing in Congress and the obvious corruption of the process, we are turning toward women.

While conservatives rail at Obama's socialist policies and his health care legislation, most voters of any ideological stripe are revolted by the insight into the legislative process we have all been afforded. We have watched, in Bismark's words, "a sausage being made and a law being passed" and are turned off by the sight. The efforts to buy off candidates who were seeking the Senate seats from Pennsylvania and Colorado, the deals to get the votes of swing Senators in Nebraska and Louisiana for health care, and the ethical lapses of Democratic Congressmen like Charlie Rangel have kindled the deepest form of revulsion among ordinary voters.

This disgust showed itself to be universal and powerful in the way it impelled the nomination of women throughout the nation on June 8, 2010.

From:

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2010/06/09/why-women-won/#more-1076

Obamanomics Recession

By Dick Morris

The drop in the stock market (now about 1,000 points on the Dow) is a graphic indication of the stark fact that we are entering the infamous double dip of the recession, long feared and predicted. The economy is not in a V after all (down and then up), but in a W (down, up, down again, and then, finally, up). And the cause of the second dip is not the recession itself, but the cure administered to it by President Obama and the Democratic Congress.

Consider the indications (data provided by the New America Foundation, analysis by Sherle R. Schwanninger and Samuel Sherraden):

· GDP growth has been 2.2 percent, 5.6 percent and 3.2 percent for each of the last three quarters, well below the rebounds typical in past recessions.

· Total civilian employment has rebounded by only 1 percent since the depth of the unemployment five months ago. In 1973, at a comparable point, it had rebounded by 7 percent. In 1981, by 8 percent. In 1990, by 4 percent. And in 2001 by 3 percent. U-6, the broadest measure of unemployment, stands at 17.1 percent, and we need 12.8 million new jobs.

· Housing prices have dropped by 30 percent since 2006 and "many economists expect housing prices to decline at least another 10 percent," according to Schwanninger and Sherraden.

· While corporate profits are 30.6 percent higher than a year ago, wages are up by 1.6 percent, less than half their rate of increase two years ago.

· Financial-sector profits make up 35.7 percent of all domestic corporate profits. These gains are driven by trading revenue, which does not reflect real economic growth. Schwanninger and Sherraden report, "In the first quarter of 2010, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America earned 72 percent, 45 percent and 16 percent of their net revenue [respectively] from trading profits."

· Personal savings dropped from a high of almost 6 percent to 2.7 percent in March 2010, so households have cut their debt by just $300 billion since it peaked in 2008. Household debt, which rose from 60 percent of GDP in 1990 to almost 100 percent in 2008, has dropped to 97 percent. It has a long way to go before it's down enough to free consumers to spend more.

· Meanwhile, retail sales have averaged only a 1.7 percent increase over the past three quarters, half of which was to restock inventories. Schwanninger and Sherraden note "in a typical recovery, the rebound is closer to 3.5 percent." And most of that increase is due to expanding government cash transfer payments, which now make up 18.3 percent of personal income. "Excluding transfer payments, personal income increased just 0.3 percent since the third quarter of 2009."

· Stimulus spending, which has failed to generate private-sector growth, is winding down. Only 43

percent of the tax benefits and entitlement spending remain to be doled out, as does 63 percent of the contracts, grants and loans in the stimulus package.

· The strengthening of the dollar due to the collapse of the euro will dry up U.S. export trade. Exports to EU nations account for 21 percent of American and 20 percent of Chinese exports. Schwanninger and Sherraden note, "A European slowdown will reduce demand for the two primary engines of world economic growth."

But this second downturn in the economy will be accompanied by inflation, making it worse than the first recession. With interest rates set to rise (because the Fed is no longer massively purchasing securities to keep them down), taxes set to go up (because of Obama's ideology) and global energy use about to increase, sending prices higher (because the rest of the world is recovering), prices have to go up. But with no growth in real personal income and household credit close to all-time highs, there is not enough demand to pay the higher prices, so a deeper slump will ensue.

The solution? Cut taxes. And bring down the deficit through massive spending cuts. Reduce our borrowing needs by slashing our spending. Free up capital to feed job growth.

It should be evident to all that Obamanomics is a disaster. It reminds one of nothing so much as the medieval practice of bleeding the patient to make him well by expelling the evil spirits that dwelt within. When the patient did not recover, they just bled him more and, when he died, they just said that the spirits killed him. The practice of spending, borrowing and then taxing to fuel job growth is the modern analogy.

From:

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2010/06/09/obamanomics-recession/

The Alien in the White House

The distance between the president and the people is beginning to be revealed.

By Dorothy Rabinowitz

The deepening notes of disenchantment with Barack Obama now issuing from commentators across the political spectrum were predictable. So, too, were the charges from some of the president's earliest enthusiasts about his failure to reflect a powerful sense of urgency about the oil spill.

There should have been nothing puzzling about his response to anyone who has paid even modest critical attention to Mr. Obama's pronouncements. For it was clear from the first that this president-single-minded, ever-visible, confident in his program for a reformed America saved from darkness by his arrival-was wanting in certain qualities citizens have until now taken for granted in their presidents. Namely, a tone and presence that said: This is the Americans' leader, a man of them, for them, the nation's voice and champion. Mr. Obama wasn't lacking in concern about the oil spill. What he lacked was that voice-and for good reason.

WSJ Asia editorial writer Hugo Restall reports on the President's travel plans.

Those qualities to be expected in a president were never about rhetoric; Mr. Obama had proved himself a dab hand at that on the campaign trail. They were a matter of identification with the nation and to all that binds its people together in pride and allegiance. These are feelings held deep in American hearts, unvoiced mostly, but unmistakably there and not only on the Fourth of July.

A great part of America now understands that this president's sense of identification lies elsewhere, and is in profound ways unlike theirs. He is hard put to sound convincingly like the leader of the nation, because he is, at heart and by instinct, the voice mainly of his ideological class. He is the alien in the White House, a matter having nothing to do with delusions about his birthplace cherished by the demented fringe.

One of his first reforms was to rid the White House of the bust of Winston Churchill-a gift from Tony Blair-by packing it back off to 10 Downing Street. A cloudlet of mystery has surrounded the subject ever since, but the central fact stands clear. The new administration had apparently found no place in our national house of many rooms for the British leader who lives on so vividly in the American mind. Churchill, face of our shared wartime struggle, dauntless rallier of his nation who continues, so remarkably, to speak to ours. For a president to whom such associations are alien, ridding the White House of Churchill would, of course, have raised no second thoughts.

Far greater strangeness has since flowed steadily from Washington. The president's appointees, transmitters of policy, go forth with singular passion week after week, delivering the latest inversion of reality. Their work is not easy, focused as it is on a current prime preoccupation of this White House-that is, finding ways to avoid any public mention of the indisputable Islamist identity of the enemy at war with us. No small trick that, but their efforts go forward in public spectacles matchless in their absurdity-unnerving in what they confirm about our current guardians of law and national security.

Consider the hapless Eric Holder, America's attorney general, confronting the question put to him by Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas) of the House Judicary Committee on May 13.

Did Mr. Holder think that in the last three terrorist attempts on this soil, one of them successful (Maj. Nidal Hasan's murder of 13 soldiers at Fort Hood, preceded by his shout of "Allahu Akbar!"), that radical Islam might have played any role at all? Mr. Holder seemed puzzled by the question. "People have different reasons" he finally answered-a response he repeated three times. He didn't want "to say anything negative about any religion."

And who can forget the exhortations on jihad by John Brennan, Mr. Obama's chief adviser on counterterrorism? Mr. Brennan has in the past charged that Americans lack sensitivity to the Muslim world, and that we have particularly failed to credit its peace-loving disposition. In a May 26 speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Mr. Brennan held forth fervently, if not quite comprehensibly, on who our enemy was not: "Our enemy is not terrorism because terrorism is just a tactic. Our enemy is not terror because terror is a state of mind, and as Americans we refuse to live in fear."

He went on to announce, sternly, that we do not refer to our enemies as Islamists or jihadists because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam. How then might we be permitted to describe our enemies? One hint comes from another of Mr. Brennan's pronouncements in that speech: That "violent extremists are victims of political, economic and social forces."

Yes, that would work. Consider the news bulletins we could have read: "Police have arrested Faisal Shahzad, victim of political, economic and social forces living in Connecticut, for efforts to set off a car bomb explosion in Times Square." Plotters in Afghanistan and Yemen, preparing for their next attempt at mass murder in America, could only have listened in wonderment. They must have marvelled in particular on learning that this was the chief counterterrorism adviser to the president of the United States.

Long after Mr. Obama leaves office, it will be this parade of explicators, laboring mightily to sell each new piece of official reality revisionism-Janet Napolitano and her immortal "man-caused disasters'' among them-that will stand most memorably as the face of this administration.

It is a White House that has focused consistently on the sensitivities of the world community-as it is euphemistically known-a body of which the president of the United States frequently appears to view himself as a representative at large.

It is what has caused this president and his counterterrorist brain trust to deem it acceptable to insult Americans with nonsensical evasions concerning the enemy we face. It is this focus that caused Mr. Holder to insist on holding the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in lower Manhattan, despite the rage this decision induced in New Yorkers, and later to insist if not there, then elsewhere in New York. This was all to be a dazzling exhibition for that world community-proof of Mr. Obama's moral reclamation program and that America had been delivered from the darkness of the Bush years.

It was why this administration tapped officials like Michael Posner, assistant secretary of state for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Among his better known contributions to political discourse was a 2005 address in which he compared the treatment of Muslim-Americans in the United States after 9/11 with the plight of the Japanese-Americans interned in camps after Pearl Harbor. During a human-rights conference held in China this May, Mr. Posner cited the new Arizona immigration law by way of assuring the Chinese, those exemplary guardians of freedom, that the United States too had its problems with discrimination.

So there we were: America and China, in the same boat on human rights, two buddies struggling for reform. For this view of reality, which brought withering criticism in Congress and calls for his resignation, Mr. Posner has been roundly embraced in the State Department as a superbly effective representative.

It is no surprise that Mr. Posner-like numerous of his kind-has found a natural home in this administration. His is a sensibility and political disposition with which Mr. Obama is at home. The beliefs and attitudes that this president has internalized are to be found everywhere-in the salons of the left the world over-and, above all, in the academic establishment, stuffed with tenured radicals and their political progeny. The places where it is held as revealed truth that the United States is now, and has been throughout its history, the chief engine of injustice and oppression in the world.

They are attitudes to be found everywhere, but never before in a president of the United States. Mr. Obama may not hold all, or the more extreme, of these views. But there can be no doubt by now of the influences that have shaped him. They account for his grand apology tour through the capitals of Europe and to the Muslim world, during which he decried America's moral failures-her arrogance, insensitivity. They were the words of a man to whom reasons for American guilt came naturally. Americans were shocked by this behavior in their newly elected president. But he was telling them something from those lecterns in foreign lands-something about his distant relation to the country he was about to lead.

The truth about that distance is now sinking in, which is all to the good. A country governed by leaders too principled to speak the name of its mortal enemy needs every infusion of reality it can get.

From:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703302604575294231631318728.html

Obama and the Trouble With Voting 'Present'

Weak and radical, the president looks more like Jimmy Carter all the time.

By Karl Rove

When Barack Obama announced he was running for president in February 2007, Nathan Gonzales of the Rothenberg Political Report wrote "Obama's history of voting 'present'" in Springfield, Ill.-even on some of the most controversial and politically explosive issues . . . raises questions . . . Voting 'present' is one of the three options in the Illinois Legislature (along with 'yes' and 'no') but it's almost never an option for the occupant of the Oval Office."

Mr. Gonzales's words were prescient. Barack Obama may now be president, but at times he appears to be merely present. That has been the case with his response to the environmental catastrophe unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico. The president was late recognizing the disaster's magnitude, late in visiting the region, late in approving requests by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, and late in feigning outrage. He has never offered an independent plan to stop the leak.

Mr. Obama also seems disinterested in hearing from experts about the spill. The White House's "Deep Water Horizon Response Timeline" doesn't list a single meeting between Mr. Obama and industry experts, though he did send Energy Secretary Steven Chu and others to Houston May 12 to meet with BP and others.

Yet while the president says his Noble Prize-winning energy secretary has been "examining every contingency," Mr. Chu was clueless about BP's plans to install a cap over the well to funnel oil to a vessel on the surface. As the New York Times reported last Saturday, "After the cap was successfully placed, Mr. Chu wondered aloud why oil was still spewing." BP engineers had to explain that oil was still coming from vents that "would be closed very slowly to ensure that mounting pressure would not force the cap off."

Even now, Mr. Obama looks like a spectator, albeit an angry one, barking at White House aides to "plug the damn hole" (now that's a good idea no one has thought of) and telling NBC's Matt Lauer he's in search of an "ass to kick."

But the main political behind that's being kicked is Mr. Obama's. The latest ABC News/Washington Post poll says Americans give the federal government a 69% negative rating for its handling of the spill, compared to a 62% negative rating for Washington's handling of Katrina in August 2005.

This pattern of being merely present has been apparent almost since the first days of the Obama presidency. He may unveil his mighty teleprompter to help pass what Congress has drafted, but this White House seems strangely disconnected from crafting legislation. For example, last year's stimulus was largely drafted by House Appropriations Chairman David Obey of Wisconsin, one of Congress's most liberal members. As a result, what passed was a wasteful spending bill rather than an economic growth package.

And faced with a growing mountain of debt, Mr. Obama passed the issue off to an ineffectual commission whose report is due after the election. After growing the size of the federal government by a quarter in just over a year, he now says he'd like agencies to try to find 5% cuts in their budgets.

On other controversies-the attempt of high-ranking aides to entice candidates not to challenge incumbent Democratic senators, the details of cap-and-trade legislation, the resolution of big conflicts between the House and Senate versions of financial regulation, and the drafting of comprehensive immigration reform-Mr. Obama appears to be removed, distant and detached, unwilling or unable to provide the adult supervision Washington requires.

The result is that he receives a 38% approval and 52% disapproval rating on his handling of the economy in the latest Economist/YouGov poll. The GOP enjoys a nine-point lead over Democrats in Rasmussen's latest generic ballot.

This is causing the public to revisit concerns it's had about Mr. Obama since he clinched the Democratic nomination in March 2008. Then the ABC/Washington Post Poll reported that 46% of Americans found him too "inexperienced" to be an effective president, the highest number ever for a major party presidential nominee. In October, just before the election, ABC/Washington Post asked the question again: 44% called Mr. Obama too inexperienced. On issue after issue, Mr. Obama is providing plenty of evidence to validate those concerns.

Americans might hope the president's diffidence when it comes to the hard work of government might mitigate his more extreme liberal tendencies. No such luck. Mr. Obama is an odd mixture of passivity and radicalism. He's happy to be a cheerleader for policies (like nationalizing health care) that many Americans find dangerously liberal.

The country has had another president both weak and radical at the same time: Jimmy Carter.

From:

http://www.rove.com/articles/238

Reasoning Arizona

Why is Obama hyperventilating?

By Karl Rove

President Obama is using the new Arizona immigration law to advance a central White House preoccupation: his reelection. At a town-hall meeting in Iowa last April, the president warned Hispanic-Americans that the Arizona statute would open them up to being "harassed" when "you took your kid out to get ice cream." In remarks at a White House Cinco de Mayo reception, he argued that Arizona's law would "undermine fundamental principles," turning Latinos "into subjects of suspicion and abuse." But will Latinos in Arizona be routinely tormented?

Even a quick reading of the statute shows that police can question someone about his or her immigration status only if three conditions are met. First, there has to have been a "lawful stop, detention, or arrest" to enforce another law. Second, during the course of that stop, detention, or arrest, a "reasonable suspicion" has to exist that "the person is an alien." And third, law enforcement "may not consider race, color, or national origin.except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution." This is a tight and reasonable standard.

The Arizona law is so narrowly drawn that it's hard to see how it will affect many people. Those whom it does concern will already have been stopped, detained, or arrested for other lawful purposes. Given Obama's hyperventilation about the law, it's fair to ask: what is Washington's standard for allowing federal law enforcement to ask about immigration status?

When my office put this question to Customs and Border Protection (CPB), we were pointed to "Securing America's Borders at Ports of Entry," a document from the CBP's Office of Field Operations. It says that before asking a person's immigration status, "CBP personnel must effectively blend their own observational techniques and interviewing abilities with situational awareness." This is a lower, less-precise standard than the Arizona law. So if the president considers the Arizona law racist, what does he consider the federal standard? If Obama believes the strict Arizona conditions are likely to lead to racial profiling, what about federal guidelines his administration now enforces?

The Arizona bill's passage in an election year provides a racial wedge to inflame tensions between Latinos and Republicans. Obama would rather do this than the hard work needed to pass comprehensive immigration reform. As president he hasn't laid a foundation for progress on the issue. For example, he devoted only 38 words out of the 7,290 in this year's State of the Union address to the subject. Nor has he tried hard to garner bipartisan support. One Republican senator at the center of the issue confided to me that his last-and only-contact with the White House on the matter was 10 months ago. And the senator, who didn't want to be named discussing private conversations with the administration, says he was the one who raised the topic. (The White House declined to comment for this piece.)

Criticized by Hispanic groups, the president recently held a meeting on immigration with South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham and New York Democrat Chuck Schumer, and then he raised the issue with the GOP Senate caucus. Both were public relations gestures, not serious talks. Three senior Republican aides on both sides of Capitol Hill, who didn't want to be identified talking about a sensitive issue, say there have been no substantive discussions between the White House and Republican congressional leaders on the topic since (or before) the drop-by.

The president has also offered conflicting messages on immigration. Threatened with the loss of Rep. Luis Gutierrez's vote for health-care reform, Obama on March 19 called for "Congress to act at the earliest possible opportunity" and pledged two days later "to do everything in my power to forge a bipartisan consensus this year." But once health care passed, with Gutierrez voting aye, Obama reversed course, saying on April 28 that "there may not be an appetite immediately to dive into another controversial issue" and cautioning that "midterms are coming up." The resulting controversy led Obama to say on May 5, "I want to begin work this year."

Rather than forge a coalition on reform, Obama is content to use the issue to secure Latino votes-if not for Democrats in this fall's contests, then for his reelection. He willingly mischaracterizes the Arizona law because doing so benefits his party and himself. But on matters involving race, the president's obligation is to unify America, not add to tensions. Obama's political handling of this sensitive issue is shameful.

From:

http://www.rove.com/articles/239

The More We Learn, The Worse It Gets

by James Caretta

This week, we learned that the Obama administration is orchestrating a $125 million propaganda campaign to sell the recently enacted health-care law to the public. That effort will be funded by labor unions and other groups from the Democratic political orbit. It comes on top of the misleading government mailer sent to the nation's seniors, at the expense of taxpayers, touting the supposed benefits of ObamaCare for the elderly. On Tuesday, the president himself will join the fray again to make the sales pitch, this time promoting the colossal waste of taxpayer money associated with $250 per senior bribes to be issued this summer and fall.

The problem the White House has, however, has never been insufficient public relations spin. The problem is the substance. Americans care deeply about their health care, and they have seen right through the Democratic rhetoric on ObamaCare from day one. They know that it is a poorly conceived experiment, built on the flawed assumption that the problems in U.S. health care can be solved with heavier regulation, subsidization, and micro-management from Washington, D.C.

In Medicare, the results of the new law will be disastrous. ObamaCare will cut payments to the private insurance component of the program (called Medicare Advantage, or MA) by nearly $200 billion over 10 years. The chief actuary of the program says this cut will eventually drive 7 million seniors - many with low-incomes - out of the plan they would prefer to enroll in. And it will mean thousands of dollars in benefit reductions for every MA enrollee, beginning next year. These seniors won't be silenced with patronizing and one-time checks. In addition, the new law imposes arbitrary price cutting for all manner of Medicare services, which the chief actuary says will harm access to care by forcing scores of institutions to stop taking Medicare beneficiaries.

Last week, we learned that the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) has postponed issuing guidance on the ill-conceived "medical-loss ratio" requirement in the new law because, as passed by Congress, it will cause massive and unnecessary disruption to millions of current insurance enrollees. One estimate is that 1 to 2 million people with individual insurance will lose their coverage if the requirement is imposed because national insurers will be forced to exit the market to avoid large business losses.

The president has said repeatedly that Americans will get to keep the insurance they have today if they like it. But that's quite clearly not going to be the case. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, of the American Action Forum, has released a new study that shows some 35 million Americans will get bumped from job-based coverage under the new law and be forced into the new government-managed system. That's because the massive new subsidies promised by the government will make dropping insurance unavoidable for thousands of employers. He also predicts the migration out of employer plans will drive up the overall federal costs dramatically, adding another $500 billion over ten years to the costs projected by the Congressional Budget Office for the bill.

Perhaps that why CBO's Director, Doug Elmendorf, is saying that the federal government's health costs are still unsustainable, even after passage of the new law, despite repeated presidential promises that ObamaCare would solve our budget problems by painlessly "bending the cost curve."

The truth is, the more we learn about ObamaCare, the worse it gets. It's filled with budgetary gimmicks and flawed assumptions that will bankrupt the U.S. treasury. Its taxes will force deep cuts in employment in the medical device and other industries. Restaurants and other employers will have strong incentives to avoid hiring workers from low income households in order to lessen the burden from the law's mandates and penalties. It will disrupt insurance for millions of Americans who are perfectly happy with the coverage they have today. And the government's clumsy cost-cutting efforts will undermine the quality of American medicine.

Most Americans already instinctively understand all of this. But it's also clear that the administration and its allies will spend millions trying to persuade them that up is down when it comes to health care. We have launched this web site to set the record straight. ObamaCareWatch.org pulls together all of the best evidence and analysis about the legislation, as well as relevant news items and commentary, in an accessible and searchable format for anyone to use as they need to. Our aim is to provide Americans with the facts so that they can hold those who sponsored and passed ObamaCare accountable for what they have done.

From:

http://fixhealthcarepolicy.com/in-the-news/the-more-we-learn-the-worse-it-gets/

[It is my understanding that $18 million of taxpayer money was spent to sell Obamacare to the seniors; and the $250 bribe]

AP Essay: Gov't Flunks Test Of Trust In Gulf

(AP) WASHINGTON

Washington, - Nobody led.

Not the president of the United States. Not the chief executive of BP. Not Congress, federal agencies or local elected officials. From its fiery beginning, the Gulf oil spill has stood as a concentrated reminder of why, over four decades, Americans have lost faith in nearly every national institution.

Like Hurricane Katrina, a natural disaster that caused voters to question then-President George W. Bush's credibility, the poisonous geyser at the Gulf's floor threatens to undermine Barack Obama's presidency. More alarmingly, the spill exacerbates the worry that this nation founded on the principle of trust now faces a crisis of faith in its public and private institutions government and big business particularly.

"This spill, it's another blow to the body politic," says John Baick, professor of history at Western New England College in Springfield, Mass. It is, he says, another excuse to be cynical and uninvolved "exactly the opposite of what has always been the American zeitgeist, a sense that we, collectively and through our institutions, can be something greater than ourselves."

It's hard to summon that rising-sun aspiration when the unemployment rate hovers near double digits. When wars in Afghanistan and Iraq continue unabated. When terrorists take aim from inside and outside U.S. borders. When the U.S. Treasury writes massive IOUs to China and public schools write off millions of poorly educated children.

Then along comes the oil spill to remind people of why they don't trust leaders and why so many Americans, looking for information and action, are turning instead to blogs, Twitter feeds and their friends.

Consider this revealing scene: With reddish-brown oil globs washing ashore at Fort Morgan, Ala., Faith Kaiser and Bertice McPherson decided to do what generations of Americans have done when government can't or won't tackle a big problem: They handled it themselves.

Before paid cleanup crews started work, the volunteers pulled on rubber gloves and picked up the gooey mess. As they did so, Kaiser said this: "Six months from now the government will lie to us and say everything is fine."

How did we get to this point where people EXPECT their government to lie to them? And what does it say about where we're headed?

___

At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin famously observed that he had been trying to determine throughout the debate whether a sun painted on George Washington's chair was rising or setting. "But now at length," he said, "I have the happiness to know that it is a rising and not a setting sun."

And with that, the Founders created a nation upon the fundamental principle of trust. They had an untested belief in the ability of people to lead themselves to choose leaders from their own ranks and to hold those leaders accountable.

Even our currency, once backed by the promise of precious metal, is today built upon a faith-based system called "fiat" a Latin term meaning "let it be done."

In a dictatorship, people can lose faith in institutions and the apparatus of state can step in. But democracy can't survive without faith in its institutions because the people, by definition, create and control them.

While there were surely crises of faith during the Civil War, the Progressive Era and others times of tumult, the early 20th century was marked by a reflexive sense of trust in the nation's institutions. Even as Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal vastly expanded the government safety net, a new breed of private charities and social reformers didn't bother waiting on government to help the poor, infirm and abused.

But things started to change in the mid-20th century, when polls showed a steady decline on the question of whether Americans trusted government in Washington to do what is right.

From 1958, when more than 70 percent said they trusted government most or all of the time, the trend line steadily drops until it hits the mid-20s in the post-Watergate era.

The trust line creeps up for a few years without getting nowhere near the 1958 mark and plunges again in 1994, the year President Bill Clinton's political faltering caused Democrats to lose control of Congress after more than 40 years in power.

Just two months ago, a Pew Research Center poll showed that only 22 percent of the public say they can trust the government in Washington always or most of the time, among the lowest measures in a half a century.

"This spill has just got to make matters worse," said Pew pollster Andy Kohut. "People are asking, Who's in charge? Why can't they plug it? What going on here?"

Just 25 percent of the public has a favorable opinion of Congress. Favorability ratings also have fallen significantly for seven of 13 federal agencies included in the Pew survey, including the Environmental Protection Agency.

             White House word cloud

Faith in institutions across the board has fallen since the 1970s, at least among the sample of institutions tracked by Gallup: churches, the U.S. Supreme Court, banks, public schools, newspapers, Congress and organized labor.

One of the least-trusted institutions is big business, no surprise after corporate wrongdoing and lax government oversight combined to help create the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Sixteen percent of Americans said they had a "great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in big corporations in 2009, compared to 32 percent 30 years prior.

The only exception to this trend is the military, which has increased from a 54 percent favorability rating in the post-Vietnam era to 82 percent this year.

Part of the problem: Americans today might expect too much of government and other institutions. Take the oil spill, for example. Accidents happen and, right or wrong, the government is not in the drilling or drill-capping business.

"On a psychological level, people are less likely to take responsibility for things these days," said Lou Manza, professor of psychology at Lebanon Valley College in Annville, Pa. "So if something goes wrong, it's somebody else's fault and somebody has to fix it."

___

"I take responsibility. It is my job to make sure that everything is done to shut this down," Barack Obama declared a few days ago.

In the same news conference, Obama also acknowledged his administration could have done better in dealing with the biggest oil spill in the nation's history and misjudged the industry's ability to cope with a worst-case scenario. It was a new twist for the U.S. presidency, an office normally filled by men who accept responsibility or admit fault only grudgingly.

Obama may be recognizing that accountability breeds trust.

Less than two years removed from an election victory built on his promise to fix Washington's broken institutions, Obama now seems a captive of them. His administration's regulators cozied up to the oil industry before the spill and moved slowly afterward to seize control. The president himself often seemed detached.

Who else dropped the ball?

BP and its chief executive, Tony Hayward. As his company's oil filled up the Gulf, he had the audacity to complain that "I'd like my life back."

The Minerals Management Service, the regulatory agency that failed to clean up its act despite Obama's promise during the campaign to end the "cozy relationship" between the oil industry and federal regulators.

                     BP Word Cloud

Even the Coast Guard the one agency that survived Katrina with its image enhanced is now being criticized for its lack of transparency and command.

And the public stews. Listen to Billy Nugesser, president of the coastal Plaquemines Parish: "We are dying a slow death here."

The public's unconditional faith in national institutions is dying, too.

We can't buy a "Shrek" drinking glass at McDonald's because it might be laced with cadmium. We can't talk about the Catholic church without wondering whether something untoward might be afoot. We can't watch a home run without wondering if our pro-ballplayer heroes are juiced.

Which may be why an umpire's blown call denying a rookie pitcher a historic "perfect game" became a viral story this week. Americans saw in the umpire's apology and the pitcher's gracious acceptance a sign that one of their institutions the made-by-America game of baseball still includes leaders who do the right thing even when the situation is less than perfect.

From their government, Americans don't expect perfection. But the system requires that people at least have faith in their political leaders to be competent and accountable.

"If people don't believe, if people don't give, if people don't trust, they will pick the politicians who are the loudest rather than the most sincere," said Baick, the history professor. "They will pick the rabble rouser rather than the technocrat who gets things done."

They will turn away from government a government of the people and by the people who must fundamentally believe that their leaders are, in the end, for the people.

From:

http://www.wkrg.com/gulf_oil_spill/article/ap-essay-govt-flunks-test-of-trust-in-gulf/893872/Jun-07-2010_9-04-am/

Krauthammer on Afghanistan

He is, of course. If we had this level of casualties in the Bush administration the press would be a lot more hostile. Democrats in Congress would be a lot more hostile.

But I think he has hurt the cause in this way. As Mara said, a lot of the people in Afghanistan who help us are now under attack. They know if the enemy returns to the village, they will be slaughtered if they help the Americans. And I'm not sure that peasants in Afghanistan are as sophisticated as Mara in understanding that when a president announces a deadline to begin a withdrawal that it's only a feint to the American left. They read it as the Americans start leaving in July of next year. That is just about a year, and if I help the Taliban, they will be here in August of 2011. The Americans are going to start leaving, and I'm going to be beheaded if I help the Americans today. I think that is one of the reasons why it's harder to get the assistance of the locals. The reason the surge succeeded in Iraq is because we had a president of extreme stubbornness and it was understood in the region he didn't have a timeline and he was going to go with the surge until it succeed or failed. And once Iraqis understood that, they started to give us intelligence, which created a virtuous cycle of increasing security, more intelligence, and ultimately success. And that is in jeopardy if you announce a timeline in advance as we have in Afghanistan.

This is the final comment by Charles on Afghanistan taken from:

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report/transcript/obama-and-bp-latest-change-strategy-afghanistan?page=1

Obama Oil Tax Proposals

Yet, the Obama Administration is proposing to do just that – abolish or revise virtually all of these existing tax incentives for our domestic energy industry, while adding new taxes as well. Here is what President Obama’s proposals would do:

•            Repeal expensing of intangible drilling and development costs (IDC)

•            Repeal percentage depletion

•            Repeal the passive loss exception for working interests in natural gas and oil properties

•            Repeal the countercyclical marginal well tax credit

•                                             Repeal the enhanced oil recovery tax credit

•                                             Repeal the manufacturing tax deduction for natural gas and oil companies

•                                             Repeal the deduction for tertiary injectants

•                                             Increase the geological and geophysical amortization period for independent producers to seven years

•                                             Levy a new excise tax on Gulf of Mexico natural gas and oil production

Some have said we are looking at a 512% tax increase on oil. Candidate Obama himself has suggested that, under his cap and trade plan, energy prices will skyrocket.

Do not think that the oil companies will simply make a lot less profit. This money, for the most part, will come out of our pockets.

Apart from the final couple comments, this came from:

http://www.twc.state.tx.us/svcs/commrs/051209chr.pdf

See also this article:

Barack Obama plans to punish BP with tax hike as Gulf spill worsens

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7124502.ece (Why is there only a UK article like this?)

Dear Helen: From One American Lebanese Journalist To another.

by Brigitte Gabriel

Dear Helen Thomas:

With a great deal of disappointment I watched your interview, replayed over and over on television, in which you said that Jews should "go back home to Poland and Germany." I find it both appalling and unsettling that someone with your level of journalistic accomplishment would lack a basic knowledge of Middle Eastern history.

So please allow me to make the case as to why Israel has a historical, legal and moral right to exist as a Jewish state in the Middle East.

According to the Arab-Palestinian-Muslim narrative, Israel is an alien colony recently planted in the Arab world by American and European imperialism. This narrative recognizes no history prior to the arrival of the first Zionist pioneers in the 1880's, and emphatically denies any ancient historical connection of the Jewish people to the land of Israel. This is the central lie, offered to justify uncompromising opposition to Jewish national rights. It's almost as if they actually expect people to think the word "Israel" was invented in modern times. What is alarming is that their increasingly successful rewrite of history has taken hold in minds supposedly as informed as yours.

The historical truth is carved in Egyptian stone. According to a well-known hieroglyphic inscription, the tribes of Israel were a significant, established presence in Canaan no later than 1212 BCE. There is a vast body of archaeological evidence that demonstrates the ancient Israelite/Jewish presence in Israel/Judea as far back as 925 BCE. This historical presence is verified in the ancient records of the Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Byzantine and Moslem Empires. The Arab conquest did not occur until 638 CE (AD). An exercise in elementary arithmetic reveals that the Jewish people were there eighteen and one-half centuries before the arrival of the Muslim Arabs.

Despite being conquered many times, the Jewish people have had a constant, uninterrupted presence in the Land of Israel for over thirty centuries. The Arabs and Islam have been there less than fourteen centuries. It has conveniently been forgotten that the Jews and Christians were there first.

Furthermore, in the thirty centuries preceding the re-establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, there have been only two periods when there was an independent, internationally recognized state in the area that now comprises Israel. Both of them were Jewish states. Even when this land was part of the Arab empire (638 CE/AD through 1099 CE/AD), there was never an independent Arab state in "Palestine," by that name or any other.

No wonder Arabs are donating millions of dollars to U.S. colleges for Middle Eastern schools of study. They have a lot of hard historical evidence to rewrite in the young minds of students, most of whom enter college with little or no knowledge of ancient Middle Eastern history.

The Jewish people have a distinct national identity. Religion is only one of the unique characteristics that defines this national identity. In addition, the Jewish people have a separate and distinct language, culture and customs, with a documented history of development over the past three thousand years. The Jewish people have created a vast body of art and literature, both secular and religious, which reflects the connection of the Jewish people to the land of Israel.

The Dead Sea Scrolls, written when the descendents of the Maccabees ruled an independent Judea, demonstrate that the Jewish people, both in the Holy Land and in exile all over the world, have been reading and writing secular and sectarian literature in the same distinct language for over two thousand years.

In contrast, the Arabic language and culture and the Muslim religion of the Palestinians are essentially indistinguishable from the wider Arab world. Prior to the mid 1800's there is no trace whatsoever of uniquely "Palestinian" art, literature, music, or any other manifestation of a distinct culture. If you find this hard to believe, try to think of one "Palestinian" book, or author, or artist, from the year 1300 through the year 1800. That's a period of 500 years.

There must be one book written by a "Palestinian" Arab author. There must be one painting by a "Palestinian" Arab artist. Guess what? There are none.

If you still don't believe it, ask a Palestinian nationalist or a Columbia University professor of Middle Eastern history to name one. The most honest response you will get is silence. The most likely response you will get is a lie.

People can propagate lies but they cannot erase historical facts. For more historical facts about the Palestinians and how they destroyed your own country of heritage, Lebanon, and how the Israelis helped and protected the Christians during the war, I invite you to pick up a copy of my New York Times bestseller Because They Hate. It's never too late to learn and catch up on history, even at 90.

From:

http://bigjournalism.com/bgabriel/2010/06/10/dear-helen-from-one-american-lebanese-journalist-to-another/

Saudi Arabia gives Israel clear skies to attack Iranian nuclear sites

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7148555.ece

No doubt, you have heard that there are various groups who protest new Walmarts. It turns out that Walmart rivals (e.g., Safeway, Supervalu and Ahold) hire a firm called Satin Consulting Group, and SCG hires people to protest.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704875604575280414218878150.html

Environmentalists give Obama a pass on his handling of the gulf oil spill:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38451.html

Democrat out-of-control spending needs to stop:

http://biggovernment.com/jboehner/2010/06/12/washington-democrats-out-of-control-spending-spree-needs-to-stop-now/

Olbermann claims that Alvin Green was a Republican plant:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntlp4fTell4

Hollywood and Obama:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/celebrity-news/102821-blogger-face-off-has-hollywoods-love-for-obama-ridden-off-in-the-sunset

Obama should resign:

http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/06/12/barack-obama-should-resign-reader-post/

Additional Sources

Labor unions and Jones Act continue to block oil cleanup in the gulf:

http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/06/11/labor-unions-and-jones-act-continues-to-block-oil-spill-cleanup/

Joseph Palermo’s column on Glenn Beck.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/glenn-beck-historian-for_b_591353.html

Tavis Smiley’s interview with atheist Ali:

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/archive/201005/20100525_ali.html

North Korean threats:

http://preview.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-12/north-korea-threatens-all-out-military-strike-on-south-s-loudspeakers.html

Obama and BP both turned down Dutch skimmers on day 3:

http://mayrantandrave.com/2010/06/09/obama-administration-and-bp-turned-down-dutch-oil-skimmers-on-day-3/

Obama calls for more emergency aid (for state and local governments unable to balance their budgets):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/12/AR2010061204152.html

Boobgate:

http://bigjournalism.com/rtrzupek/2010/06/11/liberal-booboisie-journos-just-cant-intrude-enough-into-palins-private-life/

Rush is still on vacation this past week.

Permanent Underclass: 47% of the Country Pays No Income Tax

RUSH: Nearly half of US households escape the federal income tax. "About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That's according to projections by the Tax Policy Center." By the way, this bunch, they're an outgrowth of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution. They are a far left bunch. This is not some middle of the road think tank reporting this. This is a far left group, and they're happy about it. "Most people still are required to file returns by the April 15 deadline. The penalty for skipping it is limited to the amount of taxes owed, but it's still almost always better to file," the AP suggests here. "That's the only way to get a refund of all the income taxes withheld by employers. In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009."

I have news for you. If you earn $60,000 a year, you are in the upper 10% of wage earners in this country. Fifty thousand and a family of four, you effectively pay no income tax. The earned income tax credit, all the child exemptions, and in some states you don't even have to have a child to get the child exemption, you just have to know one. I'm not making it up. Or you have to visit one. In fact, in some states, I forget which state it is, read so much about this today, one state gives you an earned income tax credit or some child tax credit if you're a father who no longer lives with the kid, but you still get credit for it. Now, that's going to promote family togetherness, right? The deadbeat dad qualifies for a child tax credit in certain states. "'We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing,' said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation. The vast majority of people who escape federal income taxes still pay other taxes, including federal payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare, and excise taxes on gasoline --" oh, okay, so we're supposed to feel better 'cause they at least are paying other taxes.

"That helps explain the country's aversion to taxes, said Clint Stretch, a tax policy expert Deloitte Tax. He said many people simply look at the difference between their gross pay and their take-home pay and blame the government for the disparity." Well, yeah! Who else is responsible for it? "'It's not uncommon for people to think that their Social Security taxes, their 401(k) contributions, their share of employer health premiums, all of that stuff in their mind gets lumped into income taxes,' Stretch said. The federal income tax is the government's largest source of revenue, raising more than $900 billion -- or a little less than half of all government receipts -- in the budget year that ended last Sept. 30." Wow. That's incredible. It was almost that much at the end of the eighties when Reagan lowered tax rates, almost exactly that much. I don't think all of that $900 billion was income tax revenue, but it was close. So anyway, there's the sad details of all this: jobless numbers up, 1.2 million people homeless, 47% paying no income tax. What recovery? Where is the laser-like focus on jobs? It doesn't exist. He's either incompetent or doing it on purpose. It doesn't matter which at this point. What matters is that the policies of this regime be stopped and reversed.

To the phones we go. Jacksonville, Florida. Steve, nice to have you on the program, sir, and welcome.

CALLER: Thank you, Rush. Good to talk to you.

RUSH: You bet.

CALLER: I got an idea here. First of all let me say I'm a very conservative person and I believe that the government should spend no more than they take in.

RUSH: Right.

CALLER: But with the national debt and the way it's still growing --

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: -- and the inability of Obama and the Democrats to try to reduce it at all, I'm getting more interested in this value-added tax, but I think that two things need to happen. One is that the value-added tax, a hundred percent of what's collected be dedicated to reducing the national debt.

RUSH: Won't happen.

CALLER: Well, I know but needs to have some controls on it.

RUSH: Won't happen.

CALLER: And it would be effective for a specified period of time, say five years or ten years.

RUSH: Won't happen.

CALLER: And then once the debt's reduced it goes away.

RUSH: Well, that won't happen, either.

CALLER: Yeah, I know.

RUSH: The debt won't be reduced. Yesterday I had a story from this same outfit that put out the story on 47% of the population not paying income tax, the Tax Policy Center, and they had their geeks do all kinds of research, and they found that there is no level of taxation within our current tax structure that would come anywhere close to reducing the debt. Even they admit that the only way to reduce the debt is to stop spending money we don't have. We cannot tax ourselves into prosperity, and we cannot tax ourselves outta debt. Do either of those make any sense? The more money you take out of the private sector, the slower the economy, the less revenue is generated, the fewer taxpayers there are. It doesn't make any sense at all. None of this that's being done makes any sense. In countries in Europe where they've had the VAT, the VAT rate keeps rising, federal spending, government spending keeps rising.

The number two job of any elected official is spending money. The first job is to get reelected. So the VAT tax, it might work, if they stop the income tax. If they replace the income tax with the VAT tax, I mean that's a fair rate, everybody pays the same rate, somewhat elective because it's a consumption-based tax. You get credits for -- well, you don't, the consumer, but people along the supply line, from manufacturer to retail sale, they get a credit for the tax in the previous step of the way, at least in some countries. It depends on how they would set this up. But I mean if they replace the federal income tax with it, get rid of the tax code, then maybe, much fairer, much simpler, you wouldn't even need to file a tax form. That will never happen, because the tax code is the single greatest power for social architecture that US Congress members have.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I just got an e-mail from somebody who says, "You blew it on the VAT tax. The Democrats are going to make a commercial out of what you said praising it." Did I not make it clear that if we got rid of the income tax, the VAT tax wouldn't be a bad idea? Did I not make that clear? I know that they parse me and take me out of context all over the place, but let them try, after that opening monologue, let them try and suggest to anybody that I support the VAT tax or any other tax increase. That's not gonna fly with anybody.

This is Eric in Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania. Great to have you on the EIB Network.

CALLER: Hey there, Rush. I'm calling with a little bit of a crisis of conscience right now.

RUSH: Oh, no.

CALLER: As I was explaining to Mr. Snerdley, I did my taxes actually early this year in February, and looking at the withholding, the federal government withheld $900 roughly in taxes. We received a refund for $2,300. So we're part of that crew that now pays no federal income tax. We have no federal income tax liability.

RUSH: Wait a second.

CALLER: Yes?

RUSH: For the whole year you had $900 withheld?

CALLER: Yes, sir.

RUSH: And you got a refund of $2,300?

CALLER: Yes, sir.

RUSH: Did you apply for any credits to get this refund or did it just happen?

CALLER: Well, I did it on one of these free online services that the IRS steers you to, and I answered every question truthfully, which you have to do. I don't itemize because we have no deductions to speak of. We own our home, and so I truthfully answered every question posed to me on the 1040-A form and at the end it told me I'm getting back $2,300.

RUSH: Holy smokes, what a deal.

CALLER: Now, I was born and raised in New York to European American parents, you know, second generation with a certain work ethic and this is my crisis of conscience. After moving to Pennsylvania, my wife and I, until we got situated, we were paying privately for medical insurance, and it was about $400 a month.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: Now, at that point we were living off the proceeds of our home sale in New York.

RUSH: Yeah, yeah.

CALLER: Within a month of moving here, Blue Cross raised their rates another hundred dollars, and I called, and I said, "Look, you gotta do something here. We're depleting our savings." So we found a plan that's based on your income, and at that point it was nothing. We had no money coming in at that moment. My wife is a nurse, so we knew she'd find something immediately. But in the meantime, we took this policy, and we were paying for ourselves and our daughter privately, with no help, we were able to manage the premium they gave us. Within a few weeks of accepting that plan, CHIP contacted me, solicited me and said, "Hey, I see you're paying for your daughter yourself. You don't have to. We'll do it for you, and we'll give you a lot better coverage than you have now."

RUSH: Wait a minute. By CHIP you mean the Children's Health Insurance Program in Pennsylvania?

CALLER: Yeah. They solicited us and said the plan we have is minimal, it's for catastrophic, you know, it's very minimal coverage, no prescriptions, no eyeglasses, nothing, and then CHIP called us and said, "Why are you paying for it yourself? You're eligible based on your income for CHIP." So, you know, only a fool would say, "I'll keep the crappier coverage for my daughter."

RUSH: You just have one kid?

CALLER: Just one daughter.

RUSH: Now, it can't be earned income credits -- (crosstalk)

CALLER: My wife works. So we had a child credit, we had an earned income credit, I have just burned through my first extension of unemployment, I am now working on my second extension of unemployment.

RUSH: Oh, so you're outta work now?

CALLER: Yes.

RUSH: Well, what did you earn, if you don't mind my asking?

CALLER: We made, I think, $33,000 last year.

RUSH: Well, this fits, then.

CALLER: Just to give you a little bit of background, we left New York at the height of the real estate market and made a good chunk of change on our home. So we moved here and were mortgage free by the time we were 42. So we own our home outright, so we're able to live on my wife's salary as a nurse. And she works part time, we're able to enjoy our home to raise our child without the help of day care or anything like that, but she's getting older now, and she needs us less, so when I think about reentering the workforce, I look at what I would have to make in order to, you know, pay for health insurance --

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: -- and quite honestly, Rush, to make it worth my while to get off my ass, and now I've got the federal government sending me this huge refund that I did absolutely nothing to earn.

RUSH: So what are you going to do with it? I got 30 seconds, how you going to resolve your crisis of conscience?

CALLER: You know what, that's why I was calling you. I was hoping you'd have something for me.

RUSH: Well, I'll take it!

CALLER: (laughing)

RUSH: I never get any money back from the SOBs.

CALLER: Well, I joke with my friends that do pay taxes and I say, "Thanks so much for contributing to the Let-Eric-Stay-Home fund."

RUSH: You fit the statistic.

CALLER: But I'm disgusted by this.

RUSH: Well, I understand how you feel. So are the rest of us who are paying it to you.

CALLER: Right, and if you saw pictures of my home you would be further incensed because I have a beautiful home.

RUSH: Well, I think you ought to continue to feel guilty as I am mad.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, that call from Eric in Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania, a teachable moment, very illustrative. You know that this regime is trying to create a permanent underclass. That's how you do it. The guy made under 39 grand, that's one of the target levels, his total income was 30, paid $900 in taxes, got $2,300 back. You have to make being poor comfortable. You have to make it comfortable and that's what this is attempting to do. This is how you create a permanent underclass, folks. All of this is by design.

RUSH: Let me ask you this question, folks. What's going to happen when that 47% who are not paying any income taxes becomes 50%, which is certain to happen during the Obama regime? All you have to know about that is that a family of four making $88,000 a year gets their health care insurance subsidized with the new health insurance bill, 88 grand, a family of four will have their health insurance subsidized by everybody who makes more than $88,000 a year. April 15th is no longer going to be tax day. It's going to become Christmas Day to the 50% of the people who don't pay income taxes who are going to soon realize, if they don't already realize it, that tax increases will lead to a better lifestyle for them. So this is how you do it, this is how you create a permanent underclass. We had a call, if you're just joining us, a guy from Pennsylvania made $30,000 last year, had $900 in taxes withheld, his income tax refund is $2,300 because of all of the earned income tax credits and child tax credits and so forth that he qualified for using IRS rules. And he said he had a crisis of conscience, didn't know what to do with this because he thinks the system sucks. But it's tough to give the money back.

My grandfather, his whole life, tried to give his Social Security check back and they wouldn't take it. So he gave it to charity. Created an account, just put the checks in there every month, let it build up and gave the money to charity at some point. But regardless, you have to make being poor comfortable, and this is how you do it. Eighty-eight grand a year, which is not poor, your health insurance is subsidized under this regime's health care plan. Fifty thousand a year and less you pay no income tax. Gotta make it comfortable, though, so people will just be satisfied enough to stay there, and then hopefully, if you are the one designing the permanent underclass, you want them to quickly learn that their well-being depends on future tax increases.

Now, the super rich, they're protected by their friends in Congress. The people that are rich with no income. You ever wonder why all these rich Democrats always support tax increases? 'Cause they don't pay them, either, because they don't have earned income. I'm talking about the super rich who inherited a bunch of money or worked for a lot of money and then retired and have that nest egg of gazillions of dollars and it earns investment income. They are gonna get taxed now with Medicare on that, 3.8% for the first time, but they take care of their rich buddies, they take care of themselves, and they're taking care of the non-producers.

RUSH: Therese in Littleton, Colorado, I'm glad you called. You're on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Thank you, Rush. I am furious. I've been trying to get on your program for years, since 1993 I've been listening to you, I'd love to tell you how much I love you and how much you've inspired me and changed my life, but I don't have time because I'm furious with that gentleman that called. I am so tired of people looking and saying, "Oh, I'm guilty, but then doing nothing about it." You know what, it's about time the people get off the dole when they don't need to be on it because they're going to the government, and knowing that they're going to their neighbors to get a handout versus just getting off their butts and working. And, you know what? I'm just furious. My husband and I have made less than $15,000 -- well, less than $20,000 the past two years in a row because we've worked our asses off up to that point to get him through a doctorate program. We opened up our own business this year, we're being hit by this insurance thing, too, because we're an upper cervical spinal clinic and we're cash only, because we refuse to be dictated to by insurance companies and by the government, it is hard work to be a business owner, it is hard work to go out and make it on your own.

But I refuse to do it any other way. I look to my family for the support that they've given me, I look to you to empower us to be able to say, "Yeah, we can do this if we work hard." And I'm just furious at being in my early thirties and being hit (unintelligible) our nation. What has happened? You know, you said two days ago, I think it was, or three days ago you asked about what we think about the generation around us, and I have to say, the people that we associate with, our friends, are very intelligent people, and they work hard and most of them are business owners and we can really commiserate with one another right now. And it's just infuriating, what is happening. I was going to call you and I was going to say, you know what, we're a really awesome generation, and then I hear that phone call from that gentleman who is so happy to go to the government to get assistance.

RUSH: No, no, now, wait. He was not happy. He said he had a crisis of conscience because he didn't like it at all, he didn't know what to do with it.

CALLER: Then stop. Why do you need to listen to somebody else to clear your conscience?

RUSH: No, no, wait, wait, hold a second. It's more insidious than that. He didn't try to get this. He went to the IRS website, he filled out his tax form as they directed, put in all the numbers that they said he needed to put in and he was shocked to get his $2,300 refund check when his total tax liability was only $900. The government arranges it. This is how you go about creating a permanent underclass. Your anger should not be at this guy. Now, there are some people out there who are gaming the system this way, and your anger at them is justified. Your real anger ought to be at the regime.

CALLER: It is. Believe me, it is. I'm just tired of it all. I look to the future and there's a part of me that just doesn't know what to do, and then at the same time, I know that there are intelligent, strong, self-motivated people that would never, never go do that, and those are the people that are being demonized like you've had so many times, by the media.

RUSH: Damn right.

CALLER: I just can't believe it. There are days that I just shake my head, I think, how is this happening?

RUSH: Look at what they're doing to this mine owner up in West Virginia. They are trying to criminalize this guy, not because of his violations, but because he donated to a legal political party, legally, the Republicans.

CALLER: Yeah.

RUSH: This Blankenship guy, they are trying to criminalize him. Meanwhile, Rahm Emanuel can stand up at a banquet at the head table, start yelling the names of politicians and stab the table with a knife and shout "dead" and nobody gives a care about that. But they're trying to destroy this guy. They're trying to criminalize work. They're trying to say that you and I and everybody else like us that work, we're the ones that are greedy. We're the ones that need to have our taxes raised because life's been too fair for us, and these poor people that don't have anything -- the theft that is being performed on us is called virtue and compassion.

CALLER: It's just outrageous. And, you know, Rush, in opening this clinic that we've opened, the people that come to us, 'cause we're cash only, the people that come to us are typically people that are either paying individual insurance so they get it or they want to take their health into their own hands and so they see the value. And it's our patients that, you know, we help our patients that have insurance get reimbursement. And they're the ones that come in and say, "Why aren't you taking insurance? Why aren't you doing this?" And they actually tend to not see -- because their employer is paying their insurance for them -- they don't see it, and so they look at it in a different way, and it's amazing to me because I think that sense of entitlement, how do we get to people -- the more that you have a sense of entitlement, you have to keep looking at who is giving you that sense of entitlement? And if you give them that right, then soon enough they're going to dictate, and like you said, they're gonna act like they are compassionate and they're doing it with this whole health care thing, and you just wait, and then they're gonna screw you because you've looked to them and you've said, "We want you to be the provider." And guess what? They're going to screw you. It just blows my mind that people don't see it.

RUSH: Well, now, wait, wait just a second. If you look at the polling data out there on any issue or at Pelosi, Obama, or Reid, you'll see that a clear majority does get it. They may not get every stinking detail --

CALLER: Right.

RUSH: -- but they know something's not right, and most of them are very sophisticated in their knowledge of what's going on here, and that is why the Democrats are going to lose bigger than they have ever lost before in November. It's going to be the equivalent of a political bloodletting. All Obama has to do is his next agenda item and he alone keeps the agenda item up and the momentum against him up. Don't think you're alone out there. You really aren't. The real question is what's going to happen when the under 50% who pay taxes stop paying them? What's going to happen when they shrug? That's the question everybody should ask.

Higher taxes will not eliminate the deficit:

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/higher-taxes-wont-eliminate-the-deficit

CBO: Present fiscal policy is unsustainable:

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/91161-congressional-budget-office-fiscal-policy-is-unsustainable

The Disconnect Between Liberalism and Americanism

RUSH: Now, we've been told here that the hearings for the socialist Elena Kagan for the US Supreme Court will start on June the 26th. Now, the Democrats delayed our nominees, they blocked many of them, but for a huge lifetime appointment like Kagan they do this. And the public is going to be outraged if they understand what is occurring here. Patrick Leahy from Vermont, a radical leftist, hell-bent on pushing this woman through fast before her radicalism is understood by the public. That's exactly what's going on. That's why you're not allowed to know what her brother Irving does in his classroom. So what we have here, and I've been thinking about this long and hard. I came up with the phrase and then I asked myself for a couple of seconds, should I actually use the phrase? And I've decided that I'm going to use the phrase. What we have here, not just in the Kagan nomination but throughout our country, is a disconnect between liberalism and Americanism. I can think of no more succinct way to explain this. The truth is what really irritates people these days, particularly the left. It's just going to irritate them like they can't believe.

The disconnect between liberalism and Americanism. Says it all. The Kagan nomination shows it, the state dinner thing tonight, the way they're handling that. Obama going to Ohio yesterday, 15-point-something percent unemployment in Ohio. And Obama goes in and starts talking about how wonderful things are in the country and things are coming back. It's like pouring salt on the wound. Foreclosures and repossessions are at an all-time high, yet we're in an economic recovery. And all this is great news for Obama. It's the disconnect between liberalism and Americanism, and they clearly are two separate things.

Since there are some links you may want to go back to from time-to-time, I am going to begin a list of them here. This will be a list to which I will add links each week.

Janine Turner’s website (I’m serious; and the website is serious too). This is if you have an interest in real American history:

http://constitutingamerica.org/

Obamacare Watch:

http://www.obamacarewatch.org/

Since this will be with us for a long time, the timeline of the BP gulf oil spill:

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/05/obamas-katrina-illustrated-timeline.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/epic/bpdot/7816715/Gulf-of-Mexico-oil-spill-timeline.html

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/05/bp-gulf-oil-spill-timeline.php

This is cool: a continuous timeline of the spill, with the daily info and the expansion of the oil, and the response:

http://www.esri.com/services/disaster-response/gulf-oil-spill-2010/timeline-advanced.html

Do you want to watch what is happening on our border? These are actual videos of observations cams along the border:

http://secureborderintel.org/

http://borderinvasionpics.com/

A conservative worldview:

http://www.divineviewpoint.com/sane/

http://www.theamericanright.com/forums/index.php

http://politipage.com/

Celebrity Jihad (no, really). The headline to one story: Heroic Helen Thomas Tells Jews to "Get the Hell Out of Palestine," Go Back to Germany, Poland. Under the heading harlots, there are bunches of photos of starlets showing cleavage or wearing bikinis. This site appears to be deeply tongue-in-cheek.

The story on Helen Thomas:

Legendary White House reporter and founding member of the Muppets Helen Thomas made a heroic stand against the Zionists late last month, telling Jews to "get the hell out of Palestine" and to go home to "Poland and Germany."

Before the Jews sink their devilish claws into Helen, we want to show our solidarity by calling on all Jews to leave Zionist Occupied Hollywood by the end of June, or we shall begin "Operation Gevalt," which will disrupt all shipments of Nova lox to the west coast.

Watch the video below and see for yourself.

Free Palestine! Allahu Akbar!

http://www.celebjihad.com/

The Freedom Project (most a conservative news and opinion site which appears to concentrate on matters financial)

http://www.freedomproject.org/ Yankee Phil’s Blogspot:

http://yankeephil.blogspot.com/

Ann Althouse ("Crusty conservative coating, creamy hippie love chick center.")

http://althouse.blogspot.com/

Independent American:

http://www.independentamerican.org/

If you want to be scared or depressed:

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/

Weekly poll, asking you to identify what we ought to cut in governmental spending:

http://republicanwhip.house.gov/YouCut/

Are you tired of all the unfocused news and lame talking heads yelling at one another? Just grab a cup of coffee, sit back, and see what is really going on in the world:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/video

It is not broken, but the White House wants to control it: the internet:

http://nointernettakeover.com/

Sensible blogger Burt Folsom:

http://www.burtfolsom.com/

Whizbang (news and views):

http://wizbangblog.com/

Judith Miller is one of the moderate and fairly level-headed voices for FoxNews:

http://www.judithmiller.com/

http://ifbushhaddonethat.com/

John T. Reed comments on current events:

http://johntreed.com/headline.html

Investors Business Daily:

http://www.investors.com/

IBD editorials:

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/IBDEditorials.aspx

Conservative New Media (it is so-so; I must admit to getting tired of seeing the interviewer high-fiving Carly Fiorina 3 or 4 times during an interview):

http://conservativenewmedia.com/

Ann Coulter’s site:

http://anncoulter.com/

Allen West for Congress:

http://allenwestforcongress.com/issues/

Army Ranger Michael Behenna sentenced to 25 years in prison for 25 years for shooting Al Qaeda operative

http://defendmichael.wordpress.com/

The Daily Caller

http://dailycaller.com/

Reason TV

http://reason.tv/

Maybe the White House does not need to hold press conferences? It releases exclusive articles daily right here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-and-releases

Jihad Watch

http://www.jihadwatch.org/

If you want to see 1984 style-rhetoric and tactics, see:

http://www.freepress.net/

Project World Awareness:

http://projectworldawareness.com/

Bookworm room

http://www.bookwormroom.com/

This is quite helpful; it is a list of all leftist groups, with links to background information on each of these groups (when I checked, 879 groups were listed). This is a fantastic resource.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/summary.asp?object=Organization&category=

Their homepage:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/default.asp

David Limbaugh (great columns this week)

http://davidlimbaugh.com/

Wall Builders:

http://www.wallbuilders.com/default.asp

Texas Fred (blog and news):

http://texasfred.net/

One of the more radical people from the right, calling for the impeachment of Obama:

http://www.ldlad.com/

The Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a free enterprise site (there are several videos on the flat tax):

http://www.freedomandprosperity.org/

The Tax Foundation:

http://taxfoundation.org/

Compare your state with other states with regards to state taxes:

http://taxfoundation.org/files/f&f_booklet_20100326.pdf

Political news and commentary from the Louisiana Political News Wire:

http://www.lanewslink.com/

Dick Morris:

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/

This is a pretty radical site which alleges that Obama is a Marxist hell-bent in taking over our country:

http://commieblaster.com/

1982 interview with Larry Grathwohl on Ayers' plan for American re-education camps and the need to kill millions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ

Another babebolicious conservative (Kim Priestap):

http://politics.upnorthmommy.com/

Stop Spending our Future:

http://stopspendingourfuture.org/

DeeDee also blogs at:

http://somosrepublicans.com/author/deedee/

Somos Republicans:

http://somosrepublicans.com/

Global Warming headlines:

http://www.dericalorraine.com/

In case you want to see how other conservatives are thinking,

Zomblog:

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/

Conservative news site:

http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/

http://dailycaller.com/

http://conservativeamericannews.com/

Here’s an interesting new site (new to me):

http://www.overcomingbias.com/

Conservative Blogs:

http://atimetochoose.wordpress.com/

http://americanelephant.com/

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/*/index

The top 100 conservative sites:

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/dbkpreport/2010/02/the-conservative-100-most-popular-conservative-sites-feb-14-2010/

Here is an interesting blog, but, it is not all conservative stuff:

http://afrocityblog.wordpress.com/

Dr. Roy Spencer on climate change:

http://www.drroyspencer.com/

This is an interesting site; it seems to be devoted to the debate of climate change:

http://www.climatedebatedaily.com/

These are some very good comics:

http://hopenchangecartoons.blogspot.com/

Helps for liberals to call conservative talk shows:

http://radio.barackobama.com/

Sarah Palin’s facebook notes:

http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=24718773587

 Media Research Center:

http://www.mrc.org/public/default.aspx

Must read articles of the day:

http://lucianne.com/

Republican Stop Obamacare site:

http://www.nrcc.org/codered/main.php

The Big Picture:

http://www.bigpicweblog.com/exp/index.php

Talk of Liberty

http://talkofliberty.com

Lux Libertas

http://www.luxlibertas.com/

Conservative website:

http://www.unitedliberty.org/

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/

Twitter to locate Glenn Beck clips:

http://twitter.com/GlennBeckClips

Excellent articles on economics:

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/ (Excellent video on the Department of Agriculture posted)

This is a news site which I just discovered; they gave 3 minute coverage to Obama’s healthcare summit and seemed to give a pretty decent overall view of it, without slanting one way or the other:

http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/

(The segment was:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU-evdGu1Sk )

I have glanced through their website and it seems to be quite professional and reasonable. They have apparently been around since 1942.

Conservative site:

http://www.keepamericasafe.com/

An online journal of opinions:

http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/

American Civic Literacy:

http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/

The Dallas TEA Party Organization (with some pretty good vids):

www.dallasteaparty.org

America people’s healthcare summit online:

http://healthtransformation.net/

This is fantastic; Florida (the Sunshine State) is now putting its state budget online:

http://transparencyflorida.gov

New conservative website:

http://www.theconservativelion.com

The real story of the surge:

http://www.understandingthesurge.org/

Conservative website:

http://www.unitedliberty.org/

Suzanne Somers s supposed to be older than Bill O’Reilly? He interviewed her this week, and she looked, well, hot. She is big into vitamins and human growth hormones.

http://www.suzannesomers.com/Default.aspx

The latest Climate news:

http://www.climatedepot.com/

Conservative News Source:

http://www.newsrealblog.com/

Your daily cartoon:

http://daybydaycartoon.com/

Obama cartoons:

http://obamacartoon.blogspot.com/

Wall Street Journal’s articles on Climate Change:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704007804574574101605007432.html

Education link:

http://sirkenrobinson.com/

http://sirkenrobinson.com/skr/

News from 2100:

http://thepeoplescube.com/

How you can get your piece of the stimulus pie:

http://www.economicstimuluspackageinfo.com/

Always excellent articles:

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/

The National Journal, which is a political journal (which, at first glance, seems to be pretty even-handed):

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/

Conservative blog: Dan Cleary, political insomniac:

http://dancleary.typepad.com/dan_cleary/

David’ Horowitz’s NewsReal:

http://www.newsrealblog.com/

Stand by Liberty:

http://standbyliberty.org/

Mike’s America

http://mikesamerica.blogspot.com/

And I am hoping that most people see this as non-partisan: Citizens Against Government Waste:

http://www.cagw.org/

Excellent blogs:

http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/

www.rightofanation.com

Keep America Safe:

http://www.keepamericasafe.com/

Lower taxes, smaller government, more freedom:

Freedom Works:

http://www.freedomworks.org/

Right wing news:

http://rightwingnews.com/

CNS News:

http://www.cnsnews.com/

Pajamas Media:

http://pajamasmedia.com/

Far left websites:

www.dailykos.com

Daniel Hannan’s blog:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/danielhannan/

Liberty Chick:

http://libertychick.com/

Republican healthcare plan:

http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

Media Research Center

http://mrc.org/

Sweetness and Light:

http://sweetness-light.com

Dee Dee’s political blog:

http://somosrepublicans.com/author/deedee/

Citizens Against Government Waste:

http://www.cagw.org/

CNS News:

http://www.cnsnews.com/home

Climate change news:

http://www.climatedepot.com/

Conservative website featuring stories of the day:

http://www.lonelyconservative.com/

http://www.sodahead.com/

Global Warming:

http://www.climatedepot.com/

Michael Crichton on global warming as a religion:

http://www.michaelcrichton.net/speech-environmentalismaseligion.html

Here is an interesting military site:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/

This is the link which caught my eye from there:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=169400

Christian Blog:

http://wisdomknowledge.wordpress.com/

Muslim Demographics (this is outstanding):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU

News feed/blog:

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/

Conservative blog:

http://wyblog.us/blog/

Richard O’Leary’s websites:

www.letfreedomwork.com

www.freedomtaskforce.com

http://www.eccentrix.com/members/beacon/

News site:

http://lucianne.com/

Note sure yet about this one:

http://looneyleft.com/

News busted all shows:

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/search.aspx?q=newsbusted&t=videos

Conservative news and opinion:

http://bijenkorf.wordpress.com/

Not Evil, Just Wrong website:

http://noteviljustwrong.com/

Global Warming Site:

http://www.climatedepot.com/

Important Muslim videos and sites:

Muslim demographics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaZT73MrYvM

Muslim deception:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNZQ5D8IwfI

Conservative versus liberal viewpoints:

http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

Excellent list of Blogs on the bottom, right-hand side of this page:

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/

Not Evil, Just Wrong video on Global Warming

http://noteviljustwrong.com/

http://www.letfreedomwork.com/

http://www.taskforcefreedom.com/council.htm

This has fantastic videos:

www.reason.tv

Global Warming Hoax:

http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php

A debt clock and a lot of articles on the debt:

http://defeatthedebt.com/

The Best Graph page (for those of us who love graphs):

http://midknightgraphs.blogspot.com/

The Architecture of Political Power (an online book):

http://www.mega.nu/ampp/

Recommended foreign news site:

http://www.globalpost.com/

This website reveals a lot of information about politicians and their relationship to money. You can find out, among other things, how many earmarks that Harry Reid has been responsible for in any given year; or how much an individual Congressman’s wealth has increased or decreased since taking office.

http://www.opensecrets.org/index.php

http://www.fedupusa.org/

The news sites and the alternative news media:

http://drudgereport.com/

http://newsbusters.org/

http://www.hallindsey.com/

http://newsbusters.org/

http://reason.com/

Andrew Breithbart’s websites:

http://biggovernment.breitbart.com/

Kevin Jackson’s [conservative black] website:

http://theblacksphere.net/

Notes from the front lines (in Iraq):

http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/

Remembering 9/11:

http://www.realamericanstories.com/

Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball site:

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/

Conservative Blogger:

http://romanticpoet.wordpress.com/  

Economist and talk show host Walter E. Williams:

http://economics.gmu.edu/wew/

The current Obama czar roster:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26779.html

45 Goals of Communists in order to take over the United States (circa 1963):

http://www.rense.com/general32/americ.htm

How this correlates to the goals of the ACLU:

http://dianedew.com/aclu.htm

ACLU founders:

http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/stokjok/Founders.html

Conservative Websites:

http://www.theodoresworld.net/

http://conservalinked.com/

http://www.moonbattery.com/

http://www.rockiesghostriders.com/

http://sweetness-light.com/

www.coalitionoftheswilling.net

http://shortforordinary.com/

Flopping Aces:

http://www.floppingaces.net/

The Romantic Poet’s Webblog:

http://romanticpoet.wordpress.com/

Blue Dog Democrats:

http://www.house.gov/melancon/BlueDogs/Member%20Page.html

This looks to be a good source of information on the health care bill (s):

http://joinpatientsfirst.com/

Undercover video and audio for planned parenthood:

http://liveaction.org/

The Complete Czar list (which I think is updated as needed):

http://theshowlive.info/?p=572

This is an outstanding website which tells the truth about Obama-care and about what the mainstream media is hiding from you:

http://www.obamacaretruth.org/

Great business and political news:

www.wsj.com

www.businessinsider.com

Politico.com is a fairly neutral site (or, at the very worst, just a little left of center). They have very good informative videos at:

http://www.politico.com/multimedia/

Great commentary:

www.Atlasshrugs.com

My own website:

www.kukis.org

Congressional voting records:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/

On Obama (if you have not visited this site, you need to check it out). He is selling a DVD on this site as well called Media Malpractice; I have not viewed it yet, except pieces which I have seen played on tv and on the internet. It looks pretty good to me.

http://howobamagotelected.com/

Global Warming sites:

http://ilovecarbondioxide.com/

35 inconvenient truths about Al Gore’s film:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5J7JNfLYco

http://www.noteviljustwrong.com/trailer

Islam:

www.thereligionofpeace.com

This guy posts some excellent vids:

http://www.youtube.com/user/PaulWilliamsWorld

HipHop Republicans:

http://www.hiphoprepublican.blogspot.com/

And simply because I like cute, intelligent babes:

http://alisonrosen.com/

The Latina Freedom Fighter:

http://www.youtube.com/user/LatinaFreedomFighter

The psychology of homosexuality:

http://www.narth.com/

Liberty Counsel, which stands up against the A.C.L.U.

www.lc.org

Health Care:

http://fixhealthcarepolicy.com/

Betsy McCaughey’s Health Care Site:

http://www.defendyourhealthcare.us/home.html

Jihad Watch

http://www.jihadwatch.org/

If you want to see 1984 style-rhetoric and tactics, see:

http://www.freepress.net/

Project World Awareness:

http://projectworldawareness.com/

Bookworm room

http://www.bookwormroom.com/

This is quite helpful; it is a list of all leftist groups, with links to background information on each of these groups (when I checked, 879 groups were listed). This is a fantastic resource.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/summary.asp?object=Organization&category=

Their homepage:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/default.asp

David Limbaugh (great columns this week)

http://davidlimbaugh.com/

Wall Builders:

http://www.wallbuilders.com/default.asp

Texas Fred (blog and news):

http://texasfred.net/

One of the more radical people from the right, calling for the impeachment of Obama:

http://www.ldlad.com/

The Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a free enterprise site (there are several videos on the flat tax):

http://www.freedomandprosperity.org/

The Tax Foundation:

http://taxfoundation.org/

Compare your state with other states with regards to state taxes:

http://taxfoundation.org/files/f&f_booklet_20100326.pdf

Political news and commentary from the Louisiana Political News Wire:

http://www.lanewslink.com/

Dick Morris:

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/

This is a pretty radical site which alleges that Obama is a Marxist hell-bent in taking over our country:

http://commieblaster.com/

1982 interview with Larry Grathwohl on Ayers' plan for American re-education camps and the need to kill millions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ

Another babebolicious conservative (Kim Priestap):

http://politics.upnorthmommy.com/

Stop Spending our Future:

http://stopspendingourfuture.org/

DeeDee also blogs at:

http://somosrepublicans.com/author/deedee/

Somos Republicans:

http://somosrepublicans.com/

Global Warming headlines:

http://www.dericalorraine.com/

In case you want to see how other conservatives are thinking,

Zomblog:

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/

Conservative news site:

http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/

http://dailycaller.com/