First he loses Rich, now Dowd?
CLINTON: First that prig Carter. Then that prig Gore. And now President Paris Hilton. The guy's in office three days and he gets the peace prize? He should have gotten the Nobel in chemistry, because chemistry's all he's got. Talk about a fairy tale. This ... is ... just ... wrong! It's killing me, man. I feel like my head's explodin'. First I had the vast right-wing conspiracy, and now I have the vast left-wing conspiracy.
W.: I hear ya, 42. As if his head wasn't big enough. This cat is all cage, no bird. He doesn't have a clue.
AMERICUS, Georgia -- An airport about 20 miles from Jimmy Carter's hometown of Plains has been named after the 39th president despite some people opposing the change.
Souther Field Airport in Americus was renamed Jimmy Carter Regional Airport on Sunday. Daily non-stop service to Pyongyang, Tehran, and Gaza.
The Americus City Council and Sumter County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously for the change last month, and the Americus and Sumter County Airport Authority approved it. A 100% vote, just like North Korea.
Opponents say they have no issue with Carter himself, and would be pleased to see anything else in town named after the former president. They just want to preserve local history including where Charles Lindbergh flew solo for the first time. They want to expand on the historic connection to Jew-haters?
Carter thanked the letter writers, saying it helped with publicity. and fund-raising in the Middle East.....
He also remarked that if you "drew a circle around Souther Field" many in his family are buried there and he eventually plans to join them. "I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my old Annapolis buddy Jim Bob, and not screaming in terror like his passengers."
The airport was named after Henry Souther, who helped develop the airfield as a military training base during World War I.
How appropriate that the rinky-dink single-termer president gave his name to a rinky-dink regional airport, no doubt serving beginners learning touch-and-goes. Quite unlike his successor, who is remembered by the national airport in Washington, DC.
#2
well, we now know where the next AQ airplane bombers will fly out of...
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/12/2009 8:19 Comments ||
Top||
#3
He also remarked that if you "drew a circle around Souther Field" many in his family are buried there and he eventually plans to join them.
Let us all hope it will be soon.
Note to Secret Service - of course, I mean from natural causes.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
10/12/2009 8:22 Comments ||
Top||
#4
For a sec I thought Desert 1 was being renamed.
#6
Oh why bother? We have a President who gets the Nobel Peace price and everyone including him wonders why. Likewise with Jimmy. I liked the comment in the story about "Daily non-stop to Pyongyang, Tehran, and Gaza." Probably true.
Massachusetts has spent more than $4 billion of the $17.7 billion in stimulus funds it received from the US government to help offset budget shortfalls, provide tax reductions, and fund construction projects, saving or creating 27,400 jobs in the state according to a report by the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center.
Job losses in the Bay State and across the nation would have been significantly deeper without the federal stimulus law, said Noah Berger, executive director of the Budget and Policy Center, a nonprofit research group.
The group's report, to be released this week, is one of the first attempts by an independent organization to document the effects of the stimulus on Massachusetts. It said the stimulus helped preserve the jobs of municipal police officers, teachers, and firefighters, while generating jobs at new building and infrastructure projects across the state. By extending unemployment benefits and providing tax credits, it also fueled new consumer spending
The report breaks down how the state's $17.7 billion will be spent, including $5.8 billion in tax relief to residents, $5.5 billion for workforce training, education, and energy efficiency programs, $3.6 billion to help fill the state budget gap, $1.9 bil lion for unemployment compensation and other direct benefits to residents, and $942 million in infrastructure repairs and improvements. Only $942 million has been spent on real work projects? The rest is a give away.
Unemployment will continue to rise and could peak at 10.5 percent, one of the nation's top economists said Sunday.
Mark Zandi, co-founder of Moody's Economy.com, warned on "FOX News Sunday" that the recovery will continue to be "halting" and "fragile," backing up estimates from other economists that show unemployment peaking next summer and hovering above eight percent four years down the road. New figures released last week showed unemployment rose to 9.8 percent in September, the highest since 1983.
But Zandi, one of the foremost economists cited by the Obama administration and Congress during the push for the $787 billion economic stimulus package in February, argued that despite the dismal economic predictions the recovery package was still a success and has prevented a massive problem from becoming even worse.
"10.5 percent is a very reasonable expectation for the peak in unemployment, but I think it would be measurably higher if not for the stimulus package," Zandi said. "The stimulus in my view is working. It's just gotten overwhelmed by the magnitude of the economic crisis."
Zandi said the presumably slow recovery means stimulus benefits should be extended into 2010.
He said unemployment benefits, first-time home buyer credits and state aid should all be continued.
"If you've got 10 percent-plus unemployment, people are going to be out of work. They're going to need more help," he said.
Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, whose state's unemployment rate is the highest in the nation at 15.2 percent, agreed that unemployment benefits should be extended. The Democratic governor said that the stimulus has helped, even though "unemployment is at a ridiculously high level."
But Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels said the stimulus has not yielded the benefits it advertised months ago.
"It's coming very slowly, if at all," the Republican told "FOX News Sunday." "The stimulus, I didn't oppose the idea of it, but I don't think you can point to much effect so far."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/12/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
These economists have it wrong, independent economic advisers, whom I have read, indicate this economy has not turned the corner but has only reached a temporary downward plateau.
#3
It's currently at 17% if you count the 'discouraged' unemployed. Expect it to get much worse when the debt from the trillions that the government has squandered turns into hyperinflation.
#3
Good, cause the planet's been getting steadily warmer for the past DECADE. Oh, wait, it's actually been getting cooler. Another feeble excuse for creeping government control of the economy.
#1
One thing this president has shown since taking office is that he holds grudges. He has stiffed the queen of England and the PM apparently over some ill will he inherited from his father. He can't let go of his ill will towards Fox News.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
10/12/2009 16:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
and Fox smiles all the way to the ratings bank
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/12/2009 17:34 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: ed ||
10/12/2009 17:45 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Hey, wasn't Chavez doing the same thing, waging war on his media critics, back when people thought he was a democrat and going to step down when his term was over?
Well, I'm sure that Obama will step down when his term is over.
Rep. John Shadegg has been trying to get a bill enacted for 15 years that would simply require legislators to cite the constitutional authority for any legislation that is proposed. His bill is called the Enumerated Powers Act (HR450). It now has 52 co-sponsors, but there is very little chance that it will ever get to the floor for a vote.
Why? Because the Democrats in Congress will not allow it.
This bill would not be necessary if the Democrats would simply follow their own rules. House Rule XIII (3)(d)(1) requires:
"Each report of a committee on a public bill or public joint resolution shall contain the following: A statement citing the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution."
That's right. The rules of procedure in the House of Representatives already require that every bill or resolution cite the constitutional authority for the proposed legislation. This rule is routinely ignored.
Why? Because Democrats control the Rules Committee and the entire House of Representatives, and they routinely "waive" or "suspend" this rule.
Pelosi: "Most honest, most open, and most ethical Congress in history"
Some people remember when Nancy Pelosi stood on her pedestal and proclaimed: "This leadership team will create the most honest, most open, and most ethical Congress in history" (November 16, 2006). Ignoring a House rule is a minor offense, compared to the corruption that Ms. Pelosi readily accepts when it affects her Democratic colleagues.
How quickly did she and her colleagues invoke House rules to condemn Rep. Joe Wilson when he blurted out "you lie" during President Obama's sales pitch to Congress? But when Democrat Alan Grayson uses visual aids to claim that the Republican health-care plan calls on sick people to "Die Quickly," there's nothing at all offensive to Pelosi and her colleagues about the gross lie Grayson speaks.
But even this duplicity is minor compared to the corruption Nancy continues to reward by her failure to take action.
Charles Rangel
Charles Rangel has failed to report his income from rental property in the Dominican Republic; has used rent-controlled housing facilities for campaign activities to avoid more than $7,000 in rental payments, and much, much more.
John Murtha
John Murtha provides a treasure trove of investigations into all sorts of abuse of power. Murtha's earmark list contains big rewards for the same companies that appear on his contributions list.
Maxine Waters
Maxine Waters completely ignores the conflict of interest rules by using her influence to set up meetings between the Treasury Department and her friends at OneUnited Bank -- which, incidentally, wound up with $12.1 million in bailout funds.
Corruption is not limited to Democrats, by any means; they just seem to be better at getting away with it.
But then, they have a good example. Obama also promised to clean up the corruption in the administration. Then, he proceeded to appoint Tom Daschle and other people who had failed to pay their taxes or, like New Mexico's Governor Bill Richardson, were caught up in some kind of investigation. Obama issued an extremely rigid executive order outlining a high bar of ethics his appointees would have to meet. Then, he proceeded to ignore his high bar and waive the requirements for several appointees.
It is pure corruption to deliberately give the appearance of high ethical standards, and then completely refuse to apply those standards.
What's needed is a tidal wave to wash over Washington to clean out every politician -- regardless of party affiliation -- who seeks personal power over constitutional compliance or personal profit over public accountability.
Tidal waves often follow earthquakes. And earthquakes often follow ground tremors. Seismic tremors are being recorded in cities across the nation. In nearly every city where a Democrat had the courage to hold a town meeting, the earth rumbled.
All across the land, individuals and organizations are preparing for a tidal wave. They are identifying those congressmen who arrogantly refuse to answer their questions. They are making notes of the votes cast by congressmen who want government to take over health care, energy, and the rest of the market place. They are putting targets on the backs of those elected officials who vote to increase taxes and blindly spend uncountable billions.
While Democrats pretended to look the other way on September 12, more than a million people politely paraded through Washington. These are the people who will take their families and their friends and neighbors to the polls next November. These are the people who are the tidal wave that can clean up the corruption in D.C. These are the people who vote.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/12/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Dear Nancy,
Please count to ten, call you research assistant , get the answer and then answer the question or make a comment.
Please Honey, You remind me of my Sainted Mother, who died of dementia in 2007, she didn't know what was going on in the world either.
Posted by: Large Uniter8538 ||
10/12/2009 0:34 Comments ||
Top||
Republicans had to look for a very long time at last week's Field Poll of California voters to find something remotely uplifting as they ponder the 2010 state elections. There it was, eventually: Against San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat running for governor, the assorted GOP candidates were losing by only single digits.
But they were losing to Newsom, a candidate who was behind in his own party's primary by 20 points and who had a net unfavorable rating among all voters questioned by the poll. Former governor and current Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown was clocking not only Newsom but also his potential GOP general election foes, each by more than 20 points.
Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, like Brown a longtime punching bag and fundraising tool to the Republican Party, was also running double digits ahead of her two potential Republican challengers in the 2010 race.
All told, even as Democrats find themselves on the defensive nationally, California inhabits a different political planet. There is no hint of a backlash against incumbents of the sort that Republicans nationally have hoped will help them gain seats in Congress and in statehouses. That is key in California, given the experience of the Democratic candidates and the neophyte nature of the biggest-named Republicans.
Just as troubling to Republicans, the poll served to remind them of the continued Democratic hold on younger voters. Unless arrested and reversed, it could eventually make the party's current challenging times look rosy in the rear-view mirror.
True, blizzards of attack ads have yet to fall. True, the only poll that counts -- as losing candidates often proclaim -- is the one on election day. And true, polls can be on soft ground as they measure match-ups featuring many candidates -- in this case mostly the Republicans -- about whom voters know little.
"I don't necessarily think the Republicans don't stand a chance," as Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo put it.
Right now, however, there is one group in which they really don't, and that is among younger voters. The conundrum for the state Republican Party and its candidates: how to get ethnically diverse voters who demand healthcare reform and environmental protection to side with a party associated with neither, and whose icon remains a former president elected before they were born.
In match-ups against Republicans in the race for governor, both Brown and Newsom did better as voters grew younger, although Brown also won among older voters. Taking the hint, GOP state party chief Ron Nehring blasted Brown via press release for his "last failed governorship."
Democrats have a driving impetus to corral younger voters in 2010. Generally speaking, newcomers are perceived to be free-floating and unattached in their early voting years; a party that manages to attract them for several elections in a row stands a good chance of keeping them indefinitely.
Many of the young voters in question streamed to the polls for the first time in 2008. If Democrats' dreams are realized, the youngsters will stick with the party -- much as young voters attracted in 1980 to President Reagan formed the bulwark of the conservative revival of the 1990s and beyond.
"If they can get them for two to three election cycles, they're pretty much locked in," said Republican pollster Steve Kinney. That said, he added, "that's easier said than done."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/12/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What the California Democrats have is a farm-team system. They recruit candidates to run for the most mundane offices. They support them through their campaign (or find support for them - union money helps), and then groom the more successful ones for higher office.
The Pubs either treat it like it's a family business, or they back a candidate only because they have momentum/star-power/heavy-outsider support.
#2
Having lived there in the early 1980s, I agree with your analysis Pappy.
Most people seem to know of the "Chicago Machine" or the "New York Borough Parties" but few seem to realise that in the great migration from East to West in the 1970-90's the New York crowd took their borough system with them.
It was transplanted to California and thrived under the county-city-town political system.
Grassroots - grew like Kudzu vine and strangled all political independent thinking, rationality or dissent to the prevailing political winds.
Sounds very familiar today - "California Scheming" - We are all thats LEFT, so you can't be RIGHT!
Regards Large Uniter8538
Posted by: Large Uniter8538 ||
10/12/2009 1:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
CA is so going to die. They think it's bad now, but they just can't seem to kick the habit.
#4
gorb,
CA's "too big to fair", so it will be 'rescued' by the rest of the country. Since the current rescuers are Dems it would be foolish for Californians to elect Pubs (though I think pubs are a good solution - a round of ale for the house!)
#5
Since all the current republican governor in CA seems to be able to do is stick a republican "face" and "brand" over Democratic policies driving the state under, one wonders what the point is of having one.
#6
California needs to divide. Some time ago I saw a plan to split it into 5 pieces about the size of East coast states. Yeah it would mss up the plans but getting the politicians closer to the voters is a good thing.
#8
California is generally socially liberal and supports Democratic positions in that area. Voters have relied on ballot initiatives to keep the lid on taxes, but have not worried about spending as the economy of the last twenty years has supported massive increases in state expenditures.
That's all coming to an end, and at the beginning (of the end) it's political beneficiaries are the Democrats. One reason is that the governor is Republican and, right or wrong, the chief executive is the first in the line of fire.
The other reason is that the first to get hit are those that live off the state: workers, contractors and other beneficiaries. They are bitter at the Republican minority in the legislature for blocking tax increases, and that bitterness outweighs any gratitude taxpayers may have.
For the forseeable future I suspect the state will keep electing liberal Democrats.
#9
Don't forget the Republican stood by and said nothing while the state was being overrun by illegal aliens. I've been here long enough to remember a time when the most popular name of newborn babies was not Jose. The Republicans can whine and cry all they want but from my perspective it's their own damn fault.
#11
Or just a straight-up civil war. There's just something pleasing about the idea of burning SF to the ground (after a suitable period of looting, of course) and thousands of SFite corpses floating out the Golden Gate to feed the great whites...
#12
California's last big economic collapse - driven by the twin storms of the early '90's recession and the shuttering of much of the region's defense/aerospace industry - wound up driving millions of Republilcan and Republican-leaning working folk (like your humble correspondent) out of the state. The CA Republican Party just doesn't have sufficient demographic support to regain a legislative majority. California's over, folks - it's about to become the USA's own little combination of Bangladesh and the Balkans.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
10/12/2009 17:12 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Or just a straight-up civil war.
Actually, certain elements ['protected class' any surprise] are already in their own Bleeding KansasOakland.
#14
Sadly, both Procopius and Ricky are correct, CA is over. If you dobt that simply drive through L.A., S.F. most of the Central Valley towns and S.D. and down to the border. The demographics visible on the street will tell you they aren't going to vote for anything except more benefits and bribes. Sadly, since the tax base has fled or is fleeing, and the state is already completely bankrupt, watch the Nobama administration and the facre of Congress just vote other people's money to the state to keep the natives from becomming restless.
#17
I lived in San Diego from 1997 through 2007 and, as a Goldwater/Reagan conservative, didn't find much in the Republican party there. The problem is that the old line Republican party is just too smug and off-putting. I might agree with them politically, but wouldn't want to live next to them, or for that matter, even have a beer with them. The Dems are thieves and the Republicans snobs, not much to choose from. California politicians, both Republican and Democrat, are just a cut above pond scum.
The Star-Ledger today endorses independent candidate Chris Daggett and recommends his election as the next governor of New Jersey.
The newspaper's decision is less a rejection of Gov. Jon Corzine and Republican Chris Christie than a repudiation of the parties they represent, both of which have forfeited any claim to the trust and confidence of the people of New Jersey. They share responsibility for the state's current plight.
Only by breaking the hold of the Democratic and Republican mandarins on the governor's office and putting a rein on their power will the state have any hope for the kind of change needed to halt its downward economic, political and ethical spiral.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
10/12/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Govenor James B Longley of Maine - Take a read - Perhaps we can get people like him back into government
#4
split the non-Corzine vote and let that feckless crap-weasel sneak back in?
I think that's the whole idea. That's how we got Bill Clinton's first term, isn't it?
Posted by: Fred ||
10/12/2009 9:57 Comments ||
Top||
#5
In a perfect universe, Daggett might be the best choice.
In New Jersey, however . . .
Posted by: Mike ||
10/12/2009 10:08 Comments ||
Top||
#6
That's EXACTLY the intention. I am resigned to voting for Christie just to help start the rollback of the statists nationwide. For NJ however, Christie is more of the same.
Just nine months into his presidency, Mr Obama has proved more of a hindrance than a help to the Democratic candidate, Creigh Deeds. Unlike Democrats across the country in 2008, the state senator is keeping a very loose grip on the president's coat-tails.
"Frankly, a lot of what's going on in Washington has made it very tough," he said at a recent forum, adding that voters were "just uncomfortable with the spending, they were uncomfortable with a lot of what was going on".
Mr Obama has made only one appearance with Mr Deeds, and will probably make just one more before polling day. The Democrat is trailing his Republican rival, Bob McDonnell, by nine points in a poll published in the Washington Post last week.
Mr Deeds, 51, may have earned the displeasure of the White House with his honesty, but no one has contradicted his assessment that Mr Obama's massive stimulus bill, and the cost of proposed health care and energy reforms, have raised concern among Virginians.
At the Deeds campaign office in Manassas, there was no sign of Mr Obama in the dozens of posters and banners lining the walls.
Campaigners admitted that Mr Obama is a liability for their candidate. "People assume Creigh is just like Obama and that every Democrat is the same, but they are two different people," said Katya Paige, a 20-year-old student. "Obama is more liberal to my mind."
Mr Deeds is conservative on gun ownership, as most Virginian politicians are, but his plans to raise indirect taxes to pay for improved transport -- a big issue in a Washington commuter town - have played into broader fears about higher taxation.
"We hear a lot of that," said Patrice Ivey, a 19-year-old volunteer. "And they want everything fixed quickly. People are very impatient."
Last year, Mr Obama became the first Democratic presidential candidate to win Virginia for 32 years. But many of the young people won over by his electrifying campaign have switched off politics again and are not planning to vote in the election for a new governor on Nov 3.
"I can't deal with small politics to be honest with you," said Alex Moore, 20. "Lots of Obama voters were in college and they are just now more focused on that." Even as a Democrat, he finds it hard to muster much enthusiasm for the president's performance so far. "I guess he has done what he said he would. But there were such high expectations and he hasn't changed the world. There are a lot of people saying he hasn't done what he said he was going to do," said Mr Moore.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/12/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Frankly, I would trust Deeds to park my car.
Pick one - My Ferarri Volumex, Mercedes Benz 450 SLC, Rolls Royce Silver Spur, Ford Crown Victoria XLS or my Explorer XLT.
I'm voting for Robert F. McDonnell
Posted by: Large Uniter8538 ||
10/12/2009 1:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
IMO, Obamism won't be defeated until both American parties unite against it.
#3
Right. Any day now the beneficiary class is going to say to the government, "Stop supporting our unproductive live styles with other people's tax money."
Posted by: ed ||
10/12/2009 6:00 Comments ||
Top||
#4
In that case, ed, get used to living in a banana republic.
#5
Possibly, but not necessarily. Ted Kennedy's ethnic remaking of the US population may not be reversible, but the Banana Republic mentality is.
The rational solution is to move the leechers into the productive class. It begins by having economic policies that generate enough decent jobs so that lower and middle class people can find productive work. That goes again to having rational trade, energy and tax policies that reward production within the country. Millions of "American" jobs are performed overseas to the slow strangulation of the US economy. Very doable and will be forced upon us anyway when the US dollar become worthless.
And for fuck's sake, quit subsidizing the rest of the world.
Posted by: ed ||
10/12/2009 10:03 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Hope you're right, ed. We're finished if you're not.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
AMERICUS, Georgia -- An airport about 20 miles from Jimmy Carter's hometown of Plains has been named after the 39th president despite some people opposing the change.
Just nine months into his presidency, Mr Obama has proved more of a hindrance than a help to the Democratic candidate, Creigh Deeds. Unlike Democrats across the country in 2008, the state senator is keeping a very loose grip on the president's coat-tails. 
