Where In the World Is Uncle Jimbo


Labels: dhimmi unions, eric erickson, marxist tactics, Media Matters, redstate update
After the Pledge of Allegiance was recited, moderator Susan Reuther dealt with her obvious consternation over the spontaneous show of patriotism by scolding Candidate Murphy who asked for the pledge.
Labels: Big Government, debate, League of Women Voters, Pledge of Allegiance, youtube
On November 2, 2010 Virginians will be faced with several seemingly innocuous but fatally flawed ballot questions, primarily dealing with various facets of taxation in the Commonwealth.
At hand are three constitutional amendments, which appear on the ballot following a multi-stage approval by the Virginia General Assembly, as follows:
A constitutional amendment, as established in Section 1 of Article XII, can be proposed in either house of the Virginia General Assembly. If a proposed amendment is approved by a simple majority vote in one session of the state legislature, it is automatically referred to the next session of the state legislature that occurs after the next general election of members of the Virginia House of Delegates. If in that second session the proposed amendment is “agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each house” it is then placed before the state’s voters. If approved by a simple majority vote, it becomes part of the state’s constitution.
Question 1 reads:
Shall Section 6 of Article X of the Constitution of Virginia be amended to authorize legislation that will permit localities to establish their own income or financial worth limitations for purposes of granting property tax relief for homeowners not less than 65 years of age or permanently and totally disabled?
Question 2 reads:
Shall the Constitution be amended to require the General Assembly to provide a real property tax exemption for the principal residence of a veteran, or his or her surviving spouse, if the veteran has a 100 percent service-connected, permanent, and total disability?
Questions 1 and 2 deal with real estate taxation. Helping veterans, disabled, and elderly people is a noble goal, as is tax reduction; the means by which the assistance will be granted, however, is insidious.
America’s founders recognized inherent peril in progressive taxation: a citizen exempt from paying taxes that his neighbor must pay, has no incentive in keeping the tax low because he, himself, does not pay the tax.
Alexander Hamilton warned against multi-tiered real estate taxation schemes in Federalist 35:
“No tax can be laid on land which will not affect the proprietor of millions of acres as well as the proprietor of a single acre. Every land-holder will therefore have a common interest to keep the taxes on land as low as possible; and common interest may always be reckoned upon as the surest bond of sympathy.”
The disastrous results of nearly a century of progressive income taxation can be seen in present day America where 47% of U.S. households paid no federal income tax in 2009. Those paying no tax actually have a vested interest in seeing rates raised for federal income-taxpayers, in order to maintain their own tax-free status.
Virginians would be unwise to allow their system of property taxation to emulate the federal model of progressive income taxation with its designated “winners and losers” and special “protected” classes.
By adding more exceptions to the rule, Virginia Ballot Questions 1 and 2 continue the erosion of “flat” (i.e., equitable) real estate taxation in the Commonwealth, ultimately to the detriment of maintaining Hamilton’s referenced common interests in private property rights and ownership.
Ballot Question 3 fundamentally enlarges state government at the expense of ordinary citizens and the overall state economy.
Question 3 reads:
Shall Section 8 of Article X of the Constitution of Virginia be amended to increase the permissible size of the Revenue Stabilization Fund (also known as the “rainy day fund”) from 10 percent to 15 percent of the Commonwealth’s average annual tax revenues derived from income and retail sales taxes for the preceding three fiscal years?
Increasing the allowable size of Virginia’s “rainy day fund” by 50% is a colossally bad idea. The state is not a bank, an investment, or a savings account; it should hold as little of the people’s money as is practical.
Funds retained by government are unavailable to the state’s economy and thus stifle economic activity both of businesses and individuals.
In addition, fattening the state’s “slush” fund encourages growth in the size and scope of state government, and it is a disincentive to vital cost cutting and budget reform/reduction measures.
Disappointingly, many known “conservatives” publicly are supporting some or all of these constitutional amendments— each of which was passed unanimously in both houses of the Virginia General Assembly. In reality, legislators will reap political gain and political power from the passage of the measures: this is another opportunity to buy votes and to curry favor from large constituencies, all in the name of providing assistance.
As an entire class, property owners are deserving of relief from crushing real estate taxation in Virginia, but such reprieve granted piecemeal is detrimental to property rights and to America’s common interest in limited government. There are better and more American-centric ways to assist veterans, disabled, and elderly people. And, growing the ability of the state to confiscate—and ultimately spend—greater sums will further saddle taxpaying Virginians and encumber Virginia’s struggling economy.
Don’t be fooled by seemingly sympathetic subjects. Progressive taxation and government largesse have not benefited America in the preceding century. The 2010 ballot questions are bad news for liberty loving Virginians, and if passed, they will result in greater state control over our everyday lives.
Virginia Ballot Questions 2010: Vote NO on 1, 2, and 3.
Labels: 2010 elections, Alexander Hamilton, amendments, ballot, Federalist 35, Federalist Papers, progressive tax, property taxes, real estate taxes, taxes, VA Consitution
Democratic Rep. Jim Moran’s 8th Congressional District is considered the second bluest district in Virginia, and the 19-year incumbent has consistently demolished his GOP challengers, but internal polling conducted by his current GOP opponent’s campaign suggests this year could be different.
Republican candidate Col. Patrick Murray’s most recent internal numbers from the last four days show Moran leading with 32.3 percent compared with Murray’s 29.7 percent. 30.5 percent are shown to be undecided.
The Murray campaign’s internal numbers also suggest Moran has high negatives. A Sept. 22 poll conducted by McLaughlin & Associates found Moran’s support at below 50 percent ̶ with only 42 percent of those polled rating him as good or excellent and 41 percent rating him as fair or poor.
“Although he currently leads Patrick Murray on the ballot for U.S. Congress, his favorable rating , job rating and vote share fall short of the thresholds for strong incumbents,” pollster John McLaughlin wrote in a memo to the Murray campaign. “Given voters’ dissatisfaction with Jim Moran’s performance as congressman and the current mood of the electorate, Jim Moran is one Democrat incumbent that could be unseated in November.”
McLaughlin’s memo also suggests that the retired Army colonel, who served tours of duty in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Iraq during his 24 years of service, could defeat Moran if he can improve his name recognition.
But Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, says the campaign’s most recent internal numbers, although reflecting the national tilt toward the GOP, cannot be used to determine the race’s outcome because they do not reflect a true random sample.
“If Murray beat Moran it would be an extraordinary upset ̶ one of the headliners of the night,” Sabato said in an e-mail to The Daily Caller. “The 8th is the second most D district in Virginia (after the majority-black 3rd). Obama won 69 percent there. A party switch is highly unlikely in 2010. That’s my best judgment.”
Moran has amassed many enemies in his two decades in Congress due to his personal conduct and connections.
Labels: daily caller, jim moron, patrick murray, VA-08
BREAKING: SEIU Handling the Voting Machines in Las Vegas
Remember the news story yesterday about the lady in Las Vegas who, when casting her ballot, discovered that Harry Reid's name was pre-checked for her? My friend Jim Hoft has breaking news that the SEIU is responsible for servicing those machines. Hhhmmmmm. . . .
Read more about it right here at Jim's site.
1. What Better Way to Signal the World You "Get It?" - Hire Washington Insiders!
So, expecting to pick up a number of seats by "newbies," what do GOP leaders in Washington want to ensure? They want "GOP insiders to staff outsiders," according to Roll Call. Eric Cantor's staff added, "There's a lot of important work to get done right out of the gate, so it's important that newly elected Republicans have access to experienced, competent staff so that they can hit the ground running."
According to Roll Call, "[a] Republican aide confirmed leadership's interest in having staff that works well with Boehner to move the agenda forward." And even better, the lobbyists and strategists are in on the act, as well - one lobbyist saying, "[y]ou want to be sure that the newbies, when they hit town, do not necessarily bring their campaign staff to run their Congressional offices, because in some cases they are totally ill-equipped."
But that's not really what this is about at its core. This is about making sure the "newbies" do not rock the boat and get with the program. the Washington establishment's program. The staff that the establishment will "suggest" to the new members will be the same freaking idiots who have been bouncing around the Hill forever and will be more likely to go along to get along - to continue the same way Washington has been working forever. Just take a look at top Republican offices - they are a bunch of re-treads from years past, Administrations past - and for those of us who have been in the trenches fighting for conservatism, let me just say that we have more often been fighting against them than with them.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
2. It's Time to Make GOP Leadership Less Powerful
As Election Day approaches, no outcome should be taken for granted, but it looks increasingly likely that Republicans will take control of the House, and perhaps even the Senate. For those who want to reform Congress, increased thought and planning needs to take place now because many decisions are made the very next week after the election when Republicans "organize."
During these organization meetings, Republicans will elect their leadership for the upcoming Congress, agree upon their internal conference rules, and give their blessing to the slate of members who will represent them on the powerful "steering" Committee that distributes committee assignments. Much of this resembles a bum's rush where the current Leadership offers a series of resolutions, often designed to preserve their own power, that are quickly agreed to because none of the members in attendance are prepared (or willing) to object and consider the long-term ramifications for conservatives.
Yet in many respects, these organizational meetings will lay the framework for whether the incoming class of members will actually be able to change the way Congress and their party does business.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
3. Did Harry Reid pull strings to protect aide in immigration conspiracy?
The facts of the case are these: in 2003 Diana Tejada entered into a fraudulent conspiracy with Lebanese national Bassam Mahmoud Tarhini, with the aim of securing permanent US residency for the latter (there was also and investigation whether Mr. Tarhini had links to 'extremist groups,' but nothing was ever confirmed). Money changed hands. For the next five years Ms. Tejada continued to misrepresent her relationship with Mr. Tarhini, despite official inquiries by immigration services; her eventual confession took place in November, which was one month after she joined current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's staff. Despite her confession, Ms. Tejada was not charged with any crime at all, let alone a felony; in fact, Ms. Tejada was misidentified as still being at her former job (La Raza) by immigration officials at Tarhini's deportation proceedings. Harry Reid's office has fired Ms. Tejada only in the last month (she was an official Reid spokesperson for the latest DREAM Act push), and claims that they had no prior knowledge of her activities: this has been contradicted by Fox's own sources, which insist that Tejada's confession was partially motivated by concerns relating to her new job with Harry Reid; and that in any case it would be standard operating procedure for the Senate Majority Leader to be made aware of a situation of this magnitude that involved one of his own aides.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
4. Dan Benishek: Of The People, By The People
We are getting down to the wire here and a candidate who can win needs our help. Dan Benishek is running in MI-1 for the seat that Bart Stupak is vacating. Y'all remember Bart Stupak, right? The man who proved that the myth of the Pro-Life Democrat is just that; a myth. He disgustingly sold out the unborn, after promising not to, and voted for Obamacare. Then bravely ran away, in the form of retirement.
Dan Benishek is the man that can, and should, replace the cowardly Stupak. He has a money bomb going on right now. . . . His latest ad, entitled "Get Us Back" shows why we need him to win. Oh, and it is an ad done by a RedState diarist.
5. Alex Sink Drips
Alex Sink and Rick Scott agreed before hand to the rules of their debate. One of the rules was that they'd not take messages or converse with staff during the debate.
Alex Sink, during the debate, sung her own praises about how she always follows the rules. Then her makeup artist came in and handed her a message. During the debate.
Given Alex Sink's debate performance, however, we may need to give her a mulligan.
She spent the entire debate bragging about all the newspaper endorsements she's received. You'd think she was running for Editor of the New York Times. Of course Sink also kept denying she was an "Obama liberal."
Please click here for the rest of the post.
6. We Helped Him Start His Campaign. Let's Help Him Finish It.
It was March 19, 2009. I got on the front page of RedState and said Marco Rubio was my choice to be Senator in Florida and we should not be going all in with a guy like Charlie Crist.
Rubio was at 4% in the polls.
Everybody laughed and thought I was crazy. He who laughs last . . .
We helped Marco Rubio start his campaign. Now let's help Marco Rubio finish it.
Please click here for the rest of the post.
Labels: ballots, dingy harry reid, electronic voting, eric erickson, irregular voting, Nevada, redstate, redstate update, screw SEIU
"A neighbor of mine voted today in early voting at the downtown New Bern site and had a strange experience. He "pulled the lever" to vote straight Republican (pressed the circle at the top that allows you to vote straight ticket), and when he looked down, the voting machine had highlighted all the Democratic candidates. He cleared it and tried again, and the same thing happened. He called a poll assistant over, she tried it, and the same thing happened. Several phone calls were made, and they finally got the machine to highlight the correct candidates.
If my neighbor had not been paying attention, he would have given his votes to the opposition!He told the Republican judge about his experience, and he said she did not seem to be that concerned. He told a Republican worker outside the poll and that worker had him call Channel 12 news about his experience."
PLEASE tell your friends and neighbors if they are voting straight Republican (or voting period) to make sure that the correct candidates are highlighted before they finish
Labels: ballots, electronic voting, New Bern, North Carolina, voting
Labels: 2010 elections, big brother, NPR, Vision to America
Web link to What's on My Ballot:Many voters may not be aware that there are three Virginia Constitutional Amendments on the ballot on November 2. I wanted to take a moment and provide a quick overview of the three constitutional ballot questions.
All three amendments address taxation and revenue issues. An amendment to the Virginia Constitution is required to pass the General Assembly two consecutive years. These amendments have done just that and now, as is required by the Constitution of Virginia, they go before the voters for final approval.
The first ballot question reads as follows: "Shall Section 6 of Article X of the Constitution of Virginia be amended to authorize legislation that will permit localities to establish their own income or financial worth limitations for purposes of granting property tax relief for homeowners not less than 65 years of age or permanently disabled?"Currently, localities are only authorized to make exemptions for those who bear an "extraordinary tax burden," or with the express approval of the General Assembly, which occasionally passes legislation authorizing specific localities to afford local property tax relief to senior citizens or the disabled. This amendment, if approved, would allow local governments to make the decision on their own, without going to the General Assembly for approval.
The second ballot question asks: "Shall the Constitution be amended to require the General Assembly to provide real property tax exemption for the principal residence of a veteran, or his or her surviving spouse, if the veteran has a 100 percent service-connected, permanent, and total disability?"If approved, this amendment would require a statewide exemption from local property taxes for the primary residence of any 100% disabled veteran, provided that the veteran's disability is service-related. A surviving spouse could continue to claim the exemption so long as the same home remains his or her primary residence, and s/he does not remarry.
Finally, the third ballot question says: "Shall Section 8 of Article X of the constitution of Virginia be amended to increase the permissible size of the Revenue Stabilization Fund (also known as the "rainy day fund" from 10 percent to 15 percent of the Commonwealth's average tax revenues derived from income and retail sales taxes for the preceding three fiscal years?"In other words, should we expand the allowable size of Virginia's "rainy day fund," to which state government contributes in good years to provide resources for lean years? Currently, the maximum size of the Fund - which is almost empty at present - is 10% of the Commonwealth's average annual tax revenues from income and sales taxes for the preceding three fiscal years; this amendment would up the maximum allowable amount to 15%.
If you have any questions about these three ballot items, please do not hesitate to contact me - and please remember to vote on Tuesday, November 2nd!
Labels: amendments, ballot initiative, Nov 2, VA Consitution
Labels: blackfive, Cooking With the Troops, Germany, Gina Elise, landsthul
Labels: Alexander Hamilton, chester patriots, debate, Thomas Jefferson
The Wall Street Journal has a report that says the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) is spending $87.5 million this election season to re-elect Democrats.
But you’re supposed to overlook that and remember that the Chamber of Commerce, along with big business, is buying this election.
Brought to you by Business Insider.
Labels: 2010 elections, AFSCME, Chamber of Commerce, dhimmi unions, The Blaze, Wall St.Journal
Labels: AFSMCE, conspiracy, Manhattan, taxes, The Blaze, unions
In a bid to stem taxpayer losses for bad loans guaranteed by federal housing agencies Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn) proposed that borrowers be required to make a 5% down payment in order to qualify. His proposal was rejected 57-42 on a party-line vote because, as Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn) explained, "passage of such a requirement would restrict home ownership to only those who can afford it."Our Senators voted against this. Remember this in 2012, when we replace Webb.
Labels: Connecticut, down payment, Dudd, mortgage, senator, Tennessee
It is unconscionable to me how a member of Congress from a District with so many Veterans, who also sits on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, could make such shameful and offensive comments about the sacrifices made by our men and women in uniform. This kind of disrespect to our service members not only offends me, but is insensitive to the sacrifices made by our dedicated military families as well.
Friday night a segment aired on ABC's Channel 7 WJLA about Moran's remarks. The story has begun to capture national attention. Just minutes ago FOX News' Chris Wallace reported on Jim Moran's remarks and played the video of my response to Jim Moran.
Other stories related to Moran's remarks have been widely circulated in publications and programs such as the Weekly Standard, National Review, the Washington Examiner, the Washington Times, RedState, Hot Air, Roger Hodgecock's Show, the Blaze, FOX News' website, and so on.
We've received hundreds of responses from people all across the country who are upset about Jim Moran's disrespect to our nation's service members. Jim Moran's comments are part of a larger pattern that cannot continue.
It's imperative that we fire Jim Moran on November 2nd. Failure to do so will mean two more years of the same from a man who clearly has no respect for our military.
We cannot fail on this mission.
Even more incredulously, Jim Moran has been claiming that he has been endorsed by two military organizations; the Disabled American Veterans and the Military Officer's Association of America. The problem is, Jim Moran does not have these endorsements. Both of these organizations have sent letters to his campaign asking him to cease and desist with promoting these organizations as endorsing his campaign.
Labels: blackfive, combat vets for congress, jim moron, McQ, patrick murray, uncle jimbo, VA-08, vff, youtube
WASHINGTON (AP) — The new health care law wasn’t supposed to undercut employer plans that have provided most people in the U.S. with coverage for generations.
But last week a leading manufacturer told workers their costs will jump partly because of the law. Also, a Democratic governor laid out a scheme for employers to get out of health care by shifting workers into taxpayer-subsidized insurance markets that open in 2014.
While it’s too early to proclaim the demise of job-based coverage, corporate number crunchers are looking at options that could lead to major changes.
“The economics of dropping existing coverage is about to become very attractive to many employers, both public and private,” said Gov. Phil Bredesen, D-Tenn.
That’s just not going to happen, White House officials say.
“The absolute certainty about the Affordable Care Act is that for many, many employers who cover millions of people, it increases the incentives for them to offer coverage,” said Jason Furman, an economic adviser to President Barack Obama.
But at least one major employer has shifted a greater share of plan costs to workers, and others are weighing the pros and cons of eventually forcing employees to strike out on their own.
“I don‘t think you are going to hear anybody publicly say ’We’ve made a decision to drop insurance,’ ” said Paul Keckley, executive director of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions. “What we are hearing in our meetings is, ‘We don’t want to be the first one to drop benefits, but we would be the fast second.’ We are hearing that a lot.” Deloitte is a major accounting and consulting firm.
Employer health benefits have been a middle-class mainstay since World War II, when companies were encouraged to offer health insurance instead of pay raises. About 150 million workers and family members are now covered.
When lawmakers debated the legislation, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected it would only have minimal impact on employer plans.
Labels: glenn beck, government healthcare, ObamaCare, The Blaze
Throughout the debate over healthcare reform, President Obama insisted that individuals would be able to maintain their current healthcare plan: “If you like it, you can keep it.” It was a refrain that was used as Congress was writing the bill, as the bill struggled to pass, and now the president continues to claim that the law will allow individuals to keep their coverage.And you can afford the 50% increase in your premium and the $3,000 yearly deductible.
The talking point may be consistent, but talking points aren’t law. Right now, the Department of Health and Human Services, administered by Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, is implementing the law in ways that radically transform the coverage of many Americans.
Over the next few years, millions of American families, individuals and retired seniors will see their health coverage transformed by new regulations and decisions made by the Secretary and her successors. The bill uses the phrase, “The Secretary shall,” or one of its variants, more than 1,000 times. This means that Congress has left many of the important decisions regarding implementation up to the Secretary and the bureaucracy.
If you like it, you can keep it; but only if the Secretary agrees.
Labels: daily caller, government healthcare, health insurance, opinion
Just when you thought the left-wing race baiting over the last year couldn’t get any worse, the Communications Workers of America chief honcho Larry Cohen has sunk to new depths attacking those who do not agree with his socialist agenda.
On Wednesday, the NAACP, in continuing its unfounded “racist” accusations of the Tea Party movement, had a conference call on which the CWA President participated.
According to Big Journalism writer Niger Innis, after the NAACP’s Ben Jealous continued his normal the-tea-parties-are-racist-harangue, his little buddy at the CWA threw the rhetorical grenade out on the call:
The most illuminating part of the call came when “progressive” ally, Larry Cohen of the CWA (Communication Workers of America) revealed the real agenda of the attacks on the Tea Party by the Left, “We disagree with the agenda of the tea party Movement… They advocate slavery,” and this classic gem, “We don’t need 19th century capitalism.”
Labels: Andrew Breitbart, Big Government, dhimmi unions, NAACP, NACCP, slavery, Tea Party, unions
In Bakersfield, CA the local carpenters’ union1506 picketed a construction site of a new office building on Thursday, October 21st for not using union labor. This is typical of any “carpenters’” union to protest when they don’t get their way. The video proves the people that are picketing the business are NOT carpenters or have any future interest in working on any union project.
Labels: Big Government, Big Hollywood, big peace, carpenter's union, dhimmi unions, paid strikers, union thugs
Labels: 2010 elections, blackfive, jim moron, McQ, patrick murray, uncle jimbo, VA-08
This is so important that the federal district judge in Florida, in Thursday's preliminary ruling in the second case, spent 22 pages analyzing it. If the fine is a penalty rather than a tax, Congress' power is far less extensive.--The Washington Times
Judge Roger Vinson noted Congress repeatedly called the fine a 'penalty,' explicitly changing its description from a 'tax' that earlier versions of the bill assessed by name. Citing Alice's admonition to Humpty Dumpty that words can't 'mean so many different things' as Humpty intended, Judge Vinson concluded, 'Congress should not be permitted to secure and cast politically difficult votes on controversial legislation by deliberately calling something one thing ... [only to] argue in court that Congress really meant something else entirely.'
Judge Vinson explained that no matter what Congress called it, the assessment was designed to act as a punishment, not a revenue measure. Hence, it's not a tax.
His 22-page analysis is an exposition of the logic that if something is called a duck, acts like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck -- and the same goes for a penalty. The tax issue is vital because it's the Obama administration's fallback position if it loses on the first and biggest dispute, which is whether Congress has the power under the Commerce Clause not only to regulate commerce, but to force individuals to engage in specific commerce."
Labels: Daily Brief, duck, federal mandates, fine, government healthcare, health tax, patriot post, penalty, punishment, The Chronicle, Washington Times
Please click here for the rest of the post.Very soon, Democrats and their union bosses' worst fears may soon be realized and, if they cannot continue their slight of hand, it may threaten their very existence. While it is true that Democrats and their union bosses are facing possibly debilitating losses on November 2nd, they are hiding the really bad news from voters until after November 2nd.
Do you remember that promise we heard back in 2008 about transparency? Democrats and, in particular, then-candidate Barack Obama stated emphatically that "transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency." What a joke that was. Well, it's time to shed some light on the house of cards that is about to come crashing down on Democrats' and union bosses' heads.
In June, a conversation took place in a hotel restaurant in Washington. As a latecomer to the conversation, it was easy to pick up that the topic that was the $165 billion union pension bailout bill introduced by Sen. Bob Casey [D-PA] in March.
Upon introductions, one of the individuals stated, "this is Armageddon."
Please click here for the rest of the post.Barack Obama and the Democrats have a story about this election. It goes like this. The Supreme Court ruled that corporations have free speech rights in the Supreme Court decision Citizens United. Since then, all this corporate money has flowed into campaigns, blah blah blah. And the press has completely accepted this line of thinking.
It is complete nonsense. They probably want to concoct a falsehood so that this election somehow is not about the White House. But the reality is that their core narrative is simply false on its face.
It's sad that this needs to be brought up, but it must: it would appear that the Netroots - as per their continuing habit of acting as if the American political system was identical to a pre-Giuliani Times Square peep show emporium - has gotten themselves in a bit of a scrape, again. Specifically, they spent several cheerful hours hooting and hollering over the way that THAT WOMAN suggested that the Tea Party not "party like it was 1773? before they noticed that. well, that the Boston Tea Party was in, well, 1773.
A couple of things: first, this storyboard; which is both cruel and accurate.
Second, while I understand and expect that your average online progressive blogger has about much awareness of American history as, say. Oh, this is awkward. An online progressive blogger would be the actual yardstick for 'abysmally ignorant about American history.' Nonetheless, while I understand that the Online Left is dumb. really, Gwen Ifill. You're supposed to be one of the bright talking heads.
Tsk, tsk.
Labels: 2010 elections, aerosmith, bruce willis, Citizens United, corrupt democrats, dhimmi unions, free speech, liv tyler, morning briefing, Palin Derangement Syndrome, redstate, sarah palin, scotus
KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN -- To the U.S. Army soldiers and Marines serving here, some things seem so obviously true that they are beyond debate. Among those perceived truths: Tthe restrictive rules of engagement that they have to fight under have made serving in combat far more dangerous for them, while allowing the Taliban to return to a position of strength.
"If they use rockets to hit the [forward operating base] we can't shoot back because they were within 500 meters of the village. If they shoot at us and drop their weapon in the process we can't shoot back," said Spc. Charles Brooks, 26, a U.S. Army medic with 1st Battalion, 4th Infantry Regiment, in Zabul province.
Word had come down the morning Brooks spoke to this reporter that watch towers surrounding the base were going to be dismantled because Afghan village elders, some sympathetic to the Taliban, complained they were invading their village privacy. "We have to take down our towers because it offends them and now the Taliban can set up mortars and we can't see them," Brooks added, with disgust.
In June, Gen. David Petraeus, who took command here after the self-inflicted demise of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, told Congress that he was weighing a major change with rules for engaging enemy fighters in Afghanistan. That has not yet happened, troops say. Soldiers and Marines continue to be held back by what they believe to be strict rules imposed by the government of President Hamid Karzai designed with one objective: limit Afghan civilian casualties.
Labels: 1st Battalion 4th Infantry, afghanistan, dcexaminer, ROE
Virginia’s fiery attorney general Ken Cuccinelli, who argued against the constitutionality of the health care law in federal court this week, has a new line: President Obama is worse than King George III, the English king in power when Americans declared independence in 1776.
Cuccinelli said Monday that at no other time in American history had a government forced citizens to purchase a product and gotten away with it, even the British King that sparked the American Revolution.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed in April contains a provision that requires citizens to buy health insurance. Virginia’s lawsuit argues that the mandate is beyond the powers of the federal government, as defined in the Constitution. (A Massachusetts state measure, championed by former governor and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, requires everyone in the state to have insurance.)
Labels: bambi, government healthcare, health taxes, King George III, lawsuit
Labels: corporate taxes, government healthcare, health taxes, kiplinger, small business, stupid taxes, tax cuts, unneccessary taxes
A conservative political scientist and historian calls it an "act of desperation" that the chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is trying to compare interest-group fundraising for GOP candidates to the Watergate scandal.
Critics say DNC chairman Tim Kaine is attempting to create a scandal by criticizing well-funded outside interest groups whose campaign war chests have swelled because of anonymous donors. Speaking at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast on Thursday, Kaine claimed that funding revenues of conservative groups, which are putting most of their resources behind Republican candidates, could be "one of the biggest political process stories since Watergate."
In response, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee called the comments a "shameless effort to silence opposition to the Democrat Party's failed policies three weeks before an election."
Dr. Charles W. Dunn of Regent University's Robertson School of Government agrees, saying Kaine and his fellow Democrats are desperate.
"That's a far-fetched claim. It's an act of desperation," states Dunn. "The Democrats are in a bind facing a landslide, an avalanche -- whatever they want to call it -- so they're trying desperately to get an issue that will stick. And nothing is sticking."
He offers this advice: "If a party has evidence of miss doings, put the evidence out there. But don't make a charge that you don't have evidence for."
Dunn says the Democrats are not winning on the issues or with the quality of their candidates -- and the American people are seeing through this desperate attempt to drub up a scandal in the waning weeks of the campaign.
Labels: Chamber of Commerce, DNC, foreign money, Little Timmy Kaine, Watergate
Labels: Bill Whittle, conservative principles, conservative values, free enterprise, free will, freerepublic, limited government, rights, self determination, Tea Party, youtube
"I'd vote in favor of a robust public option, in favor of allowing public funds to be used to provide abortion coverage, in favor of allowing illegal immigrants to buy health insurance with their own money on exchanges, and in favor of an income surcharge on wealthy Americans if neccessary to pay for this bill." Source-The Real Krystal Ball
Labels: Ball, Congress 2010 End of an Error, Congressional Candidates, holly, hope, Krystal Ball, kyrstal, VA-01, Wittman
Labels: chile, dingy harry reid, government healthcare, illinois, meet the press, military ballots, miner, Nevada, ObamaCare, social security
Last month marked the nine-year anniversary of the September 11 attacks against the United States. As we reflect upon the strikes that took nearly 3,000 lives, recent events remind us of the ongoing struggle to protect the American homeland from further acts of terror. As every month seems to usher in the revelation of a new terror plot hatched within our nation’s borders, we are reminded of the vigilance necessary to combat the dangers posed by radical Islamist ideologies.
Over the past fifteen months, 23 cases involving 56 individuals, both citizens of the United States and foreign nationals of legal residency, have been uncovered while in various stages of development. The groups and individuals captured over the past year and a half derived their inspiration, and often direction, from al-Qaeda, its affiliates, and the broader Islamist fundamentalist movement.
Labels: daily caller, domestic terrorists, Islam religion of peace my ass, islamic terrorism, opinion, Radical Islam, Scott Erickson
Labels: earmarks, eric erickson, foreign money, islamic terrorism, redstate
This is a memo to America’s hippies:
Tea Party values are hippie values.
You heard me right. The Tea Party is the one social movement in contemporary America that can rightfully claim to be the ideological heir to the original hippie movement that started in the mid-’60s. And because of this, all current hippies and ex-hippies should support the Tea Party, and by extension Tea Party candidates.
I’d like to have a private heart-to-heart talk with my fellow hippies here, so can the rest of you please stop reading now and leave us alone for a while? Thanks.
Let’s Rap
If you, as a hippie, think the thesis of this essay couldn’t possibly be true, you’ve been paying too much attention to the mainstream media. The Tea Party has been intentionally misrepresented, villainized and smeared by the powers-that-be. But this too is a feature that the Tea Party shares with hippies — the hippie movement was itself misrepresented and smeared by a different mainstream media over 40 years ago.
This essay will elucidate in a fresh way how Tea Partiers are the true heirs to the hippie ethos. When you’ve finished reading, you’ll see the Tea Party in a new light and (hopefully) understand that you may have been on the wrong side of the fence until now.
In short, the Tea Party and the hippie movement share four fundamental core values:
- A craving for independence;
- A celebration of individualism;
- Joy in the freedom offered by self-sufficiency;
- And an acceptance of the natural order of things.
Labels: hippies, Pajamas Media, Tea Party, Zombie
The Obama-run Washington bureaucracy has classified a common and reliable rifle, the M1 Garand, as a "threat to public safety in the U.S.," and the State Department has canceled plans by the Republic of Korea to return tens of thousands of surplus rifles to the U.S. for sale in the consumer market.
The stunning classification of an ordinary gun that was used in the U.S. military for two decades and issued to thousands of soldiers and Marines during World War II and Korea as a threat came in a document by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
It is being publicized by Examiner gun rights writer David Codrea, who said the federal agency appeared alarmed that there would be "no more controls [over imported Garands] than any other firearm."
"If I read this right, what they're saying is, every gun poses a threat to public safety in the U.S.," he wrote. "This is the same rationale used in model-specific 'assault weapons' bans – the type of gun is somehow deemed relevant, even though untold numbers of such firearms are already peaceably owned in this country, and even though no supporting evidence for this conclusion exists beyond agenda-promoting speculation."
A source who sought confidentiality because of his current status in the industry told WND that the document posted by Codrea is at least an accurate draft, if not the final version, of the document assembled by the ATF.
According to the document itself, it came about because of this scenario: The State Department in May 2009 approved a "request by the Government of the Republic of Korea (ROK) to transfer 87,310 M1 Garand rifles and 770,160 M1 carbine rifles to U.S. private entities for subsequent commercial resale in the United States."
But the ATF contacted the State Department and argued the stock of rifles "poses a threat to public safety in the U.S." As a result, the State Department reversed its decision.
The transfer of such weapons would raise the number of guns available and, therefore, lower the price, making them more generally available, the agency found.
Labels: ATF, Examiner, M1 Garand, South Korea, State Department, World Net Daily
Labels: dead tangos, death to terrorists, extra crispy dead tangos, islamic goat humpers, Kenneth Clodfelter, USS Cole, yemen
Labels: angle, Astroturf, Christine O'Donnell, Delaware, morning briefing, Nevada, redstate, Tea Party
The President is not interested in educating the American people by making everyone disclose their donations. He is only interested in silencing his opponents. That is why unions were specifically exempted from the DISCLOSE Act as were a slew of other interest groups.
On Face the Nation this Sunday, CBS host Bob Schieffer confronted White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod about a New York Times article showing that White House charges of "secret foreign money" "stealing our democracy" were completely baseless. Schieffer asked: "If the only charge, three weeks into the election that the Democrats can make is that there’s somehow this may or may not be foreign money coming into the campaign, is that the best you can do?"
Axelrod went on to contend that it is the responsibility of those the White House accuses to prove they aren't breaking the law. This morning, NBC's Chuck Todd described Axelrod's answer as "McCarthy-esque" on Daily Rundown.
Yes. Baseless charges about foreigners stealing democracy is the best the left can do. Their policies have completely failed and they are afraid of being held accountable. The President's response is to try and use the power of the federal government to deter all dissent. If there is a threat to our democracy in this election, it is not coming from the Chamber of Commerce.
Labels: Face the Nation, foreign money, Heritage Foundation, Heritage Morning Bell
Labels: COLA, daily caller, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, streak, The Hill