politicalpartypoop.com » 2006 » May

Archive for May, 2006

George F. Will: Post-Katrina Liberalism

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

By George F. Will

WASHINGTON — It took exactly one month — until the president’s prime-time news conference of Oct. 11, 2001 — to refute the notion that 9/11 “changed everything.” When a reporter said “you haven’t called for any sacrifices from the American people,” he replied, “Well, you know, I think the American people are sacrificing now. I think they’re waiting in airport lines longer than they’ve ever had before.” And that was before the sacrificing became really hellacious with the requirement that passengers remove their shoes at security checkpoints.
The idea that Katrina would change the only thing that matters — thinking — perished even more quickly, at about the time Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, a suitable symbol of congressional narcissism, dramatized the severity of the tragedy by taking a television interviewer on a helicopter flight over … her destroyed beach house. “Washington rolled the dice and Louisiana lost,” she said in a speech on the Senate floor that moved some senators to tears. You can no more embarrass a senator than you can a sofa, so the tears were not accompanied by blushing about having just passed a transportation bill whose 6,371 pork projects cost $24 billion, about 10 times more than the price of the levee New Orleans needed. Louisiana’s congressional delegation larded the bill with $540,580,200 worth of earmarks, one-fifth the price of a capable levee.

America’s always fast-flowing river of race-obsessing has overflowed its banks, and last Sunday on “This Week” Sen. Barack Obama, Illinois’ freshman Democrat, applied to the expression of old banalities a fluency that would be beguiling were it without content. Unfortunately, it included the requisite lament about the president’s inadequate “empathy” and an amazing criticism of the government’s “historic indifference” and its “passive indifference” that “is as bad as active malice.” The senator, 44, is just 30 months older than the “war on poverty” that President Johnson declared in January 1964. Since then the indifference that is as bad as active malice has been expressed in more than $6.6 trillion of antipoverty spending, strictly defined.

The senator is called a “new kind of Democrat,” which often means one with new ways of ignoring evidence discordant with old liberal orthodoxies about using cash — much of it spent through liberalism’s “caring professions” — to cope with cultural collapse. He might, however, care to note three not-at-all recondite rules for avoiding poverty: graduate from high school, don’t have a baby until you are married, don’t marry while you are a teenager. Among people who obey those rules, poverty is minimal.

In 1960, John Kennedy of Choate, Harvard and Palm Beach campaigned in West Virginia’s primary and American liberalism experienced one of its regularly recurring rediscoveries of poor people, an epiphany abetted three years later by Michael Harrington’s book “The Other America” receiving a 50-page review where liberals would notice it, amidst The New Yorker magazine’s advertisements for luxury goods. Between such rediscoveries, the poor are work for liberalism’s constituencies among the “caregiving” professions.

Liberalism’s post-Katrina fearlessness in discovering the obvious — if an inner city is inundated, the victims will be disproportionately minorities — stopped short of indelicately noting how many of the victims were women with children but not husbands. Released during the post-Katrina debacle, scant attention was paid to the National Center for Health Statistics’ pertinent report that in 2003, 34.6 percent of all American births were to unmarried women. The percentage among African-American women was 68.2.

Given that most African-Americans are middle class and almost half live outside central cities, and that 76 percent of all births to Louisiana African-Americans were to unmarried women, it is a safe surmise that more than 80 percent of African-American births in inner-city New Orleans — as in some other inner cities — were to women without husbands. That translates into a large and constantly renewed cohort of lightly parented adolescent males, and that translates into chaos, in neighborhoods and schools, come rain or come shine.

This will become of intense interest to the “czar” or “czarina” — this republic has a fascinating reflex for cloaking improvised offices with the dignity, such as it was, of defunct Russian royalty — who is charged with “overseeing” the “rebuilding” of New Orleans. He or she can exchange notes with our “nation-builders” in Iraq, now learning conservatism’s core truths about the limits to government’s abilities to know and control things. Or he or she can glance at Ground Zero in Manhattan where, four years later, the “rebuilding” of a few square blocks is not going well.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Blacks, Nation, Liberals | Permalink | No Comments »

Preserving a vision - Must read for liberals!

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

by Thomas Sowell

In Shelby Steele’s new book, “White Guilt,” he mentions an encounter with a white liberal who fiercely defended the welfare state programs and policies of the 1960s.
“Damn it, we saved this country!” he all but shouted. “This country was about to blow up. There were riots everywhere. You can stand there now in hindsight and criticize, but we had to keep the country together, my friend.”
Before we turn to facts, we need to understand the vision. This is a vision of the world more precious than gold. To those who believe it, this vision is a treasure beyond price because it is also a wonderful vision of themselves — and they are not likely to give it up for anything so mundane as grubby facts.
For those liberals who lived through the 1960s, that was often also the springtime of their youth, increasingly treasured as a memory, as the grim realities of old age settle down upon them today. It is expecting an awful lot to expect them to consider any alternative vision of the world, especially one that shatters the beautiful picture of themselves as wise and compassionate saviors of society.

But what are the facts?
While liberals may think of the 1960s as the beginning of many “progressive” trends in American society, cold hard facts tell a very different story. The 1960s marked the end of many beneficial trends that had been going on for years — and a complete reversal of those trends as programs, policies, and ideologies of the liberals took hold.
Teenage pregnancy had been going down for years. So had venereal disease. Rates of infection for syphilis in 1960 was half of what it had been in 1950. There were similar trends in crime. The total number of murders in the United States in 1960 was lower than in 1950, 1940, or 1930 — even though the population was growing and two new states had been added. The murder rate, in proportion to population, in 1960 was half of what it had been in 1934.
Every one of these beneficial trends sharply reversed after liberal notions gained ascendancy during in the 1960s. By 1974, the murder rate had doubled. Even liberal icon Sargent Shriver, head of the agency directing the “war on poverty,” admitted that “venereal disease has skyrocketed” even though “we have had more clinics, more pills, and more sex education than ever in history.”
Liberals looking back on the 1960s take special pride in their role on racial issues, for civil rights laws and the advancement of blacks out of poverty. Those riots that threatened to tear the country apart were race riots — and supposedly the liberals saved us all.
But what do the facts show?
Both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 had a higher percentage of Congressional Republicans voting for their enactment than the percentage of Congressional Democrats.
You can check it out in The Congressional Record.
As for black economic advances, the most dramatic reduction in poverty among blacks occurred between 1940 and 1960, when the black poverty rate was cut almost in half, without any major government programs of the Great Society kind that began in the 1960s.
Liberals love to point to the rise of blacks out of poverty since 1960 as proof of the benefits of liberal programs, as if the continuation of a trend that began decades earlier was proof of how liberals saved blacks.
As for saving the country from riots, the facts show the direct opposite. It was precisely when liberals were in power that riots rocked cities across the country. There were never as many riots during the two presidential terms of Ronald Reagan as during one term of Lyndon Johnson.
Even during the 1960s, riots were far more common and deadly in liberal bastions like New York City than in Chicago, where the original Mayor Daley announced on television that he had given his police orders to “shoot to kill” if riots broke out.
Daley was demonized for saying such a thing, even though Chicago did not have the loss of life suffered in liberal cities where mayors pandered to grievance-mongers and pleaded for restraint. In other words, the net effect was that Daley saved lives while liberals saved their vision.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Liberals | Permalink | 2 Comments »

Ammunition for poverty pimps

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

by Walter E. Williams

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina’s destruction of New Orleans, President Bush gave America’s poverty pimps and race hustlers new ammunition. The president said, “As all of us saw on television, there is also some deep, persistent poverty in this region as well. And that poverty has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action.”

The president’s espousing such a vision not only supplies ammunition to poverty pimps and race hustlers, it focuses attention away from the true connection between race and poverty.
Though I grow weary of pointing it out, let’s do it again. Let’s examine some numbers readily available from the Census Bureau’s 2004 Current Population Survey and ask some questions. There’s one segment of the black population that suffers only a 9.9 percent poverty rate, and only 13.7 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. There’s another segment that suffers a 39.5 percent poverty rate, and 58.1 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. Among whites, one segment suffers a 6 percent poverty rate, and only 9.9 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. The other segment suffers a 26.4 percent poverty rate, and 52 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. What do you think distinguishes the high and low poverty populations among blacks?
Would you buy an explanation that it’s because white people practice discrimination against one segment of the black population and not the other or one segment had a history of slavery and not the other? You’d have to be a lunatic to buy such an explanation. The only distinction between both the black and white populations is marriage — lower poverty in married-couple families.
In 1960, only 28 percent of black females ages 15 to 44 were never married and illegitimacy among blacks was 22 percent. Today, the never-married rate is 56 percent and illegitimacy stands at 70 percent. If today’s black family structure were what it was in 1960, the overall black poverty rate would be in or near single digits. The weakening of the black family structure, and its devastating consequences, have nothing to do with the history of slavery or racial discrimination.
Dr. Charles Murray, an American Enterprise Institute scholar, argues in an article titled “Rediscovering the Underclass” in the Institute’s On the Issues series (October 2005) that self-destructive behavior has become the hallmark of the underclass. He says that unemployment in the underclass is not caused by the lack of jobs but by the inability to get up every morning and go to work.

In 1954, the percentage of black males, age 20 to 24, not looking for work was nine percent. In 1999, it rose to 30 percent, and that was at a time when employers were beating the bushes for employees. Murray adds that “the statistical reality is that people who get into the American job market and stay there seldom remain poor unless they do something self-destructive.”
I share Murray’s sentiment expressed at the beginning of his article where he says, “Watching the courage of ordinary low-income people as they deal with the aftermath of Katrina and Rita, it is hard to decide which politicians are more contemptible — Democrats who are rediscovering poverty and blaming it on George W. Bush, or Republicans who are rediscovering poverty and claiming that the government can fix it.” Since President Johnson’s War on Poverty, controlling for inflation, the nation has spent $9 trillion on about 80 anti-poverty programs. To put that figure in perspective, last year’s U.S. GDP was $11 trillion; $9 trillion exceeds the GDP of any nation except the U.S. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita uncovered the result of the War on Poverty — dependency and self-destructive behavior.

Guess what the president and politicians from both parties are asking the American people to do? If you said, “Enact programs that will sustain and enhance dependency,” go to the head of the class.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Negro Watch, Democrats, Blacks, Liberals | Permalink | No Comments »

“Observations From Soldiering in Iraq.”

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

The first commander of the Multi-National Security Transition Command in Iraq and former commander of the 101st Airborne Division’s Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus Presented his lecture entitled “Observations From Soldiering in Iraq.”
Gen. Petraeus assumed command of the U.S. Army Combined Arms Center and Fort Leavenworth in October 2005 following his deployment in Iraq, which also included the command of the NATO Training Mission from October 2004 to September 2005.

WATCH VIDEO OF LECTURE

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Iraq | Permalink | No Comments »

KS-Gov: Former GOP party chief quits GOP

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

FOUND ON THE KOS, YOU MEAN LIBERALS GIVE A SHIT ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON IN BACKWARD ASS KANSAS!? Kathleen Sebelius, our unlikely governor in Kansas (and potential 2008 veep candidate), is a one-woman Democratic Party recruitment machine. Her modus operandi? She gets prominent Republicans to switch parties in order to run with her in the Lt. Guv slot.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Blog Watch, Democrats, Liberals | Permalink | 2 Comments »

A Reminder: Democrats on Iraq

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

I’m going to continue to post and recycle old material so that folks as they peep PPP can see for themselves what was discussed and said before. Certainly I’m just one blogger, but as the campaign season unfolds people need to be reminded over and over about Democrat deception. If liberals REFUSE to acknowledge the past how can they be taken serious in future arguments and debates and issues that face this nation. Check out the silly intellectually bankrupt rants like this one:”Color me reactionary, but the president’s first reaction to bad news shouldn’t be, “Huh?” By now we’re used to system-wide deceit coming from the administration. But couple that with exploding levels of sheltered incompetence and it’s easy to see that things will get far worse before they get better. As thousands died along the Gulf Coast, reports indicate the scope of the tragedy didn’t sink in with the president until Thursday, September 1, four days after he changed subjects in an impromptu speech from impending disaster to the situation in Iraq. Three days after he failed to ask a single question during a crucial briefing. Two days after his guitar lessons.”

Liberals can get away with that bullshit when they are addressing they own crowd of sheep herding, politically challenged fan base.

————–Claim: Quotes reproduce statements made by Democratic leaders about Saddam Hussein’s acquisition or possession of weapons of mass destruction.

Status: True.

Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2003]

“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.”
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

“Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.”
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

“Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

“There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.”
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction.”
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…”
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do.”
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. “[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real …
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD’S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!!

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Blog Watch, Genius Democrats, Liberals | Permalink | No Comments »

A Build-a-Protest Approach to Immigration

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

WASHINGTON, May 30 — Talk about constructive criticism.

Advocates of tougher border security have sent thousands of bricks to Senate and House offices in recent weeks to make a none-too-subtle point with lawmakers about where many of their constituents come down on emerging immigration bills.

Leaders of the campaign, which has delivered an estimated 10,000 bricks since it began in April, said they had hit on the idea as a way to emphasize the benefits of a fence along the border with Mexico.

In an age when professionally planned lobbying campaigns have long since overwhelmed spontaneous grass-roots pressure, organizers of the brick brigade said they also saw an opportunity to deliver a missive not easily discarded.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Immigration | Permalink | No Comments »

Pay no attention, Male PMS post!

Tuesday, May 30th, 2006

One thing about either reading blogs or maintaining one is that you expose yourself to more crazy and stupid shit than the average person.
Recently while peeping a number of sites looking for post material I actually kept track of how many sites I visited.
On one particular day, pissed off and outraged at this Immigration bullshit I visited more than 150 blogs in an 8 hour period. 149 more than I should have.
As an individual who rarely read books and hated (book) reading as a child, I likely read hundreds of times more material than I did in my 20’s.
However my problem is sometimes the more you know, the more you don’t want to know.
I have become more of a pessimist, I am getting more pissed and irritated by the things I see and read. I think our society is fucked. Sorry people but that tis how I see it.

Gene pool eradication fortunately takes care of some of the craziness, but the idiot gene is very prevalent on the web.
I don’t profess to all of the answers, far from it. But I do believe I have basic common sense when it comes to understanding the world around me.

Unfortunately I have found from all of this reading that people are far more willing to bang on their keyboards colossal ignorance and stupidity. I come to this conclusion after reading what I will freely admit is way too much liberal nonsense. I am thoroughly convinced that people who would consider themselves liberal must have a tumor growing on their frontal lobes that controls reasoning.

Some of the shit liberals have said to me; one liberal questioned my position on this immigration shit calling me xenophobic.
I had another liberal compare me to a KKK member.
I had one liberal tell me that this immigration issue is like slavery and the black civil rights struggle.
Another liberal actually said that the United States has NO RIGHT to keep people from seeking entry to this country.
This does not even include the times while on the local Lawrence Kansas Blogs I was called a “rich white guy”Classic!

I also read one entry by a black columnist who actually said that allowing illegal immigrants to gain entry to this country can “help black elected officials,” by helping them maintain their power base and help push through reforms and legislation consistently blocked by white lawmakers.
Think about the utter stupidity of that logic.
This is why mentioning the names of people like Howard Dean, Al Gore, Dick Turban, Hillary Clinton raises my blood pressure rise to dangerous levels.
When you read about the things these people do on the behalf of the Democratic Party it makes you wonder why they and liberals seemingly hate America so much.
Why are they are such self-loathing crackas’?
The very offenses, over which these dimwits profess their outrage, are committed by their heros (Hitler, Clinton, Stalin, Po Pot, etc.) Liberals can’t help but to flat out lie about the status of the environment, homelessness, the economy, foreign Policy, and race relations but these participants in the Liberal “Press corps” don’t consider these constant lies to be news worthy.

As liberals bitch, moan and protest the Bush Administration, Republicans, Neocons they would never consider “putting their money where their asses are.”
These Socialists pricks don’t believe in helping the less fortunate, they believe in prostituting the plight of the less fortunate in an effort to consume more power over as many people as possible. Look at how low they set the income identification for being considered “rich”. An income of $60,000 or more is considered “rich” notwithstanding numbers of family members or financial obligation.
Liberals are intent on forcing as many families as possible to be dependent on government handouts such as healthcare, welfare, public school education, and retirement. This frankly is the goal behind the most recent immigration bill. Freely invite a bunch of desperate illiterate people into the country, acting as emancipator of the Mexican masses.

Look at the seemingly “free” Negros and how they tow the line when it comes to regurgitating the liberal Democrat Party line.
Negros are summarily threatened with Liberal floggings by the New York Times, mainstream television, National Public Radio and all of their “ilk” complemented by the full support of the true Uncle Toms such as Jesse Jackson and Aunt Thomasinas such as Washington D.C. Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes-Norton Al Sharpton hell even crooks like William Jefferson…DEMOCRAT, Louisiana.
The same Niggas who bitch and moan about how George Bush don’t give a shit about them are the same tired Niggas who can barely read and write, are high school dropouts, and who are generational welfare dependents and social misfits.
Liberal idiots play on the near complete ignorance of their constituency, inciting fear in Negros that Republicans are going to take them away from the plantation at the first opportunity:

* You must elect Democrats in order to keep the [drug] needle exchange program
* If you elect Republicans, you will lose access to condoms and birth control pills.
* Republicans want you to choose either food or medicine.

Think of the days under slavery as ignorant Negros are reminded of those same fears Democrats need to regularly brainwash their Slaves with so that they would not run away.

We are a nation who believes that we are indivisible “Under God”. Our liberty depends on our own ability to solve our problems - not government! We must avoid government intervention to feed us, clothe us, and shelter us. We must cut these Liberal idiots at their sources their money!

Want to reveal the real Nazi, liberal idiot. Ask a typical liberal when the opportunity presents itself this question;
If this nation functioned exactly as you proselytize it should be, would those of us who desire to attain the same wealth and prestige that you possess be able to do so? Even further will you be willing to forfeit YOUR wealth and prestige in order to be subjected to the same government dependency as I may have to under your ideal state for this nation?
Silence.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Liberal Fun, Democrats | Permalink | No Comments »

Gore in Hay climate change plea

Tuesday, May 30th, 2006

Mr Gore, fresh from an appearance at the Cannes film festival, delivered a starker message that the world was now facing a “danger which could bring the end of civilisation.”

THIS MAN IS THE BIGGEST FOOL ON THE PLANET.
AND ANYONE WHO TAKES HIM SERIOUSLY IS AN EVEN BIGGER FOOL!

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Crazy | Permalink | No Comments »

The Catastrophe Wasn’t Katrina

Tuesday, May 30th, 2006

By Eugene Robinson - Washington Post

The evidence, by now, is overwhelming: Beautiful, decadent New Orleans wasn’t doomed by Hurricane Katrina but by decades of human incompetence and neglect. As far as the drowned city is concerned, the greatest natural disaster in the nation’s history would have been just a messy inconvenience if not for the fumbling hand of man.

The mortal threat to New Orleans, as Katrina plowed into the Gulf Coast, was not the powerful winds — Mississippi took the brunt of those — but the massive storm surge the hurricane generated. We now know that the levees, floodwalls and other barriers protecting the city were, for the most part, plenty tall enough and theoretically strong enough to keep the waters at bay. On paper, New Orleans should have ended up wet and wounded, but basically intact.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Society, Blacks, Nation | Permalink | No Comments »

The Hutchinson Report: Should We Hold Black Lawmakers to a Higher Standard Than Whites? Absolutely

Tuesday, May 30th, 2006

By: Earl Ofari Hutchinson, Special to BlackAmericaWeb.com

The instant the news broke that FBI agents raided the office of black Louisiana Congressman William Jefferson and announced that they had a videotape of him allegedly taking $100,000 in bribe money, some blacks loudly grumbled that Jefferson was the victim of a racial double standard. They noted that the FBI did not ransack the offices of Ohio Congressman Robert Ney, also under legal fire, or convicted California Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham, and that federal prosecutors and FBI agents generally issue subpoenas or informally request that lawmakers being investigated turn over documents or other relevant materials.
But the Jefferson case is special. He has been on the hot legal seat for many months. He’s been the target of an ongoing criminal investigation and a House ethics probe. He left a bitter taste in the mouths of many New Orleans residents during the Katrina debacle when he allegedly commandeered a National Guard truck to check on his personal property and save personal belongings at the same moment nearby residents needed rescue from possible drowning.
The case is also special because Jefferson is black, but for a different reason than some blacks claim.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Negro Watch, Democrats, Blacks | Permalink | No Comments »

The Nigga Kingdom”raw dogma”

Tuesday, May 30th, 2006

by Nkrumah Steward, creator of 8BM.com

”You can only be destroyed by believing that you really are what the white world calls a nigger” - James Baldwin.

Arguably no other word in the American speech has more baggage than the word Nigger. People have tried to change its definition, lessen the weight of it by misspelling it Nigga, but nothing really takes the sting from it completely.
Nigger is a word that some people can use, while some people can’t. A word that some embrace while others blame the internalization of that word for the condition of an entire race of people in America.And really, if you think about it, Nigger is a word without a definitive definition. If it had one, there wouldn’t be so many usages vying for the right to be the primary definition.
Some would like it to be just a term like “man” that anyone can use, while others would like the word to remain a disparaging term for a member of any dark-skinned people. Sadly if you use the most common use of the word Nigger as its primary definition, it would still be subject to the race of the individual using it.If blacks are using it, then it could mean friend, man, brother, male.
But that is only if blacks are using it.
Whites cannot use the word Nigger and it mean anything other than all of its derogatory connotations, and that is why so many refuse to even use it.Personally I am at a loss as to how we as Americans can stop using it altogether. If you don’t have the word Nigger, what would we call them? How would we refer to them?Who are these them that I am referring to?Well that is the sticky icky question isn’t it?

The them I am talking about are those people that live on a block with a burned out home every third house but in front of their home is a $60,000 Cadillac.

The them I am talking about are those people that claim to make tens of thousands of dollars a week selling drugs but still live in the most crime ridden, decrepit neighborhoods, surrounded by garbage, packs of stray dogs roaming the streets, drug addicts, prostitutes and homeless all to the soundtrack of police sirens and ambulances.

The them I am talking about spend what little money they have on getting their hair made up, their nails touched up and new clothes on their backs before they buy food for their own children.

The them I am talking about have three children from three different men and she isn’t certain of the identity of any one of their fathers.The them I am talking about are people who actually risk their lives over a brand name pair of gym shoes when they refuse to take them off when they are being robbed at gun point for them.

Why would you rob someone of a pair of gym shoes? Let’s think about that for a second. You can’t eat gym shoes. You can’t live in gym shoes. So you can’t talk about how poor they are and these are crimes of poverty and people just trying to survive. That is crap. These are crimes of people that are drunk with materialism. Crimes of poverty are stealing food, stealing clothing, trespassing on property for shelter from the elements. Crimes of poverty are not robbing people so you walk around wearing a $600 pair of sun glasses.

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Negro Watch, Blacks | Permalink | No Comments »

Monday, May 29th, 2006

Posted in General | Permalink | No Comments »

Who voted against the immigration bill

Monday, May 29th, 2006

From Rush:

“there were four Democrats that voted against the immigration bill, and three of them are up for reelection. I think it was Ben Nelson, Debbie Stabenow, and “Sheets” Byrd voted against it, and they’re all up for reelection. A number of Republicans voted against this, and they are up for reelection. So the Senate came up with enough cover to allow those up for reelection to vote against it. They had enough support for the bill to allow those who are up for reelection to vote against it, so they go back and not face the wrath of their voters. The people that voted for it are not up this year, and they will be up in the next two or four years, or five, depending on who they are. But they have protection. By that time it is thought that you will have forgotten all about this, and that’s the way these things work.”

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Immigration | Permalink | 2 Comments »

Hmmm…

Monday, May 29th, 2006

ISLAMO-fascists kill tennis players for wearing shorts.

An Iraqi tennis coach and two of his players were fatally shot last week in Baghdad because they were wearing shorts, authorities said yesterday.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in International Crazy | Permalink | 2 Comments »

About a dozen supporters march with S.C. girl fighting her school’s Confederate apparel ban

Monday, May 29th, 2006

You mean these crazy old niggas did not have shit else to do other than support some confederate flag bullshit?

JIM DAVENPORT
Associated Press Writer
Candice Hardwick walked with about a dozen people, about half of them family members and some wearing Confederate T-shirts, a few blocks to Latta High School. Hardwick wore a Confederate belt buckle and button and had the Confederate flag on her cell phone cover. She removed those items before entering the school, where she is a sophomore.Hardwick says she wants to wear the emblem to pay tribute to ancestors who fought on the Confederate side of the Civil War. She said she has been forced to change clothes or turn her shirt inside-out, and has been suspended twice and threatened with being kicked off the track team.John Kirby, school superintendent, said Monday that officials “have clothing issues every year … and we’ve handled it consistently every time.”Among those marching with Candice was a black man, H.K. Edgerton, past chairman of the Southern Legal Resource Center’s advisory board. The group filed a federal lawsuit in March on her behalf.”She’s made a stand for her Southland,” said Edgerton. A former local NAACP leader in North Carolina, he is known for dressing up in Confederate gear to emphasize what he describes as the role blacks played in voluntarily supporting the South in the Civil War.The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that the First Amendment protects students’ political expressions during school hours so long as they don’t substantially disrupt the education process.The high court has not ruled specifically on whether a student may wear Confederate symbols. Three years ago, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta upheld a lower court ruling allowing a school to ban the Confederate flag.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Negro Watch, Redneck Watch | Permalink | No Comments »

Power corrupts both parties

Monday, May 29th, 2006

A rare bipartisan unity was achieved in the House of Representatives this week.
What was it that brought lawmakers together? A determination to win the war on terror? A plan to secure our borders? A compromise to save Social Security from bankruptcy?
Nah. Democratic and Republican leaders in the House joined together to protest the search the FBI made last weekend of the offices of Rep. William Jefferson (D., La.), who is under investigation for allegedly accepting a bribe from a Kentucky businessman.
Partisan differences are set aside when (and apparently only when) the privileges of lawmakers are threatened.
One would imagine, that in the wake of the Duke Cunningham and Jack Abramoff scandals, the GOP would be grateful for the attention devoted to Mr. Jefferson, because his case, and that of Rep. Alan Mollohan (D., W.Va.), make Democratic denunciations of the “Republican culture of corruption ” seem a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
But one would be wrong.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Washington, Politics | Permalink | No Comments »

Good example of why Liberals irritate the hell out of me!

Sunday, May 28th, 2006

Sniff Note:
I’m sure this post will be linked to all over blogland. This entry from the KOS is more tired chicken-hawk blogsterbation liberal rants.
You see folks this is not rocket science. Liberals hate the military and hate everything the military stands for. So when some 20-something punk ass fucken whiteboy dorm rat gets on blogs like the KOS and rails about those mean old white men and women who rail against liberalism somehow the fact that they either did or did not serve in the military has some sort of a credibility attached to it.
Having served in the military, I can testify that it certainly does not make you smarter, better and more loving of this nation and better able to make decisions for this nation than those who have not served.
We are now having serious conversations about the possibility of a woman serving as commander in chief. Many of these women will not have served in the military but that does not make them any less qualified.
To those liberals who will no doubt read this tired drivel and have an orgasm after reading it, just appreciate the hypocrisy of your glee.
What you do with your position in office once you have been given the privilege to serve there is what matters.
Our country has a voluntary military. The people there have not be threatened or bribed to join.
The men who died for this country made the ultimate sacrifice for this nation. But you know what, all through human history the various leaders always stood at the top and watched as those were sacrificed on the behalf of the kingdom or country.

If you don’t like the direction of this nation, then opt to be a fucken leader or elect another one.
Simple premise to me.
All of the people this stupid jackass listed as not having served in the military is suppose to tell me what, that they have no opinion, they have no say, they can’t support a given cause or position. Because they are conservatives, Republicans or whatever that not having served in the military is license to silence them or even ME! Fuck that. Get your own damm talk radio show, or TV program, or run for office.
You liberals and this chicken-hawk bullshit is just over the top fucken retarded.
Liberal never cease to amaze me how they will malign the military and call them murderers when it is politically expedient, and on Memorial Day, while they get drunk out of their asses and watch a ball game or get on a blog and make political hay regurgitating the familiar virtues (or lack thereof) of evil Neocon and chicken-hawks everywhere.

Damm idiot pricks.
Hey you stupid liberal punk ass just what the fuck qualifies you to be the literary sounding board chastising us evil Neocons? Nothing, not a fucken thing. Other than thanks to those who died to give you the right and freedom to sit in your underwear, chug a Milwaukees’ Best and blogsterbate your colossal ignorance to the masses on KOS’s moronic world.
If the only standard is a keyboard or a microphone then Rush, Hannity and Coulter are equally as qualified you. Stupid idiot maggot!
BTW Have a nice Memorial Day. From a Chicken-hawk, oh snap I wuz in the Air Force, does that count!?

————————-

Requiem for a Nightmare by DarkSyde on KOS
Sun May 28, 2006 at 06:06:06 AM PDT
Tomorrow is the day we honor the fallen American heroes of so many wars. To avoid staining our national day of mourning, I felt it more appropriate to dedicate this post at this time to a very different kind of American. They may be clueless neocons, erroneous White House talking heads, or smear artists and their self-appointed town criers. But what they all have in common is that each one bravely ducked when called and later took part directly or indirectly in assaulting the reputation of those who stood in harm’s way. They are known, affectionately, as Chicken-hawks:
President George W. Bush - served four years of a six years Nat’l Guard commitment, some say after daddy’s friends pulled some strings to keep him out of Vietnam. The circumstances of his early separation from state-side service are still controversial (details)
Karl Rove, occasional Deputy Chief of Staff and alleged full time smear artist, escaped the draft and did not serve
VP Dick Cheney - several deferments, by marriage and timely fatherhood
Former VP Chief of Staff I. Lewis Scooter Libby - did not serve
Secretary of State and former NSA Condaleeza Rice - did not serve
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist - did not serve.
Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert - did not serve.
Former House Majority Leader Tom Delay - did not serve
House Majority Whip Roy Blunt - did not serve
Majority Whip Mitch McConnell - did not serve
Rick Santorum, third ranking Republican in the Senate - did not serve.
Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott - did not

—————

FEEL FREE TO READ MORE OF THIS BULLSHIT HERE

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Liberal Fun, Genius Democrats, Politics | Permalink | No Comments »

White House compares illegal immigration to speeding

Sunday, May 28th, 2006

Sniff Note: Looks like I’m going to impose a moratorium on myself for posting any more shit on illegal Mexican shit for awhile.

The more I read the more pissed off I get.
After reading this fucken article and seeing just how cavalier the White House and the Bush Administration is treating this I am so ready for Bush to get his tired ass out of office I don’t know what to do.

A traffic ticket!? Tony Snow needs to be bitch slapped.
The next Republican candidate better speak up on this immigration issue and they better speak firmly and convincingly. Screw John McCain and his illegal immigrant pimping ass.
Bush’s credibility on this issue as well as the Republican Senators are ZERO with me.
Bunch of punk asses.

Article By Bill Sammon, The Examiner

WASHINGTON - The White House on Friday said a Senate bill that would grant legal status to illegal immigrants is analogous to a traffic law that allows a speeder to pay a fine and continue driving.”If you had a traffic ticket and you paid it, you’re not forever a speeder, are you?” White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said in response to questions from The Examiner.”So the fact is, you have paid your debt to society,” he added. “And we have come up with a way to make sure that the debt to society gets paid. Then you move forward.”The “traffic ticket” analogy raised eyebrows on Capitol Hill, where many House Republicans regard illegal immigration as a grave crime.”I don’t know if Tony meant to trivialize it or not,” said Will Adams, spokesman for Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo. “But it’s certainly misleading.”"The penalty for a speeding ticket is a fine,” he added. “The penalty for being here illegally is being removed from this country. But the president doesn’t want illegal aliens to go home.”Snow emphasized that illegals would have to pay fines, learn English and wait years for a chance at full citizenship. But Adams called that “a slap on the hand” compared to deportation.”Here’s a more apt analogy,” he said. “You get stopped for speeding, and you say to the cop: “Hey listen, you’re about to give me a $300 ticket. How about we make it 20 bucks and just call it even?”Snow predicted that House Republicans would eventually drop their opposition to the Senate bill, which passed Thursday. The bill, which includes a guest worker program that would grant legal status to aliens, is headed to a conference committee for possible reconciliation with a House bill aimed at beefing up border security.Snow suggested the guest worker program could be sold to even ardent opponents like Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.”Chairman Sensenbrenner, who’s got some real problems with various aspects, has said publicly that the temporary worker program has merit,” Snow said.”There are areas in which members of the House are going to agree with the president,” he added. “I certainly don’t want to be speaking for Chairman Sensenbrenner, but the fact is, you know politics.”But Sensenbrenner appeared unmoved.”What’s going on now, in calling it a pathway to citizenship or earned legalization, is not honest because it is amnesty,” he said at a news conference.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Immigration | Permalink | 4 Comments »

Idiot!

Sunday, May 28th, 2006

“To think that we would build a fence without any conversation or consultation with Mexico - that doesn’t make sense,” Sen. Dick Durbin told “Fox News Sunday.”

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Immigration, Genius Democrats | Permalink | 1 Comment »

Dobbs: Bush, Congress tell working folk to go to hell

Friday, May 26th, 2006

By Lou Dobbs

CNN NEW YORK (CNN) — President Bush says that the installation of the new Iraqi government was a “watershed event,” but at the same time warns Americans of the challenges and loss as we continue to prosecute the war against Iraqi insurgents. Sen. Harry Reid declares that legislation that would render English the national language is racist.

Thirty-seven Democrats vote for full amnesty for all illegal aliens in this country, even though nobody really knows whether the number is 11 million, 12 million or 20 million. The Senate Republican leadership demands that a “comprehensive immigration reform” plan must be passed before this Memorial Day weekend. And the president signs into law a tax cut that raises taxes on the educational funds of teenagers saving for college.

Never before in our country’s history have both the president and Congress been so out of touch with most Americans. Never before have so few of our elected officials and corporate leaders been less willing to commit to the national interest. And never before has our nation’s largest constituent group — some 200 million middle-class Americans — been without representation in our nation’s capital.

George W. Bush’s approval ratings have slumped to the lowest of his presidency. The approval rating for Congress is even lower, and nearly three-quarters of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction.
But what is our government doing about that? The president is staying the course in Iraq and apparently demanding little of his generals to create a new, far more effective strategy for urgent success. Of course, he also wants a guest-worker program and amnesty of millions of illegal aliens. And Congress, faced with midterm elections in just over five months, is intent on giving the president what he wants and telling working men and women and their families, American citizens all, to go to hell.

Illegal aliens are more important to this Congress than securing our borders and our ports, more important than those legal immigrants who have waited in line and who follow the law. The Senate has added to the litany of lunacy that makes up what it calls reform: Illegal aliens would only have to pay back taxes on three of the past five years, they will not be prosecuted for felonies such as identity theft or purchasing or using fraudulent Social Security cards, and unlike millions of visa holders who have to leave the country to have them renewed, they may simply remain in the United States while this Congress and this president give away all the benefits and privileges of American citizenship.

This is an outright assault in the elitist war on the middle class. And working men and women who’ve already borne the pain of losing good-paying manufacturing jobs and having middle-class jobs outsourced to cheap foreign labor markets are faced with the onslaught of more illegal immigration and cheap labor into the American economy. This president and Congress talk about bringing illegal aliens out of the shadows while they turn out the lights on our middle class.
President Bush and his most trusted advisers tell us how well our economy is doing, how many jobs have been created and how so-called free trade will enrich the lives of the same people whose livelihoods these policies are destroying.

It’s hard not to think of the trusted adviser to Catherine the Great who sought to hide from her the embarrassing and shoddy condition of Ukrainian and Crimean villages by having elaborate facades built to divert her attention and to mask an uncomfortable reality. I don’t know whether Karl Rove is President Bush’s Grigori Potemkin or whether George Bush has created Potemkin villages all by himself. But the facades are cracking, and phony fronts of failed policies are quickly crumbling.

Six thousand unarmed National Guardsmen working as adjunct rear support to our undermanned, under-equipped Border Patrol is not border security. Three million illegal aliens continue to cross our borders and depress wages by hundreds of billions of dollars every year. The millions of manufacturing and middle-class jobs lost over the last five years have been replaced by lower-wage employment.

The president’s faith-based commitment to so-called free trade will likely lead to a $1 trillion U.S. current account deficit this year and a trade debt of $4.5 trillion after 30 years of trade deficits. And while the president and Congress point to No Child Left Behind as a solution to our educational crisis, we’re failing an entire generation of Americans whose test scores continue to fall and whose high school dropout rates would be embarrassing to a third-world country.
And a third-world country is what we will be if our elected officials don’t soon come to their senses.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Immigration, Politics | Permalink | 3 Comments »

Michigan Department of Education is attempting to ban the “America” and “American” from our public schools.

Friday, May 26th, 2006

Keep ‘America’ in Michigan schools
State bureaucrats want to do what Stalin, Osama could only dream about

Sniffer Note: You know people as much as I like this blog stuff, finding articles like this is really starting to fucken piss me off.
When you consider what the Unites States Senate did yesterday by passing that bullshit legislation those son of a bitches basically told the American people to fuck off.
And now you have shit like this, censoring “America”. You also see signs like the pic I have below that reads “America is a continent, not a country”.
I don’t know about you but this is a fucken war right here at home.
If people don’t start paying attention, to things outlines by Sen. Jeff Sessions in the post “Immigration Bill Is Worse Than You Think”, and shit like this censoring America bullshit we are fucked.

By Michael Warren
No to America

What a state social studies consultant is telling educators in e-mails about using “America” and “Americans” in tests and courses: “I have promised teachers that we would delete the use of American [when we are really ONLY referring to the United States] from the GLCEs (grade level content expectations) so that everything is consistent and correct as soon as it was feasible.” “It is ethnocentric for the United States to claim the entire hemisphere.” — Karen Todorov, Michigan Department of Education In perhaps a well-intentioned, but pernicious example of political correctness, the Michigan Department of Education is attempting to ban the “America” and “American” from our public schools. Even though the word “America” appears in the department’s own civics and government benchmarks, the department’s style protocol for the Michigan Education Assessment Program requires that “America” and “Americans” be expunged from our testing and grade level expectations. Last week, the department ordered that our hard-working teachers not utter the words.

READ MORE OF THIS BULLSHIT!

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Democrats, Idiot | Permalink | 1 Comment »

Rising black-Latino clash on jobs

Friday, May 26th, 2006

LOS ANGELES

From where Johnny Blair Vaughn sits outside Lucy Florence Coffee House in the heart of Los Angeles’s black community, he can feel the temperature rising over immigration.The biggest reason, says the father of seven, is jobs. “If you drive across this city, you will see 99 percent of all construction is being done by Hispanics…. You will see no African-American males on these sites, and that is a big change,” says Mr. Vaughn, who has worked in construction for two decades. His two oldest boys, in their early 20s, have been turned down so many times for jobs - as framers, roofers, cement layers - that they no longer apply, he says.While Los Angeles is ground zero for black-Hispanic friction these days, echoes of Vaughn’s words are rising throughout urban black America as Congress labors over immigration reform. In cities where almost half of the young black men are unemployed, a debate is raging over whether Latinos - undocumented and not - are elbowing aside blacks for jobs in stores, restaurants, hotels, manufacturing plants, and elsewhere.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Immigration | Permalink | No Comments »

Do you have an X-Box?

Friday, May 26th, 2006

Just askin”

Posted in Womens Issues | Permalink | 2 Comments »

Counting the Costs of Amnesty

Friday, May 26th, 2006

>
by Kurt Williamsen

With many of our nation’s politicians pushing to give permanent residency and amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, Americans should know the costs of granting amnesty. Many politicians are planning to give permanent residency to millions of illegal immigrants. To achieve their end goals of granting this amnesty (amnesty is what all of their proposals boil down to), these politicians have been telling the public that the illegals bolster our economy. Using verbal sleight of hand, they conveniently ignore the formidable costs that the immigrants generate, preferring to pick and choose numbers that would seem to show that massive immigration is invaluable. Immigrants, both those who are legal as well as illegal, impact state and federal budgets and American citizens in many predictable ways.
Federal Implications
According to the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a pro-immigrant organization that encourages economically sound policies, during the mid-1990s, all immigrants legal and illegal only provided a net contribution of two-tenths of one percent to our nation’s economy. Moreover, the benefit they provided to the country was outstripped by their indirect costs.
This isn’t to say that all immigrants hurt the economy, but it does indicate that the majority of immigrants are poorly educated and have low-income jobs, mainly in the service industry.
In 2002, reports the CIS, “households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government … and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.” CIS also estimated that if an amnesty were enacted in 2002, “the net fiscal deficit [at the federal level] would grow to nearly $29 billion per year.” This anticipated increase would occur even though the legalized persons would pay increased taxes because they would also heavily use services likely increasing the net annual fiscal deficit “from $2,736 to $7,668 per household.”
The aforementioned estimates were made in 2002 when the approximate number of illegal immigrants was 8.7 million; it’s now about 12 million.

READ FULL ARTICLE

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Immigration | Permalink | No Comments »

Funny Comic - Found while trolling.

Friday, May 26th, 2006

Posted in Blog Watch, Society, Womens Issues | Permalink | 1 Comment »

Immigration Bill Is Worse Than You Think

Thursday, May 25th, 2006

by Sen. Jeff Sessions

FROM HUMAN EVENT ONLINE

Editor’s Note: Sen. Jeff Sessions (R.-Ala.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, offered a devastating analysis on the Senate immigration bill in a speech delivered on the Senate floor on Tuesday, May 23. Sessions pointed to shocking elements of the bill that were hidden deep in its text. These include, for example, that the employers of illegal aliens would be given an amnesty for cheating on their taxes, and that under the terms of the law the government would for all practical purposes have to take an illegal alien’s word for it that he has been in the country illegally long enough to qualify for an amnesty.
Sessions also pointed to some of the tremendous hidden costs of the bill, including the $500 billion in additional welfare payments it will cost American taxpayers in the period 10 to 20 years after its passage.
Senators who vote for the bill today cannot credibly claim later they were unaware of the elements and consequences that Sen. Session’s outlined in this speech.
——————————————————————————–
I am going to take some time tonight to inform my colleagues about some of the problems with the legislation before us. It is worse than you think, colleagues.
The legislation has an incredible number of problems with it. Some, as I will point out tonight, can only be considered deliberate. Whereas on the one hand it has nice words with good sounding phrases in it to do good things, on the second hand it completely eviscerates that, oftentimes in a way that only the most careful reading by a good lawyer would discover. So I feel like I have to fulfill my duty. I was on the Judiciary Committee. We went into this. We tried to monitor it and study it and actually read this 614-page bill, and I have a responsibility and I am going to fulfill my responsibility.

I think the things I am saying tonight ought to disturb people. They ought to be unhappy about it. It ought to make them consider whether they want to vote for this piece of legislation that, in my opinion, should never, ever become law.

I would also just point out I will be offering tomorrow, or soon, an amendment to deal with the earned-income tax credit situation that is raised by this legislation, focusing on the amnesty in the bill and what will happen after amnesty is granted, before they become a full citizen. The Congressional Budget Office has concluded that the earned-income tax credit will pay out to those who came into our country illegally $29 billion over 10 years. The earned-income tax credit has been on the books for some time. It is a good bit larger than most people think. The average recipient of it receives $1,700. Lower-income people get a larger amount. Over half the people who we expect will receive amnesty are without a high school degree. They are receiving lower wages. They will be the ones who will particularly qualify for this. This is a score that has been given to us by the group that is supposed to score it—$29 billion will be paid out.
If they go all the way and become a citizen they will be entitled to this like any other citizen, and they will be entitled to get it under my amendment. But I do not believe we should award people who have entered our country illegally, submitted a false Social Security number, worked illegally—I do not believe we should reward them with $29 billion of the taxpayers’ money. That is a lot of money.

I will also be offering a budget point of order, I or one of my colleagues will, in the next day or so. We have been working on that. We asked for a report. The Congressional Budget Office has concluded that the budget point of order lies in the first 10 years of this bill. It also concludes that it lies under the long-term provisions of the budget points of order for expenditures in the outyears. They didn’t give us those numbers, but they said, without much work—they didn’t have to do much work—the numbers are going to be much worse in the outyears. It clearly would be a detriment to the Government and these figures would exceed the budget, and a budget point of order would lie.

At the Heritage Foundation, Mr. Robert Rector, who is the expert who dealt with welfare, studied this. He was the architect of welfare reform who has done so much to improve America’s welfare system and improve incomes for low-income families. It really worked beautifully. He was the architect of it. He says this bill represents the greatest increase in welfare in 35 years. With the provisions and benefits that will be in it, he estimates that year 10 through year 20, the cost could be $50 to $60 billion a year to the taxpayers because it takes some time for the people who are adjusting and becoming citizens and/or legal permanent residents to really begin to make the claims.

CBO admits the numbers are going to surge in the outyears. He says it is $50 billion a year. If that is so—and he is not exaggerating the numbers, because that is based solely on the amnesty provisions, not the provisions that will allow 3 times to 4 times as many people to come into the country legally in the next 20 years as come in today, and many of them will go on welfare because that whole system is not based on identifying people with skills and educational levels that would indicate they would be more than low-wage workers—so it could really be more than that. But $50 billion a year over 10 years is $500 billion. That is a half a trillion dollars, and that is why Mr. Rector said this legislation is a fiscal catastrophe. This is a man whose opinions and ideas and research this Congress, and particularly the Republicans, utilized to hammer away, time and time again, year after year, to get welfare reform.

It finally happened. It worked just like he said. The predictions of disaster made against his recommendations proved to be false.
He is saying that about this. So this is not a technical point of order. It represents an attempt to save the fiscal soundness of the budget of the United States.

I want to take some moments here to deal with some problems with the legislation. The American people are suspicious of us. They were promised in 1986, after years of urging the Government, the President and the Congress, promised to fix our borders and end illegal immigration. In exchange for that they acquiesced and went along with amnesty in 1986. They said there were a million, 2 million here who would claim it. It turned out 3 million claimed amnesty after 1986. That ought to give us some pause about the projections that we would have. We have 11 million people here now and only 8 or so will seek amnesty under it. That ought to give us some pause there. It may well be above the number.

So the American people are suspicious and they are dubious and they are watching us carefully, and they should. Let me tell you some of the things that are in the legislation that indicate a lack of respect for the American people, really. Some of these are some of the reasons I said the other day the Senate should be ashamed of itself, the way we are moving this bill.

My staff, working up some of these comments, came up with a title—maybe at my suggestion—“Sneaky Lawyer Tricks” that are in the bill. I will let you decide if that is a fair description of what is in it. I will go down through some of the matters that are important. There are others I could complain about for which we will not have time.

First, the legislation talks about title IV of the bill. That title IV of the [*S5031]
bill defines the new H2-C program as a temporary guest worker program. Those are in big print in the bill: Temporary guest workers.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Immigration | Permalink | No Comments »

Food Warning!

Thursday, May 25th, 2006

I would like to comment on consumption of unhealthy food these days.
Don’t do it, its bad, very bad.
The FDA tells us that consuming too much food is bad for your health and can lead to death.
So live longer, eat less.
Thank You for your attention on this matter

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in General, Womens Issues | Permalink | 2 Comments »

Baseless conservative spin point of the day.

Thursday, May 25th, 2006

RECYCLED STUFF FROM LIBERAL BLOGS.

“They don’t seem to recognize that intercepting communications from al Qaeda types is also necessary if we expect to thwart another terrorist attack. They’d rather accuse Bush of breaking the law.”
LIBERAL RESPONSE: No Democrat has EVER EVER suggested the Bush Administration should not spy on Al Quaeda. The argument has been he should do it in the way prescribed under law, i.e. get a warrant under a system of checks and balances, to protect civil rights of innocents who the reports show have gotten caught up in the process, and to prevent the president or future presidents from abusing the practice.

Setting The Record Straight On The Terrorist Ties Of Intercepted Communications.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Says The National Security Agency (NSA) Is Eavesdropping On American Citizens With No “Indication Of Wrongdoing.” SEN. DURBIN: “And in passing the Patriot Act, we gave the government new authority, but we didn’t give the National Security Agency the authority to spy on American citizens without any indication of wrongdoing.” (CBS’ “Early Show,” 12/17/05)

But The NSA Authorization Is Solely For Intercepting Communications Of Suspected Al Qaeda Members Or Related Terrorist Groups.

Ranking Democrat On The House Intelligence Committee Representative Jane Harman (D-CA) Calls The NSA Program “Essential” To Targeting Al Qaeda. “As the Ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, I have been briefed since 2003 on a highly classified NSA foreign collection program that targeted Al Qaeda. I believe the program is essential to US national security and that its disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities.”
(Rep. Jane Harman, Harman Statement On NSA Electronic Surveillance Program, Press Release, 12/21/05)

The Program Targets Suspected “Al Qaeda Communications.” DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE GENERAL MICHAEL HAYDEN: “Again, I make the point, what we are talking about here are communications we have every reason to believe are al Qaeda communications, one end of which is in the United States. And I don’t think any of us would want any inefficiencies in our coverage of those kinds of communications, above all. And that’s what this program allows us to do - it allows us to be as agile as operationally required to cover these targets.” (The White House, Press Briefing, 12/19/05)

The Government Has “A Reasonable Basis To Conclude That One Party To The Communication” Is Affiliated With Al Qaeda. ATTORNEY GENERAL ALBERTO GONZALES: “Another very important point to remember is that we have to have a reasonable basis to conclude that one party to the communication is a member of al Qaeda, affiliated with al Qaeda, or a member of an organization affiliated with al Qaeda, or working in support of al Qaeda. We view these authorities as authorities to confront the enemy in which the United States is at war with - and that is al Qaeda and those who are supporting or affiliated with al Qaeda. What we’re trying to do is learn of communications, back and forth, from within the United States to overseas with members of al Qaeda. And that’s what this program is about.”
(The White House, Press Briefing, 12/19/05)

We forget: Democrats were uninterested in NSA program until it was in the newspaper

Old News Interview on NBC News, Lisa Myers reported:

“One intelligence source tells NBC News that two dozen members of Congress have known about this program for years, and have been completely uninterested until today” (date story aired of course).

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Liberal Fun, Blog Watch, Genius Democrats, Idiot | Permalink | No Comments »

Gas PainsThe Clinton-Gore hypocrisy on gas prices.

Thursday, May 25th, 2006

By Jonathan H. Adler
ARTICLE DATED JUNE 19, 2000

President Clinton is “worried” about gas prices in the Midwest. Last Friday he told the Today show that it is “frustrating” that consumers must pay $2 per gallon or more for gasoline in Chicago and Milwaukee. Last week, amidst unspecified allegations of “price gouging,” officials from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Departments of Energy and Transportation met with oil-industry representatives and demanded an explanation.
Consumers are understandably upset about higher gas prices, but the administration should view inflated energy prices as a policy success. After all, the Clinton-Gore team has sought to increase energy prices for years, and deserves a share of the credit — or blame — for the recent price rise.
In their first budget, the Clinton-Gore team proposed a whopping tax on energy use that would have cost the average family an estimated $300 per year, far more than the recent upticks in the Midwest. A plan to boost energy prices in order to reduce use was also outlined in Gore’s tome, Earth in the Balance (on page 349 for those who are checking). According to Gore’s plan, “production of gasoline, heating oil and other oil-based fuels, coal, natural gas, and electricity generated from fossil fuels would trigger incremental payments of the CO2 tax according to the carbon content of the fuels produced.”
At the time, Clinton officials explained that the tax’s impact on fuel costs was its primary virtue. Higher prices, they averred, would encourage conservation. Vice President Gore explained that an energy tax “reduces pollution, promotes energy efficiency, and helps us become more independent from foreign oil.” Higher energy prices would increase the cost of everything from commuting and cooking a meal to shipping goods and heating homes. No matter, said the Clinton-Gore administration and their Green allies, it would be for our own good. Consumers didn’t feel quite the same way, and the proposed energy tax died a quick death; all that Clinton could get through the then-Democratic Congress was a 4.3 cent-per-gallon hike in the gas tax.

While they are loath to admit it, the administration bears much of the responsibility for domestic supply disruptions and higher prices. Environmental regulations, ranging from region-specific content mandates to barriers to facility modernization, have exacerbated the impact of OPEC’s price hike and a pipeline break in the Midwest.
A dynamic national market has been hamstrung and Balkanized by environmental rules, making it more difficult for refiners to respond to local needs. Proposed new rules are expected to make this problem worse. Instead of accepting responsibility for hiking fuel costs, the Clinton administration is hurriedly seeking to shift the blame. EPA officials deny any responsibility and refuse to consider loosening regulatory strictures to ease the supply crunch. Instead, a Federal Trade Commission investigation of “price gouging” allegations is in the works. Energy secretary Bill Richardson took to the air Sunday morning to proclaim that energy prices were his top priority — and he’ll be as effective here as he was in enhancing security at the nuclear-weapons labs. The vice president, interestingly enough, is quiet.
So, if gas prices continue to climb this summer, and you find yourself stuck in service-station lines, don’t blame the oil industry. Thank Al Gore.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Liberal Fun, Genius Democrats, Washington, Liberal Nuts, Crazy | Permalink | No Comments »