Author: Jonn Lilyea

  • AP doesn’t like bloggers

    Reporting on the President’s speech to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association on Wednesday, for some reason the Associated Press felt the need to describ blogs thusly;

    Blogs are Web sites that tend to be narrow in focus and directed at a niche audience. Most operate without editors and give instant reaction to the news. Their freewheeling, open nature makes them popular but also ripe for unverified statements. 

    Now I’m pretty sure that AP has a hard-on for blogs since blogs, most notably Flopping Aces in recent months, have been responsible for AP’s decline in trustworthiness, but they should also be grateful because I’m pretty sure that blogs are responsible for the large volume of traffic that gets driven to their sites.

    Now, if there are any bloggers out there who need a professional editor on their masthead to satisfy the editors at AP, you’re welcome to use me – AP can just go pound sand somewhere.

    Their mischaracterization is unjustified in the case of IraqTheModel.com, as well. I remember reading short dispatches from the brothers Fahdil before the US invasion. They’ve always been there, and they’ve always given accurate and timely updates to events in Iraq.

  • Where are the Human Rights Democrats?

    According to John at Powerline, the Democrats are sitting on HR 267 that would condemn the Iranian capture and treatment of 15 British sailors and marines. The Democrats keep preparing for their Spring Break.

    Meanwhile the Iranians are broadcasting video footage of the capture and propaganda footage of the Brits along with the public release of their mail, a clear violation of the laws of land warfare.

    Dick Durbin couldn’t wait to call our own troops SS guards, so where is on this? Why is Pelosi so retiscent about being on the side of our closest and oldest ally? Where’s Amnesty International and the Red Cross who’ve spent reams of paper trying to convince the American public that the US is the worst terrorist in the world?

    Jimmy Carter called Israel an apartheid government. So where is the little cretin now? You’d think he’d have lots of advice and thoughts on dealing with hostages in Iran, but apparently not. I guess he’s still a little gun shy about Iran.

    John Murtha said our troops were cold-blooded murders. What has he got to say about this illegal capture and mistreatment of British troops by the Iranians?

    Not a friggin’ peep from the self-righteous Left.

    Pound sand you hypocritical freaks.

    Read the Right Wing Nut House’s Iran tries the old bait and switch.

  • Democrat spending habits

    The editorial staff of the Washington Examiner laid out for us the Democrat plans for clandestine tax hikes during their anticipated tenure over the next six years;

    The more we learn about the 2008 budget being crafted by Democratic leaders in the Senate and House, the more expensive it gets. Last week we observed that the only way Democrats could match their draft 2008 budget’s assumption on tax revenues was to let the Bush tax cuts expire as scheduled in 2010. Doing so would result in “the biggest tax increase in American history,” we said.

    Coincidently, the Washington Times’ Sean Lengell reports that the Congressional agency that tracked Republican budget excesses since 1995, has ceased that portion of it’s operations – since February;

      “To me, something doesn’t smell right,” said Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican. “I just hope no one is pressuring” the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
        While not blaming the Democratic leadership, Mr. DeMint added: “I guess if you’re looking for a motive, you’d have to look in that direction.”
        CRS, a nonpartisan agency of the Library of Congress created to conduct research for members of Congress on legislative issues, changed its policy in February — a month after Democrats took control of the Congress and vowed to curb the number of special-interest projects inserted into spending bills or even reports that don’t require a vote.
        CRS Director Daniel P. Mulhollan developed the policy after consulting with “internal CRS appropriations experts” and deciding the service was redundant with what other agencies do, CRS spokeswoman Janine D’Addario said.
        “His decision was strictly an internal decision,” said Miss D’Addario, whose agency began providing Congress members with information on earmarks in 1994, when Mr. Mulhollan took over as director.

    Funny how the Democrats plan to be “fiscally responsible”, their mantra for every election since 1996, without oversight and by jacking up our taxes. The Examiner explains the Democrats’ plan;

    [Center for Budget and Policy Priorities] issued a carefully worded statement denying that the Democrats’ budget plan amounted to a tax hike: It “simply assumes the same level of revenues over the 2007-2012 period as projected by the Congressional Budget Office under its current-policy baseline, which essentially assumes no change in current laws governing taxes.” Current law specifies the 2010 expiration date, when the levies will return to their previous, higher rates. As Senate Budget Committee Chairman Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., has said, “a tax increase to me is when you increase the taxes that people are paying now.”

    The Heritage Foundation’s Brian Riedl notes that allowing the Bush cuts to expire as scheduled will mean approximately $900 billion in higher assessments over five years and nearly $3.3 trillion more in 10 years. That’s nearly $2,700 per household. The final amount depends upon whether the Alternative Minimum Tax is changed and if Democrats opt to extend some of the Bush tax cuts for some taxpayers. As we said last week, Democrats ought to be upfront about this enormous tax hike.

    Since revenues are at their highest levels ever, why would the Democrats want to increase taxes? Well since there’s no public oversight anymore, they can just start their vote-buying where they left off in 1993. From the WashTimes;

     When Democrats took control of the 110th Congress in January, they promised to limit the long-standing and bipartisan practice of slipping pork spending into bills. But when the House last week passed a $124 billion emergency war-funding provision, the bill included as much as $20 billion in nonmilitary and pork-barrel spending, a move widely criticized by Republicans, including President Bush. 

    Now, I watched Larry Kudlow’s show Tuesday night and Larry had Xavier Becerra (D-CA), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee (ya know- the guys that write tax policy) and Assistant to the Speaker (Blinky the Botox Queen). Becerra absolutely denied that there would be tax hikes in this budget. Wish I had video to prove it, but, obviously, he lied – Democrats really are sneaking around behind our backs on this one.

    The Examiner’s editorial staff asks;

    As we’ve asked before and will no doubt ask again, why can’t Washington politicians just tell us the truth?

    Do they really expect an answer?

  • The Real Bush stands up

    Since the 2004 election, I’ve wondered if the fellow they keep telling me is the president is just a pod or a stand-in. He’s been willing to let law enforcement officers sit in prison for stopping criminals and allowed criminals to stream across our borders. He’s signed pork-laden budgets, and acts like he’s never heard of a veto. He’s done nearly everything the Democrats want him to do, and some things they wouldn’t have even thought of all by themselves.

    Finally, the guy I voted for twice has shown his face, reports Joseph Curls of the Washington Times;

    “The bill includes $74 million for peanut storage, $25 million for spinach growers,” he said to laughter. “There’s $6.4 million for the House of Representatives’ salaries and expense accounts. I don’t know what that is, but it is not related to the war and protecting the United States of America,” he said to more laughter and applause.
        The president urged lawmakers to deliver a bill he can sign.
        “Here’s the bottom line: The House and Senate bills have too much pork, too many conditions on our commanders, and an artificial timetable for withdrawal,” Mr. Bush said. “And I have made it clear for weeks, if either version comes to my desk, I’m going to veto it.
        “It is also clear from the strong opposition in both houses that my veto would be sustained. Yet Congress continues to pursue these bills, and as they do, the clock is ticking for our troops in the field,” he said.

    Of course Blinky the Botox Queen has a snappy comeback in the Washington Post;

    “Calm down with the threats. There is a new Congress in town,” Pelosi said at a Capitol Hill news conference. “We respect your constitutional role. We want you to respect ours.”

    “Calm down with the threats”? What kind of grade school playground language is that? Not to be outdown with childish language, Dingy Harry stepped up (in the WashTimes again);

    “Why doesn’t he get real with what’s going on with the world?”

    Get real? That’s the kind of pop culture drivel we like to hear from our Congressional leaders. So precise, so unassailable in it’s simplicity. (If you can’t tell, I’m being sarcastic here).

    From the Examiner we get some more from Nancy Pelosi;

    “This war without end has gone on far too long and we’re here to end it.”

    Who the hell is she kidding. They cobbled together a piece of shit, weak-kneed rant about unrealistic and arbitrary time schedules so complicated that the Democrat leadership (they call that leadership) doesn’t even understand themselves, threw in tens of billions of dollars in useless vote-buying pork, patted them-stupid-selves on the back while the nasty old bags in garish pink boas cried their alligator tears for the cameras.

    The only thing the Democrats did the other day was insure that the Arab world knows that we don’t have the testicular fortitude to continue this war against their Dark Ages culture. And they’re proud of that? They think that’s why they won their “mandate” from the American voters? Do they think that Americans are as cowardly, ill-informed and ill-mannered as Democrats?

    In the Examiner, Herry Reid admits that the whole thing is an exercise in absolving the Democrats of their vote in 2003 for the war in Iraq;

    Reid said the ball was now in the president’s court.

    “The Senate and the House have held together and done what we’ve done,” he told reporters. “It’s now in his corner to do what he wants to do.”

    Kinda sounds like some Biblical reference I remember of someone washing their hands of something.

    But the President threw the ball right back at them;

    “If Congress fails to pass a bill to fund our troops on the front lines, the American people will know who to hold responsible.”

    As long as you keep waving that veto pen around, Mr. President, we’ll hold the Democrats responsible.

  • Waving the white flag

    Of course everyone has heard how the Senate feels about our troops – they loaded up their surrender flag with pork. From the Washington Post;

    Senate Democrats scored a surprise victory yesterday in their bid to force President Bush to end the Iraq war, turning back a Republican amendment that would have struck a troop withdrawal plan from emergency military funding legislation.

    And everyone knows that Chuck Hagel, a former paratrooper in the mold of Hugo Chavez, is the reason that the Democrats pulled off their little coup;

    The defection of a prominent Republican war critic, Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, sealed the Democrats’ win. Hagel, who opposed identical withdrawal language two weeks ago, walked onto the Senate floor an hour before the late-afternoon vote and announced that he would “not support sustaining a flawed and failing policy,” adding: “It’s now time for the Congress to step forward and establish responsible boundaries and conditions for our continued military involvement in Iraq.”

    Yep, that’s exactly how you attract Republicans to your primary effort, Chuckie. You can just keep your paws off the Airborne Day proclamation this year, thanks.

    And good ol’ Dingy Harry Reid is bravest when he’s surrendering as reported by S.A. Miller in the Washington Times;

       “We are not going to back down from the essential language in this bill,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, said of the mandate that a troop pullout start almost immediately with the goal of a complete exit by next March.

    Yep, you’ll back down from our enemies, though, won’t ya, Harry?

    All’ya’all may already know all of this. And you probably know that the president will veto anything resembling a surrender movement that crosses his desk. But, have you read Blackfive’s reactions from the troops?

    UPDATE: A word from Gunnery Sgt Krueger (in Iraq) on Powerline.

  • How disengenuous can you get?

    I’m reading about the recent riots in Paris and how “youths” are clashing with police. Then the AFP mentions how the thing started with a 33-year-old. Since when is a 33-year-old a “youth”? Why can’t these journalists just tell us that this supposed religion of peace is represented in Europe by a bunch of anarchists?

    They also chanted slogans of “police are everywhere, justice is nowhere” and “down with the state, police and bosses”.

    And, as Little Green Footballs points out, “citizen journalists” are forbidden in France these days so we have to rely on the truth-deficient mainstream press.

  • John Doe protections passed

    Audrey Hudson of the Washington Times writes;

    House Republicans yesterday surprised Democrats with a procedural vote to protect public-transportation passengers from being sued if they report suspicious activity — the first step by lawmakers to protect “John Doe” airline travelers already targeted in such a lawsuit.
        After a heated debate and calls for order, the motion to recommit the Democrats’ Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 back to committee with instructions to add the protective language passed on a vote of 304-121.
        All 121 of the “no” votes were cast by Democrats, while 199 Republicans and 105 Democrats voted in favor.

    What could have possibly stopped a rational person from voting for protection against specious lawsuits?

    Rep. Bennie Thompson, Mississippi Democrat and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, opposed the motion over loud objections from colleagues on the House floor, forcing several calls to order from the chair.
        “Absolutely they should have the ability to seek redress in a court of law,” said Mr. Thompson, who suggested that protecting passengers from a lawsuit would encourage racial profiling.
        “This might be well-intended, but it has unintended consequences,” Mr. Thompson said, before he accepted the motion to recommit.

    Unintended consequences like what? Like someone who acts suspiciously might be investigated? Like a terrorist attack might be averted because people aren’t thinking about the litigious consequences of reporting suspicious people?

    Actually we all know know that Mr. Thompson is more concerned about the self-esteem of Muslims than he is about the safety of the flying public.

    And then CAIR chimes in;

    Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said in an open letter yesterday to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty that “the only individuals against whom suit may be raised in this litigation are those who may have knowingly made false reports against the imams with the intent to discriminate against them.”
        The Becket Fund criticized the lawsuit last week and in a letter to Mr. Awad asked that the “John Does” be removed from the lawsuit, however CAIR is standing by the decision.

    You know if CAIR is involved it might be an effective deterent to terrorism. You can see how your representative voted here. (In case the link is wrong, go here and click on “110th 1st session (2007)” in the right column, then on Roll Call vote #200). Mine voted “No” even though I faxed, emailed and called his office. You know Chris Van Hollen is going to get an earful today.

    What really worries me is that there’s nothing anywhere about this vote, except the Washington Times. there’s not even an “Action Alert” about it on CAIR. Looks like the media is keeping this on the “down-low”.

    UPDATE: Chris Van Hollen’s office denies that the vote ever happened. He tried to tell me that the Times story was a mistake – no one from New Mexico introduced any motions on Tuesday. And then, though it never happened, it was a political maneuver by the minority to block legislation. I’ve had a couple dust-ups with this idiot’s staff in the past, it’s clear to me that they have no respect for their constituency.

    UPDATE II: Michele Malkin gives us the John Doe Manifesto.

  • Democrats support working families

    According to this .pdf put out by the Republican staff of the Budget Committee, The Democrats plan on increasing taxes across the board, reducing the child tax credit, bringing back the marriage penalty tax, increase the taxes on investments. Remember they said that they were only going to tax the rich. Guess who they think are rich.

    The Largest Tax Increase in History. The revenue numbers in the Democrat budget increase taxes by $392.5 billion over 5 years, compared with retaining provisions of the 2001 and 2003 tax laws that are currently in place. Taxes increase by $231 billion in 2012 alone, which is even greater than the $153-billion surplus the budget claims.

    Tax Increase 5-Year

    Total

    Increase in Marginal Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $182 billion  

    Reduction of Child Tax Credit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $27 billion

    Increase in Marriage Penalty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . $13 billion

    Increase in Death Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $91 billion  

    Increase in Capital Gains and Dividends Tax Rates. . . . $32.5 billion

    Other Tax Increases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $47 billion  

    So I guess the Democrats support the working family just like they support the troops.