This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Politics

  • Nancy Pelosi’s “Failure” Mantra

    Pelosi echoes Harry (”the war is lost”) Reid:

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said twice Sunday that Iraq “is a failure,” adding that President Bush’s troop surge has “not produced the desired effect.”

    “The purpose of the surge was to create a secure time for the government of Iraq to make the political change to bring reconciliation to Iraq,” Pelosi said on CNN’s “Late Edition.” “They have not done that.”

    Yeah, the ‘desired effect’ was total victory for Islamofascism and defeat of U.S. forces.

    The speaker hastened to add: “The troops have succeeded, God bless them.”

    Much to your dismay, Pelosi.

    ……Anchor Wolf Blitzer asked: “Are you not worried, though, that all the gains that have been achieved over the past year might be lost?”

    “There haven’t been gains, Wolf,” the speaker replied. “The gains have not produced the desired effect, which is the reconciliation of Iraq. This is a failure. This is a failure. The troops have succeeded, God bless them. We owe them the greatest debt of gratitude for their sacrifice, their patriotism, and for their courage and to their families as well.

    Didja get that? “Blinky” Pelosi can’t even get her defeatest story straight. She claims ‘failure’, yet in the same fetid breath she thanks us for our success.

    “But they deserve better than the policy of a war without end, a war that could be 20 years or longer. And Secretary Gates just testified in the last 24 hours to Congress that this next year in Iraq and Afghanistan are going to cost $170 billion.

    It would’ve been cheaper to use a couple of neutron bombs, but hey, they wouldn’t listen to me.

    We deserved better leadership than what we were saddled with between 1992 and 2000. FIVE terrorist attacks happened under Bubba’s watch; Khobar Towers, USS Cole, the U.S. Embassy attacks in Kenya and Tanzania, and the first  World Trade center attack in 1993. His response? He wagged the dog in Mogadishu and Bosnia. He was too busy getting re-election cash from Bejiing and blow jobs from Monica to care about national security.

    We also deserve better than mealy-mouthed leftwing democrats calling us “mercenaries” and “Nazi’s”, and telling us that they don’t think the sacrifice of the fallen in this war was “worth it”. We know more than anyone about how sacrificing for democracy works, having defended it for over 230 years.

    “Afghanistan is not settled because the president took his eye off the ball and took the full attention that should have been in Afghanistan, and shifted some of that to Iraq, a war without end, without a plan, without a reason to go in, without a plan to win, without a strategy to leave. This is a disaster … we cannot perpetuate.”

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8422.html

    Well let’s see now, al Qadea and the Taliban have gotten their asses royally kicked in Iraq and Afghanistan. There were 3000  reasons to go in and kill them. The plan is working. We’ve won. When Baghdad and Kabul are ready to take the reins, we’ll be through.

    The Democratic wing of Al Qaeda just can’t let go of their defeatist ambitions. On the other hand, the Al Qaeda in Iraq already know they’re beaten to a pulp:

    Al-Qaeda in Iraq faces an “extraordinary crisis”. Last year’s mass defection of ordinary Sunnis from al-Qaeda to the US military “created panic, fear and the unwillingness to fight”. The terrorist group’s security structure suffered “total collapse”.

    These are the words not of al-Qaeda’s enemies but of one of its own leaders in Anbar province — once the group’s stronghold. They were set down last summer in a 39-page letter seized during a US raid on an al-Qaeda base near Samarra in November.

    The US military released extracts from that letter yesterday along with a second seized in another November raid that is almost as startling.

    That second document is a bitter 16-page testament written last October by a local al-Qaeda leader near Balad, north of Baghdad. “I am Abu-Tariq, emir of the al-Layin and al-Mashahdah sector,” the author begins. He goes on to describe how his force of 600 shrank to fewer than 20.

    “We were mistreated, cheated and betrayed by some of our brothers,” he says. “Those people were nothing but hypocrites, liars and traitors and were waiting for the right moment to switch sides with whoever pays them most.”

    Assuming the two documents are authentic — and the US military insists that they are — they provide a rare insight into an organisation thrown into turmoil by the rise of the Awakening movement. More than 80,000 Sunnis have joined the tribal groups of “concerned local citizens” [CLCs] that have helped to eject al-Qaeda from swaths of western and northern Iraq, including much of Baghdad.

    US intelligence officials cautioned, however, that the documents were snapshots of two small areas and that al-Qaeda was far from a spent force.

    ……The Anbar letter conceded that the “crusaders” — Americans — had gained the upper hand by persuading ordinary Sunnis that al-Qaeda was responsible for their suffering and by exploiting their poverty to entice them into the security forces.
    Al-Qaeda’s “Islamic State of Iraq is faced with an extraordinary crisis, especially in al-Anbar”, the unnamed emir admitted.

    In an apparent reference to al-Qaeda’s brutal tactics, he said of the Americans and their Sunni allies: “We helped them to unite against us . . . The Americans and the apostates launched their campaigns against us and we found ourselves in a circle not being able to move, organise or conduct our operations.”

    He said of the loss of Anbar province: “This created weakness and psychological defeat. This also created panic, fear and the unwillingness to fight.

    The morale of the fighters went down . . . There was a total collapse in the security structure of the organisation.” The emir complained that the supply of foreign fighters had dwindled and that they found it increasingly hard to operate inside Iraq because they could not blend in. Foreign suicide bombers determined to kill “not less than 20 or 30 infidels” grew disillusioned because they were kept hanging about and only given small operations. Some gave up and went home.

    Finally the emir recommended rewards for killing apostates, using doctors to kill infidels and offering gifts to tribal leaders. He said al-Qaeda’s fighters should be sent to more promising areas such as Diyala province or Baghdad — which is exactly what happened.

    Rear-Admiral Gregory Smith, the US military spokesman in Baghdad, called Abu-Tariq’s testament a “woe-is-me kind of document”. It calls the Sunnis who switched sides a “cancer in the body of al-Jihad movement”, and declares: “We should have no mercy on them.”

    The author lists those who have made off with al-Qaeda weapons or money, describes the group’s arsenal, including C5 rockets, which are used against helicopters, and records the fate of the battalions under his command.

    Most of the first battalion’s fighters “betrayed us and joined al-Sahwah [the Awakening]”, he says. The leader of the second ran away and all but two of its 300 fighters joined the Awakening. The activities of the third were “frozen due to their present conditions”. Of the fourth he writes: “Most of its members are scoundrels, sectarians, non-believers”.

    He lists 38 people still working for him but beside five names he has written comments like “We have not seen him for twenty days” or “left us a week ago”. He concludes, wistfully: “And that is the number of fighters left in my sector.”

    Link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3346386.ece

    Gee, the beleaguered Abu-Tariq sounds so much like Pelosi, it’s downright scary.

  • Proposed Stimulus for Mexico’s Southern Border?!?

    Incredible. There’s a $1.4 Billion proposal by President Bush called the Merida Initiative, which includes a $550 Million allocation to assist Mexico with the security of their southern border. Â

    What. The. Hell. Over?

    This partnership would support coordinated strategies to:

    *Produce a safer and more secure hemisphere where criminal organizations no longer threaten governments and regional security; and
    *Prevent the entry and spread of illicit drugs and transnational threats throughout the region and to the United States.

    To achieve these goals, President Bush has requested $550 million as part of a multi-year program to provide:

    *Non-intrusive inspection equipment, ion scanners, canine units for Mexican customs, for the new federal police and for the military to interdict trafficked drugs, arms, cash and persons.
    *Technologies to improve and secure communications systems to support collecting information as well as ensuring that vital information is accessible for criminal law enforcement.
    *Technical advice and training to strengthen the institutions of justice – vetting for the new police force, case management software to track investigations through the system to trial, new offices of citizen complaints and professional responsibility, and establishing witness protection programs.
    *Helicopters and surveillance aircraft to support interdiction activities and rapid operational response of law enforcement agencies in Mexico.
    *Initial funding for security cooperation with Central America that responds directly to Central American leaders’ concerns over gangs, drugs, and arms articulated during July SICA meetings and the SICA Security Strategy.
    *Includes equipment and assets to support counterpart security agencies inspecting and interdicting drugs, trafficked goods, people and other contraband as well as equipment, training and community action programs in Central American countries to implement anti-gang measures and expand the reach of these measures in the region.

    Link: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2007/oct/93800.htm

    Our government is giving a country, known for invading our southern border, the resources to secure their own?

    Hey George, couldja maybe fork over some money for a U.S. border wall, increased border patrol, guard towers, machine guns, trenches, motion sensors….you know, protection for us for a change?

    Meanwhile, the efforts to secure our own border are languishing:

    The government plans to add 11 miles of border fence in Arizona this year, far fewer than what was built last year.

    For months the government has been mum about much of its plans, but details emerged in recently released environmental assessments. Those documents, the first step in fence-building, reveal officials’ plans to add 7 miles of fence east of Nogales and 4 miles along the Colorado River, using a combination of pedestrian fence, vehicle barrier and access road improvements.

    The effort is being criticized by two sides.

    Environmentalists say the Department of Homeland Security is threatening endangered animals by ignoring environmental laws to build barriers across their habitats.

    “I’m really now very concerned about an ecological disaster by blocking off this border,” said Kim Vacariu, western director of the Wildlands Project.

    Like this, Vacariu?:

    bordertrash.jpg

    That’s a snapshot of just a fraction of the filth left behind by south-of-the-border slugs traipsing into the U.S.

    Pro-fence activists, on the other hand, accuse the DHS of backing off its obligations by not building enough pedestrian fencing and not double-layering it.

    They say more fence is critical in a state that remains the most active pot- and human-smuggling route on the entire U.S.-Mexican border.

    Glenn Spencer, founder of American Border Patrol, says the government cares more about open borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants than building the fence.

    “Where the smuggling is really serious, they’re not building anything,” Spencer said.

    Link: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0210fence-enviro0.html

    Naturally, Mexican president Felipe Calderon, an avid illegal immigration pimp, weighed in on the controversy:

    On his first trip to the U.S. as Mexico’s president, Calderon said he is working to combat anti-Americanism in Mexico and to improve job prospects there to reduce migration. He said he hopes that Americans resist anti-Mexican sentiments.

    “The worst thing that happened in this country is this anti-Mexican or anti-immigrant perception of people. We need to contain this,” Calderon said after a speech at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.

    “I need to change in Mexico the perception that the Americans are the enemy, and it is important to change the perception that the Mexicans are the enemy,” he said. “We are neighbors, we are friends and we must be allies.”

    Link: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080212/D8UOH1CG2.html

    Calderon goes on to spew his demands for our money:

    Calderon also appeared to reject any added conditions on a proposed $1.4 billion U.S. anti-drug aid package that had been negotiated with American officials, saying, “I cannot accept any submission or subordination.”
    The proposal by the administration of President George W. Bush, dubbed the Merida Initiative, is meant to give Mexico aid, training and equipment to fight drug trafficking, which U.S. officials see as an American national security problem.

    It still awaits approval in Congress, and some U.S. legislators have suggested the program may need safeguards to prevent corruption or human rights abuses by Mexican military and law enforcement personnel.

    “I need that technology,” Calderon said. “Give it to me. And give it to me without conditions.”

    Calderon also criticized U.S. involvement in Iraq, saying U.S. leaders were “spending Americans’ money and putting the government into debt to finance their military adventure, and that is squeezing out private investment.”

    http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/12/05/news/Mexico-US.php

    Fuck you, pendejo. There’s this little U.S. Federal Statute called U.S. Code Title 8. Throwing the race card in the face of our laws will not give you credibility. ILLEGAL immigration is the contention. This is not the United States of Mexico, it’s the United States of America, amigo. And notice his hissy fit over the fact that we dare to divert money into fighting Islamofascists on their turf on behalf of our national security; money that he feels is rightfully his.

    Bubba Clinton bailed out Mexico to the tune of $50 Billion, and you can bet your last Peso it went for Vincente Fox’s palace.

    This Mexican blood sucker expects us to pour even more tax dollars into his corrupt-laden cesspool, without stipulations. He’s even more of a pompous, arrogant jackass than his predecessor, and I didn’t think that was possible.

    Americans are already footing the bill for the millions of illegals who already snuck in and haven’t yet been deported by our apathetic government.

    The most insidious thing about this push-through legislation is that our elected officials are ignoring the will of the American people. We want a secure, monitored border, well-regulated immigration, and protection of our sovereignty. With George Bush we’ve gotten very little of that.

    Just think what will happen if/when John McCain gets elected.

    His record on border security is even worse.

  • The 2008 Election Bummer

    The GOP candidates are mighty thin in substance this time around.

    I don’t like choosing among the least of the selection of evils. 

    Big issues with me:  National security, border security, illegals, killing Islamofascists, pork-barrel spending and the economy.

    Sizing up the current (and former) candidates:

    Fred Thompson:

    I wanted to vote for him, but never got the chance.  Fred was late to the game and never got the real momentum he needed to stay in the race.  He came the closest in terms of what I look for in a leader and potential President of the United States. He is strong on national and border security, illegal immigration, the war on Islamofascism, and the 2nd Amendment. Whomever gets the GOP nod for nomination, would be very smart to choose him as a presidential running mate.

    Now that Fred is out, that leaves us with the remaining consolation prizes:

    Mitt Romney:

    His politics are like a damned revolving door.  He talks the Conservative talk on the issues but doesn’t walk the walk.
    Aside from that, I’ll admit I’m very leery of Mormons and their religion.
    I’m agnostic, so I don’t care for religion in general. I care even less for one that by it’s very nature, is exclusive and cultish.

    Joseph Smith was a neurotic con man who concocted the “Gold Bible,” engraved on metal plates in an “Egyptian dialect” only he could read, with the aid of magic goggles. He dictated this manuscript to several secretaries from behind a curtain. This is funny, considering he was illiterate.

    Brigham Young, the other prominent Mormon figure, was a cold-blooded murderer. (Mountain Meadows Massacre in 1857)

    It’s hard to respect followers of a religion founded by a couple of wackjobs.
    Secondly, the history of the Mormons in Utah reads like a chapter out of the Book of Mafia.

    Human Events on Romney:

    ……examining his record and listening to his campaign rhetoric indicate to us that he is more a problem-solver than a gut conservative. His “RomneyCare” legislation made Massachusetts the first state in the nation to impose an “individual mandate,” which requires everyone in the state to have health coverage or face significant penalties. And we have concerns about the big-government approach he took as governor, raising state “fees,” according to the Cato Institute, by $500 million and proposing two corporate tax increases totaling close to $400 million a year.

    Link: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24398&keywords=HUMAN+EVENTS+Endorses+Fred+Thompson

    John McCain:
    Jeezus, where do I start?  He’s the quintessential R.I.N.O.  I can’t tell you how many times I’ve yelled at the T.V. screen during his speeches:  “Just end the charade and cross the fucking aisle, John”!  
    He claims to have “gotten the message” with regard to his shitty border security/immigration stance, but that’s belied by his disgraceful coersion with Juan Hernandez, a leading illegal immigration pimp, who’s as fazed by U.S. Code Title 8, as McCain seems to be.

    Human Events on McCain:

    …..he does not honor many conservative principles. His co-authorship of the Bush-McCain-Kennedy “comprehensive immigration reform” legislation last summer ran directly against our principles of American sovereignty and national security. His position has not been ameliorated by his more recent explanations of border-security measures he might support. His opposition to the Bush tax cuts, his support for economy-strangling measures to control “global warming” and his anti-torture legislation (which didn’t make torture illegal, it already was: McCain’s law only made a clear law vague to the point of unenforceability) all cut against the conservative grain. And so did his McCain-Feingold campaign finance law with its stifling of political free speech.
    Link: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24398&keywords=HUMAN+EVENTS+Endorses+Fred+Thompson

     On Michael Huckabee:

    For 10 years, as governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee supported amnesty and taxpayer-financed welfare and health care for illegal aliens and increased taxes numerous times. Now, after sniffing the political winds, he poses as tough on illegal aliens and a tax-whacker.
    http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2845

    “Mike Huckabee raised more taxes in 10 years in office than Bill Clinton did in his 12 years.” — writes Ernie Dumas, Arkansas Leader.
    http://www.votemike.net/

    In 1999 Mike Huckabee, despite numerous warnings from victims of a serial rapist, pushed for the release of Wayne Dumond. At the time, Huckabee said that there was no real evidence the rapist would strike again and represented no threat to the public. Because of Huckabee’s push for the release, Wayne Dumond was released 25 years early.
    Soon after Dumond’s release in 1999, he moved to Smithville, Missouri, where he went on to rape and kill Carol Sue Shields, a 39 year old woman. Dumond went on to kill Sara Andrasek, 23 year old from Platte County, Missouri, a day before his arrest in 2001.
    http://www.votemike.net/category/topic/ethics

    Human Events on Huckabee:

    ……But his support for the economically disastrous “cap-and-trade” fix for global warming is as bad as Sen. McCain’s position on the issue. The so-called “fair tax” he supports is unworkable. His tax-and-spend policies do not comport with conservative principles, but they do align all too well with Huckabee’s populist rhetoric on the injustice of corporate CEO salaries. His stance on granting special benefits to the children of illegal aliens is also very troubling. On the war, Gov. Huckabee’s understanding of the issues does not impress us. For example, he wants to close the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and move the detainees there into U.S. prisons, which — as Sen. Thompson schooled him on in a recent debate — would result in the grant of constitutional rights to terrorist detainees even though they are enemy combatants.

    Gov. Huckabee’s grasp of foreign policy does not make us comfortable.

    Link: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24398&keywords=HUMAN+EVENTS+Endorses+Fred+Thompson

    Makes me very uncomfortable, too. 

    The Dems:

    Dennis Kucinich: On behalf of the sane, rational people in the state of Ohio, I want to apologize for the union pukes and brain-damaged sycophants who continue to re-elect this jerk back into his Senate seat.

    Ron Paul: Yeah, I know he claims to be a Republican, but he’s in the same unique category as Kucinich: moonbat. He and his legion of “troofers” represent a fringe of the political spectrum usually reserved for the Greens and UFO fanatics.

    As for the two leading Dems:

    Barack Obama on Foreign Policy:

    “And if I am your nominee, my opponent will not be able to say that I voted for the war in Iraq, because I didn’t, or that I gave George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran, because I haven’t, or that I support the Bush-Cheney doctrine of not talking to leaders we don’t like, because I profoundly disagree with that approach.

    Link: http://www.examiner.com/a-1203357~Obama_Speech_Excerpts.html

    In other words, “I’ll make that pusillanimous waste of skin Jimmy Carter, look good“.

    His ideas on penalizing wealthy taxpayers for doing well:

    Democrat Barack Obama said Sunday he will push for higher Social Security taxes if elected, viewing it as the best option for improving the retirement program’s finances…during an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Obama said taxing more of a person’s income was the option he would push for if elected president.
    Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21739271/

    The Hildabeast’s view on the economy:

    “Many of you are well enough off that … the tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” (Hillary Rodham Clinton – June 28, 2004, in San Francisco at a Democrat Party fundraiser)

    Didn’t Vladimir Lenin and Karl Marx have the same idea?

    Her take on the poor ‘misunderstood’ Islamofascists:

    “Well, I believe that terrorism is a tool that has been utilised throughout history to achieve certain objectives. Some have been ideological, others territorial…And I think we’ve got to do a much better job of clarifying what are the motivations, the raisons d’etre of terrorists… I think one of our mistakes has been painting with such a broad brush, which has not been particularly helpful in understanding what it is we were up against when it comes to those who pursue terrorism for whichever ends they’re seeking.” (Hillary Rodham Clinton — interview with The Guardian, published October 23, 2007)

    Link: http://www.hillary-watch.org/

    If the Hildabeast or Obama yer Mama gets elected, there will be no lubricant good enough for the screwing they will give this country.

    What does a concerned citizen do when the choices are so unappealing and who’s beliefs and convictions come no where near your your own?

    As a single female Republican, I hate being a scapegoat for the Democratic female (and male) sheeple who have their heads so far up their asses, it would take a lengthy surgical procedure to extract them.

    What do I want?

    Foreign policy: I want a strong, confident leader (gender notwitstanding) who will be tough on illegal immigration, build a border wall, stand up to the Euro effetes, tell the ACLU and terrorist fronts like CAIR to shove it, and put America first.

    I want a President who won’t pander to foreign countries for the sake of improving our “image”. I want a President who won’t be afraid to tell America (and the world) what they need to hear, not necessarily what they want to hear.

    I want a leader who will make it their mission to destroy any and all Islamofascist nation-states and their supporters.

    I want them to make it illegal for our corporations to do business with and prop up regimes of America’s enemies, like China.

    Domestic policies: Give incentives to American businesses to keep factories and jobs here so that they won’t feel compelled to outsource.

    Enforce policies on those who use welfare as a steady source of income, that will make them decide to use birth control, stay in school, become part of the work force, and wean themselves off the teat of public dole.

    Hold parents responsible for the criminal activities of their little gangsta children, to include fines and jail.

    Clean out death row by expediting the process. Use DNA to determine guilt or innocence. Expedite the release of the not guilty and the execution of the guilty. The prisons are bursting with violent offenders who committed brutal acts against society, and once they get to prison many of them pick up where they left off on the outside. Line ‘em up against a wall and mow them down. They’re animals. They were that way before they got there, and rehabilitation is out of the question. Our tax money is wasted keeping them housed, clothed, and fed for the rest of their miserable lives. Bullets are cheap.

    I want a President who has all the attributes lacking in the motely crew of 2008 candidates.

    Which means I hope the voting machine has a “write-in” candidate space.  If it does, I will enter Fred Thompson’s name. 

    It will be a futile gesture, but at least I can say I voted my conscience.

  • I want Hillary To be the Democratic Nominee

    I really do. I fully believe what Limbaugh has been saying for years, that should the choice be between Hillary Clinton and ANYONE else, people will vote, not necessarily, FOR the other guy, but, rather, AGAINST the Hildabeast.

    Obama doesn’t have the legacy of indictments, fraud, double dealing and general douche baggery that the Clinton name carries with it like a miasma.

    I think, that given Obama’s lack of a history, he’ll have fewer negatives, and that only helps him. As scary as the prospect of Her Thighness as president is, I can’t help thinking she’s destined to lose and lose BIG to almost anyone.

  • Surprise! Surprise!

    Slate Magazine lists the 60 Largest Charitable contributions of the year
    Guess whose name is NOWHERE on the list…

    Warren Buffett, although he thinks he, and, btw, YOU, should pay more taxes, he is apparently above charity.
    This really comes as no surprise to anyone with half a brain.

  • Why is Clinton reshuffling staff?

    All of the newspapers are shouting from their headlines that Clinton is reorganizing her staff after crushing defeats this last weekend. Like this one from the Wall Street Journal;

    Sen. Hillary Clinton replaced her campaign manager yesterday, the first step in what could be a broader shakeup in her campaign, after Sen. Barack Obama won four weekend contests, turning up the pressure on the one-time Democratic front-runner.

    The intensifying race between the two leading contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination has put a premium on fund raising, strategy and organization — three of the key responsibilities of a campaign manager.

    Maggie Williams, a long-time confidante of Mrs. Clinton who served as her chief of staff when she was first lady, will become campaign chief, succeeding Patti Solis Doyle. Ms. Williams, who was closely associated with Mrs. Clinton at a time when the administration of President Bill Clinton was in frequent partisan conflict with the then-Republican-controlled Congress, is viewed by staffers as a long-time, loyal defender of Mrs. Clinton.

    But what no is asking, or answering, for that matter, is why does the smartest woman in America need to change her message and her messengers? It’s the same thing that John Kerry and Al Gore went through during their presidential campaigns – but no one ever points out that it’s all just mental masturbation. If a candidate has principles and sticks to them, and the voters aren’t attracted to that candidate, what good is changing your message? It might get you elected, but voters won’t like you if act on your principles.

    Unless of course you think politics is all about fooling people, of course. And we all know that’s EXACTLY how Clinton sees voters – a bunch of moronic goofballs who can fooled. I saw my first Clinton ad yesterday – and the part of it that struck me the hardest was her statement that she brings 35 years of experience to the job.

    By my count, in January 2009, she will have eight years of experience in politics, less than 1/4 of the time she claims in the ad. Now, she does have 35 years of fooling voters, so that’s probably what she was talking about. I think 27 years of being someone’s wife is hardly experience.

    But that’s what reshuffling a campaign staff does – fool voters to vote for someone they wouldn’t ordinarily. I also saw on CNBC this morning that the Silky Pony Breck Girl had talks with the new Clinton staff – always the opportunist, always the ambulance chaser.

    All the while, Bill Clinton is busy at DC and Maryland churches camapigning from the pulpit, while the media doesn’t bother batting an eye with their usual “separation of church and State” rhetoric;

    The former president’s comments came after he addressed more than 2,000 churchgoers at the Temple of Praise in Southeast Washington. He also visited Greater Mount Nebo AME Church in Bowie, while his wife campaigned elsewhere in Maryland and Virginia yesterday.

    Which begs the question, who is it that really thinks the voters are drooling goofballs?

  • We need an Economics curriculum

    The Washington Post stunningly announces on Page One this morning that they don’t understand economics under the headline “Fed’s Rate Cuts Bring No Relief For Consumers’ Credit Card Bills”;

    The Federal Reserve’s dramatic rate cuts were expected to make it cheaper for consumers to use credit cards. But credit card interest rates remain high and in many cases have even climbed.

    Well, credit cards aren’t a reflection of lending rates – it’s a retail business. Credit card users are welcome to shop their credit card business and dump high interest credit cards for lower rates.

    The increases have perplexed customers such as Richard Davis, an insurance agent who lives in Fairfax County who said the annual percentage rate on his Chase Business Visa card went from 8 percent to 24 percent in December, three months after the Fed’s first rate cut. “That just floored me,” he said.

    If I were Richard Davis, an insurance agent, no less, and I made a stupid remark like that in public, I should expect my clients to bail out of the financial services I’ve provided them. Credit rates increase when people don’t make their payments, the whole lending crisis happened because people stopped making payments on their credit. So guess what – that impacts the whole lending market, not just mortgage companies. Well, at least the Washington Post went into that after their terrorizing headline;

    Banks have reported steep write-offs related to the mortgage mess, and their stock prices have plummeted. “Credit cards historically have been a very profitable segment for the banking industry, so what they’re doing is trying to squeeze customers as much as they can, particularly for accounts they don’t see as profitable or as high risk,” said Curtis Arnold, founder of CardRatings.com, an independent consumer resource on credit cards.

    But it’s not the lenders’ fault, as the Washington Post implies; it’s the whole credit market. What the Washington Post doesn’t recognize is that borrowers are free to shop their good credit around for a better rate.

    And of course, it’s not really a crisis until the Democrats tell us it is;

    On Thursday, Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House financial institutions and consumer credit subcommittee, introduced the Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights Act of 2008, which would, among other things, restrict fees and rate changes that companies could impose.

    Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, has proposed a similar bill. He said in an interview that Congress will keep an eye on how card issuers react to the changes in the federal funds rate, which the Fed controls. “The credit cards raise the rates when they go up. They should go down when interest rates go down,” he said.

    We don’t need Congressional intervention, we need an education system that explains simple economics to students so they don’t get their pointy little heads into something from which they can’t recover.

  • Chavez, Nestle, Exxon; milk and oil politics

    2008_02_10t233956_368x450_us_venezuela_food.jpg

    Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez visits a rice plant during his weekly Alo Presidente broadcast in Barinas, 525km (326 miles) from Caracas, February 10, 2008.

    Photo from Reuters

    Last week, Exxon Mobil convinced a British court to freeze about $12 billion of assets belonging to Venezuela’s state-owned oil company Petroleos de Venezuela SA in Exxon’s case against Venezuela for seizing the company’s property. So of, course, because an international company, backed by a British court froze Venezuela’s money in foreign banks, Chavez blames the United States and threatens to cut off oil to the US (Breitbart link);

    Chavez has repeatedly threatened to cut off oil shipments to the United States, which is Venezuela’s No. 1 client, if Washington tries to oust him. Chavez’s warnings on Sunday appeared to extend that threat to attempts by oil companies to challenge his government’s nationalization drive through lawsuits.

    “I speak to the U.S. empire, because that’s the master: continue and you will see that we won’t sent one drop of oil to the empire of the United States,” Chavez said Sunday.

    “The outlaws of Exxon Mobil will never again rob us,” Chavez said, accusing the Irving, Texas-based oil company of acting in concert with Washington.

    Anyone with a bit of common sense, and not suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, would recognize that Exxon-Mobil’s moves are purely in their interests. But, Chavez suffers from BDS like no one else. I guess it’s that coca-chewing that makes him a bit paranoid. But Miguel at The Devil’s Excrement writes that this seizure should be no surprise to the chavistas;

    The truth is that not only did Chavez illegally take over ExxonMobil’s investment in Venezuela, but has yet to compensate that company. Moreover, the whole thing has been badly handled in the belief that ExxonMobil will simply accept whatever PDVSA offered, like the state controlled oil companies of Norway and France did with their own project.

    In fact, Chavez should have known that these injunctions were requested by ExxonMobil as far back as December, a fact that was hidden from the Venezuelan people. At least in the case of the US Court, ExxonMobil introduced the injunction in the Souhern District of New York on December 27th. and that same day Judge Batts ruled on the case, filed under number 07-CV-11590 and ordered PDVSA’s property attached. Moreover, the Judge ratified the measures on January 2nd and again on Jan. 8th. after talking to PDVSA’s lawyers. It was not until January 24th. that PDVSA’s lawyers actually replied to the injunction in the US.

    Not learning that messing with an international company has drawbacks, Chevez went on to threaten to seize Parmalat and Nestle milk plants. After freezing milk prices last year, it became more attractive to Venezuelan milk producers to export their milk to Columbia when they began going broke. So to in an attempt to stem the milk shortages in Venezuela, Chavez instead of letting the market make up shortfalls, blames foreign entities (Financial Times/Reuters link);

    “If, for example, Nestlé or Parmalat … show that through various economic mechanisms, or through pressure, they are taking the product and leaving state or cooperative plants without the necessary milk … then we have to apply the constitution and we have to intervene and expropriate the plants,” he said.

    Mr Chávez frequently issues conditional threats against the private sector without following through on them. But last year, he nationalised swaths of the economy, including the oil and utility sectors, in a drive to build a socialist state.

    In an OPEC country flush from an oil price bonanza, even Chávez supporters are angry at bare shelves and long lines in supermarkets. There have been shortages of products like sugar, eggs and meat, but especially milk.

    Of course, he has a hard time avoiding hyperbole when Chavez is on a paranoid tear (AP link);

    If companies ensure a supply through “blackmail, offering money up front” while leaving state-run plants without enough milk, “that’s called sabotage,” Chavez said. He added that in such cases, “the plants must be taken over and expropriated.”

    Sabotage would more closely describe what Chavez has done to the Venezuelan people and what should be a booming economy is light of oil prices. Since Venezuela supplies 12% of our oil, it would certainly impact us in the short term, however, somewhat less than what Chavez implies.

    Miguel (The Devil’s Excrement link above), unusually accurate in his predictions about the Venezuelan economy, thinks that it will hurt Venezuelans more than the US;

    This will create more financial problems in Venezuela than anywhere else, where shortages are already present and the population is tired of promises and inefficiencies. Thus, if Chavez dared to do it, it will likely become a defining moment in his demise, as people have put up with his rants and ideology because there were unrealized promises attached to them. But somehow it seems this is the wrong time to ask the people to sacrifice in the name of his revolution.

    The ExxonMobil injunctions would only become significant if Chavez were to take the “nutty” road, as I suggested the first day I heard about them, such a road will only be bad for us Venezuelans but I still believe there is a very low probability that Chavez will take it.

    Albert de la Cruz at Babalu Blog agrees;

    I am sure it will be much harder on the US losing it’s 4th oil importer than it will be on Venezuela losing its #1 customer. At least by chimp logic it is.