…only too familiar:

Our savings kept us afloat for a year. When it was gone, I borrowed the equity out of my life insurance. That’s gone too. We were hoping to ride out this recession, to survive until it was over. However, it is the longest lasting and deepest recession I have ever seen. And I remember when Eisenhower was president, to give you some perspective. (Okay, okay, I actually remember when Truman was president, but I was VERY young. Practically a fetus, mind you.)

It’s just a matter of weeks before I lose my home. I never, ever thought I’d be in such a predicament. This happened to other people, sure, but not to me. I am a college graduate and a CPA. Accountants were supposed to be immune from unemployment. Not any more. The fact that I am well past 50 doesn’t help. Seniors and new grads are the hardest hit.

As someone who is in a similar boat but nowhere near as far down river as he is I very much sympathize. I join with Robert Stacy in urging you to try and spot him a fiver or two. Maybe we get one payment or two taken care of, maybe not, but sometimes just a little bit of time can make all the difference.

What do this headline:

FBI Files Reveal Historian Howard Zinn Lied to Hide CPUSA Membership

and this one

So Clarkson was right: Sight of a scantily-clad woman drives men to distraction (… and off the road)

have in common? Continue reading “Howard Zinn a communist? Next you’ll be telling me Madonna used sex to sell records!”

My review of #3.1 of Big Finish’s 8th doctor adventures Orbis staring Paul McGann as the 8th doctor and Sheridan Smith as Lucie Miller is available at Amazon.com here.

This begins Lucie Miller’s final full season with McGann. It’s a good one.

As always you can pick this up at Mike’s comics. You can also listen to a trailer the adventure here.

Poet James Marley… as said to me after I called and read him the Anchoress piece. (He has no computer) The “Act accordingly” is his but he doesn’t recall where he heard the rest of the quote.

That’s two Great Christian minds I’ve been exposed to in under 1 hour. Am I lucky or what?

…for revealing that in the face of corruption we intend to give Charlie Rangel a stern reprimand!

The Texas Democrat said he intended to call the head of the full ethics committee, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), to apologize for telling reporters that the subcommittee recommended reprimanding Rangel for allegedly breaking House ethics rules. The revelation was not included in the lengthy documents on the charges faced by Rangel that were released on Thursday.

So says Rep Steve Green.

Let me translate this for the general public.

“Rep Lofgren: I’m so sorry I let the cat out of the bag that we plan on punishing Rep Rangel; who over nearly 40 years in the house likely knows more secrets about members of the house than the CIA ever will; with only a reprimand rather than any actual punitive action. I’m sorry I’ve revealed that the ethics committee is not about to punish the man who writes the tax law for avoiding taxes thus putting all of us in an embarrassing position of having to explain why to the voters in a year when we are already in trouble.”

End translation.

If anyone was wondering why Rangel isn’t cutting a deal, you now know. And what will that mean for Rangel, lets look at some history:

A reprimand carries no consequences. A censure doesn’t either, except for the perception that it’s a stronger reprimand; Barney Frank got censured in 1990 for using his influence to fix parking tickets for his partner, but he still became chair of the House Financial Services committee. However, a Representative who gets censured has to stand in the well of the House to have the language read aloud, which at least causes momentary embarrassment. A fine would carry more sting, but an impeachment or expulsion would send a clear message about following the rules.

Or as Captain Ed closes:

Yes, this would mean that Rangel would get the exact same punishment that Joe Wilson got for exclaiming, “You lie!” during Obama’s speech to Congress last fall.

After all corruption and tax evasion is one thing, but defying THE ONE? That is unthinkable!

memeorandum thread here.

Krauthammer just said he is surprised that he would turn down a reprimand deal. Why should he make any deal? If they are afraid of doing more than a reprimand then he knows they aren’t willing to challenge him, and like I said, he knows where 40 years of secrets.

What does the Rangel case tell you about the democratic congress? They are more afraid of Charlie Rangel than the American people.

Update: I couldn’t help but think of the 4th doctor Episode City of Death and the Doctor and Duggen. Jump to 3:25 and you’ll see that in at least one respect the Democratic Ethic committee and the 4th doctor have one thing in common:

The text of the exchange is as follows:

The Doctor: If you do that one more time Duggan I’m going to take very very severe measures!

Duggan: Yeah? Like what?

The Doctor: I’m going to ask you not to!

Send that time lord to congress!

Update 2: Hotair has fun with it:

Gosh darn it, it was supposed to be a surprise! Perhaps a nice surprise, tied up in a little bow, and delivered on August 11th when Democratic Party leaders throw a big birthday fundraiser — er, party — for the man whose birthday passed two months earlier. Who knows? The combination celebratory good feelings, hard campaign cash, and the softball reprimand might have convinced Charlie to shut the hell up and take a pass on the ethics trial slated now for the middle of the campaign season.

gotta love stuff like that.

Ten Buck Fridays (as seen on the Ruby Slippers Blog and the newly redesigned Adrienne’s corner) today is promoting Patricia Sullivan, running in Florida for the Republican nomination against Allan “Die Quickly” Grayson in the 8th district in Florida.

I interviewed Sullivan on the healthcare mandate back in April and Stacy and I talked to her at CPAC this year. She is certainly a worthwhile choice for congress and deserves your backing. Her blog is here and you can kick in to her campaign by clicking HERE.

Do the words: Blood on their hands ring a bell?

In an interview with Channel 4 News, Zabihullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesman, said they were studying and investigating the report, adding “If they are US spies, then we know how to punish them.”

This brought to mind something, twenty five years ago just out of college I started at Raytheon. In the list of document that had to be filled out when at my hire was one that caught my eye.

It was a list of offensives that made you subject to death or such lesser penalty as the law would allow.

When you’re 21 it’s really heady stuff to read that there are things you can do on the job that can get you executed. Of course I wasn’t planning to give classified info to the soviets in the middle of the cold war, but it was a sobering thing to read.

As I remember when the media convicted Richard Jewel I’m going to withhold judgment for now on the soldier who is being named in the media, but if an employee at a defense plant is aware that treason carries a possible death penalty how much more should a soldier, particularly during wartime?

If it is proved this or any soldier was complicit in the leaks, such an act that’s as clear a case of treason as there is.

And now it appears that those helping us will now pay for their support of America with their lives.

If this doesn’t warrant a firing squad I don’t know what does.

Memeorandum thread here.

has produced some reaction in comments and from some friends who were surprised at my reaction. For those who are unsure, two posts at other blogs make my point best.

The short version comes from Robert Stacy:

A government official successfully pursuing a defamation suit against a private citizen is quite nearly impossible.

Any responsible lawyer would provide three words of helpful advice to Shirley Sherrod: “Discovery’s a bitch.”

The long version is at the American Thinker:

This past Sunday, in his weekly column for the San Francisco Chronicle, “Willie’s World,” veteran black politico Willie Brown confirmed that “there is more to the story than just [Sherrod’s] remarks.”

“As an old pro,” Brown acknowledged, “I know that you don’t fire someone without at least hearing their side of the story unless you want them gone in the first place.” Brown observed that Sherrod had been a thorn in the USDA’s side for years, that many had objected to her hiring, and that she had been “operating a community activist organization not unlike ACORN.” Although Brown does not go into detail, he alludes to a class action lawsuit against the USDA in which she participated some years ago.

In the way of background, in 1997, a black farmer named Timothy Pigford, joined by four hundred other black farmers, filed a lawsuit against Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman, claiming that the USDA treated black farmers unfairly in all manner of ways, from price support loans to disaster payments to operating loans. Worse, they charged that the USDA had failed to process any complaints about racial discrimination.

The notion that the Clinton Ag Department had spent four years consciously denying black farmers their due defies everything we know about Clinton’s use of race and should have made the media suspicious about Pigford’s claims dating back to 1983.

Flush with revenue in 1999 and eager to appease this bedrock constituency, the administration settled with the farmers — more realistically, their attorneys — for fifty grand apiece, plus various other perks like tax offsets and loan forgiveness. If any of the presumably racist USDA offenders were punished, that news escaped the media.

Is this all talk? Is there an actual suit that will be filed? Boy does this administration hope not.

One of the things about the tea party movement that you might have noticed is that although you will find quite a few religious and social conservatives in the moment, it doesn’t touch on social issues per se because that is not the mission of the group.

Now there is a social/religious conservative basis for tea party positions. If you are a social conservative and want to attend something with a more Christian spin on the topic a group called America Refocused may have just what you are looking for.

America Refocused revival is two-day event that will be joining the grassroots Patriot movement and Tea Party’s with the Christian Church.

I guess you could call it a Christian Tea Party. Details and Registration are available online. it will be held at the Johnson County Fairgrounds in Franklin Indiana. If you want some details on America Refocused’s principles they are here.

Given my job/employment situation and the lack of success of my last fundraiser (Feel free to kick into DaTipJar if you wish), I will likely be missing this event, but if you are in better financial shape than me or closer to Franklin Indiana that I am it would certainly be worth your time.

it’s not news that our liberal friends are in an uproar because of Phyllis Schlafly, she has been giving them fits since I was 1 year old. I just want to know if anyone see the irony in this screen short from Memeorandum.

Note that at Memeorandum we can see the president’s actual remarks but we don’t know from the look what Schlafly actually said, so lets go to the tape:

Certainly nothing factually wrong there, Stacy McCain not only put it best:

This is what we in the journalism business call a “fact”

after including the numbers to back her up pointed out this:

Those numbers are from an exit poll conducted by a notorious right-wing extremist group — CNN — and Schlafly’s explanation of why single women vote overwhelmingly for Democrats is neither new nor “extreme” nor uniquely hers

Then again that’s nonsense what makes anyone think people are becoming dependent on the government:

I can’t see where anyone would get that idea

On the president’s remarks, can you imagine the uproar if George W. Bush said that? The coverage would be non stop 24/7 every station. I’m sure it’s unfair to suggest our liberal friends will not complain about the president calling Africian Americans “Mongrel People” on national TV and they will get around to denouncing it as soon as Shirley Sherrod (our national arbiter on racism) does.

As for Mrs. Schlafly; the only time our liberal friends will not be calling on us to denounce her will be on the day she is burred, and I’m not so sure about they will hold back then. Any candidate stupid enough to go along with this deserves to lose.

Anyway the Schlafly memeorandum thread is here.

Update: Bazinga!

Forgetting the theological argument on how the end times will work. Can someone explain to me why this is a bad thing if you are a Christian who believes as LaHaye does?

Huckabee went on to prod LaHaye a bit further on his assertion. “Are we now living in the end times, from your perspective?” asked the former Arkansas Governor and possible 2012 White House contender.

LaHaye’s response: “Very definitely, governor.”

Ignoring the fact that nobody knows the day or the hour, since Christians believe the end time will eventually come and the second coming along with it, why is that a bad thing?

The second coming of Christ is a central belief of Christianity why would we worry if it comes because of President Obama or anyone else?

My advice to Christians? Always be ready because regardless of if LaHaye is right or if he is wrong sooner or later you will have your personal end time, obsessing over the date and hour distracts you from the main point of loving God with all your heart soul and mind and loving your neighbor as yourself.

Memeorandum thread here.

The suit against Breitbart is going to bring up a ton of really fun stuff about her and her husband and about that lawsuit they settled. Congratulations Mrs. Sherrod every speech you gave, every statement you’ve made and your husband too is now fair game and will be out in the open for all the country to see.

Expressly false statements like this one:

“It wasn’t all media. It was Fox.” Sherrod said in commenting on President Obama’s remarks on The View blaming the media in part for the story

are really going to play well in court. This is going to print money and attention for Breitbart. So lets repeat my thoughts on this case:

Sucker!

Update: Memeorandum thread here Semi Exit question. Will the left try to use this to energize black voters?

Yeah I’m upset about the Arizona ruling, the Massachusetts electoral college law and the Keeton case but there is joy in DaTechGuy ville today:

For Rich has started his newest Doctor Who saga Outrage today staring the 6th Doctor and Mel!

So get yourself over there and start enjoying yet another exciting and well drawn Doctor Who serial.

Oh and if you missed his just completed 3rd Doctor Adventure, The Stalker of Norfolk it is now available free as a PDF download.

See life is good

When I first read this story my jaw dropped on the floor and rolled around a while:

A federal judge has ruled in favor of a public university that removed a Christian student from its graduate program in school counseling over her belief that homosexuality is morally wrong. Monday’s ruling, according to Julea Ward’s attorneys, could result in Christian students across the country being expelled from public university for similar views.

Sounded an awful lot like the Georgia case, I wrote about earlier. My outrage button was pushed and heading into overdrive but when I read the Fox story there was a twist that I noticed that should not be ignored:

She was removed from the school’s counseling program last year because she refused to counsel homosexual clients.

This is a most important sentence, we would not allow a doctor to refuse to treat a homosexual man, I can’t see how this is different than an Islamic bus driver keeping a guide dog off the bus.

A counselor’s job is to give advice, there is nothing wrong with a counselor shaping and framing that advice based on their beliefs (we are all of us are shaped by our beliefs) but to refuse a patient based on said beliefs, particularly in a training program, that’s off.

In private practice a person can pick and choose patients, but during training that is a different matter altogether.

Let’s put it another way. Murder is a mortal sin, Adultery is a mortal sin, Theft is a Mortal sin, all are explicitly prohibited by the 10 commandments. Would Julea Ward refuse to treat a person who committed any of these sins as well?

Christianity explicitly teaches that homosexual acts are sinful (many protestant denominations consider homosexuality itself a sin). It is a serious sin, but it is not the only sin, when we pretend that it is we make a grave mistake, almost as large as the mistake that is made when one pretends it is not sinful at all. One can magnify the legitimate sins of others in order to ignore our own. This is a trap not of our political foes making but of our spiritual foes making and its eternal consequences are much more dangerous to us as individuals.

Christian belief is not based on the separation of one from sinners, we are all sinners, it is based on the separation of one from sin and the willingness of Christ to forgive sin when one repents.

So lets be clear on what the 1st Amendment does and what it doesn’t do:

• Julea Ward has a right to follow any religion she chooses, natural law AND the 1st Amendment guarantees this right.

• A public university has no business trying to force any student or employee to change any person’s religious (or political) belief, that is a totalitarian act contrary to the natural law and the 1st Amendment.

• Any such speech code or rule by a public university to restrict the free expression and/or practice of religious (or political) belief is unconstitutional on its face per the 1st Amendment.

• Any and all such public universities who attempt to enforce such codes to change any person’s religious (or political) belief violating 1st Amendment rights should be sued until they are so broke that they have to go back to slide rules.

• A public university CAN however require that a student follow the basic rules of a degree program. An Islamic student can’t refuse to study the anatomy of a dog or pig if they want a degree in Veterinary medicine.  That is not a first amendment issue.

Julea Ward put herself in the wrong by refusing to counsel a homosexual student: From the ruling:

“In the case of Ms. Ward, the university determined that she would never change her behavior and would consistently refuse to counsel clients on matters with which she was personally opposed due to her religious beliefs – including homosexual relationships.”

In such a case the correct and honorable move for Miss Ward would be to tell the patient openly that she considers homosexual relationships wrong and that her advice would be informed by that belief. She could then give said patient the option to either continue with her or request a different counselor. This empowers and informs the patient without violating personal beliefs. If the patient wished to continue with her she could give advice based on actions that are harmful (lying, selfishness, deceit etc) in any type of interpersonal relationship.

And the university put itself in the wrong by trying to change her beliefs:

Ward’s attorneys claim the university told her she would only be allowed to remain in the program if she went through a “remediation” program so that she could “see the error of her ways” and change her belief system about homosexuality.

By attempting to create a single mindset within said program the university harms itself by closing of it’s own mind and robs potential patients of the perspective and philosophy that can benefit them.

There is no question that the media culture and university culture is trying to promote and protect homosexuality (remember Dirkhising Christian & Newsom? Exactly!) and to attack Christianity as a rule. Let’s avoid helping them out in their endeavor.

Memeorandum thread here.

Update: I think we on the right are missing that key detail that makes this case different than the Keeton case. I would however concede that the Clinton appointed judge would have likely gone with the university even if she didn’t refuse the patient treatment.

Update 2: Outside the Beltway almost gets it.

This really isn’t complicated: You’re allowed to believe whatever you wish. Under the 1st Amendment, you’re allowed to say or write just about any damned fool thing you please without fear of sanction from your government. You’re also allowed wide berth in the practice of your religious beliefs.

But public institutions are allowed to set policies that conflict with some people’s religious beliefs, so long as they have a rational, secular basis for doing so. In this case, EMU did. It would be simply absurd to allow students to participate in a program designed to provide counseling credentials who would never be able to get licensure as a counselor.

This misses the point here, if a license is not allowed based on a religious belief that is a religious test and unconstitutional. If they decide a believing Catholic, Muslim or Protestant can’t be certified that is a de-facto religious test made by a public university based on beliefs also unconstitutional. It wasn’t the beliefs of Miss Ward that were the proper grounds, it was the INACTION in refusing to treat the patient that constituted the proper grounds for the University to act.

Update 3: The Anchoress zings in her own gentle way at the very end of this post

I guess my question is, if a gay counseling student expressed an inability to “embrace” religious people or their values also be subject to remediation? Are we drowning in irony, here?

Bazinga!

Over and over we have seen on Morning Joe we have seen the people on set in unison (Ari Fletcher the notable exception) go after the Afghanistan war as un-winnable as not in our interest. Richard Stengel is stressing that if we go, it will be people like the woman on Time’s cover that will suffer.

It is an important point to be made.

That time magazine cover (not available online yet) should be put up every time the debate on the war takes place.

Update: That isn’t even touching on the lives of the people who supported us that are already in danger thanks to the Wikileaks and the treasonous bastard(s) who fed them info.

Update 2: The cover is now up:

The cost of running away

Time’s write up is here.

Update 3: Sissy Willis links in a first rate post. That’s almost as good as a new Dr. Who adventure from Rich’s Comic Blog.

Everybody is writing about the court ruling on the Arizona Law. On Morning Joe today they talked a little about the national political reaction.

On Morning Joe they briefly discussed the political impact of the ruling. Charles Blow of the NYT lived up to his name blowing smoke claiming it helps the White House while Mike Barnicle made an important point telling a story that MSNBC viewers likely never heard.

I have yet to see anyone point to the BIG effect this will have on the election. Not in 2010 (everyone knows that the Arizona Law helps republicans) but in 2012.

No matter who the Republican Nominee is they will be able to point to this ruling by a Clinton appointee, they will likely be able to point to a Supreme Court that will have every justice appointed by Barack Obama ruling against said law (Let’s not pretend Justice Sotomayor or a future justice Kagan will vote otherwise).

Abortion is usually the big gun (and don’t get me wrong I expect any republican appointee to be against abortion) but this is an argument that is going to resonate on 2012. Conservatives and tea party members should be making the point every time they make a stop that a vote for Obama is a vote to strike down the Arizona law in the supreme court.

If the ad isn’t already cut it oughta be.

Oh and the “Hispanic” vote is not monolithic on this issue no matter what Chuck Todd says on Morning Joe today.

will decide to push this tidbit?

Rush Limbaugh has been a rare voice arguing that the spill — he calls it “the leak” — is anything less than an ecological calamity, scoffing at the avalanche of end-is-nigh eco-hype.

Well, Rush has a point. The Deepwater explosion was an awful tragedy for the 11 workers who died on the rig, and it’s no leak; it’s the biggest oil spill in U.S. history. It’s also inflicting serious economic and psychological damage on coastal communities that depend on tourism, fishing and drilling. But so far — while it’s important to acknowledge that the long-term potential danger is simply unknowable for an underwater event that took place just three months ago — it does not seem to be inflicting severe environmental damage. “The impacts have been much, much less than everyone feared,” says geochemist Jacqueline Michel, a federal contractor who is coordinating shoreline assessments in Louisiana.

Stacy McCain has a long memory:

Mother Earth is a lot more resilient than environmentalists give her credit for. I remember the Santa Barbara oil spill of 1969 — a horrible thing, but Santa Barbara today is as lovely a place as you’d ever want to visit and I’m not aware that there is any residual damage from that spill.

and has fun with undeniable truth of life 24 but the one that is actually applicable is #6 from the updated list.

The Earth’s eco-system is not fragile.

Will we see this mentioned on Morning Joe? Likely not today, but it could happen tomorrow. I’ll keep an eye on it.

Update: Memeorandum thread here.

is available here, a quick peek:

Just last month at the twin city tea party democratic candidates turned out to seek the votes of Tea party members for seats in the general court (house and senate) however with a democratic party both polling death spiral numbers and totally dependent on the current 90-10 in the Black vote it would appear that a directive from the NAACP attacking the tea party would have the authority of the Pope speaking Ex Cathedra.

Who would have believed that the attack against the tea party would be as successful as the French World Cup Team?

Pay special attention to the excerpt from local Tea Party president Justin Brooks letter to the editor, it accurately states what this entire thing was all about.

And as always you can find my past examiner columns here. Check them out and send them to your friends.

…is not going to be in people’s hands anytime soon.

I was down at the Unemployment office today (the long wait explains the long pause in posting today) the crowd was overflowing and the big question on almost everyone’s lips was, when when the finds start flowing again?

It will apparently take at least two to three weeks before the retroactive benefits are paid. This is going to mean weeks of hardship for people, but it also means that you will see some short term loan sharking from companies anxious to cash in on the delay.

Here is a snippit:

“People are tired of the government, they have the feeling they aren’t being listened to and I’m offering a representative that will listen to them and abide by the Constitution,” Gunn said before the meeting started.

Gunn said he has strong Libertarian views on most issues.

He is a private contractor from Ware whose company had seven employees but downsized to two as the economy faltered.

Gunn said he opposed the Troubled Asset Relief Program bill and the stimulus bill, as well as Cap and Trade reform.

The federal government needs to curb spending and cut taxes, he said.

Many federal departments such as the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Agriculture Department are unnecessary, Gunn said.

This makes two days in a row that the Sentinel had something to do with the tea party on the front page. Tuesday they covered the Twin City tea Party candidate forum. It’s a good sign.

As you know I was also there, here is the first of the video’s I shot, I will append the others as they upload.

I have some errands to run so it might be a little while before it is all up.

UPDATE: Here is the rest of the Town Hall in sequence:
Continue reading “The Sentinal & Enterprise covers Bill Gunn in Leominster: Update All parts added”

Our next contestant is Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul of the Pakistani army. His topic the bleeding obvious:

described the documents’ release as the start of a White House plot. It will end, he posited, with an early U.S. pullout from Afghanistan — thus proving Gul, an unabashed advocate of the Afghan insurgency, right.

President Obama “is a very good chess player. . . . He says, ‘I don’t want to carry the historic blame of having orchestrated the defeat of America, their humiliation in Afghanistan,’ ”

Here Gul, 74 shows himself a little less knowledgeable than he thinks. The Wikileaks stuff isn’t part of a administration plot, but the media, the left and anti-victory members of the administration will use it to their advantage.

Let me repeat, the goal is to engineer withdrawal and political defeat before Petraeus manages to engineer victory.

I’m sure that such a defeat will have no chance of emboldening the forces of Jihad all over the world. There is absolutely no chance that the next Osama Bin Ladin will be able to convince radical Islamists that there is no danger in opposing the US or in hitting America again. Once we stop fighting Jihad I’m sure those trying to push Sharia all over the world will decide we are friends and stop.

One word of advice: make sure you don’t drive after drinking whatever the people who actually believe that nonsense are.

As soon as the historically deficient Ezra Klein is confronted with a republican controlled Senate he will modify his position.

Ezra might I suggest Master of the Senate by Robert Caro (my Amazon review here) if you want to learn about what the senate can and can’t do.

Memeorandum thread here. Take a look at the links at the thread, each of these liberal sites seem to forget that these rules would apply if the Republicans control the senate, but worry not, that’s when they will also change their minds.

The Gods of Irony head’s are now exploding.

Update: This comes from a discussion of hiring quotas that were included in the bank bill. Brown and Mika both came down on “White Men” and maintained that if there were more women in charge in Wall Street than the bank meltdown wouldn’t have happened. After all we know that women are not greedy and could never run a company into the ground or lie or steal or cheat.

Are we actually hearing people saying this in the year 2010? I was waiting for them to call for Wall Street to be run by a “Wise Latina”.

The details:

Four members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights have signed a letter complaining that Section 324 of the conference report titled the “Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act” “includes a section on race and gender that even those who pride themselves on keeping up with national affairs may have failed to notice.” This provision, which can be found on page 172 of the conference report, may lead to unconstitutional racial and gender preferences being forced on financial institutions covered by the new law.

There’s more:

The Commissioners further argue that these new bureaucrats will be empowered to shall “’develop standards’ for ‘assessing the diversity policies and practices of entities regulated by the agency’ and ‘develop and implement standards and procedures to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, the fair inclusion and utilization of minorities, women, and minority-owned and women-owned businesses in all businesses and activities of the agency.” According to the letter, this new mandate will cover “financial institutions, investment banking firms, mortgage banking firms, asset management firms, brokers, dealers, financial services entities, underwriters, accountants, investment consultants and providers of legal services.” If these institutions are doing business with the government, newly minted bureaucrats will be allowed to study the racial and gender composition of these covered entities work forces to search for companies with not enough minorities and women in a decision making capacity.

If I’m Scott Brown, and the senators from Maine, I’m feeling pretty foolish right now, and you should be.

Update 2: Newsbusters wasted no time jumping on this. They miss the irony part.

Why is this so confusing? Let me answer you:

1. Preventing Afghanistan from being used as a forward base for terror.

2. Neutralizing the Taliban as an effective fighting force.

Why is it so hard to understand that?

The Morning Joe crew has one good point. You don’t win a war simply by throwing more troops at it you win a war by having a smart stratagy to win it and the right leaders and tactics to do so.

Anybody who thinks the US military can’t win in Afghanistan is an idiot, but it’s more than that. The president in one of he few really good moves has put Petraeus in charge over there. There reason you see the Wikileaks and the push against the Afghan war now just as the strategy has changed is not because the left is afraid of losing this war, its because the left is afraid we will win it.

Expect more of this meme, in their minds the battle cry is “Stop Petraeus before he wins again!”

Just as the state starts to swing in a more conservative direction our one party state legislature decides that our votes will no longer count.

Under the law, which was enacted by the House last week, all 12 of the state’s electoral votes would be awarded to the candidate who receives the most votes nationally.

After all who cares what the voters of Massachusetts think, If enough other states think differently our votes and our decisions are don’t matter. We no longer have control of our own franchise. To say this is an abomination is too weak a word. Why even have a state?

Allahpundit is poo pooing this. He doesn’t live here.

Smitty is as angry as I am:

Abso-effing-lutely. This is what Article Five is about. Understood, there seems to be a psychological joy, which some find, in taking words to mean whatever they wish. Hence the Commerce Clause becoming the Constitution over the last century. Hence the “judicial deference” doctrine, where Congress can emote whatever it wishes, and We The People get to watch the 14-ish trillion dollar debt pile up due to Federal over-reach.

Any legislator who voted for this bill doesn’t deserve his office, PERIOD!

Ironically Under Article 2 section 1 the legislature has the power to do this:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress

So in theory if the legislature that electoral college electors would be selected by putting pictures of the candidate on the ground, cutting the head of a chicken and giving the votes to the person in the photo closest to where the body finally drops, they can do it.

And don’t give me the “oh we still need x amount of electoral votes states to go along, it’s this kind of incremental change that is quietly done and unnoticed. In fact it is designed to give legislators that out to minimize what is actually going on so when it takes effect they can claim surprise. The ultimate goal? To make it easier to steal a national election.

Remember we get the government we deserve, for decades we voted a one party legislature into office. We willingly elected legislators who voted away our franchise. We’ve done this to ourselves. It’s our fault.

memeorandum thread here.

…tonight at 6 p.m. 13 Merriam ave Leominster Massachusetts. I will be attending and shooting some video.

Update: Happiness is not the internet connection dropping just as the candidate hits the stage.

Update 2: Got tied up in personal stuff when I got home so here are the quick points

1. Pledges to serve no more than three terms

2. Pledges to read the bills he is voting on, will vote against bills that are not available for 7 days

3. Will not be going for pork as the financial house needs to be controlled.

4. Big 10th Amendment person.

5. On Afghanistan either define the goal and fight accordingly or pull out.

6. Secure the border first then deal with people already here.

I will be putting up the video later in a new post.

I’d say I’m an 85% guy with him maybe 90. Gunn is an excellent choice and we’d better take advantage of this choice because it’s our best chance to change direction that we’ve had.

but even though I resent the anti Palin stuff, why not focus on areas of agreement? After all some things just can’t be argued with:

The team also declared the show’s upcoming spoof of “Return of the Jedi” would be the show’s last full-episode “Star Wars” parody, a venture that’s generated healthy DVD sales for 20th Century Fox TV. In addition to increasing the creative team’s workload, the more recent prequels, MacFarlane explained, would be “too expensive” to recreate.

The problem is, we try to be as faithful as possible to the look of those movies; to do that with the prequels, I don’t think TV budgets have reached that level yet,” MacFarlane said.

Added Alex Borstein, who plays Lois: “That, and they sucked.”

Emphasis mine, well actually emphasis pretty much everybody.

This story brought back flashbacks:

If former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin decides to jump into the 2012 presidential race, liberals would be thrilled, an unofficial poll released today shows.

In a straw poll of attendees at the Netroots Nation conference in Las Vegas over the weekend, 48 percent of respondents said they’d like to see Palin as the Republican Party’s 2012 nominee. Rep. Ron Paul came in a distant second, at 11 percent. Ten percent voted for Rick Santorum, 9 percent for Mitt Romney and 8 percent for Newt Gingrich. Seven percent chose Tim Pawlenty, while 5 percent said Mike Huckabee, and 1 percent said Rep. Mike Pence.

I seem to recall that back in 1980 democrats supporting Jimmy Carter were thrilled to death that Ronald Reagan was the Republican they were going to be facing. They were much more worried about this lightweight ex-governor who’s popularity was based on celebrity

Now I’m agnostic on the subject in one respect. Palin is young enough to run any time in the next 20 years, but liberals if you want to face Sarah Palin after 4 years of Jimmy Carter redux, bring it on!

As I recall the republican establishment didn’t care much for Reagan either, Rush is right liberals will tell us who they fear the most.

memeorandum thread here

Allahpundit agrees, I don’t know how well he remembers 1980.

At the Twin City Tea Party Candidate Forum yesterday we had 1 republican, 1 Independent and 2 democrats at the Twin city Candidate forum Lets see the candidates in the order they spoke:

First up was Keith Nicholas Independent

He then took questions:

Next up was Republican Lew Evangelidis

There weren’t as many questions as he had appeared before the Tea party before

Third was Democrat Scott Bove, he is the only candidate who actually works in the Prison.

And he of course took questions:

Finally was Tom Foley

And he took questions

Mr. Evangelidis left shortly after his presentation but I talked to the other three candidates to see what they thought:

Keith Nicholas

Scott Bove:

And Tom Foley:

Candidates of all parties showing up to Tea Party events, what will the MSM say?

…but I’ve been constantly distracted, but then I saw her in My Fedora proving she has excellent taste.

In all seriousness Christine O’Donnell is a first rate candidate, a proper conservative who will actually vote that way. My fellow Examiner writer Angel Clark on the ground says this:

In the special election for Joe Biden’s vacated Senate seat, late last week, Rasmussen Reports revealed a result that may be surprising to some who considered Republican candidate Christine O’Donnell’s March 10th announcement a long shot. In the Rasmussen poll, O’Donnell fared better than her Democrat challenger Chris Coons. The most recent polling has Christine ahead in the Senate race over Coons 41% / 39%.

But the naysayers claim she can’t win. Stacy McCain who has some experience covering an election that a republican “couldn’t” win hits an important point that people are ignoring:

Castle’s 2007-08 ratings (20 and 28, respectively) by the American Conservative Union marked him as one of the most liberal Republicans in Congress. His establishment backers have argued that the best Republicans can hope for in Delaware is to elect a RINO whose voting record makes Charlie Crist look like a raging right-winger. As one O’Donnell supporter told me, “Castle is Delaware’s answer to Dede Scozzafava,” referring to the liberal GOP candidate who quit last year’s 23rd District special election campaign in New York and endorsed the Democrat.

Let me remind you all why Dede would have been even worse that Bob Owens the promise breaker we ended up with:

The moment Dede votes with Pelosi that bill becomes “bi-partisan” by definition. The fact that it is only one republican will make no difference, the MSM will trumpet it as “bi-partisan”. When ABCCBSNBCCNNMSNBCBET wants to talk to a republican on an issue SHE will be the one they call. She will become the face of the republican party that will be pushed and lionized. She will be the reason why “conservatives need to back off”.

The reality of all of these things will not matter, the media will push them as if it was true. If you don’t believe me look at how they treat Olympia Snowe, Look how they treated Chuck Hagel, Look how they treated Chris Shays and of course look at how they treated McCain when he wasn’t running for president. Republicans who attack republican positions are always welcome in the limelight.

It would be almost as bad with Castle. If the democrats hold congress (unlikely) or the senate (highly possible) he will play the role of Dede. If however we win the house (almost certainly) and/or the senate (much less likely too many seats) then he will be the “brave republican that breaks ranks”. He will be the next Hagel on every show when they need a republican Senator without a conservative.

Also consider this Angel also points out that in 2008 she managed to get nearly 40% in a democratic state in the best year that Democrats have seen in decades. That’s better than Kennedy’s last opponent did in Massachusetts. And like the Scott Brown election this time the foe is not a state icon

Two years later a lot of voters would love a “Do over” of 2008. A Christine O’Donnell candidacy would give Delaware votes an actual do over and believe me they would do so with relish! Particularly if Stacy loans her my hat long term.

This is our best ever chance to advance true conservatives to power. If we pass up this chance we will have nobody to blame but ourselves.

Update: Stacy has a new article up as we speak

As with the primary fight for the South Carolina GOP gubernatorial nomination that turned Nikki Haley into an overnight political superstar, conservatives in Delaware have the benefit of backing an indisputably telegenic candidate. O’Donnell, a 40-year-old communications consultant who worked for the Republican National Committee during the glory days of Haley Barbour’s chairmanship in the mid-1990s, has the kind of 100-watt smile that lights up a room. But she’s not just a pretty face, either, having demonstrated her gritty determination two years ago when she sold her house and invested her life’s savings in an against-all-odds challenge to Biden, who ran simultaneously for re-election to the Senate while campaigning as Barack Obama’s running mate.

Stacy also quotes Captain Ed reminding us of the importance of this election for another reason, the lame duck card…

Delaware now has to fill the rest of Biden’s term (after an interim appointment expires), and that gives this race a twist. The winner of the general election will not take office in 2011, but immediately after Election Day. That means if a Republican can beat Democratic nominee Chris Coons, they have the ability to block any lame-duck session shenanigans by Harry Reid.

Wouldn’t it be nice to have a stead conservative holding that extra vote? Wouldn’t you like that extra piece of insurance? I would.

..as they keep showing up at local Tea Party Candidate forums. Here are some photos from the event:

People gathered as the Candidates and their supporters arrived

The crowd was good particularly early

This photo must be an optical illusion

Don’t tell Charles Sherrod that guy was there

A few of the candidates for Sheriff posed for pictures:

Keith Nicholas (I) for Worcester County Sheriff

One Independent

Scott Bove (D) for Sheriff

Bove made his second appearance at twin city

Tom Foley (D) for Worcester County Sheriff

For Foley it was his first visit, those D’s are not an illusion I guess they didn’t get the NAACP memo that we were a bunch of evil loons. The Republican candidate was also there but he was in and out and I didn’t get a chance to get a posed solo shot of him.

Now thats a gavel for a tea party meeting

Gotta love the cool Tea Party Gavel. Talked to several people in attendance before the candidates went on:

First there was Bob

And then there was Joanne:

Unfortunately Joanne left right after the forum so not only did she miss getting interviewed a 2nd time but she missed the Monday 25 cent wings and half price appetizers at the Border Grille & Bar after 8 p.m. That’s tragic. However I did catch Bob again:

This post is already the size of Cuba so I’ll put the actual candidate speeches in a later post. I still have to tweak the Youtube descriptions and one video upload failed overnight. I’ll have news from the forum all through the day.

Update: Candidate forum videos up

Who knew that Sullivan’s Syndrome might have a positive side effect:

If you want to know why the allegedly liberal media didn’t touch – and still won’t touch – this story, look no further. It has nothing to do with the facts, and everything to do with their politics. Notice the core modus operandi of the political operative, not the journalist. When dealing with a story: first ask yourself not if it is true but whether the outcome benefits your side. Second, write things in defense of this that you cannot possibly know. Palin a “wonderful mother”? How on earth did Klein know that?

I’m reminded of the line from Screwtape XIII where Screwtape comments that a “patient” is: “defended from strong temptations to social ambition by a still stronger taste for tripe and onions” His trig trutherism is such a deeply held belief that it removes the blinders from his eyes to the dangerous of journolist and the lies therin one more quote:

This is your liberal media, ladies and gentlemen: totally partisan, interested in the truth only if it advances their agenda, and devoid of any balls whatsoever.

His Palin derangement comes through in the next lines blinding to the fact that of course the press would have the willingness to attack Palin in 2012 just not with Trig Trutherism. I will say this for him: He was honest enough in his delusion to openly admit it and fight for it, not so others.

Via Sissywillis on Twitter

Top memeorandum thread here.

How Ironic is it that Sullivan’s trig trutherism might be the thing that forces the journolist into the MSM? I know the Lord works in mysterious ways but this takes the cake.

Update: Who the **** is Leo La-Port?

Update 2: Ok that name I recognize. All you need to make news is a fedora and a trenchcoat to sit on.

Various news outlets are treating the story of the three Gay Cathlolic priests out getting laid in Italy as a “church scandal”. This is incorrect. Before you faint dead away let me explain:

The Huge church scandals of the last decade involving priests were a church scandal not because of what they did. (Which was scandalous and sinful) but because when knowledge of this came to their higher ups, they to their shame hid it, moved the priests around and/or didn’t report it to the proper authorities. That turned the sin of an individual (the priest in general) into a scandal of the church (an official action) and a sin by their superiors as well.

If instead this had been handled publicly when it happened it could have been addressed and stopped. Instead sin begot sin and it’s taken a lot of time, effort and money to weed this stuff out. In trying to avoid the exposure of scandalous behavior they created an actual scandal.

Now take a look at these priests in Italy. They are without a question sinning mortally, their behavior is scandalous but unless their superiors knew this was going on and looked the other way, OR if they do not take some kind of action, it is not a church scandal. It is individual sin. As the church has stated:

The Rome diocese pledged to pursue “with rigour any behaviour that is unworthy of the priestly life”.

It added: “No one obliges them to remain priests and keep enjoying the advantages.

“Consistency demands that they reveal themselves. We don’t wish them any harm, but we cannot accept that the honour of all the others is dragged through the mud because of their behaviour.”

If further information comes out concerning this then that’s another story, until then; No!