Friday, February 27, 2009

Protest of Obama's Galactic-Deficit-Budget Deemed...

...'Too Environmentally Unfriendly'.

Cedar Rapids Group Plans "Tea" Party
(yes - that's where the quotes are supposed to go)

A Cedar Rapids group will do a symbolic tea dumping into the Cedar River on Saturday because state officials won’t let them use the real thing.

An anti-tax group wanted to pitch in real tea like the Bostonian revolutionaries opposed to England’s tea taxes.
Of course, the Boston Revolutionaries didn't feel the need to ...well... ask the Government for permission to protest the Government.

Good thing, I suppose - since I imagine they'd have received the same 'No' .

"...the Cedar Rapids Tea Party will dump dechlorinated tap water or riverwater from buckets labeled “tea,”..."
So - they'll also be providing their own 'strength-of-protest' analogy... quite considerate of them, really.

(Apparently, these Iowans aren't conversant in their Arlo Guthrie.)

- MuscleDaddy

Thursday, February 26, 2009

And all you have to do to join...

You have got to check out Michele Malkin's blog. She's all over the porkulus package; complete with accompanying songs.

And down at the bottom of the page who do I find but an old friend: Arlo. Now I know he rewrote Tom Paxton's "I'm Changing My Name to Chrysler" while Bush was still in office. But you know what? I don't give a rat's ass! This.......this my friends, is the theme song of the revolution! This thing needs to be played on every radio station in the land! It needs to be played on every car radio! It needs to be burned to CD and sent to every stinkin' Congress critter who voted for this abomination!

You know if they get one copy of this song they can pretty much ignore it. But if they get two copies......they may think they were sent by right wingers and they still might ignore it. But if they get three copies..........can you imagine your Congress critter getting three copies of this song? They may think it's an organization. And if they get 50 copies? If they get 50 copies they may think it's a movement. And that's what it is: the "I'm Changing My Name to Fannie Mae Movement". And all you have to do to join is make copies of this song and send it to your Congress critters.

With feelin'...

Friends and Neighbors we so need to do this. Thank God Arlo's still here when we need him.

Looks like Japan has had enough...

...of the Goreacle's Shenanigans.

Japan’s Society of Energy and Resources disses the IPCC - says “recent climate change is driven by natural cycles, not human industrial activity”

Three of the five researchers disagree with the UN’s IPCC view that recent warming is primarily the consequence of man-made industrial emissions of greenhouse gases.

Remarkably, the subtle and nuanced language typical in such reports has been set aside.

One of the five contributors compares computer climate modelling to ancient astrology. Others castigate the paucity of the US ground temperature data set used to support the hypothesis, and declare that the unambiguous warming trend from the mid-part of the 20th Century has ceased.

“Before anyone noticed, this hypothesis has been substituted for truth… The opinion that great disaster will really happen must be broken.”

- Shunichi Akasofu,
Head of the International Arctic Research Center in Alaska
(Register Article w/more detail)

What say you, Mr Gore?


Looks like President Obama needs to hurry up with imposing
(and the planned selling-of-indulgences-for) those 'Carbon Emissions Caps' - before the news gets out.

- MuscleDaddy

Obama's New Budget - Updated!

Now I know this has been everywhere all morning, but I just wanted to point out a few of my favorite parts...

Obama promises to slash spending by $2 trillion

Okay, first of all - I find the title somewhat.... misleading.

Through both a literary bent and rather extensive martial arts training, I recognize that to "slash" something involves moving quickly and decisively - a cut intended to begin and end long before the offending target has a chance to hit the floor....


President Barack Obama unveiled a multi-trillion-dollar spending plan Thursday that would boost taxes on the wealthy, curtail Medicare, lay the groundwork for universal health care and leave a string of deficits dwarfing any in the nation's history.

I... didn't exactly hear a 'snicker-snack' there.... Maybe the next part:

In addition to sending Congress his $3.55 trillion budget plan for 2010, Obama proposed more immediate changes that would push spending to $3.94 trillion in the current year. That would result in a record deficit.
Hmmm... nope. (I wonder how much longer the MSM will allow him to continue using his "I herited this" excuse?)

Obama projects will hit $1.75 trillion, reflecting the massive spending being undertaken to battle a severe recession and the worst financial crisis in seven decades.
Okay - quick time-out here.

The - "Seven-Decades/70-Years/1930's/The-Great-Depression" - Reference AGAIN.

Am I the ONLY one who remembers the Carter Administration?
Staggering Inflation?
Doing backflips if you were able to land a merely-20%-mortgage?

Look. Around. You.
/timeout - off

As part of the effort to end the crisis, the administration proposes boosting the deficit by an additional $250 billion this year, enough to support as much as $750 billion in increased spending under the government's rescue program for banks and other financial institutions. That would more than double the $700 billion bank bailout passed by Congress last October.
Okay - so it's not The One's fault - He 'inherited' this - He's going to do a 'better job' of handling it than the 'previous administration'...

....By doing exactly the same thing - just twice as much of it.


Obama, in a morning briefing, spoke of "hard choices that lie ahead." He called his budget "an honest accounting of where we are and where we intend to go."

Not for nothing, here - but it really sounds more like "printing more money" rather than "making hard choices".

Okay - so amid all the "laying the groundwork for universal healthcare" and continued talk of
nationalizing banks - how does The One plan to pay for all of this (aside from the aforementioned printing-of-money)?

The $634 billion down payment on expanding health care coverage would come from a $318 billion increase over 10 years in taxes on the wealthy, defined as couples making more than $250,000 per year and individuals making more than $200,000.

The tax increase would occur by reducing the benefit the wealthy get on tax deductions. As one example, taxpayers in the current top tax bracket of 35 percent would see their tax deduction for every $1 given to charity drop from 35 cents to 28 cents.

The other half of the money for expanding health care — $318 billion — would come from curtailing payments to hospitals and insurance companies under Medicare and drug payments under Medicaid.

If Congress approves Obama's recommendations, the Bush tax cuts would expire only for couples making more than $250,000 per year.

Obama's budget projects $2 trillion in deficit reduction over a decade — split between tax hikes on wealthier Americans and trimming a variety of government programs ranging from subsidies paid to wealthy farmers to eliminating ineffective government programs. (demonstrating that the city-boy-messiah lacks even a basic understanding of how/why farm subsidies work - MD)

Obama would allow the marginal rate on household incomes above $250,000 to rise from 35 percent to 39.6 percent.

Obama's promise to phase out direct payments to farming operations with revenues above $500,000 a year is sure to cause concerns among rural Democrats.
(probably, because that word was 'Revenues', rather than 'Profits')

And let's not forget that Obama's adherents in Congress are also keeping their eye-on-the-prize:

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, called Obama's proposal to tax the wealthy to finance health care reform a starting point. But he wants to also examine taxing some of health insurance benefits provided by employers
So basically, The Ohe keeps his plan to 'Doing what we've seen him do':

1) Eat the Rich (and people with job-benefits)
2) Make more people Dependent on Government
3) Make the Government Healthcare-Central-Planning

Of course, as long as he can effectively frame his plans & spending in such a way as to keep #1 in the forefront, he'll likely be able to keep the LCD of the voting population steering-clear of "common sense" in favor of "class warfare".

But then, I've said that before.

- MuscleDaddy


Forgot this bit:

The plan also contains a contentious proposal to raise hundreds of billions of dollars by auctioning off permits to exceed carbon emissions caps, which Obama wants to impose on users of fossil fuels to address global warming.
Just to be clear:

- He wants to impose regulatory restrictions on carbon emissions
(the kind that come with steep fines)

... so that the government can make money off of 'Selling Indulgences' that would exempt the 'buyer' from the regulations.

This bit of H.F.M.F. is going to dovetail nicely into the next post...

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Sometimes, you don't even have to go looking...

I swear, I was only trying to get to my email!

Gov. Jindal Follow-up: What Is 'Volcano Monitoring'?

"After President Obama's speech on the economy last night, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal criticized government spending in the stimulus bill, citing examples including "$140 million for something called 'volcano monitoring.'"
The rest of the article goes on - for about the next 700 words - about how Important "Volcano Monitoring" is and how Expensive volcano eruptions are and How Many Lives could be saved by watching volcanic activity - before following the obligatory flow into:

Jindal's comment comes at a time when President Obama has pledged to return science to the White House, an effort widely applauded by scientists who felt shunned by the previous administration.

Then - just in case that whole exercise in
"These-Are-Not-The-Droids-You're-Looking-For/All-Hail-The-One" were not quite enough, the author went ahead and took the obligatory "Sarah-Palin-Is-Stupid-And-Evil" shot:

The criticism of government funding of scientific research was similar to remarks made last fall during the presidential campaign by vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin, who was dismissive of fruit fly research.

...linking to
an article by another author who - not missing the opportunity to toss off the phrase "Biblical Creationism" - goes into some detail about how "$211,000 (the amount the USDA dedicated to the France-based research - MD) is a paltry sum to help safeguard the nascent California olive industry, a potential $85 million market"

...and how that's the reason that Palin's-Christianist-Opposition-To-Science-Is-Stupid-And-Wrong.

Now, I don't know how "similar" Jindal & Palin's "criticisms" were - but the function and intent of these two responses are certainly identical:

To Misdirect and Obscure the Matter at Hand.

Just in case either of these "Writers" should go looking to see who has linked to their articles - I'm going to type this next part veerrrryy slowly, so no one has to try to read too fast:

Bobby Jindal wasn't saying "Science Is Bad" - He was saying 'Volcano-Watching isn't going to stimulate the economy and so has no place in "Stimulus-Spending".

Sarah Palin wasn't saying "Science Is Bad" (any more that she was commenting on Noah's '600-year-old eyesight') - She was saying 'The $85MM Olive Market should be paying for their own pest-studies... Not the Government'

What is it with the "Science-Based" intellectual-dishonesty?

You'd think that people who make their livings writing about science/medicine would be a little more enamored of ... I dunno... facts.

Seriously, I'm about to start lobbying for a mandatory post-script inclusion to such hack-propaganda pieces:

"His name is Barack Obama, and I pray he approves of this message."


- MuscleDaddy

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

An Update...

You may remember this post about 2-year-old Moshe Goldberg.

Here's a note on how he's doing, and on the Nanny who saved his life and still refuses to be parted from him:

Nanny becomes new mother for boy saved from Mumbai massacre

Godspeed, LittleMan - we're all pulling for you.

- MuscleDaddy

(h/t - In Jennifer's Head)

And now for a quick game of...

"Where is Your Tax Money Going?"

Now, of course, this is sort of a trick question - since the Great Generational Theft Act of 2009 assures that we will never really know the entire answer to that question.

But for the purposes of this post, the answer is: "Gaza"

U.S. plans "substantial" pledge at Gaza meeting

"The United States plans to offer more than $900 million to help rebuild Gaza after Israel's invasion and to strengthen the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, U.S. officials said on Monday."

"Rebuild Gaza after Israel's invasion"

You know, I'm having a bit of trouble with that part of the statement, but I can't seem to put my finger on exactly why.... maybe if they'd used a more "nuanced" phrasing - like:
"Israel's retaliatory strike in response to un-ending rocket attacks from Gaza"

... yeah, that might have worked...

Oh, and don't worry that nearly a Billion dollars of your money will go to buy more rockets, bullets and Semtex for cafe-bombers to slaughter Israeli children & grannies - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has already thought of that:

"The money, which needs U.S. congressional approval, will be distributed through U.N. and other bodies and not via the militant group Hamas, which rules Gaza, said one official."
There, see? The U.N. will be distributing the $900MM of your tax-money!

Of course, I guess that means that Madame Clinton has somehow forgotten about how many of the Paletinian rocket attacks seem to have come
from U.N. facilities...

And, I suppose it also means that she's managed to overlook the ... issues ... that the U.N. has had with hanging onto aid 'Not Intended For Hamas' in the recent past...

And I'm sure that the U.N.'s history of supporting a "Middle East Without Israel" narrative wouldn't make their administation of $900MM in US tax-dollars in any way ... suspect... of course - right?

So there we are - nothing to see here, folks!

I'm sure that this re-stocking of the Palestinians isn't really just the Obama administration giving Israel something more 'immediate' to worry about than their (ahem)
larger concerns.

(apparently, the IAEA - they're UN too, no? - "missed" an additional 209kg of enriched uranium in Iran which means that, along with Pakistani-acquired tech, they can now make their own nuclear device to perch atop one of those new, farther-reaching missles they have)

- particularly given that Israel recently acquired a PM with... well... a spine?

Something to think about, next time you look at that ol' pay-stub and note the difference between the "Gross" and "After Tax" numbers.

- MuscleDaddy

Monday, February 23, 2009

Looks like I'm not the only one...

...who's "too clever by half".

I haven't posted anything about the latest 'cartoon-scandal' before - mostly because it's already over-done and I try to stay away from doing a straight "me-too" thing here on the Gazette.

But something happened the other day to change my mind.

We've got this talk-radio station here in the Denver-area, and they carry a drive-home show - "Caplis & Silverman". They do a sort of medium-power "Hannity & Colmes" schtick, with Dan Caplis in the 'Conservative' seat and Craig Silverman usually trying to defend the indefensible.

Yes, it's been done, but I usually really like the way Caplis is able to destroy opposing arguements by just maintaing his cool, staying focused, keeping to the facts instead of 'feelings' and almost never biting at Silverman's straw-arguments, and I also keep listening because they hit a lot of local issues.


Holy Crap, were they in-synch with their PC, apologetic (nearly apoplectic) hand-wringing over the "Cartoon Scandal"!

The only thing that kept them from singing
"It was Wrong, Racist, and Called for Obama's Assassination" in four-part harmony, was that there are only two of them with dedicated microphones.

Personally - I didn't see it.

Having been reading & banging on the
"Great Generational Theft Act of 2009" as much as I have (and will continue to do), my first reaction to the newest "Killer Cartoon" was:

"Heh... Yeah - Crazed Chimp Shot - Crazed Chimp had to have Written the 'Stimulus' - Have to Get A New Crazed Chimp If They Want to Write a New One..."

But 'Oh, No', I am told over the sound of the knuckle-chafing hand-wringing - 'The *Chimp* is really Racist Code for *Obama*' (who, of course, wrote the Stim... no, wait - he didn't) and the police officers who have shot the *Chimp* aren't really a temporal reference to the sensationalized story of actual Officers who had to shoot an Actual Crazed Chimp - No! - that's really a call for the *assassination* of *Obama*.

Now, I've come to expect that sort of thing from Silverman, who appears to check the LGBT/Rainbow-Push-Index to know whether righteous indignation is in order, but that Dan Caplis wasn't even trying to apply Occam's Razor to what was right in front of him?

This finally bothered me so much, that I just pulled over and called-in to the show, pointing out my reaction to the cartoon (before the Reverend Sharpton told me what I was *allowed* to think, of course) and attempting to explain that sometimes-a-comic-is-just-a-comic and that the sort of Offense-Seeking-Grievance-Mongering that has resulted is not only a direct connection to Eric Holder's "Nation of Cowards" speech, but also the very reason that any "frank discussion of Race" will never, ever be allowed in the US (for, invariably, the Sharpton-Shakedown and sycophantic 'mea-culpas' will ensue).

In response, (by the "Conservative" no less) I was told that to take the cartoon @ face-value - and without applying *Racist Code* to it, the Author and the Newspaper was just being "Too Clever By Half".

As I was given the bum's-rush off-line, my parting remark was that I must be more "Post-Racial" than Eric Holder.

Well, now it looks like I'm not the only Clever-Kid on the block:

Will The Real Monkey Stand Up!
Rev. Peterson of BOND Action, Inc. Blasts Sharpton Over NY Post Cartoon Controversy

Yup - looks like the Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson of BOND is calling 'foul' on the Race-Baiters as well.

"The Post cartoon was provocative, but not racist. And it certainly was not an 'invitation' to assassinate President Obama. These are manufactured allegations by racist left-wing Democrat operatives. Sharpton, the NAACP, and their angry supporters want to intimidate and silence independent media outlets like The New York Post and The FOX News Channel. The cartoon was poking fun at the ineptness of those who wrote the horrible stimulus welfare package -- nothing more.

"I've said repeatedly on my national radio show that Barack Obama was elected because of white guilt and black racism. The majority of whites voted for Obama to prove once and for all that they don't have racial hang-ups. Ninety-six percent of blacks voted for him because of his race. We now have the first black president and his party leading our nation towards socialism; and anyone who dares poke fun or criticize are racists?

"Most blacks see racism under every rock and newspaper because they've never repented of their anger and racism toward whites. But this so-called boycott is not about racism; it's an attempt to muzzle free speech. And it's apparent who the real monkey is in this circus."
So - who's interpretation to go with?

Grievance-Monger "Reverend Sharpton" and other like-minded career
Shakedown Artists...

Or Reverend Peterson, who has always held that self-determination is the way to build families & society?

Never mind - I think I've already got it figured out.

- MuscleDaddy

P.S. - Dan Caplis - that you immediately "recognized" the *Chimp* as 'code' for *Obama* - means that you also had to automatically associate *Obama* with the *Chimp*

... so what's really goin' on?

P.P.S. - The morning guy on KHOW - Peter Boyles - is great.

Friday, February 20, 2009

Ok – so Holder called us a “Nation of Cowards”…

Holder: US a nation of cowards on racial matters

...and all across the inter-web-netubes, everyone is expressing offense, outrage and

The first-two are a given – no one can say anything about anyone (either individually or as a demographic) these days without offending and outraging someone else – it’s part of the Politically Correct culture of victimhood in which we live. (never mind that I can’t even think of an alternate-universe in which it would be the AG’s place to speak officially on such a topic)

But …Surprise? Why surprise?

I mean, I suppose I can see someone being ‘surprised’ that such a statement of derision and scorn for the American people would be coming from “The Office of the Attorney General of The United States”IF one were somehow able to separate the Office from the Man holding the OfficeI guess.

But remember that Eric Holder is an Obama appointee – and not to a ‘throw-away’ position, handed out for the appearance of “bi-partisanship”
(Gregg-and-the-powerless-Commerce-Position comes to mind).

Someone in the AG spot has REAL power – he’s The Top Law Enforcement Officer in the country – able to make Final decisions about Who comes under What Charges and Which laws are going to be Enforced ‘today’ - and you’d just better BELIEVE that the President is going to be sure that he and THAT appointee see eye-to-eye.

So understanding this means only asking yourself a series of questions:

Can you think of another US President...

- who has so long supported America hatred?

- who has so consistently shown disrespect for America’s symbols?

- who has openly associated with those committed to America’s downfall?

- who has so plainly voiced his disdainful opinion of small-town America?

- who has so openly written of his negative opinion of “White People”?

- who thinks that the Typical White Person is, at his heart, a bigot?

And, playing it straight, there’s an old saying that goes something like ‘In a successful marriage, a husband and wife may have different likes, but their hatreds must be in alignment.’

So what do Michelle’s closely-held beliefs say about the man she’s been married to for all these years?

So now we have an Obama appointee to the Office of Attorney General who believes that, when not ‘forced’ together by the legal outcomes of the “civil rights struggle”, white people deliberately have “no significant interaction” with anyone else.

(and make no mistake, that’s what he’s saying; show me someone who thinks that the Civil Rights movement – as necessary as it was at the time - was about anything other than forcing minority-inclusion into ‘white’ society, and I’ll show you a shameless revisionist)

…which only means that he’s echoing opinions and beliefs that his boss has held to all of his life

– which would have been a pre-requisite for landing the job in the first place.

Again –

I just don’t get the ‘Surprise’.

- MuscleDaddy

P.S. – This was my favorite part:

"We work with one another, lunch together and, when the event is at the workplace during work hours or shortly thereafter, we socialize with one another fairly well, irrespective of race.

And yet even this interaction operates within certain limitations.

We know, by "American instinct" and by learned behavior, that certain subjects are off limits and that to explore them risks, at best embarrassment, and, at worst, the questioning of one’s character."
Easy for him to say – I don’t see the AG getting hauled into HR and losing his job & his family’s main source of support, because he asked “Why do black people seem to…” in the break-room.
Would that a ‘questioning of character’ were actually “at worst”.

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Britain Wakes Up ...

...Hand-wringing apologists in 3...2...1.

Anti-terror code 'would alienate most Muslims'

So basically, it goes like this:

In Britain, the level of scrutiny you receive from the government is largely dependent on both the history of your personal actions and with whom you are known to associate.

To me, this sounds reasonable enough - very

The problem with that approach comes when you factor in Political Correctness and what aspects of their behavior you "mustn't see" because any such acknowledgement is inherently 'insensitive', 'judgemental' or 'discriminatory'.

It seems that someone at the Home Office had an epiphany - realizing that responsible adults (and particularly those responsible for the safety of others) are actually supposed to:

- make judgements,

- discriminate between good/bad/safe/harmful,

- and should do so based on the evidence put before them, regardless of the feelings or sensitivities of themselves or others.

Apparently, once the light died down and the host of angels ran out of breath, the decision was made to start paying attention to people's words and actions, and actually apply them as behavioral red flags to the existing Terror Code - and specifically when determining who should be subject to greater scrutiny as an "Extremist".

The measure (called 'Contest 2') would define extremists as those who "hold views that clash with what the government defines as shared British values."

(meaning essentially that the minority doesn't get to decide what's normal/acceptable for, or in opposition to, the rest of the country)

The meat of this is defined as:

According to a draft of the strategy, Contest 2 as it is known in Whitehall, people would be considered as extremists if:

• They advocate a caliphate, a pan-Islamic state encompassing many countries.

• They promote Sharia law.

• They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world. This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.

• They argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah.

• They fail to condemn the killing of British soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.
So, if you're living in Britain and you advocate the overthrow of the government, armed religious war against non-muslims, following a law other-than & to-the-exclusion-of the law of the Land, killing gays (because that's the only acceptable treatment for those who sin against Allah) , and/or cheer-on the killing of British soldiers abroad - you will be identified as an Extremist.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me - in fact, I'm a little surprised something so common-sense could come from government at any level.

Now, I can already see the 'thought-police' arguments coming 'round the bend - but let's bear in mind that what we're dealing with here is not some nebulous, double-plus-ungood preference against unhappiness.

This is a matter where it's the simplest thing in the world to draw a broad, straight line between words and actions, usually culminating in the fiery deaths of civilian commuters - and not the least because such actions are almost universally preceded and followed by these very words and sentiments.

Just like "Not all Muslims are suicide bombers, but all suicide bombers are Muslims" - it also follows that "Not all people holding extreme views/beliefs commit mass murder, but all mass murderers hold extreme views/beliefs".

If the bombing/mass-murder parts are the actions, and we know about these only after-the-fact - then what becomes the common-theme predictor to preventing/opposing the actions?
"Those who advocate the wider definition say hardline Islamist interpretation of the Qur'an leads to views that are the root cause of the terrorism threat Britain faces."
Again - take what you've seen people do - when you take any random sampling of religious murders/executions across the world, are we talking about Lutheran, Norwegian grandmothers?
"Ed Husain, of the Quilliam Foundation thinktank, said the root causes of terrorism were extremist views, even if those advocating the views did not call for violence.

Husain, once an extremist himself, said: "Violent extremism is produced by Islamist extremism and it's only right to get into the root causes."
"Root Causes".

Now, here in the US we're more accustomed to those on the Left shrieking about 'root causes' in terms of 'American Imperialism', 'Heartless Capitalism' and 'Evil Conservative Policies' as being the "root causes" of terrorism - but that only works when you disconnect 'A' from 'C'.

I am willing to stipulate right here that those can be "root causes" of indignation, anger and even outrage.

But at the same time one would have to also stipulate that billions of people all over the world feel these very same things over a myriad of conditions every day - and yet do not feel a moral imperative to slaughter innocent bystanders by the hundreds.

So what is the "root cause " of the decision to transform 'ourage' into 'murder'?

If this could remotely be considered a one-off situation the answer might be 'mental illness' generally, or 'psychosis' or 'sociopathy' more specifically.

But this cannot be - even remotely - considered a one-off situation.

And even even opponents to 'Contest 2' have to step carefully to avoid admitting it.

"Inayat Bunglawala, a former spokesman for the Muslim Council of Great Britain, said such plans would affect many British Muslims."

"That would alienate the majority of the British Muslim public. It would be counterproductive and class most Muslims as extremists."
It's obvious that she's trying very, very hard not to say this - but is trapped by the imperative of having to create a sense of wide-spread victimization.

Roll back up to that list - according to one of the more vocal opponents to the common-sense 'Contest 2', that list would class most Muslims as extremists.

Now that's a very 'Horse's Mouth' moment there.

Most. Muslims.

And the proof, as they say...

"The Contest strategy (of which this proposal is "2" - MD) was put in place in 2003 as the UK beefed up its response to the threat of al-Qaida inspired terrorism. But the security service's assessment shows no drop in those they consider dangerous and the UK's terror threat level remains at severe general."
And with the PC-taboo on the identifying features of Islamic-Extremism hampering efforts, who would have thoght such a thing?

"In a speech in December, the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, said the government's counterterrorism strategy had to include challenging nonviolent extremist groups that "skirt the fringes of the law ... to promote hate-filled ideologies".
Good Morning, Home Office.

Let me put some coffee on for you.

- MuscleDaddy

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Okay - A Small Diversion...

I wandered over to Life in 3D (hey, Instinct) and happened upon...

... The Hero Factory.

Absolutely the single coolest thing in 2009.

The best part may be that every time you start over, That Song starts over.

Every. Single. Time.

I will not rest until every one of you is a superhero.

- MuscleDaddy

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Stimulus Grinds Onward

First of all...

Yes. The One is coming to Denver to sign the The Generational Theft Act of 2009.

Best I can figure, it's a thrift-based decision - as it will save money on shipping those Roman columns somewhere else.

I grabbed that TownHall story ... mostly because my brother
(Monopticus-Shout-Out) sent it to me and I was just too lazy to go looking for one I liked any better, but then I started going down through it and a couple of things caught my attention.

First, I was once again struck by the complete lack of acknowledgement of the cognitive disconnect necessary for someone to use/speak the phrase "Tax breaks for those who do not pay taxes" - without closing his eyes and shaking his head.

Can we all - Please - at least agree that a "tax-break" is when either some of your tax-money is returned to you or is not demanded of you in the first place,...

... while someone who doesn't pay taxes getting a check @ refund-time, means that someone else's tax money has been
"Given" to that person, and that this is not a "break" from those taxes that he did-not/was-not-going-to pay in the first place?

(I know, I'm probably just picking-nits here)

Second, I learned that the Obama administration has launched a Website that will "will allow people to track where the money is being spent."

Being a part of the much-lauded "Greater Transparency & Accountability", I was curious to see if it would ennumerate the various levels of Pork that I've been reading about from the Bill itself.

....the answer so far (there are many levels to this site) is... well,... No.

But I did find this, under the title
"Where is Your Money Going?":
(and I do love graphs)

Now, let's leave-off that this doesn't look quite like the other graphs that had been previously created on the Bill... that's a subject for another post.

This is still a very nice attempt at transparency-through-visuals and it certainly looks like the largest-part of this is going to "Tax Reli... oh wait - that's an asterisk, isn't it?

Okay, let's play "Chase the Transparency Asterisk".

* Tax Relief - includes
$15 B for Infrastructure and Science,
$61 B for Protecting the Vulnerable,
$25 B for Education and Training and
$22 B for Energy

Okay, so now those totals adjust to:

$78 B for Education and Training, --------not $53 B
$65 B for Energy-------------------------not $43 B
$142 B for Protecting the Vulnerable, --- not $81 B
$126 B for Infrastructure and Science, --not $111 B
- and
$165 B for "Tax Relief", rather than the charted $288 B

Also - it turns out that there's nothing on the site that might clue you in on what is actually meant by the warm-n-fuzzy title of, say, "Protecting the Vulnerable"

(does sound like something you'd have to be pretty heartless to argue over though, doesn't it?)

Looking around for such pesky details that the chattering masses shouldn't really care about - I find a Q&A section... okay...

Q: Where can I find the full text of The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009?
A: The text of the law can be found in Text or PDF format here.

Ah! That's more like.... Ah. Okay.

Link takes you here:

Bill's done - being signed here in Denver, probably at this moment... text.

Hmm... Transparency.... Accountability.

- MuscleDaddy

PS - Just a small but somewhat amusing bit - That graphic with all the misleading numbers?
... when you grab it from the site, the name of the image is "Investment Bubble"

Yeah... like "Housing" or "Dot-Com".....

Coincidence? I think not.

Friday, February 13, 2009

You want a better Expert?

In the most stark and telling role-reversal, Vladimir Putin understands what America is hurtling toward with the "Stimulus":

Putin Warns US About Socialism

"Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin has said the US should take a lesson from the pages of Russian history and not exercise “excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state’s omnipotence”.

“In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state’s role absolute,” Putin said… “In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.”
How do you dismiss it as "Fear Mongering" when the former Head of the KGB recognizes this as a giant government over-reach toward Socialism?

What could possibly carry more weight, at this moment, than the current Prime Minister of Russia saying:

"Don't do this - We've been where you are - Don't Do This."

I got nuthin'.

- MuscleDaddy

Crazy Like A Fox.

Sen. Gregg Withdraws as Commerce Secretary

"It has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the census there are irresolvable conflicts for me," Gregg of New Hampshire said in a written statement.
Now I'm sure that most of you have heard this already, but I'm also hearing a lot of "Well, of course, what was he thinking in the first place?" coming from talk radio today.

I think there's more going on here. Consider this:

By now, the word has started to get out that the "Stimulus" Bill is a great big, steaming pile of debt that will crush future generations - Blogs are speaking out against it - Talk radio is speaking out against it - basically, everyone who's paying attention already knows.

But what about the people who aren't paying attention?

The people who get their news from the Mainstream Media are the ones who really elected Barack Obama in the first place - on no substantive information and only the vague promises of "Hope & Change" delivered to fawning reporters by a good-looking guy with a nice baritone and a hot teleprompter.

Those same "swing-voters" are still getting their news from 'Good Morning America' and Chris Matthews - GMA still refuses to examine or report the facts of the "Stimulus" bill critically, while Chris Matthews is ...well,
Chris Matthews.

So how does the message of "Stimulus Bill is a great big, steaming pile of debt that will crush future generations" - get out to those people who aren't following the whole thing closely?

Just like this: When a Republican Senator offers himself to the Obama cabinet on a wave of "Bi-Partisan Unity", is appointed to the cushy job of Commerce Secretary...

...and then, upon "Getting Inside" - ostensibly gets a look at what's going on and bails, saying
"There's no way I can be a part of this - respectfully, Mr. President, you can keep your job."

There's no way the Mainstream Media can entirely ignore that - especially with the history of the first Commerce-appointee having to withdraw over a "pay-for-play" scandal.

Now the second appointee refuses a Presidential Cabinet Appointment because the "Stimulus" is so bad?

Which, incidentally, is just as good as publicly announcing his "No" vote.
(notably highlighting These Three as the only bought-and-paid-for (R)-wearing traitors to common sense)

Who could have done a better job of getting that point out to the TV-News-Watching public?

And we go back to having a self-demonstrated Conservative in that senate seat.

I couldn't have come up with anything that good.

- MuscleDaddy

Happy Birthday Abe!

Today was the two hundredth anniversary of Abraham Lincoln's birth.

If he were alive today...

He'd be really damn old!
[Click on the title above, or date stamp below, to see the full article.]

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Socialized Medicine "Stimulus" Provisions Draw Heat...

...President Obama 'distances' self.

Well, that was quick - I only started beating on that one in the previous post!
(behold, the power of MD!)

So, just to recap that particular "Economy Stimulating Insertion":

The provisions, included in both the House and Senate versions of the bill, would allocate at least $3 billion toward the “the utilization of an electronic health record (EHR) for each person in the United States by 2014.” In addition, another $1.1 billion would be allocated to establish a Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Riiight - the "Council".... and what would they do again?

This council would serve as an umbrella group for all federal health programs, including Medicare, Medicaid, S-CHIP, and veterans’ care, with 15 members from various federal agencies making determinations and recommendations to the secretary of Health and Human Services about health care needs and cost-effective treatments.
So, 15 different federal agencies making decisions on whether your treatments are necessary and sufficiently cost-effective... what could there be to worry about there?

And I didn't even know about the
"veteran's care" part, before.

Hmmm... Thinking about all those US servicemen coming back from the Sandbox with truly grievous and extensive injuries - the amount of surgery, reconstruction, prosthesis and therapy...

I wonder how a council of 15 federal bureaucrats applying the EU's cost-efficiency-matrix (reference post below) would be likely to affect them?

Now - if you search through the recesses of your memory, into the dim past of 'the Presidential Campaign', you'll recall that Barack Obama made Universal Health-Care one of his platform planks.

President Obama was even quoted as referring to health-care as a

That being the case, it would seem perfectly reasonable to expect that he would have felt quite strongly about this particular provision - not wanting to (in the words of his chief-of-staff) "let a crisis go to waste."

So naturally, when faced with the recent criticism of this particular piece of the "Stimulus Bill", he stood up personally and defended is importance and propriety, ... right?

When asked whether President Obama had insisted that the two health care provisions be part of the final stimulus bill, spokeswoman Psaki said, “We haven’t specified that."

Hmm. Or not.

Now why do you suppose that is? It seems like it would have been the perfect demonstration of
'standing by his beliefs' or 'putting his money where his mouth is' or even 'reaffirming priorities he espoused during the election'.

Why would he have an aide distance him from something that is so important to him?

What do you think?

- MuscleDaddy

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

"Stimulus" includes medical-procedure "Star Chamber"

Remind me - what part of this represents "Stimulus"?

Betsy McCaughey @ Bloomberg dredged this up out of the Generational Theft Act of 2009 - Basically straight from the mind of Tom Daschle, it's the groundwork for every Socialist "Healthcare Program" that you ever, never wanted to see come to pass...

"Ruin Your Health With The Obama Stimulus Plan"

For those following along @ home: Here is the link to the Bill as she cites it.

And here are the appropriate Money-Quotes - that ought to scare the HELL out of you...

"The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system."

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective.

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the
HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

By creating a new government office, this piece of insurmountable shite sidesteps any hope of impermanence - unless you believe that an entire agency, with the level of investment that this monstrosity would need, would be likely to be dissolved after the "Stimulus" money ran out.

...yeah - me neither.

The government - dictating to Doctors and Hospitals what treatment you can & cannot receive.
... according to a matrix-chart & based on your likely 'productiveness'.

Which will be terribly efficient for their purposes...

Now, if they decide that 'Old Boxer' just isn't going to be productive anymore, they won't even have to go to the expense & trouble of euthanising him - just check the chart, stamp the file and deny treatment.

Whatever's wrong with him will handle the rest.

If the American people lie down for this - we deserve what we get.

- MuscleDaddy

Friday, February 6, 2009

Just in case you weren't clear by now...

First Obama put up a Tax Cheat for Treasury Secretary.

But apparently that wasn't quite enough to really demonstrate the disdain he feels for the sensibilities of the average American.

But fear not - I think he's finally got it dialed in this time.

How about a kiddie-p0arn-attorney for Deputy Attorney General?
(gotta watch those filters)

From Fidelis:

“Ogden’s record is nothing short of obscene.

... He has opposed filters on library computers protecting children from Internet smut, and successfully defended the right of pornographers to produce material with underage children.”

As a lawyer in private practice, Ogden has argued for an unlimited abortion license, gays in the military, and has urged courts to treat traditional definitions of marriage as a social prejudice.

“A vast majority of Americans support parental notification before a minor’s abortion and protecting kids from Internet pornography in our libraries,...“Yet David Ogden has fought tooth and nail against these common sense laws protecting our children from harm.

At a time when America’s families are under increasing assault, Mr. Ogden is a dangerous choice for a position whose responsibilities include the enforcement of our nation’s laws.

So - do you Bitterly-Clinging, simple-minded, flyover, racist, rube-hicks get it now?

Has your Commander-in-Chief done his job of 'Communicating' to you?

This Administration will brook no insolence from your simplisme, un-nuanced, back-country, right-and-wrong judgmentalism!

Get back to work - your betters will decide your fate!

- MuscleDaddy

Maybe I'm a little hazy here...

But what is a "Stimulus Spending Bill" really supposed to do?

My thought is that it's supposed to be a temporary influx of money into the economy, for the purpose of jump-starting industry & commerce - providing capital/opportunities for re-tooling (both literally & figuratively) and even expansion into new business - which would in turn create new jobs, hence new incomes and new consumer spending, finding its way into retail and real estate markets.

As I understand it, our main focus in America right now is supposed to be getting our economy back on track - getting our markets moving and our citizens back to work.

To that end, one of the only things in the current "stimulus bill" that I actually agree with is the "Buy American" Rule - by which, any supplies, materials (specifically iron & steel) and equipment bought or contracted for projects defined in the Bill must be made in the US.

There are a lot of reasons why US products & materials haven't been able to keep up with the foreign versions - and not just because those countries only pay people 13 cents-a-day.

A good deal of it is because a truly, obscenely HUGE number of the environmental laws and other restrictions on manufacturing make our "old" ways of making things nearly impossible - and the complete re-tooling overhaul needed to work at efficient volumes within those restrictions is prohibitively expensive.

In order to invest that kind of money, companies would have to have a reasonable expectation of like-money coming in... which they do not have right now, because it's currently cheaper to buy product/material that "will work" - from China or other countries that consider their environment 'expendable' and workers-falling-over-dead to be "turn-over".

While I've been against the Pork-a-Palooza "stimulus bill" from the outset, I have to admit that it does present a certain opportunity, in proposing manufacturing-industry related/dependent projects that would be assured of going to American companies...

American companies that would *still* need to retool in order to compete with each other, while still operating under those aforementioned laws & restrictions - those changes would become selling points in the bidding for those jobs and the vastly increased likelihood of getting those contracts would be the impetus necessary to make those investments.

Once all those changes have been made, we'd be looking at a manufacturing industry far more able to compete with countries currently operating under the fast-and-loose 'smudgepot' rules that have allowed them to undercut US products/materials for so long.

That would be some actual 'Stimulus' - and enacted via a bill that is (on it's face) intended to be temporary in nature - and associated only to spending that would exist over-and-above the normal government and economic spending.

Let me say that again:

The Made-In-America rule would apply only to project-spending under this bill and would not affect the rest of Governmental/Economic spending/operation.

None of our regular foreign trade would come under this rule - the TRILLIONS of dollars in foreign trade that exist right now would continue as usual...

... except that, eventually, those foreign countries/companies would find themselves faced with viable competition from re-tooled companies in the US...

Near as I can tell - aside from everyone else in the world wanting to "Get Theirs" out of the Generational Theft Act of 2009 - the prospect of such new competition from the US is what the Rule's detractors are referring to as "protectionist policy" - as though this were some rule being proposed across-the-board & referring to ALL foreign trade.

Detractors like (wait for it...) John McCain.

"U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is joining other free trade advocates fighting a “buy American” provision in the $825 billion federal economic stimulus bill.

The buy American rule would force contractors and governments receiving funds for construction, research and other projects to use American-manufactured vehicles and materials to build those projects.

Proponents of the made-in-America rule say the stimulus money should be spent in this country rather than being sent to China or other foreign markets, which could lead to the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs."
Indeed - as I've pointed out above, it seems that monies intended to 'stimulate' our economy could be better spent than simply sending it to China - to stimulate their economy - so that they can be better able to manufacture more cheap products - to sell to us. ( and at that point "us" would be the American economy, having found itself buying from a manufacturing market with even less American competition)

Oh, but 'Teh Maverick' doesn't see it that way:

"McCain, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and free trade advocates criticizing the rule, say it could spark trade wars with Europe and Asia and be part of a wave of protectionist actions. Britain, for example, is considering similar rules for some of its stimulus efforts."
So (again, 'to me') that sounds like we should be concerned with other countries in the world saying "Hey! We get a piece of that Pork - and nuthin' bad will happen ta youse."

But wait, there's more:

“We should not sit idly by while some seek to pursue a path of economic isolation, a course that could lead to disaster. It didn’t work in the 1930s, and it certainly won’t work today,” said McCain referring to tariffs raised during the Depression.
....which is such a glaringly bad and unsuited analogy to the current situation as to make this man's nomination to the Republican Presidential ticket absolutely beggar the imagination.

I admit that I haven't been able to slog through evergy single page of the Bill (yet), but so far I haven't seen One Word about imposing tariffs (as both the EU and China have in place, btw), either for the specific purposes of this Bill, or otherwise.

As far as the Buy American rule goes - given the circumstances (purpose, impermanence & likely effect) - I just don't see a down-side.

And apparently, I'm not alone:

"The U.S. Senate voted down McCain’s first attempt Wednesday night, but the issue is expected to pop up again when final votes are taken on the package."
When I think that a vote for *Sarah* was also a vote for this shambling idiot...

- MuscleDaddy

P.S. - In case you're left wondering if I have the correct intent of rule - Here's a brief explanation by the Senator who introduced the provision - Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D

(Yeah - "D" - and exhibiting solid common sense... I never saw it coming...)

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Rahm Emmanuel's Apartment...

Okay - as a 'gotcha' story, I think this one is pretty weak - especially considering the Rahm-stories they could be focusing on...

"Rahm Emanuel Lives in Illegal Apartment"

It's apparently about a zoning issue, and whether the 'apartment' is legally "allowed" to be rented in the first place - blah, blah, blah - he's the renter, so it's not his responsibility to check the 'zoning' before he signs a lease - it's the owner's responsibility.


I have to admit that when I put together:

- Rahm Emmanuel...

- Living in someone's basement...

- where he's not supposed to be...

The movie in my head (starring homeowners John & Marsha) is pretty funny.

Marsha: "Did you hear that? There it was again..."

John: "It's nothing - probably just the pipes."

Marsha: "I don't think so - please go down and check it out!"

John: Oh, fer the luvva...Okay, here I go... There, see? There's nothi-HOLY SHIT!!!

Marsha: OhMyGodJohn! What! What's down there?!?

John:'s the White House Chief of Staff!! Marsha, get me a broom or something!

Marsha: Oh John, be careful!

Yeah, I know - sick and wrong...

- MuscleDaddy

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Had to share this one...

How many liberals does it take to change a lightbulb?
One - Give it to Obama; he’s great at screwing-up.

- MuscleDaddy

Arnold Bucks

States like California are finding it difficult to pay for all of their vote-buying programs. It looks like tax refunds will have to be in the form of IOUs, which prompted our friends at to poke fun at... Arnold Bucks!

Questions & Answers

“Make no mistake, tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter. ”

- Sen. Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, May 7, 1998, p. S4507

On and on it goes...
I heard that Sean Hannity was asking "Why won't these Liberals pay their taxes?!?"
... - as though it were some kind of impenetrable mystery...

It makes perfect sense to me.

Have any of you read the 'Stimulus' Bill?
(btw - some really excellent charts on that second link - MD)

Those Dems - the ones up above, there?

They KNOW what's in the 'Stimulus' Package (ok, probably not the drug czar)...

Do you think you would give the government your money - to be thrown away into such a prosperity-sucking hole as that... after you'd just helped write the thing?

... not if you were the kind of person who would write the thing.

And don't forget - those Obama-Selection-Tax-Cheats?

According to Joe Biden - they're Not Even Right With GOD.

(you have to believe him - he's not only the VP, he's also Much Smarter Than You)

- MuscleDaddy

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

But there ARE promises 'The One' is willing to keep - UPDATED!..

Turns out that the Washington Post mis-reported the "10% Military Cut" story, and that it was, in fact, an Obama demand that the Military cut their Budget Increase by 10%.

While that's a huge boo-boo for the Post (sounds like they had fact-checkers on loan from the NYT) - MY position on the matter hasn't changed.

The idea of Obama cutting military spending while we're involved in two major campaigns - while trying to convince the American people that the Generational Theft Act "must-be-passed-or-we're-all-doomed" - just shows where his priorities are, and just how deeply flawed.
(... just in case you get the wrong idea about that from the previous post...)

Obama’s 1st Promise…

QUESTION: "[W]ould you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?"...

OBAMA: "I would.”

And, apparently feeling that it's important to keep his word where capitulation-to-leaders-of-terrorist-countries is concerned...

"Obama has begun discreet talks with Iran, Syria"

"In an interview broadcast Monday, Obama said the United States would offer arch-foe Iran an extended hand of diplomacy if the Islamic Republic's leaders "unclenched their fist."

...but it actually turns out that they got the 'tense' wrong in that statement....

However, even before winning the November 4 election, Obama unofficially used what experts call "track two" discussions to approach America's two foes in the region.

(so, realizing that even Sarah palin wasn't going to be enough to carry McShame to the WH, the junior Senator from Illinois started creating & acting on his own foreign policy... nuthin' to see here, folks - move along - Hope&Change! BigSmile!)

Okay - So, what about that warm response to The One's hand-extended-in-diplomacy?

Surely, now that the Evil BusHitlerBurtonZionistConspiracy is out of power, the Arab/Muslim world must be ready for a big kumbaya with The Messiah - so what was their reaction?

... Nothing if not predictable.

Meanwhile, Iran has taken an aggressive posture with regards to possible direct negotiations with the Obama administration.

Iran's government spokesman Gholam Hossein Ehlam told the Iranian Mehr news agency that the request for direct talks "means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed," the Associated Press reported.

"Negotiation is secondary," Elham added. "The main issue is that there is no way but for [the United States] to change."

Characteristically, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took up the challenge by insisting that President Obama apologize for U.S. "crimes" against Iran, including apologizing for the CIA's role in the 1953 overthrow of Iranian then-Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and for the U.S. backing of Iraq in the 1980s war Iran fought against Iraq, according to a Bloomberg report.

…So, now that he’s lent every terrorist supporting tin-pot in the ME the credibility of warranting ‘negotiation’, ‘compromise’ and – ultimately – capitulation from the POTUS…

…So, now that he’s gone on Al-Arabiya TV and debased himself and the US as ‘bullying’ and ‘wrong’ – speaking of the American people as low-brow rubes whom he must ‘educate’:

“And my job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.”
(Because everyone knows that us Bitter-Clingers *belch* think them Ay-rabs is all just belly-bombin’ skeet-targets – and we need The One to teach us diff’rint *HaockSpit*)

…So now that he’s committed to closing Gitmo (an act which must eventually lead to the release of those held therein, since they’ll now have access to US civilian courts – unless someone can come up with a US-domestic law that they’ve broken)… and the jihadis will no longer even have to fear imprisonment for attacking US military personnel…

…So now that he’s convinced the terrorist nations that he’s a weak-spined wuss who can be dictated-to, bullied and threatened with impunity....

How does he follow that up?

Well, that brings us back around to the other promise that Obama’s willing to keep:

Obama’s 2nd Promise…

To cut “Tens of billions of dollars” from the military – from missile defense systems to other weapons development that he considers “wasteful”

- slashing the US military budgets so that our “Paper Tiger” has fewer teeth.

Of course, in its place he would “propose worldwide bans on the creation of fissile material”

(put that sentiment into a ‘local’ analogy and what you have is an international version of “gun control”, where the nut-jobs and criminals who WANT to nuke other countries just ignore the ban, while countries who toe the line of 'no-nukes-or-missile-defenses' are left with….”HOPE” – that said whack-jobs will "CHANGE" the order-of-fire - and they’ll be killed ‘last’)

And, apparently feeling that it's important to keep his word where gutting-the-military-defense-capabilities-of-the-US is concerned...

Obama demands 10% defense cuts

“The Obama administration has asked the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff to cut the Pentagon's budget request for the fiscal year 2010 by more than 10 percent -- about $55 billion -- a senior U.S. defense official tells FOX News.”

Of course, that $55Bn won’t even make a dent in offsetting the embodiment of Obama’s real priorities, also known as the new Democrat Spending Orgy …er, “Stimulus Package” :

• $83 billion in welfare payments (the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax)
• $81 billion for Medicaid
• $66 billion on "education" (being more than the entire Department of Education required just ten years ago)
• $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits
• $20 billion for food stamps
• $8 billion on "renewable energy" projects (which have a low or negative return)
• $7 billion for "modernizing federal buildings and facilities"
• $6 billion on urban transit systems (dominated by unions and which, almost universally, lose money)
• $2.4 billion for "carbon-capture demonstration projects" (because...Global warming, of course...)
• $2 billion for child-care subsidies
• $1 billion for Amtrak (the federal railroad that's run in the red for 40 years)
• $650 million for "digital TV conversion coupons" (on top of billions already spent)
• $600 million on new cars for government (added to the $3 billion already spent each year)
• $400 million for "global-warming research" (separate from the $2.4Bn 'carbon-capture')
• $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts (because when you want to 'stimulate an economy'...)
Okay - so here's my take-away from all this...

We are faced with a President who outs himself as Weak to those in the world who want to kill us, while simultaneously undermining our military effectiveness at not BEING weak, while simultaneously pushing a spending-budget agenda that is sure to forever bury our already-beleaguered economy in crushing debt and create a whole new sub-class of Americans completely dependent on ever-greater numbers of socialist government programs.

What do you even CALL that?

- MuscleDaddy