Jan 13, 2007

Democrats new direction outlined

The Democrats keep saying they want the country to go in a new direction.

Let’s review the current situation based on the direction the country has been going:

1. Taxes are at a 20-year low while IRS revenue coming into the treasury is increasing even after the Bush tax cuts.

2. The federal deficit is at a 4-year low.

3. The Dow is at a new high and keeps going higher.

4. Inflation is at a near 20-year low.

5. Home valuations are up 200% over the past three and one half years.

6. Terrorists have not struck the United States since September 11, 2001 while many terrorist attacks have been thwarted including the 10 jumbo jet attacks planned to celebrate the anniversary of 9/11. These attacks were stopped by US and British intelligence gathering procedures.

7. If we pull out of Iraq today, terrorists would immediately focus their attention on our homeland. Instead of fighting the U.S. Army and Marines in the Mid-east, it would be a matter of days before they would be boarding planes to bring the war to U.S. soil in one manner or another.

The new direction the Democrats want us to follow would lead us to: (match with the numbers above)

1. Higher taxes. The Democrats can hardly wait until they can raise taxes. They have promised to begin by repealing the Bush tax cuts.

2. The federal deficit will rise when the “tax and spend” liberal agenda gets into full swing.

3. The Dow will drop as the Democrats push through anti-business legislation.

4. Inflation will return. Inflation won’t get completely out of hand as it did in the late 1970’s under Carter, but it will return.

5. If the home valuation trend continues it will be because of inflation rather than a robust economy.

6. Democrats will repeal the Bush Homeland Security measures making it easy for terrorists to attack us from within.

7. By prematurely cutting and running from Iraq, the terror war will be much closer to us and it may be a matter of time before it will be on our own soil.

Is this what the Democrats really mean when they say we should go in a new direction?

Jan 12, 2007

53 former Swift employees arrested in Texas raid

The immigration fraud connected to Swift employees is not over.

A federal grand jury has indicted 53 former workers at a Swift & Co. meat-processing plant in Cactus on felony charges of identity theft.

The former workers were among 295 people arrested in December when federal immigration agents raided the plant in the Texas Panhandle. Authorities said all had taken the identities of U.S. citizens.

Each of the 53 workers named in the indictment was charged with one count of false representation of a Social Security Number, a felony which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine, according to the U.S. Attorney's office in Dallas. Many face additional charges.

Besides the Social Security count, most of the 53 defendants were also charged with aggravated identity theft, having fraudulent immigration documents, and false representation of U.S. citizenship.


Jan 11, 2007

Henny Youngman said it

I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury.

Charlie Rangle explains the Democrat Iraq dilemma

There is an article in the New York Observer about the Iraq dilemma facing the Democrats.

When they gained a majority, one of the first things the Democrats wanted to do was to knock the knees out from under our military in Iraq.

The President has the power to conduct the war as he sees fit. However, congress controls spending.

With spending control in the hands of the Democrats, it seemed a simple matter for them to deny spending requested from the White House.

Representative Charles Rangel (pictured) put it all in perspective yesterday.

He began by reminding his fellow Democrats what would happen if they cut funds for Iraq when he said, “Anytime, politically, you have to explain what you are saying, you have a problem. And so if I am there saying, ‘Cut the funds for Iraq and the war in Iraq,’ then someone is going to say, ‘You are taking away rifles.’”

A decorated Korean War veteran, Mr. Rangel seemed acutely sensitive to the potential consequences of voting against money for the troops.

At that point, Mr. Rangle really got to the heart of the Democrats dilemma when he explained it in his usual salty manner:

“If my black ass was in Korea during the war and people got fed up with it,” he said, “and they cut off the money so I couldn’t get some snowshoes or underwear—well, goddamn, you are cutting the wrong people.”

Cutting the knees out from under our military in time of war is not new.

Three decades ago, Ted Kennedy authored the plan to cut funding to the Vietnam War. This ultimately gave the victory to the Communists and caused the deaths of thousands of people.

Now, 30 some years later, the Democrats are poised to do it again.

How can we trust our national security to the Democrats? We can’t.


Jan 10, 2007

How Sandy Berger stole state secrets and got off

What a politician’s can get by with largely depends on what political party they belong to.

In the case of Sandy Berger, he stole state secrets to protect his former boss, Bill Clinton. Naturally, Clinton protected Berger by keeping the media at bay. Berger only received a wrist-slap fine of $2,000.

Besides, if his boss could get away with sexual misconduct in the oval office, why couldn’t he get away with stealing a few state secrets?

The article here says that disproportionate justice is inherent to the legal system.

The written playbook might be the same for various cases, but different judges and different dynamics can lead to dramatically disparate results.

But what excuse is there for dramatically different media coverage depending on your political party affiliation?

Jan 9, 2007

Sun-Times chart of Chicago average salaries

Thinking of moving to Chicago? The Sun-Times chart of Chicago average salaries, found here, may help you decide.

Democrats pave way for higher taxes

A new House rules change clears the way for tax increases.

One of the first key procedural votes in the Democrat-controlled House last week established legislative rules that Republicans say will make it easier to raise taxes by a simple majority vote.

Everyone knew the Democrats would live up to their tax and spend liberal heritage. It tool less than one week for them to pave the way for tax increases by a simple majority vote.


Jan 8, 2007

Promise broken after only three days

Only three days after the Democrats gained a majority in the House and Senate, they welcomed lobbyists right back with open arms.

The House passed new rules, but it was only a formality because campaign fundraising hasn't changed.

Hours after changing House rules to reduce favors from lobbyists, it was back to business as usual in Washington.

Democrats threw a $1,000-a-person fundraising concert in Washington Thursday night, with Hollywood celebrities, big donors and those lobbyists writing checks to re-elect Democrats.

The Republicans did the same thing 12 years ago but the Democrats pledged to be different. A pledge that only lasted three days.

So much for congressional lobby reform.


Former DNC boss: Kerry guilty of political malpractice

Terry McAuliffe, former Democrat Party boss, is the author of a new book called: “What a Party! My Life Among Democrats: Presidents, Candidates, Donors, Activists, Alligators and Other Wild Animals.”

In the book, McAuliffe (pictured) has harsh words for Senator, and failed Democrat presidential candidate, John Kerry.

Terry McAuliffe, a close friend of Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton, says John Kerry’s failed 2004 campaign was, "one of the biggest acts of political malpractice in the history of American politics."

Don’t hold back Terry, tell us what you really think.


Jan 7, 2007

Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran

TimesOnline from the UK is reporting that Israel has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons.

Two Israeli air force squadrons are training to blow up an Iranian facility using low-yield nuclear “bunker-busters”, according to several Israeli military sources.

The attack would be the first with nuclear weapons since 1945, when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The Israeli weapons would each have a force equivalent to one-fifteenth of the Hiroshima bomb.


- - - - - U P D A T E - - - - -

The Rocky Mountain News reports that Israel denies planning a nuke attack on Iran.

Was this just a way for the London Sunday Times to increase readership?