Saturday, February 28, 2009

"A rainy day in Chinese towns... had me low, and had me down..."

Chinese rural migrants to the tune of TWENTY MILLION are jobless.

This is a picture of crowds waiting to get into an unemployment office in China.

Twenty MILLION. ruh roh

Good thing they have us to buy their stuff.

A doctor MUST perform an abortion?

"WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama plans to repeal a Bush administration rule that has become a flash point in the debate over a doctor's right not to participate in abortions. The regulation, instituted in the last days of the Bush administration, strengthened job protections for doctors and nurses who refuse to provide a medical service because of moral qualms.

A Health and Human Services official said Friday the administration will publish notice of its intentions early next week, opening a 30-day comment period for advocates on both sides, medical groups and the public." The rest of the article is here.

Z: Isn't a doctor who can't bring himself to kill an unborn entitled to his principles? Aren't there so many doctors who would commit abortions that this shouldn't even be an issue? "Hey, if you must, go to someone else, okay?"

Why the big move to get this rescinded? WHY FORCE SOMEONE TO ABORT ANOTHER'S BABY? What am I missing? Please help me here!


Friday, February 27, 2009

You can buy these.......

Click here and buy these bumper stickers. Let people on the streets who voted for Obama (you've seen THEIR bumper stickers!) know just how happy you are that THEY are now helping to pay your mortgage!

By the way, I had a canned voice phone call today beginning with "President Obama wants you to know that he's arranging for mortgage assistance for those who can use it. If you would like, call and find out if you qualify." They're calling us to offer us a bite of the big package. Cozy, isn't it? How much do the phone calls cost? (Except, I didn't listen all the way through, and I'm starting to think this had to have been a scam by some mortgage company. Any of you had one of these calls?)

(thanks, Mustang!)

Excommunication....correct for denying the holocaust....but not for supporting abortion?

"A British bishop whose denial of the Holocaust embroiled Pope Benedict XVI in controversy has apologized for his remarks, a Catholic news agency said Thursday. Bishop Richard Williamson, with the conservative Society of St. Pius X, had faced worldwide criticism over a television interview in which he said no Jews were gassed during the Holocaust."

Here's a fascinating line from the article: "Most historians believe about 6 million Jews died at the hands of the Nazis during the Holocaust." "MOST HISTORIANS?" Only "MOST?" But, that's beside my point here. What about this?:

The Pope had excommunicated Bishop Williamson in 1988, according to the article, for having said that 'only' 300,000 Jews died in the concentration camps and there were 'no NAZI gas chambers.' I'd have excommunicated him, too! Germany's Catholic Bishops are of the mind that this Bishop must go. He says he's sorry if this caused hurt to anyone but is not really apologizing (more on this in the linked article).

Now, Nancy Pelosi works hard to make sure women can abort unborn children.....which, whatever you or I think of it, is totally against Catholic church teachings (and most Biblical Christian teachings, for that matter), and she is, according to her (and who am I to say different?!), a practicing Catholic.....John Kerry was warned not to take Holy Communion, by the way.....I wonder if Pelosi will be denied communion, or even excommunicated for this?

I VERY MUCH hesitate to comment on someone's church affiliation and their standing in that church, but this made me curious and I'd appreciate your thoughts.



Thursday, February 26, 2009

"The Last Country of Freedom and Possibility?"

In 1970 a KGB operative from the USSR, an expert in Indian culture and languages, found himself disgusted with the Soviet system and made his way to the West. His migration was at great personal risk, but he had decided he must be free and so he defected to the United States.

In 1984, G. Edward Griffin conducted an indepth interview of the ex-KGB operative, Yuri Bezmenov, which was essentially a study of comparison and contrast between the United States and the USSR. A portion of that interview is in the video below. It's important, as you watch this video, to remember that this interview is from 1984 - amazing how no one heeded his warnings and we are so much further down the path to total communism/socialism than we were then.

In 1984, Mr. Griffin billed Mr. Bezmenov as "one of the world’s outstanding experts on the subject of Soviet propaganda and disinformation and active measures." And while I've been unable to find anything on or from Mr. Bezmenov within the past few years - IF he is still alive, I have to believe that this moniker would still stand.

In November of last year, Useless Dissident transcribed a different part of this same interview. It's a great read that gives you a little bit of Yuri's background and where he's coming from in making the statements he makes in the above mentioned interview.

Very early in that interview - remember this was 25 years ago - Mr. Griffin put forth the following question:

"In this country, at the university level primarily, we read and hear that the Soviet system is different from ours, but not that different. And that there is a convergence developing between all of the systems of the world, and that really it doesn’t make an awful lot of difference what system you live under because you have corruption and dishonesty and tyranny and all that sort of thing. From your personal experience, what is the difference between life under Communism and life in the United States?"

It's clear that, although few of us realized it at the time, we were already well down the path to the one world 'convergence', ne collectivism, that Mr. Griffin mentions in his question. And today we're running down that road with the blessing of a good percentage of the [uninformed] population.

It's obvious that we never did heed bezmenov's recommendations for the proper, America-appreciating education of our youth and our citizens - So is it now too late for the U.S.?

What of the "force" he speaks of? Obama has been in office less than 30 days and we are further down the road to complete socialism than any could have thought would be possible after 30 months.

The constitution is worse than, as Thomas Jefferson warned, a 'mere thing of wax' in the hands of the Judiciary - It is now nothing more than a wad of trash in the hands of the most horrible Congress in the history of our country. The graceless bunglers making up this current Congress is working hard to reduce our country to a country of collectivism.

And if we don't stop it now, it will be too late.

Oh, PLEASE be wiser............

There's supposedly money in there for removing tattoos from gang members, too. How stimulating is that?


Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Biden is .........gee, I hate to say "stupid", but.........

VP Joe Biden came up with some great advice last night. A woman asked him "What will this bill do to help us small business owners?" Did you hear his response? First, he couldn't think of anything and told her to call his office this morning and they could help.

Then, stammering and hesitating for something to say, he threw in "....we'll be building bridges which might be in your neighborhood and bring you more business or help you get to work."


You know those church stories....?

I just got this and couldn't resist sharing it with all of you: A first time visitor to a church came to the alter for a personal prayer with the Pastor. The Pastor asked him what he wanted to pray for and the man asked the Pastor to pray for his hearing. With that, the Pastor placed his hands on the man's ears and prayed earnestly for 20 minutes. He then asked the man if his hearing was all right. "I don't know," said the man, "my hearing isn't until next Thursday at 10:00 a.m.

Jindal and the Volcano.........This is important to Yahoo!

Is the liberal media THIS SCARED of Bobby Jindal or any other Republican!? This cracked me up..... Jindal questioned VOLCANO MONITORING in his speech last night. Seems like that's probably worth's NOT a "stimulus" item for any "Stimulus Package" to me, how about you!? (that's $140 million on volcanos, by the way)

I mean, didn't "stimulus" mean ECONOMIC STIMULUS? Isn't THAT what we're concentrating on these days? VOLCANO MONITORING!?? So, we have a science writer describing why VOLCANO MONITORING is so very, very important....wherein she lists volcanos, how they have erupted, why, when, how VERY imporant volcano monitoring is. Fine. But, to an ECONOMIC stimulus package? Is that like STD prevention is stimulating to our economy?

And YAHOO posts it in their morning headlines. THAT is why I wrote about this here. Funny, if Jindal did so badly, that Yahoo would highlight an article picking on his having dissed volcano scientists... It even adds: "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." (message: You just can't trust those Republicans to care about volcanos or fruit flies. Response: Maybe I wouldn't dismiss this research out of hand, BUT........think straight, lefties: ON AN ECONOMIC STIMULUS PLAN?)

Oh, I KNOW, a volcano could go off and hurt an economy somewhere in this great land, but is this the VITAL, important, TIMELY kind of thing we need NOW, when we're supposed to be fiscally responsible and have "no earmarks"?!! (I had to turn the speech off when Obama looked into the camera and actually reminded us how there are no earmarks in this bill! Sort of like Clinton...who did "NOT have sexual relations with...")

They're sounding a little desperate at YAHOO, aren't they!? Couldn't they highlight an article slamming Jindal on any of his other criticisms? We know his STYLE didn't wow anybody...and Obama's did. I'm just wishing STYLE wasn't quite so important in America these days....

Maybe Jindal should have discussed the FRISBEE PARK on the stimulus package, instead. Or a museum honoring Sam Rayburn? No pork there...............right?!!


Apologize to GREY DAVIS? yup

The latest on California politics and government * February 21, 2009


You have got to believe that the California Republican base is dispirited when a delegate at this weekend's state party convention is circulating a resolution to apologize to former Democratic Gov. Gray Davis for recalling him from office.

But that is exactly what party delegate Alex Burrola is suggesting.

The resolution, underscoring some party activists' seething displeasure with "post-partisan" GOP Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, reads as follows:

"Whereas, in 2003 a grassroots effort was begun to recall then-Governor Gray Davis from office on grounds which included gross mismanagement of the budget and finances of the State of California;

"...Whereas, candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger campaigned as a reformer and champion of fiscal discipline and responsibility who would bring change and reform to government which it sorely needed;

"Whereas, in the subsequent years Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has instead proven to govern as a tax and spend politician precisely similar to the one he campaigned to replace in the recall election;

"Whereas, the trust and confidence of Republicans has been betrayed and shattered by Governor Schwarzenegger's repeated and ongoing efforts to collaborate with Democrats in the Legislature to seek solutions to the state's fiscal crisis by irresponsible borrowing and increasing taxes and refusal to make the needed reductions in state spending;

"Whereas, Governor Schwarzenegger's current budget solution includes more than $14 billion in higher taxes on sales, income, gasoline and the car tax which he specifically attacked Governor Davis for raising;

"Whereas, it is plain that Governor Schwarzenegger has abandoned the most basic tenets of Republican ideology and rendered the whole purpose of the 2003 recall pointless;

"Therefore, be it resolved that the California Republican Party officially extends a heartfelt and sincere apology to former Governor Gray Davis for its role in recalling him from office."

So, six years later, Davis can take heart. Sorry about that, Gray.

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Priscilla's Post ....Another great one!

A Gathering Storm....Mexico's newest threat to us

It has been reported that the State Dept. issued a warning that American citizens, if they should travel to Mexico, should limit their visit to only business or tourist areas. Violent crime along the U.S.-Mexico is particularly dangerous and getting worse.

Nice huh? Now, what's going to stop the Mexican drug lords from coming here? The report stated that drug cartel people are coming here and recruiting. The politicians have done little to stem this tide, and now I wonder how much worse it has to get before they DO SOMETHING! How many ways do we have to be vulnerable? And we have a babe in the woods in the White House! He's only prepared to be tough I'm almost ready to grab my torch and pitchfork!!!

More than 6000 people were killed in drug violence in Mexico last year. In Ciudad Juarez signs were left on bodies saying they had promised to kill one officer every 48 hours until the police chief resigned. This is an area across the Rio Grande from El Paso Texas. Folks, it’s only a matter of time, before we here in the U.S. find ourselves in the middle of drug wars, with drug cartels controlling large parts of our cities.

We have complained, cajoled, and begged for our politicians to protect our borders and the American people from this onslaught. Their answer so far, has been amnesty. The Immigration Reform Bill which we effectively defeated, I’m sure temporarily, actually merely asked illegal alien gang members to sign a paper swearing they would no longer belong to a gang. Well now, that’s reassuring isn’t it. People who kill others for fun, I’m sure, will abide by that!

We have enough of our own home grown criminals, we do not need anyone else’s. This portends of chaos and further degradation of our cities, we cannot tolerate importing more crime. If Mexican drug cartels are successful in recruiting here, they will ostensibly own urban areas all over the U.S. Now couple this with terrorist cells and Islamist threats and I don’t have to tell you what our country will be facing. Meanwhile we have sanctuary cities, appeasers too numerous to mention among our elites and politicians, and a refusal from too many police chiefs, city councilmen, and judges to deal seriously with this problem.

Basically, it appears that, more and more, we are on our own. The people we elect seem unconcerned about us, the American people. Oh, they pay all this lip service, but you and I know nothing will be done. At least until some terrible disaster that costs enough lives to get their attention. And, even then, just look at how quickly 9-11, for too many, is a faded memory. President Bush took them on and has been verbally crucified for it. We are in a perilous position. Is anyone listening?

Priscilla, thanks so much for this well said. But, how can we expect crooks to fear us as a country and respect our laws when those laws say one thing but cities (even Washington DC!) call themselves 'sanctuary cities' and the laws don't apply?! How long can America stay alive when we're the dirty door mat?? The Mexican cartels will blend with La Raza, etc., and with Islamist terrorists, and then what?



When CAN we sue? (UPDATE: we can't, he's immune, we're in danger)

Gitmo Detainee to be Released Next Week

February 20, 2009 6:03 PM

ABC News has learned that the Obama administration will begin the process of releasing a prisoner from the Detainee Center at Guantanamo Bay next week, perhaps as early as Monday.

Binyam Mohamed, a 30-year-old Ethiopian and legal resident of the UK, will be transferred into British custody, government officials told ABC News. The British will fly Mohamed back to England. The British government has signaled it intends to subject Mohamed to surveillance, but he is not expected to be arrested. (Z: Did you have read that twice, too?)

British authorities have long expressed concern that any evidence against Mohamed would be inadmissible because of alleged torture against him by Pakistani and U.S. authorities. (Z: WHAT? What if he's planning more dirty bomb attacks? He 'alleged' torture so he's clean?)

The White House had no comment. (Z: CAN WE COMMENT? I'd like to comment...PLEASE?)

Mohamed has been detained at Gitmo since September 2004. He was first arrested in Pakistan by local authorities in 2002 and turned over to U.S. military authorities a few months later.

According to the Combatant Status Review Board filings summarizing evidence against Mohamed for combatant status review tribunal recently made unclassified (see HERE and HERE), Mohamed "received paramilitary training" at the al Faruq training camp in Afghanistan. (Z: maybe that was to become a NAVY SEAL, huh? Ya THINK? Not to insult NAVY SEALS, I'm SO SO sorry)

There he learned about "light arms handling, explosives, and principles of topography." He was "taught to falsify documents and received instruction from a senior al Qaida operative on how to encode telephone numbers..."

"The detainee proposed, to senior al-Qaida leaders, the idea of attacking subway trains in the United States," the board statement says. In Karachi, Mohamed "received explosives and remote-controlled-detonator training from an al Qaida operative." An al Qaida operative also told Mohamed to go to the U.S. "to assistant in terrorist operations," the document states. He allegedly was planning to use a "dirty bomb." (Z: Read THAT AGAIN! Are we ...nuts?)

In an interview with a member of the U.S. military also recently declassified, (read it HERE) Mohamed said that his training was done before 9/11 in order "to fight in Chechnya, which was not illegal." His contacts with al Qaida were only made so he could get out of Afghanistan and back to the U.K. Mohamed also "stated that his plane ticket at time of capture was a ticket from Karachi to Zurich to England, so how could he have plans to carry out attacks in the United States"? (Z: "How could he...?" Could he not buy a ticket with cash any stop he made and change plans? WHAT? Will we EVER be more clever or cunning than our enemy?)

All terrorism-related charges against Mohamed were dropped in 2007.

The ACLU has long claimed that Mohamed's admissions were made under the duress of torture.

"This unprecedented release of an enemy combatant, who has already targeted the United States, clearly shows that despite the promises that President Obama made to keep this country safe, he may be putting political promises ahead of our national security," said Commander Kirk Lippold, Former USS Cole Commander. "The laundry list of charges against Binyam Mohamed, many of which he has admitted to, makes it blatantly clear that it is not if he will attack the United States, but only when his attack will happen." (Z: YA THINK??? Is Obama comfortable with that?)

Lippold, a Senior Military Fellow at Military Families United, called Mohamed's release "dangerous" and urged the president to reconsider.

"By Mohamed’s classification as an ‘enemy combatant’," Lippold said, "the United States is aware that he poses a threat to our country and allies. Instead of maintaining him in custody where justice can be served, President Obama is allowing him to be released to the United Kingdom without condition. This presents a danger that he may rejoin the fight to kill innocent civilians." (Z:.....never mind..what can I say?)

The ACLU says that Mohamed, after being captured in 2002, was flown from Pakistan to Morocco on a Gulfstream V aircraft, for which flight and logistical support services were provided by Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. Mohamed claims that for the following 18 months he was tortured by Moroccan intelligence officials. In 2004, Mohamed was flown to a secret U.S. detention facility in Afghanistan, Mohamed claims. Again, support services for this flight were provided by Jeppesen.

"In Afghanistan Mohamed was tortured and inhumanely treated by United States officials," the ACLU says. "Later that same year Mohamed was rendered a third time by U.S. officials, this time to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba where he is presently."

Mohamed is one of several detainees who have attempted to sue Jeppesen Dataplan, a suit fought by both the Bush and Obama administrations because of "state secrets." (Z: and if he wasn't tortured but is lying about it, we'll err on his side, as usual, right? I wonder how much of our tax dollars he'll get.)

In a statement the British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said Mohamed "will be returned as soon as the practical arrangements can be made."

"Mr Mohamed’s return does not constitute a commitment by the Home Secretary that he may remain permanently in the UK," Miliband said. "His immigration status will be reviewed following his return and the same security considerations will apply to him as would apply to any other foreign national in this country . As always, all appropriate steps will be taken to protect national security." (Z: OURS?)

I GIVE UP. Can we sue a president for leaving us this vulnerable? Seriously....Yehudi, do YOU KNOW? Any other lawyers here? We're going to sit back and see this happen? Is he being defended by Eric Holder's firm?(read at your own risk, not after eating) Have we gone STARK RAVING MAD?

Oh, and I KNOW, he could be TOTALLY innocent (!) but WHEN can we err on OUR SIDE?


Monday, February 23, 2009


Hillary Clinton in China: "Because our economies are so intertwined the Chinese know that in order to start exporting again to its biggest market, the United States had to take some very drastic measures with this stimulus package," Clinton said.

"We have to incur more debt. It would not be in China's interest if we were unable to get our economy moving again."

Clinton added: "The US needs the investment in Treasury bonds to shore up its economy to continue to buy Chinese products." (didn't we once say BUY AMERICAN?)

(Old picture, old plans?) z

Republican Governors face a stimulating quandary....

Republican governors are 'split' on the Stimulus package and whether they should take money from it. There are sneaky (well, everything was 'sneaky' because nobody was given time to read it, of course) little bits in it which change the way they're used to doing business; Mississippi says they have on their laws that one can't take welfare if they flatly refuse to work. That's mandated to change IF they take that part of the package. And, the same benefits will apply to part-time workers, too, which is now mandated but wasn't in the state laws.

Arnold , of course, says "Governor Sanford says that he does not want to take the federal stimulus package money. And I want to say to him: I'll take it. I'm more than happy to take his money or any other governor in this country that doesn't want to take this money, I take it, because we in California need it," he said. (from article linked above)

Here's the dilemma....David Gregory on MEET THE PRESS Sunday morning grilled Bobby Jindal with "You going to turn away money to help your UNEMPLOYED?" Get the Democrat spin? (No principles SHOULD be adhered to because PEOPLE NEED THIS! There simply IS no way to help without this entire package!..not)

Mark Sanford of S. Carolina just keeps rising in my estimation. He's for not taking money. He doesn't believe it's helpful, he doesn't want to screw his state into accepting the terms. He's read and done his homework....

But, will these principled men suffer politically (in their own party) for it? The Democrats (media, too) have done such a good job of painting this as the LAST EFFORT TO FIX AMERICA. THE PEOPLE NEED IT. IF WE DO NOT DO THIS WE MAY NEVER RECOVER, right? Will many Americans understand it's NOT the 'fix', it might be exactly what we shouldn't have? Will most Americans just want the entitlements they're being manipulated into feeling they deserve?

Quite a QUANDARY... I don't envy the principled governors, but I surely do admire them.

Just saw this: Even CNN's getting the point; Apparently, if you lost your job, you won't get help on your mortgage. Wait, even I think it might be good to help people in that condition. What's up, Nancy and Harry?

geeeeeZ readers...Below is a real dilemma....what would you suggest for these people?:

Take Joe Martinez of Bristow, Va., who fits the profile of the "responsible" homeowner Obama cited in the plan. The government contractor and his wife thought they did everything right when they bought their brand new $600,000 house two years ago. They put 5% down and got a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage they could afford.

Others in their neighborhood, however, couldn't keep up with the payments. As foreclosure rose, the value of the couple's home plummeted to $450,000, leaving them doubtful they'd ever recover their investment.

Martinez called their lender to try to get into the Hope for Homeowners program, which would reduce their loan balance to 90% of the home's current value. But they were turned down because they weren't in default....


Sunday, February 22, 2009

Please pause a minute and learn about the Scholls

Sophia Magdalena Scholl (May 9, 1921 – February 22, 1943) was active within the White Rose non-violent resistance group in Nazi Germany. She was convicted of high treason after having been found distributing anti-war leaflets at the University of Munich with her brother Hans. As a result, they were both executed by guillotine. (from Wikipedia)

It makes me cry every time I think of them and today is the anniversary of their deaths. They were allowed to write letters to their parents just before they were killed and those letters have been put into a stone remembrance in the Hofgarten in Munich. It's very moving to stand there and consider their incredible bravery and how they were killed for it. Please read more from the account in her name link above. Read it for them. For their parents. For all the Germans who did speak out. It's at Netflix here. You won't be sorry, I promise. Have Kleenex nearby.

Here's a short video on the film.


Whatever is lovely.......

"Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable-if anything is excellent or praiseworthy-think about such things. Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me-put it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you." Philippians 4:8

Not a bad reminder, huh? We still have much to celebrate and much goodness to"think about".

Have a beautiful Sunday, my friends.


Saturday, February 21, 2009

A Shameless STEAL from Hot Air Blog

Obama’s Pentagon review: Gitmo meets the standards of the Geneva Conventions February 20, 2009 by Allahpundit

Z: Yup, I don't usually just lift a blog post, but this is just so important...on so many levels. Have at it. Thanks, Hot Air

When does the military’s compliance with international law qualify as bad news? When you’re a new president desperate for excuses to follow through on a dopey campaign promise that’ll please your nutroots base and no one else.

Oh well. Back to the “it just looks bad” argument.

A Pentagon review of conditions in the Guantanamo Bay military prison has concluded that the treatment of detainees meets the requirements of the Geneva Convention but that prisoners in the highest-security camps should be allowed more religious and social interaction with each other, according to a government official who has read the 85-page document.

The report, which was ordered by President Obama, was prepared by Adm. Patrick M. Walsh, the vice chief of naval operations, and has been delivered to the White House. Obama requested the review as part of an executive order on the planned closure of the prison at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. naval base on the southeastern tip of Cuba…

Walsh concluded that … force-feeding, which involves strapping prisoners to feeding chairs and forcing tubes down one nostril and into their stomachs, is in compliance the Geneva Convention’s mandate that the lives of prisoners must be preserved, the government official said.

Actually, insofar as this gives The One a handy alternative to expanding our renditions program, it does mean good news for him — or rather, it would if the left still cared about renditions, which they haven’t since January 20th. Exit question: With opposition to closing Gitmo already near majority levels, the media had better keep this as quiet as possible, huh?

z; oh, dear. What a problem for the Left..

Please read the pieces below and WATCH THE VIDEO......We don't hear these things in the media

UPDATE: Sens. Mikulski & Specter push to break cap on H-2B low-skill workers -- keeping more Americans unemployed

The federal government released the numbers for jobless claims from the first week of February on Thursday and the numbers jumped another 170,000. Yet, as American workers continue to lose their jobs, Senators Barbara Mikulski, Arlen Specter and 23 other cosponsors have proposed legislation exempting tens of thousands of former H-2B holders from the current cap of 66,000. If passed, S. 388 could triple the number of less-educated foreign workers in the country taking jobs away from less-educated American workers. (thanks for the tip, Pris)


Phoenix, AZ) -- An Arizona rancher has been ordered to pay more than 73-thousand dollars in damages to a group of illegal immigrants he allegedly detained at gunpoint after finding them on his property in March 2004. The Mexican nationals claim Roger Barnett yelled threats and obscenities at them, threatened to turn his dog loose, and kicked one of the women before turning them over to the U.S. Border Patrol. A jury at the U.S. District Court in Tucson found the 64-year-old liable Tuesday for assault and inflicting emotional distress. He was not found liable on claims of battery, false imprisonment and civil rights violations. Barnett lives on a 22-thousand-acre ranch near Douglas that is frequently traversed by people entering the United States illegally. (Z: nobody advocates kicking anybody, but can you imagine how this rancher feels seeing thousands use his land to sneak into America? Think this was the first and only bunch to do this and he's just a nut with a gun? I don't)

AND THEN THERE IS THIS!! Yes, Mr. Obama has signed an Executive Order pushing federal construction projects to favor union workers. Michael Steele says this about it and he is SO right: “President Obama’s executive order will drive up the cost of government at a time when we should be doing everything possible to save taxpayer dollars. Federal contracts should go to the businesses that can offer taxpayers the best value - not just the unions who supported the Democrats’ campaigns last year. Quietly signing executive orders to payback campaign backers undermines Obama promise to change Washington. It is a disappointment for Americans hoping for more transparency and less politics as usual in Washington.”

Z: So...there you go! A rancher wasn't nice to people breaking our laws on his land and has to pay thousands of dollars to them (What a COUNTRY!) and we have a president who doesn't understand that being Machiavellian for his agenda doesn't help this country.

Always on Watch alerts geeeeeZ to this video which you MUST watch. ACORN on foreclosures and how home ownership is a RIGHT. wow. Thanks, Always


Friday, February 20, 2009

Activists are SHOCKED! (good or bad?)

Activists are 'shocked' at Hillary's stance on human rights in China:

"Paying her first visit to Asia as the top US diplomat, Clinton said the United States would continue to press China on long-standing US concerns over human rights such as its rule over Tibet.

"But our pressing on those issues can't interfere on the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crisis," Clinton told reporters in Seoul just before leaving for Beijing."

RuhRoh. Put aside the POINT of this (human rights) for now, how fast do you think she'll cave to her buddies, the 'activists' who are 'shocked'? Did they really think EVERYTHING Obama's administration would do is payback? They supported him, so he's got to play their game to our possible peril? Do you think this stance will last?

Of course, if Hillary STILL doesn't understand that the 'global climate change crisis' is something she REALLY needs to learn more about before putting human rights second to it, then that IS a problem. But "economic crisis"? "security crisis?" Yes, I think we might want to put those in front of Tibet for a least until some of these crises are dealt with, or at least negotiations with China, NO?

OR does this mean we're caving into them because at least we HAD the human rights situation hanging over them for negotiation purposes...? OR did our Left make it so that OUR human rights have been painted to be so inferior (Gitmo, Haditha, etc.) that we don't have any moral authority on that anymore?

What're your thoughts?

On a personal note, I think I might forgo wearing RED in CHINA....what about you? (heh)


Something's happening here..........what it is is getting pretty clear

Please read this and send it to email friends. This is a MUST READ...Amazingly well done....and SO scary

Z UPDATE: If you can read more than this fantastic piece by Tim Wood, click HERE and see a letter to the President of GM I think you'll appreciate very much.

Z UPDATE #2: Chuck Schumer thinks many banks should be nationalized, FIXED by our government, then 'resold' when they're in better shape. ya.

By Tim Wood
2008 December 1

I am a student of history. Professionally. I have written 15 books in six languages, and have studied history all my life. I think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is just a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis.Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.
Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten - fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two years.We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learn just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms.That is our money, yours and mine. And that is three times the 700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people,"who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not, they now control us.

We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. Why? We have intentionally dumb down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents of why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, and school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?

We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (now violently in California over proposition 8 that is so controversial that it wants marriage to remain between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?). We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing un-elected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt,as is Medicare and our entire government, our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and know precisely what I am talking about) the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth. It is potentially 1929 x ten.

And we are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so. And now we have elected a man no one knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla, Alaska. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, religion and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course the media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe is more important.)

Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: change. Why? I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again. And that is only the beginning to a world social government.

I thought I would never be able to experience what the ordinary, moral German felt in the mid-1930's. In those times, the messiah was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they did know was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory and promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his"brown shirts" would bully them into submission. And then, he was duly elected to office, a full-throttled economic crisis at hand [the Great Depression]. Slowly but surely he seized the controls of government power, department-by-department, person-by-person, bureaucracy-by-bureaucracy. The kids joined a Youth Movement in his name, where they were taught what to think. How did he get the people on his side? He did it promising jobs to the jobless, money to the indigent, and goodies for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising tore-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe, and across the world.

He did it with a compliant media; did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and 'CHANGE'. And the people surely got what they voted for.(Look it up if you think that I am exaggerating.) Read your history books. Many people objected in 1933 and were shouted down,called names, laughed at, and made fun of.When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930's while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though.

Don't forget that Germany was the most educated, cultured country in Europe. It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And in less than six years, a shorter time span than just two terms of a U.S. presidency, it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors,all with the best of intentions of course.The road to Hell is always paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another drink, and ignoring what is transpiring around me. Some people scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. Perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe and why I believe it. I pray I am wrong. Pray with me for the truth, because the truth will set us free.WAKE UP, America!

z (Remember: Tim Wood wrote this, whoever he is..NOT me!!)


Thursday, February 19, 2009

Isn't THIS racist, TOO?

I heard about some people being really upset with a cartoonist who portrayed Barack Obama as the wild chimp who injured that poor woman in Connecticut recently. One bit from the linked article about this outrage is:

"The cartoon in today’s New York Post is troubling at best given the historic racist attacks of African Americans as being synonymous with monkeys,“ civil rights activist Al Sharpton said.
Calling the cartoon "offensive and divisive,“ he promised to stage a demonstration outside the Post offices on Thursday.

I remembered these.........
and these, too.......
Where was the OUTRAGE THEN? Shouldn't everyone just STOP THIS kind of ridiculous, nasty stuff? I think so.

UPDATE: The New York Post has caved and apologized.."to some". The very idea that Obama WROTE this bill is so silly and makes the whole liberal hysteria SO dumb.


This is a joke, right? WHAT?

check out the flag, okay? it's not photoshopped.

Report: ICE agents pressured to meet arrest quotas


LANGLEY PARK, Md. – U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrested 24 Hispanics at a convenience store in Baltimore two years ago after their supervisor told them to "bring more bodies" because they were behind their annual quota of 1,000 arrests per team, according to an ICE report released Wednesday.

The immigration rights group CASA de Maryland, which has accused ICE of racial profiling in the 2007 raid, released the agency's internal investigation report and said it shows that the agents acted improperly.

The report contradicts some sworn declarations made by ICE agents involved in the sweep, prompting the agency's Acting Assistant Secretary John Torres to ask for an investigation into inconsistencies, ICE spokeswoman Ernestine Fobbs said Wednesday. Meanwhile, CASA officials have called on Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to review the agency's enforcement policies.

"Government agents should not be in the business of judging people based on the color of their skin, clothing and employment, which is what seems to have occurred here," the Rev. Simon Bautista Betances, vice president of CASA's board of directors said Wednesday. (Z: What else can they do to round out as many ILLEGALS as possible?)

CASA officials have charged that ICE agents ignored blacks and whites at the 7-Eleven store as they rounded up all of the Hispanics, even crossing the street to detain Hispanics waiting at a bus stop. (Z: Is this the same guys who ignore dark swarthy skinned people at the airport and question Finnish grandmothers so it they're not profiling? How many blacks and whites are illegal in comparison with Hispanics?)

Soon after the raid, Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) asked for an investigation into whether the ICE officers racially profiled the people they arrested. ICE's internal probe found the allegations to be unsubstantiated, Fobbs said.

"I have confidence that the new Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano will fairly address this and other immigration issues," Mikulski said in an e-mailed statement in response to Wednesday's report. (Z: Ruhroh)

Of the 24 men arrested in the raid, one proved that he was in the country legally, 19 were deported or voluntarily returned to their native countries and four remain in immigration proceedings, said Justin Cox, an attorney with CASA representing some of the men.

The ICE agents involved in the raid are part of the agency's fugitive operations program, which tracks down violent criminals living in the country illegally. Agency records from the program show that beginning in 2004, the teams were assigned to arrest at least 125 fugitive immigrants. In 2006, each team's quota was increased to 1,000 fugitive arrests. (Z: isn't that a GOOD THING?)

"Our current enforcement of the immigration policy based on quotas lead to the separation of families and civil rights violations," said Gustavo Torres, CASA's executive director. "The evidence speaks for itself." (Z: if an ILLEGAL snuck into our country, it's our responsibility not to separate him from his family? Couldn't they maybe STOP breaking laws if they were threatened with separation? They don't seem to mind separation when the men come here without families, which is what's normally done)

The debate over the raid centers on whether the agents had probably cause to detain the men or whether agents targeted them simply because they were Hispanic.

In sworn declarations, some officers said they stopped at the 7-Eleven to take a break after several hours of arresting fugitive immigrants in neighboring counties. When the agents arrived, they said Hispanic day laborers surrounded their vehicles asking for work and, when questioned, admitted they were in the country unlawfully.

However, in the report, some officers later told ICE investigators that the men mumbled or said nothing when asked about their status. Some also said that their supervisor had instructed them to beef up their arrests, the report said.

Cox said some of the day laborers testified that agents did not ask them about their status and ignored non-Hispanics passing through the store. (Z: Are they supposed to stop EVERYONE??)

"I think that this validates all the concerns that the immigrant rights community has been expressing for the past couple of years," Cox said.

Z: Are they kidding? Is this a JOKE? Does anybody have concerns about what illegal immigrants have DONE to our country? They're not happy? WHAT? I COME from immigrants..we ALL do....but my people are VERY new here...not telling how new for privacy sake; I LOVE immigration. My grandfather came at 9 and had the language licked in 3 months and became a successful man. My people never went on welfare, even the ones who weren't as successful as Grandpa. My people love this country and my mother made the King Family Entertainment Specials during the Bicentennial look underdecorated! We had STANDARDS in America regarding immigration then. We had laws, and stringent requirements! WHAT HAS HAPPENED? And THE ILLEGALS HAVE CONCERNS? ??


Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Let's go!!

We just have to give the politics a rest once in a while. And yes, there's a hard hitting piece coming on soon, you all know I can't resist! But, I sure do wish we could take that road to somewhere beautiful.........and restful. Today. z

Fairness in Media here? You tell me

I didn't want to blog this story about the Muslim man who beheaded his wife on February 12...but a realization I had seems to beg discussion:

What would our media have done had this been a Christian pastor beheading his wife? And why aren't they covering this story, a beheading of a wife, as they do other lesser stories? You tell me.
Are our newspapers owned by people we don't know about? Are there threats to our media buildings, the very cities they're in?


Does NOTHING ever stick to THEIR GUYS?

(-Anybody got a caption for Rahm and Barry in the picture?? Fire away)

February 17, 2009

NEWS broke last week that Rahm Emanuel, now White House chief of staff, lived rent- free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) - and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate. But this is only the tip of Emanuel's previously undisclosed ethics problems. (Z: News broke LAST WEEK? Did you hear about that 'last week'?)

One issue is the work Emanuel tossed the way of De Lauro's husband. But the bigger one goes back to Emanuel's days on the board of now-bankrupt mortgage giant, Freddie Mac.

Emanuel is a multimillionaire, but lived for the last five years for free in the tony Capitol Hill townhouse owned by De Lauro and her husband, Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg.

During that time, he also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts. It paid Greenberg's firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008. (Emanuel's own campaign committee has also paid Greenberg more than $50,000 since 2004.)(Z: Wait. Not the same Greenberg in whose home he lived free?!! What a coincidence, huh?!)

To be fair, Greenberg had polling contracts with the DCCC before - but each new election cycle brings its own set of consultants. And Emanuel was certainly generous with his roommate.

Emanuel never declared the substantial gift of free rent on any of his financial-disclosure forms. He and De Lauro claim that it was just allowable "hospitality" between colleagues. Hospitality - for five years? (Z: for a millionaire?)

Some experts suggest that it was also taxable income: Over five years, the free rent could easily add up to more than $100,000. (Z: "some experts suggest?" H&R Block knows this! Heck, I KNOW this!!)

Nor is this all that seems to have been missed in the Obama team's vetting process. Consider: Emanuel served on the Freddie Mac board of directors during the time that the government-backed lender lied about its earnings, a leading contributor to the current economic meltdown.

The Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Agency later singled out the Freddie Mac board as contributing to the fraud in 2000 and 2001 for "failing in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention." In other words, board members ignored the red flags waving in their faces. (Z: and Oh, brother, are WE paying for that now)

The SEC later fined Freddie $50 million for its deliberate fraud in 2000, 2001 and 2002.

Meanwhile, Emanuel was paid more than $260,000 for his Freddie "service." Plus, after he resigned from the board to run for Congress in 2002, the troubled agency's PAC gave his campaign $25,000 - its largest single gift to a House candidate.

That's what friends are for, isn't it?

Now Rahm Emanuel is in the White House helping President Obama dig out of the mess that Freddie Mac helped start.

The president's chief of staff isn't subject to Senate confirmation, but his ethics still matter. Is this the change that we can depend on? (Z: CHUMP CHANGE)

By Dick Morris and Eileen McGrath

OKAY....Sometimes, people do the wrong thing...RIGHT? Now picture this: ANYBODY on Bush's staff did anything CLOSE to all of this and what would the media be doing?! Ya, I know, too.


Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Out of the mouths of babes..........

The Stimulus Package is signed

Yes, Barack Hussein Obama's name is now on the Stimulus Bill. It is Passed. And signed. I felt I needed to record this here at my blog, though I know better bloggers than I will write more comprehensive, passionate, informative posts than I can.

Yes, it's done, folks. Is America? It's Obama who said, this morning,
"But today does mark the beginning of the end.." To be fair, here's the end of that phrase "...the beginning of what we need to do to create jobs for Americans scrambling in the wake of layoffs."

I don't know what else to say. I think it's a disaster, I think the stocks didn't dump for nothing.....smarter minds than ours see this was passed without comprehension, without fairness, without input from people who might have deigned disagree with Pelosi and Reid, without the time to READ the darned thing, after all.

That's my post. What more is there to say? Just wanted to mark this date on my blog calender. (does anybody know if he does use Hussein when he signs...or just when he's on Muslim television?)

UPDATE: This is how much Obama's plan is like Roosevelt's/ Does ANYBODY else understand Roosevelt sent us DEEPER and LONGER into Depression! OH, MY GOSH!



Did you all hear about THIS?

Feinstein blows our Pakistani cover

Until now, most people assumed that the US conducted its Predator strikes on Taliban and al-Qaeda targets from bases in Afghanistan. Now, however, Senator Dianne Feinstein has exposed a Pakistani partnership on Predator launches that the previous administration tried to keep quiet. Her offhand remark may put the entire program in jeopardy:

A senior U.S. lawmaker said Thursday that unmanned CIA Predator aircraft operating in Pakistan are flown from an airbase inside that country, a revelation likely to embarrass the Pakistani government and complicate its counterterrorism collaboration with the United States.

The disclosure by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, marked the first time a U.S. official had publicly commented on where the Predator aircraft patrolling Pakistan take off and land.

At a hearing, Feinstein expressed surprise at Pakistani opposition to the ongoing campaign of Predator-launched CIA missile strikes against Al Qaeda targets along Pakistan’s northwest border.

“As I understand it, these are flown out of a Pakistani base,” she said of the planes.

Until now, that was a closely guarded secret. The drone attacks are incredibly unpopular among the Pakistani public, and the US didn’t want to undermine the current, democratically-elected government in Islamabad. They wanted to give the Yousef Gilani government deniability on their cooperation with the American military in order to keep our options for attack open.

This isn’t the first time Feinstein has blown a sensitive operation by opening her mouth, either. Californians will recall that Mayor Feinstein called a press conference to discuss the Night Stalker case, a string of violent rapes and murders that terrified the entire state. She divulged previously-confidential information about Richard Ramirez’ shoes and gun — and on hearing it, Ramirez promptly dumped them into the bay on his way out of town, eliminating key evidence in the case.

This exposure will cause much greater damage. The Pakistani public will almost certainly demand an end to these Predator flights, which have been highly successful at decimating terrorist leadership in inaccessible areas of the Pakistani frontier. Without that kind of tactic available, we will have to fall back to more intrusive and potentially less effective overflights from Afghanistan. This could allow our enemies breathing room to rebuild their networks in the region, and put us on a collision course with Islamabad on our efforts to fight them. At the very least, Feinstein has just complicated the diplomatic situation for Barack Obama by an order of magnitude. Ed Morrissey * Hot Air

RUHROH......... JUST what we needed. Thanks for the tip. Joey.


Obama and FDR....NEW Deal? Or Old Blunder?

Time for the truth, eh?

From February 15, 2009

Obama’s new deal is the same old blunder

Here’s something new: instead of the customary attempts to put an optimistic gloss on the state of the economy, our governments are doing exactly the opposite. Over here Ed Balls tells us, more or less, that this is the worst recession since dinosaurs roamed the primordial swamps. Meanwhile President Barack Obama declared last week that “if we don’t act immediately, our nation will sink into a crisis that at some point we may be unable to reverse”. As The Economist commented, with some alarm: “The notion that [America] might never recover was previously entertained only by bearded survivalists stockpiling beans and ammunition in remote log cabins.”

Obama’s dire assessment was on the surface the more surprising – wasn’t he supposed to be the great uplifter of the national mood, in the spirit of Franklin D Roosevelt’s “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself”? It seems all the odder because Obama has explicitly drawn on folk memories of FDR’s New Deal, telling television viewers to “keep in mind that in 1932, 1933 the unemployment rate was 25%”.

Obama is probably right to assume that those same memories have it that the massive state interventionism of the New Deal triumphantly restored America to full employment. That’s why he felt comfortable in asserting, on the eve of the launch of a $2 trillion (or so) injection of taxpayers’ money, “There is no disagreement that we need . . . a recovery plan that will help to jump-start the economy.”

He might, therefore, have been surprised to see an advertisement in the national papers, signed by more than 200 eminent economists, which declared: “With all due respect, Mr President, that is not true. Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians . . . we the undersigned do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s.” The sorry facts bear this out. The unemployment rate in the US was still 19% in 1939. Over the following four years the number of unemployed workers declined dramatically, by more than 7m. This had a very particular reason: the number of men in military service rose by 8.6m.

You might say that it is always possible to find 200 economists to disagree with anything, but in fact the practitioners of the dismal science are genuinely divided on this one. When the US Journal of Economic History polled economists on the proposition that “Taken as a whole, government policies of the New Deal served to lengthen and deepen the Great Depression”, 49% agreed. These would be the ones who might have recalled the damning remark of FDR’s own Treasury secretary, Henry Morgenthau. In 1939 he confided: “We have tried spending money . . . it does not work . . . we have just as much unemployment . . . and an enormous debt to boot.”

The trouble, 70 years on, is that America’s debt is already enormous, even before Obama’s “jump-start” has begun to hoover up the taxpayers’ trillions.

Perhaps Obama will not repeat some of the errors of the New Deal. Roosevelt (and indeed Hoover) recalled the anger caused by the wage cuts during the depression of 1920-1 and cajoled employers to keep wage rates stable, even as output dropped. This is a policy supported by the Keynesians of today, who argue that lower wages lead to lower demand, which leads to lower output, which leads to more unemployment, and so on ad infinitum.

In practice, however, if labour costs do not come down in a recession, then employers are even less willing to hire staff. The US government of the 1930s augmented this error with protectionist tariffs – designed to keep out imports from countries that had not sought to maintain wage rates, regardless of profitability.

Unfortunately, it may be that Obama will indeed leap into the same elephant trap: the president issued an executive order this month requiring federal agencies to put in place agreements that set “wages, work rules and other benefits” when awarding big construction projects. Perhaps this is payback for the unions’ support for Obama during the election. Admittedly the White House has sought to strip out many of the “buy America” clauses that Congress had attached to its stimulus bill, but when the gold-plating of federal contracts reduces any beneficial effect they might have on overall employment rates, we can be certain that the protectionist chorus will then belt out again, fortissimo.

This fear was not the reason the Dow Jones index plunged by almost 5% between the moment the Treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, began to announce the details of the “rescue” package and when he had finished speaking. There was a stunning lack of detail in the plan to inject up to $2 trillion into the financial system – prompting the observation even from a firm supporter of his, the Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman, that it reminded him of “an old joke from my younger days: what do you get when you cross a godfather with a deconstructionist? Someone who makes you an offer you can’t understand”.

How would the Treasury secretary invest the hundreds of billions earmarked to “rescue” the housing market? “We will announce details in the next few weeks.” How, exactly would he construct the announced $1 trillion public-private partnership to absorb the banks’ “toxic debts”? “We are not going to put out details until we have the right structure.” With apologies to Obama the author, this might be described as the opacity of hope.

It is, in fact, a dangerous mix of messages, and not just because it erodes the public’s sense that the administration knows what it is doing with all the billions it is throwing at the banking system – a complaint which over here is proving ever more damaging to our own government’s fading prospect of reelection.

You simply can’t tell the public on the one hand that there is an imminent danger of economic meltdown if your plans are not implemented – and on the other, give the impression that those plans are little more than scribbles on the back of an envelope. Obama is much more able to get away with such a mismatch between promise and practice – he has a fresh mandate and the high level of opinion poll support which tends to attach to that. Yet, for the same reason, he will never have had a better opportunity to harness popular goodwill to political action.

By contrast, the $787 billion fiscal stimulus that passed through Congress last week was almost too prescriptive, since Obama had allowed the House Democrats to write the cheques themselves: so, for example, there was $335m for STD prevention, $400m for research on global warming, $198m for Filipino veterans of the second world war. Noble of them, I’m sure, but how much is all of that guaranteed to “get America back to work”? Yet Obama mocked those who made such complaints: “You get the argument, well, this is not a stimulus bill; this is a spending bill. What do you think a stimulus is? That’s the whole point.”

In other words, Obama is backing the most primitive interpretation of Keynes’s theories: that any form of government spending amounts to an economic stimulus. He is almost blind to supply-side economics, which suggests that if you want to encourage profitable job creation, you should concentrate on reducing companies’ payroll taxes – and then leave individual businesses to decide how best to employ the funds released.

Instead, the young president seems to want to take us back to some of the failed policies of the 1930s, under the mistaken impression that they were a great triumph. He illustrates with dreadful clarity George Santayana’s most-quoted aphorism: those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.

Z: Fasten your seatbelts,'s going to be a bumpy ride.