Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, April 27, 2011


So... Tell... Me... WHY...?!?!
Posted by at

19 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/04/ap-afghan-officer-kills-nato-troops-042711/

KABUL, Afghanistan — A veteran Afghan military officer opened fire on foreign forces Wednesday after a dispute at the Kabul airport, killing several NATO troops, Afghan and coalition officials said.

* "NATO" TROOPS, HUH?

It was the latest in a spate of deadly incidents that have occurred inside government or military installations, a favorite target of Taliban insurgents.

* GET OUT! GET OUT NOW...!!!

NATO did not disclose the number or nationalities of the casualties pending notification of their families.

* ANY BETS ON WHETHER THE VICTIMS ARE ALL AMERICANS?

Since March 2009, the coalition has recorded 20 incidents where a member of the Afghan security forces or someone wearing a uniform used by them attacked coalition forces, killing a total of 36.

* NOTICE, FOLKS... EVEN THE (U.S.) ARMY TIMES USES THIS POLITICALLY CORRECT "COALITION FORCES" LANGUAGE SO AS TO AVOID HIGHLIGHTING HOW MANY OF OUR FELLOW CITIZENS - AMERICA'S FINEST - ARE BEING LITERALLY MURDERED OVER THERE.

April 27, 2011 at 7:56 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/04/ap-afghanistan-audit-says-afghans-unsure-of-how-many-police-042511/

A U.S. audit says Afghan authorities don’t know how many police they have or whether everyone getting a police salary is actually doing the job, a situation ripe for abuse and waste of international donations.

* YA THINK...?!?!

* FOLKS... WE'RE PISSING AWAY BLOOD AND TREASURE AT A PRODIGIOUS RATE... (*SIGH*)

The U.S. and other international donors are spending billions of dollars to build up Afghan security forces so they can one day take over their own security. Richardson was auditing a program under which donor nations have spent $1.5 billion since 2002 - more than a third from the U.S. - primarily to cover salaries of the Afghan National Police.

A larger program has been spending about $10 billion a year in 2010 and 2011 alone to train, equip and build infrastructure for a range of Afghan forces, including police, soldiers and an air force.

* AN AIR FORCE...??? THESE PEOPLE BY AND LARGE LACK INDOOR PLUMBING YET THEY NEED AN AIR FORCE...???

That program calls for increasing the number of Afghan police to 134,000 by October from the 81,509 of two years ago. But Richardson’s audit showed Afghanistan’s Ministry of Interior can neither verify how many are in the police workforce now, nor whether the payroll money is being spent correctly.

* FOLKS... OUR AFGHANISTAN "POLICY" IS A FRIGG'N CLUSTER F--K!

Another problem beyond payroll is the potential loss of weapons and equipment to “ghost” employees who go AWOL. “Are they supplying insurgents?” Richardson asked. “It is a question that is evolving.”

* FOLKS... THIS IS ALL BEING DONE IN YOUR NAME - IN OUR NAME...!!! THIS IS INSANE...!!!

April 27, 2011 at 8:06 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704729304576287041094035816.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

Pakistan is lobbying Afghanistan's president against building a long-term strategic partnership with the U.S., urging him instead to look to Pakistan - and its Chinese ally - for help in striking a peace deal with the Taliban and rebuilding the economy, Afghan officials say.

The pitch was made at an April 16 meeting in Kabul by Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, who bluntly told Afghan President Hamid Karzai that the Americans had failed them both, according to Afghans familiar with the meeting.

* FOLKS... (*SHRUG*)

With the bulk of U.S.-led coalition troops slated to withdraw from Afghanistan by the end of 2014, the country's neighbors, including Pakistan, Iran, India and Russia, are beginning to jockey for influence, positioning themselves for Afghanistan's post-American era.

* 2014...? (*SNORT*) SERIOUSLY, FOLKS... THIS IS ALL A SICK JOKE. OBAMA WAS ELECTED IN NOVEMBER 2008! NOT ONLY ARE WE STILL IN IRAQ... NOT ONLY ARE WE STILL IN AFGHANISTAN (AND F--KING IT UP ROYALLY)... BUT NOW WE'RE INVOLVED IN A THIRD WAR, A WAR WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION AGAINST LIBYA.

Pakistani officials say they no longer have an incentive to follow the American lead in their own backyard. "Pakistan is sole guarantor of its own interest," said a senior Pakistani official. "We're not looking for anyone else to protect us, especially the U.S. If they're leaving, they're leaving and they should go."

* THE CHINESE ARE GONNA EAT OUR LUNCH, PEOPLE. THEY'VE BEEN DOING SO AND IT'S ONLY GONNA GET WORSE.

Some U.S. officials said they had heard details of the Kabul meeting, and presumed they were informed about Mr. Gilani's entreaties in part, as one official put it, to "raise Afghanistan's asking price" in the partnership talks. That asking price could include high levels of U.S. aid after 2014.

* OH, SURE... NO DOUBT THERE'S SOME OF THAT. THE PROBLEM IS... FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER IT'S A LOSE-LOSE PROPOSITION! EITHER YET MORE BLOOD AND TREASURE IS SQUANDERED ON FALSE "ALLIES" OR ELSE WE SUFFER A MAJOR FOREIGN POLICY DEFEAT WITH OUR WITHDRAWAL FOLLOWED BY CHINA'S TAKING THE CAT-BIRD'S SEAT. WHAT A FRIGG'N DISASTER...

April 27, 2011 at 9:07 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/04/26/human-rights-abuser-syria-set-join-uns-human-rights-council/

[I]t would seem Syria is virtually guaranteed a seat [on the U.N. Human Rights Council], having been selected as one of four candidates for the Asian bloc.

(*CHUCKLE*)

The vote takes place on May 20 at the United Nations General Assembly in New York. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon apparently won’t do much about blocking Syria’s path to the human rights group.

(*SNORT*)

"That's not really for the secretary general to suggest to a member state," said Martin Nesirky, a spokesman for the secretary-general, when asked if the U.N. chief would ask Syria to drop out of the running for the post. When asked if Ban had brought up the point during his telephone conversation April 9 with Assad, Nesirsky told Fox News, "that's not really something the secretary general would raise specifically, because it's for other member states to decide on the membership of the Human Rights Council."

* FOLKS... SERIOUSLY... WHY ARE WE A MEMBER OF THE U.N.? WHY ARE WE "THE" MEMBER OF THE U.N. IN TERMS OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT?

* THE INSANE QUESTION ISN'T WHY WE DON'T LEAVE THE U.N. - THE INSANE QUESTION IS WHY WE STAY.

April 27, 2011 at 10:37 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/politics/27immigration.html?ref=us

Olga Zanella, a Mexican-born college student in Texas...

* NO GREEN CARD. NO STUDENT VISA.

Ms. Zanella, who has been living illegally in the United States since her parents brought her here when she was five...was pulled over by the local police in February 2009 as she was driving in her hometown, Irving, Tex., and did not have a driver’s license. The police handed her over to immigration agents.

(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

Last Thursday, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement official in Dallas summoned Ms. Zanella and told her she could remain in this country, under the agency’s supervision, if she stayed in school and out of trouble.

(*BANGING MY HEAD AGAINST THE WALL*)

Encouraged by the surprising turnaround, Ms. Zanella’s parents and two siblings, who also had been living in the United States illegally, presented papers late Monday to ICE, as the agency is known, turning themselves in and requesting some form of legal immigration status.

* WHAT'S THIS "HAD BEEN" NONSENSE? THEY'RE STILL LIVING HERE ILLEGALLY! ICE IS DELIBERATELY BREAKING THE LAW BY REFUSING TO ENFORCE THE LAW!

The about-face by ICE in Ms. Zanella’s case is an example of the kind of action Democratic lawmakers and Latino and immigrant groups have been demanding from the Obama administration to slow deportations of illegal immigrants who have not been convicted of crimes. In particular, pressure is increasing on President Obama to offer protection from deportation to illegal immigrant college students who might have been eligible for legal status under a bill in Congress known as the Dream Act.

* FOLKS... IT'S ABSOLUTELY FASCINATING - IN A SICK, PERVERSE SORT OF WAY - TO READ THE TIMES' SPIN. FIRST OF ALL, ICE HAS NO LEGAL AUTHORITY TO REFUSE TO UPHOLD THE LAW. SECOND OF ALL, PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS NO LEGAL AUTHORITY TO ORDER/AUTHORIZE ICE TO DELIBERATELY REFUSE TO UPHOLD THE LAW. THIRD... THIS SO-CALLED "DREAM ACT"... IT'S NOT A LAW! THE BILL WAS BROUGHT UP FOR A VOTE IN THE SENATE AND FAILED TO WIN APPROVAL...!!!

In an April 13 letter, the top two Democrats in the Senate, Harry Reid of Nevada and Richard Durbin of Illinois, asked the president to suspend deportations for those students.

(*SHRUG*)

* FOLKS... MORE AND MORE EACH DAY WE'RE BECOMING A NATION RULED BY MEN, NOT BY LAW. ONE MORE TIME, THE DREAM ACT FAILED TO WIN APPROVAL IN THE SENATE...!!!

[T]he senators asked Mr. Obama to set guidelines by which those students could come forward individually to ask to be spared deportation and to obtain some authorization to remain in the United States. The letter was signed by 20 other Senate Democrats.

* AGAIN, FOLKS... WE USED TO ENFORCE LAWS WHICH ACTUALLY EXISTED RATHER THAN REFUSING TO DO SO BASED UPON MINORITY REQUEST.

ICE officials in central Florida recently invited immigration lawyers to bring forward illegal immigrants facing deportation who did not have criminal records, offering provisional authorization for them to remain here and work legally.

* AGAIN, FOLKS... ALL OF THIS IS BEING DONE NOT JUST WITHOUT STATUTORY AUTHORITY, BUT ACTUALLY AGAINST STATUTORY LANGUAGE! IN OTHER WORDS, ICE IS "CONSPIRING" WITH ILLEGAL ALIENS SO AS TO ALLOW ILLEGAL ALIENS TO CONTINUE BREAKING OUR LAW BY BEING HERE!

On Tuesday, immigration authorities suspended the deportation of Mariano Cardoso, 23, a Mexican student at Capital Community College in Connecticut, according to Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, who had pressed Mr. Cardoso’s cause. ICE’s decision ended a two-year battle against deportation for Mr. Cardoso.

* FOLKS... THE INMATES ARE CLEARLY RUNNING THE ASYLUM.

April 27, 2011 at 11:26 AM
William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/265590/five-truths-about-planned-parenthood-charmaine-yoest

Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest abortion provider, performing (and profiting from) one out of every four abortions in the United States.

In 2009, abortion was a “service” that Planned Parenthood provided to 12% of its patients overall...

* BUT...! BUT...! BUT...! (CONTINUE READING...)

...and to 97.6% of its patients who reported themselves pregnant.

* UNDERSTAND THIS STAT, FOLKS. LESS THAN 3% OF THOSE WHO WALK INTO A PLANNED PARENTHOOD OFFICE WHILE PREGNANT SEEKING "PARENTHOOD SERVICES" ACTUALLY CARRY ON THEIR PREGNANCIES.

[A]bortion accounted for approximately 37% of Planned Parenthood’s "health-care-center" income in 2009. [Planned Parenthood] performed 332,278 abortions in that one year alone - that's an average of 910 abortions each and every day.

Planned Parenthood increases its abortion numbers with each passing year, bucking the nearly 20-year national trend of a decreasing abortion rate.

* READ ON... COMING UP IS SOMETHING ESPECIALLY INTERESTING...

Today, Planned Parenthood performs nearly double the number of abortions it did in 1999.

* HMM... I HAD THOUGHT THAT THE ABORTION RATE HAD BEEN GOING DOWN...? (KEEP READING...)

[O]ver the last twelve years - during which the amount of taxpayer funding Planned Parenthood receives has, coincidentally, also doubled - Planned Parenthood has dramatically reduced the other pregnancy-related services it provides.

* HMM... THAT'S INTERESTING...

In 2009, Planned Parenthood made referrals for only 997 adoptions, in contrast to the 2,999 referrals it made in 1999. Similarly, Planned Parenthood’s clients for prenatal care dropped from 18,878 to only 7,021.

* HMM! IMAGINE THAT!

Abby Johnson, the former director of Planned Parenthood’s clinic in Bryan, Texas, reports that in 2009 her clinic was given an increased abortion quota in order to raise revenue. (According to Mrs. Johnson, “the assigned budget always included a line for client goals under abortion services.”) Mrs. Johnson has said that her superiors gave her “the clear and distinct understanding that I was to get my priorities straight, that abortion was where my priorities needed to be because that’s where the revenue was.”

* OF COURSE AN ALLEGATION ISN'T PROOF, HOWEVER... (KEEP READING...)

Planned Parenthood of Mid-Hudson Valley (PPMHV), seems to corroborate Mrs. Johnson’s claim that Planned Parenthood is increasing abortion services with an eye toward increased revenue. PPMHV is relocating its consolidated clinics to open larger and more “modern” facilities, which, notably, have “the addition of surgical abortion services.” The PPMHV report “anticipates” that these new centers will lead to “increasing our revenue and sustainability.” Planned Parenthood’s new use of Skype to dispense abortion-inducing drugs and its mandate that all affiliates provide abortion services by 2013 also indicate that the organization wants its abortion-increasing trend to continue.

* NOT QUITE SURE HOW SKYPE IS BEING USED TO "DISENSE ABORTION-INDUCING DRUGS," BUT THE MANDATE BUSINESS IS ROCK SOLID.

* To be continued...

April 27, 2011 at 12:45 PM
William R. Barker said...

* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 2)

Planned Parenthood affiliates have failed to be good stewards of taxpayer funds. ... For example, a California audit report showed that in one year alone Planned Parenthood of San Diego and Riverside Counties received $5 million more than it should have because of improper billing practices.

* OH... HERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT'S VERY INTERESTING... (READ ON...)

Though individual affiliates have recorded [financial] losses, Planned Parenthood overall reported an “excess of revenue over expenses” of $63.4 million in 2009. [F]or its fiscal year ending June 30, 2009, Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and its affiliates reported receiving $308.2 million in “Private Contributions and Bequests.” It also made $404.9 million in “Health Center Income.”

* SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT... (*SCRATCHING MY HEAD*)... PLANNED PARENTHOOD IS THE NATION'S LARGEST ENTITY ABORTION PROVIDER... THEY ACTUALLY MADE A "PROFIT" OF $63.5 MILLION IN 2009 (LAST FIGURES AVAILABLE)... THEY RECEIVE LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PRIVATE DONATIONS... AND YET SUPPOSED THEY "NEED" TAXPAYER MONEY WHEN THE COUNTRY IS BROKES...???

* OH... AND SPEAKING OF OUTRAGEOUS...

Just this spring, a Planned Parenthood affiliate in Illinois fought a bill to make reporting of sex abuse mandatory, because Planned Parenthood allegedly feared that the legislation might "overload" the responsible agency with "too many" cases of suspected abuse.

* BUT... BUT... BUT... (*SCRATCHING MY HEAD*)

Just a few years ago, Planned Parenthood challenged a Missouri law that required abortion clinics to meet the same standards as the ambulatory-surgery centers in the state. Its reason? Bringing its clinics into compliance with these medically accepted standards would be prohibitively costly.

(*SNORT*)

Substantial evidence suggests that Planned Parenthood...[often engages in]...willful failure to report suspected sexual abuse of children to authorities...

* FOLKS... COM'ON... WE'VE SEEN THE VIDEOS. (*SHRUG*)

Planned Parenthood of Central and Northern Arizona was found negligent and civilly liable for failing to report the sexual abuse of a young girl who was being raped by her foster brother, and Planned Parenthood Minnesota/North Dakota/South Dakota was fined $50,000 for ignoring Minnesota’s parental-notice law.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

April 27, 2011 at 12:46 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_afghanistan

* WELL... (*SIGH*)... IT'S OFFICIAL...

Eight American troops and a U.S. contractor died Wednesday after an Afghan military pilot opened fire during a meeting at Kabul airport...

* TO REPEAT...

All nine killed were American, according to a senior U.S. defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the information has not yet been made public.

"Suddenly, in the middle of the meeting, shooting started," said Afghan Air Corps spokesman Col. Bahader, who uses only one name. "After the shooting started, we saw a number of Afghan army officers and soldiers running out of the building. Some were even throwing themselves out of the windows to get away."

* THESE ARE THE COWARDLY SCUM WE'RE DYING FOR...???

Afghan President Hamid Karzai condemned the shooting and offered his condolences to the relatives of the victims. He said those killed were trainers and advisers for the Afghan air force.

* AGAIN... WHY DOES AFGHANISTAN NEED AN AIR FORCE...?!?! WE CAN'T TRAIN AFGHAN COPS TO REPRESENT THE LAW INSTEAD OF BREAKING IT AND WE'RE GOING TO "TRAIN" AFGHANS TO FLY MODERN COMBAT AIRCRAFT - PROVIDED BY THE U.S. TAXPAYER...?!?!

* FOLKS... THIS IS INSANITY... INSANITY...

April 27, 2011 at 1:22 PM
William R. Barker said...

* THREE-PARTER... (Part 1 of 3)

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/04/26/lean_mean_fighting_machine

[C]utting defense doesn't mean going defenseless.

(*THUMBS UP*)

It means reducing America's commitments overseas (the latter-day version of "imperial overstretch") and changing the way the United States thinks about warfare.

(*NOD*)

[T]here is no existential military threat to the United States or to its vital strategic interests.

(*NOD*)

The million dollars a year it costs to keep one U.S. soldier or Marine on station in Iraq or Afghanistan makes no sense when, for a fraction of the cost, the U.S. government could easily protect America's borders from the wave of criminality, terrorism, and illegal immigration washing in from Mexico and Latin America.

(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

Before turning to specific cuts, members of Congress should acknowledge that it is unacceptable to expend trillions of dollars for defense when the Defense Department cannot conduct an audit, let alone pass one. The only way to address this problem is to implement a statutory prohibition halting funding for defense beyond fiscal year 2014 until an audit is passed. If the Pentagon doesn't know where the money is going, how can American taxpayers feel confident that their hard-earned dollars are being spent wisely?

The place to start reducing defense spending is with U.S. overseas commitments, which are vast. Estimated annualized savings resulting from withdrawals from overseas garrisons and restructuring the United States' forward military presence: $239 billion. [M]any overseas U.S. bases are now redundant. What better time than now - when the United States faces [real] fiscal calamity but few real military threats - to judiciously sort those that are truly needed from those the Pentagon can live without? It's time to declare victory and go home.

(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

* To be continued...

April 27, 2011 at 2:52 PM
William R. Barker said...

* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 3)

Today, there are more than 317,000 active-duty U.S. military personnel stationed or deployed overseas. In the Central Command theater of operations, encompassing Iraq and Afghanistan, there are approximately 180,000 active-component personnel as well as over 45,000 reservists. Approximately 150,000 active-component U.S. military personnel are officially assigned to Europe and Asia. And some estimates note that there are two civilians and supporting contractors for each service member in certain locations.

* THIS IS INSANITY! DON'T TELL ME OUR SAFETY DEPENDS UPON THIS SORT OF IMPERIAL OVERSTRETCH.

U.S. troops remained ashore in Europe and Asia long past the point when it was clear that a military presence was a needless drain on American resources. Today, new technology and a different mix of forces enables a lighter, less intrusive footprint. For instance, area control is no longer a mission that demands a large surface fleet on the World War II model. The U.S. nuclear submarine fleet augmented with fewer surface combatants employing long-range sensors, manned and unmanned aircraft, communications, and missiles can dominate the world's oceans, ensuring the United States and its allies control access to the maritime domain that supports 91% of the world's commerce.

Withdrawal of most of U.S. garrison forces (particularly its ground forces) from overseas will necessitate the elimination of many military commands. It also offers opportunities for savings through a modification of the current Unified Command Plan and U.S. Code Title 10 to reduce the current number of regional and functional unified commands from six to four. This approach would eliminate the four-star combatant command headquarters outside the United States and negate the flow-down justification of three-star and four-star single-service component commands aligned within, an action that is long overdue along with the deflation of the services' general officer/admiral rank structure.

(As Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn notes, each of these commands have become beset by "requirements creep" without regard to the cost of capability, a pernicious effect of having so many people "in charge," demanding staff, resources, and authorities commensurate with their rank, instead of what the country needs.)

* To be continued...

April 27, 2011 at 2:53 PM
William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 3 of 3)

In response to these actions, Congress should reduce all flag ranks in the bureaucracy by one star effective immediately. Exceptions to this mandate would be limited to the chiefs of service, regional unified commanders, and commanders of functional commands. Combined with the reduction in command overhead, this will assist in eliminating redundant single-service bureaucratic overhead and administration (uniform and civilian), especially in the setting of requirements and management of acquisitions. Again, U.S. Code Title 10 must be modified through new legislation to prevent continued duplication and inefficiency created by competitive bureaucracies. Simplified command structures that emphasize responsibility and accountability are always the keys to success in crisis or conflict.

(*NOD*)

Inside the United States, it's time to consider legislation eliminating the inefficient experiment that is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The agencies combined under DHS at the time of its inception should return to their former departments, and its former national security responsibilities should shift to the Defense Department.

(*THUMBS UP*)

* CONTINUING...

[N]ew federal legislation should be considered that prohibits the Army and Air National Guard from mobilizing for deployment beyond the borders of the United States - except in the event of a formal declaration of war.

(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

Once this legislation is on the books, the Army National Guard should discard most of its war-fighting equipment and convert its formations to a light, wheeled constabulary force designed for border security and domestic emergency/disaster relief inside the United States.

(*ENTHUSIASTIC NOD*)

Congress should explore a one-third reduction in the number of political appointees to the Defense Department. In most cases, these appointees simply build larger bureaucratic empires underneath them to justify their activities.

(*JUMPING UP AND DOWN WHILE CLAPPING, WHISTLING, AND HOLLERING OUT MY APPROVAL*)

* FOLKS... ALL TOGETHER THE AUTHOR WROTE A 6 PAGE ESSAY. I URGE YOU TO READ THE FULL PIECE.

April 27, 2011 at 2:53 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/27/markets-energy-gasoline-rbob-idUSN2716405220110427

U.S. gasoline futures settled at their highest level in 33 months on Wednesday...

April 27, 2011 at 5:31 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/42784201

In his first regular news conference, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said the central bank was continuing its stimulus policy because it was projecting slower growth in the economy with only a modest uptick in inflation.

* BERNANKE IS DOING EVERYTHING WITHIN HIS POWER TO DESTROY OUR CURRENCY, FOLKS. THAT MEANS INFLATION PILLAGING NOT JUST YOUR SAVINGS, BUT DECIMATING YOUR STANDARD OF LIVING. IN THIS BERNANKE IS SUPPORTED BY OBAMA. AS FOR THE GOP... BOEHNER, MCCONNELL, AND THE REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT ARE LIKE OSTRICHES WITH THEIR HEADS STUCK IN THE SAND.

April 27, 2011 at 5:31 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2011/04/27/house_votes_to_limit_bargaining_on_health_care/

[Massachusetts] House lawmakers voted overwhelmingly last night to strip police officers, teachers, and other municipal employees of most of their rights to bargain over health care, saying the change would save millions of dollars for financially strapped cities and towns.

* HUH...?!?! NOW THIS IS NEWS THAT HAVE APPARENTLY BEEN FLYING UNDER THE RADAR!

[T]he push in Massachusetts was led by Democrats...

* WELL, DUH...! IT'S MASSACHUSETTS! WHO ELSE COULD HAVE SUCCESSFULLY "LED THE PUSH?"

Unions fought hard to stop the bill, launching a radio ad that assailed the plan and warning legislators that if they voted for the measure, they could lose their union backing in the next election.

* SERIOUSLY... FOLKS... HAD ANY OF YOU (BESIDERS PERHAPS MARY AND TED WHO LIVE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE) EVEN HEARD THAT THIS WAS COMING UP...?

House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo (a democrat) said the House measure would save $100 million for cities and towns in the upcoming budget year, helping them avoid layoffs and reductions in services. He called his plan one of the most significant reforms the state can adopt to help control escalating health care costs.

The battle now turns to the Senate, where President Therese Murray (also a democrat) has indicated that she is reluctant to strip workers of their right to bargain over their health care plans.

* I CAN'T IMAGINE HOUSE DEMOCRATS PUTTING THEIR HEADS ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK UNLESS THE FIX WAS IN WITH REGARD TO SENATE SUPPORT. (*SHRUG*) I GUESS WE'LL SEE!

April 27, 2011 at 5:31 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704187604576288661026908604.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_markets

The dollar fell to fresh 2½-year lows after Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's historic post-policy meeting news conference...

The ICE Dollar Index, which tracks the U.S. dollar against a trade-weighted basket of currencies, fell below 73.300, its lowest level since August 2008.

The euro rose above $1.4750 against the dollar...

The dollar slipped against the Japanese yen...

Sterling also hit its highest level against the dollar since December 2009.

* FOLKS... THEY'RE DESTROYING OUR SAVINGS... THEY'RE DESTROYING OUR STANDARD OF LIVING...

April 27, 2011 at 7:26 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704187604576289153384161720.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_business

Chrysler Group LLC is expected to disclose Thursday it has hired a group of banks to refinance its government loans...

* O.K. CHRYSLER WANTS TO PAY OFF GOVERNMENT LOANS... GOOD... (WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT...)

...setting the stage for it to apply for additional funding from the Department of Energy...

(*THUD*)

HUH...?!?! ISN'T THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY PART OF... er... THE GOVERNMENT...???

Chrysler will secure money from a bank group led by Goldman Sachs Group, to repay the $5.8 billion it borrowed from the U.S. and the $1.7 billion it took from the Canadian government during its 2009 bankruptcy....

* AT HIGHER INTEREST THAN IT'S NOW PAYING...? AT LOWER INTEREST? AT THE SAME INTEREST? (DOESN'T ANYONE EDIT THESE ARTICLES...?!?!)

The repayment of the government debt, coupled with Fiat SpA's intention to increase its current 30% stake in Chrysler to 46% once the loans are paid off, is expected to ease the DOE's concerns about Chrysler...

* BUT... BUT... BUT... THE LOANS AREN'T EXACTLY BEING "PAID BACK" - THEY'RE SIMPLY BEING TRANSFERRED TO A DIFFERENT CREDITOR! (IT'S LIKE PAYING OFF ONE CREDIT CARD WITH ANOTHER CREDIT CARD!)

...and allow the agency to grant the company as much as $3.5 billion in low-interest loans.

* BUT... BUT... BUT... IF CHRYSLER CAN GET LOANS FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR AT MARKET RATES, WHY MUST TAXPAYERS GRANT THE (SUPPOSEDLY PRIVATE) COMPANY $3.5 BILLION IN LOW-INTEREST LOANS...?!?!

The money would be used to re-tool its plants to build more fuel-efficient vehicles.

* I DON'T GIVE A FLYING F--K WHAT IT'S BEING USED FOR...!!!

* HEY... FOLKS... AIN'T IT FUNNY HOW OBAMA'S OLD BUDDIES AT GOLDMAN SACHS ARE SET TO MAKE YET ANOTHER KILLING WHILE AT THE SAME TIME AMERICAN TAXPAYERS WILL AGAIN BE ON THE HOOK FOR $3.5 BILLION...?!

A Chrysler spokeswoman had no comment. The DOE was not immediately available to comment.

(*SNORT*)

Mr. Geithner is expected to hail Chrysler's loan package as a further sign that the government bailout of Chrysler and General Motors Co. is working...

(*BLOOD SHOOTING OUT OF MY EYES, EARS, NOSE, AND MOUTH*)

If all goes according to plan, Chrysler will end up paying significantly less in loan interest and other debt costs...

* LET'S SEE THE NUMBERS!

The company will also have a new source of funding from the DOE.

* MEANING YOU AND ME...!!!

At the same time, Fiat will be closer to its ultimate goal of owning 51% of Chrysler.

* I THOUGHT THE IDEA WAS TO SAVE AMERICAN CAR COMPANIES...?!?!

April 27, 2011 at 7:26 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4906edc4-6fb1-11e0-952c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1KldL1G3k

Gold, which many investors see as a hedge against future inflation, saw a boost all the way to $1,529 an ounce, another all-time nominal high. Silver jumped 5.5%, rebounding from a slip earlier this week, to $47.99 an ounce, nearing its own nominal record of $50.

* FOLKS... THIS IS NOT GOOD... NONE OF THIS IS GOOD...

* BERNANKE AND OBAMA'S POLICIES - DESTROY THE DOLLAR... PILE ON THE DEBT - ARE "MEN-MADE" DISASTERS!

April 27, 2011 at 7:27 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/04/27/why_isnt_obama_celebrating_high_oil_prices_109673.html

Who says this administration doesn't get things done?

The Left's "energy" initiatives of the past decade - the entire purpose of energy policy, in fact - have been aimed at artificially driving fossil fuel prices up to incentivize the bitter clingers to embrace the government's Utopian energy schemes.

No secret has been made of it.

In 2008, candidate Barack Obama was asked by CNBC's John Harwood, "So could the (high) oil prices help us?" Obama: "I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment." Sudden spikes are bad (politically speaking), but gradual price spikes? Helpful.

That same year, current U.S. "Energy" Secretary (then just a "zany professor") Steven Chu clarified that "somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe."

* FOLKS... DO YOU REALIZE THAT EVEN IF YOU'VE BEEN AWARE OF ALL THIS ALL ALONG, THE AVERAGE AMERICAN REALLY HAS NO IDEA THAT OUR NATION'S ENERGY SECRETARY IS AN ACTUAL PROPONENT OF BRINGING U.S. GAS PRICES UP TO EUROPEAN HEIGHTS... WE'RE TALKING $7...$8...$9 A GALLON.

We all, you see, have to make "adjustments."

As President Obama explained, "if you're complaining about the price of gas and you're only getting 8 miles a gallon ... you might want to think about a trade-in."

What kind of trade-in, sir?

Let me guess. A $41,000 economy-class government-made Chevy vehicle (a real cost of 100K-plus without taxpayer support) that plugs into expensive government-subsidized energy produced by the sweet howling wind?

* YEP... PRETTY MUCH.

* OH... BTW...

Government typically sees more profit per gallon of gas than the oil companies.

The Congressional Budget Office reported that in January, federal and state fuel taxes sucked in about 48 cents per gallon for gasoline and 53 cents per gallon for diesel fuel.

At least the fossil fuel oligarchs...have the decency to provide a product before taking carnal advantage of us at the pumps.

(*SMIRK*)

April 27, 2011 at 7:50 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/26/hurt-racism-lives-in-dcs-heart-when-it-comes-to-re/?page=all#pagebreak

Welcome to your nation’s capital, the last entrenched bastion of pure racism left in America.

Racism lives in D.C.’s heart when it comes to [political] redistricting.

Across America, whites, blacks and everybody else are pretty much too busy talking about the price of gasoline and all these crazy storms. But here in Washington, D.C., the first city to hear of Martin Luther King’s dream of a nation where people are judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin, it is different. In this city, in the world of national politics, among Democrats and Republicans, race is king.

Every political shop has demographers to categorize every American by the hue of their skin and then to decide what political message they should hear and whether every effort should be made to discourage and discount their vote in the next election. Here, racial profiling is not some subconscious undercurrent that skews good intentions. It is the guiding principle.

Never is this racism more pronounced than at the end of every decade when the federal government - even as it claims to be the nation’s moral gyroscope on all things racial - requires that political districts be redrawn based almost entirely upon racial considerations. No colorblindness here; only color coding. Politicians gather behind closed doors with their demographers and negotiate what would make the best new districts for their party - and, of course, for themselves. You can hear them say, “Son, I’ll give your all these blacks from mah district if you give me all them whites you got there in yoaws.”

Because self-interest trumps any principle in this town, the black politician gladly obliges and once again sails to smooth victory in his racially gerrymandered district. The only loser - other than Justice herself - are the poor voters who might benefit from a little competition.

* FOLKS... UNDERSTAND... GERRYMANDERING GOES ON THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE FRIGG'N COUNTRY! THE POLITICIANS REPRESENT THEMSELVES FIRST... THEIR PARTIES SECOND... AND US - THE PEOPLE - WE COME IN DEAD LAST.

These hustlers even have a name for it. They call it “cracking and packing.”

* FUNNY, HUH? A REAL LAUGH. GERRYMANDERING EFFECTIVELY DISENFRANCHISES MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS OF AMERICANS! (WHY DO YOU SUPPOSE A "SAFE DISTRICT" IS CALLED... er... A SAFE DISTRICT?!)

April 27, 2011 at 7:50 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)