Monday, December 12, 2011

Barker's Newsbites: Monday, December 12, 2011


Ya just can't have too much Andy Williams during the Christmas season!
Posted by at

8 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/newt_and_the_governing_class.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

* WRITTEN BY A BUSINESSMAN NAMED STEVE MCCANN WHO IS THE PRESIDENT OF A MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION SPECIALIZING IN THE FINANCING OF CAPITAL EQUIPMENT AND PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE THIRD WORLD.

I just returned from the belly of the beast, Washington, D.C. There is not a more parochial or insular city in the country.

While there, I had a conversation with two members of what can be described only as the Republican establishment, one in the print media and the other a K Street lobbyist. In short order, the conversation turned to "Newt" and his surge to the top of the ladder.

There is no one more reviled in Washington than Newt Gingrich.

* THIS IS BECAUSE THE ESTABLISHMENT KNOWS THAT NEWT CAN BEAT THEM AT THEIR OWN GAME!

If anyone believes Newt Gingrich is part of the establishment, he or she is mistaken. In fact, it would not be a terribly great stretch to say some in the Republican wing of the governing class would prefer to see Obama re-elected than Newt in the Oval Office. [T]he vast majority of this class are now in a panic as the preordained choice, Mitt Romney, is truly threatened by the rabble in flyover country constantly looking for anyone but Romney.

(*NOD*)

The increasing volume of commentary of the Beltway insiders and attendant vitriol toward Newt has become a near-hysterical tidal wave rehashing and embellishing Newt's supposed failings and personal "baggage."

* KNOW WHO NEWT IS BY THE PEOPLE WHO HATE HIM...

The Republican base has been sold down the river every election cycle since 1988. They have, nontheless, supported whoever was nominated for president. The Bushes turned out to be simply enablers of Democratic economic and spending policies, at best slowing down but never reversing the course that has put the country today on the precipice of failure.

* AND DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON MCCAIN AND HIS BUTTBOY LINDSEY GRAHAM!

The Republican failures of the past 23 years culminated in the election of Barack Obama in 2008 and a dramatic acceleration toward national insolvency and societal upheaval.

* IN A WORD: "MCCAIN."

The people who care about America are no longer willing to just settle for a candidate who is a mirror-image of all those who have been chosen since 1988. [We] want someone who is unafraid, willing to take the blows and deliver them with equal force, with a record of actual accomplishments and the tenacity so vital to reversing the course the nation is presently on.

Barack Obama will have the better part of a billion dollars at his disposal to wage a scorched-earth campaign and to do or say anything to win re-election; the rank and file of the conservative movement know this and understand the need for a brawler to take on Obama's glass jaw.

(*NOD*)

* GINGRICH WILL DECIMATE OBAMA AND LEFT IN DEBATES! (ROMNEY WOULD'T - YOU JUST KNOW HE WOULDN'T.)

Is Newt the ideal candidate? No. But of all those now on stage...

(*SHRUG*)

* THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING, FOLKS! REAGAN'S DEAD! WE HAVE TO CHOOSE FROM THE CHOICES GIVEN US AND ULTIMATELY THIS YEAR... THE CHOICE IS BETWEEN ROMNEY AND GINGRICH. I CHOOSE GINGRICH!

Newt, or any other non-Romney candidate chosen, can win against Obama, who will be forced to defend his record by someone who will be unafraid to highlight it as well as make an issue of his character flaws and radical ideological make-up. It is not in Romney's or the Republican establishment's mindset to take off the gloves in the general election.

(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

* THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING, FOLKS!

December 12, 2011 at 10:09 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/11/us-proposes-unmanned-border-entry-with-mexico/

* FOLKS... THIS IS VERIFIED. (*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

By the spring, kiosks could open up in Big Bend National Park allowing people from the tiny Mexican town of Boquillas del Carmen to scan their identity documents and talk to a customs officer in another location, at least 100 miles away.

This hardly seems a time the U.S. would be willing to allow people to cross the border legally from Mexico without a customs officer in sight. But in this rugged, remote West Texas terrain where wading across the shallow Rio Grande undetected is all too easy, federal authorities are touting a proposal to open an unmanned port of entry as a... [er...] "security upgrade."

The crossing, which would be the nation's first such port of entry with Mexico, has sparked opposition from some who see it as counterintuitive in these days of heightened border security.

* YA THINK...?!?!

Supporters say the crossing would give the isolated Mexican town long-awaited access to U.S. commerce, improve conservation efforts and be an unlikely target for criminal operations. "People that want to be engaged in illegal activities along the border, ones that are engaged in those activities now, they're still going to do it," said William Wellman, Big Bend National Park's superintendent.

* SO... (*SCRATCHING MY HEAD*)... PERHAPS THE FOCUS SHOULD BE ON STOPPING ILLEGAL ACTIVITY...!!! JUST A FRIGG'N THOUGHT!

Customs and Border Protection, which would run the port of entry, says the proposal is a safe way to allow access to the town's residents, who currently must travel 240 road miles to the nearest legal entry point. It also would allow park visitors to visit the town.

* BUT... BUT... BUT... WE'RE TALKING AN UNMANNED BORDER CROSSING...!!!

* LISTEN... LET THE MEXICANS REIMBURSE US FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FACILITY AND FOR THE MANNING OF IT AND I'M ALL IN FAVOR. OTHERWISE...

(*SHRUG*)

If the crossing is approved, Border Patrol would have eight agents living in the park in addition to the park's 23 law enforcement rangers.

* BUT... BUT... BUT... WHAT ABOUT "100 MILES AWAY?" IS THIS A NEW EXPENDITURE...??? I'M CONFUSED.

A public comment period runs through Dec. 27 on the estimated $2.3 million project, which has support at the highest levels of government from both countries.

* AH... THAT ANSWERS ONE QUESTION! THE IDEA IS FOR AMERICA TO SPEND (INITIALLY) $2.3 MILLION SO AS TO MAKE THINGS EASIER FOR... er... MEXICANS. GREAT! JUST FRIGG'N GREAT!

December 12, 2011 at 10:10 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/12/obama-slash-national-guard-force-us-mexico-border/

[T]he Obama administration early next year will cut the number of National Guard troops patrolling the U.S.-Mexico border by at least half, according to a congressman who was briefed on the plan.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

The National Guard said an announcement will be made by the White House “in the near future,” but Rep. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican who has learned of the plans, said slashing the deployment in half is the minimum number, and he said it will mean reshuffling the remaining troops along the nearly 2,000-mile border.

(In California, that will mean going from 264 Guard troops down to just 14, he said.)

(*SNORT*)

* FOLKS... I DON'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP - I SIMPLY BRING IT TO YOUR ATTENTION IF YOU'VE MISSED THE NEWS ELSEWHERE!

December 12, 2011 at 12:39 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/rev_al_deep_in_the_red_FFFX2IRlXVlP0sh79dWyxL

The Rev. Al Sharpton’s nonprofit paid him nearly $242,000 - even as it carried $1.6 million in debt, according to documents obtained by The New York Post.

(*SNORT*)

In all, the controversial activist and his empire, including the National Action Network and two for-profit companies, were $5.3 million in the red, public records show.

(*LAUGHING OUT LOUD*)

Most of NAN’s money woes stemmed from more than $880,000 in unpaid federal payroll taxes, interest and penalties.

* FOLKS... (*SNICKER*)... YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP!

It also paid more than $100,000 to settle two lawsuits, byproducts of the unpaid bills.

And it still owed $206,252 in loans to Sharpton’s for-profit Bo-Spanky Consulting Inc. and Sharpton Media LLC, the records show.

(*GUFFAW*)

* FOLKS, IF THAT DOESN'T SAY IT ALL...

(*SIGH*)

Sharpton drew a $241,732 salary and perks that included first-class or charter air travel, tax filings show. He owes the IRS $2.6 million in income tax, and nearly $900,000 in state tax.

* SERIOUSLY, FOLKS...? WHY ISN'T AL SHARPTON IN JAIL?

NAN last year took in more than $3 million in donations, which allowed it to chip away at its tax burden.

* AND HIS FIRST-CLASS OR CHARTER AIR TRAVEL! AND HIS 5 STAR HOTELS! AND GOD KNOWS WHAT ELSE...

(*SIGH*)

December 12, 2011 at 12:57 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904875404576532583587489972.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop

[B]efore the Illinois legislature is [a] proposal [to] give an estimated $85 million tax exemption to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Chicago Board of Trade and a $15 million annual break to Sears Holding Corp. to "mitigate" the state's big tax increase earlier this year.

(*SNORT*)

* AGAIN, FOLKS... I DON'T MAKE UP THE NEWS - I SIMPLY SHARE IT WITH YOU ALONG WITH MY INIMITABLE COMMENTARY.

[The proposed legislation] would also vastly expand the earned income tax credit.

(*ROLLING MY EYES*)

The bill sailed through the state Senate two weeks ago, but it was crushed in the House in a stunning 99-8 vote later that same day. After intense lobbying by the Merc and Sears, a similar bill will be voted on as early as today.

* BOTH THE ILLINOIS SENATE AND ASSEMBLY ARE CONTROLLED BY DEMOCRAT MAJORIITES. THE GOVERNOR (PAT QUINN) IS ALSO A DEMOCRAT.

In January, the Democratic legislature and Governor Pat Quinn approved a 67% increase in the state's income tax and another increase in the corporate tax that gives the Land of Lincoln the highest business taxes in the Midwest.

* BUT NOW THESE SAME DEMS WANT TO CREATE A LOOPHOLE! DISGUSTING! PHONIES AND FRAUDS... (*SIGH*)

Govenor Quinn has been handing out sweetheart tax waivers to major employers.

As we reported on June 9, Quinn has already offered or doled out more than $200 million this year to induce big companies like Motorola Mobility to stay in Illinois.

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

The better policy would be for the Governor and legislature to admit their blunder and repeal the tax increase on all companies, large and small. According to the Illinois Policy Institute, a free-market research shop, the cost of repealing the Quinn corporate tax increase would be less over 15 years than the cost of the new tax carve-outs.

(The main reason for Springfield's chronic deficits is excessive pension and health benefits to public employee unions.)

Mr. Quinn and his Democratic colleagues pretended that their midnight tax hike in January wouldn't injure the state's economy.

* BUT SINCE THEN...

(*SHRUG*)

December 12, 2011 at 1:24 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1933:no-mandatory-mental-health-screening-for-children&catid=62:texas-straight-talk&Itemid=69

Maryanne Godboldo, a mother in Michigan, noticed that pills prescribed by her daughter's doctor were making her condition worse, not better. So Mrs. Godboldo stopped giving them to her. That's when the trouble began.

When Child Protective Services (CPS) bureaucrats became aware that the girl was not receiving her prescribed medication, they decided the child should be taken away from her mother's custody on grounds of medical neglect.

When Ms. Godboldo refused to surrender her daughter to the state, CPS enlisted the help of a police SWAT team!

On March 24 of this year a 12 hour standoff ensued and young Ariana was taken into custody. The drug involved was Risperdal, a neuroleptic antipsychotic medication with numerous known side effects. Ms. Godboldo had decided on a more holistic approach for her daughter. She is still engaged in a costly legal battle with the state over Ariana's treatment and custody.

Just recently, the Government Accountability Office released a report on the astonishingly high rate of prescriptions for psychotropic drugs for children in the foster care system. It is absolutely astounding that nearly 40% of kids in foster care are on psychotropic drugs, some of them taking up to 5 different pills at a time.

Some of these children are under one year of age - too young to safely take over the counter cold medication!

* BTW, FOLKS, THE AUTHOR OF THIS PIECE IS CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL - aka DOCTOR RON PAUL!

There has been a persistent lobbying effort, funded by pharmaceutical companies, to increase the number of these prescriptions to even more children.

A universal screening program is the stated goal of these lobbyists.

I would not be at all surprised to see the recent attention to the issue of schoolyard bullying used as a tool towards these ends.

To fight this dangerous trend I reintroduced the Parental Consent Act of 2011, HR 2769, which prohibits federal funds from being used to establish or implement any universal or mandatory mental health or psychiatric screening program.

(The previous administration [Bush's] pushed hard for this type of federal intrusion into the medical decisions of families through its wildly misnamed "New Freedom Commission on Mental Health.")

Imagine the potential ramifications of a universal, mandatory psychiatric health screening program in a public school, considering how some bureaucrats are wont to behave!

* WE'RE IN TROUBLE, FOLKS; DEEP, DEEP TROUBLE.

December 12, 2011 at 1:45 PM
William R. Barker said...

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

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2011/12/12/politifacts-romneycare-bias/

* WHO IS TELLING THE TRUTH re: PERRY vs. ROMNEY re: WHAT PERRY TOOK OUT OF HIS BOOK WITH THE REPRINT:

PolitiFact opines that it is “mostly false” that Mitt Romney called his Massachusetts health care law “the model for the country.”

* AND AS YOU'LL SEE, POLITIFACT IS MOSTLY FULL OF SHIT!

[T]he debate concerns an excerpt from Romney’s book, No Apologies, which was altered between the hardback and paperback editions:

{My own preference would be to let each state fashion its own program to meet the distinct needs of its citizens. States could follow the Massachusetts model of they choose, or they could develop plans of their own. These plans, tested in the state ‘laboratories of democracy’ could be evaluated, compared, improved upon, and adopted by others. But the creation of a national plan is the direction in which Washington is currently moving. If a national approach is ultimately adopted, we should permit individuals to purchase insurance from companies in other states in order to expand choice and competition. What we accomplished surprised us: 440,000 people who previously had no health insurance became insured, many paying their own way. We made it possible for each newly insured person to have better care, and ultimately healthier and longer lives. From now on, no one in Massachusetts has to worry about losing his or her health insurance if there is a job change or a loss in income; everyone is insured and pays only what he or she can afford. It’s portable, affordable health insurance - something people have been talking about for decades. We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country, and it can be done without letting government take over health care.}

* OK - NOW THAT ABOVE EXCERPT IS THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF ROMNEY'S BOOK AS PUBLISHED IN HARD COVER.

* To be continued...

December 12, 2011 at 2:45 PM
William R. Barker said...

** CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

* NOW... LET'S GO TO THE "REVISED" PAPERBACK COPY:

{My own preference would be to let each state fashion its own program to meet the distinct needs of its citizens. States could follow the Massachusetts model of they choose, or they could develop plans of their own. These plans, tested in the state ‘laboratories of democracy’ could be evaluated, compared, improved upon, and adopted by others. But the creation of a national plan is the direction in which Washington is currently moving. If a national approach is ultimately adopted, we should permit individuals to purchase insurance from companies in other states in order to expand choice and competition. What we accomplished surprised us: 440,000 people who previously had no health insurance became insured, many paying their own way. We made it possible for each newly insured person to have better care, and ultimately healthier and longer lives. From now on, no one in Massachusetts has to worry about losing his or her health insurance if there is a job change or a loss in income; everyone is insured and pays only what he or she can afford. It’s portable, affordable health insurance - something people have been talking about for decades and it can be done without letting government take over health care.}

* WERE YOU ABLE TO IDENTIFY WHICH SENTENCE WAS TAKEN OUT...? ALLOW ME TO FOCUS THE SPOTLIGHT ON THE SCRUBBED MATERIAL:

{We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country...}

* FOLKS. COM'ON. ROMNEY IS MANY THINGS... BUT HE'S NOT STUPID - AND NEITHER ARE HIS PROFESSIONAL CAMPAIGN CONSULTANTS. THERE'S A REASON THEY REMOVED THE ABOVE SENTENCE - SCRUBBED IT WHEN MITT'S BOOK WAS REPRINTED AS A PAPERBACK! THE REASON BEING... SINCE ROMNEYCARE IS A MANDATED INSURANCE SYSTEM... THEREFORE EXPORTING THE ROMNEYCARE IDEAL TO THE NATIONAL STAGE WOULD EXPORT THE ROMNEYCARE MANDATE. (OR SO IT SEEMS TO ME!)

PolitiFact opines: "Romney’s not really saying the Massachusetts law 'should be the model for the country,' the way that Perry describes it. He’s in fact presenting a defense of state-level choice. It’s like a shout-out to other state leaders: Hey, you can have what Massachusetts has!"

* UH-HUH...

(*SMIRK*)

Shouting “you can have RomneyCare” is not advocating it as a model for the country?

(*SNORT*)

* YEP... MY TAKE EXACTLY!

* AGAIN... IF ROMNEY DIDN'T MEAN WHAT HE ORIGINALLY WROTE... WHY TAKE IT OUT IN THE PAPERBACK...? Hmm...???

* I URGE YOU TO CLICK THE LINK AND READ THE FULL PIECE. MY VIEW: I AGREE... POLITIFACT IS JUST AS FULL OF SHIT AS ROMNEY IS. PERIOD.

December 12, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)