Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, September 18, 2012


Read 'em or don't, folks... read 'em or don't...

(*SHRUG*)

Posted by at

12 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/romney-faults-those-dependent-on-government/

* BY ALL MEANS, PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO! I WISH ROMNEY WOULD MAKE A CAMPAIGN AD OF IT!

* HERE'S WHERE HE WAS WRONG: IT'S PROBABLY "ONLY" ABOUT 43% OF THE AMERICAN ELECTORATE WHO ARE LOCKED-IN TO VOTING FOR OBAMA NO MATTER WHAT - NOT THE 47% ROMNEY GUESSES. (THOUGH I COULD BE WRONG AND ROMNEY COULD BE RIGHT.)

* OTHER THAN THAT... GO ROMNEY! THE TRUTH SHALL SET US ALL FREE!

* AMAZING THE NYT DEVOTES 24 FRIGGIN' PARAGRAPHS TO THIS! AND OF COURSE THEY TRY THEIR BEST TO BLUNT THE TRUTH WITH SUBTLE (AND NOT SO SUBTLE) SHOTS AT ROMNEY AND AT THE END BY DELIBERATELY TRYING TO CONFUSE FEDERAL INCOME TAXES WITH PAYROLL TAXES. (THIS IS RIGHT OUT OF THE DNC PLAYBOOK AND THE NYT SHOWS ITSELF - AGAIN - FOR WHAT IT IS BY USING SUCH TACTICS.)

September 18, 2012 at 11:22 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/18/emails-reveal-justice-dept-regularly-enlists-media-matters-to-spin-press/

Internal Department of Justice emails obtained by The Daily Caller show Attorney General Eric Holder’s communications staff has collaborated with the Left-wing advocacy group Media Matters for America in an attempt to quell news stories about scandals plaguing Holder and America’s top law enforcement agency.

Dozens of pages of emails between DOJ Office of Public Affairs Director Tracy Schmaler and Media Matters staffers show Schmaler, Holder’s top press defender, working with Media Matters to attack reporters covering DOJ scandals. TheDC obtained the emails through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

* FOLKS... (*SIGH*)... THE FACT THAT THIS IS BEING OUTED BY "THE DAILY CALLER" AND NOT THE NEW YORK TIMES TELLS YOU ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW. IN ANY CASE, I'VE PROVIDED THE LINK TO THE STORY. WITHIN THE STORY IS EMBEDDED THE ACTUAL FOIA RESPONSES.

September 18, 2012 at 11:23 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://news.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/2012/09/cranston-bans-f.html

* THIS IS THE SORT OF INSANITY THE LEFT BELIVES IN:

CRANSTON, R.I. -- In a move that has taken some parents by surprise, the school department has announced that it is banning traditional "father-daughter" and "mother-son" activities, saying they violate state law.

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

Supt. Judith Lundsten said the move was triggered by a letter from the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of a single mom who had complained that her daughter had not been able to attend her father-daughter dance.

* DOES ANYONE BELIEVE THE SCHOOL WOULDN'T HAVE ALLOWED ANY ADULT MALE DESIGNATED BY THE FAMILY (MOTHER/DAUGHTER) TO ESCORT THE GIRL? COM'ON...

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

Lundsten said school attorneys found while federal Title IX legislation banning gender discrimination gives an exemption for "father-son" and "mother-daughter" events, Rhode Island law doesn't.

* GIVE ME A BREAK. RHODE ISLAND LAW DOES MAKE FATHER/DAUGHTER & MOTHER/SON DANCES AND ACTIVITIES ILLEGAL PER SE. NO FRIGGIN' WAY! THIS IS INSANE!

The new ban was brought to light Monday by Sean Gately, a Republican running for the state Senate, who said if elected he will work to change the state law.

* WHAT GATELY SHOULD HAVE CALLED FOR IS FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO SIMPLY TELL THE ACLU "NO" AND IF THEY BROUGHT THE MATTER TO COURT... WELL... RELY UPON COMMON SENSE AND PUBLIC SENTIMENT TO PREVAIL.

September 18, 2012 at 11:23 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/8786049-yet-another-record-americans-collecting-disability

The Social Security Administration has released new data revealing that 8,786,049 American workers are collecting federal disability insurance payments in September.

That sets yet another record for the number of Americans on disability.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

Over the past 45 years, the number of American workers taking federal disability payments has increased four-fold relative to the number actually working.

(*MORE TIGHTLY PURSED LIPS*)

* NOW... READ THE NEXT PARAGRAPH CAREFULL...

In August 1967, 74,767,000 Americans were working (according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics) and 1,152,861 were taking federal disability insurance (according to the Social Security Administration). That means that at that time there were about 65 Americans working for each worker collecting disability.

* IN AUGUST 1967 THERE WERE 65 AMERICANS WORKING FOR EACH AMERICAN COLLECTING DISABILITY.

In August 2012, 142,101,000 Americans were working and 8,767,941 were on disability--meaning there were only 16.2 people working for each person collecting disability.

* NOW... ONLY 16 AMERICANS ARE AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT THOSE ON DISABILITY...

(*SIGH*)

* FOLKS... COMMON SENSE... WORKPLACES ARE FAR, FAR, FAR SAFER NOW THAN THEY WERE IN 1967! AND YET...

(*SHRUG*)

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), a record 88,921,000 Americans were “not in the labor force” in August. These were Americans who were at least 16 years old, who were not in the military or in an institution such as a prison or a nursing home, and who did not have a job and had not actively sought one in the last four weeks.

* A RECORD... A RECORD... A RECORD... A RECORD...

Also in August, according to the BLS, only 63.5 percent of the civilian population (those over 16, who were not in the military or in an institution) participated in the labor force. That was the lowest level of labor force participation in 31 years.

* FOLKS... OBAMA AND THE LEFT ARE DESTROYING AMERICA!

September 18, 2012 at 11:24 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chicago-mounted-police-horse-stables-vandals-170086936.html

Two Chicago police horses were injured late Sunday night after a vandal or vandals broke into their stables at the South Shore Cultural Center.

The horses, part of the Chicago Police’s Mounted Unit, were let out of their stables sometime between 9:45 p.m. and 11:15 p.m., said Lt. Paul Bauer. One of the horses, J.R., was apparently sprayed in the face with a fire extinguisher. A second horse, Schott, had a cut to its leg.

Twenty-seven of the nearly 30 horses were released from their stables and were found walking around the barn, which had tissue paper strewn about.

"At this point, it's all conjecture as to how they got in, but obviously there's people out there who would know who entered this stable, and they did not enter this to commit a theft, rather it appears they entered this to maliciously harm our horses. For what reason, I don't know," said Bauer.

* FUCKING ANIMALS...

* BTW... YOU'RE TELLING ME THERE ARE NO PERSONNEL ASSIGNED 24/365 TO THE STABLES - NOT EVEN CAMERA FOR REMOTE SECURITY?

No arrests had been made as of Monday afternoon but officers continued to investigate.

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

* OH... AND THIS IS AN ONGOING PROBLEM! READ ON!

No animals were injured last week in a fire at a stables on the city's near north side that investigators deemed suspicious.

* JEEZUS...

September 18, 2012 at 11:24 AM
William R. Barker said...

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

http://cfif.org/v/index.php/commentary/43-taxes-and-economy/1568-correcting-the-clinton-record-tax-cuts-spending-restraint-moderation

Liberals currently determined to raise tax rates often reference the slightly higher top rate under Clinton (39.6% versus 35% today), as if that was what brought budget surpluses and economic growth.

They neglect to mention that Clinton also cut taxes.

* WELL... NOT CLINTON SO MUCH AS THE GINGRICH CONGRESS... (BUT, ANYWAY... CONTINUING...)

In fact, Clinton cut the capital gains tax rate, which is perhaps the most common target of liberal scorn. In 1997, Clinton and the Republican Congress reduced the rate from 28% to 20%, and just as predicted by the Laffer Curve liberals love to hate, the result was an increase in revenues to the federal government.

* LIKE I WAS SAYING... (*SMILE*)... THE GINGRICH CONGRESS...

Moreover, it is important to note that Clinton’s slight increase in the top income tax rate occurred in his first year in office.

* BACK WHEN DEMS CONTROLLED CONGRESS! YES... THAT TAX INCREASE TRULY WAS A CLINTON TAX INCREASE.

Thus, the unsuccessful portion of Clinton’s tenure witnessed tax hikes, whereas the more successful latter years for which he is often remembered brought tax cuts.

* TAX CUTS PUSHED BY REPUBLICANS!

Second, liberals constantly demand a return to the Clinton-era top income tax rate, but never Clinton-era levels of spending.

The fact is that spending restraint, not higher taxes, account for the late-1990s budget surpluses.

In the year 2000, the federal government spent $1.77 trillion and received $1.88 trillion in revenues.

Compare that to 2011, when the federal government spent $3.63 trillion and received $2.31 trillion.

Does any reasonable person believe that government was too small in 2000, or twice as effective in 2011 after spending approximately doubled? Of course not[!]

Additionally, federal spending under Clinton and the Republican Congress fell to 18.2% of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2000, versus approximately 25% of GDP under Obama.

(*NOD*)

[N]ote that if we returned to Clinton-era spending with today’s tax revenues, we’d enjoy a surplus of nearly $600 billion[!]

* SIGN ME UP!

Moreover, for all of liberals’ demonization of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, federal revenues actually reached their all-time high in 2007.

(*PURSED LIPS*)

If tax cuts were the problem, that wouldn’t have been the case.

(*SHRUG*) SO LOGIC WOULD SUGGEST!

* TO BE CONTINUED...

September 18, 2012 at 11:51 AM
William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

Indeed, the 2007 deficit (the last year in which Republicans controlled Congress and the White House) was a miniscule $161 billion. That was already several years after the Bush tax cuts, as well as the year in which war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan peaked.

* YOU UNDERSTAND THEY'RE NOT MAKING THIS STUFF UP... RIGHT, FOLKS? THESE ARE THE NUMBERS! THIS IS THE TRUTH!

So liberals can’t scapegoat tax cuts or the “unfunded” Iraq and Afghan wars for today’s deficits and debt.

Third, the so-called “Clinton surpluses” didn’t arrive until 1998, four years after Newt Gingrich and the Republicans captured Congress for the first time in four decades, and six years after Clinton was elected.

(*NOD*)

Given the fact that Congress controls the budget under our Constitution, it is therefore disingenuous for Clinton and his apologists to claim sole credit.

* HEY... I'VE ALWAYS SAID THE ONLY WAY TO JUST PRESIDENTS AND CONGRESSES IS TO LOOK AT THE NUMBERS MONTH BY MONTH ACCORDING TO WHO (WHICH PARTY) CONTROLS WHAT (WHICH BRANCHES) DURING THE MONTHS/YEARS IN QUESTION.

Fourth, the celebrated 1990s stock market boom effectively began almost precisely when Republicans claimed Congress in 1994, at which point the Dow Jones Industrial Average stood under 4,000. Six short years later, the Dow had ascended past 10,000.

* NOT THAT THE STOCK MARKET IS A FAIR MEASURE OF TRUE ECONOMIC SUCCESS. REMEMBER THE CLINTON DOT.COM BUBBLE...?!?! STILL... SINCE THE DEMS CLAIM OTHERWISE (THEY'RE CLAIMING SO RIGHT NOW!) IT IS INTERESTING TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST.

Finally, since the issue has returned to the forefront, a note about the Clinton impeachment from personal experience litigating labor and employment cases.

Clinton was a defendant who lied under oath in a sexual harassment suit.

(*NOD*)

Not even Richard Nixon did that, yet he was forced from office.

(*NOD*)

Regardless, one of the most effective ways that a sexual harassment victim can establish quid pro quo sexual harassment is to demonstrate that other women who complied with the harassing defendant were rewarded, whereas the victim was penalized for her noncompliance. If the defendant harasser, whether a CEO or mid-level supervisor or even the President of the United States, is allowed to lie about his behavior under oath in a legal proceeding because “it’s just about sex,” then sexual harassment becomes that much tougher to establish. In Clinton’s case, the alleged sexual harassment victim was Paula Jones and the alleged beneficiary of compliance with Clinton’s advances was Monica Lewinsky.

* YEP!

Talk about a real “war on women.” Clinton was rightfully impeached – as well as officially disbarred, it should be noted – and it is disgraceful that those who claim to support women’s rights so blindly and hypocritically excuse his transgressions.

* AND, YES... I BELIEVE JUANITA BROADERICK; I BELIEVE CLINTON FORCED HIMSELF ON HER.

Bill Clinton remains a charming figure to many Americans.

* JUST AS CERTAIN MAFIOSO WERE "GLAMORIZED" VIA THE GODFATHER AND SIMILAR PORTRAYALS OF CRIMINAL "MEN OF RESPECT."

(*SHRUG*)

But that charm cannot obscure the reality that whatever political success he enjoys resulted from a corrective electoral “shellacking” that forced him to behave more conservatively.

(*NOD*)

Obama, in contrast, has doubled down on what triggered his own 2010 shellacking.

* LET US PRAY GOD THIS LEADS TO HIS DEFEAT COME NOVEMBER.

September 18, 2012 at 11:51 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/afghanistan-when-the-moon-sets-watch-out.htm

Last Friday, a few hours after sunset, the Taliban struck at about 10 p.m.

They killed two U.S. Marines, one of them a commanding officer, and they wiped out roughly 8% of our Harrier jet force.

(Harriers are no longer manufactured, so these aircraft cannot be replaced. Scratch one squadron, and now the military must reallocate aircraft to cover the deficit.)

The enemy fooled all of our high-tech gadgetry with training, observation, intelligence, terrain, planning, rehearsal, and audacity, using basic military tactics that were perfected long before anyone reading this was born.

(Persistence and luck was also a key factor: the Taliban have attempted similar attacks at different bases in the past with poor results. The Taliban only have to be lucky once. We have to be lucky all of the time.)

The Taliban destroyed six jets, damaged two more possibly beyond repair, leaving Marine VMA-211 squadron with only two aircraft, and they killed the squadron commander.

All of this by Taliban who likely never served in any military. If they did serve, they joined up, they got some good training, and then they put it to use.

* FOLKS... READ THE FULL PIECE... THEN TELL ME WE SHOULD STILL BE IN AFGHANISTAN AFTER NEARLY FOUR YEARS OF THE OBAMA PRESIDENCY.

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

September 18, 2012 at 12:21 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443816804578002530634025870.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop

Congressional inaction has it merits, and this week's case in point is the $957 billion farm bill stuck in the House.
Taxpayers should hope that Republicans keep this boondoggle buried.

* HOPE AND PRAY!

With Congress back for a few weeks, Democrats are pressuring Speaker John Boehner to hold a vote on this five-year farm spending reauthorization, which passed the House Agriculture Committee in July.

* THE RINO HOUSE AGRICULTURAL COMMITTEE. THE BILL IS A DISGRACE. PERIOD. CRONY CAPITALISM AND CORPORATE WELFARE PILED UPON CRONY CAPITALISM AND CORPORATE WELFARE - ALL IN "BIPARTISAN" FASHION OF COURSE!

The farm lobby piled on last week, with a "Farm Bill Now!" rally outside the Capitol, at which even some Republicans, including South Dakota's Kristi Noem, blasted her leadership for inaction.

* FUCK THE FARM LOBBY AND FUCK KRISTI NOEM TOO!

[L]ocking in five years of sky-high farm bill dollars before a bigger debate over spending and taxes would be political and fiscal folly.

* AND, YET... (*GNASHING MY TEETH*)... THAT'S THE BILL THAT THE HOUSE AGRICULTURAL COMMITTEE PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE! THAT'S THE BILL THIS PIECE OF SHIT NOEM SUPPORTS!

[T]he House farm bill authorizes a nearly 60% increase in spending over 2008 levels.

* DID I MENTION THAT THIS IS THE "REPUBLICAN" HOUSE FARM BILL...?!?! (NO DOUBT THE DEMOCRATS WOULD ADD TO THIS IF THEY COULD!)

The House bill cuts food-stamp spending by $16 billion over 10 years, but this is nowhere near the savings that Republicans proposed in their fiscal 2013 budget, which returns the program to pre-2008 levels and block grants the money to states.

* RINOs... (*GNASHING MY TEETH*)

September 18, 2012 at 2:11 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443884104577647903145409924.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion

Jack Ward Thomas, President Clinton's forest service chief, noted a few years ago that court battles have tied the agency in a "Gordian knot" creating a "vicious cycle of increasing costs, time delays, and inability to carry out management actions."

As a result, most national forests are a tinder box of old-growth trees ravaged by disease and insects.

When the wildfires that are burning millions of acres in the West are finally smothered by winter snows, environmentalists undoubtedly will blame climate change. They might look in the mirror instead.

* YEP! FOLKS... READ THE FULL ARTICLE. NOTHING I DIDN'T ALREADY KNOW... BUT EVEN IF YOU KNEW IT TOO... THIS IS THE KIND OF STUFF LIBERALS NEED TO READ - SO SPREAD THE WORD!

September 18, 2012 at 2:21 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/some-shocking-perspectives-inflation-and-currency-destruction-none-other-federal-reserve

* I'D SUGGEST ACCESSING AND READING THIS PIECE.

* INDEED, I'D SUGGESTING BOOKMARKING ZERO HEDGE AND VISITING THE SITE AT LEAST ONCE A DAY.

* FOLKS... AGAIN... NEITHER NEWSBITES NOR MY STAND-ALONE POSTS ARE A REPLACEMENT FOR DOING YOUR OWN RESEARCH AND KEEPING YOURSELVES INFORMED AND EDUCATED.

September 18, 2012 at 2:52 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/17/lambasted-chinese-solar-panels-placed-on-governmen/

Government officials blame unfair competition from China for the collapse of solar panel manufacturer Solyndra, but such concerns didn’t stop the federal government from breaking stimulus program rules to use Chinese solar panels atop a federal building housing the offices of a senator, congressman and several agencies.

Even the contractor questioned whether Chinese-made panels could be used under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the stimulus program that mandated use of U.S.-made products. His query in early 2010 was dismissed and the General Services Administration moved forward with using the Chinese panels on the Sen. Paul Simon Federal Building in Carbondale, Ill., records show.

* AH... ILLINOIS...

(*PURSED LIPS*)

* FOLKS... YA CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP.

(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)

[T]he contractor on the Illinois building project, J.R. Conkey & Associates, initially questioned GSA officials on whether solar panels assembled in China could be used under the stimulus program, but a procurement officer told the company to proceed, according to records.

“We did what we were told to do by the federal government,” Jim Conkey, the company’s president, said Monday.

According to the inspector general’s memo, Conkey officials asked the GSA contracting official “whether non-ARRA [Recovery Act] compliant solar panels could be used” on Feb. 16, 2010, before the installation of the panels.

“The contracting officer directed Conkey to ‘proceed with the panels specified in the schedule contract since they have already been determined as satisfying all applicable contract clauses including the ARRA Buy American Act requirement,’” the memo stated.

* MAYBE THE CHINESE PANELS WERE "DEEMED" IN COMPLIANCE... (*SMIRK*)

* OR PERHAPS OBAMA ISSUED A "WAIVER"... (*SNICKER*)

* FOLKS... ASIDE FROM THE SNARK... THE LAW OBVIOUSLY MEANS NOTHING TO THOSE PRESENTLY IN POWER.

[T]he inspector general’s memo stated that the panels violated the provisions of the stimulus program. According to the memo: “The photovoltaic panels installed were assembled in and shipped from China ... Under the ARRA, the Chinese panels cannot be purchased with ARRA funds.”

* BUT... THEY... WERE...

September 18, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)