Sunday, April 12, 2009
That's really too bad since I have no idea what Obama has accomplished on his recent jaunt to Europe other than to increase his carbon footprint with burned jet fuel.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Crouch hits a walk off homer in the final paragraph:
Michelle Obama is right and that is why we would all do well to expect, even demand, more from people like Dante Terrell Smith and Cornel West. Stop buck dancing for dummies. Remember: A mind is a terrible thing to waste—especially on pop superficiality and academic blather sticky with an irresponsible eloquence. That educated lingo is used to sweeten biscuits so moldy no one should be expected to swallow them. As one history teacher wrote me about West, "Things start to go downhill for intellectuals after they release their first rap album."
Read the whole article here.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
You have got to be kidding me. What the hell kind of crap have I been reading for the last 8 years on Kos, HuffPo, and the SFGate comments section? That's the highest order of hypocrisy.
I haven't listened to Limbaugh for almost 15 years and got a few snippets of Beck on YT to get my head around this recent situation. I don't know if I could watch too much of Beck, even if we share some political sentiments. Poplawski linked a YT video of Glenn Beck on Stormfront, and that is enough to blame Glen Beck for him then shooting three cops. The left blogosphere kicks into action, almost as if there was some email chain triggering all the coordinated and compounding viewpoints.
The illogical elephant in the room is that Poplawski was posting on Stormfront, a neo-Nazi associated group. Nazis were leftist/socialists. Just about every lefty idiot at a 'peace' rally or blog associating Nazi with Bush or conservatism seems to forget that. Irony, the gift that keeps on giving.
The irony abounds. For years, the left blogosphere has been blowing hyperinflated rhetoric about Bush/Nazi/Fascist and the taking of rights and government control of security and loss of rights. Any call to put themselves in check results in increased volume of the narrative, meaning then ends justify the means.
Now that the left's idolized savior has ascended to the seat of power, any criticism of their chosen one results in overheated rhetoric about overheated rhetoric critical of their chosen one. Even valid observations about increased government control, socialism, or fascism is lumped together with the most crazed conspiracy theories of Poplawski and Alex Jones. The ends justify the means indeed.
Joel Rosenblatt of Newsbusters couldn't have put it better:
Post facto commentary: Let's be clear what these attacks on folks like Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity are all about -- the left-wing in our nation want to silence ALL opposing voices in the media, and they will do it using all tools at their disposal INCLUDING blaming journalists and political commentators for the criminal behavior of others.
As much as the Obama administration and the Democrat-controlled Congress are leading America down the path of irreversible socialism, their minions in the media -- particularly those in the liberal blogosphere -- are doing everything in their power to eliminate opinion not in lock-step with the revolution.
Those who disagree with the direction our nation is heading better be willing to stand up and fight or there will soon come a day when you don't recognize the land you live in.
Be afraid, America. Be very afraid.This statement in whole is very powerful and has much truth to it. I can see now how the Kos minions will use statments such as these, based in objective observation, as evidence of overheated rhetoric that inflames right wing conspiracy theories and inspires the wackos to shoot cops. Very scary times indeed.
Wait, I said it was very scary times. Maybe I'm fomenting right wing conspiracy theories too? I thought the left was all about free speech.
Just a thought: it seems that there's been an uncoordinated effort to turn conservatism into a bad word with negative connotations, much as liberal or liberalism has been. Instead of making liberal a good word, they have taken the easier way out and decided to redefine conservatism. Good luck on that.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
The structure of the test appears to be designed to ensure that no bank can pass it and therefore no bank will be allowed to return TARP money. The Fed/Treasury/FDIC/White House may decide that it's in the best interests of the country to not only make the banks keep the money, but also to have these banks scrub their balance sheets by selling "toxic" assets to the new Treasury program. This would be done under the motive that once the banks shed these assets, they can then start lending.
Thankfully we have the US government saving these bankers from the pitchforks, so they can return the TARP money ASAP and get to banking again.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Here's a true story first reported by my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano (with the names and some details obscured to prevent retaliation). Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.
Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with "adverse" consequences if its chairman persists. That's politics talking, not economics.I really hope this is not true. This story needs some serious validation, but if true, is the realization of most of the kookiest ODS sufferers (Obama Derangement Syndrome).
Will keep you posted if I find out anything on this.
Unbelievable. The kind of help that the government wants to give is exactly the kind of help the banking industry and the common citizen doesn't need. Not only is O's admin trying to tell them how much they should be paid, but they trying to get the banks to set interest and dividend rates as well. These people have how much experience in the banking industry?
Why doesn't the government just create it's own banks to compete with the private banks? They can just hire a bunch of people and pay them much less because it's not that hard to do, right?
Saturday, April 4, 2009
I would argue, though, that Holder's decision Wednesday to void the botched prosecution of former senator Ted Stevens on corruption charges had real impact on the racial dialogue that takes place inside our heads. Holder reviewed the record of prosecutorial mistakes and misconduct and took decisive, definitive action. On an issue that had nothing to do with race, a black man was large and in charge.
Color me incredulous. I think it had real impact on people who see everything in terms of race. I saw nothing more to it than the right decision irrespective of race, but then again I judge a man by the content of their character and not the color of their skin, unlike Robinson. Post racial indeed.
In my previous post, I referred to Al Sharpton as 'Sharton.' While it may have been a Fruedian slip and did bring a chuckle to the K-Man, I usually stay away from pedantic name calling unless its for the occasional laugh or amusement of all. It was a real slip, so I cannot take credit for the clever insult.
Really? How about those that feel the most comfortable with race don't feel the need to talk about it, yet those who feel the least comfortable about it do?
How many more white people need to espouse that they have black friends, among other silly pronouncements? How many more blacks have to worry about being called Uncle Toms (or worse) if they don't toe the Democratic party line?
Not even three months have passed since President Obama's historic inauguration, and already it tends to slip the nation's collective mind that the first black president of the United States is, in fact, black. There may be hope for us after all.
Well, alrighty then. This is the post racial president, no? I am happy the all of the important issues Mr President is having to deal with aren't distracted by irrelevant racial influences. You're on quite a roll Eugene. Maybe this wasn't such a racist country after all, even with Ruben Navarette around.
Eric Holder, our first African American attorney general, touched a nerve in February when he said we are "essentially a nation of cowards" in our hesitance to speak frankly to one another about race. Less attention was paid to the rest of his speech, in which he celebrated the vast progress we have made on racial issues but also lamented the way we tend to segregate ourselves in our private lives.
Here we go. Eric Holder didn't touch a nerve so much as he showed where his heart and mind is, at least to me. But for others, maybe he did touch a nerve: that Common Sense funny bone that some of us still seem to have.
Is Eric Holder 'comfortable talking about race' or is he 'uncomfortable' about race and thereby needing to talk about it? He's the AG, not Race Czar, so he should not be dealing with it anyway, but I digress. So what if we segregate ourselves in our private lives. I segregate myself from a whole bunch of people in my private life just as many others do, and it's their right to associate with whomever they please for whatever reason they please, even if it makes Mr Holder uncomfortable with his view of Racial Nirvana.
Holder was right in his call for a frank, meaningful dialogue about race in this country, and I wish I could be confident that something of this sort might actually take place. I doubt it will, though.
Indeed. Would this frank discussion include how insane it is for white people to have to pronounce that they have black friends (in hoodspeak or hip hop-ese no less), or that blacks should not feel ostracized if they consider conservatism relevant or despise Sharton or Jackson? Frankly, I'd love to discuss that idiocy.
While Obama himself went racial when convenient on the campaign trail with more Straw Men speeches about 'they (this) and they (that) about me looking different' than a P-Diddy tour bus, he's taken a step back from that because, well, it's unnecessary for him to do when talking global economics with Frenchmen in London and maintaining the buffer between the bankers and the pitchforks. What's clear is that whether or not Obama brings up race or not, much like the Obama Fascination is a larger story than the man himself, his presidency is the Mos' Racial presidency because of Eric Holder and Eugene Robinson and their accolites.
I'd like to have a frank discussion about the content of men's character and not the color of their skin, or anybody else's skin for that matter. I'd like to have a discussion about men and their character without their skin color, if at all possible. I thought that was being 'post racial.' Is that possible with Holder or Robinson?