And Now The Truth Is Out:

From CNBC's John Carney:

I just got off the phone with a source on Capitol Hill who has spent the past few days trying to convince Republicans to vote for a debt ceiling hike.

He told me that the biggest obstacle he faces has been "market complacency."

"Frankly, a bit of panic would be very helpful right now," he said.

As he explained it, lots of people in Washington, DC expected that this would be a week marked by panic in the markets. Stocks would tank. Bonds would get clobbered. The dollar would do something dramatic. And all of this would help convince reluctant lawmakers that they had to reach a compromise on the debt ceiling.

"Every day we wake up and think that stocks will send a shock up to Capitol Hill. And every day nothing happens," the source said.

He's still holding out hope for a panic sell-off at the end of the day.

"It's the only thing that's going to bring everyone together on this," he said.

And isn't that telling?

The Demorats -- and some Republicans! -- hope the market tanks, that you and every other citizen of the United States are assaulted, hurt, punished, for failing to completely step aside and allow the debt ceiling to be hiked at will by Leftists and RINOs in DC.

People, let me reiterate: they want you hurt. They want you PUNISHED. They want the country to enter a death spiral. So that they may continue their profligate spending ways unimpeded. And, damn it, it hasn't happened yet! How terribly inconvenient!

Think about that for a few moments. Does the phrase "torches and pitchforks" come to mind, perchance?

BZ

Friday: Boehner's Bill Passes The House

By a margin of 218 to 210.

Twenty-two Republicans voted against Boehner:

Justin Amash (Mich.)
Michele Bachmann (Minn.)
Chip Cravaack (Minn.)
Jason Chaffetz (Utah)
Scott Desjarlais (Tenn.)
Tom Graves (Ga.)
Tim Huelskamp (Kans.)
Steve King (Iowa)
Tim Johnson (Ill.)
Tom McClintock (Calif.)
Mick Mulvaney (S.C.)
Ron Paul (Texas)
Connie Mack (Fla.)
Jim Jordan (Ohio)
Tim Scott (S.C.)
Paul Broun (Ga.)
Tom Latham (Iowa)
Jeff Duncan (S.C.)
Trey Gowdy (S.C.)
Steve Southerland (Fla.)
Joe Walsh (Ill.)
Joe Wilson (S.C.)

CORRECTED: Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) voted YES on the Boehner bill. That was incorrect in the initial list. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) has been added to the list.It took days to get a bill up and through the House -- many days.

However, oddly enough -- only about 2.35 seconds later -- the Demorats in the Senate decided they wished to be the Party Of NO:

The Senate vote was 59-41 to table the measure, which effectively kills it unless Democrats decide to bring it up again.

Can we hear it, boys and girls, for bi-partisanship, for reconciliation, for compromise? Hip-hip, hooray?

Apparently, no, we cannot.

From The Washington Post:

Democrats were backing a variant of the Boehner bill that Reid planned to introduce. That measure would make the same cuts to agency budgets and establish the same debt-reduction committee. But Reid’s legislation would also count more than $1 trillion in savings from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, an accounting move Republicans decried as a gimmick. More important, the Democratic bill would extend the debt limit into 2013.

The "savings" from "winding down the war" are indeed false savings, as the money spent now is nothing like the money spent at the beginning of these conflicts. And extending the debt limit into 2013 is nothing more than political trickery so that the debt limit itself isn't Front And Center in terms of an Obama Election Issue.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Mr Obama has his own "personal issues" to confront:

• Staunch prior supporters aren't so staunch;


• Even nutty Harry Belafonte thinks less of The One, calling Him a "failure";


• When Mr Obama took his debt ceiling war to Twitter, he managed to lose 33,000 + "followers"; how does that happen??
  


• Gallup shows The One at only a 40% approval rate;

Note to Mr Obama:

I think you could have some problems, sir. Might want to examine them. Perhaps get out more often. Play some additional rounds of golf. Ping-pong your head again for the teleprompters. Mix as necessary. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Because, after all, contents may have settled during shipping.

BZ

P.S.
Finally, in reflection, Mr Obama cast this whole matter as the Republicans and the TEA Party having shoved everything down the Demorats' throats unilaterally.

Excuse me, but isn't that precisely what occurred with ObamaKare, sir?

P.P.S.
It also becomes apparent that there is at least one Republican in Fornicalia who, as issued from The Factory, does have a complete and functional set of balls.

My Congressman, Tom McClintock, Weighs In On The Debt Crisis:

I am remarkably blessed to have a CongressCritter who speaks honestly and plainly. In a recent e-mail to me he wrote:

The Debt Crisis

Imagine a family that earns $50,000 a year but is spending more than $88,000 with a credit card balance of $330,000. The discussions around the kitchen table are likely to be a little tense.

Proportionally, that’s where Washington’s finances are today, and that’s why the national discussion is a little tense, too.

Even these figures belie the magnitude of the fiscal crisis. Shutting down the entire federal government and firing every federal employee is no longer enough to balance the budget. Mandatory spending – mainly entitlements – consumes more than the government takes in.

Fortunately, revenues vastly exceed debt payments, so threats of an actual default are so much flimflam. The President has both the legal authority and Constitutional obligation to prioritize payments to prevent a default. The problem is that a lot of other bills would go unpaid, causing a downgrade to the nation’s triple-A credit, forcing up interest costs, wiping out all of the savings now on the table and jacking up everything from mortgage interest costs to family credit card rates.

But avoiding a downgrade will take more than just raising the debt limit. Without a credible plan to place the Treasury back on the path to fiscal solvency – which Standard and Poors defines as reducing the deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade -- the nation’s credit will be downgraded no matter what happens with the debt limit.

So what to do?

The President wants to raise taxes on “corporate jets” and “millionaires and billionaires.” But the awful truth is that there aren’t enough corporate jets or millionaires and billionaires to make more than a dent in these numbers.

That’s why the President has actually proposed raising taxes on those earning $200,000 per year ($250,000 for couples). These are families who are already paying more than half of all income taxes, many of whom are struggling to keep up with upside-down mortgages while putting kids through college without financial aid. Worse, over 80 percent of small businesses’ net income would be subject to the president’s “millionaires and billionaires” tax at a time when we’re depending on them to produce 2/3 of the new jobs that people desperately need.

The folly of the Left’s tax nostrums is to assume that high taxes are the path to prosperity and an antidote to deficits. They are neither.

As Adam Smith warned, raising taxes in a recession makes as much sense as a shopkeeper raising prices in a sales slump. New revenues are needed, but the healthy way is to remove the burdens that government has placed on the economy and produce those revenues through economic growth. Prosperity is the only true source of revenue.

Nor are taxes an antidote to deficits. In fact, they’re close cousins: a deficit is simply a future tax. Both are driven by spending. It’s no coincidence that while annual spending increased by $1.2 trillion in the last five years, the annual deficit increased by $1.4 trillion. It’s the spending, stupid.

So how do we reduce spending when promised entitlements are pushing the nation to bankruptcy? A family grappling with a problem as big as the federal government’s would rapidly come to several conclusions.

First, it’s going to need a work-out plan, starting with a family budget. In March, the House passed the first Federal budget since 2009. It would ultimately balance the budget and pay off the debt. The Senate tore it up.

Second, that family’s going to have to review its spending and pull out everything that it can do without. The House has begun that process but has a long way to go. The Senate frets over losing the “Cowboy Poetry Festival.”

Finally, it’s going to have to renegotiate any promises it has made but just can’t keep. And that’s the biggest budget challenge, because an entire generation of Americans has made retirement plans based on those promises.

For example, an average couple earning $89,000 and retiring in 2011 will have paid $110,000 into Medicare and will consume $350,000. Is anyone really surprised the system is collapsing?

Paul Ryan has done the nation a great service by offering an alternative that stops provider flight and guarantees seniors the choice of the health care plan that best meets their own needs, underwritten by a solvent Medicare system in a manner that provides higher support to those who are sicker, poorer and older.

Facing grim financial reality after decades of profligacy is a difficult, time-consuming and thoroughly unpleasant process. But there’s an infinitely worse alternative.

Just ask the Greeks.

Tom McClintock
U.S. House of Representatives
California's 4th District

Facts in evidence.

BZ

Down To The Wire: It's The TEA Party's Fault

Yes indeed, the debt ceiling not having been lifted to penultimate heights via a bill brought by the Demorats to completely uncap spending and uncap taxes is, you see, the fault of the TEA Party.

So sayeth John McCain:

The idea seems to be that if the House GOP refuses to raise the debt ceiling, a default crisis or gradual government shutdown will ensue, and the public will turn en masse against . . . . Barack Obama," McCain said, quoting the Wall Street Journal article. "The Republican House that failed to raise the debt ceiling would somehow escape all blame. Then Democrats would have no choice but to pass a balanced-budget amendment and reform entitlements, and the tea-party Hobbits could return to Middle Earth having defeated Mordor."

"This is the kind of crack political thinking that turned Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell into GOP Senate nominees," McCain added, still reading from the article.

Speaker Boehner's version 2.0 bill is the one that the bulk of the Old GOP Court is pushing. The New Court GOP fuzzies are not rolling over for it. Because of this, Mr Boehner has told those newbies, "get your ass in line." That is a direct quote.

But it is now a moot point insofar as 53 Demorats sent word to Speaker Boehner that his budget proposal won't pass the floor of the Senate today, Thursday (I wrote this on Wednesday afternoon). As in, purposely won't pass the Senate. By them. The Demorats. So now who is an obstructionist and who doesn't play well in terms of bi-partisanship and compromise?

Demorats and, of course, The New York Times, say that Mr Obama should simply raise the debt ceiling unilaterally, all by himself.

What bill, if any, should the GOP embrace? What tactics would you recommend? Allow the debt ceiling to be slightly extended if there are no tax hikes whatsoever?

You thoughts?

BZ

Obama's Debt:

Not a done deal.

Oddly enough, Mr Obama has no plan.

Imagine that.

BZ

6 PM Press Conferences: Obama & Boehner

There will be simultaneous press conferences at 6 PM Pacific time (9 PM Eastern), by both Mr Obama and Speaker Boehner. That occurred on Monday, 7-25-11.

I can sum it up succinctly:

If Boehner puts tax hikes on the table, he should be removed forthwith, no further discussion.

He is afraid to be as "conservative" as allegedly is his caucus.

Additionally, if the mortgage interest deduction is removed and agreed upon by the GOP, every member voting "for" this needs to be removed. Forthwith. 80-million Americans -- honest, tax-paying Americans -- utilize the home mortgage deduction. Should that pass, the value of every home in the nation will plummet immediately by 15%.

Plain and simple.

BZ

P.S.
On the other hand. . .

Debt Ceiling: Congress Actually Agrees; Mr Obama Says No

From The Washington Post:

A Republican aide e-mails me: “The Speaker, Sen. Reid and Sen. McConnell all agreed on the general framework of a two-part plan. A short-term increase (with cuts greater than the increase), combined with a committee to find long-term savings before the rest of the increase would be considered. Sen. Reid took the bipartisan plan to the White House and the President said no.”

Does this situation bring to mind the phrase "will have to own it" to anyone besides me, perchance?

More information here.

Obstructionist?

You see, Republicans, do you see? Even when you compromise it's not enough. It will never be enough. It will always be your "fault."

So why compromise?

BZ

The Republicans Must Compromise

So say the Demorats.

It's never the Demorats who must somehow compromise.

Middle ground. Bi-partisan. It's the Republicans who need to yield.

The way to extricate this nation out of its crisis is to increase spending, push up the debt ceiling by at least another trillion dollars, increase spending for entitlements and, simultaneously, increase taxes by a wide margin. Further, there is a need for many more regulations on just about every level, on businesses, corporations, the uber-rich and, of course, the Middle Class because, in consideration, there just isn't sufficient cash in the pockets of the top 1% to fund the necessities of the Left.

Because, let's be serious for a moment, if all of the above items are enacted and the country still flounders and/or fails, it's still the fault of the obstructionist GOP.

This week will indeed be interesting, will it not?

BZ

Welcome To Sunday: More Layoffs

The Demorats just don't get it, so let me make it plain:

The layoffs will continue until morale improves.

From Yahoo's The Daily Ticker:

Putting pressure on an already lousy job market, the mass layoff is making a comeback. In the past week, Cisco, Lockheed Martin and Borders announced a combined 23,000 in job cuts. (See: Another Retailer Bites the Dust: Borders Doomed by Amazon Deal, Davidowitz Says)

Those announcements follow 41,432 in planned cuts in June, up 11.6% from May and 5.3% vs. a year earlier, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

Meanwhile, state and local governments have cut 142,000 jobs this year, The WSJ reports, and Wall Street is braced for another round of cutbacks. This week, Goldman Sachs announced plans to let go 1000 fixed-income traders.

If these trends continue, we may soon be talking about losses in the monthly employment data -- not just disappointing growth, says Howard Davidowitz, CEO of Davidowitz & Associates

"Everything in business is confidence," Davidowitz says. "You lose confidence and businesses can't deal with that [and] who could have confidence with what's going on in Washington?"

Davidowitz is bipartisan in his criticism, calling the U.S. political system "dysfunctional and deranged." (See: "A Bunch of Morons in Washington": Howard Davidowitz Handicaps the Debt Ceiling Debate)

Revealed here for the first time, and for the first time in any print or digital form:

The stock market is ephemeral. It is smoke, mirrors, rumors, half-truths, outright lies and -- mostly -- emotions.

There is no plan. There is no "system." There is no planning. There are no hard and fast "facts." There is no "prognostication." There is no guaranteed, steely insurance. There are only emotions. Literally. Poorly done.

It isn't about what is; it's about what you think about what might be. What you fear. How confident you feel. Or may not feel. To continue:

Still, the restructuring expert is a longtime and vocal critic of President Obama: "There has never been in a situation in my lifetime where a guy increases the debt by 40%, GDP growth is on the way down, Food Stamps are up, millions more are unemployed -- and to accomplish this we spent $4 trillion."

But it's an open question whether any president or policy mix could do much to revive the economy after the bursting of the credit bubble.

In This Time is Different, co-authors Ken Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart demonstrate that financial crises are typically followed by severe recessions, slow recoveries, subpar growth and greater frequency of recessions in the decade following the crisis. (See: Bernanke In Denial About Economy's Fate, Vincent Reinhart Says)

"No one believes the economy, Obama or not, is going to improve," my Breakout colleague Jeff Macke says in the accompanying clip. "Time [is] the only thing that heals."

Insanity rules. You can't legislate morality. Or common sense. Or logic. Or proportion. Or reality.

Welcome to your new precipice.

Send lawyers, guns and money.

BZ



God bless Warren Zevon. One of my favorites musical artists of all time.

Mr Obama's Telling Debt Ceiling Comments:

Mr Obama recently allowed us to see just a fraction of his true self, for merely a momentary fragment in time. However, to me, it peeled away years of historical layers of multisyllabic obfuscation and cut to some of his fundamental core. He actually revealed a bit of foundational political truth.

No one has yet given, in my opinion, the proper interpretation of Mr Obama's words from Friday, July 22nd. This insight has been horribly missed by any and all forms of media, including blogs of all shapes and sizes. I seek to right this mistake and reveal that, if only for a moment, the president truly had no clothes.

From DMNews.com:

The president and House speaker have been seeking a "grand bargain" of around $4 trillion in deficit reduction, but have faced stiff resistance from lawmakers in both parties. House Republicans say they will not accept revenue increases in the deal, while Democrats say any deal must include revenue increases as well as spending cuts. Despite rumors of a deal in recent days -- the alleged contours of which fueled anger from lawmakers -- Boehner said in a letter to colleagues before Mr. Obama spoke that "a deal was never reached, and was never really close."

Toward the end of his remarks, Mr. Obama grew particularly animated when he suggested that lawmakers were putting what "some funder says or what some talk radio host says or what some columnist says or what pledge we signed back when we were trying to run" ahead of the concerns of the American people. He called that attitude "inexcusable." "You know, at some point I think if you -- if you want to be a leader, then you've got to lead," he said before leaving the podium.

Mr Obama excels at leading from the rear and posing behind the review stand. He excels at Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

But he also said that whatever pledge, promise, or platform a given candidate proffers before the electorate means nothing. It's just a sham in order to acquire an appointment via election. After that, the gloves are off. The candidate and/or Mr Obama owe you nothing because, after election, they have theirs. That you should honor your commitments is, in the words of Mr Obama, inexcusable.

Just mull that around in your Wheelhouse for a few moments. Go back and re-read the paragraph.

You'll soon come to realize that revelation is, at once, massively refreshing and simultaneously hideous.

BZ

P.S.
Newest Rasmussen Poll indicates Mr Obama acquires 41% of the vote, whilst Ron Paul garners 37%. That's about even with Roy (of Siegfried & Roy) vs Tiger.

Who's The Terrorist?

Watch this official Homeland Security video.



You tell me.

BZ

U.S. Budget: THE Definition of Insanity

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, whilst expecting different results."

A quote attributed to both Albert Einstein and Benjamin Franklin.

With that in mind, I have only one quite serious question for Mr Barack Hussein Obama:

Why is it, sir, that you are so incredibly and vehemently opposed to balancing the budget of the United States of America?

That, to my way of thinking, is THE question that should be put to the President of the United States.

This president is only concerned with spending. He has historically resisted all cuts, and history indicates his intransigence in terms of making any spending cuts whatsoever.

Mr Obama clearly lacks the capacity to make the tough spending decisions. Any tough spending decisions.

On that basis, however, he holds his water in terms of Demorat/Leftist platform. Everyone must be taxed, and there can be no cuts in spending.

Taken in retrospect, it is an age-old axiom. Tax and spend, tax and spend = Demorats and Leftists. They are, of course, nothing if not predictable in their consistency.

Let's review in brief:

• TARP didn't;
• The "Stimulus" didn't;
• Bailouts of fiduciary institutions didn't put us on the path to recovery;
• Bailouts of vehicle manufacturers didn't put us on the path to recovery;
• The ONE US vehicle manufacturer (Ford) refusing to take bailout money is the MOST successful;
• "Cash For Clunkers" stimulated nothing;
• Unemployment is at roughly 10%, up to 25+% in some areas;
• The housing market is further tanking;
• The Demorats have done nothing budgetarily beneficial in 800+ days;
• Housing contract cancellations have surged;

On the other hand, the Gang of Six deal looks remarkably similar to the Pelosi "we'll have to pass the bill in order to see what is in it."

Despite some strong pushback from liberal groups and labor unions to the proposed changes to entitlement programs, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi seemed to leave the door open to the plan, telling reporters, "We haven't seen it but it has some good principles in it."

And that is its own intrinsic kind of separate Demorat/Leftist insanity.

The debt plan from the so-called Gang of Six includes two very shocking aspects:

1. Tax deduction removal (where Mr Obama "gets" his so-called tax "cuts";
2. A constructive insertion of a Constitutional balanced budget amendment;

Let me be, again, please, incredibly and perfectly plain, with an emphasis on clarity:

Tax deductions will be placed on the backs of the Middle Class. There simply are NOT enough "rich" people to enable the cash that Mr Obama wants. The FIRST proposal on the line is the mortgage deduction.

Again, to be plain: there is roughly a 10% cost factored into every house for this.

You eliminate the mortgage deduction? You have, positively, absolutely, GUARANTEED a depression that will make the 1929 Great Depression look like child's play. Housing values will further plummet and incentives will be slaughtered. At best.

And opening the Constitutional for revision, enabled by Article V, for a so-called "Balanced Budget Amendment", is a loser at best. At very best.

The Constitution already exists. SCOTUS has already set it aside in any number of important cases, deciding that current memes are more important than a charred, flaky, doddering document.

What makes anyone think SCOTUS, stacked by a future administration, simply won't strip the Constitution when and while it will, as it will, by fiat?

You open a Constitutional Convention these days and every Bill and Amendment is up for grabs. I won't have it. I thought the GOP asking for a Flag-Burning amendment was clearly stupid, as it was. Opening up our core, founding document for Leftists during this particular administration is, likewise, beyond stupid.

Right.

You want to know what tyranny looks and sounds like, kids? Just look around. Check your DEM/MSM. These people are not about liberty or freedom. They're about an agenda. A Stalinist Show Trial. And Mr Obama, in His Infinite Wisdom, isn't responsible for any accountable portion of anything.

Like trying to nail Jello to a wall.

BZ

The US "Poor" -- Soon To Actually Change

I've known it for years, and those persons who work in law enforcement, the fire service, EMS response, welfare fraud investigations, probation, parole, know one very important and salient thing:

Those persons deemed "poor" and who have been generationally not only dependent and expectant, but normed and standardized on welfare, aren't really poor. It's a lifestyle. A lifestyle they have purposely chosen, inculcated and interwoven into their families and friends, and a lifestyle that not only pays well but enables some families to live in better conditions than you and me. And a lifestyle choice that the governments -- federal and state -- have promoted with wild abandon over the years.

When Liberals started paying women for welfare babies, and greater amounts of money for more babies -- absent fathers -- then fathers became superfluous and costly. Liberals, frankly, killed the once-solid nuclear black family and denigrated black males. Black males became disenfranchised and unnecessary. So black males turned to each other. And thence to gangs.

And the gangbanger was born. Thanks to Liberals and Leftists across the nation.

And that gangbanging, defeatist, non-achieving, damaging mindset was embraced by all other then-minority classes, to include Mexicans (though Mexicans have a history of gangs -- witness the Zoot Suit Riots in Los Angeles), Asians and finally Caucasoids.

I still think there's nothing funnier than some white cracker kid with his pants below his butt, exposing dotted boxers, hat turned backwards, tatted-up with Olde English script, unlaced shoes, pierced eyebrows, saying "yo" and "know what I mean?" Dude, your future includes cleaning some of the finer bathrooms in a local county jail. Know what I mean?

And, in truth, what does modern American "poverty" truly denote (and I use the word "poverty" loosely and, clearly, in quotes)? From the National Review Online:

Modern Poverty Includes A.C. and an Xbox

July 18, 2011 10:39 A.M.

By Ken McIntyre

When Americans think of poverty, we tend to picture people who can’t adequately shelter, clothe, and feed themselves or their families.

When the Census Bureau defines “poverty,” though, it winds up painting more than 40 million Americans — one in seven — as “poor.”

Census officials continue to grossly exaggerate the numbers of the poor, creating a false picture in the public mind of widespread material deprivation, writes Heritage Foundation senior research fellow Robert Rector in a new paper.

“Most news stories on poverty feature homeless families, people living in crumbling shacks, or lines of the downtrodden eating in soup kitchens,” Rector says. “The actual living conditions of America’s poor are far different from these images.”

Congress is tying itself in knots figuring out how to cut spending and bring down a $14 trillion national debt. Lawmakers might well take a much closer look at the nearly a trillion dollars spent each year on welfare even though many recipients aren’t what the typical American would recognize as poor and in need of government assistance.

There is no widespread deprivation in the United States of America. There are no people living in cardboard boxes who aren't single, male, mentally unbalanced and -- still -- some of them purposely choose to live like that. It's a concept that many people can't fathom but it's true. A large percentile of the "homeless" choose to live their lives like that.

Each city and county has any number of publicly-funded programs (courtesy of your local, state and federal tax dollars) directly targeted at layer after layer of the "poor." Only the truly insane don't take advantage of those programs because they can't comprehend them. And those persons comprise an infinitesimal percentile of the concerned population.

The "poor" in my county drive a Lexus, a Mercedes-Benz or the ever-popular BMW. 740s are quite popular with the "minorities" who are now a majority in my state. And funded by MY tax dollars. They live in rental multi-bedroom homes, condos, duplexes. Most do not live in high-unit apartment complexes because that's beneath them.

To continue:

What is poverty? Americans might well be surprised to learn from other government data that the overwhelming majority of those defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau were well-housed and adequately fed even in the recession year 2009. About 4 percent of them did temporarily become homeless.

Data from the Department of Energy and other agencies show that the average poor family, as defined by Census officials:

● Lives in a home that is in good repair, not crowded, and equipped with air conditioning, clothes washer and dryer, and cable or satellite TV service.

● Prepares meals in a kitchen with a refrigerator, coffee maker and microwave as well as oven and stove.

● Enjoys two color TVs, a DVD player, VCR and — if children are there — an Xbox, PlayStation, or other video game system.

● Had enough money in the past year to meet essential needs, including adequate food and medical care.

You want to see actual squalor? You only have to watch the introductory minutes of the 2008 movie "The Incredible Hulk" starring Edward Norton. Those minutes introduce the slums of Rocinha, an "upscale" favela in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.


Americans historically and currently languishing in abject poverty? Bullshit. Unmitigated bullshit. Been there, done that, seen it all. And it's a load of Leftist crap.

Above, a Shantytown in Kiberia, Kenya. Yes, these people live beneath paper and fabric and carpet and burning material in a public dump.

However, with this very important caveat:

When (not if) the federal and state governments pull back their rations of monthly Free Cheese to include physical support as well as monthly checks, there will be riots -- by so-called "minorities" -- who believe they are clearly entitled to Free. Generation after generation after generation.

They are the Lexus/iPhone welfare itinerants.

Except that they're not itinerant, and they're not poor.

Federal government statistics already prove this.

BZ

More On The Debt Ceiling:

Mr Obama has no real plan.

Have you heard it? What is it?

Does it consist of anything more than spend and tax?

No. It does not.

Mr Obama has already said that he will clearly veto any spending cuts.

Obama officially threatens to veto Republicans' 'cut, cap and balance' bill

By Sam Youngman - 07/18/11 03:58 PM ET

The White House on Monday warned President Obama will veto GOP legislation to “cut, cap and balance” spending and the budget.

I dare, thoughtlessly, to remind you of and reproduce the Top Ten Tenets of Liberalism, at the risk of being redundant:

1. America is uniquely evil.

2. America is never justified in defending itself.

3. Illiterate people from poor societies are superior to Americans.

4. The Earth would be better off without human beings.

5. Making a profit is always immoral.

6. Differences between individuals or groups are unfair.

7. For Designated Victim Groups, strong feelings excuse all behavior.

8. Policies informed by Judæo-Christian principles are inherently suspect.

9. Conservatives are hypocrites; liberals are sincere.

10. There are no acts of God; there are only acts of Government.

That said, Harry Reid is currently excoriating the GOP for failing to extend the debt ceiling.

Imagine that.

Too bad that video and audio exists immuring past statements and positions. In that vein, I submit for your consideration now:



Harry Reid on raising the debt ceiling in 2006:

“If my Republican friends believe that increasing our debt by almost $800 billion today and more than $3 trillion over the last five years is the right thing to do, they should be upfront about it. They should explain why they think more debt is good for the economy.

How can the Republican majority in this Congress explain to their constituents that trillions of dollars in new debt is good for our economy? How can they explain that they think it’s fair to force our children, our grandchildren, our great grandchildren to finance this debt through higher taxes. That’s what it will have to be. Why is it right to increase our nation’s dependence on foreign creditors?

They should explain this. Maybe they can convince the public they’re right. I doubt it. Because most Americans know that increasing debt is the last thing we should be doing. After all, I repeat, the Baby Boomers are about to retire. Under the circumstances, any credible economist would tell you we should be reducing debt, not increasing it.Democrats won’t be making argument to supper this legalization, which will weaken our country. Weaken our county.”

And yet, imagine this: Mr Reid seems to be, at his advanced age, an individual who can't seem to lick the political sphincter of Mr Obama at a more furious rate than now.

Do you, as I, detect the slightest hint of hypocrisy here?

Of course not. And buried by our American media. Because they all are, transparently, licking the hind end of the DC admin in a smartly uniform fashion.

As I've written on another blog:

I am of the opinion that TARP was a huge mistake, ALL the stimulus infusions were a huge mistake, cash for clunkers was a huge mistake, bailing out ANY fiduciary/banking agency was a HUGE mistake, bailing out ANY corporation was a HUGE mistake. It all should have been allowed to come to a much earlier staggering thump and heady crash; had that occurred, we would already be on the road to a kind of recovery that we've done nothing but delay.

When you delay this kind of thing, as Life generally goes, when the crash comes it will be larger, louder, longer and incredibly more painful.

This government can stop right now as far as I'm concerned, and the debt ceiling should never be raised again. The abject insanity simply has to stop. Anyone with a molecule of common sense knows you don't spend to save money. Or get yourself out of debt. If this were a "given" there would be no foreclosures and no poor people. We'd just spend and spend and spend money we don't have. That's how insane it's become.

No extension of the debt ceiling. Let the failure come, if it comes at all due to halting the debt ceiling explosion.

If anarchy comes, it won't be from Caucasoid middle classes; it will come from those on welfare and sucking entitlements and Free Cheese in high-population centers, moms whose baby-daddies are well-armed gangbangers driving Lexuses and Mercedes and Donks of all shapes.

I live 91 miles away from where I work in a population center. I am well-armed, well-stocked, lots of ammo, and I'm old enough to be quite grouchy.

I can't be any more succinct than that.

BZ

Your President Doesn't Know His Own Birthday

The president of the United States doesn't know his own birthday.

Barack Hussein Obama was born, according to best known popular and unverified documents, on August 4th of 1961.

"Obama's Senior Moment: I'll Be Turning 50 In A Week"

Uh. No, you won't. Try checking a calendar. Merely a humble suggestion.

From ABCNews.com:

Actually, he’ll be turning 50 in three weeks. His birthday is August 4, two days after the debt ceiling deadline. Senior moment?



And this completely incompetent and clueless man is in charge of not only our nuclear strike response, but the strongest nation on the planet?

I find myself speechless.

BZ

Now That's A Nasty Croc!

Ah, I can hear Steve Irwin now. . .

BRUTUS, the giant Aussie three-legged croc whose tour boat antics were flashed around the world this week, is in danger of losing his weekly meal.

Boat tours encouraging giant beasts like Brutus to leap from the water using meat bait are raising the risks of savage attacks on tourists, a reptile expert says.

A photograph of the Northern Territory's newest celebrity crocodile, Brutus a 5.5m three-legged beast who lost a limb in a shark attack, set tongues wagging this week.

NT News photographer Katrina Bridgeford snapped the amazing picture of the croc as it lunged for its favourite snack, buffalo meat.

Former New South Wales croc handler Craig Adams said the Territory's jumping croc cruises were teaching the reptiles to lose their fear of humans.

"We're training them to come up and get their food. The danger is that the crocs become comfortable around boats," he said.

At first I believed the photograph to be Photoshopped. But, after having seen the accompanying video, I know it's not a fake. This is an incredible picture, but Brutus is allegedly not the largest beast in the area. There is said to be an even larger "Saltie" in the region -- two feet longer.

BZ

I Say: Call Obama's Bluff; Budgetarily & Racially

Most Conservatives have been saying and writing, consistently, that Obama's bluff should be called in terms of the debt ceiling. I say: let the government tank. Refuse to allow the debt ceiling to be raised. The government, clearly, simply cannot continue on its unbridled spending spree.

Conservatives said this in re Bush's TARP program. TARP = economic failure + no accountability. Conservatives said this about every iteration of Porkulus. Porkulus = economic failure + no accountability. As in: BILLIONS and BILLIONS of YOUR American Taxpayer Dollars WASTED. Because, as I wrote earlier: "I call American Taxpayers the New Niggers. You can be berated, cut, hurt, slashed, hacked, lynched, sacrificed -- and government simply doesn't much care. Purposely."

"80% of the people support tax increases," says Mr Obama. But he is delusional and a liar. He is a radical idealogue. How do you argue or attempt to reason with a soured mind such as this?

The answer is: you simply cannot. The bulk of the GOP just doesn't "get" this point.

Further, Mr Obama' admin and supporters have -- get this -- made two further illogical and nonsensical allegations:

• 1. No previous president has faced such a terrible hailstorm of disagreement;


• 2. It all stems from the fact that Mr Obama is a black man;

Except that Mr Obama is as "completely black" as I am completely Estonian. Mr Obama is "black" when it suits, and he is "other" when it suits.

Sheila Jackson Lee, a BLACK FEMALE Demorat Representative from Texas, says that, again, it all gets down to race:



Why is this president "different"?

And just exactly how many black Demorats currently exist in the US Senate?

Why, that would be none.

Lee is just another black apologist hack, by dint of Political Matching Melanin Necessity supportive of Racial Pimps and Poverty Pimps. Just another racist cheeseball in a female guise. With one radical exception: her melanin count doesn't quite match that of The One.

Let's go back just a bit, shall we? Remember when to "be black," you had to be really black? And if you weren't, you were a poseur? Questions were asked: "Is Obama actually black enough?" to satisfy hardcore blacks with wide noses, large lips, heavy accents, darker skins? Or would they simply hang their hats on what they were told? The answer "B" turned out to be correct.

Finally, Charles Krauthammer writes:

President Obama is demanding a big long-term budget deal. He won’t sign anything less, he warns, asking, “If not now, when?”

How about last December, when he ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations? How about February, when he presented a budget that increases debt by $10 trillion over the next decade? How about April, when he sought a debt-ceiling increase with zero debt reduction attached?

All of a sudden he’s a born-again budget balancer prepared to bravely take on his own party by making deep cuts in entitlements. Really? Name one. He’s been saying forever that he’s prepared to discuss, engage, converse about entitlement cuts. But never once has he publicly proposed a single structural change to any entitlement.

Let me summarize, if I might be so bold:

- Obama is a victim;
- Anyone opposing him is a racist;
- All will fall apart if The One doesn't prevail

If I could be any more plain in my evaluatory efforts, please let me know. I value nothing if not brevity, truth and clarity.

Thank you for your continued reading and support.

BZ

"Any Republican" Beats Barack Hussein Obama

From the Gallup poll:

PRINCETON, NJ -- Registered voters by a significant margin now say they are more likely to vote for the "Republican Party's candidate for president" than for President Barack Obama in the 2012 election, 47% to 39%. Preferences had been fairly evenly divided this year in this test of Obama's re-election prospects.

In the meantime, with regard to the biggest issue of the year, our national debt ceiling, Ex-Speaker Nancy Pelosi weighs in:

(CNSNews.com) – House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she is “almost too busy” to continue listening to what is going on in the debt limit meetings at the White House with congressional leaders.

There are other more highly-pressing issues, to include cleaning her fish-tank and ordering a new wall sconce for the office.

And, finally, in a fit of pique our Mr Obama decided that simply walking away from a debt ceiling meeting was a proper concluding statement.

Anyone besides me wondering where the location might be of Mr Obama's "transparency"? And his "hope"? I know what the "change" still resides in my pocket, along with an abundance of lint.

BZ

How To Handle Somali Pirates

The Russians know how:

Further explanation:

RUSSIAN NAVY CAPTURES SOMALI PIRATES

How about that - the Russians captured the pirates, tied them up, put them on the boats, then set them all on fire - puff, no more pirates. All quite logical and simple.

This video shows Russian Navy commandos on a Somalian pirate ship shortly after the pirates had captured a Russian oil tanker. Tsk tsk. Wrong country to, apparently, screw with.

The Euro Union navy that patrols these waters would not interfere because they feared there could be "casualties."

All explanations are in Russian with the single exception of when a wounded pirate says something in English and the Russian soldier says "This is not a fishing boat." All conversations between the commandos are in Russian. If you don't understand Russian, the pictures speak for themselves.

The soldiers freed their compatriots and the tanker. The Russian Navy Commandos moved the pirates back to their own (pirate) ship, searched the pirate ship for weapons and explosives, documented the guns and rifles with video, and then left the ship and exploded it with all remaining pirates hand-cuffed on board.

The commandos sank the pirate ship along with the pirates and without any bothersome court proceedings, lawyers, hearings etc. That is, they used the anti-piracy laws of the 18th and 19th centuries where the captain of a rescuing ship can decide what to do with pirates. Usually, they were hanged. In this case, some high-order explosives worked quite effectively.

BZ

P.S.

Thanks, Don!

Welcome To Your New Emergency Services Paradigm

I said and wrote this at least 25 years ago, and I say and write it now:

• - You get the kind of law enforcement you deserve;
• - You get the level and quality of law enforcement you pay for;

I could, obviously, also say and write that with regard to the fire services as well.

That stated, from NBC:

San Jose budget cuts aren’t hurting all businesses, and in fact, one group in particular seems to be cashing in on the city’s economic woes: prostitutes.

Prostitution has made a rapid comeback to San Jose street corners in the past few weeks, according to NBC Bay Area sources.

After police budgets were slashed July 1, San Jose PD’s Vice Unit was disbanded, said San Jose Police Department spokesman Jose Garcia. This meant that part of their job responsibility – cracking down on prostitution and brothels – was reassigned to the police department’s Covert Response Unit.

The CRU was originally responsible for narcotics busts in the area and despite the newly added responsibilities, the unit’s size increased by one officer. It now totals 14. Sources say the result has been an increase in illegal prostitution.

Two police sources told NBC Bay Area that prostitutes have even been traveling from as far as Oakland and Fresno to take advantage of San Jose’s less scrutinized street corners.

Another Fornicalia agency, Stockton PD, took big cuts recently. And with that came a rash of murders and shootings -- Mexican murders. Continuing still.

Stockton PD also had its own "drive-by" shooting on headquarters.

Evidence markers A and B now mark where two bullets struck Stockton Police headquarters Wednesday night.

At 8:50 p.m., six officers were in the back lot of the department on Market Street when they heard four or five rounds fired.

"They're trained, they know the difference between a firecracker and shots fired," says Detective Roseanne Clarke. The bullets were lodged between the first and second floors of the building. Based on trajectory patterns and the tall brick garage surrounding the property, those rounds were fired from westbound Highway 4. "It does not appear that it was a random act, but that it was actually intentional to hit our building," says Clarke.

More shootings.

Nortenos are fighting Surenos -- which means that Nortenos -- those Mexicans who consider themselves already from the North or Norte -- are fighting Surenos -- those Mexicans who swarm from Mexico itself and are considered, in the state gang culture, interlopers.

Local, state and federal governments purposely cut citizen safety venues first, in order to make taxpayers hurt immediately. Government can't hurt; only you need to be hurt. The American Taxpayer. I call American Taxpayers the New Niggers. You can be berated, cut, hurt, slashed, hacked, lynched, sacrificed -- and government simply doesn't much care. Purposely.

At the same time, do you find that silly, stupid, frightening, fattening, illogical governmental programs -- locally -- are cut? Of course not! That would be unimaginable!

You want to cut cops? Be my guest. I've spent 40 years in law enforcement, seen and done it all, and I'm not far from retirement, perhaps another three years. I am clearly the exception in terms of lengthy career, and not the rule.

But I'll make sure I get every last dime due me within the law and contracts under which I operate. At this point I make a good six figures a year. It only took me 40 years to do so. And I'll protect my retirement with all my heart and soul. Because I was already paying $100,000 for a Fornicalia house in 1978 dollars "back then."

When I first started with the Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Department in 1978, I made $5.97 an hour and was "represented" by the Operating Engineers union. They primarily negotiated for big equipment construction workers. Cops were a sad third party. I was quite not "cutting a fat hog" back then nor was my motivation for it extant.

I got shot at (three times), cut, stabbed, spat upon, engaged in numerous fights, literally saved 10+ lives (though not via CPR; I am 0-for-3 with CPR). I am, however, 1-for-1 in terms of shootings. And I survived that critical incident -- luckily -- when I was much younger. If you know me, you know that event; I wrote about it earlier.

I worked when cop cars had bench seats and 440 magnum engines. I worked when there were no portable radios and the only link you had with "cover" was back in your car. I worked when I carried a .357 Colt Python and had 6 in the cylinder and two speedloaders on the belt. And no more rounds. Daring officers carried another box of rounds in their cases. I was one of them. Most officers did not.

I don't have a molecule of guilt within me when I take my retirement. I've put up with bullshit that you, as civilians, cannot even remotely imagine. Except those in combat. Except that my combat extended for 15+ years. I've put up with PC bullshit and made Career Survival my point for living. You want a system? I know how to navigate that system. Further, I've done "babysitting" and "hand-holding" for my sufficient share of adults.

I am due every damned dime coming to me. I'm still employed as a cop, a supervisor.

And smiling still.

All you others?

Welcome to your New Emergency Services Paradigm. Where you potentially get cops operating at slightly above room temperature. With no link to the past, no current vetting, where T-ball is the norm. T-Ball Esteem Cops. I've seen them. Hell, I supervise them. They cry when they get a splinter and demand a few days off. There are exceptions. But they are not the norm.

I've got mine.

Quite frankly: You're on your own.

And I couldn't care less. I've paid my price.

BZ

Obama: Never Raise Taxes In A Recession

Mr Obama wants to raise your taxes. And not by just a hair. He wishes to raise taxes by $1 trillion dollars. From The Weekly Standard:

In a 75-minute meeting Sunday night, President Obama once again demanded that more than $1 trillion in tax increases be part of any deficit reduction package attached to a vote on the debt ceiling. In the session, Obama rejected a Republican proposal to seek $2.5 trillion in spending cuts and reforms, and insisted on higher taxes on businesses and wealthy individuals.

Actually, the Associated Press (AP) says no, Mr Obama's tax hike would hurt low- and middle-class families:

Proposals under consideration include raising taxes on small business owners and potentially low- and middle-income families. You won't hear about that from Obama. Instead the president focuses on the very rich, and speaks euphemistically. Here are a few of the phrases the president has used of late to talk about what amounts to raising taxes for some:

-- "What we need to do is to have a balanced approach where everything is on the table."

--"We need to take on spending in the tax code."

--"The tax cuts I'm proposing we get rid of are tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires; tax breaks for oil companies and hedge fund managers and corporate jet owners."

--"You can't reduce the deficit to the levels that it needs to be reduced without having some revenue in the mix."

However, Mr Obama appears to be just a tad bit contradictory:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

And above is video evidence of this, in an interview with MSNBC's Chuck Todd in August of 2009. To acquire the exact quote, please fast forward to the 5:20 mark.

The specific (outside) question to Mr Obama: "Explain how raising taxes on anyone during a deep recession is going to help with the economy."

The specific answer by Mr Obama: "First of all, he’s right. Normally, you don’t raise taxes in a recession, which is why we haven’t and why we’ve instead cut taxes. So I guess what I’d say to Scott is – his economics are right. You don’t raise taxes in a recession. We haven’t raised taxes in a recession.”

Further, Mr Obama said: “We have not proposed a tax hike for the wealthy that would take effect in the middle of a recession. Even the proposals that have come out of Congress – which by the way were different from the proposals I put forward – still wouldn’t kick in until after the recession was over. So he’s absolutely right, the last thing you want to do is raise taxes in the middle of a recession because that would just suck up – take more demand out of the economy and put business further in a hole.”

Just a wee-bit-o-hypocrisy eh, Mr Obama?

Because if the debt ceiling isn't raised by the August 2nd deadline, the globe will collapse in on itself and life as we know it will end.

The same thing Mr Obama said would occur if we didn't pass each and every Porkulus Package.

I'm still here.

And so is our staggering debt.

BZ