Haloscan commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.

Economy continues to grow at healthy pace

News Release: Gross Domestic Product

Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 3.4 percent in the second quarter of 2005, according to advance estimates released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the first quarter, real
GDP increased 3.8 percent.

The Bureau emphasized that the second-quarter "advance" estimates are based on source data that are incomplete or subject to further revision by the source agency (see the box on page 3). The second-quarter "preliminary" estimates, based on more comprehensive data, will be released on August 31,
2005.

...

-more-

These advance estimates are almost always revised up a few tenths of a point ... Regardless, we have our ninth consecutive quarter of greater than 3% GDP growth ... By our calculations, this has not happened since 1986.

Something else interesting we noticed while running through the numbers: Check out 1992. The very economy the Clinton-Gore team were calling the worst since the Great Depression (sound familiar?) grew by ... 4.15%!

In 2000, under those very same "geniuses" it grew at a rate of ... 2.25% (and falling).

America's first teenaged president inherited a vigorous recovery previously described as a near depression. With the help of a lapdog press, he took credit for it despite slowing it down before the voters elected a GOP Congress to babysit him.

George W. Bush inherited an economy on the brink of recession ... to say nothing of the corporate scandals of the '90's --"Decade of Greed", anyone? -- and 9/11.

Someone somewhere owes both Presidents Bush an apology ...

Leftist casuistry, Lesson XVI

We hear a lot from the likes of NY's lipless distaff Senator -- Schumer, that is -- about the need to reject "judicial activists" nominated to the Supreme Court. But what is "judicial activism"? Well, where we come from, it entails brushing aside the letter of the Constitution and the general supremacy of state legislatures when adjudicating a case -- perhaps even deferring to international opinion over the intent of the white, Christian males who forged the Constitution.

By this definition, Ruth Ginsburg, Earl Warren and William Brennan, among too many others, are/were judicial activists.

Under Schumer's warped definition, however, any Justice who might reverse a decision intially based upon judicial activism is ... A JUDICIAL ACTIVIST!!!

This is the same clear thinking that brands a tax cut -- which returns money to the entity from which it was initially STOLEN -- as a GIVEAWAY to that entity.

Remember folks, we're the dumb ones!

We're off for a few days ....

... of metal, mayhem and Maker's Mark. [we woulda thrown in "Macanudos" but we prefer Arturo Fuentes. Gratuitous alliteration must take a back seat to brand loyalty when it comes to ceegars!]

We will check in ... maybe ...

Moonbats -- behave yourselves! Go easy on the porn and pot ... Damn, alliteration again ... Try to work up the courage to post here rather than sending us emails which we have no permission to post ... Better yet, fill out a few job applications.

Cheers!

Howard/Blair v. Moonbat reporters

Full text: Blair & Howard

(all emphasis ours)

...

Question:

Prime Minister, you have appealed for people to stay calm, but do you feel any sense of responsibility at all for the fact that ordinary people here in London now seem to be in the frontline in the war against terror?

Prime Minister:

Well I think what is important is that people do stay calm and react in the way that they have reacted so far. And the very purpose of the people who are doing this type of thing, their purpose is precisely in order to make people worried and frightened and taking responsibility off the shoulders of the people who engage in these types of acts. And we have just got to remain as we have been. I think the one thing, and the Prime Minister was just saying this a moment or two ago, the one thing that has come across very clearly over the past couple of weeks has been the impact if you like that the British attitude has had on the rest of the world, where people have seen our country react to terrorist attacks that are meant to make people frightened, and worried, and scared, and react with great dignity, and great strength and great determination that it doesn't change us, it is not going to change what we do. And therefore when something like this happens again today, and as I say I can't give you the full details of it at the moment, and the police will at a later time, our reaction has got to be the same. To react in any other way I think is to engage in the game they want us to engage in.

Question:

Do you feel in any sense that you have put people in this position, do you feel that in a sense your policies may have put people in this position?

Prime Minister:

Well I think I have said to you before, that I feel that people who are responsible for doing these things are the people who do them.

Question:

To both Prime Ministers, what was your immediate reaction on hearing that some incidents had occurred, was it here we go again? And do incidents like this, coming just 14 days after the horrific attacks, suggest that the war against terror is being lost on the streets? And yesterday an Australian bomb victim of July 7 linked the bombings to Iraq. Does that suggest that the propaganda war against terrorists is also being lost?

Mr Howard:

Could I start by saying the Prime Minister and I were having a discussion when we heard about it, and my first reaction was to get some more information, and I really don't want to add to what the Prime Minister has said. It is a matter for the police and a matter for the British authorities to talk in detail about what has happened here. Could I just say very directly, Paul, on the issue of the policies of my government, and indeed the policies of the British and American government on Iraq, that the first point of reference is that once a country allows its foreign policy to be determined by terrorism, it has given the game away, to use the vernacular. And no Australian government that I lead will ever have policies determined by terrorism or terrorist threats, and no self-respecting government of any political stripe in Australia would allow that to happen.

Can I remind you that the murder of 88 Australians in Bali took place before the operation in Iraq; and could I remind you that the 11 September occurred before the operation in Iraq; can I also remind you that the very first occasion that Bin Laden specifically referred to Australia was in the context of Australia's involvement in liberating the people of East Timor.

Are people, by implication, suggesting that we shouldn't have done that? When a group claimed responsibility on the website for the attacks on 7 July, they talked about British policy, not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan. Are people suggesting we shouldn't be in Afghanistan?

When Sergio de Melo was murdered in Iraq, a brave man, a distinguished international diplomat, immensely respected for his work in the United Nations, when al Queda gloated about that they referred specifically to the role that de Melo had carried out in East Timor because he was the United Nations administrator in East Timor. Now I don't know the mind of the terrorist, by definition you can't put yourself in the mind of a successful suicide bomber, I can only look at objective facts, and the objective facts are as I have cited. The objective evidence is that Australia was a terrorist target long before the operation in Iraq, and indeed all the evidence, as distinct from the suppositions, suggest to me that this is about hatred of a way of life, this is about the perverted use of the principles of a great world religion that at its root preaches peace and cooperation, and I think we lose sight of the challenge we have if we allow ourselves to see these attacks in the context of particular circumstances, rather than the abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder.

Prime Minister:

I agree 100% with that.

Question:

Inaudible.

Prime Minister:

No, I don't think so at all actually, I don't think so at all. I think that in the end though, I was asked this question I think it was at the press conference I had on Tuesday with President Karzai from Afghanistan, but the roots of this are deep. You know this is the mistake of people thinking this suddenly began in the past couple of years, the roots of this were deep, the terrorist attacks go back over 10 years. And the way of defeating it is to defeat it of course by security measures, but also by going after the ideas of these people, the ideology of these people, their arguments as well as their methods, taking them on and defeating them, and the best way of doing that is to show how the values of freedom, and tolerance, and respect for people of other religions and races is the best way to lead our lives.

But in the end what they want us to do is to turn round and say oh it is our fault. The people who are responsible for terrorist attacks are the terrorists, and this combination of this evil bankrupt ideology based on a perversion of Islam with terrorism, this is something that has built over a period of time, it will have to be dismantled over a period of time, but I have got no doubt at all that in the end the values that we represent are the values that will triumph.

...

-more-

Ahhhhh ... classic "blame the victim-ism" from charlatans in the media ...

Mohammed created Jihad ... His followers comply ... we respond ... The Mohammedans persist in their savagery.

Oooh ... Our fault!

We differ from Mr. Howard in that we do not believe the savages are exercising "abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder".

Sadly, the Jihadists are following their leader -- the false prophet and bloodthirsty pervert who invented their peaceful religion.

Damn! Guess we can't run for office now ...

We love our Ann ...

Souter in Roberts' clothing

...

It means absolutely nothing that NARAL and Planned Parenthood attack him: They also attacked Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony Kennedy and David Hackett Souter.

The only way a Supreme Court nominee could win the approval of NARAL and Planned Parenthood would be to actually perform an abortion during his confirmation hearing, live, on camera, and preferably a partial birth one.

...

-more-

We hope Ann is wrong about Roberts ... But, damn, she has a bead on the other side!

Hero of Chappaquiddick apparently didn't pay attention in law school

Bush sees good prospects for Roberts confirmation

Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), a Democrat from Massachusetts, reacted cautiously to the Roberts selection.

"The real question, I think, that Americans are thinking about this morning is whose side is Judge Roberts really on, on the really important issues of our time?" said Kennedy in an interview with NBC's "Today" show.

-more-

Erm .. ah ... hmmm ... Well ... we never attended law school (though we scored decent on the LSAT's ... without help) ...

On the other hand ... we never drove off a bridge and left a woman who was not our wife to die.

However ... we wonder why anyone would ask what side any judge is on ... Or why anyone would demand, as Hairy Reid has, that a Supreme Court Justice have a "big heart" and an "open mind" ....

Once ... I got a speeding ticket and went to traffic court.

The judge there might well have had a "big heart" and an "open mind" ... However ... I had broken the law as it was legislated by the elected officials of NY State.

I was guilty and was fined. As I should have been.

Whose side was the judge on? Who cares?

He applied the law ...

Who gives a rat's ass "whose side" John Roberts is on if he properly applies The Law as The Constitution defines it ... ?

No Iraq-al Qaeda connection? Think again ...

The Mother of All Connections

FOR MANY, the debate over the former Iraqi regime's ties to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network ended a year ago with the release of the 9/11 Commission report. Media outlets seized on a carefully worded summary that the commission had found no evidence "indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States" and ran blaring headlines like the one on the June 17, 2004, front page of the New York Times: "Panel Finds No Qaeda-Iraq Tie."

But this was woefully imprecise. It assumed, not unreasonably, that the 9/11 Commission's conclusion was based on a firm foundation of intelligence reporting, that the intelligence community had the type of human intelligence and other reporting that would allow senior-level analysts to draw reasonable conclusions. We know now that was not the case.

John Lehman, a 9/11 commissioner, spoke to The Weekly Standard at the time the report was released. "There may well be--and probably will be--additional intelligence coming in from interrogations and from analysis of captured records and so forth which will fill out the intelligence picture. This is not phrased as--nor meant to be--the definitive word on Iraqi Intelligence activities."
[emphasis ours]
Lehman's caution was prescient. A year later, we still cannot begin to offer a "definitive" picture of the relationships entered into by Saddam Hussein's operatives, but much more has already been learned from documents uncovered after the Iraq war. The evidence we present below, compiled from revelations in recent months, suggests an acute case of denial on the part of those who dismiss the Iraq-al Qaeda relationship.

...

THE CONCLUSION of the Senate Intelligence Committee report--that the CIA did not have the type of intelligence reporting that "would have enabled it to better define a cooperative relationship"--was ignored by the press. We now have reporting that demonstrates the nature of the relationship. One day there will be much more. At a large warehouse in Doha, Qatar, the Defense Intelligence Agency is reviewing millions of pages of documents from the former Iraqi regime. That process is painfully slow due to a lack of resources and a lack of interest in pursuing the full story of Iraqi support for terrorism.

That lack of interest is not new. As the anonymous intelligence analyst told the Senate Intelligence Committee: "I don't think we were really focused on the CT [counterterrorism] side, because we weren't concerned about the IIS going out and pro-actively conducting terrorist attacks." That the intelligence community did not pay particular attention to Saddam Hussein's terrorist aspirations created a sizable blind spot.

Why wouldn't Saddam Hussein conduct terrorist attacks against U.S. interests? The United States regularly bombed targets in Iraq--at times almost daily--in support of the no-fly zones. We conducted more significant attacks in January and June 1993, and again in 1996 and 1998. The CIA attempted to foment a coup in 1996. The U.N. sanctions sought to deprive Saddam of the resources he needed to sustain a robust military. The weapons inspections occupied his top officials and hundreds of intelligence officers. From 1998 forward, after the passage of the Iraq Liberation Act, the official policy of the United States was to end his regime. With that policy came support of Iraqi opposition groups who existed to remove him from power. For Saddam, then, the Gulf war never ended. He routinely accused the United States of "terrorism" and "genocide." The state-run Iraqi media threatened to exact revenge for more than a decade.

Further, Saddam had proven his willingness to use asymmetric means of retaliation time and again. He attempted to use his own intelligence service and terrorist surrogates against the United States during the first Gulf war. He assisted a fugitive from the 1993 World Trade Center attacks. He attempted to assassinate George H.W. Bush. He sought to blow up the U.S. government's Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty headquarters. He openly supported terrorist activity in the region. "From 1996 to 2003," according to the Senate Intelligence Committee report, "the IIS focused its terrorist activities on western interests, particularly against the U.S. and Israel."

We know that in the context of a decade-long confrontation with the United States, Saddam reached out to al Qaeda on numerous occasions. We know that the leadership of al Qaeda reciprocated, requesting assistance in its endeavors. We know that reports of meetings, offers of safe haven, and collaboration persisted.

What we do not know is the full extent of the relationship. But we know enough to know that there was one. And we know enough to know it was a threat.

-more-

In the days when national security trumped Bush Hatred, the relationship between Saddam and al Qaeda was part of the conventional wisdom -- from the MSM to the Clinton Administration.

Through the tireless efforts of The Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes and The Wall Street Journal's Claudia Rossett, and actual thorough readings of the entire Kay and Duelfer reports, we now have a pretty good picture of what Saddam was up to: Gaming sanctions and greasing the palms of those who would grade Jean Kerry Heinz's "global test"; maintaining the intellectual and physical capacity to produce WMD at a time after sanctions were lifted; and, yes, providing groups like al Qaeda with financing, safe haven and the expertise to build their own WMD.

The "no connection" crowd has taken a legalistic sentence from the 9/11 panel and extrapolated it to exculpate Iraq from any accusations of cooperation and coordination with al Qaeda. For those blinded by their loathing for President Bush, one passage taken out of context trumps all we knew up till 9/11 and all we have gleaned since. And, as Hayes notes above, there are still millions of documents to be translated and analyzed.

No one should expect to find a formal contract between Saddam and Usama calling for the destruction of the infidels. Anyone seeking one, perhaps in MS Word format, should contact disgraced former CBS producer Mary Mapes. She knows a guy ...

But there comes a time when the irritational hatred of one man has to take a backseat to reality.

Bush will be gone by Jan. 20, 2009. The Jihadists are unlikely to beat their dynamite vests into ploughshares with news of his retirement.

The bigger question is not why did we remove Saddam, but WHY did it take so damn long?

The Nominee

So, the nominee is John Roberts.

We don't pretend to be experts on such issues, but many of the people we trust have chimed in on his behalf.

And many of those we look to to be consistently wrong appear to be spoiling for a fight. New York's only feminine Senator, the unremarkable Chuck Schumer, springs instantly to mind.

At first look, Roberts seems to be another home run for the "idiot" Bush. A solid "originalist" with impeccable credentials. Further, Bush ignored the demands to replace a woman with a woman.

Awesome!

We anticipate the typical mendacity and demagoguery from the likes of the loathesome blob -- er, Ted Kennedy, not Michael Moore -- and the hero of Jihadists everywhere, Dick "Dick" Durbin.

It is difficult to see, however, how Roberts could be any less "mainstream" than that daft former ACLU General Counsel and exemplar of judicial restraint, Ruth Buzzi Ginsburg.

Ginsburg was Moonbat before Moonbat was cool. Yet as much as we disagreed with her judicial philosphy, the fact was that Clinton had WON the election. Ginsburg had no ethical or criminal issues that made her "unfit" for the bench.

She was confirmed 96-3.

Through two campaigns, the president vowed to nominate "originalists" to the bench, particularly at the highest level.

Barring anything unseemly in his background -- and we don't mean pubic hairs on Coke cans -- we see no reason why Roberts should not be confirmed with 85+ votes by October.

However, we do not underestimate the desperation of the Moonbat Enemy, the 40 or so crackpot leftists in the Senate and the lapdog MSM.

Judge Roberts can expect to have his name sullied by men and women unfit to carry his briefcase.

Coming Tuesday ... New feature!

Radio Free Ponderosa!

Tell a friend!

You Moonbats tell your dealers!



UPDATE: Dammit, W trumps our big premiere broadcast with his High Court pick ... Ask us nicely and we might post it anyway ...

More on Roberts as the story evolves

al-Zarqawi to the Loony Left: Thanks and keep up the good work!

Deadly Tolerance

...

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al Qaeda chief in Iraq, sent a thank you note to the Dick Durbins and Ted Kennedys of Congress in a message to his followers and sympathizers on July 5. According to an unreleased translation read to me by a Defense Department source, Zarqawi's message exhorted his terrorists to greater effort, because, Zarqawi said, it is very clear that America was being defeated in Iraq. Zarqawi's proof? His message said that the proof that America is losing is that some American congressmen are saying just that. [emphasis ours]


IT IS ESSENTIAL TO THE war that our enemy has no reason to doubt our resolve. Winston Churchill knew that. His ringing speeches, throughout the war, and especially in its darkest hours, were literally the fuel that propelled British courage when everyone, including many of his closest advisers, thought all was lost. When Dick Durbin compared our people at Gitmo to Nazis, Gulag guards, and Pol Pot's mass murderers, there was a short burst of outrage, quelled by his phony apology. Senate Republicans never demanded -- or got -- a clear and unequivocal apology from Durbin. By their failure to do so they give credence to Zarqawi's message.

...

-more-

Good work, Moonbats ... Your nation's enemies salute you!

We used to hang traitors.

Gratuitous mockery of a photo that would shock this fat man's wife

"The Last Temptation of Bryce" (before his "wife" initiates divorce proceedings)

The Laffer Curve in action

Disappearing Deficit

Why is it that the dreaded federal budget deficit only commands screaming headlines when it's rising, not falling? And why is it that the deficit is portrayed as a fire-breathing, hydra-headed monster only when the press can portray the villain as "irresponsible tax cuts," not runaway federal spending?

We ask these questions in the wake of the great unreported fiscal story of 2005: the shrinking federal deficit. It's down by at least $100 billion because federal tax receipts have skyrocketed this year by 14.6% (or $204 billion) through June. Private economic forecasters now believe the budget deficit may come in at about 2.5% of GDP, which is in line with the historical average for the past 40 years. Given that we're fighting an expensive, must-win war on terror, these deficit numbers aren't too shabby.

Not even the most unbridled supply-sider predicted that President Bush's investment tax cuts would unleash such a spurt of tax receipts this year. But thanks to sustained economic growth, more Americans working and improved business profits, individual income tax receipts have shot up by 17.6%. Even more astonishing is the nearly 41% spike in corporate revenues. There's a fiscal lesson here that bears repeating: The best way to grow tax revenues is to grow the tax base, and that is what has happened this year.

...

-more-

Apparently, T^x was on the right side of the curve in 2003 ...

Somewhere, Paul Krugman kicks a cat ...

Affordable health insurance available for Gen Y(or whatever letter we're up to)'ers

Cheap Health Insurance Available to Many Young Adults

FRIDAY, July 8 (HealthDay News) -- For the cost of a latte a day, many of America's 10 million uninsured young adults could afford individual health insurance in most of the 50 largest U.S. cities, according to a new national report.

The Most Affordable Cities for Individuals to Buy Health Insurance report was released by online insurance source eHealthInsurance. The report lists the cities with the most affordable health insurance options for single 30-year-olds.

"It's important that young and uninsured people realize that their health, as well as their financial future, are at stake. We created this report to raise awareness with young people that there are affordable solutions available in most of the country so they can make an informed choice about their fiscal and physical health," Gary Lauer, CEO of eHealthInsurance, said in a prepared statement.

The report cited Long Beach, Calif., as the city with the most affordable health insurance for single young adults. In that city, the cost of about 17 average-sized lattes (at $3.10 each) would cover the monthly premium for a health insurance plan.

-more-

Lessee ... forgo over-priced coffee and exhibit some adult responsibility ... or lobby to have "someone else" (eg, ME) bankroll your health care needs.

We should also note that most young people do not need the all-encompassing coverage that those of us in our advanced years require. In most cases, simply having catastrophic coverage suffices ... Of course, you will actually have to pay the full fare for an office visit, but a good dose of price sensitivity is what's needed in the health care market as a whole.

For the Moonbats

Rove's attorney talks to NRO

The lawyer for top White House adviser Karl Rove says that Time reporter Matthew Cooper "burned" Rove after a conversation between the two men concerning former ambassador Joseph Wilson's fact-finding mission to Niger and the role Wilson's wife, CIA employee Valerie Plame, played in arranging that trip. Nevertheless, attorney Robert Luskin says Rove long ago gave his permission for all reporters, including Cooper, to tell prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald about their conversations with Rove.

In an interview with National Review Online, Luskin compared the contents of a July 11, 2003, internal Time e-mail written by Cooper with the wording of a story Cooper co-wrote a few days later. "By any definition, he burned Karl Rove," Luskin said of Cooper. "If you read what Karl said to him and read how Cooper characterizes it in the article, he really spins it in a pretty ugly fashion to make it seem like people in the White House were affirmatively reaching out to reporters to try to get them to them to report negative information about Plame."

...

-more-

Meanwhile, we've reached back into the archives for the facts of the Joe Wilson fiasco ...

Report Disputes Wilson's Claims on Trip, Wife's Role

Former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, dispatched by the CIA in February 2002 to investigate reports that Iraq sought to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program with uranium from Africa, was specifically recommended for the mission by his wife, a CIA employee, contrary to what he has said publicly.

...

The panel found that Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most intelligence analysts. And contrary to Wilson's assertions and even the government's previous statements, the CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence that made its way into 16 fateful words in President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address. [emphasis ours]

Yesterday's report said that whether Iraq sought to buy lightly enriched "yellowcake" uranium from Niger is one of the few bits of prewar intelligence that remains an open question.

...

-more-

Ah, yes, the Washington Post, that great organ of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!

What really amuses us is the affront the Loony Left takes at the alleged "outing" of a CIA operative. Since when have they given a rat's ass for the efficacy of the CIA? Indeed, they have spent 30 years emasculating it!

The real scandal is how a CIA agent promoted her incompetent, poncey hack of a husband for a vital mission and how the latter misrepresented his findings.

Karl Rove could be forced out tomorrow, and you Moonbats would still be miscreants and misfits.

Not so Sillary

ASPEN, Colo. - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton went on the attack against President Bush in a speech Sunday, accusing him of damaging the economy by overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich.

The Democrat from New York also accused Bush of depriving U.S. soldiers of equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funding for scientific research.

"I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington," Clinton said referring to the freckle-faced Mad magazine character. She drew a laugh from crowd when she described Bush's attitude toward tough issues with Neuman's catchphrase: "What, me worry?"

...

-more-

People who aren't funny should steer clear of humour. "Mrs." Clinton is not amusing, except, perhaps, in a bathing suit.

She is also, clearly, ignorant. The economy is fine and the president, unlike her "husband", has tackled "tough issues": Saddam Hussein, al Qaeda and Social Security spring immediately to mind.

The toughest issue "hubby" ever dealt with was a blue dress.

This is the great Dem hope for 2008?

"Smartest woman in America?!" Hmmmm ... perhaps after about 25 million others.

Being a shrill Marxist female means never having to prove your bona fides.

NARAL shows its class

Throw your hands up and say it loud: "Screw Abstinence!!!"



SCREW ABSTINENCE, and if you or your partner should become impregnated ... drive to the nearest NARAL sanctioned facility and have the little inconvenience eviscerated and tossed in a waste basket.

Yeah, WE'RE the extremists!

In Marx we trust?

Till Death Do Us Part

(Subscription required. Lefties, this means you must spend your OWN money)

Karl Marx must be rolling in his grave, and don't even ask about V. I. Lenin: Russia eliminated its inheritance tax last month. Its move comes after January's decision by the government of Sweden, the birthplace of the modern-day welfare state, to eliminate its estate tax. Like the Russians, the Swedes have come to believe that the tax is unjust and economically counterproductive. Russia and Sweden join Argentina, Australia, Canada, India, Mexico and Switzerland as nations that don't make death a taxable event.

The U.S. now has the distinction of imposing the most onerous death tax in the industrialized world. The federal estate-tax rate is 45% on every dollar above a $1.5 million exemption, but in many states the combined federal/state tax on dying rises above 50%.
...

-more-

Congrats to our domestic Marxists for standing firm against reform of the inheritance tax. Oooh, harsh words Mr. Buzzcut! Yet Marx advocated the "[a]bolition of all rights of inheritance".

His ideals live today in the Democrat Party of the nation founded on the ideals of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Even the victims of the loony ideology of Marx, the pixilated flake who rarely left the library to encounter the real world, have cast this silliness aside.

Why can't the Left in America put their envy aside and do the same?

Most wealthy families in America are not Kennedys or Rockefellers (we refer only to the later generations of these once productive clans).

They actually work, defer gratification, invest, and PRODUCE.

It's time to cast this pathetic anachronism adrift.

Economy, worst since beginning of recorded history, continues its slide

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: JUNE 2005

Nonfarm employment increased by 146,000 [The Ponderosa: 163K in the Household Survey] in June, and the unemployment ratecontinued to trend down, reaching 5.0 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Over the month, payroll employment continued to grow in several industries, notably professional and
business services and health care.
...
-more-

We actually heard a moax on a local talk show yesterday demanding that the President pay more attention to domestic issues, like the economy.

The great travesty of the 2004 election was not the media coverage of the war in Iraq, as brutal as that was, but their mis-reporting on the economy.

This president inherited a recession, exacerbated by 9/11 and the corporate scandals -- with roots in the '90's -- and managed to minimize the damage and kick start a recovery that is in full roar today.

He has even dared to attempt to reform the scam known as Social Security, hoping to empower people to provide for their own retirements so that they might actually spend their golden years -- AFFLUENT!

His predecessor came to office with an incipient recovery, slowed it with his tax hikes (most forget he wanted to hike taxes even more than he did), then took credit when the tech boom and capgains cuts fueled the late '90's rally.

The economy's fine, excellent, even. It would be even better were the tax cuts to be made permanent and Sarbanes-Oxley rescinded.

To those who continue to moan and carp, we say only: Can the whining. If you're a failure, it's your own fault. Work harder, get smarter ... It's tough competing with those brown people in India and the yellow folk in China but you have no choice. Grow up.

7/7

Today reminds us that this is war. Not in the conventional sense, of course, but it is a war.

As long as the Jihadists breathe no one is safe, not even their co-religionists who work with the "infidels" for democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan. Indeed, they are "infidels".

Our friends in Europe are even more at risk than those of us in North America. Islamism has been spreading, unchecked, throughout that continent for more than a decade.

Apologists for Islam will say "every religion has its bad actors". Well, of course, inasmuch as any group of sinful humans is made up of -- sinful humans.

But what is it about this religion that spawns so many hellhounds?

The answer lies in the life of their "prophet". It is as important today to understand Mohammed and the Koran as it was it 1930 to know "Mein Kampf", in 1950 to study "The Communist Manifesto".

Know thy enemy.

That said, it would not shock us if these bombings were not the direct work of Jihadistan, rather of domestic terrorists, those unwashed, masked anarchists who ascend from the sewers every time a major economic summit is held.

It also would not surprise us if they had operational support from the Jihadists.

Madmen of a feather ...

Today, we are British

These colors never run, either.

The London Attacks

Before we allow the Jihadists to claim the credit they undoubtedly desire, let's not be too quick to exculpate the unbathed, kerchiefed, Guevara t-shirt sporting anti-globalization freaks who slither out from under their rocks (rent on the rock paid by Mom & Dad) every time a major economic summit is held.

Further, the possibility that these domestic enemies could be working with foreign enemies can not be discounted.

Gratuitous mockery

"After being blown off by 18 year old, flabby bass player takes his revenge."

Leftist pathology in a second easy lesson

"Something must be done, even if it doesn't work," Geldof said in one recent interview, and in that one moment he came closest to capturing the...
-more-

It was, as Chris Martin of Coldplay put it, "the greatest thing that's ever been organised probably in the history of the world", and although veterans of the two world wars might have disagreed, for once the drift-net rock statement captured the mood.
...
-more-

Psycho-babble from mediocre musicians, for sure, but we'll bite:

How's about translating 50 million copies each of The Wealth of Nations, John Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government and Hayek's Constitution of Liberty and sending over qualified instructors (no $12,000 gift bags necessary) to teach these great works?

Nah, Bush is Hitler.

We've been busy ... a recap

We've been a bit busy the past couple weeks -- contributing to the GDP, we assure you -- and have neglected our duties here, aside from mocking Bryce.

So here's a quick recap:

The president gave a speech on Iraq that had the disloyal opposition frothing at the mouth vis-a-vis the connection between Iraq and al Qaeda, which they extrapolated to Iraq and 9/11. As a public service, we recommend the following pieces regarding the nexus between Iraq and al Qaeda:
Itis All About 9/11

Case Not Dismissed

Rolling Rockefeller

The Connection"

The Worst of Intentions

Body of Evidence

Karl Rove got some heat for calling a pansy a pansy:
Rove Was Right about MoveOn

The Great Ground Zero Heist


The Bush Tax Cuts (2003) continued to pay dividends:
The Rapidly Declining Deficit

News Release: Gross Domestic Product and Corporate Profits

The Supreme Court affirmed that the dudes who crafted the Bill of Rights and its "establishment clause" didn't really understand what they ratified.

And Iran elected a Carter-era terrorist:
Bush Questions Iran Leader-Elect's Past

Iran New Prez Accused In Austria

Update:
Oops, left out the Court's absurd widening of the Takings Clause in Kelo to endorse takings for a "public purpose" rather than "public use", as plainly stated in the Constitution.

Why do these "Living Constitution" types persist in their charade? Just come out and admit it: "The Constitution is a flawed compact written by dead, white Christians. Screw the Constitution. The law is whatever we say it is."

Why even pretend to consult the Constitution anymore?

Should be a helluva battle coming up over the next Supreme Court nominee. Anyone who pledges fealty to the text of the Constitution and original intent of the Founders will be branded an "extremist" by august and learned men like Harry Reid and NY's female senator, Chucky Schumer.

Live 8: Leftist pathology in one easy lesson

Organizer Geldof sees concerts as 'final push' to help Africa

Live Aid, it was called.

Saturday, it's happening again -- but on a much bigger scale.

Live 8, put together by Live Aid organizer Bob Geldof, will feature shows in 10 cities on four continents, with 150 artists participating. The name of the benefit refers to next week's Group of Eight summit, a gathering of the world's wealthiest nations in Gleneagles, Scotland.

Geldof said Thursday that the concerts will be the "final push" in getting the world's richest leaders to come to the aid of impoverished Africa.

In an interview with CNN, Geldof said the goal of doubling aid for Africa by 2010 to $25 billion -- laid out by the Commission for Africa, which British Prime Minister Tony Blair is spearheading -- almost has been met.

...

-more-

Um ........ OK ....

If we truly want to fix the continent of Africa, howz about this: Instead of debt relief and massive subsidies, how 'bout we send them our best minds on the the subject of creating a nation where "unalienable rights" are respected and a free market economy prevails?

You could give the bum on the corner a million bucks, and you will find him back there in a couple years. Poverty is a defective state of mind, a pathology, if you will.

Do we really care about people who still live in the 16th century? Then let's teach them how to be 21st century men.

O'Connor retires

Good.

Aside from being the first woman on the Court, her tenure was disappointing to conservatives whose president appointed her.

Like many who go to DC -- including fellow GOP appointees Kennedy and Souter, she "grew" once she hit The Beltway, which is to say she became more left of center (though she did get Kelo right) and often ignored the plain language of The Constitution. Most of us consider moving left in your later years a sign of a second childhood or perhaps a severe blow to the head, but in the Blue States, this is what passes for "growth". What cannot be achieved at the ballot box can be gained by the votes of five infidel Justices.

Our hope is that the president will appoint a strict, committed constructionist, someone who actually interprets the pertinent parts of The Constitution as they were understood by those who crafted them, not as he wishes them to be.

Understandably, facile demagogues like Harry Reid (is he smart enuff to be a demagogue?) will try to do to such a nominee what the loathesome Ted Kennedy did to a brilliant Bob Bork in 1987. We are breathless wondering whether such a nominee represents an "extraordinary circumstance".

UPDATE:

Headline at National Organization for Beefy Women : Justice O'Connor Resigns ... Women's Lives on the Line

Yup. Billions of yet-to-be-conceived women's lives are in the balance.