I hate to say it, but I suspect even Joe Biden would ace this 12 question quiz. Yea, the questions are that pathetic.

IMO, what this really is, is an indictment of public education in America.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 06:03 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 48 words, total size 1 kb.

There are just not enough votes on the Democratic side of the aisle.

Yes. He said that.

"There are not the votes for Democrats to do this just on our side of the aisle. It is not possible and perhaps not desirable either," Conrad said on ABC's "This Week".

Because we cannot push through important legislation in the Senate without a 104 seat majority.

Putz.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 12:57 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 91 words, total size 1 kb.

I had forgotten about the wonderful awfulness that was The Toxic Avenger (1984). It was so bad and over the top that it was actually fun to watch unlike a lot of bad movies. The folks at Troma Films weren't afraid to steer into teh cheese: not only do you have makeup-wearing bad guys in leotards and camo tunics rob a diner, but they also rape a blind girl and kill her dog. And then get beaten with their own arm by a mutant. Their cheese-o-meter does go to 11.

And if you were wondering how they did the special effect of the guy's arm being torn off - well they didn't. The actor was already missing an arm and was wearing a prosthetic earlier in the scene. See - low budget and efficient.

And yeah this clip is blatantly stolen from HolyTaco, but it was just too good not to share.

Posted by: Open Blog at 12:43 PM | Comments (1)
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.

Forty-two percent (42%) say it will hurt the U.S. economy, while 19% say it will help.

Just another hill for the Pelosi congress to die on.

Also at the same link, people don't seem too keen on the government mandating what light bulbs they can use.

...Just 18% of adults think itÂ’s the governmentÂ’s job to tell Americans what kind of light bulb they use, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Seventy-two percent (72%) say itÂ’s none of the governmentÂ’s business, and 10% are not sure...

This light bulb thing is going to become a lot more visceral than the Pelosi organized crime syndicate ever expected. Its not an abstract discussion about deficits, etc. People interact with lights on a daily basis. This CFL mandate is the sort of government intrusion they'll feel in their gut and get angry about every time they flip a light switch. For the record, every Edison base light fixture in my house is fitted with CFL's...by choice, not dictate.

Everything Rasmussen has at that link is chocolaty ball dipping goodness. Check out the whole article. I'll credit the Obama/Pelosi crime syndicate with one major accomplishment -- their egregious, ill-planned, and sloppy overreaching seems to have finally awakened a Nixonesque silent majority that has been silent for far too long.

Can the Republican party capitalize on this change in public sentiment and get back to its roots as the party of limited government and limited spending?

Probably not. This current crew, on whole, just isn't smart enough. They are smarter than Pelosi and company of course, but that's only like saying my fern is "smarter" than my pet rock, because the fern knows how to respond to sunlight. more...

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 12:01 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 316 words, total size 3 kb.

Genghis is in repose tonight since apparently he does have a life outside of AoS.

So here are a few items for your enjoyment:

Item #1: 5 Lies All Women Tell
I'm pretty sure we've all heard these at some point or other. And by 'we' I mean uh, you guys. Most of these are white lies but the 'I'm not mad at you' lie is particularly pernicious. She knows that she's mad, you know she's mad, but you still have to go through the kabuki dance of denials to get her to actually admit that she's angry. If we just could cut out this step, I'm convinced our overall national efficiency would go up by 7%.

Item #2: The Nastiest Canned Food From Around the World
I disagree about the canned bacon, but all the rest look pretty scary/gross. Oh and in case you were wondering huitlacoche is corn fungus.

By genghis's request tonight's theme is music videos - both the best and worst. So in tribute I start off with a dedication to genghis, 'Moskau' by Dshinghus Khan, a cheesy German pop group from the 70's:

more...

Posted by: Open Blog at 06:41 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.

Thus keeping that "national discussion on race"-- you know, the one we're supposed to have whenever Obama steps in it race-wise -- quiet and private.

The way national discussions on race are supposed to be.

Gates is doin' a solid for Obama by helping to make this go away.

Opening small-talk? "Yeah, you know who I am now, don't you, racist? Your mama sure knows who I am."

I can't think of anything more likely to result in peace and harmony than feeding alcohol to the extremely angry and brittle Professor Gates.

Don't Expect Gates to Pick Up the Tab. Dan Riehl notes that Gates' "charity" seems quite stingy.

Thank to Dan F. for that.

Who's the Racist? Gates sure seemed to rely on age-old stereotypes to fuel his anger, didn't he?

Maybe he would benefit from a tolerance/diversity awareness workshop?

Posted by: Ace at 01:06 PM | Comments (6)
Post contains 163 words, total size 1 kb.

Again, please don't accuse me of being overly cynical, but sometimes I have the nagging doubt that Barack Obama is not being perfectly straight with us.

By Roxana Tiron

In a significant change, the Obama administration will now allow lobbyists to meet and have telephonic discussions with government officials regarding economic recovery projects.

The lifting of the ban comes after K Street has cried foul for months and has challenged the White House on its restrictions.

In March, President Obama announced that government officials would not be allowed to consider the views of lobbyists regarding specific stimulus projects unless the requests are put in writing. The materials also had to be posted on an agencyÂ’s website within three business days of receipt. Lobbyists have said that the policy was one more example of the administration's disdain for their industry.

Now, the just-revised rules will allow government personnel to accept meetings and calls from federally registered lobbyists on the implementation of stimulus projects. The head of the Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, issued a new guidance late Friday regarding the administration's communications with registered lobbyists about economic recovery funds.

Lobbyists can make their cases -- and agency officials can listen to them -- at "widely attended gatherings." Government officials have to ask whether the person they are talking to at such events is a federally registered lobbyist speaking on behalf of a client.

Supposedly officials will post the meat of lobbyist requests on the internet for all to see.

Right.

In related news, the Obama Administration that it is relaxing its "don't screw the middle class on taxes" rules. Henceforth, officials will be allowed to just put the tip in, just for like two seconds, just to see how it feels. "Primarily."

Thanks to momma.

Oh: Chris Dodd meanwhile continues his new crusade against lobbyists, primarily by taking so much of their money it makes them squeal.

He's really showing them what's what. They're all like, "Chris Dodd, please take our five grand," and he's all like, "Screw you, corrupt lobbyist scum! I'll take thirty grand, and you'll like it!"

So he's like totally messing with their heads 'n stuff.

Posted by: Ace at 12:35 PM | Comments (1)
Post contains 379 words, total size 3 kb.

Not really all that surprising, given that the Democrats' plan is not to save money at all, but rather to simply obscure the facts with a confusing mechanism by which they can merely claim it will save money. They're relying upon the machinery of this being so obscure and convoluted that no one can say with any certainty what the hell the effect on cost will be, thus permitting them to make any claims they wish.

You know when some huckster is offering vague, odd, and impenetrable contract provisions to you? Yeah. Those hard-to-decipher provisions are not intended to benefit you.

But the CBO is not fooled.

CBO deals new blow to health plan

For the second time this month, congressional budget analysts have dealt a blow to the Democrat's health reform efforts, this time by saying a plan touted by the White House as crucial to paying for the bill would actually save almost no money over 10 years.

A key House chairman and moderate House Democrats on Tuesday agreed to a White House-backed proposal that would give an outside panel the power to make cuts to government-financed health care programs. White House budget director Peter Orszag declared the plan "probably the most important piece that can be added" to the House's health care reform legislation.

But on Saturday, the Congressional Budget Office said the proposal to give an independent panel the power to keep Medicare spending in check would only save about $2 billion over 10 years- a drop in the bucket compared to the bill's $1 trillion price tag.

"In CBO's judgment, the probability is high that no savings would be realized ... but there is also a chance that substantial savings might be realized. Looking beyond the 10-year budget window, CBO expects that this proposal would generate larger but still modest savings on the same probabilistic basis," CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf wrote in a letter to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Saturday.

The proposal's meager savings are a blow to Democrats working furiously to bring down costs in order to win support from their party's fiscally conservative Blue Dogs, who have threatened to vote against the bill without significant changes.

Seems to be Obama's and the Democrats' SOP: Pass a trillion dollar bill and then offer up $100 million in trivial "cuts" which, incidentally, also never happen.

This whole thing is a scam. The basic problem is that there is no political will to cut federal spending on health care -- seniors would flip out. Such cuts are a political impossibility.

So the Congress proposes handing off cuts to an independent body. But the body is not in fact independent; it's an executive creature, and of course then bendable to the executive's will, and also presumably reports to Congress, and is therefore bendable to congressional will as well.

So the basic problem -- Cuts are needed to sell this abortion as "deficit neutral," yet we don't have the will to make the cuts ourselves -- remains. It's not as if a creature of the executive and legislative branches is going to exhibit much more political courage than the branches it reports to. Further, even if it did make a cut, Congress would immediately pass legislation to undo the cuts.

The CBO recognizes this as the nonsense it is, and rightly projects that the entity will in fact save no more money than Congress acting in its own name.

If Congress is serious about cutting spending on health care, they'll have to sign the line that is dotted and enact such cuts by their own authority.

But they won't, of course. They don't have the will to do so. And for the same reasons the entity they create, ultimately subordinate to themselves, will not make any cuts either.

If they're serious about cutting costs, then they should tell the American people up-front precisely what cuts they have in mind. Informed consent of the people is the standard for republican governance, not endlessly passing the buck to supposedly "independent" bodies which do not represent the people.

But, again, they're not serious about this, so they don't do that. They're basically trying to sell Americans on a Magic Box inside which we'll find cost savings that our paid, elected representatives are unable to identify, announce, and enact themselves.

There are no Magic Boxes.

Thanks to AHFF Geoff.

Abba continues to explain it all:

Two Alternatives: This "plan" -- really an evasion -- will either go one way or the other.

First, they really could make the cuts. In which case, it's rationing imposed by an independent body over which Congress, the people's representatives, disclaims any control or influence. The machinery is thus set up so that health care can be taken away from those currently receiving it in order to be given t o those not receiving it. Seniors get their benefits chopped, so that the wealth can be spread to uninsured non-seniors.

The problem with this is unfair surprise to seniors and an end-run around the principle that if laws are passed, legislators and the president should pass them, not pass the buck to unelected, unresponsive bureaucrats.

The other possibility -- and the more likely one -- is the one I focused on above, in which no cuts are made, so no "savings" occur, so the additional expense of covering the uninsured is unmitigated by any savings elsewhere.

In which case the plan is being dishonestly sold, with its true price tag hidden from voters. A cost-saving mechanism is proposed, and the plan is sold on the promise of cost-savings materializing, but the system is set up such that no such savings ever come and the taxpayers are hit with 1) the new costs of insuring millions of uninsured 2) plus the ever-escalating and still unchecked costs of the currently insured.

Incidentally, Charles Krauthammer had a great point. Obama is claiming we need to pass his plan in order to "bend the curve" in later years and keep the system from becoming insolvent. But then he proposes to merely make his plan "deficit neutral."

Well, the problem here is obvious (but not so obvious that I noticed before Krauthammer pointed it out): To accomplish Obama's claimed goal of reducing costs, it's not merely enough that the plan be deficit neutral. It's necessary that the plan be deficit non-neutral, in the direction of lowering total effective costs, not merely keeping them at zero total effective new costs.

So Obama continues, as he has in the past, to offer a crisis as the need for immediate action, but then offering a plan that does not in fact address the very crisis which supposedly makes the plan necessary.

Oh, and, by the way, his plan won't even be close to deficit neutral, either.

So, take your pick: Either this "plan" offers hidden, unfair-surprise rationing, or it offers no savings that are any more than perfectly trivial. Either we will have surprise benefit-cuts which the public has not agreed to, or we will have surprise cost-increases which the public has not agreed to.

One or the other, and neither good.

Posted by: Ace at 11:41 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 1229 words, total size 8 kb.

Goes on for too long, but worth it through the Gran Moff Tarkin meeting on the Death Star.

Very Strong Profanity Warning. more...

Posted by: Ace at 11:12 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

Maybe this is the hill a lot of congressional careers are going to die on?

...only 25% of U.S. voters now say the stimulus plan has helped the economy. ThatÂ’s a six-point drop from a month ago.

Thirty-one percent (31%) say the stimulus actually hurt the economy, little changed from a month ago. However, this is the first poll showing that more voters believe the plan hurt rather than helped.

A plurality (36%) says the plan has had no impact...
...

SIXTY. SEVEN. PERCENT.

Mandate indeed. In other news, congressional varmint season just opened, and there's no bag limit on tossing out cretins this next election. more...

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 10:42 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 135 words, total size 1 kb.