Nancy Pelosi Does Not Accept Emails from Nonconstituents

After reading and thinking about all of this bailout craziness I decided to send messages my representatives and also the speaker of the house. As it turns out she doesn't accept emails from outside her district (but I'll bet she still accepts the extra pay given to the speaker). John McCain does not email because of war injuries and Nancy Pelosi does not accept emails because she doesn't give a damn.


I think I was a little angrier than usual. Here's the email I tried to send to Pelosi.


"Would you and every other member of congress just shut up and do your job. If we need a bailout, advance evidence that it is the case and do it. Personally it looks to me like the bunch of you are unwilling to accept any responsibility for creating this mess you made with deregulation. I know a bunch of people that give hundreds of thousands of dollars to you got rich on your incompetence. (But probably incompetence is just a nice way of saying you robbed us blind and intend to keep doing it until you've bled America dry.) So, get your lying, thieving, bribe taking butt to work on fixing the problem instead of using the probably made up emergency to steal more.
I know you don't want to hear from some who isn't handing you money as they talk but I just got too sick of the lying, thieving and cheating to not bother you. And, if you really need money, get the government to give a few hundred million to your husband or one of your kids or a former aide. But it's not as if you need me to tell you how to steal from the government since you seem to have a real nose for it."

My "Think Peace" Bumper Sticker Gives Me the Right to Steal from You

This is funny. It is from www.stoptheaclu.com/

The superior people of far-Leftist Berkeley

All ego

As most veteran customers know, it takes a pretty thick skin to successfully navigate the Berkeley Bowl, this strident city’s most popular grocery store. Outside, petitioners seeking signatures for ballot measures have come to blows with opinionated residents. In the tiny parking lot, nicknamed the Berkeley Brawl, frustrated motorists have been known to ram one another’s cars. At the checkout, people have thrown punches and unripened avocados at suspected line-cutters.

When one shopper was told she couldn’t return a bag of granola, she showily dumped its contents on the floor. Culyon Garrison, who works at the customer-service desk, recently had a loaf of bread thrown at him.

The produce emporium — one of the nation’s most renowned retailers of exotic fruits and vegetables — creates its own bad behavior. Kamikaze shoppers crash down crowded aisles without eye contact or apology for fender-benders. So many customers weren’t waiting to pay before digging in that management imposed the ultimate deterrent: Those caught sampling without buying will be banned for life — no reprieves, no excuses. (Not even “I forgot to take my medication.”)

Raphael Breines, who was ejected last year for eating on the premises, said he couldn’t decide between two types of apricots, so he sampled both. Security stopped him in the parking lot. “They treated me like a thief,” said the 37-year-old park planner, who was photographed and required to sign a no-trespass agreement. “Technically I was stealing, but I wasn’t trying to hide anything. I was just deciding which type of apricot to buy.” Breines, a longtime customer, sent an apology letter, asking to be reinstated. His request was denied.

Store manager Larry Evans says the policy is a fair response to doctors, lawyers and college professors who help themselves to bags of cookies, nuts and vitamins, stick their fingers in pies and guzzle from bottles of sake, assuming the rules don’t apply to them. “There’s a sense of entitlement to this town,” Evans said. “People think, ‘If I want to do it, I’ll do it, just try and stop me.’ ”

Seven years on the job, he said, has given him insight into the city’s sometimes sharp social elbows. “Berkeley residents are angry — they’re mad at the president, the economy, all kinds of stuff. And this is the place where it seems to get released, the local supermarket.”

Longtime Berkeley residents also think they have a grip on the good life, so being banned from the Bowl is no small matter. On a typical summer day, a shopper at the Bowl is likely to find 20 kinds of apples, eight types of mangoes, half a dozen varieties of papaya, six kinds of garlic, five types of ginger and 40 different tomatoes

Algore Wants You to Go to Jail

"If you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration," says Algore.
It is important enough for kids to go to jail to help Algore get rich on his sales of carbon offsets but not important enough for Algore to do more than talk. I still don't really know if Algore believes in global warming since he is unwilling to put his own ass on the line. I think there is something questionable, and even icky, about someone who wants others to make the sacrifice of going to jail so he can make large profits.

Bail Out

The Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee with chairman Chris Dodd was told by Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve and Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr. that we are likely fast approaching a meltdown of our financial system with global consequences. Maybe. Maybe not. But I find it suspicious that these predictions of gloom are a cover for contemplated gifts of tens or hundreds of billions of dollars to people and organizations from whom Dodd, Obama and many other senators and congressmen have received many large gifts of money.
I don't know anything about the meltdown but I do know for sure these guys reek from the smell of the filthy money.

Fannie Mae Has A Mortgage on Barack Obama's Ass

Olberman and Matthews Put the Cable Squarely in Cable News

Olberman and Matthews get on their knees and give Obama a super Lewinsky.

Obama Does Have Some Kind of Religious Faith, Right?

The Detroit Free Press has it straight from Code Pink that none of this is true.

Fraud at the Detroit Free Press

To comment on the two conventions the Detroit Free Press televised a focus group. In the group were Democrats, Republicans and people who said they were independents. Among the independents were two members of Code Pink. This does not fall into the meaning of independent that would be expected by most all newspaper readers and TV viewers. A Free Press spokesman tried to rationalize the situation by saying:
“If there is a radical leftist or two in the group, I don’t care,” Essex told FOXNews.com. “I want a robust conversation, a complete range of political viewpoints.”
If by 'robust conversation' he meant lie and fraud, he got what he wanted. But trust in journalism and the Free Press has suffered.

Who Gave This Guy Permission to Criticize Obama

This is by Jim Treacher who's blog is at http://jimtreacher.com/archives/001540.html



September 05, 2008
Obama vs. Snowmama

It occurs to me: If Obama's experience in this presidential campaign is itself to be considered one of his qualifications for the Oval Office, what are we to make of his performance over the last few days? Is this an indication of how he deals with adversity? Because -- and this may be unfair -- it seems to me that over the next 4 years, the President of the United States will face much tougher challenges than watching a cute lady with glasses on TV.

It seems like instead of picking a strategy and seeing if it works, they're trying everything they can possibly think of, all at once. Which is one way of doing it, I suppose. And that's putting aside the apparent epidemic of insanity in newsrooms all over the world.

Did you guys see Hancock? Remember when Will Smith just stood there while the train hit him, and it derailed all over the place? Sarah Palin's kind of like that, except happier.

The Surge and the NYT

Good post from The Jawa Report http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/



September 03, 2008
Then & Now: NYT Got the Surge Wrong...Again, and Again, and Again

Here's the NYT two days ago: U.S. Hands Off Pacified Anbar, Once Heart of Iraq Insurgency

Barack Obama could not be reached for comment, but did release a statement saying that making such foreign policy decisions like that required for the surge to be implemented was "above his pay grade."

Noted foreign policy strategists and military experts Maureen Down, Frank Rich, Paul Krugman, Nick Kristof and the all-knowing ed board itself have plenty of crow to eat. Good job by Eric Posner at the Volokh Conspiracy for rounding these gems up:

The only real question about the planned "surge" in Iraq — which is better described as a Vietnam-style escalation — is whether its proponents are cynical or delusional. -- Paul Krugman, NYT, 1/8/07

There is nothing ahead but even greater disaster in Iraq. -- NYT Editorial, 1/11/07

What anyone in Congress with half a brain knows is that the surge was sabotaged before it began. -- Frank Rich, NYT, 2/11/07

Keeping troops in Iraq has steadily increased the risk of a bloodbath. The best way to reduce that risk is, I think, to announce a timetable for withdrawal and to begin a different kind of surge: of diplomacy. -- Nicholas Kristof, NYT, 2/13/07

W. could have applied that to Iraq, where he has always done only enough to fail, including with the Surge -- Maureen Dowd, NYT, 2/17/07

The senator supported a war that didn't need to be fought and is a cheerleader for a surge that won't work. -- Maureen Dowd, NYT, 2/24/07

Now the ''surge'' that was supposed to show results by summer is creeping inexorably into an open-ended escalation, even as Moktada al-Sadr's militia ominously melts away, just as Iraq's army did after the invasion in 2003, lying in wait to spring a Tet-like surprise. -- Frank Rich, NYT, 3/11/07

Victory is no longer an option in Iraq, if it ever was. The only rational objective left is to responsibly organize America’s inevitable exit. That is exactly what Mr. Bush is not doing and what the House and Senate bills try to do. -- NYT Editorial, 3/29/07
We tried to warn these partisan liberal Democrat hacks that history has a strange way of making fools of such pinheads and their "commentary" during wartime. We were right. The NYT was wrong, along with their candidate Barack Obama and Joe Biden. McCain was right when Bush was wrong, and that's the bottom line.

Farking morons. Will these incorrect opinions and disinformation be corrected en masse on the corrections blotter, NYT? Pinch? Keller? Hoyt? Anybody listening over there?

Let this be the evidence you trot out when people tell you the NYT is the "paper of record." It sure is - a record of EPIC FAIL.

ht: Insty

Hick-Burg Mayor Palin, hillbilly know-nothing permapregnant ditz

from Mark Steyn on NRO

Thursday, September 04, 2008

Credit where it's due [Mark Steyn]

I would like to thank the US media for doing such a grand job this last week of lowering expectations by portraying Governor Palin - whoops, I mean Hick-Burg Mayor Palin - as a hillbilly know-nothing permapregnant ditz, half of whose 27 kids are the spawn of a stump-toothed uncle who hasn't worked since he was an extra in Deliverance.

How's that narrative holding up, geniuses? Almost as good as your "devoted husband John Edwards" routine?

Raw Feminism

I'm reproducing some of an excellent post from Stop the ACLU.com.(http://www.stoptheaclu.com/) I could summarize by saying never again believe anything a feminist says they believe, just pay attention to what they have done and said since Gov. Palin's nomination announcement.



September 3, 2008
I have learned more about feminism in the past 48 hours than I had in the previous 40 years

I do not believe I can unlearn what I’ve learned in the last two days. At some point our nation’s attention will be drawn to something or someone other than Governor Palin, and then American mainstream feminists will expect to be taken seriously, as if the last few days never happened, and I will not be able to do so. I cannot unlearn what I have learned.

I’ve learned that the reliably profane Ace O’ Spades is much more of a genuine champion for womens’ autonomy and choices than is, say, Maureen Dowd. I’ve also learned something that I really should have seen decades ago, but never had it thrust in my face so blatantly as it has since Governor Palin was announced as the GOP vice-presidential pick.

As a man, I trust I’m not going too far out on a limb to suggest that I don’t completely understand women, and that’s just fine. That is, I don’t completely understand most women. America’s mainstream feminists, at least those in the punditry business, however, have proven to be nearly 100% predictable. What they are is obedient and submissive. I mean that. It’s not tongue-in-cheek. It’s not meant to elicit the response of “oh, I see how we’ve overreached a bit on Palin, and the point’s taken.” No, I mean it. Liberal feminists obey. They do what they are told.

When the New York Times male writers Patrick Healy and William Yardley take the lead in refusing to refer to Governor Palin as “Governor”, or even “Mrs.”, but with a dismissive “Ms.” or simple “Sarah”, the feminist blogs not only remain silent on that slight, but submissively follow suit.

When Markos Moulitsas allows his website to jump on and push the derisivness-dripping fantasies of “ArcXIX (whom I have reason to believe is also male)”, the feminists don’t respond with an expected, “wo, there pal”, but obediently follow Markos’ lead. Same thing with regard to the sexist fantasy posts of Andrew Sullivan recently.

When the Washington Times writer Paul Kane does a horrid job of journalism (if he meant to do a good job) and publishes an assertion ridiculously easy to disprove to mean the opposite of what he thinks it means (he calls a increase in funding for a shelter for pregnant youth a “slashing” of the budget — it’s been debunked all over the place, I just went to the shelter’s website and compared year-to-year budgets), the feminists compliantly repeat the male writer’s false assertions without regard for accuracy.

When various news sources label some mysterious thing as “troopergate”, feminist women on the ‘net don’t question, they parrot. They obey. Most recently it was listed as a black mark upon the Governor by the nation’s newspaper of record. In another context, and with feminists interested in the facts, the New York Times today would be fearing for its future existence, funding some womens’ endowment to the tune of 9 figures, and sending all the editors to sensitivity training for fear of the backlash. In this context, they have nothing to fear, because America’s feminists will easily submit to the lead of the male writers at the New York Times — that’s not even in question.

And what is “troopergate”. Well, it has a -gate on the end of it, so that’s all any woman needs to know, right? The thing is, the facts are pretty well documented. Let’s recap, with a nod to this news article written by a woman one month before the Governor was announced as VP candidate. Before Mrs. Palin became Governor, her sister was married to a guy with what seems like a temper problem. I did my own research, I’ll provide this link so you can do yours as well if you care. The man in question, Trooper M.W., was reprimanded for at least three serious breaches of his duty as a cop, for 1) tasing his stepson for fun, 2) drinking and driving in a patrol car, and 3) threatening his wife who was divorcing him that he would shoot his wife’s father if (the father) helped his wife get the assistance of legal counsel. He was disciplined in his job for that — a short slap on the wrist suspension — and even his union said it was legitimate discipline.

As for the tasing incident, my reading of the known facts don’t prove to me that the man meant to be abusive, only moronic, but it is important to note that the mother of the child he tased was yelling at him not to do it when he did, but he did it anyway. It traumatized another young female in the home who witnessed it (I already know what the feminists think of that other young female). This doesn’t bother America’s blogging and commenting feminists, though, not one bit. The fact that two different judges granted Palin’s sister a restraining order — otherwise known as an injunction against domestic violence (one in case # 3AN-05-1327CI, and a final “no contact” order in the divorce at case # 3AN-05-6838CI) is of no consequence to the feminists. I thought that domestic violence injunctions created some sort of sympathetic response in feminists; I was wrong about that. The male writers at the NY Times don’t tell them that Governor Palin saw what appears to be a documented abusive man, stood up to him and sought justice for her sister (before she was even Governor) and then later used her position as a woman in power to hold people accountable for their lax treatment of an abusive man with a badge and serial failed marriages. No, the male writers just tell our submissive feminists that this a scandal, a -gate, and our feminists go along with what they’re told to think instead of what they should be doing, which is picketing the NY Times

1992 Democrat Convention Refused toAllow an Antiabortion Speaker

this is a post from this blog http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=1161
A Vote for Sarah Palin

By Suann Therese Maier
Wednesday, September 3, 2008, 7:51 AM

Three memories have shaped my approach to this year’s general election.

Here’s the first. In the late 1970s, during a two-year break from teaching to raise our second son, an adopted child, I found myself at a Los Angeles dinner party filled with DINKs, the “double income, no kids” crowd who were just emerging as a self-aware and upwardly mobile social group. I fell to talking—or more accurately, listening—to a chatty young female attorney who said she was putting in eighty hours a week as a junior associate on a variety of important cases.

After twenty minutes or so, she finally noticed my silence and asked me what I did with my own time. So I told her. I told her about the young couple that had asked my husband and me to adopt their baby if we covered their hospital expenses. I told her about waiting outside the delivery room for our son to be born. I told her about the bureaucratic maze that came with finalizing the adoption of a newborn. I told her about borrowing money from friends so we’d look more solvent than we actually were to Social Service inspectors who checked our accounts.

“That’s wonderful dear,” she said. “You’re so lucky not to have a real job.”

Here’s the second memory. I remember my fourth child, our son Dan, being born one winter evening, purple and struggling for breath. I remember my husband pouring water over his head as we baptized him in my arms. I remember the young Filipina doctor rushing Dan to intensive care. I remember the ten days of his fighting for life. And I remember Dan’s diagnosis, when it finally came in: Down syndrome.

Here’s the third memory. I remember my father, a successful young Chicago attorney, telling me why the Democratic party was the party of “our people,” and why so many Catholics were Democrats, and why the party stood for the little guy, the poor and the defenseless. I remember listening as a young girl in our kitchen as Saul Alinsky organized my parents’ Catholic friends on racial and economic issues in our Chicago living room. And I remember the night in 1992 when Pennsylvania’s governor, Robert Casey, was denied a chance to talk against abortion at the Democratic national convention.

As I draw on those memories now, I reach certain conclusions. As a woman, mother, wife, and lifetime professional educator, I will vote, enthusiastically, for Sarah Palin as vice president this November. Even if the media pressure forces her from the ticket, I will vote against the Democratic party—partly because I respect John McCain and believe him to be the better candidate, but equally because I’m tired of the intransigence and condescension of the Democratic leadership on the abortion issue.

I will vote for Sarah Palin because I don’t need the Democratic platform’s belated affirmation of motherhood. Thanks, but I already know that motherhood is good, several times over. Moreover, the party’s rediscovery of motherhood seems rather cynical in the current news cycle, while Democratic-friendly bloggers and media types bash Palin about her daughter’s pregnancy and her own busy schedule while bringing up children. How can a real sympathy for motherhood come from the same people who wrote a platform that hardens the party’s addiction to a phony right to kill the unborn?

I will vote for Sarah Palin because she has guts. We’ve never met, but I suspect I know something about her life, and so do a great many other women. I know what it means to have a son with Down syndrome. I know what it means to talk a good line about religious faith and then be asked to prove it. I know what it means to have a daughter pregnant and unmarried.

In fact, while we’re on the subject, I also know what it means to have two grandchildren born out of wedlock, a son struggling with alcohol, two grandchildren with serious disabilities, putting myself through graduate school while simultaneously caring for a husband and children and teaching full time—and a whole lot more. This is the stuff of real human love; this is the raw material of family life. And those who think that Palin’s beliefs and family struggles are funny or worth jeering at, simply reveal the venality of their own hearts.

I will vote for Sarah Palin because she is intelligent, tenacious and talented. Nobody made her rise easy, and no one is making it easy now. And—is it only moms who notice this?—unlike Senator Biden, she does seem to act consistently on her beliefs about the sanctity of life, at considerable personal cost.

I will vote for Sarah Palin because she doesn’t come from Washington or New York or Chicago or anywhere else the political and media aristoi like to hang out. In fact, I especially like the idea that the state she governs actually produces something—like some of the oil that powers the hair dryers and klieg lights at MSNBC.

I will vote for Sarah Palin because Roe v. Wade is bad law, and it needs to fall. I don’t doubt the intelligence and character of men like Doug Kmiec, the younger Bob Casey, and others who sympathize with the Obama campaign. But I do doubt their judgment. At the end of the day, the Democratic party in 2008 has conceded nothing to pro-life Democrats. The fact that Sen. Obama listens respectfully to pro-lifers without calling them reactionary dunces does not constitute progress. Results and behavior are what matter. On both those counts, the party has again failed to show any real sensitivity to pro-life concerns. In that light, high profile Catholics who support Obama are simply rationalizing their surrender on Roe.

Finally, I will vote for Sarah Palin, not because I’ve left the Democratic party of my youth and young adulthood, but because that party has left me. In fact, it no longer exists. And no amount of elegant speaking, exciting choreography, and moral alibis will bring it back.

That’s the real tragedy of this election.

Suann Therese Maier, the mother of four and former director of non-profit support organizations for pregnant women and children with disabilities, is a teacher in Colorado.

Olberman Is Easily Scared

The main thing I take away from this is that reasonable arguments against Obama on MSNBC do not get replied to. Olberman knows his limitations. He had more sense than to even speak to Gingrich. But after Gingrich moved on Olberman planned to attack him. No one has ever accused Olberman of having courage or intellectual depth.