If you haven’t seen this yet, it’s quite entertaining. From hotair.com, an undercover conservative doing his best “Triumph the dog” impersonation at some sort of Democrat training session. Good stuff; enjoy:

You’re welcome.

With the Cash for Clunkers program getting an additional infusion of $2 billion last week, I thought it might be interesting to look at actual taxpayer impact for the program.

Before I get to the numbers, here’s a “did you know” for you: Did you know $50 million was allocated for administration of the cash for clunkers program. That’s $50 million to manage a short-term (ends November, 2009) mostly paper process. I don’t know why that kind of waste doesn’t piss more taxpayers off, but it should. I’ll volunteer to manage the next round of the program for $10 million and then retire with the remaining $40 million on some island.

Now to the numbers.

*$3 billion of total allocation to the program, $2,850,000,000 net if you assume $150 million for “administration”.

*If you assume $4,000 average per recipient (average of $4,500 and $3,500 stipends), that’s 712,500 people that will benefit from yours and mine generosity.

*According to the most recent tax statistics, there are 138 million tax filers in the United States. If you subtract the aforementioned 712,500 from that number, that leaves a net of 137,287,500 taxpayers left to pay the bill for the $3 billion program.

*If you divide the $3 billion by the 137 million or so taxpayers, you get an individual or family contribution of $21.85 for the program. $22 doesn’t sound like a lot but how would you feel if you got shorted $20 on a withdrawal from your bank. Or how about if you got overcharged $22 on your groceries.

What does it all mean?

I’m not benefiting from the program, neither are my neighbors; chances are yours aren’t either. What it means is that my neighborhood (which is a small one) consisting of about 150 homes is pooling their money together to fund a new car for somebody. And so is the neighborhood next to ours, and so on, and so on.

Now consider the hard numbers regarding impact to the auto industry. Congress would have you believe that the Cash for Clunkers is a lifeline- salvation for a struggling industry. In reality, it’s little more than another wealth redistribution scheme (see prior paragraph).

2008 U.S. auto sales was 13.2 million, 3 million off the 16 million from 2007. Assuming all 712,500 Cash for Clunkers sales are incremental and not already planned purchases (a false assumption to be sure), that figure represents only a 5.4% boost to annual sales based on 2008 figures. If you use the 16 million from 2007, that’s only a 4.4% increase. Considering sales look to be off 20-30% that’s hardly the type of salvation the industry needs.

What the auto industry needs is a healthy, vibrant economy free from government interference. Unfortunately what they’re getting is scraps and handouts and false economic theory. And a short term boost that I fear will end up doing more harm than good to the industry itself.

But by all means- enjoy your new car. And my $22.

You’re welcome.

In successive weeks, two of the leading Republican hopefuls for 2012 have taken hits in the public spotlight, and in spectacular fashion.

First, Nevada Senator John Ensign admitted he was diddling the wife of one of his staffers. Then, outspoken South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford admitted to an extended affair with an Argentinian lass.

The sudden death of Michael Jackson may spare Sanford from a few degrees of public scrutiny, but politics is still perception- and any political momentum Republicans had gained took several steps backward over the last couple weeks.

Ensign was one of the lone bright spots in the Senate for Republicans and Sanford had been particularly effective speaking against the stimulus plan. Now that their political reputations are damaged, much of their promise and accomplishments are gone with them.

Mitt Romney stands to gain the most from the fall of Ensign and Sanford, but individual gains ring hollow for a party that’s getting trampled by the will of the far left. Somebody better stand up and display some leadership or the damage from the most progressive President in generations will only get worse.

You’re welcome.

The Miss USA pageant missed an extraordinary opportunity this week. They could have lent immediate credibility to their platform but instead, further fed the travesty that the pageant is.

It all started with a question. Miss California (Carrie Prejean) was by all accounts either in the lead or darn close.

It was the Q&A portion of the evening and Judge #8’s number was drawn- Perez Hilton.

For the uninitiated, Perez Hilton is a celebrity blogger and an outspoken homosexual. His question was current given recent news: Should other states follow the lead of Vermont and three other states by legalizing same sex marriage.

Though stumbling a bit, Miss California showed tremendous poise in both handling a challenging question and expressing her beliefs unwaveringly. Take a listen:

Watch the video again and this time focus on Perez Hilton’s facial expressions. While asking the question, he’s almost giddy- either from simply being on TV or perhaps because he was lobbing what he thought was an underhand softball that he expected the contestant to knock right out of the park. Something to the effect of “I believe people should have the legal right to marry whomever they choose…”.

What he got was a line drive right back in the face and his facial expression at the end of the exchange tells the story- pain/surprise/contempt. Perez scored Miss California a “0″ for that answer, and because of that and some other scores, Miss California finished as Runner-up to Miss North Carolina.

Later that evening, Perez dropped this gem onto the world via the internet:

While the response from Perez was disgusting and distasteful, it wasn’t alltogether that surprising coming from him.

The real disappointment is the pageant judges not giving Miss California high marks for her remarkable show of character and integrity. Long ridiculed for being a setback to the women’s rights movement, the pageant missed a tremendous opportunity.

Miss California could have very easily given a safe answer- something to the effect of “it’s up to each state to make that decision…”. She would have scored solid points for that answer and probably would have ended up with the crown. Given the coaching that the contestants receive, she probably was coached on the very issue.

Instead, Carrie Prejean verbalized her beliefs while still expressing compassion for the choices others make. The Miss USA organization would have been served very well by somebody with the depth of character such as Ms. Prejean.

Instead they default back to the stereotype- a superficial beauty contest that at best builds self-esteem and at worst objectifies women.

You’re welcome.

Fortunately the hostage situation between Somali pirates and captive American Richard Phillips ended with the successful rescue of Phillips. If you weren’t reading between the lines as the story progressed, you missed a lot.

First, let me be one of the few Conservatives to say unabashedly Obama directed the military appropriately in the rescue of Captain Phillips.

Unfortunately he recoiled a bit on Monday referring to the incident in more of a criminal light stating those responsible would be prosecuted. Seizing ships and taking hostages by use of force in what amounts to international waters is an act of war, and yet many Americans think it fit to start reading the Miranda rights.

Here’s a quote from one of the so-called pirates; you be the judge if we’re dealing with people that can be reasoned with:

“From now on, if we capture foreign ships and their respective countries try to attack us, we will kill them.”

I’ll give President Obama the benefit of the doubt for now and hope that he will follow up with additional military support to stabilize the piracy problem- the Somalis clearly can’t control it themselves.

From a political perspective, Team Obama also handled the situation well. They laid low at the beginning, knowing that if they were visible on the front end and things went badly, it would have been harder to deflect criticism.

Still, his silence wasn’t comforting for Americans during the crisis and he needed to be more decisive in his statements on Monday.

Obama’s preferred strategery typically involves labored debate bordering on indecision, and these are the moments when that process weakens America. With very little international support for this piracy problem (no idea why), now is precisely the moment when we must seize the momentum, garner broad support, and deliver long-term stability to the region.

And should you need evidence of the liberal bias in the media, just consider if it were George Bush that gave the order to kill Somalis as needed in order to free one of our own. He would have been skewered - shrieks of war-mongering, excessive use of force, and cries that the act puts hostages of other nationalities in further peril.

Instead, you get the following headline from MSNBC.com: Analysis: Obama scores win on pirate crisis

Quite repulsive for a media outlet that expects to be respected. I don’t disagree with their analysis, but their double-standard stinks from miles away.

The final analysis is far from over. This particular situation is simply the tip of the pirate iceberg in what is a very busy shipping lane. Much of the rest of the world has been paying ransoms for similar abductions, and the Somalis have made it clear they don’t intend to whither away. And with a reported 228 foreign nationals still being held by Somali pirates, this situation is far from over.

You’re welcome.

I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the enviro-crazies and the planned “earth hour” tonight at 8:30pm local time (intended for 8:30pm wherever you are, unless of course you’re in an airplane crossing time zones, in which case may God have mercy on your soul.)

Based on very cursory reading of the web material, the idea behind the pre-meditated black out is that folks kill all the power to their homes, bump into walls and furniture, and contemplate how bad the world would be if humans weren’t so awesome. Or something like that.

The folks over at Small Dead Animals.com have been pushing some excellent counter movements and we’re fully in support. We especially like their call to action of “placing a couple of electric space heaters inside an old fridge, plugging them all in, and seeing which one wins”. That plus International Clean Your Oven Hour, International Idle Your Engine Hour, and the Save a Hummer Pledge Drive all seem like worthy causes. Well done SDA- we salute you and will flash our lights at the appropriate time in honor of you.

I suppose on December 28th we can also mark “extremely Liberal baby birthing hour”. After the initial rush of sitting in the darkness wears off, there are really only a couple practical things left to be done. Looking forward to that.

You’re welcome.

I’m not as smart as this guy, but I’ve got a few ideas…

The second in an extended series on constructive and real ways to fix the federal budget focuses on one specific area today- the Census.

It’s estimated that censuses in developing nations cost around $3 per person. It should then come as no surprise to you that with an estimated cost for the 2010 U.S. census of $20 billion, that works out to approximately $128 per individual/family in the U.S. (based on individual and joint tax filings- 156 million).

That’s our fantastic government at work- doing the same activity as developing countries for 43 times more money; woohoooo!

What would you do with $125 that I could save you and your family? Plenty I bet. How does it get saved? Easy, but first a history lesson.

The census is a partially dictated part of the Constitution, I say partially because the amendment was never actually ratified so technically it’s still sitting on the “To Do” pile of Congress.

Nonetheless, the Census is integral to seat apportionment for the House of Representatives plus dissemination of public funds for things like homeless shelters and other welfare programs.

We also know that, thanks to Team Obama, the Census can become highly politicized. Like the White House taking control of the process or ultra-lib, somewhat corrupt ACORN signing on to “help out” (don’t call us, we’ll call you).

The problem with the census is it’s grossly inefficient and badly managed, just like nearly everything else the Government gets its’ grubby hands on. And even with throwing $20 billion at the program, there are reports that the 2010 results will be inaccurate and unreliable.

My solution for the census is simple and twofold, and it involves the IRS of all agencies. And I can do it for $200 million which is 1% of what it currently costs.

The first part of the census is to count households. The simple solution to count those people is to include an extra form in tax filings. It’s real simple- if you want your tax refund, you must complete the census form as part of your 1040. If you owe money, if you don’t complete the census form, it would trigger an automatic audit.

You buy a couple dozen optical scanners, scan the tax census forms, and you’re finished. Sound too simple? It’s not. The Government makes it too difficult.

The second part of the census involves counting “non-filers”- homeless, illegals, etc.

Illegals shouldn’t get the benefit of social programs so that takes care of that group straight away.

The solution to count the homeless is also simple. Shelters and food banks must file tax returns annually as part their non-profit status. As part of that filing, they list profits which are tax exempt and expenses which are tax deductible. You simply take those expenses, derive a formula for people served-to-expenses (a PE ratio of sorts), you scan those forms, and have the ‘puters crunch the numbers.

When it’s all said and done, you have every household counted and you have very realistic numbers on homeless, just as good as the numbers that are currently derived.

And you’ve saved each and every American tax payer $125. Right back into their pockets and right back into the economy.

You’re welcome.

You might be angered by the AIG bonus situation. You might be angry at “corporate America” for the greed and recklessness so often publicized. You might be ready for government to have an even greater influence on private business. If you are, you’re missing the point.

The point is this is what happens when government steps in to take over any large entity or program. Cursory oversight; gross mismanagement of resources; corruption; waste; on and on. For all the people that want government to get bigger and take an even bigger role in citizen’s lives- when are you going to wake up and look at the carnage they leave behind? Our government simply isn’t capable of the idealistic, utopian management that liberals dream of.

Irrelevant fact #1: Many of the AIG bonuses were targeted at retaining key employees through a certain period in order to re-structure or eliminate entirely those portions of the AIG business. Try reforming a near-bankrupt business that’s 80%-owned by the government when the quality employees that can turn around the company are leaving to work for others.

Irrelevant fact # 2: Chris Dodd and key Democrats had the opportunity to restrict these very bonuses through the Stimulus Bill and they chose not to. More to the point, the language was pulled out of the bill at the last minute.

Irrelevant fact #3: The Obama Administration has known for quite some time that the bonuses were going out the door, and only sounded the anger alarm when Conservatives raised the issue.

Irrelevant fact #4: The waste in the stimulus bill and the Omnibus dwarfed this $160 million by momentous proportions and yet no outrage from the left for that. Waste is waste. It shouldn’t matter where the wasted money goes- it leaving is the point.

Irrelevant fact #5: The current CEO of AIG came out of retirement six months ago to work for $1 and attempt to turn around the failed entity. He bears little responsibility for the failures of the past of AIG, and should be lauded not crucified. The behavior of the Financial Services Committee toward Mr. Liddy today was absolutely reprehensible and borders on McCarthyism.

Take Rep. Barney Frank’s request to make public the names, amounts, and addresses tied to retention bonuses, in complete disregard for the safety of these people, most of whom have done absolutely nothing wrong:

Finally, for your consideration is Rep. Stephen Lynch. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen a more disgusting display from any elected official than the show Mr. Lynch put on today. Mr. Lynch represents the underbelly of the political beast- hatred-laced, politically-charged rhetoric that sets our Democracy back decades with every word spoken.

You’re welcome.

My new favorite Democrat Evan Bayh is making me proud once again. Today, Bayh announced that he and 14 other Democrats are breaking free from the tractor beams of Team Pelosi to form a moderate group of Democrats to tilt the balance in the Senate.

It remains to be seen what this group will actually do and how moderate they’re willing to be, but it’s a start considering how partisan the Senate is today. More importantly, it’s further proof that the far left is crumbling. The damage from just a few months of Liberal-palooza will be long-lasting but it’s clear the tide is starting to turn toward rationality for the mid-term elections.

You’re Welcome.

I’m starting a new series called “Fixing the Federal Budget” today, mostly to provide evidence that I’m not just full of hot air. The first installment is extremely serious and can be implemented almost immediately:

Cross-Promotion

To say that Treasury Secretary and Turbotax Impresario Tim Geithner is a hand talker would be a substantial understatement. He uses his hands like the rest of us use oxygen. His hands are the ventriloquist and his head is the puppet. Take a look for yourself:

I believe his annoying verbal style can be put to good use to help fix the federal budget. Two options to choose from- take your pick.

First and most obviously is his arms. Since Geithner is constantly waving one or both of his wings, I recommend going sleeveless a la Michelle Obama and tatting up his forearms and biceps. The tattoos could be of sponsorships just like Nascar cars. I believe this would not only provide financial benefit to the government in the form of sponsorship revenue, but would add instant gravitas.

Second, Geithner already wears a watch- looks to be nerdy-numbers guy standard issue, either Casio, Seiko, or Timex vintage. That’s not good enough for this economic crisis. I say Turbo-Tim strikes a deal with a watch-maker to be the exclusive watch-provider of the federal government. Surely you remember the Swatch Watch fad from the 80’s:

All Geithner needs to do is roll the sleeves up and go 4 watches high on each arm. Think of the TV exposure those companies will receive when he’s waving his arms to and fro in front of the next Senate panel! That would be enough revenue to pay for nearly all of Nancy Pelosi’s private jet costs.

Memo to Geithner though- make sure you book the income properly.

You’re welcome.

Unless you live under a rock (and I know you don’t), Obama signed the Omnibus bill in a private ceremony this week following another partisan vote in the Senate. It’s a shame Mr. Obama didn’t do the signing publicly, surrounded by some of the money-grubbing Senators that have earmarks in the bill.

Brush it under the rug if you’re the type to bury your head in the sand, but make no mistake about it- had Obama vetoed the Omnibus- it would have both been indicative of strong character and easy to do. The government could have passed a further sustaining measure to keep the government afloat for a couple weeks while the House and Senate cleaned up the bill.

Instead, Obama bowed to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and made it very clear they’re pulling the strings in Washington. Excuses like “this was last year’s bill” and “we’ll get ‘em next time” should make every American angry- including the most ardent bumper-sticker wielding Obama supporter.

The fact is, the spending is this year’s money. It represents dramatic increases in departmental spending, and includes gobs of programs that don’t belong anywhere near an “emergency measure”. Further to that, the only reason the measure is included in this year’s business is because the Democrats stalled it so they wouldn’t have to haggle with George Bush.

To refresh your memory, this is what Obama said while campaigning:

“Absolutely we need earmark reform and when I’m President I’ll go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.”

Also to refresh your memory, here are the earmarks that will directly benefit Obama’s Illinois Senatorial boundaries (totaling about $41 million):

• $386,000 for a corn to ethanol research pilot site
• $869,000 for Illinois-Missouri Alliance for Biotechnology
• $799,000 for soybean research
• $750,000 for Lewis University Airport
• $500,000 for a MetroLink transit facility in Rock Island
• $200,000 for mobile data terminal
• $400,000 for PACE mobile data terminals
• $250,000 for Multimodal center in Normal, Il
• $250,000 for PACE Park ‘n Ride facility in Plainfield, Il
• $250,000 for south suburban signal authority
• $250,000 for PACE suburban bus (Arlington Heights)
• $7,375,000 for METRA connects, southeast service
• $7,375,000 for METRA Star Line, Northeast Illinois
• $7,375,000 for METRA Union Pacific Northwest Line
• $7,375,000 for Union Pacific West Line
• $1,340,000 for Grand Ave. Underpass, Chicago
• $250,000 for Jack Dame Road Extension, Rochelle, IL
• $1,200,000 for River Tech Road Corridor, Moline, IL
• $100,500 for Southwest Rochelle Truck Loop
• $3,000,000 for Illinois Trails
• $670,000 for Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Center, Rock Island

How do you feel about your federal tax dollars going to pay for the items above?

You’re welcome.

We’ve all heard the joke “How do you know if a politician is lying? His lips are moving.” It would be funny if it weren’t true.

Required reading for this fine hump day is this editorial from Investors Business Daily on Barney Frank and the utterly stunning hypocrisy of his charades.

You’re welcome.

Only through real adversity is the quality and depth of a leader revealed. Through our current fiscal adversity, those leaders are starting to be revealed. One such person is Democrat Senator Evan Bayh from Indiana.

Bayh has come out in opposition of the Omnibus bill and likely will be one of only two Democrats that vote against the bill when the vote happens Tuesday or Wednesday. We salute Bayh and wish more would display the type of leadership he is on this issue. He’s clear proof fiscal conservatives can come in many forms.

Full disclosure: Bayh hails from Indiana which has gone Republican 3 of the last 4 elections. He’s clearly got Conservative support if he needs it but the state did go Democrat in 2008.

Here’s Senator Bayh speaking on the subject with Fox News:

You’re welcome.

Roland Martin at CNN has a piece up titled “Why We Secretly Love Earmarks.” The title is pretty self-explanatory but the gist of the article is that earmarks are harmless and insignificant in the big picture and we love them when spent on our communities. Congratulations Chuck Schumer- you’ve got a new lunch buddy.

I couldn’t disagree more.

The only place I agree with Martin is his position that earmarks are an equal opportunity drug between both Republicans and Democrats. I had high hopes for the Republicans to show leadership in this area and they failed me miserably.

John McCain is dead on when he says earmarks breed corruption. At the root earmarks are an “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine” except it’s not back-scratching, it’s something far more intimate which I shan’t detail here.

Earmarks should see the light of day as they truly are- federal spending for state-specific and in most cases town-specific issues. For this reason, earmarks should have to be introduced one at a time as a standalone bill by the person whose constituencies will be the recipients of the money. That person will need to debate the bill on its’ merits and explain why federal dollars are required for their local issue.

This does three things- it provides full transparency to what is a murky process at best today. Two- it demands debate on every dollar of spending. Three- simply because of time constraints, it ensures only the most critical and relevant earmarks come to the floor.

Mr. Obama- if you truly want to provide reform in this area, and not just continued lip service to another legislative disaster, this is the way. Veto the Omnibus bill and send it back to get re-worked. Do it for America.

You’re welcome.

Word late Thursday night is that Harry Reid and the Democrats in the Senate don’t have enough votes to shut down debate and force a vote Friday on the $410 billion omnibus spending bill. It’s clear the left is starting to crumble a couple pieces at a time, mostly under the weight of its’ own ego.

We wholeheartedly thank Democrats Russ Feingold, Evan Bayh and Claire McCaskill for breaking with their party and insisting enough is enough with government waste. Without them, the bill would have been passed just as swiftly as all the previous spending measures, both this year and last. We especially want to thank McCaskill for her dust up with Chuck Schumer. All of this is good for America but bad for Republicans.

It shouldn’t be forgotten that after House and Senate Republicans started to sway public opinion to their side, they couldn’t stay off the spending drug and managed to account for 40% of the garbage in the omnibus. This unfortunately displays yet another failure of leadership. Though the party is showing signs of reformation, the omnibus was a step and a half back.

The Dems will no doubt sway a couple of spineless Senators and when the bill passes, President Obama will have quite a conundrum on his hands. On the one hand, it’s a slam dunk to veto the bill. Make good on campaign promises, restore fading American confidence, and make real change in Washington. On the other hand, if he does that he alienates the whole of the Democrat leadership and thus throws the party into a tizzy.

If Obama is as principled as he says he is, the decision is easy. Do the right thing and pick up the pieces of your party after the fact. After all, you are not only the leader of our country at the moment, you are your party’s leader as well.

Here’s a video to leave you with- yet another example that Keith Olbermann really doesn’t get it. Here he is trying make light of federal waste while defending Obama despite the factual body of evidence. Mr. Olbermann- you’re missing the point- earmarks in the context of a failing economy are what should and does enrage Americans. Apparently that doesn’t matter to you and your extreme left elitists.

You’re welcome.

se*man*tics- (noun) The study of linguistic development by classifying and examining changes in meaning and form.

There’s no doubt or debate about the oratory gifts President Obama possesses. Nor can there be any doubt about the cunning linguists he surrounds himself with. But because of this- a campaign largely successful on prose thinly veiling ultra liberal positions- Obama’s presidency is forced to function on two pillars. First, extreme left-wing ideals. Some revealed slowly, others revealed as quickly as ripping a band-aid off a wound. Second is semantics.

By my count, Obama has already broken five of his campaign promises and yet uses semantics to defend each. First and most glaring was this comment in one of the McCain debates:

“Absolutely we need earmark reform and when I’m President I’ll go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.” (see 3:35 of the following video)

The semantics that Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel pointed out this weekend is that the billions of dollars of earmarks in the omnibus bill were “last year’s bill“. Ohhhhhhhh….that clears it up. What Obama meant was when he’s President he would go line by line to remove earmarks only on legislation that wasn’t drafted in a prior year. What it really means is Obama will only remove earmarks when it’s politically expedient.

Further reiterating this point, straight from Obama’s “Plan for America”:

“Obama will cut skyrocketing pork barrel spending projects by forcing more transparency about who is requesting projects and what the projects would accomplish before Congress votes to approve them.”

I already pointed out the semantics used in Obama’s pledge to not tax people earning less than $250k. With a coming cigarette tax, a massive energy tax, and a proposed per transaction tax on stock trades, I suspect Obama is only scratching the surface. What Joe the Linguist really meant here is “Folks earning less than $250k won’t get any raises to their income taxes”; every other tax increase on the planet is fair game.

Also in Obama’s “Plan for America”:

“Obama will reinstate pay-as-you-go budget rules, so that new spending or tax cuts are paid for by spending cuts or new revenue elsewhere.”

The semantics of this phrase are absolutely beautiful. Built into the statement is the ability to manipulate the federal income assumptions as to make it look like the massive government expansion is paid for. Yet anyone who’s willing to take a look into what he’s actually doing, right or left, knows he can’t possibly pay for everything using their base assumptions.

During the campaign, Team Obama committed to five days of public comment before signing a bill. He didn’t even do that with the first bill he signed, and Congress has made an even greater mockery of that statement bullrushing bill after bill without even a quick read from elected officials.

The semantics? Here’s the response from Team Obama on this as posted at the truth-o-meter:

“During the campaign, the president committed to introducing more sunlight into the lawmaking process by posting nonemergency (sic) legislation online for five days before signing it. The president remains committed to bringing more transparency to government, and in this spirit the White House has posted legislation expected to come to the president’s desk online for comment. We will be implementing this policy in full soon; currently we are working through implementation procedures and some initial issues with the congressional calendar. In the meantime, we will continue to post legislation on our Web site for comment as it moves through congress over the next few weeks.”

Finally, Obama promised a $3,000 refundable tax credit for every full-time job a business creates. No semantics here- that was just a bold lie. The stimulus bill would have been the perfect opportunity for Obama to make good on this promise but not a sniff. Instead, Obama chose to favor jobs created by the government so that our elected officials can continue to control our lives.

There are two places on the internet where you can monitor Obama’s campaign promises- the St. Petersburg Times “Truth-o-Meter” and the National Journal’s “Promise Audit“. I can’t vouch for the political leaning of either so take them for what they’re worth.

You’re welcome.

No this is not a spoof. And as Chicago Craig astutely pointed out to me, I’m verrrrrrry sure the Boston Globe ran these kind of articles when Bush was still in office. Let the positive spinning from the liberal media begin. Gentlemen and women……start your hope engines!!

You’re welcome.

I refuse to let this die so sorry for me beating the pulp out of it. As the stock market craters yet another day and politicians on both sides continue to prove all they care about is getting re-elected, here’s a bit of insane sanity courtesy of Glenn Beck:

As Beck points out, and in fairness to the new Socialist party, Republicans are nearly as much to blame for the latest gross misconduct (40% of it anyway). If you care to peruse the specific earmarks and who’s responsible for each, Senator Jim Demint’s office has been kind enough to catalog each of them.

You’re welcome.

A few words on the “Omnibus Bill” that passed through the House Wednesday last week and to be debated in the Senate this week. First- know that those dollars are simply to help the government make it to the end of the current fiscal year (ends on September 30th). It’s in addition to the funds allocated through the federal budget, the funds allocated through other omnibus appropriations bills, the billions of dollars for the housing plan, another one to two trillion more for banks, and in addition to the $1 trillion stimulus bill.

Also know that bipartisanship is still nowhere to be seen. The bill passed with 229 Democrats voting yes and only 16 Republicans supporting. More significantly, 20 Democrats voted no in addition to the 158 Republicans. The playbook is clear for the Democrats- bull rush through every bit of spending while the majority lasts- which hopefully will be only until 2010.

Finally, know that despite the length of the bill, there is very little transparency in much of the spending. For example, $17,527,000 for “necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief Information Officer” or $9,054,000 for “necessary expenses of the Office of Budget and Program Analysis” or how about $151,565,000 for “necessary expenses of the National Agricultural Statistics Service”.

As a primer, here’s a video from Hannity detailing some of the ridiculous spending and who’s responsible for it:

To save you the time of reading the hundreds of pages in the $410 billion omnibus bill, here are 10 appropriations from just the first 100 pages (there are over a thousand pages total):

1.) $27,535,000 for grants for cooperative forestry research.

2.) $15,945,000 for grants for competitive grants on pest control.

3.) This one I’m going to cut and paste in its’ entirety; I double dog dare you to make a case that this is responsible spending: “For payment of space rental and related costs pursuant to Public Law 92-313, including authorities pursuant to the 1984 delegation of authority from the Administrator of General Services to the Department of Agriculture under 40 U.S.C. 486, for programs and activities of the Department which are included in this Act, and for alterations and other actions needed for the Department and its agencies to consolidate unneeded space into configurations suitable for release to the Administrator of General Services, and for the operation, maintenance, improvement, and repair of Agriculture buildings and facilities, and for related costs, $244,244,000, to remain available until expended, of which $168,901,000 shall be available for payments to the General Services Administration for rent; of which $13,500,000 for payment to the Department of Homeland Security for building security activities; and of which $61,843,000 for buildings operations and maintenance expenses: Provided, That the Secretary is authorized to transfer funds from a Departmental agency to this account to recover the full cost of the space and security expenses of that agency that are funded by this account when the actual costs exceed the agency estimate which will be available for the activities and payments described herein.”

4.) $86,711,000 for alteration and repair of buildings and improvements for the Agricultural Marketing Service

5.) $17,270,000 for formulation and administration of marketing agreements and orders pursuant to the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 and the Agricultural Act of 1961 (not the agreements mind you- the formulation and administration)

6.) $853,400,000 for purchase and erection or alteration or improvement of permanent and temporary buildings and operation and maintenance of aircraft for Natural Resources Conservation

7.) $400,487,000 for broadband telecommunication loans

8.) $14,850,000 for “a breastfeeding support initiative” (I wish I was making this up).

9.) $2,906,262,000 (more) for the Census Bureau.

10.) $80,000,000 for “necessary expenses associated with the restoration of of Pacific salmon populations (yep- $80 million).

You’re welcome.

We’ve added a couple new sites to our blogroll. First is a site called “New American Tea Party“. I always thought the reason far left liberals did protests and not conservatives was because conservatives are employed. It turns out enough conservatives are getting fed up with Washington and taking some time off work to voice their opinions.

JohnKasich.com has been added. Kasich has always been our favorite Ohio politician and he seems to be ramping up his activity- which we’re in full support of.

Finally, we’ve added American Issues Project.org which is a PAC that’s putting together some quality info ads to combat the Repower America and Union swill out there.

The American Issues Project has a new commercial that’s out railing on the free-spending Democrats and their fiscal experiment. We’d like to thank the dishonorable Senator Chuck Schumer for continuing to spout off and make commercials like this possible.

For all the eloquence that President Obama displays, his verbal prowess is bitch-slapped by people in his own party by at least a 2-1 margin. Schumer, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Barbara Boxer, and so many countless others- thank you for continuing to verbalize your arrogance and contempt for the American people time and time again. Enjoy:

You’re welcome.

So you think Obama’s got your back- everyone in the below $250k tax bracket. It’s all good. No new taxes is what you’re told and no new taxes is what you believe. Too bad for you “Joe the Linguist” (trademarked) is on the White House payroll. It’s all about semantics in the Obama era.

While income taxes haven’t been raised (yet) on families earning under $250k, there are two tax increases already passed which are going to impact many Americans, if not most.

The first is one aimed squarely at lower-income folks. Reports clearly show the correlation between lower incomes and higher percentages of smokers, and beginning April 1st, smokers will pay an additional 62 cents per pack federal tax on each and every pack of smokes they buy. If you use the accepted average that the typical smoker tokes one pack a day, that’s an added tax to those folks of $226 per year.

Doesn’t sound like a lot but that’s a car payment or approximately four digital converter boxes worth. That also doesn’t take into account what states and counties will levy on cigarettes (just wait, it’s coming). The states will be coming for alcohol too so get ready for that tax.

The second tax is much more stealthy. Obama’s cap and trade program for energy will levy substantial penalties on most energy suppliers in the U.S. and that cost will get passed on to consumers. You will see your utility bills rise, dramatically in some cases.

This one’s easy for the left to diffuse- just blame the oil and gas companies of greed and glut and that easily explains away the problem. But you’re smarter than that- and you know the truth because I just told you. Keep all that in mind when you head to the polls in 2010.

You’re welcome.

Sifting through the soaring rhetoric of Obama’s State of the Union address that officially wasn’t the State of the Union, two things struck me right away.

First, Obama committed to curing cancer. I’d like to go on record as saying I’m in favor of this- good luck. As the body of words builds from various speeches, it becomes clearer and clearer that Obama’s speeches are made up entirely of promises he can’t/won’t keep and comments on goals that neither party disagrees about (though they disagree about how to get to the goal).

Second, Obama presented a little math word problem for those listening closely: subsidize standard of living for the welfare class and eliminate the upper income class and what do you get? Nothing but middle class. And that my friends is Socialism.

Mr. Obama also reiterated his goal of having the deficit by the end of his (first) term. Quite a lofty goal considering the exponential rate at which already porky government spending is increasing. He painted the target pretty clearly calling out families earning $250,000 or more per year. People in that category are going to get taxed back to the stone ages to balance out the deficit. And when they find places to hide their money from taxation, Bidenpalooza is going to come looking for folks in the $75k-$250k range to “be patriotic”. You might as well assume the position now.

You’re welcome.

If you’re interested in keeping tabs on the stimulus bill (and I know you are) here are several resources to help you:

First is one of my new favorite websites: readthestimulus.org.

Second is the website that was created as a result of the stimulus bill- recovery.gov. That website doesn’t come with a bullshit filter so read at your own risk.

Providing one of my new favorite quotes “The two major parties have joined forces to suck at the taxpayer’s teat” is Whigblog.com

Finally, running-for-a-Senate-seat Peter Schiff has a website that probably will be worth keeping track of.

You’re welcome.

Checking back in on ACORN and their “hell no, we won’t go” response to foreclosures that I put up a few days ago, here’s an absolutely startling video. Stuart Varney is a bit over the top here but notice three phrases uttered by the Executive Director of New York’s ACORN chapter: 1.) the most American thing you can do is to protect your home by breaking the law and refusing to leave it when you haven’t paid your mortgage; 2.) she wishes she could “force banks to our will”; 3.) Americans are entitled to happiness.

Ms. Lewis is a frightening example of the extreme left and not just their agenda, but how that agenda is being positioned and accepted as mainstream theory. And I’m no historian but I’m pretty sure the line from the Declaration of Independence is …certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And that’s the crux of what’s wrong with America right now- somehow we forgot about the pursuit part and just began expecting happiness to be bestowed upon each person. Here’s the video:

You’re welcome.