Falling like a stone

From the Politico:

President Obama's job approval numbers will dip below 50% for the first time today in Gallup's daily tracking poll, according to a Gallup official.

"Gallup Daily tracking results just in. Obama will be below 50% for the first time when we update our numbers at 1:00 p.m.," wrote Gallup.com managing news editor Lymari Morales on Twitter.

His approval numbers have bounced down to the 50% mark several times, driven by weaker support from independents and Republicans, but hadn't crossed it.

The slide is worrying for the White House, but it's probably not yet panic time. Ronald Reagan's approval numbers dropped well below 40% during the depths of his first term recession. If Obama's bad stretch puts him in the high forties or low fifties, that's not a crippling political problem. If he languishes there or drops further, it may become one.

The critical difference between Reagan and Obama is that Reagan's policies were rooted in conservative free-market principles which could not help but end the recession and usher in an era of unrivaled peacetime economic expansion.

Obama, on the other hand, is pursuing policies rooted in Marxism and cannot help but create an anemic, jobless recovery which will slide back into recession - probably before next Fall.

This 180 degree difference between the orientation of Reagan and Obama will guarantee a 180 degree difference in outcomes.

Reagan is, and will continue to be, venerated as the greatest president of the 20th century.

Obama, name will become an obscenity - literally. In future decades if someone on broadcast television is tasteless enough to utter the word "Obama" it will be bleeped out and the actor's mouth will be digitally blurred so that no one will be able to read his lips and write angry letters to the network.

Here is a video to celebrate Obama's political future.

Sarah, we hardly knew ye ;-)

I went to Amazon.com this morning to check on my pre-ordered copy of Sarah Palin's autobiography and while there I looked at some of the other Palin books.

All of the books that came up on the first page were, or seemed to be, positive except one. So I clicked on that one to see what they might have to say that was critical of Gov. Palin.

This is from the publisher's description of 101 Things You - and John McCain Didn't Know About Sarah Palin.

Hunter. Hockey mom. Live action figure.
Sarah Palin is living proof that politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. In 101 Things You--and John McCain--Didn't Know about Sarah Palin, readers learn the (alleged) truth about the (reputed) Republican darling from Alaska who's taken the nation by (ice) storm. In this hilarious, irreverent look at the world's most infamous Miss Congeniality, comedian and WTF? (ISBN 1605500313) author Gregory Bergman reveals more than one hundred bizarre, obscure facts about the bizarre, obscure governor from Wasilla, including:

#10 Sarah Palin supports funding for abstinence-only programs in schools. Just call her Grandma.

#22 "First Dude" Todd Palin, aka Sarah's husband, works for British Petroleum. Maybe he can bring gas prices down for good.

#55 Sarah Palin's future son-in-law Levi Johnston is a self-proclaimed "f-king redneck." "First Grandbaby" Billy Bob Johnston?

#100 In 2007, Sarah Palin offered $150 to every hunter who hacked off the left foreleg of a wolf shot from a plane. Talk about wolves being thrown, uh, to the wolves.

These are the four things the publisher considered most outrageous to hang out there and hook people into buying the book to see just what a wackjob Mrs. Palin is!

The author, Gregory Bergman has obviously never been outside the city limits of Manhattan, Washington DC or Los Angeles - unless you count the time he has spent in the air flying from one to the other.

Miss Ann is talking

That means that YOU are listening!

MUSLIM SUFFERS BRUISED EGO IN FORT HOOD TRAGEDY
by Ann Coulter
November 11, 2009


The massacre at Fort Hood last week is the perfect apotheosis of the liberal victimology described in my book "Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America."

According to witnesses, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan entered a medical facility at Fort Hood, prayed briefly, then shouted "Allahu akbar" before he began gunning down American troops. Now I don't know which to be more afraid of: Muslims or government-run health care systems.

President Obama honored the victims by immediately warning Americans not to "jump to conclusions" -- namely, the obvious conclusion that the attack was an act of Islamic terrorism. As conclusions go, it wasn't much of a jump.

But the mainstream media waited for no information -- indeed actively avoided learning any information -- before leaping to the far less obvious conclusion that the suspect's mass murder was set off by "stress."

The day after the slaughter, The New York Times ran one editorial and two of three op-eds asserting as much -- which was at least one more than the Times usually runs about psycho-killer soldiers going on rampages.

Two days after the mass shooting, the Times' laughably predictable headlines about the Fort Hood bloodbath were:

-- "Preliminary Inquiry Finds No Link to Terror Plot"

-- "Painful Stories Take a Toll on Military Therapists"

-- "When Soldiers' Minds Snap"

The Los Angeles Times jumped to the exact same conclusion, running an article on the massacre titled: "Fort Hood Tragedy Rocks Military as It Grapples With Mental Health Issues." Time magazine followed suit, posting an article titled: "Stresses at Fort Hood Were Likely Intense for Hasan."

Inasmuch as Maj. Hasan had never been deployed overseas, much less seen combat, liberals seem to have discovered the first recorded case of "pre-traumatic stress syndrome."

Their point was: The real victim of Fort Hood was Maj. Hasan. Indeed, all Muslims were the victims that day.

The media quickly set to work assembling lachrymose accounts of taunts Hasan had been subjected to in the military for being a Muslim, the most harrowing of which seems to have been his car being keyed at his off-base apartment complex.

I suppose we should be relieved that liberals weren't claiming Hasan snapped because of the dimming prospects for a health care bill by the end of the year.

The evidence for the manifestly obvious conclusion we were supposed to avoid jumping to is rather more extensive.

According to numerous eyewitness accounts, Hasan denounced the "war on terror" as a war against Islam, said Muslims should attack Americans in retaliation for the war in Iraq, defended suicide bombers and said he was "happy" when a Muslim murdered a soldier at a military recruiting center in Arkansas earlier this year.

Stranger still, he wasn't auditioning for his own show on MSNBC when he made these statements.

Hasan shared a "spiritual adviser" with two of the Sept. 11 hijackers, Imam Anwar al-Awlaki, whose unseemly enthusiasm for jihad got him banned from speaking in Britain, even by video link.

A few years ago, Hasan delivered an hour-long PowerPoint lecture to an audience of doctors at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, arguing that non-Muslims should be beheaded and have burning oil poured down their throats.

He had tried to contact al-Qaida, and at least one U.S. intelligence official says the Army knew it.

Despite being well aware of Hasan's disturbing views and conduct, the Army did nothing.

Far less offensive speech has been grounds for discipline or even removal from duties in the military. In the aftermath of the Tailhook scandal, for example, two Navy officers were reprimanded and reassigned after putting up a sign with the words of a nursery rhyme altered to include a vulgar sexual reference to liberal congresswoman Patricia Schroeder.

But a Muslim Army doctor can go around a military installation somberly advocating the beheading of infidels, and the girls running the military treat him like he's Nicole Kidman and they're press junket reporters.

The Army's top brass, Gen. George Casey, responded to the military's shocking decision to keep a terrorist-sympathizing Muslim in the Army by announcing: "Our diversity ... is a strength." And I thought gays couldn't openly serve in the military.

On Sept. 11, 2001, Muslims moved to the top of liberals' victim pantheon on the basis of having slaughtered 3,000 Americans. Muslims were "victims" of Americans' displeasure with them for the biggest terrorist attack in world history. The only American deserving of more coddling than a Muslim is the first African-American president.

So, now any dyspeptic expression toward a Muslim is grounds for calling in a diversity coordinator. And when the "victim" attacks, as at Fort Hood, the rest of us are supposed to feel guilty because Hasan's car got keyed once. As with all liberal "victims," it is the victim who is massively guilty.

About the "taunts" that Hasan was on the recieving end of and the business about having his car keyed.

Perhaps the ill will was directed at him not because he was Muslim but because he was being outspoken in his opposition to the war that his fellow soldiers were currently fighting and dying in and because he said things like Muslims ought to attack American servicemen and so on.

Just maybe other soldiers didn't like him because he went so far out of his way to make himself obnoxious to them.

I'm just saying. . .

The people continue to awaken

More bad news for the little tin messiah, from Rasmussen:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 30% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -10 (see trends). Republicans have opened a six-point lead on the Generic Congressional Ballot.

Sixty percent (60%) say that the Fort Hood shootings should be investigated by the military as a terrorist act. Just 27% prefer a criminal investigation by civilian authorities.

This Veterans Day, 81% of Americans have a favorable opinion of the U.S. military. Thirty-six percent (36%) had a close friend or relative who gave their life for our country. A Rasmussen video report notes that 69% say that military service is good for young people.

The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates are also available on Twitter and Facebook.

Overall, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) disapprove.

[. . .]

Most Americans continue to oppose the health care plan working its way through Congress.

[. . .]

It is important to remember that the Rasmussen Reports job approval ratings are based upon a sample of likely voters. Some other firms base their approval ratings on samples of all adults. President Obama's numbers are always several points higher in a poll of adults rather than likely voters. That's because some of the President's most enthusiastic supporters, such as young adults, are less likely to turn out to vote.

I am greatly cheered by this. My greatest fear was that too many of the American people would have such an emotional investment is Obama and his "historic" nature that they would be unable to come to grips emotionally with what a failure he was bound to be.

I beleived that there was a strong possibility that they would simply ignore bad news or continue to blame Bush. However it seems that high unemployment numbers have a way of bringing people out of denial and making them face cold hard reality.

And the reality is very cold and very hard. When you add the official unemployment numbers to the "discouraged workers", that is people who are out of work and have given up trying to find a job, you see real unemployment at over 15%. Then add the numbers of "underemployed", those workers who want and need full time employment but are only able to find part time work that does not pay enough for them to make ends meet, and you have an unemployment rate of around 21%.

These are Great Depression numbers.

Then consider the fact that severe inflation is just around the corner as the effect of all the money Obama and congressional Democrats are printing to underwrite their profligate spending begins to hit home.

How will people react when the spending power of their savings and pay checks decreases dramatically?

Do you know what the only part of the economy (other than government) that is growing and adding jobs at a brisk rate is?

It is the health care industry.

What will happen if Obama gets his way and congress actually hands him a socialized medicine bill to sign. What will happen if one seventh of the economy suddenly stops growing and is thrown into reverse as the government starts cutting costs and rationing services?

I fear our worst times as a nation are ahead of us.

Tonight's Music

Another, somewhat more traditional, Eluveitie video.

Told you so

From the New York Post:

Not so fast.

President Obama's victory dance yesterday for the House-passed health-care bill came as Senate foes -- mainly Republicans with one key Democrat moderate -- pronounced the measure mortally wounded, if not outright DOA.

Speaking from the Rose Garden after the squeaker 220-215 Saturday-night vote, Obama urged senators to be like runners on a relay team and "take the baton and bring this effort to the finish line on behalf of the American people."

Instead, he met with immediate resistance.

If a government plan is part of the deal, "as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote," Sen. Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut independent whose vote Democrats need to overcome a GOP filibusters, told "Fox News Sunday."

Lieberman said he was concerned about new government spending the health-care legislation would entail, saying deficits have gotten gargantuan.

"I don't want to do that to our children and grandchildren," he said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), on CBS's "Face the Nation," declared, "The House bill is dead on arrival in the Senate."

"It was bill written by liberals for liberals, and people like Joe Lieberman are not going to get anywhere near the House bill . . . It is a nonstarter in the Senate."

He said he firmly believes "the public option will destroy private health care."

Go read the rest.

You know you are in trouble getting a left-wing bill passed in the Senate when you can't even get liberal Joe Lieberman or RINO Lindsey Graham on board.

Like I said last night that whole dog and pony show in the House was most likely a bit of political theater intended to let Pelosi run a victory lap - and get Obama off her back - while kicking the whole matter over to the Senate where Reid can cite the independent nature of the upper house to explain why nothing comes of it.

That way the left can console themselves with the knowledge that they came closer than they have ever come before while still preserving some faint hope of electoral viability in 2010.

It is necessary to add one caveat here. This abomination could pass the Senate and be signed into law by the little tin messiah if we let our guard down.

The expected failure of this mess is contingent upon the public continuing to keep up the pressure on their Senators.

So keep up the pressure.

Good memory

Our friend Patrick, who blogs at the Pagan Temple left a comment to my post None So Blind as Those Who Will Not See which included this:

I don't know if you'll remember what I'm talking about, Lem, but I'm ready to join you by that open fire with that bottle of wine.

Of course I remember what he is talking about.


The July 22, 2007 post titled The Moonbats Cultural Death Wish, in which I made this statement:

Ladies and gentlemen I give you exhibit 9,854,541,336,874,599,476 why I hate the left with every fiber of my being. Why I would gladly throw every last one of them alive and screaming into a giant bonfire. Then drink wine, dance and play the bagpipes while they burned.

That comment set the left-wing blogs into paroxysms of foaming madness and inspired one to them to create the picture you see above.

All I can say is you bring the marshmallows and weenies and I'll bring the Boone's Farm.

And for tonight's music here is The Swiss Death Metal Group Eluveitie with a pair of electric bagpipes.

National Socialist Health Care passes the House

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Democratic-controlled House has narrowly passed landmark health care reform legislation, handing President Barack Obama a hard won victory on his signature domestic priority.

Republicans were nearly unanimous in opposing the plan that would expand coverage to tens of millions of Americans who lack it and place tough new restrictions on the insurance industry.

The 220-215 vote late Saturday cleared the way for the Senate to begin a long-delayed debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.

When I heard this morning that the House had passed this with a narrow margin under the cover of darkness I had the strong impression that it was nothing more than a bit of political theater. The impression was strongly reinforced by this article on the Financial Times website.

Many Senate watchers are predicting that the measure will die a quiet death in the upper chamber.

When I heard that the House approved the bill I figured that a deal had been cut with enough of the 80+ Democrats who were planning to vote no on the bill to let it pass. They change their vote to yea and and give the little tin messiah and San Fran Nan their little cockadoodle of victory and in exchange it goes nowhere in the Senate.

The thinking is that by next November the voters will have forgotten who voted for a socialized medicine bill that never became law.

I doubt that it will work. The electorate has been too angered by this latest attempt to deprive them of their liberty and their wealth. Add the shear arrogance of the legislators defying such clearly expressed disapproval from the voters and you have a recipe for another 1994 style bloodletting in 2010.

But there will be one important difference. While Bill Clinton had as his number one priority being reelected so that he could continue to enjoy the perks of the office Obama actually believes his own propaganda about being a messianic figure and will redouble his efforts to transform the nation if he senses that he is losing the public.

How this will play out against a Republican dominated congress (or at least a GOP dominated House) will be interesting to see.

Given that Obama is a Marxist whose heroes are people like Arafat, Castro, Che and Chavez it is not impossible that he could attempt some kind of end run around congress by some kind of declaration of martial law. This could set the United States up for the kind of constitutional crisis that Honduras is currently weathering.

Would it not be amusing to see Obama hold up in the Venezuelan embassy issuing manifestos and calls for his supporters to arm themselves and descend on Washington to return him to power.

You know, the more I think about this the more possible it seems. . .

Can you imagine what a lunatic asylum it would be sealed in with Obama and his loyalists, sort of like the fuhrer bunker under Berlin, but less mature and more delusional.

None so blind as those who will not see

Here are details that have emerged about Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan and his shooting rampage at Ft. Hood.

Hasan is a lifelong Muslim. At the mosque in Maryland where he worshiped he listed his nationality as "Palestinian" even though he was a natural born citizen of the United States.

Hasan was an opponent of the United States' warn in Iraq and Afghanistan and frequently argued with other soldiers who supported the war. Hasan had been heard to make the statement that Muslims had the right to rise up and attack the US military in those nations.

Apparently Hasan had posted comments on the Internet praising Muslim suicide bombers.

Hasan stated that America's war on terror was actually a war against Islam.

Hasan was due to be deployed to either Iraq or Afghanistan and was unwilling to go. Perhaps he did not wish to be part of the "occupation forces" in a Muslim country.

Witnesses to Hasan's attack on his fellow soldiers report that he shouted "Allahu Akbar" (Arabic for "God is great") before opening fire.

There is only one reason why someone whose behavior sent up as many red flags as Maj. Hasan's was allowed to remain in the Army.

The fact that he was a Muslim of Middle Eastern descent.

Only the politically correct desire not to appear "racist" or "anti-Muslim" caused Hasan's superiors to turn a blind eye to his statements and the underlying beliefs they exposed.

No where is it more clear than in this case that the entire complex of ideas and attitudes, and the thought processes which generate those ideas and attitudes, of the political left are nothing more than an expression of self-loathing hatred of the Western Culture.

Listen to the official statements of the Pentagon and the White House and read the coverage of this incident in the mainstream media. The self-imposed ideological blinders required by adherence to the principles of political correctness and multiculturalism force the liberal political establishment and the press which serves as its propaganda organ to willfully ignore the breathtakingly obvious fact that Hasan acted out of a belief that his Islamic religious faith required him to do what he did.

To choose to ignore this fact and to absolutely refuse to change our behavior toward Islam and those who adhere to it, except to possibly become more "open" and "inclusive" toward them, can come only from a strong internal desire to commit cultural suicide.

In fact the whole structure of political correctness and multiculturalism are nothing more than a form of slow motion cultural suicide. They are like alcohol to a man who is drinking himself to death.

Why the left despises the culture that made them safe and prosperous and has given the world as much as the West has is a mystery which I doubt will ever be solved. Much like the child of wealthy parents who is born into security and comfort with a bright future laid out before him and responds not with gratitude but bitter resentment, the leftist spits on what he should fall to his knees and thank God for.

It is long past time for the sane adults in this nation to stop indulging the spoiled brats on the left. We must rise up and take control of this nation and this culture from the simpering "elites" who currently dominate and restore sanity - while we still have a nation and a culture to rescue.

Update on Ft. Hood

FORT HOOD, Texas – Soldiers who witnessed the shooting rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead reported that the gunman shouted "Allahu Akbar!" — an Arabic phrase for "God is great!" — before opening fire, the base commander said Friday.

Lt. Gen. Robert Cone said officials had not yet confirmed that the suspected shooter, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, made the comment before the rampage Thursday. Hasan was among 30 people wounded in the shooting spree and remained hospitalized on a ventilator.

If this is true then it will be much harder for the mainstream media and the government to deny or downplay the Islamic terrorism connection to this incident.

Cry me a river

MADISON, Wis. (Reuters) - A year after his historic election, President Barack Obama sought to remind Americans on Wednesday the biggest problems he is grappling with -- from the economy to the war in Afghanistan -- are the legacy of his predecessor, George W. Bush.

With his approval ratings down from once-lofty levels and Tuesday's Democratic election losses raising questions about his political clout, Obama held no special ceremony to mark the anniversary of his election as America's first black president.

He instead traveled to Wisconsin to appear before a friendly audience in a school gymnasium and promote education as a pillar of his economic recovery efforts.

Obama was elected on a promise of sweeping change after eight years under Bush, but many Americans are increasingly expressing impatience that his pledge has yet to bear fruit.

He used the preamble of his speech to insist his administration had indeed had important successes and also to remind Americans of the litany of daunting challenges he inherited when he took office in January.

"One year ago, Americans all across this country went to the polls and cast ballots for the future they wanted to see," Obama said.

But he said his administration was also confronted with a "financial crisis that threatened to plunge our economy into a Great Depression, the worst that we've seen in generations."

"We had record deficits, two wars, frayed alliances around the world," Obama added.

President Obama, or the manchild as Rush calls him, is emotionally incapable of accepting responsibility. Credit he will claim even when it is not due him, but responsibility is alien to him.

This is why Mr. Obama's crybaby whinging about the mess the previous president left him with has to be examined closely.

The Financial Mess. It is true that exercised almost no restraint on a Republican congress that was determined to spend like Democrats. It is also true that Bush authored some big spending programs of his own. But here are some facts.

One, while it is true that the first big budget-busting chunk of money to be spent by the government to help the financial markets recover (TARP) was a Bush administration program it enjoyed more support among Democrats than Republicans. Then Senator Obama supported and voted for TARP, as did the entire House and Senate Democrat leadership.

Two, the meltdown in the mortgage lending industry which triggered the current financial crisis was caused by government policies which were authored by Democrats. The idea that people should be given home loans that they have almost no chance of being able to pay back because everybody has a "right" to a house was something so stupid that not even a RINO like Lindsey Graham could have come up with it. Ultra-left legislators like Barny Frank acted as human shields to protect Fannie Mae and Fredie Mac from the kind of regulation (which George W Bush wanted to impose on them) which might have prevented the current crisis.

Three, Obama complains about Bush's deficit but he has increased that deficit by orders of magnitude and is seeking to increase it even more. If the problem is that Bush spent too much isn't the answer to spend LESS?

Two Wars. Yes we are fighting two wars in response to an attack on American soil which killed more Americans than the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Afghanistan was not simply sheltering Osama bin Laden he was acting as an unofficial participant in the Taliban government of that nation. And Saddam Hussein was writing large checks to the families of suicide bombers, giving more and more young men - and women - incentive to strap on an explosive belt and murder innocent people.

Frayed Alliances. If Mr. Obama is so worried about our relationship with our allies then why is he offering a series of calculated insults to those same allies? Obama has insulted the British people as a whole and both the Prime Minister and Queen individually. The French have been so disappointed with Obama that they have largely given up on trying to forge a closer relationship with the US and are now looking to do military and nuclear deals in Asia and the Middle East. And in the latest flipping off of a European ally Obama is boycotting the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

The reasons for Obama's refusal to acknowledge the significance of the event which symbolizes the end of the Cold War, the fall of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany are not entirely clear but among them are probably these.

The defeat of the Soviet Empire was done before Obama became president and in Obama's world the USA only became capable of doing anything good when he was elected president.

Ronald Reagan was responsible for the final victory over the Soviets and Obama hates Reagan because Reagan, as a free market capitalist and enemy of big-brother nanny state government, is the exact opposite of Obama.

The celebrations will be held at the Brandenburg Gate which is where Ronald Reagan made his "tear down this wall" speech. The Gate's reopening is a symbol of German reunification which was only possible because of the fall of the USSR. As a Marxist Obama resents the fact that the world's first communist nation was beaten by the capitalist West.

And finally, and with what we know about Obama's massive narcissism perhaps the most likely reason for Obama's refusal to attend the festivities in Germany is that Obama had wanted to address the German people from the Brandenburg Gate during the campaign but had to back off after too many objections were raised about his plan to use such a potent German symbol as a prop in a campaign speech. Having had his whim denied Obama is still in a snit and he won't go unless they beg him.

And we won't even talk about how Obama has alienated the Israelis (one of our strongest allies in the world and the only true friend we have in the region).

For a president who was supposed to heal the damage allegedly caused by the Bush administration in our international relationships seems to be doing little more than driving away our closest friends.

I like the fact that Obama keeps trying to play the "Bush card". Every time he does he simply makes himself look smaller and less to be taken seriously. In the short term this is bad for America because as our enemies take the measure of the insignificant little punk that sits in the Oval Office they will be emboldened. However in the long run this is good for the country because it will pave the way for an easy GOP victory in 2012 as Sarah Palin, or any other conservative Republican, will win simply by demonstrating to the nation that they are a fully functioning adult.

Attack on Ft. Hood

NBC News and msnbc.com

updated 10:48 p.m. ET, Thurs., Nov . 5, 2009

An Army psychiatrist who opened fire at Fort Hood, Texas, killing 12 people and wounding 31 others, was shot but captured alive, military officials said late Thursday.

The gunman, identified as Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, was wounded at the scene but was captured alive and was in stable condition, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone, commanding general of the Army’s III Corps, said at a press conference late Thursday.

Eleven of the victims died at the scene, military officials said. A 12th died later at a hospital, NBC station KCEN-TV of Waco reported. Cone said that most of those who were shot were military but two were civilians.

Cone also said that a female officer who was thought to be the first responder shot Hasan and was herself wounded and had undergone surgery at a hospital. It was not clear if the officer was a military policewoman or a civilian officer.

Col. Ben Danner said the suspect was shot at least four times. "I would say his death is not imminent," Cone said, adding that Hasan was in custody at a hospital.

First of all our prayers go out to the wounded and the families of the dead.

I find it interesting that the shooter was a Muslim who had apparently been very critical of America's military involvement in the Middle East. *

I also note that the Army does not allow soldiers to go armed while on base. This meant that Ft. Hood was a giant Disarmed Victim Zone, just like our schools.

* We need to remember that first reports after something like this are frequently inaccurate so take everything you hear about this man's personal life and military career with a grain of salt for at least the first few days.

Miss Ann is talking

That means that YOU are listening!

ELECTION 2009: CHANGE I CAN BELIEVE IN!

by Ann Coulter
November 4, 2009

-- MSNBC, Aug. 31, 2009, Keith Olbermann on Robert F. McDonnell, Republican candidate for governor of Virginia:

"In [McDonnell's master's thesis], he described women having jobs as detrimental to the family, called legalized use of contraception illogical, pushed to make divorce more difficult, and insisted government should favor married couples over, quote, 'cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators.' Wow. When did he write this? 1875? No, 1989. Wow, 1989.

"Goodbye, Mr. McDonnell."

-- MSNBC, Sept. 22, 2009, Rachel Maddow also on McDonnell:

"And here's where the conservative movement and the Republican establishment smash into each other like bumper cars without bumpers. Here's where Republican electoral chances stop being separate from the wild-eyed excesses of the conservative movement.

"Part of watching Republicans try to return to power is watching ... the conservative movement eat the Republican Party, eat their electoral chances over and over and over again."

On election night, conservatives-eating-Republicans resulted in an 18-point landslide for McDonnell, who beat his Democratic opponent 59 percent to 41 percent -- winning two-thirds of all independent voters and ending the Democrats' eight-year reign in the Virginia governor's office.

Republicans swept all statewide offices for the first time in 12 years, winning the races for lieutenant governor and attorney general, as well as assembly seats, garbage inspector, dog catcher and anything else Virginians could vote for.

To paraphrase a pompous blowhard: Goodbye, Mr. Democrat.

And that's not the most exciting news from election night! Astoundingly, Jon Corzine, the incumbent governor of heavily Democratic New Jersey -- a state that Barack Obama won by 16 points just a year ago -- lost by 5 points.

At 49 percent for Republican Chris Christie versus 44 percent for Corzine, the election wasn't even close enough to be stolen by ACORN. (Although Corzine did extremely well among underaged Salvadoran prostitutes living in government housing.)

The biggest winner election night was pollster Scott Rasmussen, who -- once again -- produced the most accurate poll results. New York Times poll: Corzine 40, Christie 37; Quinnipiac poll: Corzine 43, Christie 38; Rasmussen poll: Christie 46, Corzine 43.

The biggest loser was President Obama, who campaigned tirelessly for Corzine, even giving up golf on several occasions and skipping a quarter-million-dollar "date night" with Michelle to stump for the Democrat.

Just two days before the election, Obama was at a rally in New Jersey assuring voters that Corzine was "one of the best partners I have in the White House. We work together. ... Jon Corzine helped get this done."

Except the problem is that voting for Obama a year ago was a fashion statement, much like it was once a fad to buy Beanie Babies, pet rocks and Cabbage Patch Kids. But instead of ending up with a ridiculous dust-collector at the bottom of your closet, the Obama fad leaves you with higher taxes, a reduced retirement fund, no job and a one-year wait for an MRI.

That is why Corzine's defeat sounded the death knell for national health care.

The good news: Next time Corzine is in a major car accident after speeding on the New Jersey Turnpike, he'll be able to see a doctor right away.

The media will try to rescue health care by talking about nothing but the 23rd district of New York, where the Democrat won Tuesday night. Congratulations, Democrats -- you won a congressional seat in New York! Next up: A Catholic elected pope!

Far from an upset, the Democrats' winning the 23rd district was a long-term plan of the Obama White House. That's why Obama made John McHugh, the moderate Republican congressman representing the 23rd district, his Secretary of the Army earlier this year. The Democrats thought McHugh's seat would be easy pickings.

Only in the last week has everyone acted as if a Democratic victory in the 23rd district would be a shocking surprise -- an upset victory caused by puritanical Republicans staging inquisitions against "mainstream" Republican candidates like Dede Scozzafava, the designated "Republican" candidate in the special election.

This is preposterous -- there was absolutely nothing Republican about Scozzafava. As a supporter of partial-birth abortion, card-check union schemes and massive government spending programs, she was less Republican than John McCain.

Even Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos called Scozzafava the most liberal candidate in the race -- which may explain why she was the choice of George Soros' Working Families Party and why she promptly endorsed the Democrat after withdrawing from the race last weekend.

Conservative opposition to Scozzafava hardly suggests that they plan to impose litmus tests on every Republican candidate in the 2010 elections.

Speaking of litmus tests, on MSNBC recently, liberal blogger Jane Hamsher said of the possibility that a blue dog Democrat would oppose national health care: "I dare Blanche Lincoln -- I dare Blanche Lincoln to join a filibuster. She'll draw primary opponents so fast it would make your head spin."

While I'm sure an out-of-touch liberal blogger from Hollywood knows more about Arkansas than an elected senator from that state, Hamsher's threat sounds more like an intra-party civil war than conservatives opposing a George Soros-supported Republican candidate in a New York congressional race.

Not only do conservatives not pick insane fights -- such as staging a 2006 primary fight against a recent vice presidential candidate because he supported the war in Iraq -- but conservatives are more popular than Republicans.

By contrast, liberals are less popular than Democrats. When conservatives take control of the Republican Party, Republicans win. When liberals take control of the Democratic Party, Democrats end up out of power for eight to 12 years.

To really put in perspective how big a deal this business in New Jersey was you have to realize that Osama bin Laden could run for governor of that state and campaign from one end of the state to the other holding the severed head of a five-year-old girl in one hand and the bloody knife in the other and still get 40% of the vote - as long as he were running as a Democrat.

If you can possibly get to DC tomorrow

Thomas Lifson writes:

Rep. Michele Bachman is leading an effort to bring citizen-lobbyists to Capitol Hill, starting noon Thursday, in anticipation of a possible vote Friday on ObamaCare, Judi McLeod of Canada Free Press reports. Within hours of Rep. Bachman's call for citizens to travel to DC to lobby against ObamaCare, which could come to a vote Friday, The Tea Party Express, the doctors of Take Back America and the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the patriots of Tea Party Patriots Live and Resistnet all stepped up.

Mark Levin, author of the important book Liberty & Tyranny (and major talk show host) will there. Readers who able to get to DC Thursday should be there too.

An aroused citizenry is much harder for legislators to ignore when the citizens turn out for face-to-face interaction. This was the great lesson of Town Hall August. Having citizens come to DC for lobbying was a brilliant move on Bachman’s part, and demonstrates the difference between old-line pols, and the new breed of conservative that the era demands.

This is an excellent idea. But it is unfortunate that our elected representatives are incapable of working without close supervision.

How long do you think it will take some Democrat politician to run to a micorphone and start squeaking about how he fees "threatened" by all the common rabble invading the Capitol building?

Consequences!

Senior Congressional Democrats told ABC News today it is highly unlikely that a health care reform bill will be completed this year, just a week after President Barack Obama declared he was "absolutely confident" he'll be able to sign one by then.

"Getting this done by the by the end of the year is a no-go," a senior Democratic leadership aide told ABC News. Two other key Congressional Democrats also told ABC News the same thing.

This may come as an unwelcome surprise for the White House, where officials from the president on down have repeatedly said the health care bill would be signed into law by the end of the year.

"I am absolutely confident that we are going to get health care done by the end of this year, and Nancy Pelosi is just as confident," Obama said Oct. 27 at a fundraiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi may still be confident -- and her spokesman Brendan Daly said today, "We are going to get our part done" -- but the reason for the delay can be found in the Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has yet to release the bill he eventually plans to bring to the Senate floor. Reid is still waiting for the Congressional Budget Office to come up with an estimated cost of several possible variations of his bill before deciding which one to introduce in the Senate.

That cost estimate, Democrats tell ABC News, is not expected until next week.

Asked directly by ABC News, "Will you pass health care reform this year?" Reid pointedly did not answer "yes."

Elections have consequences and Washington was watching yesterday's elections closely. They were especially watching Virginia where the race was a straight-up head to head contest between a conservative Republican and a liberal Democrat in a state which swung for Obama just last year.

The handwriting is on the wall and Harry Reid, who is currently favored to lose his bid for reelection in Nevada next year, is not going to fall on his sword for B. Hussein Obama - not when Obama's job approval numbers have fallen below 50% among likely voters and his endorsement of Jon Corzine in New Jersey and Creigh Deeds in Virginia were clearly harmful to those candidates.

Also reading the handwriting will be the House's "Blue-Dog" Democrats, who were elected in 2006 from conservative districts, and who now have to choose between ending their careers by supporting the extreme left-wing agenda of Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team or giving themselves a fighting chance of reelection by distancing themselves from the White House and their own leadership.

This is a difficult problem for these Democrats since their party does not tolerate "mavericks" (compare the fates of John McCain and Joe Lieberman) but it is a problem they are all going to have to grapple with in the days ahead.

Victory!

Yesterday voters in Virginia and New Jersey elected Republican governors. The margin of victory in New Jersey where the Democrat, Jon Corzine, was the incumbent - and spent around 40 million dollars of his own money and had Barack Obama visiting the state several times to campaign for him - was 5%. The New Jersey race also saw the participation of an independent candidate, Chris Daggett, who pretended to be a conservative but was actually running with the financial backing of the state's Democrat party in an attempt to siphon off votes from the Republican Chris Christy.

The margin of victory in Virginia where the seat was open was 18%. The Virginia race was also marked by repeated appearances by Barack Obama campaigning for the Democrat candidate, Creigh Deeds, and by the Washington Post's endorsement of the Democrat candidate. This race meant so much to president Obama, who wanted to hold onto Virginia for his party after it went for him in last year's presidential election - voting Democrat in a national election for the first time since the early 1960's - that he even sent his own political operatives to manage the Deeds campaign.

The Virginia race is extremely important because it cast a genuinely conservative Republican, Bob McDonnell, against a liberal Democrat in a one-to-one matchup with no independent or third party candidate acting as a stalking horse for the Democrat.

In the House race in New York's 23 congressional district Democrat Bill Owens was able to defeat Conservative party candidate Doug Hoffman with a plurality of the vote of 49% against Mr. Hoffman's 46% and nominal Republican Dede Scozzafava, who had endorsed the Democrat and remained in the race to act as a spoiler sabotaging the Hoffman bid, netting 6% of the vote.

It is unfortunate that there were enough blind party-loyalists in NY23 who were unable to see that their district and party and nation would be better served by not voting for the Republican candidate in this race. However this was only a special election to fill the seat until next year's midterm elections and Mr. Owens is going to join a Democrat majority which is deeply unpopular and under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi has little prospect of improving its standing with the American people.

All in all it was a good night for the nation.

Now on to 2010!

VOTE!

If you live in New York's 23rd district, New Jersey or Virginia it is critically important that you vote today.

These elections will be seen (and, in fact are) a referendum on the Obama presidency. They are being closely watched by all elected officials, especially by members of the House or Representatives, who all must stand for election next November.

Republican victories in these three races will send a loud message to House Democrats that their political futures are in danger if they continue to carry this administration's water on issues like socialized medicine.

GOP victories in these races could literally spell the defeat of the current socialist health care takeover and if it dies this time it will probably be at least ten years before any serious attempt is made to resurrect it.

This will buy Republicans a decade in which to bring about market based reforms like health savings accounts, tort reform and insurance deregulation which will begin to reduce health care costs and greatly lessen the pressure for any renewed attempt at a government takeover.

Another positive effect of Republican victories today will be the way in which Obama will react to them.

Obama is a narcissist who has never been forced to cope with defeat and failure. His response to what he cannot fail to see as a personal rejection will be to fly into a rage and start seeking scapegoats. This will further diminish him in the public's eyes as they see him acting like a punk rather than a president and it will further divide and destabilize the Democrat party.

As Democrats wishing to win reelection come to the full realization that Obama is a liability rather than an asset they will seek to distance themselves from him and his policies.

This will further enrage him and as we have seen in his foolish vendettas against Fox News and Rush Limbaugh he will strike out at what he sees as his new enemies, within his own party.

This will further divide and destabilize the Democrats, setting them up for a historic defeat in 2010.

So even if you looked at the polls and figures that our guys were ahead so you didn't need to make the effort to go to the voting place and stand in line. Even if you are in New Jersey and think that the Republican is too liberal suck it up and go vote.

Because a vote in any of these races is a vote against Obama.

It was worse than I thought

From the Washington Post:

State Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava (R), who dropped from the special election in Upstate New York yesterday, has now thrown her support to Democrat Bill Owens.

"It's not in the cards for me to be your representative, but I strongly believe Bill is the only candidate who can build upon John McHugh's lasting legacy in the U.S. Congress," said Scozzafava in a statement released moments ago.

Owens said he was "honored" to have won Scozzafava's endorsement, noting: "Now more than ever we need bipartisan solutions to help bring jobs to Upstate New York to get our economy back on track and move our country forward."

It's not clear how much Scozzafava's backing of Owens will change the race. Democratic strategists, who just 48 hours ago saw the race moving back in their direction, have grown pessimistic about their chances in the aftermath of the Scozzafava decision.

Polling conducted by the Siena Research Institute -- and released on Saturday -- showed that more than 60 percent of Scozzafava backers were self-identified Republicans, meaning that the majority of them are likely to back Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman.

I now withdraw my partial apology to Ms. Scozzafava.

As I've said before when these "moderate" RINO's are forced to choose between left and right they will almost always reflexively turn left.

I wonder if political hack Newt Gingrich will join his chosen candidate and also endorse Owens.

Aaron Gee posted this on the American Thinker Blog:

It is being reported today that Dede Scozzafava is endorsing Democrat Bill Owens. In one fell swoop she proved her detractors right. Her actions also speak to the Republicans that made excuses for her such as Newt Gingrich; they were dead wrong. When Dede withdrew from the race on Saturday, many (including me) thought she was doing the right thing for Northern New York, and the Republican Party. Instead we have been presented with the quintessential example of what the label RINO means.

"Scozzafava dropped out after Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman experienced a late-in-the-game surge. The move was expected to consolidate GOP voters behind Hoffman on Tuesday.

But on Sunday, Scozzafava backed Democrat Bill Owens -- the announcement was made in a statement sent out by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee."

When the DNC is releasing statements for the former GOP candidate you know something is very wrong. This is a wake up call for the leaders of the Grand Old Party. The party got its hat handed to it in the last election by running the most "moderate" candidate in decades why do they continue in the same vein that didn't work last time?

Listening to voters helped create the contract with America which propelled the GOP into the House and Senate in 1994. It was ignoring those principals that led to the GOP's decline. Instead of listening to Washington insiders the GOP would do better if it listened to the people.

I d0 have one quibble with Mr. Gee. Newt's "Contract with America" did not "propel the GOP into the House and Senate in 1994".

Newt Gingrich's real achievement in that affair was to be the first to get a real sense of how the electorate was going to vote in 1994 and run very fast in that direction yelling "follow me!" at the top of his lungs.

The Contract with America helped crystallize public sentement and it probably was responsible for the GOP winning 2 or 3 seats that it might not have won otherwise, but the House bank and Post Office scandals coupled with the gigantic mess that Hillary Clinton made out of her Stalinist "health care reform" guaranteed a bloodbath for Democrats no matter what Republicans did.

Subsequent events have proven that Newt was more lucky than smart. The Democrat takeover of the legislature in 2006 and the election of Barack Obama seems to have convinced him that the public was taking a sharp turn to the left and he has once again tried to run out in front yelling "follow me!" at the top of his lungs.

This explains his teaming up with Nancy Pelosi to promote global warming hysteria, his attacks on Rush Limbaugh and his endorsment of the left-wing Scozzafava.

However this time Mr. Gingrich has miscalculated. The facts on the ground are all pointing to 2010 being a big Republican year.

This is likely to leave Newt standing all alone out in left field.

Scozzafava steps aside - sort of

ALBANY, N.Y. — Fighting plunging support, Republican Dierdre Scozzafava abruptly suspended her campaign Saturday in the 23rd Congressional District special election that has exposed a rift among national factions of the party.

Campaign spokesman Matt Burns said Scozzafava thinks stepping aside is for the best of the party. He said Scozzafava is essentially withdrawing from the race, although her name will remain on Tuesday's ballot.

"It is increasingly clear that pressure is mounting on many of my supporters to shift their support," Scozzafava said in a written statement. "Consequently, I hereby release those individuals who have endorsed and supported my campaign to transfer their support as they see fit."

The announcement comes after a Siena College poll found she was in third place with 20 percent of the vote in the heavily Republican district that has been safe ground for the party for more than 100 years. Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman and Democratic nominee Bill Owens were too close to call with 35 percent and 36 percent, respectively.

The race has pitted conservative and moderate wings of the Republican Party against each other in a battle of ideology. The special election in New York's rural north has received national attention as big-name Republicans including Sarah Palin, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson have thrown their support behind Hoffman. Money poured into Hoffman's campaign from all over the country.

I said on this blog that I didn't think that Ms. Scozzafava would do the right thing and withdraw from the race.

I was partially wrong so I partially apologize.

But I was also partially right. Scozzafava is not officially out of the race she has only "suspended" her campaign. And she is not admitting that the people of her district have rejected her left-wing RINO Republicanism. Instead she is blaming the fact that she doesn't have enough money to "counter what has been said" about her.

Also she has not endorsed her conservative fellow Republican, Doug Hoffman. Instead she has "released" her supporters to do what they see fit.

What we have is a woman who realizes that she cannot possibly win and who doesn't want to waste any more money trying to keep a sinking ship afloat and who doesn't want to harm her political future by being seen as the spoiler who lost NY23 for the GOP.

But she also can't bring herself to do the truly right thing and totally withdraw from the race then do everything in her power to get her supporters to vote for Doug Hoffman. So we have this passive-aggressive "I'm out, but not completely out, because I have been treated so unfairly by the conservatives so I'm not going to tell my supporters what to do about their votes so I'm just washing my hands of the whole thing and going home".

If you happen to live in NY23 get out to a polling place and vote for Doug Hoffman this Tuesday.

Happy Halloween Everybody

I'll be spending the evening walking around downtown Asheville where you can see faries, queens and every kind of freak imaginable - and some people dressed in Halloween costumes as well.

Thomas Sowell's Dismantling America, parts 1 and 2

Part 1

Just one year ago, would you have believed that an unelected government official, not even a Cabinet member confirmed by the Senate but simply one of the many "czars" appointed by the President, could arbitrarily cut the pay of executives in private businesses by 50 percent or 90 percent?

Did you think that another "czar" would be talking about restricting talk radio? That there would be plans afloat to subsidize newspapers-- that is, to create a situation where some newspapers' survival would depend on the government liking what they publish?

Did you imagine that anyone would even be talking about having a panel of so-called "experts" deciding who could and could not get life-saving medical treatments?

Scary as that is from a medical standpoint, it is also chilling from the standpoint of freedom. If you have a mother who needs a heart operation or a child with some dire medical condition, how free would you feel to speak out against an administration that has the power to make life and death decisions about your loved ones?

Does any of this sound like America?

How about a federal agency giving school children material to enlist them on the side of the president? Merely being assigned to sing his praises in class is apparently not enough.

How much of America would be left if the federal government continued on this path? President Obama has already floated the idea of a national police force, something we have done without for more than two centuries.

We already have local police forces all across the country and military forces for national defense, as well as the FBI for federal crimes and the National Guard for local emergencies. What would be the role of a national police force created by Barack Obama, with all its leaders appointed by him? It would seem more like the brown shirts of dictators than like anything American.

How far the President will go depends of course on how much resistance he meets. But the direction in which he is trying to go tells us more than all his rhetoric or media spin.

Barack Obama has not only said that he is out to "change the United States of America," the people he has been associated with for years have expressed in words and deeds their hostility to the values, the principles and the people of this country.

Jeremiah Wright said it with words: "God damn America!" Bill Ayers said it with bombs that he planted. Community activist goons have said it with their contempt for the rights of other people.

Among the people appointed as czars by President Obama have been people who have praised enemy dictators like Mao, who have seen the public schools as places to promote sexual practices contrary to the values of most Americans, to a captive audience of children.

Those who say that the Obama administration should have investigated those people more thoroughly before appointing them are missing the point completely. Why should we assume that Barack Obama didn't know what such people were like, when he has been associating with precisely these kinds of people for decades before he reached the White House?

Nothing is more consistent with his lifelong patterns than putting such people in government-- people who reject American values, resent Americans in general and successful Americans in particular, as well as resenting America's influence in the world.

Any miscalculation on his part would be in not thinking that others would discover what these stealth appointees were like. Had it not been for the Fox News Channel, these stealth appointees might have remained unexposed for what they are. Fox News is now high on the administration's enemies list.

Nothing so epitomizes President Obama's own contempt for American values and traditions like trying to ram two bills through Congress in his first year-- each bill more than a thousand pages long-- too fast for either of them to be read, much less discussed. That he succeeded only the first time says that some people are starting to wake up. Whether enough people will wake up in time to keep America from being dismantled, piece by piece, is another question-- and the biggest question for this generation.

Part 2

Many years ago, at a certain academic institution, there was an experimental program that the faculty had to vote on as to whether or not it should be made permanent.

I rose at the faculty meeting to say that I knew practically nothing about whether the program was good or bad, and that the information that had been supplied to us was too vague for us to have any basis for voting, one way or the other. My suggestion was that we get more concrete information before having a vote.

The director of that program rose immediately and responded indignantly and sarcastically to what I had just said-- and the faculty gave him a standing ovation.

After the faculty meeting was over, I told a colleague that I was stunned and baffled by the faculty's fierce response to my simply saying that we needed more information before voting.

"Tom, you don't understand," he said. "Those people need to believe in that man. They have invested so much hope and trust in him that they cannot let you stir up any doubts."

Years later, and hundreds of miles away, I learned that my worst misgivings about that program did not begin to approach the reality, which included organized criminal activity.

The memory of that long-ago episode has come back more than once while observing both the actions of the Obama administration and the fierce reactions of its supporters to any questioning or criticism.

Almost never do these reactions include factual or logical arguments against the administration's critics. Instead, there is indignation, accusations of bad faith and even charges of racism.

Here too, it seems as if so many people have invested so much hope and trust in Barack Obama that it is intolerable that anyone should come along and stir up any doubts that could threaten their house of cards.

Among the most pathetic letters and e-mails I receive are those from people who ask why I don't write more "positively" about Obama or "give him the benefit of the doubt."

No one-- not even the President of the United States-- has an entitlement to a "positive" response to his actions. The entitlement mentality has eroded the once common belief that you earned things, including respect, instead of being given them.

As for the benefit of the doubt, no one-- especially not the President of the United States-- is entitled to that, when his actions can jeopardize the rights of 300 million Americans domestically and the security of the nation in an international jungle, where nuclear weapons may soon be in the hands of people with suicidal fanaticism. Will it take a mushroom cloud over an American city to make that clear? Was 9/11 not enough?

When a President of the United States has begun the process of dismantling America from within, and exposing us to dangerous enemies outside, the time is long past for being concerned about his public image. He has his own press agents for that.

Internationally, Barack Obama has made every mistake that was made by the Western democracies in the 1930s, mistakes that put Hitler in a position to start World War II-- and come dangerously close to winning it.

At the heart of those mistakes was trying to mollify your enemies by throwing your friends to the wolves. The Obama administration has already done that by reneging on this country's commitment to put a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe and by its lackadaisical foot-dragging on doing anything serious to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. That means, for all practical purposes, throwing Israel to the wolves as well.

Countries around the world that have to look out for their own national survival, above all, are not going to ignore how much Obama has downgraded the reliability of America's commitments.

Iraq, for example, knows that Iran is going to be next door forever while Americans may be gone in a few years. South Korea likewise knows that North Korea is permanently next door but who knows when the Obama administration will get a bright idea to pull out? Countries in South America know that Hugo Chavez is allying Venezuela with Iran. Dare they ally themselves with an unreliable U.S.A.? Or should they join our enemies to work against us?

This issue is too serious for squeamish silence.

Damn.

We are so screwed.

This is what we get for electing a know-nothing, done-nothing radical who never grew out of his college Marxism - with a giant racial chip on his shoulder to boot.

"Saved and Created"?

If your bullshit detector went started screaming bloody-murder when the little messiah and his surrogates started crowing about all the jobs that they had "created or saved" here's some evidence that it is properly calibrated.

Oct. 28 (Bloomberg) -- Heresy, thy name is Christina Romer.

Last week, the chairman of President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers -- a position that carried the title “chief economist” until Larry Summers took up residence in the White House -- testified to the Joint Economic Committee on the economic crisis and the efficacy of the policy response.

Here’s the executive summary in case you missed it:

The crisis: “Inherited.”

The economy: “In terrible shape” (the inherited one).

The shocks to the system: “Larger than those that precipitated the Great Depression.”

The policy response: “Strong and timely.”

The efficacy of the policy response: a 2 to 3 percentage point addition to second-quarter growth; 3 to 4 percentage points in the third; and 160,000 to 1.5 million “jobs saved or created,” a made-up metric if there ever was one. (More on that later.)

What was most puzzling about Romer’s Oct. 22 testimony was her comment on the waning effect of fiscal stimulus.

“Most analysts predict that the fiscal stimulus will have its greatest impact on growth in the second and third quarters of 2009,” Romer said. “By mid-2010, fiscal stimulus will likely be contributing little to growth.”

At first it was just fringe elements, such as conservative blogs and the not-really-a-news-organization Fox News, that pounced on Romer’s statement. Then other news outlets started to question her statement, which seemed to fly in the face of White House assertions that only a small portion of the stimulus -- $120 billion, or 15 percent -- has actually been spent. Most of the criticism of the stimulus coming from the president’s own party has been, “too little, too late,” and here’s Romer saying it’s kaput.

Thanks for That

Instead of being banished to the woodshed, Romer was consigned to the White House blog, where she slipped into professorial mode to explain the arcane distinction between the effect of the stimulus on the change in gross domestic product and its effect on the level of GDP.

Stimulus has its biggest impact on the growth rate of GDP when it’s implemented, Romer said, using a car-and-driver analogy: Step on the accelerator, the car goes from zero to 60.

Stimulus will keep the level of GDP and employment higher than they would have been even after the growth-rate effect fades, she said.

Her logic is impeccable. It’s her premise that’s flawed.

Dispensing Lucre

When the government distributes lucre or loot, people spend it. If your interest is national income accounting, spending other people’s money is great. Spending is a back-door way for government statisticians to measure what matters, which is the real output of goods and services.

But the government has no money of its own to spend; only what it borrows or confiscates from us via taxation. Oops.

“Government job creation is an oxymoron,” said Bill Dunkelberg, chief economist at the National Federation of Independent Business. It is only by depriving the private sector of funds that government can hire or subsidize hiring.

That’s why “jobs created or saved” is such pure fiction. It ignores what’s unseen, as our old friend Frederic Bastiat explained so eloquently 160 years ago in an essay.

Econometric models synthesize all sorts of variables and spit out a GDP forecast. From there they derive the change in employment using something called Okun’s Law, named after the late economist Arthur Okun, which describes the relationship between the two.

Fiction Lags Reality

Actual hiring seems to be lagging behind the model’s land of make-believe. For small businesses, which are the source of most job creation in the U.S., the government’s increased and changing role in the economy isn’t a confidence builder. Businessmen have no idea what health-care reform will mean for their cost structure or what whimsical tax policies the government might impose when it realizes those short-term deficits are running into long-term unfunded liabilities.

No wonder capital spending plans were at an all-time low in the third quarter, according to the NFIB monthly survey.

Only 30,383 jobs were created or saved by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, according to Recovery.gov, the government’s once-transparent Web site that has become a complex blur of numbers, graphs and pie charts. These are only the jobs reported by federal contract recipients. The Obama administration will report the larger universe of ARRA-related jobs on Oct. 30.

An extrapolation of what would have happened without the fiscal stimulus isn’t much consolation to the 9.8 percent of the workforce that is unemployed. Nor is Romer’s prescription for the economy and labor market very comforting in light of the trillions of future tax dollars that have been spent, lent or promised by the federal government.

“If you take your foot off the gas, the car goes from 60 back down to a slow crawl,” Romer said in clarifying blog post.

Gentlemen, start your engines.

(Caroline Baum, author of “Just What I Said,” is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.)