October 27, 2008

Positivity: Still shooting at 73

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 11:45 pm

From Knoxville, Tennessee (video at link; HT Noel Sheppard at Newsbusters):

Saturday, October 4, 2008

ink was shooting baskets in his driveway about this time last year when he had a sports epiphany.

“I had been knocking down shot after shot, so when I came in the house I told my wife, ‘I’ve still got it,’ ” said Mink, a 73-year-old semi-retired journalist. “She said, ‘You’ve got what?’ I said, ‘I can still play.’ ”

So Mink, whose playing career at Lees (Ky.) Junior College came to an unceremonious end in 1956 when he was dismissed – wrongly, by his account – for allegedly soaping the coaches’ office with shaving cream, wrote to several colleges in search of a place to play.

Roane State coach Randy Nesbit took Mink up on his offer.

“I’m not very good at saying no,” said Nesbit, who just turned 50. “It’s a gesture of good will to help a fine man find closure. Why not?”

Mink said his fountain of youth has been an active lifestyle.

“Golfing, snow skiing, hang gliding, hiking and basketball,” he said, “I can’t remember a week in my life where I didn’t take part in some sport.”

Mink said he spent the better part of last summer in the gym at Knoxville’s Central Baptist Church.

“On the average, I was in there seven or eight hours a week, running, playing and getting myself in shape,” Mink said. “I knew I’d be going to school and playing, so I have to have my stamina built up pretty good.”

Mink said he played on a senior Olympic team this summer (3-on-3, half-court), finishing second in state tournaments in Tennessee, Kentucky and West Virginia.

“And I won the Tennessee state free-throw championship this year by hitting 19 of 20,” he said.

Mink’s goal is to get himself conditioned well enough to play at full speed for a 10- to 15-minute stretch, even though it’s likely he won’t play more than five or six minutes in a game for Roane State.

Nesbit said the school’s team doctor cleared Mink without event before the team got into its full conditioning drills last month.

“The team makes allowances for Ken at practice when they need to, and they all encourage him,” Nesbit said. “We look to be fairly strong, so hopefully we’ll have some games decided early. I’m sure he’ll have the opportunity to play.

“Our weakness last year was experience; I think I’ve taken care of that.”

Go here for the rest of the story.

Latest Pajamas Media Column (‘Obama’s Redistributionist Obsession’) Is Up

Filed under: Economy,MSM Biz/Other Bias,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 10:40 am

It’s here.

It’s important.

It relates to this bombshell video from 2001 of Obama revealing, among other things, that redistribution of income and wealth is his most important core value — “more basic” than the human rights in our Constitution.

I am intensely grateful to PJM for getting the column posted virtually instantly.

Also: Even if you don’t go to the column, don’t miss this vid of Obama mentor Father Michael Pfleger telling whites that they have to give up their “401 funds” as reparations.


UPDATE: Other related SOBer posts — Freedom’s Right, Darke Blog, Maggie Thurber, Keane Observations, Andy’s Angle.

UPDATE 2: Busted myth of the day — Hillary Clinton’s vaunted opposition research. How could her peeps not find this interview in the space of over a year?

UPDATE 3: Other bloggers on this — Michelle Malkin, Hot Air, Vinny at Ace’s Place, Bill Dyer at Hugh Hewitt’s Place, Bill Whittle at National Review, Powerline, and a much longer list at Memeorandum.

UPDATE 4: Rush’s point today is totally on — “I don’t see how Obama can take the oath of office.” He’s totally antagonistic towards the Constitution he would be swearing an oath to uphold.

UPDATE 5: Bill Whittle rips the media –

I happen to know the person who found this audio. It is an individual person, with no more resources than a desire to know everything that he or she can about who might be the next president of the United States and the most powerful man in the world.

I know that this person does not have teams of highly paid professionals, does not work out of a corner office in a skyscraper in New York, does not have access to all of the subtle and hidden conduits of information … who possesses no network television stations, owns no satellite time, does not receive billions in advertising dollars, and has a staff of exactly one.

….. Remember this, America: The press did not break this story. A single citizen, on the Internet did.There is a special hell for you “journalists” out there, a hell made specifically for you narcissists and elitists who think you have the right to determine which information is passed on to the electorate and which is not.

That hell — your own personal hell — is a fiery lake of irrelevance, blinding clouds of obscurity, and burning, everlasting scorn.

You’ve earned it.

HOPE ON Project, Day 8: Let’s Never Find Out Part 8 — ‘Middle Class’ (includes 2001 ‘Redistributive Change’ Interview Transcript)

Filed under: Business Moves,Economy,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 9:31 am

HOPEONlogo.jpgNote: This is the eighth of what will be 13 daily posts on why Barack Obama is a dangerous, objectionable, and objectively unfit candidate to be president of the United States (while many of the other candidates are not). Previous Posts — Part 1 (Obama “Part of the Problem” on Fan and Fred); Part 2 (“Energy”); Part 3 (“Punished”); Part 4 (“Number One”); Part 5 (“Earmarks”); Part 6 (’The Chicken Button’ and the Chicken Who Pushed It); Part 7 (“Trust” on Bill Ayers).

The daily videos involved are from NeverFindOut.org, a project of Let Freedom Ring (donation link is here).

This post is part of the HOPE ON Project (Help Ohio Prevent Electing Obama Now).

Today’s SOB Alliance author is Brian at One Oar in the Water. Update: Additional SOB Alliance posts (surely not all): Return of the Conservatives, Buckeye RINO, NixGuy, Right Runner.


Video (direct YouTube link):


Middle Class

MAN 1: Senator Obama, why are you lying to us?
MAN 2: To help the middle class, you have promised to drastically increase the taxes on the wealthy and big corporations.
WOMAN 1: This makes us think that the middle class will be better off, right?
MAN 1: Now let’s talk about reality.
MAN 3: What does your tax increase really do for America?
MAN 4: History has shown us that when big companies pay more taxes, they cut costs, they cut jobs, and they cut salaries.
WOMAN 2: Cut salaries for who?
MAN 2: The middle class that works for those big companies.
WOMAN 3: Which means that the middle class now has less money, not more.
MAN 5: Which leads us to a few questions:
WOMAN 4: Why are you misleading the middle class into thinking that your tax plan will help us?
MAN 3: How will we feel if you become President and we find out that we’ve been lied to?
MAN 4: And lastly, you’re running for President, not us.
MAN 2: Why do we need to explain this to you?
ANNOUNCER: What happens when we elect a President who lies to the middle class? Please, America, let’s never find out.


Commentary from Brian at One Oar:

In Sept 2004, the Washington Post ran a hit piece stating that the middle class in this country was shrinking. Economist Arnold Kling pointed out that the WAPO was correct, but only telling half of the story. The other half was that those of the lower class (under 15K and 15K to 30K) were moving up to the middle class (30K to 55K), and the former middle class (30K to 55K) moved up to the next position (55K to 75K), however the largest category increase was the “75K and up,” which saw the largest percentage increase, almost 18 percent. That fact is folks the poor are moving up the ladder, as well as the middle class, despite what the MSM tells the public; despite what Barrack Obama tells us too.

Barrack Obama claims to be the champion of the downtrodden and the middle class. He claims that the American people are falling behind as the rich get richer. The rich might be getting richer, but so too is every other category in this country. Yet if elected Obama would raise taxes on the very people that have recently made it to the next rung, the new middle class. Not only would he impoverish the middle class, but he would extinguish any hope the poor have to reach the next rung.

This is nothing new the world over; those that claim to bring prosperity through government only bring despair. Obama will bring change, but that change will surely mean despair. Can we afford to vote for someone that will bring despair?

Obama, real change…real misery…real despair.


Additional BizzyBlog comments:

Best video line: Why do we need to explain this to you?

This is a guy who clearly doesn’t even understand the difference between income and net worth. John McCain admits that econ is not his strongest suit, but Barack Obama doesn’t understand the first thing about it.

What’s more, he doesn’t care. Instead, he’s obsessed with redistributing income both income and wealth — by any means necessary:

Transcript of previously unrevealed material in a 2001 interview with radio station WBEZ in Chicago –

OBAMA: You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the courts, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples — so that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order, and as long as I was able to pay for it I’d be OK. But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.

And to that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn’t shifted. And one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which to bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.

….. Karen (Caller): The gentleman made the point that the Warren Court wasn’t terribly radical with economic changes. My question is it too late for that kind of reparative work economically, and is that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to take place?

Host: You mean the courts?

Karen: The courts, or would it be legislation at this point?

Obama: Maybe I’m showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. Y’know, the institution just isn’t structured that way.

You look at very rare examples where during the desegregation era where the court, for example, was willing to, for example, order changes that cost money to local school districts, and the court was very uncomfortable with it. It was hard to manage, it was hard to figure out. You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues, y’know, in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time.

The court’s just not very good at it, and politically it’s very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So, I mean, I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally, y’know I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts. …..