May 31, 2010

Pathetic Obsession: Palin’s Hometown Paper Notes National Media Interest in Privacy Fence

Filed under: MSM Biz/Other Bias,MSM Biz/Other Ignorance — Tom @ 10:55 pm

PalinFenceWith all the major news stories and developments out there, the editorial board at the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman in Wasilla, Alaska, Sarah Palin’s hometown, is bemused, bewildered, and somewhat befuddled at the national media’s interest in a privacy fence (HT Michelle Malkin) on residential property.

The just-built fence is on Palin’s property. Its purpose is to frustrate the prying eyes of author Joe McGinnis, who has moved into a house next door for what is said to be the next five months.

The Palins are understandably none too pleased at the orchestrated attempt at privacy invasion that appears to either be funded by or will ultimately be reimbursed by publishing giant Random House. Readers here will share that feeling once they see who is expending precious newsroom resources trying to follow the McGinnis v. Palin saga instead of dealing with legitimate news stories.

Here is some of what the Frontiersman had to say on Saturday (bolds are mine):

Wasilla fence fascinating for national media outlets

The “Today” show called Friday morning saying it plans to come up Monday and do some interviews about the fence Todd and Sarah Palin built on their property on Lake Lucille.

According to people who care about those things, the former governor wrote on her Facebook account that she was worried about the neighbor, Joe McGinnis, moving in. He’s the author of several books, one of which is an alleged non-fiction story about his exploits in Alaska titled “Going to Extremes.”

… McGinnis also wrote last year a fairly scathing article for Portfolio magazine — which no longer exists — about Palin’s plans, or not, for a gas pipeline.

So it’s not surprising she might be a little leery about her new neighbor.

So the call from “Today,” quickly followed by a similar call from ABC news, seemed curious. The day before it was another national news outlet wanting to know if we had a photograph of the fence. There was an e-mail from Outside asking if the Palins were in compliance with city code.

… Fences have been known to make good neighbors and everybody knows we could use a lot more of those around here. So if the fence keeps McGinnis on one side and the Palins content, why would the “Today” show or ABC care?

The establishment press seems continually befuddled and bewildered at the public’s declining level of respect for them, wondering why people feel the need to find alternative news outlets. Assuming any work product airs, this waste of viewers’ time will be a prime exhibit. Even if it doesn’t air, complaints from the press that they don’t have the time to do their jobs right will continue to ring mighty hollow.

The Frontiersman editorial’s final paragraph commendably and appropriately communicates a not very subtle sense of outrage:

Finally, those who are fond of Joe McGinnis might remind him (if he doesn’t already know) that Alaska has a law that allows the use of deadly force in protection of life and property.

Pre-parting thought: On his show Thursday, Mark Levin noted how liberal pundits are trying to tell us how “irrelevant” Sarah Palin is — so “irrelevant” that they somehow can’t stop talking about or taking shots at her. Indeed.

Parting thought: Palin has told Glenn Beck (HT Hot Air) that McGinnis’s presence will force her family to keep their windows closed when they normally rarely do, and, it would appear, to have to install air conditioning in their home (“None of our houses have ever had air conditioning”). Does anyone think that a prominent liberal having to react as Palin has been compelled to in order to protect her and her family’s personal privacy wouldn’t be getting tons of establishment press sympathy?

Cross-posted at

Obama’s Thin, Childish Skin

Filed under: Taxes & Government,US & Allied Military — Tom @ 7:59 pm

no-whiningObamaWhinyAlthough he doesn’t mention Bill Clinton, Peter Wehner in essence explains how our Punk President is like the Boy President (several paragraph breaks added by me):

Obama is among the most thin-skinned presidents we have had, and we see evidence of it in every possible venue imaginable, from one-on-one interviews to press conferences, from extemporaneous remarks to set speeches.

The president is constantly complaining about what others are saying about him.

He is upset at Fox News, and conservative talk radio, and Republicans, and people carrying unflattering posters of him.

He gets upset when his avalanche of faulty facts are challenged, like on health care.

He gets upset when he is called on his hypocrisy, on everything from breaking his promise not to hire lobbyists in the White House to broadcasting health care meetings on C-SPAN to not curtailing earmarks to failing in his promises of transparency and bipartisanship.

In Obama’s eyes, he is always the aggrieved, always the violated, always the victim of some injustice. He is America’s virtuous and valorous hero, a man of unusually pure motives and uncommon wisdom, under assault by the forces of darkness.

It is all so darn unfair.

Not surprisingly, Obama’s thin skin leads to self pity. As Daniel Halper of The Weekly Standard pointed out, in a fundraising event for Sen. Barbara Boxer, Obama said, “Let’s face it: this has been the toughest year and a half since any year and a half since the 1930s.”

Really, now?

… For Obama to complain that the problems he faces are so much worse than any other president in the last 80 years is stunningly self-indulgent, to say nothing of ahistorical.

Ahistorical yes, but also incredibly childish. More important, the statement is a direct insult to previous generations who had to endure far more than a recession — like, just for starters, the World War II generation, and parents of soldiers in Vietnam who were coming home in body bags at the rate of 200-300 a week during the late 1960s.

Say what you will about George W. Bush, who was far less than perfect, but he almost never displayed the whiny immaturity that we see from our current president and saw from Mr. Clinton and so many of their minions on a nearly daily basis (with Bush, I believe it’s “actually never” instead of “almost never,” but someone may be able to find one or two examples in eight years that I’m not aware of).

But maybe Obama is being backhandedly prophetic. By the time he and the radical true believers in his administration are done, it could end up being worse. Sadly, lots of people who should have known better in 2008 have given him plenty of time.


UPDATE: Of course I should add that the Obama administration’s policies and the Congress dominated by his party are the reasons why the past year and a half have been so tough. Actually, it’s just a bit over 23 months since the POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) Economy began.

Deferred Post

Filed under: Economy,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 3:18 pm

An item that was supposed to be held until the end of a blackout period inadvertently appeared here for a few hours this afternoon. It has been pulled and will reappear when the related blackout period expires.

Memorial Day 2010

Filed under: Positivity,US & Allied Military — Tom @ 12:02 am

This will be a BizzyBlog tradition as long as this YouTube video is up:

Positivity: The History of Memorial Day

Filed under: Positivity,US & Allied Military — Tom @ 12:01 am

From (more background is at this link at

It was 1866 and the United States was recovering from the long and bloody Civil War between the North and the South. Surviving soldiers came home, some with missing limbs, and all with stories to tell. Henry Welles, a drugstore owner in Waterloo, New York, heard the stories and had an idea. He suggested that all the shops in town close for one day to honor the soldiers who were killed in the Civil War and were buried in the Waterloo cemetery. On the morning of May 5, the townspeople placed flowers, wreaths and crosses on the graves of the Northern soldiers in the cemetery. At about the same time, Retired Major General Jonathan A. Logan planned another ceremony, this time for the soldiers who survived the war. He led the veterans through town to the cemetery to decorate their comrades’ graves with flags. It was not a happy celebration, but a memorial. The townspeople called it Decoration Day.

In Retired Major General Logan’s proclamation of Memorial Day, he declared:

“The 30th of May, 1868, is designated for the purpose of strewing with flowers, or otherwise decorating the graves of comrades who died in defense of their country and during the late rebellion, and whose bodies now lie in almost every city, village and hamlet churchyard in the land. In this observance no form of ceremony is prescribed, but posts and comrades will in their own way arrange such fitting services and testimonials of respect as circumstances may permit.”

The two ceremonies were joined in 1868, and northern states commemorated the day on May 30. The southern states commemorated their war dead on different days. Children read poems and sang civil war songs and veterans came to school wearing their medals and uniforms to tell students about the Civil War. Then the veterans marched through their home towns followed by the townspeople to the cemetery. They decorated graves and took photographs of soldiers next to American flags. Rifles were shot in the air as a salute to the northern soldiers who had given their lives to keep the United States together.

In 1882, the name was changed to Memorial Day and soldiers who had died in previous wars were honored as well. In the northern United States, it was designated a public holiday. In 1971, along with other holidays, President Richard Nixon declared Memorial Day a federal holiday on the last Monday in May.

Cities all around the United States hold their own ceremonies on the last Monday in May to pay respect to the men and women who have died in wars or in the service of their country. …..

Read additional history at the link.

May 30, 2010

Sloppy, Erroneous AP Reporting Supports Schumer’s Proposed Foreign Call Center Tax

schumer4The federal government saw its tax collections fall by almost 20% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008. Through the first seven months of the current fiscal year, year-over-year collections were down by another 4.5%.

New York Senator Charles Schumer (pictured at right; obtained from is desperately searching for another way to fleece taxpayers (because cutting spending is of course out of the question), and has come up with a “brilliant” idea. An unbylined Associated Press story gives Schumer’s idea, a foreign call center tax, undeserved cover by going back to seven year-old information about industry job losses that doesn’t reflect current conditions..

Here are the first five paragraphs from the AP story, followed by a later paragraph containing the outdated information:

Schumer wants to slow exodus of US call centers

In an effort to slow the exodus of U.S. telephone work to overseas services, Sen. Charles Schumer is introducing legislation that would impose an excise tax on companies that transfer calls with American area codes to foreign call centers.

The measure would also require telling U.S. customers that the call is being transferred and to which country.

Companies use call centers to give customers technical product support, answer billing questions or provide other information. They often use several operators.

The fee would be 25 cents for calls transferred to foreign countries. There would be no fee for a domestic call center. Companies would have to report quarterly their total customer service calls received and the number relayed overseas.

“If we want to put a stop to the outsourcing of American jobs, then we need to provide incentives for American companies to keep American jobs here,” Schumer said last week. The New York Democrat said the excise tax would “also provide a reason for companies that have already outsourced jobs to bring them back.”

… From 2001 to 2003, the United States lost 250,000 call center jobs to India and the Philippines, according to Technology Marketing Corp., a Norwalk, Conn.-based company specializing in call centers and telemarketing.

If AP’s alleged journalists had done research that took yours truly all of about 10 minutes, it could have informed readers that the “exodus” to which Schumer refers hasn’t been happening for at least five years.

Three executive summaries available at the National Association of Call Centers (NACC) inform us that U.S. call center employment has generally grown, even through the severe nationwide recession.

First, here’s a bit of the Fourth Quarter 2008 Executive Summary (bolds are mine throughout; links are to small PDF files):

In the fourth quarter of 2008 more call center jobs were lost in the United States than were gained for the first time since the data was collected going back to 2005. This loss of jobs in the call center industry was tied directly to the recession within the United States economy.

In case the AP needs to buy a clue, the excerpted paragraph tells us that the industry gained jobs for three or more years until its job growth finally succumbed to the recession.

Next, there’s the following from the Second Quarter of 2009:

In the second quarter of 2009 more call center jobs were added in the United States than were lost suggesting a continued recovery from the recession low of fourth (4th) quarter 2008.

So despite the fact that the economy as a whole lost hundreds of thousands of jobs a month during the first six months of 2009, call centers showed net employment gains.

Finally, this is from the Fourth Quarter 2009 Executive Summary:

In the fourth quarter of 2009 more call center jobs were gained in the United States than were lost creating a three quarter long job recovery from the recession low of fourth (4th) quarter 2008.

The NAAC only makes its Executive Summaries available to the public, generally providing specific employment numbers only to members. But I suspect the organization would have been glad to give AP reporters some details if only someone had called them. Maybe the wire service should set up an outbound call center that will do the follow-up work its reporters seem incapable of doing.

The bottom line is this: Exodus, schmexodus. Senator Schumer’s interest in a foreign call center tax has almost nothing to do with jobs. His primary interest is to create yet another ongoing money pot for a government that will not control itself.

Shame on the insufferably lazy AP for giving the New York senator argumentative cover.

Cross-posted at

Six Months Late to a Game That’s Long Been Over: NYT, Newsweek Acknowledge ClimateGate’s Damage

GlobalWarmingParts of the U.S. establishment press have acknowledged “climate science” reality, six months late.

The fallout from ClimateGate (link is to the NewsBusters tag), the name eventually given to the scandal resulting from the unauthorized posting of over 1,000 emails and dozens of documents obtained from University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) in the UK, goes back a full six months to November of last year.

On November 20, Australia’s Andrew Bolt crisply described the contents of the aforementioned items as providing substantial evidence of: “Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.”

Six long months later, as the American Thinker’s Marc Sheppard observed, both the New York Times and Newsweek have recognized the fallout while still not conceding the argument. The Times does so in an article by Elisabeth Rosenthal about crumbling public support in Great Britain and elsewhere, while Newsweek’s Stefan Thiel addresses “The backlash against climate science.”

What a difference three years makes, says Sheppard:

Of greater note — the same powerhouse publication that in its August 2007 cover story — The Truth about Denial — described climate skepticism as “an undermining of the science” now challenges the same AGW orthodoxy it once preached.

The Times’s Rosenthal bitterly clings to settled-science silliness in her first paragraph, and shortly thereafter notes a plunge in public support that has been present for three months:

Last month hundreds of environmental activists crammed into an auditorium here to ponder an anguished question: If the scientific consensus on climate change has not changed, why have so many people turned away from the idea that human activity is warming the planet?

… A survey in February by the BBC found that only 26 percent of Britons believed that “climate change is happening and is now established as largely manmade,” down from 41 percent in November 2009. A poll conducted for the German magazine Der Spiegel found that 42 percent of Germans feared global warming, down from 62 percent four years earlier.

Of course the claimed scientific consensus has never really existed. But the CRU e-mails showed that there wasn’t even confident consensus among scientists who presented a public front of being entirely in lockstep. This is best illustrated in a memorable passage from a Kevin Trenberth e-mail (Trenberth is head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado):

Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low.

This is January weather (see the Rockies baseball playoff game was canceled on Saturday and then played last night in below freezing weather). …

The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Newsweek’s Thiel is even harsher on the warmists’ conduct and temperament:

The backlash against climate science is also about the way in which leading scientists allied themselves with politicians and activists to promote their cause. Some of the IPCC’s most-quoted data and recommendations were taken straight out of unchecked activist brochures, newspaper articles, and corporate reports—including claims of plummeting crop yields in Africa and the rising costs of warming-related natural disasters, both of which have been refuted by academic studies.

Just as damaging, many climate scientists have responded to critiques by questioning the integrity of their critics, rather than by supplying data and reasoned arguments. When other researchers aired doubt about the IPCC’s prediction that Himalayan glaciers will melt by 2035, the IPCC’s powerful chief, Rajendra Pachauri, trashed their work as “voodoo science.” Even today, after dozens of IPCC exaggerations have surfaced, leading climate officials like U.N. Environment Program chief Achim Steiner and Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research head Joachim Schellnhuber continue to tar-brush critics as “anti-Enlightenment” and engaging in “witch hunts.”

In a delicious piece at the American Interest, Walter Russell Mead asserts how totally unacceptable the Times’s attempt at “better late than never” is. In a critique that could equally be applied to Newsweek and the vast majority of the establishment press, Mead writes:

Who knows, in a few more months or years, somebody may write a story about the damage that the culture of cocooning and coddling did to a movement that only slowly learned that it had lost the public trust. Somebody might even interview the editors and journalists involved to find out why the collapse of the climate change movement’s political momentum was too unimportant to print while the news was still fresh. Somebody else might look at that journalistic culture and write a story about how failures of aggressive reporting and news editing undermined the credibility of some of the greatest news gathering organizations on earth.

But I wouldn’t publish any of that stuff too quickly. Stories this big and this rich need to be properly aged.

Cross-posted at

Immigration Reform … in Massachusetts?

Filed under: Immigration,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 10:35 am

massachusettsNote: This post went up at the Washington Examiner’s OpinionZone and was teased here at BizzyBlog on Friday.


Excuse me for questioning the sincerity of ultraliberal Massachusetts Democrats’ sudden interest in reforming the state’s immigration laws.

At first glance, what the Bay State’s Senate did Thursday afternoon is stunning. A seemingly shellshocked Boston Globe began its story as follows:

The Massachusetts Senate passed a far-reaching crackdown yesterday on illegal immigrants and those who hire them, going further, senators said, than any immigration bill proposed over the past five years.

In a measure of just how politically potent illegal immigration has become, the Senate, on a 28-10 vote, replaced a far milder budget amendment it had passed Wednesday. The sweeping provision, if it makes it into law, would toughen or expand rules that bar illegal immigrants from public health care, housing, and higher education benefits.

The amendment would also clear the way for courts, the state attorney general, and even average citizens to get new tools, including an anonymous hot line, to report illegal immigrants or companies that employ them to the government.

This seems way too easy.

The state’s upper chamber has 35 Democrats and only five Republicans. In the House, Dems have a 141-19 majority. The Bay State’s Governor is Democrat Deval Patrick.

Senate passage is only one step in the legislative sausage-making process. The Globe noted that the bill not only would have to “make the final budget plan lawmakers approve for next fiscal year, but it would also have to survive a possible veto by Governor Deval Patrick, who has been cool to such initiatives.”

I would love to be proven wrong, but it seems that if the Senate’s action quietly disappears from the state’s final budget, Senators up for reelection will be able to run to voters and say, “See, we’re tough on illegal immigration, but that darned House forced us to either drop our bill or shut down state operations. But don’t worry; we’ll get to it next year, after we’re safely reelected.” Sure.

Massachusetts Democrats could be going for a twofer, wherein the House and Senate both pass the bill and get bragging rights, only to see Patrick exercise his line-item veto power to surgically remove it from the state budget. Veto-override attempts in one or both chambers would “somehow” fall just short of the two-thirds threshold necessary to succeed. In the Senate’s case, only two of yesterday’s 28 supporters would have to change their minds. In such situations, the legislators will caucus and decide who the vote-flippers will be, selecting among those who are not up for reelection, have announced their retirement, or are in seats that are so safe they can’t possibly fall victim to voter backlash.

The Globe article quotes a Massachusetts Tea Party activist who shares in the cynicism: “Whoo hoo! They voted for it. Must be an election year.”

That it is. Voters need to cast their ballots based on candidates’ lifetime records and statements. They must avoid being fooled by clever posturing over contrived unsuccessful efforts.

Newman Center bicycle race promotes evangelization on wheels in North Dakota

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 6:36 am

From Fargo, North Dakota:

May 29, 2010 / 01:14 pm

When it comes to evangelization, the Newman Centers in Fargo and Grand Forks put forth a lot of effort and cover a lot of ground. During a bicycle race last month, more than 500 people actively demonstrated their faith by riding 40 miles to raise awareness of the Newman Centers and their role in bringing the Catholic faith to others.

In addition to being a successful evangelization tool, the race generated more than $150,000 that will support the work of the North Dakota Newman Centers.

“The people were so generous,” Deacon Sam Pupino said from St. Thomas Aquinas Newman Center in Grand Forks. Their financial donations ensure that “we can do the evangelization that we need to do on these campuses.”

The stories of participants are as varied as they are. Some participants wore costumes. One participant stopped to fix other racers’ bicycles, lending them another bike so they could continue the race while he made repairs. One rider has ridden in all of the 25 races that have been held throughout the years. Two children in elementary school raised more than $150 each in pledges. A ninth grader raised $1,000.

The evangelization reached well beyond North Dakota’s borders. The parents of one student traveled from Illinois to participate, and took home with them information about how to coordinate bike races at their local Newman Center.

This annual visible and physical evangelization effort is also a friendly competition between the two Newman Centers. This year St. Thomas Aquinas Newman Center earned the trophy with 233 racers and more than $85,000 in donations. St. Paul’s Newman Center in Fargo had 283 racers and raised more than $72,000.

Go here for the rest of the story.

May 29, 2010

Psst: Voters in Oklahoma and Other States to Vote on ObamaCare in November

NoObamaCare0809Over the past two years, yours truly has noted how the economy in Oklahoma has with very little media attention outperformed most of the rest of the nation. The Sooner State’s much lower unemployment rate, higher GDP growth, and higher personal income growth have “strangely” coincided with the passage of a strict illegal immigration law-enforcement measure in 2007.

Now there’s another significant news item out of Oklahoma that the establishment press has also virtually ignored. In November, voters there are going to decide whether to opt out of the statist health care legislation passed by Congress in March, also known as ObamaCare, by passing a state constitutional amendment.

Oklahoma is not alone. Two larger states will also have state constitutional opt-outs on the November ballot.

Rush Limbaugh brought the Oklahoma news to his listeners’ attention yesterday, and linked to this story. If that seems an odd choice, it’s because press coverage in general has been either curt, dismissive, or non-existent.

Here are key paragraphs from Peter J. Smith’s LifeSite report:

Oklahoma Voters May Nullify Fed Health Care Law in November

Voters in Oklahoma will be given a chance in November to decide whether they want to reject the core of the recently-enacted national health care reform, which includes taxpayer-funded abortion and requires individuals to buy health insurance or pay a penalty, thanks to a legislative action that bypassed the objections of pro-abortion Democrat Gov. Brad Henry.

The state’s House of Representatives approved Senate Joint Resolution 59 with a strong bipartisan majority of 88-9. SJR 59 allows citizens to vote up or down a state constitutional amendment that would prohibit “forced participation in a health care system,” and allow individuals to pay directly for health services and carry private health insurance.

The House had waited to act on the Senate resolution, in hopes of overriding the governor’s veto of a resolution that would have enacted the ban via statute. However, after the veto override attempt failed last week, the House enacted the version putting the question to voters.

Because the SJR 59 is a referendum question, the decision will bypass the governor and go directly to the people on the November 2 state ballot. The measure is based on American Legislative Exchange Council’s model Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act.

If enacted, Oklahoma will follow the lead of Virginia, Idaho, and Arizona in challenging President Barack Obama’s signature legislation on the basis of state law, but with a twist: the Virginia challenge to the health care bill is based on a state statute, while Oklahoma would up the ante with a constitutional amendment.

Voters in Florida and Arizona will also go to the polls in November to vote on constitutional amendments opting their states out of the national health care law.

The Associated Press’s coverage has been limited to a four-paragraph item that is not available in a search on “Oklahoma voters” (not in quotes), the first two words in the article, at its main site.

Despite the fact that an Oklahoma House resolution overrode Democratic Governor Brad Henry’s veto by 88-9, the Tulsa World’s Barbara Hoberock gave four of her report’s 13 paragraph to an opponent who argued that the “federal health-care reform law will provide access to health care for people in her district who do not have it.” As has been pointed out frequently, everyone has “access” by law, even if they don’t have insurance.

At the Oklahoman, Michael McNutt’s more balanced report contained a quote from the governor’s spokesperson that goes to the heart of an inevitiable federal government challenge:

Paul Sund, Henry’s spokesman, said passage of SJR 59 “just sets the stage for yet another lawsuit against the state and more unnecessary legal fees for Oklahoma taxpayers.”

“No state has the authority to selectively ignore federal laws of its choosing, and any attempt to do so will be ruled unconstitutional by the courts,” Sund said.

Someone should have asked Mr. Sund why we even bother having states if the federal government can pass any law it likes while imposing any mandates it pleases.

Cross-posted at

Positivity: Former Colombian model shares conversion story

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 10:23 am

From Bogota, Colombia:

May 25, 2010 / 12:02 pm

Amada Rosa Pérez was one of Colombia’s top models before she disappeared from the public eye five years ago. Now she is making headlines once again, but this time by sharing her conversion story.

Amada explained to the Colombian newspaper “El Tiempo,” that she had been diagnosed with a disease that left her with only 60 percent of her hearing in her left ear. The news caused her to question her lifestyle. “I felt disappointed, unsatisfied, directionless, submerged in fleeting pleasures …” she said.

“I always sought answers and the world never gave them to me.”

“Before I was always in a hurry, stressed out, and got upset easily,” she continued. “Now I live in peace, the world doesn’t appeal to me, I enjoy every moment the Lord gives me. I go to Mass, I pray the Holy Rosary daily, as well as the Divine Mercy Chaplet at 3 p.m.

“I go to confession frequently,” she added.

Amada now works tirelessly with a Marian religious community in Colombia.

“Being a model means being a benchmark, someone whose beliefs are worthy of being imitated, and I grew tired of being a model of superficiality.

Go here for the rest of the story.

May 28, 2010

Disengaged, Disjointed … Almost Disinterested

Filed under: Environment,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 12:40 pm

At the Hill’s Blog Briefing Room:

Asked if this was the president’s Hurricane Katrina, (Chief Deputy Whip Kevin) McCarthy (R-Calif.) responded, “It very well could be.”

He explained that Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), who represents the district in which the BP explosion occurred, said he tried reaching the president last Thursday to discuss possible solutions.

“He was called back by a staffer on Friday who said that the president was too busy to talk to him. He understood that until I turned on the TV and saw that he was golfing and went out to California to do a fundraiser. He said — six days now and he’s never even spoken to him,” McCarthy said.

Oh it seems much worse than than Katrina, whether it gets reported as such or not.

In Katrina, state and local officials in Louisiana didn’t do their jobs. With the BP rig, it’s the government that hasn’t been doing its job. That’s no longer arguable.

‘I Would Recommend You Panic’

Filed under: Economy,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 12:20 pm

Echoing a classic TV program, the question is, “Who do you trust?”

The choices are: an Ivy League professor, a journalist, and a hedge-fund manager with skin in the game.

At this video, see which one recommends panic (question begins at about the 1:05 mark), and which one turns into a snotty whiner (about 5 minutes in; HT ZeroHedge):

Latest WEOZ Post: ‘Immigration Reform … in Massachusetts?’

Filed under: Immigration,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 10:56 am

It’s here at the Washington Examiner’s OpinionZone blog.

It starts as follows:

Excuse me for questioning the sincerity of ultraliberal Massachusetts Democrats’ sudden interest in reforming the state’s immigration laws.

Read on here.

Lightning Links (052810, Morning)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 10:53 am

So much happening, so little time to comment:

  • At Hot Air“CNN poll: 82% oppose boycotts of Arizona over immigration-enforcement law.” The poll (PDF) is here. Discussion question: Is there a reason to question the timing, given CNN’s affiliation with Opinion Research Corporation, an outfit with heavy Clintonian connections?
  • Michelle Malkin is spot-on in employing adjectives like “diffident,” “bizarrely detached,” “eyes glazed over,” and  ”more self-pity than compassion” to describe Barack Obama’s pattern of behavior from Fort Hood to the thwarted Christmas bombing to yesterday’s press conference in her column and accompanying commentary today.
  • Can’t make this up — “NJ Teacher who complained of low pay to Gov. Chris Christie makes >$100,000 with benefits
  • Congressman Tom Price at — “Bloggers Beware – They’re Coming After You!” (HT Instapundit)
  • At the New York Times“In New Era of TV, Rival Hosts Drown Out King.” Quote: “His audience has been cut in half since the last presidential election.” The Times essentially whines that supposedly cool, objective guys like King are being drowned out by partisans. Spare me.
  • Pressing Priorities “Obama on NBA: Ticket prices too high”
  • Here are two things that can’t really exist in the same universe. First, this opening sentence at a USA Today article about a broader USAT/Gallup poll: “Americans are increasingly optimistic about the economy.” Second, at Gallup today: “U.S. Economic Confidence Declining in Late May.”