Obama's poll numbers on the economy remain bleak. Something for his advisors (and opponents!) to ponder - higher oil prices are in part the result of a stronger global and US economy. However, the stronger economy won't help the public mood unless people see job growth to offset higher prices at the pump, and right now the leads and lags are not working for the Team That Got Osama.
Of course, Administration foot-dragging on offshore drilling permits, fracking rules, and All Else Oil won't help them with the public either. And since higher oil prices are the centerpiece of the Admin strategy to promote conservation and alternative energy, well, any promises they make to Do Something come off as a bit hollow.
How can they impoverish the US and enrich Soros if Americans start providing our own energy?
An old friend -- a guy who once majored in physics! -- posted a Facebook comment calling for the US to start using "biomass energy" by burning the stalks and husks left over from the harvesting of corn. Amazing how living in DC and working for the government can dull a formerly sharp mind.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 10, 2011 at 10:48 AM
I call for the US to start using "bureaumass energy" by burning Washington DC.
I see a new campaign slogan "Let's finish in 2012 what the Brits started in 1812".
Posted by: Ignatz | May 10, 2011 at 10:55 AM
All well and good, but doesn't Obama have about 50% working for government? Captive voters? This is the stat that most interests me, irrespective of the general condition of the economy when it comes to the election.
It's one thing to disapprove of the economy; quite another to vote oneself out of work.
Posted by: MarkO | May 10, 2011 at 10:59 AM
The Boston Globe has a hard-hitting piece on fuel prices this morning. Apparently Businesses pass along the price of fuel.
O. M. G.
Who knew? I think the only proper response would be to penalize them by raising the tax rate on businesses, which you know they'd never pass along to consumers.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | May 10, 2011 at 11:00 AM
The gas prices are seriously NOT funny anymore. It cost me $60 to fill up yesterday. The green kooks have had their way for decades. Enough.
Posted by: Janet | May 10, 2011 at 11:08 AM
Who knew?
Plus there's that profit overhead. If only we could just have government operated gas stations, just like the post office.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 10, 2011 at 11:09 AM
--All well and good, but doesn't Obama have about 50% working for government?--
No, and I can't figure out the provenance of that stat.
About 17% work for the gov. There are about 131 million workers in the USA of whom about 22 million work for the various levels of government; <3 million for the Feds the rest state and local.
Posted by: Ignatz | May 10, 2011 at 11:15 AM
Plus there's that profit overhead. If only we could just have government operated gas stations, just like the post office.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 10, 2011 at 11:09 AM
Yeah, cause I am sure that putting unionized government workers and an entire new agancy in charge of fule distrobution would solve so many problems. Just look at how stable postage prices have remained over the last 20 years! Ok, that's a bad example, but it would be a good example if that damned privately operated, non-union FedEx wasn't stealing all of the post office's best customers! [/sarc]
Posted by: Ranger | May 10, 2011 at 11:17 AM
Speculators are the cause of all of this! Speculators!
And so, I have personally ordered the strike to kill or capture speculators, and will, as CoC, lead Seal Team Six on a daring raid that I have personally planned and ordered and mandated and ordered to be planned and mandated.
May Allah...er "God", if you will, bless me and may I in turn bless all of you with my gutsy leadership and general cowboy demeanor. Uh, which is not to say I am a bad cowboy like some people who I will not mention, whose last name starts with George W. Bush. I'm more of a funky, dancing kind of cowboy like the one in the Village People, or possibly a cast member of "Oklahoma".
Now watch this drive...
Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama, International Man of Action | May 10, 2011 at 11:21 AM
The gas prices are seriously NOT funny anymore. It cost me $60 to fill up yesterday.
Last week I filled up my Jetta and had the pump stop at $50.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 10, 2011 at 11:25 AM
Stamp speculators, ranger. Stamp speculators.
I'm going after them next.
Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama, International Man of Action | May 10, 2011 at 11:25 AM
Just yesterday I ran across a claim that the plume from biomass burning contributed less to global warming than that from fossil fuel burning. I can guess why the claim is being made, but don't know the how's of the research. Apparently it has something to do with the interaction of each with black carbon. It is a new claim.
=============
Posted by: Well, new to me. | May 10, 2011 at 11:31 AM
Ooh, Iggy, 'bureaumass burning'. That's vintage, yes, Suh!
=======
Posted by: Cork it to me. Cork, cork, cork. | May 10, 2011 at 11:34 AM
No, and I can't figure out the provenance of that stat.
He was probably thinking of the (nearly) 50% or so who don't pay federal income taxes. Or maybe he meant the other 50-plus percent who do turn over a chunk of our income to the federal government. Not quite the same as working for the government.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 10, 2011 at 11:34 AM
Inflate your tires, and gird your loins.
Or vice versa.
Hell, I dunno. I just work here. Only it's like I'm not allowed to do that much. But "not doing much" means I don't get to play golf and they leave me in charge of the White House a lot.
I lead a lot of tours.
Posted by: "Scranton" Joe Biden, National Man of...how's that go? | May 10, 2011 at 11:34 AM
black carbon
Clearly a case of institutional and chemical racism.
Posted by: Eric Holder | May 10, 2011 at 11:35 AM
Don't worry, Janet. If the Dems have their way with raising gas taxes, pretty soon we won't be able to afford driving anyway. But we'll have the prospect of looking forward to high speed choo choos that will take us where we don't want to go!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 10, 2011 at 11:36 AM
" I call for the US to start using "bureaumass energy" by burning Washington DC.
I see a new campaign slogan "Let's finish in 2012 what the Brits started in 1812"
Heh, Just tip me off first so I can hightail it out of here, please.
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2011 at 11:36 AM
I can't think of any gutsy calls for Jughead to make that would help.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | May 10, 2011 at 11:39 AM
Preview is my friend.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | May 10, 2011 at 11:40 AM
I ran across a claim that the plume from biomass burning contributed less to global warming than that from fossil fuel burning.
For the same reason, to take an example lefties wouldn't understand, that transfer payments contribute less to economic growth than producing wealth does. The former is just shifting stuff around.
Posted by: bgates | May 10, 2011 at 11:44 AM
What went wrong?
========
Posted by: Petrobras. | May 10, 2011 at 11:47 AM
--Heh, Just tip me off first so I can hightail it out of here, please.--
Don't worry clarice, you'll see the glow of the approaching torches over the horizon, but I do expect you to have a pike and pitchfork concession stand set up for the out-of-stater's convenience.
Posted by: Ignatz | May 10, 2011 at 11:49 AM
Ooh, nice, bg; good one on the carbon cycle.
I don't think it's that though, that biomass is CO2 just now removed from the atmosphere. It had something to do with the plumes, and that racist ugly carbon, the powdery sort.
===========
Posted by: Pet your arms. | May 10, 2011 at 11:49 AM
Just yesterday I ran across a claim that the plume from biomass burning contributed less to global warming than that from fossil fuel burning. I can guess why the claim is being made, but don't know the how's of the research.
Out of the apparent belief that burning plants means more plants will take the same carbon up and bind it again. In contrast with burning much older plants, which apparently aren't biologically active anymore.
The problem is, there's very little energy in biomass. What's left over from harvesting corn (for example) is essentially dry grass. It'll burn hot, but not for very long. Then there's the energy needed to collect and transport it -- and the energy to produce and spread the fertilizers to replace the nutrients you've removed from the soil. If there is a net positive, it's very, very small.
There are certainly cases where biomass makes sense -- sugar refineries burn the waste cane, for example -- but they're rare, usually have another reason for having the waste on hand, and even in those cases mostly just reduce the amount of mass-produced energy the site uses.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 10, 2011 at 11:50 AM
Yes, Rob & bg, the older claim, that biofuel is helpful because it is also taking CO2 as well as giving it to the atmosphere, is valid. I've heard a newer one, but can't explain it. Maybe I'll bother to do so if it is going to become memetic, emphasis on the emetic.
=============
Posted by: The big news is dissension in the British cabinet over climate policy. | May 10, 2011 at 11:53 AM
Dave, that chart should mark the Low Point as "Obama declares war on energy"
Posted by: Old Lurker | May 10, 2011 at 11:54 AM
For years I though al Qaeda would put a dirty bomb over Houston or Dallas.
=======
Posted by: Now I don't know what the ISI is gonna do. | May 10, 2011 at 11:55 AM
It had something to do with the plumes, and that racist ugly carbon, the powdery sort.
Ah. So they're back to magic thinking again.
Figures. It's the essential element of "green" religion -- purity. If it comes from a plant or animal, they assume it's Good -- and the less well-known to western science and agriculture the better.
I'm constantly amazed that people who will drink "soy milk" and try to get the protein from tofu also complain about trace chemicals in plastic that have a vague similarity to estrogen. Have they looked at what's in soy?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | May 10, 2011 at 11:55 AM
OT
The audio from the 4th Circuit argument will be available at 2 Eastern here
http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/OAaudiotop.htm
I bake my own bread and pizza and am thinking of getting/making a wood fired outdoor stove. I haven't room for one that takes up a big footprint and so far this one seems to be the cheapest and best for my purposes though far from the most attractive.
:http://www.outdora.com/20102sowfdo-sole-gourmet-wood-fired-double-oven.html
If anyone has any recommendations, I'm all ears.
I have been looking at plans for building your own--from scratch and also with some purchased components, but as neither I nor my husband is handy, I'd have to get my handyman to do most of this and I think it could quickly get more expensive than is worth it.
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2011 at 12:08 PM
I've read the bumpersticker 'Soy Is Murder' fairly often and wondered what it meant.
My fave bumpersticker, on a big Buick in Oklahoma, was: If you don't have an oil well, get one.
=======
Posted by: It's time to worry when they focus on 'energy footprint' instead of 'carbon footprint'. | May 10, 2011 at 12:11 PM
Big round Spanish brick oven, clarice.
=========
Posted by: Can I be your wholesaler? | May 10, 2011 at 12:13 PM
Adapt a Kelly Kettle. See L!ink U!nder N!ame for the Magic Cookpot.
===========
Posted by: Willis @ Work. | May 10, 2011 at 12:15 PM
Don't know if you've run across this page, Clarice. Some pretty nice looking ones, but none as portable as the one at your link.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 10, 2011 at 12:22 PM
Great idea but I don't think it'll work for my purposes..as fr the Spanish brick oven..I love them, but looking at the plans I'm seeing several days work which will make it quite a bit more expensive than the sole..
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2011 at 12:23 PM
Clarice, I've always wanted a wood burning oven myself, due to my love of home made pizza, but have found the masonry ones quite expensive. I recall there was one that was some kind of a do it yourself kit, but even that was expensive. Seems to me you need a good mason. I have never seen the kind you linked to.
Posted by: peter | May 10, 2011 at 12:35 PM
Where is Rick Ballard? I want to know if the following is a true fact. It is was stated by someone who refutes that the lax underwriting standards instigated by the CRA were the major cause of the sub-prime crisis:
(( Especially by dollar value, the biggest chunk of the mortgage crises was prime, alt-a or option payment. Those were issued to (gasp!) suburban middle class and upper middle class borrowers. ))
Posted by: Chubby | May 10, 2011 at 12:38 PM
Gas prices? Did I mention I have a horse?
Posted by: MarkO | May 10, 2011 at 12:38 PM
Ugh, I just learned that Dear Leader is coming to town today for a couple of fundraisers and his motorcade is goign to head to the center of downtown in the middle of rush hour:
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/obama-visit-will-be-during-tuesday-evening-rush-1464637.html
Thanks a lot, Barry.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 10, 2011 at 12:43 PM
Chelsea Clinton's Husband Launching His Own Hedge Fund With "Two Guys From Goldman"
Posted by: Neo | May 10, 2011 at 12:55 PM
Chubby, I think the CRA was the first of many bonehead measures taken by both the government and the private sector that brought about the bubble and the collapse. I highly recommend "The Big Short" by Michael Lewis for the private-sector madness.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 10, 2011 at 12:59 PM
Loved "The Big Short." Required reading on the corruption of the regulators. They simply passed the risk of loss on to the taxpayers. Everyone else made money.
Posted by: MarkO | May 10, 2011 at 01:07 PM
Porchlight:
I'll be playing 18 holes starting around 2 p.m., so that should get me back to the clubhouse around 8 p.m. Give me an hour to add up my scorecard, and another five minutes to get my Secret Service detachment to do it for me, and I should be ready for you to buy me a drink around 9:30 or so
I'll be the one over in the back of the clubhouse smoking a jay and sharpening my bayonet.
You would think people in Austin would be thanking me...
Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama, International Man of Action | May 10, 2011 at 01:08 PM
Hell, "Two Guys" was a pizza place. Everyone has a hedge fund.
Posted by: MarkO | May 10, 2011 at 01:08 PM
Lewis also leaves no doubt about how dumb and hapless the ratings agencies are.
As my dad used to say, the only one who really cares about your money is you.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 10, 2011 at 01:19 PM
PPP:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | May 10, 2011 at 01:26 PM
The MFM has frozen Trump out ever since Preznit Action Hero personally led the SEALS into OBL's compound and snapped his pencil neck so effectively that the photos can't be released because they'll be used to open a large number of Chicago cold cases. Wasn't that how Biden characterized it?
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 10, 2011 at 01:43 PM
Loved "The Big Short." Required reading on the corruption of the regulators. They simply passed the risk of loss on to the taxpayers. Everyone else made money.
Yes, though I think Lewis's emphasis was more on the mass blind hysteria among the WS geniuses. In fact he comes close to saying in the end that the ultimate cause was the change in ownership structure of the investment banks from partnerships to public corporation. Essentially this has allowed the insiders/managers/traders to screw the shareholders (and, yes, the taxpayers, but that's not Lewis's big beef). The crisis was just the latest manifestation, aided and abetted by the incompetence of the rating agencies.
One has to read between the lines a bit to see a critique of regulators. He only barely mentions the idea that the expectation of being bailed out helped to fuel the fire. It's a great read, though.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 10, 2011 at 01:46 PM
Hey Barack,
LOL. Hope your caddy has a parasol for you - it'll be a trifle warm on the links come 2 pm. Just try not to start a wildfire with your cig butts, okay.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 10, 2011 at 01:46 PM
No matter about Trump, he was never really going to run anyway IMHO.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 10, 2011 at 01:47 PM
I was pleased to hear Trump this weekend say that he wouldn't run as an independent, because that would ensure Obama's win.
Perhaps we are sliding into Muslim domination more swiftly than I had imagined. I've been picking up furniture items on Craigslist for my upcoming Alaskan island home, and I just now noticed that someone is selling a "BurqaLounger", instead of a BarcaLounger.
Posted by: Mark Folkestad | May 10, 2011 at 01:48 PM
Trump drew blood, and can now bow out. A win-win.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 10, 2011 at 01:54 PM
jimmyk,
I saw mention of an UG economics thesis that formed much of the basis for Lewis's book. Have you read that? If so, is it worthwhile?
Posted by: DrJ | May 10, 2011 at 01:56 PM
I don't think Trump will bow out, and I am delighted to hear that he said he would not run as an independent.
Posted by: bolitha | May 10, 2011 at 01:59 PM
--Especially by dollar value, the biggest chunk of the mortgage crises was prime, alt-a or option payment. Those were issued to (gasp!) suburban middle class and upper middle class borrowers.--
I's suggest reading anything by Peter Wehner on this topic, who was on the commission which supposedly looked into this, and that whitewashed the GSEs.
Fannie and Freddie were quite clever in reclassifying what anywhere else would have been subprime loans and carrying them on their books as not subprime. In fact a huge portion of their mortgages were to high risk borrowers and as anyone with a brain can remember the contagion began in the subprime swamp.
The resulting spread of defaults into more credit worthy borrowers as the house of cards built upon lax lending standards and free Fed money collapsed is like blaming typhoid cases who happened to be standing next to Typhoid Mary.
Posted by: Ignatz | May 10, 2011 at 02:02 PM
I still say Trump should try and get the democrat nomination. He is suited for it.
We learned on the trip that Dick Morris is very good friends with Mike Huckabee and he could not understand why only 2 people supported him for the nominee.
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | May 10, 2011 at 02:05 PM
Those were issued to (gasp!) suburban middle class and upper middle class borrowers
I'm trying to imagine a scenario in which a relaxation of lending standards does not result in higher prices, a greater spread between high and low prices, borrowers' creditworthiness getting inflated by the banks, and thus most of the dollar value of the bubble occurring in loans to ostensibly prime borrowers at the high end of the market.
Posted by: bgates | May 10, 2011 at 02:06 PM
I saw mention of an UG economics thesis that formed much of the basis for Lewis's book.
That would be this. Yes, I've looked at it. I wouldn't say it was the basis for the book but it may have been the inspiration. It is kind of dry and "small picture"--it has lots of details and data but (sensibly) doesn't try to answer the ultimate questions, for example:
Still, an impressive effort for an undergrad. Too bad she wasn't a few years older and working at Lehman.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 10, 2011 at 02:10 PM
Clarice,
If you can get a bricklayer or plasterer then thse are pretty reasonable and come as close to Italian wood burning pizza ovens. Its a UK firm but they have a US branch. LUN
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 10, 2011 at 02:16 PM
jimmyk & DrJ,
Did you ever read about David Li and his "Gaussian cupola Function"? Nostalgia for my old econometric lectures and exercises [but using Fortran on keypunch].LUN
Posted by: Jack is Back! | May 10, 2011 at 02:21 PM
jimmyk, that would be the one. It sounds like you preferred Lewis.
JiB, I've read the article you linked, but that's all I know about Li and his risk model.
Posted by: DrJ | May 10, 2011 at 02:26 PM
BTW Daddy if you stop by, I fulfilled your mission. I did not want to mention it until I was safely back at my desk. Take that Mark Steyn!
Posted by: Jane (sit on the couch or save your country) | May 10, 2011 at 02:32 PM
This is fun: NZ court says Greenpeace too political to count as a charity.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | May 10, 2011 at 02:38 PM
It sounds like you preferred Lewis.
Lewis you can read at the beach and get caught up in the personalities, but you might not agree with his take. Barnett-Hart is more "we report, you decide," but is only somewhat more exciting than reading a stock prospectus.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 10, 2011 at 02:43 PM
I just could not resist this.
--All well and good, but doesn't Obama have about 50% working for government?--
Years ago, working in a Federal Office Building with over 5000 employees. Someone ask the Building Manager how many people work in this building, he replied 50%..and from my 30+ years experience that is so true.
Posted by: Agent J. (formally known as "J".. | May 10, 2011 at 02:48 PM
JiB, re your article, ditto what DrJ said. I've read similar things about the Black-Scholes model, and Lewis actually explains some of its pitfalls in The Big Short. Part of the problem is that you put physicists and mathematicians into these financial firms and they can do the whizbang math in their sleep but they don't necessarily see the bigger picture. (Not that the economists always do either, but they have a better chance.)
Posted by: jimmyk | May 10, 2011 at 02:55 PM
I did,ext. Thanks. I have been scouring the IT and am astonished at the creativity and variety of bakers all around the world.
Thanks, JiB.
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2011 at 02:55 PM
Up thread I mentioned googling Peter Wehner. My mistake; I meant Peter Wallison, who was on the commission looking into the causes of the financial crisis. Here's his dissent from the FCIC whitewash of the GSEs.
And if anyone wants a good laugh read this short article from 2007 about how wrong Peter Wallison was.
Sample line:
Posted by: Ignatz | May 10, 2011 at 03:04 PM
I fulfilled your mission.
Well done, Jane!
Posted by: Janet | May 10, 2011 at 03:07 PM
Li made one fatal mistake in his risk metrics, Gaussian vs. Poisson, IMO.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 10, 2011 at 03:07 PM
Who knew that Allahu Akbar means: "If I don't get to a toilet right away, things are going to get messy!" See LUN (via Instapundit).
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 10, 2011 at 03:08 PM
Jane, do you have any inside word on whether the Mass. Constitutional Convention is going to take up putting on the ballot a proposed constitutional amendment to allow a graduated income tax in Massachusetts? I know it's been under consideration, but I have lost track of whether it is up for consideration. See LUN for a Boston Herald blog post on the issue.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 10, 2011 at 03:15 PM
The best airline security is crew and passengers who immediately recognize a threat and take action to subdue or eliminate those who yell "Allahu Akbar!"
These are probing attacks, and we must remain vigilant and prove that we won't just sit there anymore hoping the "authorities" will save us.
Posted by: fdcol63 | May 10, 2011 at 03:21 PM
BHO's latest campaign stop has me seething like the Texas wildfires:
Texas burns, Obama fund raises - LUN
Posted by: OldTimer | May 10, 2011 at 03:22 PM
clarice - We have a 1951 Home Comfort wood burning kitchen stove that would work great for your needs..and is there anything that smells better then fresh bread right out of the oven.. the taste..with home made butter..with a little home made maple syrup. living off the land is so romantic.
Posted by: Agent J. (formally known as "J".. | May 10, 2011 at 03:23 PM
and Jane,did you see that Ann Barnhardt (Lindsey you Jackass Graham) is gonna be speaking in Mass..
Details at the end of the link.
Posted by: Janet | May 10, 2011 at 03:23 PM
" ... living off the land is so romantic ..."
Until you have to squat over a hole and wipe yourself with a handful of leaves or bark.
Posted by: fdcol63 | May 10, 2011 at 03:24 PM
Someone should develop a device that detects people yelling "Allahu Akbar!" in airplanes and instantly liquidates them, using either poisoned darts or some sort of focused laser. I would go so far as to support government research in this area.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 10, 2011 at 03:27 PM
Until you have to squat over a hole and wipe yourself with a handful of leaves or bark.
No those are the neighbors down the road..we have running water..
Posted by: Agent J. (formally known as "J".. | May 10, 2011 at 03:28 PM
OldTimer,
You're going to love this. From the El Paso Times:
My bold. If they buy this carp in El Paso, then they deserve this clown. Good Lord.
Posted by: Porchlight | May 10, 2011 at 03:29 PM
A lovely post over at theconservativetreehouse about root causes...
Which brings me to my pondering’s. I think fear is at the core of liberalism, and love/trust is at the core of conservatism. Liberalism is about control. Conservatism is about self-empowerment.
Posted by: Janet | May 10, 2011 at 03:29 PM
Clarice, I was thinking you ought to figure out how to build an oven into your hillside. Pizza ovens look like artificial caves -- why can't you build one in a REAL cave? With the ground to insulate, you could get a lot of cooking done with a small amount of wood...
Posted by: cathyf | May 10, 2011 at 03:30 PM
gird your tires and inflate your loins, Big Boy.
Posted by: Queen Lizzy's VahJayJay | May 10, 2011 at 03:32 PM
Porch, per my post yesterday, "never been safer" is less extreme than the WH (Carney) claiming "the border fence is complete".
One you can see; the other you can argue. Sorta like "Jobs Created or Saved" that I heard somewhere.
Posted by: Old Lurker | May 10, 2011 at 03:39 PM
Good news. Obama just said he has solved the border problem. In fact he says he has gone above and beyond what the republicans want. Who knew?
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2011 at 03:40 PM
"Until you have to squat over a hole and wipe yourself with a handful of leaves or bark."
Wow. So you have leaves and bark? Damn.
Posted by: MarkO | May 10, 2011 at 03:40 PM
TC,
I should know but I am very our of touch. Janet, I read that somewhere but I am not familiar with her. Is she worth going to see?
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2011 at 03:44 PM
He has his petulant voice on again.
Posted by: MayBee | May 10, 2011 at 03:45 PM
He's pretending there is a consensus in the country on how to fix immigration, and "Washington" is behind.
Posted by: MayBee | May 10, 2011 at 03:47 PM
Visiting Grandma as a youngster I remember her baking bread in an old wood stove. She had a perfectly modern oven which she use to store her bread after it was baked...
Posted by: glasater | May 10, 2011 at 03:53 PM
Gad he is dull.
Posted by: MayBee | May 10, 2011 at 03:55 PM
Just talked about a young Mexican immigrant who became an astronaut. That's what we are fighting for.
Posted by: MayBee | May 10, 2011 at 03:56 PM
We paid for this campaign speech and flight, by the way. So he can go to his Austin fundraiser for free. It was billed as a policy speech and there was not one new or specific policy point.
We need a way to audit the President's campaign activities. This is outrageous.
Posted by: MayBee | May 10, 2011 at 03:57 PM
"There's folks that want a moat, full of alligators...."
What an inspiring leader
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 10, 2011 at 04:00 PM
How do you stand listening to him, MayBee? I have to turn the channel or sound off whenever he shows up.
Posted by: Sue | May 10, 2011 at 04:01 PM
I don't know how I stand it. It's a compulsion.
(but Ext, I did miss him on 60 minutes. I was watching The Real Housewives of Orange County instead.)
Posted by: MayBee | May 10, 2011 at 04:05 PM
The astronaut was an illegal alien? Wow. First an Alaskan cop, and now an astronaut!
Posted by: Extraneus | May 10, 2011 at 04:06 PM
Model UN again.
Posted by: MarkO | May 10, 2011 at 04:06 PM
Read it and weep.
All three judges hearing the case, named to the bench by Democratic presidents, suggested the law is valid, despite objections from the state as well as private groups and individuals.
Past court rulings have affirmed "the significant federal authority in health care" said Judge Diana Gribbon Motz.
Judge Andre Davis said, "There was no doubt the individual mandate was necessary to Congress' mandate" in the area of reform legislation, calling the question a "slam dunk" in the federal government's favor.
Posted by: MarkO | May 10, 2011 at 04:11 PM
Visiting Grandma as a youngster I remember her baking bread in an old wood stove
Now we have a new generation of Grand Children that can say the same thing..except it is hard to get Grandpa off the computer to do it..
Posted by: Agent J. (formally known as "J".. | May 10, 2011 at 04:11 PM