The NY Times delivers a smile when they seek expert commentary on Obama's proposed welfare reform giving states more flexibility in setting work requirements. This appears at the end of the report:
Peter B. Edelman, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center and director of the Georgetown Center on Poverty, Inequality and Public Policy, called Republican opposition to the waivers “totally ridiculous.”
“This is an advisory that is all about making it easier to get a job, which I thought is what the Republicans wanted,” Mr. Edelman said. “To say that this is somehow against the concept of TANF is bizarre, because what we have here are restrictions that Congress enacted that, on the ground, make it harder to get from here to there.”
In addition to his role at Georgetown, Mr. Edelman was one of the Clinton Administration officials who famously resigned in 1998 to protest Clinton's signing of the 1996 welfare reform. One of his many grievances was the work requirement.
Dylan Matthews of the WaPo, writing at Ezra Klein's blog, demonstrates an alternative way to introduce Mr. Edelman:
Peter Edelman, who served as assistant secretary of HHS under Clinton until he resigned in protest over the signing of welfare reform, tells me...
That doesn't seem so hard, but it was too tricky for the Times.
KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor weigh in on Penn State compared to Duke, and which interest cults hold sway: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303933704577532891512167490.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 09:05 AM
the question is WHY. Why would Scalia stoop to being interviewed by Piers Morgan? Seems beneath him somehow.
Posted by: Chubby | July 19, 2012 at 09:08 AM
"I'd prefer "RIP" so-and-so, or something other than "died.""
Yes, I prefer something like "pushing up daisies", "taking a dirt nap", "assumed room temperature", "hopped the twig" or "Checked in at Motel Deep 6".
Posted by: Ronny K | July 19, 2012 at 09:09 AM
It must reminded him of that Vizzini like exercise with Roberts, earlier in the term,
where the latter kept plugging square blocks
into round holes.
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 09:13 AM
Just another reson to love IowaHawk: http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/iowahawktweet.png
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 09:19 AM
RIP-- seems safest to me.
I agree with RonnyK, personal favorite euphemisms could unintentionally offend, mine is: "so and so, won't be coming down for breakfast."
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 09:21 AM
Here's a sample, because I'm not going to Josh Marshall's shop;
http://news.yahoo.com/everything-okay-between-antonin-scalia-john-roberts-033232995.html
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 09:22 AM
Another lousy weeks of 1st Time jobless claims-- 386,000. Bloomberg News shocked that they would go up 10% above the prior 4 day Independence Day work week.
For some reason al-Reuters is presenting that as good news.
Modest == nonexistent?
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 09:23 AM
(( I'm a Christian, but when you die, you die. ))
I find "passed on" far less insistent that life ends after the experience of death and I prefer it because it leaves open several possiblities. "Passed on" can mean passed on to death (end of life), to hell, to oblivion, or even perhaps to continuing life. Most Christians believe the latter.
Posted by: Chubby | July 19, 2012 at 09:25 AM
Well, Chubby, I think Scalia wants to sell his book.
Posted by: sailor | July 19, 2012 at 09:25 AM
Comeone, Captain, you don't believe in the forty grams of chocolate rations, pshaw, btw
the Sofia shahid, had a Michigan driver's licence, or so they say.
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 09:26 AM
NK, a euphemism I don't like is "gone home".
Posted by: Chubby | July 19, 2012 at 09:27 AM
chubby: I think sailor is correct. I notice when public figures are on a book tour, they do a lot of interviews that they might not otherwise.
Posted by: centralcal | July 19, 2012 at 09:29 AM
btw the Sofia shahid, had a Michigan driver's licence, or so they say.
I'm guessing a Dearborn address; assuming that doesn't offend CAIR.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 09:31 AM
well, yeah :), there is that sailor.
but I still wonder if authors can be picky about who interviews them, and still sell their books.
Posted by: Chubby | July 19, 2012 at 09:31 AM
Scalia on CNN?-- for better or worse, that Morgan interview will be played at thousands of airport terminal boarding areas-- right next to bokstores and in WiFi hotspots where the book can be downloaded. Hence, Scalia on CNN.
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 09:33 AM
Earlier this week Conrad Black had a column in NRO wherein he mentioned a 2008 LA Times article by Douglas Brinkley that was particularly obnoxious about him personally while reviewing a book he had recently published.
Sometime, last night, Doug Brinley called Conrad to deny any such article.
It is all quite amusing and a really classy take down by Mr. Black.
Posted by: centralcal | July 19, 2012 at 09:37 AM
On dirigisme again those deliberate searches started several days ago every day. Just that. It has to be tied to seeing that "you didn't build that" speech and someone saying it is a dirigiste view of economics and people deciding to look it up.
If I didn't already know how important that strategy was, the book I started this morning that I mentioned above certainly is a reminder.
Big Business pursuing a sustainable strategy will garner the best people and profits says gore.
That book is a perfect example of the engrenage in all these transformative plans. Break it into pieces that work together. How many business people can read a book and recognize that it's bad history or that you are citing a radical dogmatist for what caused WW1 or that quoting soros, sachs, and stiglitz on a point is not exactly a broad altruistic set of views.
No wonder hannity's folksiness seems put on. It is. And to me he is always the ATL guy.
Posted by: rse | July 19, 2012 at 09:39 AM
Brinkley who puffed up John Kerry, who turned Katrina into the second Santorini, 'the shreds
you say'
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 09:41 AM
Minus 17 at Raz today.
Trails Romney by 1.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 19, 2012 at 09:42 AM
On England's West Coast-- Aussie Adam Scott shoots British Open tournament record tying 64 (-6). Woods is at -4 through 14. if the two are at top of leader board after friday's round, they would play together in a twosome saturday. Scott's caddy is New Zealander Steve Williams, who was Woods' caddy for 11 years or so, and about 14 major titles, before Woods fired Williams for a drunken tirade at an awards dinner. That would be quite a tension convention saturday. TBD.
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 09:44 AM
Democrats doubling down on “you didn’t build it”
Posted by: Extraneus | July 19, 2012 at 09:45 AM
((No wonder hannity's folksiness seems put on.))
well, folksiness is in the eye of the beholder, I guess. Hannity has paid his dues, worked his way up from being a house painter and handyman and smalltime radio guy to where he is now, (due in large part to a Christian reform and marriage that took place in his adult life), so I accept his folksiness at face value.
Posted by: Chubby | July 19, 2012 at 09:50 AM
Meanwhile, doubleunplusgood thoughts, must be dispensed with;
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2012/07/19/aps-peoples-tells-readers-what-obama-intended-you-didnt-build-somebody-e?utm_source=twitter
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 09:50 AM
He was just pining for the pyramids, yes that's not suspicious at all;
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_EGYPT_OBIT_SULEIMAN?SITE=OHCIN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 09:52 AM
Romney has a killer new add up:
Romney on offense, Democrats doubling down on “you didn’t build it”
The entire first 1/3rd is just Obama's words playing over someone getting up and going to work at 6am.
The irony is that ObamaCo's harping on the tax returns from Romeny's private life just re-enforce the message that Obama wants to punish success.
Posted by: Ranger | July 19, 2012 at 09:55 AM
Warren has no clue of the work or the light bulb moments and going out on a limb involved with building up a non-politically favored business.
Maybe this can become the cudgel to get teenagers and 20-somethings to understand what making something out of yourself used to be about. Why you want unique skills and knowledge.
Not be deemed Competent and eligible for a Qualification to open the door for a job at one of the Big Businesses pushing sustainability and an economy redesigned around that.
Even this fatuous book notes that MNCs only employ 1% of the world's workforce.
Reminds me of the university head who had previously been at UC-Boulder who said we still need an entrepreneurial class because government and big business can't employ everyone. Telling me those are the assumed employers of tomorrow at the typical ed admin conference.
Posted by: rse | July 19, 2012 at 09:56 AM
With Romney campaigning so well, I'm starting to like him.
My guess is that is happening to a lot of people watching the campaign. Sometimes it feels odd to be as pro-Romney as against Obama. For some reason I think Romney just might be the right person for the times.
A really poor interviewer. I think Scalia had fun with the Brit Twit -
Morgan annoyed the hell out of me, but I loved Scalia. I thought his explanation about why the split in the court (judicial philosophy rather than politics) was brilliant.
Posted by: Jane - Get off the couch your country needs you! | July 19, 2012 at 09:57 AM
Yes, this is all accidental, pure coincidence;
http://www.unwatch.org/cms.asp?id=3315753&campaign_id=63111
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 09:57 AM
So, McCain and Rollins, both stick up for Huma, disregarding her role, in possibly
the greatest loss to Western interests in a generation, also coincidence.
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 10:00 AM
Chubby, that's a great question (libertarianism.) No time to respond, except to say that either
1. There is a balance to be struck between limited government and the erosion of society. There may be a role for laws against heroin use, suicide, polygamy, etc. The slippery slope to big government may be carefully avoided even with such laws in place.
or
2. The need for limited government is too great. There should be no laws against socio-moral erosion. If a society erodes morally, then so be it. To attempt to prevent that with laws is to step down the slippery slope to big government.
But you've put your finger on a huge topic for thought, in contrast to the shallow Marxist twaddle which may be succinctly dismissed.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | July 19, 2012 at 10:01 AM
They attack all institutions, that are not formerly affiliated with the government, from the family on up, and they go after anyone who doesn't want them further encroaching on our turf;
http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/07/dont-let-the-facts-on-huma-abedins-family-get-in-the-way-of-attacking-michele-bachmann/
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 10:08 AM
ABO/T1000Unit-- He's doing well--so far. He goes after 'Bam/Lefty gaffes quickly and has pretty much refused to rise to the bait of topics that don't help him, Bain and Tax returns. BUT, what does strike me about Romney is that he is a FAR BETTER candidate than McCain-- FAR better. I admired McCain, especially his loyalty. But by 2008, Mccain was most loyal to the DC System and Leviathan. The best thing McCain ever did was to show the public the establishment side of the Repubs (Duke & Duke), because that created the Tea Party deal. The TP may save America yet.
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 10:09 AM
Without limited government rent seeking and the preservation of current political power becomes the driver of what govt does. If you think about it that's the dynamic Agenda 21 is relying on to get its hooks in local govts and state govts. The politicians want to control land sales and devt direction and benefit.
Sustainability and the Green economy are perfect excuses for extraction at the federal and global levels.
This is the original dirigiste post. I have to keep a notebook now to recall when and where I explained various concepts I knew I needed to get in the mainstream consciousness to stop this Common Core toll for economic, political, and social transformation around the premise of sustainability.
http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/why-the-world-makes-far-more-sense-if-you-add-dirigisiste-to-the-things-you-understand/
Posted by: rse | July 19, 2012 at 10:09 AM
CH's link is pay to view. Here's a free look at the article:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303933704577532891512167490.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
I have a different take: It's easier for Penn State to go after faculty who protected a pedophile than it was for Duke to overcome the faculty racists and sexists.
Posted by: Clarice | July 19, 2012 at 10:10 AM
Jim, I appreciate the time you did take to respond, because it is a subject much on my mind.
Posted by: Chubby | July 19, 2012 at 10:12 AM
To answer my question from the other day, in an editorial in today's WSJ,
Them's not good odds.
Posted by: DrJ | July 19, 2012 at 10:12 AM
McRINO never misses an opportunity to "reach across the aisle" to the wrong person. Palin's usually unerring instincts were askew when she supported his re-election.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 10:12 AM
narciso, a smart poster elsewhere said it was interesting to watch McCain's spirited defense of Huma and compare it with his failure to defend his running mate even against charges being spread by the jerks on his own staff.
Posted by: Clarice | July 19, 2012 at 10:12 AM
RSE-- very true. I never understood Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugs until 2008-2010 when the reality of Leviathan hit us all in the face. I'm a conservative, not a Libertarian, but libertarians have very valid concerns.
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 10:15 AM
Yes, and that would have confirmed Berman's diagnosis that she was a Diva, which is curiously the line that Brian Jones, and Kevin Madden share, to obscure the debris from that campaign, and I'm trying to remember
what they all have in common, it will come to me,
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 10:18 AM
((The need for limited government is too great.))
applying limited government to a society of cutthroats and thieves is a recipe for anarchy. limited government can only work when indivuals are capable of governing themselves. but the modern flavor of libertarianism doesn't accept the premise that self government is the necessary quid pro quo of limited government. Modern libertarianism wants to have its cake and eat it too: limited "anything goes" moral self government, as well and limited political government.
Posted by: Chubby | July 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM
That link didn't work, Clarice, re Duke, but it led to some unintentionally humorous one,
if you like it pitch black;
http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2011/11/04/a-must-read-david-brooks-on-shale-gas/?utm_source=paid.outbrain.com&utm_medium=cpc
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 10:20 AM
Click for full size.
Posted by: Extraneus | July 19, 2012 at 10:22 AM
narciso, I just re-tried the link and it works for me.
Posted by: Clarice | July 19, 2012 at 10:22 AM
I'm fine with died, passed on or whatevered. Passed or passed away is what I most often hear where I live. I think of it as being recalled by God to eternity. I typically don't use that formulation in public, however, because I realize the phrase "recalled by God to eternity" may be viewed by many as making a theological or metaphysical assertion not appropriate for an expression of condolence.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 19, 2012 at 10:24 AM
I have a different take: It's easier for Penn State to go after faculty who protected a pedophile than it was for Duke to overcome the faculty racists and sexists.
Brodhead let himself get railroaded into trashing the assumptions of innocence of the accused. His continued presence should be a source of shame to Duke. Penn State's main problem now is dealing with the football cultists, a lot of which aren't students.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 10:27 AM
"I think the basic notion is right. Nobody got rich on their own. Nobody. People worked hard, they build a business, God bless, but they moved their goods on roads the rest of us helped build, they hired employees the rest of us helped educate, they plugged into a power grid the rest of us helped build," she said.
Where to begin? This betrays the most shallow thinking and basic misunderstanding that to try to correct it is like trying to explain trigonometry to a chimpanzee. Leave aside the small fact that "they" paid disproportionately for those roads and other public infrastructure. Everything else is already part of the price paid. They didn't receive free electricity. They paid for it, thereby paying for the power grid. They didn't get an educated worker for nothing. They paid a premium salary. If anything, it's the workers who got the gift, though they and their families also paid taxes that financed their educations.
This is just mush-minded collectivism, from someone who is too stupid to figure out that in voluntary market transactions, people pay for what they get, and if they operate a successful business, they *add value*, and only get rewarded to the extent they do so.
Posted by: jimmyk | July 19, 2012 at 10:27 AM
Well, TC, "passed" is usually used in the South. I personally prefer died because that is what happens.
Posted by: sailor | July 19, 2012 at 10:30 AM
Without Ford, Edison, Fulton, the Wright Bros,
you get nowhere.
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 10:35 AM
Without Ford, Edison, Fulton, the Wright Bros, you get nowhere.
But but but...RIGOBERTA MENCHUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 10:37 AM
I think "passed away" has become such a commonplace that it's hardly even a euphemism. In my experience, on both sides, the important thing about a condolence is to acknowledge the mourner's loss, so I can see that saying something like "He's in a better place now" fails to do that.
Posted by: jimmyk | July 19, 2012 at 10:38 AM
((that to try to correct it is like trying to explain trigonometry to a chimpanzee. ))
LOL!!!!
Posted by: Chubby | July 19, 2012 at 10:40 AM
Very foolish, so going to see the 'Dark Knight' is an inkind contribution?
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/07/19/hollywood-moonbat-morgan-freeman-donates-1-million-to-obama-super-pac-to-defend-him-from-right-wing-attacks/
Posted by: narciso | July 19, 2012 at 10:40 AM
Without Ford, Edison, Fulton, the Wright Bros, you get nowhere.
It is probably true that those guys were under-rewarded, and we are the beneficiaries. But that "we" includes the factory worker as well as the wealthy business owner. And imagine what the wealth distribution would look like if innovators reaped the full value of what they produced.
Posted by: jimmyk | July 19, 2012 at 10:42 AM
NPR is on in the other room (Father-in-law staying with us) & Diane Rehm is interviewing Sen. Rubio. There was just a really odd call from retired Republican Sen. Warner. Rehm had to interrupt & essentially tell him to get to the point. He was concerned about the Law of the Sea Treaty & seemed to be critical of Republicans. Very odd. Rehm seemed like she tried to protect him by cutting him off.
Posted by: Janet | July 19, 2012 at 10:42 AM
Obama's statement is clearly a talking point for his base, which favors nanny statism. However, Obama's statement could be turned around to support a self-evident truths polity in which governmental expenditures support infrastructure, police and military functions, but not central planning activities. There is actually nothing in the notion of humans operating within the framework of a body politic that requires a Julia-type welfare state or Solyndra-type boondoggles. In fact, the kind of nanny state that the progs support undercuts the ability of government to perform essential governmental functions. I'm glad Obama's speech has been the subject of so much derision, and that Romney has quickly counterpunched.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 19, 2012 at 10:45 AM
Any time Diane Rehm has to tell you to get to the point, it means you've meandered to the other side of the universe.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 10:46 AM
"just re-enforce the message that Obama wants to punish success."
Obama and the entire Obama regime not only want to punish success, they want to insure that no one even tries for success unless they have been handpicked by the Obamas, IMO. It looks to me to be the same as his efforts to handpick the ones to be awarded the 72 virgins by drone.
Posted by: pagar | July 19, 2012 at 10:51 AM
I have my issues with Malor, to put it mildly, but he nails the JEF in this post: http://minx.cc/?post=331141
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 10:55 AM
TCollins-- the 'Bam "business owners do nothing" BS was spoken in Roanoke Va., sans TOTUS. I am going to guess the vast majority of the 'folks' at that rally were AA,AND they were welfare state footsoldiers, i.e. teacher union reps, teachers' aids, hospital workers, welfare case workers, postal workers etc etc. So of course being amongst friends 'Bam just said what came naturally. And 40% or so of the voters agree with that BS. His problem is that 50-60% of the voters violently disagree with that. Like Bob Dole shouting 'where's the outrage' and GHWB looking at his watch, it will be remembered as a losing day for 'Bam.
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 10:56 AM
CH-- two rallies without TOTUS and we got the "private sector is doing fine" and " business owners do nothing"-- I think AxelPlouffe will insist on the TOTUS being chained to 'Bam.
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 10:59 AM
Only heard a bit, but Rubio seemed like he did really well. I went to Rehm's site & the comments were mostly Rubio-hatin' drivel. One sane person wrote - "This interview is going great, you can tell this by the shrill nonsensical responses on this comment board." Hah!
Posted by: Janet | July 19, 2012 at 11:05 AM
I just wonder what combination of medication and soothing words ValJar uses to get the JEF to believe he's anything other than a complete failure when he makes an ass out of himself in front of a bunch of high school kids. Anybody with a normal sense of self would be extremely depressed after revealing what a dumbass he is with his gaffes; although he has possibly the most inflated sense of self ever of somebody not in managed facilities.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 11:08 AM
Great link, Captain. Makes me mindful of Porchlight's post after the JEF's speech in London - "He's not even good at the one thing he's supposed to be good at."
Posted by: Janet | July 19, 2012 at 11:14 AM
"assuming that doesn't offend CAIR."
Every thing the Obama regime does is calculated on not offending CAIR,IMO.
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/07/19/fbi-report-says-agency-failed-to-investigate-ft-hood-jihadi-nidal-hasan-because-of-political-correctness/
Posted by: pagar | July 19, 2012 at 11:18 AM
video of the suicide bus bomber, apparently a long haired white guy
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/watch-footage-of-suspected-suicide-bomber-in-attack-on-israelis-in-bulgaria-1.452240
Posted by: windansea | July 19, 2012 at 11:22 AM
Whoa, a fellow moron just posted this:
The federal prosecutor brought in to reform the embattled Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in the aftermath of the Fast and Furious gun scandal distributed a videotaped message to employees this month warning there would be “consequences” for reporting wrongdoing outside their chain of command.
The video, obtained by the Washington Guardian, immediately raised alarm among agents in the field, members of Congress and whistleblower advocates.
“Choices and consequences means simply that if you make poor choices, that if you don’t abide by the rules, that if you don’t respect the chain of command, if you don’t find the appropriate way to raise your concerns to your leadership, there will be consequences,” Acting Director B. Todd Jones told the employees in a video distributed July 9 by email and closed-circuit TV and obtained by the Washington Guardian.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 11:23 AM
From the new Romney ad:
“Did somebody else take out the loan on my father’s house to finance the equipment? . . . Through hard work and a little bit of luck we built this business. Why are you demonizing us for it? We are the solution, not the problem. It’s time we had someone who believes in us. . . . We need somebody who believes in America.”
It is indeed time November 7th is going to be a Democrat Little Big Horn? Why else is the former Speaker of the House telling her caucus to avoid the DNC convention and stay in their districts to campaign for reelection? Riddle me that, Batman.
Posted by: GMAX | July 19, 2012 at 11:26 AM
I was off researching and noticed I had not yet flipped through the communitarian prof's most recent book because I did not think I could bear it. It lays out all the polling done to push the idea of a "fair society" and how it trends well with all groups.
First, are we the only family that scolded when a child said something about "not being fair?" Fair's not a word we recognize because life isn't fair was the usual comeback. And if you want life to work out as best as possible you need to understand that nobody can or has an obligation to make your life fair. Learn to do right by yourself and others on your own.
Second, I am reading what actually cites back to both Clinton in 91 and Obama in his 2008 campaign and what they meant by common ground. A government that is intrusive enough and all-powerful enough to ensure a fair society for all would be a leviathan that would itself become the primary source of unfairness.
Which seems like precisely the predicament the US finds itself in now.
Posted by: rse | July 19, 2012 at 11:31 AM
My great-nephew had an interview with Warner as part of his application to go to OCS. He had to spend a lot of time waiting in the office, and during that time he was absolutely appalled at how rude and boorish Warner was with his staff and everyone he encountered. An obnoxious man.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 19, 2012 at 11:36 AM
NK,
I don't believe the Pinhead Troika will allow the President to be muzzled by Axelplouffe. He's off the leash and even though he has proven to not comprehend the difference between sic'em and fetch he will never allow those white boys to treat him with the amused contempt exhibited by his frustrated handlers in the past.
We should all applaud the President's forthright demonstration of his unrestrained capability. He'd probably enjoy a little scratch behind the ears too.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 19, 2012 at 11:37 AM
CH-- I know I'm risking a Godwin's Law violation, but that ATF video message is Gestapo and Waffen-SS management technique. Warning the troops of 'consequences' was the way the Waffen-SS leadership perverted German patriots and made them part of a mass murder machine.
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 11:39 AM
DoT, Like Kerry, he is a tall (not terribly smart man) man who kept marrying rich women,
RB, I agree--It's time to roll out the Let BO be BO bumper stickers.
Posted by: Clarice | July 19, 2012 at 11:41 AM
Chickens come home to roost in Racine. The city of Racine extended union contracts for three years while the fleebaggers were in IL, now they figure out that they can't afford it. Contracts tossed, unions to sue. One commenter asks if Racine will be the first city in WI to declare bankruptcy.
Posted by: henry | July 19, 2012 at 11:41 AM
RickB-- hope you're right, 'Bam unplugged (from TOTUS) = 300+EVs for ABO/T1000Unit.
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 11:41 AM
Mr. Mitt shouldn't release anymore tax returns until Mr. Obama releases The Top Ten Things He Has Hidden from us simple Simians.
Posted by: J. Fred Muggs | July 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM
NK, it shows that they're scared shitless of what insiders could come up with for Issa (over and above what's already been done) and they're using the George Zimmerman experience as an example, albeit implicitly, of what could happen.
Dammit, I want my country back.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 19, 2012 at 11:43 AM
And, Dot, remember that he divorced Elizabeth Taylor!
Posted by: sailor | July 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM
Another problem with "you didn't build it" is that it ought to be extended in every direction. Let's say roads are essential to the success of your business; they're surely not sufficient. You probably need employees; you certainly need customers! Why should the government be the one entity that has a claim on your business going forward?
For that matter, your business may be essential to your customers, and it certainly is to your employees! Why not a speech instructing us to "give back" to those who hired us? We have government roads, but we'd get much less use from them without the oil companies; why not ask us to slip a five dollar bill in a thank-you note and mail it to Chevron?
Or if the objection is that my business uses things paid for by others, how big a check should I write Toyota when I buy a used car?
Posted by: bgates | July 19, 2012 at 11:48 AM
ABO T1000 rope a dope manuever proceeding on schedule
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57475191/cbs-news-new-york-times-poll-7-18-12/
Posted by: windansea | July 19, 2012 at 11:53 AM
A little sherbethttp://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2012/07/19/how-to-shop-for-wine-in-the-south-of-france/?singlepage=true
Posted by: Clarice | July 19, 2012 at 11:56 AM
"We need somebody who believes in America.”
Apparently the USDA believes America can feed Mexico on our Dime.
http://faustasblog.com/2012/07/lets-give-foodstamps-to-the-mexicans/
"Look at the bright side, once you’re broke and move to Mexico, you can still get food stamps."
Posted by: pagar | July 19, 2012 at 11:57 AM
the modern flavor of libertarianism doesn't accept the premise that self government is the necessary quid pro quo of limited government
You don't know what you're talking about.
Posted by: bgates | July 19, 2012 at 11:58 AM
Mr. Mitt shouldn't release anymore tax returns until Mr. Obama releases The Top Ten Things He Has Hidden from us simple Simians.
This morning on air Dick started the show by proclaiming that Mitt should release his tax returns. I disagreed and proposed he do exactly what you said - release one tax return for each piece of information Obama has spent $12b of our money hiding.
Amazingly Dick's face lit up in agreement.
Posted by: Jane - Get off the couch your country needs you! | July 19, 2012 at 12:00 PM
Jane, you are the bomb, girl!
Posted by: Clarice | July 19, 2012 at 12:05 PM
I think that ATF thing is probably unlawful. Somewhere there's a federal statute establishing an Inspector General or some such thing, to whom whistleblowers are encouraged to report directly.
Issa needs to do a little on-air sparring with that clown.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM
Wonderful, Clarice. So jealous of your great trip and so pleased you included photos of yourself and Mr. Clarice (only call him that in jest). Loved the photo of you in Chateauneuf du Pape - you are positively glowing, but then wouldn't we all be on such a vacation?
Posted by: centralcal | July 19, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Has the civil contempt been filed?
Posted by: Jane - Get off the couch your country needs you! | July 19, 2012 at 12:11 PM
DoT-- the Guardian article interviews an attorney who says that whislebowers have a statutory right to go outside the chain of command, w/o specifics. We have arrived at the point where the Obamaniacs have crowded into ze bunker like Hitler in April 1945 (uh oh, Godwin's Law again). When 'Bam is out, these agency IGs will be free to pursue Bam's corruption of cronyism and cover-up. lots of career bureaucrats at the DOE and ATF will say "ve ver ownley followink audahs!".
Posted by: NK | July 19, 2012 at 12:12 PM
To go with the
Canadian-built tour bus
Philippines call center
Foreign campaign donations
let's add, consorting with outsourcers
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/obama-fundraises-with-ruthless-outsourcer
After giving a speech in Austin, Texas in which he decried Mitt Romney for overseeing companies that outsourced jobs, President Obama attended a fundraiser hosted by Tom Meredith, a former Dell executive who once oversaw outsourcing at his own company — and said he would be "ruthless" about cutting costs.
Posted by: Jim,MtnViewCA,USA | July 19, 2012 at 12:14 PM
Thanks, CC.
Later
Posted by: Clarice | July 19, 2012 at 12:19 PM
http://didntbuildthat.com/
Posted by: Neo | July 19, 2012 at 12:20 PM
Romney has already released his tax returns since 2010. Now the jug-eared bastard needs to release the Fast & Furious documents from the same time period.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | July 19, 2012 at 12:21 PM
Ex-Gitmo detainee was Bulgarian suicide bomber.
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/07/19/oh-my-suicide-bomber-who-blew-up-bus-full-of-israelis-in-bulgaria-was-a-former-gitmo-detainee/
Posted by: Clarice | July 19, 2012 at 12:22 PM
I'm not one to post pictures of cute girls but this Aussie lass is just too charming.
She runs fast, too, so I guess her high spirits are justifiable.
http://vimeo.com/45784191
Posted by: Jim,MtnViewCA,USA | July 19, 2012 at 12:23 PM
Great article, Clarice. And what nice pics!
Posted by: Extraneus | July 19, 2012 at 12:24 PM
((You don't know what you're talking about.))
nah, it's modern libertarians with a laisser faire attitude toward morality who don't know what they're talking about
Posted by: Chubby | July 19, 2012 at 12:26 PM
NORRISTOWN — Former Montgomery County Commissioner James R. Matthews was accepted Tuesday into a supervisory program for first-time offenders that could eventually clear his criminal record stemming from a charge of false swearing to a grand jury.
Matthews, a Republican who served as a county commissioner from 2000 to 2012, was also placed on probation and ordered to pay court costs and make a mandatory donation to an area charity.
A grand jury spent 18 months investigating allegations Matthews used campaign contributions to pay for personal expenses, steered county contracts to friends and conducted county business in secrecy. Matthews was arrested in December 2011, but the most serious charges against him were dismissed last year by a judge.
Matthews, 62, a one-time rising star in county and state politics, is the brother of Chris Matthews, host of “Hardball” on MSNBC.
What did "Scooter" Libby get ?
Posted by: Neo | July 19, 2012 at 12:29 PM
I was unwilling to dig this deep into the depth of a NYT/CBS poll but the Corner does and finds this:
The poll includes a drop in Mr. Obama’s favorability ratings, with 36 percent saying they viewed him favorably and 48 percent saying they did not. In April, 42 percent expressed a favorable opinion of him and 45 percent an unfavorable one.
Remember they put their thumb on the scale with a + 7 D skew to the sample. OH OH LOOK OUT BELOW!
Jane does this Dick character have any original thoughts or is it all stream of conscienceness Democrat talking points? Sheesh
Posted by: GMAX | July 19, 2012 at 12:30 PM