Wednesday, October 31, 2007


Yesterday President Bush slammed Congress for not getting its work done. He says that Congress is too busy focusing on investigating his administration and trying to pull the troops out of Iraq.

Nancy Pelosi was not too pleased with this. She says, "Instead of criticizing Congress, the president's time would be better spent working in a bipartisan way to end this disastrous war in Iraq, keep our promises to our veterans by providing the largest veterans' healthcare investment in history, and providing healthcare for 10 million children."

OK .. first of all, Nancy Pelosi's MoveOn Democrat party controls both the House and the Senate. They can end the war in Iraq any time they want to. Right now it's the Democrat's fault the war hasn't been called off, not the president's. Just shut up, Nancy, and get it done. Secondly ... no child in America goes without health care if the caretaker of that child cares enough to seek it. You're going to get your precious nationalized health care in the U.S. You're going to get what Democrats have dreamed of for decades ... control over the health care of every single American. You're going to get your wish because Americans largely believe that they are not responsible for their own health care. So just shut up about it for now, and try to get some budget bills passed.

Back to Bush ... the president also pointed out that democrats have passed an "endless series of tax increases" and that they can't seem to solve anything without it involving a tax hike. He points to S-CHIP, the farm bill, the energy bill and a small business bill as prime examples. And while Bush is no frugal president, he points out that the Democrats seek to spend more than $205 billion over the next five years.

Is there something about this that surprises Bush?

Meanwhile, Dennis Kucinich has found the time to question the president's mental health, in light of Bush's comments about a nuclear Iran could mean WWIII. Kucinich says, "I seriously believe we have to start asking questions about his mental health ... There's something wrong. He does not seem to understand his words have real impact." Then, after telling the world that he thinks Bush has a mental health problem, Kucinich proceeded to talk about the time he saw a UFO.

No wonder our government can't get anything done. We have resorted to publicly question the mental state of our own president. Kucinich, by the way, is certifiable.

Monday, October 29, 2007


John Edwards wants to institute New Deal-like programs to fight poverty and stem growing wealth prosperity ... if he is elected President. The "if he's elected president" part means that we don't have to worry about Edwards right now .. but his ideas are typical big-government Democrat. Edward's poverty fighting program will require him to ask Americans to make sacrifices like paying higher taxes. Rich Americans, that is.

Edwards says the federal government should provide universal pre-kindergarten, create matching savings accounts for "low-income" people, mandate a minimum wage of $9.50 and provide a million new Section 8 housing vouchers for the poor. He also wants to start a government-funded educated program called "College for Everyone."

To pay for it ... increasing the capital gains taxes because "taxes on 'wealth income' should be in line with those on work income." And to top things off, Edwards says that it is important to "share in prosperity, and that "people who have done well in this country, including me, have more of a responsibility to give back."

Where do I start? Let's just attack this with some quick bullet points.

  • Raising capital gains taxes to the extent Edwards wants would chase billions, perhaps trillions of dollars of capital out of this country. Already we have $13 trillion dollars of American wealth working overseas to escape our tax system and politicians like Edwards.
  • Universal pre-kindergarten? This is just the government getting its hands on your children at an earlier age .. before you can instill values like freedom and individuality in their fresh little minds.
  • Raising the minimum wage? A perfect ploy for Democrats. "Vote for us and we'll make your employer pay you more money ... whether you're worth it or not."
  • More Section 8 welfare housing? Same stuff. "Vote for us and we'll take money from those evil rich people to buy you a place to live." Nothing ruins a neighborhood quicker than Section 8 housing. Edwards obviously believes that it is the government's role to provide people with a place to live. I would rather live next door to a hooker than to someone using Section 8.
  • "College for everyone"? Not everyone is capable of college level work. Who the hell does Edwards think is going to cook the French fries?

Friday, October 26, 2007


Combover Carl

... for the war against Islamic extremism.

Senator Carl Levin (a democrat) is the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. He is working with Senator Jack Reed (also a democrat) on a strategy that would basically cut the White House's war funding request in half. He hopes this will put enough pressure on President Bush to change course in Iraq.

Senator Reed says that Democrats want to include language in the supplemental that would target a complete withdrawal from Iraq in nine months. In the House, Democrats want to withhold the supplemental until President Bush commits himself to changing course in Iraq ... this would force war funding to go through the regular budget process.

The White House points to the fact that Congress can't even pass its annual appropriations bills. So sending something like this through the "regular budget process" would put our troop in harm's way ... because Congress would never get to it in time. I suppose that is the Democrat's version of supporting our troops.

Interesting, isn't it, that when most analysts would agree that progress is being made ... the MoveOn Democrats want to "change the course." The course the Democrats want is a course to defeat ... for it is defeat that gives them their reward and their victory. Bush is right ... the Democrats can't pass their appropriations bills .. they're certainly not as important as insuring our defeat overseas. Weakening a Republican president is job number one.


"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

Thursday, October 25, 2007


Yesterday the DREAM Act failed to gain cloture in the Senate. It failed 52-44, eight votes short of the 60 votes required which would have ended debate and started the voting process. Still, Democrats, like Dick Durbin, feel that it is morally imperative that this bill, or some form of it, be passed.

While some Republicans, like Senator James Inhofe, were staunchly against the bill, other Republicans objected to its timing. Many complained that the Senate should be focusing on spending bills at this time, instead of debating controversial immigration reforms. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says that the Senate has yet to see an appropriations bill. I guess this is why Nancy Pelosi gets her thong in a wad, saying that the Senate moves too slowly. (Don't worry ... I'm sure they'll find another Muslim holiday to commemorate soon.)

The Internet tax moratorium expires in one week, and Congress has yet to address the alternate minimum tax. These are issues that affect legal, taxpaying Americans – rather than wasting time Hispandering.

Wednesday, October 24, 2007


Well, you knew this just had to happen. Fires are devastating California from North of Los Angeles down to San Diego. Hundreds of thousands of people have had to flee their homes. Disaster is an understatement. So along comes MoveOn Moonbat Senator Barbara Boxer to announce who is to blame. And who would that be? Why none other than George Bush. It would seem that President Bush has taken the time off from killing children and becoming amused as our servicemen are killed in Iraq to plot these fire strategies for California. And just how is this all Bush's fault? Why, he sent all of those California National Guardsmen to Iraq .... For his amusement, of course.

It must be really strange to have such a bizarre woman representing you in the U.S. Senate.

This will just be the beginning. Look for more and more Democrats to lay the blame for the California fires .. and the failure to contain them .. on Bush. Hey .. it's what Democrats do.

But the Harry Reid isn't much better. You knew that this had to happen sooner or later also. Reid is blaming the fires on global warming. There is, of course, no scientific proof whatsoever of this ... nor is there any evidence ... but as long as you have a natural disaster on your hands, you might as well find a way to use it to push your agenda. So ... global warming it is!

The truth is that these fires .. well, not the fires themselves, but the severity of the fires .. can be blamed on whacko environmentalists. Every time someone in California suggests thinning out the brush that fuels these fires you have some environmentalist screaming about kangaroo rats or field mice or some such nonsense. I can remember many years ago there was a community outside of Los Angeles that wanted to clear the brush that abutted their homes. The environmental moonbats said no .. they went to court and managed to prevent the creation of a fire break. One homeowner told the eco-radicals to take a hike, and created his firebreak anyway. While the tree huggers were fuming, along came the fire. Can you guess which was the only home in the neighborhood that didn't burn down?

Now ... I know I'm not the first person to have thought of this. Do you remember about four years ago ... there was a report that some Al Qaeda detainees had said something about starting fires in a Western state? Here's the story from USA Today, dated July 11, 2003. Well ... doesn't it seam just the least bit curious that all of these fires from north of Los Angeles to San Diego erupted at pretty much the same time? No, I'm not saying they were started by terrorists. I am saying that if terrorists had decided to set the fires it would have been a pretty easy task ... and there is some history here.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007


Shamnesty alert: Dems prepare to ram DREAM Act through with cloture vote; Update: Where do your Senators stand?

By Michelle Malkin • October 23, 2007

amnesty zombie Update 7:30pm Eastern. I’m bumping this post to the Lead Story slot and will keep it here through tomorrow’s cloture vote. Where do your Senators stand? Let me know what responses you get. If Republicans had brains, they would put attrition through enforcement first and Just Say No to any new illegal alien magnets.

Noam Askew
has a list of possible fence-sitters. You’ll notice a lot of open-borders Republicans on that list.

Sen. Cornyn (R-Texas) sent his statement this evening. Kind of wishy-washy, but at least he comes down on the right side:

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made the following statement this evening regarding his intention to vote tomorrow against the motion to proceed to the DREAM Act (S. 2205), which was introduced by U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

“As I have long said, I have a great deal of sympathy for the plight of children who have no moral culpability for being in this country illegally. Congress should continue seeking reasonable and responsible ways they can complete their education and achieve opportunity.

“Unfortunately, the Durbin bill contains a number of gaping loopholes, while failing to address the much larger need for comprehensive immigration reform and the immediate crisis at our borders. For example, it contains no firm requirement for the illegal immigrant to graduate with a degree from an accredited U.S. institution of Higher Education (either a two or four-year institution), it grants them broad access to federal student loans at a time when we are struggling to meet loan needs for our own citizens, and it extends the benefits to adults, rather than focusing on children. Moreover, from a law enforcement perspective, his bill does nothing to prevent fraud, allows certain criminal aliens to qualify for legal status, and ties the hands of law enforcement by severely limiting their access to application information.

“If my colleagues who support this measure are committed to solving America’s immigration crisis and the plight of illegal immigrants, then the focus of this Congress should be on passing a comprehensive reform bill that addresses all of our pressing immigration matters, including securing our broken borders and the needs of American businesses for more workers.”

Here are the others targeted by the DREAM-pushers:

Hutchison, Kay Bailey- (R - TX) (202) 224-5922
Thad Cochran (202) 224- 5054
Norm Coleman(202) 224-5641
John Sununu (202) 224-2841
Olympia Snowe (202) 224-5344
Jon Tester (202) 224-2644
Richard Burr (202) 224-3154
John Warner (202) 224-2023
Lindsey Graham (202) 224-5972
Judd Gregg (202) 224-3324
Chuck Grassley (202) 224-3744
Tim Johnson (202) 224-5842
Robert Byrd (202) 224-3954
Byron Dorgan (202) 224-2551
Pete Domenici (202) 224-6621
Max Baucus (202) 224-2651
Larry Craig (202) 224-2752
Ted Stevens (202) 224-3004
George Voinovich (202) 224-3353
Lisa Murkowski (202) 224-6665
Claire McCaskill (202) 224-6154
Benjamin Nelson (202) 224-6551
John Barrasso (202) - 224-6441
Susan Collins (202) 224-2523
Crapo (202) 224-6142
Bennet (202) 224-5444
Martinez (202) 224-3041
Sen Brownback, Sam [KS] - (202) 224-6521
Sen Landrieu, Mary L. [LA] - (202) 224-5824
Sen Ensign (202) 224-6244


I’ve been keeping you up to date with the latest on the Dems’ attempt (with help from open borders Republicans) to ram the DREAM Act through the Senate. It now looks like a cloture vote is set for tomorrow. Numbers USA reports: “Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) filed to invoke cloture on S. 2205, Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin’s (D-Ill.) new stand-alone DREAM Act amnesty bill. The cloture vote, for which 60 YES votes are necessary to prevent a filibuster on the measure, is set for Wednesday, October 24. Reid is attempting to bring this nightmarish amnesty bill to the floor under Senate Rule XIV without it ever having been debated in committee.”

This morning, I received the following e-mail circulated today by Sen. Durbin’s Judiciary staff:

From: Dodin, Reema (Judiciary-Dem)
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 9:36 AM
To: All Judiciary Users
Subject: Briefing on the DREAM Act: TODAY at 3pm in SC-6

Durbin-Hagel-Lugar DREAM Act Briefing: Tuesday, October 23rd at 3PM in SC-6

Senators Durbin, Hagel and Lugar invite you to a staff briefing on S. 2205, the DREAM Act. A cloture vote on the motion to proceed to the DREAM Act will take place this Wednesday morning (tomorrow). The briefing is scheduled for Tuesday, October 23, in SC-6 of the U.S. Capitol.

The DREAM Act would make it possible for certain long-term undocumented immigrant children to go to college or join the military if they meet stringent requirements. It does not address the status of their parents, but simply allows children-who had no choice in the decision to come here-the opportunity to continue their education and give back to the country that they call home.

This bipartisan legislation has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee three times in various forms, and was approved by the Senate last year as part of the comprehensive immigration bill, S. 2611.

The briefing will feature presentations by:

Several students who would benefit from the DREAM Act; Angela Kelley, Director, Immigration Policy Center; Melissa Lazarin, Director of Education Policy, First Focus; Alfred Campos, Federal Lobbyist, National Education Association; Stephanie Grosser, Outreach & Program Coordinator, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society; and Kevin Appleby, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

This event is for Congressional staff only (no press). For more information, please contact Reema in Sen. Durbin’s office at 4-1158.

For more on the DREAM Act, please see the new report from the Immigration Policy Center.

Hope to see you there!

They’ve moved from health care kiddie human shields to illegal alien youth human shields.

The Democrat Party: It’s the Party That Won’t Grow Up.

Friday, October 19, 2007

Won't You Take Me to Chinatown?

By Michelle Malkin

hillary clinton china

The Los Angeles Times digs into Hillary’s finances and uncovers more mysterious Chinatown donors with dilapidated addresses in NYC and jobs unlikely to put them in the position of maxing out campaign contributions. They include dishwashers, waiters, contributors who deny making contributions, and another who “admitted to lacking the legal-resident status required for giving campaign money.” And more:

Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton’s campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown…

…Of 74 residents of New York’s Chinatown, Flushing, the Bronx or Brooklyn that The Times called or visited, only 24 could be reached for comment.

Will Hillary accuse the Times reporters of “stalking” now?

I like the use of the adjective “ephemeral:”

Like many who traveled this path, most of the Chinese reported as contributing to Clinton’s campaign have never voted. Many speak little or no English. Some seem to lead such ephemeral lives that neighbors say they’ve never heard of them.

Predictions: Hillary will come out swinging at the Times, her Asian-American acolytes will accuse the paper of racism and ethnic bigotry, and those “ephemeral” donors will never be found.


Hey, I just remembered something. Remember the story I blogged this summer about Chinese-language ballots in Boston? One Chinese translation of Hillary Clinton’s name:

“Upset Stomach.”

Most fitting today, I imagine.


Allah dubs it “Hsu II.”

And once again, the question looms:

Where is the money coming from?


Flip Pidot takes note of the rise of the bundler and takes a close look at Hill’s 3Q refunds. Methinks more of those will be on the way.


Did you hear what this august member of the MoveOn Democrat Party had to say on the floor of the House of Representatives yesterday? His name is Fortney "Pete" Stark, and he's the congressman representing (this time) California's 13th district.

First ... maybe a little review. Pete Stark seems to have a history of saying outrageous things about other public figures.

  • He called Health and Human Services Secretary Louis Sullivan a "disgrace to his race."
  • He called a fellow congressman a "little wimp" and a "fruitcake."
  • He once made a reference to Congressman J.C. Watts as being "born out of wedlock."
  • He called former Congresswoman Nancy Johnson, a Republican, a "whore for the insurance industry," saying that here knowledge of health care came from "pillow talk."
  • Called the director of the California state welfare program a "baby killer."

According to Wikipedia (link above) The San Francisco Chronicle once editorialized: "Only a politician who assumes he has a job for life could behave so badly on a semi-regular basis by spewing personalized invective that might get him punched in certain East Bay taverns ... Surely there must be someone along the shoreline between Alameda and Fremont who could represent the good citizens of the district with class and dignity. It's not the case now."

So .. now that you have a little background, here's what Stark had to say about George Bush yesterday. The comment was made in reference to Bush's veto of the MoveOn Democrat's attempt to vastly expand the S-CHIP program for children's health care:

"Republicans sure don't care about finding $200 billion to fight the illegal war in Iraq. Where are you going to get that money? Are you going to tell us lies like you're telling us today? Is that how you're going to fund the war? You don't have money to fund the war on children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if he can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement."

Click here to catch Stark's little tantrum. Republicans are spinning around on their eyebrows demanding an apology from Stark. They should save their breath. Wrong tactic. Enough of this apology nonsense. Just let Stark's statement stand on its own ... and use it to show the deep, seething hatred that so many Democrats have toward George Bush ... a hatred so intense that they're willing to sabotage the efforts or our men and women fighting the Islamic radical menace.

Monday, October 15, 2007


The new secretary general of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon told 80 heads of state that global warming threatens our goals of eliminating widespread global poverty.

Global warming is going to add stress to the poorest regions of the world and will make it difficult for these societies to pursue sustainable livelihoods, according to Ban Ki-moon. The agricultural production in places like Africa is going to be severely compromised.

But of course, the rich nations of the US should provide "humanitarian assistance across the globe." He says that "increased resources" will be necessary to adapt the world for climate change ... basically, he wants more money. Rather than providing emergency assistance when catastrophes occur, we should be providing solutions (and money) now, in order to save poor nations from the perils of climate change!

The cost is "very modest" according to the climate change panel. If we do not implement these measures, then – brace yourself – "the income and wealth disparities between nations will increase." And the existence of poverty, which should be "ethically unacceptable," could pose a threat to global security.

Horse squeeze.

First of all .. any measurable warming of the earth stopped about ten years ago. And even then we're only talking about one degree over the last century. OwlGore has his Peace Prize ... so enough already. It's time to get off this phony global warming crap and put some real science into the picture. I'm so sick and tired of hearing these cultists yammer about "2600 scientists" who have bought into this fad, then to realize that a good portion of these scientists are podiatrists, electrical engineers and experts on macro economics.

Can anyone out there tell me what the ideal temperature for the earth would be? Come on! I'm waiting.

Consider this scenario: The earth heats up. As the earth heats up more water evaporates from the surfaces of the earth's lakes and oceans. The atmosphere thus becomes even more saturated with water and rainfall increases. As rainfall increases the arid portions of the earth that were not suitable for farming suddenly become rich with crops. Not only that, but areas that were once frozen throughout the summer can now be planted in crops for a short growing season. Result? More food. OK, now tell me why this wouldn't be the real scenario ... if, that is, we actually experienced this global warming.

Bottom line .. global warming is being touted as an excuse by Bang My Gong, or whatever his name is, for a program of worldwide wealth redistribution. I'm not really in love with the idea.

Thursday, October 11, 2007


Another story from San Francisco. A federal judge has given in to labor and civil liberties organizations. The judge is temporarily blocking the U.S. government from cracking down on businesses employing illegal immigrants.

The Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security had a plan to send joint letter to businesses that have workers with Social Security numbers that don't match their names. The businesses would face penalties if it was shown that they were hiring illegal aliens.

These "No Match" letters were supposed to be sent starting in September until labor groups and immigrant activists filed a lawsuit. They claim that this policy puts a burden on employers and may cause "authorized immigrants" and U.S. citizens to lose their jobs over simple mistakes on their paper work. Activists say that this would be a violation of their rights!

I'm sorry but that is BS. That is NOT why these people are opposing this plan. "The legal citizens may lose their jobs if they incorrectly filled out their paperwork." If they made a mistake ... if they transposed a digit in their Social Security number ... they get every opportunity to correct it. . But these activists are hiding behind this pitiful argument in order to ensure that their fellow illegals don't lose their jobs. Or in this case, aren't even questioned. As for the unions ... you can figure that one out for yourself. They're looking for new members. Especially since more and more American workers are figuring out that unions do more harm than good.

Tuesday, October 09, 2007


Yesterday we broke the news to you that Hillary had placed a nifty new advisor on her campaign staffer. None other than Sandy Berger. Berger was Hillary's "husband's" National Security Advisor. Before the 9-11 Commission started conducting hearings Berger marched his loyal self over to the National Archives and proceeded to steal classified documents relating to Clinton's treatment of Osama bin Laden and Islamic terrorism during his eight years in the White House. To this day nobody really knows the totality of what Berger stole. We can only assume that the material was damaging to Clinton.

There's another element here I haven't yet explored .. and that is the WHY? Was Berger acting to protect himself, or someone else. Did someone ask, beg or instruct him to retrieve those documents? If so, whom? Someone with an eye to future power? Someone with a promise of a future position of power?

Well, as of late yesterday afternoon – that's more 12 hours after the news broke – where was the mainstream media coverage of Sandy Berger advising Hillary Clinton? New York Times. Nothing. Washington Times. Nothing. CNN. Nothing. LATimes. Nothing. Ditto for the Washington Post. Now, to be fair, I haven't had the time to go through all of these newspaper websites ... but durned if I don't think this is actual news!

FOXNews covered the story. But the only paper to actually run a story was USAToday, after an interview with Hillary. Of course, now she is claiming that Sandy Berger "is an unofficial adviser."

And while we are the subject of Hillary, let's talk about another story that the MSM won't cover either ... Hillary's pork-barrel spending. She, by the way, is one of the only candidates who refuses to identify her earmarks ... or "congressionally allocated funds."

Well let's take a look at why.

Between 2002 and 2006, Hillary earmarked more than $2.2 billion in spending bills.

In the 2008 defense spending bill, Hillary managed to attach 26 earmarks worth more than $148 million. This was more than any other Senator except her Democratic compadre Carl Levin ... who is the chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

How about a few local projects including $250,000 to the Seneca Knitting Mill, and $200,000 to the Buffalo Urban Arts Center. And I'm sure that is just the beginning.

Monday, October 08, 2007


Ann Coulter

The only "crisis" in health care in this country is that doctors are paid too little. (Also, they've come up with nothing to help that poor Dennis Kucinich.)

But the Democratic Party treats doctors like they're Klan members. They wail about how much doctors are paid and celebrate the trial lawyers who do absolutely nothing to make society better, but swoop in and steal from the most valuable members of society.

Maybe doctors could get the Democrats to like them if they started suing their patients.

It's only a matter of time before the best and brightest students forget about medical school and go to law school instead. How long can a society based on suing the productive last?

You can make 30 times as much money as doctors by becoming a trial lawyer suing doctors. You need no skills, no superior board scores, no decade of training and no sleepless residency. But you must have the morals of a drug dealer. (And the bank wire transfer number to the Democratic National Committee.)

The editors of The New York Times have been engaging in a spirited debate with their readers over whether doctors are wildly overpaid or just hugely overpaid. The results of this debate are available on TimeSelect, for just $49.95.

"Many health care economists," the Times editorialized, say the partisan wrangling over health care masks a bigger problem: "the relatively high salaries paid to American doctors."

Citing the Rand Corp., the Times noted that doctors in the
U.S. "earn two to three times as much as they do in other industrialized countries." American doctors earn about $200,000 to $300,000 a year, while European doctors make $60,000 to $120,000. Why, that's barely enough for Muslim doctors in Britain to buy plastic explosives to blow up airplanes!

How much does Pinch Sulzberger make for driving The New York Times stock to an all-time low? Probably a lot more than your podiatrist.

In college, my roommate was in the chemistry lab Friday and Saturday nights while I was dancing on tables at the Chapter House. A few years later, she was working 20-hour days as a resident at
Mount Sinai doing liver transplants while I was frequenting popular Upper East Side drinking establishments. She was going to Johns Hopkins for yet more medical training while I was skiing and following the Grateful Dead. Now she vacations in places like Rwanda and Darfur with Doctors Without Borders while I'm going to Paris.

Has anyone else noticed the nonexistence of a charitable organization known as "Lawyers Without Borders"?

She makes $380 for an emergency appendectomy, or one-ten-thousandth of what John Edwards made suing doctors like her, and one-fourth of what John Edwards' hairdresser makes for a single shag cut.

Edwards made $30 million bringing nonsense lawsuits based on junk science against doctors. To defend themselves from parasites like Edwards, doctors now pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical malpractice insurance every year.

But as the Times would note, doctors in
Burkina Faso only get $25 and one goat per year.

As long as we're studying the health care systems of various socialist countries, are we allowed to notice that doctors in these other countries aren't constantly being sued by bottom-feeding trial lawyers stealing one-third of the income of people performing useful work like saving lives?

But the Democrats (and Fred Thompson) refuse to enact tort reform legislation to rein in these charlatans. After teachers and welfare recipients, the Democrats' most prized constituency is trial lawyers. The ultimate Democrat constituent would be a public schoolteacher on welfare who needed an abortion and was suing her doctor.

Doctors graduate at the top of their classes at college and then spend nearly a decade in grueling work at medical schools. Most doctors don't make a dime until they're in their early 30s, just in time to start paying off their six-figure student loans by saving people's lives. They have 10 times the IQ of trial lawyers and 1,000 times the character.

Yeah, let's go after those guys. On to nuns next!

But Times' readers responded to the editorial about doctors being overpaid with a slew of indignant letters -- not at the Times for making such an idiotic argument, but at doctors who earn an average of $200,000 per year. Letter writers praised the free medical care in places like
Spain. ("Nightmare" in the Ann Coulter dictionary is defined as "having a medical emergency in Spain.")

One letter-writer proposed helping doctors by having the government take over another aspect of the economy -- the cost of medical education:

"If we are to restructure the system by which we pay doctors to match
Europe, which seems prudent as well as inevitable, we must also finance education as Europeans do, by using state dollars to finance the full or majority cost of higher education, including professional school."

And then to reduce the cost of medical school, the government could finance "the full or majority cost" of construction costs of medical schools, and "the full or majority cost" of the trucks that bring the cement to the construction site and the "the full or majority cost" of coffee that the truck drivers drink while hauling the cement and ... it makes my head hurt.

I may have to see a doctor about this. I should probably get on the waiting list now in case Hillary gets elected.

That's how liberals think: To fix an industry bedeviled by government controls, we'll spread the coercion to yet more industries! (TDC; The Liberal Democrat way of dealing with failed policy is to do the same thing over again and hope for a different result! They raised income taxes and revenues went down so they want to cancel out Bush’s tax cuts which raised revenues hugely and raise taxes again. Get it?)

The only sane letter on the matter, I'm happy to report, came from the charming town of
New Canaan, Conn., which means that I am not the only normal person who still reads the Times. Ray Groves wrote:

"Last week, I had the annual checkup for my 2000 Taurus. I paid $95 per hour for much needed body work. Next month, when I have my own annual physical, I expect and hope to pay a much higher rate to my primary care internist, who has spent a significant portion of his life training to achieve his position of responsibility."

There is nothing more to say.


By Doug Patton
October 8, 2007


Recently, radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh was attacked by Democrats on the floor of the United States Senate. Why? Their claim was that Limbaugh had referred to military personnel who disagree with our country's policies in Iraq as "phony soldiers." The statement, put forth by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, is a lie designed to lay the groundwork for reinstatement of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine."

Limbaugh was referring to soldiers who have been lionized by the Left as heroes for claiming to have witnessed atrocities in Iraq, only to later be discredited as liars. One individual, who claimed to have been an Army Ranger in Iraq, was exposed as a washout after 44 days in boot camp. ABC news had done a story on this man and others like him just days before Limbaugh made his statements on the radio.

But it really doesn't matter, because liberals will commit whatever perfidy necessary to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine.

Repealed in the 1980s, the Fairness Doctrine was a federal communications law on the books for the better part of forty years. In essence, it forced radio stations to "balance" their programming in such a way as to present opposing political points of view. It is debatable whether it was ever necessary, even in the 1940s. In the diverse 21st Century communications marketplace, it is as redundant as the phrase "liberal Democrats." Yet there are those in Congress who want to bring it back.

When anyone expresses a point of view contrary to theirs, liberals want to silence that person. In this case, it is Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Michael Reagan, Neal Boortz, Michael Medved, Dennis Prager, Mike Gallager and a host of lesser known radio talk show hosts who have flourished in the marketplace of ideas over the last twenty years since the Fairness Doctrine was repealed.

Democrats have ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, The Los Angeles Times, The San Francisco Chronicle (and most other big-city newspapers), the faculties of most universities and the left-wing blogosphere.

Balancing all this, Republicans have Rush Limbaugh and those who have followed in his footsteps down the trail he has blazed on AM radio over the last twenty years. It can also be argued that without Limbaugh, conservative Internet bloggers and the balanced format of Fox News might never have come to prominence.

Today's Dems cannot abide the popularity of conservative talk radio. They are reminiscent of similar authoritarians who have gone before them. Those who fight their tactics and express opposing points of view must be silenced.

But where are the Republicans of the United States Senate? As Harry Reid and Tom Harkin were spewing erroneous talking points fed to them by left-wing web sites, I heard nothing from the GOP side of the aisle. Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh was left to deal with Reid's and Harkin's prevarications on his daily radio show for two solid weeks. Others on radio and on cable television came to his defense, but did anyone hear a peep out of the Senate Republicans?

Rush Limbaugh has been one of America's staunchest defenders of our military for twenty years or more. He has also been the best friend Republicans in Congress have ever had. Where were the Senate Republicans when their friend was being viciously attacked? Where were they when Rush Limbaugh and others were pointing out the hypocrisy of Democrats who demean our troops and their mission?

Democrats believe so fervently that they have next year's presidential and congressional elections wrapped up that they are pushing an agenda of censorship against their opponents in the only media not doing their bidding - talk radio. And why wouldn't they believe that? Their genteel "colleagues" on the right side of the aisle are so concerned about being liked by the mainstream media they have forgotten who their real friends are.


Doug Patton is a freelance columnist who has served as a political speechwriter and public policy advisor. His weekly columns are published in newspapers across the country and on selected Internet web sites, including Human Events Online, and, where he is a senior writer and state editor. Readers may e-mail him at

Friday, October 05, 2007


The US military says that American and Iraqi troops have arrested a financer for al Qaeda. The financer had received over $100 million from donors in order to fund insurgent operations in Iraq.

For a while the military has been saying that al Qaeda's expansion was due to its access to external financing. It is hard to tell the exact scale of the financing operation that they are facing.

The man in question distributed $50,000 a month to al Qaeda and employed up to 50 terrorists to plant roadside bombs ... and paid them $3,000 for each operation.

In 2006 there was an attack on the Golden Shrine in Samarra, which is a holy Shia site. This man's money was linked to purchase of explosives used in that attack, which severely escalated violence in the region.

Details of the man's nationality have yet to be released, but apparently he used a leather merchant business as a front, which allowed him to smuggle weapons and explosives. He had shops in Iraq's Falluja and in Syria and Jordan.

The sad part of this story was that he was arrested rather than just killed. But maybe we can get some information out of him that would lead us to some of the people funding Islamic radicalism. Torture him? To tell you the truth .. wouldn't upset me all that much.

Thursday, October 04, 2007


By Michelle Malkin •

This man has some nerve. Here he is, the insane man who threatened to, you know, spit on me, last night, complaining that the “extremes” on both sides of the political debate are guilty of “coarsening the debate.” Thanks to Allahpundit for clipping the unstomach-able clip:

“Coarsening the debate.”

Un. Freaking. Believable.

Geraldo Rivera: The Rosie O’Donnell of Fox News.

Tuesday, October 02, 2007


The Crush Rush Democrats’ agenda; Wesley Clark crusades to kick Rush off of Armed Forces Radio; Update: Daily Kos wants in on the action!

By Michelle Malkin

Update Midnight: Poor Daily Kos is feeling left out of the Rush-bashing action. Kos promotes diatribe to the front page.

Lonewacko has advice on how to fight back.

Another target.

Update 8:35pm Eastern. Backdoor restoration of the Fairness Doctrine, take two: Wesley Clark ramps up the nutroots’ campaign to kick Rush Limbaugh off of Armed Forces Radio:

It’s time to put real pressure on Rush Limbaugh. His show is broadcast on Armed Forces Radio, and this time we are going to go straight to the lifeblood of Rush’s show — Congress. Congress has the power to remove Rush Limbaugh from Armed Forces Radio, and it won’t be as easy for elected officials to ignore our call.

Clark’s PAC is leading the organizing campaign:

Today, I am asking you to join 13,793 other Americans and email Congress urging them to take Rush Limbaugh off Armed Forces Radio.

Last week, Rush Limbaugh labeled American servicemembers who support an end to the war in Iraq “phony soldiers.”

We’re going directly to Congress to take him off the Armed Forces Radio airwaves. Elected officials in Congress have the power to prevent Limbaugh from using taxpayers’ money to disrespect and censure the voices of our soldiers.

Join us and hold Rush Limbaugh accountable for his offensive and outrageous comments — tell your member of Congress to Dump Rush From Armed Forces Radio today!

These people are fighting dirty. They are focused. They are unhinged.

Watch from the sidelines or get your head in the game.



Backdoor restoration of the Fairness Doctrine. That’s what I said the anti-Rush campaign is really about. The Hill underscores the point in a piece filed tonight:

House Republicans are threatening to launch a discharge petition on legislation that would ensure the future prosperity of conservative radio talk-show hosts but is expected to face opposition from Democratic leaders. On Monday evening, Republicans filed a rule with the House Rules Committee laying the groundwork for a petition that would force action on protecting radio from government regulation later this fall.

The move comes at a time when Democrats have launched a coordinated attack on conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, accusing him of disparaging American troops critical of the Iraq war as “phony soldiers.”

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) has said broadcasters should be required to give listeners both sides of political issues so voters can make informed decisions.

Conservatives fear that forcing stations to make equal time for liberal talk radio would cut into profits so severely that radio executives would choose to scale back on conservative programming to avoid rising costs and interference from the government.

Republicans’ concern has grown as Democrats have waged a battle against Limbaugh in recent days. On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) sent a letter to the chief executive of Clear Channel Communications, Mark Mays, calling on him to denounce Limbaugh’s remarks.

The Baltimore Sun’s Swamp blog has the list of the 41 Crush Rush Democrats (also posted over at Dingy Harry’s website):

Senator Harry Reid, Majority Leader
Senator Richard Durbin, Assistant Majority Leader
Senator Charles Schumer, Vice Chairman, Democratic Conference
Senator Patty Murray, Secretary, Democratic Conference
Senator Daniel Akaka
Senator Max Baucus
Senator Joseph Biden
Senator Barbara Boxer
Senator Sherrod Brown
Senator Robert Byrd
Senator Benjamin Cardin
Senator Tom Carper
Senator Bob Casey
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
Senator Kent Conrad
Senator Christopher Dodd
Senator Byron Dorgan
Senator Dianne Feinstein
Senator Tom Harkin
Senator Daniel Inouye
Senator Edward M. Kennedy
Senator John Kerry
Senator Amy Klobuchar
Senator Mary Landrieu
Senator Frank Lautenberg
Senator Patrick Leahy
Senator Carl Levin
Senator Blanche Lincoln
Senator Bob Menendez
Senator Barbara Mikulski
Senator Bill Nelson
Senator Barack Obama
Senator Jack Reed
Senator Jay Rockefeller
Senator Ken Salazar
Senator Bernie Sanders
Senator Debbie Stabenow
Senator Jon Tester
Senator Jim Webb
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse
Senator Ron Wyden

Allahpundit salutes the 10 Dems who refused to put their names on the letter.

The Swamp also has a copy of Clear Channel’s reply. A snippet:


I’ll believe Harry Reid cares about the First Amendment when he condemns for stomping on the free speech rights of the CafePress shop owners who stood up for Gen. Petraeus and satirized the MoveOn goons.




If you’d like to write to Clear Channel to share your fair and balanced view of Limbaugh, here’s the address:

Mr. Mark P. Mays
CEO, Clear Channel Communications Inc.
200 East Basse Road
San Antonio, TX 78209


Next on the counter-offensive to-do list:

“If anyone ever doubted that there is enmity between Democrats and American talk radio, they need look no further than the personal attacks leveled on Rush Limbaugh on the floor of the Senate,” said Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), the sponsor of legislation shielding broadcasters from government interference. “I thought it astonishing that members of the U.S. Senate would engage in repeated and distorted personal attacks on a private citizen. It gives evidence of a level of frustration with conservative talk radio that is very troubling to anyone who cherishes the medium.”

Pence, a former professional talk radio host, and Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), a radio station owner, on Monday sent letters to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) demanding a vote on the Broadcaster Freedom Act.

Dan Riehl dares Harry Reid to ask the troops who they’d rather listen to:

Let them vote - a show by you, or Limbaugh’s program. It won’t be the first time you were humiliated when people had a say in the matter.


LA County has released figures which outline the actual cost of illegal immigrants. Remember that these figures are just for Los Angeles County and they are just for one month.

In the month of July, illegal immigrants and their families collected over $35 million in welfare and food stamps. $20 million in welfare and $15 million in food stamps.

The estimated annual cost of illegal immigrants in LA County -- $440 million.

But wait, that doesn't include the additional $220 million for public safety and $400 million for healthcare. Where are we at now? The taxpayers of LA County are paying more than $1 billion per year because of illegal aliens.

One more thing ... that figure does not include the soaring cost of government education.

Then again .. remember that Mexican Magazine which ran a story with the headline "Los Angeles is Ours!" Fine ... let Mexico pay the bills.

..... and the invasion rolls on.


If you need any proof that the Democrats are going to try to rip the guts out of talk radio when they gain control of the White House, you need look no further than the current storm surrounding Rush Limbaugh.

OK .. so Limbaugh is a competitor (though I'm sure he doesn't see me as any competition for him whatsoever). That's fine. Competing for stations and ratings is one thing, but when a fellow talk show host is attacked by mindless myrmidons like Media Matters it's another. I'll step forward and defend any host who is being wrongly attacked, just as I did with O'Reilly. The difference is, Limbaugh won't attack me later for it.

The instigator here is Media Myrmidons. They like to call themselves "Media Matters" but myrmidons fits so much better. Media Myrmidons is an ultra left-wing machine created by Hillary Clinton and her supporters and backers to carry forth the attack on conservative talk radio. Every once in a while they do me the favor of featuring me in one of their attacks, thus increasing my name recognition across the country. It is no real surprise that ever since Media Myrmidons started their attacks on me my syndication has begun to grow ... adding over five stations just this week.

Back to Limbaugh.

Media Myrmidons started this attack on Limbaugh by writing that Rush called "service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq 'phony soldiers.'" Media Myrdions is lying .. and they know they're lying. They also know that they can depend on the mainstream media in this country to not only ignore their distortion, but to actually work to support and spread it.

This whole mess starts with a clown by the name of Jesse Macbeth. Macbeth became very popular with the media earlier this year when he started telling stories about all of the hideous crimes he saw our soldiers commit while he was serving in Afghanistan and Iraq as an Army ranger. Oh, how the leftist media sopped it up. The only problem was, Macbeth was lying.

Rather than take my word for it, here's an excerpt from a release from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Washington:

U.S. Attorney Jeffrey C. Sullivan today announced some of the results of "Operation Stolen Valor," a year long effort to investigate and prosecute those who lie about their military service for financial gain or other reasons.

Here's Sullivan's description of Jesse Macbeth:

*Jesse Macbeth, 23, Tacoma, Washington, sentenced today in connection with his fraudulent claims of military service. Macbeth sought medical benefits claiming to suffer from PTSD related to service in Iraq and Afghanistan, in fact, Macbeth was discharged from the Army about a month after he joined. Macbeth never traveled outside the U.S. with the Army. Macbeth duped reporters, claiming to be a decorated Army Ranger who had witnessed war crimes.

I've read the transcripts; the complete transcripts, and it is crystal clear that when Limbaugh made his "phony soldiers" reference it was directed at Jesse Macbeth and his ilk, people who falsely claimed to serve in the Middle East and lied about the actions of our troops there. It's an apt description, I would say, since U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sullivan himself referred to Macbeth and the other's who joined him in his efforts as "phony war heroes."

We know exactly what's going on here. It's no mystery. Rush Limbaugh is perhaps the biggest single obstacle in the way of Hillary Clinton or some other member of the MoveOn Democrat Party becoming our next president. Media Matters is a creation of Hillary Clinton and her cabal. There's no denying this, Hillary has openly admitted her role in creating this organization. As the election season continues you can expect Media Myrmidons to increase their attacks, and as they do so their attacks on Conservative talk radio will sound more and more desperate. And while Media Myrmidons keeps up the attack, Hillary's dog washers – Harry Reid, for example – will keep barking from the sidelines.

Monday, October 01, 2007


Two Different Versions! Two Different Morals!


The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building
his house and laying up supplies for the winter
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and
plays the summer away.

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.
The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!


The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long,
building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances
and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference
and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well
fed while others are cold and starving.

CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the
shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable
home with a table filled with food.
America is stunned by the sharp

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor
grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and
everybody cries when they sing, "It's Not Easy Being Green."

Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house
where the news stations film the group singing, "We shall overcome."
Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the
grasshopper's sake.

Nancy Pelosi & John Kerry exclaim in an interview with Larry King
that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both
call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper
Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of
green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his
home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a
defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel
of federal judges that Bill Clinton appointed from a list of
single-parent welfare recipients.

The ant loses the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last
bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just
happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around him because he
doesn't maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the
house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize
the once peaceful neighborhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote.



"I had to make a choice. American Solutions is in the early stages of being a genuine citizens movement. To walk out on it just as it was getting launched was irresponsible. It's far more important than exploring prospects for the presidency." Newt Gingrich, September 29, 2007

What a difference 48 hours makes in politics. On Thursday, at 10:15 am, while appearing on my program on WDUN AM 550 in Gainesville, Georgia, Newt Gingrich gave the answer to the “presidential question” he would give for the rest of that day and Friday and had been giving through out this year. As soon as his world wide event, American Solutions, was over on September 29th he would have Randy Evans, on his behalf, see if there were $30 million dollars in pledges for a presidential campaign. He said that on October 21 he would give a final answer. As late as Thursday evening on The Sean Hannity Show and later on Hannity and Colmes on Fox News Channel, he said that there was a 20% chance he would run.

When I talked to him on my program and later at the conference, he repeated many of the same things. He was looking for “Red, White and Blue” solutions, he was a “middle-class” guy who couldn’t write a $100 million dollar personal check like Gov. Mitt Romney, and that the way to beat Sen. Hillary Clinton was to have ideas not attacks. He sounded like a man who was running and he looked like a man on top of his game.

The ink was hardly dry on the press release to announce his exploratory committee on a run for president, Gingrich had suspended his contract with Fox News Channel earlier in the week and had fielded and answered a number of questions regarding living in Virginia while basing a campaign out of Atlanta. He looked like a candidate. In fact, a number of news organizations ran commentary with titles like, “Newt will Run.” What a difference a few hours make. Gingrich pulled the plug on his own presidential aspirations.

It appears that Newt Gingrich is the first casualty of McCain/Feingold and the squashing of free speech through campaign finance reform. Gingrich said, "McCain-Feingold has legal penalties. It penalizes being a citizen. We thoroughly understood the legalities of running for president. We didn't realize the implications for American Solutions. We just said this is important. We can't have all these workshops and kill it Monday morning."

Rick Tyler, Gingrich’s spokes person said in an email, “The risk during the exploratory phase would have been being accused of using American Solutions resources to travel, speak, communicate, etc. During this phase, American Solutions would have been open to the factual allegation that while Newt was actually speaking for Solutions, he was instead attempting to drum up support [or pledges]." McCain/Feingold would have made it impossible for Gingrich to continue raising money for American Solutions and explore a run for the Presidency and for a guy who has always had been many things at once, it wasn’t plausible that he could add a presidential run into the mix.

But Gingrich may fight another day. He has ruled out a vice-presidential bid, but hasn’t ruled out a run for president in 2012. I have a moment in time theory about all this. There is a reason that we haven’t had a President Howard Baker or President Sam Nunn -- it’s not because they weren’t talked about or considered or qualified, it’s because they missed their moment in time. While there is some speculation about a Nunn independent run for 2008, it won’t be at the top of the ticket. Is this Gingrich’s moment in time or has it passed? That question can only be answered with time.

His commitment to American Solutions is steadfast and suits him. If he stays with American Solutions and works within the two party system to facilitate change and connections between parties, he may do what presidents and speakers can’t do—bring people together through education. Rush Limbaugh said that the greatest mistake of the Republican Revolution of 1994 is that we thought we had convinced people on conservatism. The current Democrat controlled congress is doing the same thing. They think their win of the House and Senate in 2006 was a vote for them, when actually it was a vote against Republicans who weren’t doing their jobs and were corrupt. Maybe American Solutions is the vehicle for Newt, the teacher, to finally convince the American people about conservatism. It is a way to take the Contract with America of 1994 to a new generation with new ways to spread the message.

Newt Gingrich is a survivor and he is a guy that can get more people together of differing political persuasions than anyone I have every met. He’ll be there for the pendulum to swing back to the right and he will have a say so in where it lands. The sad thing is beginning the weekend with the possibility of a run for president and ending it with the jolt of a definitive, “I am not running,” takes away from what he wanted to accomplish from the weekend. The news became about him and not about the message. However, there will be many more American Solutions weekends and America will be watching.


You've heard the latest, haven't you? This one came out last Friday afternoon. Hillary (please sit down) wants for the federal government to "give" every baby born in America a $5,000 account that can start growing and earning interest so that by the time this kid turns 18 they'll have money to go to college.

No .. I'm not kidding. She actually came out with this idea at a speech before a Congressional Black Caucus forum. It's a brand new entitlement program, courtesy of Hillary Clinton.

Just think about it! Download a baby, and presto!, the taxpayers owe your new child a cool five thousand!

This is pure Hillary Clinton. This is a woman who believes that America is government. If government decides that every new baby gets five grand, then that's all there is to it. Every new baby gets five grand.

Where does it come from? Oh, come on now. Ask Hillary and she'll just tell you it comes from the government. If you ask her where the government is going to get the money, she'll prattle on about repealing the Bush tax cuts or some such nonsense. Bottom line? A new entitlement program. Here's your birth certificate, here's $5,000, and welcome to America!

Let me tell you how Hillary's idiotic little income redistribution idea is going to work out in real life --- after, that is, the young single women of this country make her our next president.

First we'll have to figure out whether or not the five grand baby bonus will be paid to a baby born in this country of illegal aliens. Well of course it would! After all, the baby's a citizen, isn't he? We certainly don't want to discriminate. So .. here's a scenario that will become all-too common. Consuelo lives in Tijuana. Consuelo is pregnant .. bulging, wide-eyed pregnant. Sus roturas del agua. Consuelo heads for the border ... eager to get to the emergency room of a U.S. hospital. And why would that be? Why, so her baby can get it's $5,000, that's why? You couldn't figure that out on your own? Must be government educated. Pity.

Another question. Just how will the parents be able to invest the baby's money?

You can be sure there will be restrictions. Maybe this would be a good time to resurrect the Democrat's idea of "economically targeted investments." Maybe the law would say that you could only invest the money in stocks of a company that is deemed to be "union friendly!" Or maybe it could only be invested in savings institutions that show the politically correct inclination to make loans to minorities with bad credit and job histories!

How would the baby bonus play out around election time? Well, that's a simple enough question to answer. The Democrats would have two stock campaign tactics ready for each election: (1) Vote for me and I'll raise the baby bonus to $6000! A sure winner with every pregnant or hoping-to-be pregnant voter out there. (2) Vote for a Republican and they're going to take your baby bonus away!

What happens when spending gets a little tight? This one's simple also. Democrats will suggest that the baby bonus get phased out for people in upper income brackets. In other words, stiff the high achievers. In order to increase the baby bonus for lower and middle income parents, the Democrats will phase it out for the minority who earn the higher incomes. The math is so simple you should be able to figure it out even if you went to a government school. There are more households who make under $200,000 a year in this country than there are those who make more. Cut off the baby bonus for the evil rich, increase it for the poor and middle income types --- and the votes come rolling in.

Remember Hillary shrieking "I want to take those profits" after Exxon Mobile posted a rather hefty profit figure? Sure she wants to take those profits. She already thinks they belong to her anyway! This is a woman who harbors a gut belief that every penny you earn belongs to the federal government. You are to be allowed to keep just enough of what you earn to keep you fat and reasonably complacent. Beyond that, it's hers, and she will throw it around the way she pleases.

Hold tight, my friends. There's sure to be more Hillary absurdities on the way.