fromthetop2

In the broadest-stroke terms, Democrats get a tax credit, Republicans do not. Again.

The $13 is actually $8 when you factor in that it won't hit the streets until mid-year.

Michelle Obama skewered this summer's stimulus checks as being a "joke" What would you consider $8 a week? You and a friend for a Big Mac Extra Value Meal?

I am afraid the kool-aid drinkers were looking for a new house, free cars, a couple of grand to go on a spending spree or something along those lines. THAT'S the kinda CHANGE they were asking for.

Tell you what - if Harry Reid didn't have the government spend $1 billion on a commuter train to connect gamblers in LA to the casinos in Vegas (in the bill), or Nancy with her mice (as stated above), or $10 bill for the NIH (Arlen Spector's price for capitulation), you might have gotten a little more "somethin' somethin'".

What a great stimulus package we have here! The Emperor Obama approves!

In their infinite wisdom to screw things up, Congress has passed and the President has signed legislation that extends the cut-off date (again) to now mid-June.

Some TV stations announced they will go ahead and switch anyway. More would have switched, but some stations were going to have to change their channel numbers. Since they can't do that until everyone else switches, they will stay put. The channel change was due to other carriers (cell phones for example) purchasing the rights to the lower end spectrum.

Another $650 million was allocated in the stimulus package to accomplish the switch- again. This latest move was directed at the largely densly populated urban markets that have a number of people who still get their TV reception the old-fashioned way with just rabbit ears. The numbers are apparently 6 million.

Yea, I did the math as well. /blush.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":blush:" border="0" alt="blush.gif" />

It is change, Obama is going to make us a socialist state dependent upon the Government.

Uh,oh, but don't look now. We are already there!

http://www.newsweek.com/id/183663

Now we're where the liberal newsmedia always wanted us to be. Glory Hallelujah! And the cherry on top of the sundae? It's all Bush's fault!

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration on Tuesday overturned another Bush-era energy policy, setting aside a draft plan to allow drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.

"To establish an orderly process that allows us to make wise decisions based on sound information, we need to set aside" the plan "and create our own timeline," Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced in a statement.

Alleging that the Bush administration "had torpedoed" offshore renewable energy in favor of oil and natural gas, Salazar said he was extending the public comment period by 6 months.

I'm sorry, could we get Interior Secretary Salazar to be in charge of the Stimulus Package. His reasoning is sound /roflol.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":roflol:" border="0" alt="roflol.gif" />

I guess there is snuck into the package another trillion dollars for us to upgrade the energy grid so we can all produce wind power.

AAAAUUUGGHHHH!!!

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Somebody please stop this train!!!!

Del, you know the reason. We are too stupid to be trusted to do the right thing. It's that same patrician mentality.

If they sent us back our money, then they couldn't reward their lobbyist buddy, scratch the back of the people who donated to their campaign, or hire their brother-in-law's next door neighbor to a staff job. It's really THEIR money to do what THEY want to do, don't you know?

Here's the latest news:

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner unveiled the government's new plan to bail out the financial system this morning, and investors lost no time showing their displeasure.

Stocks plunged as Geithner began to speak.

At 12:15 p.m. ET, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was down 290 points to 7,9814. The Nasdaq Composite Index had shed 44 points to 1,548, and the Standard & Poor's 500 Index had lost 30 points to 839.

Crude oil was down 52 cents to $39.04 a barrel this afternoon.

Beautiful!

Too much of the public seems to think that with the stimulus package, that new high-paying jobs will pop up next week in their home town. Or, at the very least, their old job will reappear.

Even someone who knows nothing about how money works should realize that if $1 million was given to the local or state government, and $1 million was given to the private sector, ONLY the private sector could turn around in rather short order and hire new workers fast enough to make a difference in their lives. Give $1 million to a building contractor. Give $1 million a manufacturing plant. See how fast jobs would open up.

The government would stink up half the money in just the red tape, and what was left (after it had been posted, vetted, and actually hired), it would take close to the end of the year- and that would be moving at warp speed.

If the government supposedly botched the coupon program for the DTV transition, and can't account for most of the money spent in the previous bank bailout, how are these same people going to get us the money in the time we need it?

Remember the Tobacco settlement money? Did a FRACTION of that court ordered hold up ever get to the stop smoking programs it was mandated to fund? No, it went to the general fund, the pet projects- the same group of hands who are deep into this bill.

Very good article, very cogent in its explanation of how things are happening.

Here is the problem now, as I am seeing it unfold:

- The bill is advertised in the starkest of terms; If you are for the bill, you are for Obama. If you have questions about the bill, then you want the country to be in a full blown recession by spring.

How many red flags would go up if , for example, you were buying a car and the salesman said "Just sign this contract now."

You countered by saying, well let me read this contract.

The salesman got mad and said " What, you don't trust me? Why do you think I'm the sales manager. Sign the darn thing now!"

You said what a minute, I would like to talk about this interest rate for example.

He gets indignant and yells ,"Everyone, listen up, this guy is trying to get this dealership closed! What do you think about that? Buddy, are you trying to throw us all out of work? Sign it NOW- or the price is going to go up!"

You read it and it says, you will have to pay for repairs for the car, even if you sell it.

You read further and you find that you are promising to pay for the salesman's brother-in-law's new home theater system as well.

"What does this have to do with my car?" you ask.

"Okay, we'll take that out if it's a deal breaker- but that's the end of it. Remember- YOU came into the dealership looking to buy a car. No more questions, no more delaying, no more obstructions. Sign it now."

It's going to pass, it will contain things that we will be burdened with forever. BTW, if it's going to pass, why did we need the press conferences, the town hall meetings, the addresses? It sounds more like a dictator force feeding this program than a President.

Interesting take, but I take the other side of the argument. I've seen good freshman teams with good coaches that prepared their players well in making the jump. I have seen lousy freshman coaches with good players totally screwed up the opportunity to learn and prepare. I have seen freshman lumped into the mix with the varsity that wasn't real good and pay a huge physical price(the ultimate disaster movie). Good coaching is THE most important element in freshman ball. JV coaches don't spend the time in my experience really working with the players to where the improvement is noticeable.

After watching all of the mixes, it has been my opinion that a good freshman coaching staff dedicated solely to preparing freshman for high school football is the best option on a number of levels. By playing against other frosh squads, they can adequately gauge their progress against peers, as well as develop a real class identity. It is very important for the player who is not yet up to par physically. As you know, growth spurts are all over the place in the 9th grade. For those "late bloomers" it is very beneficial. Sometimes, a very talented freshman is elevated up to the JV level to see how he performs. Most times he will be over his head physically if not mentally. In talking with other coaches, this is a preferred method as well.

Rector didn't do it after Jack left for reasons only he knows. If everyone else is doing it, it must have some merit.

Hasn't anyone picked up on the not-so-hidden message about the recruits in this year's class being subpar academically, which is why they did not get recruited to more visible D-1 programs?

Although, I will say that if anyone can be accepted to the Naval Academy or Miami (Ohio), their academics are in top order.

I take it as a call to start hitting the books!

How are they doing this season?

Muff, this topic should be in the humor section /roflol.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":roflol:" border="0" alt="roflol.gif" />

This is the ultimate slippery slope we went down when we (Federal Government) became partners with the banks- politics now has the potential to interjected into every phase.

Will we have a micro-management of loans (foreign and domestic) by politicos looking for favors, immune from responsibility for performance?

All business executives (unlike politicians) get bonus money based on acheiving certain performance goals set by their boards or management. Whether or not these goals were too soft and easily acheived is another discussion. I feel very uncomfortable having a bunch of novices with no knowledge of the industry setting performance standards.

Will the goals be tied to their own political needs, or will they reflect moving a company forward- you know, PERFORMING.

While it is very snappy to say limit compensation (and if bailout money was used for this I am upset), but I am more worried about who sets the limits- and who is left with no limits on their compensation.

I am talking about politicians who have forever been on my payroll.

The much advertised, much ballyhooed transition from analog to digital TV for Feb. 17 appears to be hitting the cancellation button.

With the new Congress in place, there are bills being presented to push it out until 6/12/09. President Obama indicated that he would sign the bill. It is expected to pass, with voting along party lines.

The reason? There are many given, but they all fall basically into the category that some people are going to be left behind when their analog sets go black. Sort of a "Katrina" effect if you will.

I know of nothing that gets 100% participation except death, so no matter when it happens, someone will say "I didn't know about it." It is the same logic I guess that lung cancer victims use when they try to sue tobacco companies saying "I didn't know smoking was harmful."

The only people who get hurt in this are the nations' television station owners and broadcasters. For months, they have prepared and spent money on this transition- buying new digital equipment and putting together PSA's. Each month of delay will cost the stations on an average of $250,000 per month. In a down economy, that is not easy money to replace- and may cost some stations to make dramatic cuts in staff or programming. The station's are trying to get a waiver from Congress to go ahead if they are ready and make the transitition anyway.

http://www.rbr.com/tv-cable/12621.html

I think the Kool-Aid factory workshop has now been exposed. It always was curious to me how the Dems could get talking points out so quickly, and be so universally similar in their talking points (remember "a certain gravitas?").

Now it appears plausible in the early morning conference calls between the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, that this is where the talking points were discussed, established, and disseminated for use. You then get Georgie boy to use his "cover" job as a journalist, and the rest as talking heads to appear on TV. Anyone of them communicates backdoor to the Party leadership what the "word of the day" is and BINGO! The gameplan is activated.

And the American Public lines up for more to drink, while the Republicans sit back in a silent stupor- outfoxed, outmaneuvered, out gunned.

I will add now the latest discovery on the expedition titled "The Media in Lockstep"

It all makes perfect sense as to why the coverage was (IMO) all one-sided, skewed, and generally predictable.

I give you witness for the prosecution, one journalist for ABC named George Stephanopoulus.

This was unearthed by well-respected LA Times journalist Andrew Malcolm:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington...el-carvill.html

Providing Kool-Aid for nearly 17 years!

This whole thing goes to my assertion made months ago during the campaign that something strange was going on with the Obama campaign as a whole, and that quite possibly BHO is being set up as a 'straw man' by some influential power brokers. His rocket-like ascendency had never been seen in modern presidential history. It was like we were watching a movie, maybe like a role Robert Redford would play.

How else in the world could a relative unknown with no political machine, no money, no relative experience, knock out the Clintons and everyone else and steamroll the nomination? How could that person skate through an election with no serious criticism being offered, and then defeat a well-known moderate in the general election?

Here's the plan: You get a 'minority' candidate who is charismatic and set him up to run and win. You fund him like crazy. Then, with his coattails sweeping more of you in office, you now control the whole game. You are running the show- he's just the figurehead, the talking head, the "prop" who is playing the role.

Watch how this plays out, but keep this in the back of your mind as the politics are played.

The Venerable WSJ explains it-and nails it- as well:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1233278125...emEditorialPage

And time to pay back your buddies:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123327820048831571.html

I was fascinated reading this piece.

http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/38574742.html

Glad to see a Cellblocker entering the thread. Dandy and I could use some more input.

Hamhuis is on my watch list. . . /dry.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

Part of the talent drop-off has been Rector's refusal to put together a freshman team. You just need an opportunity for the young guys to get their feet wet all together and assimilate into the school's culture as a unit. It is such a large jump from being a 15 year old stud to competing against 18 year old guys who've been pumpin weights and playing ball.

Maybe the new coach will see things differently.

And DAD1, you just need to move them into the house next to VY that you will buy for your daughter to insure they go to the right place!

As I have heard, one of the main reasons the Republicans voted in lock-step for "No" was that Pelosi et al refused all Republican ideas or amendments in the package. It was strictly a Democratic Party package- no others need apply. So the Red State response was "if you don't want our imput, you don't get our votes."

Obama, on the other hand, had been lobbying intently for Republicans to show "bi-partisanship" and support the package. In actuality, he wanted air cover if things go bad or don't solve the problem. If the Republicans voted affirmatively, they could share in the blame. Now it is all in the Democratic side, so "credit" will be given and it will work- no matter what happens.

"Bi-partisanship"?

I keep forgetting that Bi-partisanship means supporting unconditionally anything the Democractic Party wants. Obstructionism and Mean-Sprited means to float an idea from your side.

My jaw was absolutely smacking on the floor when I read this blog. I just kept thinking that if Ann

Coulter had written this, she would've been greeted with torches and a pyre to be burned on.

How in the world could a BLACK women have written this- and trust me, this was NOT written in a comedic or spoofing frame.

This was, is, intended to be serious journalism.

That to me is what is absolutely mystifying; is this the state of Black journalism? What is the point here? 9See the companion article: http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/11/1...ty/?source=news

I guess this is, in Sports Illustrated fashion, a sign of the Apocolypse.

To speculate on Hillary's butt made me have a little throw-up in my mouth. /blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":blink:" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />

Jack Daniels obviously spotted some talent when he selected Brian as the coach in waiting.

While many will have disagreements over his coaching style and decisions, you can't overlook the fact that the man took a new program to unprecidented heights in a very short time.

His teams played to their strengths, and posed a challenge everytime they took the field once they got up and going.

Who knows the direction of the program now and in the future, but from a Bruin perspective, his replacement has some big shoes to fill.

Best of luck in this future direction; I personally hope that it doesn't turn into a David Caruso-type decision. Rector has always struck me as a man who was going to do it his way, and I hope his way now brings him much success.

You can't make this stuff up. . .

Read the article and the comments. A new "low" in the celebrity status of our new First Family. Imagine if Ann Coulter had written this blog!

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/blogs/content...ng_respect.html

Auntie, my comment about the labor union membership only confirmed in my mind the reasons why you voted the way you do, and why you see the world the way you do. You do not need to explain any more to me. I get it.

Or enlighten me where I am wrong.

My comments about open dialogue were largely directed toward the media bias that is out in the open. Now, if you'd like to engage as to why my views about a closed media view are wrong, also fine.

Being in the industry, I am highly tuned into the daily slants coming from the major source of information in this country. The truly objective viewpoints are becoming more and more drowned out by the drumbeat of advocacy journalism, which at its core is paternalistic, elitist, and dangerous to a free nation.