So, We Weren't In A Recession...Can We Now Stop The Fear And Loathing???

See the photo? These are people - - Americans - - engaging in "economic activity" (buying and selling stuff in a mall). And yes, this kind of "economic activity" has been happening, even this year....and yes, the economy did grow between January and March of this year. Only 0.6%...and that's an economic slowdown, for sure...but it's still growth, not decline.

So can we accept this fact, and move forward? Apparently not. "Experts" still see doom and gloom. And according to polling data, Americans are increasingly believing that the road to prosperity is paved with tax increases.

More on this tommorrow morning.

And by the way, thanks to Jackie in Arlington for the very flattering call tonight on my program @ 630 WMAL (glad my website photos met with your "approval" - - and yes my wife did hear your remarks about her being a "lucky woman"), and to Ray in Gaithersburg for your very honest, very candid comments about the values of Black America, versus the "values" of Barack Obama.

This just in (regarding gasoline prices).....

Barack Obama is getting criticized for NOT supporting a hiatus of the federal gasoline tax.

Meanwhile, Hillary is calling for an "investigation" of oil companies. Why? Because, to use her terms, "the prices aren't right" ( I guess she means that they are "too high").

If Hillary is going to continue to make this a matter of "corporate America" and "conspiracy," then we will NOT move the country into a serious discussion about energy independence.

Apparantley there's just too much political gain to be enjoyed, speaking in terms of corporate conspiracies.....

Gas Prices Are Now, Officially, A Campaign Issue....

If The Wall Street Journal says so, then it must be so....
A story in today's WSJ says that while Obama, Clinton, and McCain are talking about the pain of gasoline prices and its impact on our economy (and of course 2 weeks ago McCain proposed a suspension of the federal gasoline tax for the summer months, and Hillary agreed with McCain and proposed the same thing a few days later)...they are still, each of them, proposing things that will make the situation worse.

And let's be honest about this: none of them are yet talking about the real issue - - our problematic reliance on foreign oil!

The next President of the United States (and the next Congress, for that matter), is going to have to face this reality: our nation's energy policy has been held hostage to radical "environmental" ideology; it has placed the wellbeing of plants and animals over and above the wellbeing of human beings; and this has placed our nation in a state where we are vunlerable economically (we're felling that now), and geo-politically.

Let the conversation begin now, the conversation about putting people first in our nation's energy policy, NOT Caribou and Elk.

Mr. McCain, you start first....

Starting To Get Serious About The Nation's Energy Issues?

As discussed on my program Tuesday tonight on 630 WMAL Radio (Washington, D.C.)....2 weeks ago John McCain proposed that the federal government temporarily disband the national gasoline tax during the summer months; sort of a "hiatus" if you will.

Next thing you know, Hillary Rodham Clinton was proposing the idea (Hillary has always been a big proponent of reducing taxes - - just like she's always been a gun enthusiast, and a hunter, and has always been an opponent of NAFTA and the Iraq War)......

But Barack Obama insists that these proposals were all about "playing politics," and insists that it's a bad idea.

And this scenario suggests a couple of questions:

A) How long can Obama keep opposing the idea of providing Americans with some short-term relief at the gasoline pump, without appearing like the radical socialist that he is and experiencing a drop in support because of it?

B) Will McCain be able to lead the broader national discussion on energy to where it needs to go - - to where we have a frank discussion about harvesting our own oil, and becoming more energy self-reliant, both in the short run and for the long term?

Stay tuned...more on this Wednesday....

Could This Woman Be The Next U.S. Vice President???

What, you don't recognize her??? She's Governor Sarah Palin (pronounced "Pay-Lin") of Alaska.

There's a grassroots movement underway to try and get her "drafted" as John McCain's Vice Presidential nominee.

She's virtually unknown outside of Alaska, that's true.

She is, however, a popular, sitting U.S. Governor; very articulate; very attractive; and she actually thinks that Alaska could be a part of the solution to America's dilemma of soaring oil prices.

Here is what was being said about her in The Weekly Standard about ten months ago.

And here is what is being said of her at the grassroots level now.

Mr. McCain, call your office.

And with the recent spike in "global" oil prices (read "Middle Eastern Oil"), and predictions that oil could rise to $200.00 a barrel before the year is out - - it is time, now, for the U.S. to begin developing its OWN oil resources again, and oil resources located elsewhere on the North American continenet.

Vice President Palin could play a role in that.......

It's All About Bill...."and people like you..."

Note this excerpt from a piece by Ryan Lizza in "The New Yorker:"


When Hillary Clinton’s Presidential campaign was launched, in January, 2007, her supporters feared that Bill would overshadow her, as he had when they both spoke at the funeral of Coretta Scott King, a year earlier. Now the constant fear is that he will embarrass her. When he makes news, it is rarely a good day for his spouse. Whether he was publicly comparing Barack Obama’s primary victory in South Carolina to Jesse Jackson’s campaigns in the eighties or privately, and apoplectically, complaining that Bill Richardson broke his word by endorsing Obama, every story has seemed to reinforce an image of Clinton as a sort of ill-tempered coot driven a little mad by Obama’s success. “I think this campaign has enraged him,” the adviser told me. “He doesn’t like Obama.” In private conversations, he has been dismissive of his wife’s rival. James Clyburn, an African-American congressman from South Carolina, told me that Clinton called him in the middle of the night after Obama won that state’s primary and raged at him for fifty minutes. “It’s pretty widespread now that African-Americans have lost a whole lot of respect for Bill Clinton,” Clyburn said.

But, as Clinton campaigned in Pennsylvania, he was rarely the cartoon politician portrayed in the press. He still connects better with voters than his wife or Obama. “Hillary is in this race today because of people like you,” he told one white working-class audience. “She’s in it for you and she’s in it because of you. People like you have voted for her in every single state in the country.” People like you. The phrase hung in the air and the room quieted. Clinton didn’t say what the people who voted for Obama were like, but the suggestion was that they were somehow different.

Read the full story by clicking here.

Further evidence that Bill and Hillary are committed to themselves; not to each other; not to "their" political party; but to themselves, each of them.

The Democrats' Indignation Over The Clintons: Better Late Than Never

by Austin Hill





Breaking news - - Bill and Hillary Clinton are nasty, frequently inauthentic, and dishonest.

Actually this is not “news” at all. But many Liberal Americans have just begun to discover this painful reality, and it’s an arduous process for them to stumble out of their denial.

My concerns about Bill’s relationship with the truth date back to his now-famous “I experimented with marijuana a time or two“ and I “didn‘t inhale” shtick of 1992. So many others seemed to revel in the entertainment value that then-Governor Clinton provided with those remarks. I, on the other hand, was horrified that a serious candidate for the presidency would utter such absurdities, and expect, as he apparently did, to be taken seriously.

My anxiety got worse after the Clintons stormed the White House. I watched Bill renege on his campaign promise of a middle class tax cut with the “gosh this federal deficit is worse than I thought” routine, and then usher in the largest tax increase in the history of our country. I also observed Hillary’s healthcare “task force” that was supposedly responding to a mandate of “the people,” yet operated clandestinely and could not be bothered by questions from “the people” (or the Congress, for that matter); I read of the mysterious and abrupt firing of the career staffers at the White House travel office; a steady stream of rumors and anecdotes about Hillary’s berating of Secret Service and military personnel at the White House; a steady stream of rumors and anecdotes about Bill and “other women;” the Clinton Administration’s proposed expansion of welfare spending by about $35 billion, despite Bill’s campaign pledge to “end welfare as we know it;” and allegations about the Clintons’ possibly having broken the law with some unscrupulous real estate dealings “back home” in Arkansas.

Then, after leading Democrats to the embarrassing end of forty years of control over the House and the Senate in less than two years on the job (in the historic mid-term elections of November 1994), Bill had the audacity to stand before the nation in his 1995 State of the Union address and announce that “the era of big government is over.”

Yes, long before the “I did not have sexual relations with that woman / it’s a vast rightwing conspiracy / it depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is / it’s nobody’s business but ours” psychodrama; long before Bill took the oath of office for the second time; long before the world knew the name “Monica Lewinsky,“ I had grave concerns about the Clintons and their abilities at being authentic, honest people.

Now, liberal America is awakening to the “Clinton issues“ for the very first time. It began with Ted Kennedy’s hastily arranged endorsement of Barack Obama at a campaign “rally” back last December, wherein “Uncle Ted” seemed to convey the message “you two don’t own this party…” Then there was Obama, after having been berated and ridiculed for weeks by the former President, sheepishly admitting in January that “I feel like I’m running against both Clintons” (gosh, ya think? Have Hillary and Bill ever passed-up an opportunity to use each other for political gain?).


Three days ago, former California legislator and noted liberal activist Tom Hayden published an editorial entitled “Why Hillary Makes My Wife Scream,” wherein he lamented Hillary’s “hawkish” stance on the war in Iraq, and her nasty campaign tactics. “It is abundantly clear,” he wrote, “that the Clintons… are trying… to so damage Barack Obama that he will be perceived as "unelectable.." He also registered his dismay for the “carnivore” behavior of Clinton flacks James Carville, Lanny Davis and Howard Wolfson.

A day later, Congressman James Clyburn, the highest ranking Black in the U.S. House of Representatives, described Hillary’s campaign behavior as “scurrilous” and “disingenuous,” and theorized that Hillary’s objective now is to insure Obama’s defeat in November, and thereby allow herself a second opportunity to run for President in 2012.

The timing of this new-found moral indignation is interesting, to say the least. Apparently it was easy - - or at least easier - - for Democrats to ignore the Clintons’ selfish, nasty, destructive behavior back in the 90’s, when they could pacify themselves by scapegoating conservative talk radio; or when they could rationalize that it was ONLY national security being compromised with a little Chinese money laundering; or when it was MERELY one “immature” intern being destroyed by the Clinton cronies.

Now things are different. One of their own, one of the Democratic Party’s perceived best and brightest, is the target of the Clintons’ venom, and with each strike against Obama the wellbeing of the entire party is threatened.

But if the Clintons’ behavior is now suddenly problematic, the Democratic Party shares culpability for it. Since 1992, Democrats have been collectively behaving like the classic “codependent spouse,” ignoring the public embarrassments and gross injustices of the abusive husband (both Hillary and Bill), making excuses for the assaults, and enabling the abuse to continue. And just as the Clintons gave up the Lincoln bedroom in exchange for campaign cash, Democrats long ago swapped their integrity for “success” at the polling booth.

I’m glad some Democrats have finally begun to feel outraged over the Clintons’ abusiveness. But now its time to divorce themselves from it.