President Obama is hitting us with yet another example of Hope and Change, with yet another example of the 'New Morality' of his Democratic Party.

Former senator Tom Daschle, is President Obama's nominee to be Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.

Daschle recently filed amended tax returns reporting $128,203 in unpaid taxes and $11,964 in interest.

He didn't do that until after he was nominated and it became likely that he would be 'outed'.

"The president has confidence that Sen. Daschle is the right person to lead the fight for health care reform," White House spokesman Bill Burton said. "In preparation for his nomination, Sen. Daschle and his accountant identified some tax issues and fixed them. They filed amended return with the IRS and made payments with interest."

Just like Tim Geithner, the new Secretary of the Treasury, who was also bagged over 'tax issues'. We don't call it 'tax evasion' now. We call it having 'tax issues'.

Despite this chicanery, Obama remains certain that Daschle will be confirmed.

Harry Reid also is certain that Daschle will be confirmed:

Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, also predicted Daschle would be confirmed. "He has a long and distinguished career and record in public service and is the best person to help reform health care in this country," Manley said in a statement. "Senator Reid looks forward to a swift hearing and is confident Daschle will be confirmed."

And I too am sure that he will be confirmed.

It's the New Morality of the Democratic Party.

It's the foundation of President Obama's "Hope and Change" mantra:

"I HOPE I don't get caught, but just to make sure, let me CHANGE my tax returns."

It's supposed to be an economic stimulus bill to kick start the United States' economy, right?

A 'stimulus' is something that happens now, with immediate results...or pretty close to immediate, right?

Then why is there nearly $200 million in the Senate version of the bill for lump sum payments to Filipino vets of World War II?

How does that help the US economy?

It's a pet project of Senator Daniel K. Inouye, Senate Appropriations Committee chairman, a Democrat.

Senate bill allots millions to Filipino veterans

There is good argument that these vets are due such payments; they were promised this, but Congress - of course it was Congress - reneged shortly after the war.

But this is supposed to be a stimulus bill, not something that every Democrat can hang his pet projects on...this is exactly what happened to the last piece of garbage that our elected officials rushed through.

They aren't stopping to think or ask questions, and they are hoping we won't, either.

Chris Muir comments on the White House Wagyu over on Day-by-Day:

Day-by-Day

The dialog:

President Obama: "My $800 billion economic stimulus bill - over 5% goes to the economy! 5%! And not one Republican would sign it! Not one! I even let them eat Wagyu steaks!"

Presidential sycophant ("Rahmbo" Emanuel? Dave "It's not a crap sandwich" Axelrod?): "Sir, Republicans are clueless."

Yeah.

While Otero Countians line up for food stamps, the Big Dogs of the US Congress lined up at the White House to genuflect, guzzle fine liquor, and snuffle even finer steaks.

While Otero Countians put on another sweater or another pair of socks to keep the winter chill away, and turn down the thermostat another notch, President Obama is working in his shirtsleeves in "The Orchid Office".

Who's clueless?

Sounds a lot like those auto execs and their private jets, doesn't it? Sounds a lot like John Thain and his $35,000 toilet and million dollar office remodel, doesn't it?

Who's clueless?

A poll run today indicates that support for the so-called 'stimulus bill' has dropped to 45%:

Economic Stimulus

Americans are skeptical that an economic stimulus plan from the federal government will help the nation’s economy. This is perhaps due to the fact that most people think that the elected officials in Washington working on the plan are part of the economic problem as opposed to the solution.

Less than half (45 percent) of Americans think “Barack Obama’s proposed $825 billion dollar economic recovery plan” will help the economy. Twenty-nine percent think the plan will not make a difference, while 18 percent think it will hurt the economy. Democrats (63 percent) are much more likely than independents (43 percent) or Republicans (22 percent) to think the recovery plan will help.

Charles Krauthammer made some very salient points this afternoon when he noted that the thing is loaded with Democratic Party pork, a 'wishlist' of over 40 years of spending programs that have nothing to do with an economic 'stimulus'.

He also noted that President Obama is not the author; this is not, despite what the mainstream media says, a "White House" stimulus package. This is a Pelosi project. It has her fingerprints all over it.

From the Wall Street Journal:

A 40-year wish list

"Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before."

So said White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in November, and Democrats in Congress are certainly taking his advice to heart. The 647-page, $825 billion House legislation is being sold as an economic "stimulus," but now that Democrats have finally released the details we understand Rahm's point much better. This is a political wonder that manages to spend money on just about every pent-up Democratic proposal of the last 40 years.

We've looked it over, and even we can't quite believe it. There's $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There's even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.

You see...opposition to this obscenity really has nothing to do with being 'obstructionist' or 'partisan'. Quite the contrary. It has to do with accepting the responsibility that comes with citizenship in this country, and standing against ill-advised, self-serving, wasteful, poorly thought out political horrors such as this...if any real thought went into it, other than "let's get everything we can".

The Congressional Budget Office reports than much of the funding in this porkfest won't even hit the streets, the economy, for at least a couple of years.

How can that be a 'stimulus', with a delay like that?

Meanwhile, the President and the rest of the cast of Animal Farm...oooops...the senior members of our Congress...are snuffling $100 steaks and swilling the best booze the taxpayer can buy.

Check the front page of Thursday's Tribune-Democrat. There is a story there about how food stamp applications are on the rise in Otero County.

Thank you, Mr. President. Enjoy your steak.

Meanwhile, here it is again: the closing paragraphs of "Animal Farm":

"Gentlemen," concluded Napoleon, "I will give you the same toast as before, but in a different form. Fill your glasses to the brim. Gentlemen, here is my toast: To the prosperity of The Manor Farm! "

There was the same hearty cheering as before, and the mugs were emptied to the dregs. But as the animals outside gazed at the scene, it seemed to them that some strange thing was happening. What was it that had altered in the faces of the pigs? Clover's old dim eyes flitted from one face to another. Some of them had five chins, some had four, some had three. But what was it that seemed to be melting and changing? Then, the applause having come to an end, the company took up their cards and continued the game that had been interrupted, and the animals crept silently away.

But they had not gone twenty yards when they stopped short. An uproar of voices was coming from the farmhouse. They rushed back and looked through the window again. Yes, a violent quarrel was in progress. There were shoutings, bangings on the table, sharp suspicious glances, furious denials. The source of the trouble appeared to be that Napoleon and Mr. Pilkington had each played an ace of spades simultaneously.

Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

This just in from Campbell Brown, over on...of all places, CNN, the Obama PR firm:

Obama's hypocrisy showing

Excerpts:

Unfortunately, we are again asking the president to explain why exactly he announced, with great fanfare, new ethics rules if he had no intention of abiding by them.

The Obama administration is yet again asking for a waiver to its very own rules about hiring lobbyists.

This time, it is the new treasury secretary, Tim Geithner. He wants a former lobbyist for Goldman Sachs to be his top aide at the Treasury Department.

My view is simple: Mr. President, if you want to hire former lobbyists because you think they are the best people to do the job, then hire former lobbyists. Just don't hold a big news conference first to tell us how your administration is going to be so different from previous administrations in that you won't be hiring lobbyists.

Meanwhile, this is what President Obama's so-called 'stimulus package' is going to bring us:

The House passed its version of the bill Wednesday evening, and a host of oddball recipients from ATV riders to TV viewers preparing for the digital conversion stand to benefit.

But critics question why such narrowly tailored add-ons -- which have little, if any, prospect of creating large numbers of new jobs -- are in an emergency bill aimed at stimulating the economy and creating jobs.

"The stimulus bill delivers on a lot of promises that Democrats have made over the past decade to special interest groups," said William Beach, director of the Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis. "This is their time to kind of bring home the bacon."

Among the funding measures included in the proposal are $25 million for new ATV trails; $400 million for the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global warming research; $335 million for the Centers for Disease Control to combat sexually-transmitted diseases; and $650 million coupons to subsidize TV viewers for digital television conversion.

Our city council should be making a grab for the gold ring. Why, we could be fully funding The Front Porch, so people on AMTRAK know where they are, and we should be seeing about getting an ATV trail all the way around the city and down by the river, you know, for tourism or somesuch.

Think of the jobs that would create. Primary jobs. Putting up signs. Laying out the trail. Setting up an "ATV Trail Administrator". You betcha (wink).

I heard one today that kind took me aback a bit:

"Women pastors are an abomination!"

Yep.

I don't know why it took me aback; it's the attitude of a good many "Christians".

a⋅bom⋅i⋅na⋅tion
/??b?m?'ne???n/ uh-bom-uh-ney-shuhn]
–noun
1. anything abominable; anything greatly disliked or abhorred.
2. intense aversion or loathing; detestation: He regarded lying with abomination.
3. a vile, shameful, or detestable action, condition, habit, etc.: Spitting in public is an abomination.

I wonder how that fits in with John 13:34.

Of course, if you take Titus 2 literally, and without any exegetical examination whatsoever, then it probably makes sense to you, as much as anything else these people come up with as "Christian" attitudes and behaviors.

It is often said that the measure of a man's intellect is in how much he agrees with you. If that is true, then Roland S. Martin is a down-home genius:

Focus on first 100 days is absurd

The problem with so much emphasis being placed on the first 100 days is that a premium is placed on speed as opposed to thoughtfulness.

Take the president's stimulus package.

We are looking at spending $900 billion, and Congress is proceeding so fast that I doubt most of the members have actually read the entire bill. We know from history that moving with lightning speed leads to all kinds of problems later on.

The Patriot Act was rushed through, and we didn't find out about some of the weird provisions until after it was already signed into law. Oops! Sorry, too late.

The same with the bailout of the banking industry. We didn't discover until after it was too late that there weren't enough provisions focused on accountability of the funds, as well as mandates to ensure banks didn't sit on the cash to buy other banks but instead used it to open up the credit lines.

These measures are too doggone important for us to act like we're watching the movie "The Fast and the Furious."

Mr. Martin is right on the money. As the headless chickens in the Congress have shown us, they are pretty much clueless about what they are doing. The first so-called 'bailout' has turned into a fiscal fiasco, with both parties complicit in what has to be the biggest vaudeville show since the Keystone Kops were running amok.

Our elected officials can't tell you with any certainty what is going on. Campbell Brown has a short bit on that right here:

Bailout more of a mystery every day

And as we speak, the Clowns of Congress are taking the first - and probably only -vote on the 'stimulus' package.

Well...at least Nancy Pelosi's pitch for population control as an economic measure seems to be out of the equation:

Here is a searchable (by page) copy of the Generational Theft Act of 2009, also known as "President Obama's stimulus package".

Here's more, from The Heritage Foundation:



Average spending for all family groups in the United States is similar to that of families with children. On average, families annually spend:

* $2,330 on apparel and services,
* $3,595 on health care,
* $4,322 on food at home, and
* $11,657 annually on shelter.

If all families were asked to equally shoulder the burden of the $825 billion “stimulus” package, it would be like asking them to take on an amount of debt equivalent to what they spend on food, clothing, and health care — or most of what they spend on shelter — for an entire year.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today issued the following statement on a letter from Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Douglas Elmendorf to Budget Committee Ranking Republican Paul Ryan (R-WI), in which he noted that the federal government’s interest costs related to the legislation would amount to $347 billion between 2009 and 2019, bringing the total of the congressional Democrats’ massive spending bill to more than $1.1 trillion:

“It’s official: the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that the congressional Democrats’ legislation is the trillion dollar spending bill that we all feared it would be. It would be irresponsible to pass this massive debt onto our children and grandchildren, and Republicans will continue fighting for their interests – and the interests of all taxpayers. President Obama began this process with the hope of producing a bipartisan plan to create jobs. What congressional Democrats have put on the table is a wasteful and unfocused package that will create plenty of government programs and projects – but not nearly enough new, good-paying jobs. The American people deserve better than the one trillion dollar spending bill that the House will vote on tomorrow, and Republicans will continue reaching out to President Obama to craft a plan that reduces wasteful spending and helps create jobs through fast-acting tax relief for middle-class families and small businesses.”

OK...we are in the throes of a recession. We have CongressCritters flitting about like chickens with their heads cut off. We have others dashing to and fro shrieking - in a manner of speaking, "The sky is falling!" and urging an immediate vote on President Obama's $850 billion dollar porkfest, even as we deal with the chaos created by the last 'ramming home' committed by our duly elected officials.

While this is going on, President Obama has reversed the "Mexico City" policy, first set in place during the Reagan years, left in place by George I, reversed by Clinton, and reinstated by George II. By way of explanation, from Wikipedia: The policy required non-governmental organizations to "agree as a condition of their receipt of Federal funds that they would "neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations". The policy had exceptions for abortions done in response to rape, incest, or life-threatening conditions.

Curiosity compels me to ask...if we are in such dire economic straits, why is our new president requiring We the Taxpayers to pay for overseas abortions? Not only that, but why does President Obama's nominee to be the next Deputy Secretary of State, one James Steinberg, seem to believe that We the Taxpayers have a Constitutional obligation to do so? Steinberg wrote that the freshly reversed Mexico City policy, which bars taxpayer funding of abortions overseas, "is an unnecessary restriction that, if applied to organizations based in this country, would be an unconstitutional limitation on free speech."

Steinberg's statement is in direct contravention of the United States Supreme Court in Rust v. Sullivan, one of those pesky little precedent-setters from back in 1991:

The Government has no constitutional duty to subsidize an activity merely because it is constitutionally protected, and may validly choose to allocate public funds for medical services relating to childbirth but not to abortion.

While you are puzzling over that one, let me ask this as well:

In his inauguration speech, Mr. Obama took to task "those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents" . I am sure that many Americans were pleased to hear our new president address terrorists and their murderous actions. But I have to agree with Gerald Warner of TimesOnline.com (London), who observes: "[This] comes ill from a man whose flagship legislation, the Freedom of Choice Act, will impose abortion, including partial-birth abortion, on every state in the Union. It seems the era of Hope is to be inaugurated with a slaughter of the innocents.

That is an interesting expression of "hope and change", don't you think?

Disgraced pastor Haggard facing new sex allegations

It seems that Haggard, once considered a paragon of Christian 'virtue', was getting air starts from yet another fellow back when he was involved with the male hooker and shoving meth up his snoot. Allegedly.

A megachurch paid a 20-year-old man to keep silent about a sexual relationship he had with disgraced evangelical pastor Ted Haggard, a senior church pastor said.

Rev. Ted Haggard was fired from New Life Church after allegations about a prostitute and drug use arose in 2006.

Haggard, who was fired amid allegations that he used drugs and patronized a male prostitute in 2006, had a sexual relationship with a second man -- a 20-year-old volunteer at his megachurch, the Rev. Brady Boyd, a senior pastor at the church, said Monday.

Huh. That's on a par with a Catholic priest diddling the altar boys. Well...maybe not. This guy was an adult. So all we really had was Haggard thundering from the pulpit about homosexuals and sexual immorality, while having his little gay trysts on the side - allegedly.

Consenting adults. Other than the hypocrisy of it, which is normal for most Christian churches, who really cares?

But here's an interesting twist:

Brady Boyd (let's not bother with that honorarium, 'Reverend' for reasons we shall soon see) insists that this payoff was for 'healing' both the young man and the church:

The church agreed to pay the man in exchange for his pledges not to talk publicly about the relationship, Boyd said, referring to a settlement reached by the man's lawyer and the church's insurance company. Under the settlement, the church provided the man money to pay his college tuition, moving expenses and counseling, Boyd said.

"This was compassionate assistance. It was to help him move forward, not a settlement to keep him quiet," said Boyd, senior pastor at New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

Brady speaketh with forked tongue. First, he says the church agreed to pay the man in exchange for pledges not to talk pubicly about the 'relationship'. Then, he says it wasn't that at all. It was for 'healing'. Gosh. It just makes me want to break out into "All is well with my soul".

But it gets even more simperingly self-serving:

In the last three weeks, Boyd said, the young man told him that he was considering going public with his story because Haggard was portraying himself as a victim in an upcoming HBO documentary called "The Trial of Ted Haggard," which is scheduled to air Thursday.

"I counseled him it wasn't going to help him or the church's healing. Plus it was in violation of the agreement we signed with them," Boyd said.

Hey Brady. We don't call that 'healing'. We call that 'covering your sorry buttcheeks'. That '...plus it was in violation of the agreement 'we' signed with them' kind of puts your most reverend 'counseling' in the toilet.

I guess all your Christian counselling for Reverend Ted didn't take, hey, Brady? He's about to put the screws to you and the church with his 'victimhood' on HBO.

Dominus vobiscum, you singularly pathetic excuse for a pastor.

Citigroup, the outfit run into the ground by incompetent, greedy, immoral bloodsucking leeches disguised as their CEO and senior staff, and which We the Taxpayer just bailed out to the tune of $45 billion, is buying a new, $50 million corporate jet:

Beleaguered Citigroup is upgrading its mile-high club with a brand-new $50 million corporate jet -- only this time, it's the taxpayers who are getting screwed.

Even though the bank's stock is as cheap as a gallon of gas and it's burning through a $45 billion taxpayer-funded rescue, the Citigroup's execs pushed through the purchase of a new Dassault Falcon 7X, according to a source familiar with the deal.

The French-made luxury jet seats up to 12 in a plush interior with leather seats, sofas and a customizable entertainment center, according to Dassault's sales literature. It can cruise 5,950 miles before refueling and has a top speed of 559 mph.

There are just nine of these top-of-the-line models in the United States, with Dassault's European factory churning out three to four 7Xs a month.

Citigroup decided to get its new wings two years ago, when the financial-services giant was flush with cash, but it still intends to take possession of the jet this year despite its current woes, the source said.

There is more, here:

Just plane despicable

Here is a corker:

"Why should I help you when what you write will be used to the detriment of our company?" replied Bill McNamee, head of CitiFlight Inc., the subsidiary that manages Citigroup's corporate fleet, when asked to comment about the new 7X.

McNamee didn't want to answer the reporter's questions, because the article the reporter wrote about the greedy stupidity of McNamee and his fellow dolts in Brooks Brothers suits 'would hurt the company'.

No, McNamee, you idiot. It isn't the story that hurts your company. It's your stupidity that hurts your company.

I have a suggestion for McNamee: Bill, try an "Obama staredown" next time a reporter comes sniffing around.

So as McNamee and the rest of the high-ranking slugs over at CitiCorp prepare to be flown about the world in luxurious comfort on the taxpayer's dime, our CongressCreatures are 'crafting' that $850 billion fiscal abortion our new president is calling a 'stimulus package'. And if you don't like it, stand in line for your Chikaga homie staredown.

Welcome to 'Chikaga-on-the-Potomac'. Hey Rahm! Rahm Emanuel! When do I get my dead fish package?

"The Plunderers' March":

It would appear that at least some of the mainstream media might be starting to ask the question about the Emperor's New Clothes. Last week we had Campbell Brown going on about William Lynn, the Obamanian nominee for the number two spot in the Department of Defense.Lynn has extensive connections with defense contractors as a lobbyist, and as a senior executive with Raytheon. His appointment makes a mockery of President Obama's pre-election promises of 'hope and change'.

But Navarrette takes it further than just one nominee. He actually dares to pull an Oliver and ask for more...one can only wonder if he will receive one of those icy Chikaga homie staredowns that is apparently supposed to intimidate The Fourth Estate. So far it has not worked on the bloggers, and it is not likely to work on the mainstream media, at least some of them, as the honeymoon begins to end.

Senators, do your jobs

Some excerpts:

When George W. Bush was president, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid often complained that the executive branch had usurped the power of the legislative branch, and insisted that Congress needed to preserve its oversight authority over the president's decisions.

Now, even before President Obama took office, many senators, including most of the Democrats, willingly surrendered oversight of Cabinet nominations by lobbing softballs at nominees and ignoring serious ethical questions.

and

...the nominee to head the Treasury Department didn't pay his taxes. Thursday, the Senate Finance Committee voted 18-5 to recommend Obama's nomination of Tim Geithner as Treasury Secretary and send the nomination to the full Senate, where he is expected to be confirmed.

This despite the fact that Geithner, currently president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, failed to pay $34,000 in self-employment taxes on income when he was working for the International Monetary Fund. Only a pair of Republican senators -- Jon Kyl of Arizona and Jim Bunning of Kentucky -- even bothered to question Geithner on the tax issue.

and

Or the fact that the nominee to head the State Department has a spouse with an extensive web of international business dealings. The full Senate has now accepted the nomination of Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State.

This despite the fact that Bill Clinton has raised more than $500 million for the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Presidential Library -- much of it from abroad, raising the possibility that foreign governments or individuals who want to influence U.S. foreign policy would simply cut a check to the former president.

and

Or the fact that the nominee to head the Department of Homeland Security seems to have taken all sides of the immigration issue. Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Obama's nominee for Secretary of Homeland Security, signed a bill to punish employers of illegal immigrants and then later lobbied for a ballot initiative that watered it down. She opposed a border wall but supported the deployment of national guard troops on the border.

and on Attorney General nominee Eric Holder:

To prove his independence, Holder brought up Elian Gonzalez, the young Cuban boy who was taken from his Miami, Florida, relatives by federal agents at the point of a gun in 2000. Holder insisted the "rescue" proved the Justice Department wasn't doing then-Vice President Al Gore any favors since the operation was so unpopular with the Cuban-American community that the it helped cost him Florida in the presidential election.

I remember it differently. Gore was having a terrible time with the issue, flip-flopping back and forth between whether Gonzales should stay with his relatives or be returned to his father in Cuba. The raid was a mission of mercy -- not for Gonzales but for Gore.

Unfortunately, Navarrette also thinks all of these people should be appointed. I'm not sure why; he doesn't go into his reasoning. The tax question alone has shot down nominees from both parties in the past. Why is it different now? Is accepting tax evasion part of the 'hope and change' mantra?

What Navarrette does successfully point out is the spineless, gutless, moral ineptitude of the United States Congress. These are the clowns who are right on the edge of shoveling another $850 billion into the slobbering maws of the likes of ACORN, the voter fraud specialists, and all the other larded love handles of the Congressional favorites.