Dark days ahead?

Here is the latest post on "Speaking Freely," the news commentary feature at www.TexasPolicy.com. (For those you who are more blog-savvy, we have added an RSS feed to that.)

----------

Reuters reports that “a drop in wind generation late on Tuesday, coupled with colder weather, triggered an electric emergency that caused the Texas grid operator to cut service to some large customers.” ERCOT, which operates the state’s power grid, moved directly to a stage 2 emergency.

Over the course of three hours, the megawatts of electricity coming from West Texas wind farms dropped from 1700 to 300. Other power suppliers fell short of their scheduled production.

Texas is now the nation’s leading generator of electricity from wind power, and the amount of wind generation is increasing. Consider what a problem this would be the next time if it were to happen on a hot summer evening when electricity use hits its peak. The more wind energy on the power grid, the more unreliability becomes a problem.

The cost of building those lines so far away from where the electricity is needed will almost certainly be borne by Texas consumers, while the wind energy investors, landowners, and West Texas taxing entities reap the financial benefits.

Wind energy has its place in the generation mix, but there is a problem with the state mandating the use of an unreliable resource and forcing consumers to subsidize it.

- Bill Peacock

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Stick a Fork in Hillary...She's Done.

I know, I know. I really should wait until we get the results next Tuesday, but from my vantage point, Hillary got spanked in this last debate.

No doubt about it, Obama is far more intelligent that Hillary. Not saying much there, but I really am impressed with him. He is by far the most capable and intelligent Liberal I have seen since Eugene McCarthy in the 1968 Democrat Party contest. McCarthy was a principled Liberal with core ideals, much as is Obama.

Hillary's greatest problem is that she has no justification for her desire to become President of the United States bey0nd her blind ambition for power. She has no core values so she has a difficult time defining why Americans should support her over Barrack Obama.

Policy-wise, I doubt there is a dimes worth of difference between them on any given issue. They both represent the extreme Leftist, Socialist, utopian world view. Both would have us move back from where we are now to the tired old failed policies of the great socialist experiments of the fifties, sixties, and seventies.

The difference that I see is Obama's realization that socialism is not an end unto itself, but a means to an end of providing the American people with a means of improving their lot in life. For Hillary, socialism appears to be her final goal. She lacks vision and it shows every time she speaks.

Both candidates embrace a flawed economic and social philosophy, but Barrack has shown that he has the intelligence to grow and think beyond the immediate objective of becoming President.

His answers are better and more complete, his thinking is on a much deeper level, and he is much quicker on his feet because of his superior intellect.

I think that following this final performance which was at times boring, Obama is the huge favorite in the upcoming primaries. I wouldn't be surprised if he sweeps the remaining states.

As a side note, as "brilliant" as he seems to be, he still has the myopic view that afflicts all Liberals when it comes to how this economy functions. In his responses tonight, he brought up the fact that Exxon reported record profits of $11 Billion for the quarter, as though this is something to be frowned upon. Democrats and Liberals just don't get it, never have and never will.

It must be some genetic flaw that prevents them from comprehending that the very thing they denigrate is the thing which made this country the greatest in the world. The richest, most successful, most powerful nation in the world came about because of our unfettered economy.

Therefore, the question to ask Mr. Obama is..."Who is Exxon?" It's a very simple question which gets right to the heart of the failure of their economic world view.

Mr. Obama, who is Exxon? Or if you like, "What is Exxon?"

Perhaps an even more generic question would be more appropriate. What is a corporation? How do you tax a corporation? Who owns a corporation? Who receives that $11 Billion in profit?

Therein lies the difficulty all Liberals face in condemning "corporate greed." A corporation is not an entity, it is a legal document. It is 0wned by the stockholders. Who are the stockholders? Everyone who has a 401K, a pension fund, a retirement fund, an insurance annuity or other financial retirement arrangement.

A corporation is its employees, its customers, and its stockholders. The question Mr. Obama is how many people benefit from Exxon generating $11 Billion in profit? How many pension funds, stockholders, 401K owners, Annuity funds, IRA's are invested in Exxon?

It's a stupid argument to engage in for Liberals, because it is an argument with the American people. More individuals own stock, mutual funds, annuities, and IRA's than at anytime in our history.

Slap a 50 cent/gallon tax on Exxon gasoline today, the consumer's price of gasoline goes up 50 cents tomorrow. Corporations don't pay taxes. Until you Liberals are able to comprehend that little fact, you will always be more of a hindrance to our economy and our labor markets than a boon.

I will close with this little tidbit though, I am becoming a protectionist more and more. I have come to believe that no nation should exist without a strong manufacturing base. The miracle that was America in World War II, could not exist today.

We were able to build the machine of war which beat back the growing tide of oppression in the twentieth century because of our huge manufacturing capacity. Today, we are rapidly giving away our capacity to manufacture by outsourcing significant portions of our economy to foreign nations; nations which might or might not choose to supply us with our needs should such an eventuality again occur.

And this is where I have to make an admission and an apology. The little gnat from Fort Worth, H. Ross Perot was right about NAFTA and I was absolutely and completely wrong. Patrick J. Buchannan was correct, unfettered free trade, when it begins to endanger your manufacturing base, is not a good thing.

I am in favor of free trade, but it must be accomplished with a level playing field. We must balance our tariffs to match those other nations place on our goods. We must insist on comparable environmental, employee safety, and benefit standards so that our industries are not placed at a disadvantage.

It is a sea-change from my former positions I know, but it is what I believe to be right. America cannot continue to hemorrhage jobs and industries the way it has over the past thirty years and survive as a nation.

Anyway, back to the main topic. Having sat through the entire debate between Hillary and Barrack, I now see no other possibility but that Obama will be the Democrat nominee.

Hillary's whining at being "always asked the questions first," only served to make her look weak and out of her depth...which she clearly is. I have never believed that Hillary was or is as smart as those in the press have made her out to be and it showed very clearly in this final debate.

She was out maneuvered at every turn and out answered on every question.

Next stop, Obama v. McCain.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Two new blog stars at TPPF

As much as it damages my ego to admit publicly...OK, here it goes...I am no longer the only blog star at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

Drew Thornley, policy analyst in our Center for Economic Freedom and Center for Natural Resources, is a new regular contributor to "Planet Gore" on National Review Online. His first post is on the new global cooling data.

We have also added (almost) daily news commentary to the "Speaking Freely" feature on our site. Today's post is by our new events manager, Angie Choueifati, who some of you may remember from her time working with Americans for Fair Taxation. (And if you do know her, you won't be surprised that she is talking about coffee.)

We hope that you will frequent both of those sites in addition to The Houston Conservative.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Barack Obama: Not Just Another Pretty Face

Well, it seems Barack Obama certainly possesses strong Liberal bona fides. This comes in from the Politico:

Obama once visited '60s 'terrorists'

By: Ben Smith
Feb 22, 2008 01:09 AM EST

In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious – and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement.

------------snip---------------

Like many of the most extreme figures from the 1960s Ayers and Dohrn are ambiguous figures in American life.

They disappeared in 1970, after a bomb – designed to kill army officers in New Jersey — accidentally destroyed a Greenwich Village townhouse, and turned themselves into authorities in 1980. They were never prosecuted for their involvement with the 25 bombings the Weather Underground claimed; charges were dropped because of improper FBI surveillance.

-----------snip----------------

“Ayers was a terrorist. Bernardine Dohrn was a terrorist. Ayers has never offered one word of apology – he glories in it, thinks it’s terrific. And that to me is not what I would call acceptable or mainstream behavior,” said Dan Polsby, a former law professor at Northwestern who is now dean of George Mason University Law School. “If Obama takes a different view on that--well, ok, that’s data about Obama.”

The article adds a little bit more information to the vacuum surrounding the Democrat Party's new Messiah. It appears that as late as 2003 Obama was still giving speeches calling for a "Single Payer Healthcare Plan."

Hmmm. Should we all break out in a rousing rendition of "Oh Canada" now? To recite an old Conservative saying, If you like the U.S. Postal Service, you'll love socialized medicine. More from the article:

Ackerman, the Hyde Park activist, complained of his [Barack's] votes for continued funding for the Iraq war.

“A lot of people were very angry when he voted to fund the war,” he said. “But any candidate running for president is going to strive for broader appeal and move more to the center – I don’t believe that barrack has departed from his basic principles.”

Dr. Young said, however, that he isn’t supporting either of the leading presidential candidates because he is a single-issue voter, and the issue is single-payer healthcare.

He said he was disappointed that Obama is “equivocating” on his support for single-payer, after saying in the past that he supported it. But he said Obama’s style – “cautious, deliberate, defensive” – was also familiar from the Senator’s Hyde Park days.

“In fairness, there’s no double dealing,” he said. “It’s part of his stated strategy – he wants to get maximum unity.”

Ain't it funny how popular a man can get in politics simply based on his appearance and his lofty rhetoric? Here's a man who clearly believes in full blown socialized medicine, but who has camouflaged it by calling for a "voluntary" enrollment plan. Looks to me as though Barack's plan is just the thin end of the huge wedge of socialized medicine in all of its glory and we taxpayers are the ones who are going to get a huge "wedgie" from Barack once he is elected President of the United States.

Watching last night's debate I couldn't help but feel very worried about Obama. His uncanny ability to attract a popular following and the almost hypnotic adulation he is inspiring in his followers is eerily reminiscent of that inspired by the great despots of the Twentieth Century. He frightens me far more than either of the Clintons ever did.

Obama has the potential to sweep to the Presidency with an overwhelming landslide vote and drag a super-majority of Democrats into the Senate and House. With the new voters he is attracting to his campaign and the mesmerizing influence he has on them, he has the potential to become the first Democrat in a long time to occupy the White House with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate.

Obama has even got me questioning my unalterable decision to withhold my support from John McCain.

Picture, a 6-3 Left-leaning Supreme Court, a supermajority of Democrats in the Senate with the additional votes of the four or five Liberal Republicans, a fifty vote majority in the House, and a full blown socialist in the White House; it is a nightmare scenario.

The seeds of totalitarian government are sewn in the fertile soil of emotionalism and glowing meaningless rhetoric. Adolph Hitler mesmerized his audiences with his appeals to the emotional insecurities of his fellow Germans. Benito Mussolini mesmerized his fellow citizens with his rousing rhetoric, stirring up their deep-seated patriotism and love for Italy. Castro, Lennin, Trotsky, Stalin, and Mao all had the gift of soaring emotionally charged rhetoric.

Barack is cut from the same mold. His rhetoric is filled with empty high sounding words like "change we can believe in," "new direction," "shared prosperity" (whoops those are Hillary's words Barack)," "keeping America's promise," all aimed at stirring up the voter's emotions without actually saying anything,

William Shakespeare would describe Barack as feeding American voters, "a tale told by a fool, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

I tell you Obama scares me enough that, should the American voters not awaken from this false Messiah's spell, I too will make a change in this season of change...I will vote for McCain.

Right now I am not so inclined, but come November I will be faced with that decision. Voting for an emotionally unpredictable Republican or an American Joseph Stalin.

Perhaps you think I am exaggerating the dangers here, but given his absolute dedication to the tenets of socialism...including single-payer medical coverage, his affiliation with a black separatist church which preaches racism and hatred, his complete lack of qualifications for the office of President of the United States, and his almost hypnotic command of his audiences, I fear he could be the next Huey P. Long.

Huey P. Long would probably won the presidency had he not been assassinated and had he won, America would have become an ally of Hitler. This is not an exaggeration, it is our history.

Education and clear reasoning are the antidote to the aspirations of a despot, but unfortunately the Liberal elite of our education system have systematically destroyed our education system and have replaced the need for reason with blind faith in the teachings of the Left.

We are rapidly approaching a condition in this country in which such a dictator could very well ascend to the presidency and having done so, could then gradually dismantle our Republic one small step at a time.

I will watch and wait and if absolutely necessary, cast my vote for John McCain.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas PolicyCast: Eminent Domain - Compensate or Confiscate?

While Texas was one of the first states to respond to the U.S. Supreme Court's Kelo decision, allowing governments to condemn property for economic development purposes, it has yet to finish the job of protecting property owners. Attempts to protect Texans' property rights last year fell short because of disagreements over blight designations and compensation issues. Discussing those issues with us on this week's edition is Glenn Sodd, a Corsicana attorney whose primary practice is eminent domain litigation throughout the state of Texas.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: Texas No Longer Repeat Offender on Prisons

By Marc Levin

“If you do what you’ve always done,” the motivational speaker Anthony Robbins declares, “you’ll get what you’ve always gotten.” And in Texas, building more prisons has always led to…building even more prisons.

Last January, the Legislative Budget Board (LBB) told lawmakers the state would need 17,000 more prison beds by 2012, at a cost of $1.3 billion to build and $306 million per year to operate.

Rather than being handcuffed to the past – to the detriment of the taxpayers – legislators charted a new course that emphasizes alternatives to incarceration for nonviolent offenders while continuing to lock up violent and sexual offenders.

Earlier this month, the LBB released an updated report which concluded that, largely due to last session’s reforms, those new prison beds were no longer needed.

That is a historic shift in a state with the nation’s second highest incarceration rate; one that is 10 times that of China. Between 1978 and 2004, Texas’ overall population increased 35 percent, but Texas’ prison population grew by 278 percent.

Lawmakers engineered this turnaround without lowering the penalties for any offense. In fact, they lengthened sentences for sex offenses against children and repeat auto burglary.

Parole policies – under which 28 percent of eligible inmates are approved, compared with 79 percent in 1990 – were also left unchanged. The most serious violent offenders are no longer even eligible for parole.

While remaining tough on crime – particularly the violent crime Texans justifiably fear – lawmakers adopted policies that are expected to reroute from prison thousands of first-time nonviolent offenders and technical violators of probation. Technical violators refer to the 11,000 probationers revoked to prison every year for conduct other than a new crime, such as a missed meeting or positive drug test.

Due to reforms made last session, many of these nonviolent drug and property offenders who can be rehabilitated won’t be tossed into a prison cell next to a murderer or rapist to learn new tricks. However, they also won’t be running free…and they certainly won’t be checking into the Holiday Inn.

The cornerstone of the 2008-09 criminal justice budget is 4,000 new treatment beds, most of which will be privately operated. Like prisons, these are secured facilities, but they provide substance abuse treatment, life skills, and other interventions in a shorter time period (usually between 90 and 180 days) without co-mingling these low-level offenders with convicts serving longer sentences for more serious crimes.

Many of those diverted from prison to these facilities would otherwise be among the 8,400 other offenders in Texas prisons today who are incarcerated solely for drug possession, a separate crime from drug dealing. The length of time served is the best benchmark for most serious violent offenders because incapacitation is the primary goal, but it makes more sense to spend a fraction of the money to put many nonviolent drug possession offenders into a shorter-term community-based facility where they can get clean, keep in closer contact with family, and prepare to find a job and reenter society.

The Legislature also added 3,000 outpatient drug treatment slots. Interestingly, the new LBB estimate does not assume any diversions from prison will result from those, although lawmakers hope some prosecutors and judges will use these new slots in lieu of state lockups.

Accordingly, state officials should monitor implementation of the new treatment resources to ensure that all counties are participating. For example, Harris County accounts for more than half of the offenders sent to state jail for less than a gram of a controlled substance. The governor’s office, which distributes millions in criminal justice grants, should prioritize those counties that are fully utilizing alternatives to incarceration that taxpayers are already funding.

While it is too early to fully assess the results of these reforms, there is no evidence of a crime wave. Violent crime declined last year in both Houston and Dallas.

Because Texas lawmakers were willing to embrace change, the only Texans receiving a “get out of jail free card” are taxpayers who would have been on the hook for billions in unnecessary prison costs.

Marc A. Levin, Esq., is Director of the Center for Effective Justice at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

McCain's Unwarranted "Disappointment"

Well I don't know about you, but I "shocked, shocked I say" to discover the New York Times, having helped the Left select Senator John McCain as the Republican Presidential nominee, have now turned on the "Republican Darling of the Left" and have launched an all out attack against him.

I guess this falls under the "What did he expect?" category. Can McCain possibly be as naive as to expect the New York Lies Times to support him in the general election? Give me a break! What did you expect, a ticker-tape parade? The Lies Times is one of the most Liberal newspapers in the entire nation.

Is it possible for anyone to be any more tone deaf? Clue for John...The only reason they supported you at all is because you have been pursuing their Left-wing agenda. Why do you think so many Conservatives oppose you so vigorously? What a joke!

McCain calls Times story on lobbyist "untrue"

By Jason Szep
Reuters

TOLEDO, Ohio (Reuters) - Republican presidential front-runner John McCain on Thursday dismissed as "untrue" a New York Times report suggesting he had a close and possibly romantic relationship with a female lobbyist nine years ago in conflict with his high ethical stances.

"Obviously I'm very disappointed in the article. It's not true," the four-term Arizona senator told a news conference with his wife Cindy by his side.

"At no time have I ever done anything that would betray the public trust or make a decision which in any way would not be in the public interest and would favor any one or any organization," McCain said.

The New York Times reported on Wednesday that McCain had a close relationship with a telecommunications lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, saying that early in McCain's failed bid for the 2000 presidential election, members of his campaign had grown concerned the relationship might harm the campaign.

The pseudo-intellectual pseudo-Conservtives who so enthusiastically jumped on the McCain band wagon because "He is the most electable," are now left looking as intellectually wanting as we who have opposed McCain have been saying. Fred Barnes, Bill Crystal, Bill Bennett, and Michael Medved, to mention a few have proven once and for all their absolute lack of judgment.

These same men have repeatedly attacked those of us who opposed McCain for not being Conservative enough and for not being emotionally stable. These guys attacked and sneered at Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and those of us of a similar opinion who could see McCain for the Left-wing stalking horse he is now proving to be.

Now the Times and her editorial allies, having successfully eliminated the chances of any other Republican to win their party's nomination, are going about destroying their pet Republican.

The Times, like most of the Paleo-media, is a wing of the Democrat Party. They will never support a Republican candidate if he shows any sign Conservatism and he has been attempting to court the Right since he wrapped up the nomination.

Sometimes I dispair that members of the Republican Party leadership will ever comprehend the futility of "reaching across the aisle."

This is really pathetic and it could have been so easily avoided...next time, lets nominate a real Conservative.

Lie down with Liberals, wake up with rug burns.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

houston conservative Endorses John Cornyn for Senator

As I have been saying, this year is the year for the "down-ballot" elections for me. In keeping with that policy, I am announcing my whole-hearted endorsement for returning John Cornyn to the Senate.

I am proud of Texas for having been wise enough to elect John Cornyn to the Senate and I have seen nothing that would disuade me from supporting his return.

John has consistently been on the correct side of every issue that has come up before the Senate. He is a stalwart of the Right and the equal of any Conservative in the Senate.

He recently returned from a visit to the Middle East:

Cornyn returns from visit with Texas troops

Killeen Daily Herald
January 8, 2008

AUSTIN – U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, traveled to Iraq and Afghanistan over the last several days to meet with Texas troops and receive briefings from military commanders.

He returned to Texas on Monday.

“I welcomed the opportunity to meet with Texas troops serving on the front lines in the war on terror, and thank them for the tremendous sacrifices they are making on behalf of our nation,” Cornyn said.

“Our troops in Iraq have made remarkable progress in recent months, bringing peace and stability to once violence-plagued regions of that nation. There is still much work to be done but make no mistake about it, Gen. Petraeus’ plan to defeat the terrorist networks in Iraq is working.”

On Friday, Cornyn arrived in Bagram, Afghanistan, where he met with the commander of the 82nd Airborne Division. He then traveled with to a forward operating base in Jalalabad and was briefed on combat and reconstruction operations by the brigade commander.

Texas sends some of the best Conservative legislators in Congress to Washington and John Cornyn stands out among them. He is strong on the border, strong on gun rights, strong on the economy, and strong on the right to life.

Is he perfect? Hardly, but then no one in Congress is perfect (with the possible exception of the new Democrat Messiah Barack Hussein Obama, who according to the latest press reports, can walk on water). I have a couple of disagreements with Senator Cornyn, but then I had some disagreements with Richard M. Nixon, Gerald R. Ford, Ronald W. Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, and G.W. Bush.

There is no such thing as a perfect Conservative...except possibly for your humble writer...because unless the person is my clone, he is not going to agree with me on everything [too bad].

Seriously folks, John is a smart, capable, credible and consistent Conservative and I have continued high hopes for his continued success.

The man the Democrats have chosen to run against him, State Representative Rick Noriega lists as one of his signal accomplishments in state tuition for "immigrant children." From his website, we find this:

"The most significant accomplishment of Rick's second session in 2001 was passage of House Bill 1403.This was an historic bill, making Texas the first state in the country to provide in-state tuition rates and financial assistance for certain immigrant children; today, thousands of them are attending college...

...For his courage in authoring HB 1403 and his leadership in shepherding the bill through the legislative process, Rick received numerous awards including one from the Texas Association of Bilingual Educators, Texas LULAC. He was also selected by the Texas Association of Chicanos in Higher Education (TACHE) and Hispanic Journal as "2001 Legislator of the Year." The government of Mexico honored Rick with the Ohtli Award in 2002, presented to U.S. citizens of Mexican descent who have distinguished themselves in public service." [Emphasis added]

All of which leads me to wonder if State Representative Noriega would be a Senator for all Texans, or only for the Hispanic community.

It would appear that Mr. Noriega's interests run contrary to what would be best for Texans and are sympathetic to what would be best for the illegal immigrant population of Texas...and by implication...all of America.

Do we really need a senator from Texas who would promote policies intended to attract more illegal aliens to America? Don't we already have enough problems with illegal immigration and the burdens it places on the already over-taxed citizen?

This is not about immigration. We all came from immigrant parents...even the so-called Native Americans came here from Asia...no, this is about controlling our borders and knowing who enters and who leaves our nation.

One must wonder if Mr. Noriega is one of those who believe in the greater Aztlan nation.

John Cornyn has endorsed a good common sense approach to securing our border with Mexico which emcompasses a system of concrete levees to aid in flood control and will still provide a good level of security for our borders. It's not all I would have hoped for, but then, as I have said, I know I will never agree with everything Senator Cornyn has done and the truth is, his solution may be better than mine.

We can only wait and see. In the meantime, progress will continue on securing our borders.

Another major issue is the infamous "Trans-Texas Highway" or "I-69 Corridor." While their can be little doubt that this project will greatly benefit Texas' economy, it does provide some cause for alarm. One is forced to ask will the vast increase in vehicular traffic and container carrier traffic be accompanied with a commensurate increase in the trafficking of drugs and illegal aliens.
Again, I am adopting a wait and see attitude. Like Lucille Ball, Senator Cornyn and other advocates for the TTH have some "splainin' to do." Of course, endorsements are a two edged sword, because I am endorsing John Cornyn, I will be scrutinizing his record in the Senate and when I disagree, I will be holding his feet to the fire.

In the meantime, I give my full support to John Cornyn. He is right for Texas and he is right for America.

Go John, Go!!!

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

"Speaking Freely" over at TexasPolicy.com

At our website, www.TexasPolicy.com, we are adding new content to our "Speaking Freely" feature. In the past, we have used it primarily to promote our talk radio appearances and other Foundation updates, but we recently decided to add news commentary to that section. Here is a sample of the material we're going to have there. I will continue to post here regularly, but we hope that you will also stop by and bookmark www.TexasPolicy.com if you have not done so already.


Poor government workers?

Government employee unions constantly complain that their members are underpaid. But a recent analysis published in USA Today showed that state and local government workers have much higher compensation than those in the private sector...and that gap is growing.

Last year, the total compensation paid to private sector employees averaged $26.09 an hour, but public sector employees made an average of $39.50 an hour! After adjusting for inflation, compensation this decade has increased by 16 percent for government employees but only 11 percent in the private sector.

The big reason for this is that the private sector has moved to 401(k)-type retirement and health savings accounts, while governments have stuck with the traditional pension and health plans that bankrupted American automakers.

Texas’ plan is among the most generous, with taxpayers picking up 100% of the health insurance premiums for state employees. For taxpayers, that has meant an additional $1,330 per employee in health insurance premiums between FY 2001 and FY 2007, with no meaningful effort to control those benefits or pursue consumer-directed alternatives.

It’s only a matter of time before these plans bankrupt the taxpayers. Altogether, government pension plans have a current unfunded liability of $1 trillion, which will continue to grow.

Government employees should be on the same footing as those who pay their salaries.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

As An American, I Demand to be Hated!

What is it with the Democrat Party that they feel they need to be loved by other nations of the world? Why is public opinion in Europe so important to them? Frankly I don't want to be "loved by Europeans" if it means becoming like them.

Now don't get me wrong I have nothing against Europeans or any other of our allies, it's simply that I have no desire for America to become a clone of "Old Europe."

Our Founding Fathers left Europe for a reason. They chose to loose the bonds that European opression had placed on its citizens. Why on Earth would we want to return to being subservient to an oppressive paternalistic government. This is from the Washington Times:

Europe savors '08 race drama

February 14, 2008

By David Crossland - BERLIN — Europeans across the old continent have been transfixed by the U.S. presidential race, gobbling up press reports and wrestling with the intricacies of the primary system in search of clues to the likely next president.

The fascination stems in part from the sheer drama of the contests, with Sen. John McCain storming back from seeming defeat to become the Republican front-runner while Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton battle neck and neck for the Democratic nomination. But above all, analysts and politicians say, it reflects a desire for change.

"We want to be able to love America again," the conservative former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl wrote in an editorial for Die Zeit newspaper.

The European press coverage is far more intense than usual at this stage of the voting. In France, the presidential contest since last month has consistently scored front-page headlines, at times eclipsing even such domestic stories as President Nicolas Sarkozy's romance with model Carla Bruni.

How sweet. Europeans want us to elect a socialist clone of one of their prime ministers so that they can "love us." Well no thanks Helmut we don't like you and we don't need your "love."

Europe! I would rather be free and hated by decadent, thankless, drones like you, than loved and stupid. As far as I am concerned Europeans need to make an effort to be loved by Americans, not the reverse.

I suggest that Europeans develop a backbone and strive to stand for something beyond reliance on the state. I don't want to surrender my right to keep and bear arms. I don't want to surrender my right of free speech. I refuse to become a ward of the state.

I don't want your substandard medical care. I don't want your substandard living and overly heavy tax burden. I don't want you Sharia Law. Thanks, but no thanks.

I don't care if you don't like me. I live in the greatest nation in the world. We have stood in the breach while you were begging the Soviets not to destroy your nations. If America had done what you were demanding, unilateral disarmament, the Soviet Union would still be a threat.

Maybe it's time for we Americans to remove all of our troops from their European bases and save outselves the billions of dollars it costs us annually to maintain that presence.

Stop your double dealing with our enemies in the Middle East. Stop working against us in our pursuit of victory against the Global Islamic Jihad. Stop enabling our enemies and assert control over your own Islamic dissidents. Then maybe we'll talk.

Until then shut your pie-holes. We don't need your condescending attitude, your failed economic system, your failed domestic agenda, or your friendship.

America is not interested in sucking up to you. We earned our independence with the blood of our forefathers and our citizen soldiers. Maybe you should try sucking up to us.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

President Bush to Give $1.4 Billion in Aid to Mexico...To Protect Mexico's Southern Border

And now in the "I can't believe I ever voted for this guy" category, I found this on Michelle Malkin's website:

The White House wants a $1.4 billion stimulus/national security package…for Mexico
By Michelle Malkin
February 11, 2008 01:54 PM

A reader asked me to check into information that President Bush was pushing a massive foreign-aid package to Mexico to help them secure their southern border against the flow of illegal aliens from Central America.

“We can’t even get our own border straight, and we are going to provide Mexico with funding so they can solve their problem,” the reader fumed. “I doubt the Central Americans are staying very long in Mexico anyway. We know where they are going!”

Too outrageously outrageous to be true?

Well, I checked it out and it’s even worse than the reader described. Far worse.
The plan is called “The Merida Initiative.” Seems that the White House has had this plan in the works for nearly a year with little congressional input on either side of the border.

We can’t finish our own border fence, properly supply our immigration agents and border patrol with all the equipment and resources they need, or get our house in order. Yet, the Bush administration wants to fork over $1.4 billion to Mexico and Central America–with much of it going into the hands of corrupt law enforcement officials and government bureaucrats who have worked tirelessly to undermine our immigration laws. The funding is tucked into the 2008 supplemental budget.

The real slap in the face? This money is intended to help Mexico secure their Southern border. Let me repeat that because I know you are as incredulous as I am. The money is intended to assist the Mexican Government, the same government which has been helping illegals to enter our country, secure their Southern border with Central America.

AAARRRGGGHHH!!!!! I am almost speechless. I can't believe a sitting President would so betray his nation and its citizens. Now where the heck is that impeachment petition? I'm ready to sign it. Any President who willfully betrays his nation by intentionally undermining the efforts of said nation to maintain the integrity of its borders has no business occuppying the Oval Office.

I can only conclude that George Bush has sold out to his Mexican buddies and is planning to move to Mexico City so he can live like a king with his rich Mexican relatives.

I have never been so disappointed by a Republican in my life. George Bush's betrayal makes John McCain look like a border hawk. We haven't even started building our border fence with Mexico and we are sending the Mexican Government $1.4 Billion to help them? In a declining economy? With 30,000,000 illegal alien criminals occupying our nation?

Michelle says her reader is "fuming?" Big deal, I'm apoplectic. It's all I can do to keep from unleashing a string of obscenities a mile long. Next January cannot come too soon for me.

I want Georgie Porgie out of the White House and out of our government. I apologize to all the Liberals I have ever castigated for bad mouthing President George. They were all correct. The man is either dumb as a bucket of rocks, or is complicit in the betrayal of our country...whether for profit or stupidity, I don't know, but I do know an arrogant jerk when I see him and for my money, George has turned out to be just a stupid arrogant jerk.

Maybe I will just vote Democrat. At least then I will expect to be screwed by the government.

Thanks a lot Michelle...for ruining my whole night! I'll probably lie awake all night obsessing over this. I swear I wish there was someone up there in Washington with enough power to slap some sense into this idiot.

How can someone be so good in choosing his judicial appointments and confronting Islamic terrorism and so abjectly horrible at understanding the needs of his nation?

I can only assume that whoever has been advising him on Islamists and Judges has been exceptionally neglectful with respect to his understanding of immigration.

Well I don't expect anything to improve with McAmnesty or one of the two Democrat Party panderers. I guess I will just call up my Congressmembers and ream them a new one. This needs a congressional hearing. It looks to me like Bush is bent on building Azetlan for the reconquistas.

What a sellout loser.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

(I just wish that some of our elected representatives would occasionally grow a pair and do what they know is right instead of what is politically expedient.)

Hey George, you're a real jerk! Thanks for nothing! What is they call you? Oh yea, "Chimpie." Enjoy it, you've earned it.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Obama and Che Gueverra? Is Obama A Loyal American or a Communist Subversive?

Michelle Malkin has found this picture of the Houston Obama for President Headquarters. Here's her post:

Where to buy a Che-Cuba flag
By Michelle Malkin • February 12, 2008 10:51 AM

Seems that The Butcher of La Cabaña is held in high esteem by those who support Barrack Hussein Obama, as is Castro and his totalitarian regime. What next an Iranian flag with a picture of Ahmadinejad superimposed? Maybe a picture of the smoking Twin Towers with a portrait of Osama bin Laden superimposed.

How's this? For sale on ebay...

Coming soon to an Obama Campaign Headquarters near you!!! The Ahmadinejad T-shirt. This is for real folks I found it on ebay here.

Are we to infer from the presence of this homage to Che Gueverra that the goal of Obama is to install a Stalinist Marxist dictatorship? Will he be conducting purges within our nation? Sure looks like it to me.

Obama needs to have this flag removed his campaign workers fired and issue an official apology. His supporters condemn South Carolina for flying the Confederate flag at the state capitol, but it seems that the Cuban flag and the image of Che Gueverra is perfectly okay with them.

Compared to this, the David Shuster/Chelsea Clinton "incident" fades into insignificance.

Che Gueverra was a murderous thug who got what he deserved far later than he deserved. Castro is equally evil and murderous and his utopian Stalinist regime is a disaster.

This idolization of two of the worst muderers in the Communist movement by supporters of Obama and the pro-illegal immigration forces is disturbing.

Our political leaders, from both parties need to openly and strongly condemn the brandishing of this hateful image. Although...come to think of it he looks a whole lot like one of the characters in the original Planet of the Apes movies. The resemblance is quite remarkable.

This is going to do immense damage to Obama unless he moves immediately to remedy the situation.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

Death to the Azetlan movement!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Texas Takes Center Stage: Democrat and Republican Primaries Turn to Texas

Woohoo, the circus is coming to town!

Locked in a death match, the Clinton/Obama campaigns look to Texas for the knock-out punch. The excitement is building...can you feel it? Are your palms sweating in anticipation? Is your breath getting shorter...better call a doctor...or a psychologist.

Of course you have heard that women are now swooning over Barack Obama;tearing up and declaring their love for the new "rock-star" politician. I am waiting for the stories of women throwing their underwear up on the stage...truly a disgusting habit of the rock-star enamored women of my generation.

Anyway, back to Texas, here is the Corpus Christi Caller Times article on our rather bizarre primary system.

Texas' arcane delegate system suddenly comes into play

Associated Press
Originally published 08:00 a.m., February 11, 2008
Updated 08:00 a.m., February 11, 2008

AUSTIN — For the first time in 20 years, Texas will have a heated presidential primary election next month, a contest that will bring the state's complex primary and caucus system into play for Democratic hopefuls Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.

"Texas arguably has the most arcane system in the country," state Rep. Juan Garcia, D-Corpus Christi and an Obama backer, told the Houston Chronicle in a story published Sunday. "There are a lot of people scrambling to get smart on it in a hurry."

The Democratic and Republican primaries in Texas are March 4. The Clinton-Obama tussle for national convention delegates is extremely tight, especially after Obama's victories Saturday in Nebraska, Washington and Louisiana.

The last time the Texas Democratic convention delegation was at stake in the midst of a national fight was 1988. Michael Dukakis won the statewide primary that year but virtually split delegates evenly with Jesse Jackson because of the state's unique Democratic nominating process.

Hurry! Hurry! Hurry! Step right up folks and get your ticket to the biggest show ever. Step into the big tent and see the show.

See the mad 72 year-old veteran elephant! See the backwoods country bumpkin elephant! Watch the Hillobama! A donkey against donkey death match as the young upstart black male battles the old worn out female battle ax. Watch the Bubba cheer them on from the sidelines! See low blows, cheap shots and caustic comments. *

We guarantee start to finish action. Get your tickets NOW!!!

*Self-righteous indignation extra.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

"12 Million" Illegal Aliens Can Be Removed Simply...Just Enforce the Law!

I've been saying it for two years, the illegal immigration issue is the defining issue of our generation and our leaders keep telling us there is nothing they can do about the "12 million" (more like 30 million) who are already here.

Funny how the words "can't be done" come so easily from the tongues of our politicians these days. Ike Eisenhower managed it way back in the 1950's by instituting "Operation Wetback."

By moving all INS officials with connections to the businesses using this source of labor out of the border states and replacing them with determined opponents of illegal immigration and by using a large mobilization of state police within the border states, the Eisenhower Administration arrested 30,000 illegal aliens. NOt very many you say? True, but allow me to finish. The results of these arrests was a diaspora of more than half a million Latinos back across the border.

As this article proves, it is still possible to make such a mass migration occur again simply by enforcing our laws. From the New York Times:

February 12, 2008
Arizona Seeing Signs of Flight by Immigrants
By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD
PHOENIX — The signs of flight among Latino immigrants here are multiple: Families moving out of apartment complexes, schools reporting enrollment drops, business owners complaining about fewer clients.

While it is too early to know for certain, a consensus is developing among economists, business people and immigration groups that the weakening economy coupled with recent curbs on illegal immigration are steering Hispanic immigrants out of the state.

The Arizona economy, heavily dependent on growth and a Latino work force, has been slowing for months. Meanwhile, the state has enacted one of the country’s toughest laws to punish employers who hire illegal immigrants, and the county sheriff here in Phoenix has been enforcing federal immigration laws by rounding up people living here illegally.

“It is very difficult to separate the economic reality in Arizona from the effects of the laws because the economy is tanking and construction is drying up,” said Frank Pierson, lead organizer of the Arizona Interfaith Network, which advocates for immigrants’ rights and other causes. But the combination of factors creates “ a disincentive to stay in the state.”

Oklahoma has recently seen the same thing with their rigorous enforcement of employment laws.

The illegal immigration problem can be solved relatively easily and quickly with the building of a fence and the enforcement of hiring laws here in the United States. All that is required is a Congress and President with the will to do so.

Short of that, it is time for the states to act on their own, just as Oklahoma and Arizona have.

The only problem without a solution, is the one that no one wants to solve.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Bloomberg Says Global Warming As Dangerous As Terrorism

Well, I don't believe I have ever heard it claimed that wealth is a substitute for brains. It is clearly not the case in Bloomberg's case.

Now that the data are beginning to turn against the Global Warming Hysterics and their doom and gloom predictions, it's about time for the clueless politicos to jump on the sinking AGW ship. Now it is Mayor of New York, gun confiscator extrordinaire, and all around billionaire Liberal, Michael Bloomberg adding his hysteria to the Chicken Littles of the Left. This from the New York Sun:

Mayor Compares Threat of Global Warming to Terrorism

By BENNY AVNI
Staff Reporter of the Sun
February 12, 2008

UNITED NATIONS — While he acknowledged that scientists are unable to predict its consequences, Mayor Bloomberg yesterday compared the scourge of global warming to the threat of terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Although it is a "long-term" fight, he said, reducing gas emissions may save the life of "everybody" on the planet, the same way that fighting terrorism and its proliferation saves lives in shorter terms.

Addressing a U.N. climate change conference, the mayor also announced a new plan to reduce the use of tropical hardwoods by New York City and told delegates that the city plans to host a meeting in June of leaders from 20 major world cities to discuss ways for the largest municipalities to reduce global warming. Other participants in the conference called for a "war" against climate change, in which the United Nations would serve as a front-line combatant.

Mr. Bloomberg renewed his call, made first late last year, for taxing countries such as America that emit large amounts of carbons, which are believed to cause changes in the planet's climate. "So long as there's no penalty or cost involved in producing greenhouse gases, there will be no incentive" to meet targets set by international institutions, the mayor told the General Assembly. "For that reason, I believe the U.S. should enact a tax on carbon emissions.

"Terrorists kill people. Weapons of mass destruction have the potential to kill an enormous amount of people," Mr. Bloomberg told reporters after addressing the U.N. General Assembly, but "global warming in the long term has the potential to kill everybody."

Says Bloomberg: "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" as temperatures in the Northeast plunge to record lows. Liberalism is not only, as Michael Savage avers, "A Mental Disorder," it's a decadent religion as well.

As more and more scientist are coming out in protest against the rush to bankrupt America to combat the Chimera called Anthropogenic Global Warming, the dire warnings and hysteria coming from the troglodytes of the AGW movement will continue to ratchet up. Afterall, those so-called scientist who hitched their stars to this slug have, as Mel Brooks so succinctly put it in his role of Governor LePetamaine for the movie Blazing Saddles, "got to protect [their] phoney baloney jobs."

I expect a pronouncement of the iminent demise of the entire human civilization due to 400 foot tidal waves to emanate from the confines of former Vice President and current prima donna of the AGW crowd Albert Gore, Jr.'s monster carbon dioxide producing complex in Tennessee any day now.

It is ever the same with doom and gloomers. The more information becomes available that their pet theories are bunk, the more strident and urgent their proclaimations of iminent peril become.

The fun never stops with these Liberal geniuses.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Desperation Becoming More Apparent in Clinton Campaign

Democrat Party Politics...more entertaining than Monday Night Football...somebody break out the popcorn. Even more trouble for the already troubled Clinton Coronation for Queen of the United States. This from the New York Lies Times:

February 12, 2008
For Clinton, Bid Hinges on Texas and Ohio

By PATRICK HEALY

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and her advisers increasingly believe that, after a series of losses, she has been boxed into a must-win position in the Ohio and Texas primaries on March 4, and she has begun reassuring anxious donors and superdelegates that the nomination is not slipping away from her, aides said on Monday.

Mrs. Clinton held a buck-up-the-troops conference call on Monday with donors, superdelegates and other supporters; several said afterward that she had sounded tired and a little down, but determined about Ohio and Texas.

They also said that they had not been especially soothed, and that they believed she might be on a losing streak that could jeopardize her competitiveness in those states.

“She has to win both Ohio and Texas comfortably, or she’s out,” said one superdelegate who has endorsed Mrs. Clinton, and who spoke on condition of anonymity to share a candid assessment. “The campaign is starting to come to terms with that.” Campaign advisers, also speaking privately in order to speak plainly, confirmed this view.

Sounds like the Clinton ATM machine is about to post an "Out of Order" sign. If her big money donors begin to get a hint that hers is a lost cause, they will leap to Obama's camp in droves.

Time to fatten up those sausage thighs of yours Hill. Try some ice-cream. My recommendation...Rocky Road.

You can't buy this kind of entertainment folks.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

More Trouble for Hillary: Latinos Unhappy with Solis-Doyle/Williams Move

Uh-oh. Here's another problem for Senator Hillary Rodham, Mrs. William Jefferson "Bubba Blue Dress," Clinton.

It would appear that her effort to inject a darker complexion on her candidacy by dumping the Latina Patti Solis Doyle in favor of her favorite African-American and political hatchet woman, Maggie "I Can't Testify 'Cause I'm In France" Williams will have substantial repercussions within the Latin community. We have this story from the New York Post:

'SUPER' LATINO SLAMS CLINTON
By MAGGIE HABERMAN

February 12, 2008 -- A prominent member of the national Democratic Party has circulated a sharp e-mail saying the removal of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle was disloyal to Hispanics and should give "pause" to superdelegates and voters.

The e-mail from, Steven Ybarra, a California superdelegate who heads the voting-rights committee of the DNC Hispanic Caucus, was sent to fellow caucus members in the hours after word broke that Solis Doyle - the most prominent Latina in Clinton's campaign - would be replaced by another close Clinton loyalist, Maggie Williams, who is black.

The e-mail noted that Clinton, who is looking to Latino voters for a boost in the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4, scored heavily with Hispanics in her California win.

"Apparently, loyalty is not a two-way street," he wrote. "Latino superdelegates like myself . . . will have cause to pause."

Well Hillary, someone should have taught you long ago about the importance of having and adhering to core priniciples. Too bad Liberalism is an emotional reaction rather than a rationally arrived at set of core beliefs.

Looking more and more as if Hillary is heading for a fall. Couldn't happen to a meaner, nastier, more deserving individual.

To paraphrase Bogie...Here's laughing at you, kid.

Long Live Our (Endlessly Entertaining) American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

TPPF COMMENTARY: In health care, government is the problem

By Mary Katherine Stout

As the presidential candidates discuss their plans for the American health care system, they point their fingers of blame in several directions – toward insurers, toward employers, and even toward over-eaters and non-exercisers. But none of the leading candidates are pointing toward the main culprit – the government.

The federal and state governments have driven up the cost of health insurance and health care with Byzantine regulations, outdated tax policies, and price-setting that distorts the marketplace.

States have piled on health insurance mandates, artificially increasing the cost of insurance and skewing the concept of risk. Texas ranks among the top five most heavily mandated states with 52, requiring insurers to cover everything from alcoholism to in-vitro fertilization, acupuncturists, and marriage therapists. Lower cost coverage sold in another state—perhaps one without all the mandates—is not an option since only policies approved by Texas regulators are available here.

The federal tax code tethers insurance to employers giving favor to employers providing insurance and to individuals with employer-sponsored coverage. The results include needless periods of uninsurance coinciding with unemployment, limited insurance options that reflect the choices of employers instead of employees, and individuals who buy their insurance only after Uncle Sam takes the first bite from their paychecks. Texas even gives employers credit for providing insurance coverage in calculating their tax burden, but individual taxpayers paying for their own care see no such benefit.

Prices for health care services are often based on Medicare rates, which are set by Washington. State and federal governments insulate public beneficiaries from the cost of their care, instead asking taxpayers to pay the full freight even as they work to provide for their own family. Federal laws create perverse incentives allowing people to receive treatment without paying, which stick the tab to federal, state, and local governments; along with those who have insurance.

If health insurance and health care are out of reach for people, it is due to government meddling in the marketplace and stifling competition.

Government regulations have given us this mess, so it is unlikely that government can lead us out. The stories of foreign heads of state coming to the United States for health care services, Canadians waiting in long lines for would-be life saving treatment, and Britain’s willingness to ration care according to age, seemingly fall on deaf ears.

But it is hard to imagine that a government that addresses customer service complaints about long lines at the post office by taking the clocks off the walls, can ever handle the complex and deeply personal health care decisions of more than 300 million people.

The differences between Republican and Democrat presidential candidates’ are not as “sharp” as the editorial board claims. Candidates of both parties may differ on the specifics of their plans, but most envision an increasingly active role for government in regulating health insurance and paying for health care.

Despite historically loud objections to establishing a single payer health care system in the United States, decades of quiet and incremental government expansion have resulted in record levels of government involvement in health care—everything from regulating what providers can do and what they are paid, to actually writing the checks to pay for care.

Today, people are awake to the significant problems in health care, yet most have been duped into believing that the radical departure from the status quo is more government.

Indeed, that may be the real granddaddy of health care myths.

A new direction in health policy would follow the path of competition with the goal of delivering Texans a great deal of choice in insurance and care, with both increasing quality and decreasing cost.

Mary Katherine Stout is Vice President for Policy and Director of the Center for Health Care Policy at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a non-profit, free-market research institute based in Austin.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Helmet Contractor Intentionally Endangering Troops for Profit Receives Slap on Wrist.

Well, here we have a story which has been allowed by our anti-military MSM to slip by unnoticed and unnoted. Seems that Sioux Manufacturing Corporation in Fort Totten, North Dakota, a corporation wholly owned by he Spirit Lake Tribe was caught deliberately and intentionally supplying the Defense Department with Kevlar™ cloth which was substandard by 11,000 threads/yard and which intended for the manufacture of the PASGAT helmets for out combat troops.

Both the Sioux Manufacturing weaving supervisor and its purchasing manager filed a lawsuit against their employer for the intentional violation under the False Claims Act.

Here is a portion of the Department of Justice Report:

Sioux Manufacturing Corporation (SMC), a tribal corporation wholly-owned by the Spirit Lake Tribe, both of Fort Totten, North Dakota, has agreed to pay $1,935,000 to settle allegations that it knowingly provided noncompliant woven Kevlar™ cloth that was used in the manufacturing of military combat helmets.

The allegations arose from a lawsuit filed in the District of North Dakota by two former employees of SMC under the False Claims Act, which permits private citizens, known as “relators,” to sue on behalf of the government to recover federal funds that were obtained through false claims.

The government’s investigation of the allegations determined that from approximately 1994 to 2006, SMC sold finished aramid cloth (Kevlar™) to UNICOR, Federal Prison Industries, a government corporation. UNICOR used the Kevlar cloth in the manufacture of Personnel Armor System Ground Troops (PASGT) helmets which it sold to the Defense Logistics Agency. With each delivery of the Kevlar™ cloth, SMC certified to UNICOR that its product met the required military specifications, one of which dictates a specific number of woven yarns per square inch of finished cloth. The investigation found evidence that, on occasion, SMC knowingly delivered cloth that had not been woven to the precise specifications.

Now I don't know about you , but intentionally sabotaging military equipment for profit sounds like grounds for hard time in the Fort Levinworth, Kansas military prison, not a $2 million fine and a $72 million contract renewal. This whole thing stinks to high Heaven like a cover-up.

Is this another case in which "diversity" and "political correctness" are trumping our laws and the safety of our combat troops? Sure looks like it to me. I very seriously doubt if this Aramid™ cloth was being supplied by a military contractor owned by white-males, it would have been allowed to go unremarked by the national press and our (oh so dedicated) congress.

I want to know why this scandal, this war-crime, has not been the topic of public hearings in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. I want to know why the CEO's of this company are not facing life imprisonment or death sentences for war profiteering. It's not like it hasn't been reported in prominent MSM organizations. Even the New York Times has reported on it:

Manufacturer in $2 Million Accord With U.S. on Deficient Kevlar in Military Helmets

At the core of the investigation was the contention by two former plant managers that Kevlar woven at Sioux failed to meet the government’s “critical” minimum standard of 35 by 35 threads a square inch.

When properly woven, Kevlar, a polymer thread made by Dupont, is stronger than steel, and able to deflect shrapnel and some bullets. Government regulations call for rejecting Kevlar below the 35-by-35 standard.

The company “was underweaving,” Mr. Wrigley said.

“That is undebatable,” he said.

The factory’s own inspection records often showed weaves of 34 by 34 threads or as low as 32 by 34 and 33 by 34. Looms were “always set for 34 by 34, always,” said Jeff Kenner, who operated and repaired the looms and oversaw crews on all three shifts...

...“You must have a certain amount of protection, and you can’t go below that,” said Gwynedd A. Thomas, associate professor of ballistics and protective fabrics at Auburn University.

Although the difference between 34 and 35 threads a square inch seems modest, the cumulative loss in layers of fabric is significant, Dr. Thomas said.

“Every time that you’re losing some mass, you’re losing some integrity,” she said.

The strength comes from crossed yarns, the points that disperse projectile impact. “The fewer crossovers, the less energy dissipation you’re going to have,” she added.

A 34-by-34 weave results in 5 percent fewer crossovers than 35 by 35, a difference Dr. Thomas called “quite a lot.”

This is the single most outrageous crime against our troops that I have heard of. Where is Senator John McCain on this? He's supposed to be the great supporter and defender of our troops and our national budget hawk. Maybe he, Barrak Obama and Hillary Clinton should be busy doing the job we tax-payers pay them for rather than out pimping for votes.

What does Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) have to say about this crime? Where is Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and why isn't he answering questions about this crime? What about Congressman Earl Pomeroy (D-ND)? Why isn't he being called on the carpet for this failure of Congressional oversight?

Is this another example of the Democrat Party's promise of less corruption? Is this just another Democrat cover-up for a pork-barrel contract or a contract given to a "native American" company out of preferential treatment?

Why hasn't the head of procurement for the DOD been called up before Congress? Where is Defense Secretary Robert Gates? Why hasn't he been summoned before Congress to answer questions about the reckless endangerment of our troops?

This outrage must not be allowed to go unpunished. How many of our casualties have been a direct result of this criminal behavior? Why did the United States Attorney's Office for the District of North Dakota, with the assistance of the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, the Army Criminal Investigation Command, and the Air Force Office of Special Investigations give this criminal enterprise a pass...and another $72 million contract?

I want to know the answers to these questions,