Columnist.
There's an old saying that has become more apropos than ever in these turbulent times: the greatest danger to capitalism is capitalists. Not genuine free-market capitalists. The crony capitalists, as in the cockroaches who have infested the system with a corrupt level of self-interest that is exacerbated by an ethics-free worldview. The latest scandal involves rigging something known as the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) that is ostensibly the benchmark interest rate for computing the interest on trillions of dollars worth of transactions across the world. So far the only bank on the hook is British bank Barclays. Their punishment? A $450 million fine paid to British and American bank regulators, and the resignation of its two top officers. How sorry is the bank for its transgressions? Last Friday they released this memo: "As other banks settle with authorities, and their details become public, and various governments' inquiries shed more light, our situation will eventually be put in perspective." Let me translate: when the world finds out how much every other bank sucks too, we'll look better by comparison.
Obama once again attempts to grow the culture of dependency through bureaucratic tyranny.
The Food Stamp President ramps up efforts to break down self-sufficiency ethics among the poor.
Obama invites a man to Washington who has pledged to seek the release of Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman from U.S. custody.
Why the public will reject the president's latest campaign gambit.
The Obama administration continues living in denial.
Dear Mr. Romney: Since you apparently have advisors that are very clever people, perhaps a word from a troglodyte like me might be refreshing. In the last two weeks, you have tried to explain the difference between "off-shoring" and "outsourcing" with respect to the economy, and despite the great gift handed to you by our addled Chief Justice, John Roberts, you insisted on playing a semantical game between calling Obamacare a "constitutional tax" or an "unconstitutional penalty." Let me give you a clue: the *overwhelming* number of people who understand and/or appreciate the nuances in such parsing of the language *already know* who they're going to vote for. They're the ones who follow politics, have a far higher understanding of economics than the average American, and make an ongoing effort to pay attention to what's happening in general.
Well-connected political cronies to benefit from eminent domain.
The dismal outlook for the healthcare industry under ObamaCare.
The numbers say otherwise.
'If we go out, the lights go out.'
Some observations on last week's Supreme Court rulings: • Observation One: Chef Justice John Roberts demonstrated two frightening traits last week: an utter disrespect for the law and a scary level of inconsistency. On Thursday, when he was busy announcing that the Court was taking something it was given, namely a "mandate," and turning it into something else, namely a "tax," a tremendously disturbing precedent was established.
The contempt vote against Eric Holder succeeds -- and the left is desperate to distract from its bloody scandal.
Two separate issues today, but both related if we take the long way around. First the Arizona decision. I'll spare you all of the analysis that will have been disseminated by the time you read this, save for a couple of observations. First, the political class, and thus in turn the overwhelming majority of the American people, are being held hostage and subjected to extortion by illegal aliens and their open border crowd enablers. The Democrats, in all the Stockholm Syndrome glory, welcome that extortion with open arms, confident that a viable tradeoff exists between selling out American citizens who will subsequently abandon their party, and the influx of new voters, legal and otherwise, who will replace the disaffected. Thus for Democrats, the more illegals, the merrier.
The administration plans a counter-offensive against Arizona with more executive decrees.
Unaffordable union contract at root.
As I said last week, this administration will do virtually anything to get Americans to take their eyes off the economic ball. That's not to say Mr. Obama invoking executive privilege to help Eric Holder cover up a gunwalking scandal isn't big news. It is, unless you're part of a mainstream media determined to keep this president propped up at all costs. Two observations before I get to the main point here. First, it is almost beyond belief that anyone in the Democrat party or the mainstream media (forgive me for being redundant) could call a scandal in which hundreds of people were *killed*, a "witch hunt." Try selling that offal to the parents of slain border agent Brian Terry, or the National Border Patrol Council, whose president called Mr. Holder's stonewalling "a slap in the face to all Border Patrol agents who serve this country" and "an utter failure of leadership at the highest levels of government." Second, and kudos to former DOJ attorney J. Christian Adams for this one: "Pay attention to how often (the media) use the term 'botched' gun running operation. This is government-generated language...there was nothing 'botched' about Fast and Furious except the architecture. The government wants you to think the builders screwed up, not the anti-Second Amendment architects." Adams is referring to the increasingly credible idea that the real motive behind operation Fast and Furious was an attempt to enforce more intrusive gun control policies under the guise of "protecting" Americans.
Congressional race in New York highlights the growing strand of extremism on the Left.
Media can no longer ignore the Obama administration's bloody scandal.
So, how's that effort to keep administration officials from releasing classified information going? Try this from Tuesday's Washington Post: "The United States and Israel jointly developed a sophisticated computer virus nicknamed Flame that collected critical intelligence in preparation for cyber-sabotage attacks aimed at slowing Iran's ability to develop a nuclear weapon, *according to Western officials with knowledge of the effort*." Further on in the article we get even more: "This is about preparing the battlefield for another type of covert action," said *one former high-ranking U.S. intelligence official*, who added that Flame and Stuxnet were elements of a broader assault that continues today. "Cyber collection against the Iranian program is way further down the road than this." (italics mine) *Covert* action? This effort is now about as "covert" as the Super Bowl. And the only thing hard to figure out is who is more reprehensible, the cheerleading press whores at the Post, who, like their fellow liberal presstitutes, never miss an opportunity to burnish the Obama administration's "tough on terror" credentials, or the latest gaggle of unnamed "high-ranking" officials willing to sell this nation out in the process.
