Carter Eats Crow! Prostitutes Can Learn Tricks From Congress!

Taking a look at Islam through the eyes and statistics of Dr. Peter Hammond.

Then think about Obama's appointment of devout Muslims to sensitive key government positions in The Homeland Security Agency. Placing the fox in the hen house? You decide. (See 1 below.)

Plain talk from Adm. Mullen and an assessment from Tony Cordesman.

I still maintain, if Obama wants to get re-elected he might conclude a call for military action against Iran would seal the deal. Will he? Problematical.

Continued sinking poll numbers and growing unpopularity could cause a shift. Desperation frequently controls political decisions. Witness the bribing of various Senators from Neb., La. etc. (See 2 and 2a below.)

Netanyahu has reached a critical point vis a vis the Shalit release and prisoner swap. In the process, what he is willing to accept appears to go against his past philosophy. (See 3 and 3a below.)

A contrite Carter eats crow. (See 4 below.)

Jackie Mason on "Cheetah." "Cheetah" could move to Montana(See 5 and 5a below.)

John Stossel highlights the sweetheart deals Reid made, with your tax dollars, to get needed votes from several Senate holdouts. Prostitutes could learn a trick or two from our Congress.

We just witnessed grown men and women become Reid lap dogs. (See 6 below.)

Wehner writes Democrats do not understand the backlash out there. Perhaps.

I believe they do understand and either don't give a damn or believe their incumbency can finesse it. Ideologues live in their own dreamy isolated and contemptuous world. (See 6a below.)

Remember Obama campaigned saying he would change behaviour in Washington, lower partisanship and increase transparency? More lies? You decide. (See 7 below.)

2009 Stella awards. (See 8 below.)

In the month of December our president has been on a whirlwind. First he became a Nobel honoree and made a speech about the necessity of defending yourself as a way to achieve peace. Then he pressed for a radical health care bill and the bill will be a whopper, start now but the benefits come later in order to create accounting sleight of hand so that he can pronounce how open his administration continues to be. Then off to Copenhagen so he can spend more money buying the good will of the world.

In the remaining few days Obama was home he made a few more speeches,met some State Dinner intruders and refrained from commenting about 'Cheetah's indiscretions.

If spending trillions of tax money is the basis of earning his own salary Obama deserves a big raise.

Dick



1)Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.

Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components.
The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.

Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.

When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.


Here's how it works:

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country,
they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens.

This is the case in:

United States -- Muslim 0.6%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1.8%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.

For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands --Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions.

In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam.

Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections in:
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks,
and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon --Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other
religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide),
use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77..5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab
Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

'Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris, 'The Haj'

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos.

There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death.

Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

Today we are letting the fox guard the henhouse. The wolves will be herding the sheep!Obama appointed two devout Muslims to Homeland Security posts. Doesn't this make you feel safer already?

Obama and Janet Napolitano appointed Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim, as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development.

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim who was born in Damascus, Syria, as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).

NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant...? Just wondering.
Devout Muslims being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions? Doesn't this make you feel safer already??

That should make the US homeland much safer, huh!!
Was it not "Devout Muslim men" that flew planes into U.S. buildings 8 years ago?
Was it not a Devout Muslim who killed 13 at Fort Hood?
Please forward this important information to any who care about the future of our respective countries.

2) Top US soldier: We must be ready for force option against Iran


In the plainest authoritative US statement yet about military force against Iran, Adm. Mike Mullen, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff said: "My belief remains that political means are the best tools to attain regional security and that military force will have limited results. However, should the president call for military options, we must have them ready. He said this on Monday, Dec. 21, in his annual assessment of the nation's risks and priorities for 2010.

Tehran shows no signs of backing down in the standoff over what is widely believed to be its drive for a nuclear bomb, said the US armed forces chief.

Adm. Mullen added: "Most critically Iran's internal unrest, unpredictable leadership and sponsorship of terrorism make it a regional and global concern, heightened by its determined pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Washington sources note that this is the first time any high-ranking American has put the military option squarely on the table. He has done so at the very moment that President Barack Obama's first deadline for Iran to level on its nuclear operations is running out.

Mullen said nothing about what kind of military force he wants at hand, but any attack would presumably be conducted by air.

Sunday, Adm. Mullen said he was worried about Iran's intentions and said the clock is running on Obama's offer of engagement.

Also Monday, the Washington Center for Strategic and International Studies ran an assessment by the commentator Anthony H. Cordesman on America's options against Iran as "a nuclear weapons power." He wrote: Iran's steadily advancing capabilities for asymmetric (WMD including chemical and biological weapons) and proxy warfare still leave it vulnerable to US conventional forces and devastating precision attacks on its military and economic assets.

2a) President Obama's kowtowing to anti-American dictators was a source of embarrassment throughout the first year of his presidency. Now, as his second year approaches, Obama's Carteresque tendencies are producing real-world consequences that border on the criminal.

Exhibit A is Lebanon. The freedom agenda of President Bush's first administration helped produce the Cedar Revolution. After Syria sponsored the assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, the Syrians, under pressure from a newly assertive U.S. government, withdrew from Lebanon after a 30-year occupation. There was hope that an international tribunal would arraign Syrian dictator Bashar Assad for the murder of Harriri, and that Lebanon would become a genuine Arab democracy.

But now, as Jonathan Tobin explains, these hopes have been dashed. Indeed, the situation in Lebanon is so bad that Hariri's son, Saad, has just journeyed to Damascus to pay tribute to his father's murderer. Syrian troops have not returned to Lebanon, but they don't need to - Hezbollah, a proxy for both Iran and Syria, supplies the muscle. Meanwhile, Syria's influence is again unchallenged in Beirut, as Hariri's visit demonstrates.

What happened? For one thing, Israel failed to defeat Hezbollah during the 2006 war. But according to the New York Times, no less, the main factor in Lebanese's national humiliation and downfall is President Obama's decision to "engage" Syria and its butcher of a leader:

[T]]he United States and the West have chosen to engage with Syria, not isolate it. And Saudi Arabia, which has long backed Mr. Hariri and competed with Syria for influence here, reconciled with the Syrians earlier this year, leaving them a freer hand to guide politics in Lebanon as they once did.

Or, as Tobin puts it, "those who thought they had the West's backing for resisting the thugs of Damascus have been forced to swallow their pride and swear loyalty to Assad in order to save their lives." Thus, Lebanon stands humiliated, its hopes for freedom and independence dashed probably for at least another generation.

But the real humiliated party is the United States. Its president, with his fetish for engagement with tyrants and his indifference (at best) to the aspirations of those who oppose tyranny, has sold out the Lebanese. And for what? A Nobel Peace Prize awarded by those who share the same sick fetish and the same disgusting indifference, plus the well-earned contempt of the tyrants he shamelessly appeases.


3)Analysis / Threats, pressures and concessions on way to Shalit deal
By Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff

The "forum of seven" ministers met in Jerusalem Monday evening for another session, the fifth in less than two days, to prepare for a decision on a prisoner trade to bring home kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is inclined to support the agreement, though with several conditions. Netanyahu has the support of most senior defense officials.

Aviva Shalit, the soldier's mother, said Monday that Netanyahu had told her that ministers would make a decision in the "next few hours" on a deal with Hamas for her son's release.

"They hope the decision will be made this evening, and if not - then tomorrow morning," Aviva Shalit told reporters in Jerusalem, where she was waiting in a protest tent opposite Netanyahu's office.


In these last days before an agreement, both sides are doing everything in their power to make the deal slightly more palatable. Both Israel and Hamas are expending huge efforts on psychological warfare.

Even after filtering out the background noise, things are not simple, and not everything leaked to the press in recent days is still part of the negotiations: Threats, pressures and concessions are all part of the road to the final deal. Everything is allowed, nothing said is a real commitment until the deal is signed.

Newspaper columnists stated Monday that Netanyahu is in an unenviable position, and is without a doubt suffering. The deal violates everything he has preached, in his condemnation of surrendering to terror - and goes against the beliefs of many of his voters.

The decision-making process is accompanied by real tension. For the first time, cracks have started to appear in the romance between the prime minister and his defense minister, Ehud Barak. Barak wanted to cut short the debate on the way to the deal, and didn't see much point in all the dithering.

Still it seems that the reports neatly dividing the seven - Barak, Dan Meridor and Eli Yishai are in favor of the deal; Moshe Yaalon, Benny Begin and Avigdor Lieberman are against; and Netanyahu is uncertain - are much too simplistic. Transferring the debate to the forum of seven was an artificial act, allowing Netanyahu to compartmentalize the process and control leaks. The body that decides on the prisoner swap deal is the cabinet, or at the very least the inner security cabinet. Those bodies are expected to vote in favor by a wide margin.

Netanyahu's approach is clearer than commonly thought. After all, he is the one who decided to resume the negotiations from where they stopped, and he has agreed to cross the red lines set by his predecessor Ehud Olmert. And if he did not want a deal that includes serious concessions, he never would have agreed to publicize the Shalit tape in October.

The key figure during most of the negotiations has been the head of the Shin Bet security service, Yuval Diskin. The censor has banned publication of his stances in recent discussions. All that can be said is that if the deal is approved, the decision will be based on the opinion of the majority of the defense establishment heads. Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi supports the deal, but Mossad chief Meir Dagan objects. As for Diskin, a year and a half ago he changed his stance when he agreed to free a large number of murderers as long as they were expelled abroad.

The Arab media is reporting that the main debate focuses on several Hamas members responsible for multiple murders, including Ibrahim Hamad, Abbas al-Sayyad and Abdullah Barghouti. If Israel agrees to release them, they will be banned from Palestinian territory. Foreign reports say Israel is demanding that 130 of the prisoners be expelled.

Hamad, the head of the Hamas military wing in the West Bank, was captured in 2006 after more than a decade on the run, and it will not be easy for Israel to agree to his release. Brigade commanders in the Ramallah area kept a blurry black and white picture of Hamad in their pockets. He was convicted of direct involvement in the murder of 82 Israelis, and has never renounced his beliefs. He even told his interrogators that if he was released, he would continue to fight.

The seven are discussing even the smallest details of the agreement, one name at a time. Maj. Gen. (res.) Eyal Ben-Reuven, who heads the Born to be Free organization to return captives and the missing, says the government faces a security problem and a moral problem: deterrence and preventing terror, versus redeeming captive soldiers. He says the security problem, even if it involves dangers, can be solved. But there is no answer for commanders who lead their soldiers into battle if they are left in Hamas hands.

3a)Gov't gives green light to continue talks with Hamas
By Haviv Rettig Gur

The inner cabinet has given Israeli mediator Hagai Hadas a "green light" to continue negotiations with Hamas over a deal to secure the release of captured IDF soldier St.-Sgt. Gilad Schalit, various sources reported overnight Monday.

After more than four hours of talks, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's office released a statement early Tuesday saying only that instructions were given to the negotiating team about "the continuation of efforts to bring Gilad Schalit home safe and sound." There was no word of a decision, further meetings or steps.

The decision to continue negotiations came in lieu of any final decision by the government to agree unequivocally to Hamas's demands.

The inner cabinet's decision was communicated to the captured soldier's parents, Noam and Aviva Schalit, who are set to return to their Knesset stronghold on Tuesday morning.

A Palestinian close to the negotiations said a German mediator carrying a proposal approved by Hamas has set a Wednesday deadline for Israeli action. The Palestinian, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, said there would be no further negotiations.

Meanwhile, an official familiar with the talks told the Reuters news agency that Hamas would not lower its demands upon receiving Israel's latest response. He added that any agreement would have to be approved by the terrorist organization's leadership in Damascus.

The inner cabinet, known as the forum of seven, met into the night Monday in what was described by insiders as a final marathon discussion on the prisoner-swap deal that would end Schalit's Gaza captivity.

According to sources close to the deliberations, the proposal to release some 950 Hamas gunmen and activists, some of whom have been convicted of fatal terrorist attacks, for the 23-year-old soldier was expected to gain approval by the forum, after which it would be presented to the full 30-member cabinet.

"There's a wide majority in support of the swap at this stage," a senior political source said.

According to multiple sources and observers, ministers from Shas will vote for the deal due to the party's spiritual leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef's belief that the religious commandment of "redeeming the captive" overrides possible security risks in this case.

Labor's ministers, including party chairman and forum member Defense Minister Ehud Barak, have in the past advocated conducting such a prisoner swap.

Likud cabinet members Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs Minister Yuli Edelstein, Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz and Environmental Protection Minister Gilad Erdan and Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovich of Israel Beiteinu are also believed to support the deal, as is forum member and Intelligence Services Minister Dan Meridor, also of the Likud.

Among the ministers who are believed to oppose the deal on security grounds are Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz (Likud), Science Minister Daniel Hershkovitz (Habayit Hayehudi), National Infrastructures Minister Uzi Landau (Israel Beiteinu), Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon (Likud) and Minister-without-Portfolio Bennie Begin (Likud). However, The Jerusalem Post has learned that several of these ministers are reconsidering their opposition as the discussions in the cabinet progress.

Within the forum itself, Netanyahu has the power to break a reported deadlock among the other six members.

Schalit's mother, Aviva, told reporters outside the Prime Minister's Office on Monday that the decision of the inner cabinet would be made "in the next few hours... This will not go on much longer."

Rather than criticizing ministers believed to oppose the deal, Aviva said "it isn't a question of right or wrong."

The forum of seven met three times on Sunday to discuss the Schalit proposal, for a total of over eight hours. Monday's meetings lasted even longer, with discussions reportedly centered on Netanyahu's qualms over the release of "VIP" prisoners - senior terrorism planners and executors - to the West Bank. The prime minister prefers to expel them either to Gaza or overseas.

According to reports in foreign media sources not subject to the IDF censor, Netanyahu has delayed the swap for almost three weeks over the expulsion issue.

If the forum approves the agreement, it must gain the approval of the full cabinet, after which a 48-hour delay will set in for citizens' appeals to the High Court of Justice against the deal. Only then would it go into effect.

The timeline for a full cabinet meeting is unclear, though rumors circulated that ministers were asked to remain in Jerusalem late Monday to be able to participate in a full vote.

The exchange deal has its passionate supporters and critics, with both top security officials and terror victims' families coming down on both sides of the debate.

According to sources, IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, who attended the forum discussions throughout Monday, supports a swap. But Mossad chief Meir Dagan and Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) head Yuval Diskin have expressed grave reservations over some parts of the deal, believing that many of the released terrorists would constitute a serious security threat to Israelis.

The Almagor Terror Victims Association has urged Netanyahu in recent days to oppose the proposal, saying it would encourage more terrorist attacks.

A senior Prime Minister's Office staffer, Natan Eshel, met on Monday with terror victims' families who oppose the deal and told them the prime minister's "primary consideration in all his decisions is the security of Israel and its citizens."

Meanwhile, members of the Campaign to Free Gilad Schalit staged a protest outside the Prime Minister's Office in Jerusalem in an effort to convince the ministers to vote for the deal.

The protesters held 120 life-size cardboard cutouts bearing the image of the abducted soldier.

Earlier on Monday, Gilad Schalit's father, Noam, explained why he was camped out in front of the Prime Minister's Office: "It won't help to sit at home. We'll wait until the end of the deliberations, and hear the outcome."

"We need to decide already, and so does Hamas. The time has come to end the suffering of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza," he said.

Aviva Schalit, the soldier's mother, called the vote by the inner cabinet vote a question of life or death for her son.

"I hope they decide today. Everyone who votes must realize their vote means either a death sentence for Gilad or his release," she told Army Radio on Monday morning.

"I can understand the difficulty the ministers are facing; it is not easy for us either," Aviva said. "It is inconceivable that after so many days, no alternative was proposed to releasing Gilad, and he is left there. He can still be brought back alive; the entire world saw that he is still living. He could have been home now, if so many mistakes had not been made," she said.

Also on Monday, Kadima and Ra'am-Ta'al quashed their own no-confidence motions in the Knesset because of the Schalit discussions.

According to Kadima chairwoman Tzipi Livni, the move was motivated by a desire to allow the government to focus on the prisoner deal.

MK Ahmed Tibi of the United Arab List-Ta'al, meanwhile, explained that the motion was delayed because his party supported the prisoner swap proposal.


4)Carter apologizes for 'stigmatizing Israel'
Yy Yitzhak Benhorin

Former US president offers US Jewish community heartfelt apology for any contribution he may have had to Jewish nation's negative image

Former US President Jimmy Carter on Monday asked for the Jewish community's forgiveness for any negative stigma he may have caused Israel over the years.

Carter, who is not a popular character in Israel, enraged the American Jewish community's in the past with various statements made in his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid."

In the book, Carter blamed Israel for impeding the Middle East peace process via settlement construction, further claiming such a policy will lead to apartheid.

The former president also accused Israel of interfering with US efforts to broker peace in the region.

"We must recognize Israel’s achievements under difficult circumstances, even as we strive in a positive way to help Israel continue to improve its relations with its Arab populations, but we must not permit criticisms for improvement to stigmatize Israel.


"As I would have noted at Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, but which is appropriate at any time of the year, I offer an Al Het for any words or deeds of mine that may have done so," he said.

"Al Het" refers to the Yom Kippur prayer asking God forgiveness for sins committed.


Head of the Anti-Defamation League Abraham Foxman welcomed Carter's apology, saying it marked the beginning of reconciliation.

5)Business as Usual (on Tiger Woods)
By Jackie Mason & Raoul Felder

Tiger Woods withdrawing from golf to work on his family problems was a brilliant maneuver. He went from a place where any person from pundit to straphanger who was able to put together a cohesive sentence tried to outdo each other in efforts to revile him, but now root for him to succeed. America loves second acts and soon the clamor for him to return to golf will be deafening.


Initially, Woods violated P.R. 101 — you must get ahead of the story not like Woods, bleeding day after day in the nation's media, becoming the subject of late night TV comics, and standing by helplessly as paramour after paramour popped up. His, what charitably could be called, love life became like a bakery: "Take a number. Next."


Woods makes (or made) approximately $117 million a year from golf, but $100 million of that came from endorsements. These will ultimately be toast — all of them. From what the ladies in question explained, he could not even become a spokesman for condoms.


His surviving endorsements could not drop him now since they are in the midst of advertising campaigns, not to mention possible backlash from still-remaining fans, and there is, of course, the folk myth of not hitting a guy when he is down (tactically, it is probably the best time). The companies will wait until the termination of the contracts — nowadays sports endorsement contracts are of short duration and they all have moral clauses — elsewise they would face the wrath of pious shareholders from the mid-west (or wherever piety dwells) at annual shareholder meetings.


Woods tried to buy peace, by upping the ante on another front — his wife — to buy her silence, but he miscalculated the serial appearances of different women (one wonders when he got the time to play golf). But Jackie Mason explained that Clinton could spend 20 minutes committing adultery, and he had the rest of the day to be President.


People fail to understand that an adulterer's business is adultery. It is not an addiction and not a sickness; it is a character flaw. Doctors tell alcoholics trying to break the habit to remember how ill and sick they felt the morning after. Adulterers feel fine the morning after. They had exercise and adulation and no conscience to trouble them.


The future: Mrs. Woods will hang on for another two years to reap the benefits of a pre-nuptial agreement that has now been transferred into a post-nuptial agreement. Tiger Woods will go back to golf and adultery (perhaps more selective and secretive in his choice of partners) and the public will suffer from their usual communal amnesia.

5a) A Montana rancher got in his pickup and drove to a neighboring ranch and
knocked at the door. A young boy, about 9, opened the door "Is your Dad
home?" the rancher asked.


"No sir, he isn't," the boy replied. "He went into
town."

"Well," said the rancher "Is your Mother here?"

"No sir, she's not here either. She went into town
with Dad."

"How about your brother, Howard? Is he here?"

"No sir, He went with Mom and Dad."

The rancher stood there for a few minutes, shifting
from one foot to the other and mumbling to himself.

"Is there anything I can do for you?" the boy asked politely. "I know where
all the tools are, if you want to borrow one. Or maybe I could take a
message for Dad."


"Well," said the rancher uncomfortably, "I really wanted to talk to your Dad.
It's about your brother Howard getting my daughter, Suzie, pregnant."'

The boy considered for a moment. "You would have to talk to Pa about that,"
he finally conceded. "If it helps you any, I know that Pa charges $500
for the bull and $50 for the hog, but I really don't know how much he
gets for Howard."


6)Senate: This Is About Life & Death ... and Pork

Posted By John Stossel

Congress was busy this weekend. That is never a good sign.

Today's New York Times quotes [1] Senator Harry Reid explaining what the health care bill is all about:

“This is not about politics,” Mr. Reid said. “This is not about polling. It’s about people. It’s about life and death in America. It’s about human suffering, and given the chance to relieve this suffering, we must."

So, how exactly did Senate leadership persuade the few remaining Democrats who were dragging their heels? By appealing to their principles, of course. FoxNews.com [2] reports [3]:

Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., won between $100 million and $300 million in additional federal aid for her state's Medicaid population. The deal, secured before she cast her critical vote in favor of bringing the health bill to the floor, was immediately dubbed the "Louisiana Purchase," though the actual Louisiana Purchase was considerably cheaper.

... Florida, New York and Pennsylvania -- where five of six senators are Democrats --will have their seniors' Medicare Advantage benefits protected, even as the program sees massive cuts elsewhere.

... Nebraska's [Sen. Ben Nelson] won permanent federal aid for his state's expanded Medicaid population, a benefit worth up to $100 million over 10 years. Other states get the federal aid for three years, but Nebraska's benefit is indefinite.

If the health care bill were really about life and death, it wouldn't take earmarks to get votes.

Some Democrats had another motivation [4] to pass the bill:

Lawmakers who attended a private meeting between Mr. Obama and Senate Democrats at the White House on Tuesday pointed to remarks there by Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, as providing some new inspiration...he did not want to see the satisfied looks on the faces of Republican leaders if they succeeded in blocking the measure.

The details of the bill don't seem to matter much any more. The debate has come down to "Us" vs "Them". Some bill must pass so that one side can declare "victory".

Remember that next time you hear that Congress is working "overtime" to pass a bill.


6a)The Health-Care Backlash
By Peter Wehner

Here are some thoughts on where things stand in the aftermath of the certain passage of the Senate health-care bill.

1. Few Democrats understand the depth and intensity of opposition that exists toward them and their agenda, especially regarding health care. Passage of this bill will only heighten the depth and intensity of the opposition. We’re seeing a political tsunami in the making, and passage of health-care legislation would only add to its size and force.

2. This health-care bill may well be historic, but not in the way the president thinks. I’m not sure we’ve ever seen anything quite like it: passage of a mammoth piece of legislation, hugely expensive and unpopular, on a strict party-line vote taken in a rush of panic because Democrats know that the more people see of ObamaCare, the less they like it.

3. The problem isn’t simply with how substantively awful the bill is but how deeply dishonest and (legally) corrupt the whole process has been. There’s already a powerful populist, anti-Washington sentiment out there, perhaps as strong as anything we’ve seen. This will add kerosene to that raging fire.

4. Democrats have sold this bill as a miracle-worker; when people see first-hand how pernicious health-care legislation will be, abstract concerns will become concrete. That will magnify the unhappiness of the polity.

5. The collateral damage to Obama from this bill is enormous. More than any candidate in our lifetime, Obama won based on the aesthetics of politics. It wasn’t because of his record; he barely had one. And it wasn’t because of his command of policy; few people knew what his top three policy priorities were. It was based instead on the sense that he was something novel, the embodiment of a “new politics” – matured, high-minded and gracious, intellectually serious. That was the core of his speeches and his candidacy. In less than a year, that core has been devoured, most of all by this health-care process.

Mr. Obama has shown himself to be a deeply partisan and polarizing figure. (“I have never been asked to engage in a single serious negotiation on any issue, nor has any other Republican,” Senator McCain reported over the weekend.) The lack of transparency in this process has been unprecedented and bordering on criminal. The president has been deeply misleading in selling this plan. Lobbyists, a bane of Obama during the campaign, are having a field day.

President Obama may succeed in passing a terribly unpopular piece of legislation – but in the process, he has shattered his carefully cultivated image. It now consists of a thousand shards.

6. This health-care bill shouldn’t be seen in isolation. It’s part of a train of events that include the stimulus package, the omnibus spending bill (complete with some 8,500 earmarks), and a record-sized budget. In addition, as Jim Manzi points out in the new issue of National Affairs:

[Under Obama] the federal government has also intervened aggressively in both the financial and industrial sectors of the economy in order to produce specific desired outcomes for particular corporations. It has nationalized America’s largest auto company (General Motors) and intervened in the bankruptcy proceedings of the third-largest auto company (Chrysler), privileging labor unions at the expense of bondholders. It has, in effect, nationalized what was America’s largest insurance company (American International Group) and largest bank (Citigroup), and appears to have exerted extra-legal financial pressure on what was the second-largest bank (Bank of America) to get it to purchase the ?country’s largest securities company (Merrill Lynch). The implicit government guarantees provided to home-loan giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been called in, and the federal government is now the largest de facto lender in the residential real-estate market. The government has selected the CEOs and is setting compensation at major automotive and financial companies across the country. On top of these interventions in finance and commerce, the administration and congressional Democrats are also pursuing both a new climate and energy strategy and large-scale health-care reform. Their agenda would place the government at the center of these two huge sectors of the economy…

Together, these actions tell quite a tale. Mr. Obama has revived the worst impressions of the Democratic party – profligate and undisciplined, arrogant, lovers of big government, increasers of taxes. The issues and narrative for American politics in the foreseeable future has been set — limited government versus exploding government, capitalism versus European style socialism, responsible and measured policies versus reckless and radical ones.

Barack Obama is in the process of inflicting enormous damage to his presidency and his party. And there is more, much more to come.

7)So Much for New Politics
By Jennifer Rubin

Nasty charges of bribery. Senators cut off mid-speech. Accusations of politics put over patriotism. Talk of double-crosses. A nonagenarian forced out after midnight for multiple procedural votes.In the heart of the holiday season, Senate Republicans and Democrats are at one another’s throats as the health care overhaul reaches its climactic votes, one of which is set for 1 a.m. Monday. A year that began with hopes of new post-partisanship has indeed produced change: Things have gotten worse.

Well, yes they have. How did we get to this point? Well, for starters, Obama, who ran on his determination to transcend partisan divisions, remained a passive and aloof figure when it came to the drafting and the details, allowing partisan passions to run wild. His sole concern was winning, not building a broad-based coalition for revolutionary legislation. Indeed, he contributed to partisan furies by labeling opponents as confused and misinformed and by repeating a series of partisan and baseless accusations against Republicans (the principal one — that they had “no alternative” — was easily disproved by the plethora of conservative plans and proposals). Obama had a reason for proceeding in this way — he wanted to rely on the muscle of large Democratic majorities to obtain the most liberal bill he could get. On Sunday John McCain explained:

There’s been a change. It’s more partisan. It’s more bitterly divided than it’s been. I have never been asked to engage in a single serious negotiation on any issue, nor has any other Republican. Now they’ve brought single Republicans down to try to pick off one or two Republicans so you can call it, quote, bipartisan. There’s never been serious across-the-table negotiations on any serious issue that I have engaged in with — I and others have engaged in with other administrations, both Republican and Democrat.

And if comity and Obama’s own credibility were sacrificed along the way, well, that’s simply what a Chicago pol must do to win.

It’s not a pretty picture, as even the Times must concede:

On Sunday, Republicans did not mince words when characterizing provisions put in the health care bill to attract the final votes for passage, particularly that of Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska. Some suggested that special Nebraska considerations in the bill amounted to bribery and corruption. Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that it was reflective of “seedy Chicago politics.”

“In order to try to get the 60 votes, there has been basically a pay to play approach to this, and it’s just repulsive,” [Sen. John] Cornyn said.

Now some say that bipartisanship is overrated. But Obama wasn’t one of them. He got himself elected, in large part, because he promised to rise about the naked partisanship that had alienated so many voters. No Blue and Red States, just the United States of America and all that. So the question remains whether having jettisoned that tone and approach to politics, the president and his party will face any consequences. It’s not hard to imagine that once the dreamy idealism of young voters, the optimism of independents (who had grown disgusted with politics as normal), and the self-delusion of some Republicans (convinced that Obama was a man of reason, not of bare-knuckle politics) are drained away, the Democrats will face a motivation deficit in 2010 and perhaps beyond.

Having adopted the worst qualities of his hyper-partisan predecessors, Obama has left the “outsider” and “change” message by the wayside. We’ll see if his opponents are savvy enough to grab it and run for daylight.

8)2009 - Stella Awards . . . .

It's time again for the annual 'Stella Awards'! For those unfamiliar with these awards, they are named after 81-year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled hot coffee on herself and successfully sued the McDonald's in New Mexico where she purchased coffee. You remember, she took the lid off the coffee and put it between her knees while she was driving . . . Who would ever think one could get burned doing that, right? That’s right; these are awards for the most outlandish lawsuits and verdicts in the U.S. You know, the kinds of cases that make you scratch your head. So keep your head scratcher handy.


Here are the Stellas for the past year:


*SEVENTH PLACE*

Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas was awarded $80,000 by a jury of her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture store. The store owners were understandably surprised by the verdict, considering the running toddler was her own son.

Start scratching!


* SIXTH PLACE *

Carl Truman, 19, of Los Angeles , California won $74,000 plus medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Truman apparently didn't notice there was someone at the wheel of the car when he was trying to steal his neighbor's hubcaps.

Scratch some more...


* FIFTH PLACE *

Terrence Dickson, of Bristol , Pennsylvania , who was leaving a house he had just burglarized by way of the garage Unfortunately for Dickson, the automatic garage door opener malfunctioned and he could not get the garage door to open. Worse, he couldn't re-enter the house because the door connecting the garage to the house locked when Dickson pulled it shut. Forced to sit for eight, count 'em, EIGHT days and survive on a case of Pepsi and a large bag of dry dog food, he sued the homeowner's insurance company claiming undue mental Anguish. Amazingly, the jury said the insurance company must pay Dickson $500,000 for his anguish. We should all have this kind of anguish. Keep scratching. There are more....

Double hand scratching after this one...


*FOURTH PLACE*

Jerry Williams, of Little Rock, Arkansas, garnered 4th Place in the Stella's when he was awarded $14,500 plus medical expenses after being bitten on the butt by his next door neighbor's beagle - even though the beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced yard. Williams did not get as much as he asked for because the jury believed the beagle might have been provoked at the time of the butt bite because Williams had climbed over the fence into the yard and repeatedly shot the dog with a pellet gun.

Pick a new spot to scratch, you're getting a bald spot..


* THIRD PLACE *

Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania because a jury ordered a Philadelphia restaurant to pay her $113,500 after she slipped on a spilled soft drink and broke her tailbone. The reason the soft drink was on the floor: Ms. Carson had thrown it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument. What ever happened to people being responsible for their own actions?

Only two more so ease up on the scratching....


*SECOND PLACE*

Kara Walton, of Claymont , Delaware sued the owner of a night club in a nearby city because she fell from the bathroom window to the floor, knocking out her two front teeth. Even though Ms.. Walton was trying to sneak through the ladies room window to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge, the jury said the night club had to pay her $12,000....oh, yeah, plus dental expenses. Go figure.

Ok. Here we go!!


* FIRST PLACE *

This year's runaway First Place Stella Award winner was: Mrs. Merv Grazinski, of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, who purchased a new 32-foot Winnebago motor home. On her first trip home, from an OU football game, having driven on to the freeway, she set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver's seat to go to the back of the Winnebago to make herself a sandwich. Not surprisingly, the motor home left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Also not surprisingly, Mrs.. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not putting in the owner's manual that she couldn't actually leave the driver's seat while the cruise control was set. The Oklahoma jury awarded her, are you sitting down?
$1,750,000 PLUS a new motor home. Winnebago actually changed their manuals as a result of this suit, just in case Mrs. Grazinski has any relatives who might also buy a motor home....