The Few, the Proud, the Marines new recruiting video

Ok, Ok, I admit I am proud I was in the Marine Band in D.C. 1966-1970 and though we were not "leathernecks" (called ourselves "Leatherchops") now after all these years, I do see the uniqueness of the Corps. If the video here and the title above don't give you a chill, you need to check your pulse. Sempre Fi

Is the Left Losing on UW campus

Tip of the hat to Wendy for emailing me this. The link above and here is to an article by Charlie Sykes about a Political Correct "rat out anyone who offends you" effort by a misguided Dean who seems to be channeling 'La Donna' A.K.A. Donna Shalala the PC queen who managed to repress free speech for students for about 10 years ( and for 17? years for Faculty) with her institution of speech codes. They were struck down 3 times by Federal Judge Shabazz. The last case was the speech code for faculty. He wrote in the next to last judgement that perhaps the law faculty-who were backing the code even after he told them in the first judgement it was unlawful- should "read the constitution and Bill of Rights once in awhile" or something to that effect. These things tend to be horribly one sided in reporting. Example: when the political and physical;y heavy Michael Moore was on campus during the 2004 Presidential race, the college republicans demonstrated against him near the Memorial Union. They had urine thrown on them for daring to confront the monolithic Lefties. They dutifully reported the incident and who they thought had done it to a Dean of students in charge of such incidents. They "investigated" for a couple of days and then let it drop. In this case (Nov 07) Charlie Sykes point out the students just ignored the dumb campaign and then the UW let it drop.

MLKing Jr and the Civil rights struggle against Democrats

Can we all remember on MLK's upcoming Birthday that he wanted people judged on their merits, not the color of their skin?

That what the Main stream Media and the Dems- same thing- call the "Conscience of the Senate" Sen. Byrd of W. Virgina was a Kleagle in the Ku Klux Klan as late as 1948 and used the N word publicly in the late 70's. (with no repercussions)

That Pres. Clinton's hero and mentor Sen. Fulbright (who, by the way Wis. Sen. Joe McCarthy called"Senator Halfbright") and ALGORE's old Man, Sen. Gore participated in the longest recorded filibuster by Sen. Byrd AGAINST the 64 Civil rights Act and voted they all voted against it?

That what the Hilary Clinton campaign is doing to Obama right now with Pres. Clinton dropping the drug use bomb on Obama is a classic example of putting down "an uppity black" not unlike what the southern Democrats were doing to any black person who wanted to vote or run for office after the Civil war?

Subject: Martin Luther King's struggle was against Democrats

January 15, 2008

On this day in 1901, the Alabama Democratic Party called for a convention to write a new state constitution that would prohibit African-Americans from voting. Despite vocal opposition from Booker T. Washington and other Republican civil rights activists, the Democrat scam succeeded.
Democrats dominated Alabama's 1901 constitutional convention, and its chairman was a Democrat. In his opening address, he said: "If we would have white supremacy, we must establish it by law -- not by force or fraud... The negro is descended from a race lowest in intelligence and moral precepts of all the races of men."

Alabama's African-American citizens would not vote in appreciable numbers again until the 1950s.

It was a Republican federal judge, Frank Johnson, who in 1956 ruled in favor of Rosa Parks and who in 1965 ordered the Democrat governor, George Wallace, to permit Martin Luther King's voting rights march from Selma to Montgomery.

At the 2000 Republican National Convention, Condoleezza Rice said: "The first Republican I knew was my father and he is still the Republican I most admire. He joined our party because the Democrats in Jim Crow Alabama of 1952 would not register him to vote. The Republicans did. My father has never forgotten that day, and neither have I."

Democrats want Americans to forget that Republicans supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act much more than did the Democrats.

Republicans today would benefit tremendously from appreciating the true heritage of our Grand Old Party. This Republican heritage article and others are available on the Grand Old Partisan blog each day celebrating 154 years of Republican heroes and heroics.

Michael Zak is a popular speaker to Republican organizations around the country. His e-mail address is Grand_Old_Partisan@hotmail.com. For more information, see www.republicanbasics.com.

President Bush makes an excellent decision for Israel

The guy has guts and he sticks to his word and his guns.

The article below will bring out the usual Bushwackers. Personally I respect the man for his steadfastness and forthright following of his basic principle: Protect Amercia.

Israel doesn't need our "permission" to defend themselves from terrorist sending rockets into civilian neighborhoods just as we do not need to bow to the Cut and Run surrender Democrats version of "peace through appeasement."

In the years ahead I predict that Pres. Clinton will rank even lower than the worst president of the 20th Century- Pres. Carter and Pres. George W, Bush will be seen for the righteous President he is and will be ranked among the best.

Wall Street Journal Bush Gives Israel Scope for Antiterror Acts

By JOHN D. MCKINNON and CAM SIMPSON January 10, 2008; Page A4
JERUSALEM --
President Bush signaled he would give Israel broad leeway to continue raids targeting Palestinian militants and to develop settlements in disputed parts of Jerusalem, despite international pressure to curb such actions.
That cooperative U.S. attitude is likely to ease the political burden that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will face in selling a Palestinian peace deal to a restive public. But it complicates life for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who wants to build political momentum for a U.S.-brokered peace deal in the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip, where Israel has carried out its most intensive raids.

The irrelevant Senator Feingold from Wisconsin

Sen. Russ Feingold A.K.A., the Al queda representative came out with another whopper about the magic of "diversity" today- Dec 27th.

Trying desparately to keep his name in as a Moveon.org Vice Presidential candidate- dream on Senator- he was thrilled that a woman, a black, a Hispanic were all running for the Presidency. ( I guess the standard issue white guys are just to be tolerated)

He calls this a "transformational" moment in election history and "one of the most important" moments in our nation's history to have this kind of "diversity" in the candidates.

Remember, Libs and Lefties only want skin color diversity, not diversity of ideas. Example: The only difference between Hillary and Obama is .......how far Left they are, skin color and sex. Abortion? same. Teacher's unions always right? Check. Death penalty? No difference. Iraq War? Too many positions to judge. ( Though Cut and Run as soon as possible would be fair to both) Higher taxes? Whatdoyathink? Offer everyone as many programs as you can think of? (No mention of what they will cost). No difference.

The both share a vast lack of experience but does that count towards diversity?

Have a Democrat come out in favor of winning in Iraq and......Oh, wait Sen. Leiberman did that and the Democrats turned on him and tried to take away his Senate seat. He won as an Independent and has now endorsed Sen. McCain- a big, bad Republican. Yes Virginia, there is a God of politics.

But I digress from my digression.

So if this is a "transformational moment" wouldn't that mean that a person should vote their sex or racial/ ethnic preference? Nope. The Senator continues by saying, "it's not a reason to vote for or against that person" I guess it gives him warm feelings....and that's all that matters for Libs.

The Swift Boat VETS are back!

A tip of the Semper Fi hat to "TARTANMarine" for this heads-up.

I read the book the Swift Boat Veterans put out during the 2004 election cycle.

The Swift Boat Vets pointed out the bogus medals , in their and my opinion, that John Kerry was "awarded" mostly by writing up the recommendations for himself during his two months of actual active duty while in the Navy Reserves serving in Vietnam. At least he is consistent. His commanding officers in Vietnam thought he was a royal pain in the A--, and kicked him on to another unit as quickly as they could get rid of him.

The Swift boat vets also pointed out his traitorous acts while still in the Navy Reserve by negotiating with the North Vietnamese in Paris as well as the bald face lying that characterized his and the "Winter Soldiers" testimony when he first ran for office. Many of the "soldiers" had never served in Vietnam, or even been in the Armed Forces.

The whole thing about Sen Kerry's service record could have been settled by him with a simple request to the Navy to release ALL of his service records. He has never done this, though he promised to do so during the campaign. He has released only those records he himself approved, not his complete records. Recently. a million dollar bet rides on his release of his comlete records and the Swift Vets proving their case.

The lead link above takes you to a site about the new book by the Swift Boat vets who worked with LT. Kerry during his short tour of duty and brings it up to date with their new book "To Set the Record Straight"

The sound of one small hand clapping for all the New Direction legislation by the Democrats in Congress

Harry, "The war in Iraq is lost" Reid. Harry, Nancy Pelosie New Direction =RETREAT

From The Wall St. Jrnal Best of the WEB James Taranto DEC. 14 2007

Just Wait Till Next Year!The Democrats are wrapping up their first year in the congressional majority, and pretty much everyone agrees that it has been, to be charitable, less than a rousing success. Here is a comprehensive list of their legislative accomplishments:
An increase in the federal minimum wage, to $5.85 an hour from $5.15, effective July 24, 2007.
An increase in the federal minimum wage, to $6.55 an hour from $5.85, effective July 24, 2008.
An increase in the federal minimum wage, to $7.25 an hour from $6.55, effective July 24, 2009.
That's it. Other than that, the Democrats have failed at everything they have attempted, from routine matters like relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax to ambitious projects such as turning Iraq into a haven for al Qaeda.

Well, they did try to Cut and Run and lose the war in Iraq, insult a genuine war hero, Gen. Petraeus and are upset that the "surge" could 'hurt them in 08' and are praying for the economy to fail before then. Does that count?

Obama is the Democratic Party's feel-good guy

Obama: Hands over hard?
Click to enlarge.....the photo.

Hillary

I've had the good fortune of hearing and meeting the very funny, intelligent and wonderful writer Jonah Goldberg when he has bravely come to the UW-Madison campus to speak. His column here and in link above to the National Review published today, Dec. 13 07 in the Wisconsin State Journal is a real zinger for the "Hillary is the inevitable candidate" crowd.

Few are aware today of how Truman ran (and won) on the fact that he had a "do nothing" Congress to work with. That mid to late 40's Congress was a model of efficiency and effectiveness compared to the 2006-08 Democrats "mandate", "taking back America" and white flag policy in Iraq. Goldberg covers this and more in his column. (This doesn't touch on today's news of the Clinton's latest gutter attack on Obama. -"Obama, seller of drugs" that the N. Hampshire Hillaryman and member of her N.H team made today.

I think Obama should respond using the language created by the Clintons. Stand up and say, "This is the 'politics of personal destruction' that the Clintons invented, patented and are still manufacturing and it represents the 'Vast Left Wing Conspiracy' they fund and lead"

My faith restored in Journalist integrity

A few weeks ago I called the editor and reporter Matt Gieger for the Middleton Times Tribune. He said he was planning to do a series of interviews with newcomers to Middleton ( I moved from Madison to Middleton in mid July of 07). He was interested in getting a cross section of political beliefs and he had called the Republican Party of Dane County (RPDC) and asked if there was someone he could interview who lived in Middleton. The Chairman of RPDC called me and asked me to contact Mr. Geiger to see if I would do for an interview. Mr. Geiger said yes and we set up an interview in mid November. The article, (with picture even!) is here, and in the lead link above. It is and embarrassingly long article, much more than I expected, so I hesitate out of (false) modesty to recommend it to you! I had been badly burned in the past- during the first Gulf War - by a reporter from the Cap. Times- the Progressive late afternoon paper in Madison. He seemed very friendly, kidded around a lot and then wrote a hit piece. So I was a bit worried history would repeat itself. Mr Gieger is a young guy, writes very well, articulate and is naturally outgoing with a warm personality and easy laughter. I actually had a ball sipping coffee and talking politics- and of course EVERYONE likes to talk about themselves - so the interview was fun and he even took a picture. The long interview and photo appeared today (Thurs Dec 6, 07) and I went to Walgreens to pick up a copy around noon, since my subscription arrives by mail around 4;30 pm. I read the interview and my faith in journalism- for this interview at the very least - was restored. Mr. Geiger did not bend, twist, take things out of context or indulge in what I call "agenda journalism" forcing the story to confirm an agenda the reporter wants to deliver. It was accurate, honest, and he simply reported the questions he asked and my replies. It was great to work with someone with integrity in a field that has been, in my opinion, sacrificing reporting facts, and both or many sides of a story and letting the reader decide - sacrificing that integrity to write an opinion piece instead of a balanced story. In the NY Times, Washington Post, and the Wisconsin State Journal whenever I see "analysis" on a front page story I know it is a hit piece. One sided and straight opinion unfettered by facts or opposing points of view. Not so with Mr. Geiger. He is an honest, hard working old fashioned reporter with integrity. To quote Mr. Spock may you Matt Geiger, "Live Long and prosper" !

An Inconvenient Reduction of Green House Gases in U.S.

AL GORE

U.S. boots Kyoto Protocol but beats Europe in gas house reductions with a growing economy.

REVIEW & OUTLOOK WALL ST. Journal

An Inconvenient Reduction December 3, 2007; Page A20

Note: Wall St jrnal is a subscription service so link may not take you to the source.

Thousands of government officials, diplomats, NGO folks and journalists are in Bali this week for the United Nations' global warming powwow. While they try to outline an even tougher set of restrictions on so-called greenhouse gases to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, we'll venture that little will be said about America's record on curbing emissions without such caps. It's too big an embarrassment to the assembled worthies.

The Bush Administration announced last week that U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide fell by 1.8% from 2005 to 2006. Output of all greenhouse gases was down 1.5% last year. All this while the American economy grew by 2.9%. It's the first time since 1990, when the U.N. began counting these things, that the U.S. has reduced emissions without also suffering a recession.

Critics immediately pointed to the Energy Department's acknowledgment that the reductions were in part due to higher energy prices and favorable weather. But greater use of lower-carbon energy sources, including natural gas, also played a big role. The U.S. reduction also suggests that letting markets work through higher prices will reduce carbon emissions more than the cap and trade mandates favored by environmental lobbies and most Democrats.

The EU hasn't yet released figures for 2006. But from 2000 to 2005, the U.S. outperformed Western Europe. Carbon emissions were up 3.8% in the so-called EU-15 during those years, versus 2.5% in the U.S. Over the same period, there has been virtually no difference between the increase in all greenhouse emissions in the U.S. and EU-15.

We refer back to 2000 instead of 1990 because the real agenda of those who blame America's role in global warming seems to be to blame President Bush for not signing Kyoto. It's true that U.S. emissions have grown more than Europe's since 1990, but how can this Administration be held responsible for what happened on Al Gore's watch?

For all the unproven claims about mankind's contribution to global warming, here's something that can be said with authority: If curbing emissions really is the goal, then the heavy-handed approach promoted by the U.N. and Europe isn't the best way to do so.

RELATED ARTICLES AND BLOGS
Related Articles from the Online Journal
• Climate Experts Urge Action At Bali Conference
• China Yields to U.S. On Trade Subsidies
• Oil Rises to Near $99 a Barrel
• U.S., Russia Agree on Details Of Plutonium Disposal Plan
Blog Posts About This Topic
• US reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 1.8 percent from 2005 to 2006 practicalenvironmentalist.com
• For Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Cap and Trade, Anyone? nationalcenter.org
More related content Powered by Sphere

Twenty-Four Beliefs you must hold to be a Good Democrat

24 Beliefs you must hold to be A Good Democrat 1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand. 2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity. 3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. Nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists. 4. You have to believe that there was no art before federal funding. 5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical documented changes in the earth's climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV's. 6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial, and boys must be forced to act more like girls. 7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding. 8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex. 9. You have to believe that hunters don't care about nature, but 'activists' who have never been outside of San Francisco do. 10. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it. 11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make 'The Passion of the Christ' for financial gain only. 12. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution. 13. You have to believe that your taxes are too low, but their ATM fees are too high. 14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison, and A.G. Bell. 15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not. 16. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person. 17. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried is because the right people haven't been in charge. 18. You have to believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and a sex offender belonged in the White House. 19. You have to believe that illegal Democrat Party funding by the Chinese Government is somehow in the best interest to the United States. 20. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right wing conspiracy. 21. You have to believe that airport security profiling radical Islamofascist Muslim men between the age of 18-35 who have killed thousands of people and are committed to converting, conquering or killing all ‘infidels’ is awful, but frisking your 84 year old grandmother is fine and dandy. 22. You have to believe that listening in on known terrorists’ phone conversations with Americans is worse than having another 9/11 attack prevented. 23. You have to believe that it's okay to give federal workers the day off on Christmas Day but it's not okay to say 'Merry Christmas' 24. You believe you support the Troops, by supporting your Congressional Democrats who have been trying to surrender and Cut and Run for the last four years.

If a Democrat wins the White House in 08

Will the ACLU have a permanent office in the West Wing if a Cut and Run Democrat wins the White House?

Why Warren Buffet wants to keep the Death Tax- More profit from his insurance companies!

The reason Warren Buffet is smiling is if congress keeps the estate tax AKA The Death tax, he will continue to sell millions of dollars worth of life insurance to off set the estate taxes. Is there no one in Congress that has read one of Thomas Sowell's books on basic economics? "Dough!" As Homer Simpson would say!

(Note: you may not be able to follow the link above to the whole story unless you are a subscriber- but give it a try anyway!)

Berkshire's Buffett Backs Estate Tax (Wall St. Journal)

By JOHN GODFREY November 14, 2007 3:54 p.m.

WASHINGTON -- Berkshire Hathaway Inc. Chief Executive Warren Buffett said Wednesday that Congress should consider giving lower-income families a $1,000 annual tax credit rather than repealing the federal estate tax.

In testimony before the U.S. Senate Finance Committee, Mr. Buffett noted that of 2.4 million Americans who died last year, roughly 12,000 paid estate tax. "You'd have to attend 200 funerals to be at one" where an estate tax was owed, Mr. Buffett said.

Mr. Buffett suggested that rather than repealing the estate tax, it should be reformed to have less impact on smaller estates, but tax larger estates more to raise the same amount of money.

He suggested an exemption from the estate tax of about $4 million, up from the current $3.5 million. That exemption would be indexed for inflation. But in contrast to prior years, the initial rates beyond that exemption would be relatively low, and would gradually increase, Mr. Buffett said.

Question to Mr. Buffett (that was never asked) How much life insurance did you sell last year to high income people designed to off set the death tax ? A billion dollars? Two?

Angry Left: Bush Hatred and its effect on rational thinking

My own experience with Bush haters has been confined to an older grad student on the Madison campus Humanitites building tiny parking lot screaming at the top of his lungs at me due to a Vote No to Cut and Run bumper sticker on my car, having my car keyed, and my email computer system mucked up. Why? Because I supported freeing 50 million people in Afghanistan and Iraq and the magnificent troops that made it happen. And, I had the audacity to display "diversity" in the form of a bumper sticker! I should know better to do that in Madison!

Note: The link above is to a Wall St. Journal article-it is a subscription service so it may not open to the entire article for you.

ANGRY LEFT

The Insanity of Bush Hatred
Our politics suffer when passions overcome reason and vitriol becomes virtue.

BY PETER BERKOWITZ
Wednesday, November 14, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

Hating the president is almost as old as the republic itself. The people, or various factions among them, have indulged in Clinton hatred, Reagan hatred, Nixon hatred, LBJ hatred, FDR hatred, Lincoln hatred, and John Adams hatred, to mention only the more extravagant hatreds that we Americans have conceived for our presidents.

But Bush hatred is different. It's not that this time members of the intellectual class have been swept away by passion and become votaries of anger and loathing. Alas, intellectuals have always been prone to employ their learning and fine words to whip up resentment and demonize the competition.

Bush hatred, however, is distinguished by the pride intellectuals have taken in their hatred, openly endorsing it as a virtue and enthusiastically proclaiming that their hatred is not only a rational response to the president and his administration but a mark of good moral hygiene...

And so, I told my Princeton audience, in the context of a Bush hatred and a corollary contempt for conservatism so virulent that it had addled the minds of many of our leading progressive intellectuals, Prof. Starr deserved special recognition for keeping his head in his analysis of liberalism and progressivism. Then I got on with my prepared remarks...

Bush hatred is not a rational response to actual Bush perfidy. Rather, Bush hatred compels its progressive victims--who pride themselves on their sophistication and sensitivity to nuance--to reduce complicated events and multilayered issues to simple matters of good and evil. Like all hatred in politics, Bush hatred blinds to the other sides of the argument, and constrains the hater to see a monster instead of a political opponent...

Prof. Starr shows in (his book) "Freedom's Power" that tolerance, generosity, and reasoned skepticism are hallmarks of the truly liberal spirit. His analysis suggests that the problem with progressives who have succumbed to Bush hatred is not their liberalism; it's their betrayal of it. To be sure, Prof. Starr rejects Bush administration policies and thinks conservatives have the wrong remedies for what ails America today. Yet at the same time his analysis suggests, if not a cure for those who have already succumbed, at least a recipe for inoculating others against hating presidents to come.

The conflict between more conservative and more liberal or progressive interpretations of the Constitution is as old as the document itself, and a venerable source of the nation's strength. It is wonderful for citizens to bring passion to it. Recognizing the common heritage that provides the ground for so many of the disagreements between right and left today will encourage both sides, if not to cherish their opponents, at least to discipline their passions and make them an ally of their reason.

Mr. Berkowitz is a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution and a professor at George Mason University School of Law.

Wall St Journal: Poor get rich, Rich get poor

Candidates Gov. Mike Huckabee, Senator John Edwards

Lou Dobbs

We read in today's paper that white women have had a fivefold increase in wages, black women have made significant gains, with white men stagnant in earnings and black men dropping in income. Considering the outrageous near 50% High School drop out rate of black males and the disportionate number of black males serving time these numbers are not surprising on the descending mobility scale. White males flat lining on income? Whatever could be the reason for that?

Prediction: next April the untrue old saw about "women only make 75% as much as men" will be once again widely printed and reported in MSM. What is never compared is that women who work the same number of years as men have higher income levels. The Wall St Jrnal story below underlines that 'the poor" for over 83% of the population is a temporary condition as they move up in income and that the rich move down in wealth too.

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Movin' On Up WALL ST. JOURNAL November 13, 2007; Page A24

If you've been listening to Mike Huckabee or John Edwards on the Presidential trail, you may have heard that the U.S. is becoming a nation of rising inequality and shrinking opportunity. We'd refer those campaigns to a new study of income mobility by the Treasury Department that exposes those claims as so much populist hokum.

OK, "hokum" is our word. The study, to be released today, is a careful, detailed piece of research by professional economists that avoids political judgments. But what it does do is show beyond doubt that the U.S. remains a dynamic society marked by rapid and mostly upward income mobility. Much as they always have, Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder continue to climb into the middle and sometimes upper classes in remarkably short periods of time.

The Treasury study examined a huge sample of 96,700 income tax returns from 1996 and 2005 for Americans over the age of 25. The study tracks what happened to these tax filers over this 10-year period. One of the notable, and reassuring, findings is that nearly 58% of filers who were in the poorest income group in 1996 had moved into a higher income category by 2005. Nearly 25% jumped into the middle or upper-middle income groups, and 5.3% made it all the way to the highest quintile.

Of those in the second lowest income quintile, nearly 50% moved into the middle quintile or higher, and only 17% moved down. This is a stunning show of upward mobility, meaning that more than half of all lower-income Americans in 1996 had moved up the income scale in only 10 years.

. . .. Two of every three workers had a real income gain -- which contradicts the Huckabee-Edwards-Lou Dobbs spin about stagnant incomes. This is even more impressive when you consider that "median" income and wage numbers are often skewed downward because the U.S. has had a huge influx of young workers and immigrants in the last 20 years. They start their work years with low wages, dragging down the averages.

Only one income group experienced an absolute decline in real income -- the richest 1% in 1996. Those households lost 25.8% of their income. Moreover, more than half (57.4%) of the richest 1% in 1996 had dropped to a lower income group by 2005. Some of these people might have been "rich" merely for one year, or perhaps for several, as they hit their peak earning years or had some capital gains windfall. Others may simply have not been able to keep up with new entrepreneurs and wealth creators.
The key point is that the study shows that income mobility in the U.S. works down as well as up -- another sign that opportunity and merit continue to drive American success, not accidents of birth. The "rich" are not the same people over time. . .

But the 58% of lowest-income earners who moved to a higher income quintile in this study is roughly comparable to the percentages that did so in several similar studies going back to the late 1960s. "The basic finding of this analysis," says the Treasury report, "is that relative income mobility is approximately the same in the last 10 years as it was in the previous decade.". . .

The great irony is that, in the name of reducing inequality, some of our politicians want to raise taxes and other government obstacles to the kind of risk-taking and hard work that allow Americans to climb the income ladder so rapidly. As the Treasury data show, we shouldn't worry about inequality. We should worry about the people who use inequality as a political club to promote policies that reduce opportunity.

RELATED ARTICLES AND BLOGS
Related Content may require a subscription Subscribe Now -- Get 2 Weeks FREE
Blog Posts About This Topic
• Excerpt Of The Day: A Treasury Study Proves That America Is Still The Land ... rightwingnews.com
• Income mobility in America blog.financeandeconomicscenter.com
More related content Powered by Sphere

Here's a guy who would make a great Supreme court judge for Wisconsin!

(Click on photo to enlarge)

Had the great pleasure of meeting and hearing candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme court, Judge Mike Gableman speak today. Very impressive guy who speaks from the heart and in my opinion, would bring a needed dose of common sense to our Supreme court. You can view his intoductory video by clicking on the Link above.

Dollar is crashing and Adam Smith is rolling in his grave

One of the reasons the price of gas is going up is very simple. The dollar has been tanking for a number of months and "The Shiek of Air-rub-Bee" (with apologies to Spike Jones and his wonderfully funny musical take off on that old tune) is not about to take a 30% reduction in the price per barrel of oil since OPEC pegs the dollar as their currency. The dollar sinks, they take a cut.

Hey, the Canadian Looney is now on a par with the buck, and the Euro is what, at 1.45 to the dollar? When the French President and Chinese bankers are warning America and Congress about the faltering dollar it's time to WAKE UP!. Pres. Sarkozy said the dollar's decline could lead to "economic war" you know it is way past time to let the big banks take the hit for their foolish subprime loans,and raise interest rates to increase the strength of the dollar. That swhooshing sound if the sound of the world's investors dumping American investments and dollars and buying European, Euros, Swiss Francs and Gold.

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Adam Smith Growls WALL ST. JOURNAL November 9, 2007; Page A18


"The U.S. dollar is the linchpin of not only the American economy but also the world monetary system." Those words were the lead of an editorial in this newspaper on August 21, 1978, amid the inflation of the 1970s and the world's last great dollar crisis. Are we watching another such period today? It's not inevitable, but this week we all got a reminder of what such a thing looks like, and it isn't pretty.

The dollar is "losing its status as the world currency," declared Xu Jian, a middling official at China's central bank, on Wednesday. "We will favor stronger currencies over weaker ones, and will readjust accordingly." That was perceived as a threat by China's central bank to diversify its foreign exchange reserves out of dollars and into other currencies, especially euros. While China later qualified those remarks, the dollar nonetheless fell again around the globe, stocks plunged, and gold and other traditional inflation hedges rose to fresh heights.

Meanwhile, French President Nicolas Sarkozy visited Washington and brought a dollar warning of his own. "The dollar cannot remain someone else's problem," he told Congress. "If we are not careful, monetary disarray could morph into economic war. We would all be its victims." The Frenchman was referring to the damage that the dollar's record lows against the euro are doing to Europe's exports, and the potential for a return to so-called "competitive devaluation," or what used to be called "beggar-thy-neighbor" currency policies.
* * *
Coming from opposite sides of the world, these are warnings worth heeding. For as our editorial explained 30 years ago, the dollar is far more than a medium of American exchange. It is a reserve currency, held by central banks the world over, and the core of the monetary system that underpins what has been a remarkable period of global economic growth. By toying recklessly with dollar devaluation, our policy makers are also toying with a far larger economic crisis than the current credit problems.

ANN COULTER McCarthyism: The Rosetta Stone of Liberal Lies

I audited American History courses at UW-Madison after I retired from the Music department. I wrote a short paper about McCarthy, and another about the book, DENIAL by historians Haynes and Klehr that have, based upon the information in the Venona Cables and the info. released after the collapse of the Soviet Union, absolute written documentary proof of all the Soviet Agents working in FDR's and Truman's administration. The result was total disbelief by the Teaching Assistant and fear that his Major Prof, would "kill me" (his words) if he turned in my papers.

There is no room for truth in the Academy today only dogma.

The title DENIAL was a straight arrow into the hearts of all of the established academic historians in the U.S. who still think Alger Hiss was "unjustly accused". There is even a named chair in his honor at an Eastern college- even though he was a traitor. Hiss also was the U.S. first Secretary to the U.N. in San Franciso-not surprisingly the USSR approved him without a struggle- he encouraged the entry of Soviet satellite states and agreed that any member of the U.N. security council could block any military action by the U.N. This is the main reason the U.N. is useless in stopping any tryrant in the world today.

This is Ann Coulter's Column of Nov. 7 2007. (Click on the title link above for the entire column.)

When I wrote a ferocious defense of Sen. Joe McCarthy in Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism, liberals chose not to argue with me. Instead they posted a scrolling series of reasons not to read my book, such as that I wear short skirts, date boys, and that Treason was not a scholarly tome.

After printing rabidly venomous accounts of McCarthy for half a century based on zero research, liberals would only accept research presenting an alternative view of McCarthy that included, as the Los Angeles Times put it, at least the "pretense of scholarly throat-clearing and objectivity.

"This week, they got it. The great M. Stanton Evans has finally released Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies. Based on a lifetime's work, including nearly a decade of thoroughgoing research, stores of original research and never-before-seen government files, this 672-page book ends the argument on Joe McCarthy. Look for it hidden behind stacks of Bill Clinton's latest self-serving book at a bookstore near you.

Oh poor me: Another hoax victim of a hate crime on campus

Another campus hoax. (Please see also my related blog on Oct 26 about Garrison Keillor) This is from "The best of the Web" from the Wall St. Jrnal today. James Taranto. Another 'Hate' Hoax"A George Washington University student who told school officials that someone had drawn swastikas on her dormitory room door was actually responsible for the incidents, a university spokesman said," the Washington Post reports: The student, who was not identified, had complained that swastikas appeared on her door over a period of several days last month. A hidden camera positioned in response to the postings in Mitchell Hall, one of the school dormitories, led police to interview the student, who admitted responsibility, according to spokesman Tracy Schario. The student will not face student judicial action and officials will determine whether any District or federal laws were broken, Schario said. Over the weekend, another GW student was identified in connection with the writing of racial epithets and the drawing of swastikas on doors in another dorm called New Hall, Schario said. The U.S. Attorney's office is reviewing the New Hall case to determine whether criminal charges should be filed. That student has been barred from campus. So let's see if we have this straight: Paint a swastika on someone's door, and you're persona non grata and may face federal charges. Paint a swastika on your own door, and hey, enjoy the buffet! This column is averse to the idea of "hate crime" laws. They strike us as uncomfortably close to criminalizing speech, and also as enhancing rather than diffusing the power of hateful ideas. But if we have hate-crime laws, hoaxes like this ought to be prosecuted at least as vigorously as "real" hate crimes. The argument for hate-crime laws is that such crimes make innocent people feel as if they are targets because they are black or Jewish or gay. That is no less true if the perpetrator and the "victim" are one and the same. The judge who sentenced California professor Kerri Francis Dunn to a year in prison for vandalizing her own car with racial slurs had the right idea.

Giuliani: Democrats 'couldn't even utter the word (sic) Islamic Terrorism.' It's our biggest enemy. They couldn't utter it

Linking Terror on the Trail
Republicans Point To Islam, Democrats Take Different Tone
By ELIZABETH HOLMES Wall St. Jrnal October 29, 2007; Page A5

(Note: the link above is to Wall St. Jrnal and is a subscription service, so you may not be able to go to the complete article unless you subscribe.)

A divide is emerging on the presidential campaign trail over battling terrorists: how exactly to label the fight. While Democrats tend to talk about terrorism in general, Republicans increasingly pin the threat directly on Islam.

All the major Republican candidates regularly weave some form of the phrase "Islamic extremism" into their stump speeches. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has taken the rhetoric to a new level, running a television advertisement about "this century's nightmare, jihadism."

Democratic candidates generally don't emphasize linking Islam and terrorism. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton talks more of "global terrorism," while Sen. Barack Obama refers to "stateless terrorism."

YouTube: Watch Mitt Romney's commercial, (link is) "Jihad.""In four Democratic debates, not a single Democratic candidate said the word 'Islamic terrorism,' " former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said at a Republican debate. "Now that is taking a political correctness to extremes."