Reviews I've posted

Today, I just wrapped up reviews of a book I finished earlier this month, the Michelle Malkin book Culture Of Corruption, and a film I saw last week, Sherlock Holmes.

I also have reviews of another film, The High Commissioner, and also Michael Crichton's last book, Pirate Latitudes, and Sarah Palin's instant classic Going Rogue.  If you want to check any of these reviews out, by all means take a look.

The latest from Sarah: Obamacare = Stray Dog, So Says President

In her latest Facebook note, Sarah Palin wrote yesterday of a telling thing President Obama said Friday about ObamaCare:

Obamacare = Stray Dog, So Says President

What am I missing, folks? We’re called obstructionists and made to feel uninformed in the Obamacare debate as we point out this is not a patient-driven, market-oriented approach to health care cost challenges. We’ve been saying for months that this is government takeover of our personal choices of insurers and doctors. We’re called liars when claiming that this is all about government mandates and control of up to a sixth of our economy. 

And yet, shockingly, the president admitted yesterday exactly what we’ve been saying: that his Democrats and lobbyists have crafted bills that in fact will prevent us from keeping our current insurance and/or choosing our own doctor. He said:

 The last thing I will say, though -- let me say this about health care and the health care debate, because I think it also bears on a whole lot of other issues. If you look at the package that we’ve presented -- and there’s some stray cats and dogs that got in there that we were eliminating, we were in the process of eliminating. For example, we said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your -- if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you’re not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge. [emphasis added]

Thanks to Tom Bevan at RCP for spotting this. The president’s statement is shocking, enlightening, and in an odd and unfortunate way also encouraging. Folks, this admission tells us we’re not off-base and we need to stay vigilant so we’re not missing anything else in this scheme. This trillion-dollar government takeover of our health care system is full of “stray dogs and cats” (the president’s words, not mine), and that’s what we’ve been saying all along. 

Commonsense conservatives have better ideas on how to start tackling rising health care costs. Reps. Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, Eric Cantor, John Boehner, and others have offered solutions. I commend their efforts to counter the White House’s attempt to ram Obamacare through as these Congressmen seek bipartisan, sensible solutions. I implore them to speak louder because we’re listening, and we’re counting on them! 

- Sarah Palin 

Indeed so.

Sarah Palin on Staying focused

In her Facebook note from Friday, Governor Palin wrote of the main problem not being addressed by the Obama administration when it comes to dealing with terrorists:

Stay Focused: Relocating Terrorists' Trial Doesn't Solve the Main Problem

People are celebrating the fact that the Obama Administration is considering relocating the terrorists’ trial from New York to another American city. Yet there’s still no talk of moving the trial out of our U.S. civilian courts to where it should take place – a military tribunal.

Now the administration is backtracking in order to fix its initially blundered decision to try these dangerous terrorists in New York City despite the great danger and cost to New Yorkers. This scenario is all too common in Washington. The tactic is to propose something so outrageous that the public will rise up and demand common sense, and then the White House “concedes” and changes its initial decision to give the impression of newfound reasonability and moderation. But the problem still isn’t solved! The trial location debate becomes a diversion so that we’ll take our eyes off the ball. The point missed is that our President still wants to give these terrorists U.S. constitutional protections in our civilian courts, allowing them to lawyer-up on our dime.

This tactic is in the same vein as another Washington game: creating the appearance of a “crisis” in order to push for a radical solution. (“The health care crisis must be fixed by government now or we’re all gonna die! The earth’s temperature is fluctuating; government must fix this crisis now or we’re all gonna die! Private businesses made poor decisions and bureaucrats claim they’re too big to fail, so government must fix this crisis now or we’re all gonna die!”) Politicians and lobbyists announce that there is a “crisis,” and never letting a good crisis go to waste, they propose a radical solution to fix it. The public listens intently, and in a sincere desire to help, an alternative to the politicians’ radical solution gets put forward. The politicians then “concede” and mellow out their radical solution. The public’s attention has been diverted to tinkering on the periphery, all the while ignoring the real problem at the heart of the “crisis” that started the whole debate.

The fact is our government has a choice as to where to try the terrorists. We don’t have to try them in our civilian courts. The peripheral debate regarding in which city to try these evil, dangerous haters-of-America is a diversion. Let’s get back to the heart of the matter: what choice will our government make – terrorist trials in civilian courts or military tribunals? 

- Sarah Palin 

No matter what the solution will be, the mindset of the Obama administration remains the same: the acts of the terrorists are considered acts of crime, not of war.  So the choice is, I fear, quite obvious.

Good luck, Miss America

This year's Miss America competition is set to take place tonight, which means the current Miss America, Katie Stam, will have to relinquishing her crown.  Last year's competition ended with a milestone in which Miss Stam became the first Hoosier to be crowned Miss America, and with what I know about her, I'm proud to call her a fellow Hoosier.  I also have to say starting tomorrow, it'll be a little hard to get used to the fact that Miss America and I will no longer have something in common:  that we're both Missouri Synod Lutherans!

I wish Miss Stam all the best in her future endeavors, and of course, may the best girl become the next Miss America.

The agenda rolls on

In light of the President's State of the Union address, it's no surprise to me to hear these two accounts.  First, there's the news of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) passing a resolution requiring businesses to include the estimated amount of damage they would supposedly cause by emitting carbon dioxide.  The Chicken Little Army (CLA) continues on in their crusade of hysteria (much thanks to cbullitt for the heads up, and by the way, a happy birthday to him).

The second piece of news involves ObamaCare.  Despite the fact Nancy Pelosi announced she didn't have the votes to pass the Senate version of the egregious health care overhaul, the Speaker of the House, echoing the determined progressive President Obama, has vowed they will get ObamaCare passed.  The majority of the American people are opposed to the ObamaCare bill, but that certainly doesn't seem to stop the leaders of the most unpopular Congress in American history.  What else is new?

In any case, what this should do for anybody opposed to the Obama administration and the Democrat leadership in Congress is serve as motivation as we get ready for round two of our fight against the progressives in America and ultimately for the primary and general elections this year.  We've stopped them in their tracks on many fronts, and we can do it again and much more.

The latest from Sarah: The Credibility Gap

On Fox News, Sarah Palin described President Obama's State of the Union address adequately in one word: lecture.  In her latest Facebook note from yesterday, she spoke in greater detail:

The Credibility Gap

While I don’t wish to speak too harshly about President Obama’s state of the union address, we live in challenging times that call for candor. I call them as I see them, and I hope my frank assessment will be taken as an honest effort to move this conversation forward.

Last night, the president spoke of the “credibility gap” between the public’s expectations of their leaders and what those leaders actually deliver. “Credibility gap” is a good way to describe the chasm between rhetoric and reality in the president’s address. The contradictions seemed endless.

He called for Democrats and Republicans to “work through our differences,” but last year he dismissed any notion of bipartisanship when he smugly told Republicans, “I won.”

He talked like a Washington “outsider,” but he runs Washington! He’s had everything any president could ask for – an overwhelming majority in Congress and a fawning press corps that feels tingles every time he speaks. There was nothing preventing him from pursuing “common sense” solutions all along. He didn’t pursue them because they weren’t his priorities, and he spent his speech blaming Republicans for the problems caused by his own policies.

To all Illinois Republicans:

On February 2nd, you will have the opportunity to vote for either Congressman Mark Kirk or Patrick Hughes in your state primary election.  I have a few questions to ask of you:

1. Are you enraged at what the Democrats in Washington (including your Senator, Roland Burris) have been doing for more than a year?
2. Are you frustrated with the actions of Republicans in Washington?
3. Do you wish for a candidate whose stances are compatible with your own?

If the answer to all three of these questions is yes, then I believe there is a candidate you can vote for on February 2nd: Patrick Hughes.  Now I have more questions to ask of you concerning the issues:

1. Did you support the Cap and Trade bill passed in the House last year?
2. Do you support gun control?
3. Are you pro-abortion?
4. Did you oppose the Iraq War surge passed by Congress in 2007?
5. Do you oppose the traditional definition of marriage?

If your answer to all of these questions is no, then your choice is quite obvious, as Mark Kirk supported Cap and Trade (one of eight House Republicans to do so), opposes the 2nd Amendment, is no friend of pro-lifers, opposed what turned out to be a successful strategy in Iraq and opposes the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman.  Patrick Hughes is the exact opposite of Congressman Kirk on these issues and more.

Another thing to consider:  As you recall in the second of the first round of questions I had, I asked if you're frustrated with the actions of Republicans in Washington.  Again, if your answer was yes, you should know that the Republican establishment is supporting Mark Kirk's bid.  Does that frustrate you?

A final note: If you believe Patrick Hughes doesn't have a chance against Mark Kirk or believe he doesn't stand a chance against Roland Burris or whomever the Democrats nominate, don't let it stop you.  Patrick Hughes is worth voting for, especially in this upcoming election.  If you want a true conservative Republican representing you in Washington, I have no doubt Patrick Hughes is that man.  When you go to the voting booths to cast your vote for the Republican nominee for the United States Senate, I ask you all to cast your vote for Patrick Hughes.

The latest from Sarah: The double standard of women's right s groups

In her latest Facebook post, Sarah Palin is aiming at the double standards of women's rights groups over an expected Super Bowl ad:

Women's Rights Groups: Your Double Standard is Showing

Women’s Rights groups, like NOW, commendably call out advertisers and networks for airing sexist and demeaning portrayals of women that lead to young women’s diminished self-esteem and acceptance of roles as mere sexed-up objects.

What a ridiculous situation they’re getting themselves into now with their protest of CBS airing a pro-life ad during the upcoming Super Bowl game. The ad will feature Heisman trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mom, and they’ll speak to the sanctity of life and the beautiful potential within every innocent child as Mrs. Tebow acknowledges her choice to give Tim life, despite less than ideal circumstances. Messages like this empower women! This speaks to the strength and commitment and nurturing spirit within women. The message says everything positive and nothing negative about the power of women – and life. Evidently, some women’s rights groups like NOW do not like that message.

NOW is looking at the pro-life issue backwards. Women should be reminded that they are strong enough and smart enough to make decisions that allow for career and educational opportunities while still giving their babies a chance at life. In my own home, my daughter Bristol has also been challenged by pro-abortion “women’s rights” groups who don’t agree with her decision to have her baby, nor do they like the abstinence message which she articulated as her personal commitment. NOW could gain ground and credibility with everyday Americans, thus allowing their pro-women message to be heard by more than just their ardent supporters, if they made wiser decisions regarding which battles to pick. They should call attention to and embrace the Tebow’s message, instead of covertly and overtly disrespecting what Mrs. Tebow, Bristol, and millions of other women have chosen to do (in less than ideal circumstances). 

My message to these groups who are inexplicably offended by a pro-woman, pro-child, pro-life message airing during the Super Bowl: please concentrate on empowering women, help with efforts to prevent unexpected pregnancies, stay consistent with your message that for too long women have been made to feel like sex objects in our “modern” culture and that we can expect better in 2010. But don’t let your double standard glare so vividly as to undo some of the good to which you could contribute.

And CBS: just do the right thing. Don’t cave. Have the backbone to run the ad.

To the Tebows: thank you. America is listening. We appreciate you.

- Sarah Palin 

The hypocrisy of women's rights groups like NOW (as with most of the rest of the Left) obviously knows no bounds.  I look forward to seeing the ad when I watch the Super Bowl February 7th.  Also, while I'm not a fan of any one NFL team, I am rooting for the Colts to beat the Saints.  Go Colts!

On Sarah Palin's endorsement of John McCain

Amongst fans of Sarah Palin, the recent news of her endorsement of Senator John McCain for re-election to the Senate has obviously sparked much heated debate.  Critics are unhappy because of the fact John McCain is not as much to the Right as we would like; his record on illegal immigration, campaign finance, the Second Amendment (to a degree), TARP and other issues confirm as much.  Supporters (most, if not all), while not #1 fans of Senator McCain themselves, applaud Governor Palin for her loyalty to her former running mate and for keeping her word.

I, for one, applaud Sarah Palin's decision.

As much as I disagree with John McCain on the issues mentioned, there are two major issues the Senator and I are compatible on: he has been a strong opponent of ObamaCare and remains a stalwart supporter of the War on Terror, and they are also the issues cited by Sarah Palin in her explanation for endorsing his re-election bid.  Another important component is that the former Alaska governor apparently gave her word to support John McCain and is keeping her word; we're talking about a matter of principle that makes the following of the lesser of two evils irrelevant.  A third component is her loyalty.  It was Senator McCain who chose Sarah in 2008 to be her running mate, and it is Senator McCain who has been standing up for her repeatedly since.  To expect less than a reciprocal amount of support from the Governor, especially with her high regard of Senator McCain as a war hero, goes against everything we've come to love about Sarah Palin.

For those critics I've mentioned, their reaction may be a feign of shock, but frankly, what I have written is my honest opinion of her endorsement.  The guys at both Conservatives4Palin and at Texas for Sarah Palin have written extensively on the matter (and I mean EX-TEN-S-I-V-E-LY), doing a much better job articulating their opinion of the endorsement than I do.

A final note: Sarah herself has gone so far to say if her political career comes to an early end because of her endorsement, so be it.  Personally, I admire her all the more because of it.

Mike Pence won't run for the Senate

There was talk quite recently about Indiana Congressman Mike Pence possibly throwing his hat into the ring that is this year's Republican primary election for the U.S. Senate seat held by Evan Bayh.  Today, it was announced that Congressman Pence will not be seeking a run for the Senate.

As I wrote in the comments section of the blog post I've linked to, I'm personally relieved Congressman Pence won't be running for three reasons:

1. Congressman Pence's position in the House amongst the Republicans is a key position.  When the GOP regain the majority in 2011, he stands in good position to guide the majority back to the conservative foundation it has spoken of and campaigned on.
2. Congressman Pence's entry would have been one more entry into what has become something of a zoo, as primary elections in Indiana go.  Already, in this primary, at least five and maybe as many as seven candidates are in the running, and most (if not all) are regarded as good candidates.
3. The candidate I'm supporting (Marlin Stutzman) is a good candidate who I believe will make a good U.S. Senator.

The blog post I've linked to also mentions Congressman Pence will seriously consider a run for President in 2012, but since that's too early, I'll wait quite a while before going into that topic.

Speaking of candidates in the election, those who've been reading this blog will recall I haven't anything about there being five to seven candidates in this primary.  Well, I can tell you for sure a doctor from Leesburg, Tom Haney, has started his campaign for the Senate and has a website.  I've also heard of two other names who've either started their own runs or are rumored to do so.  Since I don't know enough, I won't mention either of their names.  In any event, I wish Dr. Haney good luck with his campaign.

The latest from Sarah: Listen up, Mr. President!

Sarah Palin wrote in her latest Facebook note yesterday on the need for President Obama to listen to the American people:

Mr. President: Please Try, "I'm Listening, People," Instead of "Listen Up, People!"

We’ve now seen three landslide Republican victories in three states that President Obama carried in 2008. From the tea parties to the town halls to the Massachusetts Miracle, Americans have tried to make their opposition to Washington’s big government agenda loud and clear. But the President has decided that this current discontent isn’t his fault, it’s ours. He seems to think we just don’t understand what’s going on because he hasn’t had the chance – in his 411 speeches and 158 interviewslast year – to adequately explain his policies to us.

Instead of sensibly telling the American people, “I’m listening,” the president is saying, “Listen up, people!” This approach is precisely the reason people are upset with Washington. Americans understand the president’s policies. We just don’t agree with them. But the president has refused to shift focus and come around to the center from the far left. Instead he and his old campaign advisers are regrouping to put a new spin on the same old agenda for 2010. 

Americans aren’t looking for more political strategists. We’re looking for real leadership that listens and delivers results. The president’s former campaign adviser is now calling on supporters to “get on the same page,” but what’s on that page? He claims that the president is “resolved” to “keep fighting for” his agenda, but we’ve already seen what that government-growth agenda involves, and frankly the hype doesn’t give us much hope. Real health care reform requires a free market approach; real job creation involves incentivizing, not punishing, the job-creators; reining in the “big banks” means ending bailouts; and stopping “the undue influence of lobbyists” means not cutting deals with them behind closed doors. 

From Sarah: On Friendship Circle and the President's energy policy

I've been lax somewhat on mentioning the latest Facebook posts from Sarah Palin, so here is one from this past Sunday in which she wrote about a group called Friendship Circle:

Congratulations, Friendship Circle!

Congratulations to Friendship Circle for being a Chase Community Giving award recipient! Friendship Circle is a beautiful non-profit organization that creates meaningful friendships between children who have special needs and teenage volunteers. In Michigan, the Friendship Circle has a beautiful one-of-a-kind center called LifeTown. Its main feature is a life-like village with all kinds of realistic stores for individuals who have special needs where they can be prepared to integrate into society and where thousands of volunteers can learn to appreciate the beauty of these special souls. You can learn more about Friendship Circle and support their work by visiting their website. You can also view a wonderful video about them here. 

- Sarah Palin 

Mrs. Palin also wrote Sunday about the President's policy on energy:

Now isn't that interesting, chapter 31

If we don't do something now, it'll be too late!  The end of the world will be coming!  We have stop this climate change!  This global warming!!  Talk about hysteria!  Proponents of man-made global warming have been claiming something needs to be done, and have also cited facts and figures to back them up.  Well, not always, as it turns out.

Bioethicist Wesley J. Smith has written a post at his blog Secondhand Smoke about a UN scientist admitting there was nothing to back up an absurd claim about the glaciers on the Himalayas melting completely by 2035.  The scientist's motivation was simple: to put political pressure on world leaders.  Now isn't that interesting.

Mr. Smith concluded in his blog post about this latest episode:

What is ironic here–and in other matters that touch on science covered at SHS, such as embryonic stem cell research and human cloning (the Hwang cloning fraud, etc.) –is that science isn’t being undermined by “religion” or “deniers” or “creationists,” but supposed scientists.  The time has come for heads to roll.

Ironic, yes; surprising, no.  These scientists, at the UN, in East Anglia, at NASA and elsewhere, see an agenda and are pursuing it.  Even if the facts and figures are fudged, falsified or outright made up, this Chicken Little Army (CLA) is willing to use any means to achieve their ends.  Only continued vigilance and education on the matter of our environment will stop them in my opinion.  Only then, I believe, will heads start rolling.

Watch The Revolutionary Holocaust

Glenn Beck has been talking for a while on his TV show about a documentary he's produced that looks at the origins of progressive thinking.  The Revolutionary Holocaust will be starting at 5 pm tonight (yes, I know it's less than a half-hour from now) and if you have the Fox News Channel, I hope you watch it.  Sarah Palin also a bit to say about the upcoming documentary:

Be sure to watch Beck’s “Revolutionary Holocaust” documentary today

Please be sure to catch Glenn Beck’s documentary today (Friday, January 22nd) at 5pm ET on the Fox News Channel. You can learn more about it and watch a preview of it here. The documentary will trace the history of communism and socialism and continue Beck’s study of the roots of the progressive movement in our country. It promises to be an eye-opener for many of us.

- Sarah Palin 

I have to confess, though, I don't expect my own eyes to be opened by this documentary.  Unlike a lot of other people, I am aware of the crimes committed by Stalin, Mao, Che, Castro, Lenin, Khrushchev, Ho Chi Minh and many others.  Why this isn't taught in schools is itself a crime, in my opinion.  Watch The Revolutionary Holocaust.

The latest from Sarah: Talking About Life Today

Sarah Palin and her daughter, Bristol, are to appear on Oprah Winfrey's show today, and one of the topics to be discussed will be about choosing life:

Talking About Life Today

In light of today’s March for Life in D.C., which promotes a positive, peaceful, hopeful message concerning the sanctity of life, Bristol and I are being interviewed by Oprah Winfrey to talk about choosing life. The show airs today, and you can check your local listings for details.

- Sarah Palin 

And so, there's another reason to watch Oprah.  Speaking of choosing life, both Sarah and Bristol have unsurprisingly been criticized for their decision to talk about choosing life, as noted by Josh Painter at Texas for Sarah Palin.  Frankly, there's nothing anybody in the Palin family can possibly do that could receive approval from the Left.  In this case, it makes the Left look exactly like the heartless people they are.

Survivors of Roe v. Wade

During a March for Life rally years ago, I first heard the term which is the title of this post.  Those born after January 22nd, 1973 were born because their parent(s) specifically chose life.  I know three such survivors personally.

The first survivor I speak of was born in 2006.  His parents and grandparents were there for the blessed event, while his uncle waited anxiously for news.  The news arrived at 12:30 am: a healthy baby boy.  That baby boy is a survivor of Roe v. Wade.

The second survivor was born in 1985.  Her father was scheduled to paint the interior of a filmmaker's office at a Hollywood studio, but had to postpone that morning upon learning his wife was going into labor.  He became the father of a healthy baby girl.  That baby girl is a survivor of Roe v. Wade.

The third survivor was born in 1983.  His birth wasn't expected until well into June, but it just goes to show doctors' predictions aren't always on the money.  Just before the month of June began, a healthy baby boy was born at 9:20 pm.  That baby boy is a survivor of Roe v. Wade.

In case you're wondering who these three survivors are, the first survivor is my nephew.  The second survivor is my sister (my nephew's mother) and the third survivor is me.  Our parents and my nephew's parents chose life for their children, and it's because of those decisions that the three of us are survivors of Roe v. Wade.  Had the choice been otherwise, we wouldn't be here, and you wouldn't be reading this very blog post.  I personally cannot thank God enough for the fact my mother and my sister chose life.

Grassroots News Minute (January 22nd)

Saying NO to smoking...ban

The inner libertarian in me is out in full force to convey outrage at what could be a reality here in Indiana: a statewide smoking ban.

Currently in the state House of Representatives, it is said to still have to go through a full committee in the House, but I certainly hope this latest attempt fails.  It doesn't matter whether you or I am a fan of smoking or not; it doesn't matter whether smoking is healthy or not.  If a person wants to light up, I don't have any objections.  Furthermore, this is one of many areas where I don't believe government should be dictating to individuals here.

I've become much more of an ardent opponent to government being a nanny state, and hopefully, this attempt by my state's government will fail once again.

The latest from Sarah: Marching for a Beautiful Life

For her latest Facebook note, Sarah Palin writes about the upcoming National March for Life tomorrow in Washington:

Marching for a Beautiful Life

Tomorrow the 37th annual March for Life will occur in Washington, D.C. January is a tough month to schedule a march in Washington, but every year hundreds of thousands of everyday Americans from across our nation brave the cold weather on the anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade decision to bear a positive witness to the culture of life. 

In the years following Roe, we were told that the issue was no longer open for debate and that we should get over it and move on. But we couldn’t get over the stirrings of our conscience or move on from an issue that cuts to the heart of who we are as a nation. Affirming the dignity and worth of every innocent human life and defending the defenseless are fundamental American values. With that in mind, this peaceful, hopeful grassroots crowd of individuals, families and students comes to our capital every year to remind us that every innocent life is beautiful, precious and full of potential. These warrior souls come to show their dedication to the weakest among us: those with special needs, women without anyone to turn to, and children without a voice. They run the helpful pregnancy resource centers, the counseling hotlines, the foster care facilities, the adoption services, and countless other outreach programs that offer compassionate assistance and friendship to women who are struggling. I know from experience the joy and blessings that come from embracing life, and I know how important their work is in helping women choose life despite less than ideal circumstances.

The pro-life movement is pro-women, and it empowers women with the message that we are strong enough and smart enough to be able to pursue education, vocations and avocations while giving life to a child. This movement is largely run by women. In fact, many of the earliest leaders of the women’s rights movement were pro-life – women like Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Alice Paul, the author of the original Equal Rights Amendment in 1923, who said, “Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women.” Today, more and more young women agree with these feminist foremothers, for they know in their hearts that the culture of life empowers women by offering them real choices. Unfortunately, rather than portray this positive message, the media often focuses on divisions among Americans on this issue. But this annual rally is not about anger and controversy; it’s about a huge grassroots effort to make our voices heard in support of women and their children.

Though I can’t be in Washington tomorrow, my heart is with the marchers. Those of us who can’t be there can still join them online at the Virtual March for Life. Please follow the link and join the tens of thousands of your fellow Americans who are already marching on line. Together we can bear witness to the beauty and blessings of the culture of life.

- Sarah Palin 

My heart will be with the pro-lifers in D.C., too, as I won't be able to attend.  I will, however, be attending another March for Life, in Fort Wayne, Indiana, on the 30th of this month.  I'll let you know how it turned out.

Why am I not surprised?

So often these days in Washington politics, I come across breaking news from the White House or the Congress and my reaction is that simple rhetorical question which happens to be the title of this post.  The latest example of my recurring reaction has to do with the decision of the Democrats in Congress and the Obama administration to continue trying to shove ObamaCare down our throats.

Rodan at The Blogmocracy has a great post on this update, and the first paragraph of his post describes so well the mindset of the Democrats:

This is a blatant example of the elitist view of the Tranzi Progressive Movement, which currently controls the government. The totalitarian trio of  Neo-Fascist Nancy Pelosi, Neo-Maoist Barack Hussein Obama and Buffoon Harry Reid are showing a disdain for the public. They could care less about what the loss in Massachusetts portends for their party. In their minds the American Public don’t know what is good for them.

The loss of two gubernatorial elections in Virginia (a fairly red state, politically speaking) and New Jersey (almost as politically blue as blue can get), the near loss of what was thought a safe Congressional seat in upstate New York and now the loss of a Senate election in Massachusetts (the epitome of political blue in America today), and what do the President and the leadership in both houses of Congress do?  They go ahead with their progressive agenda anyway.  As rhetorical as it sounds, why am I not surprised?

Will the rising tide of election victories in November for conservatives, libertarians, 9/12'ers, Tea Partiers and the like convince President Obama to drop his progressive agenda starting in January 2011?  The way these progressives in Washington are going right now, it seems unlikely.  Fine with me, I look forward to an presidential repeat of 1980 myself.

Conan will be out, Leno will go back in

A deal was reached earlier today between NBC and Conan O'Brien in which the departing Tonight Show host will get $45 million for his exit from the show, allowing Jay Leno to return to The Tonight Show.

Despite the fact O'Brien got a huge severance package from NBC, it doesn't change the fact the network gave him a raw deal, which can be traced to their making the mistake of putting Jay Leno in a primetime slot just to keep him in their employ.  They should've let Leno go if the show was that big of a disaster, both with the critics and in the ratings.

I can say from having seen an episode of The Jay Leno Show, it was no different than The Tonight Show, and based on what I've seen of both O'Brien and Leno, O'Brien was the funnier of the two.  O'Brien's last episode as host of The Tonight Show will air Friday night, followed by NBC giving full coverage of the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, and then Leno will resume hosting on March 1st.  The odds are I won't be tuning in to NBC at 11:35 pm anytime after March 1st; to watch it then would benefit a network trying to bail themselves out of their mistakes (kinda like some politicians in Washington, wouldn't you say?).

What Conan O'Brien will be doing in the near future is unknown, but I don't doubt when he returns to television, it will be received with large fanfare.

The latest from Sarah: Ride the Tide with Commonsense Candidates!

Here's the latest from Sarah Palin on Facebook:

Ride the Tide with Commonsense Candidates!

I want to again thank the good people of Massachusetts for propelling a commonsense, independent agenda forward! May the working man and woman feel empowered now more than ever to get involved in their government, and let's put this great country on the right track. 

The past year continues to offer the promise of commonsense government in so many areas. There are steps we can all take to get there, one of which is to support candidates who promise to fight for the people and against politics as usual. I'm excited to get out and help elect candidates who will bring those principles to our nation's towns, state houses, and directly to Washington D.C. We are already making plans to support the candidates our nation needs to make a difference and speak for everyday Americans. 

I look forward to helping Governors like Rick Perry in Texas, Representatives like Michele Bachmann in Minnesota, and heroes and statesmen like Senator John McCain. We will support these candidates and others so that they can continue to fight for our American values. 

The special election yesterday in Massachusetts was truly amazing. It is a clear indication of things to come and a demonstration of the momentum we all share in the fight for the values and policies that will get our country back to work. The commonsense conservative principles of liberty and fiscal responsibility are on the rise, and that's why I'm going out and campaigning as hard as I can to make a difference. I can't wait to join all of you in supporting these great candidates and many more over the coming months. 

In the meantime, visit the websites of Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, and John McCain. And join us as we embark on America's journey to November! 

- Sarah Palin 

The Trial of Geert Wilders: A Trial of Free Speech

Today, the trial of Dutch statesman and parliamentarian Geert Wilders began in Amsterdam.  Charged with inciting hatred against Muslims, it started with a pre-trial hearing in which Mr. Wilders gave a passionate defense.  As Pamela Geller records at Atlas Shrugs, the prosecution sought to call only Mr. Wilders as a witness, which his lawyer objected.  Mr. Wilders, meanwhile, sought to call a number of witnesses, including Andrew Bostom, Robert Spencer and the man who murdered Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh.

The prosecution wishes a downsizing of the list, and the judges in the case will announce a decision on Feb. 3rd.

Very simply put, the fact Geert Wilders is on trial for supposedly inciting hatred against Muslims, travesty that it is, shows this is more than just a Dutch statesman on trial, but freedom of speech in Europe (and throughout the world) is on trial as well.  The International Free Press Society has a collection of remarks from a number of well known individuals whose two cents on the matters here are of great value, and who describe much better than I do what this trial is truly all about.

Geert Wilders continues to fight the good fight for freedom of speech in Europe by fighting the Islamization of Europe.  May he continue to fight that good fight, and may we here in America take note of what is happening an ocean away.

Mr. Brown is going to Washington

This is the first major election in 2010, and it is an election that can easily put ObamaCare and really the whole of the Obama administration's agenda in jeopardy.  In Massachusetts, for the first time in nearly forty years, a Republican candidate, Scott Brown, has defeated the Democratic candidate, Martha Coakley, in a special election for the United States Senate seat held by Ted Kennedy until his death last year.

Sarah Palin, in her latest Facebook note, congratulates the now Senator-elect:

Mr. Brown Goes to Washington... In a Pick-up Truck, No Less!

Congratulations to the new Senator-elect from Massachusetts! Scott Brown’s victory proves that the desire for real solutions transcends notions of “blue state” and “red state”. Americans agree that we need to hold our politicians accountable and bring common sense to D.C.

Recent elections have taught us that when a party in power loses its way, the American people will hold them accountable at the ballot box. Today under the Democrats, government spending is up nearly 23 percent and unemployment is higher than it’s been in a quarter of a century. For the past year they’ve built a record of broken promises, fat cat bailouts, closed-door meetings with lobbyists, sweetheart deals for corporate cronies, and midnight votes on weekends for major legislation that wasn’t even read. The good citizens of Massachusetts reminded Democrats not to take them for granted.

Update on Rifqa

A surprising turn of events in the case of Rifqa Bary has been reported on today.  In exchange for a guilty verdict on being “unruly”, Rifqa won't have to go back to her parents.  The family will also agree to go to counseling.

Pamela Geller has more on the update at Atlas Shrugs, as does Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch.  This was one update I didn't expect.  I still remain suspicious of Rifqa's parents and the Islamic community (particularly CAIR) and worry what could happen.

Ms. Geller's blog post also features an analysis from a frequent commenter that boils down to waiting until the court records are made public before we can know for sure what the details are.  If it does boil down to just Rifqa not having to go back to her parents, then I say thank God.  Thank God Rifqa will be safe.

Protesting Planned Parenthood

Earlier this month, I wrote about a scheduled protest at the location of Planned Parenthood's newest abortion clinic in Houston, the largest such clinic in America.  The protest was held yesterday.

Jill Stanek has the info on the protest, which was covered by local media and at the national level by Fox News.  It was said as many as 5,000 people showed up to protest the new clinic, while a couple dozen pro-abortion counter-protestors were there.

I'm glad to hear thousands showed up to protest the nefarious Planned Parenthood.  This is about the sanctity of life, especially the sanctity of unborn life.

The latest from Sarah: Remembering MLK

With today being the observation of Martin Luther King Day, Sarah Palin wrote in her latest Facebook note about Martin Luther King:

Celebrating the Life of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Tomorrow, America honors the memory of one of our greatest – Martin Luther King, Jr. He used his gifts and talents in selfless, mighty ways to mobilize efforts against racial discrimination and is deserving of our honor.

Please take a moment to tell your children about this great man. He fought for liberty and equality because he knew they were God-given and he knew that no government should be empowered to thwart our freedom. King summarized his mission when stating that no one should be judged based on skin color, but by the content of one's character.

Seeming to have a foreboding notion of how quickly life passes, he did not waste time on pettiness. He believed that “the quality, not the longevity, of one’s life is what is important.”

May our children follow in the footsteps of giants like King, who sincerely respected equality.

- Sarah Palin

“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.” – MLK 

Waiting for 24

Tonight is the night!  “Day” 8 of one of the best shows currently running, 24, premieres tonight on FOX.  Jack Bauer is now in New York, and based on the commercials I've seen today, it looks real good.  With the eighth season underway, I'm certainly wondering whether this will be the show's last.  So far as I know, Kiefer Sutherland is contracted for up to the eighth season as Jack Bauer, and there was some talk last year about this upcoming season being the last, but I have no idea.

Well, I'll sign off and await the return of Jack Bauer.

The latest from Sarah: To her union brothers and sisters

Sarah Palin's latest Facebook note is addressed to all hard-working union members who support the free market and America:

Union Brothers and Sisters: Your Leadership Doesn’t Get It – You Deserve Better

In the latest to come out of D.C.’s backroom health care deals, President Obama yesterday cut a doozy of a deal with labor union bosses. The fed’s health care plan must be so bad that even union bosses had to go to D.C. to say they wanted out. So... to keep their support for a flawed plan they got an exemption to provisions in the deal that others did not. Small business owners, our families running America’s mom & pops, did not get this deal. Ask yourself: why did union bosses get special treatment? And when did our country’s unions get on the wrong track with moves like this that hurt their good members and put them in such a bad light?

Good hard-working, pro-free-market, pro-America union members should join in opposition to their union bosses’ sweetheart deal. Coming from a union background and living in a world with many union memberships among my family and friends, I know that average members will be embarrassed by their bosses’ deal, which basically only delays the heavy tax on their health care plans until 2018 and in the meantime unfairly leaves many fellow Americans in a much less “enviable” position.

Union members don’t want to stick it to non-union colleagues in the private and public sector. Their union leadership is not helping them in the long run, they’re certainly not helping the rest of America, and unfortunately some union bosses are making all union members look bad, selfish, and anti-business with this Big Government backroom deal. 

I know that ordinary union members don’t want to hurt their fellow Americans, just as ordinary Nebraskans didn’t want to stick it to the rest of the country with a sweetheart deal on Medicaid subsidies. I urge union members to make their voices heard. Please, call your leadership – don’t put up with these special-interest politics – tell them to fight for all Americans who want common sense health care reform, not this flawed boondoggle. 

 - Sarah Palin

I hope they will answer the call.

Grassroots News Minute (January 15th)

Branded insensitive

With our attention focused to a great extent on Haiti, I began wondering how long it would be before somebody would start criticizing somebody else for any insensitive comments.  It's already begun.

Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson are now being subjected to a wave of criticism over comments they've made about the situation in Haiti.  Mr. Limbaugh's comments were about the disaster playing into President Obama's hands and would be used to score political points, while Mr. Robertson's comments were about the leaders of Haiti supposedly making a deal with the devil when it was still a French colony.  Needless to say, their comments are now branded as insensitive.  My problem, however, is not with either Rush Limbaugh's or Pat Robertson's comments.

With the problems the President has been having lately (particularly ObamaCare and low approval ratings), a tragic disaster could easily be used by the President to try and divert attention away from his problems (and his policies), as well as perhaps improve his approval rating; in other words, not letting a crisis go to waste.  What Mr. Limbaugh said wasn't out of line, and it wasn't insensitive in my opinion; it was just brutally honest.

As for Mr. Robertson's comments, it boils down to the man claiming a historical event took place.  Whether it's true or not, I haven't the slightest idea, but what his critics have overlooked in their criticisms is the fact that Mr. Robertson called for prayers for the Haitian people and showed optimism that something good may come from the tragedy.  Does that sound insensitive to you?

As far as insensitive goes, I would contend James Ridgeway at the leftist publication Mother Jones has shown insensitivity in regards to what just happened in Haiti; he criticized the policies of the junior Bush administration as being responsible for “screwing” Haiti in 2004.  Ridgeway used his article to basically say it's our fault Haiti is in such bad shape; that sounds insensitive to me.

The latest from Sarah: On the Tragedy in Haiti

Here's Sarah Palin's latest Facebook note:

On the Tragedy in Haiti 

Todd and I join the world in extending our thoughts and prayers to the victims and families of those so impacted by the earthquake in Haiti. Our hearts are with the people of Haiti as they rebuild their country. Join us in donating to the American Red Cross relief effort. To assist those in need, consider sending a $10 donation to the Red Cross by texting 'Haiti' to 90999. Click here for details. 

- Sarah Palin

What happened in Haiti is nothing short of catastrophic, and the loss of life, while not yet known, is nothing short of horrific.  My thoughts are with them.  To those who lost their lives in the earthquake, may you rest in peace.

Shortchanging The Tonight Show

It looks like at NBC, Conan O'Brien has thrown down the gauntlet in response to the network's decision to try and save a show that may not be worth saving, in my opinion.

After Jay Leno left The Tonight Show in May of last year, the reins went to Conan O'Brien, but NBC gave the go ahead for Leno to have his own primetime show.  Now, NBC has decided to move The Jay Leno Show to the 11:35 p.m. time slot, which has always belonged to The Tonight Show.  As for The Tonight Show, NBC will air it at 12:05 a.m., and in response, Conan O'Brien has announced he will not follow The Jay Leno Show.  It is now possible that Jay Leno may even end up coming back to host The Tonight Show.

The decision by NBC to move The Jay Leno Show to 11:35 is a bad move on the part of the network.  It was one thing for NBC to try and keep a comic talent like Jay Leno on the air, but if his show is a failure, NBC should simply drop the ax on it.  To try and keep Leno on the air at the expense of The Tonight Show is both unfair and wrong.  It's O'Brien's turn to host this television institution, and NBC is not giving him the opportunity.  Whether NBC will get its act together, I don't know.  

Sarah Palin, CPAC, and Lessons in Blogging

The decision of Sarah Palin to not attend this year's CPAC has sparked a minor spat between bloggers, and one of them is fellow Blogs 4 Palin member Josh Painter.

For reasons I don't totally know, Sarah Palin decided to decline an offer to speak at the American Conservative Union (ACU)'s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) this year, opting instead to speak at this year's Southern Republican Leadership Conference (SRLC).  The opinion held by bloggers on the political Right of both the CPAC and David Keene, the head of the ACU, is split down the middle, as is the judgment on Governor Palin's declining to speak at the CPAC.

Both Josh Painter and the bloggers at Conservatives4Palin have been critical of David Keene, the ACU and the CPAC, and thus applauded Governor Palin's decision, while Dan Riehl of Riehl World View has been critical of Mr. Painter and Conservatives4Palin for their criticisms of the ACU and CPAC.

Not wanting any blogwar with Mr. Riehl, Mr. Painter has written all he intends to say with a blog post at Texas for Sarah Palin titled “Lessons In Blogging”.  As far as I'm concerned, I stand in solidarity with the people at Texas for Sarah Palin and Conservatives4Palin.  David Keene's previous attacks on Sarah Palin were way off and haven't been forgotten, and Dan Riehl's criticisms of her supporters are equally way off.  That's all I have to say on the matter.

Correction (4:31 PM EST): I haven't come across any direct criticism by Dan Riehl of Sarah Palin over her decision not to speak at this year's CPAC, and I have omitted any such claim in this blog post.  My apologies for the error.

60 Minutes' hatchet job on Sarah Palin (What else is new?)

I don't normally watch 60 Minutes.  I don't think much at all of the show, except occasionally (and I mean occasionally) the commentary by Andy Rooney.  The reporting on 60 Minutes has always left something to be desired, and it thus comes as no surprise to hear of the newsmagazine's hit job on Sarah Palin.

The people at 60 Minutes focused their “reporting” on a new book about last year's Presidential election, with the majority of their coverage on Sarah Palin, getting help in their hit job from the writers of this new book and Steve Schmidt, a McCain campaign strategist who has since become one of the leading hatchet men against Governor Palin.  John Ziegler has more details in an editorial on his website.

Like I said, I don't normally watch 60 Minutes, and I didn't see last night's “reporting”, but I frankly don't doubt how it turned out.  The snippets I have seen have proven to me what the people at 60 Minutes did last night was rehash the same horse manure brought up and disproven in the past.  It wasn't worth my time to watch it, and I'm glad I put it to better use.

A very good reason to watch Fox News:

Sarah Palin will be a regular contributor.

She is not expected to have a regular series, but she will also have a series that runs from time to time, according to a blogger at The New York Times.  Glenn Beck was a good reason to watch Fox News for the past year; Sarah Palin being a regular contributor is a very good reason to watch the cable network that reports fair and balanced news.  Now I just have to keep an eye out for whenever she'll be on.

Arrivals and Departures

My brother came here from California for a visit last week (something he is able to do once a year usually), and today my dad and I saw him off at the airport for his return trip.  During the time we were waiting, it was noted how it is never as joyful when my brother as much as when he arrives.  Later on, just before he left to board the plane, I noted to my dad that the only departures I personally like are the ones I go on.

Seeing my brother off today made me realize how bittersweet it is every time I have had to depart from relatives I don't see often.  Every time I visit my grandmother in California, I never enjoy it when I have to leave for home.  As much as I look forward to head back home, I hate having to say goodbye to those who I'm close to.  But there's another aspect of my observation I realized.

When I said the only departures I like are the ones I go on, I was thinking at the time of going on flights.  It has been almost nineteen years since I last flew on an airplane (that's right, long before flying on an airplane became ever more of a hassle for passengers).  Every time I've been to an airport since April of 1991, it has always been either to see somebody arrive or to see somebody off.  My memories of being on airplanes are mostly pleasant; of course, this was well before 9/11 and the TSA being more scrutinizing.

Perhaps one of these days when I travel to the airport, it'll be a departure I like.  I hope my rambling about nothing didn't bore you too much.

Grassroots News Minute (January 8th)

Planning to protest Planned Parenthood

The most nefarious of the pro-abortion organizations, Planned Parenthood, is intending on opening what will be its largest abortion clinic in America in Houston, Texas.  But with the opening of this new abortion clinic, however, a number of pro-life groups and individuals will also be there to protest the grand opening of this place.

Penny Starr, writing for CNSNews.com, has an article on an organization known as The Call To Conscience, that is organizing the protest.  Among the people who will appear at this protest, scheduled for the 18th of this month, include Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Star Parker and Abby Johnson, a former director of a Planned Parenthood-operated clinic.

Because the protest is in Houston, I won't be able to attend the event, but if any of you reading this lives near the Houston area, please attend the event.  Planned Parenthood is to me the most nefarious of the pro-abortion groups in America because they're not in it for their personal beliefs.  They're in it to make money off of abortions being done in their clinics.  They're in the business of barbarity.

2 down, 58 (at least) to go

Two of the top Senate Democrats have now announced they will not seek re-election to their offices this November.  Senators Byron Dorgan of North Dakota and Chris Dodd of Connecticut issued announcements yesterday and early today.  Fellow Blogs 4 Palin member Josh Painter wrote about the announcements today at the website PoliticalLore.com.

Because both Senators voted to end cloture on and ultimately for the ObamaCare bill, their popularity with their constituents has fallen drastically.  Their numbers in candidate polls has also expectedly found them trailing their opponents by considerable margins.

This not only is unsurprising to me, it is welcome news, as I would like to see every single Democrat (and most Republicans) in the Senate removed from office.  What Byron Dorgan and Chris Dodd have done is spare themselves the humiliation of a landslide defeat.  Two down, and fifty-eight (Democrats) to go.

The latest from Sarah: It’s War, not a Crime Spree

Sarah Palin has written about the pre-9/11 approach President Obama and his administration in her latest Facebook note:

It’s War, not a Crime Spree

President Obama’s meeting with his top national security advisers does nothing to change the fact that his fundamental approach to terrorism is fatally flawed. We are at war with radical Islamic extremists and treating this threat as a law enforcement issue is dangerous for our nation’s security. That’s what happened in the 1990s and we saw the result on September 11, 2001. This is a war on terror not an “overseas contingency operation.” Acts of terrorism are just that, not “man caused disasters.” The system did not work. Abdulmutallab was a child of privilege radicalized and trained by organized jihadists, not an “isolated extremist” who traveled to a land of “crushing poverty.” He is an enemy of the United States, not just another criminal defendant.

It simply makes no sense to treat an al Qaeda-trained operative willing to die in the course of massacring hundreds of people as a common criminal. Reports indicate that Abdulmutallab stated there were many more like him in Yemen but that he stopped talking once he was read his Miranda rights. President Obama’s advisers lamely claim Abdulmutallab might be willing to agree to a plea bargain – pretty doubtful you can cut a deal with a suicide bomber. John Brennan, the President’s top counterterrorism adviser, bizarrely claimed “there are no downsides or upsides” to treating terrorists as enemy combatants. That is absurd. There is a very serious downside to treating them as criminals: terrorists invoke their “right” to remain silent and stop talking. Terrorists don’t tell us where they were trained, what they were trained in, who they were trained by, and who they were trained with. Giving foreign-born, foreign-trained terrorists the right to remain silent does nothing to keep Americans safe from terrorist threats. It only gives our enemies access to courtrooms where they can publicly grandstand, and to defense attorneys who can manipulate the legal process to gain access to classified information.

President Obama was right to change his policy and decide to send no more detainees to Yemen where they can be free to rejoin their war on America. Now he must back off his reckless plan to close Guantanamo, begin treating terrorists as wartime enemies not suspects alleged to have committed crimes, and recognize that the real nature of the terrorist threat requires a commander-in-chief, not a constitutional law professor. 

- Sarah Palin 

 

You said it, Governor.

The truth about Parker Griffith

Around Christmas time last year, a Democrat Congressman from Alabama, Parker Griffith, announced his intention to switch to the Republican Party, and the response largely was that of celebration.  I myself wrote about the switch and welcomed Congressman Griffith.

It turns out, however, Parker Griffith isn't all that different from his now former Democrat colleagues.  Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs wrote about this way back on Christmas Eve, and I've just now seen a blog post from the Alabama chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus dated even earlier, with info about the Congressman's record since being elected in 2008.

This seems to further prove that there is no such thing as a Blue Dog Democrat.  Best of luck to Les Phillip, Congressman Griffith's primary opponent in the 2010 election.

The Weblog Awards are off

The 2009 Weblog Awards have been cancelled, as announced on its website earlier today.  The reason cited is not enough resources available to handle all the voting.  I probably should've seen it coming myself with all the nominating of blogs for the finalist spots in each of the categories.  I must confess, I was pretty confident that I'd end up a finalist in the category of Best Small Blog this year, but oh well.

There is next year, and hopefully the people who run the awards will have the adequate resources to handle  all the voting for the 2010 Weblog Awards.  Best of luck to them.

High Noon in Massachusetts

With the death of Ted Kennedy last year, the state of Massachusetts has a special election set for the 19th of this month to decide who will succeed him in the Senate, and there is a Republican candidate currently seeking the seat, Scott Brown.

The most obvious implication of a Brown victory is the fact Harry Reid will lose his 60-seat majority in the Senate (with Cap-and-Trade & ObamaCare still at stake, this makes it important), and a possible implication of a Brown victory would be a forecast for the Democrats in November that spells electoral defeat for them, and electoral victory for 9/12'ers, Tea Partiers, conservatives and libertarians alike.

But, according to Michelle Malkin, what has the Republican Party done to help Scott Brown?  Hardly anything.  Mrs. Malkin has noted what groups like SEIU has done in trying to get Mr. Brown's opponent, Martha Coakley, elected, and yet the national Republicans have done very little to help their candidate (compared to what they did for Dede Scozzafava in New York, as Mrs. Malkin also notes).

I don't know what the hell is going on with Senator John Cornyn (head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee) or with Michael Steele, but if they really want to see President Obama, Harry Reid and the policies they advocate stopped, a good chance of that would be to actively support Scott Brown for the United States Senate; simply giving his campaign $50,000 isn't enough.

Fortunately, grassroots efforts have been in full swing for a while to help Mr. Brown and his campaign, and those efforts continue on.  One way to help is by making calls to people in Massachusetts.  As I understand it, you need to contact the campaign's field director, Brad Hansen, if you want to help by either calling the number (509) 595-4683 or e-mailing him at brad@brownforussenate.com.  He'll give you what you need to make the calls.

Noon is coming, so to speak, and it's time to act.

A Happy New Year (and a Happy 2010)

I hope everybody has had a good day today, and I hope this new year, 2010, will be a great year for all of you.

By the way, I hope you don't mind Kenny G.