Have You Read the Law?

Have You Read the Law?

Can't spell "textbook" without TX

Enjoy this major whiff by Newsweek's Barrett Sheridan in an attempt to marginalize Texas' chosen textbook standards. (Texas Cooks the Textbooks - NEWSWEEK's guide to the 10 silliest changes that will likely be in the new Texas textbook curriculum.) Read for yourself. The "10 silliest changes" sound reasonable to me. I wonder if Sheridan has ever heard of Pauline Kael.

Racism-mongering Dems ought to be ashamed

The number of Democrats who haven't taken the time to familiarize themselves with the AZ law before demonizing AZ is startling. Napolitano, Holder, others. They're demagogues. And this episode demonstrates (a) how little concern they have for being called on it by the Media and (b) how irresponsible, as public officials, they are.

Because plain talk leads to accountability . . .

MUST WATCH: Gov. Christie Destroys 'Thin-Skinned' Reporter | The FOX Nation

Posted using ShareThis

Stimulating home purchases. Not.

Since 2008, some $12.6 billion in credits have been shelled out to homebuyers. This program was supposed to end last Fall, but was extended until today based on the notion that it was providing a key pillar of support to the humbled housing market.

Which, frankly, is mildly true at best. Don't shed a tear for the loss of this program, Fools. The finance blog Calculated Risk put it best when writing, "This [credit] is obviously bad economics, but it must be good politics."

Since day one, there's been fairly widespread agreement from financial and economic experts that the housing credit would do little good. I'm not one to blanketly swear off all stimulus on the grounds that Uncle Sam can only break things. There have been well-thought-out forms of stimulus over the past two years. The housing credit just wasn't one of them. Here are five reasons why. . . .

The Death of a Stupid Stimulus

This Brit ain't Enquiring . . .

I don't know whether any of the The Enquirer's allegations of Obama infidelity are true (I hope they aren't, but know that Liberals' moral relativism is a tar pit); however, this 2008 British article linked at Drudge is hilarious in how Liberally slanted it is. Here are the first few lines of the story.

Barack Obama is the target of a shadowy smear campaign designed to derail his bid for the US Presidency by falsely claiming he had a close friendship with an attractive African-American female employee.

The whispers focus on a young woman who in 2004 was hired to work on his team for his bid to become a senator.

The woman was purportedly sidelined from her duties after Senator Obama’s wife, Michelle, became convinced that he had developed a personal friendship with her.

The allegations were initially circulated in August, just two weeks before the convention at which Obama finally beat his opponent for the Democratic Party nomination, Hillary Clinton.

The woman, now 33, vigorously denies the vicious and unsubstantiated gossip.

Emphasis mine.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1076695/Obama-hit-affair-smears-following-claims-attractive-aide-banned-wife.html#ixzz0mpaKdsF6

Informed consent by any other name . . .

"No exception for rape" blares the headline (("Oklahoma Abortion Law: No Exceptions, Even Rape")) regarding the passage of an informed consent law in Oklahoma. Why would there be an exception . . . if it is an innocent human life we're talking about?

And if you take the time to read the article, I'd be curious to know whether the young women who had suffered serial sexual abuse from her music teacher was encouraged to press charges against him? I doubt it. With proper counseling and full medical information maybe she would not have been into her 30s before she realized it "wasn't her fault" and she would feel zero regret, zero remorse for the abortion.