This'n'That; January 5th [Franken;reid;"The Letter";Limbaugh;Richardson;

Reid-A Candidate For Testicular Suspension Republicans will filibuster any attempt to seat Minnesota Democrat Al Franken when Congress convenes this week, Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn warned his Democratic colleagues last Friday. It was the latest salvo in the war of words touched off this week when Senate Majority Leader harry reid, D-Nev., suggested Franken was drawing near to clinching a victory — despite the fact that as many as 2,000 votes are uncounted and numerous legal challenges loom. "At this stage, it appears that Franken will be certified the winner by the State Canvassing Board,” a statement from reid’s office declared Tuesday. “We're keeping abreast of the situation and will make a decision with regard to Senate action at the appropriate point in the process." That statement drew a sharp rebuke from GOP leaders. “The American people will see right through harry reid’s crass partisan power grab,” says Ken Blackwell, who is a leading contender for the GOP chairmanship. “He wants to manufacture a filibuster-proof majority to push through his liberal agenda.” Cornyn, the new chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, left little doubt Republicans would fight any attempt to make a Franken victory appear a foregone conclusion by seating him early. Cornyn said he is confident that no Republican would cross the aisle to support seating someone whose election victory has not yet been formally certified. Doing so, he said, would cause “damage to the Senate and its reputation as an institution,” adding, “It would be a recipe for chaos.” Minnesota officials hoped to complete their recount by last Saturday, and will review ballot challenges today. They could declare a winner tomorrow. Legal challenges are likely to drag on for weeks. Since he wrote "the letter," harry reid has been my primary candidate for testicular suspension [for you 315ers, that means: Hung by the balls!!]. Read on...... A reid Attempt To Silence Limbaugh "The Letter," addressed to Mark Mays-CEO of Clear Channel Radio, was authored by reid and signed by 41 Senate democrats. It was reid's attempt to remove Rush Limbaugh from the airwaves through cancellation of his syndication contract with Clear Channel Radio. Yup, the same reid who lashed out at the radio show host earlier in Oct, 2007 and rounded up Democrat senators to sign a letter to Clear Channel boss Mark Mays, urging him to repudiate Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" comment, which was interpreted by some as an attack on soldiers who oppose the Iraq war. How the storyline changed!! At the suggestion of one of Limbaugh's regular 20Million weekly listeners, he put the letter up for auction on eBay. The auction lasted several days and fetched $2.1Million. The proceeds benefited Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation, which provides scholarship assistance to Marine Corps and federal law enforcement dependents whose parents fall in the line of duty. Later reid, being the usual piece-a-crap that he is, attempted to claim credit for the auction idea: "What could be a more worthwhile cause?" reid asked on the Senate floor. "I think it's really good that this money on eBay is going to be raised for this purpose. When I spoke to Mark Mays, he and I thought this probably wouldn't make much money, a letter written by Democratic senators complaining about something. Never did we think that this letter would bring money of this nature," reid said. "Everyone knows that Rush Limbaugh and I don't agree on everything in life, and maybe that is kind of an understatement. But without qualification, Mark Mays, the owner of the network that has Rush Limbaugh, and Rush Limbaugh should know that this letter that they're auctioning is going to be something that raises money for a worthwhile cause." "Think of this, more than $2 million — that will really help," reid said. ***The "Mays-reid" conversation probably NEVER HAPPENED!! If it had I'm sure the tone was more akin to reid gettin' a "royal ass-chewin'!!"*** Interesting tidbit: A Hill source revealed that the original letter was written by a reid staffer on a Blackberry in a U Street Bar!! "The Letter" In It's Entirety ["The Letter" was written on reid's official Senate stationery, which makes it coersion and an ethics violation-Using a public office to attempt the ruin of another] [Dated] October 2, 2007 ***At the time we sign this letter, 3,808 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq, and another 28,009 have been wounded. 160,000 other awoke this morning on foreign sand, far from home, to face the danger and uncertainty of another day at war. ***Although Americans of goodwill debate the merits of this war, we can all agree that those who serve with such great courage deserve our deepest respect and gratitude. That is why Rush Limbaugh's recent characterization of troops who oppose the war as "phony soldiers" is such an outrage. ***Our troops are fighting and dying to bring to others the freedoms that many take for granted. It is unconscionable that Mr. Limbaugh would criticize them for exercising the fundamentally American right to free speech. Mr. Limbaugh has made outrageous remarks before, but this affront to our soldiers is beyond the pale. ***The military, like any community within the United States, includes members both for and against the war. Senior generals, such as General John Batiste and Paul Eaton, have come out against the war while others have publicly supported it. A December 2006 poll conducted by the Military Times found just 35 percent of service members approved of President Bush's handling of the war in Iraq compared to 42 percent who disapproved. From this figure alone, it is clear that Mr. Limbaugh's insult is directed at thousands of American service members. ***Acitve and retired members of our armed forces have a unique perspective on the war and offer a valuable contribution to our national debate. In August, seven soldiers wrote an op-ed expressing their concern with the current strategy in Iraq. Tragically, since then two of those seven soldiers have made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq. ***Thousands of active troops and veterans were subjected to Mr. Limbaugh's unpariotic and indefensible comments on your broadcast. We trust you will agree that not a single one of our sons, daughters, neighbors and friends serving overseas is a "phony soldier." We call on you to publicly repudiate these comments that call into question their service and sacrifice and ask Mr. Limbaugh to apologize for his comments. The astericks [***] are mine, to indicate paragraph breaks; this site doesn't not support accurate grammar and composition. An added "point-to-ponder" for New Yorkers and for all of us as American voters: Among the 41 signatories to this smear letter were both of NY's co-senior senators: "Chuckie-Cheese" Schumer and Hillary "Rob'em" Clinton, plus [then] the senator from Illinois, barack hussein obama. What does this say about the ethics of those who will add their signatures to a letter smearing one with whom they disagree?? Boy, this will deter me from disagreeing with the power-elite..... NOT!!! By current political standards, this is an ancient issue.... I just bring it up to illustrate the lengths these four legislators will go to "get" those they oppose. ...And The Fallout Begins New Mexico Governor [and former Clintonista] Bill Richardson has withdrawn his name for consideration as the obama Secretary of Commerce. A federal grand jury is investigating how a California contributor to Richardson's political activities has mysteriously been awarded a NM contract valued at a million dollars plus. This was a "way-of-life" during "The Era of Clinton" and it'll be brought back with obama's "clinton-lite" cabinet!!! Til Nex'Time.......

This'n'That; January 4th[NY Budget;reid;Burris]

New York Ain't The Only One New York ranks 6th in the budget shortfall "race." As a percentage of the whole budget, it's shortfall will come in at 9.8% [$5.5Bln]. The states with greater shortfalls are Ca [22%], Az [19.9%], Fl [19.9%], Nv [16%] and RI [13.1%] When considering the dollar amount, NY [$5.5Bln] comes in second only to Ca [$22.2Bln]. There are six states that don't have, nor are projecting state budget shortfalls. They are: Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, Texas, West Virginia and Wyoming. It's particularly telling to note that none of the six states [with the possible exception of Texas] has large politicially and financially influential urban centers; none of them are among the thirteen original states. Nope, but thanks for askin'.....paterson hasn't called me yet for my suggestions. When he does call, I'm gonna suggest the following moves: ***10% ACROSS-THE-BOARD spending cuts; no program should be immune!! *** Increase health insurance costs of state employees by 10% each year until they reach 30%. ***Cancel the following perquisites for the state's legislators and employees: free use of state-owned housing, free gas, free use of state-owned vehicles. ***Each elected/ appointed official take a 10% pay cut[Legislators=$79,500/yr]. ***Change state pension fund from a defined benefit [DB] plan to a defined contribution [DC] plan [this would save millions; potentially billions]. New York State and its local governments provide their employees with constitutionally guaranteed pensions based on workers' peak salaries and career longevity. This defined benefit (DB) system requires government employers to contribute annually to retirement funds to cover future pension payments. Earnings during bull markets reduce employer contributions, while losses during bear markets can force governments to drastically increase contributions. Since bear markets usually coincide with recessions, DB pension plans force governments to spend more when they are least able to afford it. The financial complexity of the DB system has made it all too easy for elected officials to ignore or misrepresent the true costs of pension benefit increases for government workers. Studies show how greater fairness for New York taxpayers and competitive retirement benefits for government employees can be achieved by switching to the savings-based defined contribution (DC) model used by the vast majority of private companies. A DC plan guarantees that a set amount of money will be put aside for retirement out of every employee's paycheck, while making the ultimate retirement income dependent on how much is saved and on returns from investment over the employee's working life. In a DC retirement system, taxpayers would no longer bear all the financial risks associated with providing guaranteed pension benefits. Public pension costs for the first time would become both predictable and easily understandable, and the real costs of proposed benefit increases would be completely transparent. Use this address for any budget suggestions you may have for paterson: http://161.11.121.121/govemail Harry Reid's Balls Ya gotta admit harry reid, the less than reputable senator from Nevada, of "questionable, highly profitable land deals" fame, certainly seems to have testicles of a malleable, acoustic, non-ferris metal-commonly known as brass. With his usual combination of bluster, blather and lack of cognitive thought, reid is saying that the Senate will not seat Roland Burris, recently appointed by Gov Soon-to-be-in-jailovich, to fulfill obama's senate term. An Illinois court will eventually decide if their governor is guilty of corruption. But on at least this one issue he is more law-abiding than Majority Leader harry reid and fellow Democrats. Mr. Soon-to-be-in-jailovich appointed Mr. Burris to represent Illinois on Tuesday. As the Governor said in his announcement, the Illinois public also deserves its full measure of representation in Washington. Mr. Burris is a former state attorney general who is untainted by the charges against Mr. Soon-to-br-in-jailovich. When the legislature failed to act on legislation to require the replacement be selected by special election, Mr. Soon-to-be-in-jailovich saw his opening to name Mr. Burris. Meanwhile, mr. reid and Washington Democrats are refusing to seat Mr. Burris, never mind their lack of authority to do so. As an initial matter, they're hiding behind the Illinois secretary of state, who is refusing to certify the appointment. But Mr. Burris has asked a court to order the secretary of state to carry out what under state law would typically be a nondiscretionary duty. In any event, Beltway Democrats can't inject themselves into what is clearly a matter of Illinois law. The legal precedent here is the Supreme Court's 7-1 decision in Powell v. McCormack in 1969. Congressman Adam Clayton Powell had been accused of corruption but was nonetheless re-elected in 1966. House Democrats declined to seat him, Powell sued, and the Supreme Court ruled that Congress had acted unconstitutionally in denying him his seat. Congress could have expelled Powell with a two-thirds vote, as stipulated in the Constitution, but it couldn't deny him the seat in the first instance. While the Constitution says the Senate can determine its own membership, the Court in Powell interpreted Article I, Section 5 to say that "in judging the qualifications of its members, Congress is limited to the standing qualifications prescribed in the Constitution." Nowhere in the Constitution is there a "qualification" saying that a Senator must not have been appointed by an embarrassing Illinois Governor. mr. reid is also attempting the dodge of referring the matter to the Senate Rules Committee, which is run by Democrats, but the Powell precedent ought to be clear even to political lawyers. If mr. reid wants to banish Mr. Burris, he must first seat him and then persuade two-thirds of the Senate to expel him. Needless to say, the last thing mr. reid wants to do is create turmoil in his party by expelling an African-American Democrat whose only offense has been to accept an appointment to serve. But if mr. reid does go that route, we'd suggest worthier expulsion possibilities, such as Connecticut's chris dodd, who received sweetheart mortgages from Countrywide Financial while sitting on the Banking Committee. Republicans want Illinois to hold a special election for the vacant seat, and we recommended that ourselves (as did Mr. obama) when the Blagojevich tapes first became public. But now that Mr. Burris has been appointed, mr. reid can't legally deny him his seat. If this is the way Democrats are going to use their new monopoly on Beltway power even against a member of their own party, we're in for an ugly couple of years. I'm gonna start a rumor right here, right now!! I'm saying that mr reid has been invited to reside and legislate from the State of Illinois. He has been selected due to his crooked land deals and his proclivity for not understanding written law; and when he does, to ignore it. He'll fit right in with Chicago and Illinois "politics as usual!!" Til Nex'Time.........

This'n'That; January 3rd[NY Budget;Welfare;Kennedy;Clinton]

NY's Budget Mess The New York State budget is a mess and no one wants to take responsibility; no one has any viable solutions. [I got one:If it ain't in the treasury-Don't Spend It!!] By 2010, the state will have a budget shortfall of $15.4Billion. The G0vernor submitted his budget proposal to the legislature on Dec 16th, which will close the gap. When the state legislature returns to Albany, they'll get their sticky fingers on it, tweek it a bit by siphoning off some to buy votes in future elections [member items=porkbarrel spending] and vote on approval of a document that probably won't resemble the original budget proposal in the slightest. The state's comptroller [the Sarge-In-Charge of the purse strings] Thomas DiNapoli says "Our budgets make spending commitments for future years that aren't sustainable. We have, even in good times, not lived within our means." He also said that the state budgetary process has relied too much on one-time revenues-$21.5Billion since 2002. I checked around the 'net and found that the State of Florida is closest to New York in population [NY-19,490,297; Fl-18,328,340]; the difference being just over 1.1 Million. In a comparison by state, I found that both states' #1 outlay is health care; from there, some categories are the same-some are different. So here they are, in this order [this crappy site doesn't handle charts well] category; number of outlay; NY$; $per capita; Fl$; $per capita]. ***Health care;#1 in NY-$41.2Bln; $2.12/person; #1 in Fl-$18.3Bln; $0.99/person### ***Pensions; #2 in NY-$12.6Bln; $0.65/person; #7 in Fl-$5.3Bln; $0.29/person### ***Other Spending; #3 in NY; $11.7Bln; $0.60/person; #2 in Fl; $9.6Bln; $0.52/person### ***Education; #4 in NY; $11.2Bln; $0.57/person; #3 in Fl; $8.2Bln; $0.45/person###. My humble analysis is: New York has but 1.1Million more residents, but there's great disparity [by total population] in the expenditures IN EVERY CATEGORY except "welfare!!" New York can raise tax rates and add new taxes which, in the short term might close the budget gap; the long range affect will be driving the younger [age 25 to 45] folks out of the state. There is only one equitable method of balancing the budget, that being-CUT STATE GOVERNMENT SPENDING!! Welfare Should Be The First One Cut [Info from the Urban Institute-italics are my comments] Implementation of Family Assistance (FA), the New York TANF program, has resulted in significant reductions in FA caseloads and increased county discretion in implementing local FA-related policy[read: shift the financial burden to the counties]. New York is one of only seven states that offer payments to families beyond the 60-month federal lifetime limit, using state and local funds[read: Reward the welfare rats even more than is required]. The state also offers a generous earnings disregard that provides a substantial incentive to working [If this works, why aren't more welfare rats subjected to it?]. Though the state consolidated child care subsidy resources into a single funding stream at the state level, and substantially increased the level of funding, some counties still had waiting lists for child care subsidies [Are these subsidies available to non-working mothers/families? If so, they shouldn't be!!]. Local spending for child welfare services increased four times more than state spending increases between 1996 and 2000, owing largely to the creation of a state block grant for child welfare services that capped state spending [Again, shifting responsibilities]. What Is Social Welfare Spending? And What Is State Fiscal Capacity? [from the Rockefeller Institute for Government report for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services] For the purposes of the study, we defined social welfare spending as programs that supported lower-income households, typically, though not exclusively, programs with means tests. These programs included health initiatives such as Medicaid and state child health insurance programs (SCHIP); cash assistance programs such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) or cash payments under AFDC’s replacement, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF); and a wide variety of other service programs providing child care, foster care, low-income energy assistance, services to the homeless and those funded by the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG). Because the study was designed to understand the effects of state fiscal capacity on social welfare spending, we included in the analyses only spending that went through the budgets of state and local governments. Direct expenditures by the federal government — such as the federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), Food Stamp Program (FSP) benefits, and the federal portion of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for poor elderly and disabled people — were excluded from direct examination. Although the study used spending data on specific programs, such as Medicaid and TANF, at several points in the analysis, most of the quantitative research in the project was based on state and local spending data collected annually by the U.S. Census Bureau (Census Bureau) since 1977. One of the largest expenditure categories in the Census of Governments (Census) data was termed public welfare expenditures, amounting to $233 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2000. To determine whether fiscal capacity affected different types of social welfare spending in different ways, the study organized the 10 subcategories under public welfare expenditures into three basic types of spending: Cash assistance, which included AFDC, TANF cash assistance, general assistance, and state supplements to SSI; Medicaid, which was found to be closely related to one of the Census categories, “Payments to Medical Vendors”; and Non-health social services, which included a wide variety of services and in-kind benefits, such as child welfare services, child care subsidies, energy assistance programs, shelters for the homeless, and many others. "Slick-Willie" Over "Princess Caroline?" The state's Assembly Speaker sheldon silver has decided to support the Princess to be the "carpetbagger-in-waiting." He's rethinking his disapproval of her appointment. Like most other politicians, he wants to be on "the winnin' side!!" His change in opinion has nothing to do with what's best for NYS, her [lack of] experience or even her DNA..... It's all 'bout winnin'!! I don't know what moron put forth "Slick-Willie's" name as a "caretaker senator" but he or she must be a mental midget!! Do they really think "slick" would consider the seat; the pool of hotties would be too small for him to choose one as "Chief Rocket Polisher." That "caretaker senator" thing.... whatta hell would give anyone the idea that he'd give the seat up at the end of the current term? Back in power.... power that his wife's position didn't provide; The federal largess..... his fingers back in someone else's till..... I really can't decide which is worse..... One with not a modicum of experience..... the other as dishonest and untrustworthy as they come!!!! Til Nex'Time...........

This'n'That; January 2nd[obama;NY Budget;Breastfeeding;Immigration]

Another "Thrown Under The Bus" Obama: Don't Seat Blagojevich Appointee Tuesday, December 30, 2008 6:00 PM WASHINGTON – President-elect Barack Obama says he supports the decision by Senate Democrats to deny his vacated Senate seat to an appointee of embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. On Tuesday, Blagojevich appointed former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris. He would be the nation's only black senator. Democratic leaders in the Senate are rejecting the appointment, arguing that because of accusations that Blagojevich tried to sell the seat to the highest bidder, any appointment by him would be tainted. In a statement, Obama called Burris a fine man but said he agreed that the Senate cannot accept an appointment from Blagojevich. Obama repeated his call for Blagojevich to resign and allow the seat to be filled by other means. These guys, plus Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daly and obama himself, are all members in good standing of "Illinois Politics-As-Usual." The state's unwritten code is that ya gotta be crooked to be a politician there. There are times when obama aughta keep his trap shut!! He's great at obfuscating the truth [Resko; Ayres; questionable real estate deals] but why does he think he's gotta comment on everything.... or that his opinion really matters?!?! The Line's Gittin' Longer Paterson recently wrote to obama to beg a handout for the state. The decades-long mismanagement of New York's finances and the 137 new or "improved" taxes foisted upon NY's peasants have necessitated Paterson's suggestions on how obama can piss away even more of the taxpayers' money!! As part of the begging process, Paterson noted in the letter that as one source, New York State confiscates 20% of it's revenue from Wall Street. The state is facing $1.7Billion budget shortfall this year, $13.7Billion deficit for next year and $51Billion+ over the next three years. Important Info For New Moms In a recent issue of the "Demogogue and Comical," I found this article. It's a letter written to a syndicated columnist, a Dr Paul Donohue. Because I'm a dad rather than a mom, I found the information new, interesting and seems important. Here it is [verbatim]: Dear Dr. Donohue: In two months, I will be a first-time mother. I want to breastfeed my baby, but I really am at sea about understanding what I need to do. When does breastfeeding begin? How can I know whether the baby gets enough to eat? Do I breastfeed during the night? All information will be welcome. --L.T. Answer: Breastmilk is the most nutritious food a baby can get. Furthermore, breastfeeding promotes an emotional union of mother and child. Human milk conatins antibodies that aid an infant's immature immune system in warding off infections. Brestfed babies have fewer ear, respiratory and digestive-tract infections than do bottle-fed babies. It's been shown that breastfed babies are less likely to develop type2 diabetes, become obese or have eczema. Mothers who breastfeed have a lower incidence of breast and ovarian cancer. Breastfeeding can begin shortly after a baby is born. You can tell that a baby is getting enough to eat if it isn't losing weight by the end of the second week. Midddle-of-the-night feedings are usual in the first three to six weeks of a baby's life. Either the doctor who delivers you or the doctor who is going to be the infant's doctor can give you all the information you need on how to feed your baby sucessfully. You have anothr great source of information, the La Leche League, which provides women with knowledge on the proper techniques of breastfeeding and supplies answers to any questions you have. You live in a large metropolitan area that probably has a chapter of the league. You can reach its headquarters at [800]525-3243 or go to http://www.llli.org/. Finally, Some Important Crap-Immigration obama will likely make several tough decisions on immigration policy during his first few months in office, even if he postpones wide-ranging reform until later in his first term. obama will be under pressure from interest groups to review or drop several administrative policies aimed at curbing illegal immigration, which President Bush enacted after he failed in 2007 to persuade lawmakers to pass broad legislation that would have put millions of immigrants on a path to citizenship. Immigration was not one of the top policy objectives laid out by obama during the campaign. But labor, business and immigrant-rights groups sense an opportunity to push their agenda after Hispanic voters broke in large numbers for obama and helped him win four battleground states: Colorado, New Mexico, Florida and Nevada. The executive decisions obama will inherit are relatively tame compared to the political firestorm Bush set off when he called for the most sweeping changes to immigration law in two decades — which included legalizing the undocumented population. Opponents criticized those efforts as providing “amnesty” to millions of illegal immigrants. When the legislative effort fizzled, Bush settled for stepped-up Border Patrol efforts and workplace enforcement by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, as well as supporting ways to check whether employers have workers who are in the country illegally. “The administration acted when Congress failed,” said Laura Keehner, spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security. “We have been working with the transition team to ensure they’re aware of the important issues that will face them on day one. We have made no secret of how we think they should be dealt with going forward.” Several of those efforts are now subject to either congressional reauthorization or action by federal courts. Immigrant-rights advocates and their allies in the business community are ramping up their calls for significant changes or wholesale reversals. Advocates for immigrants are also looking to make hay out of the recession, arguing that the Bush administration’s executive policies have further hurt employers and workers. Workplace raids around the country in recent months have been only the most public of the Bush administration’s efforts. Immigrant-rights advocates have criticized the raids heavily and intend to pressure Obama to shift course early in his administration. Meanwhile, the advocates are pushing their cause in two legal cases that will likely be decided early in Obama’s administration. In the first case, pending in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the Bush administration is defending an administrative rule that cracks down on employers with illegal immigrant workers. The rule would require employers to fire workers who cannot resolve discrepancies stemming from when their names do not match information in the Social Security Administration database. The legal battle over the “no match” letter rule has been waged since late 2007, but immigrant-rights lawyers expect a ruling in March or April. The immigrant-rights community says the rule would go into effect at a bad economic time. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a key plaintiff in the case and supporter of expanding immigrant rights, commissioned an economic study earlier this year that found the rule could cost employers at least $1 billion per year. The plaintiffs plan to make the economic argument central to their legal case early next year. Opponents of ending Bush’s executive orders believe the troubled economy makes the case for tighter illegal immigration policies. “It seems to me this is exactly the time to purge illegal workers, because Americans can’t get jobs,” said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, which opposes the expansion of immigration rights. “The Obama administration could come in and settle it,” said Randy Johnson, vice president of labor, immigration and employee benefits at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Reiff said she expected the immigrant-rights community to prevail in court. “But it would gives us a little more comfort if the Obama administration lifted the rule.” Immigrant-rights advocates are also tackling a related homeland security system called E-Verify. The program, which Obama has supported, allows companies to voluntarily check whether their workers can be employed. Keehner, the DHS spokeswoman, said there is “very little” reason for a company to avoid using the system, “unless you are for some reason in favor of hiring illegal immigrants.” The program is up for congressional reauthorization in March, but the more pressing matter is a planned expansion of the system next month. The Bush administration issued an executive order requiring that federal contractors or subcontractors use the system. That has raised the ire of immigrant-rights advocates. The Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit in federal court just last week against the proposed expansion. Unless there is a court injunction, the expansion will take effect on Jan. 15, less than a week before Obama is inaugurated. Til Nex'Time...........

This'n'That; January 1st["Magic...";Kennedy]

The Basis Of The "Magic Negro" Fuss [The 04/17/007 entire Ehrenstein Op-Ed as published in the Los Angeles Times, the basis of the "Magic Negro" fuss] [***Begin Ehrenstein Op-Ed piece***] Obama the 'Magic Negro' The Illinois senator lends himself to white America's idealized, less-than-real black man. By David Ehrenstein, L.A.-based DAVID EHRENSTEIN writes about Hollywood and politics. March 19, 2007 AS EVERY CARBON-BASED life form on this planet surely knows, Barack Obama, the junior Democratic senator from Illinois, is running for president. Since making his announcement, there has been no end of commentary about him in all quarters — musing over his charisma and the prospect he offers of being the first African American to be elected to the White House.But it's clear that Obama also is running for an equally important unelected office, in the province of the popular imagination — the "Magic Negro." The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. "He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist," reads the description on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro .He's there to assuage white "guilt" (i.e., the minimal discomfort they feel) over the role of slavery and racial segregation in American history, while replacing stereotypes of a dangerous, highly sexualized black man with a benign figure for whom interracial sexual congress holds no interest.As might be expected, this figure is chiefly cinematic — embodied by such noted performers as Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman, Scatman Crothers, Michael Clarke Duncan, Will Smith and, most recently, Don Cheadle. And that's not to mention a certain basketball player whose very nickname is "Magic." Poitier really poured on the "magic" in "Lilies of the Field" (for which he won a best actor Oscar) and "To Sir, With Love" (which, along with "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner," made him a No. 1 box-office attraction). In these films, Poitier triumphs through yeoman service to his white benefactors. "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" is particularly striking in this regard, as it posits miscegenation without evoking sex. (Talk about magic!)The same can't quite be said of Freeman in "Driving Miss Daisy," "Seven" and the seemingly endless series of films in which he plays ersatz paterfamilias to a white woman bedeviled by a serial killer. But at least he survives, unlike Crothers in "The Shining," in which psychic premonitions inspire him to rescue a white family he barely knows and get killed for his trouble. This heart-tug trope is parodied in Gus Van Sant's "Elephant." The film's sole black student at a Columbine-like high school arrives in the midst of a slaughter, helps a girl escape and is immediately gunned down. See what helping the white man gets you?And what does the white man get out of the bargain? That's a question asked by John Guare in "Six Degrees of Separation," his brilliant retelling of the true saga of David Hampton — a young, personable gay con man who in the 1980s passed himself off as the son of none other than the real Sidney Poitier. Though he started small, using the ruse to get into Studio 54, Hampton discovered that countless gullible, well-heeled New Yorkers, vulnerable to the Magic Negro myth, were only too eager to believe in his baroque fantasy. (One of the few who wasn't fooled was Andy Warhol, who was astonished his underlings believed Hampton's whoppers. Clearly Warhol had no need for the accouterment of interracial "goodwill.")But the same can't be said of most white Americans, whose desire for a noble, healing Negro hasn't faded. That's where Obama comes in: as Poitier's "real" fake son.The senator's famously stem-winding stump speeches have been drawing huge crowds to hear him talk of uniting rather than dividing. A praiseworthy goal. Consequently, even the mild criticisms thrown his way have been waved away, "magically." He used to smoke, but now he doesn't; he racked up a bunch of delinquent parking tickets, but he paid them all back with an apology. And hey, is looking good in a bathing suit a bad thing?The only mud that momentarily stuck was criticism (white and black alike) concerning Obama's alleged "inauthenticty," as compared to such sterling examples of "genuine" blackness as Al Sharpton and Snoop Dogg. Speaking as an African American whose last name has led to his racial "credentials" being challenged — often several times a day — I know how pesky this sort of thing can be.Obama's fame right now has little to do with his political record or what he's written in his two (count 'em) books, or even what he's actually said in those stem-winders. It's the way he's said it that counts the most. It's his manner, which, as presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Biden ham-fistedly reminded us, is "articulate." His tone is always genial, his voice warm and unthreatening, and he hasn't called his opponents names (despite being baited by the media).Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn't project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him.***[End Ehrenstein Op-Ed piece]*** What IS all the fuss about? Are we not allowed our personal opinions? Does not "Freedom of the Press" assure our public expression of that opinion? As a liberal, free-lance journalist, Mr Ehrenstein has as much right to express his opinion as obama has to express his campaign [and now almost presidential] blather. It should be up to the reader/listener to consider the information and make his/her own decisions on the validity of that information. "Barack, The Magic Negro" is the product of humorist and political satirist, Paul Shanklin [ http://www.paulshanklin.com/ ] of Memphis, Tn. Mr Shanklin's work is featured on Rush Limbaugh's radio program, Hannity and Colmes and The O'Reilly Factor. Paul Shanklin's Response This story is based on an interview Shanklin gave Newsmax earlier this year. Paul Shanklin figures, at best, his songs make people laugh, and perhaps think a little. So he was largely unprepared for the firestorm sparked by a parody tweaking critics of Barack Obama. Shanklin got the idea for his controversial tune “Barack the Magic Negro” in March 2007 after reading a column titled “Obama the Magic Negro” by David Ehrenstein in the Los Angeles Times. In the column, Ehrenstein compared Obama to the stereotypical shallow black movie character that exists only to aid the white protagonist. “Magical Negro” is an offensive Hollywood term that has been applied to characters played by the likes of Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman and Will Smith, to name but a few. Almost as soon as Ehrenstein’s column ran, Rev. Al Sharpton joined the anti-Obama chorus, saying the Illinois senator hadn’t done enough to champion black causes. “I started humming it around the house after I read the column,” Shanklin told Newsmax. “But I seriously questioned whether it was appropriate for the show.” For one thing, Shanklin knew the issue required a lot of explanation up front. “It’s a horrible thing to say about Barack,” Shanklin said. “The guy earned his way. For people on the left to try to attack him and shoot him down early, it was amazing. “When Sharpton jumped on board, I thought I had to do something with it. I figured if people understood what this is about, it was going to be good.” The resulting parody quickly rose in popularity on the Limbaugh program, playing repeatedly through March and April. In it, Shanklin imitates Sharpton shouting through a bullhorn to the tune of Pete Yarrow’s classic “Puff the Magic Dragon,” with reworked lyrics such as: Barack the Magic Negro lives in D.C.// The L.A. Times, they called him that // ‘Cause he’s not authentic like me. // Yeah, the guy from the L.A. paper // Said he makes guilty whites feel good// They’ll vote for him, and not for me // ‘Cause he’s not from the hood. // But the song’s popularity created a backlash for Shanklin, who said mainstream media reporters saddled him with coining the “Magic Negro” moniker for Obama and branded him a racist. “The funniest thing I had was a request from the Today show to go on and explain myself,” Shanklin said. “I knew these guys were not my friends. I wasn’t going to go on there and have Matt Lauer asking me, ‘How long have you been a racist?’ They love to make people cry on that show. I didn’t want to be the guy crying in front of Matt Lauer.” On the advice of a friend, Shanklin declined the Today show invitation and issued a simple statement: “The song speaks for itself. It’s a parody of David Ehrenstein’s column in which he called Obama the ‘Magic Negro.’ Go read it.” That didn’t stop Today from covering the story, or from referring to Shanklin in most references as “the white comedian.” “That’s why you’ll hear Rush refer to me as ‘white comedian Paul Shanklin’ on the air now. It’s a leftover from that whole affair,” he told Newsmax. While he tries to stay lighthearted about the incident, Shanklin says he was hurt by the way the story got twisted. “I’m from Memphis, which is probably the most racially polarized city in the country. I take this issue pretty seriously. “This was my first experience in being a part of a story and everybody got it wrong. It was kind of scary and kind of enlightening too. It’s frustrating to be on the business end of the media’s slant. “Rush is the one who gets the slings and arrows for the most part. This time it was my turn.” Kennedy "Victory Tour [Part #20]" Princess Caroline continues to be skewered by the national media, an unheard-of event for those carrying the American royal name!! Seems, with her "ums, ahs and you knows" she's not only verbally aligning herself with obama but continuing the genetic legacy. Both Uncle "Phat" Kennedy and cousin Joe, an ex-US Rep, have individually been dubbed the "Wizard of Uhs" by Boston radio hosts. Even after "Phat" drowned that girl in Martha's Vineyard, Ma., the media was quick to formulate an excuse, an apology and drop the matter. The princess has been recorded using thirty "you knows" in 147 seconds of excerpted speech. Here's a verbatim example of her speech: "You know, I think, really, um, this is sort of a unique moment, both in our, you know, in our country's history and in, you know, my own life, and, um, you know, we are facing, you know, unbelievable challenges." Besides being distracting, these little locutions can make a spearker seem ill-prepared or unsure of his/her point. The 51 year-old princess has never held public office and has faced questions about her preparedness for the Senate. She has pointed to her experience as a lawyer [like we need even more of THEM on Capitol Hill ??], education advocate [that's another real plus-what exactly, has the US Department of Education done for the country other than being another facet of the bloated bureaucracy-wasting most of a $67+Billion budget] and author of books on constitutional law and other subjects [the "other subjects" might be ok, but the princess is at a definite disadvantage on the constitutional law topic. The US Congress has all but abandoned the Constitution], as well as her family's long history of public service [So now DNA is a determining factor to be selected as the "Carpetbagger-In-Waiting?"]. Til Nex'Time.......