Archive for May 6, 2010

Lets see what happens when we use the re-written standard (amateur hour) to determine if something should be treated as a legitimate attack.

On November 22nd 1864 a brigade from the 15th Corps of Sherman’s Army was dug in as a rear guard during the march through Georgia. 3000 Militia under P. J. Phillips attacked.

The attack was amateurish, moving forward across an open field toward veterans who naturally blew them away each time they charged. When it was all over a 10-1 casualty ratio told the tale of a foolish and useless defeat.

Under our new standards does this battle count?

Ok now lets apply the rules that some are trying to apply to the attack attempt on Times Square and see if this marker should come down:

This shouldn’t count as a battle. The tactics used were obsolete, the person leading the attack had no experience in battle and wasn’t even smart enough to not charge across an open field. Yeah he has some connections to the Confederate Army but he was Militia so it wasn’t as if it was a professional army that was even attacking. They should have simply apprehended these guys and arrested them as insurrectionists.

Now naturally none of us are going to take the Battle of Griswoldville out of the history books or pretend it is not a part of the Civil War.

Likewise it behooves us not to pretend that what happened in NY was anything less than a battle in the war on terror. Of course the facts are making pretending otherwise less and less possible.

If there was ever any doubt that the liberal media plays from the same playbook here here it is.

As Glenn points out :

There was no Duke Lacrosse “sex scandal.” Just a wrongful prosecution — for which the prosecutor was punished — and miserable press behavior, which obviously continues unabated.

You know I should really be more jaded at my age, but this stuff still surprises me.

You know pointing out this stuff is kind of like being Allen Dexter as Parson in Paint Your Wagon:

It must be tough fighting over that same niche market.

Here is what appeared on this blog March 24th:

Remember it is a lot cheaper to pay the fine than to actually cover the employee, so who is going to have to pay that cost? Back to Dennis:

Next year you’re going to have to purchase the insurance yourself or pay a large fine and face the possibility of prosecution and imprisonment.

So the end result thousands of dollars spent by people on health insurance that will not be spent on other things, like vacations, or restaurants, or that x-box 360 or COLLEGE or the MORTGAGE.

Well look at what it at Hotair today:

It’s not just the calculus of mandates and penalties that has employers considering the option of dumping health care and paying more in salaries instead. The mandate to keep “children” on plans until the age of 26 has employers seeing a steep cost curve. For Caterpillar alone, the 26-year-old mandate will cost over $20 million a year. Under those conditions, the penalties look pretty good. Add on the “Cadillac tax” on some health plans and the expected jump in medical costs from providers dealing with their own set of mandates, and health insurance looks like a very bad risk.</blockquote

They link to this story that says:

Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill’s critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.

And if that doesn’t do it check this article:

Section 9006 of the health care bill — just a few lines buried in the 2,409-page document — mandates that beginning in 2012 all companies will have to issue 1099 tax forms not just to contract workers but to any individual or corporation from which they buy more than $600 in goods or services in a tax year.

The stealth change radically alters the nature of 1099s and means businesses will have to issue millions of new tax documents each year.

This is a business killer, a large corporation has the staff already doing this kind of thing but smaller business will be paying the price helping to drive them away. I thought the democrats were against large corporations? Amazing how CNN never figured this out before the vote huh?

Remember America, we (collectively) elected these clowns. You wanted Barack Obama and the democrats you’ve got them. Enjoy!

Boston has taken sides in the Arizona law dispute:

Mayor Thomas M. Menino, joining the City Council in registering strong objections to the tough new immigration laws in Arizona, said yesterday that he will consider canceling city contracts with firms based in the state that agree with the crackdown.

As the City Council passed a resolution urging that Boston cut business ties with Arizona, Menino said it was important to send “a message’’ that the city disagrees with that state’s response to illegal immigration.

Apparently the Boston city counsel’s parents should have considered home schooling since they believe 30% is greater than 60%. Michael Graham today on his radio show proposed a boycott of Boston by people who disagree with this position. As Graham and Company were part of the 10,000 in Boston on Wednesday April 14 while the open borders crowd could only muster 300 last Saturday Afternoon I suspect that although it might gain votes in the city proper it will risk a lot more dollars to the city coffers.

Hey if they want to be with the 300 vs the 10,000 hey the city voted for these people and as always they get the government they deserve.