Hillary for VP?

Polls proclaiming Hillary's popularity have caused some to speculate on whether she is going to mount a primary challenge to Barack H. Obama.

Such speculation ignores the Clintons' mastery of triangulation.

It is far more likely that she would replace Biden on the 2012 ticket. She would signal that she would be able to perform her baby-sitting duty much more effectively, Bill would campaign for the ticket on the premise that the nation would be getting a 3-for-1 deal etc. Remember, if Mr. President wants to stay in the White House, he cannot afford to lose his radical base but he must also maintain those brains full of mush who call themselves moderate.

With the moderates entranced by Hillary, and the Democrat Cheerleader Media (DCM) constantly reminding them of how the Republicans will burn churches, bomb abortion clinics, establish LGBT concentration camps —you know the drill— Obama/Clinton might even have a decent chance.

And, if they win, Hillary gets to be the nominee in 2016.

Two primary wins without even having to run.

My guess is that the Clintons do not necessarily have the hunger to try to mount a primary challenge at the end of which they know they will not win the presidency back. In that case, Hillary for VP would look like an eminently doable alternative.

Unless, Hillary wants to signal that she is abandoning a sinking ship, say, some time around June 2012, and ensure that Mr. President goes down. It all boils down to which one is the stronger motivator for her: Ambition or revenge?

Democrat cheerleaders soiling their pants left and left

It all started with Jay Leno's stunted interview with Michele Bachman where he envisioned himself a reborn Chris Matthews.

My conviction that there is widespread panic among the Democrat cheerleading squad became firm while watching last night's (9/24/2011) SNL.

Don't get me wrong: I wanted them to make fun of the GOP debates. At the end, however, Rick Perry's mess up talking about how he'd like to mate Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain and Mitt Romney's response to that turned out to have been funnier than what SNL writers living in their bubble's could come up with.

Add to that the fact that Alec Baldwin could not succeed in making fun of a Rick Perry who failed at making fun of Mitt Romney for being a flip-flopper, and you had an unwatchable grade school production.

I mean, it would have been funnier to play excerpts of the actual debate. Those moments made me cringe during the debate. But, a comedian's job is to find the funny and amplify it. Jon Stewart, Jay Leno, and various people on SNL are talented. They can actually be funny and enjoyable to watch when they are not trying so hard to score for their team.

And, that's the problem: They forget we are watching them for the comedy. If we wanted to watch people ignoring reality while clinging on to their Stalinist fantasies, we do know where we can find MSNBC.

Reality is simple: My favorite candidate, Herman Cain, is a thousand times better at everything than the failed President some pitiful comedians are trying to cheer.

And, even the worst of the bunch, Huntsman, Johnson, and Paul would do better than Obama.

I can't even imagine how fun it would be to watch the Democrat Cheerleaders if a Cain/Santorum or Cain/Bachman ticket became reality.

But, I'll even settle for Romney running with a not a trade warrior on his side, or Perry with someone with a dynamic personality.

In the mean time, enjoy the squirming fest going on in late night comedy shows.

How many million dollar income tax returns are there?

Let's head on over to the IRS Income Tax Stats page. Currently, 2009 is the most recent year for which the All Returns: Selected Income and Tax Items table is available.

Let's open that file and add up the number of returns showing adjusted gross income of $1,000,000 or more. I get 236,883 such returns.

New York Times and other "news" outlets have been running stories with titles such as Obama Tax Plan Would Ask More of Millionaires under a scheme inspired by one of Warren Buffett's asinine anectodes.

How much more would Mr. President ask of millionaires and billionaires?

Well, I keep hearing the $1,500,000,000,000 figure mentioned a lot today.

$1.5 trillion, and all of it will come from millionaires and billionaires.

Mr. President says it's simple math.

Here is some simple math: $1,500,000,000,000 divided by 236,883 is approximately $6,332,239.97. That is, Mr. President wants to extract more than $6.3 million from each tax return with adjusted gross income of at least a million dollars.

According to the same IRS stats, there were 321,294 such returns in 2008.

That is, in just a year, the number of million dollar tax returns fell by 26%.

At this rate, Mr. President and Warren Buffett will succeed in destroying the American dream. I doubt Mr. President's math will ever work out, however.

To "make it" in this world, there are two options: One way, (not the Solyndra way) is to work hard, spend less than you make, and accumulate wealth. Of course, you can only consume and save out of what you are left with after you pay the government the taxes due on your income.

The President will succeed in rapidly eliminating all those pesky millionaires and billionaires for whom he seems to have so much contempt.

He seems to have a soft spot for Warren Buffett. Eventually, Mr. President might have to collect all of that $1,500,000,000,000 from a single "billionaire" taxpayer ;-)

So much for law school math.

P.S.: The President has not changed. He entertained such fantasies even as a senator.

He has just become a little more ambitious: Back then, he was only trying to extract an extra $446,000 out of each million dollar tax return.

Isn't it enough just to win while they lose?

The title of this post is from John Fogerty's great song "Mr. Greed" and expresses how I feel about Warren Buffett.

Words fail to express my outrage at the fact that he is so vindictively against other people accumulating wealth that he is willing to lend his name to the petulant Mr. President's stupid propaganda campaign.

Mr. Buffett: What you have does not harm me. Whether you have a fancy fridge or not does not affect my happiness one bit. But, when the government takes my wealth away by force and spends it to benefit unproductive pursuits, we are all harmed.

Of course, what is a deep wound to the rest of us is nothing but a minor scratch to you because of your already accumulated wealth, but that wealth can melt away at an instant if Mr. President and his gang don't change course.

Anyone with half a brain can see this. You have more than half a brain. Therefore, you must be motivated by malice rather than stupidity.

Shame on you!

What's in a name?

The USCIS provides, among other resources, a publication called 100 Civics Questions and Answers for prospective citizens.

Here are a couple of questions and suggested answers:

29. What is the name of the Vice President of the United States now?
▪ Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
▪ Joe Biden
▪ Biden

Correct. Although, I do wonder what that R stands for. Let me see … Robinette!!!

Now, that is a funny name if I ever heard one.

Let's look at the question before that one.

28. What is the name of the President of the United States now?
▪ Barack Obama
▪ Obama

Really?

I mean, really?

Where did that H go?

Or, maybe the test was written by the same people who consider it a smear to be confused for a Muslim.

Repeat after me: Chickens invite quagmires

One of the smartest things Senator McCain said during his 2008 presidential campaign was his statement that it would be fine for him if U.S. troops were to remain in Iraq for 100 years.

It signaled a commitment not to run away from confrontation.

After all, 66 years after World War II, U.S. forces are still in Germany and Japan. And, it wasn't always safe to be deployed in Germany. In the 60s and the 70s, U.S. troops stationed in Europe were expected to be first to die if Russians decided to launch a massive tank invasion.

Throughout his short career as a Senator, the current President of the U.S., Mr. Obama, committed to signaling that he would chicken out of every possible confrontation. He spent a lot of time trying to find ways to wash his hands clean of the Afghan war despite the fact that he campaigned on the premise that that war mattered the most.

And, now, we are faced with the Taliban trying to re-stage a messy American exodus from Afghanistan. They may or may not succeed in the end, but they will kill a lot of people along the way. Will you be able to ignore those victims the way you were able to ignore the victims of U.S. withdrawal from South Vietnam?