Well, its almost September,  and Fred Thompson still hasn't thrown his hat into the ring.    I guess I can see why, since it turns your life into a three ring circus.   The talk about his younger wife is most likely very annoying.   The media never knows when it is right to talk about your private life or not.   Bill Clinton is a good example of the stupidity and bias of the media when it comes to someones personal life.   Clinton had the right to cheat on his wife with no media coverage.   Thompson on the other hand doesn't seem to have the right to a younger wife as far as the media is concerned.   Got to love (not) the double standard when it comes to Democrats and Republicans canidates. 

There is a lot to like from someone like Fred Thompson, so I am hoping he does run.    He has a great common sense, direct speaking style.   He has a good conservative record from his Senate days.   In a lot of ways he is like Ronald Reagan.   He even is a actor!    Its nice they don't make him play a liberal like all the other characters on Law and Order.    I think he can bring some energy back to the Republican side of the race.  So Fred Thompson when are you starting your campaign?

I didn't expect this, since Indiana is thought to be a red state.    The Indiana State Fair has forced all the vendors serving food to remove all trans fats from their products. Read about it here.   I thought that if any state fair would ban trans fat it would be a place like " progressive" California,  not Indiana.   Can't say I have since much or any media coverage of this,  I guess they didn't think Indiana Fair would be the first to do something like this either.

I guess there aren't any places that are free from this liberal nonsense.    Good luck getting something that looks conservative done in a place like San Francisco.   But liberals get their way here in Indiana anyway.   Good luck to the vendors trying to comply with this.   They changed the rule on June 26,  and the fair starts on August 8.   Not much time to change.    I wonder how many vendors will pass on this years fair because they can't or won't be able to be ready for this trendy fad.

America doesn't need the Nanny state, nor does it have the right to create it.   Just because someone cannot control themselves and eat stuff they shouldn't,  doesn't mean the government should take away my freedoms.   Next year trans fat will be forgotten by the elites but stupid new rules will remain.   Dumb move Indiana State Fair. 

In another day of bad news for democracy in Venezuela,   Dictator Hugo Chavez is seeking to change its Constitution.    Under the already changed (by him) and ruined constitution, Chavez still would have to give up power in 2012.  Read about it here.   

As you can plainly see he has no intension on leaving power in 2012, so does it really mean anything at this point to change it?   Probably not,  because he will remain in power after 2012, he doesn't seem to care that many of Venezuela's citizens don't support him and this plan.     However  he is looking to make it easier to get legitimacy from the global elites.    Without it,  it is easier for critics to charge him with becoming a Dictator.  The global elites like the American mainstream media already support him.    So he is using Democracy to ruin Democracy in Venezuela.  

At this point it seems unlikely that Chavez's opposition will be able to stop the changes.  It quickly becoming clear that Venezuela is going to be the Cuba of the 21st century.    Its a sad state of affairs when one of the wealthier  South American countries will likely become a basketcase and quickly become one of the poorest.    Cuba was once one of the wealthier Central American countries until Castro came to power.    

We can only hope that Chavez doesn't remain in power as long as Castro.    But the lack of attention this situation has gotten doesn't make it look good.    It seems like few care that we are losing a new nation to communism.    Many think that we ended communism,   when the Berlin Wall was torn down.   It still alive and well,   many still think and believe  it offers solutions to modern problems.    It doesn't,  it only brings misery to those who are stuck in places with it.    It has never worked and it never will.     It often hides under the face of it little brother socialism, something else the world needs to  rid  itself of.   

Will we be able to rid the world of socialism and communism in the 21st Century?    Or are we going to be too busy trying to rid the world of militant  Islam to notice it growing back?  

Well,  when Chicago (and other Illinois) residents are in Northwest Indiana,  they often buy their gas and smokes.   If you don't know,  many residents of Illinois buy their gas and smokes in Indiana to escape the high "sin" taxes on those items.    The gas was 50 cents cheaper in Indiana today.  Plus you can buy fireworks which cannot even be bought in Illinois.

They will most likely be able to add a new item to the shopping list shortly,  Bottled Water.   Yes,  bottled water.    After many years of  well-intended folks trying to get the great unwashed to drink more water,  bottled water is out with the elite.  Alderman in Chicago are looking at taxing bottled water.   10- 25 cents a bottle.   So if at the max of  25 cents a bottle a case would have a tax of $6.    Read about it here.   $6 on top of an already overpriced case of water, I guess they figure since your willing to pay that much for water,  why not add more to the price.    On an ironic side note,   Pepsi bottles its brand of bottled water in Munster, Indiana. 

So it the "winner" of the stupid idea of the day award.    It doesn't seem quite as dumb as the tax the pot thing in California,  but it is still a bad idea.   Raising taxes to fill a budget gap,  instead of cutting some fat from it.    Illinois politicians have no idea how much business they have driven into Indiana.   Because folks are buying much more then the things noted above.   There is a "power center" (a newish term to describe a shopping center) here is Highland that is by square foot one of the most profitable centers in the country.   It was originally built to serve mostly Highland,  Schererville, Dyer,  Munster, and Griffith residents,   but has attracted many Illinois shoppers as well.   It doesn't really have any stores you couldn't also find in Illinois.   But it does have,,,,or I should doesn't have something Illinois has,  a lower sales tax.  

They just don't think about what normal people do when you raise taxes (and companies too).    And that is that normal people want to save a few bucks here and there.   Crossing into Indiana is a easy thing to do.   I know people on the north side of Chicago that do their main grocery shopping at the Meijer here in Highland.    The Wal-Mart company is adding a second store in Hammond,  not because Hammond needs a second store,   but it will be built across the street from the southeast side of Chicago.   Lower sales taxes for the customer and no dumb minimum Wal-Mart only wage law from the alderman of Chicago for the company.   So everybody wins except for Illinois.   I guess Illinois government folks just don't want to understand simple economics.   

Something new to the blog.   Stupid Idea of the Day!    Since Open Mouth, Insert Foot entries seem to be my more popular posts,  maybe this will be too.   Since many of my posts are about the idiotic, weird or just the plain stupidity of many of the positions of today's liberals, its natural. 

Today's "winner" is a man from California.  Read about it here.   He wants to legalize pot,  and for what noble purpose?   To close a hole in California state budget.    That's right,  to balance the budget.   Instead of cutting the budget like normal people would do,   he would allow lawmakers a new source of money to waste.  From I guess the tax money raised from a now illegal product.  Doesn't this sound like the arguments the supporters of state lotteries said when they wanted to start those.   

My comment to you today is:   Why is it so hard for politicos to spend less money?   Why can't we as taxpayers take away the idea that it is ok to spend money the government doesn't have?  Why is it more acceptable to over spend, instead of balancing the budget?    Why do we allow unbalanced spending for non emergencies?

Here in Lake County Indiana,  we are debating a county income tax.   We are now the last county in Indiana that doesn't have a county income tax.   It has been voted on before and overwhelmingly defeated. The state is going to withhold $15 million from being sent back to the county if we don't enact this stupid tax.    Most town councils in the county have thankfully passed resolutions against this tax.   But I can't see the county wanting to pass on that $15mil.   But the county budget is about $1 billion,  so it could be done (the cuts that is),  and the right thing done by passing on this bad deal.    Just cut 15 million and give the taxpayer a break for once.   The state has no right to mandate a county income tax.   Just because all the other counties gave in doesn't mean we need to jump off that cliff as well.    Once a tax has started it is nearly impossible to stop it.    Hopefully the county will not be smoking pot when it time to vote on this one.

I just don't get this socialized medicine thing.    It has never worked anywhere on this planet,  but people just keep wanting us to try it too.    Here is yet another example of why socialized medicine just doesn't work.    Read about it here.    Good luck with getting a second opinion when you have socialized medicine, and this guy from England dies of something really dumb.  

If the U.S. goes to socialized medicine like England,  look for most medical advances to stop.    How many new drugs and treatments come from countries with socialized medicine.   None to few.    We subsidize the rest of the world when it comes to medical advances.   In the few places where the free market is allowed to work,  the advances are there.    Image what we could have had and could have,   if we had a true free market in medicine in the U.S. and else where. 

Just compare the average community hospital in the U.S.  and England.    The average U.S. community hospital is always remodeling and building on their campuses.  Even ones in poor communities.    The average English hospital is outdated and rundown,  they don't remodel very often and forget about new contruction.   We would lose thousands and thousands of contruction jobs just from socialized medicine stopping the updating of hospital buildings.    Because local organizations are the one building local hospitals not a central government.  

Local hospitals in Northwest Indiana are on a building boom now.   Two complete new hospitals are on the drawing boards.   The  recently privatized county  hospital in  Porter County  will be building a  completely new campus  soon.     Most of the  other  hospitals are working on or are planning big projects.   Margaret-Mercy in Dyer is finishing a $60 million project,   and Community in Munster is just starting a $30 million project.  These are just a few of the projects.    Folks do you think these projects would be happening with socialized medicine?     Not a chance!  

Sure it not a perfect system but is far better then anything else out there.    We shouldn't have to give up great care for bad medicine because of funding problems.    Get the government out of the medical money business and the local organizations will step up and really solve the problems that there are.   Most of problems in medicine are caused by the government.  It is not the solution  by increasing the involvement by it.  

Does the Republican Party really want Conservatives around?  It sure doesn't seem like it at times.   It seems like we get tolerated only because the votes that make the Republicans the majority one.   I was thinking about it after reading David Limbaugh's  post about the social liberal Republicans seeking the president nod.    Read it here.   We are talking about Rudy Guiliani for the most part.   If you only listened to the "mainstream" media you would think he was the front runner.   He is the type of Republican that they wish we all were. 

David  thinks that social liberal Republicans have little chance of the nomination.   I hope he is right.    Because the Republicans will lose if they nominate a liberal.   Look how well it is working for the Democrats.   President Clinton is the only one that they got elected recently and he hid his liberalism to get elected.   Liberals don't need both major parties, they should even have the one they got.   The Democrat party has suffered very much and has lost most of it support since the lefties hijacked it.   

The only reason that the Republicans have had the majority for most of the time lately is the support of conservatives.   The Democrats ran non-liberals out of their party.   A majority of UNION members of all people vote Republican today.    Most Religious people vote Republican today.    A lot of those folks used to be Democrats and were the conservatives of that party.     Most didn't want to leave the Democrat party,  but  had no choice.     My dad is a good example (both religious and a union member),  he says he's a Democrat but hasn't voted for one since the 1970's.  

President Reagan of course won huge with the conservatives.   No thanks to the talking heads on tv,  that would like conservatives to be more "moderate".     They said it then,  and say it now.   Its still wrong.   The Republicans are the majority when they are conservative.   They were the minority when the "Rockfeller" Republicans ran the party.    And it will be if the liberals take the Republican party too. 

Conservatives are the true majority of the United States.   The parties forget that at their own loss all too often.    No matter how often the media or the elite says it that impossible for a conservative to win,   the reality is that liberals can't win.     Or win in most places.  Places like San Fran and the upper east side are few and far between.     I think America is wanting a true conservative party really bad.   Whether or not the Republican party wants to be that party is unknown.   The Democrats have chosen to not be that party.  

But most people don't know that the U.S.  is majority conservative,  due to the misinformation and the bias of the media.   All to often,  important people in the Republican party believe this misinformation and act that way.    Reagan showed the way and some do see it.    Run as a conservative,   no need to hide it.  

  

BP's expansion of it's Northwest Indiana refinery will be delayed due to opposition.    Indiana recently gave BP a permit to increase pollution due to the expansion project.    Illinois and Michigan politicians are going crazy over this.   As a said in a past post,  what business is it of theirs?    I dare say it wouldn't be a problem if this refinery had been placed in their states,  but neither Illinois or Michigan are very business friendly these days.   Nobody seemed to do much before this permit in the way of opposition.    It was looking like there would be little opposition to it.    It not like there are companies lining up to spend 3 billion in northern lake county.  Oh well.

The permit allows pollution that is well below federal and state rules.    Indiana rules are stricter then both federal,  Illinois and Michigan's.    The discharge would be 99.9% water,  there is no technology at this point to make it lower.  So the issue really isn't about pollution (Ok maybe a little bit for enviro groups it is,  but not the politicians).    A refinery cannot be pollution free.   

I guess it remains to be seen if this project dies or not.    I guess we will be paying $3 a gallon for gas a little longer. 

Its so hard to get people to look at this without the pollution issue over everything else.  Pity

The Minimum  Wage and  Defense Spending,  what  do they  have in  common.   Nothing,  until recently.   Since funding for the war in Iraq had strings attached,   the minimum wage got a boost for the first time in ten years.   Since the minimum wage increase was the lessor of two evils,  (the first bill for war funding included a pullout date) President Bush signed it.   Neither Republicans or Bush supported the minimum wage increase. 

So what is wrong with this picture.   In order to get funding for the military,  President Bush had to give the Democrats and its ally Big Labor (well not so big) a victory.    How  does it  that unrelated items end up on the same bill?  A few years ago,  the line-item veto was tried during the Clinton adminstration to stop these add-ons.    The Supreme Court  of course shot down that idea almost right  away. 

Why can't we stop Congress from sending bills to the president with these add-ons.    All items should be separate bills not all lumped into a big mess that it is today.    The president and the executive branch cannot check the legislative branch this way.    In order for things that need to be done,  all the other unwanted things happen too.   The president needs to be able to check the excesses of Congress.

If all things came separate,   we wouldn't have the bridge to nowhere.    Or any of  that nasty pork that is bankrupting the country.   Everything would have to stand on its own.   We need to stop all the bad ideas that turn into law because they got tacked on to something important.     I guess if I were president I would veto almost everything.     The funding for the military is important but the minimum wage shouldn't even be government business.   Its the way we got the minimum wage in the first place,  it came with other depression era relief items. 

I am wondering if anybody here at Townhall submitted a question to the YouTube-CNN Democrat Debate?   I thought about submitting a question.  I decided that whatever I came up with would never get selected, due to the very liberal nature of both CNN and Youtube.    So I didn't think it would have been worth the time to do.   The main question that I would have asked if I had bothered. 

How would you and your adminstration win the war in Iraq?

I figured  a generic question about Iraq would be too easy to spin.   They would go about how fast they would get the military out of Iraq and how Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror.   I could have added to the question that since all they did was criticize the presidents handing of the war how would they do it,  but then they could say they would never had been there to begin with.     So to make backtracking  and the rewriting history harder,  and to make it look like losing was not a option here is the question.     So how would you clean up "Bush's War"  and do it with honor and without defeat, without saying it.  

But CNN would have never let me ask them that would they?     Too bad it wasn't Fox,  they would be more likely to ask a question like that.   I get so sick of the mainstream media's softball questions.  

So what would you have asked them or what did you ask them?    Since none of your questions would have been asked either,    guess how they would have answered and  spun it.    

If you are a regular reader of my blog,  you may have noticed the entries on BP's plan to expand the oil refinery  here in Northwest Indiana.     Its a 3 billion dollar plan to expand the plant to refine Canadian crude (oil that is,  not their socialists).    Well,,, the plant has got its permits from the state to emit a little more pollution,  (since it is getting bigger,, duh),    and the envirocrazes go nuts over it.  

Never mind that the pollution would be still well below state and federal rules doesn't  matter.   They say that BP is going to kill Lake Michigan.   Never mind that BP has its own water treatment plant and would spend $300 million more on added pollution controls in the expansion.    No that still not good enough!   They want bigger spending on things that in reality wouldn't lower pollution much but would be expensive.   Haven't they heard the rule of not enough return for the money?   I guess not.    Or maybe they do!  

If that wasn't enough Illinois Democrat politicians are getting in on it.   Like Illinois doesn't ever pollute the lake! Governor Blagojevich of Illinois sent Governor Daniels a letter telling him to stop the expansion.    So far Daniels is ignoring it,  saying the expansion will go forward.   Governor Blagojevich is sticking his nose where it doesn't belong.     Illinois  politicians stick their noses into Northwest Indiana plans for economic growth all too often.   Last time I checked it still Indiana here.  So go home Governor Blagojevich,  you wouldn't be against this refinery had BP put it in Illinois.    But they didn't because of the anti-business climate there today.

But I am getting away from the point of this post.    The environmentalist doesn't really want this refinery here.   Or any refinery anywhere for that matter.   There is a reason why there hasn't been a totally new refinery built in the US since that early 1970's.   Or all that many expansions of existing plants either (lots of old ones closed though).   Environmentalists aren't all that interested in pollution control devices (even though they say they are).     They aren't all that interested in making alternative fuels really work either.   

There isn't a shortage of crude oil like you would think either (the media does a great job messing that up).     There is a shortage of refinery space!    Environmentalists have been very successful at blocking refineries.   After taxes this is the second reason for the high cost of gas today.    They cannot refine enough to meet demand!   Add the rules for  summer  blends  to the mix as well  its amazing the price isn't even higher! 

What the environmentalist movement  really wants is America to get out of its cars.   They just don't say it because like many other lefty causes,  its unpopular  and unrealistic.    It would ruin the economy of the United States to do that.   Plus public transit is impractical for the suburbs, rural areas and even many areas of major cities  where most Americans live and work today.    But  they work at ending the economic freedom of most of us.   

Cars are a big part of why America is as wealthy as it is today.   It is still one of the biggest business' in the US today.    Cars give us the freedom to live and work just about anywhere.   It makes the suburbs possible,  where most of the economic growth and  most of the affordable homes are today.   If we were limited to only the cities there would be more poor and less economic growth overall for all Americans.   We would be a nation of renters instead of homeowners.  

Pollution is easy to attack.    Nobody likes pollution,   but it is a reality of modern life.     We should do things to reduce it,   but it need to be practical and affordable.    A wealthy nation can be interested in reducing pollution,  a poor one cannot afford it.     Let the market do it,   it works better then government rules and controls.   BP knows all too well that it cannot pollute without people knowing.   Big companies are very afraid of bad press nowadays,  almost to the point of too much.   They don't defend themselves very well either,  but the press is always going to be against them too.   But media reform is a different problem today.    

There aren't any good reasons for the refinery not to go forward.   It just needs to be seen in the right light.  

UPDATE:   BP blinks on plan to boost pollution.    I guess it remains to be seen if Northwest Indiana loses this investment due to meddling from mostly out of state opposition.     

Congress today has yet again voted to continue funding to PBS.   To the tune of $420 million!   Its 15% of PBS's budget,  so it would be a easy line in the federal budget to get rid of.    Many companies  and organizations routinely cut 15% from their budgets so PBS could too.     PBS can continue to exist,  but there is no good reason that I can think of why the taxpayer needs to pay for it. 

But of course Congress doesn't see it that way.   It continues to think it is smarter than the average taxpayer so it funds  it to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.   Each year!    A lot has changed in television since the 1960's when PBS was founded.     Many of its shows make money,  and many people,  companies and organizations give it big money.   So it wouldn't even go away.   Replace the public money with private or cut the budget.   Let the people who think PBS is important donate to pay for it.    THIS IS A EASY ONE FOLKS!!!

PBS is one of the many reasons why the federal government will never get a hold of the big spending.   When they cannot stop funding things that the government has no business spending money on.   I have never donated to my local PBS stations because I feel I have already contributed to them.    Via my tax money.    I can't image I am the only one that has not donated to the local station for that reason.   I have no choice whether or not I like PBS or not,  I fund it.     That doesn't seem very American to me to make people pay for things they don't want to pay for.

I want my $420 million back Congress!!!

Worst Congress ever!

This line will never be said as much as that other line popular with liberals in the media(and other places). Which is too bad because it is true unlike then the other one!

Funny you don't hear about this one as often as President Bush's voter approval rate.    Yes,  Congress' Approval Rating is lower then President Bush's rate.     Wouldn't you wish the "Mainstream Media"  would report this as often,  but that isn't going to happen any day soon.   Pity,  "News" organizations are so awful these days.   

An article on Newsbuster today reports on the non-reporting of the homeschooled spelling bee champ.   Evan O'Dorney is homeschoolled by his mom.  Yeah I guess I hadn't noticed that they didn't note the school he was from. Cause there isn't one.  Not that I would want to subject any child to public school in California.  Only ABC noticed that Evan is homeschooled.
The media sure doesn't like homeschooling much.   Never mind that homeschooled kids outperform both public and private school kids on tests.    Nope,   they make it look like only wacky people homeschool their kids.    But it is only one way that the "mainstream" media forgets parts of the story.   Like the spinach scare last year.    The MSM didn't note that the spinach was organic.  I had to find out that from alternate media.   So very few know that.   Why wouldn't the media report on that.   Because the MSM is for organic farming and the public teacher union.   Can't report on their warts which they have plenty of.    Can't move from the party line.  Don't ever believe  that they report fairly,  because they don't.