The Speaker of the House, John "Big-Spender" Boehner thinks you are stupid.  He thinks you're REALLY stupid!  Check out the the chart Cato put together:

As the article notes:

The “cuts” in the Boehner plan are only cuts from the CBO baseline, which is an assumed path of constantly rising spending. If Congress wanted to, it could require CBO to increase its “baseline” spending by, say, $5 trillion over the next decade. Then Boehner could claim that he was “cutting” spending by $5.9 trillion, even though his plan hadn’t changed. You can see that discretionary “cuts” against baselines don’t mean anything.

The way to make real spending cuts is to abolish programs and agencies. But it’s been eight months since a landslide election that focused on the issue of spending cuts, and the Republican leadership hasn’t proposed any major terminations.

In other words, it SMOKE AND MIRRORS!  Again!  No real cuts.  IIRC, This is the third time Boehner has failed America.  It's not a Democrat pulling this crap, it's the Speaker that the Tea Party put into that office.

It's time to tell him to "Get your ass in line!"  Who's running against him in the primary?

So, it seems Boehner has reverted to type (Big-Spenderous Maximus).  His proposed plan to cut spending when we're facing a $1,600 Billion deficit this year is to cut just $6 Billion next year.  Oh, sure, he promises $1,200 Billion in spending cuts in the out years.

Yeah, right.  How many times have the Dems fooled us with their "tax raises now; spending cuts later" lies?  Too many.  Now it's the Repulican's speaker doing the lying.

Everything else they promise is a lie and they know it.  They KNOW that they are lying!  They cannot bind later congresses to any proposed caps.  The only thing real is what they cut this year and next.

Tell your representative to vote "No!" on Boehner's big bomb.  Then, get rid of that big-spending SOB and put in a Speaker who gets that we cannot keep over-spending.

1.  The great Mark Steyn on The Gang of Six and their deal:

If you take the Gang’s figure of half-a-trillion dollars in immediate “aggressive deficit reduction” seriously, that represents about what the U.S. government borrows every four months. What’s “aggressive” about that? And what’s immediate about it? It’s all unspecified “discretionary spending caps” and “process reforms” that will collapse like soufflés ten minutes after the signing ceremony. 

2. Using our tax money to insult us.  "Corpus Christi" does just that:

“Corpus Christi” is selling out performances left and right at the Cellar Theater of the San Pedro Playhouse.

It has drawn protesters, as well, who object to its portrayal of a gay Christ figure.

The script, in which playwright Terrence McNally weds a passion play to a coming-out story, has a clear message of love and acceptance.

The play follows the arc of the Gospels, transplanting the tale to the Texas coast. It begins with the birth of Joshua (Jonathan Itchon) in a fleabag hotel; follows him through a rough prom night in which he comes to terms with his sexuality after connecting with Judas Iscariot (Mark McCarver); has him confront temptation in the form of James Dean (Robby Vance) and go on to gather his disciples, all gay men; he performs various miracles, and is ultimately betrayed and crucified.

The San Pedro Playhouse receives money from the city of San Antonio. You may rest assured that "acceptance" does not include any consideration for those of us who object to our tax money being used to insult us.

3.   From 1963?  Interesting, if true.   "Current Communist Goals":

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
. . .
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."
. . .
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."

There are 45 in all.  The buggers sure have been successful, no?

4.   With friends like these,  conservatives need no enemies.  Wealthy GOP donors "couldn't live with Sarah Palin," voted for Obama instead:

It's in this must-read post from Jim Geraghty. He quotes Gov. Chris Christie's comments to a gathering of big election donors on why he will not be running for president, which is a worthwhile read in itself.

. . .

Cry me a river. They looked at Obama's Harvard law degree and that sharp pant crease and thought he was one of them, or at least more so than that uncredentialed piece of Wasilla trash, with all her vulgar "you betchas" and excessive children, including that embarrassing baby she doted on. And these snobs, instead of apologizing for contributing to the downfall of America, have the nerve to complain about "class warfare." 

5.  Heard about the new photography that allows you to change the focus of the picture after you take it (as you view it)?  You must see these to believe them.  Click on parts of the pictures to change the focus.  How does it work?

Recording light fields requires an innovative, entirely new kind of sensor called a light field sensor. The light field sensor captures the color, intensity and vector direction of the rays of light. This directional information is completely lost with traditional camera sensors, which simply add up all the light rays and record them as a single amount of light.  

Follow the link and try it.  AMAZING!

In a CNN interview (with the execrable Piers Morgan), Dave Ramsey makes a good analogy about a family debt that looks like this:

$366,000 in credit card debt

$55,000 income, and

$96,000 per year in spending

 (H/T: An email from Kurt, pointing to Staple News)

Boston had BEAUTIFUL weather!  Met a lot of geniuses...lots of fun to stop there for a few days.

(But, Robin, geniuses?  What were YOU doing there...?)

Hey, even geniuses make mistakes!

Got to go out and see the Lexington Battle Green again.  Cool!

Had an interesting series of discussions with a friend/co-worker who has a rather different political view than mine. We've been finding what we agree on, like both of us hating toll roads.  We also both hated the wall-to-wall TV coverage of the C@sey Anth0ny case. But then came the justness of the verdict.

I believe that it's better that a guilty woman go free than an innocent woman be convicted. My friend disagreed, and stated the belief that the opposite view was in the US Constitution,  So, I did a bit of research this evening.  Didn't find much support for a "better an innocent go to jail than a guilty person go free" statement in the Constitution.  But I did find Alexander Volokh's 1997 piece, "n Guilty Men."

"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer," 2 says English jurist William Blackstone. The ratio 10:1 has become known as the "Blackstone ratio." 3 Lawyers "are indoctrinated" with it "early in law school." 4 "Schoolboys are taught" it. 5 In the fantasies of legal academics, jurors think about Blackstone routinely. 6

But why ten? Other eminent legal authorities through the ages have put their weight behind other numbers. "One" has appeared on Geraldo. 7 "It's better for four guilty men to go free than one innocent man to be imprisoned," says basketball coach George Raveling. 8 But "it's better to turn five guilty men loose than it is to convict one innocent man," according to ex-Mississippi executioner and roadside fruit stand operator Thomas Berry Bruce, who ought to know. 9 "It is better to let nine guilty men free than to convict one innocent man," counters lawyer Bruce Rosen from Madison, Wisconsin. 10 Justice Benjamin Cardozo certainly believed in five for execution, 11 and allegedly favored ten for imprisonment, 12 which is a bit counterintuitive. Benjamin Franklin thought "that it is better [one hundred] guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer." 13 Mario Puzo's Don Clericuzio heard about letting a hundred guilty men go free and, "struck almost dumb by the beauty of the concept . . . became an ardent patriot." 14 Denver radio talk show host Mike Rosen claims to have heard it argued "in the abstract" that it's better that 1000 guilty men go free than one innocent man be imprisoned, and comments, "Well, we get our wish." 15

Or, perhaps, it may be merely "a few," 16 "some," 17 "several," 18 "many" (and particularly more than eight), 19 "a considerable amount," 20 or even "a goodly number." 21 Not all commentators weigh acquitting the guilty against the conviction of one innocent man. A Missouri district court said in 1877 that it was "better that some guilty ones should escape than that many innocent persons should be subjected to the expense and disgrace attendant upon being arrested upon a criminal charge." 22 And in Judge Henry J. Friendly's opinion, "Most Americans would allow a considerable number of guilty persons to go free than to convict any appreciable number of innocent men." 23 It is unclear whether "considerable" is greater or less than "appreciable." 24

n guilty men, then. The travels and metamorphoses of n through all lands and eras are the stuff that epic miniseries are made of. n is the father of criminal law. This is its story.

It's long, and the numbers are to footnotes.  Worth a read.

Now, can we all just shut up about this woman?  Interest brings ad revenue brings a paycheck.  Don't give her a paycheck!

Drudge noted the report:  Montana ultra-marathon race cancelled due to snow

MISSOULA — The race director of a 100-mile ultra-marathon foot race through the Flathead National Forest has cancelled the event due to lingering snow on the route that he says would make the course too dangerous for runners and likely prevent anyone from finishing within the required 36-hour limit.

Brad Lamson said that portions of the course for the Swan Crest 100 have deep snow that is concealing signs that mark trail intersections.

He said he’s convinced the snow won’t melt in time for the event scheduled for July 29.

We all knows that when Al Gore and his "environmentalists" friends show up, a cold front hits.  But for this they must have been camped there all spring & summer!

Let's start with a New Hampshire judge lying about what a man said and jailing him for two days over the supposed offense:

Adam Mueller, aka Ademo Freeman, stood inside the Keene District Courthouse in New Hampshire, waiting for Judge Edward Burke to step inside so he could ask him a question.

Less than two minutes later, he was arrested for threatening the judge, a felony charge called “improper influence.”

But Mueller had his camera rolling, so he captured the entire exchange on video.

And there is absolutely no evidence that he threatened Burke.

Here is that exchange, but you can also hear it for yourself in the above video...

You can go there to view the video.  Just ignore the over-the-top music at the start and end, it doesn't play during the critical parts.

Then, there's the police in Quartzite, AZ Wordldnetdaily):

A small town in Arizona is suddenly a YouTube sensation after a town-hall meeting devolved into a physical clash as a woman was forcibly removed from speaking during the public portion of the event.

Jennifer "Jade" Jones, 45, of Quartzsite, Ariz., was taken into custody by local police at the behest of Quartzsite councilmembers, over the objections of the mayor, who pleaded with officers not to remove the woman.

That's another video you need to go see.  Seems a lot of the people there think their police are not serving the public, but instead, the powerful.  how long until some of them decide to emulate the Battle of Athens, TN?

On this day after we've finished celebrating our independence, consider the words that brought us this freedom.  An extract from the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Everyone sees the "Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" part quite often.  I think most of us get that.  Except for the Marxists, that is (they just hate it).  It's the rest that gets glossed over.

For instance: the purpose of government!  It's not to "spread the wealth around," you ass.  It's not for Marx's "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need," you dipshit.  No, it's to secure the rights of the people!

Consent of the governed.  Any "government" that does not have that is not a legitimate government.  As Jeff Jacoby put it (via Instapundit):

If Nature and Nature’s God intended human beings to be free and equal, then the only legitimate government must be self-government. For if none of us is naturally subordinate or superior to anyone else, no one has the right to rule us without first obtaining our approval. Political power, Locke had written, stems “only from compact and agreement, and the mutual consent of those who make up the community.’’

The right to institute a new government.  This doesn't have to be by revolution.  No, thanks to the genius of our founders, we can use amendments!

Genius, ideed.  Look how much is packed into just these few words.  The knotheads we have now would stretch a bare thousandth as much content across what seems a hundred times as many words.

Go back and look at the full text and count the references to God:  Nature's God ... all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator ... appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world ... with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence.

The modern liberal/progressive/Marxist hates--HATES!--all the above, most especially God.  They work tirelessly to destroy it all so that you will give up your liberty.

Guard your freedom jealously.  They seek to take it and to bind you with chains of which King George could barely have dreamed.

On this the day before Independence Day, let us consider the words of a familiar hymn (taken from Wikipedia):

1

My country, 'tis of thee,

Sweet land of liberty,

Of thee I sing;

Land where my fathers died,

Land of the pilgrims' pride,

From ev'ry mountainside

Let freedom ring!

2

My native country, thee,

Land of the noble free,

Thy name I love;

I love thy rocks and rills,

Thy woods and templed hills;

My heart with rapture thrills,

Like that above.

3

Let music swell the breeze,

And ring from all the trees

Sweet freedom's song;

Let mortal tongues awake;

Let all that breathe partake;

Let rocks their silence break,

The sound prolong.

4

Our fathers' God to Thee,

Author of liberty,

To Thee we sing.

Long may our land be bright,

With freedom's holy light,

Protect us by Thy might,

Great God our King.

Most of us know it to there.  If that.  Look at that fourth verse again.  It's an explicit prayer to God.  Not likely that the panty waist, red-diaper doper baby Marxists who're in charge now would let such a verse through.  But our forebears knew better.  Public reverence served a social purpose, reminding all of the obligations that bind us.  Even those who broke them honored them with their shame.

 

The article notes additions, but I don't think they make the grade.

 

Now, go back and look at those again.  Consider the words in your heart. 

 

Freedom.  Liberty.  God.

All things despised by the modern Marxist in the White House, the modern Marxists in the House and Senate, and the big government nanny-state Republicans who claim to love God and Country.  My bet is that not one in ten of our elected officials really believe in Freedom, Liberty, and God.

And who's fault is that?  OURS!  Guard your Freedom jealously.

They mean to steal it.  The Democrats would draft you into the Great Marxist Collective, the Republicans would enslave you in a maze of pro-big-business regulations.

Tomorrow is the day we celebrate the casting off of our chains.   Do not let these would be kings continue to encumber you with more new ones.

Remember the words.  Guard your Freedom jealously.