Is Chili Mac next on the list of bailouts?

By S.J. Masty

Tomorrow, After Lunch - The epic nationalization of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is expected to cost taxpayers "between $50 billion and $500 billion" or more, say economists abandoning pocket calculators for a dartboard.

Next, Lehman Brothers sold the cow for a handful of magic beans and were allowed to collapse. But it is an election year, government's heels are rounder than usual, so it may not be the end of the bailouts.

Both presidential candidates have responded dynamically by adopting a concerned, mature, "I've got gas" expression as though they are auditioning for Alka Seltzer ads, then saying that somebody needs to do, um, something.

Republican John McCain - standing for smaller government, paying debts and rugged individualism - won't admit that the supposed remedy for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is pure socialism, as found in those goofy little Third World countries whose legislatures vote to repeal the law of gravity, and earn most of their Gross National Product by selling postage stamps to collectors.

For Democrat Barack Obama, who has never seen a problem that cannot be solved by borrowing your Visa card, blowing a few hundred billion is probably, well, necessary. Change we need - because all the folding money is going to Washington.

Meanwhile, none of the candidates has dared to speak out on another crisis: Chili Mac.

For more on this commentary, go to The D.C. Examiner

The premature death of Sarah Palin's political career

by Llewellyn H. Rockwell

The frenzied reaction of the middle class all over the country toward Sarah Palin has no real precedent that I can remember. Indeed, the reaction especially among women is completely understandable. She provides a much welcome cultural break from the chip-on-the-shoulder, grudge-against-the-world model of public women that have been held up to us for years, embodied in the belligerent and insufferable person of Hillary Clinton.

Sarah, on the other hand, is both beautiful and professionally accomplished, a wife and mother and a natural politician, both religious and secular, both feminine and fears no tasks such as hunting that are usually associated with men. She offers a different model of a woman who has excelled not through intimidation and aggressive demands for reparation, but through her own efforts, charms, and intelligence.

What's more, her political outlook has much to recommend it, from what we can gather so far. There is a libertarian impulse here. She has rejected the perks of public life in favor of common sense. She is friendly to business interests but unfriendly to special privileges. She has praised Ron Paul and rejected the party mentality of GOP regulars.

It strikes many people as a brilliant choice on McCain's part, and I would agree. Social conservatives have forgiven all of McCain's deviations. Many people who just last week didn't give a fig about whether he wins or loses have come around completely. She will, of course, be a huge focus of the campaign.

The claim against her that she lacks "experience" is one of the most bogus things out there. For starters, the history of VPs shows a long history of people with very little of what is called "experience" today. And contrary to what media pundits say, what is far more important than experience are the political values you hold.

The demand for experience seems to imply that somehow we are seeking social and global managers for public office, and that is manifestly what we do not want. In a truly liberal society, the job of a White House executive could be held by anyone or no one.

For more on this commentary, go to Lewrockwell.com

Fighting back against junk mail

Did you know the average person gets only 1.5 personal letters each week, compared to 10.8 pieces of junk mail? Each person will receive almost 560 pieces of junk mail this year.

That’s 4.5 million tons of junk mail produced each year!

44 percent of all junk mail is thrown in the trash, unopened and unread. Approximately 40 percent of the solid mass that makes up our landfills is paper and paperboard waste.

Believe or not there are ways to fight this nuisance.

In addition to contacting the Direct Mail Association to opt-out of all unsolicited offers, the folks at the Office of Strategic Influence suggest attaching the postage-paid envelope that comes in the unsolicited letter to a box containing a brick. Since the company has to pay $.25 for each ounce, an eight pound package will set them back $25.

As a take off on this idea, Steven Kinsella on LewRockwell.com suggested a way to stick it to fundraising letters for political candidates, especially the McBama camp. With the right amount of diligence and patience, one can make 2009 a year hassle-free from junk mail.

McCain, Obama Equally Ignorant on Solving Gas Price Crisis

by Radley Balko

In an interview last week on National Public Radio, Barack Obama was asked about his proposal for a "windfall profits" profits tax on oil companies. To her credit, the interviewer prefaced her question by noting that nearly all economists from across the political spectrum oppose the idea. Taxing oil company profits won't make gas any cheaper — it'll likely make it more expensive in the long run by discouraging exploration — and it won't speed the development of alternative energy sources. Obama's answer was pure demagoguery, pitting senior citizens and working class families against oil companies, who he says are reaping profits "hand over fist."

Obama's opponent John McCain has smartly opposed a tax on oil company profits — and Obama has promptly attacked him for it.

But McCain isn't much better. McCain has proposed an equally ridiculous "gas tax holiday," which will also do almost nothing to provide relief at the pump. Obama has smartly opposed the idea — and McCain has promptly attacked him for it.Economic ignorance is nothing new in politics. Neither is the idea that a candidate would perpetuate economic idiocy he knows to be false because it plays into the narrative he's pitching to the voters. But no issue seems to prompt more jaw-dropping sophistry and anti-capitalist demagoguery than gas prices

For more on this commentary, go to FOX News.com

Paris Hilton attacks back (in a funny kind of way)

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

Flight of the Valkyries, ghetto style

How apropos a Vietnam vet who was a ground attack pilot suggest this.

Colo. blogger provides "fair and balanced" satirical magazine cover

By now, everyone, including those living in the most remote holler of West Virginia, knows of the controversy surrounding the current edition of The New Yorker. The cover shows presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, dressed in traditional Muslim attire, with his wife, Michelle, dressed in camouflage pants and sporting an AK-47 assault rifle exchanging a pound in the Oval Office of the White House.

Upon its release, the magazine cover invoked outrage including a statement by Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton calling it "tasteless and offensive." In response to the hoopla, the New Yorker issued a statement saying the cover was satire (ostensibly to the laughable characterization FOX news "anchor" - and dumb blond of the year-nominee - E. D. Hill made following Obama's victory rally in St. Paul, Minnesota on June 3 referring to "the pound" as "a terrorist fist-jab" ).

Speaking of "fair and balanced," get a load of the satirical "New Yorker" cover a Colorado blogger did of presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain as a POW in the Hanoi Hilton. Given the historical records that undergirds both "covers," one can only wonder if it's really satire.

Obama and McCain are both wrong on foreign policy

by Sheldon Richman

Barack Obama’s call for talks with “our enemies” is shaping up as a major bone of contention between him and John McCain in the presidential campaign. As usual, both the Democrat and the Republican get it wrong.

Obama says he would sit down with so-called adversaries such as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Cuban President Raul Castro, and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to talk out their differences. Although somewhat vague, he emphasizes that such talks should be held with few conditions. As his website puts it, “Obama is willing to meet with the leaders of all nations, friend and foe. He will do the careful preparation necessary, but will signal that America is ready to come to the table, and that he is willing to lead.”

McCain has slammed Obama, arguing that his position shows his “inexperience and reckless judgment.”

How can both be wrong?

For more on this commentary, go to The Future of Freedom Foundation.

Kissing the Republicans goodbye

by Emily Mullin

Before I delve into the core of this column and its fundamental purpose, I must first preface by telling you a little bit about myself.

I am a student at Ohio University where I study journalism and political science. I write for the local newspaper as a campus reporter and am the vice president and acting president of the OU College Republicans. I was, up until recently, actively involved in the presidential campaign to elect Rep. Ron Paul for many months.

Last week, a column I wrote assessing GOP presidential candidate and now nominee, John McCain, appeared in my local newspaper. While I found no fault in the article (in fact, I thought it to be well-written and more than adequately researched), my Republican companions and those of the right persuasion were not impressed by my candid evaluation of John McCain and the state of the Republican Party as it stands.

Many members of the club and local county Republican Party approached me with concern and some were outright enraged at my public display of criticism for the Arizona senator. I was accused of being "divisive" and "irresponsible" and was told that I should not have exercised my journalistic influence because my views were in conflict with those of the club and county party. I was advised that – despite my personal feelings – I must support John McCain for the "sake of the club" and for the "good of the party" or the club would take necessary steps to resolve the problem.

When I made it known that I had no intention of supporting or campaigning for John McCain, I was asked to step down from my position because it compromised party and club unity. When I refused to simply acquiesce and give up my position, I was threatened with impeachment.

For more on this op/ed piece, go to LewRockwell.com