Just received word from WPHL-TV 17 in Philly. They plan on webcasting the major categories on a 1-hour delay like they did last year. That worked out pretty well last year.

In a message from Trevis Brower, Manager of Promotions & Production at PHL, he said . . .

Ross, the parade will be clipped out on myphl17.com on an approximate 1 hour delay.  You will be able to see the performances of the comics, fancies, string bands, and fancy brigades as individual clips on our Mummers players.

Or you can like us on Facebook and receive updates on when the individual performances are uploaded to the site.  Thanks for watching.

Merry Christmas y’all (that’s the southern lingo) or yooze guys, and Happy New Year. Will be watching the Mummers with you, wherever you are.

Order of march for the Mummers parade:

Link: WPHL-TV 17 Mummers Parade

Word is that President Obama and Michelle will ‘not be invited’ to the next royal wedding. Ostensibly because it will not be considered a ‘state occasion.’

Some consider it a snub of the Obamas. I would. And deservedly so.

President Obama showed Great Britain how much he respected them when, in his first month in office, he returned the bust of Winston Churchill to Great Britain.

In light of the Best Buy end-cap gifts that Obama gave the Prime Minister and the Queen, it is becoming obvious that Prince William has the class that Barack Obama lacks by not inviting them.

Link: President Obama not invited to Prince William’s wedding |   President Obama’s Gift For King Abdullah

“A Date Which Will Live in Infamy”: FDR Asks for a Declaration of War

The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on December 7, 1941, stunned virtually everyone in the United States military. Japan’s carrier-launched bombers found Pearl Harbor totally unprepared. President Franklin Roosevelt quickly addressed Congress to ask for a declaration of war as illustrated in this audio excerpt. Although he never mentioned Europe or the fact that Germany had by then declared war on the United States, the Pearl Harbor attack allowed him to begin the larger intervention in the European war he had long wanted.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt: Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our secretary of state a formal reply to a recent American message. While this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday the Japanese government also launched as attack against Malaya.

Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.

Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam.

Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.

Last night Japanese forces attacked Wake Island.

And this morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As commander in chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us. . .

Links:

Link to audio file. | Naval History and Heritage Command

Income taxes punish work, stifle innovation (except in ways to avoid a tax liability) and risk-taking. Coming to a network news outlet near you, in addition to all the racial stirrings provoked by the ‘post-racial’ Obama administration, prepare yourself for the next chapter in the Obama administration’s (aka Saul Alinsky) handbook; class envy/warfare.

It comes around in election seasons, which seem to never end nowadays. And it comes around whenever tax reform is discussed in the form of ‘tax cuts for the rich.’

Barring any intervening legislation, these are the numbers by income tax bracket of how the tax rates will change when ‘the Bush tax cuts’ expire.

• Up to $16,750: Rises from 10 percent to 15 percent
• From $16,751 to $58,200: Stays same at 15 percent, but entire bracket pays 5 percent additional on the first $16,750
• From $58,201 to $68,000: Rises from 15 percent to 28 percent
• From $68,001 to $137,300: Rises from 25 percent to 28 percent
• From $137,301 to $209,250: Rises from 28 percent to 31 percent
• From $209,251 to $373,650: Rises from 33 percent to 36 percent
• $373,651 and up: Rises from 35 percent to 39.6 percent

The spreadsheet below shows how much more of your income (not counting all the income credits and re-distribution schemes contained in the 75,000+ page Internal Revenue Code) you will owe Uncle Sam on every dollar you earn beginning January 1, 2011. Note the gimmick in the second tax bracket, where the poor and not as poor ‘working people’ reside. You know, the one class that Obama claims to advocate for. These brackets capture the majority of the income earning population. The tax rate remains the same, but the entire bracket pays 5 percent additional on the first $16,750. The consequence of this magic trick is putting the largest tax burden, as a percentage of income, square on the backs of the poor. The rate of increase on the next bracket, those whose income falls between $58,201 and $68,000, goes up by a massive 86.67 percent. The so-called ‘working people.’ I add ‘so-called’ to the discussion because this administration would like the dumb masses to believe that rich people don’t work. ‘Working people’ is class envy for the poor aimed at the rich, by the ‘uniter’ himself. It is a necessary function of class envy, which this administration so effortlessly employs. And so far gets away with.

Don’t be fooled by the tax brackets or these numbers either. They give the illusion that everybody is actually paying taxes. Everyone is not paying taxes. The truth is, for 2005, the top 1% of income earners paid 39% of all tax revenue. That’s up 2% since President Bush took office in 2000. 86% of all federal income taxes were paid by the top 25% of income earners. And 97% of all taxes paid are paid by the top 50% of income earners.

The power to use the ‘tax hammer’ to micro-manage voting, social and economic behavior is the drug the politicians must be weaned from. The FairTax takes that tax hammer away by putting the economic power where it belongs, with the people. All the people. Not Washington politicians and lobbyists. Because the FairTax is transparent, the FUD factor goes away. The Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt goes away, and citizens and entrepreneurs can make business decisions with some certainty of risk and tax consequences.

The FairTax unleashes the potential for economic activity, innovation, job creation, personal wealth and financial security without the interference of Washington and without increasing the national debt. And as a not insignificant side effect, the class warfare game with taxation becomes a thing of the past. Allowing the elected officials to concentrate their efforts to serving their constituents instead of trying to rob them.

Note: Due to popular demand and the current political climate, the above is a re-posting from a July 26,2010 post.

A Navy intelligence specialist stationed at Fort Bragg is in custody after an investigation revealed he allegedly sold top secret documents to an undercover FBI agent posing as a foreign intelligence officer.

Link:  NCIS: Sailor at Bragg Sold Secret Documents.

Why is it that if I take a thumb drive full of proprietary data off of the premises it is a leak. But if I take a TV out of Best Buy it is stolen?

This isn’t a stolen TV officer, it was leaked.

Point is, why isn’t Bradley Manning charged with theft, and the WikiLeaks guy charged with dealing in stolen property and put behind bars. Along with Michael Moore.

Link: Michael Moore campaigns to free Bradley Manning in war logs case

There are a lot of stories out there about an out-of-control TSA when it comes to their new screening techniques. One was a man being threatened with a $10,000 for refusing to go through the gauntlet and left the airport. What? You get fined for changing your mind and not flying?

John Tyner, 31, said he was told he could face a civil lawsuit and a $10,000 fine for leaving the screening area before the security check was complete.

It is crazy stuff like this that begs the question, just what kind of police power over travelers’ behavior does this group of government agents have? And, why is it not published or put out there so travelers can make their own informed decisions as to whether or not they want to object, fly, or drive?

There were reports where a woman wore a bikini and said ‘you’re welcome to see what I have under there if you want.’  And a guy wore a speedo.  This is hilarious, and a non-violent way to protest the politically corrrect security theater directed by Big Sis and produced by the TSA.

I want to see a video of a woman getting patted down and imitating the orgasm scene in ‘When Harry Met Sally.’ Or a guy putting one of those 18 inch dildos down his pants and see what reaction he gets. Figuring that it would be a news item, writing Janet Napolitano’s name on it, or maybe Big Sis, would be a good idea too.

I mean, surrendering yourself to a pat down and having a little fun isn’t against the law is it?

Links:

• California Man Tells TSA, Don’t ‘Touch My Junk’
• Original TSA encounter, cell phone video
• Woman Wears Bikini To LAX
• Passenger strips down to Speedo at TSA checkpoint

Spread the Word, Not the Wealth

Communism, it is often said, will work under the proper conditions. Though it might fail in a big country with millions of disconnected individuals, it should work in a small community of relatively close-knit comrades, who would thrive under a system of shared burden and harvest.

If you think that successful communism is small communism, the experience of America’s first settlers should dispel any romantic notions you may harbor on the subject.

Plymouth Colony, a small community of settlers struggling to survive in a new land, learned about the benefits of private property the hard way. When the colony began in 1621, all the goods and products were held in a “common stock.” All were to contribute equally and share equally in the community’s bounty—or lack thereof. The governor of Plymouth Colony, William Bradford, recorded the experiment of communal living in his journal. As he explains, there was little harvest and much dissatisfaction. Young men objected to working for the benefit of other men’s wives and children. The strong objected that they received the same amount of food and clothing as the weak. The older men objected to laboring the same amount as the young. The women objected to performing household chores for men other than their husbands, deeming it “a kind of slavery.”

In response to the dearth of crops, starvation, and overall miserable condition that communal living had produced, Bradford introduced a system of private property in agriculture. He assigned “to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end, only for present use (but made no division for inheritance) and ranged all boys and youth under some family.” This new system of private property proved prosperous and enlivening. Men, women, and children no longer thought labor to be tyrannical and oppressive, and instead became industrious stewards of their individual plots of land, resulting in bountiful harvests.

From Plymouth Colony’s transformation, Bradford concluded that communism was incompatible with human nature. It is vain to advocate that “taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make [men] happy and flourishing. For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort.”

It only took Plymouth Colony three years (and several bouts of starvation) to clarify that pilgrim socialism was a failure. Equality is not desirable when it means equally starving to death. This Thanksgiving, as we celebrate family, and friends, and the blessings of this life, let us also recall our other inheritance from the Pilgrims—that of private property.

The above was graciously lifted from The Heritage Foundation.

Audio file: The history of Thanksgiving.