Most have probably never heard of him, but he’s worthy of our note and respect:

Frank Woodruff Buckles, Jefferson County’s most famous living citizen and the last surviving World War I doughboy, turns 110 years old Tuesday…

As the linked story goes on to note, Mr. Buckles is also a bit of a WWII veteran – being captured by the Japanese when he was working in the Philippines in WWII.

God bless this wonderful patriot.

From CNBC:

…America’s home ownership rate, after holding steady for a while, took a pretty big plunge in Q4, from 66.9 percent to 66.5 percent. That’s down from the 2004 peak of 69.2 percent and the lowest level since 1998…

…Now to vacancies. There were 18.4 million vacant homes in the U.S. in Q4 ’10 (11 percent of all housing units vacant all year round)…

This is why housing will not recover any time soon – and will likely suffer further price erosion through, at least, the end of 2012. There are just too many houses available (some sources indicate that the “shadow inventory” – homes held by banks but kept of the market – may run in to the millions of units), too many people with destroyed credit, too many unemployed and too much demographic pressure against rising prices (boomers are retiring, eg, and thus not looking to buy homes). Even when it starts to recover, don’t look for anything like rapidly rising house prices. Some areas might experience a boom from time to time, but the overall trend – perhaps for a generation – will be from flat to slightly up, with dips mixed in from time to time.

The really bad news is that the banks are at their wits end on what to do – they keep “extend and pretend” on their bad home loans (those they haven’t been able to push off on the taxpayer via TARP, that is) and hoping that that the economy will turn around so massively that housing prices will recover. But they never will – certainly not in the time frame necessary to take care of the problem. Government is clueless, too; mostly because the government actually relies upon the bankers to tell them what to do. What is needed is a complete break with the past.

In July of last year I cooked up a plan to fix things, and I still haven’t come across a better idea. Boiled down, it amounts to incentivizing banks to lease out foreclosed homes – preferably to the people they are foreclosing on – for three to five years. This gets the houses off the market, provides a revenue stream to the banks, allows the housing market to stabilize, gives foreclosed-on people a chance to rebuild their credit and generally relieves the pressure of the housing crisis. Unless and until government and the banks start doing things differently, nothing will improve in this area – and the bad news is that things will have to get a lot worse before public pressure can be developed to force government/bank action.

Just a lousy situation all around, and we’re stuck in it…

John Huntsman. He was governor of Utah. No, really. Anyways, he is currently our ambassador to China. And he’s a Republican. And the word is that Obama picked him for the spot to keep him out of the 2012 field. No, seriously. And now Huntsman, very cleverly, has merely burnished his foreign policy cred in preparation for taking on Obama in 2012.

I know, I know – the really big question now looms:

Who in heck has ever heard of Jon Huntsman?

I have – but only in a very minor, who-gives-a-hoot manner. And I’m pretty tuned in to politics – this guy hasn’t been crossing my radar. If I’m not too familiar with him, then you can rely upon it that 99% of the American electorate hasn’t heard of this guy. But he’s the big threat to Obama in 2012? On what grounds?

Reading his biography, I get the sense of a man who is far too much “in” with the Ruling Class to excite TEA Party support. Sure, he’s got some of the conventional conservative GOP positions on taxes and spending – and that is just great – but as the son of a bazillionaire who has spent his whole life in the very upper class, he’s just not going to resonate with Americans whose mortgages are underwater, pay has been cut and are wondering if they’ll have a job next month.

2012 will be a strange political year, of that I’m certain. So strange, in fact, that a unknown, Mormon guy from Utah might just pull it off…but this guy goes down the list of prospects to the bottom…the man most unlikely to get the GOP nomination. Let’s see if he can pull out of that cellar and make a splash.

From Reuters:

A federal judge in Florida struck down President Barack Obama’s landmark healthcare overhaul as unconstitutional on Monday in the biggest legal challenge yet to federal authority to enact the law.

U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ruled that the reform law’s so-called individual mandate went too far in requiring that Americans start buying health insurance in 2014 or pay a penalty.

“Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void,” he wrote, “This has been a difficult decision to reach and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications.”…

One can figure this is just a first step in the legal process, but I wonder if liberals will really want to fight this? There is a changing dynamic in America these days and while the courts are not reflective of popular movements, they are affected by their times. The paradigm of the past 80 years or so – that government has a right to interfere – is falling and if Obama and his Democrats press this issue in the courts, they might find themselves undoing great swaths of liberalism as judges suddenly re-discover the Constitution. The day of federal mandates is ending and this defeat of ObamaCare might just be the pebble which starts the avalanche.

More than likely, however, the liberals won’t see it like that – for so many years they have relied upon the courts to undo conservatism, they might not recognize that their day in court (as it were) is passing. Hubris tends to take over in dying elites and we can probably rely upon our liberals to keep marching right off the cliff.

A lot of things can happen today, so a bit of an open thread for free discussion of whatever pops up – but here are some interesting developments:

China’s tyrants attempt to seal off China from the revolts.

Ledeen notes the similarities between 1979 and 2011.

El Baradei: Iranian tool?

Interesting poll from Rasmussen:

Nearly half of the Republican Primary voters who support Sarah Palin say they are at least somewhat likely to vote for a third-party candidate if she does not win the GOP presidential nomination.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 46% of Likely Republican Primary Voters who favor Palin say they are at least somewhat likely to vote third-party if she isn’t nominated. That includes 22% who say it is Very Likely…

The survey goes on to note that about 1/3 of GOP likely primary voters are backing Palin right now – so, about 15% of GOP primary voters will consider a third party candidate if Palin isn’t the nominee. This is just about enough to sink a GOP Presidential candidate in 2012 if the Democrats are fully united behind Obama (not a sure thing by any stretch of the imagination; if both parties base is split, then no one knows what in heck might happen). To me, this doesn’t mean “nominate Palin or lose part of the base”; its a bit more sophisticated than that. What it means is “nominate a RINO, and the GOP is doomed”.

Whomever the GOP nominee in 2012 is, that person had better be in good with the TEA Party activists – because those are the people who will provide – or deny – the donations and foot soldiers for the campaign. Obama will raise $1 billion (or more) for his re-election effort and his organization, in tight alliance with most of the MSM, will go for the most relentlessly negative and hate-filled campaign since 1948 (when Truman won by going double extra nasty against the GOP nominee). The only thing which can derail this Obama express is people power – and if the GOP nominee doesn’t enthuse the people, that person simply won’t be able to win.

And this is why, of course, Obama and his allies (especially in the MSM) are trying to scare the GOP away from the TEA Party – endlessly we are told that the TEA Party is toxic and any candidate in good with that organization will be defeated in November of 2012. This “helpful” advice is coming from those who have most to lose if a TEA Party-backed candidate wins, and that should tell everyone all they need to know of the worthiness of the advice. Don’t fall for it – don’t let yourself be convinced to back a Bod Dole-redux in 2012…we don’t need a nice, respected, establishment GOPer who will know how to lose gracefully, we need a fighter who will kick the Democrats right back in the groin when they do it to us.

It doesn’t have to be Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann or, indeed, anyone currently high on the political radar. It does have to be someone who can convince the TEA Party activists that genuine, constitutional reform is coming to DC. We’re in for the fight of our political lives in 2012 – let’s not blow it in the first round by taking liberal/RINO advice on what to do.

As we’ve watched events unfold this week in the middle east I think a lot of people have felt a combination of helplessness and resignation. What can we do? It doesn’t look good, and we’ll just have to deal with whatever bad outcome results. That sort of thing. But it is time, I think, for a clean break with our past foreign policy.

Over at Haaretz it is reported that Israeli PM Netanyahu is urging world leaders to strive for stability in Egypt. This doesn’t necessarily mean hanging on to the Mubarak regime, but it does indicate a desire for someone who can maintain control of a possibly troublesome population. That is the policy we’ve general held to since the end of the Second World War. Save for a few years under Bush when we really pressed for democracy – only to have it derailed because domestic American politics, a desire on the part of the American left to beat President Bush, America be darned – we have tended to just stick with whomever is in charge, fearful of something worse if we shake things up. But what has this brought us? Right now, the terrible situation of being tied to a dying regime without having any leverage with those who aspire to take control.

An alternative policy has been proposed for some time – namely that we cut all direct efforts and just have free trade with everyone without engaging in alliances or any deeper commitments. This libertarian view of the world is that if we just leave well enough alone, everything will be fine – no one will have a cause to hate us and we, at least, will have peace. Such a policy does not – and cannot – commend itself to me because it is an abdication. It creates a power vacuum which, if not filled by us, will be filled by others – and almost certainly by others who have wicked plans. So, disengagement also isn’t the answer.

To me, the best US policy is ardent support for any legitimate government – but only those legitimate by American standards. We hold that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and that is how our policy should be governed. If a nation is ruled that way, then they can count on us for aid and trade – if a nation is not ruled that way, then no aid and no trade. A policy like this would have spared us from being in any way, shape or form tied to Egypt’s current regime – and would allow us to step in and help if the Egyptians obtain a genuinely free government after the revolution. We would not, you see, be tied to tyrants and would be free, at will, to help people who wish to be free.

Some worry that such a policy would risk people choosing bad governments who wish to do us harm. That is, indeed, a risk – but the answer to that is a clear statement of American policy that any attack upon America or any democratic nation will result in an exceptionally violent American response – not just sanctions or targeted bombing, but the complete destruction of the offending nation. Be a tyrant all you want; elect a government of the most hideous anti-American tenor – we won’t do anything unless you attack. Don’t attack, don’t get attacked. If we make that clear, then I think that US policy will be able to proceed calmly – no revolution will ever worry us, no tyrant will ever have a claim on us.

No trade, no aid – no connections with unfree regimes. I’d prefer it if we didn’t even maintain diplomatic relations with them. Don’t allow their people to visit us, ban American travel to such places (essentially, a statement that if you’re fool enough to go to a tyrannical regime and get in to trouble, you’re on your own). We Americans have enough to do with our own troubles – we don’t need to entangle ourselves in the troubles tyrants breed for themselves.

A bit more about the British Meteorological office – seems a straight case of fraud – from Christopher Booker at the Telegraph:

Dr Benny Peiser and Dr David Whitehouse, of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), have written to John Hirst, chief executive of the beleaguered Met Office, asking for an explanation of a press release issued by his organisation on January 20 and headed “2010 – a near record year”. This won headlines by claiming that last year was hotter than any other in the past decade.

When the two men examined the original data from which this claim was derived – compiled by the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit and the Met Office’s Hadley Centre – it clearly showed 2010 as having been cooler than 2005 (and 1998) and equal to 2003. It emerged that, for the purposes of the press release, the data had been significantly adjusted.

Comparing the actual data for each year, from 2001 to 2010, with that given in the press release shows that for four years the original figure has been adjusted downwards. Only for 2010 was the data revised upwards, by the largest adjustment of all, allowing the Met Office to claim that 2010 was the hottest year of the decade.

What the warmists can’t allow is any significant reduction of annual temperatures – its already hard enough for them to sustain global warming when temperatures have really be flat for ten years, it will be impossible if a cooling trend shows. And, so, they just adjust the data to fit their needs – adjusting down earlier years, adjusting up last year and, presto!, we’ve got one heck of a hot year.

The hoax, however, continues to unravel – but it will go on for a while yet as so many people are making so much money off taxpayers on global warming alarmism that they just won’t give it up until forced to.

There are reports now that the police have all fled, that common criminals are being freed from jail, that homes and other properties are being looted – and while the army is on the streets, there seems to be no effort to stop anything. This indicates a paralysis at the leadership – probably all looking over their shoulders, wondering if they should flee.

Pray for the people of Egypt – it doesn’t look promising for an early and peaceful end to the trouble.

Lisa Graas thinks so:

…Michele Bachmann is trying to pull the Tea Party together with the Republican Party. She understands the wedges that Obama is driving. She also understands what a real Republican is. She is the anti-RINO. What makes her the anti-RINO? She knows what a real Republican is and she is on guard to defend those principles…but she will not alienate the people who can build the party. She’s smart. I’ve been watching her and know that she is put off by BOTH those who would seek to spend us into oblivion AND those who do not respect basic human dignity enough to fight for the laws that protect us all. She understands. Watch her. Pay attention to everything this woman says.

Am I saying she could be President? I don’t know. All I know is that this woman knows more about what is going on in America politics now than anyone else, and we all need to be paying attention. If she’s not the one to lead us out, she is certainly the one who can point us to the ones who can…

I have to say that I am ever more impressed by Bachmann – I’m just very doubtful that a House member can be elected President. Just too “small beans” to rise to that level…though we did elect a part-time Senator with no real experience in 2008, so anything is possible.

The key, as Graas points out, is to unite, unite and then unite some more. Graas has some hard words for those on the right who have gone along with the various liberal attempts to split the right – attempts, for instance, to overly down play social issues and that sort of thing. Some of this is on our side is unintentional, and some of it is downright well meant…but anything which causes divisions among us only helps the other side. It is either a united right – social and economic conservatives – winning, or a divided right losing.

We can win it all in 2012, if we do this right. Everyone must work to ameliorate divisions and keep focused on the real goal – getting Obama out of office, taking over the Senate and securing such a large majority that we are able to reform our nation. And reforming our nation doesn’t mean just cutting taxes or spending – it means uprooting the entirety of that modern liberalism which has given us not just high taxes and bloated spending, but moral decay and all the social pathologies attendant upon that.

As for me, I’m feeling pretty good about our prospects. Sure, Obama will be tough to beat. Sure, we on our side will break down in to arguments from time to time. Sure, nothing is ever certain in politics. But overall, I think the forces are working towards conservative victory in 2012 – after all, the liberal system is bankrupt and dying; the RINOs are still running scared from the TEA Party. Right is making might and its another good year to be a Republican.