Where Are My Keys?

John Olerud, dick..

Quite the neighbor, to pull a stunt like this:

A chain saw growled as, limb by limb, the foliage fell from Bruce and Linda Baker’s cherished Chinese pine.

Soon the crew went after the denuded trunk until it, too, was gone.

The rare pine was removed Tuesday by order of the Clyde Hill Board of Adjustment, which said it unreasonably obstructed the view from the nearby home of retired baseball star John Olerud and his wife, Kelly.

The Bakers decided last month not to appeal the ruling. The pine and a Colorado spruce will be replaced with smaller plants at the Oleruds’ expense.

“I feel like I’m doing the right thing for my neighbor,” Bruce Baker said, “but I’m standing out here watching it. It just came over me I feel so sad to see the tree go.”

So a tree that blocked the view from Olerud's house had to go.  Did the neighbors plant it there after he moved in, or was it there before he bought the house?

Board member Catherine McLamb said she was troubled that the city code considers the effect of a tree on the value of a property bought when the tree was already there. "One is not entitled to enhance your view," she said.

Yep, the tree was already there when Olerud bought the house.  Perhaps he didn't notice it blocking his view?

Believe it or not, there is also a monetary side to this story, as Olerud's house would go up in value by $255,000.  Keep in mind his house is already worth $4 million.

An appraiser hired by John and Kelly Olerud said their $4 million home would be worth $255,000 more if the rare Chinese pine and the Colorado spruce across the street were cut down and replaced with smaller plants. The Chinese pine's value is estimated at more than $18,000.

Removing the trees would widen the west-facing view from his family room by 65 percent, Olerud told the Board of Adjustment, giving his house the same amazing view of Seattle's skyline that's visible from nearby Northeast 20th Street.

I guess the neighbor who had to cut down the trees is second guessing his allowing the Olerud family to live in his house while Olerud's was being built.  No good deed, right Mr. Olerud?

Taking their ball and going home..

President Thin Skin, and his Administration:

But as economic advisor Gene Sperling demonstrated by haranguing Woodward, it's not just Jarrett. This administration is obsessed with image management. Sometimes the focus on the president being portrayed a certain way results in cuddly stuff--Barack Obama slow-jamming the news, Michelle Obama doing the Dougie--and sometimes it results in the White House acting petulant, bizarre, and gross.

- There was the time the White House banned a San Francisco Chronicle reporter from the White House press pool for filming an anti-Obama protest at a fundraiser. The White House initially claimed it banned the reporter for using a camera when she was only allowed to write what she saw. Then the White House claimed it hadn't banned her at all. All very confusing and weird. 

- There was the time the White House prohibited local journalists from covering a Silicon Valley fundraiser, presumably for fear that they'd be better equipped than D.C.-based pool reporters to recognize major players in the California tech scene. 

- There was the time the White House denied the Boston Herald a spot in the press pool because it ran a front-page op-ed from Mitt Romney. While the White House later claimed the Boston Globe got the pool spot because it submitted its request first, that explanation doesn't jibe with this email from a White House staffer: "I tend to consider the degree to which papers have demonstrated to covering the White House regularly and fairly in determining local pool reporters." Loyalty has its rewards! 

- There was the time an Orlando Sentinel reporter was made to sit in a closet at a fundraiser for Joe Biden. 

- There was the time Obama agreed to sit down with the editor and publisher of the Des Moines Register, so long as the paper agreed not to quote him or even reveal the topics of conversation.  

- My favorite overreaction to a media outlet, however, was one I first wrote about a few years ago after a small-town newspaper editor emailed me to say that the White House had asked her to remove a sentence that "reflected poorly" on First Lady Michelle Obama. The story was titled "Inside Marine One, President Obama's Helicopter," and according to the editor, it contained a single line that suggested Obama was somewhat aloof toward the chopper pilots. “Basically," the editor said in her email, "the reporter said that the First Lady didn’t speak to the pilots but acknowledged them by making eye contact." Shortly after the story went online, the editor received a call from the White House asking her to remove the sentence (she did). Shortly after my story went online, the White House called me, too (I added a denial from the First Lady's office to my story, but didn't remove or retract anything we'd already published). 

Those are just a handful of media anecdotes (inside-the-Beltway reporters have many, many more stories about the Obama administration flipping its lid over reporters not following their instructions). But the Obama machine's obsession with image management isn't limited to haranguing and punishing journalists--just ask Desiree Rogers, Carlos Pascual, Hillary Clinton, or Stanley McChrystal.

White House now walking back the immediate impact of the sequester..

What the President said a few weeks ago to scare the American People (the second part of the clip):

 

Emergency responders, like the ones who are here today, their ability to help communities respond to and recover from disasters will be degraded. Border Patrol agents will see their hours reduced. FBI agents will be furloughed. Federal prosecutors will have to close cases and let criminals go. Air traffic controllers and airport security will see cutbacks, which means more delays in airports across the country. Thousands of teachers and educators will be laid off. Tens of thousands of parents will have to scramble to find child care for their kids. Hundreds of thousands of Americans will lose access to primary care and preventive care like flu vaccinations and cancer screenings. This is not an abstraction. People will lose their jobs. The unemployment rate might tick up again.

Sounds pretty bad, doesn't it?  End of the World type stuff.  Act now, or we'll all die!

Here's Obama last night:

This is not a cliff, but it is a tumble downward. It's conceivable that in the first week, the first two weeks, first three weeks, first month, a lot of people may not notice the full impact of the sequester. But this is going to be a big hit on the economy.

Moving the goalposts.  The worst thing that can happen to this Administration in regards to the sequester?

If The People don't notice the cuts, they might be open to even more cuts to unneeded services to lower their taxes.

How brazen of The People to want to keep more of their hard-earned money.

Comapre and contrast the different Parties..

The Republicans offer a plan to ease the pain of the sequester, President Obama says he'll veto it:

The White House is threatening a presidential veto of a Senate Republican measure that would give President Barack Obama more authority and flexibility to find $85 billion in spending cuts this year. The measure is intended to replace the automatic across-the-board cuts scheduled to kick in Friday.

The Democrats want to add $7.2 billion to the deficit with their plan:

The sequester replacement bill proposed by Senate Democrats, and endorsed by the White House, would add $7.2 billion to the federal deficit over ten years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

“CBO estimates that S. 388 would increase direct spending by $62.4 billion and revenues by $55.1 billion over the 2013–2023 period. Thus, the cumulative deficit would increase by $7.2 billion from those changes,” CBO wrote in a report.

The Democratic bill would replace the $85 billion in automatic cuts scheduled to take effect on Friday with a mixture of tax increases and spending cuts to defense programs and farm subsidies.

Simple, routine catch..

 

Who doesn't love a leaf pile?

 

Blatent racism from the Left..

Because we all know it's racist to criticize the President and the First Lady, these Dems have some explaining to do, right?

Of course the even-more-Left readers take the author to task in the comments.

GWK responds to JDJ..

 

Everywhere but where he needs to be..

 

An epidemic sweeping the Country?

NSFW, thanks to JDJ for the link!