rant is over

O.K. now back to the regularly scheduled postings.

Twice in a row

WOW two days in a row you all get the bonus blog here. Today’s bonus is one that I gotta say really floored me when I heard about it.. Apparently the Obama campaign has decided that they need to raise funds a whole new way so welcome to the new option. “What is that?” You ask. Well it seems he has decided that his campaign is more important than your birthday or wedding or bar mitzvah or… That’s right! You too can go to this site, http://www.barackobama.com/obama-event-registry/ Where Obama will be more than happy to let you know how you can ask people to donate to his campaign in lieu of a present for that special event that you may be anticipating. Personally I am surprised that he made it voluntary. The way that he has been working I would have expected it to be compulsory. Yup that is right folks, Obama has decided that HE is more important than YOU are. Now maybe for some people that WOULD be a perfect wedding gift (or birthday). But still that is up to you, fortunately it is still up to us what we choose to invest our money in. I for one would tend to think that this is a pretty crass way to do things. I mean really, what’s next? Lemonade stands or yard sales? Maybe a bake sale? If we are going to be honest here, this only serves to belittle the presidency and all the other public service positions that are linked to it. Worse this is going to belittle the country. We are going to be a laughingstock because of this. But still you support your guy. I will support mine.

Alan Colmes and the Liberals

You claim that “trickle down economics” does not work. I would ask you to remember that they sure as heck DID work when Reagan was in office. But let’s take your point all the way through to it’s logical conclusion. You claim that businessmen are to greedy, that they will want to hoard all their money if we give them a tax break. That what we need to do is tax people more, because then the government will be able to create jobs. When has the government really created jobs? Wait let’s come back to that point later. Let’s talk about the inevitable result of your argument first. If the businessman is so blindingly absolutely, beyond belief, idiotic that s/he is determined that he/she will be so greedy that they would not pass the benefits of a tax break on. Well that means they are truly greedy beyond measure or intelligence. Any businessman who refuses to pass on savings to the customer or use every opportunity to provide the best service possible that they can is an utter idiot because his competition will and when the competition does HE/SHE is OUT OF BUSINESS! In your scenario you RAISE the taxes and what happens? In a real world, assuming that level of greed which you postulated, the businessman finds costs too high What will the ultra greedy businessman do? He RAISES his prices and/or cuts his/her staff/employee base so that S/He can make more money. If s/he is as BONEHEADED STUPID as you make him/her out to be relying on his/her greed that much then that is the ONLY possible outcome. (higher prices lower employment.) The real issue is not really even about taxes, it is about spending, you and yours think that if we just raise taxes and raise taxes and raise taxes that we will be able to get out of the debt that we are in. The problem there is... (1) The debt is so extraordinarily high (especially after all the out of control spending done by Obama) that you could take every single dollar in this country in taxes and still you would never be able to pay that debt, and... (2) Democrats keep insisting that we need to raise spending as well as taxes, which means that the debt will still continue to rise no matter what we try to do. For some reason you all seem to think that we need to take care of everyone because everyone is too stupid to care for themselves,(yes I have heard liberals actually SAY that in those words or worse one even referred to the poor as their "pets"!) This comes with a cost and part of that cost is that the government will have to pay for all those programs. If there were more personal responsibility maybe life would not be so expensive. But no you have to control all of it and take away responsibility. Which lets me come back to the point I put off earlier, I will expand it more here… When has the government ever taken over a business and run it better than the private sector creating more economically sound jobs? It didn’t work and isn’t working with Amtrack, it didn’t and isn’t working with the USPS, it didn’t and isn’t working with GM. Oddly enough the one recent experience where the government pulled back and left things to the private sector the costs went DOWN (the space race where all of a sudden it is now more affordable for people to use the private industries to launch their satellites because the government stopped sending up shuttles.) I heard Alan Colmes ask a caller on Thursday (6/20/2012 at 11:30 at night), “has Gm not turned a profit?” My answer is a resounding “NO it has not!” In order for GM to have turned a profit they have to have paid off all their debt first. Gm has not (and apparently WILL not) paid off their debt, therefore they have NOT made a profit. (and apparently will not) What needed to happen there, I think, Is the Government ought to have kept there big nose OUT of the situation and let GM go through the natural process of a normal bankruptcy so that events could have brought it out stronger than it was/is. FORD did not take a government bailout, Toyota did not take a government bailout, Honda did not take a government bailout Kia, Hyundai, Subaru, Nissan all did not take government bailouts and ALL of them are selling better and doing better than GM. In fact Ford was in essentially the same position overall as GM at the same time, but they restructured, renegotiated and whammo they came out stronger and more competitive in the end. The ONLY people that Obama helped with his “wonderful Bailout” were the executives and rich people heading GM. The unions got screwed, the shareholders got screwed, the employees got screwed, and the taxpayer got, AND IS GETTING screwed! That is the fundamental issue that you have to deal with. So I say instead of taxes CUT THE SPENDING.

What the SB1070 ruling looks like to me.

You all get a bonus blog today. The Bonus is all about yesterday's activities in the Supreme Court. O.K. so the Supreme Court has made a decision about the Arizona SB1070 law. Oddly enough BOTH sides are calling it a win. So let’s all review this and see what WE think. Democrats claim that it is obviously a win for them because 3 out of 4 of the points in the law were struck down as unconstitutional or at least an overreach by the state into the area that the Federal government is responsible for. On the other hand the republican side is saying that they win because the most important part of the law, the part they have been most criticized for and they have stood by most staunchly, is the part that they upheld as legal and constitutional. Interestingly, one of the judges who was in favor of the whole law being upheld, or at least most of it, stood up and berated Obama, after the decision, for failing to uphold the law as he is required to. Among the comments he made he alluded to the point that it is the failure of the federal government to uphold the laws that leads to the beleaguered states feeling they have to take matters into their own hands. This makes me think that he is pointing out that the states are basically making a vote of no confidence in the federal government because the feds are basically sitting on their thumbs and denying the problem. Interestingly that is exactly the point that Arizonans have been shouting out about during this whole process. But there is, what I believe to be, an even more telling pair of points. First is the fact that in the past few days and weeks Obama has seen fit to grant a blanket amnesty to illegal aliens (which proves to those concerned about it that this administration is ignoring the laws). Second, immediately after the Supreme Court’s ruling, Obama went as far as telling INS they are not to accept calls from Arizona law enforcement regarding Illegal aliens. (that was the one point the Supreme court pretty much upheld that AZ Law enforcement could ask for proof of citizenship.) So the Supreme court upheld the legality and the first thing Obama does is basically to say “I do not care what they said, I want MY wishes to be followed.” And so once again he flaunts his “power” and finds a way to go around the ruling that he does not like. I guess that means that both sides did get a win of sorts. The conservatives got vindication in the court of the land. But, on the other hand, Obama can simply disregard it, as he has done so many other laws before, thereby making a mockery of the law and still leaving the LEGAL citizens of this country in the dust.

To the Hosts of Red Eye Radio show

Hello Lately there have been a couple of things that you have talked about which I have to take issue with. A few nights ago you were talking about kids going to college today and how lazy they are. You said “when I was going to college, I worked my way through.” The point you were making seemed to be they can do the same. The thing is when you were going to college that was a while ago. (you are admitted to be over the age of 40) And even just ten years ago when my wife and I were in college it wasn’t as bad as it is today. There are a few major points here… (1) College was Cheaper (2) Life was cheaper (3) High schools taught students enough that upon graduation those students were prepared for either advanced schools (college) or even for life. Let me clarify… When you were going to college you probably had A job that saw to your needs, Maybe it was a full time job but it probably could have been part time, but regardless it was probably 1 (one) job. Today in order to do the same thing the average student would have to have at least 2 full time jobs. In fact, due to the cost of living it takes that much just to survive today, let alone adding college tuition to it. You claimed that no one helped you through college, I doubt that. Let’s be honest here… No one ever took you out for a meal? No one, not even your mom ever helped defray the cost of clothes, books, or tuition? No one EVER helped you at all in any way????? Really? How about, and this will bring me to my third point, all the teachers and/or family who made sure that you were Ready to go to college? Perhaps They bought you some things for your dorm/apartment? Maybe they packed a care package or two for you? How about they just made sure that you had an education that enabled you to actually get the most out of college. Today's students, and I can testify to this, are NOT getting the education that was offered 20 or 30 years ago. In fact I saw it start. When I was in my second year of Junior High school (14 years old) they started emphasizing the self esteem thing. I drove a school bus up to 5 years ago and the kids I saw were nowhere near as educated coming out of HIGH school as I was by the time I hit Junior high! In fact I would contend that all you have to do is look around today. NO one seems able to spell. They cannot distinguish between homophones, they are lost when you talk about adjectives or adverbs and they are clueless about history and other basic stuff. In fact I think that is one reason why Obama and his group are doing so well. In short you were being judgmental without either having all the facts or taking them into account. This brings me to my other issue. You were talking a couple of nights later about health care and Obama’s “solution.” I agree with you that Obamacare is a bad thing that needs to be eliminated. BUT I do NOT agree with your standard for judging people on that issue. You said “people have a big screen tv in their house or they have two cars so CLEARLY they chose to spend their money on those things instead of going to see the doctor.” I have an issue there again for several reasons. Let me use a situation with which I am very aware of... YES I know this is "anecdotal." I know exactly the kind of person that Obama described when he was saying we need to pass his health care. This person cannot afford Health Insurance and would like to be able to. He have two cars, two tv’s in fact he has a “Big screen/flat screen tv in his basement (it doesn’t work though). However if he did NOT have two cars at least one of his family (either his wife or him) would not have a job. They NEED those cars because (1) if they did not have transportation they would not go to work. (2) They live in an area where there is NOT any kind of real public transportation. Therefore too few cars equals total dependence on the government for their care and well being. As for the tv’s in fact this is true of ALL their furniture the tv’s they got second hand from places like Goodwill, except the big screen which was a gift from a well meaning but misguided (liberal by the way)parent. Somehow spending 20 bucks for a goodwill tv does not translate well into ability to afford a doctors visit. So my point is that you are judging people based on what they have in their homes when you do not know if it was a gift they received from a friend or a family member. You do not know if they got it on freecycle or from a yard sale. My wife and I like to use those sources, you do not know if they bought it second hand or got it from a discount store or ebay. You are just assuming that since they have something they had to have gone somewhere expensive and bought it brand new. That is why I get so frustrated. Maybe you need to consider those things first before you start going off on people. Some people out there legitimately need help and assistance. And the costs of yesteryear do not match the costs of today. Maybe you could help out a little by saying to a college kid, “hey here let me buy you lunch” instead of berating them for not being able to do something that frankly they were not trained or taught to do. As for the Health care maybe you could say “hey I do not know exactly where they are in their life so I will not judge them.” I will agree though that the idea the democrats have about how to address the issues are silly at best. Let me tell you why I find Obamacare a problem. I am the kind of person that Obama ostensibly described when he wanted to implement this. I opposed this plan before it was put in place because I was homeschooled for my High school, And therefore I am smart enough to realize that this country cannot afford it, I cannot afford it. All Obama did with this, as far as I am concerned is to tell everyone that the insurance which they could not afford before, they now have to buy, just because he says so. This does not help anyone. They could not afford it before the Obamacare thing, period, and just because he made it the law does not suddenly mean they can afford it. In fact the Health Insurance companies will realize they can raise their rates like crazy and make it LESS affordable for people because it is required (people will be FORCED into the product). It just punishes people for being poor.

My issue with Michael Savage

There are some Media personalities with whom I take issue. And there are various reasons for my taking issue. USUALLY those personalities are liberals, and it is a fundamental difference of opinion that leads to the variance. But tonight I want to talk about a conservative, Michael Savage. To put it simply, my issue is that he is inconsistent. He thinks we ought to secured our borders and keep out all the undesirable riff raff. He is perfectly ok with our government making the distinction of what constitutes riff raff. But when another country does the same thing regarding him he is mortally offended. Worse, he then starts to use his radio show to continuously maintain that his “constitutional rights as an American” are being violated and our government is standing by, condoning this action just because they do not like HIM in particular. It comes across as, ALL the world has a vendetta out against Michael Savage and the fact that he dropped his toast this morning is OBVIOUSLY due to the fact that EVERYONE hates him. In other words he has a touch of narcissism there. Here is the thing. If we want to have the sovereign right to make up our own minds on how our country is run, who is allowed in and who is left out, then we have to extend that to others. Maybe you have heard of the concept, it is called the golden rule. The second issue is related… The Constitution of the United States of America is just that! That is it is the document governing the rights, privileges and responsibilities of Americans. It is NOT the document that covers Britain, or Mexico, or Canada or any other nation on earth. Therefore we should not expect any if those other nations to honor its demands. If we expect all the other nations to abide by the Constitution giving us our “rights” then we also have to extend all the other stuff back in return. That is to say if we expect to receive the rights and privileges of the constitution from other countries then we have to give those other countries their due and let them start governing or having representation here. So let’s just get rid of the UN why don’t we and just let all the world elect congressmen… OH and we will have to get rid of our borders and our national identity and our sovereignty too. After all, LOGICALLY, that is where we have to end up. Unfortunately Logic seems to be lacking in the world now. Still I expect better from conservatives. And there you have it. That is why I have an issue with Michael Savage.

Coming up soon…

This next week will be pick on radio hosts week. In particular I will be looking at the late night radio hosts that I listen to/have heard. If you are waiting for me to speak on Limbaugh or whoever do not hold your breath since they are not on late at night. So get ready because I will not be easy on those I select and I will select based on my ideas and issues not on what everyone else thinks. This will be both Liberal AND Conservative talk show hosts so tune in. With that said see you this week.

To Birther or not to Birther?

I have always maintained that the birther movement was one, which I would not get involved in. I still feel that way but I also feel that there is an important point or two that has come to light because of them and I want to talk about those points today. The main point that came up a while ago for me was. “If Barack Obama has nothing to hide, then WHY is he hiding it? Does it REALLY take THREE (3) years to release a birth certificate or a drivers license? I do not think so. In fact at this moment if you asked I could open up my wallet and show you my Social Security card and my driver’s license which I had to have a birth certificate to receive. If you could wait for an hour or so I could go home and get a copy of my birth certificate to show you. Give me a week and I could order a whole certified copy with ALL the proofs of it’s authenticity delivered directly to you from the state of my birth. So WHY did it take THREE years for Obama to show us a copy of his birth certificate? And then why are there inconsistencies in his birth certificate and SSN? All Social Security Numbers are coded. The code/s used tell us where the owner received his/her SSN from and when. Obama’s SSN states that it comes from Connecticut. HE NEVER LIVED IN CONNECTICUT! He doesn’t even claim to have VISITED Connecticut. So why the discrepancy? I suppose in a way this does put me on the side of the birthers but still even if it does it is through some really persistent issues which Obama seems unable, or unwilling, to address. His unwillingness makes me wonder what else is going on. I want to see this all resolved and soon and I call on Obama and all those who are involved. Open up the vaults show us the truth and let’s remove this from the scene as an issue so we can concentrate as a country on things that are really important. Until Next time.

What exactly are they trying to hide?

Recently Eric Holder had charges of contempt considered against him. All because he does not want to release documents regarding his knowledge, or lack thereof, regarding the Fast and Furious Debacle. For my readers who may not be up on it, Fast and Furious is about the ATF allowing guns to be sold to illegal aliens and people who ought not to have had them. Ostensibly this was to “track the weapons” so they could “catch the ‘big fish’” and stop the criminal element at the roots. In reality the agency lost track of those weapons and did not know what was going on. This was found out after a Border Patrol agent was gunned down by illegal aliens entering the country with one of those guns. Eric Holder, THE guy in charge of the State Department which in turn has authority over the ATF is being questioned about his knowledge of the situation and also what knowledge his superiors (Obama) might have had about the issue. He has refused to turn over documents, which could implicate him or others. Now Congress is trying to determine what legal power they need to bring against Holder and one of those powers is to find him in contempt. I have to wonder though. There seems to be a pattern here. First you have Obama refusing to show documentation of his citizenship, (birth certificate, Social Security Number, Selective Service number) Now you have his Head of the State department doing the same regarding this fiasco. And ALL this from the guy who promised us four years ago that his administration would be “THE most Communicative, open and transparent administration EVER”. Compared to Obama’s administration the former KGB looks open and transparent. Mrs. Brady has been advocating gun control laws ever since her husband was shot protecting Ronald Reagan, has claimed that Eric Holder is a man of “High moral character” and that we all must gather round now to support him from this “Witch Hunt of the Republican’s”. Now Wait just a minute here. Is this really a “Witch Hunt”? I would say No. Holder and others are deliberately withholding information from Congress. This is not the action of a man who is of “high Moral Integrity”. These are the actions of someone with something to hide. And there is no reason to hide any of this stuff unless there is an issue of immorality or culpability attached. And IF there is immorality or culpability then there is NO way that there is “High Moral Character” involved. So I guess my question then HAS to be WHAT ARE THEY HIDING? I find it interesting that Mrs. Brady has fallen heavily on the side of Eric Holder, since she has advocated SO strongly for more gun control for so long. One of the rumors that came up early on about Fast and Furious was the idea that it was a sort of a conspiracy. That the government was “allowing” illegal gun activity in order to create a situation whereby the Obama administration could say “see!?! See?!! The guns that the crime syndicates in Mexico are using came from America. We are at fault we need to control or even take away gun rights for Americans so that they will not be able to give/sell guns to illegals.” As much as I hate Conspiracy theories this one is starting to gain some credibility for me. I mean IF Mrs. Brady was really as interested in controlling guns and keeping them away from illegals then she should be as interested if not MORE interested in seeing where this screw up really came from. But instead of that she is defending the guy who ought to hold the key to the whole issue And that in turn makes me wonder… What is it they are REALLY trying to hide? I suppose that it is entirely possible that this is all just a big tempest in a teapot. But I worry about what the truth really is. I hope that we can get through this and finally find out the truth. More than that I hope that we will all learn something out of this; like what it is to Really be open and honest in our dealings, and also how important it is to be holding our government accountable for it’s actions and works. Until next time… I will be Faithfully watching!